Re: Theos-World Re Bailey - Endersby critical article
Feb 28, 2007 05:00 PM
by nhcareyta
--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Scribe" <scribe@...> wrote:
>
> Thank you, Nigel,
> I thought that was a great post--and reminder--and very moving and
inspiring.
> Thank you again,
> Scribe
Thank you Scribe for your encouraging comments.
The Dalai Lama is certainly a special gentleman with an inspiring
manner and message for many.
Kind regards
Nigel
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: nhcareyta
> To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 3:07 AM
> Subject: Re: Theos-World Re Bailey - Endersby critical article
>
>
> --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Cass Silva <silva_cass@> wrote:
> >
> > And more important for me Luke, is the fact that HPB said that
the
> next Neophyte or Messenger would not incarnate until the year
1975.
> As far as I can reason, HPB came with the ancient teachings, gave
us
> 100 years to digest or assimilate it, and basically said that the
> next installment would not be provided until the year 1975. I am
> presuming that 1975 is the birth date, and the particular soul
would
> need to be at least 30-35 before "coming out of the closet" so to
> speak. I don't think she gave a flapdoodle about those that
followed
> her, her mission was to get the Secret Doctrine out to the
general
> public, and this she did. What followed were interpreters - not
new
> messengers. IMO
> Cass
>
> Dear Cass
> Thank you for reminding me of an interesting subject.
>
> HPB wrote, "No Master of Wisdom from the East will himself appear
or
> send any one to Europe or America after that period.until the
year
> 1975." ES Introduction, Preliminary Memorandum.
>
> This can be read and understood in different ways dependent on
> context.
> I have always found it interesting to consider that the 14th
Dalai
> Lama, Tenzin Gyatso first traveled from the East to the West
> (Europe) in 1973 towards the end of the Vietnam war and halfway
> through the "cold war."
> With the humble manner of a simple Buddhist monk and with the
message
> of compassion and non-violence, the Dalai Lama's message is
simple
> yet profound.
> Moreover at an interfaith service held in his honour by the World
> Congress of Faiths he said: "I always believe that it is much
better
> to have a variety of religions, a variety of philosophies, rather
> than one single religion or philosophy. This is necessary because
of
> the different mental dispositions of each human being. Each
religion
> has certain unique ideas or techniques, and learning about them
can
> only enrich one's own faith."
>
> From the Government of Tibet in Exile website it states:
> Recognition and Awards:
>
> Since his first visit to the west in the early 1973, a number of
> western universities and institutions have conferred Peace Awards
and
> honorary Doctorate Degrees in recognition of His Holiness'
> distinguished writings in Buddhist philosophy and for his
leadership
> in the solution of international conflicts, human rights issues
and
> global environmental problems. In presenting the Raoul Wallenberg
> Congressional Human Rights Award in 1989, U.S. Congressman Tom
Lantos
> said, "His Holiness the Dalai Lama's courageous struggle has
> distinguished him as a leading proponent of human rights and
world
> peace. His ongoing efforts to end the suffering of the Tibetan
people
> through peaceful negotiations and reconciliation have required
> enormous courage and sacrifice."
> The 1989 Nobel Peace Prize:
> The Norwegian Nobel Committee's decision to award the 1989 Peace
> Prize to His Holiness the Dalai Lama won worldwide praise and
> applause, with exception of China. The Committee's citation
> read, "The Committee wants to emphasize the fact that the Dalai
Lama
> in his struggle for the liberation of Tibet consistently has
opposed
> the use of violence. He has instead advocated peaceful solutions
> based upon tolerance and mutual respect in order to preserve the
> historical and cultural heritage of his people."
> On 10 December 1989, His Holiness accepted the prize on behalf of
> oppressed everywhere and all those who struggle for freedom and
work
> for world peace and the people of Tibet. In his remarks he
said, "The
> prize reaffirms our conviction that with truth, courage and
> determination as our weapons, Tibet will be liberated. Our
struggle
> must remain non-violent and free of hatred."
> He also had a message of encouragement for the student-led
democracy
> movement in China. "In China the popular movement for democracy
was
> crushed by brutal force in June this year. But I do not believe
the
> demonstrations were in vain, because the spirit of freedom was
> rekindled among the Chinese people and China cannot escape the
impact
> of this spirit of freedom sweeping in many parts of the world.
The
> brave students and their supporters showed the Chinese leadership
and
> the world the human face of that great nations."
>
> So here we all the hallmarks of Theosophy; profound knowledge
(Geshe
> degree), compassion, wisdom, humility, non-violence, tolerance
and
> mutual respect, support and promotion of a variety of religions
and
> philosophies in their own right, promotion of justice and human
> rights, courage and unwavering determination in the face of
> extraordinary circumstances who also accepts the Chinese
authorities
> to be his greatest teacher.
>
> We obviously have to be careful when hypothesizing the
fulfillment
> of prophecy and even more careful not to establish a cult
worshiping
> mentality in the process.
> Whether or not the 14th Dalai Lama is the person or movement to
which
> HPB alluded, give or take a couple of years, we may never know,
such
> can be the subtle nature of occultism.
> In any event he is an exceptional person with an exceptional
message
> for all.
>
> Kind regards
> Nigel
>
> >
> > Mark Jaqua <proto37@> wrote:
> > Re: Bailey - Endersby article
> >
> > As well as dan's remarks reposted, below
> > is a part of Endersby's critical "special paper" in
> > "Theosophical Notes, Sept. 1963": A STUDY OF
> > THE ARCANE SCHOOL OF ALICE E. BAILEY. It
> > includes Crump & Cleather's "The Pseudo-Occultism
> > of Alice Bailey." Its a critic of some of the
> > ususual Bailey BS. It also includes a short "occult
> > biography."
> >
> > - jake j.
> > ========
> >
> > "THE REAPPEARANCE OF THE CHRIST"
> >
> > This book by Mrs. Bailey was first published in 1948 and
reprinted
> three times later, the last being in 1962. We could write a
number of
> comments on every page of the 190, but will have to content
ourselves
> with a few samples. In general the gross anthropomorphism becomes
> more and more evident; the evolution since the '20's is tending
more
> and more toward a kind of materialistic pseudo-Christianity of a
sort
> which even the churches are outgrowing.
> >
> > 38. Note the pretentious claims of intimate personal knowledge
> indicated by the Table of Contents.
> > Chapter I
> > The Doctrine of the Coming One .......... 5
> > Chapter II
> > Christ's Unique Occasion ..... 15
> > Chapter III
> > The Reappearance of the Christ ..... 36
> > Chapter IV
> > The Work of the Christ ....... 61
> > Chapter V
> > The Teachings of the Christ ......... 102
> > Chapter VI
> > The New World Religion ......... 137
> > Chapter VII
> > Preparation for the Christ ....... 160
> > 39. p. 5. "When men feel that they have exhausted all their own
> resources and have come to an end of all their own innate
> possibilities and that the problems and conditions confronting
them
> are beyond their solving or handling, they are apt to look for a
> divine Intermediary and for the Mediator Who will plead their
cause
> with God and bring about a rescue. They look for a Saviour. This
> doctrine of Mediators, of Messiahs, of Christs and of Avatars can
be
> found running like a golden thread through all the world faiths
and
> Scriptures and relating these world Scriptures to some central
source
> of emanation, they are found in rich abundance everywhere. Even
the
> human soul is regarded as an intermediary between man and God;
Christ
> is believed by countless millions to act as the divine mediator
> between humanity and divinity.
> > "The whole system of spiritual revelation is based (and has
always
> been based) on this doctrine of interdependence, of a planned and
> arranged conscious linking and of the transmission of energy from
one
> aspect of divine manifestation to another - from God in
the 'secret
> Place of the Most High' to the humblest human being, living and
> struggling and sorrowing on earth. Everywhere this transmission
is to
> be found;
> > --- 32
> > 'I am come that they may have life' says the Christ, and the
> Scriptures of the world are full of the intervention of some
Being,
> originating from some source higher than the strictly human.
Always
> the appropriate mechanism is found through which divinity can
reach
> and communicate with humanity, and it is with this communication
and
> these Instruments of divine energy that the doctrine of Avatars
or of
> divine 'Coming Ones' has to do".
> >
> > The "Great Heresy" as it is held to be by all true esoteric
> philosophy! - a transmission from God (Capital He) to man, the
great
> external to the little internal; from the Creator to the
Creature!
> The same old separation, the same loss of the Oneness of all life
and
> spirit of the Universe, the same helpless dependence upon a boon
from
> on high, to be administered as always by a board of "Servers",
> intermediaries and interpreters!
> >
> > It goes on -
> >
> > "An Avatar is one Who has a peculiar capacity (besides a self-
> initiated task and a pre-ordained destiny) to transmit energy or
> divine power. This is necessarily a deep mystery and was
demonstrated
> in a peculiar manner and in relation to cosmic energy by the
Christ
> Who - for the first time in planetary history, as far as we know -
> transmitted the divine energy of love directly to our planet and
in a
> most definite sense to humanity. Always too these Avatars or
divine
> Messengers are linked with the concept of some subjective
spiritual
> Order or Hierarchy of spiritual Lives, Who are concerned with the
> developing welfare of humanity. All we really know is that, down
the
> ages, great and divine Representatives of God embody divine
purpose,
> and affect the entire world in such a manner that Their names and
> Their influence are known and felt thousands of years after They
no
> longer walk among men. Again and again, They have come and have
left
> a changed world and some new world
> > religion behind Them; we know also that prophecy and faith have
> ever held out to mankind the promise of Their coming again
amongst us
> in an hour of need. These statements are statements of fact,
> historically proven. Beyond this we know relatively few details."
> >
> > More of the same - and this time, of course, Jesus the Christ
is
> the one who alone in the course of the planetary history has
> transmitted the divine energy of love to our planet. There is no
> mistaking this. This is a personal God with a personal
representative
> and a unique mission from and to. No Catholic or other priest
could
> go farther and make it clearer. We even have here the Vicarious
> Atonement in the form of something mystic which can be
transmitted
> only by unique beings. No recognition whatever of karma, of the
> teaching inherent in all law, that all the powers are potential
in
> man himself and must be developed by himself, without outer aid
other
> than teaching and example. Where does the Buddha stand in this,
> please? Further. . . "All the world Avatars or Saviors, however,
> express two basic incentives: the need of God to contact humanity
and
> to have relationship with men and the need of humanity for divine
> contact, help and understanding. Subject to those
> > incentives, all true Avatars are therefore divine
Intermediaries.
> > --- 33
> > They can act in this fashion because They have completely
divorced
> Themselves from every limitation, from all sense of selfhood and
> separativeness and are no longer - by ordinary human standards -
the
> dramatic centre of Their lives, as are most of us. When They have
> reached that stage of spiritual decentralization, They Themselves
can
> then become events in the life of our planet; toward Them every
eye
> can look and all men can be affected." The need of "God"
to "contact"
> humanity! Then note the subtle welding of truth with falsehood;
the
> true Avatar is described - aside from the capitalized pronoun
which
> none of them ever claimed - rather correctly; thus the
infiltrating
> proponent of the Arcane School can point out that it "teaches the
> same thing" as Theosophy. This slyness is evident throughout.
> >
> > Then, the "relatively few details" are gone into in great
detail
> and with apparent intimate knowledge of the inmost workings of
the
> soul of "the Christ".
> >
> > 40. p.10. She then almost equates the Buddha with the
Christ. "The
> Avatars most easily known and recognized are the Buddha in the
East
> and the Christ in the West. Their messages are familiar to all,
and
> the fruits of Their lives and words have conditioned the thinking
and
> civilizations of both hemispheres. Because They are human-divine
> Avatars, They represent what humanity can easily understand;
because
> they are of like nature to Us, 'flesh of our flesh and spirit of
our
> spirit,' we know and trust Them and They mean more to us than
other
> divine Emergences. They are known, trusted and loved by countless
> millions".
> >
> > 41. p.11. But not quite - "The Christ, that great human-divine
> Messenger, because of His stupendous achievement - along the line
of
> understanding - transmitted to humanity an aspect and a potency
of
> the nature of God Himself, the love Principle of Deity. Light,
> aspiration, and the recognition of God Transcendent had been the
> flickering expression of the human attitude to God, prior to the
> advent of the Buddha, the Avatar of Illumination. Then the Buddha
> came and demonstrated in His Own life the fact of God Immanent as
> well as God Transcendent, of God in the universe and of God
within
> humanity. The Selfhood of Deity and the Self in the heart of
> individual man became a factor in human consciousness. It was a
> relatively new truth to man.
> >
> > "However, until Christ came and lived a life of love and
service
> and gave men the new command to love one another, there had been
very
> little emphasis upon God as Love in any of the world Scriptures.
> After he had come as the Avatar of love, then God became known as
> love supernal, love as the goal and objective of creation, love
as
> the basic principle of relationship and love as working
throughout
> all manifestation towards a Plan motivated by love. This divine
> quality, Christ revealed and emphasized and thus altered all
human
> living, goals and values."
> >
> > Thus is the reverence of Theosophists for the Buddha placated
while
> Christian prejudice in favor of the Christ as the One is also
> appealed to. The Buddha becomes the junior Avatar, a sort of fore-
> runner
> > --- 34
> > teaching a partial doctrine. We don't know of a greater
exhibition
> of combined disdain for the teachings of the Mahatmas and dismal
> ignorance of what the Buddha really taught and what his effect
upon
> mankind was. It is all well for Christians who are carefully
guarded
> by their shepherd from the historical truth about the religions,
to
> be ignorant about the Buddha and Buddhism. But it does not even
> require Theosophy to tell the true relationship. Word for Word
the
> ethical teachings of the Buddha are the same as those of the
Christ,
> minus any of the destruction to the unbeliever which has been
> inserted even into the Testament; more comprehensively and
> philosophically expressed, and expressed five hundred years
> previously. Then there are the innumerable legendary details of
the
> Buddha found in Mahayana Buddhism, correctly though poetically
> expressed in The Light of Asia, even to the Virgin Birth! Surely
the
> origin of Christianity as a compound of Buddhism, Mithraism,
> > Platonism and a few other things is evident enough even to
secular
> scholars, let alone to accredited agents of the Mahatmas! But as
to
> these Mahatmas - the payoff comes on p.15 - .... "The world to
which
> He will come is a new world, if not yet a better world; new ideas
are
> occupying people's minds and new problems await solution. Let us
look
> at this uniqueness and gain some knowledge of the situation into
> which the Christ will be precipitated. Let us be realistic in our
> approach to this theme and avoid mystical and vague thinking. If
it
> is true that He plans to reappear, if it is a fact that He will
bring
> His disciples, the Masters of the Wisdom, with Him, and if this
> coming is imminent, what are some of the factors which he and
they
> must take into consideration."
> >
> > So here we have it. The Mahatmas are Christ's disciples. What
an
> unholy wedding of utterly opposed systems! And when is this to
> be? "It is not for us yet to know the date or the hour of the
> reappearance of the Christ. His coming is dependent upon the
appeal
> (the often voiceless appeal) of all who stand with massed intent;
it
> is dependent also upon the better establishment of right human
> relations and upon certain work being done at this time by senior
> Members of the Kingdom of God, the Church Invisible, the
spiritual
> Hierarchy of our planet; it is dependent also upon the
steadfastness
> of the Christ's disciples in the world at this time and His
initiate-
> workers - all working in the many groups, religious, political
and
> economic. To the above must be added what Christians like to
> call 'the inscrutable Will of God', that unrecognized purpose of
the
> Lord of the World, the Ancient of Days (as He is called in The
Old
> Testament) Who knows His own Mind, radiates the
> > highest quality of love and focuses His Will in His Own High
Place
> within the centre where the Will of God is known'."
> >
> > This is very wise indeed; warned perhaps by some study of the
sad
> fate of previous prophesied "Avatars" rashly dated too closely,
> (including that of Mr. Krishnamurti, who decided at the last
moment
> that he didn't wish to be Jesus) Mrs. Bailey backs up on her
previous
> dating of 1980. This leaves the field open. The "Avatar" can come
> when, as, and if some suitable personage able to play the part
> plausibly, turns up, and the Servers - and the "Served" - can be
> strung along indefinitely otherwise. But we doubt that it can go
on
> for the millions of years
> > --- 35
> > necessary for the real Maitreya Buddha. Even faith in Mrs.
> Bailey's "Tibetan", fervent as it obviously is, could then become
> over-strained. Anyway, in case of undue delay, she has a
scapegoat
> ready; in face she has two, one behind the other. The reason why
the
> Christ has not reappeared already is the failure of the churches
to
> live up to their obligations. But this hour is now come.
(Followed in
> the next sentence by the above quoted remark that we do not yet
know
> the date or hour.) The other scapegoat - come to think of it,
there
> are three - the other two are the public which may fail to put up
> sufficient cash to insure the coming, and impliedly; the "elect"
who
> may fail to seize the opportunity of joining the "Servers"; or
having
> joined, may fail to be sufficiently diligent and cash-worthy in
the
> raising of funds and propagating the faith. There seems a quite
> childlike incomprehension of public reactions among these people;
the
> combination of a "Second Coming"
> > with all this emphasis on money - in one publication Mrs.
Bailey
> pleaded for at least $30,000 to insure the "Great Event" -
> necessarily gives the impression of arrant fraud to the average
> citizen. But these people themselves, though no doubt like most
other
> money-raising groups involving a grafter or two, do seem to be
honest
> hard-core fanatics. There probably lies the most serious public
> danger. The Fascists, Nazis, and the Birchers, all show the
explosive
> dangers resident in any pseudo-mystical power-hungry group imbued
> with this sort of emotional fervor.
> >
> > 42. p. 16. Here we find a bit of professional
jealousy.... "Even if
> there is no general recognition of His spiritual status and His
> message, there must necessarily be an universal interest, for
today
> even the many false Christs and Messengers are finding this
universal
> curiosity and cannot be hidden. This creates an unique condition
in
> which to work, and one which no salvaging, energizing Son of God
has
> ever before had to face."
> >
> > Well, while legally quotation is almost unlimited in a
refutation,
> it can also get very boring when the repetition is unlimited
also; we
> will briefly skim through a few other points, since the general
> anatomy should be clear enough.
> >
> > 43. We learn that while the churches will be an important
agency,
> the Christ will also use any other channel which may be handy.
> >
> > 44. And here is another quote not to be missed. It is the
biggest
> and reddest danger signal of a theocratic nature that we have
ever
> seen: .... "The common people are today awakening to the
importance
> and responsibility of government; it is, therefore, realised by
the
> Hierarchy that before the cycle of true democracy (as it
essentially
> exists and will eventually demonstrate), can come into being, the
> education of the masses in cooperative statesmanship, in economic
> stabilization through right sharing, and in clean, political
> interplay is imperatively necessary. The long divorce between
> religion and politics must be ended and this can now come about
> because of the high level of the human mass intelligence and the
fact
> that science has made all men so close that what happens in some
> remote area of the earth's surface is a matter of general
interest
> within a few minutes. This makes it uniquely possible for Him to
work
> in the future."
> > --- 36
> >
> > To end the divorce between religion and politics -
which "divorce",
> engineered by the Founders of our Republic, was the first great
> liberation of the human soul from religious tyranny since the
Buddha -
> is precisely what the Catholic Hierarchy continuously strives
for.
> As to what happens whenever the divorce is cancelled or non-
existent,
> let us look at Latin America and Spain; and at South Vietnam,
where a
> Buddhist priest found it necessary to burn himself to death to
call
> the attention of the world to the oppression of eight million
> Buddhists by two million Catholics.
> >
> > 45. Nobody knows what race or religion the Christ will appear
in,
> or whether in any religion. Thank heavens for at least this
> confession of ignorance.
> >
> > 46. A factor which will distinguish the Coming is that people
> everywhere are now habituated to the idea of the Masters of
Wisdom,
> etc. For this she credits "the occultists and esotericists", and
also
> the spiritualists, all of whom are working together under
direction
> and with their forces closely synchronized. (That "Hierarchical"
> business-like efficiency again.) No word of Theosophy, of Madame
> Blavatsky who used up the fires of prejudice in her own burning,
to
> the extent that such as Mrs. Bailey could hold forth with
impunity.
> >
> > 47. Although we don't know when he will come or what he will be
> like, "the unique conditions which the Christ faced during the
years
> of war forced Him to decide to hasten His coming." He was, it
seems,
> faced with a decision which he could not avoid. This is very
> interesting. Nothing about the wars of this century - not even
atomic
> energy - was any surprise to real students of Madame Blavatsky's
> Secret Doctrine. She must then have been in on something
unforeseen
> by Christ himself.
> >
> > 48. Wonder of wonders, we find that it was in the year 1945
that
> the Christ made the painful decision to come again; and at that
time
> gave to the world the oldest prayer known, hitherto not permitted
to
> be used except by the most exalted beings. It may eventually,
says
> Mrs. Bailey, become the world prayer. And guess what? It is that
> ineffable doggerel with which the "World Goodwill" announcement
is
> terminated. She actually spends pages on the great potency and
power
> of this preposterous prayer, claiming that after 18 months (1947)
> hundreds of thousands of people were using it day by day and many
> times a day; that it is used in 18 different languages; it is
being
> used in the jungles of Africa and is seen on the desks of great
> executives, and there is no country or island in the world where
its
> use is unknown. It can, she says, be to the new world religion
what
> the Lord's Prayer has been to Christians and the 23rd Psalm to
the
> Jews. There is, it seems, not a day
> > when Christ himself "does not sound it forth." We will need a
lot
> of convincing about all this! Somehow all this tremendous
> accomplishment seems to be strangely missing from any
journalistic
> records but those of Bailey.
> >
> > And here, God help us, we are still only at the 35th page of
this
> farrago. The construction of this book throws some light on how
Mrs.
> Bailey managed such a large "literary output". It takes a minimum
of
> mental effort to write the same thing over and over and over.
Anyone
> > --- 37
> > who can read this all through in detail must have a masochistic
> passion for boredom, or be moved by a grim sense of duty. (The
latter
> is our misfortune.) The repetitive fascination with an obsessing
idea
> is rather characteristic of psychic states isolated from the real
> world. Each time Mrs. Bailey repeats herself, she seems to feel
that
> it is a new theme.
> >
> > 49. For some curious reason, Mrs. Bailey does better on the
> symbolism of the Bible than on other subjects; this seems to lend
> credence to the Cleather-Crumb contention that some concealed
> ecclesiastic influence is behind it. It does not seem on the
usual
> Bailey level of intelligence; and there is only one body of
> ecclesiastics whose leading lights are likely to be really
learned in
> such matters.
> >
> > 50. She cites a legend that the Buddha, on contemplating his
> mission, left behind him certain "vestures" of a metaphysical
nature,
> to be used by others. We know where she got that. It was from no
> Tibetan - unless you call H.P.B. a Tibetan. It is from MSS left
> unpublished by her, later published by Besant and Meade in the
> falsely titled "Third Volume" of the Secret Doctrine. But there
is a
> typical Bailey twist to it. The "vestures", of course, were left
for
> the use of "the Christ", whose reappearance will thus be a sort
of
> compound of himself and what is left of the Buddha. Naturally,
she
> does not mention H.P.B. in connection with this legend. The
nearest
> she comes to mentioning her is in the general reference to
> the "occultists and esotericists", who are coupled with the
> Spiritualists on the same level; and a remark that the existence
of
> the Mahatmas was first made known to the world in 1875. By whom,
she
> does not say.
> >
> > 51. There is quite a bit about the difficulties to be
encountered
> by the Christ in announcing himself; the gem in this is "If he
> preached and taught, He would attract primarily those who think
in
> unison with His message, or the gullible and the credulous would
> flock to Him, as they do to all new teachers - no matter what
they
> teach." (Italics ours.)
> >
> > 52. The handling of reincarnation is most interesting.
Beginning
> with a quite competent general presentation, she pays respects to
the
> Theosophical teachings as follows: "The presentation to the world
of
> thought by the average occult or theosophical exponent has been,
on
> the whole, deplorable. It has been deplorable because it has been
so
> unintelligently presented." Well, we can't quarrel too much with
that.
> >
> > The following is a curious mixture of a deep fact and a failure
to
> grasp its true relationship:
> >
> > "It should be remembered that practically all the occult groups
and
> writings have foolishly laid the emphasis upon past incarnations
and
> upon their recovery; this recovery is incapable of any reasonable
> checking - anyone can say and claim anything they like; the
teaching
> has been laid upon imaginary rules, supposed to govern the time
> equation and the interval between lives, forgetting that time is
a
> faculty of the brain-consciousness and that divorced from the
brain,
> time is non-existent; the emphasis has always been laid upon a
> fictional presentation of relationships. The teaching (hitherto
given
> out on reincarnation) has done more harm than good. Only one
factor
> remains of value: the existence
> > --- 38
> > of a Law of Rebirth is now discussed by many and accepted by
> thousands.
> >
> > "Beyond the fact that there is such a law, we know little and
those
> who know from experience the factual nature of this return reject
> earnestly the foolish and improbable details, given out as fact
by
> the theosophical and occult bodies. The Law exists; of the
details of
> its working we know as yet nothing."
> >
> > Now the curious thing is that time as a function of the lower
> consciousness is one of the most fundamental and frequently
adduced
> tenets of Theosophists; it is definitely stated over and over
that
> time as we know it does not exist in the Bardo between
incarnations -
> for the subject himself; and also that time itself as a cosmic
matter
> is an illusion. (A tenet practically accepted scientifically
since
> Einstein.) What Mrs. Bailey misses so egregiously and
irrationally is
> that on our plane of physical consciousness the illusion of time
is a
> governing fact that we have to meet. A man dies and vanishes from
> sight. He returns, and there is an interval of what we
call "time"
> between for us, but not for him. He has enjoyed himself in dreams
for
> centuries, but never thought of time in connection with it; to
him it
> was an ever-present now. A man sleeps, and goes into the
dreamless
> state. He wakes without consciousness of time having passed. But
he
> has to recognize the
> > existence of his passage on our plane, or he is not going to
get to
> the job on time. If he does not get to the job on time, he is
likely
> to stop eating. This, we think, should be a practical enough
> proposition to appeal to Mrs. Bailey, who is constantly harping
on
> the "practicality" of the "Hierarchy."
> >
> > Then she straightway continues with the remark, that only a few
> things can be said with accuracy about reincarnation and these
> warrant no contradiction. These few things turn out to be
thirteen
> propositions which could have been taken from Judge's Aphorisms
on
> Karma or any one of a few dozen other Theosophical textbooks,
except
> that the "Kingdom of God" is used for the state of final
liberation.
> (Which is what the phrase actually means in the Biblical
symbolism).
> >
> > 53. The last chapter, "Preparation for the Christ" is largely
> devoted to money and the manipulation of money, finance, and
> economics - the material aspects of which seem to obsess this
cult.
> (The obsession is especially evident in Foster Bailey's Changing
> Esoteric Values.)
> > ------------
> > --- 39
> >
> > THE BAILEY CAREER
> >
> > What we may consider an "official" version of Mrs. Bailey's
life
> appears in the afore-mentioned article in Fate for June 1963, by
Paul
> M. Vest, an ardent devotee, and printed in a manner equivalent to
an
> endorsement by Fate.
> >
> > From the context the most important matters in her life in this
> connection rest solely on her own narrative. Here, incidentally,
we
> have the interesting revelation, not apparent in the previous
> material, that the "World Servers" have no organization on the
> physical plane but consist of spiritually liberated people from
all
> countries working on the "astral plane." The article,
entitled "Alice
> Bailey and the Master K.H." is suitably decorated with a portrait
of
> the Mahatma M. Evidently Mr. Vest doesn't know the difference and
> perhaps Mrs. Bailey didn't either.
> >
> > According to this narrative, this movement began when Mrs.
Bailey,
> nee Trobe-Bateman, married Foster Bailey, then National Secretary
to
> the T.S., in 1919.
> >
> > She was brought up as a strict Anglican, loved Holy Communion
but
> couldn't take the more narrow dogmas. Her religious devotion, it
is
> stated, went to attending church every day for weeks or months at
a
> time. (This sort of emotional and devotional youthful affinity
could
> be predicted to have just such results as we have been,
discussing.)
> >
> > It was in the midst of this struggle that the "Master"
appeared, in
> the form of a well-tailored Oriental who entered unannounced, and
> seating himself "with quiet dignity" - uninvited - began to
explain
> her future mission for the Mahatmas. She thought at first that
she
> might be insane, but after thinking it all over began to conceive
of
> herself as a modern Joan of Arc. This youthful and colorful self-
> dramatization, she says, in time wore off. (It wore off into
> something much bigger; the sainted Joan never claimed intimate
> personal acquaintance with the problems of Jesus, or the status
of
> the sole agent through whom he might be able to return to earth.)
> Mrs. Bailey says she at first thought that the mysterious visitor
> might be Jesus, but did not know his real identity as K.H. until
she
> saw his picture in the Theosophical headquarters. (This picture
of M.
> which is printed with the article?) Fate volunteers a footnote to
the
> effect that "his visage as well as his name
> > is remarkably well known." Evidently not very well known to
Fate.
> >
> > Each time, it is said, that the Master visited her, he gave her
> evidence in some way of his "extra-dimensional" nature. (Gad, how
> tired we get of that trite phrase of spiritualistic
ignorance, "extra-
> dimensional" or "other-dimensional!")
> >
> > The famous Djwual Khul started her on her literary career, as a
> voice in the air. She states that all her writing consisted of
taking
> down the thoughts dropped one by one into her brain, and that
> automatic writing has nothing to do with it. She is alleged to
have
> been quite a
> > --- 40
> > puzzle to the psychologists, including Jung, who thought it
might
> all be from her subconscious mind, but was puzzled by some of the
> features. She, it is said, was amused by the scientific
speculations,
> because she could show visitors gifts mailed to her by K.H. from
> India. (Did she show them the wrappings and postmarks?)
> >
> > Now we have here something, the explanation of which can
proceed
> along two branches. First of all, the subconscious. One thing
this
> writer does know, and that is the nature of psychics of this
type;
> and some of his knowledge has been painfully acquired.
> >
> > It is a breed with which the differentiations between fact and
> fancy simply disappear. Their minds have come unanchored. There
is no
> criterion of reality; their memories are ever shifting sands in
which
> real happenings are drifted over by winds or daydreams, emotional
> vicissitudes, and pseudo-memories resulting from wishful
thinking,
> though these are quite often centered on some principal fixed
idea.
> Psychiatrists have quite a time with them. They are quite capable
of
> imagining a visit such as that of "K.H.," and of coming up later
with
> a "Djwual Khul" - after learning both these names through
> Theosophical associations - to continue the internal drama; and
the
> whole mess which she made of esoteric philosophy is perfectly in
line
> with an attempted subconscious fusion of her early pathological,
> religious fervor and her interest in the new ideas furnished by
> Theosophical literature. Such people are known to write
themselves
> letters from imagined lovers or great
> > personages, and there is nothing to prevent one of them with an
> Oriental complex from doing the same thing with "gifts from
India."
> (Are her followers willing to subject these "gifts" and other
> manifestations to the same critical sort of scrutiny to which the
> Theosophists willingly submitted H.P.B.'s Adyar phenomena?) *
> >
> > There is a gulf as wide as the world between the presentation
by
> H.P.B. and that of Bailey, in the matter of mode alone. H.P.B.'s
was
> accompanied by voluminous evidence from many sources, the
strongest
> of which lies in the field of material science. Nothing of this
> appears in the Bailey output; that field might as well never have
> existed so far as she is concerned. We repeat what Cleather and
Crump
> said - the entire structure rests on her ipso dixit alone.
> >
> > One thing is certain: whatever her "K.H." and "Djwual Khul" may
> have been, they were not the mentors of H.P.B. That much is as
surely
> proven by the texts as anything could be. If not her own
> subconscious, then what were they? Let us then examine the
> implications made by Cleather and Crump, which suggest the agency
of
> the "dugpas", "redcaps", "Shammars", "Brothers of the
Shadow", "Black
> Lodge", etc., etc., all names for the same thing - the Mahatmas'
> opposite numbers.
> >
> > This is the teaching that there is a black or evil line of
> occultism as well as a white and benevolent, and it is a very hot
> potato to
> > ------------
> > * The Editor of Fate twice takes occasion in notes on this
article
> to remind readers that H.P.B. was found guilty of fraud in these
> matters. Elsewhere we are exposing, in spades, the "competence"
as
> well as the honesty of Hodgson in that frame-up.
> > ------------
> > --- 41
> > handle. Theosophists are about equally divided between those
who
> don't really believe it and those who believe it too much - and
talk
> too blooming much about it, especially when hinting that some
opposed
> school of thought in their own ranks is under the "influence".
> >
> > Of course the tenet belongs to what any official psychologist
would
> call the "paranoid" conception of things; and certainly the woods
are
> full of people who fancy themselves persecuted by invisible evil
> beings. (Most of these people are of such personal caliber that
it is
> quite a puzzle why anyone visible or invisible would take the
trouble
> to persecute them at all and they are usually pretty vague as to
why
> it is being done.)
> >
> > But let us examine it rationally. The possibility is inherent
in
> the existence of paranormal powers, and belief in such powers is
> becoming quite respectable these days. There is no divine
ordinance
> to the effect that only benevolent beings can obtain such powers,
any
> more than there is one forbidding evil people from developing
atomic
> energy. Hence nobody, whether Theosophist, Baileyite, or outside
> investigator of the psychic who is convinced that there are such
> powers at all can logically deny the proposition outright.
Moreover,
> there is a sprinkle of non-occult writers of quite respectable
> caliber who claim to have witnessed manifestations of such powers
in
> Africa, Haiti, and for that matter, Tibet and India.
> >
> > Hence Madame Blavatsky and the Mahatma Letters have pretty
> substantial logical support in describing the machinations of
these
> characters in considerable detail. Of course, this is pretty
strong
> stuff. We have actually observed individuals, upon first
introduction
> to the idea, badly shaken and actually frightened by it. Hence
part
> of the reticence about it in some quarters.
> >
> > What sort of powers? The ones which come into the question here
are
> of telepathic suggestion and even telepathic hypnosis. Telepathy
is
> now a respectable subject and so is hypnosis. The combination is
even
> beginning to be discussed as a possibility outside the occult
ranks.
> >
> > Granted the possibility, we have a serious issue to face.
According
> to H.P.B. - and the Mahatmas - these people work mainly through
> religion and religious superstitions, the obvious and logical
reason
> for this being that mankind is most easily controlled by these
means.
> Every dogmatic, authoritarian religion, she says, is the
degeneration
> of a former impulse of the true philosophy; this philosophy,
which is
> the emancipation of the mind of man from all subservience to the
> supernatural, means death to the dugpa cause wherever it is
> successful. Hence, aided by the inevitable tendency of the human
mind
> to degrade, materialize and degenerate to personal ends any
supremely
> high teaching, the dugpas work as strenuously to abort and
frustrate
> all such movements as the Mahatmas work to promote them.
Therefore we
> have here a suggestion alternative to that of the subconscious,
of
> equal logic and in some ways more evidential; because there is a
> dichotomy in Alice Bailey's
> > writings. In parts of them appear the psychic, hysterical young
> girl who never quite grew up, and who could be expected to see
> something wonderful even in the emotional doggerel of
that "prayer".
> In others, there are flashes of real knowledge, of extreme
cunning of
> a different order.
> > --- 42
> >
> > One finds a parallel in the writings of H.P.B., where the
natural
> output of the Blavatsky mind - a whole cycle of intelligence
beyond
> that of Bailey - is mixed with things which the temperamental
Russian
> could not possibly have known of herself; and this is supported
by
> the last message of the Mahatmas regarding The Secret Doctrine
which
> states that the book is in part her own product and in part
theirs,
> and that as time goes on it will be increasingly necessary to
> distinguish between the two categories. Of course the direction
and
> trend of the Mahatma teaching is directly the opposite of that of
the
> Bailey "Master's", just as the direction of the Blavatsky mind is
the
> opposite of the Bailey mind; but the corresponding dichotomy is
> there. In other words, whether through subconscious cerebration
of
> the direction of opposing occult forces, Bailey and Blavatsky
> are "opposite numbers". They represent opposite influences on
> humanity, and these influences cannot both be
> > good. This issue seems inescapable, whichever theory of the
> motivations you favor.
> >
> > If we suppose the "dugpa" thesis, then it would be quite in
line
> for that apparent physical visit of the "Mahatma" to have been
the
> result of a hypnotic suggestion by telepathy; possibly preceded
by
> some physical contact; or it could have been a physical visit by
a
> masquerader, during which she was hypnotically "conditioned" to
hear
> the "voice" of "Djwual Khul" and his teachings later. Once under
> control anything could happen, a hypnotic subject can be made to
> believe anything can happen or has happened.
> >
> > The conditions under which the voice of "DK" was heard are most
> significant. A subject is approachable only through some
weakness;
> pride and vanity are listed as the two greatest obstacles and
> the "last citadel" of the personality to fall before spiritual
> liberation is obtained. And what else than overweening vanity
could
> have caused this woman of such mediocre mind to get the idea that
she
> was the chosen agent of Christ himself? Moreover, consider the
> external situation. This was in 1923, when the Messianic craze
under
> Besant and Leadbeater was building up to a frenzy in terms which
> still make many an older Theosophist wince when he reads them now
in
> cold blood. And poor Alice Bailey was being neglected. An order
of
> chosen disciples for the then imminent "Coming of the Avatar",
was
> being built up along the same lines as the "World Servers", and
Mrs.
> Bailey was somehow being left out of the mainstream, in spite of
her
> enthusiastic services to the Society. (Her
> > followers complain that things would have been different if she
had
> been properly appreciated.) Hence the voice of "Djwual Khul' must
> have fallen from the sky like manna from heaven. She was now all
on
> her own, with her own "Coming Christ"; presented with a greater
> mission than that of H.P.B., and one which wonderfully reconciled
her
> childhood devotion to the ideal of Christ and her later
discovered
> affinity for the occult. A fig for the Society and its
ingratitude!
> >
> > H.P.B. warned that the danger is never greater than when vanity
and
> wounded pride dress themselves up in the peacock feathers of
> altruism. This has usually been applied to another personage, but
it
> seems to fit here.
> > ---------
> > --- 43
> > GOD AND PRAYER
> >
> > Mrs. Bailey makes a huge thing of that nursery
school "Invocation."
> It is evident that "prayer" is a major heritage of her childhood
> conditioning. Well, let us look at this. H.P.B.'s Key to
Theosophy
> says -
> > "Is It Necessary to Pray?
> > Enq. Do you believe in prayer, and do you ever pray?
> >
> > Theo. We do not. We act, instead of talking.
> >
> > Enq. You do not offer prayers even to the Absolute Principle?
> >
> > Theo. Why should we? Being well-occupied people, we can hardly
> afford to lose time in addressing verbal prayers to a pure
> abstraction. The Unknowable is capable of relations only in its
parts
> to each other, but is non-existent as regards any finite
relations.
> The visible universe depends for its existence and phenomena on
its
> mutually acting forms and their laws, not on prayer or prayers.
> >
> > Enq. Do you not believe at all in the efficacy of prayer?
> >
> > Theo. Not in prayer taught in so many words and repeated
> externally, if by prayer you mean the outward petition to an
unknown
> God as the addressee, which was inaugurated by the Jews and
> popularized by the Pharisees.
> >
> > Enq. Is there any other kind of prayer?
> >
> > Theo. Most decidedly; we call it WILL-PRAYER, and it is rather
an
> internal command than a petition.
> >
> > Enq. To whom, then, do you pray when you do so?
> >
> > Theo. To 'our Father in heaven' - in its esoteric meaning.
> >
> > Enq. Is that different from the one given to it in Theology?
> >
> > Theo. Entirely so. An Occultist or a Theosophist addresses his
> prayer to his Father which is in secret (read, and try to
understand,
> ch. vi., v.6, Matthew), not to an extra-cosmic and therefore
finite
> God; and that 'Father' is in man himself.
> >
> > Enq. Then you make of man a God?
> >
> > Theo. Please say 'God' and not a God. In our sense, the inner
man
> is the only God we can have cognizance of. And how can this be
> otherwise? Grant us our postulate that God is a universally
diffused,
> infinite principle, and how can man alone escape from being
soaked
> through by, and in, the Deity? We call our 'Father in heaven'
that
> deific essence of which we are cognizant within us, in our heart
and
> spiritual consciousness, and which has nothing to do with the
> anthropomorphic conception we may form of it in our physical
brain or
> its fancy: 'Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that
the
> spirit of (the absolute) God dwelleth in you?' Yet, let no man
> anthropomorphize that essence in us. Let no Theosophist, if he
would
> hold to divine, not human truth, say that this 'God in Secret'
> listens to, or is distinct from, either finite man or the
infinite
> essence - for all are one. Nor, as just remarked, that a prayer
is a
> petition. It is a mystery rather; an
> > occult process
> > --- 44
> > by which finite and conditioned thoughts and desires, unable to
be
> assimilated by the absolute spirit which is unconditioned, are
> translated into spiritual wills and the will; such process being
> called 'spiritual transmutation.' The intensity of our ardent
> aspirations changes prayer into the 'philosopher's stone,' or
that
> which transmutes lead into pure gold. The only homogeneous
essence,
> our 'will-prayer' becomes the active or creative force, producing
> effects according to cur desire.
> >
> > Enq. Do you mean to say that prayer is an occult process
bringing
> about physical results?
> >
> > Theo. I do. Will-Power becomes a living power. But woe unto
those
> occultists and Theosophists, who, instead of crushing out the
desires
> of the lower personal ego or physical man, and saying, addressing
> their Higher Spiritual EGO immersed in Atma-Buddhic light, 'Thy
will
> be done not mine', etc., send up waves of will-power for selfish
or
> unholy purposes. For this is black magic, abomination, and
spiritual
> sorcery. Unfortunately, all this is the favourite occupation of
our
> Christian statesmen and generals, especially when the latter are
> sending two armies to murder each other. Both indulge before
action
> in a bit of such sorcery, by offering respectively prayers to the
> same God of Hosts, each entreating his help to cut its enemies'
> throats."
> >
> > Prayer in any other sense than the aspiration of the personal
self
> for union with its higher, inner self of necessity creates
> separateness from that to which the prayer is addressed. It is
> something from and to, and these words apply only to separate
> entities. What the habit of prayer does, therefore is to set up
and
> continually reinforce the mental concept of something external
and
> imaginary, and to block off all possible integration of the
> personality with its inner self. Since the personality as such is
non-
> viable, perishable except in such union, the tendency is toward
> ultimate oblivion. Meantime the habit also produces a vitiating
> weakness and dependency. People boast of "strength through
prayer."
> Such strength is no more the man's own strength than is the
uplift of
> whiskey an attribute of the drunkard's own will. Should the
prayerful
> man lose his faith he becomes a shattered wreck. Where then was
any
> power of his own? Why should men be proud of being
> > automata; empty shells filled with an outside force, alien and
> unearned?
> >
> > Islam forbids images of Deity and for good reason. The great
> struggle of man is to escape the illusionary world of form, into
the
> arupa planes of reality and conscious union with universal
spirit.
> Escape is impossible for a mind clogged by the idea that the
Ultimate
> itself has form, body, parts, attributes and hence limitations.
> Graven images are no worse than mental images, perhaps not as
bad.
> Moreover, the existence of such images in the mind form focal
points
> of attraction for certain forms of life, the "Star Rishis","Rupa
> Devas", or "Mirror Devas" as they are variously called. The last
term
> is due to their capacity to assume, in the psychic field of
> perception, the mirrored subconscious images in the minds of
> worshipers, and reflect back as
> > --- 45
> > from the exterior these images, whether visual or verbal. Hence
the
> visions of saints and angels and Christs - and "Djwual Khuls". Of
all
> this the Mahatma said, in the "Prayag Message" - .... "They may
have
> had influences around them, bad magnetic emanations the result of
> drink, Society and promiscuous physical associations (resulting
even
> from shaking hands with impure men) but all this is physical and
> material impediments which with a little effort we could
counteract
> or even clear away without much detriment to ourselves. Not so
with
> the magnetism and invisible results proceeding from erroneous and
> sincere beliefs. Faith in the Gods and God, and other
superstitions
> attracts millions of foreign influences, living entities and
powerful
> agents around them, with which we would have to use more than
> ordinary exercise of power to drive them away. We do not choose
to do
> so. We do not find it either necessary or profitable to lose our
time
> waging war to the unprogressed
> > Planetaries who delight in personating gods and sometimes well
> known characters who have lived on earth."
> >
> > Elsewhere H.P.B. said "Those who fall off from our living human
> Mahatmas into the path of the Star Rishis are NO THEOSOPHISTS.
> >
> > - Victor Endersby (from: A STUDY OF THE ARCANE SCHOOL OF ALICE
E.
> BAILEY, special paper to "Theosophical Notes," Sept. 1963)
> > ----------------------------------------
> >
> > =================
> >
> > >7. Bailey's books are rooted in the pseudo-theosophy of CW
> Leadbeater??
> > Posted by: "danielhcaldwell" danielhcaldwell@
> > danielhcaldwell
> > Date: Sat Feb 24, 2007 9:19 pm ((PST))
> > >Bailey's books are rooted in
> > the pseudo-theosophy of CW Leadbeater??
> > >See:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/10237
> > >Daniel
> > http://hpb.cc
> >
> >
> > Messages in this topic (1)
> > __________________________________________________________
> > __________________________________________________________
> > >8. Jerry Hejka-Ekins on Bailey's Use of Besant/Leadbeater E.S.
> Material
> > Posted by: "danielhcaldwell" danielhcaldwell@
> > danielhcaldwell
> > Date: Sat Feb 24, 2007 9:20 pm ((PST))
> > >Jerry Hejka-Ekins on Bailey's Use
> > of Besant/Leadbeater E.S. Material
> > >On Theos-L in a posting dated Jan. 12, 1994, Jerry Hejka-Ekins
> wrote:
> > >"From my earlier perusal of AAB's writings, I found that many
of
> her
> > teachings were drawn directly from Besant and Leadbeater's E.S.
> > writings, which to this day, are not publicly available. For
the
> E.S.
> > to publicly acknowledge that AAB was publishing secret E.S.
> material,
> > would give away to the public the nature of the very material
the
> > E.S. is trying to keep secret. . . . "
> > >Quoted from:
> > http://theosophy.net/tl-text/TL199401.TXT
> > >Arvind Kumar replied to Jerry's above comment:
> > >"Can you tell me in which published books of AAB this
> > Leadbeater/Besant ES material may have appeared (your
conjectures
> > will be fine)?"
> > >Jerry replied in another posting dated Feb 1, 1994:
> > >"Your request puts me into a bit of a bind. Though I am not
> > bound by any pledges not to reveal this material, nor did my
> > source break any pledges, I still have come concern about
raising
> > the ire of pledged members who believe that this material should
> > be kept secret. I'm willing to risk their anger, and reveal the
> > contents of some of this material, if any real good were to come
> > out of it. So I will have to put the question back to you by
> > asking: If by revealing the contents of the E.S. materials, I
> > show that key teachings in AAB's writings are in previously
> > published E.S. writings that she had seen, then what would this
> > mean to you?"
> > >Quoted from:
> > http://theosophy.net/tl-text/TL199402.TXT
> > >Daniel H. Caldwell
> > BLAVATSKY ARCHIVES
> > http://hpb.cc
> > ----------
> > >9. More on Leadbeater and Bailey
> > Posted by: "danielhcaldwell" danielhcaldwell@
> > danielhcaldwell
> > Date: Sat Feb 24, 2007 9:22 pm ((PST))
> > >See more relevant material at
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/10242
> > >Daniel
> > http://hpb.cc
> > -------------
> > >10. Critical look at the claims and teachings of Alice A.
Bailey
> > Posted by: "danielhcaldwell" danielhcaldwell@
> > danielhcaldwell
> > Date: Sat Feb 24, 2007 9:25 pm ((PST))
> > >Critical look at the claims
> > and teachings of Alice A. Bailey
> > See:
> > http://blavatskyarchives.com/latermessengers.htm#6
> > Daniel
> > http://hpb.cc
> > -------------
> > >11. Statements by DK on The Secret Doctrine and The Mahatma
Letters
> > Posted by: "danielhcaldwell" danielhcaldwell@
> > danielhcaldwell
> > Date: Sat Feb 24, 2007 9:38 pm ((PST))
> > >Statements by DK on
> > The Secret Doctrine and The Mahatma Letters
> > >In 1997 you (Andrew Stinson) wrote:
> > > DK makes it plain in his dictations to AAB that it was *HE*
who
> > > dictacted the largest portions of the Secred Doctrine. It
would
> > > have been his first project, perhaps, as a Full Adept.
Nevermind
> > > that most folks believe it was DK's superiors (KH and M) who
> > > dictated the SD - DK also states that much of the Mahatma
Letters
> > > is HPB's *own* work and not actual dictation from her Masters.
> > > Here I do not mean to discredit them, though to some it may
> > > appear that I am doing so. I revere HPB even higher than AAB
in
> > > many respects.
> > >Andrew, of course, you are entitled to your opinions as they
> > may be reflected in the excerpt from your post above. It seems
> > that you believe in HPB's bonafides and actually believe in the
> > existence of M., K.H. and DK. Yet it is somewhat suprising to
> > me that instead of believing what HPB, KH and M wrote in the
> > 1880s, you are willing to set their statements aside and believe
> > what Alice Bailey is writing some 30 years after HPB's death.
> > >There are Mahatma Letters as well as HPB's own statements that
> > indicate that M., K.H and another adept had the most to do with
> > the production of the Secret Doctrine. D.K. may have helped in
> > some way, but the primary source documents from HPB's own time
> > clearly contradict your statement that "DK. . .dictacted the
> > largest portions of the Secred Doctrine."
> > >Maybe they were mistaken or lying, you may reply. But if that
is
> > a possibility, why not the possibility that the "entity"
> > communicating through Bailey might also be lying or was
mistaken?
> > Or possibly all of these "entities" as well as Blavatsky and
> > Bailey were lying or somehow "deluded".
> > >You write that "DK also states that much of the Mahatma Letters
> > is HPB's *own* work and not actual dictation from her Masters."
> > Well, are you open to the possibility that "much of DK's
supposed
> > writings through Bailey is Bailey's *own* work and not actual
> > dictation from DK"?
> > >As to the question of whether HPB " wrote" the Mahatma Letters
or
> > not, you might want to consult Vernon Harrison's new book* HP
> > Blavatsky and the SPR*. As an expert documents examiner, Dr.
> > Harrison's opinion is as follows: ". . .I find no evidence that
> > the Mahatma Letters were written by Madame Blavatsky in a
> > disguised form of her *ordinary writing* made for fraudulent
> > purposes. . . ." (p.x) Asterisks added. Another "handwriting
> > expert" (Dr. Paul Kirk) gave his opinion that Blavatsky did not
> > write certain KH letters as reproduced in the plates attached to
> > Hodgson's 1885 report on Blavatsky. Kirk didn't even know that
> > he was giving an opinion on Blavatsky and Koot Hoomi. The
> > specimens of handwriting were given to Kirk without Blavatsky's
> > and Koot Hoomi's names being given. See Victor Endersby's HALL
> > OF MAGIC MIRRORS, etc. The Hare Brothers in their book WHO WROTE
> > THE MAHATMA LETTERS? (published in the 1930s) contended that HPB
> > wrote the Mahatma Letters but read in conjunction with their
work
> > the detailed analysis of the Hares' statements by Dr. H.N.
> > Stokes in his OE LIBRARY CRITIC. (1930s)
> > >Of course, you may say that Dr. Harrison, Dr. Kirk and Dr.
> > Stokes were all wrong. But are you also willing to concede that
> > D.K. (via Alice Bailey) was possibly wrong on this issue?
> > Harrison, Kirk and Stokes give pages of detailed reasoning for
> > their conclusions. Where are DK's detailed reasoning for his
> > assertion?
> > >You also say: " I revere HPB even higher than AAB in many
> > respects." Yet from your own post, you seem inclined to believe
> > AAB over HPB. Certainly, it might be wise to be skeptical of
> > HPB's statements but why not apply that same standard to Bailey
> > and her statements?
> > > It is plainly stated, though I forget the exact source, except
> > > that I *think* it is reliable, that when HPB was in Tibet
> > > (something I have stopped even questioning, such is my
confidence
> > > and TRUST in her OWN words), one of the youngest disciples to
sit
> > > with her learning from the Mahatmas was a 14 year-old Arhat.
> > It would be interesting to know the source for this statement.
> > >You speak of your "confidence and TRUST in her [HPB's] OWN
words"
> > [about Tibet?] yet you seem quite willing to disbelieve HPB's
OWN
> > words about who helped her write the Secret Doctrine. Why?
> > >Certainly, you have the right to believe as you see fit.
> > Certainly be skeptical of Blavatsky's claims and statements but
> > why not be equally skeptical of what Bailey claims. As I see it
> > historically, Bailey's claims are dependent on Blavatsky's.
> > Blavatsky's claims are not dependent on Bailey's. If Blavatsky
> > can be shown to be a fraud "pure and simple" as A. Bharati
> > phrases it, Bailey's claims are of a simliar cloth. But if
> > Blavatsky's claims are legit, there is no builtin guarantee that
> > Bailey's claims are also legit.
> > >Food for thought....
> > >Daniel
> > http://hpb.cc
> > ====================
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Access over 1 million songs - Yahoo! Music Unlimited.
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Never miss an email again!
> > Yahoo! Toolbar alerts you the instant new Mail arrives. Check
it
> out.
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
[Back to Top]
Theosophy World:
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application
