Anthroposophy as Fascio

[Stranger]

The problem, Cleric, from an ecological perspective, is that, as in the case of the common strangler figs found in the tropics, long-term growth and survival may actually belong to some vine varieties with roots, which were sent downward after starting higher in the tree. The so-called "Strangler Fig", which is an established part of a lawful ecological diversity, follows the path of Immanence. Starting high in the tree closer to the presumed Godhead and traveling downward for more soil nutrient is the more powerful path in this case. To presume a victorious upward (Transcendent) path would be an error caused by an ascent bias, which did not appreciate the full possibilities of Lawful diversity.

I would suggest another analogy - the Tree of Life as a common Trunk from which branches of Lawful diversity grow. When branches know their common Trunk, they are in harmony with each other but still continue to grow in diverse forms. When they don't know that they grow from the same Trunk, they perceive themselves and other branches as separate vines ,compete with each other for survival and grow in disharmony.

So, when we grow as branches from the One Tree, we do grow as an ecosystem in diverse forms, but at the same time we evolve into forms of higher-developed structures of cognition and acquire more knowledge, which can also be called "ascension". So, there is no contradiction between ascending/evolving and living as a diverse ecosystem, it is both at the same time.

[AshvinP]

The problem, Cleric, from an ecological perspective, is that, as in the case of the common strangler figs found in the tropics, long-term growth and survival may actually belong to some vine varieties with roots, which were sent downward after starting higher in the tree. The so-called "Strangler Fig", which is an established part of a lawful ecological diversity, follows the path of Immanence. Starting high in the tree closer to the presumed Godhead and traveling downward for more soil nutrient is the more powerful path in this case. To presume a victorious upward (Transcendent) path would be an error caused by an ascent bias, which did not appreciate the full possibilities of Lawful diversity.

I would suggest another analogy - the Tree of Life as a common trunk from which branches of Lawful diversity grow. When branches know their common trunk, they are in harmony with each other but still continue to grow in diverse forms. When they don't know that they grow from the same trunk, they perceive themselves and other branches as separate trees and compete with each other for survival.

But also, when we grow as branches from the One Tree, we do grow as an ecosystem in diverse forms, but at the same time we evolve into forms of higher cognition and acquire more knowledge, which can also be called "ascension". So, there is no contradiction between ascending/evolving and living as a diverse ecosystem, it is both at the same time.

This is why broadening our aperture of thinking is so important, so we can discern the evolutionary process we already went through. Of course the descent-ascent rhythm occurs at many scales, but at the largest scale of our Solar evolution, we already went through the 'downward path of Immanence'. A quick look around us or within us should also make this clear. Is there anything which is more perfectly constructed in the Creation and which also befuddles the intellect than the physical human organism? That is the end result of an involutionary process which is now evolving back to more integrated structures. Everywhere the mere physical is decaying and dying around us and within us, as it is progressively spiritualized. It is only a refusal to look into the living details which allows us to maintain the nice abstractions of 'simultaneous ascent and descent' which translates into, 'ascent when I prefer and descent when I prefer'. In our modern age, this generally translates into complete stagnation and waiting for some external power to save the Earth organism through nature, the state, the apocalypse, the rapture, or after death, with possibly an abstract hope we will return on some Boddhisatva mission to set right all that we have contributed to the disharmonious World-state.

Lou, you can say 'but I'm not an intellectual who is interested in looking into all those pesky details', which is fine, but then it makes no sense to try and convince others who have looked into those details that they are in error and holding to a bias. Why should we pay any heed to the perspective which simply refuses to wade into the living details of spiritual evolution?

[Stranger]

I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman.
Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit.
Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me.
I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.
Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit; so shall ye be my disciples.
As the Father hath loved me, so have I loved you: continue ye in my love.
These things have I spoken unto you, that my joy might remain in you, and that your joy might be full.
This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you.
John 15

(Comment: we can only truly love one another when we also experientially know that we are the branches of the same One True Vine, this is why Christ speaks about love in the same passage where he speaks about abiding in the True Vine.)

[Lou Gold]

The problem, Cleric, from an ecological perspective, is that, as in the case of the common strangler figs found in the tropics, long-term growth and survival may actually belong to some vine varieties with roots, which were sent downward after starting higher in the tree. The so-called "Strangler Fig", which is an established part of a lawful ecological diversity, follows the path of Immanence. Starting high in the tree closer to the presumed Godhead and traveling downward for more soil nutrient is the more powerful path in this case. To presume a victorious upward (Transcendent) path would be an error caused by an ascent bias, which did not appreciate the full possibilities of Lawful diversity.

I would suggest another analogy - the Tree of Life as a common Trunk from which branches of Lawful diversity grow. When branches know their common Trunk, they are in harmony with each other but still continue to grow in diverse forms. When they don't know that they grow from the same Trunk, they perceive themselves and other branches as separate vines ,compete with each other for survival and grow in disharmony.

So, when we grow as branches from the One Tree, we do grow as an ecosystem in diverse forms, but at the same time we evolve into forms of higher-developed structures of cognition and acquire more knowledge, which can also be called "ascension". So, there is no contradiction between ascending/evolving and living as a diverse ecosystem, it is both at the same time.

Of course, I agree Eugene. It is definitely both Immanence and Transcendence, which is precisely the point of an integral (trunk) approach. I am happy to call ascending/descending and contracting/expanding and constructing/deconstructing and cooperating/conflicting and living/dying as integral to the real. We grow and decay as branches of one tree or as one mycelial network or as one quantum entanglement or whatever representative material metaphor of spiritual wholeness you might prefer. Oneness and Manyness for sure.

Or, as Rumi writes:

Here, it’s spring, my friends.
Let’s make our home in the cypress grove
and wake our sleepy destiny
till it surges skyward like these trees—

aliens rising out of the grass.
Just like them,
we are bound to the ground heading to groundless ground
where the soul flows,
nameless and free.

Here, let’s take our bound souls there.

New leaf, you burst through the bark.
Tell us how to break out of our cage.

Cypress tree, you tunneled through darkness blind
and blasted through the soil.
What map was in your mind?
Tell me. I’ll follow.

A flower steps out of its tight bud,
gives its nectar, gives its gold.
How do we do the same?

Soft white stars of jasmine,
sweet, dizzying musk of jasmine,
where is your garden?
I’ll serve at the gate.

Dear nightingale, I bow to your bright songs,
never the same twice.
Master of improvisation perched in a tree,
flowers delight you.
You delight us.
How do we pass on the favor?

Cypress tree, like a prophet dressed in green,
you whisper secrets from that alien sea.
Drawing down its pearls and coral,
adorning our ears.

Listen, you say. Listen to the flowers.
Listen to the nightingale
translating secrets into song.

Turtledoves coo at the moon.
Parrots sweeten our chatter.

The soul drinks their music,
wet and fresh as spring.



Isn't it also interesting that in my ecological example, the tree trunk is empty?

[Lou Gold]

The problem, Cleric, from an ecological perspective, is that, as in the case of the common strangler figs found in the tropics, long-term growth and survival may actually belong to some vine varieties with roots, which were sent downward after starting higher in the tree. The so-called "Strangler Fig", which is an established part of a lawful ecological diversity, follows the path of Immanence. Starting high in the tree closer to the presumed Godhead and traveling downward for more soil nutrient is the more powerful path in this case. To presume a victorious upward (Transcendent) path would be an error caused by an ascent bias, which did not appreciate the full possibilities of Lawful diversity.

I would suggest another analogy - the Tree of Life as a common trunk from which branches of Lawful diversity grow. When branches know their common trunk, they are in harmony with each other but still continue to grow in diverse forms. When they don't know that they grow from the same trunk, they perceive themselves and other branches as separate trees and compete with each other for survival.

But also, when we grow as branches from the One Tree, we do grow as an ecosystem in diverse forms, but at the same time we evolve into forms of higher cognition and acquire more knowledge, which can also be called "ascension". So, there is no contradiction between ascending/evolving and living as a diverse ecosystem, it is both at the same time.

This is why broadening our aperture of thinking is so important, so we can discern the evolutionary process we already went through. Of course the descent-ascent rhythm occurs at many scales, but at the largest scale of our Solar evolution, we already went through the 'downward path of Immanence'. A quick look around us or within us should also make this clear. Is there anything which is more perfectly constructed in the Creation and which also befuddles the intellect than the physical human organism? That is the end result of an involutionary process which is now evolving back to more integrated structures. Everywhere the mere physical is decaying and dying around us and within us, as it is progressively spiritualized. It is only a refusal to look into the living details which allows us to maintain the nice abstractions of 'simultaneous ascent and descent' which translates into, 'ascent when I prefer and descent when I prefer'. In our modern age, this generally translates into complete stagnation and waiting for some external power to save the Earth organism through nature, the state, the apocalypse, the rapture, or after death, with possibly an abstract hope we will return on some Boddhisatva mission to set right all that we have contributed to the disharmonious World-state.

Lou, you can say 'but I'm not an intellectual who is interested in looking into all those pesky details', which is fine, but then it makes no sense to try and convince others who have looked into those details that they are in error and holding to a bias. Why should we pay any heed to the perspective which simply refuses to wade into the living details of spiritual evolution?

Ashvin, I am happy to live and I am happy to die. This is not intellectual. I am directly and actively participating in the process. What exactly prevents you from accepting the possibility that I have indeed waded into the living details of spiritual evolution in the now? I'm here not as a teacher of a one correct way for all. I was very happy when Eugene posted the Paschal Canon, the text of which felt very much like the Holy Week I experienced along my path. I'm not proselytizing or evangelizing. I'm just offering my testimony.

[AshvinP]

I would suggest another analogy - the Tree of Life as a common trunk from which branches of Lawful diversity grow. When branches know their common trunk, they are in harmony with each other but still continue to grow in diverse forms. When they don't know that they grow from the same trunk, they perceive themselves and other branches as separate trees and compete with each other for survival.

But also, when we grow as branches from the One Tree, we do grow as an ecosystem in diverse forms, but at the same time we evolve into forms of higher cognition and acquire more knowledge, which can also be called "ascension". So, there is no contradiction between ascending/evolving and living as a diverse ecosystem, it is both at the same time.

This is why broadening our aperture of thinking is so important, so we can discern the evolutionary process we already went through. Of course the descent-ascent rhythm occurs at many scales, but at the largest scale of our Solar evolution, we already went through the 'downward path of Immanence'. A quick look around us or within us should also make this clear. Is there anything which is more perfectly constructed in the Creation and which also befuddles the intellect than the physical human organism? That is the end result of an involutionary process which is now evolving back to more integrated structures. Everywhere the mere physical is decaying and dying around us and within us, as it is progressively spiritualized. It is only a refusal to look into the living details which allows us to maintain the nice abstractions of 'simultaneous ascent and descent' which translates into, 'ascent when I prefer and descent when I prefer'. In our modern age, this generally translates into complete stagnation and waiting for some external power to save the Earth organism through nature, the state, the apocalypse, the rapture, or after death, with possibly an abstract hope we will return on some Boddhisatva mission to set right all that we have contributed to the disharmonious World-state.

Lou, you can say 'but I'm not an intellectual who is interested in looking into all those pesky details', which is fine, but then it makes no sense to try and convince others who have looked into those details that they are in error and holding to a bias. Why should we pay any heed to the perspective which simply refuses to wade into the living details of spiritual evolution?

Ashvin, I am happy to live and I am happy to die. This is not intellectual. I am directly and actively participating in the process. What exactly prevents you from accepting the possibility that I have indeed waded into the living details of spiritual evolution in the now? I'm here not as a teacher of a one correct way for all. I was very happy when Eugene posted the Paschal Canon, which felt very much like the Holy Week I experienced along my path. I'm not proselytizing or evangelizing. I'm just offering my testimony.

Your repeated indications in almost every post that you are not interested in those details and they are all secondary to your personal relationship with the Divine - how you personally experience it and how that makes you feel. This is also the difficult part in our interactions - there appears to be little effort to either understand what we mean by "living details" or self-awareness that you refuse to engage with them. The same applies to Eugene. You guys really prefer to dwell only with vague abstractions for purposes of discussion on this forum, such as - "I am happy to call ascending/descending and contracting/expanding and constructing/deconstructing and cooperating/conflicting and living/dying as integral to the real." For reasons already discussed by Cleric, it is assumed that any attempts to engage with the how of Divine differentiation-integration is simply intellectual or 'dualistic' speculation, which is either ignoring the 'Oneness/Transcendence' (according to Eugene) or ignoring the 'Manyness/Immanence' (according to you). Many attempts have been made to show why that is not the case, but there is no corresponding effort on your side to understand the attempts. When a trigger word is reached, like 'ascent' or 'integration' or 'hierarchies' or anything similar, you guys stop reasoning through the post and start thinking about how to defensively counter. The holistic meaning of what was written is naturally forsaken in the process, as we saw with your response to Cleric's last post on the tree and the vines.

[Stranger]

We do and we will have disagreements because we do not know the Truth in its ultimate way, and because, due to the diversity in the world of Immanence, we approach it from different paths and perspectives. The difference is how we handle these disagreements - in the spirit of love and inclusion, or in the spirit of intolerance and exclusion. Oneness is in love with diversity and allows for the diversity of evolutionary paths/branches while being always One in its roots. So, when we point to the differences in our perspectives, it should be inclusive invitation to enhance our perspective and look at the reality from a different angle rather than an attempt to prove ourselves right and someone else wrong (and I confess that I'm guilty of that too).

[Lou Gold]

This is why broadening our aperture of thinking is so important, so we can discern the evolutionary process we already went through. Of course the descent-ascent rhythm occurs at many scales, but at the largest scale of our Solar evolution, we already went through the 'downward path of Immanence'. A quick look around us or within us should also make this clear. Is there anything which is more perfectly constructed in the Creation and which also befuddles the intellect than the physical human organism? That is the end result of an involutionary process which is now evolving back to more integrated structures. Everywhere the mere physical is decaying and dying around us and within us, as it is progressively spiritualized. It is only a refusal to look into the living details which allows us to maintain the nice abstractions of 'simultaneous ascent and descent' which translates into, 'ascent when I prefer and descent when I prefer'. In our modern age, this generally translates into complete stagnation and waiting for some external power to save the Earth organism through nature, the state, the apocalypse, the rapture, or after death, with possibly an abstract hope we will return on some Boddhisatva mission to set right all that we have contributed to the disharmonious World-state.

Lou, you can say 'but I'm not an intellectual who is interested in looking into all those pesky details', which is fine, but then it makes no sense to try and convince others who have looked into those details that they are in error and holding to a bias. Why should we pay any heed to the perspective which simply refuses to wade into the living details of spiritual evolution?

Ashvin, I am happy to live and I am happy to die. This is not intellectual. I am directly and actively participating in the process. What exactly prevents you from accepting the possibility that I have indeed waded into the living details of spiritual evolution in the now? I'm here not as a teacher of a one correct way for all. I was very happy when Eugene posted the Paschal Canon, which felt very much like the Holy Week I experienced along my path. I'm not proselytizing or evangelizing. I'm just offering my testimony.

Your repeated indications in almost every post that you are not interested in those details and they are all secondary to your personal relationship with the Divine - how you personally experience it and how that makes you feel. This is also the difficult part in our interactions - there appears to be little effort to either understand what we mean by "living details" or self-awareness that you refuse to engage with them. The same applies to Eugene. You guys really prefer to dwell only with vague abstractions for purposes of discussion on this forum, such as - "I am happy to call ascending/descending and contracting/expanding and constructing/deconstructing and cooperating/conflicting and living/dying as integral to the real." For reasons already discussed by Cleric, it is assumed that any attempts to engage with the how of Divine differentiation-integration is simply intellectual or 'dualistic' speculation, which is either ignoring the 'Oneness/Transcendence' (according to Eugene) or ignoring the 'Manyness/Immanence' (according to you). Many attempts have been made to show why that is not the case, but there is no corresponding effort on your side to understand the attempts. When a trigger word is reached, like 'ascent' or 'integration' or 'hierarchies' or anything similar, you guys stop reasoning through the post and start thinking about how to defensively counter. The holistic meaning of what was written is naturally forsaken in the process, as we saw with your response to Cleric's last post on the tree and the vines.

Actually, Ashvin, I do think that I was slipping into intellectual mode and that opened the door to your reaction. Thank you! I'd rather not do that argumentative loop. That would not be a good use of my energy so I'll stick to testimony. That's better. Thanks again.

[AshvinP]

We do and we will have disagreements because we do not know the Truth in its ultimate way, and because, due to the diversity in the world of Immanence, we approach it from different paths and perspectives. The difference is how we handle these disagreements - in the spirit of love and inclusion, or in the spirit of intolerance and exclusion. Oneness is in love with diversity and allows for the diversity of evolutionary paths/branches while being always One in its roots. So, when we point to the differences in our perspectives, it should be inclusive invitation to enhance our perspective and look at the reality from a different angle rather than an attempt to prove ourselves right and someone else wrong (and I confess that I'm guilty of that too).

And as we see all too often these days, the people who talk outwardly about "love" and "diversity" and "inclusion" the most, are the ones compensating for an inner lack of it. People figure it is much easier to signal these virtues and establish the pretense of 'agreement' and 'understanding' than engage the hard work of actually reaching that understanding through ongoing constructive discussions which gradually build a foundation for inner exploration. Every time a challenging issue is raised to think through, the labels of "intolerance", "exclusion", "tyranny" and so forth are brought forward. So then we see the people signaling these virtues outwardly are the most willing to 'cancel' others and exclude them from society altogether, in deed and practice. I'm sure everyone is already familiar with this:





JP is exactly right there - "in order to be able to think, you have to risk being offensive." If we want to gain any traction towards a shared understanding, we have to be willing to endure what is uncomfortable and unfamiliar, what pushes us towards new horizons of thought which we otherwise have an inclination to avoid. No one here has an inclination to avoid the claim that Reality is of Idea-nature and it is One. That is why we all ended up here in the first place. Now we are trying to do exactly what you say - point to new experiential angles from which to explore the Idealness and Oneness of reality, in all its living and evolving details. But that is exactly where the outer labels start surfacing again, the posts become abstract, circular, and repetitive, and the new horizon of exploration is never reached. Why does this keep happening?

[Federica]

Your repeated indications in almost every post that you are not interested in those details and they are all secondary to your personal relationship with the Divine - how you personally experience it and how that makes you feel. This is also the difficult part in our interactions - there appears to be little effort to either understand what we mean by "living details" or self-awareness that you refuse to engage with them. The same applies to Eugene. You guys really prefer to dwell only with vague abstractions for purposes of discussion on this forum, such as - "I am happy to call ascending/descending and contracting/expanding and constructing/deconstructing and cooperating/conflicting and living/dying as integral to the real." For reasons already discussed by Cleric, it is assumed that any attempts to engage with the how of Divine differentiation-integration is simply intellectual or 'dualistic' speculation, which is either ignoring the 'Oneness/Transcendence' (according to Eugene) or ignoring the 'Manyness/Immanence' (according to you). Many attempts have been made to show why that is not the case, but there is no corresponding effort on your side to understand the attempts. When a trigger word is reached, like 'ascent' or 'integration' or 'hierarchies' or anything similar, you guys stop reasoning through the post and start thinking about how to defensively counter. The holistic meaning of what was written is naturally forsaken in the process, as we saw with your response to Cleric's last post on the tree and the vines.

Not in the least to minimize your observations, Ashvin, however it can be said, on the other hand, that the guys provide other members, like me, with continuous opportunity for spiritual training!