Abstract
A leading figure of the early Theosophical Society, a versatile occultist, and the most important German-speaking Theosophist of his time, Franz Hartmann (1838–1912) was a gifted and prolific writer. In particular, portions of his translation work were appreciated far beyond his usual esoteric audience. This article focuses on Hartmann’s Dàodéjīng
1 Introduction
For him, Theosophy was the self-realisation of the truth in man. He himself was the best example of his teachings, divine wisdom spoke from him when he had given himself to it. I have never seen the aura of a man shine so brightly as in Franz Hartmann. […] In literary terms, Hartmann leaves behind a great legacy. One cannot call his writings scientific, they are mystical in the best sense of the word. […] Read his works with the heart and you will understand why we place Hartmann alongside H. P. Blavatsky […]. Hartmann’s writings are like music that lifts us into higher regions; their infinitely great value lies in this dynamic effect.1
The above quotation is from an obituary of the pre-eminent German Theosophist Franz Hartmann (1838–1912). Born into an upper-middle-class Catholic family in Donauwörth, near the Bavarian city of Augsburg, Hartmann developed an early affinity for Christian mysticism while turning away from the perceived clericalism of the Church. After a brief stint as a volunteer in the Royal Bavarian Artillery (1859), he passed the state examination in pharmacy at the University of Munich in 1862. He continued his medical training, completing it after emigrating to America in 1865. Over the next eighteen years, Hartmann lived in various cities – St. Louis, New Orleans, and Georgetown, Colorado, working as an ophthalmologist, pharmacologist, surgeon, and coroner. In the 1870s, he became interested in spiritualism, and after reading Helena P. Blavatsky’s (1831–1891) Isis Unveiled (Blavatsky 1877), he fully committed to Theosophy. To this end, he left for India in the autumn of 1883 to live at the headquarters of the Theosophical Society in Adyar. There he soon “turned from a student to a teacher” (Göring 1895: 7; see also the vignette in Goodrick-Clarke 1985: 24–25), and a few months later, in early 1884, he even served for a time as “acting president” when Blavatsky and the Society’s president Henry Steel Olcott (1832–1907) travelled to Europe. In April 1885, Hartmann accompanied Blavatsky to Italy when she left India for good. After a few months they moved to Germany, and Hartmann eventually settled in Hallein near Salzburg, Austria, where he established a sanatorium. His final years were spent near Meran in South Tyrol (then Austria). Hartmann’s writing career began with journal articles in 1884, but quickly gained traction with multiple books published in English and, later, in German, making him into one of the most prolific esoteric writers of his time. Within a few years, he had become the key figure of German-language Theosophy, with contacts across the esoteric spectrum, often travelling to give hundreds of lectures over the years. Several of his publications, especially his translations, reached a wide audience far beyond esoteric circles.
One of these translations is the subject of this article. While Hartmann’s Theosophical project essentially wed Christian mysticism and Hindu thought, with a few sprinklings of (Indian) Buddhism, he once made a detour to the realm of East Asian religions. More specifically, through his annotated translation of the Dàodéjīng
2 Hartmann’s Dàodéjīng
2.1 Background and Genesis
In 1897, Hartmann published his Theosophie in China. Betrachtungen über das Tao-Teh-King (Der Weg, die Wahrheit und das Licht) (Theosophy in China: Reflections on the Tao-Teh-King [The Way, the Truth, and the Light]) with the Verlag von Wilhelm Friedrich (Publishing House of Wilhelm Friedrich) in Leipzig. At the time, Leipzig was the centre of occult and Theosophical publishing in the German-speaking world and the Verlag von Wilhelm Friedrich was one of its main suppliers (Wolffram 2009: 60).7 Already before the publication of Theosophie in China, within a few years, Hartmann had become one of the publisher’s main authors.8 In quick succession, he had published a number of books and booklets.9
Hartmann’s relationship with the publisher actually dates back to 1893, when it became the home of his Theosophical monthly Lotusblüten (Lotus Blossoms; 1893–1901). As the full title of the journal indicates,10 German “translations from oriental literature on the foundations of the religions of the East and Theosophy” formed a major part of this publishing project. In fact, it was in Lotusblüten where several of Hartmann’s German translations were first published before they were turned into books. One of these was Hartmann’s translation of the Dàodéjīng, first published in serial form between July 1896 and February 1897 (Hartmann 1896c-g; 1897d-e). The title of both the serial and the book version misleadingly indicates that the text was “translated from the Chinese of Lao-tze” (Aus dem Chinesischen des Lao-tze übersetzt).11 However, Hartmann did not have the slightest knowledge of (classical) Chinese, or, for that matter, of Sanskrit, although his translation of the eighth-century Indian Advaita Vedānta master Śaṅkara’s Tattvabodha (Awakening to Reality) also claims to be directly from the Sanskrit (Aus dem Sanskrit übersetzt; Hartmann 1894d). In fact, Hartmann’s version of Tattvabodha is based on the English rendering by the Irish Theosophist and scholar of Sanskrit Charles Johnston (1867–1931).12 Similarly, Hartmann’s supposed translation from the Chinese is actually a verbatim rendering of yet another English translation, the 1894 The Book of the Path of Virtue (Old 1894) by the English Theosophist Walter Richard Old (1864–1929).13 What makes this even more curious is the fact that Old had only most elementary knowledge of classical Chinese, if any. Therefore, Old’s translation is also essentially a plagiarism of two older translations. Old’s main source was the very first English translation, the 1868 Tau Tĕh King: The Speculations on Metaphysics, Polity, and Morality of ‘The Old Philosopher’ Lau-tsze (Chalmers 1868) by the Scottish China missionary John Chalmers (1825–1899). Chalmers’s translation, in turn, owes much to that of the French Sinologist Stanislas Aignan Julien (1797–1873). Published in 1842, Julien’s Lao Tseu Tao Te King. Le livre de la voie et de la vertu (Lao Tseu Tao Te King: The Book of the Way and the Virtue; Julien 1842) was the first complete translation into a western language other than Latin and made the Dàodéjīng accessible to a wide audience for the first time. The other translation used by Old was that of James Legge (1815–1897), another (former) Scottish missionary and professor of Chinese Language and Literature at the University of Oxford. His Tâo Teh King of 1891 (Legge 1891) became the seminal English translation of the Dàodéjīng, a place it probably holds to this day.
Old’s translation of 1894, produced while he was living at the Adyar Theosophical headquarters in India, came with a brief introduction and a postscript essay on “The Tao,” a text he had previously published in Lucifer (Old 1892). Apart from one remark to Verse XIV, in which he likens the dào to the Tetragrammaton (Old 1894: 5), The Book of the Path of Virtue is free of annotations. However, the 1904 re-edition of his translation – this time distributed by major publishers in the United Kingdom and the United States with the new title The Book of the Simple Way of Laotze (Old 1904) – incorporated a substantial commentary. In the Lotusblüten version of Theosophie in China, Hartmann indirectly criticises Old (immediately after mentioning him) in the preface, because “to render a work such as the Tao-Teh-King without an explanatory commentary would be of little value, because few readers would take the trouble to closely examine every paragraph in order to understand them” (Hartmann 1896c: 468).14 In other words, while Hartmann plagiarised Old’s (already plagiarised) rendition, he at least added a commentary.15
It is also in the preface – which is, surprisingly, not included in the book version – where Hartmann refers directly to Old’s translation, when describing how best to translate the three terms that make up the title of the book, that is, “Tao” (dào), “Teh” (dé), and “King” (jīng). Hartmann’s reference to Old and his related explanation gives clear evidence that he not only lacked knowledge of Chinese, but that he had no insight into the scholarly discourse of Chinese religions at the time, nor that he had effectively accessed any translations other than Old’s.16 According to Hartmann, “Tao (similar to theos) means ‘the word’ (logos) or ‘the way’; Teh: the truth or the law; King: ‘the heaven’ or ‘the light’. Tao-Teh-King is therefore the way to become aware of the truth” (1896c: 467–468).17 Old gives dào as “path” (or in its Romanised form as “Tao,” which he prefers) while also mentioning the translation of Julien’s teacher Jean-Pierre Abel-Rémusat (1788–1832) as lógos (cf. Abel-Rémusat 1823: 24).18 “Teh” or dé is explained by Old as akin to the term dharma, “as being the mode of existence proper to Tao in its manifestations; its true meaning being expressed in the words ‘virtue,’ ‘use’ […]” (Old 1894: iii). Apparently, Hartmann is drawing on Old’s dharma, which he gives in the common rendering as “law.” The translation of dé as “truth” is his own idiosyncratic suggestion, but once again informed by Old. The latter understood dé as “that which is proper to the nature of a thing or creature” (ibid.), one’s true nature expressing the dào. For Hartmann, this true nature seems to be nothing other than the “eternal truth” (ewige Wahrheit), that is, the manifestation of the “divine self” (göttliches Selbst) in us (Hartmann 1897f: 22, 59).
Following his elucidation of the terms dào and dé, Old does not, as one might expect, proceed with a short explanation of the meaning of jīng, but, like Legge (1891: 16–17), turns to the notion of “Tien” or tiān
2.2 Main Commentarial Trajectories
Hartmann reads the Dàodéjīng as a perennialist classic, reiterating his general Theosophical programme throughout. The foundation of the latter is the nexus between Gotteserkenntnis (realisation of God) and Selbsterkenntnis (realisation of self), and the Dàodéjīng is appropriated by Hartmann within this framework. To this end, he equates the dào with “God” (XIV). On the one hand, it is the Absolute, which is ineffable, inconceivable, and incomparable (I, XXXII). On the other hand, God or the dào qua logos is the pantheistic animating principle and vitality of being, the omnipresent “absolute consciousness” (absolutes Bewusstsein) that enlivens all that exists (XXXIV). God manifests as the “eternal word” (ewiges Wort), the “harmony of the universe” (Harmonie des Weltalls) (LV) and “tranquillity” (Ruhe) (XXXI). God alone is the “truth”; without realising God, there is only delusion (XX). Accordingly, for Hartmann, the realisation of the dào or God in its “creational will” (schöpferischer Wille) (XLII) is the key to salvation, the goal of Theosophical soteriology. The reification of Gotteserkenntnis is the realisation of self, which is the evolutionary purpose of human existence (V, LXV; Hartmann n.d.: 44) and the most supreme pursuit (LXIV). Selbsterkenntnis is both the consummation of and the path to Gotteserkenntnis. This “path of the Tao” is nothing other than a return to the original unity, which is hidden beneath illusory, chaos-creating diversity (XL), that is, the alienation from God and the assumed reality of I-ness (Ichheit) or selfhood (Selbstheit) (XVIII). The truth leading to the original unity, God’s creational will, is the divine spark inherent in every human being. Ignorance of one’s own inner godhead shrouds human beings in darkness. Hartmann deems the assumed self per se to be incapable of realising the divinity within. A construct of I-ness cannot independently shed its selfhood, for darkness cannot conjure up light. The divine spark, however, constitutes the light that beacons to Selbsterkenntnis (XXXIII), which to Hartmann is the very meaning of the term “Theosophy.” The main title of his translation – Theosophie in China – is therefore meant to refer to the Chinese articulation of self-realisation or “divine wisdom” (Gottesweisheit) and Hartmann unearths its perennial message.
Practitioners of Theosophy thus transition from the darkness of self-deception into the light of God-embracing salvation (XLV). Referencing Blavatsky (1888a: 136), Hartmann sees the beacon of light as the “holy trinity” (heilige Dreieinigkeit) “Kwan-Shai-yin” (LII), “the divine voice of the soul” and “the voice that speaks audibly to the Initiate” (Blavatsky 1888a: 431). Blavatsky appropriated the Chinese version of the bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara (Chinese: Guānshìyīn
Those who practise Theosophy, that is, the “Initiates,” learn to listen to Kwan- Shai-yin who prescribes the way of their spiritual transformation. Essentially, “every man is his own path” (I),19 because the divine will has already genuinely inscribed itself in our heart and mind in the process of creation.
For Hartmann, the Dàodéjīng is also a text that portrays the embodied culmination of Selbsterkenntnis, the sage (Weise; shèngrén
2.3 References
As befits a seasoned Theosophist, Hartmann’s commentary on the Dàodéjīng verses brings into corroborating conversation a range of thinkers and other texts. Given his proclivity for the Christian tradition, references to the Christian New Testament are frequent – while there is not a single one relating to the Old Testament.22 Of the thirty New Testament references, thirteen are to the Gospel of John. The others refer to 1 Corinthians (5), Colossians (3), Matthew and Ephesians (2 each), and Romans, Galatians, Mark, 1 Timothy, and Revelation (1 each). A long-standing interest of Hartmann’s was the Bhagavadgītā. Not surprisingly, he refers to this text a total of six times, drawing on his German translation of 1892 (Hartmann 1892), which, itself, was based on two earlier English translations, that of the Bengali Theosophist Mohini Mohun Chatterji (1858–1936)23 and the Sacred Books of the East translation by the Indologist Kashinath Trimbak Telang (1850–1893) (Chatterji 1887; Telang 1882).24 Not to be missed in a Theosophical exposition at the time, of course, were references to Blavatsky’s The Secret Doctrine (1888a-b), both volumes quoted by Hartmann.25 More important to Hartmann than the Bhagavadgītā and even The Secret Doctrine, however, were a number of German-speaking Christian mystics and esotericists, whom he marshalled time and again throughout his vast oeuvre. These included figures such as Jacob Böhme (1575–1624), Meister Eckhart (d. 1328), Paracelsus (1493–1541), Thomas a Kempis (d. 1471), and Angelus Silesius (born Johann Scheffler; 1624–1677), but also his early contemporary Johann Baptist Krebs (alias Johann Baptist Kerning; 1774–1851), all of whom are quoted throughout the Dàodéjīng commentary and had preoccupied Hartmann before and after.26 Other Christian writers favoured by Hartmann include the Spanish Quietist Miguel de Molinos (1628–1696) and the English visionary mystic Jane Lead (1624–1704), both of whom he also quotes.27 Additional references made are to the German Orientalist Friedrich Rückert (1788–1866), a poem of whom from his seminal work Die Weisheit der Brahmanen (The Wisdom of the Brahmins; Rückert 1837: 24) Hartmann quotes in full, and to the Buddha as rendered by the Austrian Buddhist and Pāli translator Karl Eugen Neumann (1865–1915) (Neumann 1896: 193).28 What virtually all the quotations have in common, however, are occasionally blatant citation errors, that is, Hartmann’s free adaptation of orthography and syntax. Of the individual authors mentioned by Hartmann, Böhme appears the most frequently with six references, including quotations from Vom übersinnlichen Leben (On Supersensual Life; Böhme 1831: 130), Aurora (Böhme 1835: 65, 291), Psychologia vera (Böhme 1846: 12), Vom dreifachen Leben des Menschen (On the Threefold Life of Man; Böhme 1842: 29) and one of his well-known rhymes.29 In his Dàodéjīng commentary, Hartmann recycles many quotations from his earlier works. The choice of references often seems arbitrary, but they reflect his general reading interests.
Notably, he does not refer to any scholarship or sources pertaining to Chinese religions, nor does he seem to be even remotely informed by them. His commentary is Hartmannian at its best. That is to say, it is a generic reiteration of his Theosophical programme often removed from the actual base text. Thus, it is essentially not a commentary on the Dàodéjīng (or, more precisely, on his verbatim translation of Old’s plagiarised version of Chalmers’ attempt inspired by Julien, to translate the Dàodéjīng), but the Dàodéjīng serves Hartmann as a canvas for his project of perennialist appropriation.
2.4 Notes on the Afterlife(-ves) of Hartmann’s Dàodéjīng
The popularity of Hartmann’s Dàodéjīng was far exceeded by that of his version of the Bhagavadgītā. The future Nobel Prize laureate Hermann Hesse (1877–1962), for example, first encountered Indian thought through Hartmann’s translation, which made a deep impression on him. Despite its limited impact, Hartmann’s Dàodéjīng was widely read. As one of the very few German renditions of the Dàodéjīng at the time – only three translations had been published before Hartmann’s30 – and due to the distribution network of his publisher, Theosophie in China had its visibility. Moreover, Hartmann’s Lotusblüten had a broad (esoteric) readership. That there was a continuing demand for the Hartmann version is shown by the circulation of at least six reprints – in 1900 (see Figure 1), 1903, 1910, 1912, 1920, and 1922 by two different publishers: Verlag von Wilhelm Friedrich and the Theosophische Central-Buchhandlung (Theosophical Central Library), founded in 1899 and based in Leipzig as well. Notably, unlike the Verlag von Wilhelm Friedrich editions, the version published by the Theosophische Central-Buchhandlung indicates that Hartmann’s translation was based on the English rendering from the Chinese (see, e.g., Hartmann 1903).
The back cover of the 1900 edition (Hartmann 1900b), which was published as volume nine of the Bibliothek esoterischer Schriften (Library of Esoteric Writings)
Citation: Vienna Journal of East Asian Studies 16, 1 (2024) ; 10.30965/25217038-12345007
New reprints from esoteric publishers appeared again in the 2010s. Those by the Austrian Verlag Edition Geheimes Wissen (Secret Knowledge Edition Publishing House; Hartmann 2010) and the German Aquamarin Verlag (Hartmann 2013) are based on the 1897 edition, again indicating that Hartmann has translated the book “from the Chinese of Lao-tze.”31 In contrast, the special issue of the German esoteric journal Der hermetische Bund teilt mit (The Hermetic Alliance Informs; Hartmann 2015) is based on the Lotusblüten version, which also includes Hartmann’s brief preliminary note.32 However, parts of Hartmann’s commentary have been altered. Notably, the online blurb of the book, which circulates as both a print and electronic publication reads: “This translation of the Tao Teh King by Dr Franz Hartmann from ancient original texts is meaning-wise the best translation in the German-speaking world. The Theosophist always hits the mark with his words and thus the true hermetic core.”33
Hartmann’s Dàodéjīng is not only today appreciated by some esotericists. It also found (mostly Theosophical) admirers among his contemporaries, such as, fellow Theosophist writer Anton Hartmann, then a key figure of the Theosophische Central-Buchhandlung. In 1900, he published a five-page article on “Das Tao-Teh-King des Lao-tse” in the popular occult journal Neue Metaphysische Rundschau,34 in which he drew heavily on Franz Hartmann’s Dàodéjīng, while also recommending this “splendid work” for further study alongside von Plänckner’s translation (Hartmann A. 1900: 287). Over the next few years, Anton Hartmann gave public lectures with the same title, thereby most likely also popularising Franz Hartmann’s translation. While full reprints of Hartmann’s book, aimed specifically at a Theosophical audience, started to reappear from 1903 (published by the Theosophische Central-Buchhandlung), text snippets also circulated in other publications. For example, a larger portion of the text was published in the Theosophischer Wegweiser zur Erlangung der göttlichen Selbsterkenntnis (Theosophical Guide to the Attainment of Divine Realisation of Self), an important venue for the dissemination of Hartmann’s Theosophical programme (Anon 1906).35
Aside from an esoterically minded audience, Hartmann’s version has been also used by translators and writers, and referred to by scholars.36 Most prominently, the German Sinologist Richard Wilhelm (1873–1930) used three out of the then eight existing German translations alongside various English and French ones in his own seminal translation of the Dàodéjīng (Wilhelm 1911). These included the renditions of von Strauß, the German legal scholar Josef Kohler’s (1849–1919) Des Morgenlandes grösste Weisheit. Laotse. Tao Te King (The Greatest Wisdom of the Orient: Laotse. Tao Te King; 1908),37 and that of Hartmann.38 To the subtitle of Hartmann’s book Aus dem Chinesischen des Lao-tze übersetzt, Wilhelm added a question mark in parentheses after Chinesischen (Wilhelm 1911: 115), thus highlighting his doubts that the translation was really “from the Chinese.” Wilhelm’s Laotse Tao Te King. Das Buch des Alten vom Sinn und Leben (Laotse Tao Te King: The Old Man’s Book of Meaning and Life) remains the most popular German translation to this day, and was also prime reading particularly during the “Dao Fever” of the Weimar Republic (1918–1933), when notable German writers explored Daoism (Walf 2005: 280–282; Grasmück 2004: 25–28). Together with Wilhelm’s translation, those of Alexander Ular – who like Hartmann lacked proficiency in Chinese – and Hartmann had a marked influence on German literary expressionism (Han 1993: 101).39 For example, it was these three that were used exclusively in the re-translation of the Dàodéjīng by the Austrian writer Carl Dallago (1869–1949). His Der Anschluß an das Gesetz oder Der große Anschluß. Versuch einer Wiedergabe des Taoteking (The Connection to the Law or the Great Connection: An Attempt at Rendering the Taoteking) was first published in 1915 with several subsequent re-editions. Whereas Dallago greatly appreciated Wilhelm’s translation, he was particularly critical of Ular’s version. As for Hartmann’s Dàodéjīng, while the translation itself was apparently to Dallago’s liking, he polemically disapproved the Theosophical commentary. Indeed, in his assessment of Hartmann’s commentary, Dallago went on to launch a severe critique of Theosophy in general (1915: 65, 67–68):
The first thing that comes to mind is the “Reflections on the Tao-Teh- King.” I suppose that even its English originator – and not just the Theosophist Dr Franz Hartmann, who provides a little Theosophical saying for every statement – may well have understood how to extract everything tangible from the Taoteking. But the spirit has usually managed to escape. Often the effect is as if someone had captured the strokes without being able to read the writing. […] In any case, the Taoteking has nothing in common with Theosophy in its origin. You can put Theosophy into anything, but you should not imagine that you can use it as a religion. Where such an intention is present, it is rather a sign of the decline of the religious. For the source of the religious lies in the recognition of the inability to know; feeling perceives the presence of the imperceptible, it leads to the relinquishing of knowledge. The Taoteking is imbued with this feeling; that is why it is a supreme religious document. (Admittedly, Theosophists are fond of cautioning their opponents that an appreciation of Theosophical writings presupposes a precise knowledge of Theosophical teachings. And they believe they are emphasising the value of these writings all the more when they point out, as they did to me, that, for example, “the doctrine of the sevenfold constitution of the world and of man claims to be of great importance for science.” Well, let them have their fun: then Theosophy at best proves itself to be a kind of science and should be content with that. But it never has the right to pretend that it is the triumph of all religion. For one thing is certain: the more truly religious something is, the less it claims to be important for science.) I think this should be enough to refute the intrusion of Theosophy into the Taoteking.40
4 Concluding Remarks
Theosophist translators have been imperative in the reception history of Asian religions and Franz Hartmann was one of their pioneers. He was not so much concerned with the work of translation per se – for which he simply lacked even rudimentary linguistic skills, which others certainly had, such as Charles Johnston or the later Dàodéjīng translator Charles Spurgeon Medhurst (1860–1927) (Powles 2010) – but with the perennialist message he believed these texts contained. For him, it was essentially content over form. Accordingly, he used existing translations without much creative attention, sometimes in a brazen manner, as in the case of his verbatim retranslation of Walter Richard Old’s already plagiarised Dàodéjīng. For Hartmann, the translation itself was merely an outer shell; what it supposedly encapsulated was what he wanted to uncover. Hartmann’s archaeology of the Dàodéjīng, however, was neither a philological nor a philosophical project. In Theosophical fashion, he imposed his worldview on the text. In doing so, however, he barely engaged in any conversation with the source material, instead reiterating his Theosophical master narrative of the anthropological obligation to attain Gotteserkenntnis through Selbsterkenntnis. Theosophie in China is a lesson in textual appropriation, a commentary that is widely detached from its reference text. This is also because Chinese religions, Daoism, and the Dàodéjīng were unknown territory for Hartmann. Theosophie in China is clearly an outlier in his overall work, far removed from his actual expertise and interests.
Other Theosophists before Hartmann have acknowledged the Dàodéjīng as a Theosophical guide containing perennial religious truth (Pokorny 2024); however, Hartmann was the first to elaborate on it in a commentary, making Hartmann’s Dàodéjīng a genuinely Theosophical Dàodéjīng.
References
Primary Sources
Abel-Rémusat, Jean-Pierre. 1823. Mémoire sur la vie et les opinions de Lao-tseu, philosophe chinois du VI.e siècle avant notre ère. Paris: Imprimerie Royale.
Anon. 1785. Geheime Figuren der Rosenkreuzer, aus dem 16ten und 17ten Jahrhundert. Altona: J. D. A. Eckhardt.
Anon. 1897. “M. B. in S.” Lotusblüten, 10 (51), p. 760.
Anon. 1906. “Der erhabene Tao-Pfad.” Theosophischer Wegweiser zur Erlangung der göttlichen Selbsterkenntnis. Monatsschrift zur Verbreitung einer höheren Weltanschauung und zur Verwirklichung der Idee einer allgemeinen Menschenverbrüderung auf Grundlage der Erkenntnis der wahren Menschennatur, 8, pp. 305–313.
Blavatsky, Helena Petrovna. 1877. Isis Unveiled: A Master-Key to the Mysteries of Ancient and Modern Science and Theology. New York: J. W. Bouton.
Blavatsky, Helena Petrovna. 1888a. The Secret Doctrine: The Synthesis of Science, Religion, and Philosophy. Volume I. Cosmogenesis. London: The Theosophical Publishing Company.
Blavatsky, Helena Petrovna. 1888b. The Secret Doctrine: The Synthesis of Science, Religion, and Philosophy. Volume II. Anthropogenesis. London: The Theosophical Publishing Company.
Böhme, Jacob. 1831. Jakob Böhme’s Sämmtliche Werke, vol. 1. Leipzig: Johann Ambrosius Barth.
Böhme, Jacob. 1835. Des Gottseligen Hocherleuchteten Teutschen Theosophen Jacob Böhme Sämmtliche Werke genau nach Amsterdamer Ausgabe von 1682 unter steter Vergleichung der beiden Editionen von 1715 und 1730, von Neuen aufgelegt, vol. 1. Stuttgart: Hallberg’sche Verlagshandlung.
Böhme, Jacob. 1842. Jakob Böhme’s Sämmtliche Werke, vol. 4. Leipzig: Verlag von Johann Ambrosius Barth.
Böhme, Jacob. 1846. Jakob Böhme’s Sämtliche Werke, vol. 6. Leipzig: Verlag von Johann Ambrosius Barth.
Carus, Paul. 1894. The Gospel of Buddha According to Old Records. Chicago: The Open Court Publishing Company.
Carus, Paul. 1898. Lao-tze’s Tao-Teh-King: Chinese-English with Introduction, Transliteration, and Notes. Chicago: The Open Court Publishing Company.
Chalmers, John. 1868. Tau Tĕh King. The Speculations on Metaphysics, Polity, and Morality of “The Old Philosopher” Lau-tsze. Translated from the Chinese with an Introduction. London: Trübner & Co.
Chatterji, Mohini Mohun. 1887. The Bhagavad Gîtâ or The Lord’s Lay with Commentary and Notes, as well as References to the Christian Scriptures. Translated from the Sanskrit for the Benefit of Those in Search of Spiritual Light. London: Trübner & Co.
Dallago, Carl. 1915. “Der Anschluß an das Gesetz oder Der große Anschluß. Versuch einer Wiedergabe des Taoteking.” In Ludwig von Ficker, ed., Brenner-Jahrbuch, vol. 5. Innsbruck: Brenner-Verlag, pp. 62–129.
Dvorak, Rudolf. 1903. Lao-tsï und seine Lehre. Münster: Druck und Verlag der Aschendorffschen Buchhandlung.
Evans, Guglielmo. 1905. Lao-tse e il libro della via e della virtù. Torino: Fratelli Bocca.
Franke, Otto. 1910. “Die religionswissenschaftliche Literatur über China seit 1900.” In Richard Wünsch, ed., Archiv für Religionswissenschaft, vol. 13. Leipzig: Verlag von B. G. Teubner, pp. 111–152.
Göring, Hugo. 1895. “Dr. Franz Hartmann, ein Vorkämpfer der Theosophie.” Sphinx. Monatschrift für Seelen- und Geistesleben, 20 (107), pp. 1–10.
Grill, Julius. 1910. Lao-tszes Buch vom höchsten Wesen und vom höchsten Gut. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck).
Hartmann, Anton. 1900. “Das Tao-Teh-King des Lao-tse.” Neue Metaphysische Rundschau. Monatsschrift für philosophische, psychologische und okkulte Forschungen in welcher enthalten ist Archiv für animalischen (Heil-)Magnetismus, Astrologische Rundschau; Rundschau für Phrenologie und Theosophie, 3 (8), pp. 283–287.
Hartmann, Franz. 1886. Magic, White and Black, or, The Science of Finite and Infinite Life: Containing Practical Hints for Students of Occultism. London: George Redway.
Hartmann, Franz. 1887a. An Adventure among the Rosicrucians. Boston: Occult Publishing Company.
Hartmann, Franz. 1887b. The Life of Philippus Theophrastus Bombast of Hohenheim, Known by the Name of Paracelsus and the Substance of His Teachings Concerning Cosmology, Anthropology, Pneumatology, Magic and Sorcery Medicine, Alchemy and Astrology, Philosophy and Theosophy: Extracted and Translated from His Rare and Extensive Works and from Some Unpublished Manuscripts. London: George Redway.
Hartmann, Franz. 1888. The Life of Jehoshua, the Prophet of Nazareth. An Occult Study and a Key to the Bible. Containing the History of an Initiate. Boston and London: Occult Publishing Company/Theosophical Publication Society.
Hartmann, Franz. 1889. The Principles of Astrological Geomancy: The Art of Divining by Punctuation, According to Cornelius Agrippa and Others. With an Appendix Containing 2,048 Answers to Questions. London: Theosophical Publishing Company.
Hartmann, Franz. 1890. The Talking Image of Urur. New York: John W. Lovell Company.
Hartmann, Franz. 1891. The Life and Doctrines of Jacob Boehme: The God-taught Philosopher. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trübner & Co.
Hartmann, Franz. 1892. Die Bhagavad Gita. Das Lied von der Gottheit oder Die Lehre vom göttlichen Sein. In verständlicher Form ins Deutsche übertragen und mit erläuternden Anmerkungen sowie ausgewählten correspondierenden Citaten hervorragender deutscher Mystiker versehen. Braunschweig: C. A. Schwetschke und Sohn.
Hartmann, Franz. 1894a. “Atma Bodha oder Die Selbsterkenntnis. Von Sankaracharya (Aus dem Sanskrit übersetzt von Charles Johnston).” Lotusblüten, 4 (23), pp. 541–558.
Hartmann, Franz. 1894b. Die weisse und schwarze Magie oder Das Gesetz des Geistes in der Natur. Leipzig: Verlag von Wilhelm Friedrich.
Hartmann, Franz. 1894c. Theophrastus Paracelsus als Mystiker. Ein Versuch, die in den Schriften von Theophrastus Paracelsus verborgene Mystik durch das Licht der in den Veden der Inder enthaltenen Weisheitslehren anschaulich zu machen. Leipzig: Verlag von Wilhelm Friedrich.
Hartmann, Franz. 1894d. Tattwa Bodha (Daseinserkenntnis) von Sankaracharya. Leipzig: Verlag von Wilhelm Friedrich.
Hartmann, Franz. 1895a. Among the Gnomes: An Occult Tale of Adventure in the Untersberg. London: T. Fisher Unwin.
Hartmann, Franz. 1895b. Atma Bodha (Selbsterkenntnis) von Sankaracharya. Leipzig: Verlag von Wilhelm Friedrich.
Hartmann, Franz. 1895c. Buried Alive: An Examination into The Occult Causes of Apparent Death, Trance and Catalepsy. Boston: Occult Publishing Company.
Hartmann, Franz. 1895d. Das Palladium der Weisheit (Viveka Chudamani) von Sankaracharya. Aus dem Sanskrit übersetzt von Mohini Chatterji. Leipzig: Verlag von Wilhelm Friedrich.
Hartmann, Franz. 1895e. Die Geheimlehre in der Christlichen Religion nach den Erklärungen von Meister Eckhart. Leipzig: Verlag von Wilhelm Friedrich.
Hartmann, Franz. 1895f. Die Religionslehre der Buddhisten. Aus dem „Evangelium Buddhas“. Nach dem Originaltext ins Englische übersetzt von Paul Carus. Leipzig: Verlag von Wilhelm Friedrich.
Hartmann, Franz. 1896a. Der Yoga-Schlaf (Samadhi). Leipzig: Verlag von Wilhelm Friedrich.
Hartmann, Franz. 1896b. Lebendig begraben. Eine Untersuchung der Natur und Ursachen des Scheintodes und der Mittel zur Verhütung des Lebendigbegrabenwerdens. Leipzig: Verlag von Wilhelm Friedrich.
Hartmann, Franz. 1896c. “Theosophie in China. Betrachtungen über das TAO-TEH- KING. (Der Weg, die Wahrheit und das Licht.) Aus dem Chinesischen des Lao-tze.” Lotusblüten, 8 (46), pp. 467–484.
Hartmann, Franz. 1896d. “Theosophie in China. Betrachtungen über das TAO-TEH-KING. (Der Weg, die Wahrheit und das Licht.) Aus dem Chinesischen des Lao-tze.” Lotusblüten, 8 (47), pp. 547–568.
Hartmann, Franz. 1896d. “Theosophie in China. Betrachtungen über das TAO-TEH-KING. (Der Weg, die Wahrheit und das Licht.) Aus dem Chinesischen des Lao-tze.” Lotusblüten, 8 (48), pp. 633–645.
Hartmann, Franz. 1896e. “Theosophie in China. Betrachtungen über das TAO-TEH-KING. (Der Weg, die Wahrheit und das Licht.) Aus dem Chinesischen des Lao-tze.” Lotusblüten, 8 (49), pp. 726–743.
Hartmann, Franz. 1896f. “Theosophie in China. Betrachtungen über das TAO-TEH-KING. (Der Weg, die Wahrheit und das Licht.) Aus dem Chinesischen des Lao-tze.” Lotusblüten, 8 (50), pp. 800–819.
Hartmann, Franz. 1896g. “Theosophie in China. Betrachtungen über das TAO-TEH-KING. (Der Weg, die Wahrheit und das Licht.) Aus dem Chinesischen des Lao-tze.” Lotusblüten, 8 (51), pp. 892–914.
Hartmann, Franz. 1896h. Unter den Gnomen im Untersberg. Eine sonderbare Geschichte. Leipzig: Verlag von Wilhelm Friedrich.
Hartmann, Franz. 1897a. Die Erkenntnislehre der Bhagavad Gita im Lichte der Geheimlehre betrachtet. Leipzig: Verlag von Wilhelm Friedrich.
Hartmann, Franz. 1897b. Jehoshua, der Prophet von Nazareth oder Bruchstücke aus den Mysterien. Die Geschichte einer wahren Initiation und ein Schlüssel zum Verständnisse der Allegorien der Bibel. Leipzig: Verlag von Wilhelm Friedrich.
Hartmann, Franz. 1897c. Karma oder Wissen, Wirken und Werden. Enthaltend praktische Anweisungen in Bezug auf die okkulte Wissenschaft für diejenigen, welche nicht bloss wissen, sondern auch werden wollen. Leipzig: Verlag von Wilhelm Friedrich.
Hartmann, Franz. 1897d. “Theosophie in China. Betrachtungen über das TAO-TEH-KING. (Der Weg, die Wahrheit und das Licht.) Aus dem Chinesischen des Lao-tze.” Lotusblüten, 9 (52), pp. 33–50.
Hartmann, Franz. 1897e. “Theosophie in China. Betrachtungen über das TAO-TEH-KING. (Der Weg, die Wahrheit und das Licht.) Aus dem Chinesischen des Lao-tze.” Lotusblüten, 9 (53), pp. 139–148.
Hartmann, Franz. 1897f. Theosophie in China. Betrachtungen über das Tao-Teh-King (Der Weg, die Wahrheit und das Licht). Aus dem Chinesischen des Lao-tze übersetzt. Leipzig: Verlag von Wilhelm Friedrich.
Hartmann, Franz. 1900a. Betrachtungen über die die Mystik in Goethes “Faust”. Leipzig: Verlag von Wilhelm Friedrich.
Hartmann, Franz. 1900b. Tao-Teh-King (Der Weg, die Wahrheit und das Licht). Aus dem Chinesischen des Lao-tze übersetzt. Leipzig: Verlag von Wilhelm Friedrich.
Hartmann, Franz. 1901. Weisheit des Orients von Kerning. Als Manuskript im Jahre 5841 gedruckt. Aufs Neue gesammelt und redigiert. Leipzig: Lotus-Verlag.
Hartmann, Franz. 1903. Betrachtungen über das Tao-Teh-King (Der Weg, die Wahrheit und das Licht) Deutsche Ausgabe nach der englischen Übersetzung aus dem Chinesischen des Lao-tze. Leipzig: Theosophische Central-Buchhandlung.
Hartmann, Franz. 1908. “Autobiography of Dr. Franz Hartmann.” The Occult Review, 7, pp. 7–35.
Hartmann, Franz. 2010. Tao-Teh-King (Der Weg, die Wahrheit und das Licht). Aus dem Chinesischen des Lao-tze übersetzt. Graz: Edition Geheimes Wissen.
Hartmann, Franz. 2013. Tao. Die Weisheit des Laotse. Tao-Te-King. Grafing: Aquamarin Verlag.
Hartmann, Franz. 2015. “Tao-Teh-King. Franz Hartmann.” Der Hermetische Bund teilt mit. Eine hermetische Zeitschrift, special issue 7. Waltrop: Christof Uiberreiter Verlag.
Hartmann, Franz. n.d. Was ist Theosophie? Die Theosophische Gesellschaft und ihre Zwecke. 3rd edition. Leipzig: Theosophisches Verlagshaus.
Johnston, Charles. 1894a. “The Awakening to the Self. Shankaracharya’s Atma Bodha.” Oriental Department, 18, pp. 59–63.
Johnston, Charles. 1894b. “The Awakening to the Self. Shankarâchârya’s Âtma Bodha.” Lucifer, 15 (87), pp. 182–184.
Johnston, Charles. 1894c. “The Awakening to the Self. Shankarâchârya’s Âtma Bodha.” Lucifer, 15 (88), pp. 270–272.
Johnston, Charles. 1895a. “The Awakening to Reality. Shankaracharya’s Tattva Bodha.” Oriental Department, 21, pp. 108–112.
Johnston, Charles. 1895b. “The Awakening to Reality. Shankaracharya’s Tattva Bodha.” Oriental Department, 22, pp. 121–124.
Julien, Stanislas Aignan. 1842. Lao Tseu Tao Te King. Le livre de la voie et de la vertu. Composé dans le VIe siècle avant l’ère chrétienne. Par le philosophe Lao-Tseu; traduit en français, et publié avec le texte chinois et un commentaire perpétuel. Paris: Imprimerie Royale.
Legge, James. 1891. The Sacred Books of China: The Texts of Tâoism, Part I. The Tâo Teh King. The Writings of Kwang-dze Book I–XVII. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Kohler, Josef. 1908. Des Morgenlandes grösste Weisheit. Laotse. Tao Te King. Berlin and Leipzig: Verlag von Dr. Walther Rothschild.
Neumann, Karl Eugen. 1896. Die Reden Gotamo Buddho’s aus der Mittleren Sammlung Majjhimanikāyo des Pāli-Kanons zum ersten Mal uebersetzt, vol. 1. Leipzig: Verlag von Wilhelm Friedrich.
Noak, Friedrich Wilhelm. 1888. Taòtekking von Laòtsee. Aus dem Chinesischen. Berlin: Carl Duncker’s Verlag.
Old, Walter Gorn. 1904. The Book of the Simple Way of Laotze. The Contemporary of Confucius, China, B.C. 604: A New Translation from the Text of the Tao-Teh-King with Introduction and Commentary. London: Philip Wellby.
Old, Walter Richard. 1892. “Tao.” Lucifer, 11 (63), pp. 204–214.
Old, Walter Richard. 1894. The Book of the Path of Virtue or A Version of the Tao-Teh-King of Lao-tze, the Chinese Mystic and Philosopher: With an Introduction & Essay on the Tao as Presented in the Writings of Chuang-tze, The Apostle of the Tao-Tze. Madras: The Indian Section of the Theosophical Society.
Rückert, Friedrich. 1837. Die Weisheit der Brahmanen, ein Lehrgedicht in Bruchstücken, vol. 2. Leipzig: Weidmann’sche Buchhandlung.
Telang, Kâshinâth Trimbak. 1882. The Bhagavadgîtâ with the Sanatsugâtîya and the Anugîtâ. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Ular, Alexander. 1902. Le Livre de la Voie et de la ligne droite de Lao-tsé. Paris: Éditeurs de la Revue Blanche.
Ular, Alexander. 1903. Die Bahn und der rechte Weg des Lao-Tse. Der chinesischen Urschrift nachgedacht. Leipzig: Insel-Verlag.
von Plaenckner, Reinhold. 1870. Lao-Tse Táo-Tĕ-King. Der Weg zur Tugend. Aus dem Chinesischen übersetzt und erklärt. Leipzig: F. A. Brockhaus.
von Strauss, Victor. 1870. Laò-Tsè’s Taò Tĕ Kīng. Aus dem Chinesischen ins Deutsche übersetzt, eingeleitet und commentirt. Leipzig: Verlag von Friedrich Fleischer.
Wilhelm, Richard. 1911. Laotse Tao Te King. Das Buch des Alten vom Sinn und Leben. Aus dem Chinesischen verdeutscht und erläutert. Jena: Eugen Diederichs.
Zillmann, Paul. 1912/1913. “Nachrufe von einigen seiner Schüler.” Theosophie, 3 (6), pp. 191–194.
Secondary Sources
Carmichael, Lucas. 2017. “The Daode jing as American Scripture: Text, Tradition, and Translation.” Ph.D. thesis, The University of Chicago, USA.
Emmerich, Reinhard. 2017. “Josef Kohler (1849–1919) über China.” In Kerstin Storm and Jonas Polfuß, eds., Rechtskultur und Gerechtigkeitssinn in China. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, pp. 31–73.
Goodrick-Clarke, Nicholas. 1985. The Occult Roots of Nazism: The Ariosophists of Austria and Germany 1890–1935. Wellingborough, UK: The Aquarian Press.
Grasmück, Oliver. 2004. Geschichte und Aktualität der Daoismusrezeption im deutschsprachigen Raum. Münster: LIT Verlag.
Han, Ruixin. 1993. Die China-Rezeption bei expressionistischen Autoren. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Mühlematter, Yves. 2025. “Charles Johnston’s Translation of the Yogasūtra as a Book of Theosophical Initiation.” In Susanne Scholz and Caroline Vander Stichele, eds., Contemporary Yoga and Sacred Texts. London and New York: Routledge, pp. 52–71.
Mukhopadhyay, Mriganka. 2020. “Mohini: A Case Study of a Transnational Spiritual Space in the History of the Theosophical Society.” NVMEN: International Review for the History of Religions, 67 (2/3), pp. 165–190.
Pokorny, Lukas K. 2024. “The Theosophical Daodejing: The Beginnings.” In Lukas K. Pokorny and Franz Winter, eds., Appropriating the Dao: The Euro-American Esoteric Reception of China. London and New York: Bloomsbury, pp. 61–82.
Powles, Judith C. 2010. “Misguided or Misunderstood? The Case of Charles Spurgeon Medhurst (1860–1927), Baptist Missionary to China.” Baptist Quarterly, 43 (6), pp. 347–364.
Read, Malcolm. 1977. “China and Germany: A Study of Images and Influences of China in German Literature.” Ph.D. thesis, University of Hull, United Kingdom.
Tang, Chao. 2024. “The Active Influence of Taoism on German Literature at the Turn of the Twentieth Century.” Ph.D. thesis, Pennsylvania State University, USA.
Ulbricht, Justus H. 1996. “Das völkische Verlagswesen im deutschen Kaiserreich.” In Uwe Puschner, Walter Schmitz, and Justus H. Ulbricht, eds., Handbuch zur “Völkischen Bewegung” 1871–1918. München: K. G. Saur, pp. 277–301.
Walf, Knut. 2005. “Fascination and Misunderstanding: The Ambivalent Western Reception of Daoism.” Monumenta Serica, 53, pp. 273–286.
Wolffram, Heather. 2009. The Stepchildren of Science: Psychical Research and Parapsychology in Germany, c. 1870–1939. Amsterdam and New York: Rodopi.
Zander, Helmut. 2004. “Theosophische Zeitschriften in Deutschland bis 1945.” In Judith Baumgartner and Bernd Wedemeyer-Kolwe, eds., Aufbrüche, Seitenpfade, Abwege. Suchbewegungen und Subkulturen im 20. Jahrhundert. Festschrift für Ulrich Linse. Würzburg: Königshausen und Neumann, pp. 99–120.
“Theosophie war ihm die Selbsterkenntnis der Wahrheit im Menschen. Er selbst war das beste Beispiel für seine Lehre, aus ihm sprach göttliche Weisheit, wenn er sich ihr hingegeben hatte. Nie habe ich die Aura eines Menschen so leuchtend gesehen wie bei Franz Hartmann. […] Literarisch hinterläßt Hartmann eine große Erbschaft. Man kann seine Schriften nicht wissenschaftlich nennen, sie sind mystisch im besten Sinne des Wortes. […] Man lese seine Werke mit dem Herzen, dann wird man verstehen, weshalb wir Hartmann neben H. P. Blavatsky stellen […]. Hartmann’s Schriften sind einer Musik gleich, die uns in höhere Regionen erhebt, in dieser dynamischen Wirkung liegt ihr unendlich großer Wert” (Zillmann 1912/13: 193–194).
“Lao-tze, geboren 604 vor der christlichen Zeitrechnung, war ein berühmter chinesischer Philosoph, oder vielmehr Theosoph, d. h. ein Erleuchteter […].”
Notably, on his way to Adyar from San Francisco via Japan, he had a brief stopover in Hong Kong.
“[…] und seine Lehren führten in späteren Zeiten zur Bildung eines Religionssystems, welches heutzutage unter den besseren Klassen in China weit verbreitet ist.”
For the early Theosophical encounter with the Dàodéjīng, see Pokorny 2024.
See https://franzhartmann.eu/ (accessed: December 5, 2024).
On Theosophical journals in Germany up to 1945, see Zander 2004. Founded in 1878 by Wilhelm Friedrich (1851–1925), the Verlag von Wilhelm Friedrich served as the main publishing venue of early German naturalism. In the early 1890s, Friedrich went bankrupt and passed his publishing house on to his friend, the music historian Hans Merian (1857–1902). In 1903, the Verlag von Wilhelm Friedrich was sold to the Theosophist Max Altmann, who specialised exclusively in occult and Theosophical literature.
Prior to starting his German language publishing career, Hartmann was already a seasoned writer, having published several books in English. These include, among others, Magic White and Black, or, The Science of Finite and Infinite Life: Containing Practical Hints for Students of Occultism, whose first edition was published in 1886 in London (Hartmann 1886), the novels An Adventure among the Rosicrucians (Hartmann 1887a) and The Talking Image of Urur (Hartmann 1890), The Life of Philippus Theophrastus Bombast of Hohenheim, Known by the Name of Paracelsus (Hartmann 1887b), The Life of Jehoshua, the Prophet of Nazareth: An Occult Study and a Key to the Bible (Hartmann 1888), The Principles of Astrological Geomancy (Hartmann 1889), and The Life and Doctrines of Jacob Boehme: The God-taught Philosopher (Hartmann 1891). Before turning to the Verlag von Wilhelm Friedrich, Hartmann published a book with C. A. Schwetschke und Sohn in Braunschweig, namely, Die Bhagavad Gita. Das Lied von der Gottheit oder Die Lehre vom göttlichen Sein (The Bhagavad Gita: The Song of the Godhead or The Doctrine of Divine Being; Hartmann 1892).
Die weisse und schwarze Magie oder Das Gesetz des Geistes in der Natur (White and Black Magic or the Law of the Spirit in Nature; Hartmann 1894b, based on Hartmann 1886), Theophrastus Paracelsus als Mystiker (Theophrastus Paracelsus as a Mystic; Hartmann 1894c) Tattwa Bodha (Daseinserkenntnis) von Sankaracharya (Tattwa Bodha [Realisation of Existence] by Sankaracharya; Hartmann 1894d), Atma Bodha (Selbsterkenntnis) von Sankaracharya (Atma Bodha [Realisation of Self] by Sankaracharya; Hartmann 1895b), Das Palladium der Weisheit (Viveka Chudamani) von Sankaracharya (The Palladium of Wisdom [Viveka Chudamani] by Sankaracharya; Hartmann 1895d), Die Geheimlehre in der Christlichen Religion nach den Erklärungen von Meister Eckhart (The Secret Doctrine in the Christian Religion According to the Explanations of Meister Eckhart; Hartmann 1895e), Der Yoga-Schlaf (Samadhi) (Yoga Sleep [Samadhi]; Hartmann 1896a), Lebendig begraben. Eine Untersuchung der Natur und Ursachen des Scheintodes und der Mittel zur Verhütung des Lebendigbegrabenwerdens (Buried Alive: An Examination into the Nature and Causes of Apparent Death and the Means of Preventing Being Buried Alive; Hartmann 1896b, based on Hartmann 1895c), and the novel Unter den Gnomen im Untersberg. Eine sonderbare Geschichte (Among the Gnomes in the Untersberg: A Strange Story; Hartmann 1896h), which was the German translation of his 1895 Among the Gnomes: An Occult Tale of Adventure in the Untersberg (Hartmann 1895a). The same year Theosophie in China appeared, Hartmann published several other works with the Verlag von Wilhelm Friedrich: Jehoshua, der Prophet von Nazareth oder Bruchstücke aus den Mysterien (Jehoshua, the Prophet of Nazareth or Fragments from the Mysteries; Hartmann 1897b, based on Hartmann 1888), Karma oder Wissen, Wirken und Werden (Karma or Knowledge, Action, and Becoming; Hartmann 1897c), and Die Erkenntnislehre der Bhagavad Gita im Lichte der Geheimlehre betrachtet (The Bhagavad Gita’s Doctrine of Knowledge Viewed in the Light of the Secret Doctrine; Hartmann 1897a).
Lotusblüten. Ein monatlich erscheinendes Journal enthaltend Originalartikel und ausgewählte Übersetzungen aus der orientalischen Litteratur in Bezug auf die Grundlage der Religionen des Ostens und der THEOSOPHIE (Lotus Blossoms: A Monthly Journal Containing Original Articles and Selected Translations from Oriental Literature on the Foundations of the Religions of the East and THEOSOPHY). The spelling of Lotusblüten was changed to Lotusblüthen in later volumes.
Interestingly, a reply (likely by Hartmann himself) to a letter from a reader in the Lotusblüthen states (Anon 1897) that the “translation of the Tao-Teh-King published in book form was not translated directly from the Chinese, but instead from an English translation of the Chinese into German by Dr. Hartmann. The information on the title page, which gives the impression that it is a direct translation from the Chinese, is based on a printing error which remained due to the author’s absence” (“Die in Buchform erschienene Übersetzung des Tao-Teh-King ist nicht von Dr. Hartmann direkt aus dem Chinesischen, sondern aus einer englischen Übersetzung des Chinesischen von ihm ins Deutsche übertragen worden. Die Angabe auf dem Titelblatte, welche glauben lässt, dass es eine direkte Übersetzung aus dem Chinesischen sei, beruht auf einen Druckfehler der während der Abwesenheit des Verfassers stehen blieb”). In fact, all eight parts of the serialised Lotusblüten version carry the subtitle “translated from the Chinese of Lao-tze,” as does the reprinted edition of 1900 (Hartmann 1900b).
Johnston’s annotated translation of the Tattvabodha was published in the papers of the Oriental Department of the Theosophical Society’s American Section (Johnston 1895a–b). Hartmann must have had access to the manuscript before its publication in early 1895. It is noteworthy that while Hartmann’s translation of Śaṅkara’s Ātmabodha (Awakening to the Self) in the Lotusblüten (Hartmann 1894a) mentions Charles Johnston’s Sanskrit rendering (although without giving an exact reference), the book publication (1895b) does not, stating only that the Ātmabodha was “translated by Franz Hartmann.” Johnston’s translation of the Ātmabodha was also published in the papers of the Oriental Department (Johnston 1894a) as well as in the Blavatsky Lodge journal Lucifer (Johnston 1894b-c). On Johnston, see Mühlematter 2025.
This was already indicated by Lucas Carmichael in his doctoral thesis. However, Carmichael wrongly assumes that Hartmann’s translation “may be the first translation produced without the aid of a Chinese text” (2017: 86). He is also erring when he states that “Hartmann’s version is notable, however, for one significant departure from Old: he translates dao as ‘Gott’ (God) throughout” (ibid.). In fact, Gott in Hartmann’s translation is given only twice: once as a direct translation from Old (IV), and another as a clarifying addition in brackets (LVI). On Old, see Pokorny 2024: 65–69.
“Ein Werk wie Tao-Teh-King ohne einen erklärenden Kommentar wiederzugeben, würde deshalb nur wenig Wert haben, weil sich nur wenige Leser die Mühe machen würden, die einzelnen Paragraphen dem zu ihrem Verständnisse nötigen Studium zu unterziehen.”
In his doctoral thesis, Malcolm Read erroneously claims that Hartmann’s translation is an adaptation of the von Strauß version (Read 1977: 32).
In fact, at the time Hartmann wrote his Theosophie in China, he could have had access to several translations in English, French, and German. For a list of translations available in European languages by 1896, see Pokorny 2024: 62–63. Yet, Hartmann was largely a connoisseur of esoteric and especially Theosophical writings. Chinese religions and Daoism were a niche topic in esoteric writings at the time, which left Hartmann with only rudimentary knowledge. Moreover, Hartmann’s predilection for Indian and hardly so for East Asian religions meant that there was likely no prior reason for him to delve into the subject in the first place.
“Tao (ähnlich wie theos) bedeutet soviel als ‘das Wort’ (Logos) oder ‘der Weg’; Teh: die Wahrheit oder das Gesetz; King: ‘der Himmel’ oder ‘das Licht’. Tao-Teh-King ist somit der Weg zur Erkenntnis der Wahrheit.”
Old presumably got this through Chalmers 1868: xi–xii and Legge 1891: 12.
“Jeder Mensch ist sich selbst der Pfad.”
“[…] der Zustand der Allseligkeit, in welchem kein Selbstwahn existiert, sondern wo der Geist sich seiner Allgegenwart und Einheit bewusst ist.”
“Ohne Leiden gelangt man nicht zur Erkenntnis, und deshalb sind die Leiden die Schatten, welche das Glück vor sich wirft.”
Malcolm Read largely ignored the Theosophical dimension of Hartmann’s commentary, even arguing that for him “the Tao-te-king is little more than a parallel text to the Bible [… and Daoism is] an assurance of the validity of his interpretation of Christian doctrine” (1977: 33). In his brief assessment of the Hartmann text, Chao Tang omits any mention of the Theosophical background of the work altogether and instead, drawing on Read, stresses that Hartmann approached the Dàodéjīng from a fundamentally Christian perspective (2024: 52). Moreover, he also points out that it is unclear “from which version Hartmann’s was translated” (ibid.: 51).
On Chatterji, see Mukhopadhyay 2020.
In the preface to his book, Hartmann merely states that in his translation he was occasionally informed by existing German and English translations (1892: iv).
The other two texts mentioned by Hartmann in his commentary are Johann Wolfgang von Goethe’s (1749–1832) Faust (1808) and the Geheime Figuren der Rosenkreuzer (Secret Symbols of the Rosicrucians; Anon 1785) by an anonymous author. The esoteric dimension of Faust would be of particular interest to Hartmann some years later (Hartmann 1900a; see also the articles in his Lotusblüthen in 1899).
On Paracelsus, see Hartmann 1887b and 1894c; on Böhme, see Hartmann 1891; on Meister Eckhart, see Hartmann 1895e; on Kerning, see Hartmann 1901.
Other figures Hartmann took a keen interest in included, among others, the French Catholic mystic Jeanne-Marie Bouvier de La Motte Guyon (1648–1717), the German Christian theosophist Karl von Eckartshausen (1752–1803), the English Christian mystic John Pordage (1607–1681), the Italian occultist Alessandro Cagliostro (1743–1795), the German occultist Agrippa von Nettesheim (1486–1535), the English Theosophist and medium Mabel Collins (née Minna Cook; 1851–1927) and, especially, the president of the Theosophical Society Adyar, Annie Besant (1847–1933).
At the time of writing Theosophie in China, Hartmann’s interest for Buddhism heightened. For example, prior to reading Neumann, Hartmann published his translation of German-American editor and philosopher Paul Carus’ (1852–1919) The Gospel of Buddha According to Old Records (Carus 1894) first in Lotusblüten and, subsequently, as a book entitled Die Religionslehre der Buddhisten. Aus dem „Evangelium Buddhas“ (The Religious Teachings of the Buddhists: From the “Gospel of Buddha”; Hartmann 1895f).
“Wem Zeit ist wie Ewigkeit, Und Ewigkeit wie die Zeit; Der ist befreit, Von allem Streit” (“To whom time is like eternity, and eternity like time, he is freed from all strife”) (Böhme 1835: 17). This rhyme, for example, concludes Hartmann’s short commentary “The inevitable is the eternal” (“Das Unvermeidliche ist das Ewige”) in relation to a passage in Verse XVI, translated as “Dieses Zurückkehren nach dem ersten Ursprunge wird der Friede genannt. Es ist das Eingehen in das Unvermeidliche” (Hartmann 1897f: 25) The English original by Old reads: “This going back to one’s origin is called Peace; it is the giving of oneself over to the inevitable” (Old 1894: 6). In Chalmers’ translation: “Going home to the origin is called stillness. It is said to be a reversion to destiny” (1868: 11), and in Julien’s: “Revenir à son origine s’appelle être en repos. Être en repos s’appelle revenir à la vie” (1842: 55). The underlying Chinese is “
These were Lao-Tse Táo-Tĕ-King. Der Weg zur Tugend (Lao-Tse Táo-Tĕ-King: The Way to Virtue; von Plaenckner 1870) by the German astronomer and hobby Sinologist Reinhold von Plänckner (1820–1884), Laò-Tsè’s Taò Tĕ Kīng (von Strauss 1870) by the German Protestant theologian and politician Viktor von Strauß (1809–1899), and Taòtekking von Laòtsee (1888) published by Friedrich Wilhelm Noak.
To this day, the Aquamarin Verlag edition appears among the first hits on the German Amazon website.
The journal is in the tradition of the Hermetic teachings of the Austro-Czech esotericist Franz Bardon (1909–1958).
“Diese Übertragung des Tao Teh King von Dr. Franz Hartmann aus alten Originaltexten ist die beste, sinngemäße Übersetzung im deutschsprachigen Raum. Der Theosoph trifft mit seinen Worten immer die Mitte und somit den wahren hermetischen Kern.” See https://www.hermetischer-bund.com/sonderausgabe/ (accessed: August 15, 2024).
The journal was edited by the Theosophist and later propagator of Ariosophy Paul Zillmann (1872–1940) who was a friend and collaborator of Franz Hartmann (Ulbricht 1996: 291–292).
The journal was the organ of the German branch – the Theosophische Gesellschaft in Deutschland (Theosophical Society in Germany) – of Hartmann’s pan-Theosophical organisation, the Internationale Theosophische Verbrüderung (International Theosophical Brotherhood), which he had founded in 1897. It was published by the Theosophische Central-Buchhandlung.
For example, Otto Franke (1863–1946), the most prominent German Sinologist of his day, soberly mentioned Hartmann’s translation in his survey of “Religious Studies Literature on China since 1900,” while simultaneously criticising the German (and naturalised French) writer and journalist Alexander Ular’s (1876–1919) translation Die Bahn und der rechte Weg des Lao-Tse (The Path and the Right Way of Lao-Tse; Ular 1903) and the Czech Orientalist Rudolf Dvorák’s (1860–1920) Lao-tsï und seine Lehre (Lao-tsï and His Teachings; Dvorak 1903) (Franke 1910: 112–113, 129–130).
Kohler had no real knowledge of the Chinese language, and offered a lyrical translation based largely on the English translation by Paul Carus (1898) (cf. Emmerich 2017).
German translations not considered by Wilhelm included those by von Plänckner, Noak, Ular, Dvorák, and the German Protestant theologian Julius Grill’s (1840–1930) Lao-tszes Buch vom höchsten Wesen und vom höchsten Gut (Lao-tsze’s Book of the Supreme Being and the Supreme Good; 1910). The latter, however, is mentioned by Wilhelm as not being available to him at the time of writing.
Ular’s German version was preceded by his French translation (Ular 1902). Notably, the latter was translated (or “plagiarised”) by Guglielmo Evans as Lao-tse e il libro della via e della virtù (Lao-tse and the Book of the Way and Virtue). This and Ular’s German version influenced the Italian occultist Julius Evola’s (1898–1974) Dàodéjīng translation of 1923. See the article “The Tao of Julius Evola” by Davide Marino in this volume.
“Die ‘Betrachtungen über das Tao-Teh-King’ drängen sich mir als Erstes zur Erledigung auf. Ich nehme an, schon ihr englischer Urheber – nicht erst der Theosoph Dr. Franz Hartmann, der zu jedem Spruch sein theosophisches Sprüchlein liefert – mag es redlich verstanden haben, alles Greifbare aus dem Taoteking herauszuarbeiten. Nur gelang es dabei dem Geiste zumeist zu entkommen. Oft ist die Wirkung die, als hätte einer Schriftzüge festgehalten, ohne die Schrift lesen zu können. […] Jedenfalls hat der [sic] Taoteking in seiner Entstehung mit Theosophie nicht das Mindeste gemein. Theosophie hineintragen kann man ja schließlich in alles; nur soll sich einer nicht einbilden, damit Religion machen zu können. Wo solche Absicht einsetzt, bezeugt sie vielmehr den Verfall des Religiösen. Denn der Quell des Religiösen liegt im Erkennen des Nichtwissenkönnens; das Gefühl gewahrt das Vorhandensein eines Nichtwahrnehmarben, es führt zur Preisgabe des Wissens. Der Taoteking ist förmlich durchsättigt von diese Gefühl; eben darum ist er ein höchstes religiöses Dokument. (Theosophen belehren freilich ihre Gegner gerne dahin, daß die Würdigung theosophischer Schriften eine genaue Bekanntheit mit theosophischen Lehren voraussetze. Und den Wert solcher Schriften glauben sie besonders dick zu unterstreichen, wenn sie, wie es mir passiert ist, betonen: daß beispielsweise ‘die Lehre von der siebenfachen Konstitution der Welt und des Menschen mit dem Anspruch auftritt, für die Wissenschaft von großer Bedeutung zu sein.’ Gut, man lasse ihnen dieses Vergnügen: dann erweist sich die Theosophie im besten Fall als irgend eine Art Wissenschaft und sollte sich damit begnügen. Nie aber hat sie ein Recht, sich so zu gebärden, als wäre sie der Triumph alles Religiösen. Denn sicher ist: je mehr etwas ein wahrhaft Religiöses ist, umsoweniger tritt es mit dem Anspruch auf für die Wissenschaft von Bedeutung zu sein.) Damit, denke ich, dürfte der Einbruch der Theosophie in den Taoteking genügend zurückgewiesen sein.”
