Theos-Talk Archives (October 2003 Message tt00058)

With reference to this original discussion (in the link mentioned below by 
Daniel) centered on the words "Oblong Square" -- I wish to revise and expand on 
my original statement that those words, as used by HPB were "a meaningless 
term." 

Actually, they were meaningless (to the uninitiated) in the context of the 
sentence in which they were used. But, as an esoteric term with a specific 
meaning -- they actually refer to the "Golden Triangle" and "Golden Rectangle," 
along with the ratio Phi, which is an important (if not root) basis of 
esoteric geometry.

This "oblong rectangle" (actually) is a geometrical form that refers directly 
to the metaphysical geometry of the primal beginning discussed in the SD and 
well known to the Masons and all other Ancient occultists. Thus the Golden 
Square is known in esoteric jargon to initiates of the higher Masonic teachings 
as the "oblong square." And, HPB's use of the term in describing the tablets 
on which were written the Book of the Golden Precepts, that also includes the 
Book of Dzyan and the Voice of the Silence, was simply to indicate (to the 
initiated) that such writings have particular esoteric significance -- although 
the words themselves, in their dead letter dictionary English, are entirely 
self contradictory and completely confusing to the uninitiated... Especially, if 
they think they might be important to the actual meaning of the teachings in 
those books. 

In any event -- since the oxymoronic words "oblong square," themselves, did 
not have any connection to the teachings extracted from the actually 
"rectangular" tablets (of whatever particular ratio) -- William Q. Judge was perfectly 
justified in rephrasing HPB's original words into understandable English in 
his rendition of the VOS -- so as, presumedly, not to confuse the uninitiated 
into thinking that they had any significance to the teachings therein, or to 
avoid the possibility that they might make HPB appear, to the average student, as 
being illiterate in our ordinary English language. 

Remember, it was WQJ's job to transliterate HPB into a simple American 
English that any child or beginning student of theosophy could readily understand 
without confusion, or getting caught up in side issues. He used that same 
method of knowledgeable "transliteration" and editing (he was, after all, a 
Sanskrit scholar and an initiate, as well as HPB's sidekick) in his rendition of the 
Ocean of Theosophy (which, in essence, transliterated and condensed the Secret 
Doctrine into plain English) -- as well as in his translations (actually, 
transliterations) of The Bhagavad Gita and Patanjali's Yoga Aphorisms. On 
careful reading of these volumes, and comparison with the originals, it's quite 
obvious that he made no significant changes in their esoteric meanings. In fact, 
he took great pains, in footnotes and in his other writings to thoroughly 
explain those meanings so that they would be consistent and understood similarly by 
both the neophyte and the initiated students. After many, many years of such 
study and comparison, and finding no inconsistencies, I think he had done an 
exemplary job. 

For a mathematical understanding of the geometric basis of the Golden 
Triangle, and Golden Square, See:
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/GoldenRectangle.html
http://ccins.camosun.bc.ca/~jbritton/goldengeom/goldengeom4.html

Also, for the (exoteric) Masonic definition of "oblong square," see: 
http://www.4masonry.com/education/files/masonicdictionary2.htm#Ob

Confused? I (and I'm sure WQJ would) hope not. :-) 

(But, maybe Daniel and all the other theosophical historians are not looking 
at theosophy from the same point of view as us students and teachers of 
theosophy are, and to them, doctoring of historical writings, for no matter what 
reason, is a deadly sin. ;-) 

I think HPB, if she were still around, would get a good belly laugh out of 
this comedy of cross purposes we are constantly engaged in. Maybe, if we are 
interested in fulfilling the three objects of the Theosophical Movement, it's 
about time we got down to talking about theosophy and its deeper meanings, 
rather than its history or its promulgators and their foibles.

Best wishes,

Leon

In a message dated 10/05/03 3:54:09 PM, danielhcaldwell@yahoo.com writes:

>Here are other relevant points to consider about
>Reed's comments on HPB "dashing off" the VOICE, etc.
>
>http://theos-talk.com/archives/200005/tt00022.html
>
>Daniel