Anthroposophy as Fascio

[AshvinP]

Umm. That's the Mandelbrot set. Already in the 13th century.
Anyone else agrees?

I found this:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File ... A15847.jpg

Famously used as the first color illustration to Benoit B. Mandelbrot's The Fractal Geometry of Nature...

[Lou Gold]

Umm. That's the Mandelbrot set. Already in the 13th century.
Anyone else agrees?

It's quite easy to see fractal-like patterns in nature without Mandelbrot math. Just look at a fern but, yes, the dark portions of the wreath-like image do seem like such a pattern.

[Stranger]

Great. Then I guess there are two possibilities:
1. From your perspective it seems that Initiatic science does not draw its experiential knowledge from the transcendental spiritual depths which then presents in images and concepts (shells) but instead it confuses the shells for realities.
2. You admit that Initiatic science speaks precisely about the experiential transcendental of which you also speak and fully consciously precipitates that knowledge in shells (without mistaking them for realities), yet you disagree with the results thus acquired. In other words, there must be some error either in the transcendental experience itself or in the translation because you don't experience the transcendental in the same way.

I'm open to #2 but I have not seen it so far. Can you point me to any quotes from Steiner referring to transcendental meanings, and specifically related to Oneness? The only two quotes I found are in this thread, but they are very vague and do not seem to point to any transcendental aspects. But I'm not familiar with the whole body of Steiner's work. On the other hand, I saw plenty of Steiner's quotes criticizing the "mystics" which makes an impression that he was against the mystical approach to the transcendental aspect of reality. If we compare it with spiritual traditions, both Western and Eastern, they are all explicit about reaching to transcendental Oneness through mystical experience as a goal of spiritual evolution and provide plenty of practices and pointer to it.

Now, even if at the current point anthroposophy is behind with respect to pointing to transcendental, this is not necessarily a problem. As a living tradition, anthroposophy can develop further and integrate these aspects into its teachings and practices. And you guys, being on the frontier of its development, are the ones who can do it. My role is to point you to this opportunity but it is up to you to actualize it. But the only way to do that is for you to reach to the living experience of transcendental/Oneness/nondual state, otherwise you can never draw the map with any degree of accuracy if you never stepped into the territory.

[Lou Gold]

Great. Then I guess there are two possibilities:
1. From your perspective it seems that Initiatic science does not draw its experiential knowledge from the transcendental spiritual depths which then presents in images and concepts (shells) but instead it confuses the shells for realities.
2. You admit that Initiatic science speaks precisely about the experiential transcendental of which you also speak and fully consciously precipitates that knowledge in shells (without mistaking them for realities), yet you disagree with the results thus acquired. In other words, there must be some error either in the transcendental experience itself or in the translation because you don't experience the transcendental in the same way.

I'm open to #2 but I have not seen it so far. Can you point me to any quotes from Steiner referring to transcendental meanings, and specifically related to Oneness? The only two quotes I found are in this thread, but they are very vague and do not seem to point to any transcendental aspects. But I'm not familiar with the whole body of Steiner's work. On the other hand, I saw plenty of Steiner's quotes criticizing the "mystics" which makes an impression that he was against the mystical approach to the transcendental aspect of reality. If we compare it with spiritual traditions, both Western and Eastern, they are all explicit about reaching to transcendental Oneness through mystical experience as a goal of spiritual evolution and provide plenty of practices and pointer to it.

Now, even if at the current point anthroposophy is behind with respect to pointing to transcendental, this is not necessarily a problem. As a living tradition, anthroposophy can develop further and integrate these aspects into its teachings and practices. And you guys, being on the frontier of its development, are the ones who can do it. My role is to point you to this opportunity but it is up to you to actualize it. But the only way to do that is for you to reach to the living experience of transcendental/Oneness/nondual state, otherwise you can never draw the map with any degree of accuracy if you never stepped into the territory.

Eugene,

I'm enjoying this conversation between you and Cleric, learning much from it. Thanks to both of you for keeping it going. I'm not prepared to comment on the dialog because I've never entered the territory of Spiritual Science and, though somewhat familiar with Eastern traditions, I've never plunged deeply into any of its practices. However, as a storyteller my interest is drawn toward the "God - The Architect" image. The 'architect' has one foot in the painting and one outside suggesting transcendence, immanence and communication as a bridging of both. I like!

[Federica]

Great. Then I guess there are two possibilities:
1. From your perspective it seems that Initiatic science does not draw its experiential knowledge from the transcendental spiritual depths which then presents in images and concepts (shells) but instead it confuses the shells for realities.
2. You admit that Initiatic science speaks precisely about the experiential transcendental of which you also speak and fully consciously precipitates that knowledge in shells (without mistaking them for realities), yet you disagree with the results thus acquired. In other words, there must be some error either in the transcendental experience itself or in the translation because you don't experience the transcendental in the same way.

I'm open to #2 but I have not seen it so far. Can you point me to any quotes from Steiner referring to transcendental meanings, and specifically related to Oneness? The only two quotes I found are in this thread, but they are very vague and do not seem to point to any transcendental aspects. But I'm not familiar with the whole body of Steiner's work. On the other hand, I saw plenty of Steiner's quotes criticizing the "mystics" which makes an impression that he was against the mystical approach to the transcendental aspect of reality. If we compare it with spiritual traditions, both Western and Eastern, they are all explicit about reaching to transcendental Oneness through mystical experience as a goal of spiritual evolution and provide plenty of practices and pointer to it.

Now, even if at the current point anthroposophy is behind with respect to pointing to transcendental, this is not necessarily a problem. As a living tradition, anthroposophy can develop further and integrate these aspects into its teachings and practices. And you guys, being on the frontier of its development, are the ones who can do it. My role is to point you to this opportunity but it is up to you to actualize it. But the only way to do that is for you to reach to the living experience of transcendental/Oneness/nondual state, otherwise you can never draw the map with any degree of accuracy if you never stepped into the territory.

[AshvinP]

I hope you know that I'm not arguing for one or another view but rather defending a great diversity. Spirit is embedded everywhere.

It was just a metaphor - one of great many possible. Like we spoke with Eugene, no one has ever implied that such an image is the faithful depiction of reality. No image can capture the infinite richness of the soul. Even a single photograph can't capture all the sides of a 3D object, what's left for the manifoldness of the spiritual world! What I presented was only meant to point at one of the aspects - the musical beauty of Cosmic relations which weave the soul. Obviously if these harmonic relations are taken in isolation they become only lifeless mathematics and machinery. It is up to each one of us to separate the chaff from wheat.

Other than that, I agree that these computer generated images can never have deeper spiritual impact on the viewer simply because they are produced in a completely computational way. It is different with human-made pieces of art which are inspired through higher intuition. Then the art is also means for communication, the artist can lead the viewer to the spiritual state from whence the artform was inspired. Alas, there's plenty of modern art which is not too different from the computer generated one. There's no deeper inspiration, only reshuffling of forms. As long as it's something new and original, and tingles the senses, it's applauded. In fact, for many modern people this is the preferred form of art. Art with deeper message demands too much effort to appreciate, furthermore it clashes with views and opinions. Thus computer art will be welcomed by many as politically correct, which expresses no deeper ideas, let alone spiritual realities - which many can find offensive if they clash with their views - but only presents endless combinations of forms, colors and sounds, for the senses to enjoy.

Yes, I understand it was just a metaphor and I didn't think you offered it as a faithful depiction of reality. I was just quite surprised that among the images offered by you as models of science the chosen one was the most mechanical in appearance and that, for further elaboration, you employed the tool of machine learning, which is, as you note, most deficient in spirit -- hardly anything like, as you say, "the musical beauty of Cosmic relations which weave the soul."

I do agree with what you say about there being only a reshuffling with nothing inspired through higher intuition but surely political correctness is not the main reason for avoidance of offense of portions of the audience. The man reason for such avoidance is that the algorithm is well designed to maximize profits, which is why the corporate giants are now investing and competing in a race to develop it. Simply put, machine learning is going to generate some very rich companies.

Lou,

Think of the orderly course of the stellar sphere under sway of what we dimly know as the fundamental physical forces, especially relative to the chaotic course of human culture. Our mechanical constructions pale in wisdom compared to the designs of physical nature, but nevertheless they utilize these same physical forces which we have attained a certain mastery of through our thinking consciousness. So I think these can serve as great metaphors for the ideal aims of our spiritual activity if we are able to imbue them with a new imaginative life. The images of the World will only have as much life as we can give them. There is nothing in the Cosmos which is absolutely deficient in spirit, or must remain at a certain level of deficiency, independent of our own spiritual activity.

We can also ask, what is the purpose of maximizing profits? For one thing it helps people accumulate material services and goods. And that is done precisely to indulge in convenient activities which please the senses. It is also done to accumulate power over others, to subject the will of others to our own will. I would say the current wave of political correctness and the associated 'cancel culture' is another manifestation of that will-to-power over others, under guise of outwardly 'virtuous' motives. At the end of the day, it all comes back to archetypal soul-tendencies which are rooted in our high ideals or, more often these days, our lack of them.

[Stranger]

Eugene,

I'm enjoying this conversation between you and Cleric, learning much from it. Thanks to both of you for keeping it going. I'm not prepared to comment on the dialog because I've never entered the territory of Spiritual Science and, though somewhat familiar with Eastern traditions, I've never plunged deeply into any of its practices. However, as a storyteller my interest is drawn toward the "God - The Architect" image. The 'architect' has one foot in the painting and one outside suggesting transcendence, immanence and communication as a bridging of both. I like!

Agni Parthene

O pure and virgin Lady,/ O spotless Theotokos
R: Rejoice, O unwedded Bride!
O Virgin Queen and Mother/ O dewy fleece most sacred
O height transcending heaven above/ O beam of light most radiant
O joy of chaste and virgin maids/ surpassing all the angels
O brilliant light of heaven above/ most clear and most radiant
Commanding chief of heavenly hosts/ O holiest of holies

O ever-virgin Mary/ O Mistress of creation
O Bride all-pure and spotless/ O Lady all-holy
O holy Mary, Bride and Queen/ and cause of our rejoicing
O Maiden Queen most hon'rable/ O Mother most holy
More precious than the cherubim/ more glorious than the seraphim
Surpassing principalities/ dominions, thrones and powers

Rejoice, song of the cherubim/ Rejoice, hymn of the angels
Rejoice, ode of the seraphim/ and joy of the archangels
Rejoice, O peace; Rejoice, O joy/ and haven of salvation
O bridal chamber of the Word/ unfading, fragrant blossom
Rejoice, delight of paradise/ Rejoice, life everlasting
Rejoice, O holy tree of life/ and fount of immortality

I supplicate thee, Lady/ I humbly call upon thee
O Queen of all, I beg thee/ to grant me thy favor
O spotless and most honored maid/ O Lady all holy
[I call upon thee fervently/ thou temple most holy][6]
O thou my help, deliver me/ from harm and all adversity
And by thy prayers show me to be/ an heir of immortality

[Cleric K]

Yes, I understand it was just a metaphor and I didn't think you offered it as a faithful depiction of reality. I was just quite surprised that among the images offered by you as models of science the chosen one was the most mechanical in appearance and that, for further elaboration, you employed the tool of machine learning, which is, as you note, most deficient in spirit -- hardly anything like, as you say, "the musical beauty of Cosmic relations which weave the soul."

I do agree with what you say about there being only a reshuffling with nothing inspired through higher intuition but surely political correctness is not the main reason for avoidance of offense of portions of the audience. The man reason for such avoidance is that the algorithm is well designed to maximize profits, which is why the corporate giants are now investing and competing in a race to develop it. Simply put, machine learning is going to generate some very rich companies.

Lou, I was just experimenting. Think of it as your own experiments when you play with the retouching software and apply algorithmic processing over the red-green-blue pixel values of your digital photographs - software written far from nature, in concrete office buildings, by people selling their intellectual labor to the corporate machine

[Cleric K]

I'm open to #2 but I have not seen it so far. Can you point me to any quotes from Steiner referring to transcendental meanings, and specifically related to Oneness? The only two quotes I found are in this thread, but they are very vague and do not seem to point to any transcendental aspects. But I'm not familiar with the whole body of Steiner's work. On the other hand, I saw plenty of Steiner's quotes criticizing the "mystics" which makes an impression that he was against the mystical approach to the transcendental aspect of reality. If we compare it with spiritual traditions, both Western and Eastern, they are all explicit about reaching to transcendental Oneness through mystical experience as a goal of spiritual evolution and provide plenty of practices and pointer to it.

Now, even if at the current point anthroposophy is behind with respect to pointing to transcendental, this is not necessarily a problem. As a living tradition, anthroposophy can develop further and integrate these aspects into its teachings and practices. And you guys, being on the frontier of its development, are the ones who can do it. My role is to point you to this opportunity but it is up to you to actualize it. But the only way to do that is for you to reach to the living experience of transcendental/Oneness/nondual state, otherwise you can never draw the map with any degree of accuracy if you never stepped into the territory.

I'm not sure what you expect to hear from spiritual science about the transcendental. Since you ask the question in this way, I presume that whatever you have heard so far doesn't count as viable. For example, the fact that after death our being gradually expands to the size of the Solar system (we should of course think of inner space, as there's no longer physical sight which can see things externally) and that the Spheres and the beings form our shared Cosmic organism, obviously doesn't count as transcendental knowledge to you (this expansion can be known experientially (not through intellectual speculation) even on Earth through the higher forms of consciousness). That is, all the details about the spiritual worlds, the journey of the human being through them, the way the spiritual manifests in the physical and so on, are 'behind' with respect to the transcendental that you speak of. Also you say that the few examples you have seen about the transcendental and about oneness are too vague. So at this point I'm not really sure what more concrete (the opposite of vague) you would like to read in a book presenting transcendental knowledge. Can you give a few examples of concrete things about the transcendental, that you would love to see in an anthroposophical book? In other words, would you write a paragraph or two of an imaginary anthroposophical book which, when you read it according to your own criteria, will make you glad and say "Now these guys know what they are talking about. They have really reached the essence of the transcendental and do a great job of putting it into concepts and words (which are of course only shells as we have agreed)"?

[Stranger]

I'm not sure what you expect to hear from spiritual science about the transcendental. Since you ask the question in this way, I presume that whatever you have heard so far doesn't count as viable. For example, the fact that after death our being gradually expands to the size of the Solar system (we should of course think of inner space, as there's no longer physical sight which can see things externally) and that the Spheres and the beings form our shared Cosmic organism, obviously doesn't count as transcendental knowledge to you (this expansion can be known experientially (not through intellectual speculation) even on Earth through the higher forms of consciousness). That is, all the details about the spiritual worlds, the journey of the human being through them, the way the spiritual manifests in the physical and so on, are 'behind' with respect to the transcendental that you speak of. Also you say that the few examples you have seen about the transcendental and about oneness are too vague. So at this point I'm not really sure what more concrete (the opposite of vague) you would like to read in a book presenting transcendental knowledge. Can you give a few examples of concrete things about the transcendental, that you would love to see in an anthroposophical book? In other words, would you write a paragraph or two of an imaginary anthroposophical book which, when you read it according to your own criteria, will make you glad and say "Now these guys know what they are talking about. They have really reached the essence of the transcendental and do a great job of putting it into concepts and words (which are of course only shells as we have agreed)"?

That's right, the " Solar system, the Spheres and the beings form our shared Cosmic organism, obviously doesn't count as transcendental knowledge" - all this belongs to the realm of the immanent and the knowledge of the immanent, of the Creation/World and all its content. Transcendental is the Creator, not the created, even though the created WC is never separate from the Creator, but the Creator is more than all the content of its creation. And the spiritual path to transcendental is experiential realization of our fundamental oneness and identity with the Creator. One of the best descriptions of transcendental is given in that quote that I gave from Dyonisius, so this would be something that I would expect to see in anthroposophy. Rumi, one of the most outstanding Sufis, is another example. Or, we can look at sacred texts of many spiritual traditions, I can give tons of such quotes.

"Consciousness is all there is.
One who knows Self as consciousness
has risen, from the seeming world,
to this unconditioned state
where everything is only light.
Here, all desires are attained,
and deathlessness is realized."
Aitareya Upanishad

"Since the oblivion came into existence because the Father was not known, then if the Father comes to be known, oblivion will not exist from that moment on.
Since the deficiency came into existence because the Father was not known, then if the Father comes to be known, deficiency will not exist from that moment on.
It is with Unity that each one will attain himself; within knowledge (gnosis) he will purify himself from multiplicity into Unity, consuming matter within himself like fire, and darkness by light, death by life"
The Gospel of Truth

"I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one:
I in them and you in me. May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me. I have made you known to them, and will continue to make you known in order that the love you have for me may be in them and that I myself may be in them."
John 17

"Jesus said, "I am the light that is over all things. I am all: from me all came forth, and to me all attained. Split a piece of wood; I am there. Lift up the stone, and you will find me there."
The Gospel of Thomas

“I am crucified with Christ, but I live; yet not I anymore, but Christ lives in me"
Galatians 2:20

"There is, monks, an unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated. If there were not that unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated, there would not be the case that emancipation from the born — become — made — fabricated would be discerned. But precisely because there is an unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated, emancipation from the born — become — made — fabricated is thus discerned."
Buddha, Iti. 2.16