Countering Asuras

 

From: Steinerhead
Date: Tue Jan 6, 2004 9:59 pm
Subject: Countering Asuras


In a message dated 1/5/04 12:26:02 AM anthrouncle writes, quoting Steiner:

<snip>...whereas the good Spirits made possible the working of karma to the end that the Ahrimanic powers might be resisted and the evil made good, it will not be so easy to counter the Asuric powers as earth-existence takes its course. For these Asuric Spirits will prompt what has been seized hold of by them, namely the very core of man's being, the consciousness soul together with the "I", to unite with earthly materiality. Fragment after fragment will be torn out of the 'I', and in the same measure in which the Asuric Spirits establish themselves in the consciousness soul, man must leave parts of his existence behind on the earth. What thus becomes the prey of the Asuric powers will be irretrievably lost. Not that the whole man need become their victim - but parts of his spirit will be torn away by the Asuric powers. These Asuric powers are heralded today by the prevailing tendency to live wholly in the material world and to be obliviouls of the reality of spiritual beings and spiritual worlds. True, the Asuric powers corrupt man today in a way that is more theoretical than actual.

Sounds to me that becoming aware of spiritual realities could be the best defense against these Asuric powers. Further more, he says that "it will not be so easy to counter the Asuric powers as earth-existence takes its course." So it may not be so easy, but it is counterable. He does not say that it is impossible.

So nurturing a relationship with our true selves, which is embedded with the Christ impulse, is indeed a force to be reckoned with, when it comes to these "Asuric powers," potent as they may be.

So there is more work to be done, once we resolve our personal Arimanic/Luciferic/karmic difficulties. We must learn to live Love from the center of the source; to uncover it from beneath the mountains of illusory Darwinian human-animal-science; to pay attention to the numerous syncronicities that spring up; to understand all Twelve of our senses; to recognize and experience the "I of the other"; to have wonder and reverence for life; to observe the results of our own thinking process; "to think with the power of Love in spiritual form"; And to "Love -- LOVE, and do what you will."

When I first read about these "Asuric powers" I was shaken a bit. But now that I have thought about it, I see no reason to believe that they have any power over true Love that is realized.

I have seen many a person begin to grasp a spiritual reality, and transform there lives from a living hell, to a life of meaning and wonder. This living Hell was always instilled by an understanding of ourselves that was given to us from misinformed people.

And how informed is modern materialistic Science about the nature of human consciousness? Not much in my opinion. I have a friend that in finishing up his Ph.D. in neuroscience at UCSD, who has been poking Leeches for the past six years, to try to understand how Neurons function. There is a book out that is about four inches thick entitled: "The Neuron." Well, If we start from the Neuron, it might take a hell of a long time for modern materialistic science to give us a definitive description of ourselves, and our place in the cosmos.

I love the idea of "spiritual science" because it really has opened up a whole new dimension to understanding human constructs. I tried to read Steiner fifteen years ago and found to difficult to grasp then. I needed the soul science Jung and the Twelve steps first. But to each there own....

I wonder also if Bevis and Butt-head, or Daria might be good counter efforts against the Asuric powers??? How about Frank Zappa???.... Maybe if we play the "Were only in it for the money" album (remember those?) at 78 speed we could scare away these nasty Asuras beings.

Obviously I am getting very tired.

Truth and Love -- Realized!

Mike

...................................................................................................................................

From: Tarjei Straume
Date: Tue Jan 6, 2004 10:39 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras

At 06:59 07.01.2004, Mike wrote:

Sounds to me that becoming aware of spiritual realities could be the best defense against these Asuric powers.

And:

But now that I have thought about it, I see no reason to believe that they have any power over true Love that is realized.

My thoughts exactly. Steiner had other "horror stories" up his sleeve, i.e. how the secret occult lodges of the West work to entrap some people after death and enslave them, forcing them to serve the powers that bring deadly diseases to children. But in that context he also said that spiritual knowledge facilitated through Anthroposophy gave a certain protection. (I'll try to get back to this with quotes and references.)

RS says about the Asuras that they are now working theoretically and not yet practically. Such was the state of affairs when he spoke about them 95 years ago, but we're looking to the present and the future here.

I understand it, we see their effects in the worst excesses of the Holocaust and crimes against humanity all the way up to the present; we also see the Asuras, I think, in the increased epidemic of pedophilia worldwide; we see them in capital crimes of the most revolting kind. I am also inclined to believe that the practice of capital punishment furthers the powers and the influence of these Asuric Beings by releasing them from their hosts and giving them the freedom to roam around in pursuit of new victims, enriched by feeding on the former victims. The cruelty and icecold deliberation involved in state killings (executions) helps these beings, contrary to the 'popular' belief that the (real) perpetrators of such crimes will never repeat their acts.

Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/

...................................................................................................................................

From: Joel Wendt
Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 9:03 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras

Dear Tarjei,

Neither Jesus or Steiner is here to ask them what they meant in the writings you quote, but you are here, and so I have given some emphasis below to certain of your words, by placing them in caps.

On Tue, 2004-01-06 at 23:39, Tarjei Straume wrote:

I UNDERSTAND IT, we see their effects in the worst excesses of the Holocaust and crimes against humanity all the way up to the present; we also see the Asuras, I think, in the increased epidemic of pedophilia worldwide; we see them in capital crimes of the most revolting kind. I AM ALSO INCLINED TO BELIEVE that the practice of capital punishment furthers the powers and the influence of these Asuric Beings by releasing them from their hosts and giving them the freedom to roam around in pursuit of new victims, enriched by feeding on the former victims. The cruelty and icecold deliberation involved in state killings (executions) helps these beings, contrary to the 'popular' belief that the (real) perpetrators of such crimes will never repeat their acts.

Nowhere do you say that you know anything. In this regard, why do you suppose that Steiner began his life by carefully examining the problem of knowledge first, before ever offering anything regarding spiritual research? Why do you suppose he originally didn't want his lectures published? Why do you suppose he urged us not to believe what he said, simply because he said it?

But then, I don't believe you care about the truth or knowledge, but rather are in love with your own opinions more.

But that's just my belief, its not knowledge (at least I don't think so, it could be true by accident. But certainly, since it is only my belief, how can I be held responsible for its effect?). Then of course there is the hypocrisy latent in this view which you take, given that the same loose relationship to knowledge and the truth could (which you justify as okay for yourself) be claimed by Dan Dugan and Peter S as regards their "beliefs". So how can you insist they speak the truth and from knowledge, but you aren't held to the same standard?

AS near as I can tell, everything in the above paragraph is, on your part, complete invention. What you don't like in existence, and seems the most horrible, has been by you characterized as coming from the Asuras. Yet, clearly you have no knowledge of this - you do not see the supersensible relationships, but only attribute toward that which you have antipathy, the direst characterizations.

I don't see this as any different from the thinking by which fundamentalist Christians believe that New Age impulses come from Satan. You demonize what you don't like, borrowing spiritual scientific vocabulary to support your biases.

Such thinking is not based upon anthroposophy.

joel

[Continued in a different thread]

...................................................................................................................................

From: Tarjei Straume
Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 12:02 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras

At 18:03 07.01.2004, Joel wrote:

Nowhere do you say that you know anything.

We've been through that kind of dance before, Joel, on other lists. I'll probably write more mosts, perhaps also about "anthro-horror stories," but I choose to ignore your barrage of questions that you throw at me when you try to get manipulative. I suggest you answer them yourself. They require essays, or tomes; and that's something I'll leave to you.

Cheers,

Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/

Think twice before flaming the gurus on the net.
- http://www.albion.com/

...................................................................................................................................

From: Kim Munch Michelsen
Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 11:56 am
Subject: RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras

Hi Tarjei

I think you have hit a both interesting and vital topic.

I think that 'Brain Wash' and 'Destroying of Ego' is two key sentences when seeking Asuras. I have seen a hidden camera film strip of a meeting between pedophiles. You have to look long for more lousy and ego-weak persons, than these. What they do are again both brain wash of and destroying of the childrens ego. (Powerless. Misuse of Trust.)

Big Ahrimanian companies takes the initiatives from people, but don't necessarily destroy the ego.

But what about stress? I am working with edb and know stress in the computer industry. I have colleges which at the age of 27 has not enough ego left to change a light bulb (no pun intended).

Fanatism as in Islamic fundamentalism, communism, nazizm, scientology, and every other ideology or organisation which uses methods like brain wash.

Where and how does Lucifer, Ahriman, and Asuras wok, what are their weaknesses and how do we counteract them.

Example:
It is said that Ahriman works through Lucifer, that without Lucifer Ahriman had no power ower man. Is it then so, that without Ahriman, Asuras would have no power over man?

Kim

Tarjei:

I understand it, we see their effects in the worst excesses of the Holocaust and crimes against humanity all the way up to the present; we also see the Asuras, I think, in the increased epidemic of pedophilia worldwide; we see them in capital crimes of the most revolting kind. I am also inclined to believe that the practice of capital punishment furthers the powers and the influence of these Asuric Beings by releasing them from their hosts and giving them the freedom to roam around in pursuit of new victims, enriched by feeding on the former victims. The cruelty and icecold deliberation involved in state killings (executions) helps these beings, contrary to the 'popular' belief that the (real) perpetrators of such crimes will never repeat their acts.

Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/

...................................................................................................................................

From: Tarjei Straume
Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 12:24 pm
Subject: RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras

At 20:56 07.01.2004, Kim wrote:

Fanatism as in Islamic fundamentalism, communism, nazizm, scientology, and every other ideology or organisation which uses methods like brain wash.

I haven't thought of brainwashing in this context, but you may indeed have a point there.

Where and how does Lucifer, Ahriman, and Asuras wok, what are their weaknesses and how do we counteract them.

Example:
It is said that Ahriman works through Lucifer, that without Lucifer Ahriman had no power ower man. Is it then so, that without Ahriman, Asuras would have no power over man?

Again, that's something I've been thinking too, but I'm a little confused about how these Cosmic Beings are related to each other. Ahriman is Lucifer's karma in the sense that he was brought into earthly evolution because this was made possible though Lucifer's Deed: the Fall. It's possible that the Asuras represent Ahriman's karma in the same way, but the Asuras are fallen Archai from the progressive hierarchies while Ahriman is an "alien" to the gods as well as to the earthlings:

"We, the higher hierarchies, are able to let an Earth proceed out of the Moon, on which there are men who know nothing of death, and on which they cannot develop the intellect. It is not possible for us, higher hierarchies, to form the Earth in such a way that it is able to supply the forces which lead man towards the intellect. We must rely, for this, on an entirely different being, on a being who comes from another direction than our own - The Ahrimanic Being. Ahriman is a being who does not belong to our hierarchy. Ahriman comes into the stream of evolution from another direction."

- Exoteric and Esoteric Christianity

Yes, Ahriman is an Alien!

Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/

...................................................................................................................................

From: holderlin66
Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 1:55 pm
Subject: Re: Countering Asuras

--- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, Tarjei Straume wrote:

"We, the higher hierarchies, are able to let an Earth proceed out of the Moon, on which there are men who know nothing of death, and on which they cannot develop the intellect. It is not possible for us, higher hierarchies, to form the Earth in such a way that it is able to supply the forces which lead man towards the intellect. We must rely, for this, on an entirely different being, on a being who comes from another direction than our own - The Ahrimanic Being. Ahriman is a being who does not belong to our hierarchy. Ahriman comes into the stream of evolution from another direction."

- Exoteric and Esoteric Christianity

Yes, Ahriman is an Alien!

Bradford hardly accepts that;

Ahriman is no easy nut to crack. WE have rightly understood that his Time Period, the open season and wide open incubation of the Ahrimanic mission, blew open in the 15th century there abouts. Ahriman's history goes back to Atlantis and the distrubution of matter and Spirit on the Altars of Atlantis.

We find him Genghising along the bumpy road and we find him constantly making bids for power. He made a bid for Power in Imperial Rome. We see the Symptomology of the Ahrimanic as it affects or infects human consciousness in the advanced and ripe condition of soul that Caiaphas displayed. Money-Guilt-Judas-Payment and false witness. It is wonderful Symptomology that constantly appears in the human soul. Learn think see -learn think see - learn think see.

WE find Ahriman given open season to hunt down Job and harasss the hell out of him. God's Point? Well He has served a task for the Gods but really, like the Comets and the Solar system, runs an agenda that counters the human divinity. Yet, without this experience we cannot develop freedom, science and Intellect.

More than 400 years ago, Giordano Bruno, an Italian monk, wrote that "In space there are numberless earths circling around other suns, which may bear upon them creatures similar or even superior to those upon our human Earth." Bruno deserves to be remembered -- he was burnt at the stake, in Rome, in the year 1600. A damned martyr to Science and Luciferic forces burned him.

Everything from 500 years ago can be pivoted on the luciferic Karma of the Church to the Scientific karma of Ahriman. Eveything we haven't learned yet. WE paid money for comfortable luciferic SOUL conditions after death, now we pay for bodily immortality with lifts and tucks, operations to stay immortal on the Earth. The Karma pivot from the Luciferic forces of the Church to the Church of Ahrimanic Science is bloated with exacting karma. Churches/ Skyscrapers, we have merely shifted the blame again from ourselves to Ahriman.

Christ had no interior karma on the Earth so naturally he was a real alien, to do what he did, which is what every sci-fi reality attempts to say. A superior alien intelligence who comes to earth with healing powers and humanity destroys it as a monster is a constant reminder of our stupidity. But Ahriman was right in the mix of Earth from the very beginnings otherwise we would never have left the garden of eden. Steiner examines as well the reality that it wasn't meant to be such a Fall into the well of Earth and he gives examples of the if not then what.

But the threshold of daring and unforgiving coldness that Ahriman represents brings precision into the intellect. But the ramifications of the chill hinder the redemption of the Ahrimanic forces, which are soley due to how humanity chooses to remain unconsious of this potent being. Ahriman was right there on conference call with Christ in the desert and all of the vision and debating over the future human seedlings, was set out in living color. We now are lucky, in all seriousness, that the horror and films we see, they give us some indication of the kind of danger humanity could get themselves into. It is indeed humanities maturity and ability to come up with a real working model of the Immortal forces of Courage at the root of infected and diseased hypocrisy.

Nietsche as well as Bruno could be considered martyrs to knowledge. In Nietzsche we have Ahriman finally getting his two cents worth in writing. The efficient industrial corporation of the Third Reich and the cleansing of the gene pool was finally letting Ahriman into human consciousness. Would Ahriman prefer that humanity remain hypocrites. Nay. The sooner we overcome our hypocrisy the sooner we attend to the Science of Love, which is a Science. Why in hell we don't treat it as a science baffles me. But how can we have such a mature science when we prefer to constantly pay homage to Ahriman instead of placing his contribution in critical perspective?

We humans ask for and get everything we fail to meet with consciously. It comes as a shock to experience the horrors that humans do to each other and the other kingdoms. The Nuclear Age is our answer, by abusing Ahrimanic contributions, to reveal the bastard son of light. Could we do this another way, indeed. Do we have to eat all these hard, hard lessons to come to terms with the full mechanics of Immortality, Say it isn't so, but it is. Ahriman would prefer that he doesn't arrive at the Gods door and say, 'Gee I did what you guy required, and still those little bastards did nothing to steer themselves. God, your creation is a cowardly failure and now lets do lunch.'

Ahriman has voice and a symptomology and is a stickler for the 'every last tittle of matter, better get human love and concern or I'll take it for it was partly mine in the first place'roberts rules of reason. Angels are aliens as far as any type of intelligent human stupidity reasons, at least when we look at life on other planets with our dumb outward staring eyes.

Could we begin to explore space from the spiritual side of Devachan communities of beings in the planetary spheres, yes. Do we show signs of grasping the depth of the human structure as a seven fold advancing and seeing being, who is a particpant in these other worlds? No. We just don't want to see Christ or Ahriman and we prefer the inspirations of Ahriman and we have settled on taking the bad with the bad. Instead of insisting with our Freedom and thinking for the good with the good.

We refuse to come to terms that this is how the Beings behave if you intend to be a spiritual being amongst spiritual beings you have to learn the rules of the road and learn not to let Ahriman be taken in as an unconscious infection in the soul life. Consciously Ahriman is a pretty serious task master, but has offered us many wonders. Why we prefer to worship the gifts but scorn the giver of soul, spirit, creation and thinking logos that trains humanity to become gods is sheer and utter misrepresentation of all that humans are.

Fenrir was a member of the Gods clan. If we take the Wolf of Rome and the milk of the intellect of the wolf fed to Romulus and Remus, we still have the Wolf in the Intellect and it was a member of the Gods brigade according to rich Norse legend. He was here before we were and he has every right to mock us, scorn us, torture us because we are stupid little souls who fail to learn from our mistakes. We've got it coming and there is no way around it unless we change. We supply the compassion, the Love by tapping the Christ Sciences, it ain't Ahriman's job to do it, it is our job.

Bradford

[Continued in another thread]

...................................................................................................................................

From: Kim Munch Michelsen
Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 2:08 pm
Subject: RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras

I have found this

We know that upon the ancient Moon dwelt beings who passed that time through their human stage, as we are now passing through it in the course of Earth evolution. In the Cosmic Memory and in An Outline of Esoteric Science these beings are referred to as Angels, Angeloi and Dhyanis - the name does not matter. Within these beings took place a battle similar to the luciferic battle within our own souls - a battle provoked by those beings who had remained behind upon the Sun. This battle upon the Moon is in no way concerned with our inner I for on the Moon we did not yet possess our I. It is not concerned with anything in which our I takes part. Upon the Moon it took place "within the bosom of the Angels". And so these beings developed in a way which was possible only through the influence of the other beings who had stayed behind during the Sun evolution. These beings who played the same part with regard to the Angeloi that to-day the luciferic beings play with regard to ourselves were the ahrimanic beings which, during the whole of the Sun evolution, remained behind as did the luciferic beings during the Moon evolution. That is why we can only indirectly encounter these beings. It was Ahriman who, as it were, acted as tempter within the breast of the Angeloi, and he was active within them. Because of him the Angeloi had become what they then became, and they have carried over with them what they acquired through Ahriman, as well as the good they then acquired.

From
Manifestations of Karma

Lecture 7
FORCES OF NATURE, VOLCANIC ERUPTIONS, EARTHQUAKES
AND EPIDEMICS IN RELATION TO KARMA


Found at http://southerncrossreview.org/


Kim

Again, that's something I've been thinking too, but I'm a little confused about how these Cosmic Beings are related to each other. Ahriman is Lucifer's karma in the sense that he was brought into earthly evolution because this was made possible though Lucifer's Deed: the Fall. It's possible that the Asuras represent Ahriman's karma in the same way, but the Asuras are fallen Archai from the progressive hierarchies while Ahriman is an "alien" to the gods as well as to the earthlings:

"We, the higher hierarchies, are able to let an Earth proceed out of the Moon, on which there are men who know nothing of death, and on which they cannot develop the intellect. It is not possible for us, higher hierarchies, to form the Earth in such a way that it is able to supply the forces which lead man towards the intellect. We must rely, for this, on an entirely different being, on a being who comes from another direction than our own - The Ahrimanic Being. Ahriman is a being who does not belong to our hierarchy. Ahriman comes into the stream of evolution from another direction."

- Exoteric and Esoteric Christianity

Yes, Ahriman is an Alien!

Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/

...................................................................................................................................

From: Steinerhead
Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 10:40 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras

In a message dated 1/7/04 5:22:54 Joel writes: [Countering Asuras / Closet Manicheanism / Rudolf Steiner's personal moral character / Ahriman, Death, and Stephen King 1]

Dear Tarjei,

Neither Jesus or Steiner is here to ask them what they meant in the writings you quote, but you are here, and so I have given some emphasis below to certain of your words, by placing them in caps.

On Tue, 2004-01-06 at 23:39, Tarjei Straume wrote:

I UNDERSTAND IT, we see their effects in the worst excesses of the Holocaust and crimes against humanity all the way up to the present; we also see the Asuras, I think, in the increased epidemic of pedophilia worldwide; we see them in capital crimes of the most revolting kind. I AM ALSO INCLINED TO BELIEVE that the practice of capital punishment furthers the powers and the influence of these Asuric Beings by releasing them from their hosts and giving them the freedom to roam around in pursuit of new victims, enriched by feeding on the former victims. The cruelty and icecold deliberation involved in state killings (executions) helps these beings, contrary to the 'popular' belief that the (real) perpetrators of such crimes will never repeat their acts.

Nowhere do you say that you know anything. In this regard, why do you suppose that Steiner began his life by carefully examining the problem of knowledge first, before ever offering anything regarding spiritual research? Why do you suppose he originally didn't want his lectures published? Why do you suppose he urged us not to believe what he said, simply because he said it?

But then, I don't believe you care about the truth or knowledge, but rather are in love with your own opinions more.

But that's just my belief, its not knowledge (at least I don't think so, it could be true by accident. But certainly, since it is only my belief, how can I be held responsible for its effect?). Then of course there is the hypocrisy latent in this view which you take, given that the same loose relationship to knowledge and the truth could (which you justify as okay for yourself) be claimed by Dan Dugan and Peter S as regards their "beliefs". So how can you insist they speak the truth and from knowledge, but you aren't held to the same standard?

AS near as I can tell, everything in the above paragraph is, on your part, complete invention. What you don't like in existence, and seems the most horrible, has been by you characterized as coming from the Asuras. Yet, clearly you have no knowledge of this - you do not see the supersensible relationships, but only attribute toward that which you have antipathy, the direst characterizations.

I don't see this as any different from the thinking by which fundamentalist Christians believe that New Age impulses come from Satan. You demonize what you don't like, borrowing spiritual scientific vocabulary to support your biases.

Such thinking is not based upon anthroposophy.

joel

Hi Joel,

I guess I have the benefit of ignorance based on innocence when it comes to this discussion, as I have only in the last couple of years, been trying to digest the huge "cathedral" (as Soesman calls it) we call Anthroposophy.

Metaphorically speaking, I can understand what Tarjei is saying, when attributing the horrors of humanity to these Asuras beings. I don't know for sure if what he says is true, but I know that it rocked my world for a while, and caused me to think deeply on the matter. If something makes sense to me, then I need to think about it and weigh it against my Life experience. I did this to the best of my current ability, and realized all the more, the importance of "conversations in the key of love" ;^)

Fragmented individuality on the physical plane is bad enough, and obvious to me now that I have learned to think about it. But the idea of fragmented and unrecoverable individuality of the spirit! Well, I think it deserves some serious thought. I wish that I could put a period at end of the sentences that I might use to describe the concepts that I might come up with when I think about such things. But I have thus far learned that to do so (cherish fixed concepts) is very stifling and even often painful.

So Tarjei's ideas made sense to me, and I thought about them, and realized that there is something that makes much more sense to me (on a scale of say...a billion to one). In a word, I'd have to say that it is "Love."

Much of your ideas have made sense to me as well Joel. Your participation on the WC list a couple of years ago inspired me to dig into Steiner. Thanks.

On a more personal level, Am I detecting a certain amount of animosity between you guys? Well, if so then I think you should Kiss and make up. Newbies like me need to see you old-timers getting along :)

Superdemons and Roaring Fires of LOVE

Mike

...................................................................................................................................

From: Tarjei Straume
Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 12:30 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras

Mike wrote:

On a more personal level, Am I detecting a certain amount of animosity between you guys?

Yeah, isn't that fun? Anthroposophy Tomorrow is never boring! (Tell your friends.)

Tarjei

...................................................................................................................................

From: Joel Wendt
Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 10:44 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras

Dear Tarjei,

Yea, whatever...denial is a wonderful thing isn't it. No sense looking at ourselves, when we can so easily see the horror in others (people who believe in the death penalty, child molesters, perpetrators of the Holocaust, and other ausuric phantoms of your fancy).

warm regards,
joel

On Wed, 2004-01-07 at 13:02, Tarjei Straume wrote:

At 18:03 07.01.2004, Joel wrote:

Nowhere do you say that you know anything.

We've been through that kind of dance before, Joel, on other lists. I'll probably write more mosts, perhaps also about "anthro-horror stories," but I choose to ignore your barrage of questions that you throw at me when you try to get manipulative. I suggest you answer them yourself. They require essays, or tomes; and that's something I'll leave to you.

Cheers,

Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/

Think twice before flaming the gurus on the net.
- http://www.albion.com/

* --
Joel Wendt

...................................................................................................................................

From: Joel Wendt
Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 10:40 am
Subject: RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras

Dear Kim,

Just to be consistent, as I usually don't comment on your posts...

If you want to know about how evil works in the world, you have to start with yourself. Knowledge of the working of the double in yourself is the least dangerous path to understanding the working of evil in the world.

When we look at the world for its evil, without self knowledge, our thinking lacks a real experience of evil, and therefore can only really project onto the world our antipathies. So we see not the true nature of evil in the world, but rather the mote in our brother's eye, instead of the beam in our own.

Just a note of caution...

warm regards,
joel

On Wed, 2004-01-07 at 12:56, Kim Munch Michelsen wrote:

Hi Tarjei

I think you have hit a both interesting and vital topic.

I think that 'Brain Wash' and 'Destroying of Ego' is two key sentences when seeking Asuras. I have seen a hidden camera film strip of a meeting between pedophiles. You have to look long for more lousy and ego-weak persons, than these. What they do are again both brain wash of and destroying of the childrens ego. (Powerless. Misuse of Trust.)

Big Ahrimanian companies takes the initiatives from people, but don't necessarily destroy the ego.

But what about stress? I am working with edb and know stress in the computer industry. I have colleges which at the age of 27 has not enough ego left to change a light bulb (no pun intended).

Fanatism as in Islamic fundamentalism, communism, nazizm, scientology, and every other ideology or organisation which uses methods like brain wash.

Where and how does Lucifer, Ahriman, and Asuras wok, what are their weaknesses and how do we counteract them.

Example:
It is said that Ahriman works through Lucifer, that without Lucifer Ahriman had no power ower man. Is it then so, that without Ahriman, Asuras would have no power over man?

Kim

Tarjei:

I understand it, we see their effects in the worst excesses of the Holocaust and crimes against humanity all the way up to the present; we also see the Asuras, I think, in the increased epidemic of pedophilia worldwide; we see them in capital crimes of the most revolting kind. I am also inclined to believe that the practice of capital punishment furthers the powers and the influence of these Asuric Beings by releasing them from their hosts and giving them the freedom to roam around in pursuit of new victims, enriched by feeding on the former victims. The cruelty and icecold deliberation involved in state killings (executions) helps these beings, contrary to the 'popular' belief that the (real) perpetrators of such crimes will never repeat their acts.

Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/

* --
Joel Wendt

...................................................................................................................................

From: Kim Munch Michelsen
Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 1:26 pm
Subject: RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras

Thank you, Joel,

You are right, the best place to start looking is in your own self, and with the experiences I have, I think I can understand the three principles of evil's function in the self.

But how does the evil functions in the world?

Not in extreme cases, but in everyday life!

I don't think that we, in most cases, understand wherein the evil is.

Lucifer is the one who is the most simple to understand. It is a direct expression of the persons ego with more or less respect for others.

Ahriman is more difficult. The influence is generally not so direct as Lucifer, but more collective in it's influence. Ahriman is intelligence, without common sense. This is especially seen in politics, administration's, and companies not to small. One of the primary symptoms for an Ahrimanic organisation is it's employees inability to make decisions. Common sense or expertise, experience within a field, is not accepted as background for taking responsibility. The primary solutions for handling problems are: Same procedure as last time, or wait until it is burning, or until it is not necessary any longer, or the customer makes so much noise that the president of the organisation is notified and can make a decision, or export the problem to a consultancy company.

You will not define such an Ahrimanic organisation as evil, but it is removing the will and feeling for moral from it's employes, so they can't take a decision in the real world (that is outside the organisation) based on moral or common sense. And you can't point at one person and say that (s)he is the guilty.

Where Ahriman disables the will, goes Asuras a step longer, here the will of the individual is replaced by others, and the ego is eradicated. I think that one of the results of the action of the Asuras is that the connection between the physical mind and the spirit/ego is more or less destroyed, that is, man is converted to a mechanical automaton. The military could be an example, but in most cases I think it is Ahrimanic. 'Education' by Scientology, Brain Wash by Islamic Fundamentalists are some examples, but I think there is other not so clear examples. When people are to hook'ed on computer games, especially shoot them first, the fysical brain changes it's wiring, and looses it's connection to the ego. There is an increasing number of unhandled psychiatric patiens, which has left this world mentally, where only hollow shell's is left back. I think that people pressed under extreme stress, for a longer time, can loose their ego.

Warm regards to you too,
Kim

-----Original Message-----
From: Joel Wendt
Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 10:40 am
Subject: RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras

Dear Kim,

Just to be consistent, as I usually don't comment on your posts...

[Continued in another thread]

...................................................................................................................................

From: sr_joanna
Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 6:12 am
Subject: Re: Countering Asuras

Mike wrote:

On a more personal level, Am I detecting a certain amount of animosity between you guys? Well, if so then I think you should Kiss and make up. Newbies like me need to see you old-timers getting along :)

Heya Mike,

Ummmm, I think you got it wrong here. What newbies like you need to see is that serious anthroposophers can disagree, even disagree quite vehemently, and not have the world come to an end. If we all sit around nodding and smiling all the time -- happy happy, joy joy -- where is the movement and life in anthroposophy?

My vision of anthroposophy is more vibrant -- and more inclusive -- than that!

Merrily,
JoAnn

...................................................................................................................................

From: Joel Wendt
Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 10:13 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras

Dear Mike,

As a side note, I will be giving a lecture at Groh's farm on the anthroposophical background to my new seminar practice (Conversations in the Key of Love: eros and agape in the modern world), from 3-5 on Sunday Jan. 25th, should you be free to come.

As to making nice to Tarjei, see my post to Bradford in response to his Closet Manichean-ism.

warm regards,
joel

On Wed, 2004-01-07 at 11:40, Steinerhead wrote:

Hi Joel,

I guess I have the benefit of ignorance based on innocence when it comes to this discussion, as I have only in the last couple of years, been trying to digest the huge "cathedral" (as Soesman calls it) we call Anthroposophy.

* --
Joel Wendt

...................................................................................................................................

From: Daniel Hindes
Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 11:29 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras

To Joel's position I would like to add that it is of course always possible to be right, but for the wrong reasons. The Asuras and the Mystery of the 8th Sphere are indeed terrible to even begin to contemplate. To actually know such a thing I get the impression that one would have to have successfully faced Ahriman first, and very few people indeed have completed that step. Joel's path is Steiner's path. It is not a path of knowledge, it is a path of self-knowledge. Steiner himself discovered Anthroposophy entirely out of himself, walking the path of self-knowledge. He was then able to work creatively and as a teacher out of his own experience. For us to take his "facts" without his "path" is to misunderstand his teaching.

Daniel Hindes

----- Original Message -----
From: Joel Wendt
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 1:44 PM
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras
[Countering Asuras / Closet Manicheanism / Rudolf Steiner's personal moral character / Ahriman, Death, and Stephen King 2]

Dear Tarjei,

Yea, whatever...denial is a wonderful thing isn't it. No sense looking at ourselves, when we can so easily see the horror in others (people who believe in the death penalty, child molesters, perpetrators of the Holocaust, and other ausuric phantoms of your fancy).

warm regards,
joel

...................................................................................................................................

From: Steinerhead
Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 1:47 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Countering Asuras

In a message dated 1/8/2004 9:12:53 AM Eastern Standard Time, sr_joanna writes:

Heya Mike,

Joanne wrote:

Ummmm, I think you got it wrong here. What newbies like you need to see is that serious anthroposophers can disagree, even disagree quite vehemently, and not have the world come to an end. If we all sit around nodding and smiling all the time -- happy happy, joy joy -- where is the movement and life in anthroposophy?

My vision of anthroposophy is more vibrant -- and more inclusive -- than that!

Hey Joanne,

I agree. I was surprised I guess. How about some Happy happy joy joy and then some brutal honesty? kinda like a breathing process?

Or we could be like Dori, the stupid fish in "Finding Nemo"... Just keep swimming...just keep swimming... swimming ...swimming...swimming...

Brutal Truth and flowing Love

Mike

...................................................................................................................................

From: golden3000997
Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 4:12 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Countering Asuras

Hey Mike!

Dori wasn't stupid - she had short-term memory loss!!! : ) And she DID help!!! Just goes to show you, don't it? We all have our place in the scheme of things. Even Bruce!

: ) Christine

...................................................................................................................................

From: Steinerhead
Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 8:21 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Countering Asuras

In a message dated 1/9/04 12:42:07 AM !!!First Boot!!!, golden3000997@cs.com writes:

Hey Mike!

Dori wasn't stupid - she had short-term memory loss!!! : ) And she DID help!!! Just goes to show you, don't it? We all have our place in the scheme of things. Even Bruce!

: ) Christine

You are absolutely right Christine. She did remember the address didn't she. Oh well, I'm eatin crow now....CHAW...CHAW...CHAW... ;^)

Who is Bruce?

Love and Truth

Mike

...................................................................................................................................

From: golden3000997
Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 8:57 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Countering Asuras

Duh, the Shark on the 12 step program! LOL - LOL - LOL!!!

...................................................................................................................................

From: golden3000997
Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 9:00 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Countering Asuras

oh god, I'm still cracking up!!

and don't forget the most important point of all, when they do catch us

SWIM DOWN! SWIM DOWN!! SWIM DOWN!!!

: ) : ) : )

...................................................................................................................................

From: golden3000997
Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 9:01 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Countering Asuras

Hey "Keep swimming" isn't such bad advice, either, come to think of it (still giggling)

...................................................................................................................................

From: Joel Wendt
Date: Sat Jan 10, 2004 10:13 am
Subject: RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras

Dear Kim,

What I was trying to point to was not to be found in our trying to look at our "ideas" of the human organization, as if we could label some aspects of this "idea" as luciferic or ahrimanic (or asuric). Rather I was suggesting that in order to know how evil works in the world, we have to face our shadow, our double.

This is not about ideas at all, but about what is working in our soul from the inside outward in such a way that we really don't appreciate its true nature.

Mostly we don't self observe carefully enough, or practice the relevant inner discipline by which we would meet the double. Instead what happens is that we act out of the double on a regular basis, but never see it - it is too intimate, and being that intimate we'd rather be in denial of it, than face it.

Now the activity of the double leaves all kinds of hints and clues behind, but in order to perceive this activity we have to be more focused on the beam in our own eye, than on the mote in our brother's eye. Appreciating the double is more an act of confession, than it is an act of describing the world we perceive.

So when folks describe businesses or governments or others as possessing evil qualities, we can generally assume that they don't know what they are talking about, because this focus on the "other" and the mote in their eye really only tells us something about the speaker or ourselves.

Careful self observation reveals that we adorn the world with ideas that are first produced in our own consciousness, most frequently though unconscious processes. We have a feeling of antipathy (or sympathy), and this unredeemed feeling then serves as a driver for the thought content. I use the term "unredeemed" to point to the fact that the feeling is not within our conscious mastery (as might be a cultivated mood of soul), but more likely the antipathy is a product of the double itself.

The double influences how we see the world, because until we can consciously take over that activity, and thus the unfolding of our own karma, we are bound to the double by necessity. We need the double in order to experience our karma.

So the initial difficulty is always within, and our first clue as to the problem is when we find ourselves seeing evil outside in the world (the mote), rather than facing the more daunting task of facing our own shadow (the beam).

When Steiner first taught these matters, he taught in a time in which the intellectual soul still predominated, and mostly to a people (Central Europeans) who lived very much in the ideal. This required that he give hints and point in certain directions, but could not be very overt and blunt.

But that time is now long past, and as we begin the new century, it becomes necessary to be more plain spoken.

At present the best example of work with the double is in 12 Step groups, wherein a certain practice (authored by the Ethereal Return of the Christ) has flourished. Here is one more or less accurate version: http://www.al-anon.alateen.org/12steps.html

Were anthroposophists to combine this practical and pragmatic (very American) method of "confession" together with a study of Steiner's Theory of Knowledge, great strides forward in esoteric development could be made. You see, in reality it is not about ideas at all, but about deeds - in this case inner deeds which are then joined together in some kind of wise group process.

It is the company we keep as we struggle to understand and master the doubles that brings us forward into the future along well grounded spiritual pathways. We could study Steiner lectures, read all manner of books of ideas and ideals about spiritual life, and never take the most dangerous step at all - looking honestly at ourselves.

So on this list we talk about spiritual as if we could see it in society, see lucifer here, and ahriman there, and michael behind that, when the real serious work remains undone - inside our own souls, in that place were ideas and feelings are to become the conscious product of deeds - to will in the thinking, and think in the willing.

But confession is hard to do. The last thing our very protected and still too childish egos want to do, is to confess to ourselves, much less to others. Far easier to point fingers and blame, especially when someone has the temerity to suggest we are full of shit.

Yet, of all the gifts another person can give us, telling us when we are full of it is quite very much one of the best. Hard to take - of course. Which is the main clue to its real utility.

At the same time, groups need to be formed where this is understood as a way of practice. No one goes long to a truly functional 12 Step group without finding out about confession and confrontation. "Hello, my name is Joel, and I'm an addict" pause "hello Joel" says the group. Confession and welcome, for we are brothers and sisters here, all of us striving to overcome what seems beyond us to overcome.

So personal stories get told, and some stories are from new people, and familiar to all for that reason, and then once in a while someone who has been working the Steps for twenty years gets up and speaks, and wisdom flows into the circle - hard won wisdom - wisdom won through pain, and error, and trial by fire.

Nothing from books here.

Now the 12 Steps have a weakness, in that it wasn't possible to speak of the double in a blunt way - human consciousness in the early years wasn't quite ready for this. But now, as we more and more need to understand evil in order to have any kind of intelligent civilization, it becomes necessary to speak plainly of the double. For this anthroposophy was introduced into the world, because our "psychological" paradigm had to grow so as to better reflect the truth here.

Unfortunately, the anthroposophists have fallen into Steinerism, into dogma and sectarianism, and a kind of lame theological thinking. The hard part of anthroposophy, looking squarely at one's self, and making self knowing the essential goal, this has not come to pass as much as it needed to.

So we enter the new century a bit lamed - something is missing. Anthroposophists don't know how to "confess", how to meet each other as true ego beings (as I-ams with flaws and doubles and all kinds of tendencies to error and stupidity - that is as human beings). Instead we are on this high path, students of the great doctor, far above the messy stuff of life. Our dialogs are competitions in knowing (which one has the better handle on the questions in the New Testament, or which one sees social life more clearly), when they should be cooperative arts of sharing (c.f. M. Spock's Group Moral Artistry).

Anyway, Kim, I can't really be supportive of what your wrote below - it is still about the mote, not the beam. Were you to tell us a story of how you finally noticed how badly you treated your first husband, because you were more interested in your own career than in his welfare, and how you have began to see how this impulse still lives in you today and that you need help in mastering it. And if you then related that you had begun to pray to the Holy Mother on a regular basis, for help from your higher power in dealing with this unredeemed soul flaw which you have now confessed to having. Then further, how you began to be able to notice this impulse rising in your soul, very subtly as a kind of temptation whispering to your spirit, your I-am, and that now you could recognize that this was an aspect of the double complex in the soul, this temptation, so now you could see it, and you were grateful to the Holy Mother for this help, and truly humbled by how flawed you could now see that you were. So then you went to your former husband, and sought to make amends, because you knew that you had to at least ask for his forgiveness (which it isn't necessary to receive) before you can truly forgive yourself. Then after going through this trial, which took several months and involved much agony, you found that in your prayer life, you began to have better insights into how to love your current husband better, in fact you could place questions during prayer and receive answers.

If you were to tell such a story (which is entirely made up by me of course, and isn't meant to do anything but serve as an illustration) to others, this would not only serve your own development indirectly, but also be an example to others. Then if we were in a group that worked together in this way, with many stories, we could begin to see that in practice we now had started to understand the Gospel of John, and the beginning steps outlined there - the washing of the feet, and the scourging for example.

Then the need for discussions about things we don't know anything about, like the ausuras, disappears, because we are now truly meeting each other as struggling human beings, in such a fine way that intellectual bull shit has no meaning anymore.

warm regards,
joel

On Thu, 2004-01-08 at 14:26, Kim Munch Michelsen wrote:

Thank you, Joel,

You are right, the best place to start looking is in your own self, and with the experiences I have, I think I can understand the three principles of evil's function in the self.

But how does the evil functions in the world?

Not in extreme cases, but in everyday life!

I don't think that we, in most cases, understand wherein the evil is.

Lucifer is the one who is the most simple to understand. It is a direct expression of the persons ego with more or less respect for others.

Ahriman is more difficult. The influence is generally not so direct as Lucifer, but more collective in it's influence. Ahriman is intelligence, without common sense. This is especially seen in politics, administration's, and companies not to small. One of the primary symptoms for an Ahrimanic organisation is it's employees inability to make decisions. Common sense or expertise, experience within a field, is not accepted as background for taking responsibility. The primary solutions for handling problems are: Same procedure as last time, or wait until it is burning, or until it is not necessary any longer, or the customer makes so much noise that the president of the organisation is notified and can make a decision, or export the problem to a consultancy company.

You will not define such an Ahrimanic organisation as evil, but it is removing the will and feeling for moral from it's employes, so they can't take a decision in the real world (that is outside the organisation) based on moral or common sense. And you can't point at one person and say that (s)he is the guilty.

Where Ahriman disables the will, goes Asuras a step longer, here the will of the individual is replaced by others, and the ego is eradicated. I think that one of the results of the action of the Asuras is that the connection between the physical mind and the spirit/ego is more or less destroyed, that is, man is converted to a mechanical automaton. The military could be an example, but in most cases I think it is Ahrimanic. 'Education' by Scientology, Brain Wash by Islamic Fundamentalists are some examples, but I think there is other not so clear examples. When people are to hook'ed on computer games, especially shoot them first, the fysical brain changes it's wiring, and looses it's connection to the ego. There is an increasing number of unhandled psychiatric patiens, which has left this world mentally, where only hollow shell's is left back. I think that people pressed under extreme stress, for a longer time, can loose their ego.

Warm regards to you too,
Kim

-----Original Message-----
From: Joel Wendt
Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 10:40 am
Subject: RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras

Dear Kim,

Just to be consistent, as I usually don't comment on your posts...

* --
Joel Wendt

...................................................................................................................................

From: Daniel Hindes
Date: Sun Jan 11, 2004 4:30 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras

Joel,
While much of what you speak is truth, somehow the telling of it doesn't quite ring true for me. I would be the first to say that each one of us has to look first and formost at ourselves, and work there. You say the same thing, but somehow with such force as to show some interest in changing the opinion of others. To me, it is perfectly acceptable to speak the truth of the fact that change comes from within, but it must be done in such a way that it leaves the other completely free. Yet this response to Kim seems to show a subtle desire to change her. As I said to Tarjei in another context, it is possible to be right but for the wrong reasons. Have you examined all your motivations in writing this? Does it truly reflect Ethical Individualism?

Daniel Hindes

...................................................................................................................................

From: Kim Munch Michelsen
Date: Sun Jan 11, 2004 12:52 pm
Subject: RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras

Dear Joel,

People are different, and what is good for some are wrong for others. With time we grow away from the systems each of us have followed.

When I said that I could recognize evil in my self, it is not as idea's, it is practical understanding of the way my brain functions, nearly down to the electric currents in the brain. I can go in and catch feelings like anger, when it's only a little spark, look at it, decide if it should be deleted or allowed to continue.

The 12 steps are good for some persons.

A method where you look through your actions of the day, backwards, is another excellent method.

Steiner's books and lectures is a good way to develop the Ahrimanian faculties of intelligence in the right way and in equilibrium with the Luciferic energies. The reading and understanding of his works is a kind of alchemistic work. The validity of the content, or if it is intellectual bull shit, as you state, is really not interesting in this context.

Another thing you misunderstood is that I am not looking for evil people or organizations, I am looking for how the Ahrimanian evil functions in the world, and what we can do against it.

Asuras is another story. I heard a satanist tell about his way to reach the other side, and I got a frightening view into the mechanics of the Asuras.

By the way, the name 'Kim' is primarily a male name in Europe, and especially in Denmark, where I live!

I have a good connection to the physical world, and I am educated in the most 'Ahrimanian' area I can think of: Computer Science. I have worked within the field in 30 years, with great enthusiasm (luciferic).
So, all together, I don't feel that your example is in any way related to me.

The double is strongly connected to the physical body, the physical brain. The primary goal for the uncontrolled double is to remove the connection from the brain to the spiritual, and that can be done by making never ending loops in the brain, by narcotics, cigarettes, alcohol, extreme sex, sm, pedophilia, and (other) different kinds of sickness in the mind. Some doctors have used Electro Chocks to destroy these loops. The 12 steps is another way.

-----

The only way to fight evil is to concentrate on good, and in that way remove the energy from the evil.

Example:
--------------------------------------------------------
To stop smoking you have to convince yourself that smoking is uninteresting, that it is boring...

Find every funny thing about your smoking, and laugh at it:

'Cigarettes tastes good': well, if you are smoking 40 cigarettes a day, you are nearly breathing through them, then you can't taste the cigarettes as little as you can taste the air.
'Cigarettes and a cup of coffee is a good combination': well, if I haven't smoked a cigarette in the last 15 minutes, I will finish the first cigarette before I have the first sip of the coffee.

In this way you can manipulate your brain by removing the energy from the existing loop's.

One morning, when you feel right, you quit smoking. You have one day of physical abstinences (after 40 cigarettes a day!). You don't get irritated by other smokers. Every time you think of a cigarette, you think of it as boring, and maybe of those stupid problems you would get if you take a cigarette. After a month you will not think of cigarettes more than once a month. When it happens, remember how boring to smoke.
--------------------------------------------------------

Warm regards,
Kim

Dear Kim,

What I was trying to point to was not to be found in our trying to look at our "ideas" of the human organization, as if we could label some aspects of this "idea" as luciferic or ahrimanic (or asuric). Rather I was suggesting that in order to know how evil works in the world, we have to face our shadow, our double.

...................................................................................................................................

From: Joel Wendt
Date: Mon Jan 12, 2004 6:03 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras

Dear Daniel,

Years ago (about 1997) I wrote a small journal called Outlaw Anthroposophy, which can be found on my website at http://ipwebdev.com/hermit/oajnr.html Copies (less than 25) were delivered by hand to a conference at Ann Arbor, where this work was labeled as "subversive" by some.

As a consequence of my publishing this material on the Internet, I was invited to join the anthroposophia list; had the main articles copied positively to Bob and Nancy's Waldorf Website where they are still available when you click there on "anthroposophy" http://www.bobnancy.com/menu-steiner.html; and was asked by Lorenzo Ravgali. whether he could translate the articles into German and publish them in the jarbuch fur anthroposophische kritik 1998, to which I said yes.

The two articles are (plus their German translation titles):

The Study of Rudolf Steiner's Lecture Cycles, and the Problem of Cognition - musings on the epistemological swampland of the Anthroposophical Movement (Das Studium der Vortrage Rudolf Steiners und das Problem der Erkenntnis)

The Anthroposophical Society: Is it a living social form? Is die Anthroposophische Gesellschaft eine lebedige Geminschaftsform?

The subtitle to the Journal: Outlaw Anthroposophy was: "another declaration of independence: spiritual science with passion - light and heat"

People have a little difficulty with passion, mistaking it for some kind of judgmentalism, or perhaps some kind of error, because they want their anthroposophy to be "cool" and intellectual. I called my work "Outlaw Anthroposophy" because I understood where I had to take a stand with regard to the institutional problems in the Society. As Catherine points out in her article, Steiner expected there to be nearly a million anthroposophists by the end of the 20th Century - where do you suppose they went?

Yes, there is a strong reaction to my posts, and an assumption that they are strident, when all they really are is confident, and unwilling to tolerate confusing a lot of what goes on here for "spiritual science".

People here can do and say anything they want - that is their right as members of the Life of Rights. But when they claim to practice spiritual science, then that is a cultural act, and in the cultural life, which is based upon freedom, it remains true that you either know whereof you speak, or you don't. When you don't, no one should be surprised if someone who does has to call you on it (emphasis on "has").

There isn't a lot of choice, and questioning my motives is okay as an act of free speech, but not very thoughtful, considering that I have spent a lot of time talking about moral imagination as applied inwardly as a truth test to our own speaking and writing. Have you read Gordienko's book? I believe not, in which case you are in for a shock, for she says, after the fashion of her Russian soul and mathematical background, exactly what I have been saying.

The sad thing is how simple this is. People could easily discuss all this stuff using the vocabulary of the books on the science of knowing (epistemology), but guess what? They don't use that vocabulary, and don't contradict me on that level. Instead they try insults, question my motives, make what are often personal attacks, all at the same time as not really addressing the questions I have been raising.

What is Spiritual Science? How do you practice it? Is it being practiced here? How would we know?

Nothing very difficult at all.

Now we all have our swords and our shields, and people will raise their shield unconsciously by being defensive. But the truth remains the truth, and we can always discuss that using the terminology of the epistemology and related material, while leaving aside the need for defense and attack on a personal level.

But the questions listed above remain. These questions are far more important than some people seem to understand or appreciate. Whatever Anthroposophy is to be Tomorrow, as we take upon ourselves the task of regenerating it in this the 21st Century, depends entirely upon our ability to answer those questions. Casting aspersions at me or Catherine (who is not here to defend herself) has nothing to do with the answer to these questions.

warm regards,
joel

On Sun, 2004-01-11 at 17:30, Daniel Hindes wrote:

Joel,
While much of what you speak is truth, somehow the telling of it doesn't quite ring true for me. I would be the first to say that each one of us has to look first and formost at ourselves, and work there. You say the same thing, but somehow with such force as to show some interest in changing the opinion of others. To me, it is perfectly acceptable to speak the truth of the fact that change comes from within, but it must be done in such a way that it leaves the other completely free. Yet this response to Kim seems to show a subtle desire to change her. As I said to Tarjei in another context, it is possible to be right but for the wrong reasons. Have you examined all your motivations in writing this? Does it truly reflect Ethical Individualism?

Daniel Hindes
--
Joel Wendt

[Continued in another thread]

...................................................................................................................................

From: Daniel Hindes
Date: Mon Jan 12, 2004 7:44 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras

Joel,
A reply to a few of your thoughts:

Years ago (about 1997) I wrote a small journal called Outlaw Anthroposophy, which can be found on my website at http://ipwebdev.com/hermit/oajnr.html Copies (less than 25) were delivered by hand to a conference at Ann Arbor, where this work was labeled as "subversive" by some.

You seem proud of your subversive label. I'll read you article in depth when time permits.

People have a little difficulty with passion, mistaking it for some kind of judgmentalism, or perhaps some kind of error, because they want their anthroposophy to be "cool" and intellectual. I called my work "Outlaw Anthroposophy" because I understood where I had to take a stand with regard to the institutional problems in the Society. As Catherine points out in her article, Steiner expected there to be nearly a million anthroposophists by the end of the 20th Century - where do you suppose they went?

I have often pondered this question. It never occured to me that was the lack of passion in the Anthroposophical Society. I'll have to work with that idea for a while.

Yes, there is a strong reaction to my posts, and an assumption that they are strident, when all they really are is confident, and unwilling to tolerate confusing a lot of what goes on here for "spiritual science".

I don't think people are reacting so much to what you say, it is how you say it. You seem, subtly, to enjoy confrontation and pissing people off. This goes beyond confidence almost to the point where you seem to be feeding a desire to feel ostracised. It is also possible to be calmly confident and tolerant of other peoples error. It is possible to maintain this soul attitude while still pointing out the error.

People here can do and say anything they want - that is their right as members of the Life of Rights. But when they claim to practice spiritual science, then that is a cultural act, and in the cultural life, which is based upon freedom, it remains true that you either know whereof you speak, or you don't. When you don't, no one should be surprised if someone who does has to call you on it (emphasis on "has").

The world is full of error, even in you and me. You certainly talk the talk about about changeing from within and confronting your own double, but you still harbor the desire to change others, and it is quite evident. Perhaps you don't see it.

There isn't a lot of choice, and questioning my motives is okay as an act of free speech, but not very thoughtful, considering that I have spent a lot of time talking about moral imagination as applied inwardly as a truth test to our own speaking and writing. Have you read Gordienko's book? I believe not, in which case you are in for a shock, for she says, after the fashion of her Russian soul and mathematical background, exactly what I have been saying.

So it is not thoughtful of me to question your motives, though you will conceed it is my right by free speech. Your talking about moral imagination makes your opinions immune to criticism. I will grant you no lack of confidence in your own infallibility. I will not necessarily grant you that infallibility, and further I would suggest that a belief in one's own infallibility is downright dangerous on any spiritual path.

I have acutally read Gordienko's book. Several times. I have gone over it in detail, and then checked her sources. Did you notice that the page numbers of the citations did not survive the tranlsation from Russian to German to English? The numbers were there, but they were off, sometimes by dozens of pages, to the pages in the English editions.

I must note your incipent glee in telling me what I will learn were I to read the book. It goes beyond a pure desire to enlighten, to a desire to affont the opinions of another. This is not my understandig of the goal of the spiritual path as indicated in POF.

The sad thing is how simple this is. People could easily discuss all this stuff using the vocabulary of the books on the science of knowing (epistemology), but guess what? They don't use that vocabulary, and don't contradict me on that level. Instead they try insults, question my motives, make what are often personal attacks, all at the same time as not really addressing the questions I have been raising.

I'm sorry to hear that you feel insulted. Would it surpirse you to hear that you have that same effect on others? If you would like your questions addressed, ask them in a neutral manner that invites other people to respond out of their own soul, from whatever level they might be on at this time. You might be surprised what they can teach you. But if your "questions" are really just demands that other people change to conform to your view of perfection, then they are not really questions, and people might be quite justified in rejecting your demands. Even if what you desire is for people or groups of people to achieve their higher self.

What is Spiritual Science? How do you practice it? Is it being practiced here? How would we know?

These are the types of questions to ask. Now if these were really questions, instead of not-so subtle ways of telling others that they are not really practicing what you belive these things to be, then they might be discussed, and you might even lean a few things from the various answers. Just don't be surprised if the answers differ from the ones you would give.

Now we all have our swords and our shields, and people will raise their shield unconsciously by being defensive. But the truth remains the truth, and we can always discuss that using the terminology of the epistemology and related material, while leaving aside the need for defense and attack on a personal level.

We all. Even you, Joel.

But the questions listed above remain. These questions are far more important than some people seem to understand or appreciate. Whatever Anthroposophy is to be Tomorrow, as we take upon ourselves the task of regenerating it in this the 21st Century, depends entirely upon our ability to answer those questions. Casting aspersions at me or Catherine (who is not here to defend herself) has nothing to do with the answer to these questions.

I certainly hope I am not casting aspersions your direction, Joel. I have asked you hard questions. I have asked you to examine yourself and see if your actions are actually a reflection of your ideal. This is a hard (even harsh) question for anyone. In your case I feel it was invited by the attitude that you take in dealing with other people whom you seem to feel are inferior to you. This attitude I have questioned. You claim that it is justified because you possess truth. You have stated elsewhere that you feel compelled to correct the errors in others. I am only asking you to examine this drive in your soul. Where does it come from? What purpose does it serve? Is it really within your control and only used consciously as a tool? As a tool for what? And to what purpose?

Daniel Hindes

...................................................................................................................................

From: Daniel Hindes
Date: Mon Jan 12, 2004 9:01 pm
Subject: Death of the Anthroposophical Society

Joel Wrote:

Years ago (about 1997) I wrote a small journal called Outlaw Anthroposophy, which can be found on my website at http://ipwebdev.com/hermit/oajnr.html Copies (less than 25) were delivered by hand to a conference at Ann Arbor, where this work was labeled as "subversive" by some.

Ok. So I went ahead and read your essay. Let me focus in particular on the second portion: "The Anthroposophical Society: is it a living social form?".

You lead off with a number of questions. Then you mention Steiner's example of the poet as the archetype of a human being, with enthusiasm as the essential human quality (without a citation, I might add). Then you ask "Is it possible there is some other idea which belongs to social forms, but which has an order beyond the idea of life?" I'm not sure I understand the question.

When you ask how "we" can answer these questions, it is not clear whether you mean any given researcher, or the entire society as a whole. Do you mean to suggest that the entire society should take the time to practice goethean observation of its history? In what manner do you imagine this happening? Should Dornach send a directive that next March is goethean History month, and every branch should devote the month to considering the question of life in the society? Or do you imagine that somehow, every branch in every country should suddenly feel the urge to examine the history of the whole society? More realistically, have you considered forming an initiative group on the matter? Have you approached people asking if they want to join you on this investigation? After all, Steiner said that Anthroposophists must be first and foremost people of initiative.

As a point of history, the National Societies did not break off from the General AS in the 1930's. Steiner included them in the structure starting at the Christmas Conference. They were there from the beginning.

"After some "light" conversation, this writer spoke up and made the observation "...that from his point of view the Society was dead, and had been dead since, at least, before World War II. While there were many vital individual initiatives, these were simply growing in the ground made fertile by the rotting corpse...". After this the conversation grew more animated, and members of the Council later reported, during that period when the conversation spilled over into the dinner hour, that this was a common theme (the absence of 'livingness") heard by them in their travels."

Notice that I have not yet said anything about your diagnosis. The absence of "livingness" is a problem in some contexts. The answer, given by Rudolf Steiner, is the ARTS. The arts are supposed to bring the heart life and the heart sphere into Anthroposophy. I find that branches that are able to perform the Mystery Dramas, for example, tend to have a lot more life than those that only have study groups. So to the next quote:

" "When I come to the Society I get much for my head, but nothing for my heart!" There were a number of variations on this theme - a common general sense of something being absent, and very much desired."

I would suggest that there could be a lot more art (including eurythmy) in Anthroposophy, and then people would find more of the life that they are missing.

Pertaining to your experience that your study groups are not sufficiently "alive" I could suggest that the place to fix the problem is at that study group, and not automatically in Dornach. Of course it is real work creating a healthy and living group dynamic (and I claim no special talent in this myself) so perhaps it is easier to blame Dornach.

In the next three paragraphs you describe how "we" (you?) are killing the life of the group by the manner in which the material is worked on. The problem is "we" (everyone else) is talking dead "Steiner says" and not living insight.

"It is the constantly evoked egregore of Steiner that kills the life in our groups and Society meetings. We manufacture a ghost, a shade, of Steiner, and place this shadow as the superior ideal before which our own soul understandings must give way."

Now I was not in your study group, but the question does present itself: how universal is this phenomena? Is it killing the life in Peru and the Ukraine? Is there something specific to the US that makes this such a problem here? Is it even such a problem here? I lack a comprehensive experience of multiple study groups, but in my limited experience I have not found it to be quite the same problem. Individuals may have this problem. Whether it kills the whole study group depends on the rest of the group.

"Within anthroposophical groups something rather unusual is added, both consciously and unconsciously. Each individual brings, within their own soul life, some form of relationship to Rudolf Steiner. In addition, through those social collective processes, which groups engage in as a matter of course, the group will also form a certain relationship to Steiner. But the question needs to be asked: which Steiner? Steiner as a spiritual reality, as an ego presence himself (assuming he is still dis-incarnate), or an image of Steiner, both collective and individual, which has no relationship to Steiner as a reality, but derives its nature solely from unconscious and semi-conscious assumptions as to his nature, being, meaning and intentions."

This is an interesting idea. Also interesting is the answer that you give. You posit that a "dead" counter-image of Steiner is actually what is created when Anthroposophists gather in a group.

The first thing to point out is that you are essentially claiming clairvoyant vision here. You have postulated a dead anti-Steiner spirit-being present wherever Anthroposophists gather. This point is a bit of a leap from the observable goethean facts of a bunch of people gathering, beyond even an observation of what they thing and feel. This is rather advanced intuition. Is it accurate?

To my mind, if a group of people idealize Steiner, it is not automatically a falsified image. It may or may not be healthy, but I don't feel that an evil spirit-being is necessarily the result. I leave open the possibility that I am wrong, but to me it would have to be demonstrated more effectively than this claim.

"The question was put to me in the meeting referred to above: "Okay, so the Society is dead, how to we resurrect it?""

I find it interesting that your experiences of one study group lead you to posit that he entire society is dead. This may or may not be true, but I feel that a larger sample size is necessary.

"First, admit there is no life. This ought to be done officially, although I do not expect the formal leadership to have the necessary courage."

I think that this recommendation has some validity for individual groups here and there. Whether we should wait for Dornach to issue a proclamation to this effect is another questions. In my occasional visits, I have not found the entire place moribund. Of course there are problems, but it may also be that the patient is merely ill, and if that is the case then a funeral is a bit premature.

"Please do not arbitrarily agree with me. Know it for yourselves, above all else."

Um. Ok, I won't.

"The temptation to quote or speak of an idea as coming from the "authority" needs to be resisted, and ultimately eliminated."

I can agree with this recommendation. However, I don't think that it follows that those who have not perfected this art are necessarily killing the whole society.

"Life is engendered in the group through admitting into the circle the heart felt concerns of each individual, irrespective of their familiarity with Steiner or Anthroposophy. The neophyte has as much to contribute to the life of the group as the long time practitioner."

This is true, and true of the best study groups that I have been in.

SUMMARY:

Your central argument is that the creation of an evil anti-Steiner spirit-being by worshipful Anthroposophists has killed the Society, way back in the 1930's. To verify the existence of the evil anti-Steiner spirit-being requires clairvoyant insight, so I am not able to challenge you on this. You have at least one error of understanding in the presentation of the splitting off of the National Societies. They existed from the Christmas Foundation. There was a crisis in the mid 1930's where some national societies had issues with events in Dornach, so perhaps you are mixing this up.

The lack of livingness that you see so much of in the society, I suggest can be remedied to a good degree with more art. And finally, since change comes from within, I would suggest that someone really concerned with fixing this would go out and lead by example. If meditative contemplation of the Society's history is desperately needed, I suggest you form an initiative group to work on this. I would even consider joining you.

Finally, while you may feel Gordienko to be a fellow traveler, her criticism is far more narrowly applied and better supported. She does not use clairvoyant insight or claim that the entire society is dead. Her method is to lay the statements of Prokofieff next to those of Steiner and let the inherent contradictions stand out. Her biting invective may make reading her book difficult, but her essential points are supported by texts that anyone can read and judge for themselves.

Daniel Hindes

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Click to subscribe to anthroposophy_tomorrow
 

January/February 2004

The Uncle Taz "Anthroposophy Tomorrow" Files

Anthroposophy & Anarchism

Anthroposophy & Scientology

Anthroposophical Morsels

Anthroposophy, Critics, and Controversy

Search this site powered by FreeFind