Re: Theos-World Re Bailey - Endersby critical article
Feb 27, 2007 00:08 AM
--- In email@example.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
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
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
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
> 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
> - 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
> --- 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
> 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-
> --- 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
> 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
> "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
> --- 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'
> 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
> * 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
> "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'
> 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
> 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
> Posted by: "danielhcaldwell" danielhcaldwell@...
> Date: Sat Feb 24, 2007 9:19 pm ((PST))
> >Bailey's books are rooted in
> the pseudo-theosophy of CW Leadbeater??
> Messages in this topic (1)
> >8. Jerry Hejka-Ekins on Bailey's Use of Besant/Leadbeater E.S.
> Posted by: "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
> >"From my earlier perusal of AAB's writings, I found that many of
> teachings were drawn directly from Besant and Leadbeater's E.S.
> writings, which to this day, are not publicly available. For the
> to publicly acknowledge that AAB was publishing secret E.S.
> would give away to the public the nature of the very material the
> E.S. is trying to keep secret. . . . "
> >Quoted from:
> >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:
> >Daniel H. Caldwell
> BLAVATSKY ARCHIVES
> >9. More on Leadbeater and Bailey
> Posted by: "danielhcaldwell" danielhcaldwell@...
> Date: Sat Feb 24, 2007 9:22 pm ((PST))
> >See more relevant material at
> >10. Critical look at the claims and teachings of Alice A. Bailey
> Posted by: "danielhcaldwell" danielhcaldwell@...
> Date: Sat Feb 24, 2007 9:25 pm ((PST))
> >Critical look at the claims
> and teachings of Alice A. Bailey
> >11. Statements by DK on The Secret Doctrine and The Mahatma Letters
> Posted by: "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
> >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....
> 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
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application