Alice Bailey, Lucis Trust & The Great Invocation

Convictions, morals, other societies and religions.
Locked
Angolmois

Alice Bailey, Lucis Trust & The Great Invocation

Post by Angolmois »

What is your familiarity with Alice Bailey and her writings? Have you read any, and what do you think about her line of occult thought?

What I have understood is that there is a clash between "orthodox" Blavatskyans and followers of Bailey's thought. What do you think of this schism?

What do you think of the work of Lucis Trust if you are in any way familiar with it?

I have found again her writings to be of immense value, although I don't naturally think likewise about all she says. I have practiced The Great Invocation in the past, and have taken up it to my practice again a few weeks ago, and I find the prayer itself - no matter what one thinks of Bailey or anything she has written - to be a very powerful and benevolent form of occult meditation.

I once had almost all of her books but had to sell them almost too cheap in lack of money last year. I hope the buyer of 20 books with 75 euros has benefited from the purchase! Now I'm currently reading Esoteric Healing, and have thought to buy her books again to my already too big pile of reading list.

When I made the IC REX album Vedenjakaja (The Aquarius), Bailey was a stable in my reading list and it had a definite inspiration and influence for the album.
User avatar
Nefastos
Posts: 3029
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 10:05 am
Location: Helsinki

Re: Alice Bailey, Lucis Trust & The Great Invocation

Post by Nefastos »

Rúnatýr wrote: Fri Aug 07, 2020 9:23 pmWhat is your familiarity with Alice Bailey and her writings? Have you read any, and what do you think about her line of occult thought?

I appreciate some of Bailey's works very much. She is an uneven author however, and because her best work Treatise on Cosmic Fire is so extremely hefty, one can go far enough with only that book. I would suggest reading only that, or perhaps it & The Treatise on White Magic (in English).

Rúnatýr wrote: Fri Aug 07, 2020 9:23 pmWhat I have understood is that there is a clash between "orthodox" Blavatskyans and followers of Bailey's thought. What do you think of this schism?

Bailey's important books like the ToCF are basically commentaries & extensions on Blavatsky's Secret Doctrine. Taken, naturally, with the usual sceptic mindset (always important when reading anything occult, or anything at all, for that matter) Bailey's writings should offer a valuable extra for Blavatskyan teaching. Along with W.Q. Judge, Guy de Purucker & Pekka Ervast, I consider Bailey being one of the true theosophists of the "original" Blavatskyan branch of the theosophical tree. Even though at some point that branch branches on to some weird UFO & Christian doctrines that should be taken with a load of salt, if at all.

In Bailey we also find quite strong the original Blavatskyan dualism. While Blavatsky emphasised the wickedness of sexuality, Bailey uses phrases like "cosmic evil", which are extremely harmful when taken straight. It is usual that a student misinterprets some psychically given teachings because one is unable to get past some personal bias, and the more one reads Bailey, the more intensely one should remember this. In many teachings of Bailey we can find that the idea itself has been valid, but the scribe has mishandled the way how it has been given, and the result can be worse than not publishing anything. This is, at least, my personal impression from Bailey. Maybe her later books are just for different audience, like modern American Christian mystics, who knows.

Rúnatýr wrote: Fri Aug 07, 2020 9:23 pmI once had almost all of her books but had to sell them almost too cheap in lack of money last year. I hope the buyer of 20 books with 75 euros has benefited from the purchase!

That was a good deal for the buyer for sure.
Faust: "Lo contempla. / Ei muove in tortuosa spire / e s'avvicina lento alla nostra volta. / Oh! se non erro, / orme di foco imprime al suol!"
Angolmois

Re: Alice Bailey, Lucis Trust & The Great Invocation

Post by Angolmois »

Nefastos wrote: Mon Aug 10, 2020 8:17 am
Rúnatýr wrote: Fri Aug 07, 2020 9:23 pmWhat I have understood is that there is a clash between "orthodox" Blavatskyans and followers of Bailey's thought. What do you think of this schism?

Bailey's important books like the ToCF are basically commentaries & extensions on Blavatsky's Secret Doctrine. Taken, naturally, with the usual sceptic mindset (always important when reading anything occult, or anything at all, for that matter) Bailey's writings should offer a valuable extra for Blavatskyan teaching. Along with W.Q. Judge, Guy de Purucker & Pekka Ervast, I consider Bailey being one of the true theosophists of the "original" Blavatskyan branch of the theosophical tree.
What I meant with the schism are articles such as this: https://blavatskytheosophy.com/14-good- ... teachings/
User avatar
Nefastos
Posts: 3029
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 10:05 am
Location: Helsinki

Re: Alice Bailey, Lucis Trust & The Great Invocation

Post by Nefastos »

I understand. I meant that I see Bailey being faithful to the core of the original theosophy, just like I see myself being the same (!). It is extremely easy to list from Bailey things that are very unorthodox, and even easier to do that regarding my books. But I renounce the very idea of "orthodoxy" ever being a capable spiritual path. There is no such thing as pure Blavatskyan theosophy either, should we try to find that. Even her own books are filled with passages written by other people, and some of the teachings of the masters themselves are outwardly misogynistic, racist, & filled with just the kind of Jesuit ethics they in other places condemn. This is because things are seldom as simple as they appear at the first glance. Occultism does not work by switches, but by nuances; it is not war, but poetry. Bailey was not infallible in any way, just like Blavatsky wasn't. There really is no occult authority at all whose every word should be taken as the one sacred truth. We are all just people here, even the ones whose "Angels" happen to be blinking instead of slumbering. When someone is always right, such a person is no longer here, writing books – or doing anything else.

I quote just one part from the text you linked to show how absurd such an idea of "orthodox theosophy" is:

Point #9 wrote:The Masters of the Trans-Himalayan Brotherhood also made it clear that their profoundly nontheistic and pro-Buddhistic Eastern doctrine “knows no compromises” and that “Truth is One and cannot admit of diametrically opposite views.”

Compare this statement to the very first three theosophical principles (given in our main page verbatim), and such an orthodox view becomes so absurd that it is like the church theology compared to the original ethical teachings given by Jesus. The very idea of uniting has been mutilated into a doctrine of separation.
Faust: "Lo contempla. / Ei muove in tortuosa spire / e s'avvicina lento alla nostra volta. / Oh! se non erro, / orme di foco imprime al suol!"
Locked