Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: Theos-World Pseudo-theosophy of AAB & CWL

Expand Messages
  • Jerry Hejka-Ekins
    Nicholas, The Neo-theosophy had its roots in two places that I know of: 1) In Subba Row’s Esoteric Teachings to CWL and others and, 2) through the London
    Message 1 of 7 , Jan 6, 2003
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Nicholas,

      The Neo-theosophy had its roots in two places that I know of: 1) In
      Subba Row’s Esoteric Teachings to CWL and others and, 2) through the
      London Lodge Inner Group, which CWL was a member, and where Sinnett and
      company were getting Mahatmic teachings through a medium. These
      teachings began to become main stream in the Theosophical Journals after
      Besant’s involvement with the London Lodge and CWL beginning in 1894.
      The Maitreya teaching was originally tied to Krishnamurti, the supposed
      vehicle for the Maitreya/Christ return. Besant, in an ES talk in 1909
      or 10, presented the earliest (that I’m aware of) full description of
      what later became credited as the Bailey hierarchy—Maitreya and all.
      This was published in The Link (a London ES journal) and in the American
      EST Bulletin in 1910, I think, but no later than this. Also in January
      1912, CWL and AB were called by the Maitreya to prepare Krishnamurti and
      Jinarajadasa for their second initiation. The boys were taken to
      Taormina in Sicily for the training. Much of the material in Masters
      and the Path comes from these early events. The account of this 1912
      initiation begins on pg. 298 in my 2nd edition (1927). You might also
      look at Joseph Ross’ book on the Taormina stay. There is a lot of
      material made public there for the first time.

      According to her Autobiography, (If my memory serves me correctly)
      Bailey’s first contact with Theosophy was through the Pacific Grove
      Lodge around 1912. She moved to Krotona Hollywood a year or two
      thereafter where she joined the ES, and gained access to the material
      concerning the inner government and initiations, which was only
      circulated through the ES at that time. However, you will find hints of
      it in the Theosophist. Bailey states in her Autobiography that she
      began taking psychic dictation from “the Tibetan” around 1917 or 18 and
      left Krotona shortly afterwards (I’m recalling from her Autobiography
      that I read years ago, so my memory may not exactly match her dates, but
      they should be close). Initiation Human and Solar was published in
      1922—her first book—I think. I read it some years ago, and found it
      very faithful to the ES teachings as they were presented from 1910-1918.


      I hope this is helpful.

      --j





      -----Original Message-----
      From: Nick Weeks [mailto:nick.weeks@...]
      Sent: Monday, January 06, 2003 11:00 AM
      To: Theos Talk
      Subject: Theos-World Pseudo-theosophy of AAB & CWL

      Having less time now than when I wrote Theosophy's Shadow some years
      ago, I still will try, from time to time, to respond to some criticisms
      of the article.

      I am not sure what Lindsay means by "It" being the "other way around".
      He is apparently just quoting the Fibetan via Bailey about CWL's use of
      the first Fibetan book Initiation. It is irrelevant whether Leadbeater
      borrowed from that book in 1925 or not. My point was that the return of
      Maitreya and other elements of pseudo-theosophy were brought forth from
      the fount of CWL during the Esoteric Section teachings around 1910(?).
      (Hopefully Tillett or Hejka-Ekins or some other historian will nail down
      this timeframe more accurately) This was long before Bailey started
      channelling in 1918. The Adyar TS, during AAB's early membership, was
      steeped in CWL's teachings, so it is obvious that the words AAB's "books
      are rooted in the pseudo-theosophy pioneered by CW Leadbeater" are
      accurate.

      Below is a snippet from
      http://www.esotericastrologer.org/AABHPBHR.htm#TSNW which has Lindsay's
      comments on Theosophy's Shadow.

      I will eventually wade through his remarks and respond to some of them.
      Perhaps I will plump up the article with another rewrite someday.
      Fare Thee Well,

      Nicholas

      ************
      NW:
      Her books are rooted in the pseudo-theosophy pioneered by CW Leadbeater.
      For example, one of CWL's favorite revelations was the return to earth
      of "Maitreya" the Christ. Bailey accepted this fantasy.
      Phillip Lindsay (PL): It is actually the other way around. Leadbeater
      used some of AAB's original material from books such as Intiation, Human
      and Solar and took the credit for it in his book The Masters and the
      Path.

      **********


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




      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
      http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Nick Weeks
      Yes indeed Jerry, this is very helpful and should clarify the history of who was influenced vs. who was the influencer. The former was Alice Bailey; the
      Message 2 of 7 , Jan 7, 2003
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        Yes indeed Jerry, this is very helpful and should clarify the history of who
        was influenced vs. who was the influencer. The former was Alice Bailey; the
        latter Leadbeater & Besant, who were the creators (along with Sinnett's
        medium, whose name I forget) of pseudo-theosophy.

        Joseph Ross's book is KROTONA OF OLD HOLLYWOOD, 1866-1913. I think he was
        planning another volume, but do not know if it was done.
        Nicholas
        *****************

        From: "Jerry Hejka-Ekins" <jjhe@...>

        Nicholas,

        The Neo-theosophy had its roots in two places that I know of: 1) In
        Subba Row's Esoteric Teachings to CWL and others and, 2) through the
        London Lodge Inner Group, which CWL was a member, and where Sinnett and
        company were getting Mahatmic teachings through a medium. These
        teachings began to become main stream in the Theosophical Journals after
        Besant's involvement with the London Lodge and CWL beginning in 1894.
        The Maitreya teaching was originally tied to Krishnamurti, the supposed
        vehicle for the Maitreya/Christ return. Besant, in an ES talk in 1909
        or 10, presented the earliest (that I'm aware of) full description of
        what later became credited as the Bailey hierarchy-Maitreya and all.
        This was published in The Link (a London ES journal) and in the American
        EST Bulletin in 1910, I think, but no later than this. Also in January
        1912, CWL and AB were called by the Maitreya to prepare Krishnamurti and
        Jinarajadasa for their second initiation. The boys were taken to
        Taormina in Sicily for the training. Much of the material in Masters
        and the Path comes from these early events. The account of this 1912
        initiation begins on pg. 298 in my 2nd edition (1927). You might also
        look at Joseph Ross' book on the Taormina stay. There is a lot of
        material made public there for the first time.

        According to her Autobiography, (If my memory serves me correctly)
        Bailey's first contact with Theosophy was through the Pacific Grove
        Lodge around 1912. She moved to Krotona Hollywood a year or two
        thereafter where she joined the ES, and gained access to the material
        concerning the inner government and initiations, which was only
        circulated through the ES at that time. However, you will find hints of
        it in the Theosophist. Bailey states in her Autobiography that she
        began taking psychic dictation from "the Tibetan" around 1917 or 18 and
        left Krotona shortly afterwards (I'm recalling from her Autobiography
        that I read years ago, so my memory may not exactly match her dates, but
        they should be close). Initiation Human and Solar was published in
        1922-her first book-I think. I read it some years ago, and found it
        very faithful to the ES teachings as they were presented from 1910-1918.


        I hope this is helpful.

        --j
      • Jerry Hejka-Ekins
        I apologize for not being as precise as I ought to have been. I had in mind a later book Joseph Ross published in 2000. The exact citation in MLA style is:
        Message 3 of 7 , Jan 7, 2003
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          I apologize for not being as precise as I ought to have been. I had in
          mind a later book Joseph Ross published in 2000. The exact citation in
          MLA style is:

          Ross, Joseph E. Krishnamurti The Taormina Seclusion - 1912.
          n.p.:[author], 2000. 257 pp. ISBN 0-7388-5198-1

          I believe that there are far more unpublished source documents on this
          event in this book than all of the hitherto published documents put
          together.

          --j


          -----Original Message-----
          From: Nick Weeks [mailto:nick.weeks@...]
          Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 9:33 AM
          To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: Re: Theos-World Pseudo-theosophy of AAB & CWL

          Joseph Ross's book is KROTONA OF OLD HOLLYWOOD, 1866-1913. I think he
          was
          planning another volume, but do not know if it was done.
          Nicholas
        • Jeremy Condick
          ... From: Nick Weeks To: Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 5:32 PM Subject: Re: Theos-World
          Message 4 of 7 , Jan 7, 2003
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            ----- Original Message -----
            From: "Nick Weeks" <nick.weeks@...>
            To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
            Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 5:32 PM
            Subject: Re: Theos-World Pseudo-theosophy of AAB & CWL


            > Yes indeed Jerry, this is very helpful and should clarify the history of
            who
            > was influenced vs. who was the influencer. The former was Alice Bailey;
            the
            > latter Leadbeater & Besant, who were the creators (along with Sinnett's
            > medium, whose name I forget) of pseudo-theosophy.

            > According to her Autobiography, (If my memory serves me correctly)
            > Bailey's first contact with Theosophy was through the Pacific Grove
            > Lodge around 1912. She moved to Krotona Hollywood a year or two
            > thereafter where she joined the ES, and gained access to the material
            > concerning the inner government and initiations, which was only
            > circulated through the ES at that time. However, you will find hints of
            > it in the Theosophist. Bailey states in her Autobiography that she
            > began taking psychic dictation from "the Tibetan" around 1917 or 18 and
            > left Krotona shortly afterwards (I'm recalling from her Autobiography
            > that I read years ago, so my memory may not exactly match her dates, but
            > they should be close). Initiation Human and Solar was published in
            > 1922-her first book-I think. I read it some years ago, and found it
            > very faithful to the ES teachings as they were presented from 1910-1918.
            >
            >
            > I hope this is helpful.
            >
            > --j



            Yes indeed it would be very faithful to the Esoteric Section teachings, for
            it was given to AAB by a Master Of The Wisdom, the Master DK.

            The book Initiation Human and Solar was "Dedicated with reverence and
            gratitude to the Master KH".

            Kindest Regards
            Jeremy
          • Nick Weeks
            ... [......] Your second sentence must be rhetorical, since you continue writing as if your assumption about pseudo-theosophy is correct. It is not.
            Message 5 of 7 , Jan 11, 2003
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              Lindsay:

              > In response to Niklas's letter and that of Jerry Hejka-Ekins, there
              > are a couple of points that come up. Correct me if I am wrong,
              > but 'pseudo-theosophy' is anything that is not the source material
              > of HPB's? If this is the case, I can see how diehard 'theosophists'
              > would regard anyone else as an interloper.

              [......]

              Your second sentence must be rhetorical, since you continue writing as if your
              assumption about pseudo-theosophy is correct. It is not. Pseudo-theosophy is
              whatever teaching professes to be based on, and share the KEY or BASIC tenets
              of HPB & her Gurus, but does not. Therefore Crosbie, Wadia, Tingley, Purucker
              for example, do share these keynotes of original Theosophy and to my mind are
              real Theosophists. Absolute fidelity to each and every teaching that HPB gave
              is not needed. But one must have a notion of which teachings are basic &
              vital and which are not.

              I did slog through your "criticisms" of the "Theosophy's Shadow" article.
              Your main argument seems to be that Weeks is confused, prejudiced, spiritually
              obtuse and just plain out of step. If you had addressed more of my points
              with reason, rather than just huff about my lack of understanding, I might
              have said more than the 3 brief Theos-talk postings I sent.

              As I suggested in the article, regurgitation of the Fibetan's writings in
              place of rational responses may satisfy your urge to defend, but it does not
              address the main question. If your DK is same as HPB's DK why are his MAIN
              teachings opposed to the real Brothers teachings? If your DK is presenting
              the next stage in a series of new age teachings, why were they given out
              around 1910? That date is only 20 years after HPB's death. Do you really
              think the Brothers would have HPB write 25 or so volumes of material only to
              have it replaced in 20 years by stuff & nonsense that opposes and distorts her
              BASIC Theosophy? Do you think human evolution zips along at such a frantic
              pace?

              My questions in the paragraph above are rhetorical, so please feel free to
              ignore responding to them -- please.

              However if there are other devotees of AAB or CWL online, read "Theosophy's
              Shadow" and compare HPB vs. AAB and carefully, slowly, think it out for your
              self.
            • Nick Weeks
              From: Morten Nymann Olesen ... No Morten. The question was not about presenting ES material to the public; but that was what
              Message 6 of 7 , Jan 12, 2003
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                From: "Morten Nymann Olesen" <global-theosophy@...>

                > 1.
                > About the CWL issue:
                > The agrument, that Bailey copied papers from the Esoteric Section of Adyar
                > Theosophy, is NOT valid at all,
                > as long as those papers are not presented to the public.
                > It is just like saying: I am right, and you are wrong, - well I know that
                > and I won't really tell you why !
                > Let us face it CWL was no angel, - maybe rather a Priest creating a Phallic
                > problems...
                > Do you (N. Weeks) agree ? >:-)

                No Morten. The question was not about presenting ES material to the public;
                but that was what both Leadbeater & Bailey did. Perhaps they had
                "permission" -- I do not know or care. Lindsay had suggested that because the
                Fibetan (I call that creature such, because a fib is a lie) said Leadbeater
                copied Bailey it must be true. With Jerry HE help it is clear that CWL's
                teachings were the basis of AAB's -- not the contrary.

                > 2.
                > A core problem with the teachings of Bailey - I have already made a remark
                > on. Zack Lansdowne havn't answered my posting on that here at Theos-Talk
                > yet. Maybe P. Lindsay will do that ?
                > My view on Bailey: Why Baileys books are a problem today if followed -
                > dead-letter,
                > as many pro-Baileys unfortunately do !!!
                > (On racism and Alice A. Bailey: Esoteric Psychology 1, p. 167):
                > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/10028
                > Do you agree ?

                Probably, but I have not read your post yet.

                > 3.
                > And if N. Weeks just would read my article more carefully - he would
                > discover, that maybe both he and P. Lindsay are right in many of their
                > assumptions. It all depends on the level of thinking or the mode of
                > thinking.
                > What do you think ?

                I will have to re-read your article sometime.

                > 4.
                > When asked about my view, I have today, i.e. TODAY, to say, that I disagree
                > so very much with the Alice A. Bailey teachings in being promoted as they
                > are, - i.e. as they are in total. And - especially - promoting them alone
                > without any REAL emphasis and regard for the teachings of H. P. Blavatsky is
                > not good. And this is sadly so very commen today among a lot of pro-Bailey
                > groups.

                Yes, very important Morten. Not only is their little regard, but little study
                and most importantly any study is done always through the lens of AAB's
                interpretation of HPB's original Theosophy. HPB in the Bowen pamphlet notes
                suggested to never study THE SECRET DOCTRINE through the commentary of
                another, but always approach it with your own consciousness.

                [......]

                > What do you think about this ?

                In my own case I would have probably never used AAB as a "stepping stone" to
                anything rational, because it is not on a real path to anywhere. Thanks to
                personal contacts with those who were in HPB's lineage my mind was very slowly
                jogged out of its stupification, until I finally began to think for my self.

                As for "new" teachings versus "old", I would remind you that the while the
                popularity of Buddhism now is "new", the Dharma is very "old". So I prefer
                and recommend the old paths because they have been proven to lead somewhere
                virtuous and benficial to all beings.

                > 5.
                > My view on the Jew issue: The Jew issue is also, represented badly by
                > Blavatsky herself - when viewed year 2003,(The Secret Doctrine. vol. 2, p.
                > 471). And the Mahatma Letters are not great either, on races and racism, due
                > to their age. So there I will keep my mouth shut, - if not the 7 keys are
                > used. But let us remember, that the 7 keys and the different modes of
                > reading - are - in use while reading the teachings of Blavatsky. The same
                > seems to count when talking about the teachings of Bailey, at least to a
                > certain degree. But Baileys teachings are not very helpfull at the moment -
                > i.e. year 2003 - in our present informations society.
                > Do you agree ?
                > Do N. Weeks agree ?

                I am afraid I just do not indulge much in "group think" - never have. I just
                see individuals in context with their varied influences.

                [.......]

                > 8.
                > A big problem is that Alice A. Bailey groups are closely involved with
                > politics - even at a very high level, - as high as The United Nations.
                > In Denmark, where I live, a Bailey-inspired group (the international author
                > Asger Lorentsen are involved) a at present collecting votes, so to run for
                > the Danish parliment, and maybe later The European Union. The political
                > party has the name "Visionspartiet" - translates "The Visions Party".
                > What is going on in USA ?

                No knowledge on my part.
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.