I just figured I'd chime in here just to give an opinion because I'm familiar with Bardon.
So....the criticisms here are valid. I agree with many of them.
But as someone (probably like many of us here) who's spent 10s of thousands on occult books and read as far and wide as I can (I try anyway, I'm not the best)....
I think it's fairly obvious after a while to see that.....pretty much every occult author is essentially "just some guy with opinions". Including Bardon.
This is occultism, esotericism, and spirituality. Not science. Not medicine. Not engineering. There are no peer reviewed scientific studies on these topics. You can't use a mathematical proof to prove that someone has the answers.
I often hear criticisms of Occult authors like this. And they're fair. But, what were you expecting? That God himself would be the author?
And people do claim that, even with sacred texts, like the Bible, the Bhagavad Gita......academics can find criticisms, flaws, and contradictions that are undeniable. Potential mistakes or "flaws". And that's incredibly controversial. My intention is not to disrespect anyone's faith or anyone who relies on holy texts or scriptures. I don't believe them to be nonsense in any way, rather, actually, I think they hold immense value and are sacred in nature. However, human authors, even those with 'divine inspiration,' can still manufacture flaws in their work. These books are written by humans after all.
When it comes to alternative spiritual texts? (Also known as occult works)
Every author is an imperfect human being, usually with a weird life (none of them were saints), who just was just writing down their ideas and their spiritual human experience and research. Some have better sources than others. Some write more articulately than others. Some look like an absolute crazy mess.
But ultimately, every occult text is just some guy's spiritual ideas on paper. Find me an author that was a perfect human being and wrote down a perfect spiritual work. You could argue for the bible. Maybe Hermes Trismegistus and the Hermetica? Was that divinely transmitted from the source, the heavens, from God? That's an interesting discussion.
I don't know if Bardon's systems or ideas hold any water. He did get sick and die.
But do you know why Bardon got sick and died? He was imprisoned twice, and it began to wear on the man's mental health and personal condition.
The Nazis, particularly Hitler, wanted Bardon to assist them with magic to win the war and reveal other occult lodges. Bardon refused, leading to torture and imprisonment in a concentration camp. He got out.
After the war, Bardon continued his occult studies and healing work. He was arrested again by the Czechoslovakian Communist authorities on charges of tax evasion (for alcohol used in his remedies) and treason (for allegedly making unfavorable comments in a letter). And then the pancreatitis in custody ended him.
Does this mean occult powers don't work? That Bardon's skills or ideas were nothing?
I can attest personally that trying to meditate and manifest or control your consciousness and emotions when you're in a life-reckoning situation like....prison (which is known to be psychologically traumatic).....it's hard to perform under those conditions. Not everyone can.
I'm not saying he's right or wrong. I'm just cutting the man some slack and looking at what happened here historically.
Let's look at some other occultists that arguably have overlap with Bardon.
Crowley created a whole religion off of some overlapping principles that are arguably sharing some similarity to Bardon's work. With similar roots (Hermetics/Kabbalah/Egyptian Currents). His thing was, "Love was the way to create your true will, your true life's path".
Did he do it? Did he use his invention, Thelema, to will his highest life path? Well, He was a long-time drug user and became addicted to heroin, which contributed to his declining health. He died in relative poverty and obscurity in a boarding house. At first he began experimenting widely with various psychotropic substances, including cannabis, cocaine, mescaline, and solvents, from an early age, often as part of his "magickal" studies and personal exploration. Then he developed a 20 year addiction to heroin that led to declining health and finances. Then he died.
He didn't do it. Even the creator of Thelema couldn't do Thelema.
Look at a modern magician. You can criticize me here but I'm going to back it up with arguable evidence: Joe Dispenza. People claim they have had radical remissions from cancer and other diseases. His work again pulls from Hermetics (he states hermetic principles in his courses, "The inner creates the outer", "As above, so below"), chaos magick (in his "Progressive/Intensive Course" he has you draw a sigil and charge it with your greatest intentions for your future life, visualizing your success), this is his "roll your own" version of ritual that he kind of created. He has you work "vibration" (very...."kybalionistic"), and subdue and control thoughts (similar to Bardon) and try to elevate your body's state, willingly, into love (Thelemic), to try to create a new reality (again....that's in alignment with the Hermetica, creating a new physical reality based on the inner state of the self changing. According to these principles, the inner creates the outer, so drastically working to change and elevate the inner self will create a new physical reality).
What's my point? Did Joe do it? Well......he is losing his hair. Many people mention that. Couldn't he use what he teaches to create a new reality and change his gene expression in real time, to regrow that hair? To activate dormant follicles?
These are tough questions.
Does this mean every teacher of manifestational, hermetic-like, kabbalistic/qabbalistic or pseudo-kabblaistic ideas are all peddling a bunch of useless nonsense?
That's the million dollar question when it comes to occultism isn't it? Why do we collect and read this crazy stuff that mainstream society thinks is nonsense?
It's like every occult book is a case study on some weird person who pieced together their thoughts that go outside the bounds of mainstream religion, science, and thought.
Personally, I research every author. I consider their background as a factor. But I have yet to find an author who has had a spotless history.
But also, I consider that maybe it's a situation of "those who can't do, teach."
Maybe they were great at explaining it, but not actually doing it. Is that plausible? I don't know. Is it possible? It could be.
Entering into Occultism is an exploration. There's a reason society didn't regard these books as "the best ones" or "The most sacred".
Some of them are maybe "the hidden". Some of them are also rejects. Occultism is also what is not accepted. What society did not accept. They include science, religion, thought, history, etc., which society disagreed with. That doesn't necessarily mean it's right or wrong. It just means it's outside the bounds of accepted.
I think Bardon's work is interesting. But no, it's not perfect. And he died before he could finish some of it. It's also probably not without flaws, regardless.
Every occult work I read, I take what I find valuable, and I leave the rest. That's with any book.
Because if you're looking for that supernatural author who wrote a perfectly Godly divine book with every single secret of the universe in it....
It doesn't exist. Every author was human (even if they say they were God, which some have).
So you have to consider the limitations of a book written by some guy. After all......every single occult work is just a book written by some guy. Even intricate grimoires were written by humans.
In my opinion, they hold value if you see value in it. It's up to you to decide if it's nonsense or not. But it can't necessarily be "proven" because it's not an exact science like engineering or medicine. It's up for a vast amount of interpretation.
Some can say Vitale is bald and fat, I'll say he's rich, happy and enjoys himself 
