Theos-Talk Archives (March 2004 Message tt00683)

Hallo Daniel and all of you,

My views are:

Just to give you - Daniel - more explanation.

Bailey was not just a Copy-Cat.

1. First we have the following quote from the book "The Autobiography of
Alice A. Bailey" (published 1951), page 270:

On the heading "I. Some Definitions of Esotericism" Bailey writes:
"It is with the effort to meet these seven requirements of all esoteric
schools, that the Arcane School is occupied. It is not occupied with
preparing disciples for initiations and never has been. It is attempting to
train its students to make the preliminary contacts and to work as true
servers in the world. There is no true esoteric school today which is giving
training for initiation. Those who claim to do so are deceiving the public.
Training in the life of discipleship, academically understood, can be given.
Training in the life of the initiate has still to be ascertained
individually, and through contacts in the world of spiritual being."
http://beaskund.helloyou.ws/netnews/bk/autobiography/auto1092.html

And later under the heading "II. How an Esoteric School is Formed" we find
the following excerpt, page 270-1:

"An esoteric school is not formed because some Master orders a disciple to
form one. The disciple who starts such a school of preparatory occultism
does so entirely of his own volition. It is his definite, self-chosen task.
He has been serving to the best of his ability in a Master's Ashram; he is
acquainted with world need; he is keenly anxious to be of service and is
conscious of learning all the time, and of the methods whereby he has been
taught and led forward along the Path. He is, therefore, a conscious worker,
well aware of his duty as a disciple, in touch with his soul and
increasingly sensitive to the Master's impression. He does not usually plan
to start an esoteric school; no definite and planned organization takes
shape in [271] his mind. He is simply anxious to meet the surrounding need.
Owing to the fact that he is in touch with his soul and - in the case of
more advanced disciples - in touch with the Master and the Ashram, his daily
life becomes magnetic, radiatory and dynamic and, therefore, he attracts to
him those whom he can help, gathering them around him. He becomes the
central point of life in a living organism and not the head of an
organization. Herein lies the difference between the work of a
well-intentioned aspirant and the trained disciple. The world is full of
organizations with some person at the head whose motives are usually sound
but whose methods and approach to those he seeks to serve are those of the
business world; he may build a helpful organization but he does not found an
esoteric school. A disciple becomes the center of a vital, radiating group
which grows and achieves its end because of the life at the center,
developing from within outward; it is the force of his life which makes it
successful and not any system of advertising, or claim-making and seldom, if
ever, is it a commercial success."
http://beaskund.helloyou.ws/netnews/bk/autobiography/auto1093.html

--- Now we remember what Blavatsky wrote in the known letter to the American
Convent:

"Letter I -- 1888
Second Annual Convention -- April 22-23
American Section of the Theosophical Society :

"Theosophy has lately taken a new start in America which marks the
commencement of a new Cycle in the affairs of the Society in the West. And
the policy you are now following is admirably adapted to give scope for the
widest expansion of the movement, and to establish on a firm basis an
organization which, while promoting feelings of fraternal sympathy, social
unity, and solidarity will leave ample room for individual freedom and
exertion in the common cause -- that of helping mankind.

The multiplication of local centers should be a foremost consideration in
your minds, and each man should strive to be a center of work in himself.
When his inner development has reached a certain point, he will naturally
draw those with whom he is in contact under the same influence; a nucleus
will be formed, round which other people will gather, forming a center from
which information and spiritual influence radiate, and towards which higher
influences are directed.

But let no man set up a popery instead of Theosophy, as this would be
suicidal and has ever ended most fatally. We are all fellow students, more
or less advanced; but no one belonging to the Theosophical Society ought to
count himself as more than, at best, a pupil-teacher -- one who has no right
to dogmatize."
http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/hpb-am/hpb-am1.htm


These words seems important when we compare with what
Besant/Leadbeater/Krishnamurti was doing.
Bailey clearly differs from Besant/Leadbeater and their popery and Maitreya
ideas.



2. Secondly we have the following quote from the book "The Autobiography of
Alice A. Bailey", page 272:

"Esoteric schools can be divided into different categories, dependent upon
the point of development of the teacher. It is the subconscious realization
of this that has led the mediocre leader to attempt to push his work and
attract attention to his effort by loud and noisy claim-making, by
pretending familiarity with the Master and sometimes with the entire
Hierarchy, and thus demanding recognition of himself. All this indicates the
beginner who needs to learn that the true esoteric school is ever started by
a disciple and that it is his attempt at service and not the field of
expression of a Master. The disciple - and not the Master - is solely
responsible for the success or failure of the school. The Masters are not
responsible for the schools now in existence or in process of forming. They
do not establish policies or determine issues. Just in so far as the
disciple-leader is consciously and humbly in touch with the Master and His
Ashram will the power of the inner group pour through the school; it will
show itself as spiritual light and wisdom and will not take the form of
concrete direction, commands and orders or the shifting of responsibility
from the leader to the Master. The disciple makes his own decisions, trains
his own helpers, enunciates his own policies, interprets the Ageless Wisdom
according to the light which is in him and supervises the training given to
the students. The more advanced the disciple, the less will he speak of his
Master and the more he will point the way to the Hierarchy; his emphasis
will be upon individual responsibility and the basic occult principles."

Now will you, the reader, tell me that this is "DIRECTLY DRAWN" from the ES
papers written by CWL and Besant ???
Do you, the reader, then think, that Bailey had the need to just COPY-CAT
the ES papers when she wrote the book "Initiation - Human and Solar" ?



I quote her autobiography to show her views - "The Autobiography of Alice A.
Bailey" (published 1951):

" I remember at one of the first E.S. meetings I attended Miss Poutz, who
was the secretary of the E.S. at that time.,
made the astounding statement that no one in the world could be a disciple
of the Masters of the Wisdom unless they
had been so notified by Mrs. Besant. That remark broke a glamor in me,
although I did not speak of it at that time
except to Foster Bailey. I knew I was a disciple of the Master K.H. and had
been as long as I could remember.
Mrs. Besant had evidently overlooked me. I could not understand why the
Masters, Who were supposed to have a
universal consciousness, would only look for Their disciples in the ranks of
the T.S. I knew it could not be so. I knew
They could not be so limited in consciousness and later I met many people
who were disciples of the Masters and who
had never been in touch with the T.S. and had never even heard of it. Just
as I thought I had found a center of spiritual
light and understanding, I discovered I had wandered into another sect.
We discovered then that the E.S. completely dominated the T.S. Members were
good members if, and only if, they [159]
accepted the authority of the E.S. If they agreed with all the
pronouncements of the Outer Head and if they gave their loyalty
to the people that the heads of the E.S. in every country endorsed. Some of
their pronouncements seemed ridiculous. Many
of the people endorsed were mediocre to the nth degree. A number who were
looked up to as initiates were not particularly
intelligent or loving, and love and intelligence, in full measure, are the
hallmark of the initiate. Amongst the advanced membership
there was competition and claim making and, therefore, constant fighting
between personalities - fighting that was not confined
just to oral battles but which found its expression in magazine articles. I
shall never forget my horror one day when a man in
Los Angeles said to me, "If you want to know what brotherhood is not, go and
live at Krotona." He did not know I lived there."
http://beaskund.helloyou.ws/netnews/bk/autobiography/auto1055.html


Still we will have to undertsand that these words was written some years
ago, and we live in a different time.

from
M. Sufilight with peace and love...



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Daniel H. Caldwell" <danielhcaldwell@yahoo.com>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, March 28, 2004 7:44 PM
Subject: Theos-World Morten and his "explanation" about the Similarities


Morten,

In my posting at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/15526

I asked you:

------------------------------------------------

How do YOU account for those SIMILARITIES between
Bailey's "Initiation - Human and Solar" and
Leadbeater's "The Masters and the Path."

-----------------------------------------------

Apparently in the following posting, you answered
my question:

--------------------------------------------------------

The mentioned similarities between this Bailey book
and the CWL book "The Masters and the Path" are due to . . . :

..."that each Wisdom Teaching of a certain quality is
connected with
a) Time, place people and circumstances
b) promoting a teaching in accordance with the following view as the
above link said:
"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."

The same can be said of Bailey's book, and why there were any
similarities. With other words - it is my view that this was the an
important part of the background for Bailey (and D.K.) writing the
first Bailey book. The similarities was made deliberately.
This was what my previous email should have lead the reader to
understand.

Quoted from:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/15551

-----------------------------------------------------


Morten, in order to clarify your remarks,
I ask you the following:

In your answer above, are you in fact AGREEING OR DISAGREEING
with what Jerry HE has written????

I quote his words again to refresh your memory:

--------------------------------------------------------

"From my earlier perusal of AAB's writings, I found that many
of her teachings were DRAWN DIRECTLY from Besant and Leadbeater's
E.S. writings."

"She [Bailey]moved to Krotona Hollywood a year or two
thereafter where she joined the ES, and GAINED
ACCESS to the [Besant/Leadbeater] material concerning
the inner government and initiations, which was
only circulated through the ES at that time. . . ."

". . . [Bailey's] Initiation Human and Solar was published
in 1922-her first book-I think. I read it some years ago,
and found it VERY FAITHFUL to the [Besant/Leadbeater]ES
teachings as they were presented from 1910-1918."

"Yes the parallels between Masters on the Path and Initiation Human
and Solar are striking, aren't they? Actually, the originator of the
material was CWL, but not in 1925." Caps added.

---------------------------------------------------------

Morten, do you agree or disagree with Jerry HE that Bailey
gained access to the Besant/Leadbeater E.S. material when she
became a member of the E.S.?

Do your agree or disagree with Jerry HE that therefore with
this access, it is not surprising that "many of her teachings
were DRAWN DIRECTLY from Besant and Leadbeater's E.S. writings"??

I think Jerry's explanation is quite reasonable and explains very
well why there are such marked similarities between the Bailey
and Leadbeater books.

Bailey became a member of the E.S., gained access to the
Besant/Leadbeater E.S. teachings and later decided for whatever
reasons to embody those Besant/Leadbeater teachings in her first
book, if not also in later works of hers. Do you agree or disagree
with this?

If you do not agree with these various contentions, then I would like
to know why you disagree?

Daniel







Yahoo! Groups Links