Full Transcript

·YouTLDR

Entenda de uma vez por todas o CAIBALION! (Filosofia Para Todos)

22:071,586 summary words · ~8 min readEnglishBy Conhecimentos da HumanidadeTranscribed Jul 16, 2026
Analyze another video with Pro30-day money-back guarantee
Summary

The Kybalion (1908) is not a work of ancient, pure Hermeticism, but a modern New Thought text authored by William Walker Atkinson under pseudonyms; recognizing this distinction is essential for genuine dogmatic liberation and conscious self-knowledge.

Deconstructing the historical reality of spiritual texts prevents seekers from falling into the psychological trap of defensive dogmatism, enabling them to use philosophy for authentic mental expansion instead of ego protection.

Section summaries

0:00-2:00

The Kybalion and the New Thought Origins

watch

Leo introduces the program and addresses the controversy surrounding a previous video on The Kybalion. He explains that the famous 1908 book is actually a product of the 'New Thought' movement, an early 20th-century positivist school focusing on positive mental attitude, rather than ancient Hermetic tradition. He clarifies that pointing this out isn't about discarding the book's value, but about correcting a historical misconception used as a clever marketing tactic by publisher William Walker Atkinson.

  • The Kybalion belongs to the 20th-century New Thought movement, not classical Hermeticism.
  • Its attribution to Hermeticism was originally a marketing choice by the editor.
  • Recognizing a text's true history doesn't invalidate its personal utility to the reader.

Essential context setting that dismantles the primary misconception of the book's origins.

2:00-4:00

The Mystery of the Three Initiates

watch

Leo deconstructs the identity of the author 'The Three Initiates.' He reveals that William Walker Atkinson wrote under multiple pseudonyms, representing different philosophical angles, meaning 'The Three Initiates' simply refers to Atkinson and his own alter egos. He suggests that those wishing to study authentic Hermeticism should study the Hermetic Corpus or the Greek Magical Papyri, recommending specific Brazilian translations translated directly from Greek.

  • 'The Three Initiates' is a literary pseudonym representing Atkinson and his two writing personas.
  • True Hermeticism should be studied through primary historical texts like the Hermetic Corpus.
  • Academic and traditional magical circles differentiate between Kybalion's mentalism and classical Hermeticism.

Directly exposes the historical authorship and provides practical primary reading recommendations.

4:00-6:00

Hermetic vs. Kybalion Views on the Divine

watch

The section focuses on the ontological divergence between The Kybalion and ancient Hermetic philosophy regarding the human relationship with the Divine. While Hermeticism posits that humans can attain union with the universal mind through the expansion of consciousness, The Kybalion denies this possibility. Leo uses the analogy of a person locked in a tower to illustrate how limited spatial and cultural experience restricts consciousness, whereas reading, traveling, and learning expand it.

  • Classical Hermeticism aims for the expansion of consciousness to perceive and unite with the entire universe.
  • The Kybalion contradicts classical tradition by claiming human union with the Whole is impossible.
  • Consciousness is a variable spectrum limited only by one's inputs, experiences, and beliefs.

Crucial philosophical distinction showing how the book differs in its ultimate spiritual objective.

6:00-8:00

The Divine Alka-Seltzer and the Empty Vessel

watch

Leo clarifies that reaching the Divine in Hermeticism is not an act of egoistic hubris (becoming God), but a process of expanding one's mind until it encompasses the universe. He introduces the cognitivist concept of the 'empty vessel' to describe a mind characterized by constant availability to receive and learn. He presents the 'Divine Alka-Seltzer' analogy: when a human mind dissolves into the divine waters, it becomes part of the whole while still existing within it.

  • Hermetic deification is about total systemic perception, not individual ego inflation.
  • The 'empty vessel' represents cognitive flexibility and constant readiness to learn.
  • The 'Divine Alka-Seltzer' analogy explains non-dual union where individuality dissolves into a larger totality.

Contains highly useful analogies that explain complex mystical and psychological states.

8:00-10:00

Belief Systems, Fanaticism, and the House of the Lord

optional

The speaker recounts an experience teaching a class about the history of The Kybalion. While many students were grateful for the historical documentation, some reacted with deep emotional distress, accusing him of using logic to destroy their sacred beliefs. Leo points out how Hermeticism and philosophy serve as foundations for Western magical practices, explaining that an uncritical defense of ideas often breeds a hostile, dogmatic mentality.

  • Presenting rational, documented facts to dogmatic believers often triggers existential anxiety and defensive anger.
  • Hermeticism deeply influences Western occult systems, including modern witchcraft and shamanism.
  • Defending a belief blindly halts the open-mindedness required for spiritual and intellectual growth.

Illustrates the psychological struggle of losing dogmatic beliefs through personal anecdote.

10:00-12:00

The True Nature of Western Esotericism

watch

Leo highlights how Hermetic principles, such as 'as within, so without,' permeate modern esoteric thought and occult movements, including Helena Blavatsky's Theosophy. He emphasizes that the core objective of Western esotericism and magical practices is liberation from dogma and the free expansion of thought. He asserts that a practitioner should be free to read The Kybalion while fully understanding its true nature, rather than defending it out of blind faith.

  • Western magical practices fundamentally aim for mental liberation and the dissolution of dogmatic barriers.
  • You can consciously choose to use a non-traditional text like the Kybalion as long as you do not mythologize its origins.
  • Blavatsky positioned Hermeticism as a foundational source for global spiritual philosophies.

Explains how historical knowledge serves the true, non-dogmatic goal of Western magical systems.

12:00-14:00

Psychological Identification and Historical Parallels

watch

This section addresses the psychological dynamic of identification, where people shrink their identity to match a single idea, feeling personally attacked when that idea is challenged. Leo draws a historical parallel with Christianity, explaining how its dogmas evolved from a Middle Eastern Messiah to an industrialized Roman state religion merged with Sol Invictus. He notes that open-minded believers can study this history without losing their spiritual connection, whereas dogmatic minds reject all dialogue.

  • Over-identification with an idea causes individuals to perceive objective critique as a personal assault.
  • Christianity's historical synthesis with Roman paganism (like Apollo/Sol Invictus) showcases how religions adapt over time.
  • Understanding the socio-historical construction of your beliefs is a hallmark of intellectual maturity.

Rich in philosophical and historical analogies that support the core argument of mental freedom.

14:00-16:00

The Stagnation of the Fanatical Mind

optional

Leo argues that refusing dialogue and retreating into an intellectual 'tower' halts human development, as humans are inherently social and curious animals. When someone shuts down in the face of solid, rational arguments, they experience anguish, fear, and eventually hatred toward the messenger. This dogmatic attitude leads to social isolation, as people distance themselves from individuals who insist on being the sole proprietors of truth.

  • Dogmatism and refusing dialogue leads to cognitive stagnation and social alienation.
  • Anger toward critical thinkers is often a mask for existential doubt and the fear of losing one's cognitive safety net.
  • Humanity's consciousness expands through open-minded social exchange and active listening.

Explores the social and psychological consequences of cognitive rigidity, but is somewhat repetitive of the previous section.

16:00-18:00

Learning from Alterity and Polarization

watch

Leo contrasts dogmatic fanaticism with the Hermetic method of seeing others as symbols of the Universal Mind from whom we can learn. He uses modern political polarization as an example, illustrating how hostile clashes can turn into enriching learning experiences when both parties listen to understand the logical steps behind the other's worldview. True dialogue requires approaching the 'other' without the urge to impose one's own ideas.

  • Hermeticism views other people as living symbols of the Universal Mind designed to teach us.
  • True dialogue requires mapping the architecture of another's thoughts rather than merely reacting to their conclusions.
  • Polarization is transcended not by agreement, but by mutual understanding of how beliefs are constructed.

Applies Hermetic principles directly to contemporary social and political dynamics.

18:00-22:00

Hermetic Self-Knowledge vs. Modern Coaching

watch

In the final segment, Leo discusses the law of energetic resonance: what you manifest in the universe (love or hate) is what you will receive. He contrasts modern 'coaching' self-help with authentic Hermetic self-knowledge, which is a state of deep, unshakeable certainty about who you are. This authentic self-awareness makes one immune to ego inflation from praise and emotional wounding from insults, allowing the individual to harmoniously navigate the universe.

  • You become a conduit for the specific type of energy (love, hate, etc.) you project into the world.
  • Authentic self-knowledge renders an individual immune to the emotional volatility of praise and insult.
  • True Hermetic self-awareness is built on objective internal certainty, unlike the superficial optimism of modern coaching.

Concludes with actionable, profound insights on psychological resilience and self-knowledge.

Key points

  • The Kybalion as New Thought, Not Classical Hermeticism — The Kybalion was written in 1908 by the publisher William Walker Atkinson using the pseudonym 'The Three Initiates' (representing himself and two of his own writing alter-egos) to market early 20th-century New Thought positivism under the prestigious banner of Hermeticism.
  • The Ontological Divergence: Union with the Divine — Authentic Hermeticism, as preserved in the Hermetic Corpus, posits that human consciousness has the capacity to expand, reach, and ultimately dissolve into the Divine (the Mind of the Whole), whereas The Kybalion claims that such direct union is impossible.
  • The Psychological Trap of Ideological Over-Identification — When individuals lack stable self-awareness, they often merge their identity with a specific book or doctrine; consequently, any historical or logical critique of the text is perceived as an existential, personal attack.
  • The Divine Alka-Seltzer of Consciousness — True spiritual expansion does not mean egoic hubris or 'becoming God,' but rather adopting an 'empty vessel' state of cognitive availability that allows the individual mind to dissolve into the Universal Mind while remaining a constituent part of it.
The important thing is for you to know what it is so you do n't fall into the trap of thinking, 'No, what I'm practicing here is pure Hermeticism.' Leo
He chose the three initiates, he's talking about himself, him and his two pseudonyms. Leo

AI-generated from the transcript. May contain errors.

0:00

[Music]

0:00

Welcome to another Philosophy

0:03

for All program

0:05

here on Vibe Mundial radio, where we

0:07

don't speak Greek, where we simplify

0:10

philosophy in general, and where you

0:12

can always listen to us on Fridays at

0:16

6:30 PM.

0:17

Recently, on the channel, we released

0:21

a video talking about more

0:24

fundamental mimicry and discussing the Kybalion. The

0:27

Kybalion is a book published in

0:30

1908, and it's considered, in the

0:33

study of Hermeticism, a Hermetic book. That

0:36

is, it's a book that uses some

0:38

Hermetic concepts, but it comes from

0:41

another philosophical school called

0:43

Newton, which is a school of

0:45

thought, a positivist school of thought

0:46

that believes if you think

0:49

positively, everything will work out. This generated some

0:52

controversy, because many people said, "

0:54

Oh no, how so? But the balloon falls down!"

0:58

People defending work almost like

1:00

evangelicals defend their Bible,

1:03

like Jews defend their Torah, like

1:05

Muslims defend their Quran. But look,

1:09

first,

1:11

a disclaimer, as

1:15

we say... This isn't about throwing your

1:17

work in the trash, it's not about... Oh, but it's

1:19

a book that helped me, great, everything's fine.

1:23

The important thing is for you to know what it is so you do

1:26

n't fall into the trap of thinking, "No, what I'm

1:29

practicing here is pure Hermeticism." It's not,

1:32

but that doesn't mean it's bad, that it does

1:35

n't work, that the way it

1:38

was constructed is

1:41

false. It's sold as a

1:44

Hermeticism book because it was one of the things of the

1:46

time; it was a marketing ploy that the editor of the

1:49

Penguin publishing house, who was Attikinson, found to

1:52

sell his book well.

1:55

Look how cool, how interesting,

1:57

if we were to take the book, Maria das

2:00

Editoras would publish it as having the

2:03

author "The Three Initiates," and there's only one

2:07

publisher here in Brazil that publishes it with

2:08

Attikinson's name. But look how

2:10

cool, when it was

2:12

first published, the French version of the book

2:13

came out with Attikinson's name. Then

2:16

the publisher went there and removed the name and

2:19

put "The Three Initiates." Why three

2:21

initiates? Another interesting fact: because he

2:24

wrote books with three pseudonyms, one

2:27

pseudonym that was, in fact, two.

2:31

Pseudonyms and his name, so he had

2:33

books under his name, another pseudonym

2:35

that was Indian, and another that was

2:37

like a doctor or something like that. So

2:38

he wrote with three different names,

2:40

different books by thinkers with

2:45

different lines of thought. That's why when He

2:47

chose the three initiates, he's

2:48

talking about himself, him and

2:51

his two pseudonyms. I think these

2:53

curiosities are interesting because they bring a

2:55

historical context to us. But let's

2:57

talk a little about magnetism, which is what I meant in

2:58

that other video, because there are

3:01

concepts in the work that are

3:04

discordant with the philosophical body of

3:06

dermetism, which is the Hermetic Corpus, as

3:09

I already said in that video. So, I want to

3:10

study mimicry, I'm going to study the

3:13

Hermetic Corpus, I'm going to study the Greek magical papyri,

3:15

which have a lot of information on

3:17

food practices, I'm going to study some authors

3:19

who studied and did work

3:23

based on the Hermetic Corpus and not on

3:25

the Kybalion, because there we

3:27

have someone who started from the most

3:29

original source. We have some good

3:31

traditions here in Brazil of the

3:33

Hermetic Corpus; I advise you to seek them out. There are

3:36

two

3:37

in particular, one of which is... The Polar publishing house,

3:40

translated by Américo Soube, isn't the

3:43

other one by Professor Davi Lira, who

3:44

recently translated it from the Greek, right?

3:47

He brought it directly from the Greek. Anyway, I have

3:49

two suggestions for you,

3:51

but I'll talk a little about being pretentious or

3:53

more traditional. So, since last time I

3:55

talked about what it wasn't, today I want to bring

3:57

a little more to light on one of the

4:00

central points that differentiates Kabbalah

4:02

from Hermeticism. As I

4:04

said in the other video, it's the

4:07

capacity that Hermetic philosophy

4:11

proposes to us to reach the whole, to reach the Divine through

4:15

our expansion of consciousness.

4:17

The work says that it's not

4:20

possible to get there, and all this... I remember

4:22

that it generates a controversy in the comments, with

4:24

some people saying, "Oh, it's

4:26

very presumptuous of us to think that

4:28

we're going to reach the Divine."

4:29

So let's go, let's first understand

4:31

this concept better. This Divine within

4:34

Hermeticism, both from the Oak and

4:37

the Germic body, this Divine is a

4:39

great Universal being that created everything. That's why it's

4:42

said that the whole is mind, the

4:44

whole is mental, and this kind of

4:46

corroborates the other in this sense. So

4:50

this whole is a great mind where everything

4:53

that has been thought is... Inside, that is,

4:56

this whole, it is such an

4:59

expanded consciousness that it is everything.

5:02

Our consciousness is limited to

5:05

our space-time. My consciousness

5:07

at this moment, nourished by my body, is

5:10

limited to my five senses that

5:12

are around me, perceiving everything that

5:13

happens. So, limited as far as

5:16

my imagination, my thoughts, can

5:18

reach, as far as my consciousness

5:20

goes. And my consciousness can reach,

5:22

it can go as far as my memories, for

5:25

example, so that I remember things

5:27

I learned many years ago and that I can

5:29

share with you here, for example. So,

5:32

realize that the consciousness of each

5:34

human being is different. Someone who was

5:36

raised locked inside a tower their

5:39

whole life will have a

5:41

very

5:42

diminished consciousness because that

5:45

person's universe is the room they lived in within that

5:47

tower, the people they had contact with, and

5:49

perhaps something they read or learned. Those who

5:52

travel, who read, who are constantly learning and

5:54

becoming acculturated end up expanding

5:58

their consciousness because they know many

6:00

different things. So, I wanted to make

6:03

this analogy so we understand that

6:06

reaching the whole is not about becoming God.

6:09

That is a very bad understanding that

6:12

people have of Hermeticism. It is not that.

6:14

It proposes that you

6:16

expand your consciousness. ...to the point that

6:19

you are not limited only to what you are

6:22

limited to today. And then when Hermeticism

6:25

proposes reaching the Divine, reaching that

6:27

Universal mind, it's about expanding your consciousness

6:29

to the point where you

6:33

can perceive the entire universe. Wow,

6:35

Leo, but is it possible to do this while

6:37

incarnated with a physical body?

6:40

Hermeticism says that our mind has an

6:42

infinite capacity to enable this

6:45

growth, this expansion of consciousness.

6:46

Perhaps

6:49

we can even believe in something about

6:52

reincarnation to think about how much

6:55

we expand our consciousness through

6:56

this model. Cognitivism tells us

6:59

that we should be empty vessels because

7:03

an empty vessel isn't

7:05

truly empty; it's full of availability

7:08

to receive things, and this

7:12

availability to receive things is what

7:15

allows us to always have the

7:16

capacity to learn and expand

7:18

our consciousness. So, you see,

7:21

Hermeticism is telling

7:22

us

7:23

not to stop learning, not to stop expanding, not to stop

7:26

expanding our

7:27

consciousness because our consciousness

7:28

is not limited by anything except your own

7:31

beliefs. And if you can

7:34

perhaps spend your entire existence

7:37

expanding your consciousness, that

7:39

consciousness will be a mind that is

7:41

within the whole.

7:43

I always joke about it. What does it mean to

7:46

dissolve into the Divine, for your

7:50

consciousness to become the Divine because

7:52

you dissolve into it? I call this

7:55

moment the Divine Alka-Seltzer. You throw

7:57

the Alka-Seltzer into the water, it

7:58

dissolves and becomes the water. So think

8:01

of this mind of the whole as the water, and when

8:03

you throw it there, you

8:06

dissolve into that whole, but you're still there,

8:08

you're part of it, you constitute it. Do you

8:10

understand? This is the proposition of

8:14

mimicry. And it's very, very funny

8:18

when we... I remember a

8:19

comment I saw, those comments

8:21

say, "Oh, that's so arrogant,

8:24

thinking you have to be God." Cai Bali is

8:27

a book that people don't understand

8:28

properly. And I said, "But come on,

8:32

all the people who have studied magic for

8:35

years, in academia, in orders, in the

8:39

international world of magic, everyone looks

8:41

at the work I'm talking about, what is all this

8:43

really all about?" Look, they say, "

8:45

No, it's not a Kabbalistic book, it's a

8:50

meticulous book, it uses

8:52

some concepts, but it deviates from

8:54

tradition." So, let's research, let's look at

8:59

these studies, give a... Look at this and you'll

9:01

see that this whole thing about the mind is already a

9:04

contradiction, and it's an

9:05

important contradiction. If we're studying

9:07

a philosophical school that has another

9:09

school that contradicts it, it ceases to be

9:12

that philosophical school, or it becomes

9:13

a dissident group. And then it usually

9:16

gets a different name, which is why

9:17

we call it Hermeticism. Okay, so

9:20

I wanted to bring up this experience because there are

9:22

many people—

9:24

I remember once I gave a class

9:28

to a group of people

9:31

about this whole Kybalion issue—

9:33

I started telling the story from

9:35

Professor Queen Beybla, from

9:38

Newton's positivism. I showed

9:40

all the documentation, everything properly,

9:42

to the group,

9:43

and some people looked at it and said, "Wow,

9:45

I had no idea about this! Wow,

9:47

how do we sometimes accept something

9:49

and not question it?" And another person said, "

9:51

My God, but you! How dare you bring

9:54

logic into the house of the Lord? How dare you

9:57

destroy my beliefs?" And they were

9:59

really shaken by that, and I was

10:02

worried because Hermeticism is a

10:05

foundation, Hermeticism, philosophy, is

10:08

a foundation of Western magic, many of the...

10:11

Orders of magical practices that you do

10:13

today, even if you give the

10:15

witchcraft, given shamanism, it's very difficult

10:18

not to have some Amethyst influence

10:21

on the Western practices you practice.

10:24

Okay, even if you don't recognize them, they

10:26

are there when we say, for

10:29

example, "Ah, I can shape my

10:32

external reality based on what I

10:34

feel inside, what I do inside,"

10:36

we are bringing in a

10:37

Metamorphic idea of ​​what is inside is outside, and that just as

10:40

what is inside I can

10:41

transmute what is outside, I will transmute

10:44

based on what is inside

10:45

me. So, if I'm an example of

10:48

how we have Hermeticism there, well, if

10:50

we take, for example,

10:52

Blavatsky's philosophy, which will talk a lot about how

10:55

Hermeticism would be the mother of philosophies, it was

10:57

Hermeticism that created everything, Hermeticism

10:59

that permeated everything. So, it's not

11:01

true that Hermeticism permeates

11:03

everything, but it is present in many

11:05

things. So, if we understand that it

11:07

's there, it would be good for us to truly understand it

11:10

because in some way it

11:11

influenced us, and then

11:15

understanding it will help us. To help you follow or

11:19

not follow this philosophy, and you can turn

11:21

to me and say, "Leo, I like

11:23

Carvalho, I prefer Hermeticism,

11:25

Hermeticism is the work, it

11:27

works better for me." I mean, Hermetic bodies,

11:29

I didn't understand that part correctly, it's

11:30

really not a problem, it's

11:34

just that in magic we need to

11:37

know things because magic,

11:39

esotericism, Western magical practices

11:41

propose a liberation from

11:44

dogmas, they propose a liberation of

11:46

thought so that we can

11:49

expand our consciousness to wherever

11:52

we want, including saying, "Ah, I understand what

11:55

Carvalho is, but Leo, I'll continue

11:57

using it, okay, that's great, no problem."

12:00

That's the point. That's the point, but

12:04

when someone says, "No, you did

12:07

n't understand the book correctly, no, you're

12:11

talking about something you don't know, no, that's

12:12

not true."

12:15

That person is so trapped in a belief, so

12:17

trapped in that, that they can't

12:23

free themselves from it.

12:26

And then they didn't realize it, but they failed

12:29

and became the idea, they stopped being

12:32

a person who uses ideas to

12:34

be greater and became smaller because they

12:38

became a single idea, and then when

12:40

someone attacks that idea, that person...

12:42

She recognizes so much in the idea that she feels

12:45

attacked,

12:46

she feels the attack is directed at her, and it isn't. It's

12:50

not an attack when you talk about

12:53

a tradition and speak with respect, but it

12:56

comes from a certain place. I'll make an

12:58

analogy here: when we talk about

13:00

Christianity, Christianity is a

13:02

religion that was born based on the idea

13:05

that a person born in the

13:08

Middle East was the Messiah, and he brought God, and

13:12

he was the son of God. And then, over

13:16

time, because of church councils,

13:17

he became God incarnate. And at the same

13:20

time, you have a guy named Paul of

13:23

Tarsus who takes this idea of ​​this

13:25

Messiah to Rome, puts on the

13:29

guise of the Roman god Apollo,

13:32

and then he becomes the great Sol Invictus,

13:35

the great solar god, the Great Christ.

13:37

So there's a whole lot

13:40

of influence for Christianity to have been

13:42

born. There are Christians who know this and

13:45

for them it doesn't change anything about Christianity, and there are

13:47

Christians who, when they hear this, don't

13:49

understand, don't want to accept it. I'm not

13:54

saying they have to accept it, that's not

13:55

it, but study a little, even the origin of

13:58

your own religion, see how it was

14:00

formed. It's important for us to have an

14:03

open mind. And again, you... You don't need to

14:06

change your beliefs, everything's fine, but

14:07

understand your beliefs a little better,

14:09

because otherwise you'll be in a place

14:11

where there are a lot of people who studied, who researched

14:12

things, and you'll be

14:14

saying, "No, it wasn't like that,

14:16

so look here, there's this document,

14:17

this fact, this historian who said

14:19

this at the time, no, none of that

14:21

exists, it's all a lie," and then

14:23

[Music]

14:24

you wo

14:26

n't allow any

14:29

dialogue. If there's no

14:32

dialogue, there's no growth,

14:34

because I'll tell you, if you're

14:36

living locked inside your tower,

14:39

your universe will be so repressed, so

14:41

restricted, so closed, that

14:44

why are you learning more

14:46

things? Because you've already built your

14:48

tower, you've already built your

14:50

crystallization of knowledge there, so why are

14:52

you talking to other people,

14:54

why are you socializing? It doesn't make

14:56

sense because we human beings are

14:58

social animals, we socialize, we

15:00

do this because we

15:03

like to exchange, we are curious,

15:06

we like to learn. So why

15:09

not take this innate capacity of yours

15:11

and let it flow naturally? Do

15:13

n't find it, because when you believe

15:16

strongly in something and someone brings you

15:18

solid, rational arguments for

15:20

you to think about it,

15:22

and you shut yourself off. That hurt, that was already

15:27

anguish, that was already fear, doubt.

15:31

Why is what I'm believing

15:33

true or not? I believe in this, how could

15:36

that person say that? I hate

15:37

that person for bringing me this

15:39

kind of thing, I don't want to hear this. This

15:43

kind of person becomes

15:45

very obtuse, very closed off, and is the kind of

15:48

person who sometimes can't even be in

15:50

a group of people to talk anymore. I

15:54

ask you honestly, are you

15:56

listening to me, are you watching me? Do

15:59

you prefer to learn, to have

16:02

people around you who are always

16:07

happy to share knowledge, to

16:09

talk, to exchange ideas about

16:11

different things? Do you prefer to arrive somewhere and

16:13

vomit everything you know? That's it, that's the

16:17

truth, that's the truth, that's it? And

16:18

everyone looks at you and says, "

16:19

Okay, nobody talks to you," and

16:22

people start to distance themselves because they

16:24

say, "This person is always the owner of the

16:25

truth, you can't talk to them."

16:28

You don't live in a medieval age of

16:32

fanaticism anymore, do you? Even though there are still

16:35

many fanatical people, please don't

16:37

be one of them. Humanity grows,

16:40

we grow, our

16:42

consciousness expands when we

16:45

can learn from others, and that's

16:47

one of the cool lessons of Hermeticism.

16:50

Much of the manifestation of others around

16:52

us is seen as manifest symbols of the

16:56

mind of this whole, allowing us to

16:58

exchange ideas and learn, to

17:01

expand our consciousness.

17:04

This learning from this exchange expands

17:07

our consciousness, allowing us to

17:10

hear the other's point of view, even if

17:13

we don't agree. But I'm

17:15

listening, I understand. The person is

17:17

easily bringing up arguments, and even if, I don't know, that

17:20

seems absurd to my

17:21

reality, I begin to understand why

17:23

the person constructed that argument. We

17:24

live, for example, in a

17:27

time of

17:29

political polarization,

17:31

and I've seen many people on both sides of

17:34

this polarization with

17:37

very closed, very

17:38

polarized thoughts, not listening to the other,

17:40

not wanting to listen. This becomes a clash,

17:43

a fight, and people

17:45

offend each other, insult each other, and there's no conversation.

17:46

Sometimes I've seen people sit down to

17:50

truly talk, to understand why

17:52

they arrived at those thoughts, in an open-

17:55

minded way, without offense, without imposing

17:58

ideas. It was very interesting to see how

18:02

much these two learned from each

18:03

other as they understood that

18:07

certain types of thinking the other

18:09

had were reasonable because they

18:11

understood the construction of those

18:13

thoughts. Of course, there are people...

18:15

Fanatical people who are unreasonable, who

18:19

preach certain types of hatred disguised

18:22

as anything else, like "Oh, it's not my

18:25

right, my freedom," or "It's my

18:27

love,"

18:28

are actually hate in every way. And

18:31

when a person starts with hate, the other

18:33

person reacts with hate.

18:35

This is one of the things I

18:37

teach people: if I

18:39

manifest certain types of energy in the universe through my expression,

18:42

I will end up

18:45

becoming that type of energy; I will

18:47

become a symbol of hate. And if I become

18:50

a symbol of hate, I will receive a lot of

18:52

hate.

18:53

If I become a symbol of love, I will

18:56

receive a lot of love. Besides, are you saying

18:58

that it has to be all love? That the

19:00

person who is a symbol of love doesn't

19:02

receive hate? No, they receive it too. They

19:04

will receive it too because sometimes this

19:06

love that they give is perceived by

19:08

other people as something: "Oh, this person

19:11

feels superior. How can they love

19:13

everyone? How can they be so detached?"

19:15

This generates discomfort and ends up

19:19

generating hate. There are many people who

19:21

hate, hate, hate. There are people who, look,

19:23

I said, hate the same thing as that

19:24

person, so I'm going to love this person who

19:27

somehow expresses the hate that I...

19:29

I feel it in a way with a megaphone,

19:32

but what we want for ourselves...

19:34

Forget these people, forget these

19:37

spokespeople, forget these symbols that

19:39

manifest in our universe.

19:41

Hermeticism teaches us to look inside

19:42

ourselves and see who we are, to understand

19:45

what we want, and from who we

19:48

are and want to manifest what

19:50

we want in the universe, to expand our

19:52

consciousness not only to attract what

19:55

we are, but to be able to realize what

19:58

we are.

20:00

And then, when I realize what I am, I

20:03

feel fulfilled. I no longer feel

20:05

anguish, I no longer feel emptiness, I no

20:08

longer feel unhappiness because it doesn't

20:11

matter, these things no longer make

20:12

sense. I am what I am, and when I

20:15

am who I am, nothing can offend me

20:17

because I know who I am. No praise

20:20

will inflate my ego because I

20:23

know what I am and what I am not. If

20:24

someone praises me for something I am not, I will say, "Thank you,

20:26

but I am not that." If someone praises me for something I am not, I will only say, "Thank you, I

20:30

truly recognize that." If

20:34

someone insults me for something, I will

20:37

truly say, "Thank you." So, what I'm going to say is,

20:39

I am the person who's insulting me because

20:41

they realized this thing I'm hiding, and

20:43

I am who I am. Or if they were to insult me ​​with something

20:44

I'm not, I wouldn't

20:46

feel offended. They're insulting me with things they don't even

20:48

know, calling me things

20:50

they don't even know. Imagine having what we have

20:55

here in humanity, we have a channel with a lot of people

20:57

commenting, a lot of people commenting,

20:59

someone here depending on us for

21:01

free. I read a certain number of

21:03

comments and I look and say, "Ah, this

21:05

person is right." Maybe this video...

21:07

I really went down this path,

21:09

I need to think a little about this.

21:11

Sometimes someone writes something there that

21:12

I look at and say, "You won't offend me,

21:13

this person doesn't know me, they don't know

21:15

what they're talking about."

21:17

Hermeticism brings this, it brings this

21:19

thing of self-knowledge, but not this

21:21

self-knowledge of Coaching that we

21:23

have today. This is true self-knowledge,

21:24

a self-awareness based on

21:26

certainty about who I am, independent of

21:29

what the coach or anyone else tells me. I know

21:31

who I am, and I manifest that in the

21:33

universe.

21:34

My final provocation for today, my little bit

21:36

of anguish that I like to

21:38

leave at the end of the videos for you

21:39

here on Philosophy for All: if you

21:42

realize in your actions, in your

21:45

achievements, that it is you

21:48

who harmonizes your life,

21:52

think about it. We'll see each other on next week's program

21:54

again, this Friday

21:56

at 6:30 PM here on Radio Vai Mundial, or on the

22:00

Vibe channel, or here on Knowledge of

22:02

Humanity. A kiss and hermetic esfihas

22:04

for you all.

Continue with YouTLDR

Analyze another video with Pro

Process a new video, search every timestamp, compare sources, and keep the result in your library.

Get Pro — $12/month30-day money-back guarantee

More transcripts

Explore other videos transcribed with YouTLDR.