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

Re: Islam

Expand Messages
  • carol
    Re: «...In these same lectures RS said something to the effect that the origin of Mohammedanism was inspired by spirits that were opposed but still somehow
    Message 1 of 29 , Oct 27 4:49 PM

       Re: «...In these same lectures RS said something to the effect that the origin of Mohammedanism was inspired by spirits that were opposed but still somehow connected to the Christ influence. I still haven't figured out exactly which spirits he was talking about....»

      I know that the mix is obscure and complex,  but I'd like to place a couple of concepts foreward on the subject.

      Could be,  not altogether, but perhaps a good part, Spiritual Beings overlooking folk souls. Ex. there's no close (in terms of time), direct link between 'Arabism/Mohammedism' and  the folk thread which brought Christianity forth – as a supersensible/sensible realitiy.

      It could then be Spiritual Beings overlooking  folk souls - however,  these Spritual Beings having  distinct affiliage with other Spirit Beings ex.  in a capacity of servitude, concession.  Thus,  one would speak of Spiritual Beings of the 2nd Hierarchies in interplay with others -  and perhaps  the great difference  arises in the particularities of the  relationships/configuration with some of these ' others'.

      In the immediacy, I certainly can see a clear distinction, on the folk soul  front, in terms of cultural impulses – and yet, this particular  folk soul (if that is indeed what one finds creating a divide) cannot not despise Christianity altogether, for Christianity refers itself to the equation of 6/7 of the Elohim – and these Spirit Beings would, by nature, ultimately refer back to this equation as well.

      Ex. In practical, every day life, a Muslim will normally identify- with the greates of ease - with Christian ideals.

      Thus,  a paradox arises on the subtlest of levels -  in Mohammedism, we have a forcing forward of   an outwardly  oriented vision,  all the while furnishing  a distinct yet very remote  assistance ( almost devachanic) to Christianity -  a kind of assistance which Judaism ( 's distinct configuration) cannot reach, nor furnish.  (This one,  just as Christianity has shown throughout the centuries,  must contend with a downside dimension to it's nature -  an inherent weekness  ) ...

      That's all I can come up with for now,  carol.

       

       

       

       

       


      --- In anthroposophy@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Mason" <robertsmason_99@...> wrote:
      >
      > --- In anthroposophy@yahoogroups.com, "rogerwaters88"
      > rogerwaters88@ wrote:
      > >
      > > Are there any lecture courses or other references where Steiner gives
      > > indications concerning Islam ?
      >
      > --- In anthroposophy@yahoogroups.com, "rogerwaters88"
      > rogerwaters88@ wrote:
      > >
      > > Are there any lecture courses or other references where Steiner gives
      > > indications concerning Islam ?
      >
      > If you look at the links at the bottom of this page,
      > you can see that there was a discussion of Islam a
      > few years ago. You might find something useful in
      > there somewhere, and probably some more that is not
      > so useful.
      >
      > Steiner did often discuss Islam, usually mixed in
      > with discussion of what he called "Arabism" -- a
      > related but not strictly equilavent concept. For
      > instance, in *Karmic Relationships*:
      > http://wn.rsarchive.org/Lectures/19240316p01.html
      > et seq., he shows how "Arabism" arose, was
      > repulsed by Europe, and then came into Europe
      > through the reincarnation of "Arab" individualities.
      >
      > He did discuss Islam in relation to the "666"
      > principle in the lectures to the Christian
      > Community priests:
      > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy_tomorrow/message/36719
      > (follow the links at the bottom of that page),
      > but *caveat*: this text does not come from
      > stenographic records but was reconstructed from
      > various notes.
      >
      > RS often discussed how modern science arose through
      > reincarnated and transformed "Arabism", for instance:
      > "Science only reawakened during the time of the Renaissance. What
      > Greece and Rome had started became Arabic wisdom; it became the spirit
      > of Mohammedanism. Arabism then spread from Spain into Europe. This
      > science is outstanding with regard to everything directly relating to
      > the sensible-sensual world. The science that became a powerful stimulus
      > for European science, that influenced Bacon and Spinoza, [See Note 7]
      > arises from Spanish Arabism. It comes from Spain. However, it cannot
      > rise above a pantheism that is unable to reach concrete spiritual
      > beings. Arabism did not arrive at the concrete. It ascended to the
      > sensible human being but what was seen beyond that was only an abstract
      > divine unity. It was not known what this unity is. A poor and
      > comfortable world view! There is no knowledge of the spirit if it is
      > summed up in a unity. Therein lies the poverty of pantheism."
      > http://wn.rsarchive.org/Lectures/19090514p01.html;mark=131,51,59#WN_mark
      >
      > He also discussed how this "Arabism" became the
      > carrier of a diluted Soratic culture from the
      > Academy at Jundi Sabur. This is in the cycle
      > *Three Streams in Evolution*; I haven't found this
      > online. Here is something that I previously
      > wrote on this theme:
      >
      > >>The big event , known to history, of the Seventh Century was the rise
      > of Islam. Another event, not so famous but still known to history, was
      > the transfer of ancient Greek philosophy (especially Aristotle's works,
      > probably including the lost work on alchemy) to the Academy of Jundi
      > Sabur (near present-day Baghdad). Following the expulsion of the
      > philosophers from Syrian Edessa in 489 AD and from Athens in 529 AD,
      > the philosophers had found refuge in what was then the Persian Empire,
      > and at that Academy they pursued their calling. Then this knowledge
      > passed to the Islamic Arabs, and science of a particular bent reached a
      > high development under them, while Europe was in the "Dark Ages". Only
      > gradually, over many centuries, did this science pass over to Europe,
      > where it developed into the modern scientific revolution. Again, the
      > trend of modern science, as it has in fact developed, is Ahrimanic. The
      > direct ancestor of scientific materialism was this Arabian science,
      > which was itself derived from the Academy of Jundi Sabur. Thus, on the
      > other side of the 333 AD midpoint from the Birth in Palestine was the
      > rise of an active materialistic, anti-Christian world view in Jundi
      > Sabur.
      > >>Occult history (as given by Steiner) reveals how this came about:
      > Sorat intended to approach physical manifestation in 666 AD at Jundi
      > Sabur, and to bestow upon the philosophers there a super-human
      > knowledge. This knowledge was to consist of everything that mankind,
      > under the plan of the regular Gods, was to learn through its own
      > efforts by the height of the present, Consciousness Soul Epoch. This
      > epoch began in 1413 AD, so its midpoint will be 2493 AD. In other
      > words, Sorat wanted to give to mankind, prematurely and without the
      > requisite human effort and experience, the knowledge that would be
      > right and healthy for mankind to achieve through work and evolution by
      > the middle of the Third Millennium. The regular Gods' plan for the
      > Consciousness Soul Epoch is for mankind to acquire, through self-
      > education and self-discipline, the free, conscious, individualized
      > human personality. If the mankind of the Seventh Century had been given
      > this advanced knowledge at that immature stage of development, when
      > people could not think in full consciousness, the result would have
      > been disastrous. Just consider how much evil mankind has done with the
      > science we have acquired up to now, at our present stage of maturity
      > (or immaturity), and then try to imagine what the relatively primitive
      > people of the Seventh Century would have done with the science of 2493
      > AD. -- This picture is bad enough, but we need to recall Steiner's
      > occult insights to begin to get the whole picture. If Sorat had
      > succeeded, Men would have lost the possibility of developing our true
      > nature, and would have become egotistic, animalistic automata, with no
      > possibility of further development. We would have become earth-bound,
      > and the earth could never then pass over to the Jupiter, Venus, and
      > Vulcan stages. The normal Gods' plan would have been seriously
      > hindered, and Men would have lost their due and timely opportunity to
      > become Spirits of Freedom and Love. -- However, the rise of Islam
      > thwarted this plan of Sorat. It is a deep, mysterious paradox that
      > Islam, which was, and is, opposed to Christianity in many ways, also in
      > effect worked jointly with the Christ-impulse in history, by
      > blanketing, by "skimming the cream off", this Sorat-science, and by
      > watering it down. Still, this science survived, and has worked on into
      > the present day, but the worst was averted, for those times. The
      > weakened Jundi Sabur impulse, as a distorted quasi-Aristotelianism,
      > passed to the Arabs, over Africa and Spain, to France, England, and
      > through the monasteries (e.g. Roger Bacon) back over to the Continent.
      > The "Realism" of the Medieval scholastics (especially the revived
      > Aristotelianism of Thomas Aquinas) opposed this Arabian influence,
      > somewhat correctly seeing it as inimical to Christianity; but with the
      > decline and decadence of Medieval Aristotelianism, and with the dawn of
      > modern, anti-Aristotelian "empiricism" (e.g. Francis Bacon), the
      > diluted, but still powerful, Sorat-science came to dominate world-
      > culture.<<
      > >>The ruling Time Spirit, since 1879 AD, is now the Sun-Archangel
      > Michael (the "Countenance of Christ"). His previous rulership
      > encompassed the time of Aristotle and Alexander. Michael is the
      > administrator of Cosmic Intelligence, and a promoter of
      > cosmopolitanism. Ideas to Plato had been living spiritual beings,
      > attainable in higher vision. His pupil Aristotle put this pictorial
      > wisdom into conceptual thoughts, suitable for the age of lost
      > clairvoyance; Alexander carried this Greek thought-culture into the
      > wider world -- both in the service of Michael. But this ancient Greek
      > thinking was not experienced as coming from within the Man; it was
      > rather experienced as coming, like perceptions, from the outside, a
      > cosmic Pan-Intelligence. Later, this Aristotelianism was carried over
      > to Jundi Sabur, and thence into Arabian/Muslim culture. Perhaps the
      > most brilliant and influential proponent of this Arabian culture were
      > the Caliph Haroun al Rashid and his associates, in the Eighth Century
      > AD. This culture was, as indicated above, brilliant in a way, but was
      > also anti-evolutionary in that it failed to appreciate the Christ-
      > Impulse and was infected with the Sorat/Ahriman influence from Jundi
      > Sabur. Around this time the cosmic Intelligence began to "fall to
      > earth", out of the rule of Michael and in the "heads" of Men; the Pan-
      > Intelligence becoming individualized, personal intelligence. This
      > process was a preparation for what was to culminate after the dawn of
      > the Consciousness Soul Epoch in the Fifteenth Century: that Men were to
      > experience their thoughts as coming from out of themselves, as a
      > personal intelligence in individual freedom. . . .<<
      > In these same lectures RS said something to the effect that
      > the origin of Mohammedanism was inspired by spirits that
      > were opposed but still somehow connected to the Christ
      > influence. I still haven't figured out exactly which spirits
      > he was talking about.
      >
      > Robert M
      >

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