Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

2323Re: [anthroposophy] Russell Re:Anthroposophist

Expand Messages
  • elf
    Dec 1, 2001
      and love will overcome egoism.. :)

      --- elaineupton@... wrote:
      > Hello Russell,
      > Russell, you write, apparently in response to my
      > post, though you do
      > not address me or call any name Here's what you say
      > (and see my reply
      > below):
      > Russell:
      > > The right interpretation of "Anthroposophy" is not
      > "the wisdom of
      > the human
      > > being"' but rather "the consciousness of one's
      > humanity". -- Rudolf
      > Steiner
      > > "Awakening to Community" - Feb. 1923
      > >
      > > Anthroposophy is a path of knowledge to guide the
      > spiritual in the
      > human
      > > being to the spirit in the universe.
      > My reply:
      > First of all, why do you ask a question if you think
      > you already have
      > the answer. You started this thread by asking what
      > is anthroposophy
      > (and about community)? Was that a set up for you to
      > get others to
      > talk and then come back and tell us (whoever, since
      > your post here
      > adresses no one ) what you think you know?
      > Second, what you say (or quote of Steiner and quote
      > from my post, as
      > well, though that is not clear) seems to be not only
      > possibly a
      > translation issue, but also a mis-quoting and a
      > quoting out of
      > context, and a splitting of hairs. Let me be more
      > specific.
      > You write, "anthroposophy is not the wisdom of the
      > human being..."
      > Apparently you are replying to my post where I said
      > that Steiner
      > often said that "anthroposophy is the wisdom IN the
      > human being." You
      > do not address me, but of all the responses to this
      > thread, this
      > quote comes closest to what I wrote to you. Yet, you
      > misquote me
      > quoting Steiner. You say anthroposophy is not the
      > wisdom "of" the
      > human being. I never said it was, and as far as I
      > know, neither did
      > Steiner. To say the wisdom "in" the human being is
      > quite different
      > than the wisdom "of" the human being.
      > Third, you say that Steiner says that anthroposophy
      > is "the
      > consciousness of one's humanity". I have no problem
      > with that, but I
      > doubt that it is a "rather than" situation in the
      > way that you set it
      > up, where you say Steiner says that 'anthroposophy
      > is this rather
      > than that.' Steiner said a lot of things, to
      > different people, in
      > different lectures and to different pupils at
      > different times. There
      > is even the possibility that Steiner changes his
      > mind or contradicts
      > himself or more likely, evolves, or says things that
      > are relevant to
      > one audience and one set of pupils or pupil and not
      > to another. Which
      > is not to say that Steiner is immoral or lying. No.
      > He evolves, and
      > he is also a human with some flaws, who sometimes
      > may contradict
      > himself, and he also realized that certain things
      > were more
      > appropriate for one pupil or audience and not for
      > another.
      > So, I would say that it is splitting hairs to say
      > that 'anthroposophy
      > is not the wisdom "of" (or "in", which means
      > something different, by
      > the way) the human being, but rather....." This kind
      > of hair
      > splitting, if done by you, Russell, or by Steiner,
      > is not very
      > fruitful to me. I forgive Steiner his
      > inconsistencies, because he
      > was, after all, and is, for me at least, a great
      > being of wisdom who
      > has taught and teaches me much. I pray to be able to
      > forgive myself
      > my even greater inconsistences....
      > As for you, dear Russell, I'd advise you not to ask
      > a question if you
      > think you already know the answer, unless you make
      > it clear that you
      > are being rhetorical.
      > Also, I'd prefer that if you are responding to my
      > posts, you answer
      > me directly, even if you also address or include all
      > others in your
      > address. Speaking of community (your question of
      > community), that,
      > for me, in the personal address and attention from
      > the heart (even as
      > best one can in 'virtual reality') is the beginning
      > of community.
      > Community begins where you are.
      > In any case, you will do as you are able, and I will
      > wish you the
      > best in that. Thanks for the exchange and
      > opportunity to learn.
      > Peace,
      > elaine

      Do You Yahoo!?
      Buy the perfect holiday gifts at Yahoo! Shopping.
    • Show all 15 messages in this topic