Theos-Talk Archives (January 2005 Message tt00609)

Dear Krishtar,

I'll try to shed some light but hope that JHE who presented the idea 
and has a much better sense of the infighting behind the story might 
comment:


--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "krishtar" <krishtar_a@b...> wrote:
> Paul
> Fine?
> Can you please throw more explanations on the sentence you wrote 
as " Thus she was regarded as 
> a traitor to the ES and the Masters. Sounds very plausible, and 
since ES members are not going to tell us who's on their s--tlist and 
in what order, guesswork is all we have left.?"
> Why traitor?

ES members are sworn to keep the materials secret. Bailey is 
regarded as one who broke that vow.

> I donīt know much ībout the story on A.A. Bailey quite well and 
although I own her " A treatise in cosmic Fire " in Spanish, I 
confess to never feel atraction by it...it is a very exquisite, 
strange book.
> All I know is that she ( claimed that ) got in contact with a 
Master also known by HPB and present in some passages on the Mahatma 
Letters, called Djuall Kool and whom, according to her, passed an 
entire life besides her in aprocess she described as an "overshadow" -
later called " chanel" by the '"claire-propheteers".
> I am also aware that a totality of her books was written by him.
> Some say that she wished many of the books to become a complement 
and continuation on HPBīs work but some claim that is impossible due 
to her doctrines be more similar to CWLīs works than anyone else.
> Was she daydreaming when she wrote all that stuff?
> 
> Krishtar
> 
Whether daydreaming or channeling or inventing, she was presenting 
doctrines as coming from a Tibetan that were obviously of European 
Theosophical origin. While Theosophists often refuse to acknowledge 
any distinction between the two, any Tibetan studies scholar can tell 
the difference in an instant. (Not that I'm one.)

Cheers,

Paul