57451RE: theos-talk Re: the Masonic Germain, Rakoczi question
- Jan 31, 2012
> Yes, I do have contempt for Bailey. In my view it is all the effusions of the lower left-hand path type with _some_ knowledge and _some_ power to get a following, and wreck real Theosophy. Many write and quote about "brothers of the shadow," left-hand path, et. al., but sit right in the middle of it unawares (or perhaps not.) The "Left-handers" mostly are like mesmerizing used-car salesmen on the basic level, and not Darth-vadar types wearing a sign."Evidently, then, Mrs. Bailey and the "Tibetan" consider the scheme of evolution
> In case you missed it from a few weeks back, here is a link to Endersby's (a friend of Carrithers) and Cleather's critique on Bailey. There's little else I could or want to say that isn't in there.
> - jake j.
offered in the Secret Doctrine as inadequate, and offer their own in its place. Apart from
the difficulty of discovering anything "systemic" at all in Cosmic Fire, it is quite clear that the
"Tibetan" (if he is really one) is not in agreement with the Trans-Himalayan Brotherhood.
In that case one would infer from what is said in the Mahatma Letters that he may belong
to the "Red Capped Brothers of the Shadow" (see Index under Dugpas). As K.H. says (p.
322): "the opposition represents enormous vested interests, and they have enthusiastic
help from the Dugpas - in Bhutan and the Vatican!" Hence the Christian terminology that
characterizes some of their efforts in the realm of Occultism."
Alice Leighton Cleather. Basil Crump. Peking, February, 1929.
JPC: Cleather and Crump make enormous leaps of the imagination resulting in an attack on the Teachings of AAB and the Tibetan DK. This is indicated as follows "The harm attempted on my Ashram has been more easily offset, and the source of hate which it represented failed in its attempt because of its general ill repute. It has been offset by love and understanding which is not so easily the case in a first ray attack." The above may not be the attack referred to be the Tibetan DK though could well represent similar. Love and understanding are key notes here used in this critique.
Nowhere does AAB say or infer that the work of HPB is "inadequate" and this appears an invention of the writers Crump and Cleather. AAB does draw to the attention of the reader that HPB' work is preparatory and AAB' 'intermediate'. HPB states "These two volumes only constitute the work of a pioneer who has forced his way into the well-nigh impenetrable jungle of the virgin forests of the Land of the Occult. A commencement has been made..." It is also drawn to the readers attention in AAB' works that HPB herself indicates that she 'turned the first key and no further' and that in century the twentieth another disciple far better fitted will come.
"One turn of the key, and no more, was given in "Isis." Much more is explained in these volumes. In those days the writer hardly knew the language in which the work was written, and the disclosure of many things, freely spoken about now, was forbidden. In Century the Twentieth some disciple more informed, and far better fitted, may be sent by the Masters of Wisdom to give final and irrefutable proofs that there exists a Science called Gupta-Vidya." SD1 xxxviii INTRODUCTORY. HPB.
JPC: The term 'God' is presented for a western audience. It is representative of "Good" or graded logos. It is a generic term for a western audience and no more although detailed explanation of 'logi' are given so far as allowed for the second phase of the teachings. Ray two is named in sanskrit "Harikesa" yellow or golden haired being one understanding of the second ray ruling the Sun itself, and is given by HPB although this is disputed by Cleather and Crump. From their above works they say in disput "One may search in vain for Mrs. Bailey's "Ray of Love-Wisdom" in the S.D., and the references (p. 74) given to it concerning the "Love aspect of the Logos" contain nothing of the kind." One must recall that the works of AAB brought a great expansion of detail on the seven rays. HPB stated "Fohat, in his capacity of DIVINE LOVE (Eros)." This is a reference to Fohat and the seven rays in his capacity as Love-Wisdom and the second great ray breath. Harikesa is clearly the second ray of love-wisdom that Cleather and Crump have missed yet have condemned all the same. Caution is needed where condemnation to the left hand path is made.
"The names of the Seven Rays -- which are, Sushumna, Harikesa, Viswakarman, Viswatryarchas, Sannaddha, Sarvavasu and Swaraj." SD1 515.
Sushumn� (Sk.). The solar ray�the first of the seven rays. Also the name of a spinal nerve which connects the heart with the Brahmarandra, and plays a most important part in Yoga practices.
Svar�j (Sk.). The last or seventh (synthetical) ray of the seven solar rays; the same as Brahm�. These seven rays are the entire gamut of the seven occult forces (or gods) of nature, as their respective names well prove. These are: Sushumn� (the ray which transmits sunlight to the moon); Harikesha, Visvakarman, Visvatryarchas, Sannadhas, Sarv�vasu, and Svar�j. As each stands for one of the creative gods or Forces, it is easy to see how important were the functions of the sun in the eyes of antiquity, and why it was deified by the profane. Theosophical Glossary.
"A bright star dropped from the heart of Eternity; the beacon of hope on whose Seven Rays hang the Seven Worlds of Being." SD1 120.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>