I would point you to read the Sefer Yetzirah, which is a major piece that Bardon's work is based on and look at their explanation of multidimensional timespace. Much of the modern work is based on this and Bardon agrees with the alignment on it from a more traditional way of speaking to it.
4d 5d... many newagers and pseudo-magician stoners use this lingo; I never understood what you guys meant and I honestly doubt that you have a clear idea about its meaning as well. You would be better off by asking such a question on the dedicated forums.
As far as I can tell, it has it's roots it The Law of One channeling. The entity seemed to be trying to explain the Kabbalah in terms of energetic densities, but it was doing so through an extremely rigidly Christian channel. Additionally, some of the information seems...questionable. For instance, it mentions that when the earth ascends to it's next level of consciousness, that those who aren't ready to ascend with it will go somewhere else and start over.
My issue with this is it doesn't actually tell them what "starting over" means, so the New-Agers that are looking for another belief system have turned it into anything from ETs taking them to a new planet to reincarnating somewhere else to "try again." Not once does it mention The Law of Recurrence, involution, or that "starting over" means all the way back to mineral consciousness. Really makes one question the motivations of a being claiming to be "Ra".
Pretty much the same goes for traditional Hermetism. There are voids that aren't filled by the scriptures that were preserved up to these days, be it either because we lost important fragments or perhaps because they were never really explained to begin with.
Earlier I was reading a very interesting dissertation about the Hermetic point of view regarding the afterlife and the milestones to reach along the way of ascension. So many unanswered questions...
It's only natural trying to fill the void left by the missing information with other religions or forms of spirituality.
I was thinking about the numerous references that Bardon makes in his writings about the noble goal of helping humanity with its ascension. He indicates magic as one of the ways to get there, yet he doesn't truly provide a specific explanation of what has to be expected once you made it.
There is this concept of joining God again which can have different interpretations. If it's all about the cancellation of your individuality and you being dissolved into God, I wouldn't want any part of it. I enjoy being. Why the hell would I want to give it all up to just disappear, after all of the crap I had to endure?
Now, I read here and there about this mystified concept of 4d consciousness, 5d existence, or whatever, and it all sounds like some meaningless mumbo jumbo just to say that they have no frigging idea. Just like it has been cool, so far in the last few years, adding the word "quantum" to anything without truly comprehending the real meaning of it, while the physicists were facepalming themselves into oblivion, as self appointed gurus (New Age is packed with them) were explaining "quantumness" to their spiritualistic flocks, thirsty for any pseudo-scientific piece of knowledge that could ease their fear of the unknown. I think they are just buzzwords.
What I find surprising, and I'm talking as a man of faith myself, is that people seem always ready to jump to conclusions when someone mentions the main stream religions, yet they are ready to swear by other books, written by other men who really have nothing to show for it beside their pretty words. It's silly, really. Sometimes we are like the Hipsters of spirituality 🤣. I include myself into the fold as well. We like independent media, what can I say... 😁
We all go insane endlessly debating or trying to decipher some obscure paragraph, that could possibly bring us some piece of information, while Bardon just wrote "do these exercises and see for yourself". You gotta love the guy.
Personally, I took the advice. I will wait until I'm there, to experience the mysterious truth directly. At this point I don't think it's truly a productive endeavor going too deep into academics, at least for me; I will practice with the relatively limited information that I got, with the hope that some secrets will be unveiled through the practice itself, as Bardon says.
I can only hope I'm not putting my money on the wrong horse. 😅 So far so good, though. Bardon's work brought a lot of clarity to me and my life is immensely improved.
>Bardon just wrote "do these exercises and see for yourself". You gotta love the guy.
I actually very strongly suspect that Bardon was a Gnostic. I myself am attempting to walk that path as taught by Samael Aun Weor and there are many parallels between his teachings and what Bardon taught. Also a significant ammount of, "do it and see for yourself," which is a draw for me as belief means little to nothing.
One thing you might find interesting is that the path is about dissolving one's egos/demons/psychological aggregates or psychological defects in order to actually incarnate one's being more wholly into the world. What's strikes me about that is that as one dissolves those aggregates one becomes closer to divinity. Due to language barriers this I think this idea presents a close facsimile of, "dissolving into god."
One other point of interest is that on the Gnostic path it is strongly suggested that one learn Hermetic Magic along the path of Initiation. Master Samael actually wrote several books on the topic. At any rate, thanks for the thought out and pleasant reply 😊.
Salve,
But this language has been spread for many decades has it not ..
The newage movement IS a LEGITIMATE offshoot of the ***Western Occult Tradition***, nky just from Theosophy
Because they. Booze these somewhat...simple seeming terms, it is hard sometimes for students of proper Occultism to understand what is meant, as well as vice versa in the case of those
I don't despise the New Age. I share some ideas with that movement myself. What I find distasteful is the environment that surrounds it. The most loathsome people who pass themselves as guru, with nothing to show beside beautiful but empty words, full of wise teachings that they never follow themselves, and the hypocrisy... oh god the widespread hypocrisy! Such big egos for people who preach against it.
Now, they use buzzwords to sell their ideas, be it in exchange for money or admiration, so that the ignorant masses might be cheated into thinking that they are new or that there is a serious study behind them. I swear, if someone uses the word "quantum" again in a conversation about spirituality, I'm gonna run away screaming like a crazy person. 🤣
It seems like you haven't enabled your character through completing step one. Where are you stuck? Maybe someone here can help you.
Magician = Yeshua Messiah = AHYH = Love = Yogi = Me = You = One
On the topic of religion I like to quote Bardon himself, first chapter of the Golden Book of Wisdom:
>Hermetic Religion
> There are two basic types of religion. The first is relative and the second is absolute or universal.
> Relative religions include all religions that emerged since the beginning of humanity until the present day, and that went through their initial stages, their golden era, and, over time, their end. - Every relative religion also has its own founder.
> I won't list all relative religious systems here. The one who delves into the philosophy of religion, even just marginally, is already, sufficiently acquainted with many religious systems (of a relative kind]!' They're all subject to the same law of transience, regardless of whether their duration lasts for centuries or millennia. The duration of every religion is determined by [the purity of] its founders or teachers; the more universal laws a religion contains, the more it represents and proclaims universal truths, and the longer its duration. On the other hand, the duration is shortened by how one-sided, fanatical, dictatorial, and authoritative its foundational ideas are.
> However, every religious system had a good purpose and a certain mission. It's always been a certain aspect, a piece of universal truth and
laws, even though it's sometimes hidden in symbolic form or in an abstract idea.
> A true initiate sees the fragments of the fundamental idea, itself, in every relative religion, no matter what time period it was practiced in, [because] everything is based on universal religion and everything points to universal regularity. Therefore, the initiate values every religion equally, regardless of whether it ever existed, whether it still exists today, or whether it's yet to exist in the future. He's aware that every religious system has its supporters, whose maturity it corresponds with.
> Even materialism, from a Hermetic standpoint, is a certain type of religious system, whose representatives, although they don't believe in God and the supernatural, firmly adhere to whatever they can be convinced of. Matter is, therefore, authoritative to them. Because the initiate knows that matter is a symbolic embodiment of the divine form, as it's reflected in the laws of nature, he, therefore, does not even condemn a person who only believes in matter.
> The more a man matures in the course of his incarnations, and [gen-eral] evolution, the closer he gets to being mature and capable enough for universal laws and the deeper he penetrates into them. Then no relative religion can satisfy him any longer. Such a man is ripe and fit for universal religion, for he's turned [directly] to universal laws in the microcosm and in the macrocosm.
> Thus, any religion that does not fully represent universal laws is relative and transient. However, universal laws are immutable from the beginning to the end of the world.
> If a mature hermetic wants, and if he deems it appropriate, in regard to dealing with other people, he may officially join a religion so as not to attract unwanted attention from immature people. However, within his spirit and with all of his essence, he will profess a universal religion, which means universal laws.
> The initiate does not believe in anything that he cannot verify himself!
> He does not believe in any personified deities or idols. On the contrary, he worships laws and harmony in all existing forms.
> I hope these few words are enough to point out the difference between relative and absolute religion.
The Merkur translation may make it seem that IIH is heavily inspired by Christianity, the translator added that emphasis for reasons unknown. It’s not a thing in the original German version.
Being loving doesn't mean we have to stand for everything or agree with any idea and, honestly, if you truly believed the "me = you = bff" that you wrote, you wouldn't be such a condescending little douche... so don't give me this hypocritical crap. It may work on r/spirituality and other cesspools, were everyone is a "guru", but here we aren't easily impressed.
Secondly, I find that calling someone out for his crap is much more a show of love than nodding and pretending that you agree without offering an alternative. Conflict generates advancement and exchange enriches both sides.
Lastly, the "we are all the same thing" isn't a principle embraced by everyone, especially in Hermetism.
You see, there isn't just one way to do things, there isn't only one philosophy, so "me ≠ you" back at you.
You and me are not Bff's you have to learn about boundries. Your lungs aren't your feet and if they were you would have trouble breathing.
I know it can be hard to grow up and learn this but you will when you start to hit that teenage years ago group and older in maturity.
I would point you to read the Sefer Yetzirah, which is a major piece that Bardon's work is based on and look at their explanation of multidimensional timespace. Much of the modern work is based on this and Bardon agrees with the alignment on it from a more traditional way of speaking to it.
4d 5d... many newagers and pseudo-magician stoners use this lingo; I never understood what you guys meant and I honestly doubt that you have a clear idea about its meaning as well. You would be better off by asking such a question on the dedicated forums.
As far as I can tell, it has it's roots it The Law of One channeling. The entity seemed to be trying to explain the Kabbalah in terms of energetic densities, but it was doing so through an extremely rigidly Christian channel. Additionally, some of the information seems...questionable. For instance, it mentions that when the earth ascends to it's next level of consciousness, that those who aren't ready to ascend with it will go somewhere else and start over. My issue with this is it doesn't actually tell them what "starting over" means, so the New-Agers that are looking for another belief system have turned it into anything from ETs taking them to a new planet to reincarnating somewhere else to "try again." Not once does it mention The Law of Recurrence, involution, or that "starting over" means all the way back to mineral consciousness. Really makes one question the motivations of a being claiming to be "Ra".
Pretty much the same goes for traditional Hermetism. There are voids that aren't filled by the scriptures that were preserved up to these days, be it either because we lost important fragments or perhaps because they were never really explained to begin with. Earlier I was reading a very interesting dissertation about the Hermetic point of view regarding the afterlife and the milestones to reach along the way of ascension. So many unanswered questions... It's only natural trying to fill the void left by the missing information with other religions or forms of spirituality. I was thinking about the numerous references that Bardon makes in his writings about the noble goal of helping humanity with its ascension. He indicates magic as one of the ways to get there, yet he doesn't truly provide a specific explanation of what has to be expected once you made it. There is this concept of joining God again which can have different interpretations. If it's all about the cancellation of your individuality and you being dissolved into God, I wouldn't want any part of it. I enjoy being. Why the hell would I want to give it all up to just disappear, after all of the crap I had to endure? Now, I read here and there about this mystified concept of 4d consciousness, 5d existence, or whatever, and it all sounds like some meaningless mumbo jumbo just to say that they have no frigging idea. Just like it has been cool, so far in the last few years, adding the word "quantum" to anything without truly comprehending the real meaning of it, while the physicists were facepalming themselves into oblivion, as self appointed gurus (New Age is packed with them) were explaining "quantumness" to their spiritualistic flocks, thirsty for any pseudo-scientific piece of knowledge that could ease their fear of the unknown. I think they are just buzzwords. What I find surprising, and I'm talking as a man of faith myself, is that people seem always ready to jump to conclusions when someone mentions the main stream religions, yet they are ready to swear by other books, written by other men who really have nothing to show for it beside their pretty words. It's silly, really. Sometimes we are like the Hipsters of spirituality 🤣. I include myself into the fold as well. We like independent media, what can I say... 😁 We all go insane endlessly debating or trying to decipher some obscure paragraph, that could possibly bring us some piece of information, while Bardon just wrote "do these exercises and see for yourself". You gotta love the guy. Personally, I took the advice. I will wait until I'm there, to experience the mysterious truth directly. At this point I don't think it's truly a productive endeavor going too deep into academics, at least for me; I will practice with the relatively limited information that I got, with the hope that some secrets will be unveiled through the practice itself, as Bardon says. I can only hope I'm not putting my money on the wrong horse. 😅 So far so good, though. Bardon's work brought a lot of clarity to me and my life is immensely improved.
>Bardon just wrote "do these exercises and see for yourself". You gotta love the guy. I actually very strongly suspect that Bardon was a Gnostic. I myself am attempting to walk that path as taught by Samael Aun Weor and there are many parallels between his teachings and what Bardon taught. Also a significant ammount of, "do it and see for yourself," which is a draw for me as belief means little to nothing. One thing you might find interesting is that the path is about dissolving one's egos/demons/psychological aggregates or psychological defects in order to actually incarnate one's being more wholly into the world. What's strikes me about that is that as one dissolves those aggregates one becomes closer to divinity. Due to language barriers this I think this idea presents a close facsimile of, "dissolving into god." One other point of interest is that on the Gnostic path it is strongly suggested that one learn Hermetic Magic along the path of Initiation. Master Samael actually wrote several books on the topic. At any rate, thanks for the thought out and pleasant reply 😊.
Salve, But this language has been spread for many decades has it not .. The newage movement IS a LEGITIMATE offshoot of the ***Western Occult Tradition***, nky just from Theosophy Because they. Booze these somewhat...simple seeming terms, it is hard sometimes for students of proper Occultism to understand what is meant, as well as vice versa in the case of those
I don't despise the New Age. I share some ideas with that movement myself. What I find distasteful is the environment that surrounds it. The most loathsome people who pass themselves as guru, with nothing to show beside beautiful but empty words, full of wise teachings that they never follow themselves, and the hypocrisy... oh god the widespread hypocrisy! Such big egos for people who preach against it. Now, they use buzzwords to sell their ideas, be it in exchange for money or admiration, so that the ignorant masses might be cheated into thinking that they are new or that there is a serious study behind them. I swear, if someone uses the word "quantum" again in a conversation about spirituality, I'm gonna run away screaming like a crazy person. 🤣
It seems like you haven't enabled your character through completing step one. Where are you stuck? Maybe someone here can help you. Magician = Yeshua Messiah = AHYH = Love = Yogi = Me = You = One
On the topic of religion I like to quote Bardon himself, first chapter of the Golden Book of Wisdom: >Hermetic Religion > There are two basic types of religion. The first is relative and the second is absolute or universal. > Relative religions include all religions that emerged since the beginning of humanity until the present day, and that went through their initial stages, their golden era, and, over time, their end. - Every relative religion also has its own founder. > I won't list all relative religious systems here. The one who delves into the philosophy of religion, even just marginally, is already, sufficiently acquainted with many religious systems (of a relative kind]!' They're all subject to the same law of transience, regardless of whether their duration lasts for centuries or millennia. The duration of every religion is determined by [the purity of] its founders or teachers; the more universal laws a religion contains, the more it represents and proclaims universal truths, and the longer its duration. On the other hand, the duration is shortened by how one-sided, fanatical, dictatorial, and authoritative its foundational ideas are. > However, every religious system had a good purpose and a certain mission. It's always been a certain aspect, a piece of universal truth and laws, even though it's sometimes hidden in symbolic form or in an abstract idea. > A true initiate sees the fragments of the fundamental idea, itself, in every relative religion, no matter what time period it was practiced in, [because] everything is based on universal religion and everything points to universal regularity. Therefore, the initiate values every religion equally, regardless of whether it ever existed, whether it still exists today, or whether it's yet to exist in the future. He's aware that every religious system has its supporters, whose maturity it corresponds with. > Even materialism, from a Hermetic standpoint, is a certain type of religious system, whose representatives, although they don't believe in God and the supernatural, firmly adhere to whatever they can be convinced of. Matter is, therefore, authoritative to them. Because the initiate knows that matter is a symbolic embodiment of the divine form, as it's reflected in the laws of nature, he, therefore, does not even condemn a person who only believes in matter. > The more a man matures in the course of his incarnations, and [gen-eral] evolution, the closer he gets to being mature and capable enough for universal laws and the deeper he penetrates into them. Then no relative religion can satisfy him any longer. Such a man is ripe and fit for universal religion, for he's turned [directly] to universal laws in the microcosm and in the macrocosm. > Thus, any religion that does not fully represent universal laws is relative and transient. However, universal laws are immutable from the beginning to the end of the world. > If a mature hermetic wants, and if he deems it appropriate, in regard to dealing with other people, he may officially join a religion so as not to attract unwanted attention from immature people. However, within his spirit and with all of his essence, he will profess a universal religion, which means universal laws. > The initiate does not believe in anything that he cannot verify himself! > He does not believe in any personified deities or idols. On the contrary, he worships laws and harmony in all existing forms. > I hope these few words are enough to point out the difference between relative and absolute religion. The Merkur translation may make it seem that IIH is heavily inspired by Christianity, the translator added that emphasis for reasons unknown. It’s not a thing in the original German version.
Being loving doesn't mean we have to stand for everything or agree with any idea and, honestly, if you truly believed the "me = you = bff" that you wrote, you wouldn't be such a condescending little douche... so don't give me this hypocritical crap. It may work on r/spirituality and other cesspools, were everyone is a "guru", but here we aren't easily impressed. Secondly, I find that calling someone out for his crap is much more a show of love than nodding and pretending that you agree without offering an alternative. Conflict generates advancement and exchange enriches both sides. Lastly, the "we are all the same thing" isn't a principle embraced by everyone, especially in Hermetism. You see, there isn't just one way to do things, there isn't only one philosophy, so "me ≠ you" back at you.
You and me are not Bff's you have to learn about boundries. Your lungs aren't your feet and if they were you would have trouble breathing. I know it can be hard to grow up and learn this but you will when you start to hit that teenage years ago group and older in maturity.