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

4142Re: [anthroposophy] Back on track

Expand Messages
  • Joel Wendt
    Jul 16, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      Paul writes:

      > A few questions/comments:
      > 1/ Sergei Prokofieff clearly had extraordinary gifts to be able to write "R.S.
      > and the Founding of the New Mysteries" in his mid-twenties, but Joel suggests
      > that that equated with "trying on the mantle of an initiate". I think that that
      > is unfounded: does Gordienko say this?
      > 2/ When was Gordienko's book first published?
      > 3/ What, if any, were her personal links to Prokofieff?
      > 4/ Has Prokofieff responded to the arguments set out in her book?
      > 5/ What are the implications of Gordienko's book?

      I'll make a stab at these questions, and hopefully any others who have
      read the book will contribute.

      #1 The question would be whether this book (RSFNM) contains any
      statements intended to represent original spiritual research or
      experience. I am not that familiar with the book, but my recollection
      of G's book is that SOP does in fact add material not initially provided
      by Steiner. To report such material, to me at any rate, would be to
      represent one's self as a spiritual researcher - aka an initiate. Does
      anyone know of any such material being in RSFNM.

      #2 My understanding is that it was originally written in German and
      published in 1998.

      #3 I have heard that both she and SOP were students of the Russian First
      Class reader, Bodenev (I don't recall the spelling), and that this
      person was later drummed out of the society for anti-semitism (while
      some people say he was not anti-semitic). Further gossip since the book
      came out was that G and SOP were lovers, and he broke it off and so she
      wrote the book in a fit of whatever.

      #4 Again gossip - supposedly SOP told Nick Thomas (English Society
      General Secretary) that G had recanted in front of ten witnesses. Those
      who heard this gossip tried to get SOP to say what witnesses and got no
      response. I have yet to hear of SOP actually making a considered

      #5 The implications to me are multiple. SOP is alleging as spiritual
      facts, matters that are not true, and that the ship of the Society is
      now under the sway of some other impulse than what Steiner hoped for.

      To me, however, it is not the truth or not of G's book that is crucial
      to the Society. What is being offered by Providence is a crisis, just
      like those we have in our individual biographies. This crisis is a gift
      and the important thing is how we respond. Do we choose sides based
      upon some feelings of liking or disliking SOP (or G) as a person, or do
      we consider the facts, read the book, and make a judgment based upon
      real inner work and striving to know the truth. A lot of people so far
      seem to be falling into the first category, which I find not a good sign
      for the future of the Society.

      warm regards,
    • Show all 19 messages in this topic