Re: Steiner, Intuitive Thinking, Philosophy Of Freedom
These ideas seem very important to me. I have been thinking along some of the same lines without any of the vocabulary to describe it. But... there is such an emphasis, which seems like a backlash, on tradition, traditions, back to basics and all that, but are these really the basics? Tradition seems like a prison to me, from which nothing new can ever be created. Also, many different ethnic groups do not want their concepts, wisdom teachings or rituals taken out of context, but again, if nothing is ever taken out of context, how can anything new ever be created? We can't create the future to change the past and present if we are always stuck in the past (tradition). While many of us, including me, do not want to open ourselves to E.T. energies because they seem parasitical and invasive, unless we connect with a cosmic consciousness that is not bound by (earth) history and reasoning how can we affect this robotic merry-go-round with change?
Traditionalists would say that there is nothing new under the sun, that truth exists in the eternal present and that because the Tradition has been around so long, it has had time to accumulate those eternal present truths while shaking off those fashionable non-truths that change through the ages. So they compare the stupidity and fickleness of "new" with the solid foundation of the "old." But I think they are comparing the good of one thing to the bad of another, and therefore making a misguided value judgment. Sure, tradition has its share of treasure that should be acknowledged and put into practice, but that extreme kind of conservatism ignores the fact that the value and application of something does depend on its context, and context changes with the circumstance and purpose of an age.
Take for instance the gnostics... What makes the gnostics necessarily better than the top notch researchers, intuitive thinkers, and channelers of today? In fact, I bet those gnostics are reincarnated today and carrying on their original work in a better and more accurate form. Why should their work today be limited, dismissed, or squeezed back into their views from centuries ago, rather than being expansions upon them?
Aliens are thought to be physical beings from other planets by the modern secular "profane" UFO researchers, while the traditionalists shake their head and recast aliens as "really" being demons, Jinns, or Archons. I don't agree with either the secularists or the traditionalists. Both only have a partial view of a bigger picture that is beyond their willingness to acknowledge, and that bigger picture is the hyperdimensional one. From one view, the hyperdimensional stuff follows occult rules. From another view, it employs technology. Both are right. If one only sticks to the Traditionalist interpretation of the UFO phenomenon, only the occult interpretations, one will miss out on the aspects of portal technology, implants, soul frequency, realm and timeline dynamics, the hybridization program, technological frequency control, and methods to combat these. If one sticks only to the materialist view, pretty much the same result. You can't use the faults of one ignorant system to justify the complete acceptance of its "opposame."
So I agree with you... there is still new stuff to be learned. Even the perennial truths can be interpreted in a new expanded, more accurate context. What is truly perennial is the pure essential archetype, the very idea itself, but archetypes are nothing unless expressed, and the expression depends on the circumstance... circumstance varies, thus the expression of the archetype varies. It's an essential truth that there are invisible predatory beings, and while they were once understood as Archons, now we can understand them even better with modern research. Worse is traditionalism without an ounce of gnostic or intuitive insight, where the old is quoted and reasoned from just because it's supposed to be "time-tested" -- why not also reason-tested, intuition-tested, personal-experience-tested?
Do you think that there is a type of thought and communication that has nothing to do with the brain and nervous system? Might that be something that is coming to be, so to speak? It is hard to even imagine because I have no concept of what that would even be like. I think that the intuitive thinking, and sense-free thinking such as druid talks about in the Anthroposophy stuff could be a precurser to that, but ultimately it goes much further than that in an unimaginable way. Kind of like John the Baptist preparing the way for Christ, not to go all biblical, but... Thanks to all on this thread and input-lala
Yes, the intuitive or "pure" thinking is probably it (or at least going in that direction). Eric Pepin from the Higher Balance Institute talks about it as well, a type of thinking that is not chained down by the limitations of the physical brain. The best explanation I have heard comes from Steiner... some place (I cannot find where) he talked about the physical brain versus the etheric brain, and that in this higher thinking the etheric brain decouples from the physical, and in this way it can do all this superthinking. Eric Pepin refers to it as nonthinking, not the cessation of thought, but the absence of the internal babbler and linear forms of thinking, where thoughts are comprehended and worked out nonverbally in a very nonlinear way. Maybe that leads into Castaneda's "inner silence" and "second attention."
I think anytime you are contemplating a mystery or paradox and for a brief moment intuitively receive the answer in its initial nonverbal and nonvisual form, that could be an example of higher thinking that does not originate in the physical brain because it's an act of creation and the physical brain, being a mere machine, cannot create. We ourselves experience this in our lives, and these glimpses prove it's possible. It's just a matter of finding and practicing a reliable method for entering into that state more often.
