Theos-Talk Archives (May 2000 Message tt00063)

Dear Daniel,

Due to my backup of mail, I think I have already answered your questions in 
one or another of my previous posts.  

Sorry if my attempt to clarify the technical and contextual usage of the 
phrase "oblong square" seems to be bending everyone out of shape.  I, for 
one, do not think HPB was infallible, nor was I questioning the actions of 
those who made these changes in her writings.  I don't think that any of 
those who later reedited the SD, informed everybody of the individual changes 
they made.  That is why I still recommend that students use the original 
versions... But, I like to see the distinction made between what is an occult 
"textbook" (SD) and what is simply an "instruction" (VOS) for meditation... 
And, also point out how carefully we must analyze similar words and phrases 
used in different contexts. 

I hope the confusion has been clarified a bit. At, least most of us know a 
lot more about "oblong squares" and their esoteric meaning than we did before 
this discussion started.:-)

Leon

In a message dated 05/04/00 11:34:35 AM, blafoun@azstarnet.com writes:

>Dear Leon,
>
>You wrote:
>
>> Subject: Re: Theos-World Oblong Squares Part I
>
>...............
>
>> Very interesting.
>> But in these descriptions, the word "square" refers solely to a plaza, 
space
>> or opening between buildings or roads which may either be oblong or square
>> mathematically (or geometrically).  However the use of the words "oblong
>> square" as a compound to describe the shape of a rectangular piece of paper
>> or palm leaf or plaque that is written on, cannot have the form of an
>>oblong square -- which is a contradiction in terms.  Such a rectangular 
shape
>>may be either square or oblong, but not both at the same time.

>Leon, the main reason I presented those web pages in both
>parts I and II, was to show that the phrase "oblong square" WAS
>a legitimate phrase.  It was NOT something HPB made up and it was NOT a
>slip of the pen, i,.e. a careless mistake she made that needed to be 
corrected
>by some editor.  No doubt, HPB had this specific phrase in mind when writing 
>both the VOICE and her article.
>
>It appears that you are NOW just quibbling over when the phrase should
>be used.  Whether one is describing a plaza or a room or a piece of paper
>or a palm leaf, why cannot one use the phrase "oblong square"?  A plaza or
>room may be larger than a piece of paper or palm leaf, but the shape may be
>the SAME and therefore this term "oblong square" might be used to describe 
>all four things.
>
>Plus there may be other hidden meanings here that HPB wanted to emphasize
>as Peter and Tony have pointed out.  Have you considered the essay on
>oblong numbers and their representation as "oblong squares" (?).
>
>Can't you just admit that --- maybe just maybe --- you are wrong on this
>and HPB may be right and actually knew what she was doing when she wrote
>"oblong squares"?
>
>But the more IMPORTANT point is:  why should some
>editor change HPB's phrase "oblong squares" and not tell the
>reader of that change?  If Boris de Zirkoff or some editor at
>Wheaton TPH had done that very thing, I can imagine your
>own response or that of Dallas or that of Jerome.
>
>Tell us, Leon, if you WERE the editor of HPB's VOICE would you "correct"
>her phrase "oblong squares" and NOT indicate to the reader that you were
>doing that?  Would you?
>
>Fraternally,
>
>Daniel
>
>

-- 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.