Theos-Talk Archives (May 2000 Message tt00023)

LEON writes:
<<<<The word "oblong square" is a meaningless term...>>>

HPB writes:

<<<<...It is through this 'door of life' - the
solemn pathway through which the daily entrance of the luminary into the
OBLONG SQUARE** of the earth or the Tabernacle of the Sun is effected every
morning...>>>>

The following is what HPB writes about oblong square, oblong squares and
oblong cubes (and is what Peter quoted in more than one mail he wrote about
the subject)

Tony

HPB writes:
".. the same reverence is paid in Christian and Masonic architecture to the
Orient (or the Eastern point) as in the days of Paganism.  Ragon described
it fully in his destroyed volumes.  The PRINCEPS PORTA, the door of the
World, and of the 'King of Glory,' by whom was meant at first the Sun and
now his human symbol, the Christ, is the door of the Orient, and faces the
East in every church and temple.  It is through this 'door of life' - the
solemn pathway through which the daily entrance of the luminary into the
OBLONG SQUARE** of the earth or the Tabernacle of the Sun is effected every
morning - that the 'newly born' babe is ushered, and carried to the
baptismal font; and it is to the left of this edifice (the gloomy north
whither start the 'apprentices' and where the candidates got their TRIAL BY
WATER) that now the fonts, and in the days of old the well (PISCINA) of
lustral waters, were placed in the ancient churches, which had been pagan
fanes."
(from CW XI: page 78.  Words in caps were italicised in original article)

"**A Masonic term; a symbol of the Arc of Noah, and of the Covenant, of the
Temples of Solomon, the Tabernacle, and the Camp of the Israelites, all
built as 'oblong squares'.  Mercury and Apollo were repreesented by oblong
cubes and squares, and so is Kaaba, the great temple at Mecca."
(CW XI: 78, fn)

LEON writes:
The word "oblong square" is a meaningless term, perhaps even an oxymoronic
one, that Judge, as both an occultist who was greatly trusted by HPB, as
well
as an accomplished writer, editor and scholar, recognized as a
mathematically
(as well as a scientifically) incredible term...  Since the word "oblong"
means that the length of a rectangle is greater than its width... And, a
"square" is defined solely as a rectangle having equal sides.  Therefore, a
square cannot be an oblong, nor an oblong, a square -- and there can be no
such thing as an "oblong square."  So, Judge was perfectly justified in
editing out the offending words and substituting what was really meant. I
also cannot see how any such materially descriptive word, correct or
incorrect, has any reference to theosophy, its truths, or its recommended
yoga practices, esoteric or not. If this is an example of the "serious and
misleading" editorial changes that Judge made of HPB's work, what's all this
hubbub about?

Judging from the brouhaha about the changes in the VOS, we might just as
well
say that Judge's rewriting, or should we say, transliterating into
"readable"
English, in his Ocean of Theosophy, of HPB's teachings in the SD, lost much
of the esoteric meaning.  Or, that his transliteration of Patanjali's Yoga
Aphorisms also distorted its esoteric meaning.  That would be poppycock and
another example of the sort of nit picking going on in these forums that
does
nothing but add to the confusion of theosophical students and gives grist
for
the mill to the detractors of theosophy.... (Not to mention the waste of
time
in opening raading and trashing slews of self serving, criticising,
gossiping, thanking, and hand washing letters that have no relevance to the
the study or discussion of theosophy, and its meanings and relationship to
each and all of our lives in conjunction with the "lives" of both the Earth
and the Universe.)  Such linguistic and technical mistakes by HPB, along
with
KH and M, I presume (who dictated much of the SD) -- to whom English was a
"foreign" language. (And there were a number of such understandable "errors"
in both spelling and syntax in HPB's so called, "carefully edited" writings,
as well as her use of italics, that had no other meaning than HPB's
propensity to emphasize words, or notate references to them, by
underlining.)
 Therefore, all this has absolutely no reference to the validity or
understanding (by the "intuitive student") of the teachings, themselves...
And certainly not worth the misleading commentaries and ranting about it.
Having examined both editions of the VOS, as well as well as almost every
English version of Patanjali, and having tested the commentaries in the SD
against the inherent logic and scientific validity of the "formulas" in the
Book of Dzyan, I find no contradictions or loss of esoteric meaning in any
of
the writings of both WQJ and HPB -- no matter what purely editorial (not
interpretive) changes were made by their respected, if not chosen, editors.
(I cannot, however, speak for those later editors in the TS that took it on
themselves to not only edit, but to "reinterpret" the Secret Doctrine
teachings.)

I hope we can all get back to discussing the "theosophy" -- originally
re-presented in English by HPB, as a "synthesis of science, religion and
philosophy" -- from whatever source it may come, and not be so involved in
giving credence to and arguing with those who think the teachings have
anything to do with the personalities, personal opinions, or individual
foible
s of the teachers.  What practices we each engage in for our own self
realization, as well as how we carry out our personal lives, have no
relevance to the study, teaching, or application of theosophy -- which
should
be the major point of discussion in these forums.  I'm certain HPB would
agree fully with this -- since she already warned us against getting side
tracked by such "side issues" -- to the detriment of the Theosophical
Movement

LHM



-- 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.