Theos-Talk Archives (February 1999 Message tt00029)

Dear Richard

Thanks for your reply, and taking the trouble to explain.  It is appreciated
and much more effective to reciting mantras!  Subba Row actually refers to
*ancient* Sanskrit, which is most probably rather different to Sanskrit as
seen to-day?  (Like ancient Greek, is rather different to modern Greek)?
You would know whether this is the case far better.  And by what you say you
sound as if you are open to languages having their cycles like everything else?

>Mis-spell a word, and you have lost the inner meaning of it.

Thanks 
Tony

>In a message dated 2/3/99 12:52:57 PM, Tony wrote:
>
><<but do you, when making these
>corrections, also consider the "numerical value of the letters composing the
>word... &c. &c." referred to in the Subba Row quote?  To just look at the
>spelling on its own is only one aspect, whereas there are many others to
>consider.  Once the spelling is altered, the numerical values, &c., &c.
>change.  >>
>
>Tony, I confess once again that I really don't get what you're aiming at here,
>but I'll take Peter's tack and be nice about it.  Subba Row is referring to
>actual Sanskrit words, correctly spelled, which can by transformation point to
>other Sanskrit words, correctly spelled.  This is because Sanskrit, like
>Hebrew, Greek, Arabic and other "sacred languages" (languages in which
>Scriptures were orally handed down) uses letters for both sounds and numerals.
>Mis-spell a word, and you have lost the inner meaning of it.
>
>Of what possible value would it be to publish around mis-spelled words, when
>the correct Sanskrit or other spelling is perfectly known?  Are you suggesting
>that HPB deliberately mis-spelled words in order to communicate in a
>numerological code?  I would be very interested to hear your thoughts on this,
>but *only if they include an example or two.*  Otherwise it is pure
>speculation, and no sound reason to perpetuate ignorance.  
>
>I will add that it is a matter of fact that many words HPB spelt phonetically,
>particularly Tibetan words like *bDe-wa-can* (Devachan) and *rGyud-sDe* (Kiu-
>Ti) because they would be unpronounceable by the layman.  Are you suggesting
>that her phonetic spellings are equally a numerological code?
>
>Examples?
>
>Rich
>
>-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
>
>Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
>teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
>"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
>


-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com

Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.