Meditation

[AshvinP]

...

Ashvin, I find your comments here quite eloquent, though maybe not in the exact way you intended them. This discussion may seem to have ended up in a wanting impasse at this point, but it's been relevant for me. I'm grateful to you for it, and to the beings for whom my soul has no secrets. Hopefully it hasn't been a entirely vain waste of time for you, in some way.

Sure, Federica, nothing is wasted when we try to remain centered and present in our activity. Simply finding new ways to express my intuitions of existence is an enormously helpful and rewarding experience, even if they come out as grunts rather than poetry most of the time. And it's likewise easy to find value from the posts of others generated by the discussion. It's not as if I feel what you are expressing is 100% off the mark - in fact, most of what you express intuitively resonates with me immediately, or strokes my etheric body as Steiner may say , because I am also traversing the same idea-space. I simply focus on the parts where it seems further harmonization is needed. So I am grateful for your continued thoughtful engagement as well.

[Federica]

...

Ashvin, I find your comments here quite eloquent, though maybe not in the exact way you intended them. This discussion may seem to have ended up in a wanting impasse at this point, but it's been relevant for me. I'm grateful to you for it, and to the beings for whom my soul has no secrets. Hopefully it hasn't been a entirely vain waste of time for you, in some way.

Sure, Federica, nothing is wasted when we try to remain centered and present in our activity. Simply finding new ways to express my intuitions of existence is an enormously helpful and rewarding experience, even if they come out as grunts rather than poetry most of the time. And it's likewise easy to find value from the posts of others generated by the discussion. It's not as if I feel what you are expressing is 100% off the mark - in fact, most of what you express intuitively resonates with me immediately, or strokes my etheric body as Steiner may say , because I am also traversing the same idea-space. I simply focus on the parts where it seems further harmonization is needed. So I am grateful for your continued thoughtful engagement as well.

It’s interesting, I had thought about quoting that Steiner characterization as well. I think a contradiction many need to work with and loosen - and I am definitely one of them - is that we seek that “stroking effect” of chatting with others, however, we often end up talking primarily to and for ourselves. And sacrificing that sort of vanity - that is transforming it into selfless action - is demanding, including when it appears surely enough like the right thing to do.

[AshvinP]

Ashvin, I find your comments here quite eloquent, though maybe not in the exact way you intended them. This discussion may seem to have ended up in a wanting impasse at this point, but it's been relevant for me. I'm grateful to you for it, and to the beings for whom my soul has no secrets. Hopefully it hasn't been a entirely vain waste of time for you, in some way.

Sure, Federica, nothing is wasted when we try to remain centered and present in our activity. Simply finding new ways to express my intuitions of existence is an enormously helpful and rewarding experience, even if they come out as grunts rather than poetry most of the time. And it's likewise easy to find value from the posts of others generated by the discussion. It's not as if I feel what you are expressing is 100% off the mark - in fact, most of what you express intuitively resonates with me immediately, or strokes my etheric body as Steiner may say , because I am also traversing the same idea-space. I simply focus on the parts where it seems further harmonization is needed. So I am grateful for your continued thoughtful engagement as well.

It’s interesting, I had thought about quoting that Steiner characterization as well. I think a contradiction many need to work with and loosen - and I am definitely one of them - is that we seek that “stroking effect” of chatting with others, however, we often end up talking primarily to and for ourselves. And sacrificing that sort of vanity - that is transforming it into selfless action - is demanding, including when it appears surely enough like the right thing to do.

I agree, and we are all on a gradient of vanity and selfishness, hopefully working toward more active listening and speech for the sake of mutual support and understanding. When I reflect on my Discord experiences, however, I am reminded of how bad things can truly get, and how we are making a lot more progress in these forum discussions.

I call it the 'don't ruin my fun' effect. People literally ask questions with the hope they won't get a genuine answer, only a nod of agreement, a reformulation of the question, or a trivial response that allows a chance to show off some knowledge and continue speculating. When a more involved answer is offered, there is either deafening silence or a slight response tinged with the palpable sense of, 'you are ruining my fun!' The more the answer speaks directly to the question, the more the fun is ruined. We have seen some of that here as well ('Could there be NHIs living under the Earth'?) This is practically the rule, not the exception. The rare exception is if someone asks a question and engages with the answer as if they are interested in reaching a better orientation towards the topic. This exception seems so rare it is practically non-existent.

[Federica]

Sure, Federica, nothing is wasted when we try to remain centered and present in our activity. Simply finding new ways to express my intuitions of existence is an enormously helpful and rewarding experience, even if they come out as grunts rather than poetry most of the time. And it's likewise easy to find value from the posts of others generated by the discussion. It's not as if I feel what you are expressing is 100% off the mark - in fact, most of what you express intuitively resonates with me immediately, or strokes my etheric body as Steiner may say , because I am also traversing the same idea-space. I simply focus on the parts where it seems further harmonization is needed. So I am grateful for your continued thoughtful engagement as well.

It’s interesting, I had thought about quoting that Steiner characterization as well. I think a contradiction many need to work with and loosen - and I am definitely one of them - is that we seek that “stroking effect” of chatting with others, however, we often end up talking primarily to and for ourselves. And sacrificing that sort of vanity - that is transforming it into selfless action - is demanding, including when it appears surely enough like the right thing to do.

I agree, and we are all on a gradient of vanity and selfishness, hopefully working toward more active listening and speech for the sake of mutual support and understanding. When I reflect on my Discord experiences, however, I am reminded of how bad things can truly get, and how we are making a lot more progress in these forum discussions.

I call it the 'don't ruin my fun' effect. People literally ask questions with the hope they won't get a genuine answer, only a nod of agreement, a reformulation of the question, or a trivial response that allows a chance to show off some knowledge and continue speculating. When a more involved answer is offered, there is either deafening silence or a slight response tinged with the palpable sense of, 'you are ruining my fun!' The more the answer speaks directly to the question, the more the fun is ruined. We have seen some of that here as well ('Could there be NHIs living under the Earth'?) This is practically the rule, not the exception. The rare exception is if someone asks a question and engages with the answer as if they are interested in reaching a better orientation towards the topic. This exception seems so rare it is practically non-existent.

I'm not familiar with Discord, but sometimes people are open to adjust views and opinions based on discussion. It’s not so incredibly rare, in general. Still, this is only half of the work - the easy half - when one doesn't use their counterpart(s) as mirrors. The more demanding part is the active part, when one not only sees and listens beyond the closeup of self-reflection, but also lets words and actions be guided by the good, over personal preferences. I realize that by being inspired by example, not that I have succeeded in that so far. It reminds me of this:

Before the eyes can see, they must be incapable of tears.
Before the ear can hear, it must have lost its sensitiveness.
Before the voice can speak in the presence of the Masters it must have lost the power to wound.
Before the soul can stand in the presence of the Masters its feet must be washed in the blood of the heart.

[AshvinP]

It’s interesting, I had thought about quoting that Steiner characterization as well. I think a contradiction many need to work with and loosen - and I am definitely one of them - is that we seek that “stroking effect” of chatting with others, however, we often end up talking primarily to and for ourselves. And sacrificing that sort of vanity - that is transforming it into selfless action - is demanding, including when it appears surely enough like the right thing to do.

I agree, and we are all on a gradient of vanity and selfishness, hopefully working toward more active listening and speech for the sake of mutual support and understanding. When I reflect on my Discord experiences, however, I am reminded of how bad things can truly get, and how we are making a lot more progress in these forum discussions.

I call it the 'don't ruin my fun' effect. People literally ask questions with the hope they won't get a genuine answer, only a nod of agreement, a reformulation of the question, or a trivial response that allows a chance to show off some knowledge and continue speculating. When a more involved answer is offered, there is either deafening silence or a slight response tinged with the palpable sense of, 'you are ruining my fun!' The more the answer speaks directly to the question, the more the fun is ruined. We have seen some of that here as well ('Could there be NHIs living under the Earth'?) This is practically the rule, not the exception. The rare exception is if someone asks a question and engages with the answer as if they are interested in reaching a better orientation towards the topic. This exception seems so rare it is practically non-existent.

I'm not familiar with Discord, but sometimes people are open to adjust views and opinions based on discussion. It’s not so incredibly rare, in general. Still, this is only half of the work - the easy half - when one doesn't use their counterpart(s) as mirrors. The more demanding part is the active part, when one not only sees and listens beyond the closeup of self-reflection, but also lets words and actions be guided by the good, over personal preferences. I realize that by being inspired by example, not that I have succeeded in that so far. It reminds me of this:

Before the eyes can see, they must be incapable of tears.
Before the ear can hear, it must have lost its sensitiveness.
Before the voice can speak in the presence of the Masters it must have lost the power to wound.
Before the soul can stand in the presence of the Masters its feet must be washed in the blood of the heart.

I don't discuss much of these things "IRL", so hopefully Discord is not representative of how people engage in general. On the other hand, I am talking about the servers dedicated to idealism and even spiritual outlooks like Anthroposophy (or the highly intellectualized version of it). The only adjusting of views is jumping from one Maya to another, from materialism to mysticism, from idealism to panpsychism, or something similar. There is absolutely no willingness to experience the real-time activity of thinking, the imaginative soul-gestures that get encoded in streams of intellectual commentary about the 'secrets of existence'. The trend is more concerning than I even previously imagined.

Not that I get overly judgmental or pessimistic about it - I realize these inner configurations are modulated by 'powers and principalities' that are working through the sheer momentum of ingrained soul habits at this point. But as objective patterns that can be discerned from the large dataset accumulated from interacting with many of the same people over and over again, they are unmistakable. Most of the interest is in speculating about NDEs or glorifying psychedelics, asking questions about what might happen after death but [semi-consciously] never hoping to hear a viable answer. Here is an example of a comment I made recently in response to such a question:

It's interesting because I was just reading about how people in our time are becoming obsessed with the question of death, i.e. what happens when I die, where do I go, what do I get to experience, where I can travel, etc. In that sense, it reveals a certain egoistic tendency when we obsess over the question of death in that one-sided way. We are only interested in what spiritual reality can give to us after we leave the body.

What rarely gets attention is the other side of the spiritual coin - unbornness, i.e. the path of the individuality from the spiritual worlds onto Earth, the will to incarnate. Why do we rarely think through that stage of the journey? Perhaps because it would reveal what we came here to do on Earth - our concrete tasks, goals, and ideals that we should work toward fulfilling. It's not about what we can get from the spiritual worlds but what we can give back to them by inwardly perfecting ourselves.

If we were to focus on that stage of the journey more, then perhaps our after-death experience wouldn't be so hellish either. Because it is precisely our own inner life, our own soul space, that we first awaken into after death. It is like a Cosmic mirror is erected in front of our inner life so we perceive objectively all that we did or failed to do with our opportunities during life. This is only 'scary' when understood from within the body - when we actually experience it apart from bodily cognition, we know it is the greatest gift because it gives us a chance to compensate for all the disharmony we wove into the World.

Met with deafening silence, except for - "Where are you getting all this from this seems like new age mumbo jumbo after you dead it's to late", from the guy who asked about why many NDE experiences were so "hellish". I don't see how anyone can reach the more demanding part of the task - calibrating our activity to be guided by the Good, which I agree will be of critical importance - before it is even suspected that there is a soul space of imaginative gestures to be guided. It seems to me the easy half is not so easy. Of course, that is not because of any externalized reasons like "it is too difficult to understand the esoteric terms or following the arguments" or anything like that, only because many people have lost sight of real-time thinking altogether and have used the commentary to convince themselves there is nothing to look for except reflected preferences and personal entertainment.

[Cleric K]

I don't discuss much of these things "IRL", so hopefully Discord is not representative of how people engage in general. On the other hand, I am talking about the servers dedicated to idealism and even spiritual outlooks like Anthroposophy (or the highly intellectualized version of it). The only adjusting of views is jumping from one Maya to another, from materialism to mysticism, from idealism to panpsychism, or something similar. There is absolutely no willingness to experience the real-time activity of thinking, the imaginative soul-gestures that get encoded in streams of intellectual commentary about the 'secrets of existence'. The trend is more concerning than I even previously imagined.

Not that I get overly judgmental or pessimistic about it - I realize these inner configurations are modulated by 'powers and principalities' that are working through the sheer momentum of ingrained soul habits at this point. But as objective patterns that can be discerned from the large dataset accumulated from interacting with many of the same people over and over again, they are unmistakable. Most of the interest is in speculating about NDEs or glorifying psychedelics, asking questions about what might happen after death but [semi-consciously] never hoping to hear a viable answer. Here is an example of a comment I made recently in response to such a question:

Met with deafening silence, except for - "Where are you getting all this from this seems like new age mumbo jumbo after you dead it's to late", from the guy who asked about why many NDE experiences were so "hellish". I don't see how anyone can reach the more demanding part of the task - calibrating our activity to be guided by the Good, which I agree will be of critical importance - before it is even suspected that there is a soul space of imaginative gestures to be guided. It seems to me the easy half is not so easy. Of course, that is not because of any externalized reasons like "it is too difficult to understand the esoteric terms or following the arguments" or anything like that, only because many people have lost sight of real-time thinking altogether and have used the commentary to convince themselves there is nothing to look for except reflected preferences and personal entertainment.

I guess the whole attitude with which people dabble in these questions is similar to the way they are drawn to criminal or horror movies, MMA fights and so on. They would like to flirt with some kind of stronger emotions but in no case they would like these things to happen to them.

[Ben Iscatus]

Ashvin said:
…in fact, most of what you express intuitively resonates with me immediately, or strokes my etheric body as Steiner may say , because I am also traversing the same idea-space. I simply focus on the parts where it seems further harmonization is needed. So I am grateful for your continued thoughtful engagement as well….

…The rare exception is if someone asks a question and engages with the answer as if they are interested in reaching a better orientation towards the topic. This exception seems so rare it is practically non-existent….

…Of course, that is not because of any externalized reasons like "it is too difficult to understand the esoteric terms or following the arguments" or anything like that, only because many people have lost sight of real-time thinking altogether and have used the commentary to convince themselves there is nothing to look for except reflected preferences and personal entertainment.”…


Ashvin, the only way you “harmonize” with anyone is when you shame them into acceding to your POV. Let me ask you 3 questions:

1. Do you think that because you ask people pointed or leading questions, instead of always telling them outright that they’re wrong and you’re right, that that means you’re not an intellectual bully?

2. Do you think that you will ever respectfully allow someone else to have a completely different point of view from you unless you signal in some way that it is inferior to yours?

3. Do you see what I mean?

Try very hard not to answer these three questions on this blog! Just internalize them for future reference.

[AshvinP]

Ashvin said:
…in fact, most of what you express intuitively resonates with me immediately, or strokes my etheric body as Steiner may say , because I am also traversing the same idea-space. I simply focus on the parts where it seems further harmonization is needed. So I am grateful for your continued thoughtful engagement as well….

…The rare exception is if someone asks a question and engages with the answer as if they are interested in reaching a better orientation towards the topic. This exception seems so rare it is practically non-existent….

…Of course, that is not because of any externalized reasons like "it is too difficult to understand the esoteric terms or following the arguments" or anything like that, only because many people have lost sight of real-time thinking altogether and have used the commentary to convince themselves there is nothing to look for except reflected preferences and personal entertainment.”…


Ashvin, the only way you “harmonize” with anyone is when you shame them into acceding to your POV. Let me ask you 3 questions:

1. Do you think that because you ask people pointed or leading questions, instead of always telling them outright that they’re wrong and you’re right, that that means you’re not an intellectual bully?

2. Do you think that you will ever respectfully allow someone else to have a completely different point of view from you unless you signal in some way that it is inferior to yours?

3. Do you see what I mean?

Try very hard not to answer these three questions on this blog! Just internalize them for future reference.

Noted, Ben. I won't answer your questions, as you requested. And I'm sorry for using your NHI thread as an example before, that was unnecessary to stick in there.

I noticed you never answered Cleric's question on the

other thread

, either - any particular reason why not? This isn't a leading question I'm really just hoping you contemplate the question he asked.

[AshvinP]

Ashvin said:
…in fact, most of what you express intuitively resonates with me immediately, or strokes my etheric body as Steiner may say , because I am also traversing the same idea-space. I simply focus on the parts where it seems further harmonization is needed. So I am grateful for your continued thoughtful engagement as well….

…The rare exception is if someone asks a question and engages with the answer as if they are interested in reaching a better orientation towards the topic. This exception seems so rare it is practically non-existent….

…Of course, that is not because of any externalized reasons like "it is too difficult to understand the esoteric terms or following the arguments" or anything like that, only because many people have lost sight of real-time thinking altogether and have used the commentary to convince themselves there is nothing to look for except reflected preferences and personal entertainment.”…


Ashvin, the only way you “harmonize” with anyone is when you shame them into acceding to your POV. Let me ask you 3 questions:

1. Do you think that because you ask people pointed or leading questions, instead of always telling them outright that they’re wrong and you’re right, that that means you’re not an intellectual bully?

2. Do you think that you will ever respectfully allow someone else to have a completely different point of view from you unless you signal in some way that it is inferior to yours?

3. Do you see what I mean?

Try very hard not to answer these three questions on this blog! Just internalize them for future reference.

Noted, Ben. I won't answer your questions, as you requested. And I'm sorry for using your NHI thread as an example before, that was unnecessary to stick in there.

I noticed you never answered Cleric's question on the other thread, either - any particular reason why not? This isn't a leading question I'm really just hoping you contemplate the question he asked.

[Federica]

I don't discuss much of these things "IRL", so hopefully Discord is not representative of how people engage in general. On the other hand, I am talking about the servers dedicated to idealism and even spiritual outlooks like Anthroposophy (or the highly intellectualized version of it). The only adjusting of views is jumping from one Maya to another, from materialism to mysticism, from idealism to panpsychism, or something similar. There is absolutely no willingness to experience the real-time activity of thinking, the imaginative soul-gestures that get encoded in streams of intellectual commentary about the 'secrets of existence'. The trend is more concerning than I even previously imagined.

Not that I get overly judgmental or pessimistic about it - I realize these inner configurations are modulated by 'powers and principalities' that are working through the sheer momentum of ingrained soul habits at this point. But as objective patterns that can be discerned from the large dataset accumulated from interacting with many of the same people over and over again, they are unmistakable. Most of the interest is in speculating about NDEs or glorifying psychedelics, asking questions about what might happen after death but [semi-consciously] never hoping to hear a viable answer. Here is an example of a comment I made recently in response to such a question:

It's interesting because I was just reading about how people in our time are becoming obsessed with the question of death, i.e. what happens when I die, where do I go, what do I get to experience, where I can travel, etc. In that sense, it reveals a certain egoistic tendency when we obsess over the question of death in that one-sided way. We are only interested in what spiritual reality can give to us after we leave the body.

What rarely gets attention is the other side of the spiritual coin - unbornness, i.e. the path of the individuality from the spiritual worlds onto Earth, the will to incarnate. Why do we rarely think through that stage of the journey? Perhaps because it would reveal what we came here to do on Earth - our concrete tasks, goals, and ideals that we should work toward fulfilling. It's not about what we can get from the spiritual worlds but what we can give back to them by inwardly perfecting ourselves.

If we were to focus on that stage of the journey more, then perhaps our after-death experience wouldn't be so hellish either. Because it is precisely our own inner life, our own soul space, that we first awaken into after death. It is like a Cosmic mirror is erected in front of our inner life so we perceive objectively all that we did or failed to do with our opportunities during life. This is only 'scary' when understood from within the body - when we actually experience it apart from bodily cognition, we know it is the greatest gift because it gives us a chance to compensate for all the disharmony we wove into the World.

Met with deafening silence, except for - "Where are you getting all this from this seems like new age mumbo jumbo after you dead it's to late", from the guy who asked about why many NDE experiences were so "hellish". I don't see how anyone can reach the more demanding part of the task - calibrating our activity to be guided by the Good, which I agree will be of critical importance - before it is even suspected that there is a soul space of imaginative gestures to be guided. It seems to me the easy half is not so easy. Of course, that is not because of any externalized reasons like "it is too difficult to understand the esoteric terms or following the arguments" or anything like that, only because many people have lost sight of real-time thinking altogether and have used the commentary to convince themselves there is nothing to look for except reflected preferences and personal entertainment.

I was actually referring, on the one end, to discussions and debates in entirely general terms, beyond philosophical forums, and on the other end, to the steps toward selfless action that are to be taken by someone for example like me, who’s had the chance to come to know great examples, and is therefore called to move forward in that work "against nature”.

The Discord analytic idealism forum members you dialogue with may have a tougher time identifying alert signs on 'the problem with thinking' typical of our times. Chances are they are caught in the self-fulfilling personal prophecy of the dissociative bubble, coated with curved mirrors on the inside, and cargo aircraft walls on the outside. From that stance, anyone waiving big alert signs in their vicinity will be perceived as a wiggling dot on their radar and will be sent alarmed identification requests.“Where are you getting all this from” = “you, unidentified bubble, kindly provide bubble label and bubble coordinates for due categorizing"

But in a sense I think it’s difficult to blame them for not getting the meaning encoded in your reply. We are entering exactly those times, slightly after the year 2000, when - as Steiner said - there will be in the West a situation comparable to a:

...ban on all thinking, not a direct one, but a kind of ban on all thinking, a law that will have the purpose of suppressing all individual thinking. On the one hand, there is a beginning of that in what purely materialistic medicine is doing today, where the soul is no longer allowed to work, where people are treated like a machine only on the basis of external experiments.
(…)
For example we have machines today which add and subtract: everything is convenient, we don't need to do any calculations anymore. And that's how you'll do with everything. That won't take long, a few centuries - then everything will be finished. Then you will no longer need to think, no longer need to consider, you just push. For example: “330 bales of Liverpool cotton”. That’s something to think about today, isn’t it? But then you will just push and the matter will be settled. And so that the solid structure of the social context of the future is not disturbed, laws will be passed which will not directly say “thinking is forbidden” but which will have the effect of eliminating all individual thinking.

(Lecture available here or here)


So you’re right. The easy half is definitely not so easy, when the needed understanding is not a thematic one, but an all-encompassing one, hence one that calls out the stance of the inquirer himself. That the first necessity is to set straight the understanding of the understanding of the inquirer himself - before he starts playing with a topic of inquiry at the philosophical speculation game table - is so unsuspected, as you say. I guess one of the roles of the Anthroposophical counter measure to this trend is to never cease to figure out ways to convey what has to click in the inquirer, and keep fighting the ban on all thinking, employing as much of “both halves” as one can.