Number of posts per day limits - a suggestion

[AshvinP]

You and AshvinP are obviously well versed in the resources for your approach. Most of us are not. For instance, capitalizing Thinking means nothing to me because I don't know what that means. There are other concepts that have, I think, special meaning within the broad system. Both you and he have complained many times about being misunderstood. I think you may be right in some cases but that would be normal for those not embedded in the full gamut of the approach. Suggesting people read PoF or some other important text so they'll understand is a big ask unless they can be convinced that somehow something important is to be had. In order to do that you or AshvinP may need to "dumb it down" to a level where those who are not embedded in the approach can decide if they want to put in the work. These could be short distilled texts or YouTube-like videos. Typically, I think, there are two ways metaphysical systems become mainstream or have a large following. One is to have prominent scholars or knowledgeable influencers recommend it. Another is that it goes viral because of word of mouth. Both are very difficult to achieve.

I am also posting here a part of Steiner's Introduction to his book Theosophy, as it is very relevant your comment above:

When in the autumn of 1813, Johann Gottlieb Fichte gave to the world as the ripe fruit of a life wholly devoted to the service of truth, his Introduction to the Science of Knowledge, he said at the very outset, “This doctrine presupposes an entirely new inner sense organ or instrument through which a new world is revealed having no existence for the ordinary man.” He then showed by a simile how incomprehensible this doctrine must be when judged by conception of the ordinary senses. “Think of a world of people born blind who, therefore, know only those objects and relations that exist through the sense of touch. Go among them, and speak to them of colors and the other relations that exist only through light and for the sense of sight. You will convey nothing to their minds, and this will be the more fortunate if they tell you so, for you will then quickly notice your mistake and, if unable to open their eyes, you will cease talking in vain . . . .”

Now those who speak about such things as Fichte does in this instance, often find themselves in the position of a normal man among those born blind. Yet these are things that relate to a man's true being and highest goal, and to believe it necessary “to cease talking in vain” would be to despair of humanity. We ought not to doubt for one moment the possibility of opening the eyes of every earnest person to these things. On this supposition all those have written and spoken who have felt within themselves that the inner sense-instrument had developed, thereby enabling them to know the true nature and being of man, which is generally hidden from the outer senses. Hence from the most ancient times such a hidden wisdom has been spoken of again and again. Those who have grasped some understanding of it feel just as sure of their possession as people with normal eyes feel sure of their ability to visualize color. For them this hidden wisdom requires no proof. They know also that this hidden wisdom requires no proof for anyone else to whom the “higher sense” has unfolded itself. They can speak to such a person as a traveler can speak about America to people who have themselves never seen that country but who can visualize it, for they would see all that he has seen were the opportunity to present itself to them.

It is not, however, only to researchers into the spiritual world that the observer of the supersensible has to speak. He must address his words to all men, because he has to give an account of things that concern all men. Indeed, he knows that without a knowledge of these things no one can, in the true sense of the word, be a human being. Thus, he speaks to all men because he knows there are different degrees of understanding for what he has to say. The feeling for truth and the power of understanding it are inherent in everyone, and he knows that even those who are still far from the moment in which they will acquire the ability to make their own spiritual research can bring a measure of understanding to meet him. He addresses himself first to this understanding that can flash forth in every healthy soul. He knows that in this understanding there is a force that must slowly lead to the higher degrees of knowledge. This feeling, which perhaps at first perceives nothing at all of what it is told, is itself the magician that opens the “eye of the spirit.” In darkness this feeling stirs. The soul sees nothing, but through this feeling it is seized by the power of truth. The truth then gradually draws nearer to the soul and opens the higher sense in it. In one person it may take a longer, in another a shorter time. Everyone, however, who has patience and endurance reaches this goal, for although not every physical eye can be operated on, every spiritual eye can be opened. When it will be opened is only a question of time.

[Steve Petermann]

I don't think that is the case with you at all, so I hope we can all continue a productive discussion from here.

My approach to metaphysical systems is pragmatic — do they promote the creation of love, beauty, and meaning? If so and are not harmful in some way, fine. But there's the rub. Do they have elements that are harmful? Obviously, for many of those here, philosophical materialism does have harmful elements and should be exposed for it. That does, however, not mean that non-materialistic metaphysical systems can't have harmful elements as well. That's a judgment call and why dialog with criticism is so important. Where they promote spiritual growth and its fruits, affirmations are in order. Where they don't, strong criticism is warranted and necessary as well. What I think is important is for all the cards to be on the table so people can make well-informed decisions that can have profound effects on their lives. Hopefully, all that can be done in good faith and with civility.

[AshvinP]

Becoming lost in the dream within a dream within a dream, as you say, implicitly assumes that at all levels we're the same feeble ego that confronts perceptions with its intellect and can never know their true sources. Once we step on the path of development, these layers are not isolated and indistinguishable dreams but now we live in hierarchy of Consciousness that works through its fractal levels, even to the strata where the spirit becomes lost in the fragments.

Seriously Eugene, if after all these explanations you still go around and avoid the core, it only means that you don't want to question the fort of the intellectual ego. You simply don't tolerate that there could be anything between your thoughts and the highest One Consciousness (which strangely, even though it's One, somehow can only know itself as irreconcilable groups with no chance of higher unity. Go figure how it even knows that it is One).

Now I'm really going to bed. Good night/day to everyone according to their meridian

OK, so, when you arrive a the highest level of the dream, you should be able to clearly see how the lower levels are manifested, including the physical dream, which means you should be able to experience how the sense perceptions in the physical dream-reality are generated exactly according to the Schrodinger equations. So, I asked you many times to explain in words understandable for us lower-level beings how exactly such manifestation happens.

Also, when you arrive at the "highest level", what makes you think that it is indeed the highest level and if some day you will not awaken into even higher level of the dream in which the "highest level" that you were just in is dreamt? May be you will simply awaken into an alien virtual reality simulation room and realize "oh, so I'm actually a Andromedian playing a virtual reality dream-game on a quantum computer?" And may be even that level is just another dream or another virtual reality run by even higher-level advanced civilization?

You can never be sure that all the content you are experiencing is not part of a dream or a virtual reality simulation or some level of reality manifested from some higher level. The only thing you can be sure that it is not part of the content of a dream is seeing the dream, that is because the content of a dream can not see itself.

Eugene,

Do you deny that the ancient Eastern mystics did not have abstract intellect like we have today? If so, how do you suppose they made any sense of their awakened experiences without that intellect? Seriously, the amount of power you attempt to bestow on the mere intellectual ego to comprehend spiritual reality is absolutely confounding even to me, someone who has not experienced such mystical states, since you are versed in the ancient mystical traditions. It can only be reasonably explained by the intellectual ego clinging to possession of that illusory power against all challengers. You are actually assuming the abstract Schrodinger equations govern the spiritual reality rather than the other way around. And then you are failing to understand the simple concept that there is no such thing as "just a dream" in isolation. Even this super low level "dream" of physical sense-world has a critical integral function in the Whole spiritual organism which the mere intellect cannot even begin to comprehend for itself, which really should be evident if we just take a look around at the aesthetics and subtle complexities of Nature when we go outside.

[ParadoxZone]

Ashvin,

No need to feel bad, honestly.

This thread is clarifying for me. It's already a lot calmer than other threads, and I'm getting a better sense of the frustration Cleric and you have been dealing with.

My main mode is via the intellect - which doesn't mean I'm particularly good using that mode. I'm seeing more clearly why that might be holding me back.

Having been granted the "intellectual permission" that Bernardo's endeavours bestow, it's time to push on and explore fully the notion of progression of spirit/consciousness. So I won't be commenting for a while, but might take you up on your offer to further clarify when I think I've made some progress.

On this thread, or another one if it gets moved, there are a couple of things that I hope are explored further. Firstly, I'm also a bit baffled by Eugene's reference to the Schrödinger equations. Secondly, and maybe more importantly, I'm intrigued by Steve's reference to the harm a particular approach might do - I have an inkling what this may be about and hope to see that aspect addressed.

Best wishes for now.

[Eugene I]

Eugene,

You are actually assuming the abstract Schrodinger equations govern the spiritual reality rather than the other way around. And then you are failing to understand the simple concept that there is no such thing as "just a dream" in isolation. Even this super low level "dream" of physical sense-world has a critical integral function in the Whole spiritual organism which the mere intellect cannot even begin to comprehend for itself, which really should be evident if we just take a look around at the aesthetics and subtle complexities of Nature when we go outside.

Right, so I'm not saying that spiritual reality behaves according to the Schrodinger equation, I'm only saying that, according to our experimental observations of physical sense perceptions, these perceptions (for some strange reason) always follow the Schrodinger equation. I have no idea why. Steve's theology proposes an interesting hypothesis about that which makes sense to me. But if the spiritual reality is the level where physical phenomena and sense perceptions arise from, then knowing the spiritual higher-level reality directly and experientially would automatically reveal how exactly the physical phenomena arise from the spiritual reality.

So now, since Cleric is claiming that he knows exactly how the higher level of spiritual reality manifests all lower level phenomena (which includes "physical" sense perceptions), I'm asking 101-th time a simple question: please explain to us what you experience on that level - how exactly the higher spiritual cognition manifests or gives rise to the sense perceptions and how it happens that they always follow the Schrodinger equation? If he can give us a plausible explanation of that, I then may be convinced that what he is experiencing has a relevance to reality, and believe or not, even start reading Steiner's books Otherwise, if he claims that he experientially knows the spiritual level of reality and sees how it gives rise to the lover sense-perceptional and physical level, but can not explain the simple fact that the sense perceptions always follow the Schrodinger equation, then I have all reasons to doubt that what he experiences has any relevance to reality and to suspect that it's just a play of his subconscious imagination.

I've been on the spiritual path for decades and saw so many gurus claiming that they know all sorts of the higher spiritual and ultimate truths and have divine revelations and direct experiences of them and all that quasi-spiritual mumbo-jumbo. Interesting that thier truths and teachings differ from each other substantially, but they employ a very similar tactics to deal with anyone who would question them. Instead of actually answering the questions and addressing the doubts, these gurus usually follow exactly the tactics that Ashvin and Cleric are employing, such as:
- The answers to your questions and the spiritual truths are beyond the intellect, you can only experience these truths spiritually, and if you don't, that is because you are spiritually under-developed or deficient. Become my student and I will lead you to the spiritual development level where you will be able to experience what I experience.
- It is your egoic mind that is asking these questions and having these doubts. Instead of asking these stupid questions, work with your ego, transcend your ego and then you will see that the questions will go away.
So, the fact that I'm seeing again the same tactics here is a red flag for me. I already developed a "fifth sense" to detect a presence of false gurus.

[AshvinP]

Eugene,

You are actually assuming the abstract Schrodinger equations govern the spiritual reality rather than the other way around. And then you are failing to understand the simple concept that there is no such thing as "just a dream" in isolation. Even this super low level "dream" of physical sense-world has a critical integral function in the Whole spiritual organism which the mere intellect cannot even begin to comprehend for itself, which really should be evident if we just take a look around at the aesthetics and subtle complexities of Nature when we go outside.

Right, so I'm not saying that spiritual reality behaves according to the Schrodinger equation, I'm only saying that, according to our experimental observations of physical sense perceptions, these perceptions (for some strange reason) always follow the Schrodinger equation. I have no idea why. Steve's theology proposes an interesting hypothesis about that which makes sense to me. But if the spiritual reality is the level where physical phenomena and sense perceptions arise from, then knowing the spiritual higher-level reality directly and experientially would automatically reveal how exactly the physical phenomena arise from the spiritual reality.

So now, since Cleric is claiming that he knows exactly how the higher level of spiritual reality manifests all lower level phenomena (which includes "physical" sense perceptions), I'm asking 101-th time a simple question: please explain to us what you experience on that level - how exactly the higher spiritual cognition manifests or gives rise to the sense perceptions and how it happens that they always follow the Schrodinger equation? If he can give us a plausible explanation of that, I then may be convinced that what he is experiencing has a relevance to reality, and believe or not, even start reading Steiner's books Otherwise, if he claims that he experientially knows the spiritual level of reality and sees how it gives rise to the lover sense-perceptional and physical level, but can not explain the simple fact that the sense perceptions always follow the Schrodinger equation, then I have all reasons to doubt that what he experiences has any relevance to reality and to suspect that it's just a play of his subconscious imagination.

I understand what you are saying but I am saying it is the intellect which asserts the bold part because it is modeling its own abstractions. Physical sense-perceptions which we measure and compare with one another by way of those measurements are also our own abstractions, which is really necessitated by any metaphysical idealist view, but certainly any phenomenology which deeply considers the givens of our experience. Cleric addressed this directly in most recent essay.


viewtopic.php?f=5&t=509

First we must always start from solid foundations, grounded in the given. Current science tries to grasp reality by creating an intellectual model of it and show the logical rules by which this model transforms in time. There are many different approaches which are deeply equivalent. For example, the Schrodinger equation models reality as a time-dependent wave function which must conform to certain restrictions. A Turing machine is another example of a state that evolves through time. Cellular automata are another approach. What is common between all these is that we build a certain mental picture of reality and then apply rules to transform that picture from 'frame to frame'. All these are founded on a common presupposition - it's assumed that reality exists 'out there' and we can build an intellectual replica of it. We can't afford such a presupposition if we want to stay firmly grounded in the given. The most we can say without going beyond the given facts is that we experience World Content entirely of conscious phenomena - colors, sounds, feelings, thoughts, etc. These are in continuous metamorphosis. So we are basically approaching the question in the same way as science but instead of imagining a real world 'out there' which our thoughts reflect, we take the immediate world of the metamorphosis of the World Content of consciousness. When we do this we are safe because we don't presuppose anything. Even if there are many deeper facts behind the appearances of conscious phenomena this doesn't change the given fact that we experience the continuous transformation of the conscious World Content.

I would add that, if we think about it, the very concept of "measurement" in this quantitative way is about isolating phenomenon in 'time' and comparing them, but there is nothing in our experience which is actually isolated in that way rather than fluidly metamorphosing from all previous states into new states which include all previous states. So true spiritual science is never going to be about quantitative measurements and equations of that sort - it only and always deals in fluid and evolving qualities of experience. Actually it seems the most simple integers are the ones which reveal the most qualitative meaning in this regard, such as threefold, sevenfold, twelvefold, etc.

[Eugene I]

I understand what you are saying but I am saying it is the intellect which asserts the bold part because it is modeling its own abstractions. Physical sense-perceptions which we measure and compare with one another by way of those measurements are also our own abstractions, which is really necessitated by any metaphysical idealist view, but certainly any phenomenology which deeply considers the givens of our experience. Cleric addressed this directly in most recent essay.

So, you are saying that all results of physical experiments showing systematic patterns of sense perceptions are simply not true and all are abstractions? For example, if we pass a white light through a prism, we will always see a rainbow. I'm asking: if you know the spiritual level of reality, you should be able to know/see how the sense perception of the rainbow always happens in this scenario (when white light is passed through a prism). But instead of giving me the answer, you are saying that our consistent observations of the pattern of rainbow is just an abstraction. So that is how spiritual science works, I get it: it works by eliminating all natural sciences altogether with all their "why" questions, because any natural science is just manipulating with abstractions. Excellent!

[AshvinP]

I understand what you are saying but I am saying it is the intellect which asserts the bold part because it is modeling its own abstractions. Physical sense-perceptions which we measure and compare with one another by way of those measurements are also our own abstractions, which is really necessitated by any metaphysical idealist view, but certainly any phenomenology which deeply considers the givens of our experience. Cleric addressed this directly in most recent essay.

So, you are saying that all results of physical experiments showing systematic patterns of sense perceptions are simply not true and all are abstractions? For example, if we pass a white light through a prism, we will always see a rainbow. I'm asking: if you know the spiritual level of reality, you should be able to know/see how the sense perception of the rainbow always happens in this scenario (when white light is passed through a prism). But instead of giving me the answer, you are saying that our consistent observations of the pattern of rainbow is just an abstraction. So that is how spiritual science works, excellent!

I edited to add this before you responded, which is relevant:

I would add that, if we think about it, the very concept of "measurement" in this quantitative way is about isolating phenomenon in 'time' and comparing them, but there is nothing in our experience which is actually isolated in that way rather than fluidly metamorphosing from all previous states into new states which include all previous states. So true spiritual science is never going to be about quantitative measurements and equations of that sort - it only and always deals in fluid and evolving qualities of experience. Actually it seems the most simple integers are the ones which reveal the most qualitative meaning in this regard, such as threefold, sevenfold, twelvefold, etc.

Your above comment really just does to show how desperate the intellect becomes when it senses it is losing relevance for spiritual truth. Yes, all spiritual traditions provide the image of ego-death (which is not other than sacrifice of the abstract intellect) which is necessary for higher comprehension. This is nothing new to anyone well-versed in that imagery, or should not be anything new. You need to accept the notion that all your quantitative abstract knowledge does not in and of itself explain anything we experience in the slightest, and is only useful to the extent it serves the qualitative principles derived from study of the Whole organism. And it's funny how you bring up example of white light differentiating into colors, because that is exactly what Goethe studied in a more spiritual scientific way, so there are definitely answers for how colors manifest in that way.

[Eugene I]

And it's funny how you bring up example of white light differentiating into colors, because that is exactly what Goethe studied in a more spiritual scientific way, so there are definitely answers for how colors manifest in that way.

Oh, please give me that answer. And also the answer to the question about how/why the sense phenomena always follow the Schrodinger equation. Please?

[AshvinP]

And it's funny how you bring up example of white light differentiating into colors, because that is exactly what Goethe studied in a more spiritual scientific way, so there are definitely answers for how colors manifest in that way.

Here is information on Goethe's approach. It will take a bit of reading and thoughtful effort, but is well worth it. Anyone who wants to read more can follow the link:


https://wn.rsarchive.org/Books/GA006/En ... 6_c08.html

Newton was the founder of this view which Goethe found to be prevailing among Nature investigators and which, indeed, still occupies the same position to-day. According to this view, white light, as it proceeds from the sun, is composed of colours. The colours arise because the constituent parts are separated out from the white light. If we allow sunlight to enter a dark room through a small round opening, and catch it on a white screen placed perpendicular to the direction of the instreaming light, we obtain a white image of the sun. If we place between the opening and the screen a glass prism through which the light streams, then the white circular image of the sun is changed. It appears as though distorted, drawn out lengthways, and coloured. This image is called the solar spectrum. If we place the prism so that the upper portions of light have to traverse a shorter path within the mass of glass than the lower, the coloured image is extended downwards. The upper edge of the image is red, the lower, violet; the red passes downwards into yellow, the violet upwards into blue; the central portion of the image is, generally speaking, white. Only when there is a certain distance between the screen and prism does the white in the centre vanish entirely; the entire image then appears coloured, from above downwards, in the following order: Red, Orange, Yellow, Green, Light Blue, Indigo, Violet. Newton and his followers conclude from this experiment that the colours are originally contained in the white light but intermingled with each other. They are separated from each other by the prism. They have the property of being deviated in varying degrees from their direction when passing through a transparent body, that is to say, of being refracted. The red light is refracted least, the violet most. They appear in the spectrum according to their degree of refrangibility. If we observe through a prism a narrow strip of paper on a black background this also appears deviated. It is at the same time broader and coloured at the edges. The upper edge appears violet, the lower red; the violet here also passes over into the blue and the red over into yellow; the middle is generally white. Only when there is a certain distance between the prism and the strip does this appear wholly in colours. Green again appears in the middle. Here also the white of the strip of paper is said to be resolved into its colour constituents. That all these colours appear only when there is a certain distance between the screen or strip of paper and the prism, whereas otherwise the centre is white, the Newtonians explain simply. They say: In the middle the more strongly refracted colours from the upper portion of the image coincide with those that are more weakly refracted from below, and blend to make white. The colours only appear at the edges because here into these portions of light that are more weakly refracted, no strongly refracted colours can fall from above, and into those portions that are more strongly refracted none of the more weakly refracted portions can fall from below.

This is the view from which Goethe could evolve nothing useful for his purpose. He had therefore to observe the phenomena himself. He went to Büttner in Jena who lent him the apparatus with which he could make the necessary experiments. He was occupied at the time with other work and was, at Büttner's request, about to return the apparatus. Before doing so, however, he took a prism in order to look through it at a white wall. He expected that it would appear in various degrees of colour, but it remained white. Colours only appeared at those places where the white contacted dark. The window-bars appeared in the most vivid colours. From these observations Goethe thought he had discovered that the Newtonian view was false, that colours are not contained in the white light. The boundary, the darkness, must have something to do with the origin of the colours. He continued the experiments. He observed white surfaces on black, black surfaces on white backgrounds. Gradually his own view was formed. A white disc on a black background appeared distorted on looking through the prism. Goethe thought that the upper parts of the disc extend over the adjacent black of the background, whereas this background extends over the lower parts of the disc. If one now looks through the prism one perceives the black background through the upper part of the disc as through a white veil. If one looks at the lower part of the disc it appears through the overlying darkness. Above, the light is spread over the dark; below, dark over light. The upper edge appears blue, the lower, yellow. The blue passes over into violet towards the black — the yellow into red below. If the prism is moved further from the disc the coloured edges spread out, the blue downwards, the yellow upwards. At a sufficient distance the yellow from below extends over the blue from above, and green arises from their overlapping in the middle. In confirmation of this view Goethe observed a black disc on a white ground through the prism. Now dark is spread over light above, light over dark below. Yellow appears above, blue below. As the edges are extended by placing the prism farther away from the disc, the lower blue, which gradually passes over into violet in the centre, spreads over the upper yellow and the yellow, as it extends, gradually takes on a reddish shade. The colour of peach-blossom arises in the middle. Goethe says to himself: what holds good for the white disc must also hold good for the black. “If the light is there resolved into colours here also the darkness must be regarded as being resolved into colours” (Confessions of the Author. Kürschner. Nat. Lit. Bd., 36.). Goethe now imparts his observations and the doubts which had grown out of them with regard to the Newtonian view to a Physicist of his acquaintance. The Physicist considered his doubts to be unfounded. He interpreted the coloured edges and the white in the centre, as well as its transition into green when the prism is removed further away from the object observed, according to Newton's view. Other Nature investigators whom Goethe approached did the same, and so he continued the observations in which he would have liked to have had assistance from trained specialists alone. He had a large prism of plate-glass constructed which he filled with pure water. He noticed that the glass prism whose cross-section is an equilateral triangle is, on account of the marked dispersion of the colours, often a hindrance to the observer; therefore he had his large prism constructed with the cross section of an isosceles triangle, the smallest angle of which was only 15 to 20 degrees. Goethe calls the experiments performed when the eye looks at an object through the prism, subjective. They present themselves to the eye but are not rooted in the outer world. He wants to add to these objective experiments. To this end he made use of the water-prism. The light shines through a prism and the colour-image is caught on a screen behind the prism. Goethe now caused the sunlight to pass through the openings in cut pasteboard. In this way he obtained an illuminated space bounded by darkness. This circumscribed beam of light passes through the prism and is refracted by this from its original direction. If one places a screen before the beam of light issuing from the prism, there arises on it an image which is, generally speaking, coloured at the edges above and below. If the prism is placed with the narrow end below, the upper edge of the image is coloured blue and the lower edge yellow. The blue passes over towards the dark space into violet, and towards the light centre into light blue; the yellow passes over towards the darkness into red. In this phenomenon, too, Goethe derived the appearance of colours from the boundary. Above, the clear light-beams radiate into the dark space; they illumine a darkness which thereby appears blue. Below, the dark space radiates into the light-beams; it darkens the light and makes it appear yellow. When the screen is moved further from the prism the coloured edges get broader, the yellow approaches the blue. Through the streaming of the blue into the yellow, when there is a sufficient distance between the screen and the prism, green appears in the middle of the image. Goethe made the instreaming of the light into the dark and of the dark into the light perceptible by agitating a cloud of fine white dust which he produced from fine, dry hair-powder along the line by which the light-beam passes through the dark space. “The more or less coloured phenomenon will now be caught up by the white atoms and presented in its whole length and breadth to the eye of the spectator” (Farbenlehre, Didactic Part., para. 326.). Goethe found that the view he had acquired of the subjective phenomena was confirmed by the objective phenomena. Colours are produced by the working together of light and darkness. The prism only serves to move light and darkness over each other.