Hi guest! As you can see, the new Wizard Forums has been revived, and we are glad to have you visiting our site! However, it would be really helpful, both to you and us, if you registered on our website! Registering allows you to see all posts, and make posts yourself, which would be great if you could share your knowledge and opinions with us! You could also make posts to ask questions!
I'm relatively new to the occult and Ive taken an interest in Hermetics. I've been reading Initiation into Hermetics by Franz Bardon and it seems like it is quite clearly a book with some very deep practical information which could take an extremely long time to go through. My question is: Would it be more beneficial to focus exclusively on this book or branch out into other areas, or would this only confuse things more?
I'm relatively new to the occult and Ive taken an interest in Hermetics. I've been reading Initiation into Hermetics by Franz Bardon and it seems like it is quite clearly a book with some very deep practical information which could take an extremely long time to go through. My question is: Would it be more beneficial to focus exclusively on this book or branch out into other areas, or would this only confuse things more?
As someone who practices IIH, I would say you should absolutely study, yes.
As for praxis side of things, only if its benefical to your training, and what will benefit you is for you to decide. Keep at it for a year, and should you not see much of an...
Personally, I'd focus on initiation first and then worry about everything else afterwards. But it depends on what you judge to be right for you. Which isn't to say don't read and study everything else, you should have an understanding of what you're doing. Practically, however, it helps to not be doing a thousand things at once. Initiation (in whatever form) tends to be a first step on many paths.
Depends. For me, Initiation into Hermetics is first and foremost a very tough and thorough training manual with a somewhat dated theoretical part so you might want to investigate other books on similar topics, e.g. as far a the philosophical elements are concerned. Once you get to the practical part, you may find other books useful as well - for the Thought Control section in Step One for example, you might want to look into raja yoga, empty-mind meditation and zazen if you're experiencing difficulties. I don't believe a single book can satisfy your needs, sooner or later everyone looks for some variety in their reading.
Stick with one thing at first and throw yourself into it. Practitioners have a tendency to chase down every new shiny technique they come across. Pick one and stick with it for 6-12 months (maybe longer but I try to be realistic with my advice). See how far you can push it. You’ll hit snags/plateaus/initial inertia and this is when most people start dividing their efforts. Resist that temptation of the new “easy” thing and push-through/persevere.
Stick with one thing at first and throw yourself into it. Practitioners have a tendency to chase down every new shiny technique they come across. Pick one and stick with it for 6-12 months (maybe longer but I try to be realistic with my advice). See how far you can push it. You’ll hit snags/plateaus/initial inertia and this is when most people start dividing their efforts. Resist that temptation of the new “easy” thing and push-through/persevere.
I'm relatively new to the occult and Ive taken an interest in Hermetics. I've been reading Initiation into Hermetics by Franz Bardon and it seems like it is quite clearly a book with some very deep practical information which could take an extremely long time to go through. My question is: Would it be more beneficial to focus exclusively on this book or branch out into other areas, or would this only confuse things more?
As someone who practices IIH, I would say you should absolutely study, yes.
As for praxis side of things, only if its benefical to your training, and what will benefit you is for you to decide. Keep at it for a year, and should you not see much of an improvement, you will know this path isn't the one.
Yes the book is demanding, but any path that walks its talk seems to be so. I can even say Bardon is a softie, he at least vants you to have a vacancy of mind for 10 mins to progress. Peter Carroll in his Liber Null says one should go for 30. Crowley in his Liber ABA says one should be in asana for an hour before anything else.
I have walked this path for a while and can assure you throughly if you manage to soldier through first four steps you will come out a very serious practitioner, with more than decent skills in meditation, ability to heal yourself and others, understanding of various different energies and their use, the skill to condense what people do with long extensive rituals to mudras and gestures, you will have a decent character build up, and lastly, you will have a decent foundation so whatever path you pick will be a breeze for you.
I generally recommend that beginners follow and finish at least one training scheme - doing so not only teaches a degree of dedication & perseverance, but also teaches you a lot about how you learn, and how to judge other training schemes in the future.
Since you are interested in Hermetics, Bardon's Initiation into Hermetics is a well respected book, by a well respected author, so I'd stay stick with it as a core study guide, and then only branch out for the topics that you have trouble with, or that you wish to explore further. In this case - Bardon's works are quite old, and as a result have been studied, and commented on extensively - so you shouldn't need to go too far off-topic if you do need help with any of it.
The big issue with branching out is the massive difference in the fundamental ideas. You've got these guys who say All Gods Are One, another saying No Gods At All, another saying Devils are Gods, and others saying God is Jesus, and they're all big respectable chunks of occultism as a whole. If you jump from one to the other you're just rolling around like laundry in the washer. It's better to pick something that seems like it goes deep, and stick with that until you can't get any more out of it. There's no need to adopt ideas you think are bad or dumb just because they appear to be required to work with a certain system of practice. If you go full Bardonian, you'll get haters, and same if you're into Crowley or some other system. Take note of those criticisms because there's truth in some of it, but stay the course.
The big issue with branching out is the massive difference in the fundamental ideas. You've got these guys who say All Gods Are One, another saying No Gods At All, another saying Devils are Gods, and others saying God is Jesus, and they're all big respectable chunks of occultism as a whole. If you jump from one to the other you're just rolling around like laundry in the washer. It's better to pick something that seems like it goes deep, and stick with that until you can't get any more out of it. There's no need to adopt ideas you think are bad or dumb just because they appear to be required to work with a certain system of practice. If you go full Bardonian, you'll get haters, and same if you're into Crowley or some other system. Take note of those criticisms because there's truth in some of it, but stay the course.
I'm relatively new to the occult and Ive taken an interest in Hermetics. I've been reading Initiation into Hermetics by Franz Bardon and it seems like it is quite clearly a book with some very deep practical information which could take an extremely long time to go through. My question is: Would it be more beneficial to focus exclusively on this book or branch out into other areas, or would this only confuse things more?
Good question. Bardon's stuff has a reputation of being slow and hard, but effective. However, you don't sound terribly thrilled with it. Answering your question is in a sense predicting the future, and predicting the future is always sketchy, as people are individuals, and people make choices. The conventional wisdom, of mastering one before branching out, sounds good in theory, but performs less great in practice. Focusing on the first system you try might work out, if you happen to hit on a system that fits you perfectly, and if you can manage to maintain a broader perspective and worldview while working it. Both are technically possible, but neither is very likely. I am pretty sure I would actually be dead now if i had stuck with the first system i tried. Or really any of the first 7 or so.
A far more pressing question is whether you really like Bardon's material, and whether it likes you. Some people click with a lot of systems, but most do not. I've tried at least a dozen systems, and none of them click with me 100%. If you had already found 3 systems that click with you really well, then I think your question would be more pressing, but if you've only tried one, you have no idea how others are going to work for you. And if you've only tried one, there is a very, very good chance something else is going to click with you better.
Personally, I'd focus on initiation first and then worry about everything else afterwards. But it depends on what you judge to be right for you. Which isn't to say don't read and study everything else, you should have an understanding of what you're doing. Practically, however, it helps to not be doing a thousand things at once. Initiation (in whatever form) tends to be a first step on many paths.
I am in agreement with this; however, initiation comes in various forms.
In my view i strongly believe in self initation, because its a path which you craft yourself that suits you personally.
When you look at what mystery rite is — it is based off the concept of "death and rebirth." What this implies is that you shed off your previous perspective and you adopt a new one. This is what initiation is.
My advice is that it would be wise to stick with one thing at a time. If you asked me what i do, i like to look into many different paths and compile all that information which I see that makes sense after i have questioned it. You could say im thinking sort of like a theosophist since im comparing religous and spiritual practices alot with my studies, but I still like to build my own perspective — or i could say i enjoy refining my perspective at all times when i learn new things. I do not like being told things like "this is how it is" without the "why" to go with it.
I am in agreement with this; however, initiation comes in various forms.
In my view i strongly believe in self initation, because its a path which you craft yourself that suits you personally.
When you look at what mystery rite is — it is based off the concept of "death and rebirth." What this implies is that you shed off your previous perspective and you adopt a new one. This is what initiation is.
My advice is that it would be wise to stick with one thing at a time. If you asked me what i do, i like to look into many different paths and compile all that information which I see that makes sense after i have questioned it. You could say im thinking sort of like a theosophist since im comparing religous and spiritual practices alot with my studies, but I still like to build my own perspective — or i could say i enjoy refining my perspective at all times when i learn new things. I do not like being told things like "this is how it is" without the "why" to go with it.
If you like my idea, i would still just stick with what you are reading first. Do not just read it — become it. Like for example, if im studying something from a foreign culture I will try my best to imagine myself in the shoes of someone of that culture rather than just simply listening to what they have to say. I believe if you do not do this then it is easy to misinterpret what the person is saying. So you are studing Franz Bardon's work, what would be essential in my opinion is speaking to people following that exact path. Im sure you can find someone as he is popular.
I am in agreement with this; however, initiation comes in various forms.
In my view i strongly believe in self initation, because its a path which you craft yourself that suits you personally.
When you look at what mystery rite is — it is based off the concept of "death and rebirth." What this implies is that you shed off your previous perspective and you adopt a new one. This is what initiation is.
My advice is that it would be wise to stick with one thing at a time. If you asked me what i do, i like to look into many different paths and compile all that information which I see that makes sense after i have questioned it. You could say im thinking sort of like a theosophist since im comparing religous and spiritual practices alot with my studies, but I still like to build my own perspective — or i could say i enjoy refining my perspective at all times when i learn new things. I do not like being told things like "this is how it is" without the "why" to go with it.
Post automatically merged:
If you like my idea, i would still just stick with what you are reading first. Do not just read it — become it. Like for example, if im studying something from a foreign culture I will try my best to imagine myself in the shoes of someone of that culture rather than just simply listening to what they have to say. I believe if you do not do this then it is easy to misinterpret what the person is saying. So you are studing Franz Bardon's work, what would be essential in my opinion is speaking to people following that exact path. Im sure you can find someone as he is popular.
I can't edit what i just said about mystery rite so i want to say it is "birth, death, rebirth." Forgot to write "birth." Just want to give you quality information.
