Theos-Talk Archives (June 2006 Message tt00008)

 MAHATMA LETTERS [Barker],to Sinnett. pp. 345-6  explains:
>

For the ones have a newer edition print 1979 it is letter 59 pages 
340-3.


> "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.
>