Theos-Talk Archives (February 2002 Message tt00213)

--- In theos-talk@y..., "Morten Sufilight" <teosophy@m...> wrote:
> Hi Paul and all of you,
> 
> The truth is.
> 
> Well Paul, I had hoped for a more enlightening answer. 

Maybe someone more enlightened than I has yet to reply. Is this any 
more enlightening?:

you ask:

predicted , that someone would write some books in the 20th century 
to enhance and so to speak expand her writings. The Bailey groups 
think that that 'someone' was and is Alice A. Bailey.
> 
> Anyway who wrote those books which Blavatsky made a prediction 
about ?? Paul, Daniel, Brigitte, Dallas, Chuck, Jerry and all of 
you...??
> 

If the question is who was HPB talking about, the answer has to be I 
don't know. But if the question is whose writings might qualify, the 
ones I find most valuable as extensions to the Blavatskian corpus are 
Gurdjieff, Ouspensky, Cayce, David-Neel, Krishnamurti, and Purucker. 
(Several of them would be insulted to have their works called that, 
plus they're dead so I'm a terrible sinner to say anything about them 
they wouldn't like, but so be it.) It would be interesting to know 
others' preferences among the various literary successors.

Paul

PS-- Not familiar with the first Sufi author you cite. As for Shah, 
I find his books enjoyable and was quite taken with them in the 80s. 
His pseudonymous People of the Secret was an early influence on my 
search for the Masters. But he turns out to be a self-mythologizer 
along the lines of Castaneda, and was well exposed by James Moore in 
an article some years back. Lots of b.s. in Shah along with good 
information and teaching stories, IMO. His daughter Saira's 
documentary trips to Afghanistan have been quite fascinating this 
year.