Stranger wrote: ↑Tue Feb 07, 2023 3:04 pmAll right, you still avoided answering the question, but never mind, this Steiner's sentence is a good one which confirms for me what's going on in this realm.AshvinP wrote: ↑Tue Feb 07, 2023 2:27 pm Steiner wrote:
For, paradoxical though it may sound, the following is a true statement — and you will find it clearly expressed in various lecture cycles: the dead, those living in spirit and the soul in the interval between death and a new birth, speak of the earth in the same way that men on earth speak of heaven. The earth is a shimmering vision that hovers in front of them in the way the vision of heaven hovers in the mind's eye of those on earth. Earth is the desired other world for which those living in heaven yearn. They speak of earth in the way we speak of heaven.
We are trying to point you towards a living experience, Eugene, in which the flow of your own intuitive becoming is intimately bound up. You keep insisting to get answers from the perspective of dead thoughts, from the physical sensory perspective, where everything can be fixed in place and discursively analyzed. That is what you want to hear about 'lower cognition'. Then when we don't comply with this request, because it is nonsensical from the living and polarically unified spiritual perspective, you feel the questions are being avoided. Again, you want everything to fit into the slots of your current expectations. That lower expectant perspective is precisely what needs to be inwardly transformed through its sacrifice. Until then, only what confirms your own habitual expectations will 'make sense' to you, while everything else will be seen as either nonsense or confirmation for your beliefs.
Anyway, I have made the Anthroposophical perspective somewhat clear on the St. Paul verses, which is really the only thing I wanted to do. I hope you are able to address Cleric's questions on the other thread honestly and frankly. Because I see that you completely blew off his question about the 'I think the words' exercise and quoted something irrelevant. It was a very simple question which can be answered directly from your first-person experience of the exercise, without any abstract analysis of 'nondual cognition'.