IT IS THE TRUTH? – HUBERT MANSION
Spirituality has entered the wellness market and the industry succeeds so well in its attempt to confuse these two concepts that, in a few years, there will be many who will no longer be able to untangle them, in the same way in which they already cannot today. they are better able to distinguish a natural flavor from an artificial one. On the one hand we find the indispensable accessories (candles, incense, music to relax, pillows for meditation), on the other hand ways of being prefabricated: a mixture of indolence, mimicry, blind positivity and intransigence. . In place of the staid behavior of the Catholics of the past, we find Zen attitudes (in the face of the pain of others), but it is naturally the same self-righteous attitude, again and always in total disregard of the same thing through the centuries: the truth.
Omraam Mikhaël Aïvanhov placed truth above everything and this is a point that has always tormented me very much. What does this word mean? How do you find it? What truth are we talking about?
In these few lines I would like to address a single aspect of this broad question, speaking only of that truth that for all of us is so difficult to find and from which, in my opinion, we must start: ours. If we don’t find our truth, how can we have a clear vision on the outside? If we are not comfortable with ourselves, how can we hope for any harmony in any context?
We are full of pseudo-beliefs, of beliefs, of ideas that do not belong to us, of thoughts that run through us, of habits that we imitate. You have to get rid of all this junk to start getting closer to yourself. How to do it?
The passing of life and the often surprising encounter with the reality principle contribute, fortunately with a certain effectiveness, to this great work of evacuation: unhappiness, Simone Weil said, forces us to recognize as real what we do not believe. possible. For anyone who is interested in it, spirituality can represent a grave danger if it is reduced to a recourse to new faiths, as if it were a paint applied to the best of all our waste and scrap. How often do we see people with emotional, sexual, intellectual imbalances filling their gaps with clichés and invocations to the cosmos? Preferring karmic explanations to acting? We see the timid who, instead of opening up to others, choose to avoid them on the pretext that they emit “negative waves”; the complexed, who go in search of extras in order to then, as a group, accuse the outside world; the desperate, who take refuge in illusions; the lazy, who call into question reincarnation. In short, spirituality serves all but its sole purpose: to awaken us.
Of course we are all wounded and also half-bleeding, but that is because we are human beings. We suffer from shortcomings, we try to keep the course towards achieving an ideal that is too high for us. But it is not a question of a flaw, rather of a label: we are Made in Earth . A part, alas , of our truth lies in this simple and infinitely distressing observation: we will never be able, as long as we are on earth, to become what we want. Before we even want to transform, we must become able to accept that we are who we are.
Beyond this general fact, which roughly concerns the whole human race, I have always had the impression that the path of life naturally leads every living being to know each other: a living entity, immersed in life, comes out more conscious, we could say, paraphrasing Archimedes in some way. More aware of the environment, of course, but inevitably also of himself in that environment. Could we not perhaps go so far as to say that self-knowledge is the very essence of life and that it experiences itself through creatures, passing through an immense amount of experiences, as we do individually?
This aspect of the work on oneself is not, in itself, of a spiritual or even psychological nature, and constitutes simply a preliminary cleaning, since, as is well known, dirty walls are not repainted. It follows that each person who drives another may have to say things exactly opposite to those he pointed out to the previous one: this is why we hear sometimes so contradictory things about Mikhaël Aïvanhov. Not being able to understand that this is the least of the problems when dealing with a spiritual Master of this level is a glaring display of stupidity, or childishness.
How can we analyze ourselves if we are mixed with definitions of good and evil, prohibitions and censorships? How do you know who you are when you don’t want to know? One must observe or judge, but if one judges before observing, one condemns before knowing. This is why truth is fundamentally linked to freedom: to know one must necessarily be free to explore, to try, to verify. Without being prevented by neither fear, nor beliefs or pseudo-convictions, however spiritual they may seem.
The same is true, in my opinion, of Mikhaël Aïvanhov’s teaching. As time passes, the danger of embalming it in dogmas increases … A large number of spiritual teachings, which had the sole purpose of making the human being freer, can now be summarized in various absurd prohibitions and obligations. Affirmations worthy of the Golden Legend circulate about Petar Danov, which risk depriving him of any humanity. It is something that always happens according to the same script: someone, touched by an invented grace, proclaims himself the holder of what he has not understood, and which nevertheless teaches everyone. It begins with the drawing up of regulations (products of course of “universal laws”), continues with the moral and then contributes to making the inner search a path sidetracked by pseudo-convictions and beliefs rather than traced by the truth of each one, marked by rigidity rather than by life.
It is a danger that already existed when Mikhaël Aïvanhov was alive, and he was well aware of it. But the danger is greater today, given the number of “apostles”. The next generations will know, of his person, what they are told today by those who knew him. The responsibility of the latter is therefore considerable, given that their attitude, free or prisoner, alive or dogmatic, sincere or hypocritical, will be decisive for the vigor and efficacy of a precious verb for all humanity.
The truth, said Omraam Mikhaël Aïvanhov, is neither a knowledge nor an understanding. Truth is a feeling. It is wonderful to be able to feel something as immaterial as truth, but the only feeling that can be imposed on others is suffering.
How many people say they are in search of the truth! While they regret not having found it yet, they feel proud to have embarked on such a difficult search … Well, no, the truth is not that hard to find, and it can also be defined very simply. Let’s say it is like a medal whose faces are respectively love and wisdom. If you seek truth independently of love and wisdom, that is, independently of the harmonious development of the heart and intellect, you will never find it. But as soon as you have love and wisdom, you also possess the truth, even if you don’t seek it. Truth is never found as a principle in its own right: it can exist only for those who know how to work simultaneously with the heart and with the intellect. If currently so many different and contradictory truths circulate and collide in the world, it is because they reflect the deformation of the heart and intellect of human beings. Someone tells you: “Here is the truth!” In reality, that is “his” truth, and that truth is the expression of his weak and deformed heart and intellect, or on the contrary steadfast and enlightened.
Omraam Mikhaël Aïvanhov
Hubert Mansion is a Belgian writer and lecturer. Together with Emilia Tamko he produced the first documentary film on Omraam Mikhaël Aïvanhov, La présence d’un Maître (2012).
Leave a ReplyWant to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!