Absent any and all idea construction what remains?

[AshvinP]

Isn't it possible your advances in understanding Cleric's illustrations and what they are pointing to came despite being "primed" by Spira.

Well, it wasn't Spira I was drawn to, but a teaching the long predates him. And yes, I feel it was vital to first have that understanding of the primacy of Consciousness, and that without that being firmly established, anything else would have been a bridge too far. Mind you, it's never been in my nature to latch onto any given teacher, or teaching, as the be all and end all, as some seem to be prone to do. Likewise, I'm not about to become attached to Cleric either.

I get it. And clearly we are not saying to become attached to Cleric, Steiner, or any individual personality. But this is what I mean - if that's the way you are thinking about it, that comes entirely from "Spira" (standing in for all similar nondual views), or somewhere else entirely, but not from Steiner, Cleric, or myself. The underlying ideas, however, are not the sort of thing which can be understood and still treated like one among many other philosophical worldviews. The holistic constellation of ideas either reflects Reality or is complete delusion which proceeded from flawed reasoning early in the process... I see no logical in between. So that is to say, I don't think Spira primed you to understand Cleric, because you are not yet understanding him. Which is fine... no one says its an easy thing to do. There are many things Cleric could write here which I would not understand. The negative thing is when we assume we have understood when we have not, because then we are either rejecting or following up on something which is not representative of esoteric spiritual evolutionary view at all.

[Soul_of_Shu]

I get it. And clearly we are not saying to become attached to Cleric, Steiner, or any individual personality. But this is what I mean - if that's the way you are thinking about it, that comes entirely from "Spira" (standing in for all similar nondual views), or somewhere else entirely, but not from Steiner, Cleric, or myself. The underlying ideas, however, are not the sort of thing which can be understood and still treated like one among many other philosophical worldviews. The holistic constellation of ideas either reflects Reality or is complete delusion which proceeded from flawed reasoning early in the process... I see no logical in between. So that is to say, I don't think Spira primed you to understand Cleric, because you are not yet understanding him. Which is fine... no one says its an easy thing to do. There are many things Cleric could write here which I would not understand. The negative thing is when we assume we have understood when we have not, because then we are either rejecting or following up on something which is not representative of esoteric spiritual evolutionary view at all.

Suffice to say that I disagree with your opinion about what I feel was first necessary to be ready to delve into what Cleric is offering, regardless of how much more delving remains ahead. Again, that is not to say that the same must be the case for all. Anyway, this has all digressed far from what I was inquiring about in the original post, which is fine, because that inquiry has now been clarified, as much to do with my own further thinking it through, with some confirmation from Cleric after I restated the inquiry. So if you all now feel he need to go back into the usual mode, I will bow out.

[AshvinP]

I get it. And clearly we are not saying to become attached to Cleric, Steiner, or any individual personality. But this is what I mean - if that's the way you are thinking about it, that comes entirely from "Spira" (standing in for all similar nondual views), or somewhere else entirely, but not from Steiner, Cleric, or myself. The underlying ideas, however, are not the sort of thing which can be understood and still treated like one among many other philosophical worldviews. The holistic constellation of ideas either reflects Reality or is complete delusion which proceeded from flawed reasoning early in the process... I see no logical in between. So that is to say, I don't think Spira primed you to understand Cleric, because you are not yet understanding him. Which is fine... no one says its an easy thing to do. There are many things Cleric could write here which I would not understand. The negative thing is when we assume we have understood when we have not, because then we are either rejecting or following up on something which is not representative of esoteric spiritual evolutionary view at all.

Suffice to say that I disagree with your opinion about what I feel was first necessary to be ready to delve into what Cleric is offering, regardless of how much more delving remains ahead. Again, that is not to say that the same must be the case for all. Anyway, this has all digressed far from what I was inquiring about in the original post, which is fine, because that inquiry has now been clarified, as much to do with my own further thinking it through, with some confirmation from Cleric after I restated the inquiry. So if you all now feel he need to go back into the usual mode, I will bow out.

Ok well I see I missed one of your comments (re:Venice) to Eugene, so at least there is shared understanding

After a year of agreeing with everything Cleric said and saying nondual mystical view can be conjoined with Western esoteric view, all the while we were telling him this cannot be done in the way he fantasizes because he doesn't understand the latter as a later evolutionary stage of the former, he now finally admits he misunderstood it this entire time! I will gladly take it, so we can at least stop that part of the charade.

[Cleric K]

It is strange to see so much rejection and resistance to the nonduality by anthroposophists. There might be some deeper spiritual reasons for that, the division may originate in the noncorporeal realms, who knows...

It's interesting to note that Steiner called the afterlife realm "kamaloka" (which literally means "the realm of desires" in Sanskrit), but according to the Buddhist cosmology that realm belongs to Brahmaloka - the realm of Brahma - the deity-creator of the astral/etheric/material worlds, with a hierarchy of his servants, and this is the realm of dualities belonging to samsara. No wonder their philosophy is so opposed to nonduality. This is of course quite esoteric, but still...

I was trying to unify the nondual and Steinerian worldviews into an integrated one, but I think Cleric is right, they are incompatible. And the difference is not simply philosophical, they represent completely different sets of spiritual goals and values.

Eugene, here you build upon very fragmentary understanding. "Steiner called the afterlife realm "kamaloka"" This is as if you opened at a random page of a book, read a word and claim that this is all the author said. If you had read even only a few more pages you would see that kamaloka refers to a specific stage of the journey after death. And here once again we see how misleading everything becomes when there's no proper notion of Time and spiritual metamorphic unfolding. The idea that the incorporeal state is somehow a timeless Gödel arena, is very misleading. Just as we pass in normal life through growth, changing of the teeth, puberty, adulthood, etc., so we continue through similar stages after the separation of the body. Kamaloka refers to the stage where we purify precisely the web of sympathies and antipathies, which we can purify also while in the body. Kamaloka is not some separate realm that we go to only after death. We live in it even now with our desires but our bodily life gives means to satisfy these desires. When the bodily instruments are laid down, we're left with the desires (which live in the soul/astral body) but we lose the means to satisfy then. The state can be compared to feeling burning thirst in the midst of a desert. These states continue as we long as we learn that we must transform the desires themselves. Then life continues in more spiritual states, where we live in the archetypal forces of man and the Cosmos.

Please note that all these things are verifiable. We only need to make at least few steps in the direction to discover how our desires act as the deeper arrow rhythms, at the tip of which our thinking unfolds.

When the desire to imagine a free electron paradigm after death is so strong that it prevents the only direction from which real self-knowledge can be attained, then no amount of explanations can help. The incompatibility of paths is not some superficial disagreement. It's really about the desire to stay on the inner side of the threshold of death and fantasize whatever afterlife mechanics suit us, instead of pursuing the only logical path that can give answers to these questions. Please note this. The situation is not symmetric. The path of evolution doesn't reject, disbelieve, misunderstand the ancients paths. It's quite the opposite. They are understood, integrated but development goes further. On the other hand, the ancient paths dismiss the evolutionary development for completely different reasons - because they don't understand it and as a rule it must be rejected. This understanding is feared because it threatens the ancient state. It cannot be dismissed by understanding it, because this would only make it more and more logical and self-evident. This would be like trying to dismiss the Pythagorean theorem by understanding it and then trying to show it is false. But the more we understand it, the more we see its inner logic. For this reason we can only reject it if we stay outside it and launch superficial attacks. Such is the situation in spirituality today. The evolutionary path which begins to integrate the consciousness on both sides of the threshold of death can't be dismissed by understanding it because this would in itself dismantle the naive belief in the free electron paradigm. Such a paradigm can be supported only when self-knowledge is kept at safe distance (by the veil dogma for example). For this reason, higher knowledge can be rejected only based on superficial attacks, based on misunderstanding (like the Kamaloka example above).

Dana has grasped quite some of the inner logic of these things but now faces the final fortification of the Earthly self. There's inner rebellion to conceive that there could be something within ourselves, which understands much better our life path and to which the Earthly self works in opposition most of the time.

Mind you, it's never been in my nature to latch onto any given teacher, or teaching, as the be all and end all, as some seem to be prone to do. Likewise, I'm not about to become attached to Cleric either.

It is actually in the nature of our age that there shouldn't be attachment to external authority. The question is, can it be conceived the the real Master lives with the deeper layers (the periphery of the funnel) and that most of the time we're a quite disobedient apprentice? And I know for a fact that this point is the most difficult for most people. The logic goes like: why should I turn to an inner Master if I'm already the only Self there is?

One way to approach this question is by meditating on the nature of conscience. We know very well how our desires are fully capable of disregarding the quiet whisper of conscience. If we can grasp this polarity properly, we've already accomplished quite a lot. From that point we can understand that there are deeper layers of self which are obscured by other layers - and very few of these layers are conscious! We need real scientific knowledge of how to restore the communication flow with these deeper layers of self. Not by reducing them and explaining them away with intellectual abstractions but by developing the fully conscious means of relating to our higher being, which is also the true Teacher, the true Master. All external personalities serve only to lead us to a point where we know how to speak to the Master within. If we feel that it's foolish to speak to the Master who arts in the depths and whose voice we dimly hear in conscience, we're not yet giving up the fortification of the Earthly self. We keep the desire to feel as top authority in our conscious world. This desire would be one of the first that we will have to dismantle with our own hands in Kamaloka. We can support the abstract belief that we're seeing things from the apex of awareness, only because of the bodily shell which keeps us in the shade of Truth. Once outside the shell, everything around us proves the impossibility of what we had desired. We could have easily avoided this disappointment in Kamaloka, only if we had not shied away from self-knowledge while still in the body.

[Soul_of_Shu]

Dana has grasped quite some of the inner logic of these things but now faces the final fortification of the Earthly self. There's inner rebellion to conceive that there could be something within ourselves, which understands much better our life path and to which the Earthly self works in opposition most of the time.

Mind you, it's never been in my nature to latch onto any given teacher, or teaching, as the be all and end all, as some seem to be prone to do. Likewise, I'm not about to become attached to Cleric either.

It is actually in the nature of our age that there shouldn't be attachment to external authority. The question is, can it be conceived the the real Master lives with the deeper layers (the periphery of the funnel) and that most of the time we're a quite disobedient apprentice?

Indeed, this is pretty much where I'm at, and have been for quite a while now, endeavouring to listen to the Voice within, still often more like a distant whispering, as if through a surgical mask (how apropos is that metaphor now), rather than a clear and present audible from the inner quarterback.

If I may be allowed to return to the 'Venice' analogy: I'm one of those who shows up at some newfound city, and when offered the guided tour by a hawker at the gate, balk at the offer, preferring to go solo, with no companions who explore at their own pace. Mind you, I'm not one of those who shows up, after exploring the countryside, with its road map in hand—not a bad map, just now irrelevant—who when offered a good map of the city, says 'no thanks, I'm good', after taking a glance at what appears to be a good map one found in an old guidebook, only to soon find oneself quickly lost. Then again, I don't mind getting lost for a while, which in the labyrinth of a city like Venice, even with a good map, is still likely to happen, and actually is a good thing, because in learning how to be unlost, relying on the inner GPS, the map gradually becomes dispensable. And best plan on staying for quite a while. As for the tour guides, wagging their fingers disapprovingly at the cheap map, of course they too serve a valid role for the more tentative ones on a tight schedule, doing the quick turnaround trip.

[Eugene I.]

Eugene, here you build upon very fragmentary understanding. "Steiner called the afterlife realm "kamaloka"" This is as if you opened at a random page of a book, read a word and claim that this is all the author said. If you had read even only a few more pages you would see that kamaloka refers to a specific stage of the journey after death. And here once again we see how misleading everything becomes when there's no proper notion of Time and spiritual metamorphic unfolding. The idea that the incorporeal state is somehow a timeless Gödel arena, is very misleading. Just as we pass in normal life through growth, changing of the teeth, puberty, adulthood, etc., so we continue through similar stages after the separation of the body. Kamaloka refers to the stage where we purify precisely the web of sympathies and antipathies, which we can purify also while in the body. Kamaloka is not some separate realm that we go to only after death. We live in it even now with our desires but our bodily life gives means to satisfy these desires. When the bodily instruments are laid down, we're left with the desires (which live in the soul/astral body) but we lose the means to satisfy then. The state can be compared to feeling burning thirst in the midst of a desert. These states continue as we long as we learn that we must transform the desires themselves. Then life continues in more spiritual states, where we live in the archetypal forces of man and the Cosmos.

That's right, it's how it is also viewed in the Buddhist cosmology (we are getting esoteric here). The realm above kamaloka where the higher-order beings abide with their Master (Sun Man, or Brahma in Buddhist/Hindu tradition) is called Brahmaloka in the Buddhist cosmology and it is indeed above the kamaloka level of unsatisfied desires. In the Buddhist cosmology the universe is structured and layered just like in Steinerian view, but there is a substantial difference: there are realms (belonging to Pure Lands in Rupaloka beyond samsaric realms) where consciousness exists in the state of nondual perception and cognition, and it is so fundamentally different from the state of consciousness in Brahmaloka and other samsaric realms that they basically do not overlap. This is not an abstract fantasy, nonduality practitioners know that from experience: their nondual state (the way of perception and thinking) is radically different from a normal state of consciousness of human and other beings living in astral/etheric noncorporeal realms, it is basically a different type of body belonging to different type of realms. In Tibetan tradition it is called "rainbow body". When people who developed their rainbow body state of nondual consciousness die, they shred their astral and etheric bodies and remain in the Pure Lands where their rainbow body belongs. Basically, there are two metamorphic paths: the one described in anthroposophy and similar systems and the nondual path, and these paths diverge substantially. We do not know if they will converge again somewhere at very high levels/stages of development, they may, but at lower levels they go almost orthogonal to each other going along very different curvatures of meanings. This is why nondual traditions are not so concerned about higher knowledge of the beings, levels, orders, structures and bodies belonging to the astral and etheric (samsaric) realms, because these are irrelevant to their path and this is not where they are heading to.

On another note, I noticed that by far the most common word used in Cleric and Steiner texts is "we must". That is quite telling...
But I think we deviated from the root topic quite far, sorry

[Cleric K]

That's right, it's how it is also viewed in the Buddhist cosmology (we are getting esoteric here). The realm above kamaloka where the higher-order beings abide with their Master (Sun Man, or Brahma in Buddhist/Hindu tradition) is called Brahmaloka in the Buddhist cosmology and it is indeed above the kamaloka level of unsatisfied desires. In the Buddhist cosmology the universe is structured and layered just like in Steinerian view, but there is a substantial difference: there are realms (belonging to Pure Lands in Rupaloka beyond samsaric realms) where consciousness exists in the state of nondual perception and cognition, and it is so fundamentally different from the state of consciousness in Brahmaloka and other samsaric realms that they basically do not overlap. This is not an abstract fantasy, nonduality practitioners know that from experience: their nondual state (the way of perception and thinking) is radically different from a normal state of consciousness of human and other beings living in astral/etheric noncorporeal realms, it is basically a different type of body belonging to different type of realms. In Tibetan tradition it is called "rainbow body". When people who developed their rainbow body state of nondual consciousness die, they shred their astral and etheric bodies and remain in the Pure Lands where their rainbow body belongs. Basically, there are two metamorphic paths: the one described in anthroposophy and similar systems and the nondual path, and these paths diverge substantially. We do not know if they will converge again somewhere at very high levels/stages of development, they may, but at lower levels they go almost orthogonal to each other going along very different curvatures of meanings. This is why nondual traditions are not so concerned about higher knowledge of the beings, levels, orders, structures and bodies belonging to the astral and etheric (samsaric) realms, because these are irrelevant to their path and this is not where they are heading to.

On another note, I noticed that by far the most common word used in Cleric and Steiner texts is "we must". That is quite telling...
But I think we deviated from the root topic quite far, sorry

OK Eugene, that's all settled.

As we've talked from the early days, it's not my goal to shaken anyone's choice of religious tradition. These discussions persist only when I have to explain how ideas are rejected based on misunderstandings.

For me things are quite clear. I'm thankful for my atheistic-scientific period because what I learned from there was to dig deep for the explanations beneath the surface. There's no way the scientist in me could be satisfied by some tradition and its Cosmology. Ultimately, it is always the thinking voice in us which decides to stop searching for answers and choose ready-made package. Placing a bet and waiting for death to see how it turns out is not an option for me. I reject that God has placed us here to play roulette. So the logical thing was to go 'meta' and investigate what the thinking voice is, from what palette it chooses its words, why it is drawn to this or that. To follow these inner processes we need different modes of cognition leading to quite different ideas about what we really are. Coincidentally, it is there that we find also what the religions have always spoken of, but now as conscious spiritual reality.

PS: about the "we must" thing: yes I use it often but for very specific reason. It's used in the sense of "If I'm not to die of thirst, I must reach out and take the glass of water in front of me." Of course this presupposes that we want to stay alive. So for future reference, when I use "must" it is only when I describe something which can't possibly be circumvented, granted that we want to get at the destination of course.

[Soul_of_Shu]

On another note, I noticed that by far the most common word used in Cleric and Steiner texts is "we must". That is quite telling...

Don't know if you've been to Venice, but if there you truly 'must' go inside St. Mark's Basilica ... sorry

[Cleric K]

Indeed, this is pretty much where I'm at, and have been for quite a while now, endeavouring to listen to the Voice within, still often more like a distant whispering, as if through a surgical mask (how apropos is that metaphor now), rather than a clear and present audible from the inner quarterback.

If I may be allowed to return to the 'Venice' analogy: I'm one of those who shows up at some newfound city, and when offered the guided tour by a hawker at the gate, balk at the offer, preferring to go solo, with no companions who explore at their own pace. Mind you, I'm not one of those who shows up, after exploring the countryside, with its road map in hand—not a bad map, just now irrelevant—who when offered a good map of the city, says 'no thanks, I'm good', after taking a glance at what appears to be a good map one found in an old guidebook, only to soon find oneself quickly lost. Then again, I don't mind getting lost for a while, which in the labyrinth of a city like Venice, even with a good map, is still likely to happen, and actually is a good thing, because in learning how to be unlost, relying on the inner GPS, the map gradually becomes dispensable. And best plan on staying for quite a while. As for the tour guides, wagging their fingers disapprovingly at the cheap map, of course they too serve a valid role for the more tentative ones on a tight schedule, doing the quick turnaround trip.

It's worth noting that the Voice is not like a GPS assistant that does the thinking for us. There are layers of being. Whatever we're conscious of is our responsibility. I'm saying that because it seems there's a common misconception that connecting to the higher powers robs us of our freedom. It's the opposite of course. Finding our way through Venice is our creative responsibility (for which we can always seek help if needed of course). But there is hierarchy of navigation. For example, we need to listen to the Voice if we're to go to Venice at all or we should go somewhere else.

The bottom line is that we shouldn't expect the higher self to do things on our level instead of us. We must get in the feeling that there's always collective work and every being is consciously doing what no one else can do instead of it. The more we develop, the more processes we take as our own responsibility. Who could stay alive even for a second if suddenly we had to personally control the processes in every cell in our body? We're quite far from supporting our life processes with our spiritual activity but we must gradually make our life of desires a fully conscious spiritual activity. The "I" of a small child doesn't yet have good control of the astral body and it swings around. Fits of anger, unstoppable crying and so on, take the "I" as by storm. Some people are enslaved by their erratic astral nature throughout their lives. But we need to become masters of these processes. Then they become degrees of freedom of our fully conscious spiritual activity, instead of staying as subconscious deeper rhythms on which the tip of our spiritual activity helplessly unfolds.

It's very interesting to examine the feeling when we solve a problem by ourselves. It's a very peculiar configuration of feelings. I'll only mention that whatever comes from the higher self doesn't come externally, as ready made answer. Practically anything that 'occurs' to us, any 'aha!', any 'eureka', all come from one and the same direction. We must realize that we don't have control over insight. If that was the case we would be able to make ingenious discoveries whenever we like. When we discover something, first and foremost we should be grateful (Ashvin's essay). What lies within our powers is to tirelessly prepare the soil. The seed we can't create from our mechanical thoughts. Neither will the seed come if we don't prepare the soil. The feeling of pride when we solve something by ourselves is unnatural. We have no right to be prideful because we don't know how the solution manifested. If it had never arrived, there's nothing we can do about it, it's outside our control. The natural process is to feel like there are always two cones that approach one another with their tips and interpenetrate. Our job is do our best to prepare within our cone the conditions for the incoming stream. This is where our true power lies. But the point is that what comes from on high doesn't come from the outside, as if we have given up and have asked for the ready made answer. No, the answer can never come in this way. We must become worthy for the answer, we must prepare the ideal soil and then the 'aha!' will come from the only direction it ever comes. This is a very rich topic but maybe for another time.

[Soul_of_Shu]

It's worth noting that the Voice is not like a GPS assistant that does the thinking for us. There are layers of being. Whatever we're conscious of is our responsibility. I'm saying that because it seems there's a common misconception that connecting to the higher powers robs us of our freedom. It's the opposite of course. Finding our way through Venice is our creative responsibility (for which we can always seek help if needed of course). But there is hierarchy of navigation. For example, we need to listen to the Voice if we're to go to Venice at all or we should go somewhere else.

The bottom line is that we shouldn't expect the higher self to do things on our level instead of us. We must get in the feeling that there's always collective work and every being is consciously doing what no one else can do instead of it. The more we develop, the more processes we take as our own responsibility. Who could stay alive even for a second if suddenly we had to personally control the processes in every cell in our body? We're quite far from supporting our life processes with our spiritual activity but we must gradually make our life of desires a fully conscious spiritual activity. The "I" of a small child doesn't yet have good control of the astral body and it swings around. Fits of anger, unstoppable crying and so on, take the "I" as by storm. Some people are enslaved by their erratic astral nature throughout their lives. But we need to become masters of these processes. Then they become degrees of freedom of our fully conscious spiritual activity, instead of staying as subconscious deeper rhythms on which the tip of our spiritual activity helplessly unfolds.

It's very interesting to examine the feeling when we solve a problem by ourselves. It's a very peculiar configuration of feelings. I'll only mention that whatever comes from the higher self doesn't come externally, as ready made answer. Practically anything that 'occurs' to us, any 'aha!', any 'eureka', all come from one and the same direction. We must realize that we don't have control over insight. If that was the case we would be able to make ingenious discoveries whenever we like. When we discover something, first and foremost we should be grateful (Ashvin's essay). What lies within our powers is to tirelessly prepare the soil. The seed we can't create from our mechanical thoughts. Neither will the seed come if we don't prepare the soil. The feeling of pride when we solve something by ourselves is unnatural. We have no right to be prideful because we don't know how the solution manifested. If it had never arrived, there's nothing we can do about it, it's outside our control. The natural process is to feel like there are always two cones that approach one another with their tips and interpenetrate. Our job is do our best to prepare within our cone the conditions for the incoming stream. This is where our true power lies. But the point is that what comes from on high doesn't come from the outside, as if we have given up and have asked for the ready made answer. No, the answer can never come in this way. We must become worthy for the answer, we must prepare the ideal soil and then the 'aha!' will come from the only direction it ever comes. This is a very rich topic but maybe for another time.

Truly, I am so grateful for this sharing ... Speaking of grateful, back to Venice for a while, indeed the first time I arrived there, as a young hitch-hiking/back-packing wanderer naive enough to show up on Good Friday without a room reservation, I got so hopelessly lost as I ventured ever-deeper into the web-like labyrinth of narrowing alleyways in search of a bed, feeling as exhausted as it is possible to feel without collapsing on the spot, with a dark lampless cold-rain night fast approaching, that I was in tears and about to give up all hope, when I chanced upon a 'room for rent' sign in perhaps one of narrowest alleyways of all. This surely being the last hope for a place to rest, other than some outdoor alcove, I struggled up a steep staircase, and knocked on some stranger's door, opened by a widowed nonna who looked at me as if I might have been some dank stray dog begging for scraps, but nonetheless showed me to a walk-in-closet of a room, with a folding cot, and a lone bedside stool. And I can truly say that I have never been so grateful in all my life for such a meagre blessed shelter.