Massimo Scaligero

[Federica]

Rome, March 4, 1978


- The legitimacy of prophecies
- Focus on thinking versus focus on religious feelings
- Meaning of the Eucharist
- How to realize "Christ in me"
- The events of spring and Easter



“Divination and omen in relation to man’s inner life - their legitimacy.”
We don’t have to worry about the future, because we create the future. If someone is guessing correctly, saying that, when we exit this building and walk down Cavallotti street, a beam will fall on our head, then what do we do? Shall we avoid passing there? Our destiny would wait for us, anyway. So we wouldn’t change our plans. Therefore, there is just as much value in not knowing. So when we encounter fortune tellers, let’s try to be shrewd: we don’t need to be informed in advance of anything at all.

It’s different when we speak of our knowledge of certain lines of evolution, by virtue of which we are aware of what happens in a certain epoch, depending on whether certain inner conditions are or aren’t fulfilled. This, of course, is important. We can even be the repository of prophecies. But all this only works in a spirit of sagacity, for the one who does not utilize the knowledge to try and get clever with destiny. Because the wise person who knows that, as he walks down Ciceruacchio street, will get a brick on his head, still goes there, and gets hit by the brick. On the other hand, there can be, I shall not say Initiates, but, let’s say, enlightened individuals who are able to foresee something of the future. If they are really wise, they remain silent. On the contrary, if they begin to show off their capacities, they are probably cheaters. Maybe they guess it correctly one time, and wrongly another time. And we are already on a less than serious level here. In any case, this topic is interesting from another point of view, because we really have the possibility to predict the future, and we also have the capability to go back in time. In this sense, we can have a higher experience of self consciousness, however not to be used to try and get clever with destiny.


“Since time immemorial, man becomes a god through prayer, and through rite. As the gospel tells, so the miracle confirms. Why do you now say that it’s all about thinking? The message that Christ brought to us is “Love your neighbor as yourself”. Why do you say that Christ is the bearer of the I?” - I’m not the one saying it - “Why Theosophy rather than Theology? And which one can I really believe in?”
About the meaning of “man is a god”: the difference between Buddha and a common man is that the Buddha knows he is the Buddha, while the common man doesn’t know it. Therefore, he suffers. So, man has always been a god, through prayer and rite. However, times have changed. Safe Saint Gennaro, Father Severino, and Father Gino (Father Pio has died, he’s still dead) you know that we have never been short of prayers in our practice, because we believe in the miracle. Still, without thinking there is absolutely nothing we can do. Here let’s not go through the whole story again. There is plenty we have written on thinking. I believe I can summarize the evil of our time in a single situation. It’s terribly simple, it's like Columbus’s egg: people believe that the brain thinks. And even when they don’t believe it, they behave as if they believed it. Therefore, while materialism comes from such thinking brain, those who believe they are fighting it may very well be materialists of a different color. And they are fighting each other: they are on one side, and they are also on the other. Both are materialists.

There is no way out, unless one comes to an understanding of this tragic mistake, which, in a sense, really summarizes the foundation of an entire worldview [materialism]. We have to say, they [the outspoken materialists] are the most coherent and respectable of the two, because they clearly state that they rely on such a foundation. Whilst the other ones, who are supposedly all about “spirit”, overcoming materialism, and superior morality, are actually in the same position as the fomer. Only the language is different. Actually, the only distinctive element is feeling, their feeling is different. Why do we say all that? We can really sympathize with this question aked by our super powerful, or, shall we say, ultra powerful friend here, because it gives us the opportunity to summarize everything.

In ancient times, the situation of man was different. Of course man had a brain then. Indeed, there were some real brainiacs back then. However, souls were able to consider things independent of the brain, and that’s how they used to have great intuitions. Let’s take the Greek thinkers for example. Why were they great? Because they still had an etheric structure of thinking that was independent of cerebrality. For this reason, they were all greatly intuitive. From spiritual science we learn that’s how things are. Moreover, those who engage in experiential thinking practice have an experimental confirmation of that. They know that in certain moments one becomes free from cerebrality, penetrating in this way inside certain realities, in objective, precise and determined manner. In other moments, one is indeed captive in one’s brain - being so smart and so logical, and still, alarmingly obtuse. To whomever already knows how things are, it’s clear what “alarming” means here, because, naturally, the world of the dim-witted is all his world. But the one who practices thinking knows very well that the soul in its entirety depends on the centrality of consciousness.

In this sense, one can be a theologian, according to Saint John of the Cross - because almost all mystic theology is founded on the intuitions and visions of Saint John of the Cross - one can be tremendously religious, friend of prayer, friend of miracle and of all forms of rite and devotion, nevertheless, if thinking is conditioned by the brain, all that is just rhetorical. All that theology becomes chatter. By itself, it allows you to go nowhere beyond the dialectical-cerebral boundaries, to establish no contact with supersensible reality. The only possible point of connection would be a sentimental one, one of exalted theology.

That’s where religion stands nowadays. We need to recognize this, otherwise we will not find the way out of the mess. We really need a certain stream, a certain human minority to take that step beyond the cerebral jail, beyond the imprisonment of the brain. The brain literally is a prison, and that’s what philosophy is - and when we say “philosophy” we mean all philosophers, because what did idealism do to impede the birth of materialism? It did nothing. Idealism only produced chatter, since there’s no real method to be found in it enabling us to overcome materialism. In order to achieve such an enterprise, we had to discover a higher Yoga, appearing within Western thinking, that we recognized in Steiner - the bearer of the message of living thinking, who points us toward the way of Michael, hence towards the redemption of thinking.

So, whoever loves religion has to redeem thinking. Without holy thinking, the path of holiness can’t be pursued. This is true theosophy, because a true and healthy experience of thinking leads us to perceive that the foundations of our consciousness are grounded in divinity. This is where true religious experience can begin. In the absence of this understanding, we can’t speak of religion, except in sentimentalistic, rhetorical terms. These are still good for a certain level of humanity that still needs a shepherd. Those who are at the level of herd do need a shepherd. But let’s be wary of shepherds who are wolves disguised as shepherds, which is a real danger nowadays. So this sort of religiousness is a makeshift. In order for the herd to be guided in the future towards the experience of the spirit, spiritual guides are needed - beings who have overcome the imprisonment of the brain.

So, “Love your neighbor as yourself” truly is a beautiful, marvelous formula, but the risk is that it remains just that: a formula. One can surely say “How beautiful, I want to dedicate my life to this” but what next? It will remain a beautiful purpose, and that's it. The next moment, when walking down Cavallotti street, he gets infuriated because someone will have stepped on his foot, and he wishes he could kill him. Or, the taxman arrives and ...good-bye, the purpose of loving a neighbor as oneself. The problem is that we are talking about a feeling, and the feeling should be transformed into an idea. Then the idea should be further transformed into a force. Then, the force needs to be charged with will, so that it becomes as powerful as an instinct. When it has become as powerful as an instinct, you will be in a position such as Mother Teresa of Calcutta, whom I so often refer to. We are very grateful to her, because she provides us with an example we can continually bring forth. Whence does this being source such a willpower? It’s exceptional, because she certainly ignores the path of thinking, however, she has that force with her. We know the origin of such force. It’s the same force that acts negatively in others, as power of the instincts - indeed, when empowered by instincts, humans can be tremendously effective, since it’s not their own force, but the force of instinctive animal character. And whenever our will, freed from cerebrality, succeeds in achieving the same level of force in loving our neighbors as ourselves, then we realize Christ. As you can see, it’s a matter of overcoming that same limit. With this, I deem to have responded to our super powerful friend.


Here we have a question from someone who signs as the “Filarcante” [unknown word]. It says “...a question meant in terms of orientation towards sculpture…. a new Plato… this new platonism is continued in what at the end of the XVIth century resulted in the light brown [“bruno”] of Nero Giordano…. “Sic sunt bona nostra”” [cryptic question]
This is a good thing, because it preludes to what we will realize one day, through social threefolding, and we are reminded of the beautiful picture of Christ establishing the Eucharist, that also indicates the true sense of the liberation of man. Since there is another question here that brings me to this same topic, let me take it now. It says: “Free thinking as memory of the Logos”. Indeed, we have discussed brain thinking, which is unfree, because it is determined by brain dynamics. So it’s a long going battle. Now, when Christ institutes the Eucharist, He says "Do this in memory of me", it means: “Remember who I am”. This memory is a cosmic memory. It means: “Remember that I am at the origin of the Sun, at the origin of the Earth, at the origin of everything on Earth that is solar”. Then, in the cup, he gives the drink that [seals] the new covenant.

However, all this takes us back to what He says in response to the Ahrimanic temptation, when He speaks about the bread. Christ responds to that temptation by saying: "One cannot live by bread alone". The Gospel tells that afterwards, Ahriman went away, but only for a short time. On this, our Doctor commented and explained that the reason is that there was an Ahrimanic substance - the metal of the Earth - acting in Judas, because the thirty denarii were made of silver. Silver and gold are Ahrimanic metals. And as long as the bread is paid with Ahrimanic metal, that bread does not give spiritual nourishment. But Christ gives the bread as a nourishment that is not subject to Ahriman.

Now think about Threefolding. Threefolding holds a luminous idea. If things go well, this idea will be the fortune of the future: it’s the idea that work should not be paid. One does not have to work in order to live, because work cannot be bought, and therefore bread must not be subject to money. That is, bread is the fruit of the earth, the fruit of the ancient Sun, therefore it should just be available. It is the body of Christ. In fact, this is the Eucharist, this is its meaning. But as long as Ahriman dominates bread through money, that bread cannot help man. One should be cautious, though, when expressing these luminous ideas, lest people take you for a fool. It has already happened that such ideas were deemed utopic. However, if we really want to get out of this prison we were talking about, we have to understand that work cannot be bought, for it’s not a commodity, and that bread must be liberated from the Ahrimanic metal. Only then will we finally have a clear path towards the Logos. This liberated thought is nothing else than the thinking we were just discussing, that is, thinking that overcomes the cerebral constraints. Cerebral constraints are Ahrimanic constraints.

We know very well that man is dominated in thought by Ahrimanic and Luciferic powers, and that rare are the beings who are not dominated in this way. Those who know meditation know what a painful effort they have to make to have a thought that is not dominated by those two, because every day we are forced to think under conditioning. And since in current humanity there is the danger - it’s a danger from the viewpoint of Ahriman - that man begins to have autonomous thinking, Ahriman is playing a big game by destroying the world economy, so as to create worldwide a continuous concern for living, for daily sustenance, so that man no longer has time to think about the things of the spirit. In this way, the means - the concern for daily sustenance - becomes the end. In this Ahriman has succeeded. He knows very well that if human beings could be independent from these concerns, they would have the sagacity to use their time well, that is, the sagacity to dedicate time to meditation. But this becomes increasingly difficult, because our time is invaded by a series of daily occurrences. This fight will be won by the bearers of the solar Logos. "Portae inferi non praevalebunt" [The doors of hell will not win]. However, this result must be earned with determined will, and with courageous insistence on the right attitude.


Now this question: “I feel myself in feeling. How to will myself in willing, so as to realize Christ in me?”
The key is always thinking. We must remember the technique suggested by our Doctor. In thinking it can be said that we must put ourselves outside of thinking. In fact, the exercise of concentration leads us to objectify thinking. We must insist for a long time precisely in order to be able to see thinking as a reality from which we are independent, a reality that gives us the experience of the identity of the I. Finally the I, rather than being reflected by physical sensations - whereby we are continually at the mercy of everything that physically happens - is reflected by the etheric current of thinking. That’s how we arrive at the first image of the I.
Having had this image, the I has an independence, it achieves an independence, by which it sees the entities of thinking as objective, external. And the beings who carry thinking, both the elemental beings and the cosmic beings, are entities from which man is distinguished, therefore there is a real experience of detachment of the I from thinking.

The experience of feeling is different. In feeling we must feel that we are’ inside’. If we are capable of this independence from thinking, then we can reach the true experience of feeling, within feeling: we have to dive into feeling, like someone who dives into the water knowing how to swim, or we could say, like a fish. Feeling is symbolized by the waters. In water the fish feels very comfortable, because it’s not seized by the water, it slides into it, it’s not a prisoner of the water but it’s free, it darts wherever it wants. Not only that, we could add various other things. In any case, it’s on the inside of feeling that we need to come. Then we feel we are in an area in which the Logos is active. Our friend's question about Christ in me really refers to this experience of feeling. Still, this experience can’t come without the liberation of thinking.

It is difficult to explain all this to those who do not know spiritual science. Not knowing spiritual science, we would experience an inevitably luciferic, subjective feeling, enclosed within ourselves. That feeling can indeed feel exalted, but those exaltations are truly …rhetorical, so much so that the church for centuries has feared such exaltations in certain mystics, and rightly so. Instead, one can have the admirable experience of feeling as the feeling of the Logos. In this way, one begins to have a synthesis of thinking and feeling, and this is the way of Michael. In fact, true feeling is enthusiasm for pure thinking. When it comes to the will, however, things stand differently. It's a matter of sensing oneself above willing, as if one felt a horse beneath oneself. So: before thinking, inside feeling, and above the will. It’s as if the will were a force that we see flowing in our flesh, in our metabolism.

Naturally, all this must be translated into a relevant picture. It is nothing abstract, it truly aligns with the occult configuration of our experience. If we identify with will in other areas of our being, this is temporary. For example, if we feel the point where thinking is born, and really feel thinking arising from there - it’s a quite lucid, vivid, and I would say, beneficial experience - at that moment there is indeed a current of will in it, however, it tends to descend downwards. The same can happen in the heart too. On the other hand, the authentic experience of the will is something that leads us to see it as a support of all life, as a backing of life, in the same way that the limbs - especially the lower limbs - support the whole body. The trunk has no participation in this. The will must be felt as a current independent of the trunk. The trunk must rest, because it is the part in which the forces of Buddhi operate, that is, the forces of higher feeling, ultimately the forces of the Logos. Therefore, the area of the trunk must be left in great stillness, so that the power of will can be as dynamic as possible. Only then the will helps us.

Here we must add that taking advantage of this will requires precise internal duties. Since it gives us great strength, we must then use this strength wisely. Even simply an irregular use of this strength is enough not only to make the experience disappear, but also to cause some pretty heavy events to happen. When this current of the will is in agreement with the I, therefore with thinking and feeling, then one can truly feel the higher self, the I in oneself, and this is like saying: "Not I, but Christ in me". I think there is nothing else to add. Indeed, this theme is pretty delicate.


Now let’s conclude with this question:
"We are approaching Easter. Now more than ever, in these terrible days of darkness for humanity, our spiritual community should meditate on the descent of the essence of sovereign love into the hearts of men and into the heart of the Earth. Therefore it is important to rekindle within us - with the sacrificial power of the word inspired by direct experience - the memory of the sacred event, so that we can become worthy of it."

Yes, the event of Easter is also prepared through a change in the life of nature, through an irruption of the vital forces of nature, which, to that end, must make use of higher and lower elemental beings. In this process, the Luciferic and the Ahrimanic entities attempt to seize man - the Luciferic entities through breathing, the Ahrimanic ones through the stimulation of all the mineral processes that are triggered by the roots of plants from the depths up. This is a process that we can call mineral-calcareous, by which the Ahrimanic powers bypass diaphragms and, from the depths of the Earth, tend to rise up towards man, due to the fact that in plants an inflow of these forces occurs. So man is besieged by these forces and almost made dull, that is, the joyful energy of spring makes him dull. This is an observation that we can reconnect with the fact that man has become a cerebral being, therefore, when he feels joy, it is rarely a joy of the spirit. Rather it's an animal joy. So everything that comes as the vitality of spring is previously taken hold of by these powers. In spring, the Luciferic and Ahrimanic entities unite to destroy man and, at least for a while, they are successful. It is a dangerous period. Man is unlikely to notice this pressure, but if he listens to himself well, he will realize it. Especially those who have a rhythmic inner life, will notice that before Easter they have to struggle to keep the I independent from the processes of spring.

It would help to go to the countryside, and have a pure experience of the blossoming of buds, of the blooming of flowers, to overcome the animal and aesthetic-sensual element, in order to grasp the Christ-like within the forces of spring. These are forces of birth and we usually grasp this poetic beauty of spring as an external fact. But we must also think that there are forces that are imprisoned in the forms of plants to allow for such an outpour of life. This means there is a sacrifice, and man must follow this sacrifice and feel its poetic beauty in pure contemplation of the processes of rebirth in nature, to which the thought of autumn must not be alien - because everything is to be felt rhythmically. In this way, man redeems himself, makes himself independent from the Luciferic-Ahrimanic aggressions. It can be said that this is the time of the year in which these beings have hope that they can destroy man.

You may wonder: “What do they gain if man is destroyed?” Their goal is to capture man. Lucifer wants to capture man in the area where his spirit lives, and Ahriman wants to capture man within the Earth. Anyhow, at a certain point, all this undergoes a plot twist. During the Holy Week the tension increases. Besides that, those who practice meditation may also feel the life of the Grail, and can prepare themselves, prepare their soul for Good Friday, recognizing the story of Parsifal. If they are able to arrive at that week with an alert soul, then the event of Easter gives them back the strength, it gives them back the magical-solar element they need. Naturally, we reserve the right to speak further on this theme when the event is closer, so as to say something more precisely relevant on Resurrection.

In this event of Easter we have the opportunity to connect with what is living in nature, beyond the Luciferic and Ahrimanic processes. But we must be persuaded that this is not about anything vital or physical. It is about eminently inner processes which then find their symbol in flowering, in greenness, in the green tenderness of the blossoming plant, in the explosion of greenery. It’s difficult to free this symbol from aesthetic rhetoric, and from vital pleasure. We are after something more subtle, more radical, that enables us to feel the force of Easter in spring. The thought of death and resurrection helps us feel the true value of spring. We can do this already today, and some may benefit, for example, from [Anne Catherine] Emmerich's descriptions.

Recording at:
https://ecoantroposophia.it/2014/08/mat ... arzo-1978/

[Federica]

In connection with this point at page 10 of the Cell Intelligence thread, where it is question of the spiritual path proposed by Sri Aurobindo, I thought I would try to render a passage from Scaligero's "From Yoga to the Rose Cross" in which he shared his understanding of Aurobindo. My impression is, it's not an easy read! I did my (quick and dirty) best - surely not enough to make this as fluid as it can be!


"My sympathy for Sri Aurobindo was mainly due to the fact that he appeared to me as an experimenter of a sort of "direct take", albeit within the limit of the traditional Hindu form: a "direct take" from which he elicits a unidirectional Vedic-Vedantic-Tantric direction of asceticism, implying the ascetic's integral openness to the divine Shakti: openness, therefore, also of the mind. This mental openness - though somewhat emphasized by Aurobindo in his teaching - is however not placed at the center. The positive element of the “direct take” emerges - though not determinately - in the metaphysical function of the mental aspect, but Aurobindo does not posit the latter as consciousness of its own synthesis, nor do the disciples sense it. In fact, the value of a certain level is explainable by the one above it, though it is wise not to access it ahead of time.

And it is understandable: Aurobindo studied at Oxford, knew the philosophy and classics of the West, had a modern experience of the rational intellect and yet an intact inner life, peculiar to his race of ancient ascetics. His Yoga, as a synthesis of the different paths of traditional Yoga, is indeed, radically, an elaboration of thinking. Aurobindo himself cannot but feel, at a certain moment, that his contribution in this sense is mediated by a Yoga of thinking: he reaches the heights of devotion, through thoughts and the discipline of thinking.

But he can only barely hint at such a path, pervaded as it is by the light of the landscape to which it leads. The path he traces through his synthesis of Yoga is a path of devotion and action, of total consecration, according to the structure of the Bhagavad Gita: essentially an opening to the Light of the original Force, or the divine Shakti, not ascending from the lower centers (muladhara chakra), but descending from celestial heights in the adhar, through the higher centers of consciousness (sahasrara ajna).

Here the mediation of thinking is its silence, but such silence is still its being there: the task is to grasp this “being there” at its origin. In the "Western" or "Rosicrucian" way, the liberation is represented as an event concerning the man's head, that is, the relationship of thinking to the brain: it begins there and demands awareness of the original mediation. Aurobindo sees such mediation, but not as the essential impulse of Purusha. Because of the inevitable yogic nature, he does not refer to its original value [of the mediation], rather he identifies it with the sentient-volitional motion of the donation, or submission (samarpana): he cannot place it at the center of his system, out of constitutional impossibility, but above all because of the necessary occult function of his teaching.

The concentration in the heart center or in the head centers which he recommended, postulates the current of feeling, rather than the current of the liberated thinking: he does not start from the independent "essence" of the soul, but from the soul, although he does appeal to such essence: this essence, indeed, is at the summit of the Way of Thinking, within a "purer" sphere than that of the more regular Yoga. The Western researcher who intuitively recognizes the virtue of the devout concentration suggested by Aurobindo, legitimately tends to realize it as a dedication of feeling, with which thinking and will cooperate: he accepts his Yoga, without sensing the priority of the more subtle force of Shakti: precisely that of the pure mediation. That would require to be identified and made conscious, so that the discipline of devotion may take place independent of the insidiousness of sensualism taking the place of knowledge. However, as an opus of essential mental purification, such identifying and making the mediation conscious would lead the disciple to the ascesis of Solar Thinking, which opens the path to the real experience of cosmic feeling and cosmic will. Aurobindo himself feels the call of such ascesis and composes a hymn to Thinking-Paraclete.

In his letter to a disciple he expresses himself in these terms: "...The I is separate from mental thinking. In this sense, the feeling "I am" is a survival of the ancient consciousness. In complete silence, what is felt is: "thinking is produced in me."" But this animadversio [observation] is precisely pure thinking: the impersonality of thinking presupposes indeed the central power of individuality: the "I am".

The awareness of the priority of the original mediation, and the importance it has for the modern Westerner, do not meet in Aurobindo's system, undoubtedly because in him the mediation operates spontaneously. On the other hand, his function, yogic and oriental, would not make sense otherwise, being intended for a vast family of spirits, which in the East and in the West moves to that degree. Certainly one has to know that degree in order to surpass it, but this is possible to the extent that overcoming it means to possess it as a force for the further degree.

Sri Aurobindo's function as teacher is for disciples who still fail to discern the light of the Logos and the earthly "event" that corresponds to it: they can be oriented to discern it, but - more likely - to operate unconsciously in opposition to it. Aurobindo's teaching is for seekers who tend toward a Yoga involving conscious responsibility and continuous choice according to the aspiration to the sphere of freedom, vastness and bliss, but who still have no opportunity to operate directly according to the very Principle of responsibility and freedom, which arises within the I and is presupposed by thinking, that is, according to the specific instance of the epoch of the conscious soul, which, insofar as it lacks the action of the spiritual Principle of the I, is the epoch of the confusion of values.

The experience of Shakti, deprived of the central reference of the I, is in danger of becoming a sensitive mysticism: it does not achieve consciousness of its unfolding at the level of corporeality. The noetic discrimination in such a direction provides a way to sense that - at the center of the inner being who gives itself, knows vastness and bliss, calmness and detachment - there is a knowing, perceiving Subject, the being who can truly give itself, free in his action, free to perfect it or corrupt it, capable of decision, inasmuch as grounded in himself through self-consciousness, and yet continually recurring to his own original activity, the mediation of self: the being that at the pure source of himself finds the Divine.

Pure devotion is undoubtedly the highest achievement of the ascetic, the power of the whole Work, but for the modern Westerner it cannot be acheived as the direct attainment of feeling. The limit where the Westerner inevitably stops is his inability to step out of the ordinary immediacy of feeling, however much it is aimed at communion with the Divine, due to sudden persuasion: he remains unconsciously bound to the lower prakriti through thinking, whose liberation from cerebrality cannot come from bhakti. Such a seeker is on the right path, but always at the brink of losing it, through the paths of feeling, of an instinctive life whose paths do not know the point of distinction between the incorporeal light and the reflected light, which is in itself endowed with its own beatitudes. Such beatitudes risk being sensual, because of the difficulties of the radical purification of feeling, only possible through the ascesis of thinking. Feeling, however sublimated, cannot go beyond corporeality, except in the case of a conscious dissolution of the cerebral constraint: which is precisely the Way of Thinking. But, as mentioned, the latter responds to the attainment of a degree requiring that one does not skip that which precedes it, regardless of one being a follower of Aurobindo, or of other teachings.

The fact that - without the universal action of the Logos on Earth - it wouldn't have been possible for the original sacred sense of Yoga to be restored in Asia, especially through the path of bhakti, nor would the recognition of the divine Shakti have been possible, nor that of Tantrism, nor the flourishing of figures such as Ramakrishna, Vivekananda, Aurobindo, Ramana Maharshi, Yogananda Paramahamsa, is a rare insight, in alignment with an actual suprasensible reality: an intuition only possible at the edge of the traditional form that those doctrines and those ascetics - despite the originality of their impulse - have the task of maintaining.

Such metaphysical background, however, constitutes not so much of a problem for the current follower of Yoga, as for the disciple of Spiritual Science, who must be able to recognize the forces behind the names, that is, the spiritual contents of phenomena, following the sense of the learned inquiry, without stopping at the boundaries of a world on which he places a label and avoids casting his gaze for fear of erring. Of course, this is not a task for the student who is still under training. But for the disciple who thinks he possesses the key thoughts, it is a duty to know the current situations of the Spirit on Earth, to gain awareness of the Impulse from which it moves, to understand the oppositions, the alterations and their meaning in relation to the hidden, though rare, consonances. Stopping polemically at the borders of worlds deemed alien, or different, or opposite, is for him the failure of the spiritual scientific spirit from which he believes to be moving, inasmuch as he assumes as real an opposite that is only a category of thought, a thought limitation to his freedom.

The asceticism that I was pursuing, based on the synthesis of different techniques, Eastern and Western, and the subsequent perception of the original mediation, made me glimpse at the real position of Aurobindo, and confirmed for me how openness to the Supramental cannot but pass through the pure mental. An autonomous choice in this sense would unite me indeed with the Master [Steiner] who expresses the original synthesis in the form required by the times. Therefore, from that moment, I would often have occasion to connect a seeker of Yoga with the path that leads from the mental to its transcendence, that is, beyond Yoga.

I have always been persuaded that there is no point in recommending this or that author to a seeker of guidance. Rather it is necessary to first of all understand what he is really asking for, what animus he moves from, so as to establish a relationship with his I, and provide him with the method that will bring to fruition the means of knowledge that he has by birth, by inner constitution, by karma. However, it happened that someone discarded all such suggestions, refusing to learn anything about Spiritual Science, insisting that I suggest a yogic way, in which case I felt that the only means of rendering harmless the modern, inevitably irrelevant use of Yoga was to suggest Sri Aurobindo, as the most current rectifier of Yoga, and possible introducer to a presentiment of the Logos, precisely by virtue of his path of pure devotion. It has been sometimes possible to suggest Aurobindo through an act of "imaginative morality," that is, thanks to the intuition of a spiritual necessity that was requiring that form, only seemingly contrasting with its content.

But, again, this was interpreted by my observers as deviationism in the Orientalist sense: some were whispering about my further breaking of the rules. When a student wrote to me: "I get what you tell me about Spiritual Science and the dangers of Yoga. I am reading Steiner, but for now I insist that you suggest to me some authentic rapporteurs of Yoga, since I intend to understand what Yoga is all about”, according to my observers, I - pharisaically and priestly resentfully - should have replied: "Vade retro, Satan!" or something similar. But that would mean abdication of the essential inner act whose necessity Spiritual Science is all about: the act of responsibility and freedom. And the form of such act is eminently mutable: here it has one determination, there it has another, according to its correlation with the object, not with any fixed rules.

Indeed, the paralysis and decadence of all spiritual movements has always been the advent of the strict custodians of form, that is the bearers of series of notions, norms, rules of thumb, and prefabricated analyses, to replace spiritual action, even to exclude free creativity as if dangerous - the free creativity that does not obey word for word the traditional dictates, the inherited normation by which certain instructors, "elders", or official speakers tend to gain influence over the weak. This is precisely the test of the weak: being dominated by an unconscious medium masking his own inadequacy behind a series of rare notions and rules, or behind a specific dialectic of the spiritual quest.

Taking into account the personality, inner constitution, and karmic background of the one who asks for orientation, the method of Rudolf Steiner simultaneously responds to the seeker’s metaphysical need - which is not always conscious - as well as to their intellectual demand in a dialectical sense. As we have seen, however, it’s not by automatically suggesting the name of such an Author that one can put him in contact with the seeker. It is necessary to love and really absorb the teaching in order to learn from it that no mechanism and no formal observance can replace the individual conquest of the Truth that it points to, and the possibility of actually communicating it: the connection of ourselves and others with its source."



Based on: Massimo Scaligero, "Dallo Yoga alla Rosacroce" Edizioni Perseo Roma, 1972. pp 121-127.

[AshvinP]

In connection with this point at page 10 of the Cell Intelligence thread, where it is question of the spiritual path proposed by Sri Aurobindo, I thought I would try to render a passage from Scaligero's "From Yoga to the Rose Cross" in which he shared his understanding of Aurobindo. My impression is, it's not an easy read! I did my (quick and dirty) best - surely not enough to make this as fluid as it can be!

Thanks for sharing and translating this, Federica. It certainly helps me orient to the subtle differences more. From just browsing a few websites about Aurobindo's framework and exercises, I got a similar impression as to what Scaligero seems to be saying here. I have an English translation of this book in paperback but have not read much of it yet.

Clearly Aurobindo's whole spiritual framework is in keeping with the outlines of Western esotericism, but nevertheless the sort of fine resolution that one would expect from higher cognitive faculties is missing. At the end of the day, I can't help but feel the resistance comes down to an instinctive sense that the Way of Thinking is asking too much humility and too much responsibility. The very idea that one could know in concrete and living detail what happens to all souls between death and rebirth is a difficult thing for the modern constitution to contend with, even if very devoted to spiritual seeking. Of course, logical reasoning shows that if one does not voluntarily adopt the responsibility now, one will be forced to confront it later.