Lou Gold wrote: ↑Sat Sep 03, 2022 10:17 pm
Thank you, Federica, for sincerely being at your provocative best.
For the record, I have never denied
"the possibility of there being precise and lawful ways in which the inner radiates outwards." The fact I see many ways does not negate this. My response to Ashvin was not a denial that Spiritual Science is in my focus (how could it not since I'm in this conversation?). But it's not my priority or emphasis now. I do not know what visions dance in your mind about our Barquinha (Little Boat) communion with Francis of Assisi but they are surely not Disney-like jaunts with cute animals or a blissful joyous adventures on a cruise ship. The spiritual vision is better described as
São Francisco das Chagas in Portuguese or Saint Francis of the Wounds (Stigmata) in English. I presented the painting of Caravaggio in order to convey this seriousness. I do agree that this is not some kind of free fall or randomized evolution. It entails a moral responsibility to carry well one's changes into our world.
You and Ashvin are quite correct in picking up a very strong child energy or vibe from me. That amazing inner child has many times offered the key for me to unlock the doors of perception and move into greater responsibilities. The times I neglected that child in favor of seriousness were disastrous for me, once driving me close to suicide. Holding him close in my awareness is part of my work. I'm not embarrassed that he likes to play and helps me offer a bit of hope and happiness into our terribly troubled world.
However, you have convinced me that plunging more deeply and revealing more in this forum context is not really appropriate for me at this time. I hope you can appreciate that I too have work to do. Being a happy person is not always an easy task.
Lou,
I cannot see far enough to understand the reasons why you are inhabited by such a tenacious, obstinate, intolerant (yes, the adjective you reject the most is the most fitting here) clinging to the both/and multidirectionality of paths. Because of this inability of mine, I am afraid this is not going to be of as much help to you, as I am sure a wiser, more skillful reply could be. I regret that. I am still writing, driven by the intention and hope that something, maybe even not fully intentionally on my part, a speck of this, a word, can resonate on your side in some useful way. As I have seen, this is possible for you in principle. So I hope this can somehow encourage you not to stack yet another evocative-provocative card on top of your bonanza of approaches, but to an aware flash, a wide glance at the bonanza itself, at
the loot itself. Lou, please take a step back and look at the loot you have amassed. As you do that, don’t allow your attention to get lost in the enchanting details of each item the loot consists of. That’s why a step back is necessary, to loosen the sharp focus on the beauty of the stunning gems and the call of the radiant jewels. It is possible to look at the loot itself, and to refrain from engaging in the
mental images of the wealth of serious contents the loot consists of. It’s not a contemplation. A contemplation would inevitably drag you and lock you inside the contents, in pictures. It is the idea of loot/treasure that I am submitting to your attention. Can you please consider it? Do you find anything sensitive there?
Your current clinging to the bonanza of paths is intolerant, because what makes you interested in each path is first and foremost its ability to conveniently fit into your game of cards. Only secondarily, only as an element within your scheme, are you interested in the essence of each path. As an eight of diamonds acquires a specific significance in a given card game, which is determined by the game and not by the card itself, in the exact same way you are not as much interested in the significance of each path in themselves as you are in the significance of your game,
of having a game, having a wealth of gems that you can watch over, and keep in constant sight. The loot requires a bonanza of gems/cards, and forces its rule on each of them, even to the point of overriding, or at least minimizing, perhaps trivializing, their original meaning.
The only sense in which you are possibly not denying “the possibility of there being precise and lawful ways in which the inner radiates outwards”, is precisely this sense I have just described. You are indeed not eliminating the intuitive thinking path from your horizon the way many members of this forum do. Why would you, when it can be made into a new card to stock your game/treasure? So you
highjack it into your game. Once you have acquired the card, the most of the work is done, you don’t have to really dive into its meaning and you can call the whole acquisition process inclusive, or both/and. And you can finish off your labor with a soft, unifying coat of gratitude. In any other substantial sense, of course you are negating spiritual science. If you were admitting, in any positive sense, the possibility of there being a reality of ideas that can be known and that we are a part of, you would want to explore it, and know it! But you don’t want to know. Not as much as you want to ‘inclusively accumulate’ one more card to your existing treasure. The visual aspects of this process are paramount to you. That’s why I am challenging you to not contemplate anything, but to go to the idea behind the pictures, instead.
This highjacking modus you have also applied at the simple level of this conversation. You have hijacked my words into the provocative-evocative inspiration material that I explicitly told you they were not. You have done this both conceptually and even physically, when you have started bold-quoting the whole post content. Something similar happened a few weeks ago on the side of the whirlpool thread. There again, you have not been interested in understanding the meaning I was intending to put in the words, as much as you have been in how you could use that
output and make it into a triggering addition to your game. You are interested in isolating outputs, and accruing them, adding them to the loot!
By keeping yourself busy with this outspoken opening to all serious paths, you are in fact precluding for yourself the possibility to deeply
connect with any of them. You remain at the brink of their symbolic, visual beauty. You look at your eight of diamonds and are pleased with how well it harmonizes within the game. Because you feel compelled, for some reason I ignore, to keep a worried eye on the game, on the loot, you can’t possibly look at cards for what they really are. You want to be inclusive, you want to offer a bit of hope and happiness to yourself and to the world, still you keep yourself separated from the full engagement that would facilitate that. For that to happen, you have to relinquish the hold on the treasured loot. Please, consider this idea, and find the true obstacle - which I don't know what it is - that is preventing you from committing to your one path.