The Theosophical Glossary (book)

Editions an availability online

The Union Index of Theosophical Periodicals lists 106 articles about or extracted from the Glossary. From 1894 to 1913 the journal Le Lotus Bleu regularly printed entries from the French edition, Glossaire Theosophique, and other journals have frequently based articles on the Glossary.

Reviews and criticisms of the Glossary

Several criticisms were leveled against the final editor of the Glossary after its publication:

• Specific errors were identified.
• Some entries were not original with HPB, but from unidentified sources.

Review by Colonel Olcott

Henry Steel Olcott, President-Founder of the Theosophical Society, wrote one of the earliest reviews:

Head-quarters Staff have given still another proof of their amazing industry by bringing out H. P. B.’s posthumous and most useful “Theosophical Glossary”. It is a 4to. volume of 389 pp., printed superb type, on the best of paper, and bound to match the “Secret Doctrine.” Nothing could have been more timely for, with the expansion of our literature, fresh Oriental terms are being introduced which, without interpretation,’ are meaningless to the Western reader. The present work supplies a crying want, therefore, and will add enormously to H. P. B.s literary reputation while, at the same time, going to show her extraordinary clairvoyant intuition. Needless to say, she never made the least pretence to what is called scholarship, i.e., acquiring her knowledge in the usual way by book-study: it came to her mainly while in the act of writing. In a letter to her sister, quoted by Mr. Sinnett in his biography of her, she very clearly describes this mental process. But when it came to quoting or translating from current literature, her habit was to ask the help of those who were learned in the specialities she might be discussing. When she first undertook the “Secret Doctrine” the rew as an agreement between her and the late erudite Mr. T. Subba Row, that he should edit the portions relating to Indian Philosophy, verify her transliterations and correct her interpretations of Sanskrit words. If she had lived to bring out the Glossary, this would undoubtedly have been her course, and the work would have been free from the large number of errors which now characterize it, and which are more than likely to be pointed out by unfriendly Orienta list critics. Deserving of all praise, as Mr. Mead’s industry and skill in editing this are he would have done better service to H. P. B. by calling upon some one or ore of o u r m o st co m p eten t In d ia n co lleag u es to h av e v erified th e re n d e rin g s of th e S a n s k rit w ords an d p h ra ses ; th e m ore so as th ey w ould d o u b tless have co n sid ered it a lab o r of love. A c cu ra c y w ould n o t th e n h ave been sacrificed to speed. A s it stands, th e G lo ssary m u s t be ta k e n as g iv in g the m e a n in g s w h ic h H . P . B . supposed the w o rd s to have, a n d w h ic h in te rp r e t the ideas she p u t in to E n g lis h w ords w h ile w r itin g . I n th is re sp e c t it is in v a lu ­ ab le to th eo so p h ical stu d e n ts. B u t fro m th e p o in t of S a n s k rit sc h o larsh ip it ap p ears fu ll of b lu n d ers. In im ita tio n of H . P . B .’s ow n exam ple, I h a v e asked an E n g lish -k n o w in g S a n sk rit p a n d it to re p o rt u p o n th e S a n s k rit w ords u n d e r th e in itia l A . H e says :—

“The transliterations of the Sanskrit words is sometimes so bad that readers may often confound them for others which have a different meaning. With this general remark, I may say that out of 154 words beginning with A, put down as Sanskrit, 28 words are so transliterated that some of them would not, in their new o-arb, be taken to be Sanskrit. Eighteen of the words are very badly explained, as, for instance, Adhyatm a vidya, which literally means the Science of Atma,’ and n o t ‘ the esoteric luminary.’ (This mistake is copied from Dr. Eitel.) Amitabha, is a Sanskrit expression, meaning ‘ boundless splendor not a ‘Chinese corruption of the Sanskrit Amrita Buddha,’ as explained. The Amitabhas are certain Devas who are said, in the Yishnu Purana, to rule the sky in Raivata and Savarni Manvantaras. Aindriya means literally ‘pertaining to the senses,’ not ‘Indrani, the wife of Indra.’ Apana is wrongly explained as 4 inspiration albreath and is not ‘a practice in Yoga.’ It means the ‘wind * or ‘vayu* which is said to be in the lower portion of the body. Prana, again, is ‘not expirational breath.’ Arasamaram is not Sanskrit but pure Tamil, and means simply the Pipal tree, literally, ‘ the king of trees.’ Two of the erroneous renderings of Sanskrit under the letter A have been taken over from Dowson’s ‘Classical Dictionary of India,’ and five from Dr. Eitel’s 4 Sanskrit-Chinese “Dictionary.’ Under the letter B there are seven mis-translations; under C one; and under D fourteen. Thus, overlooking minor ones, in the first four letters of the alphabet, out of 303 words, there are no less than 40 glaring mis-translations. I have examined no farther.”

Among the many proofs of the incompleteness of the M S. must be mentioned these: Sankara, Founder of the Adwaita school, is mentioned, but not Ramanuja and Madhava, the equally well known Founders of the other two great schools, the Dwaita and Yishisthadvaita; Rammohun Roy is spoken of, but not Yalmiki, author of the Ramayana, nor even Swami Davananda Saraswati, our contemporary. Bhagavatam is described as “a Tamil scripture on Astronomy and other things,” whereas it is one of the (Sanskrit) Mahapuranas and treats on Y e d an tic Philosophy, the Creation, histories of sovereigns, etc. All these would have been rectified if H. P. B. had lived.

In his modest Preface to the Glossary, Mr. Mead disclaims all “pretension to the elaborate and extraordinary scholarship requisite for the editing” of the work, and candidly admits the likelihood of there being mistakes in transliteration: he tells us also that, for the interpretation of facts relating to the Kabalah, to Rosicrucian and Hermetic doctrines, H. P. B. availed of the Help of our erudite brother W . Wynn Westcott. It is a thousand pities that the Sanskrit portions were not sent here for verification by Mr. Gopalacharlu, Prof. Manilal, Mr. Govinda Dasa, of Benares, or R . Sundara Sastri, of Kumbakonam — all F. T. S.’s and staunch friends of H. P. B. Permitting the work to be hurried out with so many errors of omission and commission in its Sanskrit department, are we not playing into the hands of Prof. Muller and other Sanskritists who concur with him in calling us a lot of pseudo-scholars?

As for the explanations of terms pertaining to occultism and the Secret Doctrine in particular, words of praise are superfluous, for H. P. B. wrote upon those themes with perfect knowledge of her subject and with unequalled force and brilliancy. For this reason, I repeat, the work should be in every Theosophist’s library. Available from [ IAPSOP website].

Comments by Elsie Benjamin

Elsie Benjamin commented about this controversy:

Do you Know -- I think it is very salutary that we have these uncertainties, because it throws us back onto our own investigations and intuitions, if we find something that seems not "to ring true" to us, or something that we think may be a misprint. Which of course doesn't mean that we should immediately reject it, but they are points to ponder over and see whether we can accept them. Remember HPB's advise to the American Convention: "orthodoxy in Theosophy is a thing neither possible nor desirable. It is diversity of opinion, within certain limits ... a certain amount of uncertainty, etc. that keeps the Society a healthy body."