This forum

[Federica]

Of course, there are quite different individualities here, but how this is relevant to the question I asked, I fail to see.

And I thought it was agreed that, in what you and Cleric attempt to convey, there are indeed clear facts to understand and integrate. Besides, Ashvin, you have often warned people of the effects of sympathies and antipathies here, and your answer seems to contain a reminder of that.

More generally, it seems to me that, sooner or later, the search for truth requires sacrifices in terms of search for other things, and that the preferred objects of sacrifice can be influenced by sympathies and antipathies, likes and dislikes, just like anything else. Finally, yes, we all know that this is a public forum and posts are read by some more than one person. And here I will simply repeat one last time my opinion that there might be inverted results when the attraction of certain curvatures is allowed to, well, attract.

I have read this a few times but, honestly, I can't figure out what you are suggesting. Maybe you can elaborate with a bit less crypticism

But more generally, I just don't see much value in arguing about "who is worthy of being responded to". It's an individual decision based on particular circumstances which are always evolving. We all think about these things. There have been a few comments from Lorenzo that I never responded to because I felt it was fruitless. I'm sure the same can be said for Cleric. But circumstances can change such that a new avenue opens up for exploration, and even if exploring it ends up elucidating no one else but ourselves, that could still be very useful for future discussions as Cleric's last comment suggested. We are dealing with archetypal forms of resistance expressed through the prism of particular personalities and we will never stop encountering these same forms as time goes by (also within ourselves), in fact, it is likely we will only encounter them more and more. Each individual can decide whether any particular interaction provides the basis for learning/teaching opportunities or not.

No it doesn't seem there would be any value in elaborating.
You are distorting it too much.

[AshvinP]

Of course, there are quite different individualities here, but how this is relevant to the question I asked, I fail to see.

And I thought it was agreed that, in what you and Cleric attempt to convey, there are indeed clear facts to understand and integrate. Besides, Ashvin, you have often warned people of the effects of sympathies and antipathies here, and your answer seems to contain a reminder of that.

More generally, it seems to me that, sooner or later, the search for truth requires sacrifices in terms of search for other things, and that the preferred objects of sacrifice can be influenced by sympathies and antipathies, likes and dislikes, just like anything else. Finally, yes, we all know that this is a public forum and posts are read by some more than one person. And here I will simply repeat one last time my opinion that there might be inverted results when the attraction of certain curvatures is allowed to, well, attract.

I have read this a few times but, honestly, I can't figure out what you are suggesting. Maybe you can elaborate with a bit less crypticism

But more generally, I just don't see much value in arguing about "who is worthy of being responded to". It's an individual decision based on particular circumstances which are always evolving. We all think about these things. There have been a few comments from Lorenzo that I never responded to because I felt it was fruitless. I'm sure the same can be said for Cleric. But circumstances can change such that a new avenue opens up for exploration, and even if exploring it ends up elucidating no one else but ourselves, that could still be very useful for future discussions as Cleric's last comment suggested. We are dealing with archetypal forms of resistance expressed through the prism of particular personalities and we will never stop encountering these same forms as time goes by (also within ourselves), in fact, it is likely we will only encounter them more and more. Each individual can decide whether any particular interaction provides the basis for learning/teaching opportunities or not.

No it doesn't seem there would be any value in elaborating.
You are distorting it too much.

Ok, well I understand you feel there are no tangible benefits to these "constantly fruitless attempts", despite everything we have stated to the contrary (which for some reason is "irrelevant"), but what I can't figure out is what you imagine it is costing us or anyone else to respond or to read our responses. What are the "inverted effects" they are yielding? That simply hasn't been clarified in any way that I can decipher.

[Federica]

To describe the inertial space this forum has reached I’d say there seems to be a problem with appearances. One tries to save them, only too late too little, another one tries to look as if they didn’t count, safe trying to gather some undercover, another one doesn’t seem to notice how’s influenced, another one believes one can bypass them, another one lives inside them, and so on. Unfortunately it seems to create parallel worlds that could keep rotating one around the other without ever producing any harmonious interplay, only screeching noises at the occasional crossovers (with one clearly resounding exception of course). It’s a strange situation, like a multi-level game, but one that can’t self-regulate. At this point I’m not sure what’s the right way to think/do.

Well, actually, it clarifies a little bit by now

[Federica]

For my part, besides what Ashvin said, I still use these dialogs as opportunities to understand the perspective of the other person. The reasons why things are rejected or misunderstood could have various sources. For example, I vividly remember my young materialistic years. I used to argue with a friend who had embraced Gita. The truth is, that even if I were to lead these conversations today, they would still be completely unconvincing. Thus I often wonder what my reaction would have been if I was presented with some of the things that I have realized today. Would I have rejected them impulsively without really trying to understand? I don't know. But anyway, in these conversations the thing that motivates me is that I still search for ways to present the ideas, in the hope that the person maybe simply needs a thought-form that clicks to their personal constitution.

For example, in Lorenzo and Eugene's case, my feeling is that the culprit is the Toruk Makto fallacy:

As explained countless times, this an elementary error. Remember the following scene of the first Avatar. Toruk is a top predator. He has no natural enemies so he never looks up. That's exploited by Jake to jump on his back and make the Tsaheylu bond:



Movie clip: https://www.youtube.com/clip/Ugkxh9dgBu ... ti2HCxfTbZ

We act like Toruk every time we imagine that we have reached the ultimate foundations of reality. And NO, this is not denial of oneness. This in no way contradicts the fact that we're of one essence with the Divine and all beings. It only brings to attention the simple fact that we blind ourselves for half of reality as soon as we decide that we already know what consciousness is. Instead, we should be open that we haven't even begun to see what consciousness is. This shouldn't cause despair. In fact, it can become our greatest inspiration because there's so much more to learn, so much more to be awestruck by!

What I try to understand is whether there's any consciousness that this is happening. Or it is so deeply embedded and feels like 'pure consciousness' that one doesn't even allow himself to question it. Basically, the ego self-promotes itself - it renames itself to 'pure consciousness' or 'true self', and from that point on, the inner gaze is directed only down the cone. Everything is seen as phenomenal fragments, quests for golden calves, etc.

At this point I still don't have a conclusive opinion on whether there's something that can be communicated which may give an awakening signal, or one is so deeply unwilling to even consider the Toruk Makto possibility, that they would rather wait for death.

***

The reasons why things are rejected or misunderstood could have various sources.

Indeed. And a categorical source is when the person does not read the posts, as Lorenzo has stated: "I don't read the posts". It was 2022. We are in 2024. You think about your younger self in conversation with a friend. In a conversation with a friend, yes, you can be presented with ideas. Has Lorenzo transformed himself since then? Maybe we can ask him, keeping this one short, surely there’s a chance he reads this one. Lorenzo, please tell us: do you usually read posts that are longer than couple of paragraphs?


PS: Besides, you say that you believe this is a case of "blinding oneself for half of reality", but at the same time you are trying to "understand whether there's any consciousness that this is happening"? Sorry, I can’t make sense of this proposition.

[lorenzop]

Lorenzo, please take note: in my message, I stated:


1. verifiable facts

2. my opinion that the lack of expressed engagement with the object of Cleric's and Ashvin's "countless" posts - that is, living thinking - signals that one is not interested in living thinking, when this goes on for years.

3. a question to Cleric and Ashvin about their "countless" endeavors to present living thinking


Compare this with the response you have quoted above.
Now please tell us: what post qualifies as "toxic" according to your own parameters?

When multiple persons suggest a manner of communication is toxic - perhaps take your own advice and "It’s best to try to introspect first, and try to sense what your soul feels like, then put it in some words, it doesn't matter if it feels approximate and arbitrary. It will be your experience, that is a great starting point."

This forum is exceedingly one-pointed (cultish) with a particular POV, and no other POV's are tolerated. I keep forgetting this - and keep making the same mistake of returning. This is on me . . . I now sense I have achieved escape velocity . . .

[AshvinP]

Lorenzo, please take note: in my message, I stated:


1. verifiable facts

2. my opinion that the lack of expressed engagement with the object of Cleric's and Ashvin's "countless" posts - that is, living thinking - signals that one is not interested in living thinking, when this goes on for years.

3. a question to Cleric and Ashvin about their "countless" endeavors to present living thinking


Compare this with the response you have quoted above.
Now please tell us: what post qualifies as "toxic" according to your own parameters?

When multiple persons suggest a manner of communication is toxic - perhaps take your own advice and "It’s best to try to introspect first, and try to sense what your soul feels like, then put it in some words, it doesn't matter if it feels approximate and arbitrary. It will be your experience, that is a great starting point."

This forum is exceedingly one-pointed (cultish) with a particular POV, and no other POV's are tolerated. I keep forgetting this - and keep making the same mistake of returning. This is on me . . . I now sense I have achieved escape velocity . . .

Lorenzo,

Anyone can see that people here simply point attention to the first-person flow of thinking experience. You keep veering into mystical abstractions and we keep offering you a way back to concrete reality.

You keep returning because you enjoy agitating others and getting completely off-topic snide remarks in, pretending you are asking for clarifications when you are not at all interested in the answers, while simultaneously failing to devote any serious attention to what people are communicating to you. If that's all you are interested in doing, there are much better political, philosophical, entertainment, etc. forums where you can find others who will indulge your proclivities and tell you the highest wisdom is merging into an isolated bubble of oneness and otherwise remaining exactly the same, stuck in old habits and patterns of thinking, feeling, and being. Please do some orbits around those forums and leave this one to people who actually care about improving life and the World.

[Stranger]

This forum is exceedingly one-pointed (cultish) with a particular POV, and no other POV's are tolerated. I keep forgetting this - and keep making the same mistake of returning. This is on me . . . I now sense I have achieved escape velocity . . .

That is exactly what it is. And moreover, if we look at the facts of the history of this forum, originally it was a vibrant philosophical community with hundreds of members where different views were discussed in the spirit of openness and tolerance (usually ...). Then at some point the forum was hijacked by Steiner's followers and converted into Anthroposophy forum by force by beating to death everyone who would not subscribe to their philosophy. Instead of creating their own platform and forum and inviting there people who would be interested in their POV, they hijacked the existing forum and pushed away everyone who would not subscribe to their POV. As a result of this, there is now about four active members and two or three occasional guests. Disclaimer: this is not to criticize the Steiner's philosophy, it's just a comment on the facts of the behavior of his followers.

[AshvinP]

This forum is exceedingly one-pointed (cultish) with a particular POV, and no other POV's are tolerated. I keep forgetting this - and keep making the same mistake of returning. This is on me . . . I now sense I have achieved escape velocity . . .

That is exactly what it is. And moreover, if we look at the facts of the history of this forum, originally it was a vibrant philosophical community with hundreds of members where different views were discussed in the spirit of openness and tolerance (usually ...). Then at some point the forum was hijacked by Steiner followers and converted into the Anthroposophy forum by force by beating to death everyone who would not subscribe to their philosophy. Instead of creating their own platform and forum and inviting there people who would be interested in their POV, they hijacked the existing forum and pushed away everyone who is not interested in their POV. As a result of this, there is now about four active members and two or three occasional guests.

Eugene,

Why is it that the non-dual approach does not sensitize you to cognitive dissonance? I am genuinely curious.

I have no objections against what you said, Cleric. It is indeed important to expand our reach of knowledge to ideal activity of these higher orders and its curvatures. It is these curvatures that shape the evolution on the Cosmic level, and so each soul (as an individuated instance of Cosmic spiritual activity) can participate in this evolution consciously and creatively only by reaching to know these higher levels and the curvatures.

This was written less than one day ago. The POV you are describing above as 'cultish' is the same one that you say above is important and absolutely necessary for each soul to "participate in this evolution consciously and creatively". I'm just wondering if you have any idea that you live in these inner contradictions? Or do you just write things like this to avoid addressing Cleric's well-reasoned logic, while secretly you harbor disgust and resentment for spiritual science, perhaps because you have never attained the higher knowledge of the curvatures yourself?

[Stranger]

Eugene,

Why is it that the non-dual approach does not sensitize you to cognitive dissonance? I am genuinely curious.

I have no objections against what you said, Cleric. It is indeed important to expand our reach of knowledge to ideal activity of these higher orders and its curvatures. It is these curvatures that shape the evolution on the Cosmic level, and so each soul (as an individuated instance of Cosmic spiritual activity) can participate in this evolution consciously and creatively only by reaching to know these higher levels and the curvatures.

This was written less than one day ago. The POV you are describing above as 'cultish' is the same one that you say above is important and absolutely necessary for each soul to "participate in this evolution consciously and creatively". I'm just wondering if you have any idea that you live in these inner contradictions? Or do you just write things like this to avoid addressing Cleric's well-reasoned logic, while secretly you harbor disgust and resentment for spiritual science, perhaps because you have never attained the higher knowledge of the curvatures yourself?

There is no contradiction here because conscious participation in the evolution of consciousness is based on free will. The higher order beings do not force anyone to subscribe to their knowledge, neither they push away or punish anyone who does not subscribe to that. They patiently wait until the beings evolve up to their level of intelligence while they maintain the evolutionary environment and its structures to make it eventually happen. They also know that there is a large variety of evolutionary paths including a variety of philosophical views and practical ways to approach the Reality.

You cannot force a specific path of evolution or a specific way of knowing the Reality down the throat of the living beings, it just does not work that way. And if you don't believe it, just look at the facts - the state of affairs on this forum.

[AshvinP]

Eugene,

Why is it that the non-dual approach does not sensitize you to cognitive dissonance? I am genuinely curious.

I have no objections against what you said, Cleric. It is indeed important to expand our reach of knowledge to ideal activity of these higher orders and its curvatures. It is these curvatures that shape the evolution on the Cosmic level, and so each soul (as an individuated instance of Cosmic spiritual activity) can participate in this evolution consciously and creatively only by reaching to know these higher levels and the curvatures.

This was written less than one day ago. The POV you are describing above as 'cultish' is the same one that you say above is important and absolutely necessary for each soul to "participate in this evolution consciously and creatively". I'm just wondering if you have any idea that you live in these inner contradictions? Or do you just write things like this to avoid addressing Cleric's well-reasoned logic, while secretly you harbor disgust and resentment for spiritual science, perhaps because you have never attained the higher knowledge of the curvatures yourself?

There is no contradiction here because conscious participation in the evolution of consciousness is based on free will. The higher order beings do not force anyone to subscribe to their knowledge, neither they push away or punish anyone who does not subscribe to that. They patiently wait until the beings evolve up to their level of intelligence as they maintain the evolutionary environment and its structures to make it eventually happen. They also know that there is a large variety of evolutionary paths including a variety of philosophical views and practical ways to approach the Reality.

You cannot force the evolution or a specific way of knowing the Reality down the throat of the living beings, it just does not work that way. And if you don't believe it, just look at the facts - the state of affairs on this forum.

The state of affairs on this forum is that some people are experiencing tremendous inner development and inspiration over relatively short amounts of time. Just look at Guney's last post. These are the people who are freely choosing to investigate their flow of first-person thinking experience, without materialistically or mystically reducing it via abstractions. Instead of being steered by shadowy antipathies and resentments into whining, complaining, and using deceitful tactics on a forum they ostensibly feel is a 'failure', these people seek to render their inner nature more transparent and seek the Truth above all else in good faith. Whether people come or go from the forum does not deviate them one bit from doing that important inner work.

Then there are others (you and Lorenzo) who, I'm sorry to say, haven't changed a bit for the last few years. Your last post to Cleric reveals you still don't understand the duality created by separating 'thinking' from 'being/awareness'. You still cant distinguish phenomenology from abstract metaphysics. We could go through all the reasons for that which have been discussed for the last few years, but there is hardly any point. By saying this, I am not "forcing" you to do anything. It's exactly the opposite - we are offering you the opportunity to become free of these enslaving thinking habits. You can only become free of these tendencies once you become aware of them. I am simply pointing attention in a certain direction and you are free to take that opportunity or not. This is what the higher-order beings do as well. They give us the environment and structures as opportunities for awakening to our self-activity and using it toward inner perfection. You have consistently declined to take the opportunities they are giving you by placing your karmic path at an intersection with ours. I don't know, perhaps there is a greater wisdom unfolding here that will only become apparent across the threshold.

No one is being pushed or punished here, unlike when you privately whined to BK and suggested that he ban us from the forum. Or when you suggested to Dana that people be subjected to a comment limit. These are forceful tactics that seek to repress free speech and thinking. Some people are more comfortable when their freedom and the freedom of others is curtailed, because that freedom comes with more responsibilities, and therefore anything that goes in the opposite direction toward more freedom is instinctively avoided. The ego can instinctively sense when it's egoistic life is being threatened and so it fights or flees. That's the real reason for various people either throwing false accusations of 'cult', 'tyranny', etc. or exiting the forum. Again, it doesn't matter - the rest of us will continue seeking the Truth and doing the inner work, regardless.