the riddle of this world by aurobindo

[Dennes De Mennes]

http://intyoga.online.fr/riddle.htm

excerpt:

``For once it appears it acquires for the Soul descending into
evolutionary manifestation an irresistible attraction which creates the
inevitability an attraction which in human terms on the terrestrial
level might be interpreted as the call of the unknown, the joy of danger
and difficulty and adventure, the will to attempt the impossible, to
work out the incalculable, the will to create the new and the uncreated
with one's own self and life as the material, the fascination of
contradictories and their difficult harmonisation - these things
translated into another supraphysical, superhuman consciousness, higher
and wider than the mental, were the temptation that led to the fall. For
to the original being of light on the verge of the descent the one thing
unknown was the depths of the abyss, the possibilities of the Divine in
the Ignorance and Inconscience.''

[Tom]

Post by Dennes De Mennes
http://intyoga.online.fr/riddle.htm
``For once it appears it acquires for the Soul descending into
evolutionary manifestation an irresistible attraction which creates the
inevitability an attraction which in human terms on the terrestrial
level might be interpreted as the call of the unknown, the joy of danger
and difficulty and adventure, the will to attempt the impossible, to
work out the incalculable, the will to create the new and the uncreated
with one's own self and life as the material, the fascination of
contradictories and their difficult harmonisation - these things
translated into another supraphysical, superhuman consciousness, higher
and wider than the mental, were the temptation that led to the fall. For
to the original being of light on the verge of the descent the one thing
unknown was the depths of the abyss, the possibilities of the Divine in
the Ignorance and Inconscience.''

"Material bad, spiritual good."

[Dennes De Mennes]

Post by Tom

Post by Dennes De Mennes
http://intyoga.online.fr/riddle.htm
``For once it appears it acquires for the Soul descending into
evolutionary manifestation an irresistible attraction which creates the
inevitability an attraction which in human terms on the terrestrial
level might be interpreted as the call of the unknown, the joy of danger
and difficulty and adventure, the will to attempt the impossible, to
work out the incalculable, the will to create the new and the uncreated
with one's own self and life as the material, the fascination of
contradictories and their difficult harmonisation - these things
translated into another supraphysical, superhuman consciousness, higher
and wider than the mental, were the temptation that led to the fall. For
to the original being of light on the verge of the descent the one thing
unknown was the depths of the abyss, the possibilities of the Divine in
the Ignorance and Inconscience.''

"Material bad, spiritual good."

not bad, just incomplete and in the process of evolving.
like the kids say: it's all good.

[Tom]

Post by Dennes De Mennes

Post by Tom

Post by Dennes De Mennes
http://intyoga.online.fr/riddle.htm
``For once it appears it acquires for the Soul descending into
evolutionary manifestation an irresistible attraction which creates the
inevitability an attraction which in human terms on the terrestrial
level might be interpreted as the call of the unknown, the joy of danger
and difficulty and adventure, the will to attempt the impossible, to
work out the incalculable, the will to create the new and the uncreated
with one's own self and life as the material, the fascination of
contradictories and their difficult harmonisation - these things
translated into another supraphysical, superhuman consciousness, higher
and wider than the mental, were the temptation that led to the fall. For
to the original being of light on the verge of the descent the one thing
unknown was the depths of the abyss, the possibilities of the Divine in
the Ignorance and Inconscience.''

"Material bad, spiritual good."

not bad, just incomplete and in the process of evolving.
like the kids say: it's all good.

So why would "the Soul descend into evolutionary manifestation" if
it's already beyond that? It's like deciding to repeatedly hit
yourself in the head with a hammer because it feels so good when you
stop.

[Dennes De Mennes]

In article <daa7d970-7004-470e-bf86-0006282e88c6
@l10g2000pra.googlegroups.com>, ***@comcast.net says...

Post by Tom

Post by Dennes De Mennes

Post by Tom

Post by Dennes De Mennes
http://intyoga.online.fr/riddle.htm
``For once it appears it acquires for the Soul descending into
evolutionary manifestation an irresistible attraction which creates the
inevitability an attraction which in human terms on the terrestrial
level might be interpreted as the call of the unknown, the joy of danger
and difficulty and adventure, the will to attempt the impossible, to
work out the incalculable, the will to create the new and the uncreated
with one's own self and life as the material, the fascination of
contradictories and their difficult harmonisation - these things
translated into another supraphysical, superhuman consciousness, higher
and wider than the mental, were the temptation that led to the fall. For
to the original being of light on the verge of the descent the one thing
unknown was the depths of the abyss, the possibilities of the Divine in
the Ignorance and Inconscience.''

"Material bad, spiritual good."

not bad, just incomplete and in the process of evolving.
like the kids say: it's all good.

So why would "the Soul descend into evolutionary manifestation" if
it's already beyond that? It's like deciding to repeatedly hit
yourself in the head with a hammer because it feels so good when you
stop.

to make it a free choice type thing, not something forced on you. when
you get enough faith of your own and you know what's good, then you
surrender, but not before.

[Tom]

Post by Dennes De Mennes
In article <daa7d970-7004-470e-bf86-0006282e88c6
@l10g2000pra.googlegroups.com>, ***@comcast.net says...

Post by Tom
So why would "the Soul descend into evolutionary manifestation" if
it's already beyond that?  It's like deciding to repeatedly hit
yourself in the head with a hammer because it feels so good when you
stop.

to make it a free choice type thing, not something forced on you.

If you choose to hit yourself in the head with a hammer repeatedly,
you ought to have a better reason than simply because you can.

Aurobindo's cosmology is just another in a long history of lame
metaphysical justifications for the Brahmans' attempt to convince
everybody that they are innately superior to everyone else and
therefore should run everything, control all the wealth, and assign
all the shit jobs to others.

http://nirmukta.com/2010/04/24/the-legacy-of-brahmanism-abomination-of-untouchability-and-curse-of-caste-system/

Aurobindo came from a family in Bengal whose caste was kayastha, which
in Bengal is considered (along side the Brahmans) to be the highest
caste, the upper crust of Hindu society. No wonder he liked the idea
that some people are spiritually superior to others. He considered
himself to be one of these self-proclaimed superhumans. He is on
record as favoring the caste system, with only some minor
modifications in order to square it with late 19th Century
nationalism.

"The historic problem that the present attitude of Indian Nationalism
at once brings to the mind, as to how a caste-governed society could
co-exist with a democratic religion and philosophy, we do not propose
to consider here today. We only point out that Indian Nationalism must
by its inherent tendencies move towards the removal of unreasoning and
arbitrary distinctions and inequalities. Ah! he will say, this is
exactly what we English men have been telling you all these years. You
must get rid of your caste before you can have democracy. There is
just a little flaw in this advice of the Anglo-Indian monitors, it
puts the cart before the horse, and that is the reason why we have
always refused to act upon it." -- Sri Aurobindo, 1907

[Dennes De Mennes]

In article <ef4192a2-61f2-467a-bb63-

Post by Tom
There is
just a little flaw in this advice of the Anglo-Indian monitors, it
puts the cart before the horse, and that is the reason why we have
always refused to act upon it." -- Sri Aurobindo, 1907

his views changed constantly. gotta look at the time period. he's like
crowley. hard to pin down to one statement.

[Tom]

Post by Dennes De Mennes
In article <ef4192a2-61f2-467a-bb63-

Post by Tom
There is
just a little flaw in this advice of the Anglo-Indian monitors, it
puts the cart before the horse, and that is the reason why we have
always refused to act upon it."  -- Sri Aurobindo, 1907

his views changed constantly. gotta look at the time period. he's like
crowley. hard to pin down to one statement.

Saying he's like Crowley is not a particularly good argument for
trusting him.

If you think he changed his view, find me a statement from a later
period in which he reverses himself and advocates scrapping the caste
system.

[Dennes De Mennes]

In article <0eee766c-ae3b-4d2f-bf7e-82fb5ce60aa6
@p20g2000prm.googlegroups.com>, ***@comcast.net says...

Post by Tom
If you think he changed his view, find me a statement from a later
period in which he reverses himself and advocates scrapping the caste
system.

he wasn't saying he supported the caste system just that that was an
internal indian problem and wanted indians to deal with it on their own
without the help of brits, in their own way and time, so to speak.
seems like you have some agenda to try and discredit him. he hadn't yet
developed the integral yoga system. he may have done a little yoga here
and there but it wasn't a system. that was years later. in his system
every human has the exact same potential. not one word is about one
human is better than another. that's just total fantasy by you.

[Dennes De Mennes]

In article <ef4192a2-61f2-467a-bb63-

Post by Tom
No wonder he liked the idea
that some people are spiritually superior to others.

if some people have developed their spiritual potential more than others
then they would be superior. even crowley would agree with that.

[Absorbed]

In article<ef4192a2-61f2-467a-bb63-

Post by Tom
No wonder he liked the idea
that some people are spiritually superior to others.

if some people have developed their spiritual potential more than others
then they would be superior. even crowley would agree with that.

There is no developing of your spiritual potential. There is just the
discovery of your true nature.

And does making this discovery make you superior to others who haven't?
No. It simply means you have an insight that others don't have.

It doesn't make you any more superior to others than if you understood
quantum physics and they didn't. Or if you were a concert pianist and
they weren't.

You can arbitrarily decide that you're superior to others because of any
criteria. How tall you are. How intelligent you are. How "spiritually
developed" you are.

Real spiritual insights reveal this idea of some being superior to
others as the illusion that it is.

[Dennes De Mennes]

In article <j7rk0s$4mt$***@dont-email.me>, ***@hotmail.com
says...

Post by Absorbed
Real spiritual insights reveal this idea of some being superior to
others as the illusion that it is.

i don't think aurobindo said anything about some people being superior
to other people. i don't really know where tom got that.
he gave some link about brahmanism this and that and there wasn't a word
about aurobindo on there. totally unrelated.

[Absorbed]

Post by Dennes De Mennes
says...

Post by Absorbed
Real spiritual insights reveal this idea of some being superior to
others as the illusion that it is.

i don't think aurobindo said anything about some people being superior
to other people. i don't really know where tom got that.
he gave some link about brahmanism this and that and there wasn't a word
about aurobindo on there. totally unrelated.

I was replying to what you said, that "if some people have developed
their spiritual potential more than others then they would be superior".

[Dennes De Mennes]

In article <j7rl5j$b14$***@dont-email.me>, ***@hotmail.com
says...

Post by Absorbed

Post by Dennes De Mennes
says...

Post by Absorbed
Real spiritual insights reveal this idea of some being superior to
others as the illusion that it is.

i don't think aurobindo said anything about some people being superior
to other people. i don't really know where tom got that.
he gave some link about brahmanism this and that and there wasn't a word
about aurobindo on there. totally unrelated.

I was replying to what you said, that "if some people have developed
their spiritual potential more than others then they would be superior".

i was just using tom's words so as to appease him that i had addressed
his grievance.

[Absorbed]

Post by Dennes De Mennes
says...

Post by Absorbed

Post by Dennes De Mennes
says...

Post by Absorbed
Real spiritual insights reveal this idea of some being superior to
others as the illusion that it is.

i don't think aurobindo said anything about some people being superior
to other people. i don't really know where tom got that.
he gave some link about brahmanism this and that and there wasn't a word
about aurobindo on there. totally unrelated.

I was replying to what you said, that "if some people have developed
their spiritual potential more than others then they would be superior".

i was just using tom's words so as to appease him that i had addressed
his grievance.

Those weren't Tom's words. They were your words.

Tom said that Aurobindo and Brahmans have attempted to convince others
that they're innately superior to everyone else. You said that someone
who has "developed their spiritual potential" is superior to someone who
hasn't.

They are two very different points.

[Dennes De Mennes]

In article <j7rp78$64j$***@dont-email.me>, ***@hotmail.com
says...

Post by Absorbed
Tom said that Aurobindo and Brahmans have attempted to convince others
that they're innately superior to everyone else.

i don't know he quoted some shit from like 1907, he didn't start doing
yoga until like 1910. maybe he was speaking like a normal indian would
at that era, who are under british rule or whatever...
he just meant, the brits are not superior on indian affairs than indians
themselves.

[Dennes De Mennes]

In article <***@news.sysmatrix.net>, jesucristo2
@netscape.net says...

Post by Dennes De Mennes
he just meant, the brits are not superior on indian affairs than
indians themselves.

he didn't mean at cricket, tho.

[Tom]

Post by Dennes De Mennes
says...

Post by Absorbed
Tom said that Aurobindo and Brahmans have attempted to convince others
that they're innately superior to everyone else.

i don't know he quoted some shit from like 1907, he didn't start doing
yoga until like 1910.

Actually, he had been practicing yoga for a number of years
previously, but considered his political activities to be more
important. It was in fact precisely in 1907 that he began having
mystical experiences in conjunction with his yogic practices.
Tellingly, he describes a vision of Swami Vivekananda that he had in
1907 in which he was supposedly introduced to the concept of the
"supermind". You see, Vivekananda was also a Bengali of the kayastha
caste and therefore his spiritual equal. The "equality" between the
castes that he advocated was that every individual is a different
manifestation of Krishna. Yet he still believed in a division of
labor according to caste, with only minor modifications to accommodate
democratic ideas that were necessary as a justification for throwing
off the British chains. Apparently, the manifestations of Krishna as
a kayastha caste are superior to manifestations of Krishna as a shudra
caste even though they are all Krishna. Essentially, he says we're
all equal but some are more equal than others.

Post by Dennes De Mennes
maybe he was speaking like a normal indian would
at that era, who are under british rule or whatever...
he just meant, the brits are not superior on indian affairs than indians
themselves.

That's typical nationalistic thinking. He still felt that, among
Indians, some are spiritually superior to others and that this
superiority is reflected in the caste system. He really had no
objection to the system that had been in place prior to British
hegemony. It was only the fact that the high Indian castes were being
subjugated by someone else that he considered objectionable.

[Dennes De Mennes]

In article <d87ab90d-ab5e-436f-94aa-

Post by Tom
Essentially, he says we're
all equal but some are more equal than others.

that stuff is not coming out of his system of yoga. it's way earlier and
it's an internal indian problem that neither you or i are in a position
to judge.

[Tom]

Post by Dennes De Mennes
In article <d87ab90d-ab5e-436f-94aa-

Post by Tom
Essentially, he says we're
all equal but some are more equal than others.

that stuff is not coming out of his system of yoga. it's way earlier and
it's an internal indian problem that neither you or i are in a position
to judge.

I see nothing in any of his later writings that contradicts the
passages that he wrote in 1907. But perhaps I'm missing something.
If you can find any words he actually wrote (not just what you think
he meant or how you imagine he felt, but stuff he himself wrote) that
would indicate he no longer believed what he had written in 1907 in
which he advocates for the caste system to be kept in place, feel free
to cite some quotations.

However, given all the information I am currently aware of,
Aurobindo's notion of people evolving themselves into spiritual
superhumans who will be to humans as humans are now to animals looks
to me like just another metaphysical justification for the dominance
of a religio-magical elite, which is exactly what caste system
advocates assert that it is.

[Dennes De Mennes]

In article <261836f9-efc6-4512-a59a-120505cbf4a5
@g27g2000pro.googlegroups.com>, ***@comcast.net says...

Post by Tom
However, given all the information I am currently aware of,
Aurobindo's notion of people evolving themselves into spiritual
superhumans who will be to humans as humans are now to animals looks
to me like just another metaphysical justification for the dominance
of a religio-magical elite, which is exactly what caste system
advocates assert that it is.

he's talking about evolution. involution is the divine descending into
matter. evolution is matter ascending to the divine. no different than
what kabbalists teach. it is the laws of nature of evolution and the
vital force and everything else, but no longer limited to a judaic
framework. no where does he say some humans are more capable than
others. that's some political bullshit he wrote before he even developed
his system of integral yoga. you have nothing.

[Tom]

Post by Dennes De Mennes
In article <261836f9-efc6-4512-a59a-120505cbf4a5
@g27g2000pro.googlegroups.com>, ***@comcast.net says...

Post by Tom
However, given all the information I am currently aware of,
Aurobindo's notion of people evolving themselves into spiritual
superhumans who will be to humans as humans are now to animals looks
to me like just another metaphysical justification for the dominance
of a religio-magical elite, which is exactly what caste system
advocates assert that it is.

he's talking about evolution.

Sort of. Not in a scientific sense, though. He barely admits the
possibility that science might be partly right.

"It has not yet been really established that ape-kind developed into
man; for it would rather seem that a type resembling the ape, but
always characteristic of itself and not of apehood, developed within
its own tendencies of nature and became what we know as man, the
present human being. It is not even established that inferior races of
man developed out of themselves the superior races; those of an
inferior organisation and capacity perished, but it has not been shown
that they left behind the human races of today as their descendants:
but still such a development within the type is imaginable." -- Sri
Aurobindo, "The Life Divine", Book 2, Chapter 23, "Man and the
Evolution", published 1940.

Wait a minute... He's talking "inferior races of man"? In 1940? At
the very least, that shows remarkable insensitivity.

Well, anyway, he doesn't really buy into the theory. He simply cannot
conceive of sentience as an emergent property without the necessity of
miraculous divine intervention.

"If Science is true, what more absurd, paradoxical and Rabelaisian
miracle can there be than this, that a republic of small animalcules
forming a mass of grey matter planned Austerlitz, wrote Hamlet or
formulated the Vedanta philosophy?" -- Sri Aurobindo, "Essays Divine
and Human" Section 2 (1910-1912), "The Claims of Theosophy"

Post by Dennes De Mennes
no where does he say some humans are more capable than
others.

Try this one:

"The mystics founded their endeavour on a power of suprarational
knowledge, intuitive, inspired, revelatory and on the force of the
inner being to enter into occult truth and experience: but these
powers are not possessed by men in the mass or possessed only in a
crude, undeveloped and fragmentary initial form on which nothing could
be safely founded; so for them in this new development the spiritual
truth had to be clothed in intellectual forms of creed and doctrine,
in emotional forms of worship and in a simple but significant ritual.
At the same time the strong spiritual nucleus became mixed, diluted,
alloyed; it tended to be invaded and aped by the lower elements of
mind and life and physical nature. It was this mixture and alloy and
invasion of the spurious, this profanation of the mysteries and the
loss of their truth and significance, as well as the misuse of the
occult power that comes by communication with invisible forces, that
was most dreaded by the early mystics and prevented by secrecy, by
strict discipline, by restriction to the few fit initiates." -- Sri
Aurobindo, "The Life Divine", Book 2, Chapter 24 "The Evolution of the
Spiritual Man", published 1940.

[Dennes De Mennes]

In article <9d1012db-f3c8-4d21-9502-ab64cfbfefa1
@l10g2000pra.googlegroups.com>, ***@comcast.net says...

Post by Tom

Post by Dennes De Mennes
no where does he say some humans are more capable than
others.

"The mystics founded their endeavour on a power of suprarational
knowledge, intuitive, inspired, revelatory and on the force of the
inner being to enter into occult truth and experience: but these
powers are not possessed by men in the mass or possessed only in a
crude, undeveloped and fragmentary initial form on which nothing could
be safely founded; so for them in this new development the spiritual
truth had to be clothed in intellectual forms of creed and doctrine,
in emotional forms of worship and in a simple but significant ritual.
At the same time the strong spiritual nucleus became mixed, diluted,
alloyed; it tended to be invaded and aped by the lower elements of
mind and life and physical nature. It was this mixture and alloy and
invasion of the spurious, this profanation of the mysteries and the
loss of their truth and significance, as well as the misuse of the
occult power that comes by communication with invisible forces, that
was most dreaded by the early mystics and prevented by secrecy, by
strict discipline, by restriction to the few fit initiates." -- Sri
Aurobindo, "The Life Divine", Book 2, Chapter 24 "The Evolution of the
Spiritual Man", published 1940.

clearly he's not of the same school that feels things have to be kept
secret and is merely giving us a frame of reference about why the wisdom
was kept secret for so long, but today the wisdom has to be available to
everyone and everyone should be able to access it--amd he made his
system so anyone can evolve to the next evolutionary step, not just
special folk, or mystics or a specific class or race.

he's saying the same shit kabbalists were saying. the world had to be
ready first before it could receive it and now it is, once all the
earthly pursuits have been followed and shown to lead nowhere. and man
cannot do it alone. he needs the divine force to help it out of its
current condition, because by definition it's outside our current
perception. it's a dual action of us seeking god and god coming down to
fulfill our need down on our material realm, and altering everything
along with it. not like the yogis of old that only had to ascend and
leave the world behind, as it were. no need to change a thing on the
earthly plane. it will change organically when it has to.

[Tom]

Post by Dennes De Mennes
clearly he's not of the same school that feels things have to be kept
secret and is merely giving us a frame of reference about why the wisdom
was kept secret for so long, but today the wisdom has to be available to
everyone and everyone should be able to access it--amd he made his
system so anyone can evolve to the next evolutionary step, not just
special folk, or mystics or a specific class or race.

There are few, if any, variations on Hinduism that assert spiritual
advancement is restricted only to a certain caste. Rather, the castes
are supposed to reflect the different levels of spiritual progress
each individual makes. Aurobindo was a little more liberal than some
because he was willing to provide more education to the lower castes
and allow some token promotions for outstanding individuals, but he
did not abandon the caste system as a basis for the division of labor
in society. As he moved from politics to mysticism, he simply stopped
talking about social systems and focused his writing on spiritual
matters for all of humanity in general, without getting into the day-
to-day details or individual variations in development.

Post by Dennes De Mennes
he's saying the same shit kabbalists were saying.

So it seems to you, who has studied neither kabbalah nor Hinduism
extensively and so have only the most general knowledge of their
tenets. That fuzziness makes them seem pretty similar to you. What's
really going on here is that you are interpreting both kabbalah and
Hinduism as saying the same things you personally believe. You do not
believe in these faiths as they are. Instead you force-fit them into
your own theories of spirituality. Where they differ fro one another
or from your own beliefs, you simply ignore or minimize it.

[Dennes De Mennes]

Post by Tom
Instead you force-fit them into
your own theories of spirituality. Where they differ fro one another
or from your own beliefs, you simply ignore or minimize it.

that's right. each individual has to develop his/her own system by
taking truth from any system. where kabbalah went wrong is in saying
they were the only source of truth, when clearly truth is to be found
everywhere because it's all a result of the One Eternal Self manifesting
itself in the universe we see here below. so why limit yourself to one
gospel or one nation. I'm not Aurobindo, so I don't know everything that
went on in his head, but I see similar ideas to kabbalah, and so I can
take from both and adapt them as I see fit. I don't see why you have to
follow just one and not diverge. You sound just like a kabbalist.

[Tom]

Post by Dennes De Mennes

Post by Tom
Instead you force-fit them into
your own theories of spirituality.  Where they differ fro one another
or from your own beliefs, you simply ignore or minimize it.

that's right. each individual has to develop his/her own system by
taking truth from any system.

No, each individual does not have to do that. Spiritual seekers who
are also chronic control freaks do this a lot, though.

Post by Dennes De Mennes
I'm not Aurobindo, so I don't know everything that
went on in his head, but I see similar ideas to kabbalah, and so I can
take from both and adapt them as I see fit. I don't see why you have to
follow just one and not diverge.

That's because your root assumption is that you have to be in control
all the time. So surrendering is out of the question. At some point
every seeker discovers that they simply don't know what's going on and
stops trying to insist that they do. You're not there yet.

[Dennes De Mennes]

In article <fb7cda57-2796-45f8-8a13-7629a2ff9371
@x16g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, ***@comcast.net says...

Post by Tom
You're not there yet.

thank you mr. obvious...

[Dennes De Mennes]

In article <261836f9-efc6-4512-a59a-120505cbf4a5
@g27g2000pro.googlegroups.com>, ***@comcast.net says...

Post by Tom
If you can find any words he actually wrote (not just what you think
he meant or how you imagine he felt, but stuff he himself wrote) that
would indicate he no longer believed what he had written in 1907 in
which he advocates for the caste system to be kept in place, feel free
to cite some quotations.

``The gospel of true supermanhood gives us a generous ideal for the
progressive human race and should not be turned into an arrogant claim
for a class or individuals. It is a call to man to do what no species
has yet done or aspired to do in terrestrial history, evolve itself
consciously into the next superior type already half foreseen by the
continual cyclic development of the world-idea in Nature's fruitful
musings. And when we so envisage it, this conception ranks surely as one
of the most potent seeds that can be cast by thought into the soil of
our human growth''

comment: you see that it's not about a class or a group of even some
individuals but the whole race. all humankind advances together or no
one advances.

[source: http://www.odinring.de/eng/superman.htm]

[Robert Scott Martin]

Post by Dennes De Mennes
[source: http://www.odinring.de/eng/superman.htm]

This might be one of those "consider the source" scenarios students of the
kabbalah might want to consider.

[Dennes De Mennes]

Post by Robert Scott Martin

Post by Dennes De Mennes
[source: http://www.odinring.de/eng/superman.htm]

This might be one of those "consider the source" scenarios students of the
kabbalah might want to consider.

because theirs are so less confusing...

[Tom]

Post by Dennes De Mennes
In article <261836f9-efc6-4512-a59a-120505cbf4a5
@g27g2000pro.googlegroups.com>, ***@comcast.net says...

Post by Tom
If you can find any words he actually wrote (not just what you think
he meant or how you imagine he felt, but stuff he himself wrote) that
would indicate he no longer believed what he had written in 1907 in
which he advocates for the caste system to be kept in place, feel free
to cite some quotations.

``The gospel of true supermanhood gives us a generous ideal for the
progressive human race and should not be turned into an arrogant claim
for a class or individuals. It is a call to man to do what no species
has yet done or aspired to do in terrestrial history, evolve itself
consciously into the next superior type already half foreseen by the
continual cyclic development of the world-idea in Nature's fruitful
musings. And when we so envisage it, this conception ranks surely as one
of the most potent seeds that can be cast by thought into the soil of
our human growth''
comment: you see that it's not about a class or a group of even some
individuals but the whole race. all humankind advances together or no
one advances.
[source:http://www.odinring.de/eng/superman.htm]

Aurobindo is saying that all humanity evolves, but they don't all
evolve together at the same rate or at the same time. Thus, the more
evolved people have power and privilege that is denied lesser evolved
people. Once again, Vedanta has always taught that all people
evolve. They don't, however, advance through the castes in a single
lifetime. They evolve by being obedient to the demands of their
assigned place in society and paying proper respect and devotion to
Krishna in his many forms, which generates good karma, which is then
rewarded by advancement in one's next incarnation.

[Dennes De Mennes]

In article <5553541a-59f5-4fb7-8bec-8d10ff343b37
@x16g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, ***@comcast.net says...

Post by Tom
Aurobindo is saying that all humanity evolves, but they don't all
evolve together at the same rate or at the same time. Thus, the more
evolved people have power and privilege that is denied lesser evolved
people.

well then the more evolved have earned it, because they've speeded up
the evolution on their own through lifetimes of doing the right karmic
actions and allowing god to enter and be their source of knowledge and
wisdom. everything is the way it is for a reason and god doesn't make
mistakes. but our tiny ignorant brains cannot grasp such awesomeness.

[Tom]

Post by Dennes De Mennes
In article <5553541a-59f5-4fb7-8bec-8d10ff343b37
@x16g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, ***@comcast.net says...

Post by Tom
Aurobindo is saying that all humanity evolves, but they don't all
evolve together at the same rate or at the same time.  Thus, the more
evolved people have power and privilege that is denied lesser evolved
people.

well then the more evolved have earned it,

Or at least so they claim. Unfortunately, these alleged "powers" are
not particularly demonstrable to independent observers. So their
claim of privilege should be put on hold until they are.

There's more to being "evolved" than merely claiming that you are.

[Dennes De Mennes]

In article <c6bba298-0233-4fb2-8332-94cd8053f958
@j15g2000prn.googlegroups.com>, ***@comcast.net says...

Post by Tom
There's more to being "evolved" than merely claiming that you are.

i didn't claim shit that i recall...

[Tom]

Post by Dennes De Mennes
In article <c6bba298-0233-4fb2-8332-94cd8053f958
@j15g2000prn.googlegroups.com>, ***@comcast.net says...

Post by Tom
There's more to being "evolved" than merely claiming that you are.

i didn't claim shit that i recall...

Aurobindo was claiming that some are. He doesn't name any names,
though. And he certainly doesn't back up any of his views with
rationally persuasive evidence. Like every other psychotic with
delusions of grandeur (or any standard religious believer) he thinks
he's "suprarational".

[Dennes De Mennes]

In article <8231afbd-b86f-4db0-960d-

Post by Tom

Post by Dennes De Mennes
In article <c6bba298-0233-4fb2-8332-94cd8053f958
@j15g2000prn.googlegroups.com>, ***@comcast.net says...

Post by Tom
There's more to being "evolved" than merely claiming that you are.

i didn't claim shit that i recall...

Aurobindo was claiming that some are. He doesn't name any names,
though. And he certainly doesn't back up any of his views with
rationally persuasive evidence. Like every other psychotic with
delusions of grandeur (or any standard religious believer) he thinks
he's "suprarational".

yeah i'm not buying anything you say. you're full of crap.

[Tom]

Post by Dennes De Mennes
In article <8231afbd-b86f-4db0-960d-

Post by Dennes De Mennes
In article <c6bba298-0233-4fb2-8332-94cd8053f958
@j15g2000prn.googlegroups.com>, ***@comcast.net says...

Post by Tom
There's more to being "evolved" than merely claiming that you are.

i didn't claim shit that i recall...

Aurobindo was claiming that some are.  He doesn't name any names,
though. And he certainly doesn't back up any of his views with
rationally persuasive evidence.  Like every other psychotic with
delusions of grandeur (or any standard religious believer) he thinks
he's "suprarational".

yeah i'm not buying anything you say. you're full of crap.

Of course you'd think so. You're "suprarational".

[Dennes De Mennes]

In article <fefb13e8-7235-4ebf-bef0-16eaed960094
@u24g2000pru.googlegroups.com>, ***@comcast.net says...

Post by Tom

Post by Dennes De Mennes
yeah i'm not buying anything you say. you're full of crap.

Of course you'd think so. You're "suprarational".

i am nothing. god is everything. you are also an expression of god so
that presents a challenge for me.

[Tom]

Post by Dennes De Mennes
In article <fefb13e8-7235-4ebf-bef0-16eaed960094
@u24g2000pru.googlegroups.com>, ***@comcast.net says...

Post by Dennes De Mennes
yeah i'm not buying anything you say. you're full of crap.

Of course you'd think so.  You're "suprarational".

i am nothing. god is everything. you are also an expression of god so
that presents a challenge for me.

Like I say, above all be honest. You're still posturing.

[Dennes De Mennes]

In article <b96489a0-b0d0-4a56-bbce-

Post by Tom

Post by Dennes De Mennes
In article <fefb13e8-7235-4ebf-bef0-16eaed960094
@u24g2000pru.googlegroups.com>, ***@comcast.net says...

Post by Dennes De Mennes
yeah i'm not buying anything you say. you're full of crap.

Of course you'd think so.  You're "suprarational".

i am nothing. god is everything. you are also an expression of god so
that presents a challenge for me.

Like I say, above all be honest. You're still posturing.

what do you do just read atheist stuff, because anyone that mentions god
is a fake?

[Tom]

Post by Dennes De Mennes
In article <b96489a0-b0d0-4a56-bbce-

Post by Dennes De Mennes
In article <fefb13e8-7235-4ebf-bef0-16eaed960094
@u24g2000pru.googlegroups.com>, ***@comcast.net says...

Post by Dennes De Mennes
yeah i'm not buying anything you say. you're full of crap.

Of course you'd think so.  You're "suprarational".

i am nothing. god is everything. you are also an expression of god so
that presents a challenge for me.

Like I say, above all be honest.  You're still posturing.

what do you do just read atheist stuff, because anyone that mentions god
is a fake?

No, anyone who mentions god is "suprarational". I read and consider
all sorts of stuff, even stuff I don't believe. My belief or
nonbelief doesn't make any claim true or false. My criteria for
plausibility are not my private experiences alone.

Spouting pious piffle doesn't make you holy.

[Dennes De Mennes]

In article <a48aae63-5ae3-4eaf-acb7-

Post by Tom
Spouting pious piffle doesn't make you holy.

the idea is not to be holy but let god in and let the chips fall where
they may.

[Tom]

Post by Dennes De Mennes
In article <a48aae63-5ae3-4eaf-acb7-

Post by Tom
Spouting pious piffle doesn't make you holy.

the idea is not to be holy but let god in and let the chips fall where
they may.

But if you only let in the stuff you currently believe and reject the
rest, you're not letting anything in, really. You're only attempting
to preserve what's already there.

You cannot look at any spiritual teaching and say to yourself "I like
this part, so it's true, but I don't like that part, so it's not
true." If you do that, you're not regarding the teaching as being any
more authentically spiritual than whatever happy fiction you decide to
make up for yourself. And if you think that's OK, then why bother
going looking for spiritual truth at all? Just make up whatever you
like.

To seek spiritual truth is to look at the world as it is, not as you
would like it to be. Reality isn't something you choose. It's
something that is there, whether you like it or not. That's why you
have to be ruthlessly honest with yourself and refrain from trying to
edit the message to suit your prejudices and confirm your fantasies.

When I look at the teachings of someone like Aurobindo, Philip Berg,
Billy Graham, Eckhart Tolle, or Chogyam Trungpa, I look at all of what
they say and do, not just the parts I like. Because of this, I see
all these people for what they are, just ordinary people trying to
figure things out as best they can, not the Voice of God issuing
nothing but Truth.

[Dennes De Mennes]

In article <de0299a3-ae99-4f7f-9c9a-

Post by Tom

Post by Dennes De Mennes
In article <a48aae63-5ae3-4eaf-acb7-

Post by Tom
Spouting pious piffle doesn't make you holy.

the idea is not to be holy but let god in and let the chips fall where
they may.

But if you only let in the stuff you currently believe and reject the
rest, you're not letting anything in, really. You're only attempting
to preserve what's already there.

i'm not. i'm saying god is in everything even you. i'm even letting you
in.

Post by Tom
You cannot look at any spiritual teaching and say to yourself "I like
this part, so it's true, but I don't like that part, so it's not
true." If you do that, you're not regarding the teaching as being any
more authentically spiritual than whatever happy fiction you decide to
make up for yourself. And if you think that's OK, then why bother
going looking for spiritual truth at all? Just make up whatever you
like.

i'm saying to use critical thinking and check things out yourself. don't
just accept it a-priori.

Post by Tom
To seek spiritual truth is to look at the world as it is, not as you
would like it to be. Reality isn't something you choose. It's
something that is there, whether you like it or not. That's why you
have to be ruthlessly honest with yourself and refrain from trying to
edit the message to suit your prejudices and confirm your fantasies.

i'm exploring evolution. things that evolve are always changing so you
can't go by what's there now. explore how they evolve and come up with
scenarios for the future based on observed phenomena.

Post by Tom
When I look at the teachings of someone like Aurobindo, Philip Berg,
Billy Graham, Eckhart Tolle, or Chogyam Trungpa, I look at all of what
they say and do, not just the parts I like. Because of this, I see
all these people for what they are, just ordinary people trying to
figure things out as best they can, not the Voice of God issuing
nothing but Truth.

i'm looking for authenticity, not just variety.

[Dennes De Mennes]

In article <8231afbd-b86f-4db0-960d-

Post by Tom
Like every other psychotic with
delusions of grandeur

look in the mirror lately?

[Tom]

Post by Dennes De Mennes
In article <8231afbd-b86f-4db0-960d-

Post by Tom
Like every other psychotic with
delusions of grandeur

look in the mirror lately?

I think you look in the mirror entirely too much. Try looking
elsewhere.

You won't find out anything new if your criterion for accepting new
information is that it must always agree with the information you
already have.

[Dennes De Mennes]

In article <246df928-d17e-4aac-bf0a-6f497ed9aeb4
@q39g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, ***@comcast.net says...

Post by Tom
You won't find out anything new if your criterion for accepting new
information is that it must always agree with the information you
already have.

my criterion is that you oppose it. then i know i'm on the right track.

[Tom]

Post by Dennes De Mennes
In article <246df928-d17e-4aac-bf0a-6f497ed9aeb4
@q39g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, ***@comcast.net says...

Post by Tom
You won't find out anything new if your criterion for accepting new
information is that it must always agree with the information you
already have.

my criterion is that you oppose it. then i know i'm on the right track.

Don't posture so unrealistically. You don't always disagree with me.
When I happen to say something that coincides with what you currently
believe, you don't automatically abandon it.

In matters of sincere spiritual exploration, above all be honest.

[Tom]

Post by Dennes De Mennes
http://intyoga.online.fr/riddle.htm
``For once it appears it acquires for the Soul descending into
evolutionary manifestation an irresistible attraction which creates the
inevitability an attraction which in human terms on the terrestrial
level might be interpreted as the call of the unknown, the joy of danger
and difficulty and adventure, the will to attempt the impossible, to
work out the incalculable, the will to create the new and the uncreated
with one's own self and life as the material, the fascination of
contradictories and their difficult harmonisation - these things
translated into another supraphysical, superhuman consciousness, higher
and wider than the mental, were the temptation that led to the fall. For
to the original being of light on the verge of the descent the one thing
unknown was the depths of the abyss, the possibilities of the Divine in
the Ignorance and Inconscience.''

[Dennes De Mennes]

Post by Tom

Post by Dennes De Mennes
http://intyoga.online.fr/riddle.htm
``For once it appears it acquires for the Soul descending into
evolutionary manifestation an irresistible attraction which creates the
inevitability an attraction which in human terms on the terrestrial
level might be interpreted as the call of the unknown, the joy of danger
and difficulty and adventure, the will to attempt the impossible, to
work out the incalculable, the will to create the new and the uncreated
with one's own self and life as the material, the fascination of
contradictories and their difficult harmonisation - these things
translated into another supraphysical, superhuman consciousness, higher
and wider than the mental, were the temptation that led to the fall. For
to the original being of light on the verge of the descent the one thing
unknown was the depths of the abyss, the possibilities of the Divine in
the Ignorance and Inconscience.''

http://youtu.be/0AKvRvL5r3A

if you're comparing that to aurobindo, you're more fucked up than i
thought.