Theos-Talk Archives (July 1996 Message tt00023)

When we look forward to the work necessary to help the
theosphical movement be a power for good in the world, we often
have a skillful balancing act to perform. Often, for each thing
that we need to do, we almost paradoxically need to do the
opposite as well.

One problem before us, for instance, is the language,
terminology, and manner of presentation of the theosophical
philosophy. Consider some aspects of this (and related) problems:

1.  Terms like "root races" bring some readers to quickly explode
    in anger -- thinking "racism!" -- even though the doctrine
    has nothing of the sort in it.

2.  Books are written in language that is not politically
    correct, using personal pronouns like "he" more often than
    some readers would like.

3.  There are comparisons to the science of the last century,
    which is now outdated, and nothing said with regard to the
    marvelous discoveries of the current century.

4.  The approach in writing was directed toward people of the
    Victorian Age, with a certain temperament. A different slant
    would appeal to the more enlightened attitudes and new
    prejudices and fears of our current age, including a new
    individualism and distrust of authority and doctrine.

5.  We need to clearly distinguishing between the *content* of
    the literature and the *manner of expression*. Putting the
    materials into new words is a *translation process* not a
    *replacement process*, although we may stress a different
    subset of them.

6.  Lucid introductory (and perhaps intermediate) books can be a
    useful study aid, but are not a replacement for the deeper
    literature. It would take another HPB (with help from her
    Masters) to rewrite THE SECRET DOCTRINE.

7.  The purpose of the writings is not just to inform the reader,
    but also to train the reader in how to discover the deeper
    ideas on one's own. A book that does not come out and state
    things plainly may be better than one than follows the style
    of western textbooks.

8.  Not everything that is stated in the literature is intended
    for everyone. There are exoteric blinds to deeper truths.
    Who should decide when to plainly state things that some of
    our teachers have thought best to veil?

9.  By staying with the source literature, like THE MAHATMA
    LETTERS and Blavatsky's writings, we're protected against
    confusion caused by "the revising of terminology and
    suppression of ideas found in the original teachings".

10. Certain ideas may not be possible to be more plainly stated
    than they have been. The use of Sanskrit is fine. Every
    discipline has its own technical terminology -- computers,
    psychology, mathematics, etc. -- and a layman needs to learn
    the language to tap into a particular line of thought.

11. More discussion is needed of ethics, morals, unselfishness,
    service, and other religious issues need to be raised,
    independent of any association with modern religious dogma
    and repressive modern religions. We need to *be religious*
    without becoming a religion.

12. For the benefit of new students, more information and
    encouragement regarding the spiritual path should be
    provided. This includes talk about how a study of Theosophy
    *can* effect changes in one's life and be a form of treding
    the Path.

13. Professional organizations the the ACM (for computer
    professionals) have two tiers of publications. One is for
    the practioner, the other is popularized for the layman. We
    need "for the layman" books, without compromising the
    treasury in the deeper literature.

I'm sure that with a few more minutes, I'd come up with some more
items, but time is running out. (Time is also running out for
Western Theosophy. What are we to do?)