Re: Debunking Samael Aun Weor
Posted by:
corboy
()
Date: December 07, 2012 10:41PM
Some quotations from Brian Vickers Occult Mentalities
Persons committed to gnosticism and hermeticism will disagree with Vickers, as they are free to do.
However, before someone involves themselves with gnosticism or hermeticism, at least that person should understand that an important difference between modern scientific consensus reality vs gnosticism, hermeticism and magic, is that the first makes and then mentains clear distinctions between words and what those signify, and that this is standardized, so that scientists and students of science can communicate with each other in open society.
Vickers contends that a major development in the late sixteenth and seventeenth centuries was how the new science created precise distinction between word and thing, and used mathematics for quantitative descriptive purposes, making a difference between the occultists and hermeticists use of words, symbols, names as partaking of the essence of objects, and that the manipulation of words and numbers could directly manipulate or call forth power.
In the occult hermetic, alchemical systems that link words symbols, numbers to the essence of objects or entities signified.
On page 9 of the Introduction to Occult Mentalities, Brian Vickers suggests:
[books.google.com]
Note: Reification
[webcache.googleusercontent.com]
It is important to understand this because if we treat abstract concepts as though they are real, this can generate fears that immobilize us--and worse, keep us from questioning the processs of reification that promised us power (occult or gnostic studies) and after leading us into its system, inculcates fears that keep us from recognizing this new bondage-and that the system and teacher that promised us liberation at the beginning, has left us with a burden of anxiety we did not have at the start.
Persons committed to gnosticism and hermeticism will disagree with Vickers, as they are free to do.
However, before someone involves themselves with gnosticism or hermeticism, at least that person should understand that an important difference between modern scientific consensus reality vs gnosticism, hermeticism and magic, is that the first makes and then mentains clear distinctions between words and what those signify, and that this is standardized, so that scientists and students of science can communicate with each other in open society.
Vickers contends that a major development in the late sixteenth and seventeenth centuries was how the new science created precise distinction between word and thing, and used mathematics for quantitative descriptive purposes, making a difference between the occultists and hermeticists use of words, symbols, names as partaking of the essence of objects, and that the manipulation of words and numbers could directly manipulate or call forth power.
In the occult hermetic, alchemical systems that link words symbols, numbers to the essence of objects or entities signified.
On page 9 of the Introduction to Occult Mentalities, Brian Vickers suggests:
[books.google.com]
Quote
"I have drawn on the admirable studies by P. O. Kristeller,
D. P. Walker, and E. H. Gombrich to define the occult's tendency to reify images and E. H. Gombrich to define the occult's tendency to reify
images and toa way of distinguishing it from the nonoccult sciences. .
The occult discourse is essentially symbolic. In whatever discipline - astrology, alchemy, numerology, or magic or magic - nature is significant not in itself but as a system of signs pointing another system of mental categories. Objects, plants, stones planets are given various attributes (good/evil, pure/impure, male /female) and fitted into a system of operations that, far from being addressed to far from being addressed to a disinterested study of nature, returns again and again to a self-centered concern with the individual's welfare.
Note: Reification
Quote
REIFICATION
treatment of an analytic or abstract relationship as though it were a concrete entity. (Young, p. l09)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The process of regarding something abstract as a material entity, Whitehead's "fallacy of misplaced concreteness," e.g., the mistake of confusing a system, which is a construct, with the physical entity described in its terms (see general systems theory). In social systems reification is encouraged by the use of language and underlies many processes of constructing social reality. (Krippendorff)
[webcache.googleusercontent.com]
It is important to understand this because if we treat abstract concepts as though they are real, this can generate fears that immobilize us--and worse, keep us from questioning the processs of reification that promised us power (occult or gnostic studies) and after leading us into its system, inculcates fears that keep us from recognizing this new bondage-and that the system and teacher that promised us liberation at the beginning, has left us with a burden of anxiety we did not have at the start.
Re: Debunking Samael Aun Weor
Posted by:
corboy
()
Date: December 07, 2012 11:26PM
"In the occult tradition “analogical” relations are transformed into “identity” relations; a conventional relation between word and thing is made into a direct or causal or natural relation." Vickers
Some have criticized Vickers for taking a moralizing and normalizing tone, putting too strict a contrast between modern science and the occult disciplines, seeing the latter as selfish and primitive, when contrasted with the new science. Others suggest he made too close and abitrary a distinction between the old and new sciences.
But...for those persons who entered into gnostic studies with high hopes, but who found themselves increasingly burdened by fears, finding their lives constricted rather than enriched, may find Vickers' discussions helpful.
Many of us just do not have background in language and philosophy when beginning contact with gnostic studies.
How many of us begin gnostic studies having already learned some basic instruction about the different kinds of relationships between signs and signfiers--or even the terminology?
(Corboy note: I didnt pick this up in college--I was too busy taking pre-med classes and trying not to flunk organic chemistry.)
These days many of us miss foundational instruction in logic and grammar and rhetoric, because today these are considered specialized subjects, and not useful for harried, hurried students who enter university and college as a stepping stone to compete for entry into professional schools--business, law, medicine, engineering. Subjects not seen as relevant risk being neglected.
A further disadvantage is that subjects such as logic and rhetoric, unless taught by alert, empathetic instructors, can seem dry and forbidding. A tired stressed student may not understand how such material can be useful unless given much encouragement and many examples.
A good instructor would have to find ways to settle people down, persuade all and sundry to turn off their cell phones and handheld gadgets, remove the iPod buds from their ears, and make a convincing case that an understanding of logic, and language are tools of liberation. Then that instructor would teach the students to look for examples in our culture and relationships where these logical and grammatical fallacies are routinely perpetrated, either by mistake or by design (political rabble rousin and advertisements for stuff we do not need).
The instructor would then assist us to discover and remember events in our lives and of our friends and through history where undetected reification has had consequences.
When does it bring genuine pleasure and when has it lead us into unneeded expense or even harm?
take place and the personal and relational implications caused by undetetected reification.
Professor Vickers himself has suggested that few historians have had the kind of intensive training in logic and rhetoric, and that this can cause us to miss that the new scientists developed a different working strategy in understanding relationship between words and signs vs the occultists.
Further discussion of Vickers here. The author disagrees with Vickers on several points. But the discussion mentions concepts (signs signifiers) that one needs to know about and have some knowledge of, before even beginning to study occult sciences. Otherwise one can become a frightened inmate of a system one lacks the cognitive tools to evaluate objectively.
[webcache.googleusercontent.com]
Some have criticized Vickers for taking a moralizing and normalizing tone, putting too strict a contrast between modern science and the occult disciplines, seeing the latter as selfish and primitive, when contrasted with the new science. Others suggest he made too close and abitrary a distinction between the old and new sciences.
But...for those persons who entered into gnostic studies with high hopes, but who found themselves increasingly burdened by fears, finding their lives constricted rather than enriched, may find Vickers' discussions helpful.
Many of us just do not have background in language and philosophy when beginning contact with gnostic studies.
How many of us begin gnostic studies having already learned some basic instruction about the different kinds of relationships between signs and signfiers--or even the terminology?
(Corboy note: I didnt pick this up in college--I was too busy taking pre-med classes and trying not to flunk organic chemistry.)
These days many of us miss foundational instruction in logic and grammar and rhetoric, because today these are considered specialized subjects, and not useful for harried, hurried students who enter university and college as a stepping stone to compete for entry into professional schools--business, law, medicine, engineering. Subjects not seen as relevant risk being neglected.
A further disadvantage is that subjects such as logic and rhetoric, unless taught by alert, empathetic instructors, can seem dry and forbidding. A tired stressed student may not understand how such material can be useful unless given much encouragement and many examples.
A good instructor would have to find ways to settle people down, persuade all and sundry to turn off their cell phones and handheld gadgets, remove the iPod buds from their ears, and make a convincing case that an understanding of logic, and language are tools of liberation. Then that instructor would teach the students to look for examples in our culture and relationships where these logical and grammatical fallacies are routinely perpetrated, either by mistake or by design (political rabble rousin and advertisements for stuff we do not need).
The instructor would then assist us to discover and remember events in our lives and of our friends and through history where undetected reification has had consequences.
When does it bring genuine pleasure and when has it lead us into unneeded expense or even harm?
take place and the personal and relational implications caused by undetetected reification.
Professor Vickers himself has suggested that few historians have had the kind of intensive training in logic and rhetoric, and that this can cause us to miss that the new scientists developed a different working strategy in understanding relationship between words and signs vs the occultists.
Further discussion of Vickers here. The author disagrees with Vickers on several points. But the discussion mentions concepts (signs signifiers) that one needs to know about and have some knowledge of, before even beginning to study occult sciences. Otherwise one can become a frightened inmate of a system one lacks the cognitive tools to evaluate objectively.
[webcache.googleusercontent.com]
Quote
Relations of analogy and identity Toward multiple orientations to the world Stanley J. Tambiah
In D. Olson & N. Torrance (eds.) Modes of Thought. Explorations in Culture and Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996, pp.
34-52
In an influential essay entitled “Analogy versus Identity,” included in a book he edited with the title Occult and Scientific Mentalities in the Renaissance,
Brian Vickers has argued that what distinguishes the Renaissance occult tradition from the emergent scientific tradition was their respective attitudes toward the relation between words and things, verba and res; and more generally signs and their referents.
The mistake of the occult tradition (the Renaissance Neoplatonism of Ficino and Pino) consisted in imputing a direct, even causal, relationship between the word and its referent (what Ogden and Richards called the “denotative fallacy”; Cassirer, “the hypostatization of the word”; or in the terminology of Saussure, the confusing of the signifier with the signified).
.2 (Apparently the debate about words and things began with Plato’s Cratylus where both views of language’s relation to reality, natural versus conventional, are argued back and forth, with the final judgment being given in favor of the separation between language and reality.)
Brian Vickers, ed. Occult and Scientific Mentalities in the Renaissance (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1984).
2 By arbitrary Saussure meant that the choice of the signifier by the speaker is “unmotivated” in that “it actually had no natural connection with the signified.” Ferdinand Saussure, Course in General Linguistics (New York: McGraw Hill, 1966), p. 69.
Vickers argues that the new philosophers and scientists, like Galileo, Bacon, and Hobbes, argued for the conventional or arbitrary relation between language and reality.3
The main thrust of Vickers’s exposition is that the Renaissance Neoplatonist mystical and magical tradition believed in “natural language,” that is, an “innate union of signifier and signified,” and the new scientists and experimentalists held that “the linguistic sign is conventional, its meaning given by society.” Magical, astrological, and alchemical thought and practices were predicated on this root fallacy of natural language.
In sum the Vickers narrative is as follow: In the late sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, there were to incompatible views of the relationship between language and reality.Quote
(Vickers)“In the scientific tradition, a clear distinction is made between words and things and between literal and metaphorical language. The occult does not recognize this distinction: words are treated as if they were equivalent to things and can be substituted for them. Manipulate the one and you manipulate the other”(p. 95).
(Tambiah)Thus (according to Vickers--Corboy note)in the occult tradition “analogical” relations4 are transformed into “identity” relations; a conventional relation between word and thing is made into a direct or causal or natural relation.
The corrective to this linguistic confusion was the notion that the linguistic sign is conventional and arbitrary.
In passing, it may be noted that Foucault in his Order of Things5 had preceded Vickers in giving a similar but fuller and richer account of an allegedly
3
Vickers cites Bacon as holding that “words are but the current tokens or marks of popular notions of things” (in Advancement of Learning); Hobbes as asserting that “Names are signs not of things, but of our cogitations” (in Leviathan); and Locke’s “Essay Concerning Human Understanding” (1690) as including a refutation of natural language theories and recalling Hobbes, Bacon, and the long tradition back to Aristotle and Plato.
(Tambiah) Vickers does not spell out the notion of “analogy.”
Standard dictionary glosses include the following features: a similarity of rates or proportions;
resemblance in particulars between things otherwise unlike;
agreement or resemblance in certain aspects as in form or function; similarity without identity.
A more informative discussion of analogy and its use in two senses ⎯ the “scientific predictive” and the “conventional persuasive” ⎯ is to be found in my essay, “Form and Meaning of Magical Acts,” in Stanley J. Tambiah, Culture, Thought and Social Action (Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press, 1985), Ch. 2.
Though Vickers’s understanding of analogy is unsophisticated, I shall follow his usage here since I am testing his ideas in this essay.
(Corboy: words are developed through social process and consensus--words are not divine givens in and of themselves)
Re: Debunking Samael Aun Weor
Posted by:
Stoic
()
Date: December 08, 2012 11:17PM
Gombrich does a good job of explaining this for those who incline to a more visual and less logical frame of mind in:
[www.amazon.co.uk]
and:
[www.amazon.co.uk]
His 'Story of Art', aimed at adolescents, is a good start for anyone.
[www.amazon.co.uk]
and:
[www.amazon.co.uk]
His 'Story of Art', aimed at adolescents, is a good start for anyone.
Re: Debunking Samael Aun Weor
Posted by:
justaman22
()
Date: June 13, 2013 02:28AM
I am glad to have found this forum. I began listening to the, "Gnostic Teachings" podcasts for several months now.
These teachings are put on through Glorian Publishings based on the works of SAW. I must say, spiritually speaking, this stuff is gold.
I find it quite disturbing that all you can do here is blast SAW for "predictions" he made regarding planets in the Pleadies, and give his
teachings bad merit because of their focus on fornication and the spilling of the seed.
In the teachings I've been listening to, the teacher emphasis charity and chastity. Part of awakening makes you see people for how they
really are, and they are disgusting and living in sin. That goes for all of us. We are born into sin. It's painfully obvious that all of you that posted malevolent
comments towards SAW because his teachings made you feel bad for others is quite sad. That just proves that you miss the point of those teachings.
When you see people for how they really are, which is brainwashed (by their parents, the compulsory education system, television, movies, and culture) you
as the awakened individual surely should have compassion for these people as you were once one of them... living in misery and ignorance.
The reason why this world is so messed up is because of bad personalities and ego's. Which is why in SAW's work he makes it a point to help individuals
come to understand their ego's and try to work to crush it. What SAW tries to help people with is that they should work in themselves if they would like to
see change in this world. He doesnt tell anyone to go out and buy his books or to join any sects. If you believe you need to join a sect in order to
obtain gnosis and spiritual experience then you are sadly mistaken. He also tries to help people learn that they should not become attached to every whimsical idea
that floats into their minds, as these things can lead to suffering. It is truly hard to follow the path when the way has been shown to you, and you see the
world for how it truly is with all of it's sufferng.
Perhaps SAW sprinkled in some lies into his work in order that he could spread greater truths to the people that were ready for it, or maybe he was simply mistaken
by certain things. To discredit the entirety of his work is foolish, because it is filled with treasures.
Let's see... what happens to famous people in this perverted world that tell the whole truth on how things operate??? Oh, I know.. they get killed.
John Lennon, JFK, Martin Luther King, Abraham Lincoln, Jesus Christ (why not right?), Malcolm X.. the list goes on.
Yes, it is true that retaining one's seed for a man is better for you. See Mantak Chia's book, "the multi orgasmic man". The Taoists have been practicing semen retention techniques for thousands of years. Is it no wonder to any of you that the internet is flooded with pornography, and every other commercial on television is about erectile dysfunction and trying to sell men viagra? Of course they want you to spill your seed. Spill it and be lazy and weak.
These teachings are put on through Glorian Publishings based on the works of SAW. I must say, spiritually speaking, this stuff is gold.
I find it quite disturbing that all you can do here is blast SAW for "predictions" he made regarding planets in the Pleadies, and give his
teachings bad merit because of their focus on fornication and the spilling of the seed.
In the teachings I've been listening to, the teacher emphasis charity and chastity. Part of awakening makes you see people for how they
really are, and they are disgusting and living in sin. That goes for all of us. We are born into sin. It's painfully obvious that all of you that posted malevolent
comments towards SAW because his teachings made you feel bad for others is quite sad. That just proves that you miss the point of those teachings.
When you see people for how they really are, which is brainwashed (by their parents, the compulsory education system, television, movies, and culture) you
as the awakened individual surely should have compassion for these people as you were once one of them... living in misery and ignorance.
The reason why this world is so messed up is because of bad personalities and ego's. Which is why in SAW's work he makes it a point to help individuals
come to understand their ego's and try to work to crush it. What SAW tries to help people with is that they should work in themselves if they would like to
see change in this world. He doesnt tell anyone to go out and buy his books or to join any sects. If you believe you need to join a sect in order to
obtain gnosis and spiritual experience then you are sadly mistaken. He also tries to help people learn that they should not become attached to every whimsical idea
that floats into their minds, as these things can lead to suffering. It is truly hard to follow the path when the way has been shown to you, and you see the
world for how it truly is with all of it's sufferng.
Perhaps SAW sprinkled in some lies into his work in order that he could spread greater truths to the people that were ready for it, or maybe he was simply mistaken
by certain things. To discredit the entirety of his work is foolish, because it is filled with treasures.
Let's see... what happens to famous people in this perverted world that tell the whole truth on how things operate??? Oh, I know.. they get killed.
John Lennon, JFK, Martin Luther King, Abraham Lincoln, Jesus Christ (why not right?), Malcolm X.. the list goes on.
Yes, it is true that retaining one's seed for a man is better for you. See Mantak Chia's book, "the multi orgasmic man". The Taoists have been practicing semen retention techniques for thousands of years. Is it no wonder to any of you that the internet is flooded with pornography, and every other commercial on television is about erectile dysfunction and trying to sell men viagra? Of course they want you to spill your seed. Spill it and be lazy and weak.
Re: Debunking Samael Aun Weor
Posted by:
rrmoderator
()
Date: June 13, 2013 04:17AM
justaman22:
Preaching is against the rules you agreed to before posting at this message board.
Disagreement is fine, but personal attacks are also against the rules.
Please follow the rules.
Preaching is against the rules you agreed to before posting at this message board.
Disagreement is fine, but personal attacks are also against the rules.
Please follow the rules.
Re: Debunking Samael Aun Weor
Posted by:
Lone_Flame_of_Eternity
()
Date: June 16, 2013 12:09AM
I am compelled to respond to this post.
About your quote:
The main reason I left the gnostic movements inspired by Samael Aun Weor is that they took away my personality. I became a drone that had nothing to distinguish me from others. People saw me as a bland, boring, weird person to avoid at all costs. I was shunned by many and I lost some of my best friends because I was encouraged to cut myself off from them. The damage is irreparable in some of those cases. It was so painful to watch as my friends socially developed ahead of me in my teen years (when I joined the gnostic movement bandwagon). I missed some very critical life and social landmark events because I was poisoned by this ideology.
During my near decade going through the various gnostic movements, I watched as people wept while they gave up their assets and hobbies (even their jobs) in order to “sacrifice themselves for humanity.” I myself wept as I did things like destroy my video game consoles and movies (or give them away) and even destroyed a huge collection of books I had because they didn’t fit in with the ideas of the Samael gnostic movements. I stopped in the middle of my bachelor’s degree program because I was persuaded by gnostic leaders to not “damage my intellect.” I was lucky to be welcomed back to the program by my professors after years of abandonment. I was lucky to have a lot of support after I left the movements.
You said:
No, the world is messed up because people are not honest with themselves (one among many other reasons, as the problems of the world are not in such black and white terms). I was never honest with myself under the influence of the SAW gnostic movements. It caused me a lot of mental damage; and even as I am progressing in society there is still more damage to be undone.
You also said:
Not join a sect? That’s quite odd. Because in his book “The Greater Mysteries” SAW outlines how gnostic organizations (i.e. - sects, schools, what have you) should be run [see Chapter 18 - The Apostolate]. Here are some quotes from that chapter:
This is a key concept in Samael Aun Weor style gnosticism. You have to be a member of a gnostic organization in order to carry out the key of sacrifice of humanity (oh, yeah, send money; every penny you can spare). Here are some more quotes from that chapter:
With things like meetings, there is a gathering of gnostic peoples, therefore there is a sect, school, etc. When I was in gnosis, I went from school to school, changing when I found each one “corrupt.” I tried so hard to follow the teachings, ending up at square one in each school. I had even obtained great resposibility in one school. I thought I was set to ascend the path of initiation. But, despite me making effort to “die to myself” and giving every penny I could give to that on particular movement, I never did get the promised key of alchemy (this was after quite a while in this movement).
You said:
Here’s one of many pieces of proof that SAW was a hypocrite. In chapter 18 of The Greater Mysteries, SAW says this:
[www.youtube.com]
Go to around 6:20, and you’ll see that he’s oh so perfectly fine accepting the title of doctor.
On a final note, you said:
I followed the teachings for nearly a decade, and the only real suffering that I experienced was my own for being deprived of the things that make me, ME.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/16/2013 12:22AM by Lone_Flame_of_Eternity.
About your quote:
Quote
justaman22
“It's painfully obvious that all of you that posted malevolent comments towards SAW because his teachings made you feel bad for others is quite sad.”
The main reason I left the gnostic movements inspired by Samael Aun Weor is that they took away my personality. I became a drone that had nothing to distinguish me from others. People saw me as a bland, boring, weird person to avoid at all costs. I was shunned by many and I lost some of my best friends because I was encouraged to cut myself off from them. The damage is irreparable in some of those cases. It was so painful to watch as my friends socially developed ahead of me in my teen years (when I joined the gnostic movement bandwagon). I missed some very critical life and social landmark events because I was poisoned by this ideology.
During my near decade going through the various gnostic movements, I watched as people wept while they gave up their assets and hobbies (even their jobs) in order to “sacrifice themselves for humanity.” I myself wept as I did things like destroy my video game consoles and movies (or give them away) and even destroyed a huge collection of books I had because they didn’t fit in with the ideas of the Samael gnostic movements. I stopped in the middle of my bachelor’s degree program because I was persuaded by gnostic leaders to not “damage my intellect.” I was lucky to be welcomed back to the program by my professors after years of abandonment. I was lucky to have a lot of support after I left the movements.
You said:
Quote
justaman22
The reason why this world is so messed up is because of bad personalities and ego's.
No, the world is messed up because people are not honest with themselves (one among many other reasons, as the problems of the world are not in such black and white terms). I was never honest with myself under the influence of the SAW gnostic movements. It caused me a lot of mental damage; and even as I am progressing in society there is still more damage to be undone.
You also said:
Quote
justaman22
If you believe you need to join a sect in order to obtain gnosis and spiritual experience then you are sadly mistaken.
Not join a sect? That’s quite odd. Because in his book “The Greater Mysteries” SAW outlines how gnostic organizations (i.e. - sects, schools, what have you) should be run [see Chapter 18 - The Apostolate]. Here are some quotes from that chapter:
Quote
“The one who wants powers should sacrifice himself for humanity.”
This is a key concept in Samael Aun Weor style gnosticism. You have to be a member of a gnostic organization in order to carry out the key of sacrifice of humanity (oh, yeah, send money; every penny you can spare). Here are some more quotes from that chapter:
Quote
“Form pure sanctuaries with humble people, simple and sincere laborers. Let us transform the world; forward to the battle for the new Aquarian Age.”
[...]
“Work in the Great Work of the Father. In this manner you will pay your debts and you shall liberate yourself from the Law of Karma. Later you will be justified by the faith in Christ; you will then live under grace. When we are servants of sin, we are subjected to the Law of Karma. When we are servants of the Lord, we will live under the action of grace, or blessing. The laborer receives his salary; that is the payment from the Law.”
[...]
“There are few initiates who comprehend what the attributes of the great initiates are. Gnostic apostles do not lack a Judas who betrays them, a Peter who denies them, a Thomas who mortifies them with his doubts and a Magdalene who cries for them.”
[...]
“Meetings should be carried out with order and veneration. The instructors should not be called masters, but “friends” instead. Only the Inner Christ is Master. The Gnostic Movement is impersonal and made up by humble laborers. Let us reject all personalism; let us not accept bossy persons; no one is more than anyone else. Among us, we are all laborers, bricklayers, mechanics, farmers, writers, doctors, etc.”
With things like meetings, there is a gathering of gnostic peoples, therefore there is a sect, school, etc. When I was in gnosis, I went from school to school, changing when I found each one “corrupt.” I tried so hard to follow the teachings, ending up at square one in each school. I had even obtained great resposibility in one school. I thought I was set to ascend the path of initiation. But, despite me making effort to “die to myself” and giving every penny I could give to that on particular movement, I never did get the promised key of alchemy (this was after quite a while in this movement).
You said:
Quote
justaman22
Perhaps SAW sprinkled in some lies into his work in order that he could spread greater truths to the people that were ready for it, or maybe he was simply mistaken by certain things. To discredit the entirety of his work is foolish, because it is filled with treasures.
Quote
“Whoever wants to dissolve the ‘I’ has to begin by not being a liar. All people are liars unto themselves, everyone lies to himself.” - SAW in The Revolution of the Dialectic
Here’s one of many pieces of proof that SAW was a hypocrite. In chapter 18 of The Greater Mysteries, SAW says this:
Quote
“We do not accept nobility titles, nor high-sounding titles such as doctor, lawyer, guru, Master, elder brother, avatar, etc. among us. We are all friends; Aquarius is the house of friends.”
[www.youtube.com]
Go to around 6:20, and you’ll see that he’s oh so perfectly fine accepting the title of doctor.
On a final note, you said:
Quote
justaman22
It is truly hard to follow the path when the way has been shown to you, and you see the world for how it truly is with all of it's suffering.
I followed the teachings for nearly a decade, and the only real suffering that I experienced was my own for being deprived of the things that make me, ME.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/16/2013 12:22AM by Lone_Flame_of_Eternity.
Re: Debunking Samael Aun Weor
Posted by:
EverVigilant
()
Date: June 19, 2013 04:42AM
justaman22,
I'm going to throw in my $1.05 on this. The first thing I want to say is that the posts I made in this thread were sincere. If you look at them honestly, you will see the wrestling I was doing with this philosophy, comparing its good points with its questionable points.
The question is, are you capable of looking at it that way? SAW trains you to see the bad in people. Are the things I have said nothing but worthless talk fueled by a needy, grasping, demonic ego? I understand if you really believe that it's all bathwater, no baby. I am happy to simply assert that that is not the case.
But I have more to say than that.
SAW's philosophy is so tempting precisely because of how much truth it contains. When a man reaches a breaking point where he is absolutely sick of all the BS surrounding his life, SAW can look like a breath of fresh air. Here's a man who says it like it is, and isn't it about time to stop rushing to narcotic, feel-good lifestyles and start facing cold, hard, brutal truths?
So truth be told, there is something healthy about the mentality that brings a person to SAW. I'm glad I passed through those 7 months or so. I found religion and kicked a lot of bad habits.
So let's take a look at his philosophy, shall we?
1.) The problem with the world is bad, ugly personalities.
Well, religion has been saying this for millenia, philosophy has been saying this for millenia, psychology has been saying this for a little while. Humans have a dark side, no question. No disagreement, except to remind you that we are not all dark side.
1-a.) The only, or at least the best, way to deal with these personalities is to wage a war of annihilation against them.
Maybe this is true, I didn't get far enough in it. But I doubt it. "Ye shall know them by their fruits." I would think by now I would know some people who, via SAW's system, have become the sort of strong, conscientious, constructively-oriented, wise, virtuous, and funny people who bring out the best in everybody around them and whom I respect and admire. Where are these people?
1-b.) The reason for suffering and absence of joy is these personalities. They must be destroyed via SAW's system or there is no genuine joy, all is vanity and pleasure-seeking.
It's easy to see this when you have no genuine joy in your own life and it has mostly been a life of suffering. A person attracted to SAW is a person who has experienced a lot of pain. I am sure this applies to you. I am sure you have felt a lot of pain in your life.
We project our own realities on the world, so a person obsessed with suffering will see suffering all around them. The most productive thing you can do spiritually is to get in touch with your own pain and loneliness and own it. Mourn over it. Shed tears. Get in touch with your real desires, your real needs, and then find ways to meet them. When I started doing this, when I finally stared caring about myself, even with my limited initial successes I experienced a sense of fulfillment and love of life and love of God and spontaneous friendly feelings toward others that dwarfed anything I experienced doing "Gnostic" work.
Your bitterness, envy, hatred, are a result of your feeling left out of life. Not the result of your own "ugliness." This is the subtle poison of SAW. SAW is going to drive you further away from people, then you are going to feel these feelings more strongly, then you are going to try to lobotomize them, and all the while the most spiritually healthy thing you can do with yourself is figure out what you want most and work at it. Use your bitterness as emotional fuel to provide the willpower to live the most healthy life you can, for "The best revenge is living well." This is what Jung meant by integrating the shadow. SAW's philosophy is an escape into self-produced action-movie drama which allows us to avoid the one really brave thing: loving ourselves, all of ourselves.
Pick up a copy, or read on Scribd, Karen Horney's "Neurosis and Human Growth."
2.) Our consciousness is asleep and must be awakened by destroying the egos mentioned in point 1, which will expand our powers.
Do you know why your consciousness is asleep? Anxiety. When you want to talk to somebody, instead of being in the moment and responding consciously in the conversation, you are having essentially a mini-panic reaction and say something automatic. Yeah, this is "demonic" in the sense of being automatic and unconsciously reactive, and can be worked at.
So I agree in principle, but not in etiology. Again, those subtle and seductive bits of truth of SAW. "Awakening the consciousness" is in fact best accomplished via love and peace, which banishes the anxiety and allows you to be present. But my point is it's all about fear. What prevents you from being conscious, from having a constructive, hands-on, go-getter, and interpersonally sincere orientation to life, is fear.
Read Horney's book.
3.) Ejaculation is the worst thing a human being can possibly do and there is absolutely no excuse for it ever.
I mean, come on. That's not even a caricature. But to somebody like me, who had a multitude of sexual hangups and was always afraid of women and envious of their sexuality, this was a very welcome path. Finally, an excuse to throw in the towel.
But surprise! Once again, the most love and peace I've ever experienced came after admitting to myself that I'd really like to have a sex life, and trying my best at it, owning my envy and bitterness, and actually achieving some successes. This was incredibly difficult because the old hangups were still there, only considerably reinforced by my experience with SAW. Consciously seeking sex felt like blaspheming the Holy Ghost.
But God didn't walk away just because I got laid. Far from it: our relationship seems to have gotten better. I have learned a lot. In time I know I will learn the lessons men typically learn when they are 10 years younger than me, which lead them to finding love, I am already learning them very rapidly. I may be ready for a sweetheart sooner than I think.
As a spiritual person who has always seen mystery in life, and sees mystery in sex, I have no doubt that there are interesting effects of semen retention. My experience with pranayama during my SAW days were actually pretty nice, I found some bliss that way.
But frankly, it doesn't compare to living. I'd rather live, than sit and be blissful. When I'm older, perhaps I'll pick that stuff up again. But I'm only 29. I want to live. I want to be a flawed, flesh-and-blood man who does his best. It is our flaws and our awkward struggles that facilitate sympathy and love between humans. And from my limited experience with love, I like it a lot.
I guess that's a choice we all have to make though. I just hope you think this through.
I'm going to throw in my $1.05 on this. The first thing I want to say is that the posts I made in this thread were sincere. If you look at them honestly, you will see the wrestling I was doing with this philosophy, comparing its good points with its questionable points.
The question is, are you capable of looking at it that way? SAW trains you to see the bad in people. Are the things I have said nothing but worthless talk fueled by a needy, grasping, demonic ego? I understand if you really believe that it's all bathwater, no baby. I am happy to simply assert that that is not the case.
But I have more to say than that.
SAW's philosophy is so tempting precisely because of how much truth it contains. When a man reaches a breaking point where he is absolutely sick of all the BS surrounding his life, SAW can look like a breath of fresh air. Here's a man who says it like it is, and isn't it about time to stop rushing to narcotic, feel-good lifestyles and start facing cold, hard, brutal truths?
So truth be told, there is something healthy about the mentality that brings a person to SAW. I'm glad I passed through those 7 months or so. I found religion and kicked a lot of bad habits.
So let's take a look at his philosophy, shall we?
1.) The problem with the world is bad, ugly personalities.
Well, religion has been saying this for millenia, philosophy has been saying this for millenia, psychology has been saying this for a little while. Humans have a dark side, no question. No disagreement, except to remind you that we are not all dark side.
1-a.) The only, or at least the best, way to deal with these personalities is to wage a war of annihilation against them.
Maybe this is true, I didn't get far enough in it. But I doubt it. "Ye shall know them by their fruits." I would think by now I would know some people who, via SAW's system, have become the sort of strong, conscientious, constructively-oriented, wise, virtuous, and funny people who bring out the best in everybody around them and whom I respect and admire. Where are these people?
1-b.) The reason for suffering and absence of joy is these personalities. They must be destroyed via SAW's system or there is no genuine joy, all is vanity and pleasure-seeking.
It's easy to see this when you have no genuine joy in your own life and it has mostly been a life of suffering. A person attracted to SAW is a person who has experienced a lot of pain. I am sure this applies to you. I am sure you have felt a lot of pain in your life.
We project our own realities on the world, so a person obsessed with suffering will see suffering all around them. The most productive thing you can do spiritually is to get in touch with your own pain and loneliness and own it. Mourn over it. Shed tears. Get in touch with your real desires, your real needs, and then find ways to meet them. When I started doing this, when I finally stared caring about myself, even with my limited initial successes I experienced a sense of fulfillment and love of life and love of God and spontaneous friendly feelings toward others that dwarfed anything I experienced doing "Gnostic" work.
Your bitterness, envy, hatred, are a result of your feeling left out of life. Not the result of your own "ugliness." This is the subtle poison of SAW. SAW is going to drive you further away from people, then you are going to feel these feelings more strongly, then you are going to try to lobotomize them, and all the while the most spiritually healthy thing you can do with yourself is figure out what you want most and work at it. Use your bitterness as emotional fuel to provide the willpower to live the most healthy life you can, for "The best revenge is living well." This is what Jung meant by integrating the shadow. SAW's philosophy is an escape into self-produced action-movie drama which allows us to avoid the one really brave thing: loving ourselves, all of ourselves.
Pick up a copy, or read on Scribd, Karen Horney's "Neurosis and Human Growth."
2.) Our consciousness is asleep and must be awakened by destroying the egos mentioned in point 1, which will expand our powers.
Do you know why your consciousness is asleep? Anxiety. When you want to talk to somebody, instead of being in the moment and responding consciously in the conversation, you are having essentially a mini-panic reaction and say something automatic. Yeah, this is "demonic" in the sense of being automatic and unconsciously reactive, and can be worked at.
So I agree in principle, but not in etiology. Again, those subtle and seductive bits of truth of SAW. "Awakening the consciousness" is in fact best accomplished via love and peace, which banishes the anxiety and allows you to be present. But my point is it's all about fear. What prevents you from being conscious, from having a constructive, hands-on, go-getter, and interpersonally sincere orientation to life, is fear.
Read Horney's book.
3.) Ejaculation is the worst thing a human being can possibly do and there is absolutely no excuse for it ever.
I mean, come on. That's not even a caricature. But to somebody like me, who had a multitude of sexual hangups and was always afraid of women and envious of their sexuality, this was a very welcome path. Finally, an excuse to throw in the towel.
But surprise! Once again, the most love and peace I've ever experienced came after admitting to myself that I'd really like to have a sex life, and trying my best at it, owning my envy and bitterness, and actually achieving some successes. This was incredibly difficult because the old hangups were still there, only considerably reinforced by my experience with SAW. Consciously seeking sex felt like blaspheming the Holy Ghost.
But God didn't walk away just because I got laid. Far from it: our relationship seems to have gotten better. I have learned a lot. In time I know I will learn the lessons men typically learn when they are 10 years younger than me, which lead them to finding love, I am already learning them very rapidly. I may be ready for a sweetheart sooner than I think.
As a spiritual person who has always seen mystery in life, and sees mystery in sex, I have no doubt that there are interesting effects of semen retention. My experience with pranayama during my SAW days were actually pretty nice, I found some bliss that way.
But frankly, it doesn't compare to living. I'd rather live, than sit and be blissful. When I'm older, perhaps I'll pick that stuff up again. But I'm only 29. I want to live. I want to be a flawed, flesh-and-blood man who does his best. It is our flaws and our awkward struggles that facilitate sympathy and love between humans. And from my limited experience with love, I like it a lot.
I guess that's a choice we all have to make though. I just hope you think this through.
Re: Debunking Samael Aun Weor
Posted by:
corboy
()
Date: June 19, 2013 12:38PM
Quote
I'd rather live, than sit and be blissful.
Words worth writing in letters of gold.
THe right proportion of neurotransmitters generate feelings of bliss.
Cocaine, speed, crack and combining speed and heroin can make people blissful.
But wanting bliss can turn us into prisoners. And at worst turn us murderous if cut off from our 'supply.'
'Pathei Mathos' -- through ordeal we learn (or ripen)
Aeschylus Agamemnon
Re: Debunking Samael Aun Weor
Posted by:
EverVigilant
()
Date: June 19, 2013 11:17PM
And that's why I emphasized pain. The desire to sit and be blissful comes to somebody whose life is characterized by internal suffering.
It's not quite so sick if the person can withdraw the projections. That is, if the person can admit, "I'm a neurotic wreck and all I want right now is to calm those waters, but I recognize that this doesn't apply to everybody."
SAW gives the reader the impression that if a person is not practicing his style of meditation and his war of annihilation against the egos, that person is necessarily living in an inner hell he's not even aware of. What clicks with the reader, what arouses his sense of recognition, is that for a long time he himself was unaware of how much he was suffering. It may sound strange that a person can be unaware of their own suffering, but it's commonplace in psychology (that's part of why I recommended that Horney book).
The recognition of one's own condition is fine, until the person then does what we all do until life teaches us not to, and assumes his own psychological situation applies to everybody.
Not everybody lives in a hell of anxiety and fear. A huge number of people seem to, but you have to discern that for each individual, and SAW does not hold a monopoly on the key to getting out of that condition.
It's not quite so sick if the person can withdraw the projections. That is, if the person can admit, "I'm a neurotic wreck and all I want right now is to calm those waters, but I recognize that this doesn't apply to everybody."
SAW gives the reader the impression that if a person is not practicing his style of meditation and his war of annihilation against the egos, that person is necessarily living in an inner hell he's not even aware of. What clicks with the reader, what arouses his sense of recognition, is that for a long time he himself was unaware of how much he was suffering. It may sound strange that a person can be unaware of their own suffering, but it's commonplace in psychology (that's part of why I recommended that Horney book).
The recognition of one's own condition is fine, until the person then does what we all do until life teaches us not to, and assumes his own psychological situation applies to everybody.
Not everybody lives in a hell of anxiety and fear. A huge number of people seem to, but you have to discern that for each individual, and SAW does not hold a monopoly on the key to getting out of that condition.
Re: Debunking Samael Aun Weor
Posted by:
justaman22
()
Date: July 15, 2013 01:12AM
"Not everybody lives in a hell of anxiety and fear. A huge number of people seem to, but you have to discern that for each individual, and SAW does not hold a monopoly on the key to getting out of that condition."
You're exactly right. He does not hold the monopoly. In the end, it all comes down to the individual.
"But wanting bliss can turn us into prisoners. And at worst turn us murderous if cut off from our 'supply.' "
Someone is being a little over-dramatic, no?
"Ejaculation is the worst thing a human being can possibly do and there is absolutely no excuse for it ever.
I mean, come on. That's not even a caricature. But to somebody like me, who had a multitude of sexual hangups and was always afraid of women and envious of their sexuality, this was a very welcome path. Finally, an excuse to throw in the towel.
But surprise! Once again, the most love and peace I've ever experienced came after admitting to myself that I'd really like to have a sex life, and trying my best at it, owning my envy and bitterness, and actually achieving some successes. This was incredibly difficult because the old hangups were still there, only considerably reinforced by my experience with SAW. Consciously seeking sex felt like blaspheming the Holy Ghost. "
Huh? Ejaculation is the worst thing ever? I mean, c'mon. I never stated it like that, you largely took my words out of context. The people at gnosticteachings rightly advocate that you retain your seed. Don't you think it's funny that tv is pushing sex BIG TIME and pornography is only 3 mouse clicks away on the internet. Why is it before a big sporting game some coaches advocate and demand that their players do not engage in sex or masterbation before a big game?
"Do you know why your consciousness is asleep? Anxiety. When you want to talk to somebody, instead of being in the moment and responding consciously in the conversation, you are having essentially a mini-panic reaction and say something automatic. Yeah, this is "demonic" in the sense of being automatic and unconsciously reactive, and can be worked at.
So I agree in principle, but not in etiology. Again, those subtle and seductive bits of truth of SAW. "Awakening the consciousness" is in fact best accomplished via love and peace, which banishes the anxiety and allows you to be present. But my point is it's all about fear. What prevents you from being conscious, from having a constructive, hands-on, go-getter, and interpersonally sincere orientation to life, is fear. "
Nothing wrong with a good helping of anxiety and fear. How people handle their anxiety and fear largely determin the over-all characteristics of the individual. My anxiety helped my ass wake up. This world is not a bed of roses. To hide from things and pretend they don't exist is silly.
One things is true. Each and every person here will die. I'm by no means scared of death, I welcome it. All these religions of the world carry the same thread. Not to be taken at face value. The lecturers at gnosticmedia have done a great job at weaving those threads together. I've never heard them once ask me to abandon my belongings in order to help people. Sure they ask for money, but they still put out all their podcasts for free. The only thing I've found in all of their podcasts was that they try to get the listener/ student to challenge themselves. Which, I see absolutely nothing wrong with.
You're exactly right. He does not hold the monopoly. In the end, it all comes down to the individual.
"But wanting bliss can turn us into prisoners. And at worst turn us murderous if cut off from our 'supply.' "
Someone is being a little over-dramatic, no?
"Ejaculation is the worst thing a human being can possibly do and there is absolutely no excuse for it ever.
I mean, come on. That's not even a caricature. But to somebody like me, who had a multitude of sexual hangups and was always afraid of women and envious of their sexuality, this was a very welcome path. Finally, an excuse to throw in the towel.
But surprise! Once again, the most love and peace I've ever experienced came after admitting to myself that I'd really like to have a sex life, and trying my best at it, owning my envy and bitterness, and actually achieving some successes. This was incredibly difficult because the old hangups were still there, only considerably reinforced by my experience with SAW. Consciously seeking sex felt like blaspheming the Holy Ghost. "
Huh? Ejaculation is the worst thing ever? I mean, c'mon. I never stated it like that, you largely took my words out of context. The people at gnosticteachings rightly advocate that you retain your seed. Don't you think it's funny that tv is pushing sex BIG TIME and pornography is only 3 mouse clicks away on the internet. Why is it before a big sporting game some coaches advocate and demand that their players do not engage in sex or masterbation before a big game?
"Do you know why your consciousness is asleep? Anxiety. When you want to talk to somebody, instead of being in the moment and responding consciously in the conversation, you are having essentially a mini-panic reaction and say something automatic. Yeah, this is "demonic" in the sense of being automatic and unconsciously reactive, and can be worked at.
So I agree in principle, but not in etiology. Again, those subtle and seductive bits of truth of SAW. "Awakening the consciousness" is in fact best accomplished via love and peace, which banishes the anxiety and allows you to be present. But my point is it's all about fear. What prevents you from being conscious, from having a constructive, hands-on, go-getter, and interpersonally sincere orientation to life, is fear. "
Nothing wrong with a good helping of anxiety and fear. How people handle their anxiety and fear largely determin the over-all characteristics of the individual. My anxiety helped my ass wake up. This world is not a bed of roses. To hide from things and pretend they don't exist is silly.
One things is true. Each and every person here will die. I'm by no means scared of death, I welcome it. All these religions of the world carry the same thread. Not to be taken at face value. The lecturers at gnosticmedia have done a great job at weaving those threads together. I've never heard them once ask me to abandon my belongings in order to help people. Sure they ask for money, but they still put out all their podcasts for free. The only thing I've found in all of their podcasts was that they try to get the listener/ student to challenge themselves. Which, I see absolutely nothing wrong with.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.