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 28, 2007 05:00 PM
by nhcareyta


--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Scribe" <scribe@...> wrote:
>
> Thank you, Nigel,
> I thought that was a great post--and reminder--and very moving and 
inspiring.
> Thank you again,
> Scribe

Thank you Scribe for your encouraging comments.
The Dalai Lama is certainly a special gentleman with an inspiring 
manner and message for many.

Kind regards
Nigel




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