Theos-Talk Archives (January 2005 Message tt00243)

Hello Pedro,

Thank you for your thoughtful reply. That sloka in the Rig Veda is one 
of my favorites, and yes, perhaps that essential unknowability could 
even be the key to that ultimate question of existence. 

You write,

>If a teaching is something which is shown to someone - a person, a 
>group, a culture - all of which are also experiencing growth and 
>evolution, such a teaching needs to be dynamic. Theosophy has also 
>been called the Perennial Wisdom, and that which is perennial lasts 
>for a long time, perhaps because its 'language' is one that 
>acknowledges the changing environment and the growing perceptions of 
>humans in every age.
>

The present prevailing opinion in academia is pointing towards a 
sixteenth century author named Agostino Steuco as the earliest user of 
the word perennialism (as we use the term) in his book, Philosophia 
Perennis. As to its application to Theosophy, our Theosophical group in 
Los Angeles may have been the earliest ones to apply the term 
"perennialism" to Theosophy with the release of our video "The Perennial 
Wisdom" in 1990. At least, I wasn't previously aware of the term being 
previously applied to Theosophy, and appropriated to term from Aldous 
Huxley who used it in the title of his book: The Perennial Philosophy. 
Huxley, in turn, credits Leibnitz. If there is a pre 1990 use of the 
term applied to Theosophy (and there may be), I would be very interested 
in seeing the citations. Another term with nearly, if not exactly the 
same meaning is Traditionalism. Interestingly, those who call 
themselves Traditionalists or Perennialists, such as Katherine Raine and 
Rene Geuenon had been careful to exclude Theosophy from that 
classification. The only exception was Bill Quinn's doctoral 
dissertation become book, The Only Tradition (1997). But his book is 
hotly contested by other Traditionalists, particularly those connected 
with Seyyed Hossein Nasr, and is even avoided by the popular 
Traditionalist, Huston Smith. 

Nevertheless, I personally find the notion of a perennial wisdom very 
seductive, and my early intuition of it was, I believe, the basis of my 
initial attraction to Theosophy and with HPB's The Secret Doctrine. 
Sadly, the demonstration of the objective existence of a "Perennial 
Wisdom," "Tradition," or "Theosophy" through an acceptable methodology 
has been no more successful than the theologian's attempts to prove the 
existence of a personal God. With this awareness firmly in mind, I 
prefer to refer to Theosophy (or Traditionalism or Perennialism) as a 
belief. With that said, I still suspect that Perennialism is a 
universally appealing notion for those who haven't already learned to 
reject it through contrary religious or academic training. Perhaps that 
makes its "language" a "voice" which is accessible to all who are open 
to sensing humanity and the universe as a oneness. 

>Like you, Jerry, I also don't have any daily conversations with 
>higher spiritual realities and in that respect I am very 
>much "offline". But I like to think on these things and was very 
>much heartened by what I read on a bookmark produced by TPH Wheaton 
>many years ago:
>
>"THINK! It could be a new experience for you."
> 
>
This sentiment must have originated with a cynical remark made by a 
progressive member who managed to appeal to the "gate keepers" at 
Wheaton. If that notion were to become integrated into its policies, I 
suspect that the TS could experience a new renaissance.

Thanks
Jerry



prmoliveira wrote:

>--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Jerry Hejka-Ekins <jjhe@c...> 
>wrote:
>
>>Because I'm only willing to speak from my personal understandings, 
>>experiences and intuitions, I'm not one to proclaim that Theosophy 
>>pre-existed in the mind of Parabrahm. You will have to ask Parabrahm about these things :-)
>> 
>>
>
>Hello Jerry:
>
>Thank you for your comments. I think the fragment of the beautiful 
>hymn from the Rig-Veda, quoted by HPB before the Stanzas of the 
>Cosmogenesis in the SD, seems to indicate that the essential 
>unknowability of the mystery that surrounds us goes right up to the 
>very top, perhaps to THAT itself:
>
>"Who knows the secret? who proclaimed it here?
>Whence, whence this manifold creation sprang?
>The Gods themselves came later into being--
>Who knows from whence this great creation sprang?
>That, whence all this great creation came,
>Whether Its will created or was mute,
>The Most High Seer that is in highest heaven,
>He knows it--or perchance even He knows not."
>
> 
> 
>
>>Since I don't have daily conversations with Parabraham, the Masters, or
>>
>>even the late Madame Blavatsky, my understanding of Theosophy must bemuch more humble. 
>>
>>I see Theosophy as an expression of a kind of perennialism which demonstrates the universality of ideas among 
>>
>>humankind's myths, religions, philosophies and sciences. I think this 
>> 
>>
>>definition is more useful, because Theosophy then becomes something we 
>> 
>>
>>can personally engage with and grow from--otherwise we are left to 
>>merely be wowed by and parrot writings from old books we believe to have 
>> 
>>
>>been inspired. In the SD, HPB writes that even the Dhyani Chohans have 
>> 
>>
>>limitations in what they are able to perceive and understand. If we are 
>> 
>>
>>to accept her statement here, then, I would ask: why should we proclaim 
>> 
>>
>>to be True things that even the gods she writes about do not even know? 
>> 
>>
>> To do so is just another form of self delusion, or self ggrandizement, 
>> 
>>
>>IMO.
>> 
>>
>
>
>I also see it along similar lines. The word Brahman, for example, 
>derives from the verbal root 'brih', "to grow, to expand". So 
>perhaps growth, expansion, evolution - all three - belong to the 
>very nature of the universe as a whole. 
>
>If a teaching is something which is shown to someone - a person, a 
>group, a culture - all of which are also experiencing growth and 
>evolution, such a teaching needs to be dynamic. Theosophy has also 
>been called the Perennial Wisdom, and that which is perennial lasts 
>for a long time, perhaps because its 'language' is one that 
>acknowledges the changing environment and the growing perceptions of 
>humans in every age.
>
>Like you, Jerry, I also don't have any daily conversations with 
>higher spiritual realities and in that respect I am very 
>much "offline". But I like to think on these things and was very 
>much heartened by what I read on a bookmark produced by TPH Wheaton 
>many years ago:
>
>"THINK! It could be a new experience for you."
>
>
>Pedro 
> 
>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]