Communicating Theosophy to Others.
Dec 19, 2004 01:40 PM
by Jerry Hejka-Ekins
Hello Dallas,
I hope there was nothing serious that brought you to the hospital and
that all is well. April's mother in law is the same age as you, and we
have to watch here very carefully. These are the years when any little
illness can go terribly wrong. April lost her father a couple of years
ago, simply because he took too long to see a doctor.
Anyway I'm glad to see that you opted to continue our exchange, so I
changed the header to reflect the subject of our original conversation.
I received privately several emails from people who read this bulletin
board but rarely if ever contribute to it. Their emails concerned our
discussion and were very positive in that they have found our exchange
very informative and useful in their own efforts to communicate
Theosophy to a broader audience. And, of course, this whole discussion
is about how this can be done in a more effective way. I submit that
the relative unpopularity of Theosophy is not because of any failing or
lack in the average person, rather, it is because of the failure of
individual Theosophists and Theosophical Organizations to effectively
communicate to the average person. This is something that I have proven
for myself over the last forty years, but I'm frankly at a loss as to
how I could pose a compelling proof of this in, say, twenty words or
less. Rather, developing these ideas in a dialogue format seems to work
the best.
You wrote:
I have an intense dislike for "buzz" words like "post modern, modernist"
etc... which signify nothing at all. That is all to me, pseudo-intellectual.
I try to deal with facts and truths, and care little for opinions and "buzz
words."
After knowing you for thirty years, I am not at all surprised by your
"intense dislike" concerning the use of current philosophical
terminology, and empathize with your frustrations of living in a world
where words and culture are in a constant state of change. I have also
lived long enough to have witnessed several such abrupt changes in our
society, and you have witnessed even more of them. But this is the
nature of the world which we live. We can curse the changes and/or hide
from them, or we can try to keep up.
Most people have to live in this world. They have to go to work, some as
much as sixteen hours a day. They have to interact with others who may
have very different views some of which may be hostile to their own.
They don't have the luxury of high level philosophical discussions, such
as the ones we put on this bulletin board. They have to contend with
the realities of securing the means for food and shelter, take care of
sick children etc. Was it KH who said to the effect that "we have no
patience with the sunnyasis who seek enlightenment for themselves
alone"? How much less patience must the Masters have for Theosophists
who limit their reading to century old theosophical texts and mingle
only with other Theosophists. Such a Theosophist becomes as isolated as
any sunnyasi, and for the needs of this world, is about as useless.
Nevertheless, I have to respectfully disagree with your putting buzz
words and currently used technical terms into the same bag and tossing
them all out. I also submit that you are mistaken to assert that "buzz
words" signify nothing. All words have signification, and one purpose
for a dictionary is to assist in the determination of signification.
For instance, the word "gay" has a very different signification to your
generation, then it does to someone, say, in their thirties.
As for the words "post modern" and "modernist," I would not call them
"buzz words." I prefer to use that term for generational expressions
such as "bee's knees" a phrase from your parent's generation, now
intelligible to the average twenty year old. Actually, your phrase "buzz
word" is also a generational expression which arose in the 1950s. There
was a short-lived young Theosophists publication titled: "Buzz of the
Western Young Theosophists." As typical of Theosophical efforts, the
newsletter began just as the word "buzz" had fallen out of fashion.
Contrarily, such words as "post modern," "modernist," "plate tectonics,"
" nuclear fusion" etc. are not what I would label buzz words. Rather,
they are technical terms which are laden with meaning and coined out of
the necessity to communicate ideas which previously lacked a precise
terminology. The ladder two terms are respectively used in oceanography
and nuclear physics. The former two terms are used in all disciplines
which deal with culture. These disciplines include Sociology,
Psychology, Cultural Anthropology, Cultural Archeology, Philosophy,
Public Administration, Political Science, Literary Criticism, etc.
They (buzz words) embrace like a mist -- insubstantially, and designed to
blur -- expressions that require deep thought and hard work to grasp.
They confuse rather then make clear. They appear to give elevation to a
conversation in which most try to make points by seeming to know much (of
what ?) -- just repartie.
For generational expressions, perhaps yes. For technical terms such as
post-modernism, I will again have to respectfully disagree. It is just
the opposite. Terms used in the hard sciences and the social sciences
are designed to clarify what has previously been a blur. Yes, the terms
may confuse a reader who is unfamiliar with the subject at hand. But,
is that the fault of the term, the subject, or the reader?
So, does the terms modernism and post-modernism have a place in a
discussion of how to promulgate Theosophy? I would say yes, because
learning how to better communicate Theosophy (or any other subject, for
that matter) to others concerns the understanding of our own culture.
Therefore, the term has just as much of a place in Theosophy as it does
in any philosophy or other discipline related to the social sciences.
It is true that the term was unknown in HPB's time. But, her writings
show that she indeed understood the concept, though she did not have a
term to express it. Her comment about the ancient Egyptians have an
entirely different way of thinking about things as compared to the
archeologists of her time is an example.
Buy the way, I think HPB has expressed a great deal on Education in The KEY
TO THEOSOPHY -- I would find it difficult to say more.
Please try anyway. I am very interested in your views on what HPB says
about education.
Best Wishes
Jerry
W.Dallas TenBroeck wrote:
Dec 19 2004
Dear Jerry and Dan:
May I do a little breaking in?
I did not mean to terminate our exchanges
I had to go to the hospital for a while. Now trying to catch up.
Excuse me for brevity.
Buy the way, I think HPB has expressed a great deal on Education in The KEY
TO THEOSOPHY -- I would find it difficult to say more.
If "thinking" could only be taught -- if freedom and independence from
"authority" were insisted on, then their might be real progress.
THEOSOPHY is a moral affair and not just head learning or the application of
the laws of Nature for selfish advantage (black magic). Nor is it merely a
bunch of quotes.
I would hardly classify myself as an "apologist" for THEOSOPHY. A
protagonist, or an advertiser -- yes.
But I also say at almost every turn: do your own work. Study, find out.
Don't trust "authorities." Let no one say they "think for you."
THEOSOPHY defends itself quite well without any effort on my part -- if only
people would study it. If they don't then who suffers?
Main trouble is that most go by opinions, and few actually try to prove to
themselves the verity (or reverse) of opinions adopted. They spend a lot of
time defending themselves, and especially their prejudices. If we could all
see this clearly, for ourselves, then 9/10ths of the confusion would vanish.
I have studied THEOSOPHY most of my life. To me it is a statement of facts
in Nature. Others may have their own views.
I have an intense dislike for "buzz" words like "post modern, modernist"
etc... which signify nothing at all. That is all to me, pseudo-intellectual.
I try to deal with facts and truths, and care little for opinions and "buzz
words."
In a few years those will be replaced, by other and newer "buzzes." -- and
what will not? THEOSOPHY will remain -- if it is indeed a statement of
facts in nature. It may be called something else, but the facts, however
named, will still be FACTS.
They (buzz words) embrace like a mist -- insubstantially, and designed to
blur -- expressions that require deep thought and hard work to grasp.
They confuse rather then make clear. They appear to give elevation to a
conversation in which most try to make points by seeming to know much (of
what ?) -- just repartie.
Simply put: there is actually no "religion" higher than truth and fact.
THEOSOPHY is a statement of the cause and reality, including the
laws and existence of all beings.
A single word defines it completely: BROTHERHOOD.
Best wishes,
Dallas
[Back to Top]
Theosophy World:
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application