Theos-Talk Archives (May 2001 Message tt00158)

Eldon:

"Subhava, from which Svabhavat, is composed of two words: Su "fair,"
"handsome," good;" Sva, "self;" and bhava, "being" or "states of being."

Surely "Sva" relates to Svabhavat... Su to Subhava, and bhava to both. Su
"fair," "handsome," good;" [from which] Sva, "self;"? You say you prefer it
with the 'Sva, "self;"' deleted, rather than how H.P.B. has it. If you
think that, surely it would be logical to take out "from which Svabhavat" as
well?

You write:
<<<In balance, I still the many improvements -- including
spelling corrections, corrections to quotations,
typographical changes making quotes stand apart from
the body text, etc. -- make the book much more suitable
for study by all but the most exacting scholar, more
interested in the history of the book than what is
being said in it.>>>

The last part of what you write is quite an assumption.

You write:
<<<I've been going to the Malibu ULT study class in THE SECRET
DOCTRINE for several years. We've gone through Volume I, and
are into the second volume. I've used Boris's edition, and
at the same time hear others reading from the same book from
the original edition.>>>

I would be very surprised if you really think this of fellow students in the
study class, and truly hope you don't ...that they are more interested in
the history of the book than what is being said in it, because they study
the original edition.

Tony