This post discusses who Alice Bailey’s Tibetan may be giving photos and possible documentation about his true identity. The post goes on to argue pro and con about who he may be and discusses the mystery of the name given to him as well. The post also gives reasons as to why knowing who he is doesn’t really matter. What is more important his understanding his teachings.


At the beginning of every book by Alice Bailey she writes the following:

“The books that I have written are sent out with no claim for their acceptance. They may, or may not, be correct, true and useful. It is for you to ascertain their truth by right practice and exercise of the intuition. Neither I nor A.A.B. is the least interested in having them acclaimed to be inspired writings, or in having anyone speak of them (with bated breath) as being the work of one of the Masters. If they present truth in such a way that it follows sequentially upon that already offered in the world teachings, if the information given raises the aspiration and the will-to-serve from the plane of the emotions to that of the mind (the plane whereon the Masters can be found) then they will have served their purpose. If the teaching conveyed calls forth a response from the illumined mind of the worker in the world, and brings a flashing forth of his intuition, then let that teaching be accepted. But not otherwise. If the statements meet with eventual corroboration, or are deemed true under the test of the Law of Correspondences, then that is well and good. But should that not be so, let not the student accept what is said.”

We also find this in her book A Treatise on White Magic.

“You have wisely guarded the teaching from the taint of superimposed authority, and there lies back of your  books no esoteric principle of hierarchical authority or support, such as has produced the narrow limits of certain ecclesiastical bodies and groups, differing as widely as the Catholic Church, Christian Science, those who believe in the verbal inspiration of the Scriptures, and numerous (so-called) esoteric organisations.  The curse of many groups has been the whispered word that “Those who know wish….” “The Master says….” “The Great Ones command…” and the group of silly sheep feebly and blindly tumble over themselves to obey.  They think thereby, through their misplaced devotion, to contact certain authoritative personages, and to get into heaven by some short cut.

You have wisely guarded your books from the reaction accorded to those who claim to be masters, adepts and initiates.  My anonymity and status must be preserved, and my rank be regarded as only that of a senior student and of an aspirant to that expansion of consciousness which is for me the next step forward.  What I say of truth alone is of moment; the inspiration and help I can accord to any pilgrim on the path is alone vital; that which I have learned through experience is at the disposal of the earnest aspirant; and the wideness of the vision which I can impart (owing to my having climbed higher up the mountain than some) is my main contribution.  Upon these points the students are at liberty to ponder, omitting idle speculation as to the exact details of unimportant personalities, and environing conditions”  Treatise on White Magic, pp. 3 – 4



Even though the above warning is given by Alice Bailey and the person she claims she channeled the teaching from, it has done little to stop the impulse to wonder who this “Tibetan” guy is who was said to have telepathically transmitted to Alice Bailey the teachings in her main books. Why this curiosity? Maybe it is hard to not be curious about curiosity is a natural human emotion. Though using Bailey’s system of the Ten Groups of Humanity, we may also see the impulse to want to know who Bailey’s Tibetan is differing upon which group you are in.

Groups 1, 2, 3. Frankly these groups are either so non-existent on the planet, or so consumed with just surviving and indulging themselves they are unlikely to ever even be exposed to one of Bailey’s books. So, let’s just rule these groups out.

Groups 4 & 5. Withing these two groups, Alice Bailey says, the masses of humanity reside. As a reminder for those of you who have not become familiar with my Becoming Human book, Bailey says that those in this group have what she calls Atlantean consciousness, which is kama-manasic, meaning they use the limited capacities of their minds (manas) primarily to help them achieve their desires (kama). They also tend to struggle with their emotions meaning their emotional impulses frequently tend to cloud out their mental reasoning power. For this reason, members of these groups tend to not question much of what they hear and are easily more led by authority. They also tend to be literal minded and are inclined to believe what the political, cultural and religious leaders of their groups tell them is so without question. Therefore, if anyone in this group were ever to hear about Bailey’s D.K., or Tibetan, they would be likely to turn to the leaders of their various tribal (social, religious, cultural) groups to help them decide if they should judge the Tibetan, Bailey, and the Bailey material favorably or unfavorably. They will also tend to hype and distort whatever is said or written about Bailey’s Tibetan. In fact while writing this blog I already know that there are plenty of YouTube videos, articles and websites on the Internet already doing this. Who D.K. or the Tibetan is then, is going to be whoever their leaders claim him to be. And, they are very unlikely to use their minds to dig much further than that.

Group 6. Those in this group tend to have more intellectual capacity. They employ their critical minds more and tend to be more investigative, but they are also highly skeptical of anything that exists beyond the realm of the five senses. That is why they tend to be  secular materialists. If they ever heard about Bailey’s Tibetan they  are very likely to immediately conclude that the Tibetan was a figment of Bailey’s imagination. They would also consider Alice Bailey to be deluded, even if they were kind enough to consider her a well-intentioned woman. The problem with those in Group 6 is they rarely challenge what I call their own “illogical logic.” (See my chapters on Group 6 in my Becoming Human book). Despite the fact that they want to argue that their minds are open, too often their minds are really closed. These close-minded tendencies derive from the fact that they too are still highly kama-manasic, even if they are in fact much more intelligent than those in Groups 1 – 5. For this reason their minds and belief systems still follow along the line of their desires (especially for prestige, power, pleasure, and money). What they care about is what the material world can bring them. As for Alice Bailey’s teachings? They don’t really bring them much.

Group 7 — Little Chelas. Little Chelas are comprised of Aspirants (who actually reside in Group 6) and Probationary Disciples (who are part of Group 7). Little Chelas are opening up to the realities of life beyond the material world and are much more open to discovering what lies beyond what the five senses conveys to them. They are therefore more open-minded and are the most likely of Bailey’s ten groups to be attracted to teachings like those that Alice Bailey gives. And, Little Chelas will be the main ones who want to know who the Tibetan really is. The problem is Little Chelas are likely to take too much of a devotional approach to the Bailey teachings inclining them to be gullible towards understanding who Bailey’s Tibetan may be. Because of their lack of objectivity they can create much glamour and confusion even regarding the Tibetan and his identity.  They may even claim to be in touch with and/or channeling Bailey’s Tibetan themselves. This tendency to want to channel the Tibetan is outlined in my chapters on Probationary Disciples in my Becoming Soul book, where Bailey says that Little Chelas (Aspirants and Probationary Disciples) are subject to what she calls the “problems of guidance.” The “problems of guidance” that Bailey talks about is the tendency to follow teachers (either living in physical bodies or existing on the “inner planes” somewhere) too blindly. This blind devotion happens because Little Chelas simply do not possess enough discernment to analyze various teachers,  teachings, or techniques correctly. Please see my chapters on Aspirants in my Becoming Human book, and Probationary Disciples in my Becoming Soul book to learn more about this.

Group 7 — Chelas in the Light. Here we find greater understanding and experience with realms that exist beyond what the five senses can reveal. Chelas in the Light are much more likely to have a mental understanding of these realms. And, they are more likely to analyse things looking at them from various perspectives including mythical, metaphorical, and scientific viewpoints. They also tend to be much more skeptical and investigative in regards to both inner and outer realms making them similar to those in Group 6. But, whereas those in Group 6 tend to be close minded to realms beyond what the five senses reveal, Chelas in the Light are not. That means Chelas in the Light will be open to the possibility of the existence of Bailey’s Tibetan. At the same time they are  more likely to adhere to what the first few paragraphs in this blog state, that a focus on the teachings, more than the teacher, is the most important thing. This blog post then, will most likely appeal primarily to them.



For decades there have been numerous theories regarding who Bailey’s Tibetan really is. There have even been drawings circulated about claiming to be a likeness of him. The most popular drawing from done during the time Bailey was alive by a woman named Annie Gowland, who painted a picture of Bailey’s Tibetan in 1931. It is claimed that when she saw the drawing Bailey said that, “yes, that was a good likeness of her Tibetan.” There is also a black and white version of this painting that has circulated for decades and as you can see, even that black and white version already has a few variations. Please see these below.

Regarding the colored painting the following information is copied and pasted here from the website of Philip Lindsey. “The DK colored painting is from one of five paintings made in the 1930’s. The original of this particular painting was in the possession of one of the principals of The School for Esoteric Studies in North Carolina, USA, and was passed on to the SES for safekeeping. The SES has a particular lineage with two of its founders participating in some of DK’s experimental groups in the 1940’s, namely ‘RSU’ and ‘FCD’ – Regina Keller and Roberto Assagioli. These groups of aspirants and disciples are discussed in the two books, Discipleship in the New Age (Volumes I & II), by Alice A. Bailey.”

Most people then who follow the Bailey writings and want to be concerned with her who Tibetan really is, look to the images above.


In general it is safe to say that Bailey first became aware of the person known as the Tibetan, or Djwal Khul (D.K.), through her connection to the Theosophical Society. At the time D.K. was one of the Theosophical Masters, who were said to be evolved and realized men in physical human bodies who mainly lived near or in the Himalayas. Helena Blavatsky, who first shared the notion of Masters with the West, referred to D.K. as “that little boy” and there are some assertions that Blavatsky did not believe that D.K. was as evolved as the other Masters around her.

Though Bailey clearly believed that D.K. was a Tibetan lama, ironically, when we look at the name Djwal Khul we discover that it is not at all a Tibetan name. True Bailey claims he was known by a variety of different names. One name the Theosophical Society used to refer to D.K. was Aryasangha, though this may be another blind, because this name simply means the “noble community.” (Note: Please go to the end of this post for my analysis on what the name Djwal Khul may really mean and where the name may have come from).

Just as Blavatsky claimed that her Masters were real human beings, Alice Bailey did the same thing, making it very clear that her Tibetan was a flesh and blood human. Here is a quote from her “Extract from a Statement of the Tibetan, Published August 1934” that is found at the start of just about every one of her books. “Suffice it to say that I am a Tibetan disciple of a certain degree, and this tells you but little…. I live in a physical body like other men on the borders of Tibet, and at times (from an exoteric standpoint) preside over a large group of Tibetan lamas, when my other duties permit. It it this fact that has caused it to be reported that I am an abbot of this particular lamasery.”

In her Unfinished Autobiography, Bailey asserts that her Tibetan was a real man who lived in a physical body and who was the head of a Tibetan lamasery near the borders of Tibet in the region of Shigatse. She also claims to have received letters and packages from him in the mail. For example, she has this to say in response to famed psychologist, Carl Jung, who doubted if her Tibetan was real or not. “I have been told that Jung takes the position that the Tibetan is my personified higher self and Alice A. Bailey is the lower self.  Some of these days (if I ever have the pleasure of meeting him) I will ask him how my personified higher self can send me parcels all the way from India, for that is what He has done” (The Unfinished Autobiography, p. 165).

After this statement in her book Bailey goes on to illustrate how a friend of Bailey’s, Mr. Henry Carpenter, was trying to get into Tibet to reach the Masters on Bailey’s behalf. Though he was not given permission to come into Tibet from India, an Tibetan abbot crossed the border near the Tibetan town of Gyanste to greet him. Mr. Carpenter states that this Tibetan abbot then inquired about Alice Bailey’s Arcane school and asked Mr. Carpenter to deliver some incense to her. Until recently this about all we knew about Alice Bailey’s Tibetan.

Then in 2018 for some reason I was led to do research on the Internet to try to discover who the Tibetan may have been following clues from Bailey.  I focused lamaseries that were said to be near Gyatso and then Shigatse. What I found out was that the head of a lamasary in that area was indeed a “high lama” as Mr. Carpenter claimed he was. In fact, he was the highest lama in all of Tibet, the 9th Panchen Lama. Here he is.

0637425-THUBTEN-CHOEKYI-NYIMA-9th-Panchen-Lama-1883-1937-Tibetan-Buddhist-spiritual-leader-Photographed-in-China-c1930 (1)

I continued my research and started to make claims to friends that the Panchen Lama shown below was a likely candidate for Bailey’s Tibetan. I found other pictures and even a video of him that I saved onto my computer. (See these later in this post). Few thought my intuitions were correct. Then, in 2019, one hundred years after Bailey (who passed away in the 1949) was first said to have had contact with her Tibetan, a photo was shared by Bailey’s grandson of a photo inside Bailey’s apartment in New York, an within that photo was another photo visible on the wall of a man. That man, Bailey’s grandson claimed, was Bailey’s Tibetan. Her grandson says that he knew this because when he had asked Bailey if the man in the photo was D.K. (her Tibetan), Bailey confessed to him that it was. Here then is the photo that Alice Bailey had on her wall that she claimed was a photo of her Tibetan next to a the photo I found of the 9th Panchen Lama in a newspaper magazine clipping. You decide for yourself.

The 9th Panchen Lama – Lobzan Tub-ten Cho-gyi Nyima

This then, the 9th Panchen Lama, is who Alice Bailey herself claims her Tibetan was. He was a real man, who was in fact an abbot of a lamasery at the time she began to write her books. Interestingly enough his lamasery was precisely on the border near the Tibetan town of Gyanste, exactly where Bailey says Henry Carpenter welcomed him. And, when Mr. Carpenter greeted him Bailey writes that Mr. Carpenter was informed that the lama who greeting him was of very high status. As the Panchen Lama of Tibet, you can’t get any higher in status. That is because the Panchen Lama in the Tibetan system is the highest lama that exists, higher up than the Dalai Lama himself.

Having researched the life of the 9th Panchen Lama – Lobzan Tub-ten Cho-gyi Nyima — on the Internet, (including finding videos of him visiting China , see below)  I was stunned to see some other facts line up that might indicate that he could have been Bailey’s Tibetan. First, he crossed over into India as a young boy with a group of Tibetans around the time Blavatsky was around. Her reference to him as “that little boy” then lines up, because he would have been a little boy at the time Blavatsky was said to have known him. Second, he was very modern for his times (he flew around in airplanes), and even spoke English and Chinese as well as Tibetan. In the early 1900’s he felt a certain sense of urgency to get Tibet to enter into the modern world. He even felt it crucial that Tibet and China learn to establish better relations, as he felt there would be difficulty if they did not. Unfortunately, the 13th Dalai Lama at the time did not agree with him. That Dalai Lama argued that Tibetans should take up arms against the Chinese. The 9th Panchen Lama did not agree with him asserting that Tibet did not have the means to fight the Chinese (something the 9th Panchen Lama would have understood first hand as he, unlike the 13th Dalai Lama had for sometime been traveling outside of Tibet). Sadly, the two men entered into conflict.  In fact, the 13th Dala Lama even attempted to take money from the Panchen Lama’s monastery so Tibet could go to war with China. The disagreement between the 9th Panchen Lama and the 13th Dalai Lama actually resulted in  the 8th Panchen Lama – Lobzan Tub-ten Cho-gyi Nyima — being forced out of Tibet and into exile in China of all places.

Here is an excerpt from Wikipedia about this event. “In 1924, the thirteenth Dalai Lama prohibited the 9th Panchen Lama’s followers from holding any office in the Central Tibetan government and imprisoned them in Lhasa, prompting the Panchen Lama to flee to Inner Mongolia, China.[32][33] The Dalai Lama was attempting to collect revenue from the Panchen Lama’s estate to cover Tibet’s military expenses, and to reduce the power of the Panchen Lama.[34] In China, the ninth Panchen Lama worked on plans to develop Tibet.[35] He also held a position in the Mongolian and Tibetan Affairs Commission, and was considered extremely “pro Chinese”.[36][37][38] There, he adopted the ideas of Sun Yatsen through revolutionary Pandatsang Rapga of the Tibet Improvement Party.[39][40]”

As a side note having learned about the above fight between the 9th Panchen Lama and the 13th Dalai Lama, I suddenly understood why I have heard the current 14th Dalai Lama say once that the invasion of China into Tibet was partially the Tibetan’s fault. Also, tragically when the 14th Dalai Lama (the one we presently all know) recognized the 9th Panchen Lama’s reincarnation to have come back into physical existence, the Chinese government kidnapped the young boy and took him to China. Since then no one knows what has happened to the young boy (who would now be a man if the Chinese government did not have him killed). The Chinese government then turned around and handpicked their own 10th Panchen Lama training him on their own outside of Tibet and the typical system used in Tibetan lamaseries and culture. That is who most people consider the 10th Panchen Lama (spiritual head of Tibetan Buddhism to be).


The Drawings

(Note: In these drawings of DK that Bailey says is a reasonable likeness of him, how the color of this costume is more Chinese like, than Tibetan. That also fits with the 9th Panchen Lama, who often wore CHINESE clothes).

Photos of the 9th Panchen Lama 

panchen lama4

Additional photos of the Panchen Lama that are available.

Panchen_Lama_and_entourage_in_Calcutta,_1906 (1)
The Panchen Lama as a young man in India. Blavatsky’s “that young boy?”
0637425-THUBTEN-CHOEKYI-NYIMA-9th-Panchen-Lama-1883-1937-Tibetan-Buddhist-spiritual-leader-Photographed-in-China-c1930 (1)
The 9th Panchen Lama in his Lamasery
Panchen Lama, China
The 9th Panchen Lama in China (Notice the Chinese robe)

YouTube Video of the 9th Panchen Lama in Shanghai Harbor in 1934



The Case for YES.

Here are the facts that indicate that perhaps he really was. First, Bailey herself claims that the photo I have here, the one of the 9th Panchen Lama, that looks just like the photo on her living room wall, was her Tibetan. Second, most of the facts line up. The Panchen Lama was in fact a Tibetan, the head of a lamasery, that was in the region Bailey claimed he was. He was also a very important (if not the most important) Tibetan at the time, meaning he had the power and means to not only be exposed to Tibetan spiritual teachings, but teachings of other faiths. We know that he lived in India for some time. We know for a fact he interacted with the Theosophical society. And, we know that he seemed to be a very modern Tibetan!  He spoke English, traveled in airplanes, and wore modern clothes (not just his Tibetan robes). And he was passionate about trying to bridge East and West. All this fits the profile of someone who would want to reach out and try to get certain teachings out to the world so that East and West would become more receptive to each other.

He also paid a heavy price for his desire to get Tibet more modernized as I have illustrated above in his conflict with the 13th Dalai Lama, and even possibly suffering once more in his reincarnation as the 10th Panchen Lama (who this time was captured and taken into exile and possibly even as a young boy killed). Looking back at what has since happened to Tibet, perhaps the 13th Dalai Lama should have followed the advice of Lobzan Tub-ten Cho-gyi Nyima, the 9th Panchen Lama, and tried to bridge Tibet more into the modern world. By following the 9th Panchen Lama’s advice to create stronger alliances with the West, and to make greater efforts to get along with China, instead of believing Tibet could somehow militarily fight them off, Tibet may not have been invaded. Who knows?

Considering the 9th Panchen Lama as Bailey’s Tibetan also makes sense because he lived where Bailey claimed he lived and headed a lamasery right where she said he did. Perhaps, then yes, this is Alice Bailey’s real Tibetan.

The Case for Maybe NO!

First of all, some people argue that the 9th Panchen Lama, Chökyi Nyima, who left his physical body as of 1937 (eight years before Bailey passed over in 1949) could not have been Bailey’s Tibetan because he was dead and gone during the last twelve years that Alice Bailey was doing the major part of her writings. (Note: Bailey wrote her books from 1919 to 1949).

In some ways that argument could easily be countered. After all we are told that Alice Bailey was writing all of her books “telepathically.” Perhaps it didn’t really matter that the 9th Panchen Lama was no longer in a physical body.  I mean when it comes to telepathically receiving messages from someone, how do any of us really know how to answer the question as to whether someone is in communication with someone who is alive, or dead, or both?

Next some argue that the 9th Panchen Lama could not have been Bailey’s Tibetan because she claims that her Tibetan had already reached what she calls the 5th initiation somewhere in the mid to late 19th century (between the 1850’s to 1890’s), and that means he had created the “mayavirupa” (the “body of illusion”), meaning after this point he could not have reincarnated again into a physical form. Therefore, they believe that the 9th Panchen Lama could not have been Bailey’s Tibetan because he did come back in a physical body. He was born and he died like every other human being.

But, what is the mayavirupa really? Well, it is hard to know because frankly there are different opinions about it and there is not a lot of information out there about what it is. But in general the mayavirupa is thought to be something that looks like either a light body (which is more like a resurrection body), or it can even look solid like a physical body, but really isn’t. We see an example of this in one of the latest Star Wars movies, where Luke Skywalker confronts Kylo Ren. Luke appears to be a physical person fighting against Kylo Ren, until Kylo Ren tries to kill Luke and we discover that Kylo can’t kill Luke, because though Luke looks like a solid human being, he is really just a very solid looking hologram. Turns out Luke is actually far away on another planet, projecting that holographic image towards Kylo. We see then that the mayavirupa is much like a video game avatar image that we project out into space. Or, like some of the modern day 3D hologram images that are created through our modern day that can project what look like almost solid images of ourselves out there in front of others. To let you know I have at times seen CNN use this technology to interview people. When they do it looks like a slightly broken up image of the person is standing in front of them, instead of just a moving image of them coming at you through a television screen.

The only problem with the argument of saying that once you reach the 5th initiation you can’t come back into a physical body in the normal way, is that even Alice Bailey doesn’t agree with that premise. First off, her Tibetan says himself a the start of everyone of her books that he is a Tibetan living in a physical body. And, (see Addendum where I have other quotes at the bottom of this post), Bailey says 5th degree initiates (who can create a mayavirupa) can decide to reincarnate like ordinary human beings who get born and die just like everyone else. Finally, it seem incredulous then to try to imply that Bailey’s Tibetan lama, who states he headed up a lamasery for many years, was doing so not in a real physical body, but in a mayavirupa, leading that lamasery and living in our world always in a state of being only apparently real!  But, if that is what you want to believe, then it makes sense to argue that the 9th Panchen Lama is not the Tibetan.

The Case for Maybe YES!

Which leads us back to “yes” then maybe the 9th Panchen Lama was in fact Bailey’s Tibetan. That is because the mayavirupa can be viewed in a few ways. First, you can see it as a physical body you consciously create before you are born (like getting all the atoms and DNA figured out), and then you project that consciously constructed image into a physical body at the time of conception. You can also see the mayvirupa more as a light body that is like that holographic, video game avatar, Luke Skywalker analogy, that I just talked about earlier. Actually, if you read the Bailey books you can see that she talks about the mayavirupa in both these ways (see the quotes from Bailey on this at the end of this blog). You will also find that if you do the research the Tibetan Buddhist tradition itself talks about the mayavirupa in these two manners.

The mayavirupa is also found within the Hindu tradition, and along these lines I refer to classic book The Autobiography of a Yogi writen by Paramahansa Yogananda.  In this book Yogananda talks about a few cases where his gurus use a mayavirupa. One example is when his guru, Swami Sri Yukteswar Giri, appeared to Yogananda looking just like a solid human being. But, then after the conversation with Yogananda was over, his guru — Swami Sri Yukteswar Giri — was said to have rolled himself up like a scroll before  disappearing.

Now, Swami Sri Yukteswar Giri was very much in a physical body. He was born and died  just like everyone else does. That implies that yes, you can be a 5th degree initiate and come back into physical incarnation. (Again Bailey also confirms this, see the quotes at the bottom of this page). And, you can also use a mayavirupa both while you are in and out of a physical incarnation. For example, Yogananda states that after his guru,  Swami Sri Yukteswar Giri died, he again appeared to Yogananda in what what looked more like an etheric light body. This is similar to the “resurrection” body that comes from the Christian tradition, meaning that the “resurrection” body may be equivalent to the mayavirupa (something Bailey also insinuates).

All of this demonstrates that maybe yes, Bailey’s Tibetan could very well have been the 9th Panchen Lama because he could have: 1) taken the 5th initiation in his previous incarnation before becoming the 9th Panchen Lama. Then he could have come back into a physical body as the 9th Panchen Lama having already mastered this “projection” technique. 2) he might have even used his knowledge of how to create the mayavirupa while out of incarnation by consciously building the the characteristics (including the DNA) of his next physical body incarnation as the 9th Panchen Lama.

The point I am making is taking the 5th initiation does not mean that you don’t come back in a new physical body that may look different than the body you had before. (Again read the quotes from Bailey at the end of this post). It may simply mean that you know how to consciously create your next physical body before you incarnate into it, or that you have learned the technique of creating a mayavirupa (which is a lot like creating a video game avatar) that you can project in front of others at will. And, this may also mean that you are not stuck with your “video game avatar” forever, you can change it whenever you want to. Either by changing its appearance in a physical body, or by changing its appearance in etheric substance. Your choice! So again, yes maybe, the 9th Panchen Lama  learned to create a mayavirupa before he incarnated as the 9th Panchen Lama, lived his life as the 9th Panchen Lama, and then died. And, even after he died yes maybe, he stayed in touch with Bailey and communicated with her through a less solid more holographic kind of mayavirupa as he helped to dictate the rest of her (his?) books, just as Yogananda’s guru, Swami Sri Yukteswar Giri, communicated certain information after he was technically dead, to Yogananda.

The Case for NO!

When I first got into the Bailey teachings and questioned the validity of the Tibetan, I was shown the passage in her Unfinished Autobiography of how the Tibetan gave her incense as proof that the Tibetan was a real person and not just a figment of Bailey’s imagination. Later (a year before the word came out that Bailey had a picture of her Tibetan on her wall), I had already come to wonder about the 9th Panchen Lama being her Tibetan because of my research on the Internet. For a time then I was convinced that Bailey’s Tibetan might be real.

Until I started to reflect on experiences from my own life that made me a little skeptical again. To begin with Bailey is using as proof the notion that Tibetan telepathically dictated her books to her, the fact that her Tibetan was known to have sent letters or packages she states she got from him (and others claim do exist) as “proof.” Only one problem, though that may prove that there was someone (aka a Tibetan) giving her letters and packages, that does not necessarily mean that he was telepathically communicating with her. I mean unless there are letters things like, “How are my books that I am telepathically communicating to you coming along?” Or, “Good work on writing those books for me. Your telepathic skills are awesome,” — how do we really know he was telepathically dictating books to her?

Why do I say this? I say it based on my own experience with real live in the flesh Tibetans. You see in 1989, I was volunteering at the East/West Conference in Southern California. This was the year the 14th Dali Lama received his Nobel Peace Prize so he was at this conference. Because I was a volunteer I was often backstage and I met a high lama and some of the monks from Gaden Shartse Monastery. I even became initiated as a White Tara by this lama. For years, I kept in touch with some of the monks from this monastery. One of them even made a special trip by airplane from Texas (where they were giving talks) to California (where I lived) exclusively to come see me and bring me a special package from the abbot of this lamasery. I still have what was given to me today. It is a vase filled with something (I have never opened it to find out), with a double dorje symbol on top of it.

Looking back at my own experiences with an abbot and monks from the Gaden Shartse Monastery,, it occurred to me.  What if I now believed I was in touch with this high abbot of the Gaden Shartse Monastery on a regular basis and started to believe that he was now telepathically trying to write books through me? I mean I have his picture. Someone could have easily made a drawing of it. I know that we were physically in touch. And, he even sent me a vase after personally instructing one of his monks to fly out to see me in a remote area of California to give it to me. I mean I have the proof! Here is the vase. With this proof I could easily write book after book claiming that this abbot was telepathically working through me and point to my communications and my vase to prove that this was all real.

But, would that really make it so? Unless I am in a process of talking through emails or a cell phone back and forth about the books I could claim to be writing with him, and others could see or hear him saying to me, “Hey Lisa great job on that book you wrote with me. Your telepathic skills are awesome” there is no proof that even though I thought he might be writing books through me, he really was. (And NO, I DO NOT THINK he is writing even these books through me so don’t go down that path on my behalf now).

My point here is not whether an Abbot from the Gaden Shartse Monastery is helping me write this book. I don’t believe that is happening at all. I believe I have read enough books and had enough of my own experience to come to the conclusions I am putting forth in this blog using my own intuition and capacity for investigative work. What I am saying, however, is using my own experience as an example — it is possible that Bailey may have thought she was having a “Tibetan” like the 9th Panchen Lama dictate these books through her, and despite this belief, Carl Jung may have been right. She may have made the entire thing of taking dictation from some Tibetan up and could have been using the photo of the 9th Panchen Lama and any of her interactions with him to justify the notion that she was in telepathic communication! So, then no, the 9th Panchen Lama was not her “Tibetan.”

My main point though is having gone through all of this WHO CARES?

What matters is the message, not the messenger!

Still I get it, all of us are curious. So let’s take a moment to look at what our motivations are for being more attached to the messenger than the message and get some insights into ourselves there.



Here are some psychological and psycho-spiritual reasons we may care more about the messenger than the message and what the message says itself. Here are just a few thoughts that come quickly to my mind.

  1. We feel comforted in our confused, lonely, scary lives to know there is someone out there watching over us who knows better than us how to make our own lives and the world right.
  2. We seek a role model, someone who can show us the way, which is fine. But, when we focus too much on the messenger, we tend to do so through a lack of discernment. When this happens we fail to see if the person we are looking to for guidance (guru, lama, pastor, rabbi etc.) is truly walking their talk and giving us really helpful advice through their message, so that we can make our own lives, and the world a better place. Because we focus too little on the message and how the person is actually living their lives, we get steeped in glamour. We may even excuse behaviors in the messenger that should not be excused (a problem Little Chelas are especially prone to according to Bailey’s teachings).
  3. We want to feel special. This is especially appealing if our own lives are a mess. One of the best ways to feel special is to be part of a special group who claim to be in touch with some special people. This makes us feel well — that much more — special! Now we can forget about having to become familiar with what many spiritual disciplines say about what it takes to actually become a spiritual person. We can forget about the message and all the disciplines it says we have to go through. We can just automatically accelerate our own spiritual standing and become special just because we rub elbows or claim to be in touch with, very special people.
  4. We want to become important in the eyes of others. And, what better way is there to do that than by getting others to believe that we are associated with people of high spiritual standing. In fact, some side benefits of being more important in the eyes of others because of the spiritual people we claim to be in touch with, is that we are also able to convince those around us to give us important goodies (like money, pleasure, power) to make us feel a lot better and make our lives a lot easier.
  5. In this scenario our motives are less selfish. Maybe they are based more in some mental curiosity that is connected to some research we are attempting to do, such as trying to find out if two people really can be telepathically receptive to each other, which is something that the Institute for Noetic Science is doing. Of course, what we discover here is not necessarily for our own personal gain. Rather, it is meant to further humanity’s overall understanding as we engage in psychic research.
  6. Maybe we are just trying to do research and our attempts to understand the background of certain individuals and the claims about them helps us to gain greater clarity and insight for the purpose of helping us shift out of our own misunderstanding and glamours about them. That way we can free ourselves from an attachment to the messenger, and get back to focusing on the message, which is more important.



Personally? As a female, I would love it if I found out that Alice Bailey made up her Tibetan and had actually wrote all these books herself (even if she believed this wasn’t true). I would say to her (since she was an English woman), “Bloody well good on you!” Though they can be mind-boggling frustrating and at times strangely convoluted from my point of view, her books remain full of brilliant insights that continue to stand the test of time. That is why I am bothering presenting them to you.

But then again, maybe some Tibetan lama did telepathically write them through her. I for one believe this to be possible.  At the same time I am willing to admit that I just don’t know for sure. And, honestly it doesn’t matter that much to me. What matters more to me is in fact the teachings themselves, which is why this blog exists and why I spend so much of my life trying to understand them, share them, and most important of all try to apply them! I encourage you to do the same as well.




Here is what I have found out about this very strange and not very used name.

KHOOL… this spelling of the name is always used as a first name, not a last name and that first name is connected to Manipur in India (near Myanmar, formerly Burma).

KUHL is actually a German name! Kuhl comes from the Middle Low German word “kule,” meaning a “hollow” or “depression.” There are also several places in the northern part of Germany with that name. You can find migrations of this name to the United states in the mid 1700’s and 1800’s.

KHOL is another derivative of the name, which is a two sided drum in Bengali.

KOHL is a word from from Bohemia. it refers to a community that is somewhat “bohemian.”

KHUL. This spelling can be found in Tibet. Khul is a Tibetan word meaning ‘region, jurisdiction etc.’, but this is not used in reference to people in Tibet.

KUL or KULA, (Sanskrit: “assembly,” or “family”). In India the word ‘khul’ is a rendering of the word kula that in India refers to one’s group, family or community’. Throughout India, except in the south, a family unit or, in some instances, an extended family, are called a kul or kula. Most commonly kul refers to an existing family, though sometimes this sense is extended—for example, when “family” implies a sense of lineage. As such, kul describes, in the Indian context, the patrilocal family unit, often made up of three generations who live together in a compound headed by the grandfather or his eldest son, into which the brides of the various generations are absorbed. The family holds its property in common, as division of possessions is traditionally frowned upon.

The splitting up of the joint family and the reforming into new units normally takes place on the death of the grandfather. The joint family system had a beneficial effect on the consolidation of landholdings and the sharing of resources but is steadily disappearing under modern pressures of economic mobility, improved communications, and widening job opportunities.

Special usages of kul, or kula, are found in such appellations as Agnikula (“Family of the Fire God”), a putative ancient dynasty from which the Rājputs of Rājasthān derive their claim to be Kshatriyas (nobles). Another is the gurukula (“guru’s family”) system of education, in which a pupil, after his initiation, lives in the house of his guru, or teacher, and studies the Veda and other subjects under his guru’s guidance. —  Encyclopedia Brittanica Website

Doing further research I also found this about the word KUL. “There are several major subdivisions of Rajputs, known as vansh or vamsha, the step below the super-division jati. These vansh delineate claimed descent from various sources, and the Rajput are generally considered to be divided into three primary vansh: Suryavanshi denotes descent from the solar deity Surya, Chandravanshi from the lunar deity Chandra, and Agnivanshi from the fire deity Agni. Lesser-noted vansh include Udayvanshi, Rajvanshi, and Rishivanshi. The histories of the various vanshs were later recorded in documents known as vanshaavaliis. Beneath the vansh division are smaller and smaller subdivisions: kul, shakh (“branch”), khamp or khanp (“twig”), and nak (“twig tip”). Marriages within a kul are generally disallowed (with some flexibility for kul-mates of different gotra lineages). The kul serves as primary identity for many of the Rajput clans, and each kul is protected by a family goddess, the kuldevi.”

DJWAL. It has some connection to the Sanskrit word jwala-, meaning ‘light, flame or illumination.’ Treated as a Hindi name, the final a’s of both words would be silent; thus you would say it as jwal kul.

In short, perhaps the name Djwal Kuhl is really a made up name. Put the two words together of jwal and kul connected to the Sanskrit and what do you get?



How interesting because this name has a similar meaning of the Aryasangha name that was also once attributed to Djwal Kuhl, which we mentioned before means “noble community” since Arya means “noble” and sangha means “community.”


Finally, some in the Theosophical Society claim that Djwal Kul was also known by the name Gai Ben-Jamin in his youth, that was before he became an Adept. He is often referred to as the Master D. K. and is also known as “The Tibetan”. Edward Abdill, in his book Masters of the Wisdom, uses the spelling Djual Khool, and also asserts that in the Mahatma Letters, the “Master K.H.” asserts that “D.K.” was only a high chela, not yet a Master at the time. In the book The Masters Revealed: Madame Blavatsky and the Myth of the Great White Lodge by K. Paul Johnson, he asserts that Djual Khool was really a man named Dayal Singh.


These two points are given to you for the first time in the sequential giving out of the occult teaching; hints have, however, prepared the way for these two facts.  Information has also been given anent the mayavirupa through which the Master works and contacts the three worlds and which He deliberately creates in order to serve His purposes and plans.  It is a definite substitute for the personality and can only be created when the old personality (built and developed during the cycle of incarnation) has been eliminated.  I prefer the word “eliminated” to the word “destroyed.”  The structure—at the time of elimination—persists, but its separative life has gone.

If you will think clearly about this statement, you will see that a very complete integration is now possible.  The personality life has been absorbed; the personality form is still left, but it persists without any real life of its own; this means that it can now be the recipient of energies and forces needed by the working initiate or Master in order to carry on the work or salvaging humanity.  Students would find it of value to study the three “appearances of the Christ” as recorded in the Gospel story:

  1. His transfigured appearance upon the Mount of Transfiguration.  That episode depicts symbolically the radiant soul, and also the three vacated bodies of the personality, and hints also at a future building of a vehicle of manifestation.  St. Peter says, “Lord, let us here build three huts” or tabernacles.
  2. His appearance as truth itself (silent yet present) before the bar or judgment seat of Pilate—repudiated by the world of men but recognised by the Hierarchy.
  3. His radiant appearances after the resurrection initiation:
  4. To the woman at the sepulchre—symbolising His contact with Humanity.
  5. To the two disciples on the way to Emmaus—symbolising His contact with the Hierarchy.
  6. To the twelve disciples in the upper chamber—symbolising His contact with the Council Chamber of the Lord of the World at Shamballa.

You can thus see the factual nature of the results to which I earlier referred in this instruction.  The disciple who has eliminated (in the technical sense as well as in the mystical sense) the hold of the personality has now the “freedom of the Ashram,” as it is called; he can move at will among his fellow disciples and initiates.  There will be nothing in his vibratory life or his quality which can disturb the rhythm of the Ashram; there will be nothing to call forth the “calming intervention” of the Master, as is frequently the case during the earlier stages of discipleship; nothing can now interfere with those higher contacts and spheres of influence which have hitherto been sealed to the disciple because of the intrusion of his own personality. Esoteric Healing, p. 518 – 520

How will these Members of the Hierarchy in Their various grades appear on earth? Will They come through the methods of ordinary birth, of childhood and maturity? Some initiates may follow this ordinary pattern, some are already passing through it today and are in the stages of infancy and adolescence; to them will be given a large share of the preparatory work. Some will not pass through these relatively limiting phases… Some of the Masters will create what is called in the language of the East the “mayavirupa”—a vehicle of expression which is built of atomic physical and astral substance and of concrete mental substance. This they can create at will, use at will and cause to vanish at will. Externalization of the Hierarchy, pp. 696 – 697.

[ccli] 52: The Mayavirupa is literally the illusory form; it is the body of temporary manifestation which the Adept creates on occasion through the power of the will and in which He functions in order to make certain contacts on the physical plane and to engage in certain work for the race. A Treatise on Cosmic Fire, Footnotes.

In the second method the student pictures himself as the ideal man.  He visualises himself as the exponent of all the virtues, and he attempts in his daily life to make himself what he visualises himself to be.  This method is employed by the more mental types, the intellectuals, and those whose ray is not so coloured by love, by devotion or by harmony.  It is not so common as the first.  The mental thoughtform thus built up serves as the mayavirupa as did the other and the man passes from these forms into the higher consciousness.  As you therefore see, in building these forms certain steps will have to be taken and each type will build the form somewhat differently. Letters on Occult Meditation, p. 146

One or other of these three can, if so He will, occupy a body on the physical plane which will not be simply a created mayavirupa. A Treatise on Cosmic Fire, p. 1193

Copyright © 2020 by Lisa Love. All rights reserved. No part of this blog may be reproduced or transmitted in any form, or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, computer, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the author.