Re: Re: Jerry Schueler on Devachan
May 26, 1998 05:29 AM
by Jerry Schueler
> Would you also include HPB and her
>Teachers in this "elitism"? Certainly if we can use regular
>English words to explain Theosophy then let's do it.
I think you know the answer to your question. In heer day
there were no English equivalents. In some cases there
still aren't. But in a lot of areas there are. I applaud CWL,
Kuntz, Perkins, Long, and others for their use of plain
>every science, philosophy, etc. has its own jargon, so why not
Its a personal thing with me. I was originally trained in the Army
to use plain English when possible (keep fog index low, etc)
and have maintained this even today. I believe that the high fog
index of the old Quest, for example, is primarily what killed it.
Sunrise is still going today largely because of its low fog index.
Every time we use a Sanskrit word, the fog index rises. HPB had
no choice. We do.
> Do you ever use the words yoga, or karma or Mahatma?
Yes. Yes. No. I dislike the obscure term Mahatma and seldom
if ever use it. I prefer Adept which connotes someone who is
capable or knowledgable. Mahatma increases the fog index
because everyone today associates the term with Ghandi.
>Does it hurt the inquirer of Theosophy to learn *some* Sanskrit
>terms? I find that learning these terms expands one's mental
>horizons, etc. One can gain a greater understanding of
>words and their root meanings.
Then by all means use them. But don't be too surprised when
membership continues to decrease.
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application