> I am 48 years old and I was a Waldorf teacher for
> around 15 years. I have
> been away from it for a decade and would like to go
> back if I can find a school
> community that can handle my radicalism.
What do you mean by your radicalism? What class did
you teach in Waldorf and what age group I am
wondering? What did you feel you were supposed to lie
about when you were there? How do you think Dr.
Steiners teachings are more in line with how you would
do things versus the way they are being done?
> I understand the heart impulse very well. My own
> heart is very deeply
> involved. But Anthroposophy per se requires a lot of
> "head" work, too!
Well the way I see it the two must be married in a
sense. It seems to me they mostly work seperately and
the more enlightened we become the more chances are
that the mind is won over by the spirit.
> Just a few points:
> 1. You noticed the simplistic element in the Koran -
> that's what I meant by a
> mish mash re-telling of Old Testament stories - very
> popular all over the
> middle east at the time.
Yes but the same thing happened with the stories of
the Bible as well as the Torah. These can be traced
back to the Buddist/Hindu Traditions as well. The
story has been told for thousands of years before
Christ came. We may have a different take on them but
most of their forms come from the ancient archtypes of
humanity itself. We just found another way to tell the
> 2. I would never equate the "Deed of Christ" and
> man's choices in his actions
> at any level. This is really off the mark. What
> Christ chose to do and why is
> far, far beyond man's capacity of choice at any
Well, I would have to disagree. I believe what Christ
did is what we all must do to know the Father. I don't
believe there is another way.
He was not a "man"
> though incarnated in the flesh. Men's choices are
> mundane in comparison, but this
> does not, to me, mean that mankind has to be so very
> stupid and greedy about
Again, I disagree. It will take great Christ like
courage and Christ like will power to ward off all
that has been given to us in this physical
incarnation. We must reach up and touch the Heavens
with our hearts. No easy task. Christ reached down and
touched the Earth with His heart. And he did become
human in my mind. Christ chose the same path, albeit a
bit differently, that happens when we become human
from the spiritual world. imo. Christ got to become
man and to experience it just as our spirits
experience this physical reality. And the spirit of
Christ 'sank' down in man to know all that we as man
know and feel. I can't take that away from Christ.
> 3. I have worked through a lot of Christology in
> myself through reading and
> discussion. I won't claim any special revelation or
> vision, but I have had very
> strong experiences supported by my studies. What
> future ages may have the
> maturity to understand, once we grow past the
> patriarchal power structure of the
> past ? 5,000 years, is that "God" is not male! "God"
> (and I put this most
> carefully in quotes because it is so presumptuous in
> a way to say what God is or
> is not) is the Divine Oneness of the Universe from
> which all eminates, or has
> its being. I don't know if you have studied the
> Bible in the light of
> Anthroposophy yet, but there are many "open
> secrets". If you really do read it and take
> it word for word as truth, you really have to come
> to vastly different
> conclusions than any church I have encountered so
> far. Read Genesis and the line
> (mind you this is BEFORE Adam and Eve)
I have had confirmation on many of the things you
speak of above. This is my study for some reason. It
did not start out as that but I was guided to find
much of what you speak of regarding the Marys. And
most of it came through vision type of experiences or
at least guided type of experiences. And it was mostly
shocking although it was also instantaneously self
evident. But then I am a doubting Thomas in a sense
and my spirit has to work double for me to really
believe of a thing that has been shown or seen by me.
> Genesis 1:27 So God created humankind in his image,
> in the image of God he
> created them; male and female he created them."
But what does that really mean? See for me, my work is
leading me to find the Father and I think the Father
is the physical reality and that is why we are all
male and female. I think that is what Magdalene meant
when she said 'he is going to make males of us all'(
meaning Christ)...to me that means they are all going
to become Suns or rayers of God. I believe the female
part of us is the spirit. Therefore we, as human
beings are all male and female. This thought is not
really confirmed in me but it is jostling around
looking for the Father. As well I recall Dr. Steiner
stating that the Father is asleep. Well, what does
that mean? Asleep?
> Anyway, this to illustrate the male/female unity of
> God and the manifestation
> of God as male and female on the physical plane. Why
> then interpret the
> Trinity as God the Father, God the Son (Sun -
> shouldn't really be male in a strict
> sense, but another topic) and God the Holy Spirit
> and interpret this as a
> "He"? It is the Holy Spirit which INCARNATES the
> LOGOS or Sun of God, and through
> whom did He incarnate in the physical? And who was
> specifically present in the
> upper room at Pentecost with the disciples? I have
> some pictures somewhere
> around here of Mary in the middle of the circle as
> they receive the flame above
> their heads - most rosary pictures have it that way.
> Again, SHE brings it down
> into them. SHE IS the manifestation of the Divine
> Female. And not just ONE
> Mary - but THREE Marys.
I am wondering if you see Magdalene sitting to the
left of Jesus at the last Supper? Do you see her in
the room? Have you ever seen the painting, don't know
whose it is, where the finger of God reaches out and
touches the finger of man? Up until this year I
thought that was the whole painted picture. It is not.
Under the bridge of a place I drive past is a mural of
the whole picture or at least what I can feel is the
whole picture: God with his arms enfolding a woman and
a child. Incredible.
There is a book called Crone, don't recall the author
at the moment, that really allowed me to move further
on my search for the Marys' mystery. It was there that
I was able to connect the symbolism of the three
Marys. And they can be found throughout history of the
OT as well as Hindu/Buddist/Sumerian texts.
But I see Mary Magdalene as the third in the
> Female Trinity of God.
I see her there as well. For me she is the Daughter
Voice of God. Never really thought of it being the
third but it makes sense if we look at mother father
> She was the one who first saw the Risen Christ.
> There were three Marys
> accounted for at the foot of the cross, also.
I am wondering if you see her at the end of John on
the beach with Christ? Do you see her as the one Peter
takes issue with and Christ tells him to mind his own
business in a sense?
> Mind you, this is not a full answer, just pointing
> in the direction of one.
> Of course the Maria Sophia is of the past in terms
> of mankind's past. But her
> IMPULSE is of the future - it is the impulse of
> TRANSFORMATION. God = BEING
> Christ = CREATION Holy Spirit = TRANSFORMATION.
When you say Transformation I think of creative. To me
She is the creative energy and it transcends any past
present or future ideals in my thoughts.
> Everything that is alive,
> physically or spiritually must transform, change,
> must dissolve and resurrect in a
> new form. Otherwise it stagnates, dies and decays or
> crystallizes. That is what
> Ahriman wants the world to do. Achieve "perfection"
> then crystallize and stay
> frozen for all eternity. Lucifer wants us to wallow
> in a spiritual mire -
> caught in our own spiritual cesspool of stagnant,
> individualized spirituality
> which has no relationship or connection with the
> true spiritual world.
I see Lucifer as my lower self. I find Luci, the
feminine aspect of Lucifer is very seductive off our
own wants and desires. I watch her kick mans ass all
the time through artists and musicians particulary and
it makes me laugh so hard when it is my friends. She's
just waiting to be played with in a sense. And she
puts herself in front of all hoping to tempt. But it
is us who are tempted. It is not her fault as far as I
> Lucifer have their reality both internally and
> externally. But when man succumbs to them
> allows them to take over
> his ego and limit or corrupt his progress, then they
> become "evil" on our plane
> of existence.
I don't know about 'them' taking over mans ego. I am
thinking it is man who gives it over out of laziness
or lethargy, loss of hope due to interaction with
other humans who have lost hope and the spirit not
being put forth as the most important. And then we
Read "Lucifer and Ahriman" by Steiner.
> It is not a question of
> hating either of them.
The problem I have is people blaming them. Tarjie has
an amazing poem/story on his page of Christ and
Lucifer. I will see if I can find it.
> In regard to being "as a child" in heart-openess and
> a willingness to learn
> and to share with others, I think that it is a
> natural and good part of
> activating that love-force within you. However,
> there is a spiritual maturity that
> comes from thinking that can, for some people
> initate that heart force, for
> others, strengthen and support it.
I am teaching my heart to think not my mind to feel.
Again, it's late and I have to go work in the belly
> of the beast tomorrow, so
> I will say good night and promise to give more
> later, if you really want me
Christine, I love your thoughts and forwardness in
them. You are right about the Marys and there is so
much more to learn about the mystery. And its good and
I believe this is what the war is leading to: the
opening of the Feminine force within all of us on a
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard