Re: Doubts about the path

["loumade_1999" <loumade_1999@...>]

--- In BardonPraxis@yahoogroups.com, "David Yeh" <ldreamr@y...> wrote:
> I have a number of questions I would like to put forward to you 
all, 
> particularly the experienced practitioners like Rawn. Your 
feedback 
> and guidance would be very welcome.
> 
> I am feeling some basic doubts with regards to the Hermetic path.
> 
> First of all, it seems to me that Bardon gave a sort of bare-bones 
> outline in IIH of what is needed to achieve each step. But what 
> about the particulars of the technique or instruction? The 
language 
> he uses in the Step One exercise about vacancy of mind, for 
instance, 
> is very forceful, i.e. suppress your thoughts. But what I've 
> gathered, particularly from exploring writings of systems such as 
> Buddhism that really focus on the natural emptiness of mind, is 
that 
> you can't really fight the mind. You have to let go and be 
mindful, 
> or you have to "love your ego to death" or something like that. So 
> right there is one thing where I think, "Hmm, I can't quite trust 
> Bardon." If I start to distrust Bardon in Step One, what does that 
> mean for the rest of the course?



Buddhism is one of those interesting philosophies that has had many 
revisions on top of it that coincide with the original laws, not 
changing them, but illucidating them further and further. The same 
goes for Kabbalah with it's eight periods. Each not changing the 
original laws but illucidating further what has been said in the 
Torah.

The main thing you should understand about the Buddhist philosophy is 
that the Four noble truths are a diagnosis of what goes on in life. 
Basically, attachment is suffering. The eightfold path is the 
prescription for that suffering (Right knowledge, intention and so on 
to right meditation). Just about all of the Sutras and the 
commentaries on the sutras are conceptualizations put into verse to 
teach others not to conceptualize. In conceptualization, we dualize 
and get further away from Nirvana. Or in Bardon terms, we get away 
from the Mystical where as magical is working with the will to 
penetrate further into the metaphysical. Mystical is quality, magic 
is quantity. 

Buddhism has its own heirarchy where there is a progression from the 
Hinayana (ethically based, somewhat antisocial with the enlightened 
arhat as the ideal and philosophically empirical) to the mahayana 
(Ideal person is the Bodhisattva, which is very social for the 
benefit of others, focusing on emptiness and philosophically 
rational) and finally, Vajrayana (taking and refining what is in the 
concepts of the mahayana and furthering the concept of emptiness so 
that there is no difference between nirvana or samsara. In 
otherwords, and more base terms, I am a pile of crap but I am 
enlightened and don't know it; there is a diamond in me and I have to 
find it.) 

What influences the Vajrayana, the higher aspect of Buddhism, are the 
practices of the earlier primitive shamanic tibetans (Bon Po) that 
did implement a very similar practice as that found in the IIH with 
the Soul Mirror exercise. Basically, we were made of elements, they 
cannot function independently and must be in balance for the body, 
soul, and spirit to progress further. The elements were applied in 
exactly the same method as was in IIH. The theory from the Buddhist 
perspective on this is that the higher beings were at an elemental 
equilibrium to such a fine degree that they were in a constant state 
of bliss. 

Naturally, if you meditate (in the eastern sense of the word where 
you let go and dont conceptualize) you will develop some of the 
powers that Bardon suggests. However, if you make these powers your 
focus, you deluded your ego, and these great powers fall further out 
of reach. Interesting failsafe. You develop abilities as you go on 
but if you focus on them you fall back.

Unfortunatly, Bardon is VERY barebones. Vacancy of mind is written 
in only a few pages for IIH but Buddhism has attacked it quite a bit 
more.

Quite Honestly, IIH is correct without much in the way of trying to 
back up what it is saying. All it is, is "do this and do this" no 
questions asked and so on. Buddhism has gone so far into the 
philosophy to mention "do this because of these reasons" with far 
exceeding explanations.

There are many things in the Buddhist world that are mentioned in 
IIH. Some Monks do finger posterings where a certain postering would 
bring about a mental attitude. Meditating (focusing rather) for 4 
hours a day on certain aspects like patience. When that patience is 
fully grasped, the fingers take a posture, when the mind loses focus, 
the fingers come apart. So if the monk is losing patience, they can 
bring it back with their fingers. 

There are many secrets in the Monastic life that would preferably be 
kept secret. When the Dalai Llama goes around and speaks, RARELY 
does he ever talk about Dzogchen, but rather the basics of Buddhism 
of what is mentioned mostly in the Hinayana and some of the 
Mahayana. I am sure Bardon felt the same thing when revealing the 
secrets that he had for fear that people would misuse and 
misunderstand them. 



> 
> Further, Rawn mentions on his website that Bardon doesn't really 
> mention, except in a couple of sentences, that EOM is meant to be 
> practiced throughout the ten steps. It is implied. Well, what 
else 
> is implied that isn't set out in so many words? So how can I trust 
> it?




Gone are the days when one would go to a guru and the guru would 
force the medication of reason down the persons throat to get them to 
understand even if they didn't want to. It would make my life 
easier, let me tell you.:-) In the beginning, with children, parents 
do and say things to get the children to do things for their own 
benefit even though the children don't even realize it. Like telling 
a child that there is candy outsideside to get the scared child out 
of a burning house. So, Trust me, when you work on the exercises in 
IIH, a HUGE amount of money will be found in your closet. hee hee

Honestly, if you are having doubts about it and don't want to 
research it, then move onto something else that satisfies your soul. 
My hope is that if you do decide to pursue buddhism further, that you 
would keep a copy of IIH with you because it is very reflective of 
the whole path of Buddhism. At least, this is what I have found. 
There are similarities everywhere in all religions and philosophies, 
and bardon has been a great help to me. (my testimony)





> 
> Moreover, what is the goal of the Hermetic path? In Buddhism it 
> seems that the goal is very simple: be enlightened. I am unsure 
what 
> the goal is in Hermetics. If it is self-transformation and 
mastery, 
> what is the purpose of developing all of those powers?
I came to 
> Bardon while trying to explore the practice of astral projection 
and 
> needing more of a spiritual framework for it instead of doing it 
for 
> recreation. Now I flip ahead in IIH and encounter a multitude of 
> things that I will ostensibly be focusing my energy on, like magic 
> mirrors and rituals and mental wandering. To me they are very 
> tempting in terms of ego, though I know that supposedly by the time 
I 
> reach the stage where those things are possible, I will have 
attained 
> a degree of mastery that will eliminate that. Well what is the 
point 
> of the powers in the first place? Why not, as some Buddhists 
teach, 
> ignore all of it, because all phenomena are illusion, and place the 
> focus simply on being awake in the moment?





Well, Buddhism, like the hermetic path of Bardon is an aspect of the 
perrenial philosophy. Basically, all of us will eventually acheive 
enlightenment in an incarnation somewhere along the road. This being 
said, many of the spiritual masters that bardon makes reference to 
come here to Earth as a buffed up version of a "Bodhisattva," they 
are here to help humanity. With there skills of magic, being that of 
focusing further into the metaphysical world, they can focus and 
understand better the mystical. They truly do go hand in hand (the 
magical and mystical).


Buddhism teaches many things about the phenomenal world being that of 
illusion since it coincides with everything being empty of their own 
being to a form of understanding dependent origination. Since all 
things in this world are dependent on something else, they are empty 
of their own being because it belongs to something else. THat is why 
they say not to place much faith in phenomena. Madyamikans carry 
this degree of scrutiny towards reality to a high degree quite 
similar to Bishop Berkeley's view of the world existing only in the 
mind. Berkeley's treatise, as well as the Madyamikan's depends on a 
Being or G-D that perceives reality to keep it constant. It is also 
a good method to ignore all other things and focus on the pure here 
and now. For the Kaballist, that aspect of here and now is one 
translation for the term Keter. Being ready to BE in the moment that 
is NOW! Unfortunately, for a Kaballist, Buddhism tends to separate 
the aspects that are seen in the Tree of life, the triads, into 
different schools, Hinayana focused around malkuth and its adjoining 
triad, mahayana and the vajrayana taking up the rest of the tree 
respectively.

Basically, Buddhism is so rich that it will take a long time to gain 
the understanding because it is so meaty. IIH is bare bones as you 
put it and is the very short, straight to the point path of what can 
be gained while delving into Buddhism. Again, I say, Buddhism is 
very meaty. I had a buddhist professor that said he had been 
studying it intently for over thirty years, and he said he was just 
finally starting to understand it. Hopefully that puts things into 
perspective that no matter what you decide to pursue as a path, 
practice and practicality will have to come first to understand it 
because the path is hard.


(dont stop reading, I posted more lower)



> 
> Also, there are lineages in Buddhism that are unbroken going back a 
> few thousand years. There are teachers around and available with 
> whom one can meditate and learn. Hermetics by comparison seems new 
> and obscure and perhaps immature? Where are the guides and the 
> wisdom teachings handed down over hundreds of years? Obviously I 
> don't know much about it but I would appreciate someone 
enlightening 
> me.
> 
> One answer might be to practice Bardon and also seek out Buddhist 
> teachers to help with some concepts. But I think it is really hard 
> to have two teachers at one time. Something has got to give.
> 
> I do think that part of it for me is the unfamiliar complexity. 
The 
> four elements, three bodies, the Hebrew words and Qabalistic terms 
> and talk of elementals that people bandy around. This is all very 
> new to me and somewhat overwhelming. I know that part of my doubt 
is 
> that I would rather retreat to something familiar. I take a look 
> inside the Kybalion and my mind starts to shut down from the sheer 
> overload of unfamiliar forms of information.
> 
> But a part of me also wonders, isn't this unnecessarily complex? I 
> guess that would, again, depend on the goal. If the goal of 
> Theravadan Buddhism is simply enlightenment, then it is simple 
enough 
> to go live in a monastery and work on being mindful of everything 
> that arises in yourself. If the goal of Christianity is to feel 
> God's love, then one simply must open oneself to it. I hope 
someone 
> can tell me what Hermetics is about to them, because right now I 
> still have this idea in my head that magick is about power over 
> things in the world, rather than harmony with the world. That idea 
> is very attractive and, as such, I think, dangerous to me if what I 
> really seek is freedom. But I also know, from writings by Rawn and 
> William Mistele among others, that that's not necessarily the 
case ...
> 
> I would like to say that MY goal is to live life fully, both by 
> removing the things in me that block my way to the Divine, and by 
> expressing myself and exploring the wonders and mysteries of the 
> world.
> 
> So I'm begging for answers to my questions:
> Isn't a path like Hermetics, strewn with many possibilities for 
power 
> and abuse of power, also prone to abuse of self and self-delusion? 
> Doesn't it focus unnecessarily on methods of control rather than 
> methods of communion? Would it not be simpler to give up the power 
> and focus on experiencing the Divine, with paths like Buddhism?


so, my conclusion. (I think I touched on most of your questions 
above)

The hermetic path is strewn with many possibilities for delusion and 
power. The soul mirror does help with that as a radical form of self 
honesty. The methods of control can be used as a method for 
communion. The learning of the aspects of the metaphysical through 
the will (magic) can help one better penetrate into the mystical. 
Experiencing the divine through paths like buddhism is actually a 
complex issue. The traditional hinayanist focuses on enlightenment 
while the traditional mahayanist focuses on enlightenment and tries 
to get everyone else to enlightenment, because, if everything is 
connected, you cannot reach enlightenment fully since a part of you 
is left behind in the unenlightened tree. IIH, for me, appears to be 
a method to help the most people because you can use the magical to 
understand the mystical further through experience and teach others 
more effectively.

Dont, laugh at this, but the way that I see the answer to your 
question is with two mental pictures. One of Buddhism and the other 
of Bardon's path set in IIH. The first picture is of the path set in 
IIH where it is a line set between two points in the void. The 
learning, if done properly gets one from one point to the other 
without a great amount of elucidation (deep vibration at certain 
points on the line that lead to difficult concepts of metaphysics, 
epistemology, ethics and so on). For IIH, you pass from one point to 
the other as a child, just learning without a deep penetration into 
the hardcore philosophy. When you are competent enough with IIH 
where you can answer questions yourself, and you most certainly will 
ask and answer them, the line begins to vibrate as you go deeper and 
deeper.

Buddhism is the other line where you first start off with the ethics 
and delve into which is an automatic vibration on the line that you 
penetrate deeply. There is an automatic vibration on the line that 
happens when you first touch it as opposed to bardon's system where 
you learn the laywork and then penetrate deeper into the line and 
make it vibrate. Hopefully this makes sense, I tried to make it as 
tangeable as possible from the synesthetic crap it was before. eeesh!



> 
> I hope that no one takes offense at my questions, they are posed in 
a 
> spirit of honest inquiry.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> David




I am glad that you are asking questions like this. At least you are 
swimming in a sea of people doing backfloats. No matter what you do, 
if it is to pursue buddhism, that you would keep a copy of IIH with 
you just to refer to as it is a wonderful resource in the Buddhist 
philosophy. I am sure you will see complimentary ideas if you do 
pursue buddhism.


~relax and breath~
Louis de Sully


~~~~~checking on the drunk outside to make sure he isnt hurt~~~~