Ralph Shirley, editor of the
Occult Review magazine, in 1928 published an article in which the writer
Herbert Adams praised the last book that Alice Bailey had published: The Light of the Soul. And later Mr. Shirley received two letters,
one from Alice Bailey and other from Basil Crump.
And below I transcribe them:
ALICE BAILEY'S LETTER
« Sir,
May I request the privilege of sufficient space in your valuable
magazine in which to make clear my position with regard to the authorship of my
latest book, Light of the Soul, which
is commented upon by Mr. Herbert Adams in your issue of June 1928, American
edition (page 377?).
The value of the study of the Yoga
Sutras of Patanjali is so great, and the need for elucidation of the truths
which they contain has been felt so keenly, that it is with real pleasure that
I have seen the book mentioned in your pages. I am deeply desirous of having
this book made available for all who may profit by it, and I am grateful to my
friend, Mr. Herbert Adams, for his article about the book.
Mr. Adams is evidently under the personal opinion that the Tibetan
Brother with whom I have co-operated in producing A Treatise on Cosmic Fire, Letters
on Occult Meditation and Initiation
Human and Solar, and who co-operated
in the production of the present volume, is one of the Masters of the Wisdom
connected with the Trans-Himalayan group of Masters. This is a matter purely of
his personal opinion, an opinion to which he is as much entitled as any other
opinion which any person may form on this or any other matter.
I am, however, reiterating publicly and in print, as I have previously
done on several occasions, that I myself do not make and never have made any
such claim. It is the express wish of
the Tibetan that his real name be withheld. It is his desire that the books be
studied and valued on the basis of their own intrinsic worth and by their
appeal or non-appeal to the intuition, and not because any person presumes to
claim authority for them.
In February 1923, I wrote for publication in The Beacon, the following paragraph, which I wish very much you
would do me the courtesy of reprinting at this time:
“In this particular period of the history of the Theosophical Movement
it should be apparent to all careful students that much of the trouble has been
brought about through two factors: the blind credulity of a certain group who
accept any statement provided it is backed by an Hierarchical claim of some
kind, and the narrow sectarianism which would make a prophet out of Blavatsky
and a Bible out of the Secret Doctrine.
It is high time, therefore, that occult books should be put forth and
judged because of their contents and not because of this, that and the other
Master is supposed to be responsible for them or because they agree or disagree
with the Secret Doctrine.
Only in this way will our people find their way out of the narrow rut of
the credulous devotee or of the narrow sectarian follower, on to the broad road
which leads a man to self-realization.”
Thanking you for your courtesy in this matter.
Yours very truly,
ALICE ANN BAILEY. »
(Later, Alice Bailey contradicted what she stated in this letter because
she asserted that the Tibetan was Djwal Khul and that he was working closely
with the Trans-Himalayan Masters, and also that he dictated the Secret Doctrine
to Blavatsky.
But I can assure you that all these affirmations are false and it is
very hypocritical that Alice Bailey criticizes "the blind credulity"
imposed by the new theosophical instructors, when she did exactly the same thing
with her students affirming many things that are false.
And when you study Alice Bailey's books for their content, as she
demands it, you realize that these books are full of mistakes and lies.)
And now I transcribe the letter sent by Basil Crump who was a very learned member of the Theosophical Society.
BASIL CRUMP'S LETTER
« Sir,
I am very much surprised to read the extravagant claims put forward for
Mrs. Bailey’s works by Mr. Herbert Adams in your May issue, European Edition,
p. 305.
He appears to accept without question her statement that her works are
imparted to her psychically or inspirationally by a “Tibetan brother,” who has
“dictated and paraphrased” the Sutras of
Patanjali in her latest book and revised her commentary.
On p. 306 he quotes from her introduction to the effect that a “second
Ray impulse” is coming, which “has no relation to the first Ray impulse which
produced the work of Blavatsky.”
He calls this statement “authoritative,” and one would like to ask him
on what evidence he bases his opinion.
In the Mahatma Letters we are warned of the “unprogressed Planetaries
who delight in personating gods and sometimes well-known characters who have
lived on earth” (p.462).
Where is one to draw the line in these cases, and who but a trained seer
or initiate, like Blavatsky could distinguish between a personation and the
real thing?
Mr. Adams goes on to assert that the book “emanates virtually from the
Brotherhood,” who, “ignoring all the petty issues, or, rather, answering them
most effectively by the voice of an accredited messenger, declares once again
in clear and solid English the Science of the Spirit hidden in the Sutras.”
I have just been looking through Mrs. Bailey’s book “Cosmic Fire,” and find it simply full of
pure, unsupported assertion, not at all on the lines of the masters’ teachings,
but, on the other hand, containing most of the well-known terminology of the
Neo-Theosophy and Adventism of the Besant-Leadbeater cult, such as “the
World-Teacher the Christ,” ”the Master Jesus,” “Cosmic Rapture,” “Rhythmic
Bliss," “Sevenfold Love of God,” “Coming of the Lord.”
As to the alleged “clear and solid English,” perhaps Mr. Adams will
enlighten us concerning the following:
-
“The average man
comes into incarnation through egoic impulse, based on desire, and on the
relation of the second aspect to the third aspect of the Self to the Not-Self” (p.767).
And yet there are people who hail Cosmic Fire as a continuation and
expansion of The Secret Doctrine!
Mr. Herbert Adams is in error when he says (p. 305) that book Light on the Path “was communicated to
the world through a disciple of the Masters within the present century.”
The writer was Mrs. Keningale Cook, née Mabel Collins (only daughter of
Mortimer Collins the poet and novelist, who was my father’s stepfather), and in
an original copy before me is the autograph inscription:
« Work done under Sri:
Hilarion. Light on the Path, begun
October, 1884. Karma written, December 27, 1884. Mabel Cook. »
But because of an error in that book, Blavatsky when she wrote the Voice of the Silence in 1889, she
included the following warning (p. 17):
-
“Do not believe that
lust can ever be killed out if gratified or satiated, for this is an
abomination inspired by Mara. It is by feeding vice
that it expands and waxes strong, like to the worm that fattens on the
blossom’s heart.”
This was done in order to counteract the following advice in Light on the Path (verse 20):
-
“Seek it [the way] by
testing all experience, by utilizing the senses in order to understand the
growth and meaning of individuality. . . .”
“Mistrust thy senses, they are false,” says the Voice, and this is a cardinal doctrine of Raja Yoga (the Buddhist Dhydna).
Blavatsky said that Mabel Collins’ imperfectly controlled psychic
organism had misinterpreted her teacher’s thought.
My late step-aunt was well known in the family as a strong
spiritualistic medium, and her literary talent inherited from her father made
her a useful instrument at that time. She began her occult training under
Blavatsky, who placed her under the tutelage of Master Hilarion ("our
semi-European Greek brother,” Mahatma Letters, p. 64).
In her Letters to Sinnett, Blavatsky spells the name “Illarion” and says
(p.153) that on her way back from India (1870, after her initiation in Tibet)
she “first went to Greece and saw Illarion, in what place I cannot and must not
say.”
Blavatsky says of her own training that it was only after “a terrible
struggle and a supreme effort of will, with the help of initiated friends” (her
Teachers in Tibet), that she gained control of her psychic organism.
Mrs. Cook was not so fortunate, and very soon left the movement,
subsequently denying that Hilarion had anything to do with her work.
I only mention these details because they show the necessity for great
caution in similar cases of psychic “inspiration,” especially when there is no
trained initiate like Blavatsky at hand who is competent to judge the merits of
the claims made. Our only guide in such cases is the material offered, and that
in Mrs. Bailey’s works, as I have indicated, is at least open to serious
question.
I am, etc.
Peking, May 23.
BASIL CRUMP. »
(Basil Crump was a great connoisseur of Theosophy and Buddhism, and he was
very involved with the Theosophical Society in Europe when Blavatsky was in
charge, so it is worth paying attention to him since he knows very well what he
is talking about. And my own research has led me to the same conclusions.)
(These two letters were published in the Occult Review, August 1928,
p.117-119)
No comments:
Post a Comment