Theos-Talk Archives (March 2004 Message tt00389)

Sorry, Morton, I hit the wrong key. Here is my reply in full.

> So what the possible Master KH might have meant when
> talking to Besant,
> could have been something else - namely the
> tendencies to
> over-emphasise the Masters importance as being
> almost Gods.
> That tendency certainly had a peek at that time- 
> year 1900 - (and maybe
> also even today in Adyar).


No, I think he meant "stop talking about it", plain
and simple. Historical records show that this tendency
peaked not in 1900 but in August 1925, at the Ommen
Star Camp, when several personal statements were made
regarding intiations, Hierarchy, and so on. It was
from February 1953 onwards, when N. Sri Ram became the
President (of the Adyar TS), that all personal
references to the Masters completely stopped. And it
was very much due to his own personal example. As for
the present, if you look at her 'On the Watch Tower'
notes in "The Theosophist", the international journal
of the Adyar TS, you will not find absolutely any
personal references to the Masters. Such personal
references have ceased to be part of the culture of
the Adyar Society for the past 50 years. 


> "Then followed A Treatise on White Magic. It is the first
> > book ever given out upon the training and control of
> > the astral or emotional body."
> - is clearly not true.

> I will not call the books Bhagavad Gita, the Dhammapada, the Lamrin 
Chenmo,
> the
> Tao-te-ching, the Cloud of Unknowing --- treatises --- on the 
emotional and
> mental body in
> a (ordinary) theosophical sense.


I was just trying to emphasize how absurd Bailey's claim is, and I 
didn't say those great classics were 'treatises'. They are not 
theological books; they are books of spiritual instruction. Every 
great classic on the inner life deals very specifically with the 
culture of emotions, perhaps because every human being gets trapped 
in his/her emotions very regularly and needs guidance on this point.


> "(Is it not surprising that a "Master of Wisdom" would
> > submit himself to conditions determined by a disciple?"
> 
> Perhaps not, if the disciple has taken the 4th initiation OR is
> working under another Master - not named in the presentation of the 
issue.
> The ray or typ of Path the individual disciple follows could have 
something
> to do with that.
> HPB was (or is) on a different Path than Bailey no doubt.


You are speculating here. Please indicate a passage in HPB's writings 
or the letters from her Teachers where her "ray" is mentioned.


> The sentences do not say, that Bailey would run the School on her 
own !


You obviously didn't read the quote from the "Tibetan" in the 
posting. Here it is: "A.A.B. started such a school in 1923 with the 
aid of F.B. and certain students of vision and spiritual 
understanding. She made it a condition that I should have nothing to 
do with the Arcane School and that I should have no control over its 
policies and curriculum. In this she was wise and right and I fully 
endorse her position."


> 4. HPB on the comming book with the "Psychological Key" and the 
Bailey claim !!!:
> Oliveira asked where the HPB quote were...Here it is 
> a)
> --- The Secret Doctrine - vol 1., page xxxviii ---
> In Century the Twentieth some disciple more informed, and far
> better fitted, may be sent by the Masters of Wisdom to give final 
and
> irrefutable proofs that there exists a Science called Gupta-Vidya;


Does this quote mention the "Tibetan"? Does it say anything at all 
about the "psychlogical key" to The Secret Doctrine? 


> 5.
> Oliviera, you presented a view on who are being accepted or not at 
the
> Bailey Arcane School or a Wisdom School in general.
> Please understand, that this view could be false. 


No, I didn't mention anything about people being "accepted or not". I 
simply quoted Bailey, the founder of the Arcane School, who 
wrote: "... our emphasis was impersonality and mental development. I 
added that we made our work deliberately eliminative, only keeping 
those who would really work hard andwho showed signs of true mental 
culture. I told him that we dropped hundreds of the emotional, 
devotional type..."


> The Arcane School if it was (and is) a real School of Wisdom will 
because of
> the laws of Karma have to
> drop certain (and not "all" - Bailey didn't say "all") emotional 
aspirants
> and other persons, who wouldn't or
> will not fit the pattern.


The idea of the laws of Karma "dropping" someone, whoever he/she is, 
is a gross anthropomorphism. Karma is a universal law and in "The 
Voice of the Silence" it is spoken of as Compassion. "It is de LAW 
of laws -- eternal Harmony, Alaya's SELF; a shoreless universal 
essence, the light of everlasting Right, and fitness of all things, 
the law of love eternal." (VS, III:300) Compassion, or Karma, drops 
no one. There may purification, probation, tests before one enters 
the path. Once in it, you are not dropped. You drop yourself.


> If one of them was sick you would'nt buy it for horse or camel race 
would
> you ?


If I had money I would buy it to take care of it.


> Did this help the readers ?


The dialogue is helpful.

> from
> M. Sufilight with peace and love...


Peace and love to you too, Morten.

Pedro