War
From: Joel Wendt
Date: Mon Dec 22, 2003 9:34 am
Subject: War
Dear List-mates,
I am writing this post about the "War",
before reading the long piece shared with us by Paulina.
I have been reading a lot of stuff about politics
and war on various lists, including those oriented in an "anthroposophical"
direction. Hard positions have often been taken, and many folks
quote Steiner or Christ to bolster their views. The assumption
seems to be that there is a "right" place to be.
I consider this idea - that there is a "right"
place to be - itself to be contrary to what lives in anthroposophy,
especially as is reflected in the Philosophy of Freedom concerning
moral imagination.
Now some point out that Steiner has said that
in moral imagination, people considering the same question would
arrive at the same answer, and I find this true to experience,
but only as a generalization. The tricky part (and where Steiner
slid around the truth as he often had to do because of the soul
conditions of his listeners) has to do with what is meant "by
the same question".
Questions put to "moral imagination"
are never abstract, as in, for example, "Is war a good?".
The moral imagination is a gift, what I call in my writing "moral
grace". Everyone has this capacity in the Age of the Consciousness
Soul, and it is being exercised everywhere (with varying degrees
of self-conscious awareness). In this sense, this moral gift
is quite individual. We can really only put to this capacity
for moral grace a quite specific, concrete and real, personal
question.
[In the Philosophy of Freedom, Steiner points
out that thinking tends to seek more and more universal concepts,
except when the question is "moral", in which case
the resulting concept of the true and the good is "individualized".]
Steiner also points out to us that English
speaking Peoples are instinctively in the Consciousness Soul
in their Life of Rights. What this means to observation and experience
is that political (rights) questions are experienced by the I-am
in a quite personal way - not abstractly, and these soul configurations
(English speaking Peoples), then instinctively respond by forming
inwardly a personal moral question in relationship to the matters
coming toward them in the Life of Rights.
What this means is that when we face questions
arising in the Life of Rights (War, politics, Bush whatever),
the moral aspect which leaps inwardly to the fore as the central
existential dilemma for the I-am brings about inwardly in the
soul an individualized question, and then an individualized answer.
The essential question as a member of the
Life of Rights is "What do I do in response to this particular
aspect of our shared sea of troubles?". The question being
thus personalized, can only result in a personalized response,
for the moral act evoked only we can carry out.
Now mind tends to "rationalize"
its moral intuitions, because as social beings we have yet to
really appreciate and honor this capacity of the Thou as a law-giver
(see Theory of Knowledge). Our peers want to question our political
judgments (by social habit), so on this list we raise a political
question and then find all manner of apparent disagreement because
we sleep through the inner background at the level of instinctive
moral imagination that permeates our political thinking.
Or, as Steiner has pointed out in other contexts,
everyone is right, no one is wrong.
So, in order for us to arrive at the same
sense of the true and the good as regards a moral question, this
only happens to the extent that our moral question itself more
and more becomes congruent with another's moral question. No
abortion question is ever the same when presented (offered up)
to moral grace (our grace given capacity to be in touch with
the eternal - the good and the true - in the Age of the Consciousness
Soul). Each question is individualized because no two people
are alike, and no two biographies are alike. This means that
our contact with the good and the true evokes an individualized
"sense of what is right to do", and the action that
then proceeds is based upon an individualized moral judgment.
Of course, as social beings we need to come
to appreciate this ever more deeply, if we truly desire to understand,
find compassion for and then love our fellow human beings.
love,
joel
...................................................................................................................................
From: holderlin66
Date: Mon Dec 22, 2003 10:46 am
Subject: Re: War/Christmas Freedom
--- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com,
Joel Wendt wrote:
Each question is individualized because
no two people are alike, and no two biographies are alike. This
means that our contact with the good and the true evokes an individualized
"sense of what is right to do", and the action that
then proceeds is based upon an individualized moral judgment.
Bradford comments;
Yes dear Joel, but the unstated foundation
of this argument is that unfree and free actions and moral intuitions
depend on how deeply we penetrate to the core of our instincts,
motives, impulses and fears in order find this Universal well
spring where all Free individuals draw their fire from.
All laws have apparently been drawn from the
well spring of an uncommon common sense going back through ancient
time right into Hamurabi and the economic laws of the state.
Their amongst those first law givers were Gods, stars that were
accurately studied, Incarnations and prophets were traced, so
that we could understand today, in hindsight that Zarathustra
knew he was coming into incarnation again and could hand this
insight down to The Three Kings. Naturally to be in an advanced
Consciousness Soul phase well ahead of the rest of us, somebody
had to do it.
While Herod had other motives for his 'free'
actions. He also drew from the prophecy well springs and instead
of reading the records of how a King was going to be born in
his backyard, his concept of King and Power was fairly clearly
molded in today's mental imagery. Herod, understanding what a
King meant in his own mind set, chose to narrow the odds that
such a king could interfere with his own selfish Powers. Slaughter
of the Innocence and the full blown concepts of Collateral damage.
Now both Zarathustra and Herod were drawing
from the same world of ideas and a rich world of fairly solid
prophecy. They weren't in the Consciousness Soul period that
we are in, they were in advance and trend setters for high acts
of freedom and understanding what freedom could be. Except that
Herod and Caiaphas certainly were advanced souls in terms of
the learning curve. They would fit in now, today, and would understand
Machiavelli and the Neocon party very well.
Some of them are no doubt on Earth and that
is another aspect of unexplored reality. As you know Joel, we
love to remind ourselves of Reincarnation, Reincarnation and
Reincarnation and this does not apply to those who have taken
in this Law, it applies to souls in the WC and in the general
thought bin that groggily dismiss this as not something of their
concern. When in fact it stares them in the face with each child
they raise and how the soul of the child beseechs the parents
to guide them to holy shores where they are able to build foundations
for wide open and free thinking. We have to be willing to be
Miners that delve into our Soul life and Storm tested navigators
on the tossing sea of world impulses and thought in order to
hold our selves and loved ones on track.
How does average Jane and Joe penetrate to
Freedom? Well indeed I find Joel can handle the course because
the door to Freedom opens into a vast world of Initiation Science.
If Steiner had only had time to complete the POF without having
explored the upper floors of where this vast region of thought
cross cuts through soul and Spirit worlds to find the secret
route to the motives and actions of Spiritual Beings and how
humans can sync up with the true, beautiful and good, I doubt
anyone of us could navigate the world of freedom. We would all
be on the 12 Step Program and indeed, that 12 step program would
have arisen in us just because there would arise 'double like
pot holes and addictions' that would be a natural part of living
in a world where nobody understands the complex ComTrails of
cross cutting spiritual Beings in a mighty framework of the divine.
Making sense out of the medical, subjective
and addictive beliefs and associations that arise from unconscious
desires, family and manipulated power blocs, have made for a
situation on earth that is worse than Six way Hexagonal intersection
without traffic lights. You know from painful experience and
certainly Garrison Keeler can tell us how Lutherans and their
marriages and educated intellectuals are stacked up along the
roadside of wasted, dysfunctioning vehicles that end up with
a right or left turn signal blinking insanely and spinning in
circle after circle like so many broken Christmas Toys.
Philosophy, science, art and relgion dwarf
with mighty billboards and neon signs the tiny, frail signpost
of the POF. 20th and 21st century consciousness soul and Intellectual
soul surging cunning and intelligence, woven in powerful motives,
wrapped in cyanide tootsie roles at every supermarket, have made
even the most sturdy thinking vessel open to torpedos that they
never saw coming.
So we offer for a trail of Tears the lessons
gleaned for a 21st Century review of body bags, lies and deceptions
that have never even heard of the idea that "if humanity
knew the right thing to do, surely they would do it"...Steiner
Planted a Travellers Aid station for the utterly confused and
lost. That is us and he planted it squarely before the proverbial
full blown sh-- hit the fans.
It was an eleventh hour karmic thrust to reveal
the scaffolding of Freedom as above and as below and, as you
have rightly said many times Joel, it depends on the ability
of the individual to penetrate, prove to themselves the validity
of scaffolding, the strength of the buttresses and that support
the floating world of the communion of ideas and moral intuitions.
Here is Exhibit A: for those have short term
memories or suffer from Cliff Notes educational dysfunction and
for those who need a refresher course in history, here it is.
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/ARTICLE5/index.html
...................................................................................................................................
From: Joel Wendt
Date: Mon Dec 22, 2003 2:58 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: War/Christmas Freedom
On Mon, 2003-12-22 at 11:46, holderlin66 wrote:
a bunch of stuff I'll have to wait to some
future incarnation to understand
sounded good though.
oh well <sigh>
also read the url on fake terrorism...didn't
believe most of it...
I must not being going deep enough, or not
be free enough, I guess...
j.
...................................................................................................................................
From: dottie zold
Date: Tue Dec 23, 2003 7:24 pm
Subject: Re: War/Christmas Freedom
Joel wrote:
also read the url on fake terrorism...didn't believe most
of it...
Dear Joel,
I loved reading your thoughts on the individual
moral codes within us and how we act within that understanding.
It really made a lot of sense to me. It kind of felt like an
anchoring of sorts.
I also felt the website Bradford shared was
not realistic regarding the believe it or not page.
I seem to be at odds with most people on line
regarding Clinton and his days as President. One thing that strikes
me the most is the thought that we went in and bombed Yugoslavia
and there really wasn't anything going on to the extent it was
being shared in the media. The whole 'he bombed them because
of the Lewinsky affair' never felt right to me. I recall following
this fight in the newspapers a year before anything was ever
done. I remember the fight with the Dems and the Republicans
about whether to let arms pass into the country so the Muslims
could defend themselves. I remember being besides myself as to
how one could allow the atrocities to be happening to the extent
they were in Serbia/Bosnia. Seems a bit transparent to me now
with us in Iraq and so forth but it did not make sense to me
then. You may feel differently about this than I however I just
really wanted to say that I too did not find much to go on with
that particular page.
Thanks for the anchor,
Dottie
...................................................................................................................................
From: golden3000997
Date: Tue Dec 23, 2003 5:17 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: War/Christmas Freedom
Dearest Joel,
I am a little bit surprised at your response
here. I think that you are much too deep and knowing within yourself
to say:
"also read the url on fake terrorism...didn't
believe most of it...
Now, saying that an idea or an event is "unbelievable"
in the sense of being hard to accept or difficult to understand
or just plain shocking is fine. But to deny that an article such
as this is or can be true without an accompanying analysis is
not very thoughtful. I sent a very long list of links and some
parts of those articles which concur strongly with the particular
one that Bradford just sent. The ones I sent were only the tip
of the iceberg in terms of the staggering amount of articles
and postings available on the subjects that we have been discussing.
Does this alone make them "true"? Of course not, but
the depth of research and specific outlining of factual events
make them worth an open-minded yet discerning reading. As I said
in a post this weekend, "911 has made the unbelievable,
believable."
Neither I nor Bradford nor the authors of
these articles want you or anyone else to "believe"
what is being said. Belief should no more be a part of the study
than "belief" in Anthroposophy or Anthroposophical
ideas. This information is being shared only for study and consideration.
For my part, as I said to Taz (and I was not being facetious,
although it may have sounded so) I would welcome having some
of this information proved incorrect. But proving it incorrect
by merely accusing the writers of being incompetent or crazy
(not that you have done this, but others have) is not sufficient.
The people writing and publishing these articles or contributing
to their content are often people in very responsible positions
in the world and they run the risk, like in "The Emperor's
New Clothes" of being thought "unfit for their position"
by declaring what they see with their eyes as the truth. I think
that this information needs to be examined for its own content,
regardless of whether or not we want to agree or disagree with
the writers. Too many people are saying the same thing or supporting
those who do, for it all to be dismissed without consideration.
In the lecture by Steiner that I just posted
on the Isis-Sophia mystery, Dornach, December 24, 1920 RS says:
Many things in human evolution
may at first appear incomprehensible. However, if we investigate
them without narrow-minded superstition, for example the kind
of superstition that believes that unknown gods should come to
the aid of human beings without their active involvement, and
that such aid should come just where human beings consider it
necessary — if we leave aside such views, we find that even
the most painful events in the course of world history can show
us the significance and meaning that the evolution of the earth
has acquired through the fact that Christ went through the Mystery
of Golgotha."
Love,
Christine
...................................................................................................................................
From: Joel Wendt
Date: Thu Dec 25, 2003 11:19 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: War/Christmas Freedom
Dear Christine,
I suppose that I should say more about my
views about a lot of this kind of material. It does seem that
many authors have given considerable research to such themes,
and I am not presumptively refusing to honor their efforts. My
"doubt", such as it is, comes from another quarter.
I cut my political teeth, so to speak, during
the heady revolutionary days of the late '60's and early '70's
in that very special environment for such work, Berkeley, California.
My then wife Tina and I, with our two young children, moved into
our first East Bay apartment two weeks after the People's Park
riots in the late summer of 1969.
I acquired friends in the following months
and years who had been in Madison, Wisconsin for the founding
of the Students for a Democratic Society, who ran the local Chinese
book story (complete with Mao's little red book), and knew folks
imprisoned in the Alameda County Jail for various infractions
in the unfolding California Police State over seen by the then
Governor of California, Ronald Reagan.
Being a little older than some (I was 29,
and already had an honorable discharge from the Air Force, plus
degrees in Religion and Law), I could stand back a little from
the passion to act, although not from the pain of the first intimations
of the Amerika that has returned in spades in the last 3 plus
years.
By the time these years where ending (the
War over, Nixon crashed and burned), I was wounded deeply in
soul, and if it wasn't for the intervention of a most unusual
man (see my essay on the man with clear eyes, at http://ipwebdev.com/hermit/lzbwe.html
), I might have stayed wounded.
But just as I was discovering Rudolf Steiner,
this soul mentor dropped by and gave me back my faith in the
World, and in possibilities.
Then from Rudolf Steiner I received probably
the greatest gift of all, which was not information of any kind,
but rather a clear glimpse of the true nature of thinking, and
how to make of thinking an organ for the perception of the good
and the true.
The result is that no longer do I just analyze
the writings of others, looking for facts and for healthy or
unhealthy trains of logic, but even more I live into the world
of ideas where these writings rest in their wholeness, in such
a way that I experience their internal music, and their harmony
(or dissonance) with the Logos Nature of the world of thought.
Here then is seen and felt the truthfulness
of the author, what he knows and doesn't know, that in spite
of any attempts to deny or pretend otherwise, sneak right into
the writing. Most people don't admit the limitations of their
thought, but rather build up pictures based as much upon their
antipathies and sympathies, as these pictures do on research
and reason. Thus, the totality of what they write is more like
a song that any thing else, and the voice falters and waivers
from one note of truth to the next note of belief to the next
fantasy for which there is no knowledge but rather only prejudice
and invention.
In the end I am not convinced by facts or
logic, but by "expression" for the authors own sense
of his work and connection to the truth cannot be hidden from
his deeper self, and as a result cannot be kept out of his writing,
for what he doesn't consciously provide, his unconscious surely
will.
One either knows or does not, and how they
write reveals this clearly.
This is something different from being accidentally
correct on some level, or from knowing not just specific elements,
but the whole context of a matter.
So, I take much with a grain of salt, for
the author has frequently revealed his own limits. I limit myself
to not going where I cannot go, having perhaps a well developed
understanding of my own limits of knowing.
Then there is what difference does it make,
this or that particular conspiracy theory or fantasy. Much is
urged that has no real meaning in the larger scheme, and which
therefore can be easily ignored as violating Steiner's admonition
concerning distinguishing the essential from the non-essential.
All of the above is quite general, but works
for me. I admire much for the effort involved, but find use for
little of what is provided, because I can see its inherent limits
- many pretend to believe, but few actually know.
warm regards,
joel
On Tue, 2003-12-23 at 18:17, golden3000997@cs.com
wrote:
Dearest Joel,
I am a little bit surprised at your response here. I think that
you are much too deep and knowing within yourself to say:
"also read the url on fake terrorism...didn't
believe most of it..."
Now, saying that an idea or an event is
"unbelievable" in the sense of being hard to accept
or difficult to understand or just plain shocking is fine. But
to deny that an article such as this is or can be true without
an accompanying analysis is not very thoughtful. I sent a very
long list of links and some parts of those articles which concur
strongly with the particular one that Bradford just sent.
<snip>
...................................................................................................................................
From: golden3000997
Date: Thu Dec 25, 2003 12:06 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: War/Christmas Freedom
Dear Joel,
I know from your own work and writing that
you are not the kind of person to dismiss any information lightly,
so I appreciate your taking the time to give me a deeper explanation
of your reaction to this material.
I'm not trying to state unequivocally that
all of these things are true, but that it seems to me that there
must be some kind of basis to this "alternative" take
on what the media presents as true. I also know that it does
and will require a lot of hard work to sort it out. I was not
being facetious when I wrote the post to Tarjei saying that I
would love to have it all proved wrong. I do long to live in
a world where the truth is told and we are allowed to have faith
and trust in our leaders. After all, every individual has his
or her own interests and concerns and it seems like we should
be able to have dedicated sleuths such as reporters who can do
the "footwork" for us. Every individual is not expected
to be a car mechanic or medical doctor or an electrical engineer.
We all have our specialties of knowledge, talent and experience.
We should be able to rely on one another to provide those in
areas not our own.
That is why it is so distressing to think
that "1984" has come true and probably was true to
a certain extent when it was written. I guess that all epochs
of history as we know it have had their propaganda machines.
But I just don't like lies. I have lived with a liar in my life
(my second husband) and I know how really devastating even the
common "garden-variety" lie is. I suspect that these
massive political lies are devastating to a thousandfold degree.
And I have always felt that Truth was our only weapon against
L, A, S & all the other forces of darkness. I don't think
that we will be able to fight with swords, or guns, etc. These
kinds of weapons belong to "their" world. But I have
always believed that to know and to be able to state the truth
about a person or situation that one confronts strikes a blow
that remains even if one perishes in the process. If nothing
else, the planting of doubt is, to me, a good thing if it merely
makes people think about what they are being presented with.
Your website is a treasure trove and I make
it a New Year's resolution to read quite a few of your writings.
I found your "Outlaw Anthroposophy" and the article
on funding Waldorf Schools. Do you want me to send you mine?
I include an idea that would really make them howl!!! Also, a
separate piece titled "The Structure of a Waldorf School"
that considers taking the Threefold division of the school community
a step further. These are "theoretical" pieces, as
I have never had any chance to give them a try and see how it
would work. But I have survived several "pioneer" endeavors
and have seen efforts die and I think a new (old) paradigm needs
to be found. I think that there are Economic Laws, just like
there are Laws of Physics and Laws of Mathematics and these can't
be ignored. Also, I think there is a "magical" element
in Economics that we can use (without harm). One of these, partly
expressed by my fund-raising for another school idea is that
when you ask for something for someone else, you tend to receive
much more than when you ask for yourself.
I remember when I moved to California and
my sister was still in High School. I asked my parents to fund
a trip for her to come and visit over the summer and they did!
I know they never would have given me money to go somewhere if
I had asked for myself. There is something in being asked like
that that makes people much more willing to give. I don't know
why this is so, but I really think it works.
Maybe instead of a once a year fundraiser
for another school (which would be a good start) the ultimate
would be if everyone paid everyone elses bills!!! No one would
pay their own bills! Parents would not pay tuition at their own
school, but in joining that school would be responsible with
everyone else there to meet the needs of another school, while
yet a different one was responsible for meeting the needs of
their own school. Whew!! What would that do??? I think it would
activate some really powerful will/ economic forces. Some real
kick-ass brotherhood/ sisterhood!!! Just imagine - I don't have
to pay tuition, but I have to help come up with ideas and projects
to keep some other school in another state going!! AND I have
to trust that other people are doing the same for "my"
school!! Whoa!!
But that concept is bound with others that
I tried to set down. I'll share it if you are interested.
Anyway, I know that you are very knowledgable
about politics & our society, so I welcome any insights that
you have about the "conspiracy" material, especially
if you can give some information on what is accurate and what
is not and why.
I wonder if we met in Fair Oaks at the college
or the school - 1977 - 1980?
Were you "around" when Querido arrived?
Got any pix of yourself at that age? I might recognize you! :
)
Are you having a nice Christmas in Arizona?
No snow here in Miami, but it has been a nice day.
Have you ever been to New Zealand?
Love,
Christine
...................................................................................................................................
From: Joel Wendt
Date: Sun Dec 28, 2003 10:42 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: War/Christmas Freedom
Dear Christine,
You ask a number of questions below, and also
make some statements that call for something more substantive
in response, so I have placed various comments below in [brackets].
warm regards,
joel
On Thu, 2003-12-25 at 13:06, golden3000997
wrote:
Dear Joel,
I know from your own work and writing that
you are not the kind of person to dismiss any information lightly,
so I appreciate your taking the time to give me a deeper explanation
of your reaction to this material.
I'm not trying to state unequivocally that
all of these things are true, but that it seems to me that there
must be some kind of basis to this "alternative" take
on what the media presents as true. I also know that it does
and will require a lot of hard work to sort it out. I was not
being facetious when I wrote the post to Tarjei saying that I
would love to have it all proved wrong. I do long to live in
a world where the truth is told and we are allowed to have faith
and trust in our leaders. After all, every individual has his
or her own interests and concerns and it seems like we should
be able to have dedicated sleuths such as reporters who can do
the "footwork" for us. Every individual is not expected
to be a car mechanic or medical doctor or an electrical engineer.
We all have our specialties of knowledge, talent and experience.
We should be able to rely on one another to provide those in
areas not our own.
That is why it is so distressing to think
that "1984" has come true and probably was true to
a certain extent when it was written. I guess that all epochs
of history as we know it have had their propaganda machines.
But I just don't like lies. I have lived with a liar in my life
(my second husband) and I know how really devastating even the
common "garden-variety" lie is. I suspect that these
massive political lies are devastating to a thousandfold degree.
And I have always felt that Truth was our only weapon against
L, A, S & all the other forces of darkness.
[As a practicing Goetheanist, in a social
sense, I can understand the emotional value of such a statement
("forces of darkness"), but not its utility or accuracy
with regard to real events of a social nature. In another context
yesterday, a friend reported to me a conversation with someone
we both know, who made remarks about the activity of the opposing
forces, which again makes emotional sense, but which is (to me
at any rate) misleading because of its vagueness and lack of
precision.
Let me explicate this with what I believe
are more accurate ways of viewing "darkness" in modern
life.
First of all I find no evidence that matters
are ever, on the scale of whole, completely out of balance in
favor of the dark. Tarjei recently referred to the Prince of
this World, which again is really a biblical reference of emotional
value, but not quite accurate. Christ does say his Kingdom is
not of the Earth, but he also says the Kingdom of Heaven is within
you. What this means to me is that in a very real way good and
evil flow into the world through us, and only through us.
Ahriman, for example, does not act upon the
world from outside it, like some "force at a distance"
akin to gravity, but only is able to manifest to the extent that
we have yet failed to master the shadow elements of the soul
(the human, luciferic and ahrimanic doubles - see Tomberg's Inner
Development). In Ben-Aharon's quite remarkable The Spiritual
Event of the Twentieth Century, he does not speak of Evil as
manifesting in the world on its own, but rather that when the
Beast rises from the Abyss during the years 1933-45, it is the
conscious embrace by what he calls "evil humanity"
that brings this terrible darkness into our shared social existence.
Freedom has no real meaning if evil is able
to manifest without human cooperation. What gives our particular
cultural age its ahrimanic characteristics is not Ahriman working
from the outside upon our existence, but the fact that the ahrimanic
doubles of everyone let flow certain types of characteristic
elements (bottom line corporate values, materialistic thinking
in science, education and medicine, and so forth) enter in from
each of us to greater of lesser degrees. When the very worst
manifests, we are looking at something where the double has either
been allowed to possess the individual (most often through physical
illness), or where the I-am has chosen to set aside its humanity
in favor of the pleasures of consciously chosen depravity.
We need to remember that we are the microcosm,
and that not only are the doubles present in is for the very
purpose of helping us unfold karma and learn the harsh lessons
that can only be learned in the denseness of earth existence,
but also so is the Christ Impulse and the Force (the Virgin)
of the Divine Mother. Whether we are male or female in this incarnation,
the higher elements are also inside us, waiting our choices in
order to manifest, in the same way that evil can only manifest
from our choices.
The way I put this in my own developing work
is that we need to be educated in the spirit for the mastery
of the soul. Evil is first and only truly defeated in ourselves,
not by us becoming fascinated and obsessed with the mote in our
brother's eye. It is the evolutionary development of our own
I-am that leads to the penetration of the Mystery of Evil, through
leaning to master the shadow in the own soul.
One of the one sided aspects of fallen anthroposophy
(Steinerism) is that temptation by the luciferic double to view
the world through the lens of a not really thought out fascination
with Ahriman and Lucifer (or as Stanley Messenger puts it "Lucifer
and Ahriman under the bed"). By making Ahriman the new bogey-man,
we really only place over the world an illusory picture - we
don't just see the mote in the other's eye, we see a huge Mote
in the eye of the World. This is why I wrote my essay: Initiation,
Goetheanism and the New Bogey-man (http://ipwebdev.com/hermit/bogey.html
While Ahriman can be seen as the Prince of
this World, that role is set within easily perceivable limits
(the Divine Mother's realm is at the root of the World, on the
other side of the Eight inner spheres of the Earth, where she
manages and limits what the faux dark can do, from Her position
as Mistress of the True Dark (the Dark that came before Fiat
Lux - before "let there be Light").
Thus the world is enfolded from below (the
Mother) and from above (the Christ). Now clearly on this list
the Mother is manifesting, for Her time to return is also coming
near (I would say it has actually happened, but that we need
to first see Christ's Return, before we can readily experience
the Mother).
This manifestation on this list is seen mostly
in the interest of the women present in the questions of the
role of women in the Bible. This questioning is always the first
way that knowledge appears in the soul (first a question, then
the struggle to know, and then finally - true knowing).
What this means for our phenomenological observations
of social existence is that we need to temper our perceptions
of the manifestation of evil, with an equally penetrating "seeing"
of the manifestations of the Son and the Mother, for those manifestations
far out weight what evil is doing in the world.]
I don't think that we will be able to fight
with swords, or guns, etc. These kinds of weapons belong to "their"
world. But I have always believed that to know and to be able
to state the truth about a person or situation that one confronts
strikes a blow that remains even if one perishes in the process.
If nothing else, the planting of doubt is, to me, a good thing
if it merely makes people think about what they are being presented
with.
Your website is a treasure trove and I
make it a New Year's resolution to read quite a few of your writings.
I found your "Outlaw Anthroposophy" and the article
on funding Waldorf Schools. Do you want me to send you mine?
[Yes, would you like it posted? Are you "finished"
with it?]
I include an idea that would really make
them howl!!! Also, a separate piece titled "The Structure
of a Waldorf School" that considers taking the Threefold
division of the school community a step further. These are "theoretical"
pieces, as I have never had any chance to give them a try and
see how it would work. But I have survived several "pioneer"
endeavors and have seen efforts die and I think a new (old) paradigm
needs to be found. I think that there are Economic Laws, just
like there are Laws of Physics and Laws of Mathematics and these
can't be ignored. Also, I think there is a "magical"
element in Economics that we can use (without harm).
[In which case you will want to read Barbara
Gardner's piece on my website: "Aesthetics of Economics
and the Scottish Masonic Tradition: in the Light of the Folk
Spirits" at: http://ipwebdev.com/hermit/bgae1.html]
One of these, partly expressed by my fund-raising
for another school idea is that when you ask for something for
someone else, you tend to receive much more than when you ask
for yourself.
I remember when I moved to California and
my sister was still in High School. I asked my parents to fund
a trip for her to come and visit over the summer and they did!
I know they never would have given me money to go somewhere if
I had asked for myself. There is something in being asked like
that that makes people much more willing to give. I don't know
why this is so, but I really think it works.
Maybe instead of a once a year fundraiser
for another school (which would be a good start) the ultimate
would be if everyone paid everyone elses bills!!! No one would
pay their own bills! Parents would not pay tuition at their own
school, but in joining that school would be responsible with
everyone else there to meet the needs of another school, while
yet a different one was responsible for meeting the needs of
their own school. Whew!! What would that do??? I think it would
activate some really powerful will/ economic forces. Some real
kick-ass brotherhood/ sisterhood!!! Just imagine - I don't have
to pay tuition, but I have to help come up with ideas and projects
to keep some other school in another state going!! AND I have
to trust that other people are doing the same for "my"
school!! Whoa!!
But that concept is bound with others that
I tried to set down. I'll share it if you are interested.
Anyway, I know that you are very knowledgable
about politics & our society, so I welcome any insights that
you have about the "conspiracy" material, especially
if you can give some information on what is accurate and what
is not and why.
[I don't doubt that conspiracies exist. It
is human nature and history. However, some so-called conspiracies
require too many people to be in on it, and keeping secrets is
again something that people find quite hard to do. I suspect
most conspiracy theories come from the desire to believe the
worst of people, and this desire then leads to unjustified fact
warping. Even the most outrageous modern conspiracy (that which
Terry Boardman and Ben-Aharon point out), namely the control
exerted by the English-American Establishment, mostly works because
it isn't in fact hidden, so there is no need to keep it secret.
It mostly works because we buy the accompanying disinformation
and discount those who try to tell us to look at that! (For example,
early recognition of this in plain view "conspiracy"
was by Gary Allen, a Birch Society writer in his book: None Dare
Call It Treason.). Also, lets face it. Americans are seduced
into accepting things because of our being on top of the economic
heap with our standard of living. We are, as I pointed out in
my political writings, the wealthiest peasant class in the history
of the world (what makes us peasants is our essential wage slavery,
and lack of real ownership of land - home ownership is an illusion,
the banks own the land, we just rent it in a different way).]
I wonder if we met in Fair Oaks at the
college or the school - 1977 - 1980?
Were you "around" when Querido
arrived? Got any pix of yourself at that age? I might recognize
you! : )
[I came in 1982, and left in 1985]
Are you having a nice Christmas in Arizona?
[High desert cold (20's every night, clear
sky's 40's days, little moisture, Arizona is very dry]
No snow here in Miami, but it has been
a nice day.
Have you ever been to New Zealand?
[Only when watching Lord of the Rings]
Love,
Christine
--
Joel Wendt
...................................................................................................................................
From: Daniel Hindes
Date: Sun Dec 28, 2003 1:47 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: War/Christmas Freedom
Joel,
I really liked your thoughtful and considered reply to Christine's
questions. I lack the time to write anything on the subject of
conspiracy theories etc. but fundamentally, I agree. Your observations
on Ahriman are most important. The real battle is inside each
one of us, and not with some outside force; that would be too
easy! Ahriman is inside you and me, and not "out there"
somewhere. The hardest task, and the most important, is to fight
him where we meet him (which requires that we see him first).
It is too easy to blame everyone else. Steiner's Mystery Dramas
really bring this out.
Daniel Hindes
...................................................................................................................................
From: golden3000997
Date: Mon Dec 29, 2003 7:30 am
Subject: Divine Darkness
Hello Joel and Everybody!
Thank you Joel, for taking the time to answer
me at length regarding some of the "forces of darkness"
in the world today.
The following just jumped out at me and really
got me excited. You wrote:
While Ahriman can be seen as the Prince
of this World, that role is set within easily perceivable limits
(the Divine Mother's realm is at the root of the World, on the
other side of the Eight inner spheres of the Earth, where she
manages and limits what the faux dark can do, from Her position
as Mistress of the True Dark (the Dark that came before Fiat
Lux - before "let there be Light").
Thus the world is enfolded from below (the
Mother) and from above (the Christ). Now clearly on this list
the Mother is manifesting, for Her time to return is also coming
near (I would say it has actually happened, but that we need
to first see Christ's Return, before we can readily experience
the Mother).
This is so wonderful to me - that the "Darkness"
is not populated by "Evil" alone, but there waiting
for us is the Divine Mother. The Darkness that was BEFORE the
light. The true Matrix, the Womb of the World. I am thinking
about how terrified the Patriarchy has been of the Divine Feminine
and how it has sought to denounce, denigrate and deny Her in
myriad ways. I am thinking of the "Whore of Babylon"
as the corruption of the Divine Feminine. True, the "Whore
of Babylon" represents ancient mysteries that really have
become decadent and must be replaced by the Divine Son/Sun of
Christ. But there has been much in the Judeo-Christian stream
that has only reviled Her and abused Her, rather than lifting
Her up into the Light. She has been made the object of fear and
loathing due to a willful ignorance on the part of Church Powers.
Because they know that She can't be controlled. The Power of
the Divine Feminine is in its Formlessness, in a certain sense.
In order to give Birth or Re-Birth, there is always a point of
dissolution, like in the Chrysalis or in the Platonic Solids
clay formation (or any other metamorphosis). There is a point
where one form crosses over to another form and both forms are
no longer perceptible. The sperm links with the egg and (in the
textbook type descriptions that I have learned
from) a zygote is formed that is truly formless. Nothing of what
that new creation will become can be perceived. Even the original
structure of the sperm and egg cells disappear entirely. But
there is not "nothing" there - there is something -
the Original Darkness - the Matrix of Divine Darkness from which
the New arises! Even the Light itself is Born from this Darkness!
Oh, this is so comforting to me! That She
is there in the Darkness. That She receives us there and allows
us to come to birth within Her. Truly, She IS the Comforter of
mankind!
It occurs to me, too that something new is
coming to being within the Male element of humanity - that You
who are Male are becoming willing and able to embrace the Divine
Feminine in a way that has been denied in the course of history
for so long. It seems like there have been decades in which many
men have been individually struggling to "get in touch with
their Feminine side." It hasn't been an easy process, I
think. Many men have experienced frustration, anxiety, depression
and an estrangement from women as a whole. Individual male/ female
relationships have been lost in the process because of the lack
of defined social/ cultural roles. Men are trying to find the
Female within themselves and Women are trying to find the Male
within themselves rather than only a reflection found in their
projection on the Other. The hope is that as men and women grow
more unified within themselves, they will re-gain a sense of
security that will allow them to re-connect with each other in
entirely new ways. To enjoy and celebrate the Male and Female
of each other while not limiting themselves or their partners
to stereotypical roles.
I am thinking of Don Quixote and his Dulcinea.
I am thinking of Dante and his Beatrice. I am thinking of the
Pieta of Michaelangelo where the Divine Mother holds all that
is Male on her knees and mourns His Death while accompanying
Him on his journey through the Darkness. I am thinking of Mary
Magdalene and the Mystery of Love that surpasses all Male/ Female
stereotypes and preconceptions. I am thinking of Ahriman turning
around and kneeling in front of the Divine Mother and laying
his head in her lap and weeping. I am thinking of the Divine
Mother laying her hand on his head and singing to him songs of
healing.
There is a song on Paul Winter's album "Common
Ground" written and sung by SUSAN OSBORN. The words go:
Oh, Lay down your burden
Oh, Lay it all down
Pass the glass between you
Drink it up.
Place the light before you
Come through the door
The Dragon doesn't live here anymore
Sing with the choirs that
surround you
And dance to the music in your soul
Looking through the eyes that really see you
Place all that you have into that bowl
Oh, Lay down your burden
Oh, Lay it all down
Pass the glass between you
Drink it up.
Place the light before you
Come through the door
The Dragon doesn't live here anymore
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Click to subscribe to anthroposophy_tomorrow
December 2003/January
2004
The Uncle
Taz "Anthroposophy Tomorrow" Files
Anthroposophy & Anarchism
Anthroposophy & Scientology
Anthroposophical
Morsels
Anthroposophy,
Critics, and Controversy
