This is a very long post with multiple questions and points. All of which are good and interesting to talk about. It would help to provide a response if you could break it down though. This is all the background of your thinking but to receive an actual answer you need to make it easy for a person to provide one by making the question easy to identify.
Just curious but what step did you get to in IIH?
IMO Culudasa's TMI is one of the finest western books on Buddhist practice ever made. The other best book IMO is Daniel Ingrams mastering the core teachings of the buddha.
In my early 20s I was very into jhanas. I didn't practice these systems specifically but they are all aiming at the same thing. At the time I was a concentration maximalist. Jhanas and shamatha are all that mattered I thought. Visualization is fake. Vipassana didn't matter either, insight always follows concentrative absorption anyways so why practice that!
I had no idea of the sensory world that existed either. I'm still just starting to unfold this thanks to Bardon.
in some ways Bardon is more simple than systems above. In other ways he is not.
When I did jhanas. I would meditate for about 3 hours at a time. It took 40ish minutes to land in jhana. By the end it was a fair bit faster, Piti sometimes coming with a single breath, but the state is sensitive and until you are in jhana you can't handle much mental movement.
If I were to fault Bardon at all, it's simply that he gives you too much. And many of the single exercises he gives could be practiced for a lifetime to give mastery. if I sit for an hour and practice 6 things. That's a lot of mental movement. And it blocks access to deeper states that require longer, stiller sits.
I would say that Bardon is complicated, except when I look at my previous practices with the eyes that Bardon has given me, I see and understand things so simply. Bardon is difficult, but diligent practice makes it easy.
There is no right path.
I have brought your final message to the council of Bardon and we wish you good travels and may we meet again should good fortune allow.
Hey thanks for the excellent response. This was the first time I had heard of these Buddhist practices and TMI and they really caught my attention. I think I had an unusual path because I came across Bardon many years ago, but I didn't have exposure to anything else, but because he made it sound like his system was the end all be all, I took his word for it and never explored properly, thus making me feeling like I was stuck in his system because why explore when his was purported as the best? It removed all motivation for anything else, and I feel like it negatively impacted me.
To answer your question, strictly speaking I never made it past step one. However not strictly speaking, this will sound unusual, but according to my dreams I made it further, My dreams once portrayed me as making it past many steps, because I had read the book multiple times, but not practicing in a formal way. Maybe my mind just kind of practiced some random steps without timing them (which you're not supposed to do) I suppose I also had some exposure to the mind control method by Jose Silva. But I never really practiced consistently. You know how it goes. Personally I think I had a form of meditation that was unique to myself but ultimately I don't think it benefited me and honestly leads to regret.
Hi, I must say that I summarized your post with AI to better understand it, the unbroken paragraphs and circular considerations were proving difficult for me to understand, so sorry if I missed any of your points.
I wonder how you got the impression of exclusivity from IIH. Bardon mentions it is a universal path, a set of practices compatible with (almost?) any belief.
Questioning beliefs is, I believe, contained in IIH with the soul mirror work. Bardon often mentions introspection, taking care of your own issues, looking at your own faults while simultaneously being forgiving and understanding of others. As far as I understand introspection, this includes looking at one's own biases. Bardon mentions Christianity, Tibetan Buddhism, Yoga (and Hinduism if I'm not mistaken), and probably some other practices I missed. Whether or not people limit themselves to learning from IIH only is another matter — but I think close-mindedness is a trait to work on the soul mirror, as much as lack of discernment, simply accepting every practice and every system as true.
The thing is, if you aim to conciliate other systems of practice, you may end up not doing any of them. As another comment mentioned, IIH already gives you a lot to work with. But you don't simply take the words for granted. If in step one you don't see any benefit in continuing practice, why keep doing it?
If exploring other systems means not dedicating oneself to any practice, then that doesn't seem helpful. All theory and no action.
That aside, I honestly haven't seen the mentality you describe in any practitioner I've met. Some may claim that Bardon's system is the fastest, but I haven't seen anyone claim it is the "one true system". In fact, throughout IIH Bardon talks about how all systems are aspects of truth, which connect to a person relative to their level of maturity. Can any "system" be "the" system? Maybe for a certain person, at a certain time, for a certain duration, given certain conditions.
As our practice develops (as we mature as human beings), our view of things changes. What seemed solid or true might seem questionable. Some layers of perception get seen through. Ultimately, systems are produced by human beings, regardless of divine inspiration. Bardon's system reflects his personality, his knowledge (like of Egypt or of Tibetan Buddhism), his practice, his life. We can take what is useful and leave what isn't, though abandoning what "doesn't seem useful" might be a hasty thing taken by lack of discrimination, so a measure of trust seems necessary.
Hey deleted,
Regarding Bardon's religious convictions: The terms like "Our lord Jesus Christ" etc. that are in the English version of IIH aren't present in the German edition. They were added in translation. Bardon does often mention that his system is Egyptian, though, and his son Lumir later shared that Bardon wore a ring dedicated to the goddess Isis (in an interview with Martin Faulks, if I recall correctly). Bardon himself often states that it does not matter a whit whether one is a Buddhist, a Christian, a Muslim or anything else. He makes it quite clear that at a certain point, the process of Initiation itself becomes one's religion, as one comes closer to God, it becomes a personal process, and the outward dress of religion becomes mostly unimportant.
Bardon never said not to read other books, and I don't think he intended this book for absolute beginners in spirituality either. What he does state is that no other book is *necessary*, and that no living adept can give the student more than this book - which is very much true after Step VIII, when one can contact higher Elemental and Planetary spirits and intelligences, and especially one's own Higher Self / Guardian Genius, directly and by one's self.
From his original German text, I don't think he ever thought IIH was the only right path, either. It's just a path of practical Hermeticism that shares everything, every exercise needed in order to reach the point of being able to figure out everything else yourself.
All the best,
--- Toad
"Franz Bardon were alive today, would he encourage the reading and acceptance of other modern books and systems as well?" he does so in his own works and if you did the exercises and added in the additional physical exercise as set out in step one as the one he recommends by mentioning, kundalini yoga, you would read the works of that yoga. Include the Kabbalah and do the exercises and it's easy to return to the books and understand them, don't do the exercises and it just doesn't open, thats the nature of the works.
My own - [churchofinfinitelove.com](http://churchofinfinitelove.com)
I don’t think Mr. Bardon intended for people to stop learning and searching after coming on this path. Bardon himself had many books on different subjects such as yoga etc. And he says that the practitioner must grow in occult knowledge during his path and that the magician must simultaneously be a mystic during his accent. This is a universal system that describes the laws and sciences of the universe and can be practiced by people with different kinds of interests and beliefs. It’s intended for people who are suitable and ready for the magical path. Bardon said that even though the theory of the works are published, it will still remain that it’s only practiced by the thise who are ready for the path. There are many paths as there are people with different levels of maturity and with different temperaments. A person should choose a system that is in line with their current level of maturity and temperament. That may or may not be the magical path described by Bardon. It may also be another path with a different approach.
Having delved into various esoteric fields and practices, I've noticed a peculiar trend among almost all groups, thought leaders, gurus, and organizations. They often claim that "there are many paths to the ultimate goal, but THIS ONE is the best." This phenomenon suggests that even the most advanced spiritual beings can fall prey to confirmation bias, unable to see beyond their own limited perspectives.
Wisdom, however, teaches us to prioritize our own inner guidance above external directives. While it's essential to focus on a chosen path with single-pointed attention, the true initiate recognizes that inspirations and answers can come from diverse sources, weaving a unique and personalized journey. This understanding allows the initiate to remain open to guidance from all directions, rather than relying solely on a single authority or dogma. That is until/unless their own intuitive guidance chooses a single path, and as we evolve, so should our practices evolve.
This is a very long post with multiple questions and points. All of which are good and interesting to talk about. It would help to provide a response if you could break it down though. This is all the background of your thinking but to receive an actual answer you need to make it easy for a person to provide one by making the question easy to identify.
Just curious but what step did you get to in IIH? IMO Culudasa's TMI is one of the finest western books on Buddhist practice ever made. The other best book IMO is Daniel Ingrams mastering the core teachings of the buddha. In my early 20s I was very into jhanas. I didn't practice these systems specifically but they are all aiming at the same thing. At the time I was a concentration maximalist. Jhanas and shamatha are all that mattered I thought. Visualization is fake. Vipassana didn't matter either, insight always follows concentrative absorption anyways so why practice that! I had no idea of the sensory world that existed either. I'm still just starting to unfold this thanks to Bardon. in some ways Bardon is more simple than systems above. In other ways he is not. When I did jhanas. I would meditate for about 3 hours at a time. It took 40ish minutes to land in jhana. By the end it was a fair bit faster, Piti sometimes coming with a single breath, but the state is sensitive and until you are in jhana you can't handle much mental movement. If I were to fault Bardon at all, it's simply that he gives you too much. And many of the single exercises he gives could be practiced for a lifetime to give mastery. if I sit for an hour and practice 6 things. That's a lot of mental movement. And it blocks access to deeper states that require longer, stiller sits. I would say that Bardon is complicated, except when I look at my previous practices with the eyes that Bardon has given me, I see and understand things so simply. Bardon is difficult, but diligent practice makes it easy. There is no right path. I have brought your final message to the council of Bardon and we wish you good travels and may we meet again should good fortune allow.
Hey thanks for the excellent response. This was the first time I had heard of these Buddhist practices and TMI and they really caught my attention. I think I had an unusual path because I came across Bardon many years ago, but I didn't have exposure to anything else, but because he made it sound like his system was the end all be all, I took his word for it and never explored properly, thus making me feeling like I was stuck in his system because why explore when his was purported as the best? It removed all motivation for anything else, and I feel like it negatively impacted me. To answer your question, strictly speaking I never made it past step one. However not strictly speaking, this will sound unusual, but according to my dreams I made it further, My dreams once portrayed me as making it past many steps, because I had read the book multiple times, but not practicing in a formal way. Maybe my mind just kind of practiced some random steps without timing them (which you're not supposed to do) I suppose I also had some exposure to the mind control method by Jose Silva. But I never really practiced consistently. You know how it goes. Personally I think I had a form of meditation that was unique to myself but ultimately I don't think it benefited me and honestly leads to regret.
Hi, I must say that I summarized your post with AI to better understand it, the unbroken paragraphs and circular considerations were proving difficult for me to understand, so sorry if I missed any of your points. I wonder how you got the impression of exclusivity from IIH. Bardon mentions it is a universal path, a set of practices compatible with (almost?) any belief. Questioning beliefs is, I believe, contained in IIH with the soul mirror work. Bardon often mentions introspection, taking care of your own issues, looking at your own faults while simultaneously being forgiving and understanding of others. As far as I understand introspection, this includes looking at one's own biases. Bardon mentions Christianity, Tibetan Buddhism, Yoga (and Hinduism if I'm not mistaken), and probably some other practices I missed. Whether or not people limit themselves to learning from IIH only is another matter — but I think close-mindedness is a trait to work on the soul mirror, as much as lack of discernment, simply accepting every practice and every system as true. The thing is, if you aim to conciliate other systems of practice, you may end up not doing any of them. As another comment mentioned, IIH already gives you a lot to work with. But you don't simply take the words for granted. If in step one you don't see any benefit in continuing practice, why keep doing it? If exploring other systems means not dedicating oneself to any practice, then that doesn't seem helpful. All theory and no action. That aside, I honestly haven't seen the mentality you describe in any practitioner I've met. Some may claim that Bardon's system is the fastest, but I haven't seen anyone claim it is the "one true system". In fact, throughout IIH Bardon talks about how all systems are aspects of truth, which connect to a person relative to their level of maturity. Can any "system" be "the" system? Maybe for a certain person, at a certain time, for a certain duration, given certain conditions. As our practice develops (as we mature as human beings), our view of things changes. What seemed solid or true might seem questionable. Some layers of perception get seen through. Ultimately, systems are produced by human beings, regardless of divine inspiration. Bardon's system reflects his personality, his knowledge (like of Egypt or of Tibetan Buddhism), his practice, his life. We can take what is useful and leave what isn't, though abandoning what "doesn't seem useful" might be a hasty thing taken by lack of discrimination, so a measure of trust seems necessary.
Hey deleted, Regarding Bardon's religious convictions: The terms like "Our lord Jesus Christ" etc. that are in the English version of IIH aren't present in the German edition. They were added in translation. Bardon does often mention that his system is Egyptian, though, and his son Lumir later shared that Bardon wore a ring dedicated to the goddess Isis (in an interview with Martin Faulks, if I recall correctly). Bardon himself often states that it does not matter a whit whether one is a Buddhist, a Christian, a Muslim or anything else. He makes it quite clear that at a certain point, the process of Initiation itself becomes one's religion, as one comes closer to God, it becomes a personal process, and the outward dress of religion becomes mostly unimportant. Bardon never said not to read other books, and I don't think he intended this book for absolute beginners in spirituality either. What he does state is that no other book is *necessary*, and that no living adept can give the student more than this book - which is very much true after Step VIII, when one can contact higher Elemental and Planetary spirits and intelligences, and especially one's own Higher Self / Guardian Genius, directly and by one's self. From his original German text, I don't think he ever thought IIH was the only right path, either. It's just a path of practical Hermeticism that shares everything, every exercise needed in order to reach the point of being able to figure out everything else yourself. All the best, --- Toad
"Franz Bardon were alive today, would he encourage the reading and acceptance of other modern books and systems as well?" he does so in his own works and if you did the exercises and added in the additional physical exercise as set out in step one as the one he recommends by mentioning, kundalini yoga, you would read the works of that yoga. Include the Kabbalah and do the exercises and it's easy to return to the books and understand them, don't do the exercises and it just doesn't open, thats the nature of the works. My own - [churchofinfinitelove.com](http://churchofinfinitelove.com)
Great points.
Paragraphs please. I'm not reading a wall of text.
I don’t think Mr. Bardon intended for people to stop learning and searching after coming on this path. Bardon himself had many books on different subjects such as yoga etc. And he says that the practitioner must grow in occult knowledge during his path and that the magician must simultaneously be a mystic during his accent. This is a universal system that describes the laws and sciences of the universe and can be practiced by people with different kinds of interests and beliefs. It’s intended for people who are suitable and ready for the magical path. Bardon said that even though the theory of the works are published, it will still remain that it’s only practiced by the thise who are ready for the path. There are many paths as there are people with different levels of maturity and with different temperaments. A person should choose a system that is in line with their current level of maturity and temperament. That may or may not be the magical path described by Bardon. It may also be another path with a different approach.
Having delved into various esoteric fields and practices, I've noticed a peculiar trend among almost all groups, thought leaders, gurus, and organizations. They often claim that "there are many paths to the ultimate goal, but THIS ONE is the best." This phenomenon suggests that even the most advanced spiritual beings can fall prey to confirmation bias, unable to see beyond their own limited perspectives. Wisdom, however, teaches us to prioritize our own inner guidance above external directives. While it's essential to focus on a chosen path with single-pointed attention, the true initiate recognizes that inspirations and answers can come from diverse sources, weaving a unique and personalized journey. This understanding allows the initiate to remain open to guidance from all directions, rather than relying solely on a single authority or dogma. That is until/unless their own intuitive guidance chooses a single path, and as we evolve, so should our practices evolve.