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

Disfigurations in the Orient - CCXVIII

Expand Messages
  • opetha
    Greetings, One thing that I have found disagreeable about the anthroposophic teaching, particularly on the dual nature between the spirits of Lucifer and
    Message 1 of 2 , Oct 2 4:47 AM
    • 0 Attachment

      One thing that I have found disagreeable about the anthroposophic
      teaching, particularly on the dual nature between the spirits of
      Lucifer and Ahriman,
      is that by nature I have always felt that Rudolf's "invention"---
      invention so far that we now all agree that spiritual phenomena are
      objectivizations---was backwards and quite unforwarned. I feel like
      turning my copy of THE INFLUENCES OF LUCIFER AND AHRIMAN upside down.
      what I mean is: not only are the original meanings behind these names
      misappropriated for Rudolf's usage, but also that the spirit of
      technology is anything but the soul problem of the FUTURE.

      Ahriman in the ZEND AVESTA was the spirit of death, the seventh
      Archangel to infuse his portion into the creation upon which the
      limitation on all living things, including GAYODAD, were to perish.
      This is in keeping with the correspondence to SATURN-SHABBATAI, the
      NEGATIVITY of religion--such is Catholicism, fundementalism, fascism,
      Fraciscanism, etc.

      Lucifer (light-bearer) was a contrivance upon the Biblical adversary
      from the Book of Isaiah, which originally read as the Hebrew HLIL
      (halil--as in Halil V'Jah) meaning commonly Venus. It was translated
      in the Greek Septuagint as PHOSPHORUS and thence to Latin and English
      as LUCIFER. And we can see how in modernity this name is popularly
      used in New-age spiritual circles, where a compromise with Lucifer as
      a necessary spiritual power. This is the POSITIVITY of religion, as
      found in anthroposophy, Thelema, event the Beatles.

      Where Steinar speaks of Lucifer as that force that influences extreme
      spirituality, and Ahriman as that force that influences extreme
      science/technology, a fo par is seen. This for me is because living
      into the twenty-first century (as Rudolf did not) we can see quite a
      different contention between social attitudes, namely what I have
      alluded to as "NEGATIVE" and "POSITIVE religion" above. Ahriman as
      negative is the force of the PAST, and Lucifer as positive (to so-
      many new-age circles) is the force of the FUTURE. Those attitudes
      summed up in Ahriman are Saturnine and are the nomalistic misgivings
      of dogmatic religion, those of Lucifer are magical and sum up the
      freedom of expression that is shown in fashion, stardom and ALSO
      technology as the vehicle of this emerging media.

      So it must be understod that the hypermarket, as technological, is a
      new leeway of Luciferic spirituality, that is "vain-light", spiritism
      that is cast before swine as commodity and egotism, the neon-light
      light of the movie/music machine, Of Aleister Crowley (the first rock-
      star) to Ziigy stardust as pseudo-Messiah, but no the balanced,
      eternal light of Christ. It is also the light of the astral plane
      where the power of light, as Genesis I, is still creating---hence
      magick and pop-music are going hand in hand in the form of Peyr,
      Kukl, Marilyn Manson, Psychic TV etc, people who are not exactly
      sanyasa, but 2D pseudo-messiahs, working from the new mt Olympus that
      is MTV or EMI etc. Howard Bloom's best seller THE LUCIFER PRINCIPLE---
      if it was called the ANIMAL PRINCIPLE or the SAVAGE PRINCIPLE it
      would have been taken up by his fellow anthropologists, but as THE
      LUCIFER PRINCIPLE it has a selling power, one which would see it
      eventually taken up, not by anthropologists, but by modern, pseudo, -
      art-spiritists as documented by Richard metzger for DISINFONATION, a
      TV program that also highlighted pop-culture.

      And this is all something that Steinar could not have prophesied.

      The main cause of the "Ahrimanic" attitude is being born with bad
      prarabdha karma, the libido flows backwards to power existing
      unconscious complexes in that karma that are projected through
      outside affordances. Much of fascism and fundamentalism uses
      scapegoating as a means to "bring one down to our level", hence the
      emerging dislike of Christian, nun-style incarceration, especially by
      a youth that can today claim its pop-cultre as "satanic". These
      karmic images liken to a subjective way of life and have no tend to

      The cause of the "Luciferic" attitude is being born with good
      prarabhda karma (either polarities of karma can have urges upon the
      will and its kriyamena karma). It cannot be content with conservative
      ideals of the apst, but yearns the future. As theocracy changes to
      industry there are much more greater stakes to be won for him who is
      born into riches. With this type of person overcoming the old we can
      see the fall, not only of authoritarianism, but also of the
      romanticism it haboured. Now comes extraverted phallicism and great
      opportunities for him born with an array of well-laced planets on the
      progressed horoscope (the images and complexes of karma).

      And having said this it is well to note how even the whole movement
      of the anthroposophical society is not without its luciferic (or, for
      your sake, "ahrimanic") Inluencing. The love of information--
      spiritual information---and modern word-conventions is a failing of
      the EGO (which has karmic relevancy by the natal-charting of the
      planet Uranos and is very much involved in the projection of ego-
      totemizing, logos, pseudo-nyms, pronouns, STARdom; and also by the
      fact that the age-of-aquarius is ruled by this STAR-planet, this
      planet of Crowley's "everyman and every woman is a star [there is no
      sin but restriction]"). There are human beings that will project this
      Luciferic EGO into the modern machine of the internet, with catchy
      pseudonym and all, and pose themselves as little spiritual masters
      (The GD website is beset by adolescent teenagers taking the names of
      their favourite Greek masters), the bad thing is is that it is this
      spirituality-EGO that is the veil over the more loving and
      considerate SELF.

      We are all with our biases due to Karma urge--which is different from
      will---and inevitably it is to balance this bias and destroy good AND
      bad karma, not produce one or the other. Jung, as the wisest man in
      the west, critically reduced the theosophic and anthroposophic person
      to the extraverted THINKING TYPE, a psychological type that fulfills
      just one of the arms of the cross, and this is not without some sort
      of karmic makeup of the psyche. My objection to Steinar is quite in
      the negative, fundamental to this unconscious Karma because I have
      bad prarabha Karma myself, so it is the duty of a positive
      anthroposophist to meet me halfway and not ignore my post, insult it
      or misunderstand it, and that the new spiritual science is not
      without the modernity extreme itself, whether it belivews it is the
      centre or not.

    • tmasthenes13
      Welcome, Godot! Been waiting a long time for you to show up. I ve got to run & tell Estragon, not to mention Lucky & Pozzo! Make yourself at home here where
      Message 2 of 2 , Oct 2 12:47 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        Welcome, Godot!

        Been waiting a long time for you to show up.

        I've got to run & tell Estragon, not to mention Lucky & Pozzo!

        Make yourself at home here where the inmates not only RUN the asylum;
        they ARE the asylum.

      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.