Theos-Talk Archives (September 2008 Message tt00048)

To all readers

Yes. Interesting words from Daniel Caldwell.

And now Alice A. Bailey's groups of followers want us all to believe, the following about D. K. 's role in the writings of The Secret Doctrine:

Alice A. Bailey: Initiation - Human and Solar, p. 57-58:

"The Master Djwhal Khul, or the Master D. K. as he is frequently called, is another adept on the second Ray of Love-Wisdom. He is the latest of the adepts taking initiation, having taken the fifth initiation in 1875, and is "therefore occupying the same body in which he took the initiation, most of the other Masters having taken the fifth initiation whilst occupying earlier vehicles. His body is not a young one, and he is a Tibetan. He is very devoted to the Master K. H. and occupies a little house not far distant from the larger one of the Master, and from his willingness to serve and to do anything that has to be done, he has been called "the Messenger of the Masters." He is profoundly learned, and knows more about the rays and planetary Hierarchies of the solar system than anyone else in the ranks of the Masters. He works with those who heal, and cooperates unknown and unseen with the seekers after truth in the world's great laboratories, with all who definitely aim at the healing and solacing of the world, and with the great philanthropic world movements [58] such as the Red Cross. He occupies himself with various pupils of different Masters who can profit by his instruction, and within the last ten years has relieved both the Master M. and the Master K. H. of a good deal of their teaching work, taking over from them for certain stated times some of their pupils and disciples. He works largely, too, with certain groups of the devas of the ethers, who are the healing devas, and who thus collaborate with him in the work of healing some of the physical ills of humanity. He it was who dictated a large part of that momentous book The Secret Doctrine, and who showed to H. P. Blavatsky many of the pictures, and gave her much of the data that is to be found in that book." (http://nimrodgroup.org/AAB/ )

- - - - - - - -

Compare the above with the following Mahatma Letters:
http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/invit-sd/invsd-4.htm

A relevant excerpt countering Alice A. Bailey's views follows:

"Today, a century after the publication of The Secret Doctrine, other egos are creating a new world. The teachings they call forth for the next century will be in answer to their karma and the karma of their times. If HPB's writings have produced any effect, it may be found in the deeper spiritual yearning among an ever greater number to bring about the Universal Brotherhood for which she so labored and sacrificed.


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

  The following letters regarding the "triple" authorship of The Secret Doctrine were written by the Mahatmas M and KH. These facsimile reproductions are made from originals in the Archives of the Theosophical Society, Pasadena.
Letter One is a copy made by the Mahatmas of their original messages to Dr. Hubbe-Schleiden of Germany. Upasika stands for HPB.

Side One, written in blue crayon by KH, reads:

  To Hubbe Schleiden - copy.
  I wonder if this note of mine is worthy of occupying a select spot with the documents reproduced and which of the peculiarities of the "Blavatskian" style of writing it will be found to most resemble? The present is simply to satisfy the Dr "the more proof given the less believed." Let him take my advice and not make these two documents public. It is for his own satisfaction the undersigned is happy to assure him that the Secret Doctrine when ready, will be the triple production of M \. Upasika and the Doctors most humble servant.
  S. E. C.
  K. H.
[Link to photograph of first letter, side one]


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

Side Two, written diagonally in red crayon by M and now very faint, reads:

  If this can be of any use or help to Dr. Hubbe Schleiden - though I doubt it - I the humble undersigned Fakir certify that the Secret Doctrine is dictated to Upasika partly by myself and partly by my Brother K. H.
  M\
[Link to photograph of side two, letter one. Image is enhanced for readability]


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

LETTER TWO, sent the following year by M and KH, repeats the original statement concerning the authorship of The Secret Doctrine. The portion written by KH is in blue crayon, the second half of the reverse side being written diagonally in red crayon by M. The texts read:

  The certificate given last year saying that the Secret Doctrine would be when finished the triple production of Upasika M\and myself was and is correct, although some have doubted not only the facts given in it but also the authenticity of the message in which it was contained. Copy this and also keep the copy of the aforesaid certificate. You will find them both of use on the day when you shall, as will happen without your asking, receive from the hands of the very person to whom the certificate was given, the original for the purpose of allowing you to copy it (14); and then you can verify the correctness of this presently forwarded copy. And it may then be well to indicate to those wishing to know what portions in the Secret Doctrine have been copied by the pen of Upasika into its pages, though without quotation marks, from my own manuscript and perhaps from M\ though the last is more difficult from the rarity of his know(n) writing and greater ignorance of his style. All this and more will be found necessary as time goes on but for which you are well qualified to wait.
  K. H.
  The Dr. will be in the same rut for many years. Go on and fear nothing. I am beside you when you least expect it. No, this is not my personal style - the latter in a language you could not read - Yes right, the whole age transits - Particulars not given
  M\
[Link to photograph of letter two, side one]

[Link to photograph of letter two, side two]"


http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/invit-sd/invsd-4.htm


- - - - - - -

So far I have not heard any followers of Alice A. Bailey explaining this difference of opinion between Alice A. Bailey and her D. K. master on one side and Mahatma Letters by KH and M on the other. Letters read by H. P. Blavatsky 1886, as far as we can tell.

Any one on this?
Robbins? Reigle? Zakk?


M. Sufilight

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: danielhcaldwell 
  To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2008 7:06 PM
  Subject: Theos-World Compare T. S. Row/Leadbeater explanation with Master KH's explanation


  Compare T. Subba Row's and C. W. Leadbeater's explanation with Master 
  Koot Hoomi's explanation 

  --------------------------------------
  I invite interested readers to compare the
  T. Subba Row/Leadbeater explanation about Madame Blavatsky
  with what Master Koot Hoomi wrote to Colonel Olcott
  about Madame Blavatsky.

  In a letter dated June 14th, 1885 from Adyar, Madras,
  India, Charles Leadbeater wrote:

  "Subba Row related to us recently more concerning
  Madame's remarkable complex character than I, at
  least, had previously known; and it shows us plainly
  how foolish it would be to blame her for what in
  anyone else would be called a want of common moral
  qualities. We were right in believing that the
  original H. P. Blavatsky, who was by nature clairvoyant
  and who had some knowledge of occultism, disappeared
  from earth life some twenty years ago, and that a
  certain Adept, who in some way had failed to reach
  his goal, voluntarily took possession of her body,
  or was placed there --- partly as a punishment, in
  order to do all in his power to promulgate the truth
  through her. We likewise understood rightly that when
  engaged on other business he was frequently absent
  from this body. But now I come to a point about which
  I was completely in error. I thought that during the absence of the
  Adept, the body was in a state similar to that of Margrave in Bulwer
  Lytton's "Strange Story," only animated by its original lower
  constituents. But it seems this was not the case. At her death, all
  the usual constituents of the body left it as with that of others,
  and the present inhabitant had to supply the whole want from his own
  organisation. For this purpose two Chelas, but little versed in
  occultism, were selected to take the Adept's place when
  necessary; and as no Adept or Chela can enter into a woman's body
  during times of illness, at such times it had to be taken possession
  of by a terrible ill-tempered, ignorant old Tibet woman, in place of
  the Adept or Chelas, as she was the only female available for this
  purpose. It seems that when either of the four replaced one of the
  others, he or she had no idea of what had been said or done by the
  predecessor, and thus endless confusion occurred. This explains the
  fact that Madame so often contradicts what she had said a few hours
  previously, which fact naturally greatly excited Hodgson's
  suspicions. It likewise accounts for the fact that sometimes she
  seems to know less about occultism than we ourselves do, while at
  others she speaks with the power and authority of a Rishi. For
  months together, in consequence of her various illnesses, the
  terrible old woman alone has inhabited her almost all the time, and
  all around her have suffered from her ill-temper. Still the Adept
  maintains his connection, in the hope, as we think, to be able to
  complete his promulgation of the "secret doctrine" through her.
  Whether this poor diseased body will hold together long enough for
  this purpose no one at present can predict. Of course this true
  explanation is useless for outsiders. But I think I can give even to
  them a satisfactory explanation of Madame's contradictions
  without attributing intentional untruth to her, when I inform them
  that, as a Russian, she was prone to exaggeration, coupled with an
  unretentive memory and an excitable style of speaking; and
  especially when we consider that English is not her mother tongue
  ... and therefore she often makes mistakes. Poor old lady! her life
  has truly been a wonderful one, and who can say what will still come
  of it!'
  Quoted from:
  http://blavatskyarchives.com/anoncomplex.htm

  In a letter received August 22, 1888, Master Koot Hoomi wrote to 
  Colonel Henry Olcott as follows on H.P. Blavatsky:

  "...we employ agents -- the best available. Of these for the past
  thirty years the chief has been the personality known as H. P. B. to
  the world (but otherwise to us). Imperfect and very troublesome, no
  doubt, she proves to some, nevertheless, there is no likelihood of
  our finding a better one for years to come -- and your theosophists
  should be made to understand it....

  ...Her fidelity to our work being constant, and her sufferings
  having come upon her thro' it, neither I nor either of my Brother
  associates will desert or supplant her....

  ...this you must tell to all: -- With occult matters she has
  everything to do. We have not abandoned her; she is not 'given over
  to chelas.' She is our direct agent....

  I have also noted, your thoughts about the 'Secret Doctrine.' Be
  assured that what she has not annotated from scientific and other
  works, we have given or suggested to her. Every mistake or erroneous
  notion, corrected and explained by her from the works of other
  theosophists was corrected by me, or under my instruction. . . .
  K.H."

  Quoted from: Letters from the Masters of the Wisdom, First Series,
  Letter 19, 5th edition.

  See also my essay titled:

  "Bear Witness!": Who Was the Real H.P.B.?
  http://blavatskyarchives.com/whitelotus2000.htm

  Daniel
  http://hpb.cc



   

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]