Re: Heads Up: Steiner's "Esoteric Lessons"
- --- In email@example.com, Robert Mason
> I think that the situation is a little moreYes, the situation is complex, but on an internet forum it becomes a
> complicated than you seem to assume, Stephen.
> If you have it available, you might want to
> read Stephen Usher's discussion of this topic
> in the Summer 1994 issue of the ASiA
> *Newsletter*, pp. 34-5. He cites GA 264....
matter of what to say without dulling people any more than they
already are with concerns that they have no real clue of. I do not
assume anything because I have studied this particular subject for a
number of years, and the real matter of concern with the occult
movement in the 19th century is that it was brought forward into the
20th in its entirety. And no one has really touched the subject of
how this played out in the century that is now seven years past.
When you consider the ES of 1904-1914 it is important to remember
that Steiner felt a great responsibility to extend occult history
into the present, even if he personally felt the need to move in a
new direction. This new direction is amply indicated with his four
main works: PoF, Theosophy, KoHW, and OS. Thus,it is well known
that Steiner allowed the receiving of a templar lodge in 1906 from
Theodor Reuss, but only to pay homage to the extension of occult
history. According to his autobiography, he never implemented it as
a practice. As well, according to the last pages of the KR, Steiner
was much more in favor of moving directly from the platonism and
aristotelianism that permeate his main philosophical work, The
Philosophy of Freedom, than having to edit Goethe's scientific
writings. It could even be said that having to work through
theosophy to get to anthroposophy was an unwelcome compromise.
So, in fact the original ES, which I know has a cult following
today, stands for something that was overcome. Yet, still has its
adherents, which is why I spoke up. It was not to be abrupt, or
rude, or to dismiss your kind offering, or make a dismissive
judgment by any means.
The fact is that in September of 1914, World War I broke out in
Germany, and this had a huge effect on the furtherance of
anthroposophy, and the beginning of a heightened sense of
responsibility by Steiner for the future. And this sense would
increase year-by-year until 1925. And that is why the original ES
fell by the wayside. Many things began to be seen for what they
truly were behind their outer facades; their masks.
But the real catalyst for what would take form as the lectures from
October 10-25, 1915, was what occurred in the immediate aftermath of
the marriage of Rudolf Steiner to Marie von Sievers in December of
1914. And it had the effect of plaguing the Society for ten months,
until this course was given as a resolution.
Do you know the incident referred to? It was one of those society
matters wherein certain people tried to create dividing lines; a
schism in effect, which Steiner had to deal with at the same time
that he was trying to explain the occult forces that were working
behind WWI, and the demands these forces placed on the human soul
I'm sorry, we don't seem to be speaking the same language, strangely enough. But that which is common between us both, is that we both inhabit this earth on this year 2007. We share the same language of communication. We also read works by Steiner. I invite you to glance at this excerpt from The Metamorphosis of Intelligence-The Fundamental Social Demands of our Time. From this passage, you may be able to gain a hint or even an understanding of how, and under what circumstances I think.
I personally don't feel that I should be compelled to pay lip service to specific elements of the American folk soul in any way, shape or form if I choose not to. I feel that I am entitled, through the authority held by the heavens even, to live freely, in spirit, in the deepest sense of the word and in the form that I'm able to discover through my own hard efforts ...
Again, my own translation from French to English, pratically word for word.
"...If you study historic rapports (relationships) within a symptomatology of history, you will find the following: it appears that Protestantism is all natural to instinctive intelligence, which is inbred in occidental Europe and America, an 'evidence' that manifests itself often enough in political and religious life. This absolutely self evident instinct impregnates all, it does not require a particular dispositon, even though here and there, you will find the hearts of reformists quite enflamed by it. Instinctive Protestantism has no need to call upon Reform as was the case in central Europe; it exists naturally in the West, we could even say: the West is born protestant, central European discusses protestantly, for precisely, protestantism calls forth discussion on intelligent things. In this instance, it is not inborn.
Russia, for it's part, pushes it away, refuses it, doesn't want of it and being Russian, it cannot accept it. Russianism and Protestantism do not support each other.
That which I've spoken of has value not only in a confessional point of view but expresses itself within all the cultural impulse. Take for example how the West receives Marxism. It is over there greeted as a protest against (former) ancient property rights, etc... in the center, we discuss of these same subjects, we will quarell over them, doubt them, we'll say many unecessary things, all of which is significant to the caracter of the peoples of central Europe. In the East, it takes on strange forms, there we transpose it, we recompose it completely and there we find it penetrated by and colored in Orthodoxy. It's not carried over into ideation, but only into the manner in which the Russian places himself in front of it, how he imprints it with Orthodoxical faith.
This comment (remark) reveals just how much it is necessary to draw back from exterior assessments in order to have an indepth view. You will understand much if you develop in yourselves the habit to say to yourselves, when facing all phenomena in life: words in the way that we use them today, have become ' used money'; what is thought of things and expressed through language, never corresponds to it's exact truth. One must go even deeper, I would say, the protestantism in the way that it defines itself today, through habit in how we form thought, is no longer capable of expressing anything real. You see, it is so necessary to overcome the image of the word, the image of the idea, in order to apprehend it's truth in a way that is living.....
(And a few pages later)
...So when a person scolds another, it's not because the one being scolded is like this or like that, but because the scolder experiences the need to scold and wishes to be relieved of it.
This has now to do with considering things in a way other than the one of which we are accustomed. Grasping Spiritual Science at the deepest levels of the soul is in many circumstances, quite other, than what even anthroposophist represent for themselves..." RS.
The Metamorphosis of Intelligence- The Fundamental Social Demands of our Time. Dornach 15.12.1918
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "Stephen Hale" <sardisian01@...> wrote:
> --- In email@example.com, "carol" organicethics@ wrote:
> > I remember the title contained the words: realite vraie- Real Reality?
> > Anyway, I will write Mark and ask him to resend it to me.
> > So back to square one, again.
> > That's if, you are willing to STUDY as opposed to throwing around your
> > Will.
> From this point forward I will give you the big wide berth that you
> deserve, or maybe "need" is a better word.