Theos-Talk Archives (March 2004 Message tt00378)

Hallo Daniel and all,

My views are:

Allright.

1. Answers..."Quite giving" in the following sense...

a) Many Seekers after Wisdom has been attracted towards the (real)
theosophical teachings via Bailey's books, which not otherwise would been
so.
This is true and very important.
I talk about Seekers who without doubt would have rejected the --- old-timer
HPB and her old writings, her old use of vocabulary,
her to some difficult manner of writing. Let us admit that she indeed had
her own style. >:-)
I like it, but others don't. And so it is.

b) Bailey's books sheed - new and important - light upon the spiritual
iomportance of the global body United Nations. An importance which SHOULD
NOT be overlooked, - even - if theosophy is not into politics (ie. unless it
is "corrupt" as HPB says it in a letter to the Amercan Convent in 1888).
The Lucis Trust and the World Goodwill and Triangles have done a not
unimportant effort in raising awareness about Theosophy in general even
if --- you still - as I also do - deems it dangerous, at least in a certain
sense ---.

c) In my archive the book "Light of the Soul" by Bailey - are still - viewed
as very useful in spiritual circles !
(Why not use it as a Comparative study between different versions.)


d) Those who do not use the 7 keys and who do not understand that there are
7 path within spiritual development (Secret Doctrine vol 2., p. 191)
often face trouble when trying to really understanding HPB and her views.
Those among us who reads between the lines (ie. for instance knows how to
ignore the christian vocabulary on a high level. - ...grin...) - often learn
something by Baileys books.

e) Bailey can be viewed as a Second Teacher to some. To others she is a
deliberate test made by the initiates.

What a Second Teacher is - you will understand if you read the below taken
from my 2001 article at
http://home19.inet.tele.dk/global-theosophy/BLAVATSK.HTM .
We are in the below talking about what happened when HPB died.

......."Those above mentioned Spiritual teachers work has not only been to
give people Spiritual guidance and education. It has also been to prepare
the ground for further development of the living progress of the Path of
Wisdom.
There are also minor emissaries who are sent out to teach and prepare the
ground for further development. These people has been known to set
themselves up as ultimate authorities, because part of their training is to
test their loyalty to the whole School of Wisdom, which is as generally
known consisting of one entity.
But, if, a teacher of the Wisdom tradition dies, or there is a gap in the
teaching, what then? The interesting thing is, that the very gap is a part
of the training. You may explain certain things to a child : shall we say
teach her or him not to do certain things. Then you will pretend to go out
of the house - and observe her or him. According to how well he/she has
learned, so will he/she react. In this 'absence exercise', precisely the
same thing happens to the teacher of Wisdom, though many are not conscious
of it.

After the disappearance from the field of a teacher of Wisdom, the followers
will divide themselves into groups, in accordance with their strength and
weaknesses. Some will assume control of others. They may be good or bad, and
this will be shown by their reaction to - the second teacher - when he/she
arrives.
If they realise he/she is their teacher, then they have merely been
developing themselves and can mature. But if they have become atrophied,
they will be too blind to recognize the Spirituality of the very teacher,
for which appearance they have been prepared. They may attach themselves, in
default, to a different group. (And this groups existence is maybe no
coincidence.) Again well and good : providing they return to the mainstream
of teaching when it is offered to them again. This is the test of whether
they have overcome the lower self. They will realise, if they are
sufficiently developed, that the person who appears to be 'second' teacher
is in reality - the first in importance.
Life is reversed for the undeveloped man (the newcomer), and he/she will
behave in accordance with this. The first teacher does not make life easier,
in most cases, for the generality of disciples. He/She will teach them
things, which are only of use when the second teacher arrives and reality
falls into place. The object of this is twofold. In the first place, certain
valuable thoughts have been given to the disciples. In the second, they are
tested by the means of these ideas. Just as our western psychologists give
odd-shaped pieces of wood to people, to see how they put them together,
teachers of Wisdom will give odd-pieces of material of - mental kind - to
his/her followers. - If they try to fit these together however, and to make
a pattern in his/hers - absences, - they are becoming 'fossilised'. Because,
the Wisdom tradition has to show that the object of mankind is not to
construct idols, but to follow a supreme pattern, which is learnt piece by
piece.

Quite obviously the semi-blind among the people, during their
'waiting-period', will try to work out their own interpretation. They may,
as have been done in the past, write books to explain what they have
learned. This is the danger-point, because when a man/woman is accepted as,
say, a philosopher (of wisdom) because she/he has written a book explaining
a philosophy, he/she will not readily accept, that she/he only have been
'fumbling'. He/She has quite possibly become a prisoner of his/hers lower
self. The self-conceit of the man/woman is now bound up with his/hers
'creation', the book or the method, which he/she has used to organise the
fragments, which he/she has. He/she is probably or possibly lost - for the
cause.
In order to break through this shell of accretions and fossilisations,
the - second teacher - will tend to act in a different, perhaps in a certain
dramatically different manner, from the original one. This could happen, to
break the 'idols', which have been formed out of the thoughts, which were
originally given.
So very important: The use of ideas is to shape a man or woman, not to
support a system - which is viewed in a limited manner. This is one way in
which the Wisdom Tradition is 'living', and not just the perpetuations of
ideas and movements. This seems important to understand and know about.

When a system of teaching of wisdom is in a period of fallowness, because
the one who propagated it is dead, then there comes a period of stagnation.
This period can last between 10 years, 15 years or more. In the time, which
passes, the group of people who is affected by the system are sieved by
natural means. Some wander away. Others carry on automatically not really
knowing, what they are doing. They are now 'frozen', though they do not know
they are.
The blind may try to lead the blinder. This takes the form of assumption of
authority by those who were given some sort of authority in the original
mandate. These are the people in the most dangerous position, because the
longer they remain 'orphaned' the more strongly their lower self (or the
three lower bodies) asserts it self.
Others may modify the teachings in a learned and personal way. Some
certainly fall a prey to cults, which have come into being in order to serve
them. The people who joins these are at great pains to explain why they
consider, that they represent the same kind of teaching - and this is
important. It is important, because it shows the Theosophist or the real
spiritually minded, very clearly, that the people who try to explain - are
in fact troubled by conscience. Somewhere inside them, they know, that they
are identifying themselves with an imitation, or a second-best. But they are
supported by their lower bodies or lower personality, - and this is too
strong for them.
Those can be helped by being lead to think in new thinking-patterns and
systems. It is via the conscience, that one finds the path forward, -
thereby will be able to remove the limitations of the lower personality.

Imagine a group of people shipwrecked. They think there is no hope of
rescue. They find a raft, and are glad. After a time more people come along
in a big boat. But the first people will not leave the raft, because they
have become used to it. They may have convinced themselves, that it is
actually a boat. (So it is to some philosophical or religious people today.)
The points at which the mystical traditions, which are still alive, are in
contact with each other cannot really be explained by the means of books.
And yet people continue to write books showing how they have found this and
that point of resemblance.
The truth can only be found by actual experience, - and easier by awareness
on such aspect as I have touch upon.

To sink ecstasy in Wisdom is better than to sink Wisdom in ecstasy. The
Wisdom Tradition teaches by several different systems, and not only by
one, - one book or teen books, BUT also by thousands and thousands of
books - and the dogmatic ones doesn't want to listen.".......

f) Yes. Such teachings ARE dangerous as HPB says. But how should onme
understand the word "dangerous" ?
As directly treathening to Theosophy --- OR --- just dangerous in the sense,
that one aught to keep an eye upon such a teaching ?
And was and is Bailey's teaching dangerous in the same sense as HPB refers
to ?
We aught to think about this.

I would problably have used similar words as HPB at her time of living.
But we do not live in the years around 1875-1891.
We live in the year 2004 and that indeed changes the matter a whole lot !
Please read e) one more time if you do not understand this.
So - Daniel - let us relate to that. Agreed ?

g) And Daniel we have to be careful about the word "Authorithy" !
Even Blavatsky said, that she wasn't without faults. Do you not say the same
?

(--- from the below email of mine: We must remember that H. P. B . makes no
claim to infallibility. S. D., II, 25 note, 273. I, 293. ---)



Let me know if this isn't enough.


2. Both kinds of theosophy are known and recognized. Both Bailey's version
and the core Blavatsky one as well as other versions.
The many variations cannot be avoided at this monent in history. --- You can
perhaps with adavantage read 1. e) again if you do not understand this.
But at the moment Bailey's version is recognized - very much - becasue of
the many followers, which get there what the spiritual WANT,
but agreed Daniel NOT what they spiritually NEED !

3. United Nations and Lucis Trusts relation to it I have referred to
earliere.
Try reading thsese links, which are mentioned in the following email I made
here at Theos-Talk:
http://theosophy.com/theos-talk/200301/tt00471.html or
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/10605
Add the following:
http://www.freemasonwatch.freepress-freespeech.com/lucistrust.html
(Reading these links and the emails links, should tell you about what is
going on. Both Good and bad. What is good and what is bad is your choice.)

4. About the quote on authorithy. I took it as stated from the book "A
Treatise on Cosmic Fire".
I was aware of that this quote was referred to in a wrong manner. But it is
true, that Bailey at more than one place
refers to HPB writings in a inproper manner.

It happens to be so, that I know, that this quote was written by HPB at one
time.
I just do not have the right place to refer the readers to. If anyone can be
of help, then I would be happy.
Even the Aquarian Theosophist produced the same vol 2, no. 5 2002. Here it
is http://www.teosofia.com/Docs/vol-2-5.pdf
So maybe the editor needs to let someone more suited to do the work. >:-)
If I remember correctly - it was HPB who was the main editor when she lived.
So very important was that job in her days !
Today...???..hmm...
Maybe: Today the Master smiles silently and ignores the fumbling
theosophists.

I mailed the same words two years ago at here at Theos-Talk and none of you
said anything then.

I suggest: Try searching the Collected Writings on CD-rom with the word
"autorithy" and see if you get hold of the right paper.




Did I miss anything ?


from
M. Sufilight with peace and love...




----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Daniel H. Caldwell" <danielhcaldwell@yahoo.com>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2004 6:39 PM
Subject: Theos-World Morten on Was Alice Bailey "the New Torch-Bearer of
Truth"?


> Morten,
>
> You write many things and to properly respond I
> would have to write much more than I can at the
> present time.
>
> But I will make a few comments:
>
> You write:
>
> "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 !!!"
>
> But you fail to tell us what you mean by "quite giving" and
> you fail to illustrate what you mean by "when viewed under
> certain angles."
>
> Therefore it is hard to know exactly what you mean or what
> you are referring to. We have only your vague statement.
> And it is impossible to judge whether what you say is correct
> or not because we have no details.
>
> So when HPB wrote
>
> ". . . A new and rapidly growing danger. . . is threatening . . . the
> spread of the pure Esoteric Philosophy and knowledge." etc etc.
> http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/latermessengers.htm#2
>
> Are you telling us that if you had been a contemporary of
> HPB, you might have objected to her statements? That you would
> have said, "Hold on HPB, 'they are dangerous, [but] they can also
> prove to be quite giving when viewed under certain angles !!!" "
>
> HPB herself makes no qualifications as you seem inclined to do.
>
> She simply writes:
>
> ". . . A new and rapidly growing danger. . . is threatening . . . the
> spread of the pure Esoteric Philosophy and knowledge. . . . Nothing
> is more dangerous to Esoteric Truth than the garbled and distorted
> versions disfigured to suit the prejudices and tastes of men in
> general."
>
> You also write:
>
> "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."
>
> But WHAT KIND of Theosophy is "known and recognized"?
>
> Exactly what is known of Theosophy "on such a high level as The
> United Nations"?
>
> Again you fail to give us specifics. Without those specifics,
> I have no idea exactly what you are referring to. Most of
> your readers may also be in the same position.
>
> If what I contend is true, ie. that Bailey's teachings are
> a "garbled and distorted " version of what true Theosophy is,
> (ie, "the pure Esoteric Philosophy and knowledge"), then why
> is it good that such a distorted version is known "worldwide"
> and even "on such a high level as The United Nations"?
>
> If anything, one could contend that Bailey's teachings being
> so well known and recognized worldwide, in fact, threatens
> "the spread of the pure Esoteric Philosophy and knowledge. . . ."
>
> One could also contend that the Bailey's teachings have led readers,
> students and inquirers "far from the Truth" and that this
> has been done on worldwide scale!
>
> Much more could be said about many of your other comments.
>
> One last item.
>
> You quote HPB:
>
> 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.
>
> Morton, you give this last quote starting with "The Secret Doctrine
> is no 'authority' per se . . . " as from Lucifer, Vol. III, p. 157.
>
> Looking on page 157 of Lucifer, Vol. III, I do NOT find this
> quotation. Where is it?
>
> Did you take this quote directly from the Lucifer volume??
>
> Daniel
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Morten Nymann Olesen" <global-
> theosophy@a...> wrote:
> > 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@y...>
> > 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
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>