Stranger wrote: ↑Sun Mar 19, 2023 11:51 pmYou are right about noticing that in my responses T comes before F, it has to do with my personality.Federica wrote: ↑Sun Mar 19, 2023 11:01 pmAs you can see, despite my rather soft post, and your initial factual expression, you later felt that it was necessary to reaffirm your position more strongly against me, recalling the ideas of arrogance, lack of humility, and taking a dig at “the anthroposophist” at the same time. Again, this was not present in your spontaneous reply, you got caught up by Feelings. As we both know, Feelings are perceived as thought-pictures just as thoughts are, and so my whole point with this long post is: please don’t forget that the trend, the direction of your thought-pictures is likely to go towards a hardening. Please, factor that in when you consider your interactions. Obviosuly, this is completely accessible to your attention.Stranger wrote: ↑Sun Mar 19, 2023 12:30 pm I can see some arrogance in the attitude of anthroposophist: "only we have the right phenomenological approach grounded in esoteric experience and every other perspective is always only empty abstraction". It is a sectarian black-and white approach of "we are always right, those who don't subscribe to our beliefs are always wrong". Even if your approach would indeed be the most aligned with the truth, that does not mean that other approaches may have at least some insights into at least some aspects of the truth, and may be even some aspects still missing in your approach. So, I think, certain openness and humility is always useful.
Eugene, I hope and wish that you see the positive intention that makes me write all that. I know, I have not yet answered your question on the other thread, but I will have to take a pause now, I will continue later, or maybe tomorrow, as it’s now close to midnight where I live.
But that particular quoted passage was rather related to Ashvin's arrogant attitude, and I apologize if it sounded like it was relevant to your attitude. But I also see how Ashvin's arrogant approach may also be poisoning the minds of other people who sympathize with anthroposophy. which is definitely a concern. He seems to be totally fine with no feeling of wrongdoing whatsoever and continuing with employing the tactics of intentional twisting and misinterpretations and even lies by ascribing to people something they never said for the purpose of proving the views of other teachings/practices/philosophies wrong, and with consistently arrogant attitude towards them. This is especially dissonant when the same person proclaims high moral standards according to the teaching/philosophy they claim to adhere to. I do not see a point in continuing any discussions in that way.
Come on, Eugene, everyone is "twisting" and "misinterpreting" when they point to your inner contradictions in a way you can't immediately rationalize to the clever intellect.
I just don't get it: are you continuing twisting my words for purpose or what?
...
Cleric, I'm giving up on you, you choose to keep twisting and misinterpreting my words even though I wrote pages trying to describe the nondual state.
And those were in response to his much more mild-mannered comments than my own. Now you are saying you couldn't control your response to Federica on this thread because your antipathy for my comments on another thread. The excuses have become quite absurd.
I don't expect a response to this, and even if you do, I won't be responding to you directly anymore. I only wonder how you will react to the latest post from Cleric which you were previously anticipating eagerly. Will it be 'agreed' with and cast aside, or will it be characterized as further "twisting" since it mentioned you in a way that doesn't acknowledge you are already at the vanguard of spiritual wisdom on this forum? Or will it be contemplated as something unexpected, fresh, new, pedagogical and deserving of serious interest? Time will tell.