Chapter 10: The Different "I's"The rational mammal mistakenly called man, really does not possess a defined individuality.
Unquestionably, this lack of psychological unity in the humanoid is the cause of so many difficulties, and so much bitterness. The physical body is a complete unit and works as an organic whole unless it is ill. However, the internal life of the humanoid is in no way a psychological unity. |
The most serious thing of all, despite what the diverse pseudo-esoteric and pseudo-occultist schools say, is the absence of psychological organization in the intimate depths of each person.
Certainly, in such conditions, harmonious work as a whole does not exist in the internal lives of people.
With respect to this internal state, the humanoid is a psychological multiplicity, a sum of “I’s”.
The erudite ignoramuses of this tenebrous epoch worship the “I”, they deify it, place it on altars, name it “alter ego”, “superior I”, or “divine I”, etc., etc., etc.
The self-proclaimed “experts” of this dark age in which we live do not want to realize that “superior I” or “inferior I” are two aspects of the same pluralized ego.
The humanoid certainly does not have a permanent “I” but rather, a multitude of different infrahuman and absurd “I’s”.
The poor intellectual animal mistakenly called man, is similar to a house in disorder, where instead of one master, there are many servants who always want to command
and do whatever occurs to them.
The greatest error of cheap pseudo-esotericism and pseudo-occultism is to suppose that we possess, or that we have a permanent and immutable “I” without beginning or end.
If those who think this way were to awaken consciousness for even an instant, they would be able to see clearly, for themselves, that the rational humanoid is never the same
for any length of time.
From the psychological point of view, the intellectual mammal is continuously changing.
To think that someone called Louis is always Louis, is like a joke in very bad taste.
This person called Louis, has within other “I’s,” other egos, that express themselves through his personality at different moments. Even if Louis does not like covetousness, another “I” in him, let’s call him Joe, likes covetousness, and so on.
No person is continually the same. We really do not have to be very wise to fully realize the innumerable changes and contradictions within each individual.
To suppose that someone possesses a permanent and immutable “I” amounts of course, to an abuse of ourselves, and of our fellow man.
Within each person, live many persons, many “I’s”. Any awakened, conscious person may verify this for himself, and in a direct manner.
Certainly, in such conditions, harmonious work as a whole does not exist in the internal lives of people.
With respect to this internal state, the humanoid is a psychological multiplicity, a sum of “I’s”.
The erudite ignoramuses of this tenebrous epoch worship the “I”, they deify it, place it on altars, name it “alter ego”, “superior I”, or “divine I”, etc., etc., etc.
The self-proclaimed “experts” of this dark age in which we live do not want to realize that “superior I” or “inferior I” are two aspects of the same pluralized ego.
The humanoid certainly does not have a permanent “I” but rather, a multitude of different infrahuman and absurd “I’s”.
The poor intellectual animal mistakenly called man, is similar to a house in disorder, where instead of one master, there are many servants who always want to command
and do whatever occurs to them.
The greatest error of cheap pseudo-esotericism and pseudo-occultism is to suppose that we possess, or that we have a permanent and immutable “I” without beginning or end.
If those who think this way were to awaken consciousness for even an instant, they would be able to see clearly, for themselves, that the rational humanoid is never the same
for any length of time.
From the psychological point of view, the intellectual mammal is continuously changing.
To think that someone called Louis is always Louis, is like a joke in very bad taste.
This person called Louis, has within other “I’s,” other egos, that express themselves through his personality at different moments. Even if Louis does not like covetousness, another “I” in him, let’s call him Joe, likes covetousness, and so on.
No person is continually the same. We really do not have to be very wise to fully realize the innumerable changes and contradictions within each individual.
To suppose that someone possesses a permanent and immutable “I” amounts of course, to an abuse of ourselves, and of our fellow man.
Within each person, live many persons, many “I’s”. Any awakened, conscious person may verify this for himself, and in a direct manner.