Body of Christ
From: dottie zold
Date: Sat Nov 22, 2003 9:54 pm
Subject: Body of Christ
Hi Rick and All,
Rick, I am wondering if you have ever thought
of why it is that Christ can not come back in the body form?
Why not?
I have been thinking on your comments regarding
Christs body and how it basically disintegrated and was at its
worst during the transfiguration. I am reading an amazing book
written by Douglas Klotz. He interprets Aramaic which was mostly
spoken before the middle east before Islam came into a totality
of sorts.
Speaking of the last supper Klotz interprets
the word 'body' as 'corpse' and says it speaks to this: This
term (bashar) does not, however indicate a form, only a substance.
Although Aramaic has two words that might be translated 'body'
the one used in the Gospels (for instance, in Jesus' words "This
is my body" during the Last Supper) really means 'corpse';
that is, an enfleshed being that is no longer living (and thereby
no longer fulfilling its divine function).
This got me to thinking that maybe Jesus'
body was absolutely consumed by the spirit of Christ by the last
supper and it is no longer available to Him even if He wanted.
This Mr. Klotz also speaks to the issue of
how the breath of God and the Kingdom of God are both feminine
gendered. Even to the point of saying that the earliest traditions
of the Christian Jews stated that it was Sophia/Shekinah whom
called out to the Baptism of John saying 'this is my Son in whom
I am well pleased. Pretty interesting to think that what may
have happened was the Greek characterizations of a thing. He
speaks to this as well. Which leads me to Jesus calling out Mother
behold your Son and Son behold your Mother.
Anyway, why is it that Jesus will not return
in the body? I am not worried as we can see him in our mind/heart
clouds but unto what is this mystery?
Good Night,
Dottie
............................................................................................................................
From: Richard Distasi
Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 2:33 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Body of Christ
Dottie,
Rick, I am wondering if you have ever thought of why it is
that Christ can not come back in the body form? Why not?
Christ did not simply bring Himself to incarnate into the aura
of the earth He also brought with Him forces that lead the way
for our own evolution and the evolution of the earth as well.
These forces are deeply connected with the form with which He
takes on. Our evolution and that of the earth is ascending (eventually)
to the etheric and on to the astral condition of form from out
of the present mineral condition of form. Christ is in an etheric
form in the astral. He then moves on to an astral form in lower
Devachan and then as pure Ego in upper Devachan.
All the while the whole of humanity and the earth are to follow
the Christ in the evolutionary path that is set by Christ in
these successive and ascending forms of Christ. The whole pattern
of the path of Christ is a parabolic path. Christ followed humanity
in its downward path in the realm of the mineral. In reverse,
we now follow Christ in His ascension towards higher realms.
"Speaking of the last supper Klotz interprets the word
'body' as 'corpse' and says it speaks to this: This term (bashar)
does not, however indicate a form, only a substance."
That is interesting because according to Steiner that is what
the body mostly consisted of; at least within the body. Only
the outer held any resemblance to the figure of Jesus of Nazareth.
As I mentioned earlier, an angel had to come and minister to
Christ in order to vitalize the body just enough so that it could
completely and in full measure pass through the Event of Golgotha.
rick distasi
............................................................................................................................
From: Tarjei Straume
Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 4:06 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Body of Christ
At 06:54 23.11.2003, Dottie wrote:
Rick, I am wondering if you have ever thought
of why it is that Christ can not come back in the body form?
Why not?
Rick has given a superb answer to this question,
so I'll just add a few thoughts here:
Ahriman's incarnation is coming in the not
too distant future. Perhaps a lot of people will believe it's
Christ having returned in the flesh. The illusion Ahriman seeks
to implant into the souls of men and women, is that spiritual
existence is impossible for any being without the vehicle of
a biological body. To a great extent, this is supported by our
culture. Not by Star Wars which has a genuine mythological dimension,
but by Star Trek, which has been with us for forty years. Remember
Spock's death and resurrection in Star Trek 3 and 4? The Spock
character and his Vulcan culture have certain similarities to
mysteries and the path of initiation, so this is very seductive.
When Spock dies, his spirit is kept alive in doctor McCoy's body,
where it mingles with the doctor's own consciousness. It has
to be kept there until a duplicate of Spock's original physical
body has been bred at record speed, remember?
Yes, Star Trek is indeed an important contributor
to the sustenance of these materialistic illusions. The rapture
a la beam-me-up-Scotty, Jesus as an astraunout who left in a
star ship and is returning in the same manner and so on.
Just some thoughts....
Cheers,
Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/
............................................................................................................................
From: golden3000997
Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 6:13 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Body of Christ
Hello Everyone!
I hesitate to jump into this discussion, even
though it is another favorite topic of mine, because I have so
many previous questions to answer and discussions to continue.
I haven't forgotten them, but I have been doing a lot of reading
on another subject in the past couple of weeks and that has taken
up most of my time away from work.
But I would really like to add to this picture
of the Resurrected Christ. Much of what I want to share comes
from discussions with Rene Querido and other people in my past
as well as readings in Christology. Please don't ask me for references
because I already have a large amount of my library piled around
me in quest of previous info. Any more and I won't have a path
to get away from my desk!
I really appreciate Dottie's question and
Rick, Dag and Tarjei's answers. I would just like to add that
the Risen Christ, according to stories I've heard can and does
appear in quite a physical form when necessary. But not born
into or incarnated into another body. As I understand it, the
physical, molecular substance of the Christ Jesus body was dissolving
away before Golgotha and the struggle was to keep the Christ
within it long enough to get through the actual human death experience.
That is why "water and blood" ran out when His side
was pierced. That substance and the rest that was laid in the
tomb was "swallowed" up by the earth like a homeopathic
remedy, healing the Earth being from the poison injected into
Her from the first murder of Abel by Cain. I think the Fifth
Gospel explains this.
Now, this is my own mental picture of what
happened. The Christ "descended into hell" - in other
words, entered the sphere of the spiritual world where individual
Egos had been trapped for eons because they had not been able
to develop the organs and forces of spiritual perception during
their earth incarnations. He brought His Light into that darkness,
thereby releasing them to go on in spiritual evolution. There
was also a meeting (a kind of "fight") with Ahriman
himself as the regent of death in which Christ showed that death,
Ahriman's greatest earthly power, had no final hold over him,
even though He went through the experience completely; and that
from that time on, all who aligned themselves with Him would
no longer be in Ahriman's sway, even if their spiritual forces
were not yet fully developed. There would always be a light to
light the way out of Purgatory (so to speak).
After this "battle", Christ returned
to the material sphere and began to absorb molecular, atomic
material back into His Etheric Archetype, changing it completely
in the process into a TRANSUBSTANTIATED physical body (sorry
for the caps!). This was already pre-viewed in the Transfiguration,
when certain disciples were allowed to witness the "blueprint"
of the Christ Archetype ready to be brought into reality on earth.
This Transubstantiated body was and is absolutely material and
physically real - to be shown and even handled by the disciples
when it was completed. I have a print of Rembrandt's painting
of Mary Magdelene and the Risen Christ as the Gardener. I will
try to take a digital of it and upload it for you. It is so remarkable
and I love it so much, because the Risen Christ is behind Mary
Magdalene, between her and the rising sun and he has a gardener's
hat and trowel and a sort of loving and amused expression on
his face. She is looking at him over her shoulder. He is quite
"earthy" and solid except for one thing - his left
arm is stretched out behind her and the sun is shining through
it! The other painting that I love is Fra Angelico's "Noli
Mi Tangere" from the San Marco cloisters. It is not as earthy,
but I love Mary Magdelene in it and it also expresses the "do
not touch me for I am not yet ascended to my Father."
This phrase is quite mysterious, actually,
because He does not "ascend" until 40 days later and
during that period he is fully physically present. But in those
early hours, to my understanding, the atomic matter is still
being "absorbed" and has not fully solidified. He doesn't
want Mary Magdalene to try to touch him and have her hand go
through him. Then she would think He was just a ghost. (Also,
maybe it would interfere with the blueprinting).
After the 40 days, Christ "ascended into
the clouds." This is Him "letting go" of the atomic
matter that is fully transformed into spirit/matter and allowing
the molecules to separate, expanding the body until it seems
to "rise" and finally disappear from common sight.
These transubstantiated molecules expand throughout the Etheric
body of the Earth itself, healing it like the physical substance
healed the physical earth body. And the Being of Christ then
expanded thoughout the spiritual spheres as He originally was,
all the way to the "Father" or "Godhead".
Yet, because His Substance has permeated all of the Spheres,
including the Astral, Etheric and Physical, "He" can
come and go always and simultaneously. When we reach "up"
to Him in the Etheric, we "see Him" there as an Eternal
and Permanent Presence which we can always turn to. But I have
been told that He can also appear to us whenever He chooses in
whatever human shape and form He desires. Rene told us several
examples. I also read or heard that Christian Rosenkreutz has
this ability and probably others. When the Risen Christ appears
as physical, it is not as "Christ" as we would expect
Him to look, but as an ordinary person in the crowd that one
may bump into. But this person says or does something essential
to the situation and then seems to "disappear".
But the real task that is still ongoing is
to continue a process of transubstantiating the Earth Body and
all of our physical bodies in the long ages of time to come.
Someday we will all have bodies that are physical substance permeated
and transfigured through and through with Spiritual "substance"
like water mixed with wine. The physical will be a pure reflection
of our Etheric Blueprint, which is the Christ Archetype combined
with our individually developed Egos.
We will no longer reproduce physical bodies
from our present day sexual organs, but from our larynxes. We
will "speak" and our speech will create forms available
for other Egos to "incarnate" into.
Unfortunately, humans will also have this
capacity even if they are not very spiritually advanced, leading
to the creation of very monstrous physical forms that will be
"spoken" into being.
We were taught in Teacher Training that this
is why our present day speech training and development is so
vitally important. That as we speak, we already implant forms,
healthy or unhealthy in those around us, especially the children.
Steiner was very specific about this, for example that hearing
a fully expressed "T" sound was essential in developing
the physical heart organ and that the kind of speech you hear
around you today with everyone dropping the sound of the "T"
at the end of the word leads to heart disease. I remember that
by the end of my Foundation Year speech classes, I had really
developed my pronounciation and at a certain point I became embarrassed
because it sounded so pretentious in normal company. I guess
I felt I had to "give it up" to fit in.
Anyway, I hope that this helps a bit to explain
why the Christ will never "incarnate" in a physical
body again. This was a one-time event! But He "has"
a physical body which He can and does manifest at His will. And
this is why he warned of "false prophets". We can be
sure that whatever leader is in front of us, no matter how "good"
he may seem - and Ahriman will appear to be very, very good at
first - that it is not The Christ. And when The Christ "comes
again" it will not be in the materialistic way that most
fundies imagine. In fact, He has "come again" but most
cannot perceive Him as He is in the Etheric Body of the World.
The very fact that so many people look for a "Saviour"
or leader of some kind to come and "rescue" them is
so off the mark. Each one of us must be a "Saviour"
of ourselves and of each other. It is up to us to develop the
spiritual powers of perception and creation that will enable
us collectively to build the New Jerusalem. The time of the King
is over. We must each be a King and a Queen among Kings and Queens.
Then we will be clothed in the Robes of
Christ - the Transubstantiated Spiritual-Physical
body that is Eternal and One with the Father.
With the best of intentions,
Christine
............................................................................................................................
To: anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com
From: eyecueco
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 21:11:41 -0000
Subject: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
--- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com,
golden3000997 wrote:
Hello Everyone!
I hesitate to jump into this discussion, even though it is another
favorite topic of mine, because I have so many previous questions
to answer and discussions to continue. I haven't forgotten them,
but I have been doing a lot of reading on another subject in
the past couple of weeks and that has taken up most of my time
away from work.
But I would really like to add to this picture of the Resurrected
Christ. Much of what I want to share comes from discussions with
Rene Querido and other people in my past as well as readings
in Christology. Please don't ask me for references because I
already have a large amount of my library piled around me in
quest of previous info. Any more and I won't have a path to get
away from my desk!
I really appreciate Dottie's question and Rick, Dag and Tarjei's
answers. I would just like to add that the Risen Christ, according
to stories I've heard can and does appear in quite a physical
form when necessary.
It would be more correct to say that it looks
like a physical form. You are speaking about the 'phamtom body'.
According to Steiner's christologies, (and
there a great many lectures besides the Fifth Gospel) you are
correct, He can appear as though in a physical form if and when
necessary, and RS predicted that this would begin to happen,i.e.,
He would appear in a conference of well meaning individuals struggling
with a certain problem, speak and then, vanish from sight.
Personally, I don't see this happened as hoped
for as I believe the aura around the earth has been considerably
darkened through technological advances placing emphais on the
materialistic, and the success of distracting, even destroying,
the formative inner forces of the young child before these forces
have developed.
{snip]
This phrase is quite mysterious, actually,
because He does not "ascend" until 40 days later and
during that period he is fully physically present. But in those
early hours, to my understanding, the atomic matter is still
being "absorbed" and has not fully solidified. He doesn't
want Mary Magdalene to try to touch him and have her hand go
through him. Then she would think He was just a ghost. (Also,
maybe it would interfere with the blueprinting).
After the 40 days, Christ "ascended into the clouds."
This is Him "letting go" of the atomic matter that
is fully transformed into spirit/matter and allowing the molecules
to separate, expanding the body until it seems to "rise"
and finally disappear from common sight. These transubstantiated
molecules expand throughout the Etheric body of the Earth itself,
healing it like the physical substance healed the physical earth
body. And the Being of Christ then expanded thoughout the spiritual
spheres as He originally was, all the way to the "Father"
or "Godhead". Yet, because His Substance has permeated
all of the Spheres, including the Astral, Etheric and Physical,
"He" can come and go always and simultaneously.
What you are are leaving out here is the necessary
journey through the same spheres as the human soul is intended
to make after death. The astral body, after losing the etheric
sheath, begins an expansion into the cosmos, stage by stage.
When the soul reaches the boundary of Saturn it begins its return
journey back to another reincarnation.
The Christ poured His forces into the earth
and renewed the earth's etheric body, but He also began the same
journey outward as does the human soul after death. Over a long
expanse of time he expanded throught the spiritual spheres and
when reaching the boundary of Saturn, He, too began a redecent.
In or around the year 1933 is when Steiner says that the Christ
returned to the aura of the earth. That is the true Second Coming,
and is of the clouds, so to speak.
It is up to the individual to develop the
necessary organs of perception to experience the Etheric Christ,
but, there is also something called Grace, and it certainly is
within the realm of possibilty for the individual to have a Christ
experience. I tend to believe this does not come about for purpose
of ego gratification for the individual as it does to bring about
specific help and guidance for the good of the whole, for example,
in the instance of Bill Smith who, following, his experience
of the Christ, established AA, Alcoholics Anonymous.
The Second Coming is an ongoing Event that
contiues for some time to come, happily. It is up to humanity
to lighten up the darknessnow permeats the earth's aura. The
Christ is now taking over the karamic judgement of souls from
Moses, hopefully this will help.
............................................................................................................................
From: golden3000997
Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 3:44 pm
Subject: The Etheric Christ
pkleonard writes:
The Second Coming is an ongoing Event that
contiues for some time to come, happily. It is up to humanity
to lighten up the darknessnow permeats the earth's aura. The
Christ is now taking over the karamic judgement of souls from
Moses, hopefully this will help.
Thank you PK! Very good addition! Of course,
there is so much more to the picture. I think I understand what
you mean by "phantom body" but the term may be misconstrued
by non-anthropops. It just sounds kind of nebulous. And while
that may be one form of appearance, I think it can be very real
and solid, too.
I also think I understand what you mean by
Christ "taking over the karmic judgement of souls"
but I also thought he did that as Vishnu Karman as Steiner expresses
it in the St. Luke gospel. I thought he always was the "Master
of Karma" but I'm sure that Moses has something to do with
it, also. I know there is some fabulous material out there on
Moses, but I haven't yet dug into it.
I certainly agree if you are saying that we
can't "wait around" expecting Christ to come and save
us. We have to reach toward Him and toward each other and affirm
the "Christ in me" that He has implanted in us.
I, for one would always love an intro from
all of our members. Thanks!
: ) Christine
............................................................................................................................
From: dottie zold
Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 9:44 am
Subject: Re: Body of Christ
Christine wrote:
But I have been told that He can also appear
to us whenever He chooses in whatever human shape and form He
desires. Rene told us several examples.
I am wondering if you have any example that
you might recall something like this happening?
Christine
I also read or heard that Christian Rosenkreutz has this ability
and probably others. When the Risen Christ appears as physical,
it is not as "Christ" as we would expect Him to look,
but as an ordinary person in the crowd that one may bump into.
But this person says or does something essential to the situation
and then seems to "disappear".
Dottie
Well, Christ 'can' appear as we percieved
Him in the physical in my experience. I have had a few experiences
that speak to this and one that actually helped to avert an accident
of sorts while driving home exhausted from work one night.
Christine
We will no longer reproduce physical bodies from our present
day sexual organs, but from our larynxes. We will "speak"
and our speech will create forms available for other Egos to
"incarnate" into.
Dottie
Have you actually had an experience that speaks
to this mystery?
Christine
Anyway, I hope that this helps a bit to explain why the Christ
will never "incarnate" in a physical body again. This
was a one-time event!
Dottie
I think I can understand it in the manner
of how Rick explained it being the 'ascension' and the moving
'upward' or maybe 'inward'. It would be logical, since Christ
took us on, that Christ would show us the way to higher realities,
by marking the path for us first, which of course then we are
able to follow: Showing us the way home.
Christine
But He "has" a physical body which He can and does
manifest at His will. And this is why he warned of "false
prophets". We can be sure that whatever leader is in front
of us, no matter how "good" he may seem - and Ahriman
will appear to be very, very good at first - that it is not The
Christ.
Dottie
Wow, that is really clear. I love hearing
things that I can use when speaking to others about real logic
in the Bibles.
Christine
He has "come again" but most cannot perceive Him
as He is in the Etheric Body of the World.
Dottie
Can you percieve Him Christina, or is this
too personal of a question?
Dear Christine, I love that you are able to
express yourself in the manner you do. It is a dream come true
for me if I hadn't told you already. It's like I recognize it
immediately as self evident yet I am unable to express it. But
you do and that makes me very happy. I am always so jealous to
have people understand the real beauty of the Bible and Christ
its almost like i feel you put my thoughts into form. So, I love
you:)
All my best,
Dottie
............................................................................................................................
From: golden3000997
Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 3:15 pm
Subject: The Power of Speech
Forgot to address this question -
Christine
We will no longer reproduce physical bodies
from our present day sexual organs, but from our larynxes. We
will "speak" and our speech will create forms available
for other Egos to "incarnate" into.
Dottie
Have you actually had an experience that
speaks to this mystery?
Well, having taken Speech classes in Foundation
Year and Teacher Training, I certainly could feel the inner effect
of learning to speak "from the Ego". I had a year with
Sarah Burton in Spring Valley. She was in her 70s, I think and
she could run circles around us students in our 20s. She was
a former actress and she traveled with the Stuttgart Eurythmy
ensemble when they did their big tour in???? 1980?? I would have
to look for my brochure. You know, the Speech & Drama course
in Dornach is a Four Year Course - longer than Teacher Training!!
Of course, having been so attached to the
written word all of my life, I can imagine it, even if I can't
yet "perceive" it. I also feel a deep connection to
the concept of the Christ as the Logos of God.
Hold on, I think I have my Speech notebook
around here somewhere - there's a wonderful verse. Hang on, I'll
check. Nope, I can't find it right now. You have no idea what
a mess my apartment is, boxes of papers, piles of books, etc.
I have a "button" somewhere that says "I'm not
messy - I'm creative" !
Anyway, you live in or around Hollywood, CA,
right? Are you near the Highland Hall school and whatever Anthropop
work is going on there? I think they have a teacher training
program going, so probably some speech classes. You might enjoy
participating in something like that. Speech work, like all art
has to be participated in to be fully appreciated.
That verse will turn up soon or later. I'll
pass it on when it does.
: ) Christine
............................................................................................................................
From: golden3000997
Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 2:52 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Dear Dottie,
Thank you for your warmth toward me, even
when I get prickly! The writing is a gift from a past life which
I haven't even used to its capacity yet. The understandings are
gifts from wonderful people that I have met through the years.
Of course, my own inner pain and turmoil has in a sense, "anchored"
these early experiences. As for perceiving Christ in the Etheric,
I'm lucky if I can "perceive" my way to work in the
mornings!!
But I know that He is there. I know that without
Him, I wouldn't be at all. And I know that someday I can and
will perceive Him, and that, to me, is faith - knowing that there
is a reality to be known, even if we can't perceive it just yet.
The closest I can honestly say I have come to really, clairvoyantly
"perceiving" anyone in the spiritual world is the Archangel
Michael and that was in extremity.
As far as examples of Christ appearing as
a normal human, one that has always stuck with me is similar
to your experience of help driving home. Rene told us this one
about a friend of his in Europe during WW II. I think this friend
was a nurse (I can't remember where this took place - Rene is
from Belgium originally, but it might have been in Holland or
France.) Anyway, this woman normally took a very late train home
at night. One night, she was approached by a very brusque, somewhat
stout man dressed as a conductor with a large black moustache!
He grabbed her by the arm and pulled her away from her platform,
insisting that she was trying to get on the wrong train!! She
resisted and protested, but he kept hold until she had missed
the train. That train was bombed and destroyed completely that
night. Shortly after the train had gone, he was nowhere to be
seen and she never saw him in the station again.
Of course, there are probably millions of
such stories, many of which are probably of angels and other
guardians. Obviously, there are many people who are not "saved"
at the last minute, either, but we are not to be the ones to
know why unless we can really look into the Akashic record and
examine each individual Karma.
An online friend of mine recently sent me
this story in a kind of "chain letter" "pass it
on to those you love" kind of e-mail. I don't participate
in those because they are so superstitious, but I kept this lovely
story:
Subject: Fw:sometimes, things are just not
what they seem
Two traveling angels stopped to spend the
night in the home of a wealthy family. The family was rude and
refused to let the angels stay in the mansion's guest room. Instead
the angels were given a small space in the cold basement. As
they made their bed on the hard floor, the older angel saw a
hole in the wall and repaired it. When the younger angel asked
why, the older angel replied, "Things aren't always what
they seem."
The next night the pair came to rest at the
house of a very poor, but very hospitable farmer and his wife.
After sharing what little food they had the couple let the angels
sleep in their bed where they could have a good night's rest.
When the sun came up the next morning the angels found the farmer
and his wife in tears.. Their only cow, whose milk had been their
sole income, lay dead in the field. The younger angel was infuriated
and asked the older angel how could you have let this happen?
The first man had everything, yet you helped
him, she accused. The second family had little but was willing
to share everything, and you let the cow die. "Things aren't
always what they seem," the older angel replied. "When
we stayed in the basement of the mansion, I noticed there was
gold stored in that hole in the wall.. Since the owner was so
obsessed with greed and unwilling to share his good fortune,
I sealed the wall so he wouldn't find it."
"Then last night as we slept in the farmers
bed, the angel of death came for his wife. I gave him the cow
instead.
Things aren't always what they seem."
Sometimes that is exactly what happens when things don't turn
out the way they should. If you have faith, you just need to
trust that every out come is always to your advantage. You just
might not know it until some time later...
As I said, to me "faith" is knowing
that someday, I will know. It doesn't always make life easier,
but it helps me to cope.
By the way, what kind of films are you involved
in?
Luv,
Christine
............................................................................................................................
From: Daniel Hindes
Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 3:33 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Body of Christ
Rick [and All], I am wondering if you have
ever thought of why it is that Christ can not come back in the
body form? Why not?
Dottie,
I hope you won't mind if I jump in and attempt an answer. I think
one part of the answer probably lies in all the preparation necessary
to produce a body suitable for such an incarnation. When you
consider all that was necessary to produce just the one in the
first place (49 generations of preparation on both sides of the
family, plus the whole history of the Hebrew people etc.) you
can imagine how difficult that would be to do all over again.
Then there is the mystery of the two Jusus children - according
to Steiner one of them (the one in the Gospel of St. Luke) was
a soul that was incarnating for the first time, and more specifically,
was THE LAST human soul that had never incarnated. So, being
rather pedantic, if there are no more souls that have never incarnated,
you are missing an important ingredient for fashioning a human
body suitable for the Christ to inhabit. I realize that what
I have said sounds a bit abstract, but if you really penetrate
each of these elements and their importance, you would be a long
way towards understanding the answer to your question. For reference
I would point you to Steiner's lecture cyce The Gospel of St.
Luke, especially the 5th lecture, of September 19th, 1909.
Daniel
............................................................................................................................
From: dottie zold
Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 8:13 pm
Subject: Re: Body of Christ
Daniel wrote:
Then there is the mystery of the two Jusus children - according
to Steiner one of them (the one in the Gospel of St. Luke) was
a soul that was incarnating for the first time, and more specifically,
was THE LAST human soul that had never incarnated.
Hey Daniel,
You must be kidding me! It's so funny going
back to reread certain passages in order to correlate a new understanding.
I find myself unfolding the pages that I felt were so important,
which now are things not so mysterious to my self anymore. .
AND, then, finding new things that didn't jump out at me on the
first reading and being blown away by them. So, needless to say
I think I will be looking at Mr. Luke again:)
Daniel:
So, being rather pedantic, if there are no more souls that
have never incarnated, you are missing an important ingredient
for fashioning a human body suitable for the Christ to inhabit.
I realize that what I have said sounds a bit abstract, but if
you really penetrate each of these elements and their importance,
you would be a long way towards understanding the answer to your
question.
Dottie
Well, what are your thoughts/understandings
on this? This just seems so amazing to me at the moment. What
are your thoughts of no more bodies? I never really contemplated,
although I have heard others discuss, the idea of new souls coming
into being and so forth. What about new souls? If it is as above
also below is that a real possibility? Can conditions change
as much there as well.
It's so funny that the idea of Christ not
reappearing as a body is tied to the fact that this was the last
human body.
Thanks,
Dottie
............................................................................................................................
From: Jo Ann Schwartz
Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 6:36 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
--- dottie zold wrote:
Daniel wrote:
Then there is the mystery of the two Jusus
children - according to Steiner one of them (the one in the Gospel
of St. Luke) was a soul that was incarnating for the first time,
and more specifically, was THE LAST human soul that had never
incarnated.
Hey Daniel,
You must be kidding me! It's so funny going back to reread certain
passages in order to correlate a new understanding. I find myself
unfolding the pages that I felt were so important, which now
are things not so mysterious to my self anymore. . AND, then,
finding new things that didn't jump out at me on the first reading
and being blown away by them. So, needless to say I think I will
be looking at Mr. Luke again:)
Dear Dottie,
Tom Mellett wrote an interesting essay on
the two Jesus children, which you can find on the web here: http://www.antroposofi.org/mellett/twojesus.htm
Cheers,
JoAnn
............................................................................................................................
From: dottie zold
Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 6:41 am
Subject: Re: Body of Christ
Dottie wrote:
It's so funny that the idea of Christ not reappearing as a
body is tied to the fact that this was the last human body.
Okay, can I start over? :))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
So, basically it is the idea that we have
come full circle round by the untouched aspect of Adam incarnating?
And where would Adam be without Eve? Where is the untouched aspect
of Eve in this story?
Thanks Christine,
Dottie...
p.s. it has been bandied about from time to
time the idea of a book that clarifies Dr. Steiners work for
new people wanting to check him out. I think you should approach
the AP people in charge of ideas like this and offer your very
real skill of bringing forth his words in a way that make total
sense to how one can 'experience' his words inside. Sincerely
you are truly wonderful at matching him in a way I have yet to
experience in almost four years on line. It almost is like the
missing link in a sense for those of us who can understand it
yet not connect it to physical words.
............................................................................................................................
From: golden3000997
Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 3:46 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Body of Christ
Way to go, Daniel!! Now THIS is really becoming
a wonderful "round-table" with lots of input. Anyone
for tea & cookies??
: ) Christine
............................................................................................................................
From: golden3000997
Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 4:49 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
'Morning Dottie,
(she mumbled over the rim of her coffee cup)
It's the last human SOUL, dear, not the last
human body. And, why not necessarily disagreeing, I think it
is a little more complex than that. To my understanding, the
"Adam Kadmon" that incarnated in the Luke Child was
a "new" soul, but a special one. It was a "part"
of the human soul that had never been allowed to incarnate before
because it was so pure and wonderful that God held it back lest
it be spoiled. Whether or not any more individual human spirits
can be created, I have no idea. But remember, this is all in
the context of an understanding that all individual human spirits
have been "present" from the moment of the Creation
within the Godhead. The rhythm of their coming and going from
Spirit to Matter has been complex and varied throughout the eons
and only a cosmic perspective like that
found in ""Occult Science" can give us even a
simplified picture of it.
Since human beings have sort of incarnated
"in shifts" - that is, various soul groups at various
times, it takes a very long-term perspective to see that they
have all been there all along. I think some have incarnated frequently
and others much less so. That is my understanding of "old
soul" vs "relatively new soul". The "old
souls" are people who jumped down real early and keep bouncing
back and forth all the time. "Young" souls are a bit
more hesitant and possibly less committed to the stream of Earth
evolution itself. As I understand it,
the reason we have such a "population explosion" in
the world today is not just because of material factors like
better nutrition and promiscuity, but because so many "soul
groups" have chosen to be here for the fireworks - the "last
battle" in a sense. Many soul groups who are here physically
were not here together before, which is
why it is so hard for them to get along. They just don't have
the same reference points, cosmically speaking.
Somewhere, maybe in "The Course of My
Life", Steiner speaks very personally about his relationship
with Goethe and says that even though he felt such a tremendous
warmth and connection to Goethe's life work, if he had actually
met him, he probably wouldn't have liked him. They belonged to
very different soul groups who had always incarnated alternately.
He says that this is quite common. So, if these soul groups are
all wanting to be here at the same time, in order
to participate in world events, it's no wonder that there is
so much pluralism. Sometimes I get the feeling that most people
basically are striving for the same thing, but they express it
so differently and want to go about it very differently. Steiner
even addresses this within the Anthroposophical Society itself
(see "Awakening to Community"). It's really funny,
I mean I laughed out loud the way he addressed the members in
those lectures! The "card-filers" versus the "go-ahead
and do it" factions within the Society.
Anyway, I think that is what we are struggling
with so much in the world today. On one hand, those who have
always striven to "follow the light" are here
to battle the Ahrimanic forces in a major way.
On the other hand, the lightworkers don't always get along because
they are from different streams of spiritual development. The
third battle (just HAD to find a trilogy here, somewhere) is,
to me, the struggle of each individual with his or her own karma,
trying to resolve so many issues from the past and "work
them out" - preparing for a new stage in spiritual development
on the earth.
Well, coffee's gone. Gotta go to work. Have
a great day!
: ) Christine
............................................................................................................................
From: golden3000997
Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 3:59 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Aw, shucks, 'tain't nuthin" : )
Actually, I used to have a wonderful little
intro book "Everything you always wanted to know about Anthroposophy"
I think was the title. It was by Paul Allen. Probably out of
print, but maybe not. I lent it out, didn't get it back. C'est
la vie!
I have a series of articles in which I have
tried to write as a Waldorf introduction. I think I have 3 uploaded
at the Steiner Group. The one on "The Waldorf Approach to
Reading" is the best, but I haven't uploaded it yet because
it is so big - 22 pages in print with lots of illustrations.
I have a web domain, but I can't figure out how to upload there,
either. Tarjei said that he would help me, but he's probably
mad at me over the Shirley issue. : )
I can send you a CD in the mail, if you want
to send me an address off list. I have lots of stories that haven't
seen the light for a long time. I have a set of St. Nicholas
stories posted at:
http://www.stnicholascenter.org/Brix?pageID=155
and I have some for this time of year called
"The Sky People" a re-telling of Native American tales
for my Kindergarten age children (takes a week to tell). I just
found a site for Native American stories and I plan to send them
there. I could e-mail them if you wish. I just sent them to Standing
Elk, a Lakota Sioux acquaintance of mine and a (gasp!) Spiritual
Teacher. I haven't studied his teachings, yet, but I've met him
and he's a nice guy.
I have thought of a book about RS Christology,
though. I feel very unqualified, not being a Christian Community
priest. There are many books by such people, especially Alfred
Heidenreich, Adam Bittleston, Emil Bock and Eleanor Merry that
are just wondeful. But I would like to write it for the "common
folk" in a way - like a re-telling of the story. I have
told it to some friends now and again and I think it makes an
impact. Mind you, I don't mean a treatise, just a re-telling
- kind of a radical thing like, "The Truth about Christianity."
Do you think it would get me on Oprah??? : ) (Ain't I a wascal??)
Also, I've got the next GREAT Disney flick!!!
It's all written as a play and could be adapted in a heartbeat.
I have a lot of issues with Disney, but boy, could I use the
money!!!
Don't I wish I were JK Rowling!!!!
Oh well, your turn - tell me about the projects
that you are involved with!!
By the way, did you ever check out the Kahil
Gibran website and "Jesus, Son of Man"? I think Kahlil
Gibran was to poetry as Steiner was to philosophy. I think Herman
Hesse had it in his novels. Pretty terrific stuff.
And don't forget "Jitterbug Perfume"
Tom Robbins' other books don't live up to it for me, but that
one is an all-time fav!!
You asked me about my poetry and I haven'
t forgotten. But I don't see a website for Sophia Blue. Is there
one yet? I'm sure that it would be fine. I've got more (surprise,
surprise) including one called "Incubus" that would
guarantee I'd "never teach in this town again." : )
Going to feed the kitties now. As Mrs. Slocum
says on "Are You Being Served" (classic Britcom) "It's
just not fair to my pussy."
PS - anyone out there into Britcoms??
Tell me more about what you do. : )
Christine
............................................................................................................................
From: dottie zold
Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 8:03 pm
Subject: Re: Body of Christ
Christine wrote:
I have a series of articles in which I have tried to write
as a Waldorf I can send you a CD in the mail, if you want to
send me an address off list. I have lots of stories that haven't
seen the light for a long time. I have a set of St. Nicholas
stories posted at:
http://www.stnicholascenter.org/Brix?pageID=155
Hi Christine,
I will check them out this week. And yes I
would like the cd and will email you off list.
Christine
and I have some for this time of year called "The Sky
People" a re-telling of Native American tales for my Kindergarten
age children (takes a week to tell). I just found a site for
Native American stories and I plan to send them there. I could
e-mail them if you wish. I just sent them to Standing Elk, a
Lakota Sioux acquaintance of mine and a (gasp!) Spiritual Teacher.
I haven't studied his teachings, yet, but I've met him and he's
a nice guy.
Dottie
Please email me them.
Christine
I have thought of a book about RS Christology, though. I feel
very unqualified, not being a Christian Community priest. There
are many books by such people, especially Alfred Heidenreich,
Adam Bittleston, Emil Bock and Eleanor Merry that are just wondeful.
Christine, we need one on the Feminine Mysteries.
Seriously. You have a great way of expressing things and the
books on Magdalene are making me ill. Well, I think I am coming
to a certain understanding regarding the writers who insist Jesus
and Mary were married and had a child and it is that they are
onto something but can't divine to the spiritual aspect of a
marriage.
I just bought a book by Starbird, I believe
is the name, and I recall another book of hers that had me just
besides myself. Yet this one speaks to the numbers of things
as well as the Feminine that make sense even if she ends it with
them having children:)
But I think you should seriously consider
this idea of writing a good Magdalene book or rather a Sophia
book. What is great about this idea is that Steiner has not touched
on this mystery for some reason and with your extensive knowledge
you are in the perfect moment to put this down on paper. Maybe
you could approach someone with your writings and so forth, maybe
a little treatment or whatever it is that one does in the real
writing world that will inspire them to take you on.
Christine
But I would like to write it for the "common folk"
in a way - like a re-telling of the story. I have told it to
some friends now and again and I think it makes an impact.
Dottie
Well, I think you naturally write for folks
like me while still getting it on in the Anthroposophia circles.
I would like to see a Feminine versus a book on approaching Steiner.
Christine
Also, I've got the next GREAT Disney flick!!! It's all written
as a play and could be adapted in a heartbeat. I have a lot of
issues with Disney, but boy, could I use the money!!!
Dottie
Well then do it. YOu talked about being in
the belly of the beast. That does not sound like to much fun.
Have fun. Create.
Christine
Oh well, your turn - tell me about the projects that you are
involved with!!
Dottie
Well, I work with homeless youth in Los Angeles.
I am doing a documentary on the oldest theatre group in Los Angeles.
I am in preproduction next month for a documentary on foster
children in Hollywood. I am partnering with my assistant director,
of my last short film actually my first:) called sister beatrice,
on a feature that has caught a few eyes called The Nature of
Things. I have started a small company called Sophia Blue that
will represent local artists that I believe can rock the world
with love and also my own work.
Christine
By the way, did you ever check out the Kahil Gibran website
and "Jesus, Son of Man"? I think Kahlil Gibran was
to poetry as Steiner was to philosophy. I think Herman Hesse
had it in his novels.
Dottie
I love Kahlil. His Song of Songs makes me
weep. I am wanting to make time to paint the Song of Songs yet
have been unable to.
Christine
You asked me about my poetry and I haven' t forgotten. But
I don't see a website for Sophia Blue. Is there one yet?
Dottie
It just moved from Sophia Productions and
should be up in a preliminary form till I can get my pictures
and such from the short movie. I would love for you to write
something on the feminine divine along the lines of your understandings
according to Steiners approach.
Christine
I'm sure that it would be fine. I've got more (surprise, surprise)
including one called "Incubus" that would guarantee
I'd "never teach in this town again." : )
Dottie
You are so funny! What sign are you?
So, you obviously love to write and know how
to so when will you give us something on the feminine divine:)
Love to you and happy turkey leg:)
dottie
............................................................................................................................
From: Daniel Hindes
Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 5:53 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Dottie,
Thanks for your comments. I speak out of my limited understanding,
in the hopes that that can be helpful to others. From my own
understanding of Steiner's christology, the importance of the
Jesus child of the Gospel of St. Luke (also referred to as the
Nathan Jesus, because Nathan is the ancestor where Luke's geneology
diverges from Matthew) is the special quality of the ether body
that it brought. Because the Ego of that Jesus was incarnating
for the first time, it had no karma, and therefore no consequences
of sin. Being, as it was, without the consequences of sin, it
was undamaged and possessed none of the weaknesses that sin causes.
Only thus could it even hope to contain the immense power that
a God would bring to a human incarnation, and allow a divine
ego inhabiting it to work in the world without hinderances and
distortions. Were Christ to attempt to inhabit a human being
with a less perfect ether body (say, mine, or for that matter
any other random person you might imagine), one consequence would
be that the intentions of the divine would not be able to be
properly expressed, because the instrument, in this consideration
specifically the etheric body, would be forever getting in the
way. I should note that in such a hypothetical case, the astral
and physical bodies would of course also be hinderances. To really
understand these things, you have to go into the details from
every angle.
For references to the above, see Rudolf Steiner's
lecture cycle on The Gospel of St. Luke, especially the 7th lecture
(September 21st 1909), and From Jesus to Christ, especially the
8th lecture (October 12th, 1911)
As to there being no more souls, I think this
concept too is best understood out of a deeper understanding
of the being of man as presented by Rudolf Steiner. In An Outline
of Occult Science (or Esoteric Science as it is being translated
today) Steiner describes the processes that have created the
human being as she/he is today. This is an incredibly long process,
begenning as it does, at the near edge of eternity, and is already
in the 4th major phase of development. If the process, as described
there, makes sense to you, it should also become evident that
more ego's could not simply pop into existance at divine whim.
Now if we are dealing with a finite number of egos, who were
all present in the beginning with God, then the question becomes
how they all subsequently developed. Steiner describes the process
in great detail, summarized in the book and Outline of Esoteric
Science, but filled out to a complete picture of extraordinary
richness in his lecture cycles, with virtually every lecture
between 1904 and 1911 adding at least some new details. To shorten
it all to one sentence, once the earth became suitable, the egos
started incarnating on it, some sooner, some later, so that by
the start of recorded history almost all had been incarnated
at least once. At that point, the few that were still comming
down for the first time bore extraordinary tasks, and the very
last to come down was the Jesus of the Gospel of St. Luke.
I hope that this is helpful to you, and stimulates
further research,
Daniel
............................................................................................................................
From: Tarjei Straume
Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:21 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
At 02:53 26.11.2003, Daniel wrote:
As to there being no more souls, I think
this concept too is best understood out of a deeper understanding
of the being of man as presented by Rudolf Steiner. In An Outline
of Occult Science (or Esoteric Science as it is being translated
today) Steiner describes the processes that have created the
human being as she/he is today. This is an incredibly long process,
begenning as it does, at the near edge of eternity, and is already
in the 4th major phase of development. If the process, as described
there, makes sense to you, it should also become evident that
more ego's could not simply pop into existance at divine whim.
Now if we are dealing with a finite number of egos, who were
all present in the beginning with God, then the question becomes
how they all subsequently developed. Steiner describes the process
in great detail, summarized in the book and Outline of Esoteric
Science, but filled out to a complete picture of extraordinary
richness in his lecture cycles, with virtually every lecture
between 1904 and 1911 adding at least some new details. To shorten
it all to one sentence, once the earth became suitable, the egos
started incarnating on it, some sooner, some later, so that by
the start of recorded history almost all had been incarnated
at least once. At that point, the few that were still comming
down for the first time bore extraordinary tasks, and the very
last to come down was the Jesus of the Gospel of St. Luke.
There is another riddle arising here, that
was once adressed by RS, but not adequately, as far as I remember.
It's an argument against the very reincarnation-idea in general:
During the last few centuries, the world population has exploded
so drastically that more souls are now incarnated than throughout
all the previous millennia put together. If this is the case,
the concept of reincarnation can only be sustained if we think
of new arrivals that have evolved on other planets.
Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/
............................................................................................................................
From: Kim Munch Michelsen
Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 3:03 am
Subject: RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
There is two more possibilities: Highly developed
animals moving up to man, and shorter distance between incarnations.
As of arrivals from other planets i think that Napoleon Bonaparte
has been mentioned. His mental capabilities was rather special.
Kim
............................................................................................................................
From: lightsearcher1
Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 4:20 pm
Subject: * An answer to the incarnation question
Tarjei:
You wrote:
During the last few centuries, the world
population has exploded so drastically that more souls are now
incarnated than throughout all the previous millennia put together.
I, for one, have never understood the complexification
that people so unnecessarily feel concerning this subject!
Do not despair, for this is the likely situation:
There exist in the universe MORE individual
spirit-souls than EVER have been PRESENT on the earth at one
time.
(The Alice Bailey material cites 60 billion
as a total number of human spirit/souls.)
Hence, there have always been many more "people"
out-of-incarnation at one time than there have been "people"
in-incarnation at that same time.
There has always been a greater "pool"
available "above" from which to draw from. --
If 60 billion is correct, then we formerly
have had about "1-in-20" incarnated at once (3 billion),
and now we are rapidly approaching a "1-in-9-in-incarnation"
scenario.
Today, we just have a greater PERCENTAGE of
the total that is in incarnation.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
By the way, the current world population is
estimated at:
-- 6 , 3 8 4 , 7 6 0 , 4 0 0 --
THE FOLLOWING LINK IS NOT FOR THE SQUEAMISH
!
This is freaking me out...
http://www.ibiblio.org/lunarbin/worldpop
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Regards,
LS/1
--- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com,
Tarjei Straume wrote:
There is another riddle arising here, that
was once adressed by RS, but not adequately, as far as I remember.
It's an argument against the very reincarnation-idea in general:
During the last few centuries, the world population has exploded
so drastically that more souls are now incarnated than throughout
all the previous millennia put together. If this is the case,
the concept of reincarnation can only be sustained if we think
of new arrivals that have evolved on other planets.
AND -
Kim wrote:
There is two more possibilities: Highly
developed animals moving up to man, and shorter distance between
incarnations.
............................................................................................................................
From: eyecueco
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 00:21:58 -0000
Subject: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
--- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com,
Tarjei Straume wrote:
There is another riddle arising here, that
was once adressed by RS, but not adequately, as far as I remember.
It's an argument against the very reincarnation-idea in general:
During the last few centuries, the world population has exploded
so drastically that more souls are now incarnated than throughout
all the previous millennia put together. If this is the case,
the concept of reincarnation can only be sustained if we think
of new arrivals that have evolved on other planets.
Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/
For what it's worth...
I was told by the man who guided my beginning
Steiner studies back in the 70s that we are now living in a time
period when the higher worlds are literally being emptied out
becaue there is a large number of souls from the Atlantean period
that were so traumatized by the destruction and horror experienced
that they have been unwilling incarnate and have held back. Now
that we are in the 5th epoch it's crunch time, so to speak. The
choice these souls face is to either come down and get on with
it before it is too late or else stay in the soul world and get
leftbehind.
Paulina
............................................................................................................................
From: lightsearcher1
Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 4:27 pm
Subject: * Re: An answer to the incarnation question
Paulina happened to post just after I did
and it kind of agrees...
Paulina wrote:
I was told by the man who guided my beginning
Steiner studies back in the 70s that we are now living in a time
period when the higher worlds are literally being emptied out...
............................................................................................................................
From: golden3000997
Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 4:41 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] * Re: An answer to the
incarnation question
My two cents!!!!!
I also heard the same thing in the 70's from
my mentors about the Atlantean population, many of whom were
instrumental as "hippies" trying to bring anti-materialism/
anti-war message to the world like it had never received before.
And before we get off on all kind of criticism of hippies, they
DID plant seeds - many of which have become quite respectable.
The population question is not one of simple
mathematics, that's for sure. And I am sure that the human cannot
fully comprehend the far reaches of humanity, whether 6 billion
or 60 billion. There's plenty of room for us on this planet now and plenty more to come when the planet
"blows up" and expands into the far reaches of the
Jupiter Sphere.
: ) Christine
............................................................................................................................
From: dottie zold
Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 6:02 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] * Re: An answer to the
incarnation question
And Eve? Where is she in this story of the
unfallen Adam?
dottie:)
Christine wrote:
The population question is not one of simple mathematics,
that's for sure. And I am sure that the human cannot fully comprehend
the far reaches of humanity, whether 6 billion or 60 billion.
There's plenty of room for us on this planet now and plenty more
to come when the planet "blows up" and expands into
the far reaches of the Jupiter Sphere.
............................................................................................................................
From: Daniel Hindes
Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 10:29 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] * Re: An answer to the
incarnation question
The stories in Genesis can be read from a number of different
levels. Thus, for example, a day of creation is not one rotation
of the earth around the sun - the sun had not even been created
at the end of the first day. So day is just an indication for
a period of time. Likewise, from one level, the story of the
creation of Adam and Eve is an expression of the experiences
that everyone went through at that time period, not just two
individuals. The requirements of the earth and of cosmic evolution
necessitated a division of the human form into two genders. As
a consequence, the egos wishing to incarnate had to limit themselves
to just one aspect of the human experience for one lifetime,
and through reincarnation alternate so as to balance and complement
the experiences gained as one gender through those of the other.
The spirit has no gender, only the body (physical and etheric)
has gender. The spirit moves from body to body (with rest in
between) from male to female and back. Eve is contained within
the unfallen Adam. In Emil Bock's translation of Genisis: "In
the Image of God they created him, male/female they created him."
(Another mystery - in the Hebrew version of Genesis, God is plural,
so it reads: "During the begenning, the Elohim (plural)
created the heaves and the earth..." Jehova, singular, only
comes later.) There is much profound knowledge hidden in plain
sight in these texts.
Daniel
----- Original Message -----
From: dottie zold
To: <anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2003 9:02 PM
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] * Re: An answer to the
incarnation question
And Eve? Where is she in this story of
the unfallen Adam?
dottie:)
Christine wrote:
The population question is not one of simple
mathematics, that's for sure. And I am sure that the human cannot
fully comprehend the far reaches of humanity, whether 6 billion
or 60 billion. There's plenty of room for us on this planet now
and plenty more to come when the planet "blows up"
and expands into the far reaches of the Jupiter Sphere.
............................................................................................................................
From: Richard Distasi
Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 2:35 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Tarjei wrote:
During the last few centuries, the world population has exploded
so drastically that more souls are now incarnated than throughout
all the previous millennia put together.
I have heard this also and I'm not so sure that I can accept
this at face value. When this is stated as true those who propose
this never really give any real demographic figures to back it
up. Let's not forget that in past centuries and millennia most
people did not live past fifty. People were constantly coming
into the world only to end up leaving very early in life. Who
actually knows the count of all of the peoples of the world over
the last let's say 10,000 years. I remember watching a documentary
about the life of Christ Jesus and they stated that at the time
of Christ there were 250 million people in the world. I thought
that was a very high number. I don't know where they got their
numbers but I'm assuming that someone did some research; whether
it is valid or not is another question. Again who really knows
what the world's population was at that time.
I did my own research and here is a link to world historical
population estimates which really discredit those who say that
there weren't enough people on this planet even over the millennia
to account for all of the souls alive today. Here is the URL:
http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/worldhis.html
Briefly, there are different studies done and the numbers are
shown in graphs. The estimates for the time of Christ range from
170M to 400M.
If it had been 250 million people at that time and the average
life expectancy was 50 years of age (and that is a high estimate
for those times) then that would be 500 million people who had
passed through this world in one century. If souls incarnated
only once in a millennium then that would be 5 billion souls
in the first millennium after Christ. Again if anyone has any
good data on historical world populations I would like to read
it.
Reincarnation used to take centuries before one returned to an
earthly life. Steiner had mentioned that in these times the influence
of Ahriman has a way of rushing the human soul/spirit back to
earth for another earthly incarnation.
rick distasi
............................................................................................................................
From: Daniel Hindes
Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 9:18 pm
Subject: Re: Body of Christ - question of world population
Richard,
You have surveyed the question quite comprehensively.
If I might add a few points...
The quote from Steiner on the population increase
is found in “The Evolution of the Earth and Man” in
lecture 4 (July 12th 1924). These were lectures to the construction
workers building the Goetheanum, in a somewhat free format where
he answered any questions they put to him. It was in the last
two months of his lecturing activity.
The truth is that even in
the most ancient times there was a vast population in China,
also in South America and in North America. There, too, in those
ancient times the land reached out to the Pacific Ocean. If that
is taken into account the population of the earth cannot be said
to have grown.
As to data on the past population of the earth,
and specifically to the Americas, it should be noted that the
consensus of modern understanding is continually changing, and
almost everything that was “known” in the 1970's has
been completely revised at least once since then. Just last year
an entirely new ancient civilization was discovered in Central
America. An excellent survey of the current understanding was
published in the March 2002 issue of The Atlantic by Charles
Mann, titled “1491”. It is available online at http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/2002/03/mann.htm
One point that the article discusses is that
some people consider the native population of the Americas in
1491 to have been as high as 120 million (higher than Europe),
and that by 1630 disease had reduced it by 95%. I think that
the population of the Americas in 0 or 600 BC could very well
be the same number, as the level of society in 1491 was not considerably
more technologically advanced.
More data: Columbus and the subsequent Spanish
killed as many as 15 million native in the West Indies in less
than 50 years.
Here is a summary by Ward Churchill from
http://www.transformcolumbusday.org/columbus_myth.htm
“The 1492 "voyage of discovery"
is, however, hardly all that is at issue. In 1493 Columbus returned
with an invasion force of 17 ships, appointed at his own request
by the Spanish Crown to install himself as "viceroy and
governor of [the Caribbean islands] and the mainland" of
America, a position he held until 1500. Setting up shop on the
large island he called Española (today Haiti and the Dominican
Republic), he promptly instituted policies of slavery (encomiendo)
and systematic extermination of the native Taino population.
Columbus' programs reduced Taino numbers from as many as 8 million
at the outset of his regime to about 3 million in 1496. Perhaps
100,000 were left by the time the governor departed. His policies,
however, remained, with the result that by 1514 the Spanish census
of the island showed barely 22,000 Indians remaining alive. In
1542, only 200 were recorded. Thereafter, they were considered
extinct, as were Indians throughout the Caribbean Basin, an aggregate
population which totaled more than 15 million at the point of
first contact with the Admiral of the Ocean Sea, as Columbus
was known.”
(Note: the source form much of the above is
Bartoleme de Las Casas, who worked with Columbus and wrote his
“Brief Account of the Devastation of the Indies” in
1542. Excerpts can be read at:
http://www.swarthmore.edu/SocSci/bdorsey1/41docs/02-las.html
I haven't looked at ancient Asia, but if we
accept for a moment Steiner's statement that it's population
is underestimated (and take the newer, higher number for the
Americas) we could push the upper number to perhaps the 600 to
800 million range. That is, it is not implausible to estimate
the population of the earth at the time of Christ at 800 million.
I'm not arguing that that number is widely accepted, only that
it is possible.
Daniel
............................................................................................................................
From: Kim Munch Michelsen
Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 4:00 am
Subject: RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
If we consider Atlantis and Lemuria as more
than philosophical entities, I would guess that they don't count
in the 'official' estimates.
Kim Michelsen
............................................................................................................................
From: dottie zold
Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 4:21 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ - question
of world population
Oh goodness Daniel, this is an absolutely
devastating piece. Just devastating. Thanks for sharing it and
how appropriate for me today living in America and our thanksgiving
day. Lets me put my heart to the Native Americans and offer up
my prayers which I shall do everyday to this group of people
who's blood has been shed unmercifullesly. Jeez.
dottie
Daneil wrote:
(Note: the source form much of the above is Bartoleme de Las
Casas, who worked with Columbus and wrote his "Brief Account
of the Devastation of the Indies" in 1542. Excerpts can
be read at:
http://www.swarthmore.edu/SocSci/bdorsey1/41docs/02-las.html
............................................................................................................................
From: golden3000997
Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 10:19 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ - question
of world population
Happy Thanksgiving Everyone!!!
What better day to discuss what European people
have done to the original population in the "Americas".
Thank you so much Daniel, for all of your insights and especially this one. This is a subject very close
to my heart and in fact, I have been reading on it intensively
lately. I mentioned this book a little while ago "A People's
History of the United States" by Howard Zinn, which I am
3/4 of the way through. The chapters on Columbus are almost word
for word the quote that Daniel gave us. Mr. Zinn probably was
using the same source. That's why I made this comment previously,
(11/6):
***********
What would this country be like today if we
had met the native populations in the same spirit that they,
for the most part, met us? What if European man had come only
searching for freedom and new experiences of life, rather than
gold and slaves (Columbus' expressed intentions and no other!)
I refuse to believe that Columbus was an initiate, and if he
really was, then I do not want to be associated with any initiate!
What WOULD this country today be like if we
hadn't committed unimaginable terrorism on millions of unsuspecting
human beings, if the very ground beneath our feet was not still
running with psychic blood? What kind of "New World"
would we have found?? Utopia? Maybe not, but something far better
than what we live with now.
************
Makes me feel that this country is standing
on its head, condemning others in the world for "human rights
violations" while standing in a psychic pool of blood.
On a brighter note, though, I ordered a lot
of books on Native American subjects from Alibris, some that
I had years ago but lost along the way and I am also deep into these. There are two which are reports
of discussions held in the early 70s between
representatives from the Myrin Institute and Native American
leaders. The first transcripts that we have of such discussions
since the colonial days. The books are long out of print, but
you can get them through Alibris.
TITLE: Respect for Life: the Traditional Upbringing
of American Indian Children
AUTHOR: Morey, Sylvester M. (Editor); Gilliam, Olivia L.
PRICE: 9.90
TITLE: Can the Red Man Help the White Man?
: a Denver Conference
AUTHOR: Morey, Sylvester M. Ed.
PRICE: 9.45
The other titles on this order:
TITLE: Our Fathers Had Powerful Songs (Rare
& Beautiful Children's book)
AUTHOR: Belting, Natalia.
PRICE: 4.95
TITLE: Indian Givers: How the Indians of the
Americas Transformed the World
AUTHOR: Weatherford, Jack
PRICE: 2.95
TITLE: American Indian Myths and Legends
AUTHOR: Erdoes, Richard And Ortiz, Alfonso
PRICE: 2.95
TITLE: Sacred Pipe Black Elk's Account of
the Seven Rites
AUTHOR: Brown, Joseph E. ; Black.
PRICE: 2.95
TITLE: Native American Testimony: a Chronicle
of Indian-White Relations from Prophecy to the Present
AUTHOR: Nabokov, Peter (Editor), And Deloria, Vine, Jr
PRICE: 2.95
TITLE: Thirteen Moons on Turtle's Back: A
Native American Year of Moons (beautifully illustrated children's
book)
AUTHOR: Bruchac, Joseph, and London, Jonathan
PRICE: 6.29
Native Land
She strides across the land each day
From sacred place to sacred place
What does she see?
What does she know?
Giant woman of Light
Great birds circle along her way
Spiraling the outline of her form
What do they hear?
What do they need?
Vortex path of Spirit
All those to whom our spirits pray
Guardians of this native land
What do you teach?
What do you speak?
Ancient words of Power
We who witness truth today
Must feel and see our mother's wounds
What will we do?
What will we say?
Human rite of Healing
Christine Natale 2002 all rights reserved
Written from a vision that Standing Elk had
when he was in Miami and saw "the Grandmother" over
the Miami River.
............................................................................................................................
From: Tarjei Straume
Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 10:57 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ - question
of world population
At 19:19 27.11.2003, Christine wrote:
Happy Thanksgiving Everyone!!!
How do you keep a turkey in suspense?
Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/
..........................................................................................................................................
From: golden3000997
Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 11:04 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ - question
of world population
DO TELL!!! : ) LOL
..........................................................................................................................................
From: Tarjei Straume
Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 11:37 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ - question
of world population
At 20:04 27.11.2003, Christine wrote:
Happy Thanksgiving Everyone!!!
I asked:
How do you keep a turkey in suspense?
Christine:
DO TELL!!! : ) LOL
Later.
Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/
..........................................................................................................................................
From: golden3000997
Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 11:52 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ - question
of world population
As Michael just said - "Takes one to
know one!" LOL!!
..........................................................................................................................................
From: Tarjei Straume
Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 2:07 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
At 11:35 26.11.2003, Rick wrote:
Reincarnation used to take centuries before
one returned to an earthly life. Steiner had mentioned that in
these times the influence of Ahriman has a way of rushing the
human soul/spirit back to earth for another earthly incarnation.
Are you saying that a shorter time than 'centuries'
- i.e. the equivalent of time elapsed between birth and death
- is the time now spent in the spiritual world by normal people
like you and me? To me, that seems highly unlikely, although
popular New Age literature has been presenting reincanation as
if it's a matter of jumping in and out of bodies. And the curious
thing is that some people who have undergone past life regression
actually remember jumping in and out of bodies like that.
It's true that Ahriman seeks to reduce the
amount of time spent between death and rebirth, because he wants
people to remember as little as possible, preferably nothing,
of the spiritual world. And he does succeed with those who are
heavily influenced by him. Take into consideration a full mature
life reaching an age between 70 and 90, and the subsequent journey
through kamaloka (purgatory), the Zodiac, the planetary spheres
and the hierarchies and so on, plus the search for the most suitable
parents etc. To the best of my recollection, Helena Blavatsky
is talking about 600 years here, and I believe RS is corroborating
a minimum of 300 years, at least in the case of people reaching
old age. Initiates and avatars may be exceptions here, especially
when they are needed on the physical plane for specific tasks,
but in the case of normal people, it is a hindrance to be cut
short on the spiritual journey between incarnations like that.
It's possible, of course, that the number
of people whose existence on the other side is cut off by Ahriman
is on the rise as Ahriman's incarnation is approaching and his
influence increasing. But most of those affected by this, I believe,
are our notorious troublemakers: War criminals and similar amoral
individuals, carriers of the Sorath stream, cold-blooded bureaucrats,
the makers of weapons of mass destruction in the Pentagon and
elsewhere, child exploiters. RS once said that criminals sleep
so well because they have no conscience, and I seem to recall
that this has something to do with being unconscious between
death and rebirth, remembering nothing of it, and coming back
at record speed.
So all I can say that if there are many people
spending less than centuries between incarnations today, I certainly
hope I'm not among them. I want my half millennium this time
too, hopefully skipping Ahriman's incarnation. (I'll help clean
up after he's been here.)
Cheers,
Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/
............................................................................................................................
From: Daniel Hindes
Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 9:35 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
I am more inclined towards the second possibility
than the first. An understanding of the nature animals from the
Anthroposophical perspective seems to preclude first. That is,
each animal is merely a limb of it's species, the species as
a whole is the body of one ego, that ego being the group soul
of that species. Or, as Steiner puts it in Theosophy, each human
being is equivalent to a whole animal species. In Theosophy this
is one of Steiner's four premises in his "proof" of
reincarnation; thus the point is rather central to the anthroposophical
view of man. Steiner did talk of other beings taking the place
of the human ego in bodies, but I can't remember off hand exactly
where that came up. I can look it up if anyone really wants to
know.
The only reference to arrivals from other planets that I have
read in Steiner all refer to the Lemurian period and earlier.
These were souls that had stayed off earth prior to the moon
separation. That is, they were incarntating on earth, they withdrew
to the planets for a while, then they resumed incarnating, all
before the end of the Lemurian period. For reference see Rudolf
Steiner's lecture cycle on Genesis, 9th lecture (August 25th
1910). Now there may be more indications that I am not aware
of, so I would very much like to hear of them if you could point
me in the right direction.
Regarding Napoleon, I have found Steiner strangely silent on
him, so if Steiner somewhere speaks of him beyond a general characteristic
of his temperment, I would very much like to know where.
Daniel
----- Original Message -----
From: Kim Munch Michelsen
Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2003 6:03 AM
Subject: RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
There is two more possibilities: Highly
developed animals moving up to man, and shorter distance between
incarnations.
As of arrivals from other planets i think that Napoleon Bonaparte
has been mentioned. His mental capabilities was rather special.
Kim
............................................................................................................................
From: Tarjei Straume
Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 12:58 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
At 06:35 27.11.2003, Daniel wrote:
Regarding Napoleon, I have found Steiner
strangely silent on him, so if Steiner somewhere speaks of him
beyond a general characteristic of his temperment, I would very
much like to know where.
To the best of my recollection, RS said of
Napoleon that his individuality couldn't be detected claivoyantly
as if he weren't properly human or something. If anyone has a
reference here, it would be interesting to see.
Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/
............................................................................................................................
From: Kim Munch Michelsen
Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:02 am
Subject: RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
As I have understood it, man has earlier been part of a group
ego (and are still, until we have astral sight), but have/are
developing individuality.
The animals has not reached the state where an individuality
can develop. But their development is not stopped, it would be
against the whole idea if development could stop. Some animals
go fully back to the group ego, after deads, other animals don't
(ie. apes, and others), which means that they are on different
levels of development. The primary source for animal development
is man, as the primary source of plant development is animals,
and the primary source of mineral development is plants. The
influence from man gives animals an input which it can not get
in the nature, and which, slowly, develops the possibility to
be born with physical bodies where the necessary organs for individuality
is contained.
Kim
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Hindes
Sent: 27. november 2003 06:35
To: anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
I am more inclined towards the second possibility
than the first. An understanding of the nature animals from the
Anthroposophical perspective seems to preclude first. That is,
each animal is merely a limb of it's species, the species as
a whole is the body of one ego, that ego being the group soul
of that species. Or, as Steiner puts it in Theosophy, each human
being is equivalent to a whole animal species. In Theosophy this
is one of Steiner's four premises in his "proof" of
reincarnation; thus the point is rather central to the anthroposophical
view of man. Steiner did talk of other beings taking the place
of the human ego in bodies, but I can't remember off hand exactly
where that came up. I can look it up if anyone really wants to
know.
The only reference to arrivals from other planets that I have
read in Steiner all refer to the Lemurian period and earlier.
These were souls that had stayed off earth prior to the moon
separation. That is, they were incarntating on earth, they withdrew
to the planets for a while, then they resumed incarnating, all
before the end of the Lemurian period. For reference see Rudolf
Steiner's lecture cycle on Genesis, 9th lecture (August 25th
1910). Now there may be more indications that I am not aware
of, so I would very much like to hear of them if you could point
me in the right direction.
Regarding Napoleon, I have found Steiner strangely silent on
him, so if Steiner somewhere speaks of him beyond a general characteristic
of his temperment, I would very much like to know where.
Daniel
............................................................................................................................
From: Daniel Hindes
Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 9:38 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Atlantis predates the last great ice age (which
ended with the retreat of the glaciers 15,000 years ago), and
lemuria is much further back still. I have not seen any population
estimtes that go back further than 10,000 years.
Daniel
----- Original Message -----
From: Kim Munch Michelsen
Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2003 7:00 AM
Subject: RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
If we consider Atlantis and Lemuria as
more than philosophical entities, I would gues that they don't
count in the 'official' estimates.
Kim Michelsen
............................................................................................................................
From: Daniel Hindes
Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 9:44 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Paulina,
I find this idea very interesting, though I'm afraid I haven't
encountered it, or anything to support it, in what I have read
in Steiner so far. Do you or anyone else have a citation to support
this so I can look into it further?
Daniel
For what it's worth...
I was told by the man who guided my beginning Steiner studies
back in the 70s that we are now living in a time period when
the higher worlds are literally being emptied out becaue there
is a large number of souls from the Atlantean period that were
so traumatized by the destruction and horror experienced that
they have been unwilling incarnate and haveheld back. Now that
we are in the 5th epoch it's crunch time, so to speak. The choice
these souls face is to either come down and get on with it before
it is too late or else stay in the soul world and get left behind.
Paulina
............................................................................................................................
From: eyecueco
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 09:08:53 -0000
Subject: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
--- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com,
Daniel Hindes wrote:
Paulina,
I find this idea very interesting, though I'm afraid I haven't
encountered it, or anything to support it, in what I have read
in Steiner so far. Do you or anyone else have a citation to support
this so I can look into it further?
No, Daniel, I don't.
Perhaps that might be some reference, but, I don't have it. I
am sharing what was told me by the First Class Reader who guided
my beginning Steiner studies. Apparently, from what Christine
has shared, this idea on the Atlantean souls seems to be a familiar
one with a lot of the old guard anthroposohists.
Remember, not everything Steiner shared is
in his books and lectures. Many interesting things were shared
by Steiner in private conversations and have made their way into
the biographies of those who knew Steiner personally, or have
been handed down word of mouth from in an inner-circle, so to
speak.
It must be left to the individual to accept
or reject such statements. What I shared works for me because
I could look out and see some of what I had been told at work
in the world. Like, Christine, I understood these young souls
to have been something along the lines of the flower children,
but, unlike Christine, I understood from my teacher that these
souls were causing difficulties in the world due to their having
missed out on lessons they would have learned if they had not
lagged behind in their incarnations.
The reason we incarnate is to learn something that has not been
learned before. We don't incarnate to learn the same lesson over
and over. Each time period offers something needed. The lesson
learned from incarnating in Greece, for instance, cannot be learned
now. If it wasn't learned it is a lesson lost. The lesson in
the past of struggling to be able to _distinguish_ Good from
Evil, is a very different task from that in front of us now of
learning how to to transform the Evil into a Good.
The task in the Middle Ages of struggling
to distinguish Truth from Falshood is not the task assigned to
the incarnated soul today. Imo, much of what is going on in the
world that is misunderstood and misrepresented by so well meaning
individuals is a result of souls unable to take up the lessons
an incarnation offered them. A example of this, again, imo, is
how so many tender hearted anthropops tend to see the current
world situation in light of a 6th Epoch of brotherhood that is
not even close to becoming a reality.
Sorry, I can't help you, Daniel.
I think one has to live into what they read and hear, and wait
to see if it fit, if it works for them, written refrences or
not. If something doesn't bring up an inner resonance within
me, or if I can't make work and fit into what I observe in the
world around me, then I don't muchcare who said what it or where
or when. Therefore, I don't tend to go around collecting a lot
of encyclopedic references. ;-)
Paulina
............................................................................................................................
From: Daniel Hindes
Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 10:06 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
So, basically it is the idea that we have
come full circle round by the untouched aspect of Adam incarnating?
And where would Adam be without Eve? Where is the untouched aspect
of Eve in this story?
Adam Kadmon (a name not found in the Bible,
but in Jewish esoteric tradition) represents humanity before
gender (and if it makes you feel any better, Steiner said that
the primal human form before the division into sexes generally
more resembled the female - I can find the lecture if you would
like). Thus it is NOT the untouched aspect of the post-Fall MALE
Adam that is related to the Nathan Jesus, rather, it is the pre-fallen
pre-gender complete human (which, just to confuse you is also
has Adam in it's name) that is related to the Jesus of Luke's
Gospel. So the answer to your question "Where was Eve?"
is: still inside Adam, still a part of her/him. They weren't
separate yet. Only later was there a separation, where in Genesis
it is told how God made Eve out of Adam's rib.
I hope this helps,
Daniel
............................................................................................................................
From: dottie zold
Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 4:24 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Daniel
So the answer to your question "Where was Eve?"
is: still inside Adam, still a part of her/him. They weren't
separate yet.
Hi Daniel,
So this was the ChristSophia, true?
............................................................................................................................
From: dottie zold
Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 10:24 am
Subject: Re: Body of Christ
Daniel wrote:
Adam Kadmon (a name not found in the Bible, but in Jewish
esoteric tradition) represents humanity before gender (and if
it makes you feel any better, Steiner said that the primal human
form before the division into sexes generally more resembled
the female - I can find the lecture if you would like).
Hi Daniel,
Yes please point me to the lecture. Another
thought comes up for me regarding this Adam Kadmon that I would
like to look at if you don't mind. I shall just give a moment
of background of my own thought so I can get a fix on this concept.
Okay until now I have come to the idea that
we are all God. Each of us is this piece that makes up the whole.
I come to the idea of no hiearchy which usually gets people in
a bit of an uproar to a certain extent beings many things seem
to show a hiearchy especially in Steiners work and of course
many others.
My point is what is this Kadmons relationship
to God? Because if I go to the place of thinking that this Kadmon
is actually a unity of all the souls that exist in our Earth
existance than I can see possibly a hiearchy outside of itself:
because God and the Angeles would be outside of it yet within
the whole Cosmic world.
So, what is the relationship of Kadmon to
God and to the Cosmos if we do indeed hold them to be seperate
yet one. I wonder the shape of a Kadmon I wonder if it is a fish:)
Also do you know in what Jewish essoteric
book I can find this in?
Thanks,
Dottie
P.S. I think Sophia is in that which you note
below. And in this is the mystery of how the male female divine
presence was present on Earth at Golgotha. imo. I wish we could
develope this stream a little more here at A-T.
Daniel wrote:
Thus it is NOT the untouched aspect of the post-Fall MALE
Adam that is related to the Nathan Jesus, rather, it is the pre-fallen
pre-gender complete human (which, just to confuse you is also
has Adam in it's name) that is related to the Jesus of Luke's
Gospel. So the answer to your question "Where was Eve?"
is: still inside Adam, still a part of her/him. They weren't
separate yet. Only later was there a separation, where in Genesis
it is told how God made Eve out of Adam's rib.
I hope this helps,
Daniel
............................................................................................................................
From: Daniel Hindes
Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 4:50 pm
Subject: Working with supersensible knowledge
Remember, not everything Steiner shared
is in his books and lectures. Many interesting things were shared
by Steiner in private conversations and have made their way into
the biographies of those who knew Steiner personally, or have
been handed down word of mouth from in an inner-circle, so to
speak.
Paulina,
I have found it important in spiritual research to know who the
speaker of a given statement is, who stands behind it. This,
to me, is an integral part of an idea, an inseparable part of
it's truth. In mathematics a statement may stand entirely on
it's own merits, however this is due to humanity having developed
to such a state as we are capable of thinking logically without
error, and because the axioms of mathematical discourse are self-evident.
With spiritual perception, humanity in general, and myself specifically,
have not yet developed to the state where spiritual axioms are
self-evident. I do not see with clarity facts such would, for
example, illuminate the exact circumstances of other peoples
previous incarnations. I can think logically about the implications
of one or more such facts as are revealed to me, but the fact
itself I have to either accept or reject without the absolute
certainty that I can apply to numbers. From here we leave the
realm of the self-evident for the realm of judgment. When I have
to judge the relative worth of an idea, I recognize that logic
is insufficient. Emotions play a large role, specifically whether
we like or dislike the idea. There is nothing wrong with this.
It is, in fact, the direction towards which we are all evolving.
As we advance and purify our inner life (transform our astral
body, in the anthroposophical parlance) or feelings will become
progressively more reliable as a guide to judgment. Indeed, when
the work on that stage is finished, our feelings will become
an organ of perception, as reliable as the eye, only what we
will see with them is the spiritual world. But since I am not
yet so advanced as to be able to rely on my feelings for absolute
certainty in judgment, I must consider other factors, as well
as live with the uncertainty of never really knowing for sure.
Among the other factors I include the source of a statement and
it's context. Who said it and what were they trying to accomplish.
Knowing who the speaker is helps me in judging their current
statement, as I can get a general feeling for the import of the
current statement based on what I might know of previous statements.
For example, with Rudolf Steiner, everything of his that I have
been able to test I have been able to verify. Therefore, he has
built up a fair degree of credibility in my estimation, so when
I read a statement of his that at first seems unlikely to me,
I withhold judgment in deference of his track record. This is
not the same as saying that I believe everything he says, or
that I believe he is infallible, only that I will make a special
effort to understand, which I might not for another speaker.
Now I am fully aware that not all of Steiner's
statements and indications are contained within the Complete
Works. And I have read most of the published material by his
students. Published materials by Steiner's students I feel to
be generally reliable, as most were level headed people who were
genuinely striving to present his statements faithfully. So "Rittlemeyer
says that Steiner told him..." is nearly as reliable to
me as reading it in "a stenographic record, unrevised by
the lecturer" (a lecture cycle), both of which are second
to Steiner's own written words in his published works.
A third category of statements are "Someone
told me that someone told them that Steiner said..." Here
you have the danger of the telephone effect, over 70 to 100 years
and three or more people. In addition, the motives of someone
who felt it necessary to withhold a statement of Steiner's, not
just at the time, but for decades afterward, and then chose not
to publish it, but instead to tell it to another person, who
then retells it to us, are to me somewhat suspect. Why did they
not write a short piece for one of the many anthroposphical journals,
titled "My interview with Rudolf Steiner?" Were they
unsure of their memory, or whether they comprehended it properly?
Did they feel that it was too important, too special, to be shared
with other anthroposophists (the concept of a privileged "inner
circle" which, I would maintain, is inimical to the spirit
of Rudolf Steiner's whole mission)? Why did they not want their
name attached to it? Had they mixed their own insights with the
initial idea to such a degree that they could not separate their
own idea from Steiner's? The answers to these questions would
be important to me in considering how to value the statement
itself. And especially if the statement is a bold and significant
departure from the remainder of Steiner's work. Whose statement
is it, when it is at this point so far removed from the purported
author?
I am reminded at this point of the early history
of Buddhism (as explained by Alan Watts in his "The Way
of Zen"). Early followers of Buddha, and even monks writing
hundreds of years later, felt that any conception of Buddhism
they really owed to Buddha. Without Buddha, they would not have
been able to write their works. So out of the purest sense of
individual modesty, they did not put their own name to it. Buddha
inspired them, so Buddha was the author. For this reason, it
is nearly impossible to determine what, if anything, Buddha actually
said in a literal, word for word sense, or even how close a text
is historically to the life of Buddha.
So this is why I am such a stickler for sources
and citation in Anthroposophy. Not that I am against further
independent research, or the striving of individual anthroposophists
to explain the present and recent history, or any other point
of inquiry not answered by Steiner during his lifetime, from
out of their own insight. I only request that they attach their
own name to their own efforts, and resist the temptation to imply
that their work is so implicit in Steiner's that his name somehow
should be attached to it. Steiner's name has so much authority
for so many people, that there is a great temptation for me to
state "Steiner says..." and then retell from memory
my impression of a lecture I might have read years ago. But who
is actually speaking at that point? I am. So in reality, "My
impression of what Steiner says is that..." or "I remember
reading in Steiner that..." is both more honest and more
truthful than "Steiner says..."
That's my statement of philosophy, where I
am coming from.
Daniel Hindes
............................................................................................................................
From: dottie zold
Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 9:42 am
Subject: Re: Body of Christ
Hi Daniel,
Do you recall what Steiner book or lecture
speaks to this below? Sorry to repeat my self and I will start
in Steiners Genesis if you do not remember where you found this.
Thanks,
Dottie
Daniel wrote:
So the answer to your question "Where was Eve?"
is: still inside Adam, still a part of her/him. They weren't
separate yet. Only later was there a separation, where in Genesis
it is told how God made Eve out of Adam's rib.
I hope this helps,
Daniel
............................................................................................................................
From: Daniel Hindes
Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 8:10 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Kim,
I understand what you are saying, I just don't recognize it as
Steiner. If you have some references, I would be very interested
in looking into it further.
Daniel
----- Original Message -----
From: Kim Munch Michelsen
To: anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 6:02 AM
Subject: RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
As I have understood it, man has earlier
been part of a group ego (and are still, until we have astral
sight), but have/are developing individuality.
The animals has not reached the state where an individuality
can develop. But their development is not stopped, it would be
against the whole idea if development could stop. Some animals
go fully back to the group ego, after deads, other animals don't
(ie. apes, and others), which means that they are on different
levels of development. The primary source for animal development
is man, as the primary source of plant development is animals,
and the primary source of mineral development is plants. The
influence from man gives animals an input which it can not get
in the nature, and which, slowly, develops the possibility to
be born with physical bodies where the necessary organs for individuality
is contained.
Kim
............................................................................................................................
From: Kim Munch Michelsen
Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 11:05 am
Subject: RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Daniel,
It is not allways simple to remember where you have read a piece
of RS (It was not his intension to make an encyklopedia, but
to influence the mental bodies of his readers by forcing them
to think), but it should be in some of his rosicrusian teachings,
where it most natural belongs.
Regards,
Kim
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Hindes
Sent: 27. november 2003 17:10
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Kim,
I understand what you are saying, I just don't recognize it as
Steiner. If you have some references, I would be very interested
in looking into it further.
Daniel
............................................................................................................................
From: Kim Munch Michelsen
Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 12:34 pm
Subject: RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Daniel
There are some indications in Manifestations of Karma Lecture
2, May 17, 1910, Hamburg KARMA AND THE ANIMAL KINGDOM:
'Therefore with the progress of evolution there will come again
through the consciousness of karma a better relationship between
man and the animal kingdom than there is now, especially in the
west. There will come a treatment of the animals whereby man
will again uplift those he has pushed down. '
Regards,
Kim
............................................................................................................................
From: Tarjei Straume
Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 12:13 pm
Subject: RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
At 21:34 27.11.2003, Kim wrote:
There are some indications in Manifestations
of Karma Lecture 2, May 17,1910, Hamburg KARMA AND THE ANIMAL
KINGDOM: 'Therefore with the progress of evolution there will
come again through the consciousness of karma a better relationship
between man and the animal kingdom than there is now, especially
in the west. There will come a treatment of the animals whereby
man will again uplift those he has pushed down. '
It seems to me that some aspects of the animal
protection movements may be an interesting step in this direction,
although other aspects are rather extreme. It was kind of funny
in a cruel sort of way, though, when some animal rights activists
kidnapped a farmer or butcher or something and branded his ass
to make him feel what it was like.
Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/
............................................................................................................................
From: Daniel Hindes
Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 8:12 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Dottie,
I'd have to do some more investigation to answer that fully.
Sorry.
Daniel
----- Original Message -----
From: dottie zold
Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 7:24 AM
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Daniel
So the answer to your question "Where
was Eve?" is: still inside Adam, still a part of her/him.
They weren't separate yet.
Hi Daniel,
So this was the ChristSophia, true?
............................................................................................................................
From: dottie zold
Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 10:04 am
Subject: Re: Body of Christ
Hi Daniel,
I do not know how it could not be ChristSophia
if your thought of Eve inside of Adam holds water. Also do you
have a certain book that speaks to this point.
Maybe Bradford will give us a shout, I believe
he has some work on this. Bradford?
Peace,
dottie
Daniel wrote:
Dottie,
I'd have to do some more investigation to answer that fully.
Sorry.
Daniel
So the answer to your question "Where
was Eve?" is: still inside Adam, still a part of her/him.
They weren't separate yet.
Dottie
So this was the ChristSophia, true?
............................................................................................................................
From: Richard Distasi
Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 5:20 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Steiner had mentioned (and please forgive
me for not citing the source) that the next wave of Beings to
pass through their stage of Egohood would not be animals as Daniel
points out but rather they would be the nature spirits: undines,
sylphs, salamanders and gnomes.
rick distasi
----- Original Message -----
From: Daniel Hindes
Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 12:35 AM
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
I am more inclined towards the second possibility
than the first. An understanding of the nature animals from the
Anthroposophical perspective seems to preclude first. That is,
each animal is merely a limb of it's species, the species as
a whole is the body of one ego, that ego being the group soul
of that species. Or, as Steiner puts it in Theosophy, each human
being is equivalent to a whole animal species. In Theosophy this
is one of Steiner's four premises in his "proof" of
reincarnation; thus the point is rather central to the anthroposophical
view of man. Steiner did talk of other beings taking the place
of the human ego in bodies, but I can't remember off hand exactly
where that came up. I can look it up if anyone really wants to
know.
The only reference to arrivals from other planets that I have
read in Steiner all refer to the Lemurian period and earlier.
These were souls that had stayed off earth prior to the moon
separation. That is, they were incarntating on earth, they withdrew
to the planets for a while, then they resumed incarnating, all
before the end of the Lemurian period. For reference see Rudolf
Steiner's lecture cycle on Genesis, 9th lecture (August 25th
1910). Now there may be more indications that I am not aware
of, so I would very much like to hear of them if you could point
me in the right direction.
Regarding Napoleon, I have found Steiner strangely silent on
him, so if Steiner somewhere speaks of him beyond a general characteristic
of his temperment, I would very much like to know where.
Daniel
............................................................................................................................
From: Kim Munch Michelsen
Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 8:19 am
Subject: RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Hey Rick
You are problably right in the way that on the next planetary
stage they will be the primary contenders for Egohood, but the
animals is of our evolutionary wave, and they are on all levels
of development, where many will enter to our stage by help from
us (we will take the role as Group Ego for individual animals).
The Salamanders is a result of certain animals life, and can
therefore, not as a wave, get egohood before the animals.
See:
http://wn.elib.com/Steiner/Lectures/19080607p01.html
With all the apes, fragments are detached in each case from the
group-soul. It is the same with certain kinds of amphibians and
birds; in the kangaroo, for example, something is kept back from
the group-soul. Now everything in the warm-blooded animals that
remains behind in this way becomes an elemental being of the
kind we call a salamander.
Regards,
Kim
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Distasi
Sent: 28. november 2003 14:21
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Steiner had mentioned (and please forgive
me for not citing the source) that the next wave of Beings to
pass through their stage of Egohood would not be animals as Daniel
points out but rather they would be the nature spirits: undines,
sylphs, salamanders and gnomes.
rick distasi
............................................................................................................................
From: Richard Distasi
Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 5:28 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
I have to agree with Daniel on this. Steiner certainly mentions
the return of souls from the Lemurian period but I don't recall
him saying the same for the Atlantean period. I would also be
interested in getting something on Steiner about this. I vaguely
remember him saying something about the locusts in the Book of
revelation in his lecture cycle to the CC priests (Sept. 1924)
in which he says that there are souls coming into earthly incarnation
who have very little in the way of Ego development. Obviously
these souls have been out of earthly incarnation for a long time.
Maybe this is the connection to what is being referred here to
the lost Atlantean souls though I don't recall him making the
connection of these souls to the Atlantean catastrophe.
rick distasi
----- Original Message -----
From: Daniel Hindes
Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 12:44 AM
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Paulina,
I find this idea very interesting, though I'm afraid I haven't
encountered it, or anything to support it, in what I have read
in Steiner so far. Do you or anyone else have a citation to support
this so I can look into it further?
Daniel
For what it's worth...
I was told by the man who guided my beginning Steiner studies
back in the 70s that we are now living in a time period when
the higher worlds are literally being emptied out becaue there
is a large number of souls from the Atlantean period that were
so traumatized by the destruction and horror experienced that
they have been unwilling incarnate and haveheld back. Now that
we are in the 5th epoch it's crunch time, so to speak. The choice
these souls face is to either come down and get on with it before
it is too late or else stay in the soul world and get left behind.
Paulina
............................................................................................................................
From: Richard Distasi
Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 5:36 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Tarjei,
I thought that Steiner was referring to Casper Hauser who was
thought to be a progeny of Napoleon when he made this comment.
rick distasi
----- Original Message -----
From: Tarjei Straume
To: anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 3:58 AM
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
At 06:35 27.11.2003, Daniel wrote:
Regarding Napoleon, I have found Steiner
strangely silent on him, so if Steiner somewhere speaks of him
beyond a general characteristic of his temperment, I would very
much like to know where.
To the best of my recollection, RS said
of Napoleon that his individuality couldn't be detected claivoyantly
as if he weren't properly human or something. If anyone has a
reference here, it would be interesting to see.
Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/
............................................................................................................................
From: Tarjei Straume
Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 12:08 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
At 14:36 28.11.2003, Rick wrote:
Tarjei,
I thought that Steiner was referring to Casper Hauser who was
thought to be a progeny of Napoleon when he made this comment.
I don't recall the mention of Caspar Hauser
in connection with the remark about Napoleon, so I was a little
bewildered by this question of yours. It seems to have been taken
care of by Christine, however.
Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/
............................................................................................................................
From: Daniel Hindes
Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 9:30 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
I imagine that it is likewise not always easy
to remember what you have read in Steiner, and what you have
read elsewhere. I have, since the beginning of my work with Steiner,
kept somewhat extensive notes, with the express purpose of being
able to locate the source of an idea for later referrence.
In the tradition of Rudolf Steiner, and in an effort to influence
your mental body by forcing you to think, do you consider it
possible that the idea of "individual higher animals moving
up to man" is not actually consistent with Steiner's anthroposophy?
Daniel
----- Original Message -----
From: Kim Munch Michelsen
Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 2:05 PM
Subject: RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Daniel,
It is not allways simple to remember where you have read a
piece of RS (It was not his intension to make an encyklopedia,
but to influence the mental bodies of his readers by forcing
them to think), but it should be in some of his rosicrusian teachings,
where it most natural belongs.
Regards,
Kim
............................................................................................................................
From: Daniel Hindes
Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 9:57 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Kim,
How does your quote indicate that animals will become human?
I read the quote as predicting the animal's rights movement.
Tangentally related to our discussion is this quote from a lecture
titled "Practical Training In Thought" given in Karlsruhe,
January 18, 1909 (online at http://wn.elib.com/Steiner/Lectures/PracTr_index.html
).
"Still another example will show you clearly how such errors
in thinking arise and how a person who has been practicing exercises
like these can no longer make such mistakes. Suppose someone
concludes that man as he is today is a descendent of the ape.
This means that what he has come to know in the ape — the
forces active in this animal have — attained higher perfection
and man is the result. Now, to show the meaning of this theory
in terms of thought, let us imagine that this person is the only
man on earth, and that besides himself there are only those apes
present that, according to his theory, can evolve into human
beings. He now studies these apes with the utmost accuracy down
to the most minute detail and then forms a concept of what lives
in them. Excluding himself and without ever having seen another
human being let him now try to develop the concept of a man solely
from his concept of the ape. He will find this to be quite impossible.
His concept “ape” will never transform itself into
the concept “man.”
If he had cultivated correct habits of thinking, this man would
have said to himself, “My concept of the ape does not change
into the concept of man. What I perceive in the ape, therefore,
can never become a human being, otherwise my concept would have
to change likewise. There must be something else present that
I am unable to perceive.” So he would have to imagine an
invisible, supersensible entity behind the physical ape that
he would be unable to perceive but that alone would make the
ape's transformation into man a possible conception."
While this quote does not directly address the question we are
considering, it does point to the importance of clarity regarding
the question of what an animal is, and what a human being is.
Now I don't want to totally preclude the possibility that Steiner
did actually predict "highly developed animals moving up
to man" in some lecture I have not yet read. However it
seems to me inconsistent with an understanding of being human
as developed in Theosophy and most of the lectures. Also, any
statements regarding developments predicted to occur during the
Jupiter phase of earth evolution are unlikely to be influencing
the current population increase.
It is my hope that you will take this in the spirit of a joint
search for the truth, where we can hopefully both expand our
understanding.
Yours,
Daniel
----- Original Message -----
From: Kim Munch Michelsen
Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 3:34 PM
Subject: RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Daniel
There are some indications in Manifestations of Karma Lecture
2, May 17, 1910, Hamburg KARMA AND THE ANIMAL KINGDOM:
'Therefore with the progress of evolution there will come again
through the consciousness of karma a better relationship between
man and the animal kingdom than there is now, especially in the
west. There will come a treatment of the animals whereby man
will again uplift those he has pushed down. '
Regards,
Kim
............................................................................................................................
From: Richard Distasi
Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 11:09 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Kim,
In the words expressed by Daniel I would agree to the following:
"It is my hope that you will take this in the spirit of
a joint search for the truth, where we can hopefully both expand
our understanding."
As of now I have difficulty accepting the possibility that animals
eventually become Ego-endowed Beings in the future. I don't know
if you are familiar with Max Heindel's Rosicrucianism but this
is exactly what he had proposed and as I moved further into Anthroposophy
over the years I had never read anywhere where Steiner makes
such a statement.
Is it not true that nature spirits/elemental Beings are created
from the activities of the hierarchies whereas animals came about
in the creation of the human astral body. We move from one Condition
of Life to the next Mineral, Plant, Animal and Human (see Steiner's
schematic in his Book of Revelation lectures) where the mineral
becomes plant and the plant realm becomes animal, animal become
like human. I never got the impression from Steiner that these
realms ever become as we understand them now. He mentioned that
in the next condition of Life (the plant condition of life) the
Cologne cathedral will take on a plant form. This not to say
that the cathedral actually becomes a plant but rather the etheric
forces that are active in the plant world today will then create
a structure, etherically, that is the Cologne cathedral becomes
metamorphosed into etheric forces which we would find in the
plant realm today. The plant realm and its forces are also elevated
to the astral realm and the animal astral forces become Ego forces
and here I think Steiner is referring to the group soul Beings.
That is, the group soul Beings of whom are now active in the
animal realm will then become pure Ego Beings. This, for me was
always so difficult to grasp, and I don't mean to imply by any
means that I fully understand this.
Steiner, I believe, quotes from Paul, in that man is the point
of origin of creation. That is, what poured into the world from
the hierarchies in the creation of the human Being left its residue
in the mineral, plant and animal kingdoms. What had passed through
the long shaping of the astral bodies of humans and that which
was gradually discarded became the ground for the creation of
the animal realm. The same could be said of what shaped the etheric
bodies and was discarded became the plant realm and the will
forces that were discarded in the creation of the physical body
became the mineral realm.
rick distasi
............................................................................................................................
From: Joel Wendt
Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 5:11 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Dear Kim and Rick and Daniel,
Here are some notes I made while reading Valentin
Tomberg's three part Studies of the Foundation Stone:
Man is the connecting link between nature
and the spiritual worlds.
Perceived in the horizontal (on the Earth),
the I is human, the astral body animal, the etheric body plant
and the physical body mineral.
However...
Perceived from the spiritual world (vertical),
the I is mineral, the astral body plant, the etheric body animal,
and the physical body human.
So, for example, we take into ourselves the
mineral to build up the physical body (the horizontal gesture),
but it is our I which constitutes the concept of the mineral
world to the spiritual world (the vertical).
Nature is the living percept, and man the
living concept.
Man is the representative to the spiritual
world of nature, and the representative to nature of the spiritual
world.
Now me:
The redemption of nature is through man. The
outer aspect of nature is "fallen", as a gift to us.
We honor that gift by redeeming (resurrecting) fallen nature.
The inner aspect of nature (its spiritual aliveness) is of the
Gods (Demeter, Persephone, the elemental beings of the Foundation
Stone, and so forth). But only man can "lift" that
gift back into the spirit. However, to learn to do this requires
that we understand nature, beginning by overcoming in our ideation,
scientific materialism (something far harder than most of us
fancy).
This is to say that we now contain within
our etheric bodies, fallen or mineralized ideas and thoughts
about nature. So the first work is nearest at hand, within the
own inwardness. The later work only can come when we have first
learned to properly think nature.
To me then, to try to imagine how or in what
order the redemption of nature will arise, is to leap ahead in
consciousness past the real work of the present - which work
is done upon ourselves. We are nowhere near ready to think properly
that for which we really have not yet discovered even the true
percepts, much less the true concepts.
The overcoming of scientific materialism in
the own soul then is the first work of the redemption of nature.
Were we to begin to discuss that on this list, we would, I believe,
truly start on the path to honoring the gift to us which nature
is.
warm regards,
joel
............................................................................................................................
From: Tarjei Straume
Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 1:54 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
At 20:09 28.11.2003, Rick wrote:
As of now I have difficulty accepting the
possibility that animals eventually become Ego-endowed Beings
in the future.
Well, since human beings have evolved through
the modes of consciousness equivalent to those currently possessed
by the hierarchies below us, i.e. deep trance (minerals), dreaming
(plants), and group souls (animals), and destined to evolve through
stages now held by angels, archangels, archai, and so on, it
makes perfect sense that animals are also destined to evolve
through the sates of manhood, angels, archangels and so on, and
the plants and the minerals after that.
I also believe that animals are evolving individuality,
personality, through their contact with humans. They are still
group souls, but the daily influence of human beings on domestic
animals seems to have affect their evolution in a manner that
may have significance for future planetary epochs. And the study
of dolphins is absolutely fascinating. They have apparently sought
out contact with human beings in order to communicate and learn.
I don't know if you are familiar with Max
Heindel's Rosicrucianism but this is exactly what he had proposed
and as I moved further into Anthroposophy over the years I had
never read anywhere where Steiner makes such a statement.
Max Heindel is an entirely different chapter.
He copied Steiner and claimed it was all his own spiritual work.
Heindel's works, therefore, have a distinct ahrimanic coloring,
and most telling of all is that Ahriman is nowhere mentioned
in his books.
About Haindel's plagiarism of Steiner: I posted
a relevant quote by RS in a former message entitled "New
Age streams of various kinds.... "
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy_tomorrow/message/193
Cheers,
Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/
............................................................................................................................
From: Kim Munch Michelsen
Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 6:23 am
Subject: RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Thank you Tarjei, I was feeling a little alone, and probably
at the wrong place.
You gave some of your background in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy_tomorrow/message/193
and it looks in many ways as my own.
When i was 12 years old (i am now 49 years old) i found a book
of my mothers: 'The Akasha Chronicles' (in Danish, actually)
by RS. That was the start, and my primary source of esoteric
information has always been RS, but of course I have been through
any accessible literature, as Hermes Trismegistos, Platon, Vedic
stuf, sufi literature, as well as Emil Bock, Bulver Lytton, Herman
Hesse, and many more.
She was student under, and friend with the leader of the Danish
Rusicrusian order ('Rosenkreuzer-Selskabet i Danmark', startet
in 1928, as an independent organisation, by the german Rosenkreuzergesellshaft,
which had no relation to the american variants).
Dear Daniel and Richard
You took the breath out of me for a moment.
The animals is not mere debris, they are in reality our brothers
which had to stop at an earlier development stage, which helped
us to go forward. We do not only have a morally responsibility
to help them to go forward, at the end of the Vulcan cycle, every
beeing which initiated on saturn, should have reached the goal.
For me it's not an intellectual knowledge, it's build in soul
knowledge from the age of 12. It's so self evident as the gravity,
and I felt it as if someone said that the gravity didn't exist.
So it got me to think a little about 'what if':
RS's descriptions is logical, and consistent, both in width and
depth, and also with other esoteric writings, and that is the
reason he is my primary reference of esoteric knowledge. But
if he had written that animals could not get the ego-conciousness,
the whole logic of his writings would break down, and it would
be in opposition to other sources of esoteric knowledge, and
in that case I would have a problem, because I would loose my
primary reference.
As a seeker of knowledge, you should not base all your knowledge
on one source, you should read everything which looks interesting,
find patterns, and use your logic to build your Cosmology, and
in that way it will be printed into your soul. As long as it
is pure intellectual knowledge (pure book knowledge), without
real understanding, it's of no consequence. That don't mean that
everything should be right understood, nobody can that, but the
activity of understanding the esoteric knowledge is the way.
Back to the 'what if':
If the animals could not achieve 'I Am', what then?
What would be the destiny of the animals?
What about all the other developing beings, could they allso
risk the same, that is, hell in all eternity?
All other beings has been or are on their way to 'I Am', why
not the animals?
The beings directly above another being, is the primary helper,
that is the Angels are the helper of man, so it seems natural
that man is the helper of the animals.
Have fun, and thank you starting me on this excursion.
Kim
............................................................................................................................
From: Tarjei Straume
Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 2:34 am
Subject: RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
At 15:23 30.11.2003, Kim wrote:
Thank you Tarjei, I was feeling a little
alone, and probably at the wrong place.
You gave some of your background in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy_tomorrow/message/193
and it looks in many ways as my own.
When i was 12 years old (i am now 49 years old) i found a book
of my mothers: 'The Akasha Chronicles' (in Danish, actually)
by RS.
Wow, that was my first Steiner book too, in
Danish or Danish-Norwegian, and I wasn't much older than you
- perhaps even the same age - and I also started out by browsing
my mother's bookshelf.
That was the start, and my primary source
of esoteric information has always been RS, but of course I have
been through any accessible literature, as Hermes Trismegistos,
Platon, Vedic stuf, sufi literature, as well as Emil Bock, Bulver
Lytton, Herman Hesse, and many more.
The reason I remember Max Heindel's "Rosicrucian
Cosmo-Conception" - an absolutely awful title, was my father's
remark - so well is that I discovered it in England in my early
twenties and bought it there. I read it with great interest and
gave it to my mother, who also swallowed it raw. But then I sent
an inquiry to a Rosicrucian organization in America, AMORC about
their take on Heindel and Steiner. Well Steiner developed a system
of his own, they told me in a letter with no further comment
about him, but Max Heindel had studied Steiner's works and made
all kinds of false claims to being initiated by unnamed and unknown
Rosicrucian masters, and his works were therefore disreputable.
In other words, I received this info about Heindel from a source
that had nothing whatsoever to do with Anthroposophy. And then,
a few years later, I discovered the previously quoted passage
from "The Fifth Gospel", where Steiner describes Heindel's
plagiarism and dishonorable behavior.
Cheers,
Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/
............................................................................................................................
From: Richard Distasi
Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 1:47 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Joel,
As you have pointed out the redemption of thought is imperative
to the redemption of the earthly sphere and this particular cosmos
(planetary system).
Francke & Cawthorne cite G. Wachsmuth's
lecture, "The Face of the Earth and the Destiny of Mankind"
in their book, "The Tree of Life and the Holy Grail."
It seems to follow from reading the excerpt
they cite from Wachsmuth that we are slowly awakening to the
actualization that human consciousness is gradually becoming
aware of its potential in transfiguring the whole structure of
the Earth. Our conscious and Willed connection with the Impulse
of the Christ gives us the potential to slowly evolve our own
bodies thereby evolving the Earth itself. Could we then say that
Christ is slowly handing over to us the capacities to consciously
work with the chemical/sound and life ethers, the Tree of Life
forces, along with the eventual full understanding of our capacities
so that we, over time, bring about the evolution of this planet
and reunite it with the Sun?
In the scene of the Crucifixion we are given
the word Golgotha which translated means "the place of the
Skull." (Mark 15:22). This leads us to consider the human
head and its forces in relation to the archetypal scene of the
Crucifixion on Golgotha. The Crucifixion is a scene that depicts
a dark, solid sense-bound image. Its image of death is an image
of the nadir of brain-bound thinking with its crucifying, hardening
forces. It is a picture that projects the reality of solid, dark
mineral matter created by "fixated, cemented and sedimented"
(J. B. Aharon's words) thoughts. We see in this image the crucifixion
and death of living Imagination and Intuitive thinking; the sense-bound
thinking that now must be spiritualized and resurrected.
rick distasi
----- Original Message -----
From: Joel Wendt
To: aptmw
Sent: Friday, November 28, 2003 8:11 PM
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Dear Kim and Rick and Daniel,
Here are some notes I made while reading
Valentin Tomberg's three part Studies of the Foundation Stone:
Man is the connecting link between nature
and the spiritual worlds.
Perceived in the horizontal (on the Earth),
the I is human, the astral body animal, the etheric body plant
and the physical body mineral.
However...
Perceived from the spiritual world (vertical),
the I is mineral, the astral body plant, the etheric body animal,
and the physical body human.
So, for example, we take into ourselves
the mineral to build up the physical body (the horizontal gesture),
but it is our I which constitutes the concept of the mineral
world to the spiritual world (the vertical).
Nature is the living percept, and man the
living concept.
Man is the representative to the spiritual
world of nature, and the representative to nature of the spiritual
world.
Now me:
The redemption of nature is through man.
The outer aspect of nature is "fallen", as a gift to
us. We honor that gift by redeeming (resurrecting) fallen nature.
The inner aspect of nature (its spiritual aliveness) is of the
Gods (Demeter, Persephone, the elemental beings of the Foundation
Stone, and so forth). But only man can "lift" that
gift back into the spirit. However, to learn to do this requires
that we understand nature, beginning by overcoming in our ideation,
scientific materialism (something far harder than most of us
fancy).
This is to say that we now contain within
our etheric bodies, fallen or mineralized ideas and thoughts
about nature. So the first work is nearest at hand, within the
own inwardness. The later work only can come when we have first
learned to properly think nature.
To me then, to try to imagine how or in
what order the redemption of nature will arise, is to leap ahead
in consciousness past the real work of the present - which work
is done upon ourselves. We are nowhere near ready to think properly
that for which we really have not yet discovered even the true
percepts, much less the true concepts.
The overcoming of scientific materialism
in the own soul then is the first work of the redemption of nature.
Were we to begin to discuss that on this list, we would, I believe,
truly start on the path to honoring the gift to us which nature
is.
warm regards,
joel
............................................................................................................................
From: Joel Wendt
Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 7:43 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Dear Rick,
Seriously cool!
I am presently involved in a deep (daily)
meditative study of J.B. Aharon's The Spiritual Event of the
Twentieth Century, which I find not only illuminating in terms
of inner pictures but a priceless guide to meditation on the
theme of the Second Golgotha.
Nice to see you reference him.
warm regards,
joel
On Sat, 2003-11-29 at 02:47, Richard Distasi
wrote:
Joel,
As you have pointed out the redemption of thought is imperative
to the redemption of the earthly sphere and this particular cosmos
(planetary system).
Francke & Cawthorne cite G. Wachsmuth's lecture, "The
Face of the Earth and the Destiny of Mankind" in their book,
"The Tree of Life and the Holy Grail."
It seems to follow from reading the excerpt they cite from Wachsmuth
that we are slowly awakening to the actualization that human
consciousness is gradually becoming aware of its potential in
transfiguring the whole structure of the Earth. Our conscious
and Willed connection with the Impulse of the Christ gives us
the potential to slowly evolve our own bodies thereby evolving
the Earth itself. Could we then say that Christ is slowly handing
over to us the capacities to consciously work with the chemical/sound
and life ethers, the Tree of Life forces, along with the eventual
full understanding of our capacities so that we, over time, bring
about the evolution of this planet and reunite it with the Sun?
In the scene of the Crucifixion we are given the word Golgotha
which translated means "the place of the Skull." (Mark
15:22). This leads us to consider the human head and its forces
in relation to the archetypal scene of the Crucifixion on Golgotha.
The Crucifixion is a scene that depicts a dark, solid sense-bound
image. Its image of death is an image of the nadir of brain-bound
thinking with its crucifying, hardening forces. It is a picture
that projects the reality of solid, dark mineral matter created
by "fixated, cemented and sedimented" (J. B. Aharon's
words) thoughts. We see in this image the crucifixion and death
of living Imagination and Intuitive thinking; the sense-bound
thinking that now must be spiritualized and resurrected.
rick distasi
............................................................................................................................
From: Tarjei Straume
Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 1:24 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
At 10:47 29.11.2003, Rick wrote:
In the scene of the Crucifixion we are
given the word Golgotha which translated means "the place
of the Skull." (Mark 15:22). This leads us to consider the
human head and its forces in relation to the archetypal scene
of the Crucifixion on Golgotha. The Crucifixion is a scene that
depicts a dark, solid sense-bound image. Its image of death is
an image of the nadir of brain-bound thinking with its crucifying,
hardening forces. It is a picture that projects the reality of
solid, dark mineral matter created by "fixated, cemented
and sedimented" (J. B. Aharon's words) thoughts. We see
in this image the crucifixion and death of living Imagination
and Intuitive thinking; the sense-bound thinking that now must
be spiritualized and resurrected.
This is an interesting topic that I have made
a rudimentary attempt to approach as a major theme at http://www.uncletaz.com/skullpage.html
- "The Symbol of the Skull." But it obviously needs
further elaboration....
Thanks,
Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/
............................................................................................................................
From: Gisele
Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 3:32 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] A propos de skull...
Tarjei Straume wrote:
This is an interesting topic that I have
made a rudimentary attempt to approach as a major theme at http://www.uncletaz.com/skullpage.html
- "The Symbol of the Skull." But it obviously needs
further elaboration....
~~~You might get some new insight in the matter
when reading chapter 'Skull and bones' at the following:
http://www.tarpley.net/bushb.htm
...but not good as bedtime reading - you wouldn't
take this with your night dreams....
Gix
............................................................................................................................
From: golden3000997
Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 7:20 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] A propos de skull...
Hi Giselle,
You go girl!! This is the kind of stuff I'm
really into right now. I'll get the links for infowars &
serendipity for you shortly.
What would a "Michaelic" leader
be today?? To my understanding it would be a person of great
strength who had the courage to come forward and tell the truth.
And to live or die by it. (Thus my references here to the White
Rose). The Golden Soldier is this Michaelic leader (if I was
at all successful with that story and I think I might have been
as I had grown men cry when I told it at the Michaelmas festival
in Seattle.)
But the awful paradox that we face is that
the real Michaelic Leader, the real Golden Soldier has to be
each of us. We are past the age of mankind when we can look to "someone else" to fight our
battles. Perhaps Rudolf Steiner himself was the last real "Michaelic
Hero" per se, living just at the end of the
Kali Yuga and the beginning of the Michaelic
Age. He was so clear, time and again, that neither he nor any
other teacher would be able to impart wisdom to us, heal us or
guide our actions. Those days are over. All that he could and
did do was to give us the tools, the Golden Helmet, Shield and
Sword that we are now free to take up or not and use as we see
fit. It is a terrible tightrope that we have to walk - to learn
(very quickly) to live and work in groups without giving ourselves
up totally to a group identity, whether race, religion or nationality
while on the other hand, living and working as Individuals filled
with a Divine Ego without succumbing to the many temptations
of both spirit and flesh that our Ego is assaulted with all the
time, including the temptation to isolation and spiritual pride.
How hard it must be for the Ego that was Rudolf
Steiner as "he" is today. For it has been made very
clear by my teachers in the Anthroposophical Society that "he"
would be back for this critical time. Obviously I use "he"
as "he" was a "he"
in the most recent incarnation. But there is no reason to suppose
that "he" will be a "he" in the present.
But "he" or "she" must be facing this dilemma
as a young adult today. How to continue the work in a form truly
appropriate for the time. For even in the short space of the
past 75 to 80 years, human conciousness has undergone more radical
changes - some good, some bad.
As I sit in this sea of books and read his
lectures, I am amazed at the history, the culture and the myriad
of references that come pouring out that most of the people in
his audiences were obviously familiar with. This was simply a
fact of their education of the time. It may have already been
calcified and ossified, but at least they had it. He could talk
about Greek philosophers and Crusaders and early church Fathers
and the regular people of the last turn of century had some idea
of what he was talking about. Do you think that could be done
here, except in the most rarified of academic circles? And even
there, most academics today are so specialized that such a speaker
probably could not reach many of them. How do WE, supposedly
Anthroposophics being the vanguard of the Michaelic Era, lead
with a golden wisdom when those around us have no cultural references
to the historical and socio-political development of mankind
except through mis-information and cliches? How
do we awaken a new life of feeling through the arts when most
"normal" people in this society don't even sing out
loud (except in the car with the windows up) because one cannot
participate in the arts unless one is a star??? How do we activate
new will forces in this society when everyone is trapped between
the Scylla of stress and the Charybdis of convenience? (How many
people would even know what THAT is a reference to?) The forces
whose intentions have been to make humanity as materialistic
as possible and as ignorant as possible have done a very good
job.
Some take refuge in believing in a returning
Christ who will save them as a political leader (sons of Judas,
really), others immerse themselves in fantasy role playing with
kings and wizards and other fun stuff (I like those games, myself,
so this is not to be judgemental). The difference is in really
KNOWING that it is fantasy and belongs to our psychic past and
having a subconcious or concious belief that such a king or wizard
will arise to save us at the last minute. As far as I know, the
only weapons we have are the Golden Helmet of Self Knowledge,
the Golden Shield of Truth and the Golden Sword of Courage. We
have to be ready to face the Dragon, look him in the eye and
say "You can kill my body - I may not be able to stop that.
But you will know that I KNOW who you are. I will not succumb
to you in Spirit - now or ever." And this is the quest of
every human ego. Perhaps the world may in the end pivot on one
soul. Maybe there will be one soul - could be you, could be me,
could be the child that we teach today - that will say this and
thereby tip the scale in favor of the Risen Christ.
We need to KNOW what is going on and who is
who and what is what. And we have to stand up for the Truth,
despite the consequences.
In Hope,
Christine
PS - Tarjei, I didn't really like the skull
when I first saw it, but stuck with you anyway. : )
............................................................................................................................
From: Joel Wendt
Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 10:01 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] A propos de skull...
On Sat, 2003-11-29 at 20:20, golden3000997
wrote:
How do WE, supposedly Anthroposophics being
the vanguard of the Michaelic Era, lead with a golden wisdom
when those around us have no cultural references to the historical
and socio-political development of mankind except through mis-information
and cliches? How do we awaken a new life of feeling through the
arts when most "normal" people in this society don't
even sing out loud (except in the car with the windows up) because
one cannot participate in the arts unless one is a star??? How
do we activate new will forces in this society when everyone
is trapped between the Scylla of stress and the Charybdis of
convenience? (How many people would even know what THAT is a
reference to?) The forces whose intentions have been to make
humanity as materialistic as possible and as ignorant as possible
have done a very good job.
Dear Christine,
These are good questions, but seem to have
been written in a rhetorical form, suggesting that they are statements
rather than real questions. As statements they seem to be not
particularly justified judgments, and perhaps reflect a misunderstanding
on your part. If they were turned into genuine questions, they
actually open doors, for there are real answers.
The questions begin with the form "How
do we...?" In a rhetorical form you seem to be saying (but
maybe you are not), how do we give our great wisdom, when everyone
is so useless and out of it. This conclusion, to the extent in
lives in the above paragraph, is understandable but flawed.
In J. Ben-Aharon's remarkable The Spiritual
Event of the Twentieth Century, easily the most significant truly
anthroposophical act at the End of the Century, he describes
a remark of Steiner's which I will quote: "The souls that
seek Anthroposophy are incarnated; but we don't speak their language."
This was in response to a question about where were the millions
of Michaelic souls to which Steiner had occasionally referred.
Ben-Aharon goes on to describe how there are
two Michael communities presently incarnated - Michaelic because
they all experienced and participated in the Second Golgatha
in the Ethereal World prior to incarnation.
The smaller community is those anthroposophists
who have managed to actually engender some real spiritual connections
on the paths which Steiner had indicated - this he called the
conscious Michaelic community. The much large community is all
those souls that have incarnated mostly since 1945, of which
the first group reached their majority (age 21) in 1966/7, at
the beginning of the social revolution that appeared world wide
in the late '60's. This revolution has continued to grow, creating
the very large environmental and social action movements, which
have begun to combine in the new century in the anti-globalization
movement, and what is now called Civil Society (see my essay:
Civil Society: its potential and its mystery, at: http://ipwebdev.com/hermit/civil.html
)
This very much larger community is the unconscious
Michaelic community present now on the Earth, that has taken
on the extraordinary task of self conscious social transformation
of our shared existence.
Ben-Aharon recommends that it is necessary
to cultivate a sense that the reason these two communities are
divided, is because of the failures of the conscious Michaelic
community - he believes a kind of karmic debt has appeared that
needs to be consciously accepted and shouldered.
Be that as it may, it is my experience and
view that at the least the attitude needs to be cultivated with
regard to the those outside the conscious Michaelic community,
by those who see themselves as within it, of a nature based on
the first Stage of the Seven Stages of the Passion of Christ,
as described in the Gospel of John (and elaborated in Valentin
Tomberg's lectures on Inner Development) - Washing the Feet.
We are to see ourselves as the humble servants of the World,
and not in any way as its leaders or masters.
When this attitude is consciously cultivated
(and again I speak from experience) thinking takes on a quality
such that one yearns to let die what might be called anthro-speak,
so that one's creative spirituality can recreate and recast the
true and the good in the language of those to whom one offers
it as a gift.
If you can appreciate this idea, and also
recognize the ongoing developments in what I call the True West
(the Americas), you might begin to see that by so transforming
Anthroposophy at the level of its images (building those anew
out of ordinary language), this activity now finishes the incarnation
of Anthroposophy as a social impulse.
In a way, the mistakes of the past of the
conscious Michaelic community are allowed to die (Steiner-speak
- using only his terms, and endless Steiner quoting - depending
on Steiner instead of your own thinking), after which, out of
the creativity of our individual I-am, Anthroposophy is reborn
as this new Century begins.
Let me weave in a couple of additional themes
to put more color in this picture.
I recently attended, via satellite at a local
college (Prescott College in Prescott Arizona, where I now live),
the latest Bioneers Conference (here is a report I wrote on the
Conference: Bioneers: who are these people and what are they
up to; http://ipwebdev.com/hermit/bioneers.html
I was particularly struck with the language
used and could immediately see that its pictorial nature contained
a capacity for imagery by which all manner of anthroposophical
understandings of social life, and inner life could be rendered
in an entirely knew way. This is largely derived from the environmental
movement, with its very rich ecological and living process oriented
understanding. These images were borrowed by the social activists
who also spoke, and I had the sense of a community mind (Christ's
wherever two or more...) at work weaving a new pictorial language.
That occurred this Fall. Last Spring I was
graced to be able to attend a gathering on the occasion of Emerson's
200th birthday where an unpublished draft manuscript of a previously
unknown work of Emerson's was in part read (we read two chapter's
of A Natural History of the Intellect). There is an essay of
that name already known, but a much larger and more detailed
version (basically a complete book) was discovered about 4 years
ago in some archives at Harvard University.
Here was the fully mature Emerson, at the
height of his powers of Imagination, and wise perception, describing
the soul life of his fellow human beings, using the commonly
understood and easily observed processes of nature as a very
exact and alive metaphor.
At the Bioneers Conference, these two experiences
combined and I could clearly see how in living transformations
of the English language (at least, this is probably so in other
languages) nature based imagery could be used to describe soul
and spiritual life, as well as be the language by which a newly
spiritualized social science could be rendered. In this way then,
the true gesture of service could complete the task Steiner set
before us, when he pointed out that "we don't know how to
speak their language".
Steiner, of course, had to render his teachings
and indications into the ideal-like language of his place and
time. This "communication" necessarily took a certain
form, and as we know in the United States, where there is intense
social activism, very few people are able to approach Anthroposophy
precisely because something "foreign" lives in it (German
Idealism). The name Anthroposophy is itself off-putting.
It is my view then, if we genuinely ask the
question "How do we...?", we will find within our own
souls and out of truly humble Michaelic creativity, the way to
render spiritual truths about soul life and social life into
the very rich metaphorical potential of the languages of our
time.
Already we see the counter-impulse, in the
use of computer imagery as it is everywhere now applied to describe
the mental and thinking processes of the human being. This fact
more than anything should wake us up to need of the time, for
the conscious Michaelic community to shoulder this work of the
artistic crafting of a new rendering of the true and the good,
using the available language of the unconscious Michaelic community.
Anthroposophy belongs to them, not to us. However, it can only
come to them, via the gift of the word, after being cast in a
metaphorical terminology that relates to their immediate experience.
warm regards.
joel
............................................................................................................................
From: golden3000997
Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 10:31 am
Subject: Re" How do we? response to Joel
Hello Joel,
Many thanks for your response. I read it over,
but I will re-read it deeply, for it is really fascinating.
I would like to clarify the following, though:
Joel wrote:
The questions begin with the form "How do we...?"
In a rhetorical form you seem to be saying (but maybe you are
not), how do we give our great wisdom, when everyone is so useless
and out of it. This conclusion, to the extent in lives in the
above paragraph, is understandable but flawed.
It may have sounded a little bit rhetorical,
I can see where you could take it that way, but I really meant
those questions sincerely. I was talking about the difference
between Steiner's audience and the people of today. You and I
are in complete agreement that it needs a new language and I
think RS, whereever he or she is now, would agree!
This might be exactly why I have never personally
been able to just join some nice Anthroposophical community somewhere
and have done with it. I find too much of value "in the
world" and I usually feel that I don't fit in in either
"world". It makes it very hard. I didn't say "we"
meaning people who specifically seek to understand Steiner today
have all that education, etc., I was saying that the people (mostly
European) of the early 20th century still had it and that the
difficulty in studying a lecture might be that one had to get
a working knowledge of history first!
I feel that we can express Anthroposophical
(It's such a damn long word to type!) knowledge in today's language.
I have tried to do this with my Waldorf articles, but then one
might find oneself criticized by "Anthropops" for not
being "Anthropop-ish" enough! Aargh!
Always such a tightrope to walk!!
: ) Christine
............................................................................................................................
From: Gisele
Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 2:07 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] A propos de skull...
Hi Christine, thanks for everything. Sorry
I can't stop I am kind of busy right now. Great to have you on
this list
Gix
golden3000997wrote:
Hi Giselle,
You go girl!! This is the kind of stuff
I'm really into right now.
............................................................................................................................
From: Michael
Helsher
Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 6:38 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] A propos de skull...
Christen, you wrote:
<snip>
As far as I know, the only weapons we have
are the Golden Helmet of Self Knowledge, the Golden Shield of
Truth and the Golden Sword of Courage. We have to be ready to
face the Dragon, look him in the eye and say "You can kill
my body - I may not be able to stop that. But you will know that
I KNOW who you are. I will not succumb to you in Spirit - now
or ever." And this is the quest of every human ego.
We need to KNOW what is going on and who
is who and what is what. And we have to stand up for the Truth,
despite the consequences.
Mike:
Thanks for all that, you really hit the nail on the head. It
reminds me of a short piece that I read recently on a bulletin
board while my wife and I were waiting to start a difficult marriage
counseling session:
Hope is an orientation of the spirit;
An orientation of the heart.
Not a conviction that something will turn
out right,
But a certainty that something makes sense,
Regardless of the outcome.
I was educated, like most people that I know,
in what I like to call the "comfortably numb" generation.
Most of us had an E.Q. equivalent to that of Bevis and Butt-head
(which I still love to watch, by the way). Oh the irony of such
a show, depicting such supposed moral dicrepitness, as a mirror
of truth. Can you imagine discussing this kind of truth with
a focused religious fanatic? a dualistic thinker... say like
- George Bush - for instance. How sad that Truth and Morality
can seeming end up at opposite ends of the planet.
And then we have "A Philosophy of Freedom",
which gives us ideas like: Intuition; Moral imagination; thinking
with the power of Love in spiritual form; and my personal favorite:
"My neighbors want to live out their
intuitions, I mine. If we really draw from the idea, and follow
no external (physical or spiritual) impulses, then we cannot
but meet in the same striving, the same intentions. An ethical
misunderstanding, a clash, is impossible among ethically free
human beings."
Obviously I am not yet "ethically free"
when it comes to my marriage. But the process of getting there
is amazing; as well as emotionally painful, which is sometimes
a consequence of truth. I forget who said that "Love is
the Pain of being truly alive".
Most of those who are living in the consumer
matrix just plain haven't got a clue. I know, I was there doing
the American dream thing: RV's, houses, mortgages, swimming pools,
Vacations, Taxes, Disney world, and the flip-flopping credit
card game. My painful awakening came at just the time that the
first Matrix movie came out. It was a culminating moment in my
life, to watch Neo wake up in his pod, covered in slime, all
plugged in...
I recently interviewed for a job at a Waldorf
school that is looking for a 7'th grade teacher. When they asked
me to give a biography, I couldn't help crack a shit-eatin-grin
on my face; I knew that I was going to tell the truth. As you
may know I've been on this new kick about my own vanity, so I
gave them a good blood and guts war story. Oh the look of awe
in some of those nice ladies eyes. I'm telling this story because
it is a fresh experience that I have had wrestling with truth,
self knowledge, and courage.
More will be revealed...
I HOPE?
Truth and Love
Mike Helsher
............................................................................................................................
From: Richard Distasi
Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 1:43 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Joel,
I'm glad to hear that others are taking up this work in a meditative
way. I spent months reading and meditating on "The Spiritual
Event of the Twentieth Century". You literally have to take
it one sentence at a time and compound each sentence with everything
that you have assimilated through the years of one's study of
Anthroposophy. It is well worth the work and effort.
rick distasi
----- Original Message -----
From: Joel Wendt
To: aptmw
Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2003 10:43 AM
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Dear Rick,
Seriously cool!
I am presently involved in a deep (daily)
meditative study of J.B. Aharon's The Spiritual Event of the
Twentieth Century, which I find not only illuminating in terms
of inner pictures but a priceless guide to meditation on the
theme of the Second Golgotha.
Nice to see you reference him.
warm regards,
joel
............................................................................................................................
From: Richard Distasi
Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 2:30 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Tarjei you wrote:
". . . it makes perfect sense that animals are also destined
to evolve through the sates of manhood, angels, archangels and
so on, and the plants and the minerals after that."
Tarjei, I thought about this also before I sent my post in regard
to this topic. However, I really don't recall anything in which
RSteiner specifically states that the animal kingdom will be
the next human kingdom. The pattern of development that you cite
makes perfect sense but does anyone have an explicit quote from
Steiner that would substantiate this.
I do recall, however, (and again I apologize that I can't cite
the reference) that he did say that the next wave of Beings to
pass through the condition of Egohood would be the nature spirits.
Whether that is in the next planetary condition of Jupiter or
in the next condition of life, the plant condition, in this particular
Earth Manvantara I can't say with certainty.
rick distasi
----- Original Message -----
From: Tarjei Straume
Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2003 4:54 PM
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
At 20:09 28.11.2003, Rick wrote:
As of now I have difficulty accepting the
possibility that animals eventually become Ego-endowed Beings
in the future.
Well, since human beings have evolved through
the modes of consciousness equivalent to those currently possessed
by the hierarchies below us, i.e. deep trance (minerals), dreaming
(plants), and group souls (animals), and destined to evolve through
stages now held by angels, archangels, archai, and so on, it
makes perfect sense that animals are also destined to evolve
through the sates of manhood, angels, archangels and so on, and
the plants and the minerals after that.
I also believe that animals are evolving
individuality, personality, through their contact with humans.
They are still group souls, but the daily influence of human
beings on domestic animals seems to have affect their evolution
in a manner that may have significance for future planetary epochs.
And the study of dolphins is absolutely fascinating. They have
apparently sought out contact with human beings in order to communicate
and learn.
I don't know if you are familiar with Max
Heindel's Rosicrucianism but this is exactly what he had proposed
and as I moved further into Anthroposophy over the years I had
never read anywhere where Steiner makes such a statement.
Max Heindel is an entirely different chapter.
He copied Steiner and claimed it was all his own spiritual work.
Heindel's works, therefore, have a distinct ahrimanic coloring,
and most telling of all is that Ahriman is nowhere mentioned
in his books.
About Haindel's plagiarism of Steiner:
I posted a relevant quote by RS in a former message entitled
"New Age streams of various kinds.... "
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy_tomorrow/message/193
Cheers,
Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/
............................................................................................................................
From: Tarjei Straume
Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 2:58 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
At 11:30 30.11.2003, Rick wrote:
Tarjei, I thought about this also before
I sent my post in regard to this topic. However, I really don't
recall anything in which RSteiner specifically states that the
animal kingdom will be the next human kingdom. The pattern of
development that you cite makes perfect sense but does anyone
have an explicit quote from Steiner that would substantiate this.
I do recall, however, (and again I apologize that I can't cite
the reference) that he did say that the next wave of Beings to
pass through the condition of Egohood would be the nature spirits.
Whether that is in the next planetary condition of Jupiter or
in the next condition of life, the plant condition, in this particular
Earth Manvantara I can't say with certainty.
Man, this is complicated, and my own understanding
of it is vague and rudimentary. Animal species are so different
and varied, fishes and insects and crocodiles and deer and horses.
And speaking of horses, the centaur represents a stage in human
evolution, before the expuslion of the horse from the human being
enabled the latter to develop intelligence.
Something else of great interest is the role
of the hierarchies there. Human beings are guided by angels;
one for each individual. Because man is evolving the higher members
of his ego, it's a two-way relationship of sorts. And the animal
group souls, arent' they Spirits of Form? The point is that the
lower you go on the evolutionary scale, the higher you end up
in the hierarchies when searching for their spirit. With the
minerals, don't you end up with the Seraphim or the Cherubim
or something?
It's so complicated because within each hierarchy,
there are beings in so many different stages. Some Archangels
are Archai or Time Spirits and so on. And just like there's a
tremendous difference between an ant and an elefant, the difference
between the group souls must be equally dissimilar although perhaps
belonging to the same hierarchical group.
It would make sense, therefore, that within
this enormously rich variety of animals, some of these are next
in line to develop egohood. And aren't animals somehow intermingled
with nature spirits, with gnomes and so on?
Curious,
Tarjei
............................................................................................................................
From: Kim Munch Michelsen
Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 3:31 am
Subject: RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Just a short note.
The animal kingdom is not the next human vawe, they are part
of our vawe. All who started on Saturn is in the same vawe.
If the elementals are going through the I AM development in the
next cycle, they have to have started on the Sun cycle, by the
spirits of I AM at that cycle, as we are now creating the first
step in a whole new cycle of being, without our nowledge (according
to Steiner is has something to do with our brething out).
Have fun
Kim
............................................................................................................................
From: Tarjei Straume
Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 11:22 am
Subject: RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
At 12:31 01.12.2003, Kim wrote:
The animal kingdom is not the next human
vawe, they are part of our vawe. All who started on Saturn is
in the same vawe.
Wow, you're right. The same wave. We started
off on the same HUGE surfboard, but in order for us to reach
the shore, we had to separate from the animals, so we carved
up the big surfboard into smaller ones WHILE RIDING THE WAVE
THROUGH FULL STORM - one for each species, and we separated into
many surfboards, but we still rode the same wave, keeping the
balance. Man learned to keep his balance on top of the Saturn
wave through the amazing feat of straightening up his spine and
standing upright, glancing at the stars and navigating the entire
fleet of surfboards. We were yelling "Land in sight!"
when an exceptionally vicious and capricious gale knocked us
out, and then Noah picked everybody up on his ark, and the rest
is Biblical history....
I believe I just wrote a new Genesis story.
How about a movie? "The Surfers from Saturn."
No wonder cybersurfing comes so natural to
us.
If the elementals are going through the
I AM development in the next cycle, they have to have started
on the Sun cycle, by the spirits of I AM at that cycle, as we
are now creating the first step in a whole new cycle of being,
without our nowledge (according to Steiner is has something to
do with our brething out).
Makes perfect sense. I've seemingly read this
at one point, and since forgotten it.
Have fun
I just did.
Happy surfing,
Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/
............................................................................................................................
From: holderlin66
Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 10:06 pm
Subject: Re: Body of Christ
--- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com,
Tarjei Straume wrote:
I believe I just wrote a new Genesis story.
How about a movie? "The Surfers from Saturn."
No wonder cybersurfing comes so natural to us.
Anyways I like to see Steiners Imagination
flowing in different ways. Saturn is Blue, so Blue Crush...however
there are four distinct waves as mineral kingdoms, all the various
mineral families and geometric identities, the flower families/insects
and the Ego Group Souls of the Animals and then there is us..
Surfs up.
I also see it as spun off, flecked off the
foam, but their upward nurturing comes through those four distinct
frozen, slo-mo waves in motion, slowed molasses to petrified
yet still in motion.
rose and lily coming in on one board. Clinging
to the board like the mighty little shop of horrors plant. talking
plant that sneezes butterflies.
12 different stones, holding a pattern or
geometric patterns on a black surfboard.
A dolphin pulling a dog and a cat.
The hermaphrodite from Fellini Satriycon,
now grown up with long bleech blond california hair...
Finally the nine Nazgoul surfing in on the
eighth wave as the light disappears into the sea and only their
red eyes and hiss of the wave is heard.
............................................................................................................................
From: Joel Wendt
Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 8:12 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Dear Bradford,
Best thing of yours I've ever read. Concise,
poetic and wise.
joel
On Thu, 2003-12-04 at 23:06, holderlin66 wrote:
Anyways I like to see Steiners Imagination
flowing in different ways. Saturn is Blue, so Blue Crush...however
there are four distinct waves as mineral kingdoms, all the various
mineral families and geometric identities, the flower families/insects
and the Ego Group Souls of the Animals and then there is us..
Surfs up.
I also see it as spun off, flecked off the foam, but their upward
nurturing comes through those four distinct frozen, slo-mo waves
in motion, slowed molasses to petrified yet still in motion.
rose and lily coming in on one board. Clinging to the board like
the mighty little shop of horrors plant. talking plant that sneezes
butterflies.
12 different stones, holding a pattern or geometric patterns
on a black surfboard.
A dolphin pulling a dog and a cat.
The hermaphrodite from Fellini Satriycon, now grown up with long
bleech blond california hair...
Finally the nine Nazgoul surfing in on the eighth wave as the
light disappears into the sea and only their red eyes and hiss
of the wave is heard.
............................................................................................................................
From: Daniel Hindes
Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 9:12 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Kim,
Allow me to respond to your "What if". To me, there
is an essential difference between "an animal", and
"animals". A human being is a fourfold being of ego,
astral body, etheric body and physical body. There is a high
degree of coincidence in the location of these bodies in an adult.
From a given perspective, they all roughly in the same physical
space, extruding only slightly. For one ego, there is one astral
body, one etheric body and one physical body, at any one point
in time, and all are very near each other. With the animals there
is a one to many relationship between ego and physical bodies.
As a human has ten fingers, which all give sensory information
to his astral, to be used by the ego, the group soul of an animal
species has many members of the species, the experiences of these
members, as an aggregate whole, are useful to the development
of that group-soul. Animal group-souls are evolving, are our
brothers and sisters who have taken a special task to enable
our own evolution. They deserve our respect and care, as well
as our gratitude. And they have an evolution ahead of them that
is intrinsically related to our own. The only difference, and
thus the only point of contention, is what you or I see in an
individual representative of any given animal species, for a
concrete example, my brother's dog Oso. In Oso I experience "dogness"
and sense a portal to the essence of dogness, the being which
is the formative force behind all dogs. This being, I sense,
is my equal, on another path. Oso is one part of him, a particular
manifestation of dogness. When Oso dies, a part of dogness will
have passed from the manifest to the unmanifest, from the physical
to ths spiritual. This, however, is only a part of dogness, not
an individual being who will experience an individual path from
eternity to eternity, from the begenning of the world to it's
end. Thus, Oso is not an ego-endowed creature, he is part of
one. This is my understanding of Steiner's exposition of the
nature of the animal kingdom. I should point out that changing
from your view to mine changes nothing at all about how an animal,
or animals in general, should be treated.
I hope this is helpful to you,
Daniel Hindes
............................................................................................................................
From: Kim Munch Michelsen
Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 12:58 pm
Subject: RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Hello Daniel
It took me a little while to understand that our difference is
that you see the group ego, for the animal species as like man
where I see the single animal as a contender for manhood.
It simplifies things considerably (it is allways better to understand
each other:-).
The difference between man and animal is that man has his ego
with him in the mineral world, and animals don't.
Both man (4 groups) and each animal species has a group ego.
RS: Just as the human
being has an individual ego, so in every astral body there lives
something of a group-ego; this animal-ego lives in the human
astral body and the human being does not become independent of
this animal-ego until he develops astral sight and becomes a
companion of astral beings, when the group-souls of the animals
confront him on the astral plane as individual animals confront
him here.
(Theosophy of the Rosicrucian II THE NINEFOLD
CONSTITUTION OF MAN
http://wn.elib.com/Steiner/Lectures/19070526p01.html)
.
The soul groups of man is: Lion, Eagle, Bull, Man. They are described
in connection with the start of atlantis and in connection with
the Apocalypse of John.
Concerning your example with the dog:
When man takes a dog to him, he takes the role of the dogs group
ego. The dog looses many of the characteristics of his wild cousins,
and take form of his human owner.
There has been many scientific eexperiments showing that domesticated
animals where not so intelligent as their wild cousins. Someone
then got the idea to have the dog's owner beside the dog, then
everything changed, the dog was substantially better than its
wild cousins.
I hope this helps you,
Kim
............................................................................................................................
From: golden3000997
Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 1:21 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Hi Taz!!
Thank you, I was wondering where I had seen
that!
Great organization - great story behind it:
http://www.bestfriends.org/
: ) Christine
............................................................................................................................
From: Richard Distasi
Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 4:01 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Kim,
I appreciate the background from which you draw your conclusions
and that the observation of patterns in world/cosmic evolution
does form a base when trying to understand any mystery knowledge.
However, I'm still trying to find where RSteiner specifically
states that animals become Ego-endowed Beings and the same for
the plant and mineral realms. Let's not forget that when Steiner
spoke of the types of consciousness we had during the Saturn,
Sun and Moon Periods he was merely making a comparison between
those levels of consciousness and that of the animals, plants
and mineral as we know them today during the Earth Period. Can
it be and I would suggest that the animal, plant and mineral
realms are recapitulations of those past stages of consciousness
now manifested in the world's animals, plants and mineral.
In RSteiner's lectures on the Apocalypse of St. John (June 1908)
he spoke of the eventual evolution and extinction of the animal,
plant and mineral realms as the earth advances in its evolution.
The animal realm passes away first and the astral forces from
them envelop the earth with wisdom. The plant realm then follows
in its extinction and gives the earth the capacity to emit light.
The mineral realm is the last to dissolve and its dissolution
allows the earth to become a body of heat/fire.
rick distasi
............................................................................................................................
From: Kim Munch Michelsen
Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 6:04 am
Subject: RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Rick Distasi
In each cycle some go on in development because they have learnt
what they should and some don't reach the goal.
When the new cycle starts, the environment is changed: Those
hos managed to build the body in the last cycle, continue building
on the new body they get, in the new cycle, while those who did
not, continue to build on the body they got in the old cycle.
To help them finish their body from the previous cycle, some
of their 'teachers' from that cycle, stands back in their development.
The group egoes for the animal species, and for man (Bull, Lion,
Eagle and Man) also, are spirits who have stopped in their development
to give the necessary conditions for the continued development.
You can call it recapitulation, but continuation is a better
word.
In the first 3½ cycle the development forced the planetary
material down into more and more heavy material. The next 3½
cycle are going against the lighter materials again. The way
through the last cycles is development, it's the only way to
dissolve the heavier stuff, and that means that the animals,
the plants and the minerals has to finish the evolution started
on Saturn.
Steiner talks a few places about the 8'th planet. It's build
of residue from the old Moon and is on a lower level than earth.
It's Lucifer and Ahrimans intension to build their kingdom there.
It's build on non purified astral remains of man and animal.
If they succeed in that, it would not be possible to reach the
goal after the 7'th cycle.
The animal stuff passes away first, that is converted to a higher
level. At the same time the plant stuff, and the mineral stuff
moves one step up. In the next cycle the plant stuff on the higher
level is converted, and the mineral stuff on the higher level
moves one step further up. In the last cycle the now two times
hightened mineral is converted.
The reached levels, Wisdom, Emitting of Light, and the body of
Heat and Fire is the development of atman, buddhi and manas,
and it means the conversion off all ether-, astral-, and physical
stoff in the world of today, not only in man.
Christ gave os the I AM and gave os the possibility to work on
atman, buddhi and manas. As we are developing these we get bigger
possibilities to further the development of our lower kingdoms
(inclusive what we have in our selves).
Kim
............................................................................................................................
From: Richard Distasi
Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 5:25 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Kim,
I'm not sure if I have fully grasped your point but I would point
out that group souls are Beings already well advanced from humans.
Steiner had mentioned that there are many group souls for animals
and few group soul Beings for the plant world. I can't answer
for the mineral realm though it has it group-soul Beings also.
They may be even less in number than the number of plant group-soul
Beings.
He went on the say that the group-soul Beings for animals are
the Mights who are active as the group-soul of a species on the
astral realm. It is in the astral realm that animals have their
Ego as a group; A Might or group of Mights act as the Ego for
any one species. The plants have their Egohood in lower devachan
as the Spirits of Wisdom are the group-Ego Beings for the plant
realm. The mineral has its Egohood in upper devachan. The Spirits
of Will are the Group-Ego Beings for the mineral realm.
rick distasi
............................................................................................................................
From: Kim Munch Michelsen
Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 6:23 am
Subject: RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Hello Rick
My main point is that the only difference between man and animal
is that man has an ego and animals don't.
Both man and animal groups has a group ego.
And if man has common goup egoes, then there should be nothing
illogical that an animal can develop whats necessary to aquire
an ego.
RS: Just as the human being has an individual ego, so in every
astral body there lives something of a group-ego; this animal-ego
lives in the human astral body and the human being does not become
independent of this animal-ego until he develops astral sight
and becomes a companion of astral beings, when the group-souls
of the animals confront him on the astral plane as individual
animals confront him here.
(Theosophy of the Rosicrucian II THE NINEFOLD
CONSTITUTION OF MAN
http://wn.elib.com/Steiner/Lectures/19070526p01.html)
.
The soul groups of man is: Lion, Eagle, Bull, Man. They are described
in connection with the start of atlantis and in connection with
the Apocalypse of John. In the Apocalypse it is written how man
regresses to the animal kingdom when he don't develop his ego.
Futhermore, the group-egoes are teachers from the previous cycle
which has stopped their evolution to help the last with the rest
of their evolution.
Kim
............................................................................................................................
From: Richard Distasi
Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 6:27 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Kim,
As of now I can only respond in saying that the mineral moves
into etheric plant-like forms in the next condition of life of
the Earth Manvantara. The plant realm moves up into astral forms
that move about in the astral realm as do animals do now in the
physical world today and that the animal realm is now converted
back to the pure Egohood of the Group Egos which are Spirits
of Motion (animals).
rick distasi
............................................................................................................................
From: Richard Distasi
Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 6:35 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Tarjei wrote:
Are you saying that a shorter time than 'centuries' - i.e.
the equivalent of time elapsed between birth and death - is the
time now spent in the spiritual world by normal people like you
and me?"
Yes, that's what I am trying to say. Didn't Steiner mention that
the souls that were first involved in the early years of the
Anthroposophical Movement would be reincarnating again in the
second half of the 20th. century.? I thought that I had read
that somewhere.
Also. you are right about the souls who rush back to earth due
to the heavy influence of Ahriman in their souls. As I recall
Steiner warned that barbarism would be a problem in the close
of the 20th. century due to souls who in the late 19th. century
and early 20th. century did really nothing in the way of taking
up any kind of spiritual life. As a consequence they could not
find communion with higher Beings in their after life. Likewise,
if one does not connect with progressive Beings one then attracts
lower adversarial Beings.
rick distasi
............................................................................................................................
From: Tarjei Straume
Date: Mon Dec 15, 2003 1:40 am
Subject: Reincarnations (Body of Christ)
At 15:35 01.12.2003, Rick wrote:
Tarjei wrote:
Are you saying that a shorter time than
'centuries' - i.e. the equivalent of time elapsed between birth
and death - is the time now spent in the spiritual world by normal
people like you and me?"
Yes, that's what I am trying to say. Didn't
Steiner mention that the souls that were first involved in the
early years of the Anthroposophical Movement would be reincarnating
again in the second half of the 20th. century.? I thought that
I had read that somewhere.
Those who were to work towards
a real development of Christianity - souls not at the moment
incarnated on the earth, and also other spiritual beings - were
gathered in great numbers around Michael, from the fourteenth
to the sixteenth century, as though in a great, supersensible
school in which those souls were being prepared who were to appear
on earth at the beginning of the twentieth century during Michael's
regency. When we look at what was being prepared there we find
that it was the anthroposophical world view, which wants to work
for this evolution.
From what the ancient Mystery
wisdom saw, and through the prophetic sight of future Mystery
wisdom, we gather that human beings who take in what we call
the inner Christianity, the spiritualized Christianity, those
who look to the Genius of the Sun with regard to Christ: these
indivivuals will experience an acceleration of their evolution
and reappear on the earth again at the end of the twentieth century.
"The Book of Revelation and the Work
of the Priest" (GA 346) lecture 8,
Dornach 12 Sept 1924.
It seems to me that we're still talking minimum
300 years between incarnations here. Exceptions to the rule are
avatars and initiates, plus those on the opposite scale who are
savages of sorts.
Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/
............................................................................................................................
From: Richard Distasi
Date: Tue Dec 16, 2003 5:52 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Reincarnations (Body of
Christ)
Tarjei,
I wish I could locate the quote from Steiner in which he said
that because of the ahrimanic impulses that weave through human
souls today that the time spent between incarnations is much
shorter now. It may be from, "The Ahrimanic Deception"
lecture. Not only are initiates returning sooner and I believe
that because of their advanced state they were always able to
do so but also everyone has a stronger and more developed Ego
than what was the case centuries and millennia ago. The need
to spend centuries in the spiritual world in times past was necessary
because the Ego was much weaker than it is now for most people.
Also the time spent in the spiritual world was often in a condition
in which it was asleep. The bible has several references to the
dead in which it refers to the dead as those who are in sleep.
And these books were written during their times which were two
thousand years ago and more. The Ego would return to the earth
when either physical conditions changed dramatically or in the
post Atlantean Period when the cultural change would be a factor.
The world is culturally changing more rapidly now than ever before.
Look back to the early years of the 20th. century and now to
the present. It is almost two different worlds. To be present
at the beginning of the 20th. century and not reincarnate again
until centuries into the future would be a great loss for the
human soul/Ego. You can't gain in the spiritual world what can
only be gained here on earth.
I don't feel that the dynamics of reincarnation are stagnate
but rather they are ever in flux and flow with the dynamics of
human evolution. Spending centuries in the spiritual world between
incarnations is a thing of the past. Steiner may point out that
the human Ego follows generations of people here on earth before
it reincarnates. But let's be realistic in what we see about
us in the world today. Since W.W.II the world has experienced
a tremendous population explosion and I simply cannot accept
that we all now spend centuries following a bloodline in which
we then incarnate. This may still hold true for those who have
a very special role to play in human evolution and that they
need to incarnate into very special conditions but for the most
part I think we incarnate when we are ready and we take on an
incarnation that is closest to what would fit our destiny. I
don't think that it is as precise and exact as many occultists
espouse though this would be the ideal rather than the actual
reality anymore.
rick distasi
............................................................................................................................
From: golden3000997
Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 4:34 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
WHOA, cool, dude! : )
............................................................................................................................
From: golden3000997
Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 4:40 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Let's film the whole trip in "bullet
shots" like "The Matrix"
Righteous, dude! : )
............................................................................................................................
From: Daniel Hindes
Date: Thu Dec 11, 2003 7:28 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
OK, I've found it. It is in a book of Steiner
lectures called The Temple Legend, lecture of October 23rd, 1905.
Daniel Hindes
----- Original Message -----
From: dottie zold
To: <anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 1:24 PM
Subject: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
Daniel wrote:
Adam Kadmon (a name not found in the Bible,
but in Jewish esoteric tradition) represents humanity before
gender (and if it makes you feel any better, Steiner said that
the primal human form before the division into sexes generally
more resembled the female - I can find the lecture if you would
like).
Hi Daniel,
Yes please point me to the lecture. Another thought comes up
for me regarding this Adam Kadmon that I would like to look at
if you don't mind. I shall just give a moment of background of
my own thought so I can get a fix on this concept.
Okay until now I have come to the idea that we are all God. Each
of us is this piece that makes up the whole. I come to the idea
of no hiearchy which usually gets people in a bit of an uproar
to a certain extent beings many things seem to show a hiearchy
especially in Steiners work and of course many others.
My point is what is this Kadmons relationship to God? Because
if I go to the place of thinking that this Kadmon is actually
a unity of all the souls that exist in our Earth existance than
I can see possibly a hiearchy outside of itself: because God
and the Angeles would be outside of it yet within the whole Cosmic
world.
So, what is the relationship of Kadmon to God and to the Cosmos
if we do indeed hold them to be seperate yet one. I wonder the
shape of a Kadmon I wonder if it is a fish:)
Also do you know in what Jewish essoteric book I can find this
in?
Thanks,
Dottie
P.S. I think Sophia is in that which you note below. And in this
is the mystery of how the male female divine presence was present
on Earth at Golgotha. imo. I wish we could develope this stream
a little more here at A-T.
............................................................................................................................
From: dottie zold
Date: Thu Dec 11, 2003 9:49 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Body of Christ
--- Daniel wrote:
OK, I've found it. It is in a book of Steiner
lectures called The Temple Legend, lecture of October 23rd, 1905.
I LOVE YOU DANIEL:)
I have the book. Thanks so very much.
Dottie
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Click to subscribe to anthroposophy_tomorrow
November/December
2003
The Uncle
Taz "Anthroposophy Tomorrow" Files
Anthroposophy & Anarchism
Anthroposophy & Scientology
Anthroposophical
Morsels
Anthroposophy,
Critics, and Controversy
