Your browser version is outdated. We recommend that you update your browser to the latest version.

Other Recommended websites for the study of Gnosis 

The New Age of AquariusThe New Age of Aquarius

Please share



The mind must free itself from all kinds of “schools,” religions, sects, beliefs, etc. All those “cages” are obstacles which render the mind incapable of thinking freely.  - Samael Aun Weor

    Introduction to Gnosis

 Public lectures

    Youtube Videos

CONCEPT AND REALITY

Posted 2/21/2015

Who or what can guarantee that concept and reality are absolutely equal? Concept is one thing and reality is another. There is a tendency to overestimate our own concepts. Reality equalling concept, is almost impossible. However, people, hypnotized by their own concept, always suppose that it and reality are the same. 

Any psychological process correctly structured by a precise logic, is opposed by a different one strongly formed with a similar or superior logic. So, what then? 

Two minds severely disciplined within ironclad intellectual structures, arguing with one another, polemising, in dispute over this or that reality, each one of them believing its own concept to be exact and the other's to be false: but, which of them is right? Who could honestly guarantee either case? In which of them do concept and realit  y prove to be equal? 

Without question each head is a world on its own. In each and every one of us, a kind of pontifical, dictatorial dogmatism exists which wants to make us believe in absolute equality of concept and reality. No matter how strong the structures of reasoning may be, nothing can guarantee absolute equality between concept and reality. 

Those who are self-imprisoned within any intellectual logistic procedure, always want to make the reality of phenomena coincide with the elaborated concepts. This is nothing else than the result of the reasoning hallucination. 

To open oneself to the new, is the rare faculty of the man from classical times. Unfortunately, people want to see, to discover, in every natural phenomenon their own prejudices, ideas, preconceptions, opinions and theories. No-one is actually receptive, seeing anew with a clear and spontaneous mind. 

The proper thing would be that phenomena talked to the sage. Unfortunately, sages of this day and age do not actually see the phenomena. They only want to see in them the confirmation of all their preconceptions. Although it may seem incredible, modern scientists know nothing about natural phenomena. 

When we see in the phenomena of nature exclusively our own concepts, certainly we are not seeing the phenomena, but the concepts. 

Nevertheless, foolish scientists hallucinated by their fascinating intellect, stupidly believe each of their concepts to be absolutely equal to this or that observed phenomenon, whilst reality is different. 

Without doubt, in no way could the pontifical and dogmatic condition of the intellect accept that any correctly elaborated concept would not coincide exactly with reality. Without doubt, in no way could the pontifical and dogmatic condition of the intellect accept that any correctly elaborated concept would not coincide exactly with reality.

We do not deny that our affirmations are rejected by everyone who be self-incarcerated by this or that logistic procedure. Without doubt, in no way could the pontifical and dogmatic condition of the intellect accept that any correctly elaborated concept would not coincide exactly with reality. 

As soon as the mind, through the senses, observes some phenomenon, it immediately hurries to label it with this or that scientific term which undoubtedly serve to cover over its own ignorance. 

The mind does not really know how to be receptive to the new, but it does know how to invent extremely complicated terms with which it seeks to qualify in a self-deceitful way what it certainly ignores. Speaking in a Socratic sense, we will say that not only does the mind ignore, but it is even ignorant of its ignorance. 

The modern mind is terribly superficial. It has specialized in inventing terms, which are made extremely difficult in order to cover its own ignorance. 

Two types of science exist: the first one is nothing else than just that compost heap of subjective theories which are so abundant. The second one is the pure science of the great enlightened ones, the objective science of the Being. Undoubtedly, it is not possible to penetrate the amphitheatre of cosmic science without having first died in ourselves. 

We need to disintegrate all those undesirable elements that we carry within and which jointly constitute the oneself, the "I" of psychology. 

As long as the superlative consciousness of the Being continues to be bottled in the myself, in my own concepts and subjective theories, it is absolutely impossible to directly know the harsh reality of natural phenomena in ourselves. The key to nature's laboratory is held in the right hand of the Angel of Death. 

We can learn very little from the phenomenon of birth, but from death we will be able to learn everything. 

The inviolate temple of pure science is found at the bottom of the dark sepulcher. If the germ does not die, the plant is not born. Only with death does the new come. 

When the Ego dies, the consciousness wakes up and can see the reality of all of nature's phenomena as they are in themselves and by themselves. 

The consciousness knows that which it directly experiences by itself, the harsh reality of life beyond the body, affections and the mind.