Advice
Bad advice is rarely cheap.
“The sophists obviously know everything, at least that’s how they present themselves to their students.” (Plato: The Sophist 233c)
Does Plato do justice to “his” Sophists by portraying them as more than just a literary projection surface for his criticism? They were clearly not good advisors for him, but rather cunning businessmen. At the very least, they aided Socrates and Plato in making Western philosophy aware of the problems that can arise in the relationship between teachers and students. That is why the Platonic Socrates felt the need to distinguish between good and bad advisors or teachers.
It is often said that Socrates was the first to call philosophy down from the heavens. From there, philosophy then devoted itself to the right way of life: via speculation on nature to ethics, so to speak. However, when one person acts as the teacher of another, a hierarchy seems almost inevitable, which is prone to manipulation, seduction and exploitation. In this sense, the Platonic Socrates also criticizes the Sophists. They sell themselves as supposed masters and teachers of the contest about the divine and all other matters between heaven and earth. They are also supposedly responsible for legislation and government affairs, as well as for all the arts (Soph. 232b-233c). Their omniscience and worldly wisdom, however, are only an illusion, an arrogance that should actually shame anyone who boasts of such superhuman claims. Nevertheless, the Sophists successfully offered their deceptive and, above all, money-making powers of persuasion to the people (22d-223b, 226a, 233d-268d). Their teachings were in demand because they often taught how to successfully influence other people with the right words: how to convince people of one’s own cause, one’s own ideas and goals, no matter what they are. This was of course a good business at the time of the flourishing Athenian democracy, because effective speech was most important before the people’s assembly and the jury courts.
What was different about the wise Socrates? He probably did not take money for his “teachings”. In the Platonic dialogues, less so in the earlier ones, one often comes across passages in which his interlocutors appear as willing fools of the master of rhetoric: “Yes, oh Socrates, certainly, oh Socrates…” This is sometimes the extent of their contribution to the dialogue. Socrates is often seen to be playing an ironic game with his interlocutors. But one thing you cannot accuse him of is wanting to produce mere echoes of his own views in his students or interlocutors. Anyone who wanted to reply to him could probably do so.
Shakespeare, Hamlet and No End
What is the situation today for those who offer advice? “There are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in your scholarly wisdom,” said Shakespeare. In fact, this quote is often used as a kind of conclusive proof for any kind of nonsense. In self-help books, which today are classified as “esoteric” and whose fan base likes to refer to Shakespeare as a kind of authority, Shakespeare is often quoted.
But is the English poet really suitable for this purpose? Was he a pioneer of homeopathy, face reading, or ancestor channeling by phone or text message? Strictly speaking, it is not Shakespeare, but his character Hamlet who utters this famous quote, and in the original English, it is not scholarly wisdom that is referred to, but ‘philosophy’:
“There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, / Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.” (Shakespeare, William: Hamlet 1.5 167-8)
Perhaps we should ask ourselves what Shakespeare or Hamlet meant by ‘philosophy’? We would also have to take a closer look at the play and try to understand the context. But that is not the point. The quote about scholarly wisdom is often used to divide people into two groups: Those who strive for deeper or higher knowledge and those who simply go with the flow of the latest opinions or supposedly follow a leader like sheep.
Esotericism – Exotericism
In the original sense of the word, esoteric teaching is for an “inner” circle, while ‘exotericism’ refers to knowledge that has been made publicly accessible. Insider knowledge and outsider knowledge? Insiders and outsiders?
Over the centuries, the meanings of these terms have changed, and sometimes an exoteric is seen as someone who is ignorant, while at other times they are someone who is striving for methodically revealed knowledge – in contrast to an occultist.
Who would want to be called an occultist today, or an esoteric? Irrational secret-keepers, gullible people. But can this boundary really be drawn so easily? Is there any clarity about where “serious” knowledge ends and nonsense begins?
Are these the words of an esoteric?:
“We feel that even if all possible scientific questions are answered, our life problems are still not touched at all.” [(Wittgenstein, Ludwig: Tractatus-Logico-Philosophicus, 6.52 , italics and trsl. MM]
Has scientific progress brought us any closer to solving our life problems? Do people today know better than before what makes life worth living, what makes it a good life? Isn’t it rather the case that the high degree of specialization, which seems to be the condition for progress in the scientific disciplines, means that there is a specialist for every detail problem, whom I as a layperson have to trust, but that nobody is able to keep an eye on the so-called ‘big picture’ that might have to be understood for a successful life? As Kant once remarked, are we not becoming immature if we delegate the treatment of every little problem to paid specialists?
Yes, Nestroy is right when he says that progress in itself has the effect of making it look much bigger than it really is! Centuries of research have passed, and people still have to worry, endure fears, fall ill, be angry and jealous, sometimes greedy and arrogant, sad and insecure. Why should we grant the intellectuals at universities and research institutions the right to decide on the border between sense and nonsense when it comes to questions of lifestyle? Paul Feyerabend tuned in on the matter in 1984:
“I become infuriated every time I see with what arrogance many intellectuals dismiss ideas that do not suit them, even though they give meaning and security to the lives of many people. Thousands of academic brats happily collect their big salaries, without gratitude, without a sense of obligation to those people who put their trust in them, without a sense of perspective.” (Feyerabend, Paul: Wissenschaft als Kunst, Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp 1984, S. 12. Trsl. MM)
Crises and Yearning
Not every personal problem has to be blown up into a social crisis. Nevertheless, a connection between the life problems of individuals and the “health” of an entire society or culture is often made. At the height of a culture, as per organologically oriented cultural diagnosticians, the society to which it belongs is supposedly carried by binding values and world views. The lives of individuals and communities run harmoniously along orderly paths. However, towards the end of the heyday, the foundations begin to crumble. Uncertainties break through, and the time comes for all values to be reevaluated. Confusion and animosity spread.
In the German-speaking world at the end of the 19th century, the so-called ‘Lebensreform’ movement emerged, a conglomeration of experimental minds who tried to break out of the old structures of industrialization, which were perceived as authoritarian and petit bourgeois, and the new ones, which were perceived as threatening, as the pace of development accelerated. They suffered from the life choices available to them and considered them unsustainable or no longer worth pursuing. Instead, they longed for a life that (once again) turned more strongly to “nature”, from which they felt they had become estranged by the money economy, greed for profit and mechanization.
At that time, Oswald Spengler’s The Decline of the West was one of the most widely read books in the German-speaking world. The book’s eloquent expression of an apocalyptic mood was particularly appealing. It was associated, not only among the life reformers, with a longing for something new and wonderful, for so-called re-enchantment and spirituality, for depth and connectedness. Herrmann Hesse depicts this in Journey to the East. A publisher’s brochure for the book states that it is about:
“(…) the isolation of the spiritual person in our time and the need to integrate one’s personal life and actions into a larger, more universal whole, an idea and a community, a longing to serve, a search for community, a liberation from the barren loneliness of the artist’s virtuosity.” (Hesse, Hermann: Die Morgenlandfahrt: Eine Erzählung, Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp 1982. Trsl. MM)
But why were the Lebensreformer largely regarded as outcasts and madmen, and not as role models for a new era, when they had actually struck a chord? It takes courage to question your own way of life and then to change it. Did the petit bourgeois feel uncomfortably touched by those eccentrics because they spoke from the soul, showing them the “falsehood” of their own lives? Was it perhaps easier to simply defame them as eccentric esoterics because they took a risk that they themselves could not bring themselves to take?
“What the herd hates most are those who think differently. It is not so much the opinion itself, but the audacity to think for oneself, something they themselves cannot do.” (Schopenhauer, Arthur: Die Kunst recht zu behalten.)
Noise and roar – From Advice to Incantation
My partner repeatedly received advice and reading tips from her childhood friend. “You have to leave your past behind you!”, “Trust your body, it knows what you need!”, “Find out what you really want and then live it!” What sounds like fortune cookie sayings can sometimes be the necessary impetus in the right context. Maybe. Those who were able to talk to the Seven Sages of Greece in everyday life were hopefully able to converse with good interlocutors whose teachings went beyond the traditional sayings.
Thales: “Don’t be lazy, even if you have money.”
Solon: “Nothing in excess!”
Chilon: “Don’t move your hand when you talk; it looks like you’re crazy.”
Pittakos: “The land is reliable, the sea is unreliable.”
Bias: “Most people are bad.”
Kleobulus: “Listen a lot and don’t talk much.”
Periandros: “Stick to old laws, but eat fresh food.”
Thank you very much, sages from far-off Greece, for these teachings! But what do I do now in concrete terms? In Germany today, there is the Council of Economic Experts (Sachverständigenrat zur Begutachtung der gesamtwirtschaftlichen Entwicklung, SVR). One can only hope that their activities go beyond the mere uttering of calendar sayings and concern concrete economic planning. However, it is not entirely fair to blame the Seven Sages of Greece for the later use and interpretation of their sayings. The tendency to express and pass on complex facts, teachings or relations in the shortest possible form is certainly important for mortal, speaking beings. Or are these sayings perhaps just titles or advertising texts for more complex relations of ideas that we have unfortunately lost? Does this condensation really preserve only the essential in concentrated form? Are they, as it were, only wisdom-filled stock cubes that need to be dissolved, mathematical formulas that need to be interpreted, algorithms that need to be applied, or mantras that those striving for wisdom need to keep in mind for the right action and the good life? We don’t know.
At a birthday party, a friend lays out ‘Osho Zen Tarot’ cards for three of the guests. The cards have kitschy motifs on them. Each card has a “name”. The description of the “transcendental game of Zen” reads:
“Traditional tarot decks are often used to satisfy our desire for knowledge about the future or the past. The Osho Zen Tarot is about understanding what is HERE and NOW. The basis is the wisdom of Zen, which teaches us that external events merely reflect our own thoughts and feelings, even if we are not aware of them. These spiritual cards help us to gain a better understanding of our inner world and its transformations.
The tarot deck is based on the Major and Minor Arcana of the classic tarots, but offers completely new interpretations and descriptions of the spiritual journey of man: Existence – The Inner Voice – Creativity – Emptiness – Consciousness – Courage – Change – Breakthrough – Transformation, etc. The Minor Arcana also appears in a new guise: squares of different colors replace the classic symbols, and terms such as Exhaustion, Travel, Suppression, Kindness, Source, etc. also make the direct connection to the inner view clear.
The images are visionary, spiritual, dreamy, modern and powerfully designed by Ma Deva Padma – they take us into a colorful fantasy world. The texts in the accompanying instruction book are clearly written in the spirit of Zen and contribute to a deeper understanding.”
The director of the game claims to only lay the cards, but otherwise to withdraw completely. The choice of cards, content and interpretation are entirely up to the person seeking advice. In connection with the small booklet, the leader and the seeker then interpret the cards, or bring the seeker’s (still) subconscious meaning to light. All three seekers are dissatisfied with themselves and their lives in some way. The analysis and solution follow the same pattern for all of them.
“You are unhappy because you live in the past and focus too much on the future.”
“Look inside yourself and take responsibility for yourself, only you can do that! Live in the present!”
“Learn: You are not unimportant. You can be happy!”
No one seems to want to ask how exactly you are supposed to do that, to be happy. Isn’t it a truism that events from our past can weigh on us for a long time and that we constantly worry about shaping the future? Nevertheless, all three are surprised at how accurately the cards tell them that there is or was a difficult relationship in their lives, that they have fixed desires for the future, that they are dissatisfied with at least one of their character traits. The card reader herself casts significant looks around the room as soon as a new card is revealed, and the “clients” almost confess to the content to which the cards have drawn attention.
From the arm of the leader, her totem animal silently looks around the room, and above it floats a dream catcher and something that looks like a yin-yang symbol. I remember how a few friends and I played ‘Ouija’ years ago during a school trip to the Black Forest. A “conjuring of spirits” in which everyone places their index finger on the back of a glass and then the leader or conjured spirit moves the glass over letters and numbers to answer the questions we have asked. The setting also included playing it at night, slightly tilting the window and only lighting a few tea lights. Some people acted up, but in the end, nobody took it seriously. I always thought that all the “esoteric hoo-ha” took place in a similar way, that it was harmless and ultimately useless or just a bit of fun. But it’s not quite like that.
My former partner did not like the snide tone I adopted when we talked about the supposed Zen practice between champagne glasses and barbecue coals. Apparently, in her eyes, I was not taking the matter seriously enough. She concluded with the words: “There is more between heaven and earth than scholarly wisdom could dream of!” I have to admit that, the Buddha figurines that smile from almost every corner of the apartment, dream catcher tattoos, the belief in supposedly “alternative medical” medications such as globuli from the house of “system-defying” conglomerates, minerals to “energize” tap water and the demonization of vaccinations spark nothing more in me than a way to make money and a representation of needs and desires, and certainly nothing that would go beyond “book learning”. Perhaps a longing to believe in something special and thus to become a little special yourself. Perhaps it is about the need to have more intense experiences than everyday life offers, to connect with something “bigger” than what you encounter as banalities in your daily routine. Am I, with these assessments, the modern version of a Lebensreformer, defaming petit bourgeois?
Self-Deception
14 years ago, I decided to take up a martial art after all. Which one to choose? I had only minimal experience with karate and judo. Of course, it should be an efficient style, preferably one that is superior to all others. But I was completely dependent on how different schools, styles, masters and students presented themselves on the internet and how they were talked about in forums and articles.
I was lucky. A friendly Kung Fu trainer who became my friend was able to convince me of his style. To be more precise, I simply enjoyed training with him from the very beginning. I was not able to make any well-founded decisions that would have had anything to do with a qualified judgment of skill, efficiency or the like. But I couldn’t get the discussions from the forums out of my head. It also has something to do with vanity. Who wants to learn a martial art that doesn’t fulfill its purpose? Who wants to spend years of time and effort only to have to admit in the end that, apart from a little hopping around, you haven’t done what you thought you had done or could do, or that you can’t do it at all?
Today I would ask my younger self what the supposedly comprehensive efficiency of the athletic training was actually supposed to be based on. Perhaps I would have answered: “Well, on the fight, on fighting!” But it’s not the same thing whether I want to be an Olympic boxer, a bar brawler, an elite soldier or a successful fencer!
To me, the question seems silly today. It is based on a childish mentality of comparison: “Who has the coolest toy car?”, “Who has the most expensive shoes?”, “Is Eastern Kung Fu better than Western boxing?”. This is equivalent to questions like: “Which is stronger: a pit bull or a panther?”, “Which is more dangerous: a crocodile or a hippopotamus?” with which adolescents also pass their time on the internet. The question of which style is best prepared for all situations or has an answer for every dangerous situation is not looking for a concrete answer, even if it seems that way. It is based on a double delusion of judgment or megalomania. How should one imagine answering the question? It is so general that there is no way to answer it at all at the desired general level. Furthermore, the person asking the question seems to be striving for something like invincibility and thus nurturing a childish fantasy of omnipotence, the realization of which we all have to stop believing in at some point… To believe that you only need to learn this system, for whatever reason, is an illusion. “This system is the complete one, it is self-contained. I don’t need anything else anymore! Everything else is nonsense!” Anyone who thinks like that would also have to believe that there must be a universal tool that can hammer as well as a hammer, pull as well as pliers, screw as well as a screwdriver, measure as well as a ruler, but would be neither a hammer, nor pliers, nor a screwdriver or ruler, but rather a super tool that can do everything alone and better.
Should it be in the interest of good teachers to promote or even teach such an (absurd) attitude? It is not uncommon for students to be immersed in such an aura with subtle hints that they are among the lucky ones who have found a teacher who can teach the universal super-technology. This aura can be used to extract money from many people. Take another expensive exam here, pay for a “deeper” technique there, which is only reserved for the smallest esoteric circle, that must be possible if you really want the ultimate. But not only students are victims of such deceptions. Sometimes the whole “community”, together with its more or less charismatic leaders, becomes entangled in such beliefs. The internet is full of appearances that seem to point to such deceptive communities: an adoring student interviews the grandmaster, who seems to be above it all, and asks whether they have ever had to use their arts? No, they say, the situation could always be defused before it escalated and physical violence occurred that could have been fatal. “But if I have to fight, then I know: I would win!” After a forced pause, they add: “That is the essence of the idea of ‘being able to fight so as not to have to fight’.”
The masters’ belief in their own superiority and that of their technique, which is often a particularly stubborn form of denial of reality and self-deception, then jumps to the students, some of whom I was later able to experience in our training. “We don’t do sparring. We only practice drills, the techniques are too dangerous.» «We never did punching training, in (Asian) martial arts it’s not about sport or fitness like in boxing.» Often, people who had expressed themselves in this or a similar way were then strangely out of place in relaxed sparring, as you would only expect from a beginner. What was the reason? The attacks did not come in an agreed manner, the stress level, which can also occur in sparring among friends, was simply new to them. Surprise was rarely followed by curiosity. Most of the time, such experiences are frustrating and people like to try to deny them, which is extremely embarrassing for the uninvolved observer. This may also happen because followers, not only in the context of so-called “sects”, often identify so strongly with their teachers or their style that they feel personally attacked, not only physically, but also personally, when their role models and idealized techniques are questioned.
Power to the Master
What makes me an authority on any given subject? A title? Education? Very often, the attribution of authority is based on demonstrable experience, on goals that have been achieved. At universities and training centers, we submit qualification papers that someone without the relevant experience and the resulting skills and knowledge would not have been able to produce. At least that’s the theory. But is there anything equivalent to medical training, for example, for the big questions of life? There is certainly no doctorate in life mastery. (Self-proclaimed) life coaches, on the other hand, are more numerous than dentists, I suspect and fear. Were Socrates or Confucius professional counselors?
“The guide does not have to walk the path he points to.”
A heavy smoker can be a good lung specialist. A good nutritionist, someone who knows good advice tailored to me, can be very overweight. But can someone who acts completely unwisely and does not know how to follow their own advice be capable of giving wise advice? Wouldn’t that often be someone who does not learn from their experiences, who keeps making the same mistakes and then wonders or even gets indignant about the results? Then it seems unlikely that I would expect any deeper insights from this person. Is it not wise advice that helps me break bad habits from which I suffer in some way, whether consciously or unconsciously? Through this disturbing intervention, they can make experiences, insights and reflections transparent to me. Can any person who does not have experience or insight in this area, or only pretends to, really help me in an emergency, and are they even interested in doing so?
On the other hand, you can certainly be there for someone, help them in a difficult situation, without having been in exactly the same situation yourself. Think of the servant Gerasim in Tolstoy’s story The Death of Ivan Ilyich. Unlike Ilyich’s relatives, who clearly show during visits that they are embarrassed by the imminent death and therefore try to deny it, the servant is simply there, straightforward and sincere. He looks after the dying man without telling him any fairy tales, and in this way he is able to comfort Ivan Ilyich, and even helps him make a late about-turn in his life.
Hirayama, the main character in Wim Wenders’ film Perfect Days, has a similar effect on a terminally ill stranger. He drinks a beer with him, talks openly and plays shadow tag with him. Hirayama (PClink) uses his openness to bring the stranger back to life, so to speak, and gives him a good time.
Nobody can help a dying person because they know what it is like to die. Nobody returns from the dead. Or if the experience of dying were a prerequisite for providing help at the end of life, then only reanimated people with near-death experience would be allowed to work in palliative medicine.
Rather, the two fictional characters mentioned above have “understood something about life”, as the saying goes, and can therefore assist the dying. Those suffering at the end of their lives can benefit from the attitude to life of these “simple sages” without being “rationally” lectured to by them about life and death. Nor are the aforementioned engaged in any kind of “consultancy business” that they use to earn a living, as the Sophists and authors of esoteric self-help literature do. Hirayama and Gerasim do not appear to be based on any particular doctrine, and it is not clear whether they draw on their own experience. Both are open, caring, honest and genuine with people who, in a difficult or even hopeless situation, are suddenly or accidentally dependent on their help.
Self-Care: The Truth About (Absolutely) Everything
In life coaching, it has become fashionable to frame and legitimize the statements in a book by what the author has experienced as someone who is also affected. This seems to make them more approachable, perhaps to a friend. But it also serves as a prerequisite: “I have been through this and that! Here is my path, my lesson, my truth for you! It is based on authentic life experience!” It is not uncommon for the pretense of self-sufficiency to include the assurance that, of course, in the end everyone has to find the truth for themselves, the truth that only applies to them.
The books of best-selling author Brianna Wiest are a good example of this type of guidebook. In The Truth About Everything, she presents herself as very personal and vulnerable, but she still wants to share her thoughts. While reading, I had the feeling that with every sentence, my ability to stay alert evaporated. Almost every sentence could also be waiting inside a fortune cookie or be part of a horoscope. Sentences are apparently strung together at random. A particularly free association of generalities and platitudes that are perhaps intended to be poetic but are reminiscent of the sentimentalism in pop song lyrics. Alongside these are sentences that are expressed with great conviction, almost in a commanding tone. The book probably needs this authoritarian tone to feign an intimate insight or connoisseurship of life.
Again and again, you sink into a kind of a thought froth or a word mush in which you can’t grasp anything solid. Here is an example:
“Maybe you’ve been unhappy with yourself for a long time, or maybe not. That’s normal and sometimes important. But know that everything is wonderful and yet mysterious at the same time! And what would we be without mysteries?! I am grateful for everything I have been able to experience. Always be yourself! But don’t forget the others either! Hope never dies, it’s just forgotten.”
A voice that sometimes sounds like a high priestess and then like an old childhood friend seems to be addressing the reader. However, the stories are far too vague to create the impression that someone is speaking authentically from their own life experience, if you pay even the slightest attention to the text and don’t just skim it, half-asleep. If you imagine the author in a conversation, you probably assume that the alternation between banalities, constant relativization and strict assertions is merely intended to conceal a weakness of judgment:
“I know that there is a higher power that is above all else, and I know that I have chosen a path for myself in accordance with this higher power. I know that there are greater goals and things that I have to learn, parts that I have to develop, things that I have to experience. But I also know that there are different ways to get there, to be there and to experience this.
(…)
Today someone told me to imagine my life at forty. I did. I liked most of it. I didn’t like some of it” (p. 52, essay: Fate is a Question of One’s Own Will).
“What exactly do you not like? What do you intend to change? Why? Where did you get the knowledge of that higher power?” This is how one would like to respond to this murmur that passes itself off as wisdom. Sometimes it would even have been better if the editor had checked the semantics of the sentences more carefully:
“Happy people do not call themselves ‘happy people’ or consider themselves to be such. They define happiness as a feeling of meaningfulness and contentment, combined with following their true passions. This is part of the wisdom of happy people.
(…)
Happy people choose happiness by choosing what makes it most likely” (p. 59).
In this type of self-help book, which does not give any concrete advice, you can find the sayings that can be found on any esoteric rummage table on the internet: “Find your inner core”, “Everything is in flux”, “Listen to your inner voice”, “Life is a dream from which we have to wake up”. Normally, according to Wiest, we would define ourselves by our job or gender. But both can be lost or called into question. However, “your ‘true self’ cannot be lost, and therefore all this is not a meaningful way to define yourself” (p. 117). Again the question arises: where does it all come from? What is this true self that remains the same in constant change? Or not:
“You are constantly evolving, your state is not static, and you have to learn to adjust to it.”
And further with the assurance to do what you feel:
“This means acting on what you think and feel at any given moment.” [page number]
But what if I have become doubtful about exactly that? What if thinking and feeling don’t go together? Unfortunately, the so-called advisors often have little more to offer than “If it gets really bad, then listen to your deep and true self, act wisely and be happy!” If that is the truth about everything or the answer to the question of everything, then you are probably better off with the answer: “42”.
Who chooses brown?
Do Wiest’s books count as esoteric in today’s sense of the word just because they contain elements of various wisdom traditions? What does “in today’s sense of the word” mean? Perhaps the following example will be clearer:
“You are the color you choose, and it reflects the needs of your being.”
This is something like the guiding principle of ‘Aura-Soma therapy’. It is a holistic method for helping people to find self-knowledge and well-being. Vicky Wall is the name of the inventor of this game with colored oils and spring water in glass bottles. She had already had psychic experiences in her youth and later the name for the product or therapy was “revealed” to her during meditation.
The ‘Equilibrium bottles’ contain the living energies of plants, crystals and colors. The vibrations of the angelic realm are said to unite with the realm of plants and minerals in these bottles. These energies are said to have a healing effect through the agency of beings from the spiritual world. ‘Pomanders’ are also available. These contain fragrances that are to be rubbed on the left hand and rubbed with the right hand. The energetic scent is then fanned into one’s own aura. Quintessences are also available. These contain essences from masters that can (re)connect you with the inner master within yourself. The power of the color rituals is demonstrated, for example, by the master essence B55, ‘The Christ’. If you apply this essence to your lower abdomen in the evening, it can awaken the Kundalini energy and thus help you to process possible abuse. This liquid Christ is available for just 41 euros (1 liter = 820 euros).
Aura-Soma is said to be related to the ancient wisdom teachings of the Kabbalah, the Yijing, the Tarot and, of course, the Hindu chakra teachings. Every person is said to be intuitively, not rationally, attracted to certain color combinations. These are then chosen during a “consultation” and conclusions and diagnoses are drawn from them with the help of an interpretation catalog, similar to the Tarot.
Fortunately, you can not only go to color therapy, but also support other people in self-healing or balancing, after completing three courses of six days each for a few hundred euros.
If you immerse yourself in this world of “esocommerce” for a while, you will repeatedly encounter the same elements. A little bit of the Far East, or the distant past, the subtle, which of course eludes scientific research, or is even denied its existence in a sacrilegious manner, ominous founding figures with alleged psychic abilities, occasional initiation into deep secrets that only a chosen few are able to understand, and a snowball system in which, in addition to the usual fraud, you can burn your money and drag other people into it. How often do we read that these are not really costs, but rather “investments”, whether in the exploration of one’s own feminine power, the reawakening of the “primal man” within oneself, or some other quackery.
The esoteric “life reformers” and “travelers to the Orient” of today are not breaking new ground. However, they often serve up old clichés and use the internet to sell the associated rubbish more easily. Morpheus was wrong: it is not the Matrix that has you, Neo, but the market!
Where There is Enlightenment, There Are Also Shadows
Anyone looking for or expecting a clear-cut criterion with which to distinguish between serious and unserious esoteric wisdom teachings, in the pejorative sense of the word, in order to always be on the safe side, will probably be disappointed or ultimately fall victim to (another) scam. Of course, if you look at it more closely, many of the promises of salvation made by the esoteric market seem to expose themselves. But that does not apply to all of them, and sometimes self-deception and deception by others are closely interlinked. As the social scientist Pia Lamberty and Katharina Nocun have repeatedly shown in recent years, so-called esotericism has now become a gateway for all kinds of politically motivated conspiracy theories. “Zwischen Klangschalen und Reichskriegsflagge” is the title of a chapter in the book Gefährlicher Glaube, in which esotericism is shown to be a “door opener” (p. 224) for precisely these narratives. Unfortunately, both commercially focused esotericism and politically motivated esotericism primarily want to bind people to certain products, world views and belief systems, making them more manipulable and dependent on the relevant “products” – be they healing stones, anointing oils or ideologies – as sustainably as possible. Often, however, rhetoric is used that is intended to convey exactly the opposite: You are finally being led to freedom, where you will belong to the awakened, the initiated into the secret, who no one can deceive anymore. All the others are sheep who won’t understand anyway… It seems questionable to me whether those who want to narrow the view of other people in this way and also make money from it are really interested in the well-being of their “customers”.
