Anthroposophia

[Red.Emano]

i think thats a misconception sir. just because ive read 24 upanishads, some parts of The Life Divine, the Enneads, Brahman sutrya bhasya, some buddhist books, doesnt mean that it would necessarily change everything in me. Its the same thing as telling someone to read the biblical texts and telling them that if they have not changed according to the teachings of the bible then they do not understand it?

i dont think it works like that sir. some may fall in-love with certain studies or with certain readings, but for me, so much as i was inlove with Indian thought back years ago, my first and favorite book was tge translation of 12 upanishads by swami nikilinanda it doesnt mean that i have to embrace it because i understood it.
dili diay pwede that i understood it, but i do not want to embrace it?


to abandon once faith, as ive said must be contextualized with the priest issue, i hope you dont take it away from context. the priest has commitments, promises, not only to himself but to his flock and to the church as a whole. Would it be right to break away from that commitment especially if that commitment concerns not only you but also others? Commitments are important. Before entering the priesthood, discern. reflect. meditate. all those things.

As ive said, there is that critical juncture in the history of human thought when it divided to gnostic tradition and rational tradition, and where at the end it was rational tradition that won over as the lingua franca discourse.

Now, child, how is your Philosophy program in the University of San Carlos? Do you still look full as before? I hope you are enjoying the academics and fun of discussing. and god, someone i know seem to have pointed you out to me. who and how is that? let us keep it a mystery.

I would agree with child that you can read something, understand it and yet not embrace it. I've read a certain biography of a certain popularly discussed western philosopher(of whose name i cannot state because my memory fails me.) that when he is asked about his stand on god and his faith, this Philosopher would not answer. In response, this Philosopher would say that Philosophy and matters of his catholic faith are 2 different things. To my understanding, you do not want your catholic faith shattered, thus it would be better of for you not to embrace such teachings like that of the indians ,etc.

You are learned in the language of reason, and it is right for you to say that "there is that critical juncture in the history of human thought when it divided to gnostic tradition and rational tradition, and where at the end it was rational tradition that won over as the lingua franca discourse". This is what we know now as Roman Catholicism or to make it broader, mainstream Christianity.

Do not mind if I share my insights from your recent discussions.
I think it is only righteous to say that a Priest of the church should not break his commitments. Especially when he engages in such things such as the Esoteric. Most of the esoterics we know somehow have conflict with popular Christian Faith. To all we know, Ignatius of Loyola, a Christian Mystic knew and understood the deeper context of Christian Faith, grasped the idea of SEEING GOD IN ALL THINGS as a popular ignatian principle and value.

Do keep in mind that what is taught in Catholic/Christian Universities is truly different from those programs taught in non-sectarian Universities just like the University of the Philippines e.g.Philosophy from Ateneo & Philosophy from UP.

You say about the issue of the priest not a personal thing. I verily agree with this, it is not a personal thing for he is obliged to an institution that by nature is EXOTERIC and has clouded the ancient Mysteries which are ESOTERIC in nature. Thus, he should portray and stick to the rules. the institution. He may have practices which are esoteric from the view of esotericists(e.g. the spiritual exercises of ignatius of loyola), this is an exoteric practice by the church. Anthony de Mello is one Jesuit Priest who is somehow publicly practicing esotericism.

you are graduating, yet you have not understood what it means to be a Philosopher. Don't just argue with people like us here in the forum. Probably this is called istorya.net and not istorya+solutions.net ; You may give credible answers, but do not give solutions on how to deal with the situation. after your posts, one can ask, "so what?" and besides, what people mean when they say that "be more broad minded" does just correspond to your post saying that you havent embraced other teachings other than your own, it simply means that you ought not to criticize each post students of other schools of thought other than your own. Because it is useless. Criticize, then give amends. Don't just criticize. Its like cutting old trees then not planting new ones will cause floods. (it is reflected in your previous posts). After you remove and dispel the doubts & misconceptions, dont leave it hanging.


Most people have gone before you. in those years we have studied and experimented, we must have had a practical application of truth. have you? and have you met other practitioners of theosophy, mystics, masons, buddhists, islamic mystics, teachers of Advaita,vedantists etc.. ?

For me, the church is obsolete. Its practices arent. The politics behind it cloud the higher teachings of this religion. The so-called authorities are clouded by their faith that they think other belief systems(other than their own) do not lead to salvation. Even the morality. Just look at RELIGIOUS EDUCATION in USC, one can say that this may be a good subject, it doesn't truly give a scholarly and academic approach to the christian religion. why and how? probably because there are other teachers who are not competent enough to teach this divine studies subject. They even brng down ISLAM, BUDDHISTS, and other religions and compare them publicly discriminating other religions in their class lectures. tsk tsk...

[patrizekirsten]

Hmmm. Hehe. Just passin by . Seems that am burden with weighty karma for not being able cope with this thread. "The blind trying to describe the sun." I still owe you two of your queries. Soon ill get into that.

[Red.Emano]

Hmmm. Hehe. Just passin by . Seems that am burden with weighty karma for not being able cope with this thread. "The blind trying to describe the sun." I still owe you two of your queries. Soon ill get into that.

wow. i like that.

The Blind trying to describe the sun. hehe

[Red.Emano]

..........

[flying fish]

I think the Roman Catholic Church is open nowadays when ti comes to Spirituality and Occultism. Only the conservatives are against it. My friend who is a Jesuit priest is advocating Yoga and ZEN meditation.

well my friend The-child would disagree w/ those rebellious jesuit priest, they should be excommunicated

[patrizekirsten]

Howdy!! Salutee!!

[patrizekirsten]

thats why he is a child. he needs milk i guest...

[flying fish]

@ the_child

Correct me if im wrong but this is your statement= Relativity, contradiction, & if truth is relative we
are left to our "subjective whims"
Since Truth to you is Absolute you hastily reject the idea of RELATIVITY,
well again if your well versed in ESOTERICISM specially w/ indian thoughts, Absolute (or in east ULTIMATE REALITY, THE ONE REALITY, THE CAUSELESS CAUSE) is the central aim of one's evolution, "to go back to its source"
I think what you refer as the absolute is the "absolute Doctrine & Faith of Catholic church", w/c perfectly defines what you call-"left to our subjective whims", and the church has been left to its subjective whims for a long long time but of course under the pretense of being the costudian of Truth as Absolute,
im sorry but id rather be left alone by my subjective whims rather than be mislead buy the church Absolute whims,
Truth as Absolute? Copy paste again from all esoteric & occult traditions, an axiom- that behind all manifested things seen or unseen an absolute reality exist, but can never be entered by the limited mind.
Light on the Path- "You may enter the Light but never touch the flame"
So how does the Absolute be recognize in our finite mind/world? or will it ever be recognize?
Where is Relativity in occult science? does occult science reject Relativity?

All these qestions you can perfectly answer if you have studied esotericism & occultism w/c you claim you did,
just a hint your absolute concept does not contradict to the concept of relativity,
not unless your concept of absolute as define by the catholic church w/c most of the time rejects & admonish other school of thought & claims to be original, then no doubt it will conflict,

Take for instance your catholic concept of god w/ its human deficiency, that in itself does not belong to the category of Absolute, i think dong NASYO has a better character than that "absolute"

Again Truth as Absolute is in Harmony w/ relativity, why?, The occult science explain it(look closely in the subject "the law of manifestation" or law of periodecity", & it can be appreciated also in the dramatization of Masonic geometry, The concept of Pythagoras regarding Monad will also help,

so im inviting you to read again your esoteric manuals, not me explaining you, im interested w/ your understanding w/ your so many readings,

goodluck

[Hellblazer 2.1]

why are you people so hostile? pick a fight? what is wrong with you people. at least the bible fanatics and the atheist posse arent that hostile, this bunch is beyond me.

hay. IN arguing: Answer, Assert, Prove. unsa manang "lets face it sir" ? face what? you could not prove that its obsolete, you just said "lets face it sir" thats a fallacy, i think you know that. Change their style? what style?
Im sorry sir, but your not making any supporting argument here that the church is obsolete.
So why are there universities still teaching Catholic thought, even in secular universities? As i said sir, you cant prove that statement, you cant even reply why "esotericism" is not a very well accepted academic course. it is not a course in itself, but an object of the course to say the least. (and then youd look at this as an insult towards theosophy labeling me with things again and again)

dont reverse that "ugh" thing on me, you were the one who claimed i am not broad minded, which i replied with an "ugh" how in god's name am i suppose to deal with the study on poststructuralism, which is my deepest interests, if i am not broadminded? but anyways, thats not the point. I never said im disgusted with you.( WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE, YOU THINK EVERY THING IS ABOUT YOU? I Have never lift any personal statements to anyone yet, they are all general statements. )


about the PRIEST ISSUE, NGANO DILI MAN MO KASABOT THAT THE PRIEST ISSUE IS NOT A PERSONAL ISSUE OF THE PRIEST ALONE, REMEMBER THAT THE PRIEST HAS A COMMITMENT NOT ONLY TO HIMSELF BUT TO HIS FLOCK AND TO HIS CHURCH. IF HE COULD NOT COMMIT, WHY BECOME A PRIEST IN THE FIRST PLACE? IS IT SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE PRIESTHOOD IS NOT SOMETHING PERSONAL?
and esotericism is opposite to church belief. why is that soooooooooooo hard to understand? WALA MOY SENSE OF COMMITMENT AND RESPONSIBILITY TO SAY, THAT THE PRIEST COULD DO WHATEVER HE WANTS AS LONG AS IT DOESNT HURT ANYBODY? TO EMBRACE BELIEFS THAT DOES NOT JIVE WITH CHURCH BELIEFS IS ALREADY A VIOLENCE TO THE FLOCK HE IS ADMINISTERING TO, and to the CHURCH AS A WHOLE. ( If you do not understand that, i dont know how else to explain it)

the truth is relative. 1st year philosophy majors would usually reply that saying so nullifies your own statement that truth being relative is itself relative - a double negation. But since im not a first year, let me explain in another way, that there is no such thing as relative, you have to consider what yo u mean by relative, Einstenian relativity, Kantian Relativity, Dostoevskian relativity? relativity as solipsism. there are a lot of shades to what you are referring to as truth as relative. but at the end, its contradictory and untenable.


your priest talking? ugh. you claim to be broad-minded and yet you continue to assume a lot. I dont have a priest talking with me. I have no mentor-priest. And frankly, i dont need one in conversations like this.

about the Robot nick-change thing, i prefer to have my nick as it is. thank you for the suggestion. but perhaps before you suggest others people's nick you might want to reflect yours.

that's a rather lengthy read. but thanks for your reply. i appreciate your eloquent choice of words. but, it's still shallow. i know you're an intellectual person and i truly respect that. if you choose to stay in your comfort zone of church dogmas, that's fine by me.

esotericism does not need to be an accepted academic course because it's not a mainstream subject like the ones being taught at schools. if you see beyond the symbolism of traditions, peel away the dogmas and superstitions, you'll see a clearer version of the histories that are masked by religionism.

i'm not saying that you SHOULD study esotericism but that explore the possibilities, the wonderful possibilities of a non-ordinary reality beyond the four corners of the church. i (because i don't speak for a particular group), am not antagonizing you for holding on to your beliefs, but that if you could find it in your intelligence not to equate esotericism with the occult (not even all of the occult is a bad thing), then i might truly respect you.

if you say you're a broad-minded person, then so be it. that's your declaration and i would have to take your word for it. but the moment you judge a person, group, principle then... just don't say i didn't warn you.

good day, mr. child.

research about anthony de mello, he's a jesuit priest. his views are quite staggering when it comes to spirituality. not conventional vatican-approved thoughts. but a whole lot of common sense. i hope you also have a lot of those, mr. child.

[regnauld]

Going back to the topic, I was amazed by Theosophists like Steiner who was able to synthesize his ideas and learning into a multi cultural level which for me had a profound impact in our evolving world. The great thinkers and philosophers in his time really admired his wisdom just like J. Krishnamurti who was also a great Theosophist who transcended Theosophy for that matter. I would like to stress again and again the much contribution of Steiner especially in his study and appreciation of Esoteric Christianity.

Steiner placed Jesus Christ at the center of his spiritual history of Earth, seeing what he called the "Christ impulse" as living at the heart of every religion. He described Christianity as having evolved out of previous religions and believed that each religion is valid and true for the time and cultural context in which it was born.

He also believed that the historical forms of Christianity need to be transformed considerably to meet the on-going evolution of humanity.

So, Steiner placed much great emphasis on the evolution of christianity not so much on the idea of religious institutions whose dogmas and faith are rigid and inflexible but rather on the idea that Christian Spirituality being ONE with all Esoteric religions would provide our souls with much needed INSIGHTS or DEPTH and WIDTH in the search for authentic HAPPINESS and greater TRUTH within ourselves.