Answer to Bailey Critics Part 8

Answer to Bailey Critics Part 8
The Two Female Prophets

Distortion Number Nine

“If you believe the Bailey writings then you must accept every teaching given out by the Theosophical Society, for they were both from the same source.”

Before we cover this let me mention that Alice A. Bailey was never the President of the Theosophical Society (as some critics claim) that was founded by H. P. Blavatsky. She was a member, and lead study classes, but never had a lot of authority in the organization. In addition, there are numerous teachers associated with Theosophy with oconflicting views who were not endorsed by Bailey but often unfairly linked to her.

The Theosophical Society began distancing themselves from Bailey as soon as she began receiving transmissions. She became a basic outcast from the group and only a handful of Theosophists followed her in creating a new organization. Even today, when many serious metaphysical students recognize that the Bailey writings are on a higher order than Blavatsky’s, the society has an eerie silence concerning her. They teach the principle of continuing revelation yet they seem to feel that both God and the Masters have been silent for some time now.

This is an interesting correspondence to the Mormon Church which also believes in a continuing revelation, yet current revelators are always overlooked while awaiting some future one working through authorized channels.

Djwhal Khul assisted Blavatsky as well as Alice A. Bailey in the revelation of their teachings, but the method of help for the two was very different, making two very different in presentation, yet both were what was needed for the time.

The difference in the presentation of the two comes mainly because H. P. Blavatsky put the writing in her own words and Alice A. Bailey acted as a transmitter and her revelations were the actual words or thoughts of a 250 year old Master.

Because H. P. Blavatsky put her teachings in her own words, it is her personality, thoughts and flaws which are revealed in her writings whereas the Bailey material give us a window into the mind of a Master of whom death is no barrier.

In fact if one wants proof that Bailey herself did not pen the revealed material, all he has to do is read a book of her own writings and then read one of the books transmitted by Djwhal Khul. A little study reveals beyond dispute that the two sets of writings were authored by two separate minds.

The question is then, if H. P. Blavatsky was indeed assisted by Masters, but did not act as a transmitter as Alice A. Bailey how then did the Masters help her?

It helps to understand the two different purposes of the two women. Blavatsky was a restorer of much knowledge which has been on the earth, but lost, whereas Alice A. Bailey was as revealer of new teachings, many of which have never been given out to humanity.

To assist Blavatsky in her mission of the restoration of many teachings past, Djwhal Khul worked with her where her talent was which was etheric vision. He would present to her many manuscripts ancient and modern which were not in her library, and many were not to be found in any library in the western hemisphere. She would study these manuscripts from her room in America, England or India (wherever she happened to be living) and then quote from them and expound in her own words.

This ability to pull writings and quotes out of the air was very frustrating for Bertram Keightley who was assisting her with editing and publishing in England.

One day Blavatsky included two four line stanzas from a poem that Keightley felt should be referenced so he brought the manuscript to her and asked where the quote had come from. Blavatsky would not immediately give him the reference so Keightly left it with her in hope that she would make a notation.

A while later she returned and under the quote Blavatsky had simply written: “Alfred Tennyson.”

Now this threw Keightly for a loop for he was a Tennyson expert and thought he had a collection of everything he had ever written. For one thing the quote did not sound to him like Tennyson’s writing and he was sure that it was in none of his collections. Even so, he researched everything he could find in the writings, but to no avail – the quote was not there.

After an exhaustive search he went back to Blavatsky stating that he was sure the quote did not belong to Tennyson and if he could not verify the source he would refuse to use it.

Blavatsky then became irritable and demanded to be left alone. A short time later Keightly checked back with her and was handed a sheet of paper having on it written: “The Gem – 1831.”

Thus frustrated Keightly all the more for he knew that Tennyson had never written a poem called “The Gem,” and could not think of anything named “The Gem” related to him.

After stating his doubts to HPB he was abruptly told by the female seer that was all he was getting.

Now under normal circumstances Keightly would have discounted the quote, but his experience with Blavatsky’s accuracy made him check a little deeper.

He went to the British Museum Reading Room and checked with some Tennyson experts there. They all came to the same conclusion that he had, that the stanza did not sound like Tennyson and they had never heard of the poem or anything called “The Gem.”

As a last resort, he asked to see Mr. Richard Garnett, the famous Head of the Reading Room and asked him about the quote. He also did not think it sounded like Tennyson and could not link it to any published work. As Keightly was about to give up the search Mr Garnett asked him if he had checked the Catalogue of Periodical Publications that he seemed to remember an obscure short-lived publication named “The Gem” listed there.

Keightly immediately checked it out and was fortunate enough to find the back issues of this publication. He looked through the issues for the year 1831, as noted by Blavatsky, and to his delight found an obscure poem written by Tennyson.

The reason the writing did not sound like Tennyson to the experts is because it was written by him when he was just 17, before he had developed his famous writing style.

The poem was named “No More” and was quoted correctly word for word by Blavatsky as follows:

“Oh sad No More! Oh sweet No More!

Oh strange No More!

By a mossed brookbank on a stone

I smelt a wildweed-flower alone;

There was a ringing in my ears,

And both my eyes gushed out with tears.

Surely all pleasant things had gone before,

Lowburied fathomdeep beneath with thee, No More!”

Taken from From: The Esoteric World of Madame Blavatsky, by Daniel Caldwell, Pages 339-340

She thus produced hundreds, perhaps thousands of quotes out of apparently thin air that were not in her library and some of them were from manuscripts not known to any man.

If Djwhal Khul wanted her to follow a certain line of thought he would communicate with her the direction and supply the needed manuscripts, but basically all her works were in her own words subject to her own bias and flaws in thinking.

This was as it had to be, for the world was not yet ready to receive and accept writings directly from the mind of a Master of Wisdom, and H. P. Blavatsky was probably too independent to cooperate as diligently as Alice A. Bailey did.

Whereas Blavatsky was never particularly religious and had a great distrust of orthodox religion and ministers (which shows in her writings) Alice A. Bailey was raised in a religious atmosphere and considered becoming a minister. Bailey had a great love for Christ, the scriptures and their teachings, and this shows in her writings.

Bailey was told that Blavatsky gave out the beginning teachings for the new age and that she would give out intermediate teachings. Then after the year 2025 more advanced teachings would be given.

Blavatsky, as we said, put her writings in her own words, but Bailey received the writings directly from Djwhal Khul and wrote them down as they were transmitted. Sometimes she would disagree with the wording and the two would argue mentally back and forth as to the best way to put the thought in writing.

In the beginning of the work (which lasted several decades) she would register the words with inner hearing, word for word, but after years of practice she reached a stage where their minds became almost as one to the extent that she received the information in packages.

She never went into a trance state, but transmitted all the material in full consciousness of what was being written down.

Having studied both Blavatsky and Alice A. Bailey here are my observations. Both of them have performed an invaluable service for the knowledge they have made available to humanity, but as far as giving weight to the words produced, I take the words of Alice A. Bailey more seriously because the transmitted teachings are the actual words of a Master who sees from a higher angle of vision than teachers in this human kingdom. In addition to this, word for word they register strongly with my soul.

Even though Blavatsky did a great job, I find myself not getting soul confirmation on some of the things she wrote whereas I get a more consistent confirmation on the Bailey writings.

If one wishes to check out some of the Bailey writings I would recommend starting with “A Treatise on White Magic.”

Aug 27, 2001

Copyright by J J Dewey (Excluding quotes)

Index for Original Archives

Index for Recent Posts

Easy Access to All the Writings

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.