Theos-Talk Archives (June 2005 Message tt00468)

June 23 2005

Solomon -- These notes may be of interest.

----------------------------



SOLOMON.DOC
=============
TEMPLE OF SOLOMON
"Be that as it may, it is no longer the Masons who have all of the truth
whether we place the blame on Rome or the insect Shermah of the famous
temple of Solomon which modern Masonry vindicates as base and origin of its
order. [ From a Jewish tradition, the stones that served to build the
temple of Solomon (an allegorical symbol taken literally of which an actual
edifice was made) were not cut and polished by hand of man but by a worm
named Samis created by God for this purpose, These stones were miraculously
transported on the spot where the temple was to rise and cemented henceforth
by the angels who raised the Temple of Solomon. The Masons have introduced
the Worm Samis in their legendary history and call the "insect Shermah." ]
For decades of thousands of years the genealogical tree of the sacred
science which the peoples possessed in common, was the same--for the temple
of this science is ONE and is built on the unshakeable rock of primitive
truths. But the Masons of the last two centuries preferred to divorce
themselves from it. Once m and applying this time the practice to the
allegory, they broken the cube which divided itself into twelve parts. They
have rejected the real stone for the false, and whatever they did with the
first--their angular stone--it 
Is it again the Worm Samis (alias the "insect Shermah") which the traces on
the rejected stone had already led into e the "builders of the Temple" that
gnawed the same lines? But this time what was done was done with full
knowledge. The builders must have known the total by heart to judge by the
thirteen lines or five surfaces. [ This total is composed of a bisected
isosceles triangle--three lines--the side of the cube being the base: two
squares diagonally bisected having each a perpendicular line toward the
center--six lines; two straight lines at right angles; and a diagonally
bisected square--two lines: total thirteen lines or five surfaces of the
cube. ]

No matter! We faithful disciples of the East prefer to all these stones a
stone that has naught to do with all the other mummeries of the Masonic
degrees.
We will adhere to the Eben Shatijah (having another name in Sanskrit), the
perfect cube which while containing the delta or triangle, replaces the name
of the Tetragrammaton of the Kabalists, by the symbol of the incommunicable
name.
We willingly leave to the Masons their "insect"; while hoping for them that
modern symbology which marches at such rapid pace, will never discover the
identity of the Worm Shermah-Samis with Hiram Abif--which would be
embarrassing enough."
HPB - A SIGNAL OF DANGER HPB ART III 148-9


[ See CORNER-STONE I U I 546 ; S D II 465 ; Ocean 17,
21; ; Glos 80-1 ]

----------------------------------------------

SECRET DOCTRINE References


Solomon, King. 

biblical, fr Persia II 396n 
on circuits of the spirit II 553 
did not recognize Moses or Law II 541 
never really existed II 314 
Seal of I 118; II 591 


Temple(s). See also Initiations, Pyramids, Temple of Solomon

body of man is a I 212, 327, 574n; II 470, 651 
curtains in ancient I 125, 462; II 459 
Dracontian, grandeur of II 380 
in universe & in us II 651 


CUBE (s, ical) I 60; II 612

allegories of I 344, 367 
base of Pythagorean triangle I 616 
circle, point & I 320-1, 612; II 111n, 626 
dodecahedron in I 450 
a fertile number II 599 
Fire in triangle not in II 79 
formed fr infinite circle II 465 
four cardinal points symbolized by I 367 
lipika & I 129-31 
manifested Logos & II 626 
perfect, & angelic beings II 79 ; I 442 
perfect, or four-faced Brahma II 465 
primeval perfect, in Puranas I 344 
sparks called I 93, 97 
square or, second figure in nature II 594 
31415, & I 131 
two, of good & evil I 312 
unfolded becomes seven II 600, 626 
unfolded in man II 36, 542, 561, 593, 600n, 601 


Sacred Four
remain to serve mankind II 281-2 
swastika emblem of II 587 
Tetraktis or I 88, 99; II 621

---------------------------
Dallas
 
==============================

-----Original Message-----
From: Frank Reitemeyer
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2005 9:15 AM
To: 

Subject: Re: Re[2]: HPB about Solomon: man or myth?

>As far as I understood that particular quote and its context, it was
not about the type of figure, it was about person. Well, it is again a
matter of interpretation. Anyway, do you have any other clues to this
dilemma?

Vladimir, I understand HPB otherwise.

After re-reading it I cannot see, why do you read HPB saying Solomon was a 
person. 

In fact, one get's out from occult texts exactly that quality which are you 
putting in.

If you are in harmony with it, you'll get it, if not, then not.
Perhaps Purucker's hints may help you?

>If so, then for HPB the former must have existed although not
necessarily in the circumstances ascribed to him by the Jewish myth.

Mmmh. That's your interpretation!
Frank