[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: theos-talk A challenge !!!

Oct 12, 2010 02:09 AM
by Duane Carpenter

Dear Sufilight
You will take the challenge âIFâ your conditions are met. You have already laid 
out all the reasons you will not research this group. Perfect way out. They do 
not conform to all of your preconceived ideas about what an esoteric school 
should be so I cannot join. 

Do you not see the impossible impasse you or others may put this opportunity 
HPB would be the first to admit advanced esoteric work is not done by simply 
studying theories and memorizing facts but by an immersion through meditation 
into our higher and more spiritual selves. ÂMorya Federation although based on 
the works of AAB and HPB and demanding intellectual clarity is a school of 
meditation first and foremost.
You are given an opportunity to grow spiritually and what you do is find all the 
reasons it could not possibly be a legitimate esoteric school. Paradoxically you 
will never know will you?. It is said in the Pythagorean esoteric school of the 
past we would have to remain silent for at least a year or two when we first 
entered. Why is that? Perhaps because we might arrive at this school so full of 
ourselves and what we know we might be passing judgment, categorizing and 
telling everybody how thing should be when we should be humbling ourselves to 
That may be one of the reason few people join esoteric schools because all 
potential candidates have all kinds of preconceived ideas about what it is 
suppose to be. 

If you joined would you not have all of your questions answered??
Best Duane

From: M. Sufilight <>
Sent: Mon, October 11, 2010 3:05:22 PM
Subject: Re: theos-talk A challenge !!!

Dear Duane, AAB-followers and friends

My views are:

I do hope, that you do not mind me calling you all my friends?

Duane wrote:
"I challenge any readers here to suspend their preconceived ideas or disbelief 
and join the Moray Federation of Esoteric Schools for just 6 months or a year 
before they start passing out judgments about teachings they either do not 
understand or cannot comprehend. This school teahces both AAB and HPB."

M. Sufilight says:
I will take such a challenge at any time, if is possible for me, provided I am 
given some answers first to the below questions, and if those answers are proper 
and truthful.
If I, who is not a Seeker of beliefs but of Knowledge, should suspend my 
(appearntly) by you claimed "preconceived ideas or disbelief" I will first have 
to ask you some questions. I ask them with a kind heart, and I do hope that they 
are not being misunderstodd by any of the Alice A. Bailey followers.

Here they are...

*** 1 ***
I ASK all Alice A. Bailey followers:
- Why should one join a group, which do not clearly tell me why or whether it 
has deviated from the Original Programe of the Theosophical Society as it was 
given by H. P. Blavatsky, Morya and KH.? 

- Or tell me why why or whether it has deviated from the programe of the 
Esoteric Section as it was given by H. P. Blavatsky?

The Original Programe of The theosophical Society - a few excerpts:
"In order to leave no room for equivocation, the members of the T.S. have to be 
reminded of the origin of the Society in 1875. Sent to the U.S. of America in 
1873 for the purpose of organizing a group of workers on a psychic plane, two 
years later the writer received orders from her Master and Teacher to form the 
nucleus of a regular Society whose objects were broadly stated as follows:
1. Universal Brotherhood;
2. No distinction to be made by the member between races, creeds, or social 
positions, but every member had to be judged and dealt by on his personal 
3. To study the philosophies of the Eastâthose of India chiefly, presenting them 
gradually to the public in various works that would interpret exoteric religions 
in the light of esoteric teachings;
4. To oppose materialism and theological dogmatism in every possible way, by 
demonstrating the existence of occult forces unknown to science, in nature, and 
the presence of psychic and spiritual powers in man"......."But if the two 
Founders were not told what they had to do, they were distinctly instructed 
about what they should never do, what they had to avoid, and what the Society 
should never become. Church organizations, Christian and Spiritual sects were 
shown as the future contrasts to our Society."
(The Original Programe: BCW, Vol. VII, p. 145-173)

The Theosophist - January 1891"
1. Any Fellow who shall in any way attempt to involve the Society In political 
disputes shall be immediately expelled.

2. No Fellow, Officer, or Council of the Theosophical Society, or of any Section 
or Branch thereof, shall promulgate or maintain any doctrinas being that 
advanced, or advocated by the Society. "

I ASK all Alice A. Bailey followers:
Now you tell me why we should not call all Alice A. Bailey groups and even your 
wellmeaning Morya group a Sect - using doctrinas - when they use "Bible-study" 
and political entanglements at the United Nations and an Messiah-craze?

Blavatsky was send to USA by Master KH and Morya's own chiefs (and not only by 
themselves) to form a group, which among its aims was to be a - contrast - to 
the Christian Churches. And not a group promoting "invocative" prayers to make a 
very physical external MALE Messiah-craze - excitingly awaited - walk about in 
the physical.

Referring to Madame Blavatsky, Master K.H. wrote: 
"After nearly a century of fruitless search, our Chiefs had to avail themselves 
of the only opportunity to send out a European body upon European soil to serve 
as a connecting link between that country and our own." 

( The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett, Letter No. 26, Master K.H.'s 
Confidential Memo about Old Lady [HPB]. Received Simla, Autumn, 1881. ) 

*** 2 ***
I ASK all Alice A. Bailey followers:
Why should one join a group, which do not clearly tell me why or whether it has 
deviated from the Original Programe of the Esoteric Section as it was given by 
H. P. Blavatsky?

H. P. Blavatsky's Esoteric Section has today been turned into a sham by many 
Alice A. Bailey groups who claim to follow her footsteps. 

Many of them claim to be following these Blavatsky footsteps while they - very 
very carefully - avoid forwarding the view that THEY have real contact with a 
Master. They demand huges sums of money being spend on membership fee's at their 
Esoteric Groups - this DESPITE - that H. P. Blavatsky's Esoteric Section never 
required any money being paid to her.

Other groups even claim that THEY have a continous contact with a real Master, 
while they also demand huges sums of money being spend on membership fee's at 
their Esoteric Groups - this DESPITE - that H. P. Blavatsky's Esoteric Section 
never required any money being paid to her.

Why should we join such a openly proclaimed Esoteric Section, who gives 
membership to almost anyone?
What kind of esoteric agenda - so-called by itself - is it good for?

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

*** 3 ***

I ASK all Alice A. Bailey followers:
Why should we trust a man (the so-called D.K. or else Alice A. Bailey) who take 
most of the credit for dictating the Secret Doctrine to H. P. Blavatsky, when we 
find many letters opposing this view by Master KH, Master Morya, H. P. 
Blavatsky, Constance Watchmeister, HÃbbe Schleiden and perhaps others?

Alice A. Bailey's guide named D.K. forwards his claims several times in the AAB 
books. Here are the books and pages where Alice A. Bailey's guide named D.K (or 
AAB her self) claims that he was behind the Secret Doctrine:
- Alice A. Bailey - "Initiation - Human and Solar", p. 58
- Alice A. Bailey - "The Rays and Initiations", page 255
- Alice A. Bailey - "The Externalisation of the Hierarchy", page 685
- Alice A. Bailey - "Esoteric Healing", p. 521, 536(?), og 565

And not a single word of credit to Morya and KH about their involvement with the 
We can only wonder what agenda motivates such a promotion and why we aught to 
take such an author seriously at all?

HPB wrote: "For the true, the genuine âMasters,â whose real names have, 
fortunately, never been given out, cannot be created and killed at the beck and 
call of the sweet will of any âopportunist,â whether inside or outside of the 
T.S." (BCW, Vol. XI, p. 294 - year 1889) 

Some words documenting that it was Blavatsky, Morya and KH who was behind the 
Secret Doctrine:
The below link and its mahatma letters show me and others that it was not Alice 
A. Bailey's guide named D. K. who as claimed wrote large parts of the Secret 
Doctrine. It was Master KH and Morya. Blavatsky even write more than one time 
about it to Olcott, why should she be lying about this? And why should the 
Masters be lying about it? And why should Constance Watchmeister be telling an 
untruth about Blavatsky's words about her readings of the Akasha and that her 
Master was guiding her?

The Writing of The Secret Doctrine (Remember: read the footnotes as well)

Reminiscences of H. P. Blavatsky (Chapter 5)

"Another witness to such a phenomenon (during H.P.B's stay in WÃrzburg) was Dr 
HÃbbe-Schleiden who writes, I saw a good deal of the well-known blue K.H. 
handwriting as corrections and annotations on her manuscript as well as in books 
that lay occasionally on her desk. And I noticed this principally in the morning 
before she had commenced to work. I slept on the couch in her study after she 
had withdrawn for the night and the couch stood only a few feet from her desk. I 
remember well my astonishment one morning when I got up to find a great many 
pages of foolscap covered with that blue pencil handwriting lying on her own 
manuscript, at her place on her desk. How these pages got there I do not know, 
but I did not see them before I went to sleep, and no person had been bodily in 
the room during the night, for I am a light sleeper. [Reminiscences, 112/3]"
See also Reminiscences of H. P. Blavatsky (p. 110-113)
A letter received by Wachtmeister from Schleiden
Or with a bit more info and extra notes by Boris de Zirkoff "The Secret 
Doctrine", p. 13-16. (Search it here:

Here we have Blavatsky 's words about D.K.'s lack of grammar:
"Letter LIV
[Sent from Wurzburg. 1885 (?1886)

I have a number of diagrams with reference to the evolution of the septenary 
globes and Cosmogony of Esoteric Buddhism, made by Djual Khool and Sarma for me 
to explain to you, and Hume during the first year of the Simla teaching; and 
several of them I had copied by a Parsee, a good draughtsman of the School of 
Arts at Bombay, who could not do them well -- and then, I copied them from D. 
Kh.'s with Tibetan signs and names, translating them and doing it the best I 
could -- since I did not want to give the originals out to a stranger and you 
could not have understood them -- and gave them to Olcott to be copied and one 
of them -- the one I sent to Hume I believe -- was copied by Coulomb who is a 
very good draughtsman -- too good unfortunately [cf. Letter XLVI, page 304 of 
this volume. -- EDS.] I remember how well he copied the few lines in English, a 
remark by D. K. on the cosmogony -- in a way that I was astonished: it was a 
perfect copy of D. K.'s writing, grammatical mistakes, and all. Neither Olcott, 
nor I, nor Damodar, ever made a secret of such copies. . . . [This letter was 
unsigned, but it is in H. P. B.'s handwriting. -- EDS.]"

- - -
Some comments:
I know that my questions in the above might sound harsh. But they are wellmeant.
And I really do care about those, who are Seekers after Truth. That is a most 
noble thing. But, I like them to avoid telling me, that I MUST absolutely follow 
their Primary "AAB Bible-study" with political entanglements - instead of an 
open inquiring into religious-philosophies of all kinds. - And - if they clam to 
invite me into what they call an Esoteric Section, they aught to at least pledge 
people (and show what that pledge is all about) and show, that they as teachers 
know their way around in life - like H. P. Blavatsky did. And openly beforehand 
without demanding any fee's what so ever!

Show us this Morya groups Constitution ( If it 
is not online its website, we can only ask ourselves why? And if it promotes the 
AAB Messiah-craze and political entanglements, we also ask ourselves why, 
because this is the same as promoting a dogma and cutting the political flowers 
from the surface of the soil instead of tearing them out by the roots. And as a 
theosophist I will not agree upon this.

- - -
Blavatsky wrote about why the TS carefully avoided Politics:
"ENQUIRER. Do you take any part in politics? 

THEOSOPHIST. As a Society, we carefully avoid them, for the reasons given below. 
To seek to achieve political reforms before we have effected a reform in human 
nature, is like putting new wine into old bottles. Make men feel and recognise 
in their innermost hearts what is their real, true duty to all men, and every 
old abuse of power, every iniquitous law in the national policy, based on human, 
social or political selfishness, will disappear of itself. Foolish is the 
gardener who seeks to weed his flower-bed of poisonous plants by cutting them 
off from the surface of the soil, instead of tearing them out by the roots. No 
lasting political reform can be ever achieved with the same selfish men at the 
head of affairs as of old. " (The Key to Theosophy, p. 231)

And I guess the Master looked at TS Adyar (and its Besant politics) and the AAB 
groups (United Nations entanglements) ...and...expressed a friendly sigh....

Any comments?
(No comments is also an answer.)

M. Sufilight

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Duane Carpenter 
Sent: Saturday, October 09, 2010 11:08 PM
Subject: theos-talk A challenge !!!

Hi martin


From: Martin <>
Sent: Sat, October 9, 2010 7:33:53 AM
Subject: Re: theos-talk Re: Aurobindo's madman?

Hi Martin
Thank you for sharing your views.
What AAB did by her own admission was to include Esoteric Christianity into 
Hindu and Buddhist esoteric traditions. If Theosophy is the esoteric core of ALL 

religions why would she not want to include Christianity. Theosophist need to 
stop comparing Annie Besant and Charles Leadbeaters superficial analyses of 
Christianity and read what AAB has to say. If you are saying here martin that 
AAB failed to bring new insights into an old dogmatic Christianity that may not 
be correct.
Alice bailey teachings are growing exponentially in leaps and bounds as many of 
the earlier contributors to Theosophy are declining. HPB will always be one of 
the greatest contributors to esoteric wisdom in my experience but not 
necessarily the only one.
We sometimes confuse the heart of Theosophy which is inquiry into the spiritual 
with loving or hating the messengers. 

This is why Some Theosophists despise AAB because they see her as a threat to 
their established dogmas and cherished beliefs. The paradox that no one has yet 
explained to me successfully is why do so many AAB students love HPB and study 
her alongside AAB. But those who have studied only HPB make premature judgments 
and condemnation of AAB without an honest study of her material.?
I challenge any readers here to suspend their preconceived ideas or disbelief 
and join the Moray Federation of Esoteric Schools for just 6 months or a year 
before they start passing out judgments about teachings they either do not 
understand or cannot comprehend. This school teahces both AAB and HPB.
Best Duane

"What is it about Bailey in particular that creates such a paranoid atmosphere 
throughout the TS?"
Lol, it is all about tactics...Bailey and those behind her wanted to synthesize 
Christianity into Theosophy which is not possible...
At the same time they wanted to bring the Old Wisdom more apprehensible for all 
people in which they also failed...
We have now entered a time where all religion will destroy itself from within to 

find they were all derived from the One Religion...check my site 

...sorry you will need Google to translate some of the text there...

From: kpauljohnson <>
Sent: Sat, October 9, 2010 1:21:34 PM
Subject: theos-talk Re: Aurobindo's madman?

This was a very contemporary article to have been written a hundred years ago! 
As for the "dethroning of popes" that still is the main thing needed IMO. But 
now in addition to an authoritarian mindset on behalf of the current leadership, 

the popes of 100 years ago are untouchable, beyond criticism, still enthroned 
even though long dead. 

I would think that Morten and I agree about the relative value of the writings 
of Leadbeater and Bailey compared to those of HPB. I'd be equally disinclined 
to spend time on either one, but if others in a group wanted to study them would 

not object, just skip those classes. But the difference in the TS is that 
nothing negative can ever said about the former, nothing positive about the 
latter, without making The Powers That Be extremely uncomfortable. What is it 
about Bailey in particular that creates such a paranoid atmosphere throughout 
the TS?

--- In, Duane Carpenter <monad_monad_monad@...> 
> Great Article Jim
> This extracted section of the article really gave important insights.
> Aurobindo: Claims of Theosophy
> "If Theosophy is to survive, it must first change itself. It must learn that 
> mental rectitude to which it is now a stranger and improve its moral basis. It 

> must become clear, straightforward, rigidly self-searching, sceptical in the 
> nobler sense of the word. It must keep the Mahatmas in the background and put 
> God and Truth in the front. Its Popes must dethrone themselves and enthrone the 
> intellectual conscience of mankind. If they wish to be mystic and secret like 
> our Yogins, then they must like our Yogins assert only to the initiate and the 

> trained; but if they come out into the world to proclaim their mystic truths 
> aloud and seek power, credit and influence on the strength of their assertions, 
> then they must prove. It need not and ought not to be suddenly or by miracles; 

> but there must be a scientific development, we must be able to lay hold on the 

> rationale and watch the process of the truths they proclaim." 
> Circa 1910/12
> ________________________________
> From: jamesbergh <jamesbergh@...>
> To:
> Sent: Fri, October 8, 2010 7:12:33 PM
> Subject: theos-talk Aurobindo's madman?
> Ã 
> I was reading an article by Aurobindo, Claims of Theosophy at:
> He wrote in 1910/12: ...The only member of the Theosophical Society who could 
> give me any spiritual help I could not better by my unaided faculties, was one 

> excluded from the esoteric section because of his rare and potent experiences 
> were unintelligible to Theosophical guides... one who meddled not in 
> organizations and election cabals but lived like a madman, unmattavat."
> Could have been some other Chuck, but I wonder who this soul may have been.
> Any ideas?
> Jim
> [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]

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

[Back to Top]

Theosophy World: Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application