IS CORRECT THE LIST OF SACRED PLANETS TAUGHT BY ALICE BAILEY?

In a previous article, I showed that the list of the sacred planets taught by Alice Bailey is incorrect and she relied on the lies that Leadbeater invented to elaborate her false classification (see link).

But a defender of Alice Bailey called Patrick Chouinard replied me:

« You are mistaken. Bailey did not base her classification on Leadbeater. Even HPB wrote that the Sun is a veil for Vulcan and/or Uranus. Bailey rejected much that Leadbeater wrote. For example, in A Treatise on Cosmic Fire (1925) she rejects Leadbeater's claim that Mars and Mercury are part of the Earth chain. There is solid basis for Bailey's classification in HPB's writings. See https://m.facebook.com/groups/363230130479134?view=permalink&id=595953133873498&refid=18&__tn__=-R »

I clicked this link, but there, he proves nothing, he only lucubrate putting some excerpts from what Alice Bailey wrote about the sacred planets, plus other excerpts from what Blavatsky wrote, and an excerpt from what the researcher David Pratt wrote.

But at no time does he prove that Alice Bailey's list is correct!

Instead, I am going to prove that his statements are false.

1. Because to start, I ask Patrick Chouinard to tell us exactly in which part of the book "A Treatise on the Cosmic Fire" Alice Bailey rejects Leadbeater's claim that Mars, Earth and Mercury belong to the same planetary chain, because I have read this book several times and nowhere I have found that, but on the contrary I have found that Alice Bailey also claimed the same lie in her book, since she wrote:

« Systemic kundalini goes forward to the vivification of these centres, and at this stage of development certain centres are more closely allied than others. Just as in connection with our planetary Logos, the three etheric planets of our chain—Earth, Mercury and Mars—form a triangle of rare importance. »

(This is in the first part, section E-V-2, p.181)

And there, clearly Alice Bailey says that our planetary chain is composed by Earth, Mercury and Mars.

But if Alice Bailey had studied a little more Theosophy than just copying what Leadbeater had written, she would know that this statement is a monumental absurdity, because the planetary chain is the equivalent to our septenary structure.

And to affirm that these three planets form part of the terrestrial chain, it would be the same as to affirm that we are composed of three different physical bodies and only four subtle bodies, which do not make any sense.

In addition, Blavatsky, William Judge and Master Kuthumi, all stated that this concept was false and those who claimed it were wrong. And this shows that Alice Bailey and Leadbeater lied when they said they were in communication with the masters because if that had been the case, then they would not have made such a mistake such huge.

2. And secondly, although it is true that Blavatsky explained that from the list of the sacred planets enunciated by the ancient sages (Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Sun and Moon), three of those celestial bodies (Mars, Sun and Moon) are substitutes for three sacred planets whose identity remains secret.

And based on this asseveration, Patrick Chouinard wants to convince his readers that Alice Bailey has revealed the real list by replacing those three celestial bodies substitutes by the planets Vulcan, Uranus and Neptune, since Alice Bailey had assured that the sacred planets are:

Vulcan, Mercury, Venus, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune.

But the detail is that if Patrick Chouinard would have read what Blavatsky had explained and not just copy a little excerpt, then he would have noticed that Blavatsky had also pointed out that Uranus and Neptune are NOT sacred planets, since she wrote:

« Saturn, Jupiter, Mercury, and Venus, the four exoteric planets, and the three others, which must remain unnamed, were the heavenly bodies in direct astral and psychic communication with the Earth, its Guides, and Watchers — morally and physically; the visible orbs furnishing our Humanity with its outward and inward characteristics, and their “Regents” or Rectors with our Monads and spiritual faculties.

But in order to avoid creating new misconceptions, let it be stated that among the three secret orbs (or star-angels) [i.e., the three sacred planets that have not yet been revealed] neither Uranus nor Neptune entered; not only because they were unknown under these names to the ancient Sages, but because they, as all other planets, however many there may be, are the gods and guardians of other septenary chains of globes within our systems. Nor do the two last discovered great planets depend entirely on the Sun like the rest of the planets. »

(Secret Doctrine I, p.575)

~ * ~

And this is an example of how the Alice Bailey’s defenders manipulate the information to coax other people and to avoid confronting to the sad reality that much of what Alice Bailey wrote are pure falsehoods.