Chapter 14: Negative ThoughtsTo think profoundly and with full attention is strange in this involutive and decadent epoch. Diverse thoughts arise from within the intellectual center, not from a permanent “I” as the learned ignoramuses foolishly assume, but rather, from the different “I’s” within each one of us. When a man is thinking, he firmly believes that he is thinking for himself, and by himself. |
The poor intellectual mammal does not want to realize that the multitude of thoughts which cross his mind have their origin in the different “I’s” that we carry within.
This means that we are not true thinking individuals.
Really, we do not yet have ‘individual mind’.
However, each of the different “I’s” we carry within uses our intellectual center to think, each time it is able.
It would therefore be absurd to identify ourselves with this or that negative and harmful thought, believing it to be our personal property.
Obviously, one or another negative thought arises from some “I” which in a given moment has abusively used our intellectual center.
There are different kinds of negative thoughts: suspicion, mistrust, ill-will towards another person, passionate jealousy, religious jealousy, political jealousy, jealousy of friends, family jealousies, greed, lust, vengeance, anger, pride, envy, hatred, resentment, theft, adultery, laziness, gluttony, etc., etc., etc.
Really, the psychological defects we have are so many, that even if we had a palate of steel and a thousand tongues to speak, we would not succeed in fully enumerating them.
As a consequence or corollary of the above, it is preposterous to identify ourselves with negative thoughts.
Since it is impossible for an effect to exist without a cause, we solemnly state that a thought cannot exist by itself, by spontaneous generation.
The relationship which exists between thinker and thought is obvious. Each negative thought has its origin in a different thinker.
In each of us, there are as many negative thinkers as there are thoughts of that kind.
Looking at this question from the plural viewpoint of “thinkers and thoughts,” it follows that each one of the “I’s” we carry in our psyche is certainly a different thinker.
Without question, there are too many thinkers within each of us. Nonetheless, each one of them, in spite of being merely a part, believes itself in a given moment to be the whole.
Mythomaniacs, self-worshippers, narcissists, and paranoiacs could never accept the thesis of the “plurality of thinkers,” because they are very much in love with themselves, they feel they are “Tarzan’s father,” or “mother hen.”
How could such abnormal people accept the idea that they do not possess an individual, genial, marvelous mind?
Such know-it-alls think the best of themselves, and even dress in the robes of Aristippus to demonstrate their wisdom and humility.
It is related in the timeless legend that Aristippus, wanting to demonstrate his wisdom and humility, dressed in an old robe, full of patches and holes, and holding the Staff of Philosophy in his right hand went through the streets of Athens.
They say that when Socrates saw him coming, he exclaimed in a great voice, “Oh Aristippus, your vanity can be seen through the holes in your robe!”
Whoever does not always live in a state of alert novelty, alert perception, thinking that he is thinking, easily identifies with any negative thought.
As a result of this, sadly, he strengthens the sinister power of the negative “I”, the author of the corresponding thought in question.
The more we identify ourselves with a negative thought, the more we shall be slaves of the corresponding “I” which characterizes it.
With respect to Gnosis, the secret path, the work on oneself, our particular temptations are found precisely in those “I’s” which hate Gnosis, the esoteric work. They do not ignore that their existence within our psyche is mortally threatened by Gnosis and by the work.
These quarrelsome, negative “I’s” easily take control of certain mental programs stored in our intellectual center and, in sequence, originate harmful and detrimental mental currents.
If we accept those thoughts, those negative “I’s”, which at a given moment control our intellectual center, we shall then be incapable of liberating ourselves from their consequences.
We must never forget that every negative “I” self-deceives, and deceives. Conclusion: it lies.
Each time that we feel a sudden loss of strength, when an aspirant becomes disillusioned with Gnosis, with the esoteric work, when he loses enthusiasm and abandons what is best, it is obvious that he has been deceived by a negative I.
The negative “I” of jealousy deceives those beings who adore one another and destroys their happiness.
The negative “I” of mystical pride deceives the devotees of the path and they, believing themselves wise, despise their Master or betray him.
The negative “I” appeals to our personal experiences, our memories, our best aspirations, our sincerity, and through a rigorous selection of all this, presents something in a false light, something which fascinates, and failure comes.
Nevertheless, when one discovers the “I” in action, when one has learned to live in a state of alertness, such deception becomes impossible.
This means that we are not true thinking individuals.
Really, we do not yet have ‘individual mind’.
However, each of the different “I’s” we carry within uses our intellectual center to think, each time it is able.
It would therefore be absurd to identify ourselves with this or that negative and harmful thought, believing it to be our personal property.
Obviously, one or another negative thought arises from some “I” which in a given moment has abusively used our intellectual center.
There are different kinds of negative thoughts: suspicion, mistrust, ill-will towards another person, passionate jealousy, religious jealousy, political jealousy, jealousy of friends, family jealousies, greed, lust, vengeance, anger, pride, envy, hatred, resentment, theft, adultery, laziness, gluttony, etc., etc., etc.
Really, the psychological defects we have are so many, that even if we had a palate of steel and a thousand tongues to speak, we would not succeed in fully enumerating them.
As a consequence or corollary of the above, it is preposterous to identify ourselves with negative thoughts.
Since it is impossible for an effect to exist without a cause, we solemnly state that a thought cannot exist by itself, by spontaneous generation.
The relationship which exists between thinker and thought is obvious. Each negative thought has its origin in a different thinker.
In each of us, there are as many negative thinkers as there are thoughts of that kind.
Looking at this question from the plural viewpoint of “thinkers and thoughts,” it follows that each one of the “I’s” we carry in our psyche is certainly a different thinker.
Without question, there are too many thinkers within each of us. Nonetheless, each one of them, in spite of being merely a part, believes itself in a given moment to be the whole.
Mythomaniacs, self-worshippers, narcissists, and paranoiacs could never accept the thesis of the “plurality of thinkers,” because they are very much in love with themselves, they feel they are “Tarzan’s father,” or “mother hen.”
How could such abnormal people accept the idea that they do not possess an individual, genial, marvelous mind?
Such know-it-alls think the best of themselves, and even dress in the robes of Aristippus to demonstrate their wisdom and humility.
It is related in the timeless legend that Aristippus, wanting to demonstrate his wisdom and humility, dressed in an old robe, full of patches and holes, and holding the Staff of Philosophy in his right hand went through the streets of Athens.
They say that when Socrates saw him coming, he exclaimed in a great voice, “Oh Aristippus, your vanity can be seen through the holes in your robe!”
Whoever does not always live in a state of alert novelty, alert perception, thinking that he is thinking, easily identifies with any negative thought.
As a result of this, sadly, he strengthens the sinister power of the negative “I”, the author of the corresponding thought in question.
The more we identify ourselves with a negative thought, the more we shall be slaves of the corresponding “I” which characterizes it.
With respect to Gnosis, the secret path, the work on oneself, our particular temptations are found precisely in those “I’s” which hate Gnosis, the esoteric work. They do not ignore that their existence within our psyche is mortally threatened by Gnosis and by the work.
These quarrelsome, negative “I’s” easily take control of certain mental programs stored in our intellectual center and, in sequence, originate harmful and detrimental mental currents.
If we accept those thoughts, those negative “I’s”, which at a given moment control our intellectual center, we shall then be incapable of liberating ourselves from their consequences.
We must never forget that every negative “I” self-deceives, and deceives. Conclusion: it lies.
Each time that we feel a sudden loss of strength, when an aspirant becomes disillusioned with Gnosis, with the esoteric work, when he loses enthusiasm and abandons what is best, it is obvious that he has been deceived by a negative I.
The negative “I” of jealousy deceives those beings who adore one another and destroys their happiness.
The negative “I” of mystical pride deceives the devotees of the path and they, believing themselves wise, despise their Master or betray him.
The negative “I” appeals to our personal experiences, our memories, our best aspirations, our sincerity, and through a rigorous selection of all this, presents something in a false light, something which fascinates, and failure comes.
Nevertheless, when one discovers the “I” in action, when one has learned to live in a state of alertness, such deception becomes impossible.