Theos-Talk Archives (December 2008 Message tt00419)

My views are:


Yes.
It is strange how silent all the Alice A. Bailey members at Theos-talk always are.
And I know, that some of the members here are or at least have been Alice A. Bailey followers. Maybe they are former members now, I am not sure.

Maybe we should name them and encourage them to come forward and explain their stance?
Do any of you also have some names of Theos-talk members former ones who are followers og Alice A. Bailey?

I wonder if Lindsay and Kenneth still are here?
David Reigle is a member of Alice A. Bailey groups. And Zachary?



M. Sufilight

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Joseph P. Fulton 
  To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:32 PM
  Subject: Re: Theos-World Questions about ABailey group.


  Morten, I would have to agree with your later assertion. The Bailey 
  folk, as do most "revealed" religions already feel that they have the 
  truth, period. The TS, on the other hand, was cobbled together by HPB 
  as primarily an investigatory group. A perusal of the first five 
  years of the Theosophist magazine reveals that distinction pretty 
  clearly. It was the only format that allowed her to shift gears when 
  necessary to accommodate the changing tides of circumstances, such as 
  the situation with Dayanand Saraswati.

  I find it funny that Bailey started off in the Boston Lodge as a 
  "Blavatsky fundamentalist" who revolted against her perceptions of the 
  excesses of AB & CWL. How she got into bhoot-dak mode one really has 
  to wonder. Stylistically, she's much closer to Leadbeater than HPB, 
  although Leadbeater at least adhered to the form of the comparative.

  Joe

  --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Morten Nymann Olesen" <global-
  theosophy@...> wrote:
  >
  > Dear friends and Joseph 
  > 
  > My views are:
  > 
  > Joseph wrote:
  > "There is a fundamental difference in the way that HPB and AAB 
  > wrote. The origin of the difference actually lies in the Objectives 
  > of the TS. "
  > 
  > M. Sufilight asks:
  > I cannot help wondering, what the difference in "objectives" 
  actually is?
  > 
  > Are both groups not in search after the truth or are you saying that 
  the Alice A. Bailey groups have decided already what the truth is? Or 
  is it the other way around?
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > M. Sufilight
  > 
  > 
  > ----- Original Message ----- 
  > From: Joseph P. Fulton 
  > To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
  > Sent: Monday, December 29, 2008 11:33 PM
  > Subject: Re: Theos-World Questions about ABailey group.
  > 
  > 
  > There is a fundamental difference in the way that HPB and AAB 
  > wrote. The origin of the difference actually lies in the 
  Objectives 
  > of the TS. Isis and the SD take the reader out to various ancient 
  > writings, current scientific publications (for that day) and into 
  > various philosophical traditions in order to make her points. This 
  > has the effect of causing the reader to look up the sources on 
  their 
  > own (if available) or digging deeper into whatever tradition they 
  > come from. There is not the blind assertion and dogmatism so often 
  > relied upon in Bailey's writings.
  > 
  > For a further examination of the issue, see: 
  > 
  > http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/baileyal.htm
  > 
  > One of the early hallmarks of the Theosophical movement was to 
  take 
  > all comers, regardless of belief. Rather than getting shunned or 
  > kicked out of the TS, an Alice Bailey transported back into the 
  early 
  > 1880's would have found herself having to defend her proclamations 
  on 
  > their own merits, not only to HPB, but also to the likes of Thomas 
  > Edison, Dyanand Saraswati and T. Subba Row. She would have become 
  > just another bhoot-dak (Olds, Maitland, Holloway, etc.) using 
  names 
  > and concepts foreign to the personages who she flaunted about so 
  > freely and not the so-called "continuation" of the HPB/Mahatma 
  > Letters tradition. Anyone who can read Letter #10, then reads 
  Bailey 
  > really has to ask themselves, "is this the same teaching?".
  > 
  > Another angle, though not previously mentioned, is if Paul 
  Johnson's 
  > writings on the Masters is true, then all of Bailey's metaphysical 
  > claims go out the window. The "Masters", from this point of view 
  are 
  > a couple of Indians who corresponded with HPB and, if true, then 
  the 
  > esoteric bogeymen cease to exist. Frankly, I'm much more inclined 
  to 
  > accept Johnson's interpretation than AAB's anytime. At least his 
  > writings are based on historical evidence and not some mayavic 
  psuedo-
  > Christian/Eastern fantasy.
  > 
  > I would have much more respect for the Bailey folk if they just 
  stood 
  > on the merit of what they are trying to do for world peace, and 
  > chucked all of the metaphysical psychobabble.
  > 
  > As a final thought, nobody in this movement ever took the 1900 
  Letter 
  > to Besant very seriously, did they? If they did, Bailey wouldn't 
  > even be an issue.
  > 
  > Joe Fulton
  > 
  > --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "christinaleestemaker" 
  > <christinaleestemaker@> wrote:
  > >
  > > Because HPB wrote for other public and used too much history.
  > > Christina
  > > 
  > > 
  > > 
  > > 
  > > 
  > > 
  > > 
  > > 
  > > 
  > > 
  > > -- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Morten Nymann Olesen" 
  <global-
  > > theosophy@> wrote:
  > > >
  > > > Dear Christina
  > > > 
  > > > My views are:
  > > > 
  > > > 
  > > > Christina wrote:
  > > > "Than I think Alice A Bailey has different way in teaching , 
  more 
  > > to 
  > > > the point."
  > > > 
  > > > M. Sufilight:
  > > > May I politely ask: - In what manner do you find H. P. 
  Blavatsky 
  > > not being to the point compared with Alice A. Bailey? 
  > > > 
  > > > 
  > > > 
  > > > 
  > > > 
  > > > M. Sufilight
  > > > 
  > > > 
  > > > 
  > > > ----- Original Message ----- 
  > > > From: christinaleestemaker 
  > > > To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
  > > > Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2008 12:14 PM
  > > > Subject: Theos-World Questions about ABailey group.
  > > > 
  > > > 
  > > > They are political in this case : round 2000 they give all the 
  > > books 
  > > > free to download on internet and later in this millenium 
  > totally 
  > > not 
  > > > one.
  > > > While Theosophical literature was not able on internet during 
  a 
  > > lot 
  > > > of years and now TS; especially America gives a lot for free.
  > > > So who is better?
  > > > There can be made enough money on lectures, seminars and 
  > > courses.And 
  > > > not to forget people stay buying the books.Especially in 
  > > > courses.Nobody goes with his laptop into course.
  > > > And I think it is very important to keep as much as books of 
  > > > references online too.
  > > > I have for example Collected writitng on CD, but easier if I 
  > need 
  > > > some references to look at the internet version.Also it is 
  good 
  > > to 
  > > > have the CD near it, for what now is on-line can be away next 
  > > year.
  > > > 
  > > > Than I think Alice A Bailey has different way in teaching , 
  > more 
  > > to 
  > > > the point.Not whole stories round a subject,where people need 
  > to 
  > > fly 
  > > > over.
  > > > But that is my opinion and experiences.
  > > > Christina
  > > > 
  > > > --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Morten Nymann Olesen" 
  > <global-
  > > > theosophy@> wrote:
  > > > >
  > > > > Dear friends
  > > > > 
  > > > > 
  > > > > My vieus are:
  > > > > 
  > > > > 
  > > > > 
  > > > > Is the Alice A. Bailey groups and LUCIS TRUST really non-
  > > political?
  > > > > AND is this coinciding with H. P. Blavatsky's and H. S. 
  > > Olcott's 
  > > > teachings?
  > > > > 
  > > > > 
  > > > > 1.
  > > > > At the front page on the LUCIS TRUST hompage - The Alice A. 
  > > Bailey 
  > > > groups main website if any we find that the claim to be a non-
  > > > political group:
  > > > > 
  > > > > LUCIS TRUST
  > > > > The worldwide activities of the Lucis Trust, founded by 
  Alice 
  > > and 
  > > > Foster Bailey, are dedicated to establishing right human 
  > > relations.
  > > > > 
  > > > > The activities of the Lucis Trust promote the education of 
  > the 
  > > > human mind towards recognition and practice of the spiritual 
  > > > principles and values upon which a stable and interdependent 
  > > world 
  > > > society may be based. The Lucis Trust is non-political and 
  non-
  > > > sectarian. It sponsors no special creed or dogma. 
  > > > > http://www.lucistrust.org/
  > > > > 
  > > > > 
  > > > > 2.
  > > > > Seven years after the birth of the U.N., a book was 
  published 
  > > by 
  > > > the theosophist and founder of the Lucis Trust, Alice Bailey, 
  > > > claiming that,
  > > > > 
  > > > > "Evidence of the growth of the human intellect along the 
  > needed 
  > > > receptive lines [for the preparation of the New Age] can be 
  > seen 
  > > in 
  > > > the "planning" of various nations and in the efforts of the 
  > > United 
  > > > Nations to formulate a world plan... From the very start of 
  > this 
  > > un-
  > > > foldment, three occult factors have governed the development 
  of 
  > > all 
  > > > these plans".
  > > > > 
  > > > > [Alice B. Bailey, Discipleship in the New Age (Lucis Press, 
  > > > 1955), Vol.II, p.35.]
  > > > > 
  > > > > 
  > > > > Although she did not spell out clearly the identity of these 
  > > > 'three occult factors', she did reveal to her students that,
  > > > > 
  > > > > "Within the United Nations is the germ and seed of a great 
  > > > international and meditating, reflective group - a group of 
  > > thinking 
  > > > and informed men and women in whose hands lies the destiny of 
  > > > humanity. This is largely under the control of many fourth ray 
  > > > disciples, if you could but realize it, and their point of 
  > > meditative 
  > > > focus is the intuitional or buddhic plane - the plane upon 
  > which 
  > > all 
  > > > hierarchical activity is today to be found".
  > > > > 
  > > > > [Ibid., p.220.]
  > > > > 
  > > > > To this end, the Lucis Trust (formerly known as the Lucifer 
  > > Trust), 
  > > > under the leadership of Foster and Alice Bailey, started a 
  > group 
  > > > called 'World Goodwill' - an official Non-Governmental 
  > > Organization 
  > > > within the United Nations. The stated aim of this group is "to 
  > > > cooperate in the world of preparation for the reappearance of 
  > the 
  > > > Christ" [One Earth, the magazine of the Findhorn Foundation, 
  > > October/
  > > > November 1986, Vol. 6, Issue 6, p.24.] 
  > > > > 
  > > > > 
  > > > > - - - 
  > > > > 
  > > > > Now, I would really like to know, what your answer is?
  > > > > If not, I ask why not?
  > > > > 
  > > > > 
  > > > > 
  > > > > 
  > > > > M. Sufilight
  > > > > 
  > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
  > > > >
  > > > 
  > > > 
  > > > 
  > > > 
  > > > 
  > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
  > > >
  > >
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
  >



   

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