11549Re: Amoeba contra Manu
- Oct 5, 2006Hello,
"Disfigurations in the Orient" is the opposite of "Transformations in
the Occident", where would we be without ambiguity? We must face our
Tarot cards--that's why it appears "typical new-age", maybe a typical
filter is the case. But what I say is 100% eternal law of the dhamma,
so far as the unconscious as mulaprakriti is unchanging ideation from
which any spiritual world, in any epoch, is built.
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "Steve Hale" <sardisian01@...>
> --- In email@example.com, "opetha" <opetha@> wrote:
> > Hello Bradford
> > OK, I understand what you're saying if only you wouldn't go so
> > ahead and write so much, it all only proves to me the theory ofwhich
> > psychological type.
> Yes, Bradford writes alot, just as you write alot. Actually, I
> don't see much of a difference. Now, I try to write in brief
> because it serves to catch the eye, and maybe gets a response,
> is what I look for. I said you wrote "hodgepodge" because youwere
> pulling out all stops to write 'new-age' dribble, which someKant
> possibly could have found offensive. In fact, I found your initial
> post offensive and arrogant. And that is why I didn't respond to
> indications of Steinerian concepts from his "Foundations of
> Esotericism" lectures from 1905.
> You are quite right in that Jung and Steiner represent a polarity;
> just as Kant and Steiner represent a polarity from a philosophical
> standpoint. This has all been gone over before, on that other
> little ship called the s.s. minnow. Jung is to psychology what
> is to philosophy in terms of limits to knowledge and perception.interests
> And Rudolf Steiner overcame these bounds for those that seek to
> overcome such limits in order to go further in terms of knowledge
> and being.
> Esotericism and its relationship to modern thought is what
> me. Spiritual science exists in order to extend thinking andlose
> knowledge into the causal realm that stands behind external
> phenomena. But you have to take up the study in earnest, just as
> you have taken up your study of Jungian principles according to a
> collective unconsciousness that is quite attractive to people today
> because it leaves the mysteries and enigmas alone; except to engage
> in conservative speculation about what things mean in the greater
> course of events.
> Thus, synchonicity and its phenomenal representation is a fact that
> only spiritual science can truly penetrate into its causality as an
> increasing experience of spiritual necessity. I didn't want to
> that important point.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>