DK [Djwhal Khul] Studies

2003-10-5 03:59:00

I thought I would finish up our discussion on the credibility of Alice A. Bailey writings with a few comments.

One comment some have made (which I have heard expressed before) is that the writings are difficult to understand. This causes some to conclude that they either have no real depth or that the writer consciously attempted to obfuscate the truth.

There are several reasons why this may seem to be the case to the new reader and the reasons for this are:

DK uses many Theosophical, Hindu and Buddhist words and terms of which the new reader has usually never encountered.

The solution: The reader must become familiar with them. I wish that I had made a more focused effort to learn the vocabulary when I first started reading the books. It would indeed have greatly speeded my learning.

A good aid to assist you, which I did not have when I began learning, is "The Encyclopedic Theosophical Glossary." This is free to read online at:

http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/etgloss/etg-hp.htm

Bookmark this and look up any key word as you progress with your reading. This will make the first read through slower, but the end result is that your learning will speed up.

Each time you look up a word keep a record of it in a notebook or computer file so you do not have to keep looking up the same word. Eventually it will become a part of your vocabulary.

One more thing to keep in mind as you seek to understand esoteric vocabulary is this: DK uses a number of theosophical words with a twist of meaning unique to himself. The glossary will be a big help, but with certain words, the only way to fine tune the meaning as they are used in the Bailey writings is to study them in the context that DK actually uses them. Therefore, when you come across a difficult word do a computer search for that word and review how he generally uses it throughout the writings. Often he will give his own unique definition or a more complete explanation. When he does this make a note of it.

Several words that he uses in a unique manner are:

Antahkarana or Antaskarana
Dharma
Atom -- as in Permanent Atom
Devas
Dweller on the Threshold
Cosmic Fire
Electric Fire
Fire by Friction
The Rays
Initiation
Personality
Radioactivity (as it applies to living things)

There are many others, but the thing to keep in mind is that there are a number of words he uses with a twist peculiar to himself, but the standard meaning will carry you through.

DK's writings are mainly intended for disciples, even though all who seek to understand will benefit.

Because his writings are mainly intended for disciples he wrote in a language and vocabulary that would be most meaningful to them. He expressed the idea that various disciples who read and understand his words will teach them to others in a more simplified language.

He states that his writings are often intended to give hints around the real principle he wishes to reveal so the disciple can exercise his intuition. This increases the intuitive ability in the disciple and in the end causes him to understand much more thoroughly than if the principle had been given out in clear black and white detail.
He states that he teaches from the universal to the particular. This is the opposite approach than is used in the schools of today which teach the particulars (details and data) in the hope that the student will eventually understand the universal (the principles).

Overall then, his method of presentation is not for the faint of heart. Even so, I do find portions of his writings wherein all can benefit that are quite quotable.

Here's my personal experience with the writings. Like most readers I found then difficult at first. Even so I realized that there was a lot of light in them. As I plowed through my first book I realized my first instinct was correct and continued on.

Now I understand the basic vocabulary and have a feel for his approach I see his writings as perhaps the most clear and precise that I have ever read, except perhaps the words of Jesus.

I find his words are a lot like that of Isaiah, even though the purpose is different.

When I first read the book of Isaiah I do not think I got anything out of it at all. I doubt if I could have given a paragraph of explanation of what I had read (I was sixteen at the time.). The second time I read it I learned a little, but not much. It wasn't until I read it for about the sixth time that it started making sense. Now even today as I contemplate his words new truth is still revealed. My opinion of his words are much different now than in my youth. At my first reading I forced my way through it just to say I had read it. Now I see great light and intelligence in every verse.

I think Isaiah prepared my mind to understand DK for his words are also complex and new light comes periodically as I reflect upon them.

Question:

How should the seeker handle the various writings and teachings he studies? For example:

The Bible or other scriptures with a long tradition of containing truth that humanity is supposed to accept without question.
Writings such as those of Alice A. Bailey which obviously have high intelligence and original thought behind them -- and claimed to be the work of a master.
Other channeled or transmitted writings that seem to have intelligence behind them.
Writings that you are pretty sure are just the product of a big ego.
Writings that you believe may be from the dark side.

Should your approach in discovering the truth be different for each one, the same or what?

"Last week I forgot how to ride a bicycle."
-- Steven Wright