Theos-Talk Archives (June 2006 Message tt00006)

Dear Dallis,
Thanks for your work,I shall see the Mahatma's for that too.
I use the SD from TPH,Wheaton-Adyar-London large octavos;illustrated 
with rare portraits; clothbound; fully indexed.1978/79 printed.in 3 
editions.
I literary typed over what is standing on page 591

see under your writing:
-- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "W.Dallas TenBroeck" 
<dalval14@...> wrote:
>
> 5/31/2006 4:59 PM
> 
> 	Re: 	Meaning of the double triangle
> 
> Dear Christinalee Stemaker:
> 
> You wrote:   "Can anyone give the answer to this: why HPB (SD 591)
wrote the
> double triangle wrongly called  "Solomons seal",
> 
> What edition of the SECRET DOCTRINE do you use?.  There is in Vol. 
II
> 591[original 1888 SECRET DOCTRINE] some mention of relevant 
symbology and
> meaning.  But not the wording you use.  

Dallis, strange enough she used the words in my book: After she 
explain the Indian Trimurti: 
*** 
For even in the exoteric rendering, the lower triangle with the apex 
downward is the symbol of Vishnu, the god of the moist principle and 
water ( Nârâ-Yana) or the moving principle in water(Nârâ); while the 
triangle with its apex upward, is Shiva, the principle of Fire, 
symbolized by the triple flame in his hand.
It is these two interlacted triangles- wrongle called "Solomons seal"
which also form the emblem of our Society.   see farther page 
592.which allinea I typed over before.

***
By this I don't understand why she mentioned this, for the solomons 
seal have more meanings, not only the enneagram with 3 equalized 
triangles in the circle, also there is a sign with this two 
triangles.



> 
> I think we all use and refer to the ORIGINAL 1888 Edition.
***
Which I have.

Times ago you also could not find the  SOLAR  and LUNAR ,for MANAS 
is double.
Which she give explanation on page 495/6:Varius names for 
initiations:
  
Lunar is lower manas(animal soul), and solar is the higher manas
(human soul),which is towards Buddhi.






> 
> Here are a few references I have found:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------
> 
> 	Heptachord   - Lyre of Apollo
> 
> --------------------------------------------------
> 
> MAHATMA LETTERS [Barker], pp. 345-6  explains:
> 
> "Does your B.T.S. know the meaning of the white and black 
interlaced
> triangles, of the Parent Society's seal that it has also adopted? 
Shall I
> explain? ? 
> 
> the double triangle viewed by the Jewish Kabalists as Solomon's 
Seal, is, as
> many of you doubtless know the Sri-antara of the archaic Aryan 
Temple, the
> "mystery of Mysteries," a geometrical synthesis of the whole occult
> doctrine. 
> 
> The two interlaced triangles are the Buddhangums of Creation. They 
contain
> the "squaring of the circle," the "philosophical stone," the great 
problems
> of Life and Death, and -- the Mystery of Evil. 
> 
> The chela who can explain this sign from every one of its aspects -
- is
> virtually an adept. 
> 
> How is it then that the only one among you, who has come so near to
> unravelling the mystery is also the only one who got none of her 
ideas from
> books? Unconsciously she gives out -- to him who has the key -- 
the first
> syllable of the Ineffable name! 
> 
> Of course you know that the double-triangle -- the Satkiri Chakram 
of Vishnu
> -- or the six-pointed star, is the perfect seven. In all the old 
Sanskrit
> works -- Vedic and Tantrik -- you find the number 6 mentioned more 
often
> than the 7 -- this last figure, the central point being implied, 
for it is
> the germ of the six and their matrix. 
> 
> It is then thus . . . [At this point in the original there is a 
rough
> drawing of the interlaced triangles inscribed in a circle. -- 
ED.] -- the
> central point standing for seventh, and the circle, the Mahakasha -
- endless
> space -- for the seventh Universal Principle. 
> 
> In one sense, both are viewed as Avalokitesvara, for they are 
respectively
> the Macrocosm and the microcosm. 
> 
> The interlaced triangles -- the upper pointing one -- is Wisdom 
concealed,
> and the downward pointing one -- Wisdom revealed (in the 
phenomenal world). 
> 
> The circle indicates the bounding, circumscribing quality of the 
All, the
> Universal Principle which, from any given point expands so as to 
embrace all
> things, while embodying the potentiality of every action in the 
Cosmos. 
> 
> As the point then is the centre round which the circle is traced --
 they are
> identical and one, and though from the standpoint of Maya and 
Avidya --
> (illusion and ignorance) -- one is separated from the other by the
> manifested triangle, the 3 sides of which represent the three 
gunas --
> finite attributes. 
> 
> In symbology the central point is Jivatma (the 7th principle), and 
hence
> Avalokitesvara, the Kwan-Shai-yin, the manifested "Voice" (or 
Logos), the
> germ point of manifested activity; -- hence -- in the phraseology 
of the
> Christian Kabalists "the Son of the Father and Mother," and 
agreeably to
> ours -- "the Self manifested in Self -- Yih-sin, the "one form of
> existence," the child of Dharmakaya (the universally diffused 
Essence), both
> male and female. 
> 
> Parabrahm or "Adi-Buddha" while acting through that germ point 
outwardly as
> an active force, reacts from the circumference inwardly as the 
Supreme but
> latent Potency. 
> 
> The double triangles symbolize the Great Passive and the Great 
Active; the
> male and female; Purusha and Prakriti. 
> 
> Each triangle is a Trinity because presenting a triple aspect. 
> 
> The white represents in its straight lines: Gnanam -- (Knowledge); 
Gnata --
> (the Knower); and Gnayam -- (that which is known). The black-form, 
colour,
> and substance, also the creative, preservative, and destructive 
forces and
> are mutually correlating, etc., etc. 
> 
> Well may you admire and more should you wonder at the marvellous 
lucidity of
> that remarkable seeress [Mrs. Kingsford], who ignorant of Sanskrit 
or Pali,
> and thus shut out from their metaphysical treasures, has yet seen 
a great
> light shining from behind the dark bills of exoteric religions. 
How, think
> you, did the "Writers of the Perfect Way" come to know that Adonai 
was the
> Son and not the Father; or that the third Person of the Christian 
Trinity is
> -- female? Verily, they lay in that work several times their hands 
upon the
> keystone of Occultism. Only does the lady -- who persists using 
without an
> explanation the misleading term "God" in her writings -- know how 
nearly she
> comes up to our doctrine when saying: -- "Having for Father, 
Spirit which is
> Life (the endless Circle or Parabrahm) and for Mother the Great 
Deep, which
> is Substance (Prakriti in its undifferentiated condition) -- Adonai
> possesses the potency of both and wields the dual powers of all 
things." 
> 
> We would say triple, but in the sense as given this will do. 
> 
> Pythagoras had a reason for never using the finite, useless 
figure -- 2, and
> for altogether discarding it. 
> 
> The ONE, can, when manifesting, become only 3. 
> 
> The unmanifested when a simple duality remains passive and 
concealed. The
> dual monad (the 7th and 6th principles) has, in order to manifest 
itself as
> a Logos, the "Kwan-shai-yin" to first become a triad (7th, 6th and 
half of
> the 5th); then, on the bosom of the "Great Deep" attracting within 
itself
> the One Circle -- form out of it the perfect Square, 
thus "squaring the
> circle" -- the greatest of all the mysteries, friend -- and 
inscribing
> within the latter the -- WORD (the Ineffable name) -- otherwise 
the duality
> could never tarry as such, and would have to be reabsorbed into 
the ONE. 
> 
> The "Deep" is Space -- both male and female. "Purush (as Brahma) 
breathes in
> the Eternity: when 'he' in-breathes -- Prakriti (as manifested 
Substance)
> disappears in his bosom; when 'he' out-breathes she reappears as 
Maya," says
> the Sloka. The One reality is Mulaprakriti (undifferentiated 
Substance) --
> the "Rootless root," the. . . But we have to stop, lest there 
should remain
> but little to tell for your own intuitions. 
> 
> Well may the Geometer of the R.S. not know that the apparent 
absurdity of
> attempting to square the circle covers a mystery ineffable. It 
would hardly
> be found among the foundation stones of Mr. Roden Noel's 
speculations upon
> the "pneumatical body . . . of our Lord," nor among the debris of 
Mr.
> Farmer's "A New Basis of Belief in Immortality"; and to many such
> metaphysical minds it would be worse than useless to divulge the 
fact, that 
> 
> the Unmanifested Circle -- the Father, or Absolute Life -- is non-
existent
> outside the Triangle and Perfect Square, and -- is only manifested 
in the
> Son; and that it is when, reversing the action and returning to 
its absolute
> state of Unity, and the square expands once more into the Circle --
 that
> "the Son returns to the bosom of the Father." 
> 
> There it remains until called back by his Mother -- the "Great 
Deep," to
> remanifest as a triad -- the Son partaking at once, of the Essence 
of the
> Father, and of that of the Mother -- the active Substance, 
Prakriti in its
> differentiated condition. 
> 
> "My Mother -- (Sophia -- the manifested Wisdom) took me" -- says 
Jesus in a
> Gnostic treatise; and he asks his disciples to tarry till he 
comes. . . .
> The true "Word" may only be found by tracing the mystery of the 
passage
> inward and outward of the Eternal Life, through the states 
typified in these
> three geometric figures. 
> 
> The criticism of "A Student of Occultism" (whose wits are 
sharpened by the
> mountain air of his home) and the answer of "S.T.K. . . . Chary" 
(June
> Theosophist) upon a part of your annular and circular expositions 
need not
> annoy or disturb in any way your philosophic calm. 
> 
> As our Pondicherry chela significantly says, neither you nor any 
other man
> across the threshold has had or ever will have the "complete 
theory" of
> Evolution taught him; or get it unless he guesses it for himself. 
> 
> If anyone can unravel it from such tangled threads as are given 
him, very
> well; and a fine proof it would indeed be of his or her spiritual 
insight.
> Some -- have come very near it. But yet there is always with the 
best of
> them just enough error, -- colouring and misconception; the shadow 
of Manas
> projecting across the field of Buddhi -- to prove the eternal law 
that only
> the unshackled Spirit shall see the things of the Spirit without a 
veil. 
> 
> No untaught amateur could ever rival the proficient in this branch 
of
> research; yet the world's real Revelators have been few, and its
> pseudo-Saviours legion; and fortunate it is if their half-glimpses 
of the
> light are not, like Islam, enforced at the sword's point, or like 
Christian
> Theology, amid blazing faggots and in torture chambers. 
> 
> Your Fragments contain some -- still very few errors, due solely 
to your two
> preceptors of Adyar, one of whom would not, and the other could 
not tell you
> all. The rest could not be called mistakes -- rather incomplete
> explanations. These are due, partly to your own imperfect 
education in your
> last theme -- I mean the ever-threatening obscurations -- partly 
to the poor
> vehicles of language at our disposal, and in part again, to the 
reserve
> imposed upon us by rule. Yet, all things considered, they are few 
and
> trivial; while as to those noticed by "A Student, etc." (the 
Marcus Aurelius
> of Simla) in your No. VII, it will be pleasant for you to know 
that every
> one of them, however now seeming to you contradictory, can (and if 
it should
> seem necessary shall) be easily reconciled with facts. 
> 
> The trouble is that (a) you cannot be given the real figures and 
difference
> in the Rounds, and (b) that you do not open doors enough for 
explorers. 
> 
> The bright Luminary of the B.T.S. and the Intelligences that 
surround her
> (embodied I mean) may help you to see the flaws: at all events 
Try. "Nothing
> was ever lost by trying." 
> 
> You share with all beginners the tendency to draw too absolutely 
strong
> inferences from partly caught hints, and to dogmatize thereupon as 
though
> the last word had been spoken. You will correct this in due time. 
You may
> misunderstand us, are more than likely to do so, for our language 
must
> always be more or less that of parable and suggestion, when 
treading upon
> forbidden ground; we have our own peculiar modes of expression and 
what lies
> behind the fence of words is even more important than what you 
read. But
> still -- TRY. 
> 
> Perhaps if Mr. S. Moses could know just what was meant by what was 
said to
> him, and about his Intelligences, he would find all strictly true. 
As he is
> a man of interior growth, his day may come and his reconciliation 
with "the
> Occultists" be complete. Who knows? 
> 
> Meanwhile, I shall, with your permission, close this first volume. 
> 
> 	
> K. H. 
> 
> {Esoteric Buddhism was published June 11.} 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------ 
	
> 
> 
> See TRANSACTIONS OF THE BLAVATSKY LODGE:  p.   106  [Blavatsky:  
COLLECTED
> WORKS  Vol. X ]
> 
> 		STANZA III. (continued). 
> 
> Sloka (2). THE VIBRATION SWEEPS ALONG, TOUCHING WITH ITS SWIFT WING
> (simultaneously) THE WHOLE UNIVERSE; AND THE GERM THAT DWELLETH IN 
DARKNESS:
> THE DARKNESS THAT BREATHES (moves) OVER THE SLUMBERING WATERS OF 
LIFE. 
> 
> 
> Q. How are we to understand the expression that the vibration 
touches the
> whole universe and also the germ? 
> 
> A. First of all the terms used must be defined as far as possible, 
for the
> language used is purely figurative. The Universe does not mean the 
Kosmos or
> world of forms but the formless space, the future vehicle of the 
Universe
> which will be manifested. This space is synonymous with 
the "waters of
> space," with (to us) eternal darkness, in fact with Parabrahm. In 
short the
> whole Sloka refers to the "period" before there was any 
manifestation
> whatever. In the same way the Germ?the Germ is eternal, the 
undifferentiated
> atoms of future matter?- is one with space, as infinite as it is
> indestructible, and as eternal as space itself. Similarly 
with "vibration,"
> which corresponds with the Point, the unmanifested Logos. 
> 
> It is necessary to add one important explanation. In using 
figurative
> language, as has been done in the Secret Doctrine, analogies and 
comparisons
> are very frequent. Darkness for instance, as a rule, applies only 
to the
> unknown totality, or, Absoluteness. Contrasted with eternal 
darkness the
> first Logos is certainly, Light; contrasted with the second or 
third, the
> manifested Logoi, the first is Darkness, and the others are Light.
> 
> 
> Sloka (3). DARKNESS RADIATES LIGHT, AND LIGHT DROPS ONE SOLITARY 
RAY INTO
> THE WATERS, THE MOTHER-DEEP. THE RAY SHOOTS THROUGH THE VIRGIN 
EGG; THE RAY
> CAUSES THE ETERNAL EGG TO THRILL, AND DROP THE NON-ETERNAL 
(periodical)
> GERM, WHICH CONDENSES INTO THE WORLD-EGG. 
> 
> 
> Q. Why is Light said to drop one solitary ray into the waters and 
how is
> this ray represented in connection with the Triangle? 
> 
> A. However many the Rays may appear to be on this plane, when 
brought back
> to their original source they will finally be resolved into a 
unity, like
> the seven prismatic colors which all proceed from, and are 
resolved into the
> one white ray. Thus too, this one solitary Ray expands into the 
seven rays
> (and their innumerable sub-divisions) on the plane of illusion 
only. It is
> represented in connection with the Triangle because the Triangle 
is the
> first perfect geometrical figure. As stated by Pythagoras, and 
also in the
> Stanza, the Ray (the Pythagorean Monad) descending from "no-place" 
(Aloka),
> shoots like a falling star through the planes of non-being into 
the first
> world of being, and gives birth to Number One; then branching off, 
to the
> right, it produces Number Two; turning again to form the base-line 
it begets
> Number Three, and thence ascending again to Number One, it finally
> disappears therefrom into the realms of non-being as Pythagoras 
shows. 
> 
> 
> Q. Why should Pythagorean teachings be found in old Hindu 
philosophies? 
> 
> A. Pythagoras derived this teaching from India and in the old 
books we find
> him spoken of as the Yavanacharya or Greek Teacher. Thus we see 
that the
> Triangle is the first differentiation, its sides however all being 
described
> by the one Ray. 
> 
> 
> Q. What is really meant by the term "planes of non-being"?
> 
> A. In using the term "planes of non-being" it is necessary to 
remember that
> these planes are only to us spheres of non-being, but those of 
being and
> matter to higher intelligences than ourselves. The highest Dhyan-
Chohans of
> the Solar System can have no conception of that which exists in 
higher
> systems, i.e., on the second "septenary" Kosmic plane, which to 
the Beings
> of the ever invisible Universe is entirely subjective. 
> 
> 
> 
> Sloka (4). (Then) THE THREE (Triangle) FALL INTO THE FOUR 
(Quaternary). THE
> RADIANT ESSENCE BECOMES SEVEN INSIDE, SEVEN OUTSIDE. THE LUMINOUS 
EGG
> (Hiranyagarbha), WHICH IN ITSELF IS THREE (the triple hypostases 
of Brahma,
> or Vishnu, the three Avasthas) CURDLES AND SPREADS IN MILK WHITE 
CURDS
> THROUGHOUT THE DEPTHS OF MOTHER, THE ROOT THAT GROWS IN THE OCEAN 
OF LIFE. 
> 
> Q. Is the Radiant Essence the same as the luminous Egg? What is 
the Root
> that grows in the ocean of life? 
> 
> A. The radiant essence, luminous egg or Golden Egg of Brahma, or 
again,
> Hiranyagarbha, are identical. The Root that grows in the ocean of 
life is
> the potentiality that transforms into objective differentiated 
matter the
> universal, subjective, ubiquitous but homogeneous germ, or the 
eternal
> essence which contains the potency of abstract nature. The Ocean 
of Life is,
> according to a term of the Vedanta philosophy?if I mistake not?
the "One
> Life," Paramatma, when the transcendental supreme Soul is meant; 
and
> Jivatma, when we speak of the physical and animal "breath of life" 
or, so to
> speak, the differentiated soul, that life in short, which gives 
being to the
> atom and the universe, the molecule and the man, the animal, 
plant, and
> mineral. 
> 
> "The Radiant Essence curdled and spread through the depths of 
Space." From
> an astronomical point of view this is easy of explanation: it is 
the Milky
> Way, the world-stuff, or primordial matter in its first form.
> 
> 
> Q. Is the Radiant Essence, Milky Way, or world-stuff, resolvable 
into atoms,
> or is it non-atomic? 
> 
> A. In its precosmic state it is of course, non-atomic, if by atoms 
you mean
> molecules; for the hypothetical atom, a mere mathematical point, 
is not
> material or applicable to matter, nor even to substance. 
> 
> The real atom does not exist on the material plane. The definition 
of a
> point as having position, must not, in Occultism, be taken in the 
ordinary
> sense of location; as the real atom is beyond space and time. The 
word
> molecular is really applicable to our globe and its plane, only: 
once inside
> of it, even on the other globes of our planetary chain, matter is 
in quite
> another condition, and non-molecular. 
> 
> The atom is in its eternal state, invisible even to the eye of an 
Archangel;
> and becomes visible to the latter only periodically, during the 
life cycle.
> The particle, or molecule, is not, but exists periodically, and is 
therefore
> regarded as an illusion. 
> 
> The world-stuff informs itself through various planes and cannot 
be said to
> be resolved into stars or to have become molecular until it 
reaches the
> plane of being of the visible or objective Universe. 
> 
> 
> Q. Can ether be said to be molecular in Occultism? 
> 
> A. It entirely depends upon what is meant by the term. In its 
lowest strata,
> where it merges with the astral light, it may be called molecular 
on its own
> plane; but not for us. But the ether of which science has a 
suspicion, is
> the grossest manifestation of Akasa, though on our plane, for us 
mortals, it
> is the seventh principle of the astral light, and three degrees 
higher than
> "radiant matter." When it penetrates, or informs something, it may 
be
> molecular because it takes on the form of the latter, and its 
atoms inform
> the particles of that "something." We may perhaps call 
matter "crystallized
> ether."
> 
> 
> Q. But what is an atom, in fact? 
> 
> A. An atom may be compared to (and is for the Occultist) the 
seventh
> principle of a body or rather of a molecule. The physical or 
chemical
> molecule is composed of an infinity of finer molecules and these 
in their
> turn of innumerable and still finer molecules. 
> 
> Take for instance a molecule of iron and so resolve it that it 
becomes
> non-molecular; it is then, at once transformed into one of its 
seven
> principles, viz., its astral body; the seventh of these is the 
atom. The
> analogy between a molecule of iron, before it is broken up, and 
this same
> molecule after resolution, is the same as that between a physical 
body
> before and after death. The principles remain minus the body. Of 
course this
> is occult alchemy, not modern chemistry. 
> 
> Q. What is the meaning of the allegorical "churning of the ocean," 
and "cow
> of plenty" of the Hindus, and what correspondence is there between 
them and
> the "war in heaven"? 
> 
> A. A process which begins in the state of "non-being," and ends 
with the
> close of Maha-Pralaya, can hardly be given in a few words or even 
volumes.
> It is simply an allegorical representation of the unseen and 
unknown
> primeval intelligences, the atoms of occult science, Brahma 
himself being
> called Anu or the Atom, fashioning and differentiating the 
shoreless ocean
> of the primordial radiant essence. 
> 
> The relation and correspondence between the "churning of the 
ocean" and the
> "war in heaven" is a very long and abstruse subject to handle. To 
give it in
> its lowest symbolical aspect, this "war in heaven" is going on 
eternally.
> Differentiation is contrast, the equilibrium of contraries: and so 
long as
> this exists there will be "war" or fighting. 
> 
> There are, of course, different stages and aspects of this war: 
such for
> instance as the astronomical and physical. 
> 
> For everyone and everything that is born in a Manvantara, there 
is "war in
> heaven" and also on the earth: for the fourteen Root and Seed-
Manus who
> preside over our Manvantaric cycle, and for the countless Forces, 
human or
> otherwise, that proceed from them. 
> 
> There is a perpetual struggle of adjustment, for everything tends 
to
> harmonize and equilibrate; in fact it must do so before it can 
assume any
> shape. The elements of which we are formed, the particles of our 
bodies, are
> in a continual war, one crowding out the other and changing with 
every
> moment. 
> 
> At the "Churning of the Ocean" by the gods, the Nagas came and 
some stole of
> the Amrita?the water of Immortality,?and thence arose war between 
the gods
> and the Asuras, the no-gods, and the gods were worsted. This 
refers to the
> formation of the Universe and the differentiation of the 
primordial primeval
> matter. But you must remember, that this is only the cosmogonical 
aspect?one
> out of the seven meanings. The war in heaven had also immediate 
reference to
> the evolution of the intellectual principle in mankind. This is the
> metaphysical key. ...
> 
> 
> Q. In what sense can numbers be called Entities? 
> 
> A. When intelligent Entities are meant; when they are *(Vol. I., 
p. 66.)
> regarded simply as digits they are, of course, not Entities but 
symbolical
> signs. 
> 
> Q. Why is the radiant essence said to become seven inside and 
seven outside?
> 
> 
> A. Because it has seven principles on the plane of the manifested 
and seven
> on that of the unmanifested. Always argue on analogy and apply the 
old
> occult axiom "As above so below." 
> 
> 
> Q. But are the planes of "non-being" also Septenary? 
> 
> A. Most undeniably. That which in the Secret Doctrine is referred 
to as the
> unmanifested planes, are unmanifested or planes of non-being only 
from the
> point of view of the finite intellect; to higher intelligences 
they would be
> manifested planes and so on to infinity, analogy always holding 
good.
> 
> 			
> 	THE ROOT REMAINS, THE LIGHT REMAINS, THE CURDS REMAIN,
> 	AND STILL OEAOHOO IS ONE. 
> 
> 
> Q. What is meant by saying that these remain? 
> 
> A. It means simply that whatever the plurality of manifestation 
may be,
> still it is all one. In other words these are all different 
aspects of the
> one element; it does not mean that they remain without 
differentiation. 
> 
> "The curds are the first differentiation, and probably refer also 
to that
> cosmic matter which is supposed to be the origin of the 'Milky 
Way'?the
> matter we know. This 'matter,' which, according to the revelation 
received
> from the primeval Dhyani-Buddhas, is, during the periodical sleep 
of the
> Universe, of the ultimate tenuity conceivable to the eye of the 
perfect
> Bodhisatva?this matter, radical and cool, becomes, at the first 
reawakening
> of cosmic motion, scattered through Space; appearing, when seen 
from the
> Earth, in clusters and lumps, like curds in thin milk. These are 
the seeds
> of the future worlds, the 'Star-stuff'."*
> 
> 
> Q. Is it to be supposed that the Milky Way is composed of matter 
in a state
> of differentiation other than that with which we are acquainted? 
> 
> A. I thoroughly believe so. It is the store-house of the materials 
from
> which the stars, planets and other celestial bodies are produced. 
Matter in
> this state does not exist on earth; but that which is already 
differentiated
> and found on earth is also found on other planets and vice-versa. 
* (Vol.I.,
> p. 69.) 
> 
> But, as I understand, before reaching the planets from its 
condition in the
> Milky Way matter has first to pass through many stages of 
differentiation.
> The matter, for instance, within the Solar system is in an entirely
> different state from that which is outside or beyond the system. 
> [ S D   I  142- ]
> 
> 
> Q. Is there a difference between the Nebulae and the Milky Way? 
> 
> A. The same, I should say, that there is between a highway road 
and the
> stones and mud upon that road. There must be, of course, a 
difference
> between the matter of the Milky Way and that of the various 
Nebulae, and
> these again must differ among themselves. But in all your 
scientific
> calculations and measurements it is necessary to consider that the 
light by
> which the objects are seen is a reflected light, and the optical 
illusion
> caused by the atmosphere of the earth renders it impossible that
> calculations of distances, etc., should be absolutely correct, in 
addition
> to the fact that it entirely alters observations of the matter of 
which the
> celestial bodies are composed, as it is liable to impose upon us a
> constitution similar to that of the earth. This is, at any rate, 
what the
> MASTERS teach us.  ..
> 
> Fire is the father of light, light the parent of heat and air 
(vital air).
> If the absolute deity can be referred to as Darkness or the Dark 
Fire, the
> light, its first progeny, is truly the first self-conscious god. 
For what is
> light in its primordial root but the world-illuminating and life-
giving
> deity? 
> 
> Light is that, which from an abstraction has become a reality. No 
one has
> ever seen real or primordial light; what we see is only its broken 
rays or
> reflections, which become denser and less luminous as they descend 
into form
> and matter. 
> 
> Fire, therefore, is a term which comprehends ALL. Fire is the 
invisible
> deity, "the Father," and the manifesting light is God "the Son," 
and also
> the Sun. Fire?in the occult sense?is æther, and æther is born of 
motion, and
> motion is the eternal dark, invisible Fire. 
> 
> Light sets in motion and controls all in nature, from that highest
> primordial æther down to the tiniest molecule in Space. MOTION is 
eternal
> per se, and in the manifested Kosmos it is the Alpha and Omega of 
that which
> is called electricity, galvanism, magnetism, sensation?moral and
> physical?thought, and even life, on this plane. Thus fire, on our 
plane, is
> simply the manifestation of motion, or Life. 
> 
> All cosmic phenomena were referred to by the Rosicrucians 
as "animated
> geometry." Every polar function is only a repetition of primeval 
polarity,
> said the Fire-Philosophers. For motion begets heat, and æther in 
motion is
> heat. When it slackens its motion, then cold is generated, 
for "cold is
> æther, in a latent condition." 
> 
> Thus the principal states of nature are three positive and three 
negative,
> synthesized by the primeval light. The three negative states are 
(1)
> Darkness; (2) Cold; (3) Vacuum or Voidness. 
> 
> The three positive are (1) Light (on our plane); (2) Heat; (3) All 
nature. 
> 
> Thus Fire may be called the unity of the Universe. Pure cosmic fire
> (without, so to speak, fuel) is Deity in its universality; for 
cosmic fire,
> or heat which it calls forth, is every atom of matter in 
manifested nature.
> There is not a thing or a particle in the Universe which does not 
contain in
> it latent fire. 
> 
> 
> Q. Fire, then, may be regarded as the first Element? 
> 
> A. When we say that fire is the first of the Elements, it is the 
first only
> in the visible universe, the fire that we commonly know. Even on 
the highest
> plane of our universe, the plane of Globe A or G, fire is in one 
respect
> only the fourth. 
> 
> For the Occultist, the Rosecroix of the Middle Ages, and even the 
mediaeval
> Kabalists, said that to our human perception and even to that of 
the highest
> "angels," the universal Deity is darkness, and from this Darkness 
issues the
> Logos in the following aspects, (1) Weight (Chaos which becomes 
æther in its
> primordial state); (2) Light; (3) Heat; (4) Fire.
> 
> [Corporeal substance belongs to the fifth division of the seventh 
Principle
> of the Mother substance, and is, therefore, four degrees higher 
than the
> solar reflected substance.  As there are seven Dhatu (principle 
substances
> in the human body) so there are seven Forces in Man and in all 
Nature."
> ( S D   I,   289-290) and  Kama-Rupa Of Akasa I 527fn; ) ]
>  
> Q. In what relation does the Sun, the highest form of Fire we can 
recognize,
> stand to Fire as you have explained it? 
> 
> A. The Sun, as on our plane, is not even "Solar" fire. The Sun, we 
see,
> gives nothing of itself, because it is a reflection; a bundle of
> electro-magnetic forces, one of the countless milliards of "Knots 
of Fohat."
> Fohat is called the "Thread of primeval Light," the "Ball of 
thread" of
> Ariadne, indeed, in this labyrinth of chaotic matter. This thread 
runs
> through the seven planes tying itself into knots. Every plane being
> septenary, there are thus forty-nine mystical and physical forces, 
larger
> knots forming stars, suns and systems, the smaller planets, and so 
on. 
> 
> 
> Q. In what respect is the Sun an illusion? 
> 
> A. The electro-magnetic knot of our Sun is neither tangible nor 
dimensional,
> nor even as molecular as the electricity we know. The Sun absorbs,
> "psychizes" and vampirizes its subjects within its system. Further 
than this
> it gives out nothing of itself. It is an absurdity, therefore, to 
say that
> the solar fires are being consumed and gradually extinguished. The 
Sun has
> but one distinct function; it gives the impulse of life to all 
that breathes
> and lives under its light. The sun is the throbbing heart of the 
system;
> each throb being an impulse. But this heart is invisible: no 
astronomer will
> ever see it. That which is concealed in this heart and that which 
we feel
> and see, its apparent flame and fires, to use a simile, are the 
nerves
> governing the muscles of the solar system, and nerves, moreover, 
outside of
> the body. This impulse is not mechanical but a purely spiritual, 
nervous
> impulse. "		
> 
> ----------------------------------------------
> 
> Best wishes,
> 
> Dallas
>  
> ======================================================
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: christinaleestemaker
> Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 11:10 AM
> Subject: Meaning of the double triangle.
> 
> Dear All;
> 
> Can anyone give the answer to this:
> 
> why HPB (SD 591)wrote the double triangle wrongly 
called  "Solomons seal",
> 
> 		snip
>