Theos-Talk Archives (March 2004 Message tt00369)

Hallo Daniel and all,

My views are:

First. I agree.
Second. Yes but even if - such teachings as Bailey's (+ D.K.'s) they are
dangerous,
they can also prove to be quite giving when viewed under certain angles !!!
This is important.
I think without the Bailey teachings theosophy wouldn't have been known
and recognized so much world wide and on such a high level as
The United Nations as they are now.

Both pro-Bailey's and the more ordinary Blavatsky-core theosophists agree
upon certain
important fundamental issues.

Here they are as they are presented in the book "A Treatise on Cosmic Fire"
by Alice A. Bailey
in what I will call a quite important footnote:

"The difficulty of giving one the Wisdom Religion is dealt with by H. P. B.
in the Secret Doctrine as follows:

1.. Opinion must be reserved because:
1.. Complete explanation for initiates only.
b.. Only a fragmentary portion of the esoteric meaning given.
c.. Only adepts can speak with authority. - S. D., I, 188, 190. II, 55,
90.
d.. The teachings are offered as a hypothesis. - II, 469.
b.. We must lose sight entirely of:
1.. Personalities.
b.. Dogmatic beliefs.
c.. Special religions. - S. D., I, 3, 4.
c.. We must be free from prejudice. - S. D., III, 1. We must also:
1.. Be free from conceit.
2.. Free from selfishness.
3.. Ready to accept demonstrated truth.
4.. We must find the highest meaning possible. S. D., III, 487.
5.. We must be also non-sectarian. - S. D., III, 110.
6.. We must remember the handicap of language. - S. D., I, 197, 290, 293.
7.. We must aim to become a disciple. - S. D., I, 188. II, 246. III, 129.
8.. We must eventually develop powers. - S. D., I, 518. II, 85.
9.. We must lead the life of Brotherhood. S. D., I, 190.
10.. We must remember that H. P. B . makes no claim to infallibility. S.
D., II, 25 note, 273. I, 293.
H. P. B. says:

"I speak with 'absolute certainty' only so far as my own personal belief is
concerned. Those who have not the same warrant for their belief as I have
would be very credulous and foolish to accept it on blind faith... What I do
believe in is:

1.. The unbroken oral tradition revealed by living divine men during the
infancy of mankind to the elect among men.
2.. That it has reached us unaltered.
3.. That the Masters are thoroughly versed in the science based on such
uninterrupted teaching." - Lucifer, Vol. V, p. 157.
"The Secret Doctrine is no 'authority' per se; but being full of quotations
and texts from the Sacred Scriptures and philosophies of almost every great
religion and school, those who belong to any of these axe sure to find
support for their arguments on some page or another. There are, however,
Theosophists, and of the best and most devoted, who do suffer from such
weakness for authority." - Lucifer, Vol. III, p. 157.

59 See Preface and Introduction, Secret Doctrine, Vol. I."



It is true, that most of Bailey's (+ D.K.'s) books do not mention these
important issue much in the different books and their contents.
And - THAT is one reason why I find that Alice A. Bailey often are
misunderstood by even experienced Theosophical readers.
They forget, that they themselves have a limited outlook upon the world.

Again and again --- I withness, that Language and the 7 keys plays a way to
important role when we talk about were Bailey
went wrong in the presentation of her books.

--- If anyone has found any faults with the book "The Light of the Soul",
then please let me know. ---

As far as I am concerned the Bailey books was - partly - written to confront
certain Western groups of Seekers after Wisdom and Truth, so that they would
get rid of what Blavatsky in the above mentions as "There are, however,
Theosophists, and of the best and most devoted, who do suffer from such
weakness for authority."



Did this help ?



from
M. Sufilight with peace and love...



----- Original Message ----- 

From: "Daniel H. Caldwell" <danielhcaldwell@yahoo.com>
To: "Theos-Talk" <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2004 4:10 PM
Subject: Theos-World Was Alice Bailey "the New Torch-Bearer of Truth"?


> Was Alice Bailey "the New Torch-Bearer of Truth"?
>
> See http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/latermessengers.htm#five
>
> The three passages taken together indicate that HPB was referring
> to an emissary of the Masters coming in 1975 or later. These statements
> by HPB would seem to rule out the messenger being Alice Bailey.
>
> HPB wrote in 1889:
>
> "Nothing is more dangerous to Esoteric Truth than the garbled
> and distorted versions disfigured to suit the prejudices and
> tastes of men in general."
>
> Unfortunately the teachings to be found in Alice Bailey's book
> are "garbled and distorted versions" of what HPB original taught.
>
> Daniel
>
> Daniel H. Caldwell
> BLAVATSKY STUDY CENTER/BLAVATSKY ARCHIVES
> http://blavatskyarchives.com/introduction.htm
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> "...Contrast alone can enable us to appreciate things at
> their right value; and unless a judge compares notes and
> hears both sides he can hardly come to a correct decision."
> H.P. Blavatsky. The Theosophist, July, 1881, p. 2
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> You can always access our main site by
> simply typing into the URL address
> bar the following 6 characters:
>
> hpb.cc
>
> See also THEOSOPHY: FROM LONG-SEALED ANCIENT FOUNTAINS
> http://www.theosophy.info/
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>