As a side note, I'd say his core intention was rather for people to develop the right relationship to active thinking, with or without higher spiritual vision. This is the object of the lecture: The Tasks and Aims of Spiritual Science - GA 117. There is also the audio version.
Federica wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 5:11 pm This discussion is about the future, just as your thesis about the value of the RCC is about the future. But whereas you insist that the failure of the present RCC to live up to the requirements coming to present-day man from the future, will transform into a success, and must be the only home of our spiritual operations today, I don’t rely at all on the present institution of the AS. I don’t care about what the AS does or doesn’t do. It plays no role in what I am talking about. Is it clear?
Can we have something of a free vision of the future, rather than again and again fall into a trapped, institutionalized understanding of these things? Can we break free from institutions of all sorts as the carriers of man's impulse toward its future?
I am saying that the evident and pressing need that Steiner spent his entire life pinpointing for us is for the recognition of the carrier within, and at the same time for a communal intention to facilitate for all the accessibility of this recognition, and its applicability to all fields of practical life. If this shift progressively succeeds - if man accepts to work at actively meeting his future - the shift will progressively make religion a thing of the past. This has nothing whatsoever to do with the present AS. It has all to do with our collective responsibility to build new means of realizing the pressing need articulated by Steiner, and to bring it to the world, in the face of evolution's pressing requirements.
As shown, VT unfortunately pedals against this needed evolution, as he encourages his friends to abdicate the mentioned collective responsibility, doing all he can to seamlessly minimize, and covertly discredit Steiner’s practical initiatives and spiritual-scientific approach, while arguing for silence, secrecy, and inactivity within the practical fields of human activity, in the name of temperance and modesty. At a first reading of MoT, this had not stood out to my attention, as I ignored his volte-face to spiritual science. Aware of that now, I see the trajectory of his writing standing out in much more clarity.
So what will you cling to now, to argue your thesis that we need to ignore the call coming from the future and follow instead VT’s retrograde indications?
As a side note, I'd say his core intention was rather for people to develop the right relationship to active thinking, with or without higher spiritual vision. This is the object of the lecture: The Tasks and Aims of Spiritual Science - GA 117. There is also the audio version.
Federica wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 5:11 pm I am saying that the evident and pressing need that Steiner spent his entire life pinpointing for us is for the recognition of the carrier within, and at the same time for a communal intention to facilitate for all the accessibility of this recognition, and its applicability to all fields of practical life.
AshvinP wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 6:36 pmFederica wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 5:11 pm This discussion is about the future, just as your thesis about the value of the RCC is about the future. But whereas you insist that the failure of the present RCC to live up to the requirements coming to present-day man from the future, will transform into a success, and must be the only home of our spiritual operations today, I don’t rely at all on the present institution of the AS. I don’t care about what the AS does or doesn’t do. It plays no role in what I am talking about. Is it clear?
Can we have something of a free vision of the future, rather than again and again fall into a trapped, institutionalized understanding of these things? Can we break free from institutions of all sorts as the carriers of man's impulse toward its future?
I am saying that the evident and pressing need that Steiner spent his entire life pinpointing for us is for the recognition of the carrier within, and at the same time for a communal intention to facilitate for all the accessibility of this recognition, and its applicability to all fields of practical life. If this shift progressively succeeds - if man accepts to work at actively meeting his future - the shift will progressively make religion a thing of the past. This has nothing whatsoever to do with the present AS. It has all to do with our collective responsibility to build new means of realizing the pressing need articulated by Steiner, and to bring it to the world, in the face of evolution's pressing requirements.
Of course, it plays a role, otherwise we are simply dealing with abstractions upon abstractions. In that case, it becomes clear who is truly waiting passively for the Luciferic cloud to magically condense as 'carriers of man's impulse toward its future', without any concrete sense of how this should happen.
Let's recall: it is not "any kind of significant role" that you and R mention with regards to the RCC, but a very specific and all-encompassing one.
AshvinP wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 6:36 pm Everything Cleric has discussed above about "seeking a center of coherence that is not of this world" absolutely depends on higher spiritual vision. Without it, the projects all remain as preferred ways of maintaining the clearly traceable wires from Cosmic Intelligence to intellectual representations. Steiner knew that as well.
Federica wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 6:55 pmAshvinP wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 6:36 pmFederica wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 5:11 pm This discussion is about the future, just as your thesis about the value of the RCC is about the future. But whereas you insist that the failure of the present RCC to live up to the requirements coming to present-day man from the future, will transform into a success, and must be the only home of our spiritual operations today, I don’t rely at all on the present institution of the AS. I don’t care about what the AS does or doesn’t do. It plays no role in what I am talking about. Is it clear?
Can we have something of a free vision of the future, rather than again and again fall into a trapped, institutionalized understanding of these things? Can we break free from institutions of all sorts as the carriers of man's impulse toward its future?
I am saying that the evident and pressing need that Steiner spent his entire life pinpointing for us is for the recognition of the carrier within, and at the same time for a communal intention to facilitate for all the accessibility of this recognition, and its applicability to all fields of practical life. If this shift progressively succeeds - if man accepts to work at actively meeting his future - the shift will progressively make religion a thing of the past. This has nothing whatsoever to do with the present AS. It has all to do with our collective responsibility to build new means of realizing the pressing need articulated by Steiner, and to bring it to the world, in the face of evolution's pressing requirements.
Of course, it plays a role, otherwise we are simply dealing with abstractions upon abstractions. In that case, it becomes clear who is truly waiting passively for the Luciferic cloud to magically condense as 'carriers of man's impulse toward its future', without any concrete sense of how this should happen.
No dear. Cleric has adressed precisely this point in his last post. I don't see anything I could say that would add anything to it. You need to dare to fully detach yourself from the earthly institutional bedrock.
Let's recall: it is not "any kind of significant role" that you and R mention with regards to the RCC, but a very specific and all-encompassing one.
AshvinP wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 6:36 pm Everything Cleric has discussed above about "seeking a center of coherence that is not of this world" absolutely depends on higher spiritual vision. Without it, the projects all remain as preferred ways of maintaining the clearly traceable wires from Cosmic Intelligence to intellectual representations. Steiner knew that as well.
It doesn't. For the transition between the two Souls to be launched at scale in the right way, it doesn't. Read/listen to the lecture, then we can discuss this further.
AshvinP wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 8:55 pm I suppose you mean when he says:
"Conversely, the greatest source of discomfort for the intellectual soul is to have here and there manifestations of human activity that, in a trivial sense, can be called 'spontaneous'. This is uncomfortable because the intellectual soul completely misses the thread. It cannot trace the wires."
What are these spontaneous 'here and there manifestations' if not the Anthroposophical projects that have developed through the Society?
The thing is, what is written above won't be applied to any esoteric organizations because it is understood that, at least in principle, it would be a presumptuous fallacy. The criticism would be rooted in an assumption that the soul is working out of an esoteric organization because it feels uncomfortable without any physical and intellectual support, but in reality, the soul is working out of such an organization because, from its intuitive perspective, it can see that such support can be leveraged for the higher work. It knows that the organizations don't exist out of a desire to prolong the intellectual gestures as long as possible, but out of a desire to musically harmonize the whole spectrum through existing structures that have been wisely constructed out of the prior Spirit of initiates. A part of that wise construction was a certain degree of flexibility and pliability, just as the human physical organism.
The only reason this shift in perspective is completely ignored when it comes to the Catholic project, it seems, is because the Church = power-hungry, manipulative, coercive, dogmatic, regressive, inflexible, etc., institution, in the eyes of modern esotericists. No other reason has actually been given for why the Church should be treated as fundamentally different from other organizations through which higher intuitive work must be channeled. There is some unexamined desire for the Church not to be involved in any of this work, which then leads to ignoring any and all indications of why the Church may have an important role to play. Only after all the nuanced indications are thrown aside as irrelevant, can you maintain that it is a "specific and all-encompassing one", which is simply a caricature and, perhaps, after so many posts from Rodriel trying to remedy the caricature, even an outright falsity. It's not that I think there are any bad intentions involved - perhaps you sincerely feel like this is a logical way of going about it, but I simply can't understand why such a thing would ever be considered logical.
Federica wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 9:56 pmAshvinP wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 8:55 pm I suppose you mean when he says:
"Conversely, the greatest source of discomfort for the intellectual soul is to have here and there manifestations of human activity that, in a trivial sense, can be called 'spontaneous'. This is uncomfortable because the intellectual soul completely misses the thread. It cannot trace the wires."
What are these spontaneous 'here and there manifestations' if not the Anthroposophical projects that have developed through the Society?
The thing is, what is written above won't be applied to any esoteric organizations because it is understood that, at least in principle, it would be a presumptuous fallacy. The criticism would be rooted in an assumption that the soul is working out of an esoteric organization because it feels uncomfortable without any physical and intellectual support, but in reality, the soul is working out of such an organization because, from its intuitive perspective, it can see that such support can be leveraged for the higher work. It knows that the organizations don't exist out of a desire to prolong the intellectual gestures as long as possible, but out of a desire to musically harmonize the whole spectrum through existing structures that have been wisely constructed out of the prior Spirit of initiates. A part of that wise construction was a certain degree of flexibility and pliability, just as the human physical organism.
The only reason this shift in perspective is completely ignored when it comes to the Catholic project, it seems, is because the Church = power-hungry, manipulative, coercive, dogmatic, regressive, inflexible, etc., institution, in the eyes of modern esotericists. No other reason has actually been given for why the Church should be treated as fundamentally different from other organizations through which higher intuitive work must be channeled. There is some unexamined desire for the Church not to be involved in any of this work, which then leads to ignoring any and all indications of why the Church may have an important role to play. Only after all the nuanced indications are thrown aside as irrelevant, can you maintain that it is a "specific and all-encompassing one", which is simply a caricature and, perhaps, after so many posts from Rodriel trying to remedy the caricature, even an outright falsity. It's not that I think there are any bad intentions involved - perhaps you sincerely feel like this is a logical way of going about it, but I simply can't understand why such a thing would ever be considered logical.
I refer to the entire post as a whole. The Church doesn’t need to be dismantled, but it becomes more and more secondary, once the focus shifts to, innerly, the transformation of thinking, and outwardly, the reorientation of social life, so as to 1/ facilitate this transformation of thinking, and 2/ make the fruits of the transformation enliven all fields of practical life. What you are still not integrating is that all institutions, not only the RCC, will progressively become secondary. Again, this will not happen instantly, but consider how the concept of outer “institution” itself will begin to fade.
And it’s interesting that you say you cannot imagine other options. How do you become so exoteric, all of a sudden, so fixed on comparing earthly, institutional options? You yourself are already part of “the other option”, the non institutional one, when you for example decide to post a phenomenological essay on publicly accessible platforms, and/or to share it with the world in meditation. Is this “waiting passively” for Lucifer? No, right? Wouldn’t that be a good example of "spontaneous manifestation"?
So it’s not a matter of unexamined antipathy for the RCC. It’s a matter of how all institutions must become secondary, for the consciousness soul to emerge (and by the way, when one says that the message is that the state should become the church, how is this not a vision for an all-encompassing role, where large earthly institutions converge to become even larger, and more monolithically present, as an even tighter fabric?) The problem with R is that he’s the first to skip engaging with Cleric questions, always preferring to elaborate his views in response rather than taking the questions at heart. For example, in his last long reply to Cleric, the questions Cleric asked are evaded, again, brushed off with a “no, my Catholic project has not changed any spiritual scientific ideas I had before, nothing is incompatible”, which, you will recognize, is nothing other than an avoidance strategy. This avoidant way (or sense of superiority, if you prefer, which repeatedly becomes a bit disappointed that Cleric dares to express to certain thoughts despite them not being in line with what was presented or discussed) may not even be entirely in focus. Nonetheless it is emblematic of an attitude to impart a quite specific vision, to provide hints, and then to retreat, or back off a bit - but without having engaged with the questions - once the vision is not adopted by Cleric, in the same way as you have adopted it.
AshvinP wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 8:55 pm The other interesting thing is that, if you understand Cleric's posts, you should be the one pushing back, because the critique applies directly to what you have suggested over and over again in recent threads, including the last few posts. The idea that Steiner's "core intention was rather for people to develop the right relationship to active thinking, with or without higher spiritual vision", is the most blatant way of preserving the intellectual soul indefinitely. Cleric says, "MoT provides a great way for souls to develop the right relationship to active thinking (and devotional feeling), but in the background of this work is the Catholic project, and this secretly acts as a way for the soul to indefinitely avoid seeking higher spiritual vision and letting go of its dependent grip on the fully traceable intellectual gestures." Yet this is also how you view the spiritual scientific project, and feel it is perfectly viable for souls to remain dependent on those gestures as long as they are developing the right relationship to active thinking. In that sense, the "Catholic project" that Cleric imagines is actually what you are advocating, while the Catholic project, as Rodriel has been trying to elucidate it (if we take him at his word and don't simply brush all nuanced indications aside), is something quite different.
It is a thousand times better to have grasped the ideas of Spiritual Science with thought first of all, and then—sooner or later, each according to his karma—to be able oneself to ascend into the spiritual worlds; a thousand times better than to have ‘seen’ straight-away and not to have grasped with thought the knowledge that is imparted in the Movement known as the Theosophical. A thousand times better it is indeed, to know Theosophy and to see nothing as yet, than to see something and not be able to penetrate it with thought, for that is how unreliability is introduced.
We must consider the age in which we live. It is the age which, in the whole evolution of man, is the epoch when conscious thought must be developed, just as in the ancient Indian period a quite different kind of consciousness was evolved, a consciousness that was reminiscent of a dim, shadowy clairvoyance; the powers of the present day have gradually been developing ever since that time. It is only we in this age, who in conjunction with the development of the Spiritual Soul have brought human thinking into the sphere of earth-evolution. For this reason Theosophy must now, at this time, be brought down out of the super-sensible world and must make its appeal to the reasoned thinking of men.
We need to distinguish clearly between two conditions. Firstly: a man may not be much of a thinker, his thinking may indeed be quite primitive and yet he may at the same time be comparatively far advanced as regards vision on the astral plane, and even, up to a certain point, on the devachanic plane; he may be quite advanced in this respect and able to see a great deal. Or again, the other case is possible: A man who knows a great deal about the theosophical truths may yet be able to see nothing at all for himself, may not be in the position, as we were saying, to see even “the tip of the tail” of an elemental being! This is also quite possible. Now let us ask ourselves: What is really the inner connection between these different faculties of the human soul?
Here it must be emphasised that to have something, and to be conscious of what we have, are two distinct things. It is extraordinarily important to grasp this point. You will understand it rightly if the question is put somewhat differently. You were all once clairvoyant, in primeval times everyone was clairvoyant, and there was a time too when men were able to look back into the far, far past. And now you may ask: But how is it that we do not remember our former incarnations if we were once able to look back through the ages? Then you may ask: If we become clairvoyant now, will that help us in the next incarnation to look back?
This fact you must have clearly before you, that the old clairvoyance is of no use for looking back to-day. You once had this clairvoyance. How is it, then, that the majority of people to-day do not remember their former incarnations? This question is of the greatest importance. People do not remember their former incarnations—although in earlier epochs they were clairvoyant to a greater or less degree—because in those times they had not developed the faculties which are the faculties of the self, of the ego. For the development of clairvoyant faculties in the general sense is not the essential point.
Now however clairvoyant people may have been in former times, if they did not pay attention to the development of the faculties of the ego, namely, the faculty of thinking, the power of discrimination, which are the special faculties of the human ego on this earth, then the ego was not actively present in the former incarnations, the self-hood was not there! What, then, is there for people to remember? A self-contained ego must be there in the previous incarnation. That is the whole point! So that to-day it is only those people who in their earlier incarnations have worked through the medium of thought, of logic, of discrimination, who can remember those incarnations. Thus however advanced a man is in clairvoyance, if he has not in former incarnations worked through the power of discrimination, of logical thinking, he cannot remember a former incarnation. For he had not at that time set up the signpost as it were, to which his recollection has to go back. So you will see that when one understands Spiritual Science, one cannot too quickly set to work to acquire just these very faculties of genuine thought.
Imagine that you had been given a legacy, but had not yet heard about it. If this were the case, the legacy would nevertheless have its value for you. Even if you do not hear about it until later, yet you possess it all the same. So it is with whoever learns of the facts of the spiritual world through Spiritual Science. They are his, if he has grasped them in an understanding way; he possesses them and need only wait for the time when he will become conscious of them. The becoming conscious of them, however, is not of equal significance with their possession. This is particularly noticeable after death. Which is of more use—if we may put it thus trivially, to make the meaning clear—which is of more use to man after death: to see something in a visionary way, without thought, or to receive purely theosophical communications without seeing things in a visionary way?
One could easily imagine that visionary sight would be a better preparation for death than merely to hear of the facts of the spiritual world. And yet the truth is that after death, what a man has simply seen in a visionary way is of very little use to him, while on the other hand an actual reality is immediately present, as soon as he becomes conscious of what he has received in spiritual communications, if he has grasped these with his understanding. It is what has been understood that is of value after death, whether it has been seen or not.
Consider the deepest Initiate. Through his clairvoyance he can behold the whole spiritual world! But this will not enhance his significance after death, if he is not able to express these facts in human concepts. All that will help him after death is what he has possessed here on earth in the form of clear concepts of thought. There are the seeds for the life after death. Of course anyone who is a thinker as well as a visionary clairvoyant can turn his visions to good account. But two non-thinking persons, of whom one is clairvoyant and the other merely listens to the results of the clairvoyance—these two will be in exactly the same position after death. There is no difference between them, for what we take into the life after death is what we acquire for ourselves here by means of clear thinking. This springs up like a seed; but not so, what we have merely already seen on earth of the worlds we now enter. What we receive here from the higher worlds is not given to us as a free gift so as to make it easier for us when we leave the physical plane, but in order that we may translate it into the current coin of the earth. What we have thus translated, just so much helps us after death. That is the essential thing.
All quotes from: The Tasks and Aims of Spiritual Science - GA 117. Audio version.This must be clear to us. We must inscribe these fine shades of thought upon our minds and souls; we must be clear that the task of a real occult science to-day is to impart those results of spiritual investigation which are permeated with a thinking content, so that one can always clothe the results of spiritual research in such a way as to be comprehensible through thinking to the man who is not clairvoyant. To this end they must first be combined with thought.
Federica wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 11:12 pmAshvinP wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 8:55 pm The other interesting thing is that, if you understand Cleric's posts, you should be the one pushing back, because the critique applies directly to what you have suggested over and over again in recent threads, including the last few posts. The idea that Steiner's "core intention was rather for people to develop the right relationship to active thinking, with or without higher spiritual vision", is the most blatant way of preserving the intellectual soul indefinitely. Cleric says, "MoT provides a great way for souls to develop the right relationship to active thinking (and devotional feeling), but in the background of this work is the Catholic project, and this secretly acts as a way for the soul to indefinitely avoid seeking higher spiritual vision and letting go of its dependent grip on the fully traceable intellectual gestures." Yet this is also how you view the spiritual scientific project, and feel it is perfectly viable for souls to remain dependent on those gestures as long as they are developing the right relationship to active thinking. In that sense, the "Catholic project" that Cleric imagines is actually what you are advocating, while the Catholic project, as Rodriel has been trying to elucidate it (if we take him at his word and don't simply brush all nuanced indications aside), is something quite different.
Looks like you have still not checked GA 117.
What I have said - as a side note - is that for Steiner, in order for the Consciousness/Spiritual Soul to develop, it's more important to anchor the awareness of being there with one's I, in the thoughts, than to achieve clairvoyance. As Cleric presented in the DDF meditation, this is the way to create an anchoring point that allows the soul-spirit to find itself after death, and in subsequent reincarnations, hence to progress. This is granted by painstakingly developing active thinking and study-meditation by which the contents of SS are apprehended through the powers of thought. The first, initial measure of clear progression towards the Spiritual Soul (at rebirth, as I said, higher spiritual vision will inevitably come) is the application of the I-infused powers of thought to the revelations of the Spiritual Worlds shared by the Initiates in intelligible concepts. This is no blatant way to preserve the intellectual soul. Rather, it is the only way to facilitate the advent of the Spiritual Soul.
Hi Anthony,Anthony66 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 29, 2025 1:13 pm I personally find the eschatological perspectives discussed in this thread a far grander vision of things compared to a jaundiced "believe the right things in your one life and the salvation story is done". But trying to get my head at least partially around the dynamics of the omega point is challenging!