[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: Theosophical Doctrines (HPB)

May 20, 1998 06:51 PM
by Dr A M Bain

W. Dallas TenBroeck <> writes
>The attempt to "date" HPB's writings with the stigma (?) of the
>time in which they were written "Victorian," etc ...  Why not
>take them on face value ?  The moral condition of the world and
>its philosophical evolution are to be considered on the basis of
>what is being offered -- in terms of verity, or accuracy of
>description.  The "age" of the language, and the slight change in
>colloquial expression in 100 years has very little to do with
>those concepts.

Alas, this is far from the truth.  for instance, it is now recognised that the
"Authorized King James" version of the Bible is both misleading in its
language by reason of the antiquity of that language, and also a great
many mistranslations based upon the prevailing ethos of the period
when the translation was made.  Also, new information and knowledge
of ancient languages and sources has made new translations inevitable.
Yet the fact remains that *any* translation is also an interpretation.

In the same way, any author's writing(s) - be it HPB or Paul Johnson -
is or are an interpretation of that author's point of view.

As an example, the KJV bible has Jesus say, "He that hath ears to hear,
let him hear."  The Greek text from which this is rendered does not say
this, but rather, "Whoever has ears to hear - listen!"  Note the absence
of a gender reference.

Throughout the SD, Isis Unveiled and most (if not all) Victorian writing
"He" is assumed to include "she" as a matter of course.  This was the
convention at the time, and no one would have questioned such usage.

*They do now.*

See the "Statement of Intent" of Theosophy International, which seeks
to address such antiquated and outdated conventions.


[Back to Top]

Theosophy World: Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application