Balancing the Mechanical and the Spiritual.

Posted on September 4, 2007
Filed Under Society, Spirituality |

Materialism is Ahrimanic? There is a line somewhere between the “mechanics” of life, and the inner workings on our individual self. Seems to me, that finding where that line is, varies from person to person.

Don’t you think that we are all taught to think too literally by society? I think there is room for both literal thinking and symbolical thinking - and that an individual should have a good balance of both. Problem is - our society doesn’t work that way. But then, couldn’t that be why we have so many problems in our society?

Rudolf Steiner termed “literal thinking” as Aharimanic. He believed that a time would come when humanity saw everything in terms of physical materialism. That such a perspective would believe that everything can be measured, counted and understood by scientific and logical means.

On the other hand he felt “symbolical thinking” or spiritual thinking to be Luciferic (don’t get hung up on the terms though - they don’t refer to the satanic, or biblical ideas). This was the popular method of thinking in the time of Buddha - it is the type of thinking employed by most guru’s. This thinking is fantastic for understanding the inner workings of the “self”, but it doesn’t really apply to the physical world as such.

Consumerism

Steiner felt that Ahrimanic and Luciferic thought were / are at constant war with each other. That across centuries and millennia, humanity swings from one extreme to the other. Clearly such extremes are dangerous and have led to a lot of destructive acts throughout humanity’s history. Most of the problems in the modern world are a result of Ahrimanic (literal) thought!

The idea - as he saw it then, was to find a balance between the two aspects. That if you find the middle-ground between Ahrimanic thinking, and Luciferic thinking - then you become in tune with reality, both physical and spiritual. He referred to that balanced method of thinking as “Christ Consciousness”. This term expresses the idea that Christ Consciousness is the perfect balance between a materialistic viewpoint and a spiritual viewpoint.

So continuing to use Steiner’s terminology; modern western society with its rigid-mechanical approach to life could certainly be viewed as ‘Ahrimanic’.

Steiner also expressed that both Ahrimanic and Luciferic consciousness are not necessarily bad in and of themselves. What is potentially negative is how we choose apply them.

Mechanical Man? I have found that in some ways this can serve as a good framework from which to approach life. But is building such a framework a “mechanical” notion? For example to take this a step further; a person who spends their lives reading psychology books - would gain a good reference and framework for how people work on a mental level. Same would apply for any other form of learning; but could this also be considered ‘Ahrimanic’?

In my experience many people with this sort of knowledge use it to look outwardly at life. They use it in order to understand other people or society - rather than using it to look within. Both literal thinking and spiritual thinking can serve as mirrors of each other, through which we can learn to be balanced.

This is one of the main reasons I am always interested in finding any teachings and systems that help this process. So have you came across any teachings out there that you feel take this sort of balanced approach to life?

Comments

2 Responses to “Balancing the Mechanical and the Spiritual.”

donna on September 6th, 2007 2:37 am

Taoist thought has come the closest for me.
For such a simple text it explains both inner and outer reality fairly well.

I still explore other philosophies as well, though. Right now venturing into Buddhist texts.
[ Quote ]
Marcus on September 6th, 2007 6:30 pm

I think it’s amazing that most of the worthwhile teachings nearly always seem to be eastern.

Taoism is great. Let me know what you think of the Buddhist texts!
[ Quote ]