theos-talk.com

[MASTER INDEX] [DATE INDEX] [THREAD INDEX] [SUBJECT INDEX] [AUTHOR INDEX]

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: Theos-World Re Bailey - Endersby critical article

Feb 27, 2007 04:22 AM
by Scribe


Thank you, Nigel,
I thought that was a great post--and reminder--and very moving and inspiring.
Thank you again,
Scribe

  ----- 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://www.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://www.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