Re: Judas Iscariot --> ????? ---> Leonardo
- Val, I'm not sure there's a "Steiner Said" on this one. In fact, if
you can find it, it stands to be a very important find in the annals
of what Steiner had to say about Peter. You see, Steiner had
nearly next to nothing to say about Peter in all of his voluminous
lecture work. He had alot to say about Paul, but little to say
about Peter. Please believe me. Outside of "The Fifth Gospel",
which treats of Peter's rather profoundly experienced initiation at
the Last Supper, Steiner seems to have excluded Peter from the
My perception on this concerns how Paul was the very first to
experience the Etheric Christ, while Peter's experience is quite a
bit more primordial, and maybe Steiner felt that it was meant for a
future time. Although he gave many indications of how the bull
sacrifice was needed in order for the sun forces to enter mankind,
he never specifically names Peter as bearing this requirement as
part of his personal being. It is true, nonetheless.
As well, Abraham can be found in the personal karma of Peter. And
it's been gone over before with the same fiery enthusiasm as I
display now. And thanks to Bradford for challenging us to not be
just grazing cows.
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "isenhart7" <isenhart7@...>
> --- In email@example.com, "Stephen Hale"
> > Val, I don't buy the history as generally accepted. Please
> > that. That's why I am taking issue with what is written
> > this painting. And didn't I already say that? Spiritualscience has
> > another take on the matter, which doesn't concern art historiansor
> > bible scholars.there
> I'm pretty sure the Steiner said on this one corresponds with the
> historical work. I know that's not necessarily what you meant but
> you are. Thus some people perhaps maintain a rather rigidperception of
> this painting. Their loss, I think. I was thinking about thetwisted
> Mr. I think you asked why Leonardo would paint someone in thispose. My
> question was why would someone stand like that. That particularstance
> is stabilizing to the shoulder and might be used by someone whohad a
> weak shoulder due to, let us imagine, the use of a weapon, like Idunno-
> a crossbow or arrow or something.with
> > And Peter was 37 years old at the time; destined to live 30 more
> > years.
> Ergo, he wouldn't have been depicted wisened and gray as the man
> the knife, IMHO.-Val
V. and D. The author has a german website:
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "nadmateescu" <nadmateescu@...> wrote:
> Hi Val,
> So, what's your opinion about the zodiac and apostles?
> A work on this masterpiece of Leonardo can be found in the book of
> Michael Ladwein, (The Last Supper -A Cosmic Drama and an Act of
> Redemption, http://www.steinerbooks.org/detail.html?id=1902636759);
> but it seems to me that the author still not reach some hidden aspects
> of it.
> best regards, dan
> --- In email@example.com, "isenhart7" isenhart7@ wrote:
> > --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "Stephen Hale" <sardisian01@>
> > wrote:
> > > Val, I don't buy the history as generally accepted. Please
> > understand
> > > that. That's why I am taking issue with what is written concerning
> > > this painting. And didn't I already say that? Spiritual science has
> > > another take on the matter, which doesn't concern art historians or
> > > bible scholars.
> > I'm pretty sure the Steiner said on this one corresponds with the
> > historical work. I know that's not necessarily what you meant but there
> > you are. Thus some people perhaps maintain a rather rigid perception of
> > this painting. Their loss, I think. I was thinking about the twisted
> > Mr. I think you asked why Leonardo would paint someone in this pose. My
> > question was why would someone stand like that. That particular stance
> > is stabilizing to the shoulder and might be used by someone who had a
> > weak shoulder due to, let us imagine, the use of a weapon, like I dunno-
> > a crossbow or arrow or something.
> > >
> > > And Peter was 37 years old at the time; destined to live 30 more
> > > years.
> > Ergo, he wouldn't have been depicted wisened and gray as the man with
> > the knife, IMHO.-Val
- One of the mysteries Steiner unveiled was how the mythic issue of
Oedipus was resolved in the circle of the disciples. Here we
encounter one of the buried gems of insight around the karmic
destiny of individuals gathered around the Christ Being.
"There is a saga - it doesn't stand in the Gospels, but it is for
that reason no less a Christian saga, and also a Christian truth,
and it goes this way:
There lived a married couple. This couple had no son for a long
time. Then it was revealed to the mother in a dream (pay close
attention to this) that she would have a son---but that this son
would first kill the father, and then have a union with the mother,
and he would bring a terrible calamity down upon his whole family.
Once again you have a dream, as the oracle does with Oedipus; this
means that here we have a remnant of the ancient clairvoyance. It
was revealed in the ancient way to the mother, what was to happen.
Was what was revealed to her sufficient, so as to see through the
relationships of the world, so as to hinder the calamity? Let's ask
the saga. It further tells us:
Under the impression of this wisdom, which flowed to her from the
dream, the mother took the child that was born to her, to the island
of Kariot; there it was exposed to the mercy of the elements, but it
was found by a neighboring queen. She took in the child and brought
it up herself because they were childless. Later on this couple had
a child of their own, and the foundling who had been taken in, soon
felt neglected, and as a consequence of his passionate temperament,
he killed the son of the royal couple. So now he could not stay
there; he had to flee---and he came to the farm of the country
gentleman, Pilate. There he soon became a foreman in the household.
But then, one time, he got into a dispute with his neighbor, knowing
only that it was his neighbor; in a fight he slew him---and did not
know that it was his own father. And afterwards he married the
neighbor's wife, his mother!
This foundling was Judas Iscariot. And when he became aware of his
horrible situation, he then fled again. And then, solely and alone
he found mercy in the situation he was in, by him who had mercy for
all who came near him--who not only sat at the same table with tax
collectors and sinners, but also despite his deeply penetrating
insight, took up this great sinner as well, for it was his task to
work not merely for good men but for all human beings, and to lead
them from sin into salvation. Thus Judas of Iscariot came into the
vicinity of the Christ Jesus. And now he brought the calamity that
was expressed in advance and had to work out, into the circle of
Jesus Christ---in accordance with Schiller's saying, "That is just
the curse of the evil deed, that, self-generating, it must bring
evil to birth." He became the betrayer of Jesus Christ;
fundamentally, what was to be fulfilled with the murder of his
father and the marriage of his mother. But he stayed on, so to
speak, as a tool, because he was to be a tool, the evil tool that
was to bring about the good---and with that deed, so to speak, to
carry out a deed beyond the fulfillment.
He who is presented to us in Oedipus, as the consequence of the
calamity that he brought about---from the moment on when he
perceives this calamity-loses his eyesight. He, however, who has the
same destiny through his connection to the remnants of the ancient
heritage of original wisdom, he does not go blind; but he is
predestined to carry out the destiny and to do what brings about the
Mystery of Golgotha, which results in the physical death of him who
is the "light of the World," and who brings the light of the world
into effect at the healing of the man born blind. Oedipus had to
lose his eyesight; Christ gave eyesight to the man born blind,---but
he died because of him who had the character of Oedipus---all of
which is to show us how the ancient wisdom becomes exhausted within
humanity, how it is no longer sufficient to bring healing, peace,
and love to men.
For this the Christ impulse, with the event of Golgotha, was
necessary. For this it was necessary that first of all that had to
happen which appears to us as an external reflection in the wedding
at Cana in Galilee, of the relationship of the Jesus Christ ego to
his mother. Also for this, it was further necessary that something
else happened, which the writer of John's Gospel thus describes:
Down below the Cross-stood the mother, down below stood the
disciple "whom the Lord loved", Lazarus-John, whom He had Himself
initiated, and through whom. the wisdom of Christianity was to come
down to posterity; he who was so to influence the astral body of
human beings that the Christ principle could live in them. There,
within the human astral body, the Christ principle was to come to
life, and John was to be the one to pour it in! But for this, the
Christ principle coming down from the cross, had to be united with
the etheric principle, with the mother. Therefore Christ calls down
from the cross the words, "From this hour on, this is-your mother---
and this is your son." This means he binds together his wisdom, with
the motherly principle!
Thus we see how deep are not only the Gospels, but how deep all
connections are in the being of the mysteries. Indeed, the ancient
sagas stand in the same connection to the proclamations and Gospels
of modern times, as prophecy to fulfillment. The ancient sagas show
us one thing clearly in relation to the Oedipus saga and the Judas
story: "Once upon a time there was an ancient divine wisdom. But it
exhausted itself! And a new wisdom must come." And this new wisdom
will bring human beings to the point, to which the ancient wisdom
could no longer have brought them. What would have had to come
about, without the Christ impulse-that the Oedipus saga tells us;,
what the opposition to Christ was, the inflexible holding fast to
the ancient wisdom-that the Judas saga tells us. But that, about
which the ancient sagas and myths tell us, that it is not sufficient-
this, the "new proclamation", the Gospel, tells us in a new light.
The Gospel gives us answers to what the ancient sagas have expressed
as pictures from the ancient wisdom. They have said: there can no
longer come from the ancient wisdom what humanity needs for the
future. But as the new wisdom, the Gospel tells us: I proclaim to
you what humanity needs---but which would have never been able to
come without the influence of the Christ principle, without the
event of Golgotha." The Gospel of St. John, Jul. 4th, 1909, Kassel ~
- Hi Val,
Sorry for the delay.
Yes, the author seems to agree with this identification of the
apostles. Indeed, the painting is well known due to it's dramatic
display and of course, in a deeper study of it, we can find that it
live and breath.(also can be "heared" due to it's pythagoreic
proportions - Tetrad there)
Da Vinci prepared this fresco for a long time and he studied how light
falls on the walls of Santa Maria delle Grazie, before Easter and
that's why he tried to use this light perspective into his painting.
(as Rudolf Steiner indicated).
The one holding the knife could be seen also in :
--- In email@example.com, "isenhart7" <isenhart7@...> wrote:
> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "nadmateescu" <nadmateescu@>
> > Hi Val,
> > So, what's your opinion about the zodiac and apostles?
> Hi Dan!
> I'm assuming you mean by opinion who do I think represents what and how
> are they configured? I thought the guy with the bum shoulder possibly
> from knife throwing was Sagitarius. I thought the four groupings of
> three apostles each reflected the seasons and that when I worked with
> the painting long enough, especially as a reverse image, that the
> painting actually began to ebb and flow or live and breath. I remember
> that, for me, the ordering from right to left was Spring, Summer,
> Winter, Fall.
> > A work on this masterpiece of Leonardo can be found in the book of
> > Michael Ladwein, (The Last Supper -A Cosmic Drama and an Act of
> > Redemption, http://www.steinerbooks.org/detail.html?id=1902636759);
> > but it seems to me that the author still not reach some hidden aspects
> > of it.
> That looks like a good book. Does the author consider the gray haired
> apostle with one hand on John's shoulder and the other holding a knife,
> to be Peter?-Val
- --- In email@example.com, "nadmateescu"
> The one holding the knife could be seen also in :Dan and Val, this is the very significant painting in which the
> best regards,
proof is given, in visual form, that Christ had put the disciples in
a kind of dreamy clairvoyant state of consciousness. So to buffer
them from the awesome reality of what was about to occur.
According to what Steiner says in "The Fifth Gospel", it was Peter
who was most buffered, and that is why his confused state of mind
made him deny Christ three times before the cock crowed. It was
because of what was instigated and depicted here in this painting.
And Peter woke up and wept over what he had been told beforehand.
He remembered it in waking consciousness. The spell had been
broken. Henceforth, he saw it all. I mean all.