Theos-Talk Archives (January 2003 Message tt00442)

Daniel,

> Is "inner resonance and intuition" the SOLE standard that you use 
to determine whether Bailey's teachings are or are not genuine 
> Theosophy, that Bailey's teachings are or are not a true 
continuation of the teachings of Blavatsky?

Of course not. The mind, inadequate instrument that it may be, is 
a framework within which the intuition works. 

> "As I keep on repeating, NW's article SEEMS TO BE part of the 
> general TS propaganda, that does not allow members to have freedom 
> of choice, and is simply anti AAB." caps added
> 
> But Phillip this is a mental construct/projection of yours using a 
> historical argument about the supposed workings of the TS, etc. 

I disagree that it is not a 'mental construct/projection' because 
this has been an *experience* that I have had in my contact with 
various TS lodges as well as the plethora of material on the web.

> In light of Nicholas' own personal history relating to Theosophy 
(and I know a little about it as he has told me bits and pieces 
over the years) your construct is based on nothing that can be 
called evidential or reliable. 

To conform to this 'evidential or reliable' demand of yours, and to 
really do it justice, would require an enormous amount of time and 
energy in going through its minutae, tempting to do, but I have 
other prioties which prohibit me doing that now.

> From what I can see, his opinions about Bailey in his article are 
HIS opinions based upon HIS study and HIS comparison of both the 
> Blavatsky and Bailey writings. The Theosophical Society (which 
> one??) had nothing to do with his study, his comparison or his 
> publication of the said article. 

Yes but dont you see, it adds to the general attitudes which prevail 
within the society.

> I hate to say this Phillip, but this argument of yours appears to 
be of the ad hominem variety. Instead of discussing and debating 
the issues Nicholas brought up in the article, you go out side the 
> article and try to question HIS motivations by referring vaguely 
> to "general TS propaganda, that does not allow members to have 
> freedom of choice."

I cannot say that I can identify anyone who is completely free of ad 
hominem in this forum. I have taken NW's article point by point on 
my website and responded quite impersonally. It is something that I 
intend to revise in light of our discussions.

I concede your other questions re NW are all fair points. I do not 
deny NW's freedom of choice or intuition. I simply state that his 
article and others like it, have a cumulative effect on the general 
anti AAB propaganda that exists.
P.