Aum wrote:
Purple monkey dishwasher!.
Again, Theosophy is not to be blame for this.
Aum wrote:In summary, you criticize the New Age and Theosophy for bringing together knowledge from different sources (which were unknown at the time) and because they were not 100% accurate in respect to their origins, it is a flawed work. Much of what makes up the Golden Dawn is a syncretism of Jewish, Egyptian, Greek, and Babylonian magic. This is the very same syncretism at work that you are looking down on with Theosophical work. You condemn Theosophy for bringing together systems that cannot be easily brought into direct translation, yet this applicable to the Western Hermetic Tradition. You will find no one Esoteric tradition that is completely original in its work and 100% direct replica of the original.
Try to pay attention. I'm criticizing New Age literature.
So what I'm saying is that the literature is "bad" because the source material is bad and too many people have been willing to perpetuate the "bad"ness.
The failings of one literature doesn't absolve the failings of another. Not only is New Age literature erroneous, it's harmful for the reasons I specified previously.
If someone actually tries to work magically with the convoluted cosmological constructs that typify the movement, they'll instill all that mess right down at the core of their psyche, where their experience of the world is formed. Nasty business.
Now, if you want to discuss other literatures, that would be another topic.
Aum wrote:
What you’ve concluded is only that New Age is bad because YOU think it’s bad. And because supposedly people have spread this information that YOU think is bad. It’s your opinion only, and others have worked with the system quite well.
R. Eugene Laughlin wrote:Aum wrote:
What you’ve concluded is only that New Age is bad because YOU think it’s bad. And because supposedly people have spread this information that YOU think is bad. It’s your opinion only, and others have worked with the system quite well.
I think it's a bad literature because of the erroneous information. It is my opinion, generally, that literature so full of erroneous information is bad. Yes. If you'd like to go line by line with some of the literature and argue over the errors, I'm willing..
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 95 guests