Jan 18, 1994 01:02 PM
by Arvind Kumar
Let me start this message by making a somewhat 'outrageous'
offer to everyone on this network who may be interested in
joining Jerry H-E and me in the study and analysis of AAB's
TCF: I offer to pay for the cost of the book ('A treatise on
Cosmic Fire') to anyone who may have even a passing interest
in this book! I am only doing this because (a) I have known
several people who were prevented from study of these types
of books due to lack of money, (b) I see a lot of energy
being generated in various discussions on theos-l which
could perhaps be better channelled into one specific 'main'
study or project, (c) at this time I can afford to pay for
a few books (and incur good 'karma'!), tommorrow - who knows,
perhaps I'll be wishing for someone to loan or buy me a book!!
I was rather 'touched' by Eldon's message on the Earthquake
yesterday. Are all of you, our fellow-netters on theos-l
who reside in that area, ok? Is there anything that I can
do for you, brothers (and sisters)? Please e-mail directly
to my address (email@example.com) any queries or
comments in regard to both of the above offers.
Eldon, it is heartening to know that we may get connected
with these persons that are on a BBS in Canada. I know of a
BBS run by the Seven Ray University which deals with Bailey
books primarily but also theosophy in general, including
HPB. Their numbers are: Voice 718 380 0805, modem:
718 380 5750 Jerome Salem, SYSOP. I have never connected
with them (primarily because our phones at home are very
busy anyways), but they probably could answer several of
Jerry H-E's questions related to Bailey. If there is a way
to connect these BBS's into INTERNET economically, I'd like
to know and suggest it to Jerome Salem (and a few others as
well that run BBSs).
Brenda, why do you feel 'pained' by the discussion on Bailey/
Blavtsky/Leadbeater? Please do elaborate and give fuller
vent to your feelings (that is perhaps the best way to
'transcend' them). You write very comprehensive messages,
and are probably much more knowledgeable than I am. But we
all need to get control over our 'personalities', not only
you and me but also we have to recognize that even highly
developed disciples like Besant and Leadbeater had their
own 'personality' shortcomings, no matter how evolved
their egoes may have been. So in the spirit of learning
more about them and benefiting from it, I do not mind at all
when Jerry H-E (or anyone else for that matter) writes what
he knows as negative traits of the personality of these great
'sons of men'. Let us join together in thought, learn from
each other without criticizing anyone, let us learn to
relinquish the 'sense of responsibility' for the actions of
others, let us all work in a spirit of cooperation!
Jerry S., thanks for your piece on Lucid Dreaming. My
understanding was that we were not to
interfere or try to 'control our circumstance' but rather
face upto what we come 'face to face with', without
trying to postpone 'karma'. But thanks for the reference
on HPB (Jerry H-E, are the 'transactions of the Blavatsky
Lodge' in one of the books that you have already sent me?)
Now, let me turn my attention to the first of Jerry H-E's
unanswered messages of the past few days.
> O.K., so your solution is that the H.P.B.'s "Astral Body"
> (i.e. Linga Sarira) is the same of Leadbeater's Etheric Double.
> I'am interested in hearing your arguments for this match.
Frankly, I do not know much about Leadbeater's Etheric double, so
my answer is based on what I know of Bailey's use of the term
'etheric' body. And I have not had the time to research fully
(in fact there is a blue book on 'Telepathy and the Etheric
Vehicle' which I have not referenced so far which may shed
some more light on the etheric body). Your quote that HPB's
"Astral Body" or Linga Sharira is
"...the inert vehicle or form on which the body is moulded;
the vehicle of Life. It is dissipated very shortly after the
disintegration of the body." (S.D. II:593).
This is exactly the definition of the etheric in the Bailey books
that I have read. Moreover, your definition of HPB's "Kama-Rupa"
"...the principle of animal desire, which burns fiercely
during life in matter, resulting in satiety; it is inseparable
from animal existence." (S.D. II:593).
This is exactly the definition of the Astral body in Bailey
books! I agree with you that there is a lot of difficulty
involved in establishing a correlation between the various
terminologies for the vehicles, but I feel quite comfortable
with Bailey's terminology (but am afraid have not gotten used
to HPB's terms; in fact I am quite confused after Brenda's
extensive quotes). And this brings me to another important
point in our discussion on AAB-HPB comparison, which I'll
try to document now.
The Bailey/Blavatsky teachings can be grouped into two classes:
(a) those that pertain to spiritual practice, and (b)those
that pertain to areas of the invisible universe that we as
human beings know very little about in our everyday waking
life. In reading these books, I look primarily for (a), and
I venture to say that there is no disagreement as regards (a)
between HPB and AAB. Regarding (b), these must be
regarded as 'speculations' by most of us until we also become
adepts and are able to verify these for ourselves. As far as
I am concerned, the discussion of the various vehicles or
bodies falls into the (b) category, and I'd like to suggest
that we not get hung up on it. Let us concentrate on (a)
although I have definite interest in seeking your clarifications/
comments on teachings of the type (b) also.
> Yes H.P.B. occasionally uses the term "Causal Body"--it is
> the reincarnating Ego "which is held responsible for all the sins
> committed through and in, every new body or personality--the
> evanescent masks which hide the true individual through the long
> series of rebirths" (Key to Theosophy p. 136). You account of
> AAB's explanation of the "Causal Body," as far as you go with it,
> doesn't seem to contradict my understanding of H.P.B.'s concept.
That is clean, thank heavens!
> The words "soul" and "ego" have special meanings with
> H.P.B., and probably with A.A.B. as well. We'll get to all of
> that soon enough.
> Yes Leadbeater's Chakra diagram has become standard. I
> often see his individual chakra illustrations reproduced from
> time to time in new age literature. Further, Leadbeater's
> CHAKRAS has continuously been the Quest Book best seller ever
> since it came out. However, these facts are not evidence to me
> of the correctness or incorrectness of his book.
You are right; this one falls into (b) category so I am not
hung up on it.
> I was only stating that some major themes in A.A.B.'s
> teachings are to be found in E.S. material distributed and taught
> to pledged members long before they appeared in her books. It
> was not intended to be a "charge" against her, but only a simple
> observation, based upon a comparison of some of A.A.B.'s writings
> to E.S. materials. But my point concerning this, was really a
> theory, not a charge. My theory is that the E.S. was mad at her
> for making public E.S. teachings. That she did not credit the
> E.S. for the material is a point in her favor from the point of
> view of the E.S. I only suggested it as a more probable
> explanation for the anti-Bailey feeling in the E.S., than the oft
> heard statement that she was a medium of some sort. Which may be
> a red herring.
Thanks for the clarification. Were you a member of ES (otherwise
how do you know that there is a close resemblance between ES
materials and Bailey books?) Incidentally, I think that Bailey
wrote a lot more than is possibly covered by ES, so it must be
a small subset of perhaps early Bailey books that may contain info
originally made available thru ES. Have you yourself been in any
'esoteric school' at all; are you aware of any other esoteric schools
other than Arcane School and ES?
> I will send you a copy of the Senzar Pamphlet and Paul's
> book, and also the Endersby material over the weekend. You're
> right, the phone number is not on the Invoice. It is (209) 669-
Thanks a lot.
> Re. the "loops" you want to close:
> (a) I'm glad to hear that you feel that H.P.B.'s and A.A.B.'s use
> of the term "psychology" match. On that point, I have no opinion
> until I have read more A.A.B. But whether or not they use the
> term in the same way is not evidence to me that TCF is the
> "psychological key." In fact, until we find the prediction that
> Foster Bailey mentions, I'm not convinced that a "psychological
> key" was ever predicted. Isn't there anyone in the Arcane school
> who can find this reference? It seems to me that anyone really
> familiar with A.A.B.'s writing would be able to tell you where to
> find it right off the top of their heads. Or doesn't anyone pay
> attention to references?
I have a couple of points in this regard: (i) I do not think that
HPB has spoken explicitly about the seven keys anywhere; has
she? It is my opinion that the seven keys just refer to the
seven levels of meaning attached to SD. It is said that all
of the Bailey books can also be interpreted at seven levels. So
by 'psychological key' Bailey means the interpretation of the
SD in the context of 'esoteric psychology'. This may be
a good time for me to mention the two ways in which a student
of Bailey (see Zachary F. Lansdowne,'Rules for Spiritual
Initiation'115 pages, published by Samuel Wiser Inc.) has
interpreted a very small part of the book 'Initiation, Human
and Solar' by Bailey. Zachary (who has a PhD in Engineering
from Stanford and whom I met at a seminar last year) has
interpreted Bailey's symbolic rules for spiritual initiation
in an outer way in terms of 'character building' and in an
inner way in terms of 'stages in the meditation process'. This
is another one of those books that have had a rather profound
effect on me! But the point is that there are seven ways in
which the archaic SD can be interpreted, Bailey has shown one
of those ways, at least that is what I understand from Foster's
comment. (ii) I asked Sarah McKechnie of Lucis for this, but then
backed away from asking her to 'research' it for me when she made
it clear that she did not know where the reference may be, if it
exists in written format at all. Sarah and her colleagues at Lucis
Trust are in my opinion modern day saints. They get paid paltry
salaries but have more than enough work cut out for them in terms
of publishing Beacon, replying AS/Triangles/World Goodwill
correspondence etc. etc. So that is where that stands! Perhaps
you can send a query to the BBS that Jerome runs for 7 Ray U and
ask him for it (otherwise I might give it a shot one day).
> (b) I'll send you more oddities on Leadbeater later. I'm a
> little short of time right now.
> (c) If you are benefiting from A.A.B.'s spiritual practices, you
> have my concurrence that A.A.B. is doing some good. I'm aware of
> people's complaints that H.P.B. does not "preach a particular way
> of life or spiritual practice." They are correct--She does not
> in the popular sense of the word. The spiritual practices she
> teaches are Jnana yoga and Karma yoga. The first forces one to
> think for one's self, and the second forces one to think of
> others besides one's self. Most people I have talked to who are
> turned off by Blavatsky had missed the point completely. Yes,
> there are inner group instructions. If you want them, I will
> send them also. By the way, Are you interested in Rajagopal
> Sloss' Biography of Krishnamurti; LIFE IN THE SHADOW? I have
> copies of the British edition in cloth. $25.00.
I definitely 'd like to purchase HPB's inner group instructions.
Can you tell us a little about K's biography and why it may be
a good reading for us?
> O.K., now for commentary on the first 33 pp. of TCF:
> p.vi: TCF is the "major and far reaching portion of the
> thirty year teachings..." Sounds like this is the Magnum Opus--
> Bailey's S.D.
Perhaps. My impression is that TCF is the least read of all of
the Bailey books because of the perceived difficulty in
understanding it. I love several other Bailey books which
contain more or less unamalgamated instructions for practice e.g.
Discipleship in New Age etc. I'll tell you more about TCF as we
continue the study (in terms of why I like it etc.)
> p vii: Description of the psychic relationship between AAB
> and the Tibetan. Nothing of use here--as it is unverifiable.
> 2nd para: describes problems with Krotona--more fully
> described in her Autobiography. "...and that the teaching should
> go public over her signature" is an interesting turn of phrase,
> as it suggests that the teaching pre-existed in a private form.
> An allusion to the E.S. instructions perhaps.
> 3rd para. "The entire platform upon which esoteric teaching
> stands...has been liberated from...mystery, glamour, claim making
> and impracticality..." sound here like a description of the E.S.,
> who was guilty of all of these things during her time.
> p. viii: Here A.A.B. has removed the book from scholastic
> inquiry and criticism, and that its worth is to be judged upon
> its results. How is this to be measured?
Perhaps individually by each student while 'keeping the mind
steady in the light', listening to the Voice of Silence!
> 2nd para: Master/chela relationship are changed. Now there
> is group training. Is this claim verifiable?
Perhaps it can be seen in the numerous groups in existence today
in all cities for the purpose of 'spiritual study and practice'.
> 3rd. para: Here is the reference to the prophesy. O.K.,
> finally we have something to go on for verification. But where
> is the reference?
Do not know.
> p ix: Author of the statement is unverifiable. Anyone could
> have written it. This is an interesting change, because H.P.B.'s
> Mahatmas didn't publish statements in books.
This is editorial, I think. The whole book is supposedly written
by DK, so the extract is very relevant in my opinion as it sets
the stage for 'how to deal with what is to come in the rest
of the book'.
> 2nd para: Here the Tibetan gives no assurance of the
> correctness of this book, but leaves the reader to judge the book
> by its effect.
> p xii: Says that the book was written to be employed for a
> generation. That means until 1935. The S.D. was written to be
> employed until 2000.
I do not know how you arrived at 1935. What is the number of
years for a generation? Most of the Bailey material is written
as a 'second instalment' of esoteric teaching, which is meant for
the period from the time the books were written, up until early
> 2nd para etc.: The five purposes of the book show that it
> deals primarily with consciousness, but is also a cosmology etc.
> xiii: Fourth purpose is curious: "to give practical
> information anent those focal points of energy which are found in
> the etheric bodies of the solar Logos..." Her definition of
> "solar Logos" should be interesting.
AAB's use of 'Solar Logos' refers to the stupendous Being
in whom all that 'lives and moves and has its being in our
Solar System' resides, so the body of the Solar Logos contains
the Planetary Logos in it; in fact the seven 'sacred planets' I
believe are the Seven Chakras in the body of this great Being.
> xiv: Under things that should be kept in mind: b.: the
> slippage of words in conveying ideas is true in all
> communication. Is this to suggest that she is shrugging her
> responsibility to communicate? In other words, if something is
> mis-understood, the reader alone is responsible?
You are playing on her words my friend! AAB has indicated again
and again that it is extremely difficult to put into the English
language (in any language but esp. the English language) that
which can only be seen or experienced on other planes.
> xv: "No book gains anything from the dogmatic claims or
> declarations as the authoritative value of its source of
> inspiration." They why have the Tibetan write a statement in
> this book? Why credit it to the Tibetan at all?
Credit had to be given to the Tibetan because there is no way
that AAB herself could have known the material covered in this
book. The whole book is based on Tibetan's teaching; the extract
just sets the stage and is very relevant in my opinion.
> Introductory Postulates:
> No comment obviously. We just have to see what she does
> with them.
> These must be her own stanzas, as they are not in the S.D.
> Presumably these are supposed to be further stanzas not given in
> the S.D. Is that right? Well, who is to say they are or not?
> For whatever it is worth, they read like parodies to me. They
> remind me of Francia LaDue's stanzas. But who am I to judge?
Who is Francis LaDue? It is true that the stanzas are difficult
to understand at first glance. Will you not say the same of the
stanzas in HPB's SD, were it not for the commentary? All I know
is that persons who meditate on these stanzas seem to find
meaning in them (in a manner similar to what is in Mr. Lansdowne's
book mentioned before).
> For the next time, I will read to page 68, and make comments
> if I have any. As we get into the book, there should be more of
> substance to comment upon.
Best Wishes to all/Arvind
> Consecration to the service of the soul is, in the last analysis,
> the service of Humanity and of the Hierarchy. Such is the sequence.
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application