Theos-Talk Archives (June 2005 Message tt00232)

Friday, June 10, 2005, 5:36:29 PM, Konstantin wrote:

> If anything is not "in line with the doctrine given through
> HPB", it doesn't mean at all that it's rubbish.

I didn't say "it is rubbish because it is not in line". But as far as
I can see, it really IS rubbish because it contradicts evidence (like
CWL's "visions" about life on Mars); or boasts about its author's and
his companions' past incarnations (like "Lives of Alcyone"), which are
of course undeniable as well as unverifiable, but really strange
looking at those people's present lives; or is simply illogical as
sheer specialism in AAB's and CWL's ranking Masters along "rays of
qualities".

BTW, once upon a time I participated in a kind of "round table" with
some AAB's followers and I noticed they had strange difficulties in
setting up a free-flowing discussion because they strongly tended to
"over-organize" it by dividing the topic into tiny bits and ascribing
every member with his/her special bit of it. And when presented with
an option to embrace the topic as a whole, some embarrassment was
felt... :) Later I was told that this kind of cognition by splitting
up the world and labeling its pieces instead of perceiving it as an
integrated whole is a characteristic feature of these people. Well, no
wonder with such a background -- AAB's treatises are permeated with
specialism...

And not all but quite many followers (or rather blind believers and
devotees) of Helena Roerich tend to bear a kind of black and white
view of things and expect dirty hands of the dark ones everywhere,
vindicating this attitude with numerous quotations from Agni Yoga
about black brothers. People tend to seek for excuses instead of
explanations...


> Subba Row aptly criticized HPB's set of principles, stating that it
> doesn't follow any natural division lines, and HPB herself was
> slightly changing this set.

As far as I remember, his criticism was called forth not by her
incorrectness but by difficulties in comprehending her 7-fold set of
mysterious "principles" compared to 4-fold set of physically
detachable "bodies". But these two classifications don't contradict
each other.


> The newer set which includes etheric body, is now adopted
> universally even outside of Theosophical Society

So what is new here apart from yet another label?


> The teaching about life on the astral plane also makes some sense.
> According to the "classical" theosophy, we drop astral shells and
> proceed right to devachan,

This is too black-and-white view of the "classics". This is just a
general way, not an absolute one, and time between death and this
dropping is not nil.

> while real man cannot communicate from the astral plane, but the
> empty shells only.

Not "only". Again, generally they don't. And generally they cannot
when they cast off the shell.


> It's interesting enough that up to 1895 CWL/AAB doctrine in
> its main features was already formed, and it seems impossible
> for a beginner to invent it and persuade many theosophists
> in 4 years only

Why? And their multitude is no proof for their correctness.



>> And all those suspicious cases of pedophilia, although apparently
>> not very criminal, and other weaknesses simply hint at a very
>> probable cause of producing that rubbish by the aforementioned
>> writer.

> The same can be said about Blavatsky, changing "pedophilia" to the
> boxes with sliding walls for producing "miracles" and other things
> like that.

Did I say "pedophilia produced that rubbish"? Please read that passage
again.


> We also can remember her bad temper, smoking, etc.

Yes, we can. And all that didn't do her any good. But it didn't seem
to affect her common sense or logic.


> It is obviously a practice of double standards which is such vogue
> now, to deny all accusations against HPB as a slander campaign and
> believe all accusations against CWL.

It is. But it is somewhere else.


> So it is only logical that CWL's reputation was also ruined.

Either he ruined it himself, or those boys' and his own confessions
about their upbringing under his tender guidance were false and the
World Teacher affair never happened.


> Yet there's no any proofs to H. Roerich's statement, so why should
> we believe her more than AAB.

I agree with this. That's why I'm trying to find out why she made that
statement.


> And we know for sure that H.Roerich was definitely hostile to the
> most prominent theosophists of her time.

And so was AAB. So what? I'm searching for facts. Like that photo of
Laden La you sent me. Since I've read a lot of books written by
H.Roerich and found very little difficulty to reconcile them with
Theosophy, as I know it from HPB's writings, and with Nature I can
perceive with my own senses, I have enough reasons to investigate her
statements about historical figures and events, until they are proved
to be false. I don't think she ever lied in those factual statements.
And I don't think they can be explained away with simple personal
hostility.


> Also I remind you that she (to be more correct, her "control")
> approved only one book by CWL, "The Inner life", the most
> controversial of all, for he speaks there about the life on Mars!

That's funny indeed. But it was not an approval, it was a kind of
pointing at the least evil out of many. Apparently his other books she
knew of were even worse... :)

She claimed to have seen that "control" in flesh in London in 1920 and
in Himalayas when they travelled over Tibet a few years later. Again,
I don't have any reason to suspect her lying. Of course, she may have
been deluded, but, as I already said, her writings are reasonable
enough to think otherwise.


> In "Letters on occult meditation" there are some good advises how to
> avoid some common errors in meditation, which in extreme cases may
> cause brain damage.

Fine, but I asked for something not to be found in earlier
theosophical works.


> As for contradictions, there are different opinions.

Sure. We all have our own wisdom to judge. Unfortunately (or maybe, on
the contrary, fortunately) I haven't read all AAB books and hence
can't make a thorough comparison of them with HPB's, but what I have
read about 7 rays is quite enough for me to drop all this stuff
altogether until, perhaps, I happen to be on an uninhabited island
given nothing else to do but to read it.

The most conspicuous contradiction between HPB et al and AAB I've seen
so far is given in "The Pseudo-Occultism of Mrs. A. Bailey" By Alice
Leighton Cleather and Basil Crump. BTW, have you seen a refutation of
this particular point by any of AAB's followers? Here it is:

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For Mrs. Bailey's further detailed explanations as to the sex relationshipsof "Initiated Masters" parallel columns will again supply the necessary contrast:

Initiation, Human and Solar, Chap. XIX, pp. 204-5-6. Referring to the abovequotation from p. 204.

Mrs. Bailey continues:

"This might be interpreted by the superficial reader as an injunction to the celibate life, and the pledging of the applicant to abstain from all physical manifestation of the sex pulse. This is not so. Many initiates have attained their objective when duly and wisely participating in the marriage relation ...."The physical plane is as much a form of divine expression as any of the higher planes... that it may be advisable at certain stages for aman to perfect control along any particular line through a temporary abstention is not to be denied, but that . . . will be succeeded by stages when - the control having been gained - the man demonstrates perfectly through the medium of the physical body, the attributes of divinity, and every center will be normally and wisely used, and thus race purposes furthered."

"Initiates and Masters, in many cases, marry, and normally perform their duties as husbands. wives, and householders, but all is controlled and regulated by purpose and intention, and none is carried away by passion or desire. In the perfect man upon the physical plane, all the centers are under complete control. . . the spiritual will of the divine inner God is the main factor.... The true initiate would be known by his wise and sanctified normality.... by the example he sets to his environing associates of spiritual living and moral rectitude, coupled with the discipline of his own life...."(Italics mine. - A.L.C.)

>From "The qualifications expected in a Chela" (Theosophist, Vol.. IV, Supplement, July, 1883, p. 10)

"2. Absolute mental and physical purity."

"Remember, he who is not as pure as a young child (had) better leave chelaship alone." (The Master K.H.)

The Master M... to the Esoteric Students: "Bodily purity every Adept takes precautions to keep."

"The Self of matter and the SELF of Spirit can never meet. One of the twainmust disappear; there is no place for both."

"Guard thou the lower lest it soil the Higher." Voice of the Silence.

There are not in the West half a-dozen among the fervent hundreds who call themselves 'Occultists' who have even an approximately correct idea of the nature of the Science they seek to master. With a few exception, they are all on the highway to Sorcery." (H.P. Blavatsky in Occultism v. The Occult Arts.)

"No Adept ever marries." - H.P. Blavatsky.

"It is true that the married man cannot be an Adept." (The master K.H. in The Mahatma Letters, p. 17.

Ibid. (p. 272 by Master M): - "The Dugpas and the Gelugpas are not fightingin Tibet alone: see their vile work in England among the 'Occultists' and 'Seers'! Hear your acquaintance - preaching, like a true 'Hierophant of theleft-hand,' the marriage of the 'soul with the spirit' and getting the true definitions topsy-turvy, seek to prove that every practicing Hierophant must at least be spiritually married if for some reason he cannot do so physically, there being otherwise a great danger of Adulteration of God and Devil! I tell you the Shammars (Dugpas, Or Black Magicians) are there already,and their pernicious work is everywhere in our way."
----------------------------------------------------------------------
http://users.aol.com/uniwldarts/uniworld.artisans.guild/HPBvsAB.html