Theos-Talk Archives (May 1998 Message tt00437)

>W. Dallas TenBroeck <dalval@nwc.net> writes
>>I believe that the book also contains a key to occultism, and the
>>so called trifles bay blur or obscure the original "codes"
>
>This, as you say, is something you "believe."  Why?
>
>>  If
>>you do that then you will soon see the meanings are altered.
>>Example  HPB uses KOSMIC for the Universe outside our Solar
>>system.  Inside our solar system she used the word COSMIC.  There
>>are other changes too.
>
>Have all the references to KOSMIC been changed to COSMIC?  I do
>not (yet) have the 1888 edition to make my own comparison, and time
>and energy is short - I am disabled with osteo-arthritis, which is
>debilitating, to say the least.
>
>Does HPB make it clear (in the 1888 edition) that she uses the different
>spelling in different contexts?  Can you quote (rather than give the
>reference)?

Which edition do you have Alan?
If it is the 3rd revised edition (3 vol.) see page 33 larger print.  Here it
says about Kosmos and Cosmos, but Noumenon on line 3 is in caps in the
original and cosmic line 7 has a capital C in orig.  There are other changes
in the larger print.

Will copy it out:
Kosmos - the NOUMENON - has nought to do with the causal relations of the
phenomenol World.  It is only with reference to the intra-cosmic soul, the
ideal Kosmos in the immutable Divine Thought, that we may say: "It never had
a beginning nor will it have an end."  With regard to its body or Cosmic
organization, though it cannot be said that it had a first, or will ever
have a last construction, yet at each new Manvantara, its organization may
be regarded as the first and the last of its kind, as it evolves every time
on a higher plane . . . ."
It didn't come over that Dallas was saying that necessarily Kosmos and
Cosmos were altered in the revised edition.  Also Kosmos with a K - the
NOUMENON - only refers to a portion of the SD, not all of it.

As said earlier, when studying in a group the differences are illuminated
and it can be seen that occult keys are removed by the alterations. It can
be easily understood why Dallas uses the word "believe", because once one
(or a group) says it is so, that is then also criticised.  On a dead-letter
level, a comma left out of a sentence can completely reverse the meaning.
Hence, for example, the barbarous murder of Edward II at Berkeley Castle.
Think how devastating that is on the inner planes.  The seemingly minor
alterations (the change of a letter for e.g.) do erradicate important clues
and change the emphasis.

It can be imagined how different things become when using a numerological
key, Gematria, Temura, Sanskrit synonyms, etc.  Like HPB says about 1881, it
can be read from left to right, right to left, turned upside down, looked at
through the page when held up to the light . . . . all ways it is 1881.
There are many ways of looking at the SD.

Hope you are able to get round to checking for yourself different editions,
as it is a revelation. Is there another way round it?  Would  you like a
facsimile issue of the PROEM which is easy to manage?

Tony