|
MizSuz -> RE: Origins of Evil (LONG RESPONSE) (10/25/2006 8:45:01 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: sissifytoserve
Actually...he DIDN'T lump Helena Blavatsky in with the illuminati. In fact..he spoke highly of her.
Alice Bailey was one of the founders of the Lucis(luciferian) trust. If anything..she was part of the agenda...and ill have to
concur with Tsarion.
How much of Alice Bailey's work have you read and how much of her history with the Theosophical Society are you aware of?
She married a member of the theosophical society and was a member of the Esoteric section of the Theosophical Society for some time before she and her husband split off to found the Arcane School, which they did because they were disenchanted with the petty bickering and politics occuring within the Theosophical Society. The lucis trust is the publishing arm of the Arcane School. Bailey was quite fond of HPB (in spite of any disagreements in form they might have had) and respected HPB a good deal. Although there was a lot of disagreement in their time regarding the form of the content and how much of Bailey's books were or were not in keeping with The Secret Doctrine, Bailey and HPB didn't have these disagreements - everyone else around them did. Particularly the HPB purists (a new breed of fundamentalist). They (AB & HPB) were both the sort of people to present the information and let the reader decide for themself, an attitude that is echoed throughout both of their works.
Have you read the Lucis Trust Mission Statement?
The worldwide activities of the Lucis Trust, founded by Alice and Foster Bailey, are dedicated to establishing right human relations. The motivating impulse is love of God, expressed through love of humanity and service of the human race. The activities of the Lucis Trust promote the education of the human mind towards recognition and practice of the spiritual principles and values upon which a stable and interdependent world society may be based. The Lucis Trust is non-political and non-sectarian. It sponsors no special creed or dogma.
If that's evil then sign me up.
Perhaps you'd like to read any of her books, which are available online in their entirety for free (when the server is up). I recommend starting with The Return of The Christ - its an easy read (one of the only easy reads in her repertoire).
http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/book/lookupname?key=Bailey%2C%20Alice%2C%201880-1949
Have you read The Secret Doctrine? A word of caution, it's a very difficult and lengthy read. Remember there are two volumes (that could be considered tomes).
I realize that both AB and HPB have been lumped in with other conspiracy theories, usually those that are Christian in foundation, which is rather comical since her critics from the Theosophical Society maintained that AB had watered HPB's writings down with christian dogma. Their works have been credited as foundational in the forming of the URI, which is looking to make a 'one world, one religion' sort of system that I am opposed to. Rather, I prefer the Dalai Lama's feelings on the matter. No one world religion, use what you know and have been exposed to to its advantage, rather than expending energy trying to adopt new systems. They all lead to the same objective anyway and each of us has our own path to walk.
Her contemporary critics are usually christian, often fundamentalists, and are fearful of the notion of a united world, likening it to the coming of the anti-christ. I think it's (a united planet) a rather grand ambition, frankly. I don't think we're anywhere near capable of making something like that happen, but I am hopeful that the peoples of this world can find a commonality that results in unification at some point in our future. If there were no nations then we wouldn't be at war with other nations, eh? We are certainly living in a global economy, for better or worse, and this could be considered a time of tension while we learn how to make it work, which it clearly doesn't yet. Of course this global economy didn't really exist 100+ years ago, at least not to the extent that it exists today. But Alice Bailey wrote extensively about the "New World Order." She saw a world in unity for the common cause of helping humanity, particularly to grow spiritually (which could be said of any missionary). I realize this sort of propoganda usually upsets a lot of folks, particularly conspiracy theorists and especially fundamental christian conspiracy theorists.
In the early portion of the video you linked to Tsarion mentions HPB's referenced "Hierarchy" with some disdain, likening it to the motives of the illuminati. Later he makes use of her quotes to strengthen his arguments. I get the impression that he, like everyone else, picked and chose his notion of 'truth' out of HPBs writings and I'm ok with that. I don't necessarily have to agree with his choices, but I'm ok with his right to do so. In fact, I've always encouraged anyone to always read with discernment, take what sings to them, thoroughly examine what doesn't sing, and after a thorough examination throw what doesnt work for you away. If you looked far enough back in the archives here on CM you may find evidence of my advising just that.
Until yesterday I had no clue who Tsarion was. I don't even have a problem with his message, in fact in large part I agree with his inevitable point. Look within, root out our own darkness, be prepared to grow - quite possibly by significant trials and tribulations. Whether or not I agree with how he got there or how he thinks it will manifest is moot (to me). Again, he's not saying anything that hasn't been said before.
FOR ME, conspiracy theory tends to focus on the negative, to inspire fear and anger and other sorts of lower emotions that generally are only good for catharsis and, if overused, to perpetuate emotion fed illusion, even if tempered by what appears to be logical thinking. I do recognize that there is a large segment of the population that needs to take that road to work their own inner darkness out and I leave them to it. I don't need or want that path. I have enough of my own negativity to deal with and have no need of plugging into someone else's to facilitate seeing it in myself.
As for whether or not I think the man has a right to make a living - well...would it surprise you to know that I am a concious channel and have accepted monetary recompense for performing that service? My problem was with signing up only to get an email encouraging me to sign up for payment. I felt it was a bit of bait and switch, which I find personally distasteful. Perhaps you'd just call it marketing.
You are quite correct, I am not familiar with his body of work freely available on the internet. Since I never heard of him before yesterday I think that's a reasonable situation. Since I am only familiar with the 2 hour video I took the trouble to watch in its entirety, I don't claim to be an expert on his ideas. I did, however, go to his website, sign up for his service, and then got an email asking me to register and pay. So, the email and your linked video is my only exposure to him. I did not immediately find any of his work available for free on his website. Perhaps I didn't look close enough.
Perhaps you'd like to give us your point of view on the topics at hand, rather than simply posting a link and then slamming everyone who debunks the content and/or the author (and didn't, to my knowledge, attack you personally until you over reacted)?
|
|
|
|
