The Nature of the sensory world or do we really *know* the ultimate ground of reality?

[AshvinP]

I must admit that the Jupiter, Venus, Vulcan, Sun, Moon conditions terms sit uncomfortably with me. They sounds so....small. We exist in a very large universe!

They are as small as our thoughts are. In our abstract mind God is small too - it's just a concept, a thought-marble.

All efforts here, including on the latest Meditation thread, are to point towards the way our inner flow of becoming has to be transformed if we are to gain consciousness not simply of the small concepts but of the vast reality within which our inner world is embedded.

Does the discomfort manifest because the described Macrocosmic convolutions don't seem correct or they are not grandiose enough? Or because we can't escape seeing them only as mere small concepts without any conceivable way of finding the realities? Or maybe because we believe that the 'non dual state' already gives us the experience of the true vastness and from that perspective, the realities of the convolutions are encompassed as small optional details?

It's interesting that - with regards to the planets and their fullness of meaning - Anthony's concerns match Eugene's:

Steiner's works are overloaded with occultism and with occultic statements too far from being scientifically verifiable. Take for example his astrological views or statements like "Buddha now lives on Mars" (see below) etc. To me that is not science

And I heard this same concern expressed by others as well: how Steiner's characterization of Mars, for example, and its "improbable inhabitants" is the one reason to dismiss "occultic" and "highly unreasonable" spiritual science.


There must be something about the meaning of the spiritual planets in particular that stands in fully orthogonal relation to the mainstream present-day sense of soundness and plausibility.

Federica,

A big part of the problem, as Cleric also indicated, is when the spiritual reality is taken to be a 1:1 corresponding image with physical reality as we know the latter. That is why spatial properties of 'smallness' and 'largeness' are used to measure the vastness and richness of the inner spiritual realities of the Spheres, which of course can only be associated with living be-ings. As we know, the polar relation of the spiritual to physical indicates that what is normally considered 'small' in spatial terms is actually vast in its spiritual reality. "What shall we say the kingdom of God is like, or what parable shall we use to describe it? It is like a mustard seed, which is the smallest of all seeds on earth. Yet when planted, it grows and becomes the largest of all garden plants, with such big branches that the birds can perch in its shade.”

That is why we can realistically speak of the human being as a microcosm of the Macrocosm. It is unfortunate that these simple errors block understanding to otherwise profound realities. The Sphere of Mars, for ex., is associated with the lotus flower situated in the human larynx, which is of course the organ of our speech. That is not the only influence working into our soul-life from Mars, but it is a critical one to gain living knowledge of. These are the influences which shape the riverbed of our destiny in any given incarnation and across multiple incarnations. We can only arrive at genuine Self-knowledge and start consciously working into the stream of our future becoming if we gradually unveil these Cosmic influences which work through the harmonies of the Spheres in relation to the Earth. 

Much of the obfuscation of these influences culminated when the Copernican system, which is practically synonymous with abstract 3rd person perspective of the Cosmos, won out over the Tychonic system which still retained something of the ancient Star-Wisdom. Our modern abstract thinking is entirely governed by the Copernican view and any paradigm which tries to reintegrate the Star-Wisdom in a living way is shunned as scientifically unsound. It's interesting that Eugene, for ex., is all about the vast Universe being populated by spiritual beings that secular science knows nothing of, but only cries foul when this reality is taken from the realm of speculative abstraction into that of living knowledge. That is the real issue here. When we bring these realities into the sphere of living knowledge, it becomes clear how they are intimately connected with the progressive Earth-human evolution and we lose the responsibility-free fantasy of wandering into completely separate domains of evolution apart from the Earth. Modern humanity should honestly confront this inner resistance to living knowledge of the Cosmos if it is to continue making progress towards spiritual freedom. 

[Anthony66]

They are as small as our thoughts are. In our abstract mind God is small too - it's just a concept, a thought-marble.

All efforts here, including on the latest Meditation thread, are to point towards the way our inner flow of becoming has to be transformed if we are to gain consciousness not simply of the small concepts but of the vast reality within which our inner world is embedded.

Does the discomfort manifest because the described Macrocosmic convolutions don't seem correct or they are not grandiose enough? Or because we can't escape seeing them only as mere small concepts without any conceivable way of finding the realities? Or maybe because we believe that the 'non dual state' already gives us the experience of the true vastness and from that perspective, the realities of the convolutions are encompassed as small optional details?


These are vast topics, that have to be addressed from many different angles. I'll refrain from writing more at this time. Just regarding the homo species, it would be appropriate not to imagine that evolution of man has gone through these forms but rather that the forms were separated from the evolving still more ethereal human form. These separated forms rigidified prematurely and died off. So the progressing human line has gone through the level of consciousness comparable to that of the homo species but in a more pliable form.

It's definitely the lack of grandiosity. I have the same reaction with mention of the "sun being" (whatever that is). It sounds so earthly and pagan in comparison to the glorious descriptions of deity developed by the orthodox Christian theologians.

This sounds like: "If only Steiner and his advocates were a little better at designer branding, we could feel much more grand about wearing their custom symbols"....

There is an element of that. There is much about the outer apparel of anthroposophy that is a turn off for many. My wife (PhD educated) had one read and that was enough.

[Federica]

It's definitely the lack of grandiosity. I have the same reaction with mention of the "sun being" (whatever that is). It sounds so earthly and pagan in comparison to the glorious descriptions of deity developed by the orthodox Christian theologians.

This sounds like: "If only Steiner and his advocates were a little better at designer branding, we could feel much more grand about wearing their custom symbols"....

There is an element of that. There is much about the outer apparel of anthroposophy that is a turn off for many. My wife (PhD educated) had one read and that was enough.

Well, Anthony, thanks for your honesty. But based on this recognition, what else could be discerned from this "element", once it is objectively and dispassionately observed, or maybe even meditated...

[Cleric K]

There is an element of that. There is much about the outer apparel of anthroposophy that is a turn off for many. My wife (PhD educated) had one read and that was enough.

So pimped up SS would get more traction?



Joke aside, I hope it is clear that no matter how shiny our words are, if they don't lead us to reality we'll remain with nothing but idols adorning our soul's interior. Let's also remember the conditions in which the Savior was born. There's infinite wisdom in this. There were people back then and today who wouldn't believe that a Divinity could be born anywhere else but in an Earthly palace with golden gates and walls of precious stone. It is one of the most important lessons in our human education about inner content triumphing over outer shells.

We're in much the same situation today because in our age the Christ is born in the human souls. The Spirit needs clear and precise concepts from whence knowledge of reality can begin to grow. Otherwise it will know only bloated vanity.

[Anthony66]

There is no need to be defensive whenever a negative observation is made pertaining to SS. Yes it has a branding problem. Yes it sounds weird at times. Yes, it appears to give insufficient regard to non-dual experience. Yes, it is hard to understand. Take it on board and continue your fine work distilling its teachings for us.

[Stranger]

There is no need to be defensive whenever a negative observation is made pertaining to SS. Yes it has a branding problem. Yes it sounds weird at times. Yes, it appears to give insufficient regard to non-dual experience. Yes, it is hard to understand. Take it on board and continue your fine work distilling its teachings for us.

Right, and also keeping in mind that Steiner's anthroposophy is not the only possible approach to SS, there are other approaches like Martinus and possibly others.

[Federica]

There is no need to be defensive whenever a negative observation is made pertaining to SS. Yes it has a branding problem. Yes it sounds weird at times. Yes, it appears to give insufficient regard to non-dual experience. Yes, it is hard to understand. Take it on board and continue your fine work distilling its teachings for us.

Could the issue be that of a reverse branding problem...

[AshvinP]

There is no need to be defensive whenever a negative observation is made pertaining to SS. Yes it has a branding problem. Yes it sounds weird at times. Yes, it appears to give insufficient regard to non-dual experience. Yes, it is hard to understand. Take it on board and continue your fine work distilling its teachings for us.

Anthony,

What if its teachings, like that of any genuine esoteric stream, can only be understood if we begin transforming our inner disposition to give birth to the Spirit within? Are you open to the possibility that what you view as 'defensive' is simply a constructive offering, based on careful observation over many months, to start working on those inner qualities in relation to the seeking of spiritual knowledge? For ex., do you see the value in the eightfold exercises which were shared on the other thread? These two in particular are relevant here:

(1) To pay attention to one's ideas.

To think only significant thoughts. To learn little by little to separate in one's thoughts the essential from the nonessential, the eternal from the transitory, truth from mere opinion.

In listening to the talk of one's fellow-men, to try and become quite still inwardly, foregoing all assent, and still more all unfavourable judgments (criticism, rejection), even in one's thoughts and feelings.

This may be called: `RIGHT OPINION'.

(2) To determine on even the most insignificant matter only after fully reasoned deliberation. All unthinking behaviour, all meaningless actions, should be kept far away from the soul. One should always have well- weighed reasons for everything. And one should definitely abstain from doing anything for which there is no significant reason.

Once one is convinced of the rightness of a decision, one must hold fast to it, with inner steadfastness.

This may be called: `RIGHT JUDGMENT' having been formed independently of sympathies and antipathies.

Are we willing to actually take a hard look at ourselves, our seeking for spiritual knowlege, and assess to what extent we indulge in criticism based only on superficial outer appearances or on our personal sympathies and antipathies? Again, we don't bring these things up arbitrarily to make it difficult. These aren't only secondary, tangential considerations. Perhaps the deeper arcana of body, soul, and spirit will only open to our inner senses when we stop keeping the inner realities at a safe distance to analyze and start making their pursuit a transformative way of life.

[Federica]

Federica,

A big part of the problem, as Cleric also indicated, is when the spiritual reality is taken to be a 1:1 corresponding image with physical reality as we know the latter. That is why spatial properties of 'smallness' and 'largeness' are used to measure the vastness and richness of the inner spiritual realities of the Spheres, which of course can only be associated with living be-ings. As we know, the polar relation of the spiritual to physical indicates that what is normally considered 'small' in spatial terms is actually vast in its spiritual reality. "What shall we say the kingdom of God is like, or what parable shall we use to describe it? It is like a mustard seed, which is the smallest of all seeds on earth. Yet when planted, it grows and becomes the largest of all garden plants, with such big branches that the birds can perch in its shade.”

That is why we can realistically speak of the human being as a microcosm of the Macrocosm. It is unfortunate that these simple errors block understanding to otherwise profound realities. The Sphere of Mars, for ex., is associated with the lotus flower situated in the human larynx, which is of course the organ of our speech. That is not the only influence working into our soul-life from Mars, but it is a critical one to gain living knowledge of. These are the influences which shape the riverbed of our destiny in any given incarnation and across multiple incarnations. We can only arrive at genuine Self-knowledge and start consciously working into the stream of our future becoming if we gradually unveil these Cosmic influences which work through the harmonies of the Spheres in relation to the Earth. 

Much of the obfuscation of these influences culminated when the Copernican system, which is practically synonymous with abstract 3rd person perspective of the Cosmos, won out over the Tychonic system which still retained something of the ancient Star-Wisdom. Our modern abstract thinking is entirely governed by the Copernican view and any paradigm which tries to reintegrate the Star-Wisdom in a living way is shunned as scientifically unsound. It's interesting that Eugene, for ex., is all about the vast Universe being populated by spiritual beings that secular science knows nothing of, but only cries foul when this reality is taken from the realm of speculative abstraction into that of living knowledge. That is the real issue here. When we bring these realities into the sphere of living knowledge, it becomes clear how they are intimately connected with the progressive Earth-human evolution and we lose the responsibility-free fantasy of wandering into completely separate domains of evolution apart from the Earth. Modern humanity should honestly confront this inner resistance to living knowledge of the Cosmos if it is to continue making progress towards spiritual freedom. 

Much clarifying points, Ashvin, thanks.
Now with the latest, prodigious admissions that SS is resisted also because it has a... "branding problem", the paradox of the non-dual perspective seems to have reached new heights of incongruity
On the one hand, as you say, the domains of abstract, aseptified mental representation are kept dual, separate from their intrinsic connection with matter, and now at the same time, and on top of that, that same material pole that is vehemently rejected on one side, is claimed back as "branding" on the other. There's this unashamed demand for grand apparel that one should "take onboard". Anthony, sorry but... are you serious?

There is no need to be defensive whenever a negative observation is made pertaining to SS. Yes it has a branding problem. Yes it sounds weird at times. Yes, it appears to give insufficient regard to non-dual experience. Yes, it is hard to understand. Take it on board and continue your fine work distilling its teachings for us.

Right, and also keeping in mind that Steiner's anthroposophy is not the only possible approach to SS

Eugene, I was just about to ask you about your position on "the branding problem" of SS. I am stunned. How do you make the branding problem of SS fit the rest of your non-dual statements? What reasons other than sectarian, block-positioning against SS can explain this?


Mike, and other non-dualists in the audience, I am curious: do you also subscribe to the "branding problem" of Spiritual Science?

[Stranger]

Eugene, I was just about to ask you about your position on "the branding problem" of SS. I am stunned. How do you make the branding problem of SS fit the rest of your non-dual statements? What reasons other than sectarian, block-positioning against SS can explain this?

"Branding problem" seems to be too vague of a statement, I don't see it that way. IMO Steiner's version of SS have these particular issues:
- Insufficient regard to non-dual experience.
- Hard to understand for an average human.
- Too much emphasis and stretch into the occultic content
- The representation of Steiner's version of SS on this forum has a significant skew towards defensive sectarianism

And as I said in another thread, Martinus version of SS does not have these issues.