Basic Distinctions: the first preliminary

Brothers, let us for a moment recall, as has been suggested, that the evil that men do, does indeed manifest in all kinds of greed and vile selfishness via monied interests, capital and land acquisition etc, on a scale and focussed knowing execution, with which we would find hard to imagine or believe if we knew the reality of the situation for ourselves, but which DK explains very well. We also know that it was man's greed and capital/profit bias, at the expense of the suffering masses, which led to war. This is unquestionable and completely accurate. DK also explains that these moneyed interests, during the explosion of the war, the meeting of "two antagonistic forces," went underground and quietly simmered while the labour masses rose up against the capital forces.

I do not believe any person of goodwill would think otherwise. Where I think, in my hypothetical proposal, that there may be some areas of confusion, is that even though such entrenched forces were spread worldwide, with large conglomerate material forces both in the UK and USA prior to WW2, this did not forestall the then British Empire from eventually declaring war on Germany. Also, this did not curtail an isolationist America from eventually entering the World War and throwing all her resources and weight behind the allied countries. America, for all her imperfections, recognised that she was an allied country and joined the war on terror as it was being waged at that time. We are told that the Christ was on the "side" of the Allied nations and did not "side" with the Axis countries. This should tell us all a great deal.

I think there is a schism in understanding that even though there was much evil and actually a great battle in process, the USA, UK, Australia, Canada and many others, in full or in part, did and were fully able to recognise evil and through their governments, chose to enter the battle. I propose that, though there is much evil and in effect, attack by the dark forces in these countries, we should not necessarily assume that the mass of the people and the governments are unable to respond to the flow of good and to take issue "against" those who voice destruction to the world. There does indeed come a time when a "decision" has to be made and a side has to be chosen as to where a country or a person actually "stands." 

DK clearly and purposefully makes this point and challenges the people as to how they choose, and that indeed they should choose and make such a decision. I am not writing to clarify DK, for I think he makes his thoughts, wisdom and distinctions perfectly clear and leaves no misunderstanding. When he speaks of the monied interests and materialistic forces in the western hemisphere we should remember well, I think, that ultimately DK does not confuse between those forces, and the world leaders together with the mass of men and women, who are good persons and who ultimately and freely chose to stand "against" evil.

Remember, when such evil manifested upon a country as it did Germany, this broke upon humanity as a whole and through certain leaders such as Hitler and "his evil gang," the dark lodge took issue with humanity and tried to capitalise on the weakness of the masses. They overshadowed a weak people, though ideally suited for this, and vampire-like fed on the then-focussed greed and corruption of all concerned. The only way forward for humanity was to physically fight for their freedom and to keep fighting to the end, when the door could be sealed.

This was the only method when such a dire world situation had materialised, which could again free men and women from slavery and materialism of an order unimaginable to the many. Remember also that when two such "forces of antagonism" reach such a dire stage, it is Shamballa, which allows their ultimate meeting and clashing. Two forces so potent must under law fight it out, and one or the other take hold. Shamballa from one angle, initiated this as a product of the "decision" of the Chohans, this we know full well, and of it there is no dispute. Shamballa literally battles for the soul of humanity, protecting it as far as is possible from materialistic forces, but ultimately humanity has to fight for its soul. 

Humanity also had to overcome what DK described for us as a "massed negativity" or "the blocking, hindering, muddled but massed opposition of the well-meaning people of the world who talk vaguely and beautifully about love, but refuse to consider the techniques of the will of God in operation" EA 585. Alice and Foster Bailey had no such negativity and definitely did not allow themselves to be aloof and separated from the taking of sides with allied nations and standing against the Axis nations of "aggression and religious bias" as they were at that time focused. Though it is true that this was much to the annoyance of many people of goodwill.

Today, humanity is again finding itself fighting for its soul. It finds itself a victim of the opening of the door to forces of great materialistic power as accounted for by Alice Bailey. When WW2 finished the door had been closed, entrenched, monied and capital interests had retreated "underground" and in my view, had the door not been re opened, would have died and faded away, with the mass "labour" of men being victorious and a true perspective of sharing, equality, and recognition of "need" being uppermost in their minds. However, it is most obvious that the selfish interests of men won the day, ultimately, with the entrenched selfish interests being allowed to regroup and reorganise. 

This, in hindsight for us is most evidently what has happened after the World War. Great conglomerates, financial organisations, and businesses of power have grown and networked more or less freely to again attempt to feed the greedy, separate nature of the few at the cost of the many. Also, many more ordinary people have fallen victim to the general illusion of the sharing of the wealth. They become entrenched with debt, as have countries, and become slaves to the financial institutions that control the great wealth of the world. This is still prevalent and most apparent today.

It will not have escaped the notice of men and women of goodwill that the Middle Eastern question is fully and squarely in our faces at this time, as I have highlighted in the paper 'the problem of the Middle East today' addressing such. The religious question "strife" as defined by DK and headed by the Christ Is addressing itself to humanity right now, which further complexes the situation with itself being enough of a world problem without the added problem of materialistic entrenchment.

Many today strongly dislike the USA for having at one time associated with the likes of Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden. Perhaps such an association was unfortunate, but we must recall that Saddam was supported in his struggle against Iran and Osama in his struggle against the Russian army in Afghanistan. Historically, such associations are made in a struggle against a greater threat.

The Allied countries, Great Britain and America, made such an allegiance with the USSR in World War II, yet knew full well of her communist activities. DK knew, and yet the association was met with the view to a greater world need. This is a point that all should consider, but do not. The networks and interlacing of evil take many forms, as DK points out. I would like to point out that historically, the United States, for all her shortcomings, has endeavoured to stand "against" totalitarianism in many forms. Not always has the will of the people and their "massed negativity" supported her. Such examples as North Vietnam hold good. If ever there were a stand against soviet communism as supported, financed and wilfully aggressed into the south, Laos and Cambodia, then here is one. North Korean aggression is another example.

DK makes clear the threat of totalitarianism and that its stranglehold murders the spirit of a country, a crime far worse than the murder of an individual. "The year 1952 will be a year of spiritual crisis and a year when it should prove possible to close more tightly the door where evil dwells." RI 760. Clearly, DK indicates that there is the possibility of closing the door "more tightly" and standing "against" evil is a prerequisite for humanity whilst at the same time using the Great Invocation, for to invoke love is to invoke the spiritual will which necessarily works out through men, as indicated by DK. He clearly stands against the aggressive totalitarian move for land by military force and makes it clear that this is to be opposed. It was opposed in Kuwait by the USA against the aggressive move for land by Iraq in the first Gulf War.

7 x 7 = 49 year cycle Chohan Decision/Initiation.

1903 = Build up to WW1 and 2.

1952 = The Battle between Democracy and Communism/Totalitarianism.

2001 = War On Terrorism.

The last initiation of this kind was therefore held in 1903. Those prepared to pass through this initiation were faced with the fact of the emerging forces of cosmic evil. TWM 772.

Certainly, as DK mentions and we are aware, there was a "direct impact" of the Shamballa force in yr 2000. I propose that the war on terror is a direct result of the planetary decision taken by Chohans in a cyclic 49 years. Lets consider in the group mind that the "impact" upon humanity as result of yr 2000 planetary event and yr 2001 planetary event, the highlighting between right and wrong, good and evil, was indeed in this instance a "twin impact" of stupendous proportions, effecting humanity in The destructive/constructive ways that we are seeing right now. Hence, the extremism between war as declared on the West by fundamental Islamic extremism and the war declared on terrorism. What clearer or more perfect symbolism could we have of such a double impact?

"This direct impact will again take place in 1975, and also in the year 2000, but the risks will then not be so great as in the first impact, owing to the spiritual growth of mankind". RI 716. Alice Bailey.

The Tibetan flatly states that in World War 1 and 2, there were NO human beings killed, only the forms were destroyed, making opportunity for ones more fit to handle the new inflowing energies. He also states that this "is very very good." Today, Iran holds the peculiar position of creating fear and uncertainty in the West and in the United Nations by possibly developing Nuclear weapons. We cannot know for certain that they are not in some clandestine manner aiming to do this. Again, the Tibetan clearly says that the power of the atomic bomb should remain in the hands of the countries or men and women of goodwill. 

He does this for good reason and indicates that if the intentions and "all her motives were compelling wrong", a country could NOT be trusted with such power. The world is very aware that Iran intends to wipe out the Jewish people. So I clearly state that Iran should NOT be allowed to even be in the process of developing nuclear power. This goes contrary to all hierarchical teachings and will, at some point sooner or some time later, create a world problem that will have to be dealt with.

So, once again, humanity finds itself having to, at some point, seal the door again, for it will not seal itself. In the past, DK found no problem distinguishing for humanity on which side the Christ and the spiritual hierarchy find allegiance. The distinction between the Allied and Axis nations were clearly drawn out then, and he challenged humanity to choose once and for all "on which side they stand".  The values and qualities identified when he first wrote are, I think, as much highlighted and applicable today as they were back then and should find no great difficulty in recognition today.

JPC.

"On the basis of these distinctions, it is surely apparent that God is on the side of the allied nations, for it cannot be supposed that Christ is on the side of Hitler and the rule of cruel aggression.

The spiritual Hierarchy of the planet is throwing the weight of its strength against the Axis powers just in so far as the spiritually minded peoples of the world can collaborate, for there can be no coercion of man's free will. No one is afraid of the allied nations; the situation has not been precipitated by the Allies; their methods are not the methods of lying propaganda and the terrorizing of the weak and the defenceless. Facts prove these points, and it is this recognition which lies behind the constant aid of the United States."  EXT 187. Alice Bailey.

JPC. 25/08/2006.

Jeremy Condick.