Lifetruetome you undersell yourself -- you do know the difference between when someone is being loving or not -- everyone does. You would know if your child is giving you a flower because they want a cake. Or if they were giving you a flower because they just truly felt to show their appreciation. In my message to the students I asked them to be honest and reflect on their intention when posting a message. If people post simply to get attention or recognition of 'appearing loving' then by anyone's standards that is not truly an expression of love.

Quote
rebecca08
Lifetruetome you undersell yourself -- you do know the difference between when someone is being loving or not -- everyone does. You would know if your child is giving you a flower because they want a cake. Or if they were giving you a flower because they just truly felt to show their appreciation. In my message to the students I asked them to be honest and reflect on their intention when posting a message. If people post simply to get attention or recognition of 'appearing loving' then by anyone's standards that is not truly an expression of love.

Hi Rebecca08, I don't think I try to analyse why my child would give me a flower. To be honest I just accept that our love and their love is a given. Of course, there are ways children or adults manipulate their behaviour to get what they want, I am not that naive, to think that is love. My problem with UM is that you tell your students how to be on Facebook, and what love should look like. Its as if UM has the rules on what "love" is. if someone wants to post messages to get attention, whose business is it, theirs, not UM's and certainly not mine. But Rebecc08 its not just that UM writes the rules on love it also says that if you are not connecting to your true "inner heart" then you are open to pranic energy. This creates fear amongst your students. This is the hook that UM uses. Its this fear that I ultimately have a big problem with. i.e. the UM students can't express themselves freely on Facebook in case they will be struck down by pranic forces. Of course this fear goes beyond Facebook and into their everyway of being.

If wasn't for the fact that we live in an open democratic society and that we all have the right of freedom of speech and expression (unlike China where there are strict rules on freedom of speech on the social media) then UM wouldn't be able to operate. UM ostracises the very society that has allowed it to flourish.

Yes thanks for reminding me that I do know when someone is being loving, and I am sorry but I feel in every cell of my body that Serge isn't the real deal. I don't get the right feeling of love from Serge or UM.

Hi Rebecca

Thanks so much for posting. Its great to have a UM member on here to get the other side of the story. I hope you can hang around because I think a lot of people are looking for some answers. It would be great if Serge could also participate.

You made a statement in your email which raises a question for me

"This is not to say that one shouldn't express in all their glory -- but glory holds all equally and often a lot can be said in very simple language."

If a lot can be said in simple language how come Serge has to talk in a way that both UM and particularly NON UM members have an extremely difficult time to understand. None of what Serge says is simple. The grammar is shocking.

Secondly, I think there is big difference between an adult recognizing a child trying to milk something from a parent and you claiming to interpret the intention of words from Facebook from grown adults. It is this kind of mind reading that poses a concern for me.


Thirdly, You don't need to be a member of an organisation to be more loving or caring. I personally believe UM dangles this carrot to draw members in. If UM was simply about being more loving and caring i wouldn't have a problem with it. Its everything else that has so clearly been expressed on this forum that raises the alarm bells. I know for a fact the retreats are more then just about love and kindness.

Thanks again for posting!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/14/2012 11:11AM by frodobaggins.

Hello Rebecca,
A great thank you for your willingness to give us the opportunity for dialectical discussion. It is deeply needed from if anything a cultural perspective if not more.

Many people are perplexed by the use of syntax and semantics by S.B. As you have started this is doctrinal and must be considered within this context to grasp it's orthodox and esoteric implications. My concern is manifold though for I will just say they like all other teachings they do not have independent existence, that is seperate from opposing opinions, cultural conditions, and history to name just a few.

Are other opinions then Serges in your opinion sufficiently and fairly examined?

Do any of his teachings include conditioned existence that you have heard? (such as the current cycles like the development of science and movements to bring critical thinking into schools?)

Are aspirants involved in this doctrine instructed on exhausting their karmic ties (in a loving manner) to conditioned existence whilst developing their esoteric awareness? Do you consider many to be at the stages where the thought of completion of the wheel of rebirth is priority for them?


Many on this forum are deeply concerned for family and friends that have been impacted through Serges views and they may not possess any direct insight into esoteric doctrine or have esoteric awareness. Are you able to give a definition of what esotericism means that encompasses the history of esotericism incuding both western and eastern tradtions such as the rosy cross or golden dawn? I ask this as his views seem to not include the development of esotericism in the slightest bit.

Also would you be willing to share anything on your involvement with esoteric sciences prior to becoming a student of Serge?

Like Serge, many on this forum wish to help others eliminate wrong views which bind them to ignorance and various forms of suffering. The assesment that one type of phenomena on the physical plane is deemed esoteric is highly unusual (surfing not esoteric and Elvis esoteric as an example)and may get people not versed in esotericism using this word out of context.
I am wondering why is physical plane phenomena being named as esoteric ?
Is it true that he claims some people to be esoteric or not? In this do you know if he is considering the personality or the externalisation of the soul or spirit or whatever he calls it? Would this view of being esoteric or not in some cases simply increase the self clinging and cherishing?


One person said esoteric is what comes from the heart ( I have no issue with this, even though it is very incomplete), so why is the heartfelt concern from all of those on this forum not embraced by this man? Does this mean the hearts that believe fallacy to exist in Serges work are not actually hearts?
Your defintion of the word esoteric would be muchly appreciated.


Do you know if Serge intends to open up his teachings to an intensive critique from many perspectives?
Of course one doctrine does not entirely correlate with another though principals within trans himalyan occultism, Kabballah, Rosicrucianism, The golden dawn and other western branches have some similiarities from most angles. I would also think that esoteric buddhism (Vajrayana) with its inclusivity of all conditions would offer a very appealing critique to those fair minded individuals that which to gain comprehensive insight is used skillfully.

Previously I suggested on this forum the need for critique from at least the following perspectives:
- critical thinking (this has been mainly used on here)
- Psychological
- Chinese medicince
- Esotericism

My personal perspective is that a wise and loving individual that understands the culture that he lives within would willingly open his works up to critique especially since his conviction is so strong. Perhaps if this were done many on this forum would see he has spiritual maturity and naturally adjust their views if Serges teachings stand after scruitiny. Literary critique is nothing new and certainly not something that one unattached to the dense realms would be averse to. The claims of hierarchical status must also be scruitinised as why would the hierarchy of enllightend being with belicose remarks attempt to squash all things that are not directly related to this particular personality? Do you think he may possess the view that he is an inherenlty existing independent self?

I also am intrigued are the inner students deeply trained in combat of the dark brotherhood? (can this be shared?)

How many of them possess magical karma?

Do you believe that the students are guided to him to gain training in magical methods of clensing their prior acts of sorcery?


His usage of the word prana is rather different then the doctrine he claims affiliation with which is Alice Bailey and the Lucis Trust.
Have you read the different uses of the word prana in his works and Baileys works?
Have you heard him discuss the 5 vayus and the relation to the elements, nadis and chakras in details? or what is the term he uses instead of prana?

One day perhaps we will see a systematic dissection of prana by Serge that rectifies yogic philsophy, hinduism, and the higher tantras (vajrayana buddhism). If reformation is his role within the esoteric sciences clearly unsupported assertions much be reconsidered, do you not think so Rebeccas?
(this is what he does from an outside perspective)

Much for us to debate in a compassionate manner I hope Rebecca. I am sure your willingness to particpate on this forum in any measure is going to be appreciated by many. May Serge also work with those who share not the same view as his as from the conditions now presenting I think we can all be sure this stream has some power behind it.

Thank you in advance Rebecca

1. 'often a lot can be said in very simple language' ... again this is a question of context ... I was talking about facebook posts. In regards to the grammar and the style of Serge's books, they are written differently than most writing and because of this they require more presence when you read them if you are to fully grasp them. I don't see this as disadvantaging anyone because if there is an earnestness to read them then the focus is there and the words themselves are not that hard to understand. Have you ever read a thesis or an academic paper? In my experience there are writings that are a lot harder to understand than Serge's books. And if you do find them difficult and you don't have the patience to read them, that's ok too. They are not going to be palatable to most and they are not trying to appeal to a mass audience.

2. Not sure whether you are insulting children or grown adults here, both are capable of not being clear in their intentions when they express even when they mean to be loving or caring it can come from the wrong place. I am not special in being able to observe this. It is certainly not 'mind reading', just an observation -- the grown adults who I was directing the message to are grown adults who can feel for themselves whether it was something for them to reflect on / applied to them or not.

3. Hmmm - No you don't need to be a member of an organisation to be more loving or caring I agree with you, at what point did I say this was the case?

Hi Rebecca,

Like Frodo, really happy to have you here, especially after the negative comments this thread seems to have attracted in UM circles. I hope you will come to realise that we are loving people, quite different from how how we have been portrayed. We have a lot of questions, and a lot of concerns, and maybe your presence here can answer some of them.

Cheers

Herb

Hi ALL
It has come to my attention that you are quoting me out of context.

The message above was intended for my fellow students and friends in the Esoteric Community, so there is a lot of assumed knowledge in the text. Since you are also interested in its content I will fill you in on the broader meaning contained therein.

But first, allow me to introduce myself. My name is Rebecca and I set up the group for UniMed Students on Facebook. If you are a student of UniMed you are free to join. If not you will probably find the content a bit confusing. Clearly this is the case because there seems to be clarification required for you to understand my messages. So here goes, it was never intended for this forum but I will gladly expand on it for you:

One of the central tenants of the retreats and workshops is that our essence is love.
Agree with or not, that is one of the central tenants. It is not hidden or mysterious.
It is also not hidden or mysterious that human beings often re-interpret and re-appropriate anything they learn.

So when a student of UniMed or any other organization starts talking about love in a fashion that is very over the top and flowery rather than simply living it and being that love, then yeah, I am going to point out that they are perhaps not actually being loving. No students claim to be perfect (and if they do they are missing the point) and sometimes UniMed students come across a bit lovey dovey and over the top, most students are aware of that and we call it out when we see it. Cynically – you may see this as image control. Lovingly, I see it as telling someone they are not being themselves and they are mis-interpreting what it means to be loving.

Example: If you want to be loving with others and be inclusive and caring do you use language in a way that makes them feel as though they are not included?

Many students of Universal Medicine study the books and go to the courses. There naturally comes from any study certain words and elements that are particular to it. E.G If I go to a course on web design and I start talking about CSS and XHTML in my every day conversation with you, you are going to feel alienated by my language. And it is not necessary that I speak with you that way. I am not omitting or hiding anything, I am simply being considerate of the fact that you likely don’t know what I am referring to. And just because you want a website doesn’t mean you need to know all those terms. If you want to study web design the resources are freely available to you, just like if you want to study with Universal Medicine you are free to register. There is nothing closed-door about it. Anyone can look up the courses on the web and register and any one can read the website.

In future please do not take messages not intended for you and make your own re-interpretations.
It results in the highly charged false accusations posted above and it further confirms that you need to fabricate in order to serve your needs. Serge isn’t hiding and neither are we.[/quote]

Hi Rebecca
since i am the one that posted, i guess i should also respond. First, thanks for actually getting involved in the conversation. Many of us here have found having a two way debate with a student is not possible as it gets closed down with accusations of being 'imposing', 'closed down', channeling, in the wrong energy and so forth so we appreciate you commenting.

Please let me point three things out to you. The first is this- If someone goes to a web design course and starts using acronyms related to that discipline it is not going to bother any one in the 'wider- temporal' world if they use those terms in a public forum. Why would it? It is up to them to post what they want. Your message clearly asks students to stop using language that could be misconstrued or even embarressing to people. No one would have that problem if I mentioned HTML or PHP- they simply might not understand.

The second point is a little more personal. Do you realise Rebecca that you use words only Serge uses? He has a tendency to use formal archaic phrases -This is known as 'mirroring' which is what happens when you under the influence of a stronger personality. (I emphasis the word person so as to avoid confusion with Serge's supernatural claims) All of us here have witnessed our loved ones doing the same thing. This is not simply the language of what is being learned. Many people learn things but dont sound the same when expressing it.

You also speak of 'mis-interpret or mis-approprating' information, which is a favoured expression of Serge and I am afraid, something that he clearly is guilty of, whether you understand that at this stage or not.

Lastly, there is a tone of holier-than thou in your response to me and to treefern. You dont seem to notice it, but this is again something we have all experienced as one close to a UM adherent. I am sure Treefern has a good idea of who she is, as I am sure the adults on Facebook 'should' be able to tell whether they are 'loving' or not. I am sorry, but if you are also not perfect, who are you to judge their state and expression?

You would have to think that the people here would have much better things to do with their time. Like UM puports, it is actually a group of people coming together to out of LOVE and deep concern for people who are involved with. Why do we have that concern? Well I am sure you have read this forum and get the idea, but let me recap in a short sentence;

We believe students are offered a false choice. We think Serge uses half or part truths to help replace one paradigm with another. By deconstructing identity and roles and then offering his 'choice', over time he slowly changes peoples world view- not as positive transformation and he or you may claim. Simply from one view to another more dense, fear based view that is exclusive to UM and more frighteningly, abitrated by one man alone as the only one able to divine what is eneregetically correct or not. We believe that people, rather than becoming more self aware, are less so as they are given a very confusing and dense cosmology to absorb; and moreover remain unaware that they have given their power to Serge, which is evident to anyone who has not.

We find it disturbing that relationships are tossed aside in favour of the 'work' at an alarming rate, and we dont believe it is because people are finding their glory or re-alinging to the inner truth. ( if so the narrative of those events would not be carbon copy)
Rebecca I am sure you are a lovely person just like us and the vast majority of people doing 'the work'- We are not here because we are touched by the truth of Serge's 'wisdom' or are angry or jealous and Serge so wrongly asserts. It is because we CARE and LOVE our friends and family deeply and in a real, non judgmental way. We want them to be free to make their own minds up and express as they see fit- not in line with a group and its 'teachings', expressing with the same language and reasons, and not in awe of a man who claims to be more than any mortal man alive. I know for a fact that the group at large worship Serge while claiming not to. I leave it to you to admit to this or not, and if you do, to ask why serge allows it to happen and what the benefits are to him.

Thanks for taking the time to read this without thinking it is an energy, chanelling or fabricated lies which is the defense we so often first hear.
Regards
CP

Rebecca wrote:

Quote

1. 'often a lot can be said in very simple language' ... again this is a question of context ... I was talking about facebook posts.

In regards to the grammar and the style of Serge's books, they are written differently than most writing and because of this they require more presence when you read them if you are to fully grasp them. I don't see this as disadvantaging anyone because if there is an earnestness to read them then the focus is there and the words themselves are not that hard to understand. Have you ever read a thesis or an academic paper? In my experience there are writings that are a lot harder to understand than Serge's books.

Academic writing is done according to a standard that can be understood by people from different backgrounds, as long as they have the reading skills and enough background information.

When I was trained to write papers in graduate school, two things I had to pay special attention to were transition sentences--how to lead the reader from one idea to another, from one part of an argument to another.

One has to know how to pay sustained attention and make distinctions and evaluations when writing and when reading academic writing. One also has to give sources and those source materials have to meet an exacting standard.

Rebecca, have you considered it possible that if one spends enough time in the environment SB has created that one may lose ablilty to concentrate attention, and make distinctions? Like muscles getting weak if one doesnt engage in regular exercise?

By contrast with academic writing, this was written by someone who had read Theosophical and Anthroposophical writings--writings of the kind Serge produces.

Maria Carlso noted that she found Blavatsky's writing to be 'hynotic and associative.'

In her book, No Religion Higher Than Truth: A History of the Theosophical Movement in Russia Maria Carlson wrote that the problem with reading Blavatsky, Besant, Steiner and other esotericists, is that these authors do not reason according to causal logic or by use objective evidence and premises. They tend to reason by analogy.

Definitions of analogy

[www.google.com]



One must, to meet academic standards introduce one's argument by defining terms and then use the terms consistently. If one changes how one uses terms, one must notify the reader of this. Its a lot like playing sports. One must not change rules in the middle of the game)[/i]

Quote

One of the major reasons that Theosophy and Anthroposophy are difficult to define and outline concisely is that both doctrines continually redefine basic concepts (such as Logos, Christ, soul, spirit, plane, and so forth) according to the immediate demands of the point under discussion.

"The understanding of the various terms also change with time, topic, exegete, and the point of the argument:

(Corboy note: in academic writing one cannot do this. One must, to meet academic standards introduce one's argument by defining terms and then use the terms consistently. If one changes how one uses terms, one must notify the reader of this. Its a lot like playing sports. One must not change rules in the middle of the game)


(Carlson)Mrs Besant and Rudolf Steiner, for example, frequently (though not always), mean very different things when they use the word Logos; thier definitions are, in turn, different from either the traditional Christian or Gnostic understanding of that important term.

"At the same time, enough points of coincidence lull the reader into a false sense of identity of concepts.

The esultis that becomes impossible to get a real grip on what should be basic building block ideas.

(Corboy, this can make the ideas seem more profound than they actually are. And result in students remaining confused and thus dependant on the master teacher.)

Carlson:
"Furthermore, occultists tend to develop their arguments not by deduction or even induction, but by analogy. The reader, at the time of reading, momentarily senses the relationship of terms and intuitively or sympathetically perceives parallel; afterward, understanding vanishes.


"Finally not only do the Theosophists (and IMO successors such as Serge) constantly redefine their own terms, but they "translate" the statements of non Theosophists into their own terminology, invariably muddling the translation.

"Their definitions of basic concepts are unfortunately so loose and subjective that just about any alien concept can be subsumed by them.

(Corboy note:In academic writing one is expected to use terminology with precise meanings and keep them that way--dont move the goal posts in the middle of the game

(Carlson)

"Thus, for example, Anne Kamenskaia, discussing Fedor Dostoevsky (who was not much taken with oriental philosophy) blithely attributes to him the idea that mankind will achieve spiritual heights not through sorrow and suffering, but through the radiant flight of an exultant soul liberated from the chains of karma (!), although Dostoevsky would never have chosen to express himself in that way."

(Maria Carlson, No Religion Higher Than Truth: A History of the Theosophical Movement in Russia 1875-1922 Princeton University 1993, page 229, footnote to Chapter 5: Theosophical Doctrine: An Outline.

Corboy note: I am not sure, but perhaps this alludes to the kind of dream like primary process thought one encounters in dreams or in the thought process of children too young to be capable of former logic.

This analogical process is richly creative for artists, and in relationships, but incompatible with adult logic and scientific and historical problem solving.

If one cannot retain logical grasp of such material, that means that one is always left insecure and in need of the 'Master'.

It is not because the material is profound and not due to any shortcoming on the reader's part. The confusion comes because these kinds of esoteric texts are written out in a manner that induces confusion and may produce a dreamlike trance like state of mind that operates by analogy, not by adult level logic. It mimics adult logic but that is actually pre-logical and possibly for some readers, could be hypnotic due to induction of confusion.

(Corboy note: In medieval times reasoning by analogy was acceptable academic writing. But in modern times, this is no longer the case.

In medieval times and into the Renaissance a standard principle was based on analogy. A guiding principle, beloved and used by esotericists is stated in the form:

"As above so below."

The human body mirrored the cosmos, stones and plants corresponded to analogues amongst the planets. Through controlling and changing one's body and ones routines, 'as above so below' it was believed one could change the cosmos.

This was current and standard until seemingly ancient prechristian writings that taught, as above so below, and which were prized by esotericists were demonstrated not to be ancient wisdom, but written during the early Christian era. By this time, evidence based methods began to supplant reasoning by analogy as the academic standard and open sharing of information, instead of secret lodges lead to creation of open discussion of ones findings and in turn created evidence based open communities of investigators who became modern academics and created modern science.

Rebecca,

Attempting to limit what people say on a free information source is an attempt to violate that person's freedom of expression.

You did this in your Facebook post to 'the students' (I'll come back to this). And you did it again in your first post on here when you claimed that we took your fb post out of context, and then took it on yourself to attempt to correct us.

I would expect someone who starts up Facebook pages on behalf of another entity to understand the basics of online interaction - i.e. once something is online in a public forum it is open to interpretation.

So let's come back to how you referred to them as 'the students' isn't everyone in Universal Medicine a student? Then why have you elevated yourself by referring to them in this way, shouldn't it be 'the other students' or are you special?

Alright next point. At this point there are maybe a couple of things to thank you for:
1. By posting on here you have confirmed what we already know - that people within the core of Universal Medicine are reading this site.
2. You have also helped to increase the amount of unique content on our forum page about Universal Medicine and helped increase our relevance and rankings in search engines so we have to thank you for that.

But moving forward it would be useful if you would take part in an open discussion with the other posters on this forum.

In this case an open discussion would be defined as a discourse between two individuals or groups with conflicting views on a given subject, using common language and grammar, without buzzwords or jargon, and focused on the salient points, with the primary motivation for both to gain an understanding of the other side's point of view rather than to convince them around to your point of view - as was your objective when discussing the tennets of love earlier with Lifetruetome.

Let's assume that we can take you at face value and that we can believe you when uou say that you and UM and Serge and his family have nothing to hide. That's awesome! Then why don't you post a link to this forum on the Universal Medicine Facebook page? I mean if you don't have anything to hide this is a great opportunity for you to answer our concerns and by displaying it on your page it keeps you transparent. Because really all we are discussing are things any rational adult should be asking themselves when they 'join' (your word) a group like this.

So I guess the question is:
Do you:
a) stay on here and part take in an open debate, risk increasing search traffic to this site, and post up a link to this forum thread on your UM Facebook page, and achieve the transparency gains that clear a lot of the doubts about UM?
b) do you turn down the challenge and leave people wondering what you and by extension what UM have to hide?
or
c) do you come up with an excuse to leave for another reason, or attack my reasoning, or ignore me but refuse nonetheless?

I for one really hope you stick around, as I would love to hear your thoughts on some of the things we've been discussing of late. Shall we start with tampons or eating disorders I'll let you choose.

Quote
gillweir
Hello Rebecca,
A great thank you for your willingness to give us the opportunity for dialectical discussion. It is deeply needed from if anything a cultural perspective if not more.

Many people are perplexed by the use of syntax and semantics by S.B. As you have started this is doctrinal and must be considered within this context to grasp it's orthodox and esoteric implications. My concern is manifold though for I will just say they like all other teachings they do not have independent existence, that is seperate from opposing opinions, cultural conditions, and history to name just a few.

Are other opinions then Serges in your opinion sufficiently and fairly examined?

Do any of his teachings include conditioned existence that you have heard? (such as the current cycles like the development of science and movements to bring critical thinking into schools?)

Are aspirants involved in this doctrine instructed on exhausting their karmic ties (in a loving manner) to conditioned existence whilst developing their esoteric awareness? Do you consider many to be at the stages where the thought of completion of the wheel of rebirth is priority for them?


Many on this forum are deeply concerned for family and friends that have been impacted through Serges views and they may not possess any direct insight into esoteric doctrine or have esoteric awareness. Are you able to give a definition of what esotericism means that encompasses the history of esotericism incuding both western and eastern tradtions such as the rosy cross or golden dawn? I ask this as his views seem to not include the development of esotericism in the slightest bit.

Also would you be willing to share anything on your involvement with esoteric sciences prior to becoming a student of Serge?

Like Serge, many on this forum wish to help others eliminate wrong views which bind them to ignorance and various forms of suffering. The assesment that one type of phenomena on the physical plane is deemed esoteric is highly unusual (surfing not esoteric and Elvis esoteric as an example)and may get people not versed in esotericism using this word out of context.
I am wondering why is physical plane phenomena being named as esoteric ?
Is it true that he claims some people to be esoteric or not? In this do you know if he is considering the personality or the externalisation of the soul or spirit or whatever he calls it? Would this view of being esoteric or not in some cases simply increase the self clinging and cherishing?


One person said esoteric is what comes from the heart ( I have no issue with this, even though it is very incomplete), so why is the heartfelt concern from all of those on this forum not embraced by this man? Does this mean the hearts that believe fallacy to exist in Serges work are not actually hearts?
Your defintion of the word esoteric would be muchly appreciated.


Do you know if Serge intends to open up his teachings to an intensive critique from many perspectives?
Of course one doctrine does not entirely correlate with another though principals within trans himalyan occultism, Kabballah, Rosicrucianism, The golden dawn and other western branches have some similiarities from most angles. I would also think that esoteric buddhism (Vajrayana) with its inclusivity of all conditions would offer a very appealing critique to those fair minded individuals that which to gain comprehensive insight is used skillfully.

Previously I suggested on this forum the need for critique from at least the following perspectives:
- critical thinking (this has been mainly used on here)
- Psychological
- Chinese medicince
- Esotericism

My personal perspective is that a wise and loving individual that understands the culture that he lives within would willingly open his works up to critique especially since his conviction is so strong. Perhaps if this were done many on this forum would see he has spiritual maturity and naturally adjust their views if Serges teachings stand after scruitiny. Literary critique is nothing new and certainly not something that one unattached to the dense realms would be averse to. The claims of hierarchical status must also be scruitinised as why would the hierarchy of enllightend being with belicose remarks attempt to squash all things that are not directly related to this particular personality? Do you think he may possess the view that he is an inherenlty existing independent self?

I also am intrigued are the inner students deeply trained in combat of the dark brotherhood? (can this be shared?)

How many of them possess magical karma?

Do you believe that the students are guided to him to gain training in magical methods of clensing their prior acts of sorcery?


His usage of the word prana is rather different then the doctrine he claims affiliation with which is Alice Bailey and the Lucis Trust.
Have you read the different uses of the word prana in his works and Baileys works?
Have you heard him discuss the 5 vayus and the relation to the elements, nadis and chakras in details? or what is the term he uses instead of prana?

One day perhaps we will see a systematic dissection of prana by Serge that rectifies yogic philsophy, hinduism, and the higher tantras (vajrayana buddhism). If reformation is his role within the esoteric sciences clearly unsupported assertions much be reconsidered, do you not think so Rebeccas?
(this is what he does from an outside perspective)

Much for us to debate in a compassionate manner I hope Rebecca. I am sure your willingness to particpate on this forum in any measure is going to be appreciated by many. May Serge also work with those who share not the same view as his as from the conditions now presenting I think we can all be sure this stream has some power behind it.

Thank you in advance Rebecca

is this a gee up?
a) you have spent the last month (since your last post) constructing this 'reply' although it reads more like the kid who stole the essay question
b) you are the Stephen Hawkins of Universal Medicine and Esotericism
c) this is a contrived manipulation piece complete with canned questions that the respondent will no doubt have pre-arranged all encompassing answers to

Either way I'm not buying it, there is no way this was a spontaneous spur-of-the-moment reply you've been sitting on this for a while.