Learn more Shop now Learn more Shop now Shop now Shop now Shop now Shop now Shop now Learn More Shop now Shop now Learn more Shop Fire Shop Kindle Learn More Shop now Fitbit



There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

on 11 October 2010
In common with Stephen Mehler, I also studied under the direct tutelage of Hakim Awayan - an eccentric but totally endearing indigenous oral tradition wisdom keeper who lived by the Sphinx - for several years until he sadly passed away in 2008. I'm really pleased that Stephen has been published as he has proved an invaluable source of corroboration for my notes from conversations with Hakim, which initially inspired me to develop my Egyptian Alchemy healing system (Reyad Sekh Em). Hakim explained to me that the ancient Egyptians called their land Khemit (pronounced Khempt but spelled in various ways due to the non-use of vowels in heiroglyhics)and referred to themselves as Khemitians or Soufs (with existing Sufis being connected to this lineage). Hence the very word 'Philosophy', widely attributed to the Greeks, is in itself proof that the Greeks themselves were attributing their 'knowledge' to the Egyptians as 'Philo-souf' meant exactly that. Indeed the Greek word for wisdom is derived from this same source word. Fascinating stuff, and for me Stephen helped to confirm some of my interpretations of Hakim's teachings as well as adding his own researched and intuited extrapolations. Stephen's earlier book - the Land of Osiris - was recommended to me by Hakim even though he wasn't a fan of the written word, being an oral traditionalist! Well done Stephen, I can't wait for your next book and I look forward to adding my own book(s) into the melting pot.

I'd also recommend interested parties to read some of the books by Moustafa Gadalla who helped me to understand the bigger picture and UK readers should be sure to obtain Lorraine Evans's book 'The Kingdom of the Ark' as she details and defends her hypothesis that one of Akhenaton's daughters actually made it to Britain, with her husband and entourage, in circa 1450 BC and may have founded the Scottish and/or Irish dynasties. Again much of the material Hakim discussed with me would substantiate this amazing claim ...
0Comment| 12 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 14 August 2008
I have read Land of Osiris, and seen lectures by the author on Google and dvds, so was eagerly looking forward to a lucid follow up of some of the points the author (Stephen S. Mehler) had said he would elaborate on in this his new book. But before you could get into what this book was really about, you had to get past all the subjects the author says it is not about! With a picture of Ahknaten on the front, one is therefore somewhat mislead. The author says he has studied Ahknaten for 35 years, he also says Ahknaten is the most written about Pharaoh in history, and only covers this subject towards the end. As an exploration of a journey from Light into Darkness, I found it all a bit foggy.

Overall, I was disappointed; the book was unsatisfying.
0Comment| 7 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 14 November 2015
Stephen S Mehler is a great researcher of pre-history and this book is fascinating and enlightening.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 4 March 2016
not bad, bit low on detail
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 21 January 2016
No complaints
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 1 September 2015
Stephen Mehler, From Light Into (sic) Darkness: The Evolution of Religion In (sic) Ancient Egypt (Kempton: Adventures Unlimited, 2005), 229pp.

This publication starts off badly and becomes progressively worse.

Apart from the fact that the author is unable to follow the rules of English grammar in terms of the use of upper and lower case letters in titles (p. 0 , verso) - a minor sin, perhaps - the reader already senses a number of alarm bells before the author even gets to grips (or otherwise) with his subject (whatever the latter may be).

In the ‘Acknowledgements’ section Mehler expresses his thanks to ‘the [sprit] of Akhenaten […] without whose life [experience] and [influence] this book could never have been possible’ (p.xiii), but Mehler fails to explain by what miraculous means Akhenaten, who died ca.1336 BC, managed to rise from the dead and convey his ‘life [experience] and [influence]’ to the author Mehler. This curious statement pales, however, into insignificance in comparison with the preposterous nonsense which follows. Already on p.2 we are erroneously informed that ‘recent research in quantum and theoretical physics is inexorably heading to a fusion of physics and metaphysics’. No, it most certainly is not, and Mr Mehler would be well advised to study the works of respected natural scientists such as Lawrence Krauss before firing off such ludicrous claims. There are further attempts to hijack the work of real scientists later in this work (p.6 et al.).

As an aside, Mehler’s deployment of the term ‘inexorably’ reveals much about his failure to understand the nature of scientific enquiry. Natural scientists - just like genuine academics of every ilk - do not ‘inexorably’ head towards a conclusion, but rather they test out hypotheses again and again and maintain a healthy sense of doubt and uncertainty.

The reader - already wary given Mehler’s attempted usurpation of quantum physics for his own metaphysical aims - is further alarmed by the author’s questioning of Darwin’s analysis and explanation of evolution. Those conversant with Darwin’s On the Origins of Species will be familiar with the manner in which Darwin presents his thesis in a rational manner and develops his argument on the basis of evidence. Mr Mehler, it would appear, has not bothered to read Darwin (the title is not listed in what is presumably his bibliography (he terms it ‘Selected References’ - whatever that is supposed to be; one assumes he means ‘Bibliography’)), otherwise he would be familiar with the notion of presenting evidence for one’s arguments.

Mehler, however, presents no arguments and no evidence for his assertions. One is nothing less than startled to discover on the ‘About the Author’ page (p.229) that the writer of this work has attained university degrees, and one can only conclude that he missed the tutorials which dealt with the topics of academic discourse and the use of evidence to support one’s thesis.

Mehler continues (and, presumably, he erroneously considers the sentence to constitute evidence for his assertions re Darwin): ‘There are researchers currently arguing against all theories of Darwinian evolution, that there is no evidence for evolution at all’, but he absent-mindedly forgets to state the names of these ‘researchers’ in a footnote. Who, one wonders, are these ‘researchers’? Surely not Richard Dawkins or any of the myriad of other respected evolutionary biologists who would, presumably, fall over laughing at Mehler’s unfounded assertions.

Mehler employs this approach ad nauseam. The reader is presented with an untiring series of assertions (‘the bias of academia’, ‘the whole incorrect conception of evolution’ (p.7) and so on and so on…) without the slightest shred of evidence. Instead, Mehler discusses ‘statements [he] completely disagrees with’ (p.9). Very good, Mr Mehler, but, sadly ‘I disagree with a statement’ is scarcely an argument and Mr Mehler should be aware that he can disagree with a statement until the cows come home but he will impress no thinking person with the expression of his own private and unfounded opinions.

By page 20 Mehler has also rejected the Big Bang explanation of the universe, but again without the slightest vestige of evidence. This just happens to be his opinion. Having opinions, however - no matter how improbable - and printing them on paper is not the same as expounding a scientific theory.

Instead of evidence, arrived at on the foundation of scientific research, Mehler presents the unfortunate reader with a series of scientifically worthless and wholly gratuitous assertions and opinions. His evidence (if ‘evidence’ be the appropriate expression) consists in the ‘teachings’ (this word is altogether revealing in terms of the unscientific nature of this publication) of one Mr Abd’El Hakim, an individual who appears, as we learn, to have some special (and unexplained) connection to deeper wisdom (or, perhaps: shallower delusion). No (one is tempted to state), some bloke called Hakim standing on the Giza Plateau spouting pseudo-profundities is not a credible source of evidence.

As if all of the above were not enough, Mehler goes on to question the generally accepted age of the pyramids (against the prevailing scientific consensus and, as usual, without a shred of evidence for his assertion). He then propounds a theory whereby the pyramids were connected by water ‘to produce hydrogen gas for energy’ (sic!). And so on.

This is not an academic work. Nor is this work about ‘The Evolution of Religion in ancient Egypt’, as it is misleadingly subtitled. Readers interested in an assortment of unfounded assertions, opinions, pseudo-profundities and metaphysical claptrap should, of course, go ahead and purchase this work. The rest of us should stick with trustworthy academic publications on the subject such as Stephen Quirke and Jeffrey Spencer, The British Museum Book of Ancient Egypt, Nicholas Reeves, Echnaton etc. etc. etc.

The publication From Light Into (sic) Darkness: The Evolution of Religion In (sic) Ancient Egypt dwells in its superstitious preoccupations upon the cyclical nature of all things, and Mr Mehler will be delighted, one assumes, to note that at least one copy of his publication will be confirming the cyclical nature of all things by being disposed of in a paper recycling container. The author of this review will, sadly, never again see the £14.99 he squandered on this ridiculous book, but is cheered in the thought that others will not make the same mistake.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse

Sponsored Links

  (What is this?)