Science Rendition

And the creative mentative power will face increased resistance to the execution of its desire to know, and its creative potential; and only through a painful process of resistance will it generate conceptions. It will have to follow the laws of the rational nature of the ADM-ic mind, which is ruled by representations.

KJV: : Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

Key Words: ASHH ETZBWN HRWN ETZBWN THYLDY BNYM THSHWQH AYSH MSHL

E-TZ-B-W-N – ‘travail, toil, labor’

The word עצב employed twice in this verse merits a particular attention. It springs from the two contracted roots עץ–צב. The first עץ, should be known to us. It is the same one which forms the name of that mysterious substance whose usage was forbidden to intellectual man. It is not difficult to recognize in it, sentient, corporeal substance, and in general, the emblem of that which is physical, in opposition to that which is spiritual. The second צב contains the idea of that which is raised as hindrance, swells with wrath, arrests, prevents a thing, opposes with effort, etc.

Moses employs first the word עצבון, after having added the tensive syllable ון, wishing to indicate the general obstacles which shall be opposed henceforth to the unfoldment of the will of intellectual man, and which shall multiply its conceptions, forcing them to become divided and subdivided ad infinitum. He then makes use of the simple word עצב to depict the pain, the torment, the agony which shall accompany its least creations. This hierographic writer would have it understood, that the volitive faculty shall no more cause intellectual conceptions to pass from power into action, without intermediary; but that it shall experience, on the contrary, deviations without number and obstacles of all sorts, whose resistance it shall be able to overcome, only by dint of labour and of time.

It is not necessary to say how the Hellenists have interpreted this verse. It is well known in what manner the ideas of Moses were materialized, and how the volitive faculty having been transformed into a corporeal woman, the physical hindrances opposed to the exercise of the will, have been no more than the pain which accompany childbirth. But one cannot accuse the Hellenists entirely of this charge. It was an inevitable consequence of the corruption of the Hebraic tongue, of its total losss and of the wretched inclination of the Jews to bend everything to their gross ideas. Moreover the vulgar translation seems to offer at first some appearance of reason. Only a moment of reflection, nevertheless, is necessary to discover the error…

In the first place, it is not true that Moses made the Being of beings say, that he will multifply the sorrows and the conceptions as the Hellenists translate it λυπας και ζεναμοις ; but that he will multiply the number of the obstacles and the conceptions, as Saint Jerome has not been prevented from seeing, “aerumnas et conceptus.” …

Now I ask in the second place how the Being of beings could have said to the corporeal woman that he would multiply the number of her conceptions or her pregnancies, as one understands it, since it would in such a manner shorten her life? Would he not rather have said that he would diminish the number, by rendering them more and more painful and laborious? But the Hellenists only abandoned it to follow the Samaritan version, because they saw plainly that it exposed the spiritual meaning, as indeed it does. For, while it is in accordance with reason and experience, to think that the volitive conceptions increase in proportion to the obstacles which are opposed to their realization and which force them to be divided, it is absurd and contradictory to affirm it of the pregnancies of physical woman, which are necessarily diminished with the pains, maladies and sufferings which accompany and follow them. (The Hebraic Tongue Restored, Fabré d’Olivet, p. 111-113)

H-R-W-N – ‘conception’

2032. herown, hay-rone´; or  herayown, hay-raw-yone´; from 2029; pregnancy:—conception.

2029. harah, haw-raw´; a primitive root; to be (or become) pregnant, conceive (literally or figuratively):—been, be with child, conceive, progenitor. (Strong’s Concordance)

Y-L-D B-N-Y-M – ‘give birth to creative beings’

The compound radical verb ילוד comes from the root לד, which, formed by the union of the signs of directive movement and of natural abundance, expresses all propagation, all generation, all extension of being. This verb is employed in Hebrew, literally as well as figuratively, as much in relation to the generation of spirit, as to that substance, without any distinction of sex: so that it is wrong when one has wished to restrict the meaning to a corporeal childbirth. The word which follows בנים, is also very far from signifying simply children. It characterizes, in general, the analogous creations of a creative being, whatever it may be. (The Hebraic Tongue Restored, p. 113)

TH-SH-W-Q-H – ‘desire, resonant tendency’

This is an ellipsis of such boldness that the Hebraic tongue is the only one that permits it. The verb שק signifies to have a movement, a tendency toward a determined end, as water, for example. Now, in what manner does Moses express the tendency which the volitive faculty shall submit to its intellectual principle? He takes this verb, and after having employed it according to the positive form of the second person future, feminine singular, he makes abruptly a constructive noun of it, by means of the sign ת, which he adds to it; in this state he joins the nominal affix ך , as if to say in an hieroglyphic manner, that the dependence in which the will shall be with regard to its principle, shall take away nothing of its liberty and shall be as a result of its own tendency. I know of no other tongue in the world where this ellipsis could be rendered. (The Hebraic Tongue Restored, p. 114)

M-S-H-L – ‘symbol, archetype’

The verb משול, which means equally to rule, and to be represented, to be expressed by symbols, is used with purpose in this passage, to conceal no doubt a mystery which is not my purpose to penetrate…(The Hebraic Tongue Restored, p. 114)

…it is evident that the sun and the moon rule over the day and night. Indeed, Moses would be but little understood if one were to stop at an idea so trivial. The verb משול means, it is true, to be ruler, judge, prince; but it signifies much oftener to be the model, the representation, the symbol of something; to speak in allegories, in parables; to present a similitude, an emblem, a figure. This verb is produced from the root שו which containing in itself every idea of parity, similitude and representation, is joined to the signs מ and ל, to express its exterior action and its relative movement…[and] invested with the continued facultive of the sign מ, which doubles the force of its action. (The Hebraic Tongue Restored, Fabré d’Olivet, p. 47)