HPB-SD(ed.3) v.2 p.3 sec.4 ch.C: Difference between revisions

318 bytes removed , 11 October

незначительные правки

Interface administrators, Administrators (Semantic MediaWiki), Curators (Semantic MediaWiki), Editors (Semantic MediaWiki), Suppressors, Administrators, trusted

16,158

edits

@@ Line 100: / Line 100: @@
 Let us briefly glance at the divergencies between orthodox and Esoteric Science, on the question of the age of the globe and of man. With the two respective synchronistic tables before him, the reader will be enabled to see at a glance the importance of these divergencies; and to perceive, at the same time, that it is not impossible—nay, it is most likely—that further discoveries in Geology and the finding of fossil remains of man will force Science to confess that it is Esoteric Philosophy which is right after all, or, at any rate, nearer to the truth.
-<center>{{Style S-Small capitals|Parallelism of Life.}}</center>
+<center>'''{{Style S-Small capitals|Parallelism of Life.}}'''</center>
 {| style="width: 100%; border-spacing: 1.5em 0; table-layout: fixed;"
@@ Line 115: / Line 115: @@
 | style="width: 50%; vertical-align: top;" |
 {{Page SD 3d ed|ed=1|v=2|p=712|title=the secret doctrine.}}
-{{Style S-Small capitals|Scientific: Primordial Epoch}}
+<center>'''{{Style S-Small capitals|Primordial Epoch.}}'''</center>
-Laurentian, Cambrian, Silurian. The Primordial epoch, Science tells us, is by no means devoid of vegetable and animal life. In the Laurentian deposits are found specimens of the Eozoon canadense—a chambered shell. In the Silurian are discovered sea-weeds (algæ), molluscs, crustacea, and lower marine organisms, also the first trace of fishes. The Primordial epoch shows algæ, molluscs, crustacea, polyps, and marine organisms, etc. Science teaches, therefore, that marine life was present from the very beginnings of time, leaving us, however, to speculate for ourselves as to ''how'' life appeared on Earth. If it rejects the biblical “creation” (as we do), why does it not give us another, approximately plausible hypothesis?
+Laurentian, Cambrian, Silurian. The Primordial epoch, Science tells us, is by no means devoid of vegetable and animal life. In the Laurentian deposits are found specimens of the Eozoon canadense—a chambered shell. In the Silurian are discovered sea-weeds (algæ), molluscs, crustacea, and lower marine organisms, also the first trace of fishes. The Primordial epoch shows algæ, molluscs, crustacea, polyps, and marine organisms, etc. Science teaches, therefore, that marine life was present from the very beginnings of time, leaving us, however, to speculate for ourselves as to ''how'' life appeared on Earth. If it rejects the biblical “crea-
 | style="width: 50%; vertical-align: top;" |
-{{Style S-Small capitals|Esoteric:}} {{Style S-Small capitals|“}}{{Style S-Small capitals|Primeval}}{{Style S-Small capitals|”}}†
+<center>'''{{Style S-Small capitals|“Primeval.”}}'''†</center>
 Devas or Divine Men, the “Creators” and Progenitors.‡ The Esoteric Philosophy agrees with the statement made by Science (see preceding), demurring, however, to one particular. The 300,000,000 years of vegetable life (see “Brâhmanical Chronology”) preceded the “Divine Men,” or Progenitors. Also, no teaching denies that there were traces of life ''within'' the Earth, besides the Eozoon canadense, in the Primordial Epoch. Only, whereas the said vegetation belonged to this Round, the zoological relics now found in the Laurentian, Cambrian, and Silurian systems, so called, are the ''relics'' of the
@@ Line 136: / Line 136: @@
 {| style="width: 100%; border-spacing: 1.5em 0; table-layout: fixed;"
 |-
-| style="width: 50%; vertical-align: top;" |
+| style="width: 50%; vertical-align: top;" | {{Style P-No indent|tion” (as we do), why does it not give us another, approximately plausible hypothesis?}}
 | style="width: 50%; vertical-align: top;" | {{Style P-No indent|Third Round. At first astral like the rest, they consolidated and materialized ''pari passu'' with the new vegetation.}}
 |-
 | style="vertical-align: top;" |
-<center>{{Style S-Small capitals|Scientific: Primary}}</center>
+<center>'''{{Style S-Small capitals|Primary.}}'''</center>
 Devonian,* Coal, Permian. “Fern-forests, sigillaria, coniferæ, fishes, first trace of reptiles.” Thus saith Modern Science.
 | style="vertical-align: top;" |
-<center>{{Style S-Small capitals|Esoteric:}} {{Style S-Small capitals|“}}{{Style S-Small capitals|Primary}}{{Style S-Small capitals|”}}</center>
+<center>'''{{Style S-Small capitals|“Primary.”}}'''</center>
 Divine Progenitors (Secondary Groups), and the two and a half Races. The Esoteric Doctrine repeats that which was said above. These are all relics of the preceding Round.†
@@ Line 155: / Line 155: @@
 | style="width: 50%; vertical-align: top;" |
 {{Page SD 3d ed|ed=1|v=2|p=713|title=the two sciences contrasted.}}
-{{Style S-Small capitals|Scientific: Secondary}}
+<center>'''{{Style S-Small capitals|Secondary.}}'''</center>
 Triassic, Jurassic, Cretaceous. This is the age of Reptiles, of the gigantic megalosauri, ichthyosauri, plesiosauri, etc. Science denies the presence of man in this period. But it has still to explain how men came to know of these monsters and describe them ''before'' the age of Cuvier! The old annals of China, India, Egypt, and even of Judea are full of them, as demonstrated elsewhere. In this period also appear the first marsupial mammals‡—insectivorous, carnivorous, phytophagous; and, as Prof. Owen thinks, a herbiferous hoofed mammal.
-Science does not admit the appearance of man before ''the close'' of the Tertiary period.§ {{Page SD 3d ed|ed=1|v=2|p=714|title=the secret doctrine.}}Why? Because man has to be shown younger than the higher mammals. But Esoteric Philosophy teaches us the reverse. And as Science is quite unable to come to anything like an approximate conclusion as to the age of man, or even as to the geological periods, the Occult teaching is, therefore, more logical and reasonable, even if accepted only as a hypothesis.
+Science does not admit the appearance of man before ''the close'' of the Tertiary
 | style="width: 50%; vertical-align: top;" |
-<center>{{Style S-Small capitals|Esoteric:}} {{Style S-Small capitals|“}}{{Style S-Small capitals|Secondary}}{{Style S-Small capitals|”}}</center>
+<center>'''{{Style S-Small capitals|“Secondary.”}}'''</center>
 According to every calculation the Third Race had already made its appearance, as during the Triassic there were already a few mammals, and it must have separated before their appearance.
@@ Line 177: / Line 177: @@
 ‡ Geologists tell us that “in the Secondary epoch, the only mammals which have been [hitherto] discovered in Europe are the fossil remains of a small marsupial or pouch-bearer.” (''Knowledge'', March 31st, 1882, p. 464.) Surely the marsupial or didelphis (the only surviving animal of the family of those which were on Earth during the presence on it of androgyne man) cannot be the only animal that was then on Earth? Its presence speaks loudly for that of other (though unknown) mammals, besides the monotremes and marsupials, and thus shows the appellation of “mammalian age” given only to the Tertiary period to be misleading and erroneous, as it allows one to infer that there were no mammals, but reptiles, birds, amphibians, and fishes alone in the Mesozoic times—the Secondary.
-§ Those who feel inclined to sneer at that doctrine of Esoteric Ethnology, which pre-supposes the existence of Men in the Secondary age, will do well to note the fact that one of the most distinguished Anthropologists of the day, M. de Quatrefages, seriously argues in that direction. He writes: “There is then nothing impossible in the idea that he [man] . . . should have appeared upon the globe with the first representatives of the type to which he belongs by his organization.” (''The Human Species'', p. 153.) This statement approximates most closely to our fundamental assertion that man preceded the other mammalia. Professor Lefèvre admits that the “labours of Boucher de Perthes, Lartet, Christy, Bourgeois, Desnoyers, Broca, De Mortillet, Hamy, Gaudry, Capellini, and a hundred others, have overcome all doubts, and clearly established the progressive development of the human organism and industries from the miocene epoch of the tertiary age.” (''Philosophy Historical and Critical'', Pt. II, p. 499, Chapter II, On Organic Evolution. “Library of Contemporary Science.”) Why does he reject the possibility of a Secondary-age man? Simply because he is involved in the meshes of the Darwinian Anthropology. “The origin of man is bound up with that of the higher mammals”; he appeared “only with the ''last'' types of his class”! This is not argument, but dogmatism. Theory can never excommunicate fact. Must everything give place to the mere working hypotheses of Western Evolutionists? Surely not!
 {{Footnotes end}}
@@ Line 184: / Line 183: @@
 {| style="width: 100%; border-spacing: 1.5em 0; table-layout: fixed;"
 |-
-| style="width: 50%; vertical-align: top;" |
+| style="width: 50%; vertical-align: top;" | {{Style P-No indent|period.* {{Page SD 3d ed|ed=1|v=2|p=714|title=the secret doctrine.}}Why? Because man has to be shown younger than the higher mammals. But Esoteric Philosophy teaches us the reverse. And as Science is quite unable to come to anything like an approximate conclusion as to the age of man, or even as to the geological periods, the Occult teaching is, therefore, more logical and reasonable, even if accepted only as a hypothesis.}}
-| style="width: 50%; vertical-align: top;" | {{Style P-No indent|human races in their procreative processes. A parallel might certainly be found between the monotremata, didelphia (or marsupialia) and the placental mammals, divided in their turn into three orders* like the First, Second, and Third Root-Races of men.† But this would require more space than can be now allotted to the subject.}}
+| style="width: 50%; vertical-align: top;" | {{Style P-No indent|human races in their procreative processes. A parallel might certainly be found between the monotremata, didelphia (or marsupialia) and the placental mammals, divided in their turn into three orders‡ like the First, Second, and Third Root-Races of men.§ But this would require more space than can be now allotted to the subject.}}
 |-
 | style="vertical-align: top;" |
-<center>{{Style S-Small capitals|Scientific: Tertiary}}‡</center>
+<center>'''{{Style S-Small capitals|Tertiary.}}'''†</center>
 Eocene, Miocene, Pliocene. No man is yet allowed to have lived during this period.
-Says Mr. E. Clodd, in ''Knowledge'': “Although the placental mammals and the order of primates to which man is related, appear in Tertiary times, and the climate, tropical in the Eocene age, warm in the Miocene, and temperate in the Pliocene, was favourable to his presence, the proofs of his existence in Europe before the close of the Tertiary epoch . . . . are not generally accepted here.”
+Says Mr. E. Clodd, in ''Knowledge'': “Although the placental mammals and the order of primates to which man is related,
 | style="vertical-align: top;" |
-<center>{{Style S-Small capitals|Esoteric:}} {{Style S-Small capitals|“}}{{Style S-Small capitals|Tertiary}}{{Style S-Small capitals|”}}</center>
+<center>'''{{Style S-Small capitals|“Tertiary.”}}'''</center>
 The Third Race has now almost utterly disappeared, carried away by the fearful geological cataclysms of the Secondary age, leaving behind it but a few hybrid races.
@@ Line 202: / Line 201: @@
 {{Footnotes start}}
-<nowiki>*</nowiki> These placentalia of the third sub-class are divided, it appears, into villiplacentalia (placenta composed of many separate scattered tufts), the zonoplacentalia (girdle-shaped placenta), and the discoplacentalia (or discoid). Hæckel sees in the marsupialia didelphia, one of the connecting links ''genealogically'' between man and the moneron!!
+<nowiki>*</nowiki> Those who feel inclined to sneer at that doctrine of Esoteric Ethnology, which pre-supposes the existence of Men in the Secondary age, will do well to note the fact that one of the most distinguished Anthropologists of the day, M. de Quatrefages, seriously argues in that direction. He writes: “There is then nothing impossible in the idea that he [man] . . . should have appeared upon the globe with the first representatives of the type to which he belongs by his organization.” (''The Human Species'', p. 153.) This statement approximates most closely to our fundamental assertion that man preceded the other mammalia. Professor Lefèvre admits that the “labours of Boucher de Perthes, Lartet, Christy, Bourgeois, Desnoyers, Broca, De Mortillet, Hamy, Gaudry, Capellini, and a hundred others, have overcome all doubts, and clearly established the progressive development of the human organism and industries from the miocene epoch of the tertiary age.” (''Philosophy Historical and Critical'', Pt. II, p. 499, Chapter II, On Organic Evolution. “Library of Contemporary Science.”) Why does he reject the possibility of a Secondary-age man? Simply because he is involved in the meshes of the Darwinian Anthropology. “The origin of man is bound up with that of the higher mammals”; he appeared “only with the ''last'' types of his class”! This is not argument, but dogmatism. Theory can never excommunicate fact. Must everything give place to the mere working hypotheses of Western Evolutionists? Surely not!
-† This inclusion of the First Race in the Secondary is necessarily only a provisional working hypothesis—the actual chronology of the First, Second, and early Third Races being closely veiled by the Initiates. For all that can be said on the subject, the First Root-Race may have been Pre-Secondary, as is, indeed, taught.
+† The above parallels stand good only if Professor Croll’s earlier calculations are adopted, namely, of 15,000,000 years since the beginning of the Eocene period (see Charles Gould’s ''Mythical Monsters'', p. 84), not those in his ''Climate and Time'', which allow only two-and-a-half million years, or at the utmost three million years’ duration to the Tertiary age. This, however, would make the whole duration of the incrusted age of the world only 131,600,000 years, according to Professor Winchell, whereas in the Esoteric Doctrine, sedimentation began in ''this'' Round approximately over 320,000,000 years ago. Yet his calculations do not clash much with ours with regard to the epochs of glacial periods in the Tertiary age, which is called in our Esoteric books the “Age of the Pigmies.” With regard to the 320,000,000 of years assigned to sedimentation, it must be noted that even a greater time elapsed during the preparation of this Globe for the Fourth Round ''previous to stratification''.
+‡ These placentalia of the third sub-class are divided, it appears, into villiplacentalia (placenta composed of many separate scattered tufts), the zonoplacentalia (girdle-shaped placenta), and the discoplacentalia (or discoid). Hæckel sees in the marsupialia didelphia, one of the connecting links ''genealogically'' between man and the moneron!!
+§ This inclusion of the First Race in the Secondary is necessarily only a provisional working hypothesis—the actual chronology of the First, Second, and early Third Races being closely veiled by the Initiates. For all that can be said on the subject, the First Root-Race may have been Pre-Secondary, as is, indeed, taught.
-‡ The above parallels stand good only if Professor Croll’s earlier calculations are adopted, namely, of 15,000,000 years since the beginning of the Eocene period (see Charles Gould’s ''Mythical Monsters'', p. 84), not those in his ''Climate and Time'', which allow only two-and-a-half million years, or at the utmost three million years’ duration to the Tertiary age. This, however, would make the whole duration of the incrusted age of the world only 131,600,000 years, according to Professor Winchell, whereas in the Esoteric Doctrine, sedimentation began in ''this'' Round approximately over 320,000,000 years ago. Yet his calculations do not clash much with ours with regard to the epochs of glacial periods in the Tertiary age, which is called in our Esoteric books the “Age of the Pigmies.” With regard to the 320,000,000 of years assigned to sedimentation, it must be noted that even a greater time elapsed during the preparation of this Globe for the Fourth Round ''previous to stratification''.
 {{Footnotes end}}
@@ Line 213: / Line 215: @@
 {| style="width: 100%; border-spacing: 1.5em 0; table-layout: fixed;"
 |-
-| style="width: 50%; vertical-align: top;" |
+| style="width: 50%; vertical-align: top;" | {{Style P-No indent|appear in Tertiary times, and the climate, tropical in the Eocene age, warm in the Miocene, and temperate in the Pliocene, was favourable to his presence, the proofs of his existence in Europe before the close of the Tertiary epoch . . . . are not generally accepted here.”}}
 | style="width: 50%; vertical-align: top;" | {{Style P-No indent|before* the said cataclysm took place, perished during the Miocene period,† when the Fifth (our Âryan Race) had had one million years of independent existence.‡ How much older it is from its origin—who knows? As the “historical” period began with the Indian Âryans, with their ''Vedas'' for their multitudes,§ and far earlier in the Esoteric Records, it is useless to establish here any parallels.}}
 |-
@@ Line 221: / Line 223: @@
 |-
 | style="vertical-align: top;" |
-<center>{{Style S-Small capitals|Scientific: Quaternary}}</center>
+<center>'''{{Style S-Small capitals|Quaternary.}}'''</center>
 Palæolithic Man, Neolithic Man, Historical Period.
 | style="vertical-align: top;" |
-<center>{{Style S-Small capitals|Esoteric:}} {{Style S-Small capitals|“}}{{Style S-Small capitals|Quaternary}}{{Style S-Small capitals|”}}</center>
+<center>'''{{Style S-Small capitals|“Quaternary.”}}'''</center>
 If the Quaternary period is allowed 1,500,000 years, then only does our Fifth Race belong to it.

HPB-SD(ed.3) v.2 p.3 sec.4 ch.C: Difference between revisions

HPB-SD(ed.3) v.2 p.3 sec.4 ch.C (view source)

Revision as of 14:29, 11 October 2026