Theos-Talk Archives (May 1998 Message tt00480)

In a message dated 98-05-25 12:46:08 EDT, Daniel Caldwell writes:

<< Nevertheless, every science, philosophy, etc. has its own jargon, so why
not
 Theosophy?  >>

Good point!!! When I expanded my reading into the works of Sri Aurobindo,
Ramana Maharshi, Sai Baba and other Indian yogis and teachers, I discovered
that my acquired Theosophical Sanskrit vocabulary was very advantageous. I
have found glossaries like A DICTIONARY OF THEOSOPHY by Theodore Besterman, A
DICTIONARY OF SOME THEOSOPHICAL TERMS by Powis Hoult, A GLOSSARY OF SANSKRIT
TERMS by Geoffrey Barbourka, the OCCULT GLOSSARY by GdeP and the VEDANTA
DICTIONARY, ZEN DICTIONARY and YOGA DICTIONARY by Ernest Wood all very
beneficial in my studies. When I got into more obtuse Indian works, I forked
out over a hundred bucks for Monier-Williams' SANSKRIT-ENGLISH DICTIONARY.
With all that, however, I don't consider myself a Sanskrit scholar by any
means.

As was pointed out, "every science, philosophy, etc. has its own jargon". Why
do we have to "dummy down" Theosophy to the lowest common denominator? I
realize, of course, that this is the national trend - we don't want to lower
anybody's self-esteem, do we?

However, from a personal point of view, I don't feel "inadequate" when I come
across a word I don't know. I just look it up in a dictionary. Isn't that what
we all used to do at one time?

my 2 cents
Lmhem111