Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Administrators (Semantic MediaWiki), Curators (Semantic MediaWiki), Editors (Semantic MediaWiki), Suppressors, Administrators, trusted
15,339
edits
HPB-SD(ed.1) v.1 p.2 sec.8: Difference between revisions
m
no edit summary
(Created page with "{{HPB-SD-header | volume = 1 | part = 2 | section = 8 | section title = The Lotus, as a Universal Symbol | previous = v.1 p.2 sec.7 | next = v.1 p.2 sec.9 | edition...") |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 88: | Line 88: | ||
{{Style P-No indent|logy of the early Aryans. The idea and application are purely Semitic. This is corroborated by the writer of the said intensely learned and Kabalistic revelation himself, when he closes the above-quoted passages by adding : —}} | {{Style P-No indent|logy of the early Aryans. The idea and application are purely Semitic. This is corroborated by the writer of the said intensely learned and Kabalistic revelation himself, when he closes the above-quoted passages by adding : —}} | ||
{{Style P-Quote|“ If to these organs as symbols of creative cosmic agencies the idea of the origin of measures as well as of time-periods can be attached, then indeed, in the constructions of the Temples as Dwellings of Deity, or of Jehovah, that part designated as the Holy of Holies, or the Most Holy place, should borrow its title from the recognised sacredness of the generative organs, considered as symbols of measures as well as of creative cause. With the ancient wise, ''there | {{Style P-Quote|“ If to these organs as symbols of creative cosmic agencies the idea of the origin of measures as well as of time-periods can be attached, then indeed, in the constructions of the Temples as Dwellings of Deity, or of Jehovah, that part designated as the Holy of Holies, or the Most Holy place, should borrow its title from the recognised sacredness of the generative organs, considered as symbols of measures as well as of creative cause. With the ancient {{Style S-Small capitals|wise}}, ''there was no name and no idea, and no symbol'' of {{Style S-Small capitals|a first cause}}.” . . . .}} | ||
Most decidedly not. Rather never give a thought to it and leave it for ever ''nameless'', as the early Pantheists did, than degrade the sacredness of that ''Ideal of Ideals'', by dragging down its symbols into such anthropomorphic forms ! Here again one perceives the immense chasm between Aryan and Semitic religious thought : two opposite poles — Sincerity and Concealment. With the Brahmins, who have never invested with an “ original Sin ” element the natural procreative functions of mankind, it is a ''religious duty ''to have a son. A Brahmin, in days of old, having accomplished his mission of human creator, retired to the jungle and passed the rest of his days in religious meditations. He had accomplished his duty to nature as mortal man and its co-worker, and henceforth gave all his thoughts to the spiritual immortal portion in himself, regarding the terrestrial as a mere illusion, an evanescent dream — which it is. With the Semite, it was different. He invented a temptation of flesh in a garden of Eden ; showed his God (esoterically, the Tempter and the Ruler of Nature) cursing ''for ever ''an act, which was in the logical programme of that nature. * All this exoterically, as in the ''cloak ''and dead letter of Genesis and the rest ; and at the same time ''esoterically ''he regarded the supposed ''sin ''and {{Style S-Small capitals|fall}} as an act so sacred, as to choose the organ, the perpetrator of the ''original sin'', as the fittest and most sacred symbol to represent that God, who is shown as branding its entering into function as disobedience and everlasting {{Style S-Small capitals|sin}} ! | Most decidedly not. Rather never give a thought to it and leave it for ever ''nameless'', as the early Pantheists did, than degrade the sacredness of that ''Ideal of Ideals'', by dragging down its symbols into such anthropomorphic forms ! Here again one perceives the immense chasm between Aryan and Semitic religious thought : two opposite poles — Sincerity and Concealment. With the Brahmins, who have never invested with an “ original Sin ” element the natural procreative functions of mankind, it is a ''religious duty ''to have a son. A Brahmin, in days of old, having accomplished his mission of human creator, retired to the jungle and passed the rest of his days in religious meditations. He had accomplished his duty to nature as mortal man and its co-worker, and henceforth gave all his thoughts to the spiritual immortal portion in himself, regarding the terrestrial as a mere illusion, an evanescent dream — which it is. With the Semite, it was different. He invented a temptation of flesh in a garden of Eden ; showed his God (esoterically, the Tempter and the Ruler of Nature) cursing ''for ever ''an act, which was in the logical programme of that nature. * All this exoterically, as in the ''cloak ''and dead letter of Genesis and the rest ; and at the same time ''esoterically ''he regarded the supposed ''sin ''and {{Style S-Small capitals|fall}} as an act so sacred, as to choose the organ, the perpetrator of the ''original sin'', as the fittest and most sacred symbol to represent that God, who is shown as branding its entering into function as disobedience and everlasting {{Style S-Small capitals|sin}} ! | ||