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

Re: Gulags for Anthros?

Expand Messages
  • carol
    Robert wrote: Anthroposophy does indeed have moral force , and the karma of the Anthro Movement is interwoven with world-karma, but whatever influence
    Message 1 of 68 , Jul 29 10:55 PM

      Robert wrote:

      "Anthroposophy does indeed have "moral force", and the karma of the Anthro Movement is interwoven with world-karma, but whatever influence Anthroposophy may have had upon world politics seems to be the obscure kind of karmic influence that only a Seer such as Steiner could perceive clearly.

      Perhaps Anthroposophy on Earth, as Steiner suggested, will have to live a "catacomb"-life for several centuries before Anthro ideas can shape the larger society in any way that would be noticeable to non-occultic observers."

      Yes, I beleive that you are right that Anthroposophy's influence exists as an obscure kind of karmic influence. This is exemplified in the following excerpt from:

      The New Manifestation of Spirit/The Fundamental Social Demands of our Time 20/12/1918 Dornach

      I basically translated it word for word from French, so you will have a sense of thinking as the French do while you read the English words...

       

      "...The purpose of the Anthroposophic Society is exactly to make comprehensible these new spirtual representations.

      We can ask this important question: Who is behind these revelations that are rising forth and piercing the veil of fact within humanity's history? You are familiar with the Hierarchies, their prescriptions of which also are the Spirits of Personality. You know that they are positioned below those from which you find Jahve, for example, the Spirits of Form. The Spirits of Personality now wish to join to the revelations of the Spirits of Form, thanks to a preperation, but with a lesser strength than which is used by the Spirits of Form to manifest themselves.

      If we were to look for a term to describe the Sprits of Form, we would do well to remain with the ancien and fair term of 'creators'. The biblical term: creator, pretty much sums up what we can attach to the Sprits of Form, through observing their influence on mankind since the ancient Lumerie time up until our day, and even into the future. They will not cease their activities but they will be obliged to organise them according to another plan. All observations reveal that the Spirits of Forms can be called 'creators' of which mankind is subject for their existance as earthly beings. But the Sprits of Personality for their part, have not until this time been creators: they have prescribed different things within other spiritual fields. You can refer to what is said in my "Occult Science". Now, the time has begun where they are to create. In a later time, they will also create within other kingdoms. Evolution exists within the Hierarchies. The Spirits of Personality are rising to creative activity, and this fact leads us to become familiar with an evotionary enigma.

      He who ponders on the deep impulses in evolution knows that at the onset of our 5th post Atlantian period, something has begun to breakdown (weaken). I would go as far as saying that all of our psychical and spiritual progress is dependent on this paralysis, this breaking down of our very nature. We are no longer the same as our ancesters of a few centuries ago, and even more so of those of milleniums ago. They were in posession of a certain vitality, a strength of which was derived exclusively from the body. Mankind knows death only when it presents itself through the form of the cessation of earthly life. But we also know that something is continualy dying within ourselves. If this were not the case, we wouldn't know 'consciousness' since this exists because of this continuous death . Now, this process of dying has become much more rapid than was the case in the early Christian centuries, and much more than in prechristian times. That which is given to us through the Spirits of Form has begun to breakdown (weaken) and so a new impulse coming out of the Spirit world must now intervene. In fact, beginning in our time, creative forces originating from the Spirit world are being introduced into humankind, when one does not refuse them, when one does not erect obstacles against them. Spiritual Science attempts to understand these creative forces. It does so through using thought and vision to grasp the spiritual elements which are now penetrating human evolution, elements of which their impulses up until this time have not intervened. Speaking in modern terms, Anthroposophy is just this. She exists because the heavens are sending new revelations to mankind and these need to be understood. It is not for putting into application a scientific program or other. To not understand her mission through this viewpoint, is to not understand it at all.

      In fact, she would be silent if from out of the heavens, these revelations were not coming forth (erupting), if they were not something all together "new". Therefore, that which is being made manifest in this manner is the expression of a new creative principal of which the Spirits of Personality have the charge. As a result, the caracter of our era (since its origins in the XVth century) is an expression of the impulses of the 'Personality". This here wants to be responsible for itself, wants to stand it's own feet, and if you would permit me to express it thus, it will want this more and more into the 3rd millenium. Other impulses will take over once the personality will be completely perfected..."  RS

      PS. Just for fun!

      C.

       

       


      --- In anthroposophy@yahoogroups.com, Robert Mason <robertsmason_99@...> wrote:
      >
      > To Carol, who wrote:
      >
      > >>I would say that North Americans are walking
      > on a similar fragile ground as their European
      > counterparts are.<<
      >
      > Robert writes:
      >
      > You are in Canada, in Quebec; I am in the US.
      > I haven't traveled much, but I do have the
      > impression that there are significant legal-
      > cultural differences between the US and Canada
      > (and probably even more so for Quebec). We are
      > on the same continent, but we have different
      > histories. Canada never had a 1776, never a
      > Second Amendment, and, for that matter, never
      > slavery, never a Civil War, etc. I get the
      > feeling that Canada is more European in culture
      > than is the US: e.g. more socialized medicine,
      > more gun control, etc.
      >
      > I recall that some years back Ernst Zündel was
      > prosecuted and convicted in Canada for
      > "spreading false news" by his questioning of
      > the standard history of the "Holocaust". And I
      > recall that the Canadian supreme court
      > overturned the conviction and possibly that law
      > against "spreading false news", but I doubt
      > that the process could have gotten that far in
      > the US. This might be an example of Canada's
      > cultural-political place somewhere between the
      > US and Europe: Zündel was prosecuted and
      > convicted, but the respect for civil liberties
      > was strong enough that he was finally freed.
      >
      > (More recently, the US and Canadian authorities
      > combined to extradite him to Germany, where he
      > is now imprisoned. The respect for civil
      > liberties was not such that the enemies of
      > freedom couldn't pull some legal tricks to
      > finally get him behind bars. You can read some
      > about his extradition from the US here:
      > http://axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/article_24990.shtml)
      >
      > I don't doubt that the "elites" in both Canada
      > and the US are practically indistinguishable
      > and would both like to stamp out all real
      > freedom (they have both signed on the North
      > American Union plan), but still I would guess
      > that they would have a somewhat harder time
      > imposing total control in the US than in
      > Canada. Am I guessing or wishing?
      >
      > Carol wrote:
      >
      > >>. . . . more thorough experiences of the
      > spirit of Anthroposophy would not be rising to
      > the surface of consciousness, in some of us, if
      > the opportunity for experiencing the vivid
      > manifestation of 'evil' was not here and now.<<
      >
      > Robert writes:
      >
      > Yes, that ties into the much larger question of
      > why the Gods allow, even command, the presence
      > of evil in the world. A deep, solemn Mystery.
      > Apparently the bottom line is that evil is
      > necessary to the evolution of freedom and love.
      >
      > Carol wrote:
      >
      > >>I strongly suggest that we all start now, in
      > establishing a real firm grip on the side of
      > good (Michael, Anthroposophy) because as much
      > as possible, it's best that a growing number
      > face the 'battle against the dark spirits' on
      > the level of the soul, and not allow their
      > unconscious souls to passively go along with
      > 'it' being projected onto our outward
      > social/geographic sphere.<<
      >
      > Robert writes:
      >
      > The inner and outer battles go hand-in-hand,
      > don't they?
      >
      > Carol wrote:
      >
      > >>The problem with Anthroposophy, apparently,
      > is that it is a science (albeit spiritual)
      > which is capable of permitting it's 'hosts' to
      > actually 'get in' on the real mischief that's
      > happening behind the scenes. But of course,
      > this is permitted through a portal defined by
      > Anthroposophy . . . . A situation is unraveling
      > itself everyday people (refined Anthros for
      > example) find themselves stumbling into the
      > realms held by secret societies (because these
      > ones impose their rule over them and the rest
      > of the masses)- and are able to influence even
      > their set course because Anthroposophic moral
      > forces carry creative forces and true the
      > spiritual stamp of the Times.<<
      >
      > Robert writes:
      >
      > I tried to think of a concrete case in which
      > Anthroposophy influenced the "set course" of
      > power politics, and I couldn't think of any,
      > especially not any since Steiner's lifetime.
      > Even when Steiner tried to bring the idea of
      > the Threefold Commonwealth to the German
      > leaders as a counterweight to Wilsonism, those
      > efforts failed. Anthroposophy does indeed have
      > "moral force", and the karma of the Anthro
      > Movement is interwoven with world-karma, but
      > whatever influence Anthroposophy may have had
      > upon world politics seems to be the obscure
      > kind of karmic influence that only a Seer such
      > as Steiner could perceive clearly.
      >
      > Perhaps Anthroposophy on Earth, as Steiner
      > suggested, will have to live a "catacomb"-life
      > for several centuries before Anthro ideas can
      > shape the larger society in any way that would
      > be noticeable to non-occultic observers.
      >
      > But this potential does live in Anthroposophy,
      > and the initiated power-occultists know this,
      > and surely the adversarial spiritual powers who
      > inspire them know this -- thus the physical
      > danger that might yet manifest from political
      > power against Anthroposophists.
      >
      > Robert Mason
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > ____________________________________________________________________________________
      > Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative vehicles. Visit the Yahoo! Auto Green Center.
      > http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
      >

    • isenhart7
      ... I m sorry you feel that way.-Val
      Message 68 of 68 , Aug 23, 2007
        --- In anthroposophy@yahoogroups.com, Robert Mason
        <robertsmason_99@...> wrote:

        > I don't object to the mere fact that my view is
        > being challenged; I was inviting a discussion.
        > But so far you haven't shown me anything that
        > convinces me that your "challenge" is well-
        > founded in this case. And now it seems to me
        > that our discussion has reached an impasse, a
        > dead end; you're not saying anything really
        > new. So I don't see any point in my
        > continuing.

        I'm sorry you feel that way.-Val
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.