Theos-Talk Archives (May 2001 Message tt00150)

Hi Daniel,

I didn't quite get what you had in mind as to why these qoutes throw light
on the reason de Zirkoff altered the SD. Could you say a bit more? Thanks.

...Peter

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Blavatsky Archives [mailto:info@blavatskyarchives.com]
> Sent: 20 May 2001 19:14
> To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> Cc: BlavatskyArchives; Blavatsky_Study; BN-Secret Doctrine; BN-Study;
> Carson, Reed; Carson, Reed; Eklund, Dara; Maddock, Tony; Merriott,
> Peter; Stubbs, Steve; Tenbroeck, Dallas; Tucker, Eldon B.; Weeks, Nick;
> Weeks, Nick; Wheeler, Jerome; ultinla@juno.com
> Subject: Theos-World Boris de Zirkoff has completely done away with the
> word "sacr'" WHY?
>
>
>
> SUBJECT: Boris de Zirkoff has completely done away with the word "sacr'"
> WHY?
>
> To possibly throw some light on Tony's question concerning "WHY?", I give
> BELOW from the original edition of the SECRET DOCTRINE the following four
> relevant quotations.
>
> I have a good number of questions myself on this subject that I would like
> to ask Tony, Eldon and other students of the SD. I will ask them in my
> next email.
>
> Part of Tony's orginal statement is at the very END of this email.
>
> Daniel
>
> --------------------------------------------
> QUOTATION A:
>
> “. . . With the races of our Fifth Race it became in symbology the sacr',
> and in Hebrew n'cabvah, of the first-formed races;* then it changed into
> the Egyptian . . . .” SD, I, 5
>
> Footnote marked * reads:
>
> “See that suggestive work, ‘The Source of Measures,’ where the
> author explains
> the real meaning of the word ‘sacr',’ from which ‘sacred,’ ‘sacrament,’
> are derived, which have now become synonyms of ‘holiness,’ though purely
> phallic!”
>
> --------------------------------------------
> QUOTATION B:
>
> “In the unpublished MSS. on the Art Speech, already mentioned, giving a
> key to the formation of the ancient (symbolical) languages a
> logical raison
> d'etre is brought forward for this double worship. It is written
> by a wonderfully
> well-informed and acute scholar and Mystic. . . . Thus, he says: -- . .
> .
>
> ‘. . . These parturient and natural periods are found to have
> been subjects
> of symbolism all over the world. They were thus used by the Hindus, and
> are found to be most plainly set forth by the ancient Americans, in the
> Richardson and Gest tablets, in the Palenque Cross; and manifestly lay at
> the base of the formation of the calendar forms of the Mayas of Yucatan,
> the Hindus, the Assyrians, and the ancient Babylonians, as well
> as the Egyptians
> and old Hebrews. The natural symbols . . . would be either the phallus or
> the phallus and yoni, . . . or male and female. Indeed, the words
> translated
> by the generalizing terms male and female, in the 27th verse of the 1st
> chapter of Genesis are . . . sacr and n'cabrah, or literally, phallus and
> yoni,**** while the representation of the phallic emblems would
> barely indicate
> the genital members of the human body, when their functions and
> the development
> of the seed-vesicles emanating from them was considered; then would come
> into indication a mode of measures of lunar time, and, through lunar, of
> solar time.’ . . .” SD, I, 388-390
>
> Footnote marked **** reads:
>
> “**** ‘Male and female, created he them.’”
>
>
> --------------------------------------------
> QUOTATION C:
>
> “. . . Adam is the collective name for man and woman: ‘male and female
> (Zachar va Nakobeh) created he them . . . and called their name Adam.’ ”
> SD, II, 127
>
>
> --------------------------------------------
> QUOTATION D:
>
> “Adam, as the supposed great "Progenitor of the human race," is, as Adam
> Kadmon, made in the image of God -- a priapic image, therefore. The Hebrew
> words sacr and n'cabvah are, literally translated, lingham (phallus) and
> yoni, notwithstanding their translation in the Bible (Genesis i. v. 27.)
> "male and female." As said there "God creates 'Man in his own image'. .
> . . . in the image of God created he him, male and female created
> he them,"
> the androgyne Adam-Kadmon. Now this Kabalistic name is not that
> of a living
> man, nor even of a human or divine Being, but of the two sexes or organs
> of procreation, called in Hebrew with that usual sincerity of
> language pre-eminently
> Biblical, sacr and n'cabvah*; these two being, therefore, the image under
> which the "Lord God" appeared usually to his chosen people. That this is
> so, is now undeniably proven by almost all the symbologists and
> Hebrew scholars
> as well as by the Kabala. Therefore Adam is in one sense Jehovah. . . .”
> SD, II, 467
>
> Footnote marked * reads:
>
> “Jehovah says to Moses ‘the Summation of my name is Sacr, the carrier of
> the germ’ -- phallus. ‘It is the vehicle of the annunciation, and the sacr
> has passed down through ages to the sacr-factum of the Roman priest, and
> the sacr-fice, and sacrament of the English speaking race.’
> (Source of Measures,
> p. 236) Thence marriage is a sacrament in the Greek and Roman Churches.”
>
> ---------------------------------
>
> Tony Maddock wrote in part to Eldon Tucker:
> .......................
> >
> >In the original edition, on page 5, after the 6th symbol, a circle with
> >a
> >vertical line, the text reads:
> >
> >"the circle, or sexless life modified or separated -- a double glyph or
> >symbol. With the races of our Fifth Race it became in symbology
> the sacr',
> >and in Hebrew n'cabvah, of the first-formed races;*"
> >
> >In the de Zirkoff edition it becomes (capitals added to try and make the
> >alterations clearer):
> >
> >"the circle, or sexless life modified or separated -- a double glyph or
> >symbol. With the [SUB]races of our Fifth Race it became in symbology the
> >HEBREW ZAKHAR and NEGEBAH of the first-formed races;*"
> >
> >The footnote in the original reads:
> >
> >* See that suggestive work, "The Source of Measures," where the author
> >explains the real meaning of the word "sacr'," from which "sacred,"
> >"sacrament," are derived, which have now become synonyms of "holiness,"
> >though purely phallic!
> >
> >The footnote in the de Zirkoff edition reads:
> >
> >* See that suggestive work, "The Source of Measures," (1875, PP 326-237)
> >where the author explains the real meaning of the word "ZAKHAR,"
> from which
> >[HE DERIVES] "sacred," AND "sacrament," which have now become synonyms
> of
> >"holiness," though purely phallic!8
> >
> >Boris de Zirkoff has completely done away with the word "sacr'" WHY?
> >
> >In a note at the end Boris elaborates and writes in part "...but when the
> >ordinary Hebrew word ZAKHAR is taken into consideration the
> interpretation
> >becomes somewhat strained..." Boris de Zirkoff is the one who introduces
> >and uses the word ZAKHAR, not H.P.B., nor Ralston Skinner. Neither of
> them
> >mention it. So what is he going on about? He has become his
> own strain.
> >
> ................
>
> Daniel H. Caldwell
> info@blavatskyarchives.com
> ---------------------------------------
> BLAVATSKY ARCHIVES
> http://blavatskyarchives.com
> Publishes rare & hard-to-find source
> documents on Madame H.P. Blavatsky.
> ---------------------------------------
> SELECTED THEOSOPHICAL BOOKS FOR SALE
> http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/bookstore.htm
> ---------------------------------------
> ESOTERIC WORLD OF MADAME BLAVATSKY
> http://blavatskyarchives.com/esotericworld.htm
> This new book contains a unique collection of
> rare reminiscences of H.P. Blavatsky's life.
> ---------------------------------------
> Theosophyonthe.NET
> http://theosophyonthe.net
> Easy Net Access to the Classics of Theosophy
> ---------------------------------------
> You can always access our main site
> BLAVATSKY ARCHIVES by simply typing
> into the URL address bar the following
> 6 characters: hpb.cc
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>