Federica wrote: ↑Tue Feb 13, 2024 2:43 pmRight, I may have misinterpreted that particular point - sorry about that. But this does not change the objective situation as it appears from the posts and the blog comments. Of course my irritation is real, but also anecdotal. What's way more important is that you don't accept even the possibility that your esoteric comment might be part of the reason why BK has reacted as he did, and his intellectual stance, ego inflation, etc are not the only reasons. For my part, I have surely much more soul work to do, but I definitely don't see that you have completed yours. You have to control your patronizing instinct.AshvinP wrote: ↑Tue Feb 13, 2024 2:25 pmFederica wrote: ↑Tue Feb 13, 2024 2:09 pm
Ashvin, please be careful.
I did NOT say that the way to go was to speak to BK about "communion with the dead". Not only my words above, but also, my own comment to BK are the indisputable proofs this is NOT what I recommended. Your statement therefore is at best, careless reading, and at worst, wish to be right, and defensiveness.
I said VERY CLEARLY that the way to go with Bernardo is Clerics way.
The fact that he reacted negatively and without the least understanding is NOT in anyway a proof you were correct. YOU are the one who were endeavoring to facilitate a different and new understanding for him, and it was UP TO YOU to make the meaning as accessible to his personality as possible. It's not a good idea to push his lack of understanding for the inner path, entirely on him. It's just as much OUR inability to pierce the boundary of understanding of an intelligent thinker.
And when I say OUR, I am talking about me and you. Cleric is NOT included here. His reply is not at all a "comment to the article", as you call it. He has sacrificed his comment to the article, preferring to come in the thread of your comment instead, and try to undo the (fully foreseeable) effect of esoteric words on BKs current perspective.
You are misreading my comment - I said the 'communion with the dead' comparison didn't seem a promising path of engagement, which is why I said (in your words) - "nääääääääääääää, not promising at all, he is worsening his stance, ego-inflated, etcetera." I didn't say anything about you suggesting that was the 'way to go' with BK - you simply read that into my comment through the prism of antipathy.
I hope you at least see how the etheric death spectrum comparison is much different than communion with the dead based on there only being one 'dissociative boundary' instead of two. It's a completely different thing.
I'm sorry, Federica, I'm not going down this rabbit hole of your personal antipathies anymore. The result is entirely predictable from past experience and it will have nothing to do with calmly discussing the important spiritual ideas.
As long as you are still doing the soul work, there is no need to address it further. I think you will make a huge step in this soul work if, the next time you feel so irritated by something I do in the comments, you resist the urge to condense it into a post on the forum. That is the soul work which makes a difference. I know the potent effectiveness of this strategy entirely from experience.
And by the way, of course Owen Barfield still thinks. He does it through us, who think his ideas, read his books, and have new intiatives about them, making them into new ideas and new books, new deeds.
There is no objective situation here, Federica. There is something completely trivial and subjective - me expressing some ideas about BK's latest article, deciding not to comment, changing my mind to comment after Cleric's post stimulated an idea, and you being irritated and insulted at this decision and deciding to express that. Everything else flows from that subjective feeling.
Sure, I could have made my comment less esoteric and more general, as I usually do. I chose to go a different route this time. Cleric weighed in to help smooth out the situation. It's no big deal - it's trivial. It's not something to get up in arms about, get irritated about, point fingers about, etc. BK's salvation from abstract thinking does not rest on my comment. You wouldn't even be suggesting such a thing if not for the initial irritation with my trivial decision.
Neither was my comment about OB 'not thinking' something to take so literally and bring up again out of the blue simply to 'one up' me.