[Re: from facebook] Alice Bailey and Benjamin Creme

This site has a facebook.com group. Someone asked what people think of Alice Bailey (AAB) and Benjamin Creme.

I read some of their books years ago. At first I thought Bailey had some new ideas based on Leadebeater & Besant. I only agree 49% with L&B's idea of the monad as a higher human consciousness, because I think consciousness monistically connects us and the Logos. Whether we have individual monads on the 3rd plane rather than 4th as HPB says is another matter. I do not think so, though I think L&B's idea is just an allegory (metaphor, etc.) for how the Logos can have a viewpoint about reality within it from any viewpoint--even ours--and our reality depends on the Logos. This is also because I have studied Siddha Yoga, which is Kashmir Shaivist Tantra from a rather Advaita Vedanta viewpoint ultimately.

There were a lot of interesting ideas in AAB's texts, but people have called her (and even HPB) anti-Semitic. I think she said beforehand she is not, but she may be overly critical of the Jews and Judaism. There is also the problem that she took dictation from a disembodied voice. HPB only did--or used visions--after she met the speakers in person. Some people think AAB's texts are too Anthroposophical (i.e. Christian Theosophy.) I do not know if it is just because she said 'The Master Jesus,' which is not far-fetched, but I do not see it that way: it has plenty of Hinduism. I would call it more of 'focusing less on the paganism and leaving the so-called "great religions" in Theosophy.' One can only, as AAB or maybe DK said, judge the Arcane School on its merits and what it does not focus on: or other flaws it directly implied one should judge whether it has, so I do not see dogmatism as a problem. If it is not derived from DK then that is a problem, or if it is somewhat derived from him with what people call flaws AAB has, then that is a problem that is common today and much of the corpus could be ignored.

As for Creme, his central idea, a Mahayana Buddhist one, that Maitreya will come is excellent. People say he is not interesting either because he has personal ideas (e.g. smoking and Arcane School) they disagree with, but the Dharma says anyone that expounds it gets good karma. That is even reasonable to a Theraveda person who thinks (s)he is an arhat and needs something to do (if the word for 'karma of a Buddha' is used in that tradition, or just in a sense of purifying others karma while the arhat remains here.)

The Arcane School texts are just too much for me to really give an opinion on and they sound too advanced. If I meditated once/month to DK as they say and then started doing the other things : 'White Magic rules' or whatever I thought he told me, then maybe I could give an opinion, but I am unlikely to do so. If there is another 2nd ray teacher or if Athena, Hermes (Trismegistus,) Apollo & Sibyls, Yeshua or the Marys/etc., Buddha, Krishna, Orpheus, Pythagoras, Sokrates & Plato, Amonnius & Plotinus, Akhenaton, Kung-fu-tzu & Lao-tzu, Patanjali, HPB, Bodhidharma/etc., J Krishnamurti, Mani, Vyasa, Christian Rosenkreuz, Zarathustra, Krishnamacharya, G dePurucker, Paramhamsa, Padmasambhava, Ayya Vaikundar, Abdul Baha, Mohammed, Guru Nanak, any Maharishi or Mahatma or Golden Dawn ego, the gods of my own culture, and maybe a few others accept my request to learn, then that is another matter. Then I would have to listen, and of course I must if HPB wants me to listen to DK. I do not really know much about the Mahatmas, but I guess he is one and I would automatically listen to them and make a judgement about truth. I can only learn from so many though... I suppose they are somewhat merged consciousness, but obeying all different sorts of rules is hard: but it is practically impossible enlightened egos say conflicting rules. LIstening to AAB's rules is just too much for me. Now I will comment on one I have read about.

AAB 'channled DK' saying 'meditate on me on each full moon.' Well unless he just recommended regular meditation, I think it is a pre-Mastery teaching of his or not his teaching. The moon and sun affect the tides and also our blood, etc., but the new moon apparently has similar (or maybe sometimes opposite) effects, and it is sounds more complicated than there is just some monthly cycle... maybe women's one is partly coincidence. If the new and full moon really have a similar sort of effect because it happens cyclically in different places. then there is not much special about lunar cycle especially because the sun also affects tides. Actually what happens at new and full moon is that the tide range is maximum, so I suppose so is where there is slightly more blood in the body. I just see no relation between maybe a little more in the head and full moon--it is lunar fortnightly if anything, but I do not know so much about the sun.

I think AAB, the I AM movement, and Creme all had some interesting and maybe original ideas. Some of the ideas are sort of like after Krishna, Buddha, or Yeshua died and there was much Philosophical discourse with some great ideas we lost. There was also a lot of bunk and intolerance that remains today, and bunk happened with Theosophy.

I think AAB's focus on both 'Brahman' (or Trimurtis) and 'Christos' (the same really,) the I AM movement's theoretical focus on ideas from adepts rather than aspirants, and Creme's focus on Maitreya are all better than what I have read about Theosophy's relation to WWII. Of course HPB predicted it, but Theosophy-derived 'occultism' may have been on both sides. That is what AAB implied, but she also said the term 'German accomplishment' (of WWII,) which is really pushing it for me. Some people compared Allied economics to Axis, but still.... I guess the aforementioned ideas are about all I think is reasonable in these schools of thought. Most of what AAB said and the I AM movement said was already said by HPB and even L&B. I do not think Creme is to Maitreya as the prophet speaking to Buddha's father is to Buddha, because Buddha is as to Maitreya that way. That does not mean Creme is worse as a person, and it is good he is trying to be a Bodhisattva and getting people to meditate, but after they are successful at that--even if they get enlightened and Maitreya does not come yet--they need to stop doing those vigils and start doing practical Philosophy to solve human suffering even in small instances.

I used to read Creme's site (soon after reading AAB, often,) but its news is rare. I guess I will check back in case there is some proclamation, though I think Maitreya Buddha (prophesied by Buddha Siddhartha) proclaimed by a non-Asian would be humourous... it could happen. I have only skimmed vol. 2 or 3 of Creme's main book. It is nice if he said Yeshua is incarnate, but who knows? I do not know what else is relevant... I hope it has a lot of ethics but I did not get the time to get into that book much. What do others think of him?

Views: 596

Replies are closed for this discussion.

Replies to This Discussion

Dear friends

My views are:
It might be good to know that, According to a few of my AAB insider students, it is a known fact, that the leaders of Lucis Trust are not supporting Creme's agenda as a whole.

I have written a lot about the AAB groups at various forums, but not much at this forum.
The AAB books can be profitable to some Seekers, no doubt. But in the end, they will have to confront themselves, with at least one fact or two.

a)
The AAB corpus contains almost nothing what so ever about the Middle East, its culture and religion.

b)
The AAB corpus and its present day organisation Lucis Trust are involved with politics in the United Nations.

One thing I rejected was the following Newsletter: http://www.lucistrust.org/en/media/files/wg_newsletters_pdf_files/2... - (Lucis Trust - Newslettter no. 2, year 2003)

c)
The teachings in the AAB corpus heavily down-waters any talk about the Divine within each human being, and thereby effectively kills self-reliance within the Seeker. (Have a look at H. P. Blavatsky "The Key to Theosophy", p. 70-75)

d)
The teachings in the AAB corpus heavily down-waters any talk about false dugpa Christians within the Vatican and the Jesuists mentioned by HPB.

e)
The teachings in the AAB corpus heavily promotes the arrival of the Christ in the flesh. The teachings in the AAB corpus heavily down-waters the fact that HPB spoke against the teachings of the Christos arrival in the flesh - and she in oppostion to AAB instead called it the arrival the Divine within each human.

f)
The AAB book "The Light of the Soul" or "Patanjalis Yoga Sutras" recommends The New Testament as main reading. HPB did not, and in fact she opposed this.

g)
Esoteric Psychology, vol 1., p. 167 - turns the Christian religion into a Root religion, whereas Islam is merely called a hybrid offshoot hereof with a tinge of Judaism. As if Christianity is not merely a hybrid offshoot of Judaism with a tinge of Jesuitism?

h)
The teachings in the AAB corpus heavily promotes teachings on Meditation, Mantras, Astrology etc. without openly recognising the fact that the doctrine of Atma-Vidya (Atma=Brahman etc.) and the related metaphysics ought to be learned before dabbling with magic, without a real heart of compassion. (Try H. P. Blavatsky: "Occultism Versus the Occult Arts" - http://www.katinkahesselink.net/occult.htm )

i)
The AAB book is called the Psychological Key to the Secret Doctrine written by HPB through the help from M and KH.
Yet, this book was expected to arrive no earlier than after the year 1975 according to HPB. That book would accoridng to HPB (and her masters) contain irrefutable proof on the teachings of Gupta-Vidya (the same as Atma-Vidya or Esoteric Gnosis of the Greek). The question not answered is: Where is that irrefutable proof?

j)
AAB claims that it was master DK who dictated a large part of The Secret Doctrine. Mahatma Letters to german TS Hübbe Schleiden kontradicts this. ( Here. Letter no. 1: http://home1.stofanet.dk/theos-octagon/kh-m_letter_to_hs-1a.jpg - Letter no. 2: http://home1.stofanet.dk/theos-octagon/kh-m_letter_to_hs-1b.jpg --- An article about it: http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/invit-sd/invsd-4.htm )

AAB (or DK) wrote:
"He it was who dictated a large part of that momentous book The Secret Doctrine, and who showed to H. P. Blavatsky many of the pictures, and gave her much of the data that is to be found in that book."
(Alice A. Bailey - in Initiation Human and Solar - Chapter 5, p. 58 - http://nimrodgroup.org/AAB )

Mahatma Letters to the german TS Hübbe Schleiden from 1886 and later shows this to be a false claim.
It seem quite obvious HPB must have known about them.

k)
The AAB corpus contains a use of vocabulary which are heavily filled with christian or christian related expressions, which effectively shuts the door form regarding them as being a teaching given to the world and a teaching targeting a multicultural audience.


- - -

Yet, as I said. The books by AAB contains teachings, which are able to help some seekers on the Path.
But saying that they are in accordance with HPB the teachings and other writers from the same timeperiod I cannot and will not.

My view is: What is going on is, that a number of wellmeaning seekers confuse emotional energies with spiritual ones.


But these were my views.
Maybe some of the many compassionate AAB followers would care to respond to these views, so to help honest Seekers after Truth?



M. Sufilight
Sorry. The first sentence in the above should have been:
"It might be good to know that, According to a few of my acquaintances, who are AAB insider students,"
The points I am replying to make me think worse of AAB's works, but some seem irrelevant and I want to get to the heart of the matter, so I may play the 'devil's advocate.' Please skip to the bottom and give some more info on which Mahatma letters are posted: I am having trouble reading them and so finding any typed version. I became more skeptical because the works are channeled and HPB only recommended one channeled text: her own work was not channeled... the rest of my reply is irrelevant if the Mahatma letters are against AAB.

>a) The AAB corpus contains almost nothing what so ever about the Middle East, its culture and religion.

DK was Tibetan right? (not middle Eastern.)

>b) The AAB corpus and its present day organisation Lucis Trust are involved with politics in the United >Nations.

That could develop problems, but I think the UN has 50 to 51% benefits, and that free speech is important and anyone can speak to UN officials if they listen.

>c) The teachings in the AAB corpus heavily down-waters any talk about the Divine within each human >being, and thereby effectively kills self-reliance within the Seeker. (Have a look at H. P. Blavatsky "The >Key to Theosophy", p. 70-75)

I did not see it that way, though I am not an expert. It also emphasizes at least a bit of altruism. Personally, I have preferred the term 'selflessness' to 'self' before I ever read much/any AAB texts. I think 'know thyself,' mystic ethical selflessness, and esoteric metaphysical selflessness of 'one's spirit' not being 'oneself' but Divinity are equally significant.

>d) The teachings in the AAB corpus heavily down-waters any talk about false dugpa Christians within the >Vatican and the Jesuists mentioned by HPB.

That is unfortunate. I do not recall AAB's works condoning the Vatican, but if the Mahatma letters are against it and it the works are overly 'neutral,' then this may be evidence enough.

>e) The teachings in the AAB corpus heavily promotes the arrival of the Christ in the flesh. The teachings >in the AAB corpus heavily down-waters the fact that HPB spoke against the teachings of the Christos >arrival in the flesh - and she in oppostion to AAB instead called it the arrival the Divine within each >human.

I do not recall that in either text; I do not take either view seriously.

>f) The AAB book "The Light of the Soul" or "Patanjalis Yoga Sutras" recommends The New Testament as >main reading. HPB did not, and in fact she opposed this.

That is funny to put in a _Yoga Sutras_ book--at least if not recommending _Revelation_, but if HPB said that I ignore it because she was ecumenical and said everyone should practice their own religion if they want. She emphasized ecumenism: not separatism or just arbitrarily ignoring any text that can be analyzed. Some _NT_ gematria analysis turns up exact Yoga ideas. (see Pryse, HPB's secretary)

>g) Esoteric Psychology, vol 1., p. 167 - turns the Christian religion into a Root religion, whereas Islam is >merely called a hybrid offshoot hereof with a tinge of Judaism. As if Christianity is not merely a hybrid >offshoot of Judaism with a tinge of Jesuitism?

Even the SD has mistakes, though it was written with supervision of Mahatmas. I have read the Quran and I like Islam, but some of its ideas, such as limited polygamy, are more appropriate for Arabs than for the Christians who prefer already monogamy. I think the latter is preferable and in that sense AAB could have been correct, though it is not quite nice to classify religions that way if they are at least about inner jihad like in the Bhagavad-Gita's symbolism and if besides that altruism and ahimsa are at the core of the religion, which is necessarily the case with Islam. Christianity long predates Jesuits.

>h) The teachings in the AAB corpus heavily promotes teachings on Meditation, Mantras, Astrology etc. >without openly recognising the fact that the doctrine of Atma-Vidya (Atma=Brahman etc.) and the related >metaphysics ought to be learned before dabbling with magic, without a real heart of compassion. (Try H. >P. Blavatsky: "Occultism Versus the Occult Arts" - http://www.katinkahesselink.net/occult.htm )

Maybe so: AAB should have said her work is intended for those already learned in Theosophy such as you mention. If it focuses on Western astrology that is most likley another reason to ignore the corpus.

>i) The AAB book is called the Psychological Key to the Secret Doctrine written by HPB through the help >from M and KH. Yet, this book was expected to arrive no earlier than after the year 1975 according to >HPB. That book would accoridng to HPB (and her masters) contain irrefutable proof on the teachings of >Gupta-Vidya (the same as Atma-Vidya or Esoteric Gnosis of the Greek). The question not answered is: >Where is that irrefutable proof?

That is suspicious, though one of AAB's books is one of few/one place(s) that may list the descriptions of the 7 keys. I do not think it gave any further elaboration on the keys; it was just a helpful footnote. Of course if the corpus is in suspicion it should be checked.

>j) AAB claims that it was master DK who dictated a large part of The Secret Doctrine. Mahatma Letters to >german TS Hübbe Schleiden kontradicts this. ( Here. Letter no. 1: http://home1.stofanet.dk/theos-octagon
/kh-m_letter_to_hs-1a.jpg >- Letter no. 2: http://home1.stofanet.dk/theos-octagon/kh-m_letter_to_hs-1b.jpg --- >An article about it: http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/invit-sd/invsd-4.htm )

Then you said AAB made a false claim: maybe DK was involved in editing what was spoken, though we may not know much about that your claim seems to be good. I am having trouble finding these letters in the ML book.

>k) The AAB corpus contains a use of vocabulary which are heavily filled with christian or christian related >expressions, which effectively shuts the door form regarding them as being a teaching given to the world >and a teaching targeting a multicultural audience.

I noticed that, but it depends on what expressions were used. If the ML do not completely contradict this work then I would like to see some examples. However, I think the ML are probably enough. They would imply the channeled source or AAB was not enlightened to the degree that they should have been doing channeling--unlike Mabel Collins.

If you are right, then do you have any ideas of what text proves the Gupta Vidya? Personally I think HPB's text proves them enough for me, but I am speaking from an 'a-priori' ('gnostic noetic') viewpoint. I get the main idea of most/all HPB said on Gupta Vidya or at least certain ideas in it. Some people have also spoken highly of de Purucker's texts, but I do not know if those were written late enough or if they say details about the Vidya ('Gnosis') that 'prove' them enough for the average scientist. Pryse also wrote at least one work that goes further to proving at least part of it: but again maybe not late enough.
Dear friends

My views are:

All the below are just my views Seeking the Truth about life.
I am of course open to any new views about life.

Try this article:
"The Origins of Christianity" by David Pratt (September 2001)
http://www.world-mysteries.com/gw_dpratt3.htm


Here is a short version with some changes and additions thrown into it all.......

a) Belief versus real Visdom
HPB said: Faith is not reason's labour, but repose. ("Is Theosophy a Religion?" by Blavatsky)


b) A theosophical view uopn Religion
Note carefully the following. We Theosophists believe that a religion is a natural incident in the life of man in his present stage of development; and that although, in rare cases, individuals may be born without the religious sentiment, a community must have a religion, that is to say, a uniting bond—under penalty of social decay and material annihilation. We believe that no religious doctrine can be more than an attempt to picture to our present limited understandings, in the terms of our terrestrial experiences, great cosmical and spiritual truths, which in our normal state of consciousness we vaguely sense, rather than actually perceive and comprehend; and a revelation, if it is to reveal anything, must necessarily conform to the same earthbound requirements of the human intellect.
In our estimation, therefore, no religion can be absolutely true, and none can be absolutely false. A religion is true in proportion as it supplies the spiritual, moral and intellectual needs of the time, and helps the development of mankind in these respects. It is false in proportion as it hinders that development, and offends the spiritual, moral and intellectual portion of man’s nature. And the transcendentally spiritual ideas of the ruling powers of the Universe entertained by an Oriental sage would be as false a religion for the African savage as the grovelling fetishism of the latter would be for the sage, although both views must necessarily be true in degree, for both represent the highest ideas attainable by the respective individuals of the same cosmico-spiritual facts, which can never be known in their reality by man while he remains but man. Theosophists, therefore, are respecters of all the religions, and for the religious ethics of` Jesus they have profound admiration. It could not be otherwise, for these teachings which have come down to us are the same as those of Theosophy. So far, therefore, as modern Christianity makes good its claim to be the practical religion taught by Jesus, Theosophists are with it heart and hand. But the historical truth about the gospels is another issue, which I will touch upon later in this article.

(“Lucifer” to the Archbishop of Canterbury - Greeting, An Open Letter Lucifer, Vol. I, No. 4, December, 1887, pp. 242-251)

c) The divine creation of the four Gospels?
Which 4 gospels to use in the Bible was decided by through a mere vote by humans at the meeting in Nicea in 325 AD. A meeting arranged by a politician who presided over the meeting.

They also voted about the Jesus was God in the flesh. (They raised their arms and the Emporer Constantin wrote down the result?)

d) Ussher chronology - clockwise
Ussher chronology was instituted and then it was abandoned again. Well by most churches, not all of them.
The Bible was revised. Is it Infalliable?

e) Jesus and his enemies fast-forward
On the events of the night before the crucifixion:

Furthermore, the events of the night before the crucifixion of Jesus are too numerous to have occurred within the prescribed time. Here is a list of them:

* The Last Supper,
* The agony in the Garden,
* The betrayel by Judas,
* The hailing and the questioning, first before Caiaphas, secondly before the Sandhedrin and then before Pilate;
* The visit of Herod (recorded by Luke),
* The return to Pilate;
* Pilate's speeches and his washing of hands;
* The scourging, the mocking and
* The arraying of Jesus in a purple robe;
* The long and painful bearing of the Cross to Golgotha

- all these events could not possibly have occurred in such a short time.
(This is also mentioned by the theoosphist G. Hodson.)

f) Galileo Galilei was excommunicated for more than a hundred years
Galileo Galilei was excommunicated in 1633. Later his was saved by another Pope in 1992.
I guess he was frying for some time in Purgatory until God decided something else. :-) (Smile in pain.)
( Se Wikipedia here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purgatory )

g) The gospel of Matthew is falsified
The gospel of Matthew is falsified says St. Jerome. And HPB said the same.
(BCW, vol. 9, p. 225 - http://www.katinkahesselink.net/blavatsky/articles/v9/y1888_033.htm )

The Pope do like Jerome a whole lot. An infallible Pope?
BENEDICT XVI - GENERAL AUDIENCE - Saint Peter's Square
Wednesday, 7 November 2007

Of course. It is well known, that the Pope almost never talks Ex Catehdra, and can therefore be excused for being ignorant about the realities of life.

The question is whether, the Catholic Church is actually prepared to follow this advice by St. Jerome, about to "learn on earth those truths which will remain ever valid in Heaven", when we talk about the Gospel of Matthew, and other issues, which I have mentioned in the earlier parts of this article.


h) No historical proof of when Jesus lived and his birth
Jesus (know to theosophists as Jehoshua Pandira) was born in 120 bc. in Lydda.
The Catholic Church says 3 years B. C.

Matthew tells us that Jesus was born during the reign of King Herod, who died in 4 BCE (before common era). But Luke states that Jesus was about 30 in the 15th year of Tiberius' reign, implying that he was born in 2 BCE, i.e. after Herod's death. He then contradicts himself by stating that John the Baptist and Jesus were miraculously conceived six months apart in the reign of Herod, but that Jesus was born at the time of the census of Quirinius, which took place in 6 CE (common era), thereby creating the miracle of a ten-year pregnancy!

Lack of real historical proof about Jesus existence:
"Confusion, lies, deceit, and forgery, such is the ledger of the early centuries. Eusebius of Caesarea, king of falsifiers, inserted the famous 16 lines referring to Jesus in the manuscript of Josephus, to get even with the Gnostics who denied that there ever had been a real personage named Jesus."
(Taken almost verbatim from H. P. Blavatsky Collected Writings Online vol. 9, p.227)

Annals of Tacitus are also used by the Churches as historical proof today. (Annals of Tacitus, book 15.44)
Yet the oldest version could easily have been falsified as well. - For instance, is it so, that Tacitus' Annals of Imperial Rome, the first six books exist today in only one manuscript, and it was copied about A.D. 850. An the Tacitus Books eleven through sixteen are in another manuscript dating from the eleventh century. (I think it is on page 60 in Strobel, Lee. The Case For Christ: A Journalist's Personal Investigation of the Evidence for Jesus. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1998.)

i) When did Jesus actually die?
The day when socalled historical Jesus died:

John places Jesus' death on the eve of the Passover, whereas the other gospels place it on the following day.
Infallible?


j) The final word or curtain
Jesus socalled final words:
The final words of the Christ to His apostles were, "Lo, I am with you all the days, even unto the end of the age" or cycle. (Matt., XXVIII, 20.) The important word is "end." The word used is the Greek "sun-teleia," which means the end of the time period, with another immediately following after (what would be called the end of a cycle). In Greek the final end is another word "telos." In Matt., XXIV, 6, "but the end is not yet," the other word telos is used for it means "the end of the first period has not yet been reached.

So Judgement Day is a false teaching and doctrine. At least the Catholic Church and other Christian Churches failes to clearly show the public, that Judgement Day is maybe not just like that the final day and the end of times.

It because of the Catholic Church's and other Christian Churches' stance on the strange doctrine of Judgement Day, that a lot of persons on this Planet are being kept down in a fearful lifestyle. Faith is not reason's labour, but repose. And reason without objectivly analyzing the issues surrounding religion is as false a teaching as it can be.


k) A few quotes just to show what H. P. Blavatsky and KH wrote about it all.



Master KH wrote in a Mahatma Letter:
For the opposition represents enormous vested interests, and they have enthusiastic help from the Dugpas -- in Bhootan and the Vatican!
(Mahtama Letter, No. 55. Dugpas are the same as selfish Magicians.)


H. P. Blavatsky wrote:
""This theory of the seven keys, the Church, according to the Abbé Roca, has simplified “without disfiguring it,” reducing the keys to three; while, on the contrary, it has fabricated three false keys which do not open anything. The legend of which I speak is founded, as I have demonstrated over and over again in my writings and my notes, on the existence of a personage called Jehoshua (from which Jesus has been made) born at Lüd or Lydda about 120 years before the modern era. And if this fact is denied—to which I can hardly object—one must resign oneself to regard the hero of the drama of Calvary as a myth pure and simple. As a matter of fact, in spite of all the desperate research made during long centuries, if we set aside the testimony of the “Evangelists,” i.e., unknown men whose identity has never been established, and that of the Fathers of the Church, interested fanatics, neither history, nor profane tradition, neither official documents, nor the contemporaries of the soi-disant drama, are able to provide one single serious proof of the historical and real existence, not only of the Man-God but even of him called Jesus of Nazareth, from the year 1 to the year 33. All is darkness and silence."
(BCW, vol. 9, p. 225 - http://www.katinkahesselink.net/blavatsky/articles/v9/y1888_033.htm )


H.P. Blavatsky also says:
"...I deny in toto the Christ invented by the Church, as well as all the doctrines, all the interpretations, and all the dogmas, ancient and modern, concerning that personage..." (H.P. Blavatsky: REPLY TO THE MISTAKEN CONCEPTIONS OF THE ABBÉ ROCA CONCERNING MY OBSERVATIONS ON CHRISTIAN ESOTERICISM, in Collected Writings, Vol. IX, page 216).


H. P. Blavatsky wrote:
"In the last quarter of the nineteenth century, when the latest international revision of the Bible-that infallible and revealed Word of God!-reveals 64,000 mistranslations and other mistakes, it is not the Theosophists-a large number of whose members are English patriots and men of learning-but rather the Christians who ought to beware of "wanton aggressiveness" against people of other creeds. Their boomerangs may fly back from some unexpected parabola and hit the throwers. " (H. P. Blavatsky's article "NOT A CHRISTIAN"! , written 25. Feb. 1879.)



And we remember, that the Christian Bible only spans a few thousand pages. So if, Blavatsky are right in her words, it will have as a consequence that almost each and every verse in the Bible have errors or mistranslations. So why this stranges emphasis on The New Testament, which Blavatsky never praised in her writings?


Alice A. Bailey's Christianizing of HPB's and the Himalayan Masters teachings:
And why did Master DK and Alice A. Bailey agree upon a book named "From Bethlehem to Calvary", when leading theosophists through the Akasa know that Joshoua Pandira was born in Lydda and not Bethlehem?

- - -
All the above are just my views Seeking the Truth about life.
I am of course open to any new views about life.


I do hope you find this article useful?


M. Sufilight
I am glad to hear more reasons one should be more skeptical about the Arcane School, but I am also skeptical about whether HPB recommended against the NT and whether it really matters what kind of language someone uses. What many people call the anti-Semitic language seems more significant to me than how Christian AAB's language was. But, I am not that interested in further discussing all that: I started the topic in answer to someone who asked on Facebook's Theosophy Network, and I am unsure he has joined theosophy.net.
Just want to mention that I corresponded (on a public forum) with Mr. Creme a decade or two ago (boy, do I feel old!). At the time, he was discussing his Maitreya floating down from the sky in front of a large crowd. I pointed out to him that this bore a very close resemblance to one of the temptations Satan gave Jesus in the desert, and if his guy WAS the Maitreya, then, apparently, he had given in to Satan;'s temptation. The story suddenly disappeared from the biography, of course.
If he was Maitreya, i.e. Maitreya Buddha, then he had not given in to Mara's temptations. I do not see what the big deal is about someone floating in front of people. There are stories of Yogis doing odd things in front of people as well as away from them. One should also judge someone by what (s)he says and other things that they do. I am not saying the Maitreya Mr. Creme talks about is the Buddha one, but it does not seem far-fetched and wrong that Maitreya could levitate.
From the New International Version, book of Matthew:
Then the devil took him to the holy city and had him stand on the highest point of the temple. "If you are the Son of God," he said, "throw yourself down. For it is written: " 'He will command his angels concerning you, and they will lift you up in their hands, so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.'" Jesus answered him, "It is also written: 'Do not put the Lord your God to the test.

According to Creme, the Maitreya floated down from the sky, into the crowd.
Dear friends

My views are
:

Lol, Bart.

A few words to the threads readers...

I do however find Cremes views on Sathya Sai Baba as being a Cosmic Avatar on the one hand and Sathya Sai Babas views about, that there is ONLY one Avatar quite puzzling. :-)


Creme on Sathya Sai Baba:
"Q: What is the relation between Sai Baba and Maitreya?

BC: The Christ is a planetary avatar, Sai Baba is a cosmic avatar. He is a Spiritual Regent, sent into the world by the Lord of the World, Sanat Kumara, on Shamballa. A regent 'stands in' for the king. Similarly, a Spiritual Regent 'stands in' for God, for the Logos, Whose reflection Sanat Kumara is. Sai Baba embodies the energy of Love at a cosmic level (the Christ embodies this energy at the planetary level) and his work, in part, is to prepare humanity for the work of the Christ.

By awakening the love principle in humanity, Sai Baba will prepare people for the initiatory work of the Christ. As the Hierophant, the Initiator, at the first two planetary initiations, the Christ will lead humanity gradually out of the strictly human kingdom into the Hierarchy, the Kingdom of Souls, or the Kingdom of God. That is his major work in the coming age of Aquarius. These two Great Ones work together in daily contact, complete harmony and shared purpose in the evolution of mankind. "
http://www.share-international.org/background/FAQ/faq_main.htm#anch...


The problem with the above quote is, that the person Sai Baba himself says that he is the ONLY Avatar who will emerge in this timeperiod.


"The whole world will be transformed into Sathya Sai Organisation and Sathya Sai will be installed in the hearts of one and all." (Sanathana Sarathi, January 1999 - page 16)


Not much "share"-ing there. :-)

And Sai Baba for the time being firmly seated in a wheelchair is presently accused of being a child-molester. However the court in India however dropped charges made against him because of clear lack of evidence.
Another problem is that the Share-Creme teachings are not a global teaching - their use of vocabulary are certainly not targeting Middle Eastern followers. The Alice A. Bailey groups are heavily involved with politics at The United Nations. So to me, they are very problematic or perhaps even dangerous to peaceful political and religious developments these days. There are also more evidence showing that the Alice A. Bailey teachings likely are a hoax more than they are the real deal so to speak.

HPB said:
"The Bible less authenticated than any other sacred book," -
Isis Unveiled, vol. 2, p. 577 - HPB)
HPB and Harte said:
"We are accustomed to say to the Buddhist, the Mohammedan, the Hindoo, or the Parsee: “The road to Theosophy lies, for you, through your own religion.” We say this because those creeds possess a deeply philosophical and esoteric meaning, explanatory of the allegories under which they are presented to the people; but we cannot say the same thing to Christians."
(BCW, vol. 8., p. 271, HPB and Harte)


Words have vibrations. Some languages are more esoteric in nature than others. Some are more phallic in nature. Certain words are more able to reach deep inside the Seekers minds and open the intuitive skills and the inner spiritual organ. Some words nurtures certain thought-patterns, and other words other thought-patterns.
What the Seekers spiritually Needs is often not what is craves, desires or Wants.


M. Sufilight
Just a note about Sathya Sai Baba. He was actually filmed in the act of faking materialization of gold; his assistant handed him the gold with the wrong hand. Several days later, the assistant who screwed up the pass was found, murdered. The murder has not yet been solved.
The murder story about the assistant was new to me. Do you have a quote on that from another source?
Here's one. There are plenty more.

RSS

Search Theosophy.Net!

Loading

What to do...

Join Theosophy.Net Blogs Forum Live Chat Invite Facebook Facebook Group

A New View of Theosophy


About
FAQ

Theosophy References


Wiki Characteristics History Spirituality Esotericism Mysticism RotR ToS

Our Friends

© 2014   Created by Theosophy Network.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service