Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

11549Re: Amoeba contra Manu

Expand Messages
  • opetha
    Oct 5, 2006
      Hello,

      "Disfigurations in the Orient" is the opposite of "Transformations in
      the Occident", where would we be without ambiguity? We must face our
      devil sometime.

      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.

      Bless.

      Godot.












      --- In anthroposophy@yahoogroups.com, "Steve Hale" <sardisian01@...>
      wrote:
      >
      > --- In anthroposophy@yahoogroups.com, "opetha" <opetha@> wrote:
      > >
      > > Hello Bradford
      > >
      > > OK, I understand what you're saying if only you wouldn't go so
      far
      > > ahead and write so much, it all only proves to me the theory of
      > that
      > > 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,
      which
      > is what I look for. I said you wrote "hodgepodge" because you
      were
      > pulling out all stops to write 'new-age' dribble, which some
      > 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
      Kant
      > is to philosophy in terms of limits to knowledge and perception.
      > 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
      interests
      > me. Spiritual science exists in order to extend thinking and
      > 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
      lose
      > that important point.
      >
      > Steve
      >
    • Show all 30 messages in this topic