Theos-Talk Archives (May 1996 Message tl01253)

Martin:

>Take extreme care with promulgating teachings about root-races.
>In general, try to assess carefully whether the audience, students
>and the public in general understands the subject you are talking about.
>In other words: use words and language that is clear, unambiguous
>and to the point.

This point of yours is *very* important. Even with the great opportunity
to write on Theosophy, and to try out different language in explaining
the philosophy -- even with this great opportunity on places like theos-l,
it's so easy to be misunderstood!

>In this era of mass-communication nothing will remain
>hidden from an inquisitive journalist or other searchers for information
>about theosophy. Add to this that the majority of people still judges
>others on surface appearance, not on the deeper qualities within.

Yes, and the great ones of the past, far wiser than any of us,
knew the importance of blinds, exoteric veils, and other ways of
communicating yet concealing the deeper truths. It's important for
us to watch what we say, lest we sometimes mislead though speaking
the plain truth.

>This implies taking extensive precautions when preparing lectures,
>articles, etc. Hence my conclusion that the teachings on root-races
>are probably premature in this era. No theosophy bashing involved!

One implication of this is that theos-l is the best sort of place
for practice writing about Theosophy, where the audience is limited
to a small number of fellow students, rather than the whole world,
like in an alt.theosophy group. Careless, hastily written words
that go out to the whole world are far more dangerous than practice
writing in a sympathetic study group, where mistakes can afford to
be made. A mailing list provides an opportunity for writing that
a media with a wider audience would not permit, since more formal
preparation would be appropriate to that wider audience.

>Summarizing, I would like to emphasize the need of being aware
>of the psychological idiosyncracies of people today, and phrase
>teachings in very plain and clear words, adapted to and fit for
>this era.

I've said in the past that even as further Teachings are made
public, as the west opens up to the hidden side of life, other
Teachings may be withdrawn or veiled. Perhaps this doctrine will
need to keep a low profile, and my suspicions are founded?

>But, Eldon, if theosophy talks about remnants and laggards it puts
>labels on a certain group of people. And, people being labeled
>will suffer from this inevitably.

Here it would be talking about a group of people, perhaps, that
continue to practice backward customs and lifestyles, like
slavery, cannibalism, the caste system, etc. This does not say,
though, that the people in a backward village are not capable
of education and participation in a more advanced culture. The
problem may be one of finding and upgrading their backwards
customs, and not one of calling them inferior because of those
customs.

The labeling is wrong. It's quite possible for more civilized
and less civilized customs to exist side-by-side, with people
tolerating each other's individual choices. We generally do that
with smokers versus non-smokers, vegetarians versus meat-eaters,
meditators versus non-meditators, etc. One may drink, for
instance, and know that it is not good to do, but continue anyway.
That person is living an non-optimal life, but can be accepted
with respect by his fellow non-drinkers.

In a bigger sense, there are whole groups and collectives of
people that do the same thing, tending to hang out together
because of common interests and lifestyles.

>Why? Because there is a want in many people to feel
>superior (because they feel insecure and have some
>inferiority-complex, feel threatened in their way of living, etc,
>etc.). So, this last kind of people (more in number than you
>might think) will seize any opportunity to put other people down.
>It gives them a mighty feeling of self-importance.

Sadly, this is one of the big signs of the absence of
spirituality. The biggest barrier to an inner awakening is
"the big me", the continual thinking of oneself and identification
with the personality. One's mind is filled with "what's in it
for me!" rather than dazzled with the wonders of wisdom and
the spirit, and doing things in life to give it expression.

>Well, I hope this small lesson in psychology illustrates my
>point of view enough. It is not intended to belittle you or
>anyone else for that matter, but it *is* a matter of serious
>concern.

You're right, and I'll have to learn more discretion as to
what I write about. There are many things that I *would*
like to write on, but I'll have to carefully consider *if*
I should. It's frustrating ...

>We deal with real people, not with some ideal type which has no
>flaws. Indeed, we ourselves have flaws..

And perhaps theos-l is too diverse. No matter how we target
a message, there's bound to be some people to whom it would
be inappropriate. Things are much easier in a study with
other students with a similar background of study and
spiritual development.

-- Eldon