Jun 28, 1996 11:34 AM
by alexis dolgorukii
At 01:36 AM 6/28/96 -0400, you wrote:
>* Forwarded by Macnev Uri
>* From : Kay Ziatz
>Subject: Postings on CWL Controversy
>For: alexis dolgorukii <email@example.com>
>a> so-called "9th Initiation" he says "Even I have never encountered such a
>a> being"...what does that say about his pretensions?
> Maybe... But there are some letters by K.H. to CWL (if they
>aren't humbug), so CWL might know K.H. personally (in those
>letters K.H. writes that karma of priest "caste" is very hard
>and warns CWL that he could fail.) Masters like M. & K.H. have
>6th (or 7th) initiation, as i've read somewhere.
Konstantine: What I was talking about is concentrated in the phrase "Even
I", who, or what did this man imagine himself to be? As I investigate CWL I
am coming to believe that he was not a CONSCIOUS fraud, but was insensibly
imagining things that had no real validity except to him. This probably had
to do with his involvement in the German OTO and in some of their
ritualistic activities. As to "M" and "K.H.". It is my blelief that Yelena
Blavatskaya had, among her adept associates two Indian Potentates who were
known as "M" (He was Chandragupta das Maurya, Maharajah of Benares and
Varanassi) and "K.H." (he was Ranbir Singh, Maharajah of Jammu and Kashmir),
they were both Adepts as was Yelena herself and many of her other associates
such as Tuitit Bey, Serapis Bey, and Hilarion Smerdis (those are not their
real names of course). But she was associated with other adepts as well,
Garibaldi, Mazzini, and the Count di Cavour were the leaders of the italian
Revolutionary Movement and she was very closely connected with them, and
they too were adeptii.
> It should be noted, too, that those numbers are too "oldfa-
>shioned" - only 3-rd initiation in our classification is re-
>ally 1-st. 1st & 2nd are rather disciple's level, as ABB wri-
>tes. It's because in prevoius epoques body control was impor-
>tant, and hatha-yoga was main yoga, so total physical control
>was an object of 1-st initiation. So you shouldn't be frighte-
>ned by huge numbers like 9 - it's only 7 ;)
As to "initiations" all they are are adjustments in the oscillation rate of
the sine curves in the particle carrier waves that form the force fields
that individuate an apparently physical body. I don't believe in them as the
kind of thing Leadbeater and associates taught.
> "Right" & "Left" paths split after 2-nd, so by this reason
>3-rd should be regarded as really first, too.
>a> also have a problem believing in ("ex-communists").
> If we accept reincarnation, all of us are ex-communists, or
>ex-inquisitores, ex-cannibales, etc. If a man can change his
>opinion in a new life, why can't he in the same?
Well once again I have to say that based upon my own experience, I do not
believe in Reincarnation" as usually presented. I believe in it in a way,
but not as any kind of PERSONAL continuation. Based on what I'm seeing going
on in Russia today, I am beginning to wonder what we had there communists or
Opportunists? I think you must be aware of why I am personally so prejudiced
against Bolsheviks, they murdered almost my entire family in 1919. And I
have spent almost my whole life in anonymity for fear they'd kill me.
>bf> For example, I believe Alexis has said something to the effect
>bf> that he believes HPB wrote most if not all of the Mahatma Let-
>bf> ters. I have no idea what Alexis has based this conclusion on
But Alexis does, One: I am a psychic too, and I know how she did it, and
two: If you compare the letters with her usual writing they are very much
the same. It's a matter of style and phrasing. Now I don't for a moment
think that the letters weren't channeled (or at least some of them) But
mostly it was just Yelena doing her work and the work of her order.
> But much worse - HBP didn't stopped then.
>After that she wrote "letters on occult meditation" to A.Bailey,
She DID???? I thought "Letters on Occult Meditation" were written by Djwal
Kul (The Tibetan)! And Nicholas Roerich's letters purported to be from "M"
but cake through his wife.
>lot of letters to E. Roerich and Letters of alive dead to E. Bar-
>ker. To be honest, I never heard of E. Barker.
She was a very productive writer, indeed ;)
Well she was a very productive person.
>a> Yelena Blavatskaya was, as I see her, an enthusiastic iconoclast, and I
>a> admire her immensely for being so.
> Krishnamurti was even more. So there's a progress ;)
And I am worse than either of them,,so there's more progress.
>b> against the negatives. To me, it is obvious that both CWL and AB has done
>b> A LOT of good. It is also quite obvious that they made serious mistakes.
> They were like N. Hruschov. Do you understand?
Oh yes, I understand what you mean. I don't entirely disagree either. I
think that they'd have done a great deal more good were they genuine and not
>W/best regards, Konstantin Zaitzev 2:5020/360.4 Fidonet
>P.S. Because you're russian, i inform you about web site with
>lot of theosophical literature in russian:
>I think it's only place of that kind (and may close down soon!!!)
Konstantin: I thank you, but while I speak 7 languages, Russian is
unfortunately NOT one of them. Who could foresee the fall of the Soviet
union in 1990? I thought never to see it in this body. I asked my
Grandfather (who spoke 14 languages, as he served in the imperial Diplomatic
Corps and The Imperial Army) to teach me Russian and he said "What for"
you'll never get to use it! This is something I feel very badly about.
Actually despite the Russian name I am only one quarter Russian, one quarter
Magyar, and the rest is French, English, Scottish, and Irish.
>Address for personal replies:
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application