Theos-Talk Archives (January 1994 Message tl00061)

Jerry H-E,

I see you have been spending a lot of time posting various replies,
in your ususal thorough, scholarly fashion. Nancy raised a good
point in her message about how it is hard to keep up with all that
is going on. I have to admit that I have also not been able to
keep pace very well with your messages lately. I probably spend
two hours on an average weekday (and 0 on the weekend) working
with theos-l (reading other postings, replying etc.) ... that
amounts to 10 hrs/week. I do not know how long I'll be able
to keep up this level of effort but I have been enjoying the
exchange of opinions regarding AAB/HPB immensely and will do my
best to not sacrifice this work in favor of some other. On the
other hand, I also will be willing to work at a slackened pace
if necessary due to the circumstances of your study or some
other reason.

Lots of ideas/thoughts have occurred to me which I have been
wanting to share with you. BTW, can have a phone number where
I can reach you (if it was on the 'list of books', I'll look it
up; if it is not there, then pl send it to me with the next
batch of books if not before that). You had mentioned sometime
back that you have learnt from our discussion as well. That is
very good to hear, because I was beginning to wonder what you
are getting out of this; you seem to be so much more
knowledgeable about theosophical literature/history than I am.

I am writing this message without specific regard to anyone of
your previous messages and would like to present my ideas in the
form of a list below (that way I can close this message as soon
as my 2 hours for the day are up or when it is time to go home!)

(a)Regarding Leadbeater and Besant, I did read the very erudite
monograph by Ray Morgan sometime back (I do not have it in front
of me though), with which I agreed more or less entirely.
But you have to excuse me for not remembering any conclusion to
the effect that EVERYTHING THAT THEY WROTE is wrong. Is that
really what that monograph implies?  If that is the case, I beg
to differ. I think that certainly Leadbeater and Besant made
mistakes but not all that they wrote is wrong. It is my belief
that Leadbeater and Besant were Not initiates but sincere disciples,
possibly much more advanced than I am (and most of our fellow-
netters on theos-l). They reach an audience that HPB or others
do not reach and I see definite value in the work that they
published (even if some of it is untrue). Who is to prove that
Leadbeater's famous pictures of the Chakras is
wrong?  Guaranteed that he did not exactly stick to the HPB line
on many topics (as shown by Ray), but he was doing his best to
outline or translate what he got from 'his higher self' or the
Masters. Some of it he did translate correctly, and I'd like
you to clarify if you are recommending a 'total boycott' of
Leadbeater and Besant.

My previous message on the Astral body was written in a hurry
and I half expected the comments that you made on it. Bailey
teaches (at least this is my understanding) that at each birth,
the ego first appropriates the mental body, then the astral
(or emotional), then the etheric and then dense physical body.
The physical body is patterned after the astral body in this
sense. Also, AAB says that the ideas gleamed from the higher
self have to traverse through the concrete mind, from there to
the astral body and from there to the physical. The ideas get
garbled many times in passing through the astral body. Did
HPB not talk about the Kama-Mansic body in a similar way?  It
is my impression that HPB has used 'astral' in the sense of
the 'astral light' meaning everything above the physical
(i.e.mental, emotional, etheric). Please do shed more light on
this if possible.

(b)I am so glad that we are going to try to read TCF together.
I'll go over the first 33 pages, as you have suggested and
comment in particular about what I see as questions or
discrepancies with what else I know. Perhaps sometime next week.

BTW, I should mention that there are at least three different
study groups in the Dallas area that study in a group format the
Bailey teachings. From time to time I have attended sessions at
each one of these groups, sometimes with Rita and Shashi. A lot
of ideas are generated during group study, one can learn a lot
more, a lot more quickly this way. Once someone pointed out to
me that DK has deliberately inserted lies in the blue books to
make us to think for ourselves. I sort of dismissed this
suggestion at the time but I wonder if there is something to it.
This same person (as genuine a Bailey student as you can get) also
felt that in the discussion of Sex in the Bailey books, it seems
that AAB's own special upbringing may have 'corrupted' or
influenced the text of DK's ideas. For the record, I read the
'Compilation on Sex', but did not find anything that I could not
agree with i.e. everything seemed ok to me. May be it is because
of my background (some ancient Indian literature and many modern
sages preach abstinence, even within marriage, except for the
specific object of providing 'bodies' for souls waiting to be
incarnated) versus this other person's (typical American, I am
afraid, with the ususal exposure to the sex and violence culture
of the TV).

I got interrupted and need to close this message now. Will try
to pick up the 'thread' of my thoughts tommorrow hopefully.

Arvind