Theos-Talk Archives (September 1998 Message tt00136)

>>By the way, Boris de Zirkoff's edition has it correct.

Tony:
>Don't you mean incorrect?
>It is interesting what you say, but only correct as far as you (and some
>others) are concerned.  Crystallised and finished with?

Yes, this correction should be accepted.  Do you have some evidence that
the quote is actually in the Mandukya?  It is only 12 verses -- not hard
to read. The quote on supreme/not supreme is given by BdZ from the true
chapter & verse from the true Mundaka Up.

>Do you feel by adding the point to the centre of the pentagram reversed on
>page 5  has made it correct?  Or do you feel it doesn't really matter?

Boris was not thrilled to have the SD typeset in India.  He did not have
much luck in trying to get things perfect.  For every mistake he would
tell them to fix, the type setters would make another.  I would prefer the
star & semi-circle were closer to the original.

>In the first few pages of the INTRODUCTORY, there is quite a bit about
>"Esoteric Buddhism," and Budh-ism, *Budha,* "Budh," *to know,* etc.,
>highlighting among other things the difference in spellings, and the
>significance of this.
>And yet one of the main pre-occupations of the de Zirkoff edition is
>altering/"correcting" the spellings.

His purpose was simply to modernize the transliteration schemes, which in
many cases changed the spelling.  I do not say BdZ edition is perfect,
nor is the original SD (or every Mahatmic or HPB writing) free of mistakes.


--
<> Nicholas Weeks <> am455@lafn.org <> Los Angeles
	"Men must learn to love the truth before they thoroughly believe it."
		Blavatsky