# فِي ٱللُّغَةِ ٱلْإِنْجْلِيزِيَّةِ:
### لفظ

* (RP, , , , ) أصد: /hɪəˈɹɒfəniːz/

### اسم

hierophanies ج.
* صِيغَةُ جَمْعٍ مُفْرَدُهَا [[hierophany]]
** 1991: Robert D. Baird, Category Formation and the History of Religions, p75$^{{1},{2},{3},&{4}}$
    $^{{1}}$For example, the symbolism of the moon implies a system of hierophanies which cluster about the moon.
    $^{{2}}$In the case of water symbolism, there is no such central symbol, but rather various water hierophanies.
    $^{{3}}$In the case of water symbolism, then, some 'hierophanies such as Baptism and the Flood are more clear in their intention.
    $^{{4}}$These systems manifest more clearly, more fully, and with greater coherence what each of the individual hierophanies intends. To interpret the hierophanies individualistically would be to lose their deepest meaning.
** 1994: Subrata Kumar Chakrabarti, Offshore Structure Modeling, chapter 1 — Hierophany, pp7$^{{1}}$ & 8$^{{2}&{3}}$
    $^{{1}}$The major themes in Eliade’s thought are symbol, myth, and ritual$^1$, hierophanies, the sacred and the profane, the coincidentia oppositorum, the repetition of archetypal structures$^2$, illud tempus, and homo religiosus.
    $^{{2}}$Then there are the difficulties raised by Eliade’s actual usage of his term. His first introduction of the word into his text$^3$ is problematic. “Some hierophanies are not at all clear, are indeed almost cryptic,” he states, “in that they only reveal the sacred meanings … in part, or, as it were, in code” (Patterns, 8).
    $^{{3}}$So, not only are things “transformed” into hierophanies, but anything can be so transformed, and yet, having been so transformed the hierophany may remain “cryptic”.