Intuition of the material world

[Federica]

Good question. I hope that those who post remember that old adage: “It takes few words to speak the truth.”

Lorenzo, I am afraid you are under the influence of - as Steiner would say - "the demon who loves the easy path".
You will admit it, it's quite convenient to rest on that old adage. Then it's fine to live from day to day and let life flow through us. Then we don't need to think too hard.

Don't you sometimes have the sense that we might have been given this opportunity of life on Earth in order to work with effort to discover the truth, rather than to be happy with few evocative words and call it a good life?

The enjoyment of a cup of coffee or a sunset is as easy as falling off a log, and apparently, so did Jesus think of his path.
To make any kind of spiritual progress, or to understand spiritual progress, should not require rigorous philosophical thinking, or intuitions outside of one's daily experience. It should be explainable to a child.
Steiner, Cleric and Ashwin use flowery fancy phrases to create the false impression that spiritual progress has a steep entry, and that spiritual progress requires skills beyond the authentic inclinations of the mind and heart. As I've suggested in earlier threads - Steiner (PoF) is about creating a perceived need for High Priests.

I get your position, Lorenzo. Yes, Steiner, Cleric and Ashvin use elaborate language, and it may be said that the look of those written pages is "flowery". But when you say that the message enclosed in those words is for an elite, that it is exclusive, that’s not true. It is a steep entry, yes, it's not easy, this is true.

However, it is accessible to every normal person on this Earth - if they put in the effort. This is the only differentiator. You are right, it is a steep entry. But it’s steep in the same way that the entry in adult life is steep, very often. Nonetheless adulthood it’s accessible to everyone, right?

Man has evolved beyond childhood now, and so, spiritual awakening is not anymore explainable to a child. Because if it were possible to explain the highest goal of human existence to a child, then what would be the purpose of becoming an adult?

[Lou Gold]

Here's something I've been playing with. I won't go into explanations now but just as something to contemplate (maybe in the sense Lou suggests )

https://www.shadertoy.com/view/MfX3Df

Perhaps an interesting trinitarian view? It's fun to play with.

[Lou Gold]

Lorenzo, I am afraid you are under the influence of - as Steiner would say - "the demon who loves the easy path".
You will admit it, it's quite convenient to rest on that old adage. Then it's fine to live from day to day and let life flow through us. Then we don't need to think too hard.

Don't you sometimes have the sense that we might have been given this opportunity of life on Earth in order to work with effort to discover the truth, rather than to be happy with few evocative words and call it a good life?

The enjoyment of a cup of coffee or a sunset is as easy as falling off a log, and apparently, so did Jesus think of his path.
To make any kind of spiritual progress, or to understand spiritual progress, should not require rigorous philosophical thinking, or intuitions outside of one's daily experience. It should be explainable to a child.
Steiner, Cleric and Ashwin use flowery fancy phrases to create the false impression that spiritual progress has a steep entry, and that spiritual progress requires skills beyond the authentic inclinations of the mind and heart. As I've suggested in earlier threads - Steiner (PoF) is about creating a perceived need for High Priests.

I get your position, Lorenzo. Yes, Steiner, Cleric and Ashvin use elaborate language, and it may be said that the look of those written pages is "flowery". But when you say that the message enclosed in those words is for an elite, that it is exclusive, that’s not true. It is a steep entry, yes, it's not easy, this is true.

However, it is accessible to every normal person on this Earth - if they put in the effort. This is the only differentiator. You are right, it is a steep entry. But it’s steep in the same way that the entry in adult life is steep, very often. Nonetheless adulthood it’s accessible to everyone, right?

Man has evolved beyond childhood now, and so, spiritual awakening is not anymore explainable to a child. Because if it were possible to explain the highest goal of human existence to a child, then what would be the purpose of becoming an adult?

Then he answered, “... Verily I say unto you, except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 18:3-4).

[Cleric K]

The enjoyment of a cup of coffee or a sunset is as easy as falling off a log, and apparently, so did Jesus think of his path.
To make any kind of spiritual progress, or to understand spiritual progress, should not require rigorous philosophical thinking, or intuitions outside of one's daily experience. It should be explainable to a child.
Steiner, Cleric and Ashwin use flowery fancy phrases to create the false impression that spiritual progress has a steep entry, and that spiritual progress requires skills beyond the authentic inclinations of the mind and heart. As I've suggested in earlier threads - Steiner (PoF) is about creating a perceived need for High Priests.

Lorenzo, maybe you can simply offer to Guney your simple few-words child-level explanation of how to understand the nature of the physical world.

[AshvinP]

Here's something I've been playing with. I won't go into explanations now but just as something to contemplate (maybe in the sense Lou suggests )

https://www.shadertoy.com/view/MfX3Df

This is great and very helpful, Cleric, thanks!

It's amazing how a simple animation like this can speak volumes when we have worked our way to the proper intuitions of our first-person spiritual existence.

Without that prior effort, however, it's just a "flowery" set of pictures

[Federica]

The enjoyment of a cup of coffee or a sunset is as easy as falling off a log, and apparently, so did Jesus think of his path.
To make any kind of spiritual progress, or to understand spiritual progress, should not require rigorous philosophical thinking, or intuitions outside of one's daily experience. It should be explainable to a child.
Steiner, Cleric and Ashwin use flowery fancy phrases to create the false impression that spiritual progress has a steep entry, and that spiritual progress requires skills beyond the authentic inclinations of the mind and heart. As I've suggested in earlier threads - Steiner (PoF) is about creating a perceived need for High Priests.

I get your position, Lorenzo. Yes, Steiner, Cleric and Ashvin use elaborate language, and it may be said that the look of those written pages is "flowery". But when you say that the message enclosed in those words is for an elite, that it is exclusive, that’s not true. It is a steep entry, yes, it's not easy, this is true.

However, it is accessible to every normal person on this Earth - if they put in the effort. This is the only differentiator. You are right, it is a steep entry. But it’s steep in the same way that the entry in adult life is steep, very often. Nonetheless adulthood it’s accessible to everyone, right?

Man has evolved beyond childhood now, and so, spiritual awakening is not anymore explainable to a child. Because if it were possible to explain the highest goal of human existence to a child, then what would be the purpose of becoming an adult?

Then he answered, “... Verily I say unto you, except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 18:3-4).

Yes, the humility and closeness to the spiritual world children have not yet lost are good to remain connected with, and bring into adulthood, or rediscover then. But the self only can incarnate in a thinking human, with child-like humility.

[Lou Gold]

I get your position, Lorenzo. Yes, Steiner, Cleric and Ashvin use elaborate language, and it may be said that the look of those written pages is "flowery". But when you say that the message enclosed in those words is for an elite, that it is exclusive, that’s not true. It is a steep entry, yes, it's not easy, this is true.

However, it is accessible to every normal person on this Earth - if they put in the effort. This is the only differentiator. You are right, it is a steep entry. But it’s steep in the same way that the entry in adult life is steep, very often. Nonetheless adulthood it’s accessible to everyone, right?

Man has evolved beyond childhood now, and so, spiritual awakening is not anymore explainable to a child. Because if it were possible to explain the highest goal of human existence to a child, then what would be the purpose of becoming an adult?

Then he answered, “... Verily I say unto you, except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 18:3-4).

Yes, the humility and closeness to the spiritual world children have not yet lost are good to remain connected with, and bring into adulthood, or rediscover then. But the self only can incarnate in a thinking human, with child-like humility.

Can the self incarnate in a feeling human?

My sense is that humans are converted by feeling something like love. Then we start thinking about performing and maintaining that love. At least that's how it seems to work for me.

[Federica]

Then he answered, “... Verily I say unto you, except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 18:3-4).

Yes, the humility and closeness to the spiritual world children have not yet lost are good to remain connected with, and bring into adulthood, or rediscover then. But the self only can incarnate in a thinking human, with child-like humility.

Can the self incarnate in a feeling human?

My sense is that humans are converted by feeling something like love. Then we start thinking about performing and maintaining that love. At least that's how it seems to work for me.

No it can't, since consciousness is only half awake, half in control, in feeling.
And feeling as perception - like in the picture: "feeling something like love" - is a subset in thinking.

[lorenzop]

The enjoyment of a cup of coffee or a sunset is as easy as falling off a log, and apparently, so did Jesus think of his path.
To make any kind of spiritual progress, or to understand spiritual progress, should not require rigorous philosophical thinking, or intuitions outside of one's daily experience. It should be explainable to a child.
Steiner, Cleric and Ashwin use flowery fancy phrases to create the false impression that spiritual progress has a steep entry, and that spiritual progress requires skills beyond the authentic inclinations of the mind and heart. As I've suggested in earlier threads - Steiner (PoF) is about creating a perceived need for High Priests.

Lorenzo, maybe you can simply offer to Guney your simple few-words child-level explanation of how to understand the nature of the physical world.

Guney had specifically asked re an Ss explanation - which I cannot provide - and it appears, no one can provide an explanation using ordinary language.
I'm under the opinion that an "understand the nature of the physical world" is a red herring. There is no true single explanation of reality, there are only relative individual\species specific explanations. Knowledge of the world is based in consciousness.

[Lou Gold]

Can the self incarnate in a feeling human?

My sense is that humans are converted by feeling something like love. Then we start thinking about performing and maintaining that love. At least that's how it seems to work for me.

No it can't, since consciousness is only half awake, half in control, in feeling.
And feeling as perception - like in the picture: "feeling something like love" - is a subset in thinking.

Consciousness or awareness is half awake?

Are you simply stating a truism like "the self depends on self-consciousness"?