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

2 initiates?

Expand Messages
  • Danny Fortier
    I think someone on this list says that the Society had the gift of a second initiate.. To my point of view this clearly points to the problem, 2 initiates
    Message 1 of 4 , Feb 7, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      I think someone on this list says that the Society had the 'gift' of
      a second initiate..

      To my point of view this clearly points to the problem,
      '2 initiates' in what should be a Society of initiates.

      What is it to be anthroposophist?

      As long as this Society doesn't work on the initiate 'mode', I mean
      leaded by and constituted of initiates, this is destined to remain
      in the way it seems to be now, a good job on the Waldorf education
      level, bio-dynamic agriculture, beauty products, medecines, nice
      artwork, selling books, etc., but without any direct spiritual and
      occult potency on the course of human evolution as a whole else than
      people reading anthroposophical books and practicing for themselves.

      We need more than intelligent people, we need people able to tear
      themselves away from the actual modern consciousness, modern way to
      BE, not only have different ideas than the mainstream; we must make
      work the 'not from this world' in this one, we need people speaking
      with authority...

      The initiate culture needs to be cultivated I'd say.

      I don't know the way it works in order for a person to access the
      state of Vorstand and leader of the Society, but this is the position
      above all that has to be attributed to merit, and to an initiate,
      else the whole Society gets disempowered.

      Glory to the initiates, and the initiates to be!

      Danny
      __________________________________________________
      Do You Yahoo!?
      Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
      http://im.yahoo.com
    • Joel A. Wendt
      Dear Danny, To my mind, having initiates is one of those swords that cut both ways . You put it right on the issue when you wrote: we need people speaking
      Message 2 of 4 , Feb 7, 2000
      • 0 Attachment
        Dear Danny,

        To my mind, having initiates is one of those "swords that cut both
        ways". You put it right on the issue when you wrote: " we need people
        speaking with authority..." Does this mean you don't want to think for
        yourself anymore? Would you like to be able to stomp on another's point of
        view by bringing out the words of an "authority"?

        I suspect that is not what you really mean. I also believe that an
        "authority" would be the final death blow to the anthroposophical society and
        movement. This would shift us away from the central problem, which is
        learning to get along with each other.

        Now in saying this, I am not saying I am against initiation or the work
        of initiates. Clearly the main goal of anthroposophy is to foster a new
        intercourse between humanity and the world of spirit, an intercourse
        appearing as a fully conscious, fully awake activity. Myself, I have the
        sense that we have, either in the society, or on the fringes of it, several
        who have achieved some degree of this "living thinking". However, were these
        to step forward and insert themselves into the dynamic social processess of
        anthroposophy, seeking a leading role (or being offered a leading role), that
        again would lame us, when what we need to do is learn to stand on our own.

        The most wonderful spiritual activity I have observed (in the sense of
        suspecting that the individual is routinely "connected"), has always involved
        the appearence of some kind of "fruit". That is the individuals I have in
        mind are doing one or another remarkable kind of work. So what we receive is
        not an "authority" to look up to, but a gift of new knowledge in a special
        field. The "initiation" is purposeful and opens up our understanding of the
        world. Thus, we look not to an individual "initiate", but to the gift
        created in cooperation with the world of spirit, the "work". The individual
        is irrelevant, and their "authority" is the practical utility of what has
        been revealed - the successful use of the new knowledge for the service of
        humanity, e.g. D. Kloceck's work on the relationship between the Cosmos and
        Weather . This service can also include "spiritual research" e.g. J.
        Ben-Aaron's work on Christ's Second Death in the Ethereal.

        warm regards,
        joel

        Danny Fortier wrote:

        > From: Danny Fortier <premabrahma@...>
        >
        > I think someone on this list says that the Society had the 'gift' of
        > a second initiate..
        >
        > To my point of view this clearly points to the problem,
        > '2 initiates' in what should be a Society of initiates.
        >
        > What is it to be anthroposophist?
        >
        > As long as this Society doesn't work on the initiate 'mode', I mean
        > leaded by and constituted of initiates, this is destined to remain
        > in the way it seems to be now, a good job on the Waldorf education
        > level, bio-dynamic agriculture, beauty products, medecines, nice
        > artwork, selling books, etc., but without any direct spiritual and
        > occult potency on the course of human evolution as a whole else than
        > people reading anthroposophical books and practicing for themselves.
        >
        > We need more than intelligent people, we need people able to tear
        > themselves away from the actual modern consciousness, modern way to
        > BE, not only have different ideas than the mainstream; we must make
        > work the 'not from this world' in this one, we need people speaking
        > with authority...
        >
        > The initiate culture needs to be cultivated I'd say.
        >
        > I don't know the way it works in order for a person to access the
        > state of Vorstand and leader of the Society, but this is the position
        > above all that has to be attributed to merit, and to an initiate,
        > else the whole Society gets disempowered.
        >
        > Glory to the initiates, and the initiates to be!
        >
        > Danny
        > __________________________________________________
        > Do You Yahoo!?
        > Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
        > http://im.yahoo.com
        >
        > --------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------
        >
        > Unique Valentine gifts, available now at eGroups.
        > <a href=" http://clickme.onelist.com/ad/SparksValentine2 ">Click Here</a>
        >
        > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
      • Danny Fortier
        ... That s right, by speaking with authority I rather meant the Word, make the Word ours, make anthroposophy ours. In this way there shall be no reason to
        Message 3 of 4 , Feb 8, 2000
        • 0 Attachment
          --- "Joel A. Wendt" <hermit@...> wrote:
          > From: "Joel A. Wendt" <hermit@...>
          >
          > Dear Danny,
          >
          > To my mind, having initiates is one of those "swords that cut
          > both
          > ways". You put it right on the issue when you wrote: " we need
          > people
          > speaking with authority..." Does this mean you don't want to think
          > for
          > yourself anymore? Would you like to be able to stomp on another's
          > point of
          > view by bringing out the words of an "authority"?
          >
          > I suspect that is not what you really mean.


          That's right, by speaking with authority I rather meant the Word,
          make the Word ours, make anthroposophy ours. In this way there shall
          be no reason to deify Steiner nor than to deify the apostles or
          anybody. To not rely on authorities but rather being ourselves our
          own 'authority' by the very fact that our house is built on the rock
          of the spirit and not a Steiner's book or anything coming from this
          world. This aptitude to stand next to the 'Abyss' of nothingness, and
          find this strenght that arise from the begging of the spirit, the
          strenght that arise when we are weak as St-Paul says, or to use a
          part of one of your last post: 'Tomberg called it "learning to think
          on
          your knees" and Steiner called it "sacrifice of thoughts'.

          Christ was speaking with authority and yet he says in essence: I'm
          not your master but your friend. By authority I did not mean of course
          anything of what your two questions above evoke, but rather the
          state of spiritual 'solidity'. I heard that Steiner did not want his
          lectures to be published has it happened, I know why and I'll tell
          you, this is that it makes people intellectually active and 'greedy',
          but rather spiritually lazy, and especially towards initiation; to
          prefer remaining blind and being satisfied of a description of how
          things are in the spiritual world through reading shortly.

          The common ground must be found in the Sophia and Christ, then shall
          there be a true brotherhood in the Society and not division after
          division, and pseudo-threats to be found against the Society.

          I find there's still the tendency to see initiation as something
          for the few, and being something kind of suprahuman for the very
          special ones, this is why arise the deification of the initiates; the
          Mystery of Golgotha is not understood yet..

          'Ye are gods', if the initiate culture has to be cultivated, let me
          add the godly one as well, let's not find refuge in a false humility
          in saying 'we ordinary people', that's too comfortable and aim not
          towards a culture of excellence. Are we too weak to bear the presence
          of initiates and what they could have to say that we prefer to not
          have them intercourse in the social affairs of the Society? Let's
          see then how this Society shall react towards the incarnation of
          Ahriman, it might find itself in a great state of weakness...

          I think I would like to call the incarnation of Ahriman
          'the Test of godliness'. It might be in the likeness of what was be
          found in the movie 'Ghostbuster', the creature to ask 'Are you a god?'
          having for reply 'no', and the creature to say 'So perish'..

          You're right Joel by looking in the american movie culture, for
          there's
          a lot to be found in there, especially for an anthroposophist. I
          personnaly found that there's almost always a moment at least that
          could be called the Christ line , the hero as a moral entity, most of
          the time the job of one man, a happy ending, hey! that's pretty
          christian after all no?

          We will gain much if we are able to identify the presence and
          manifestations of the Christ spirit as we might be able to do also
          for the Adversary.

          This is also not a coincidence if the Star Trek trio was how it was
          also: Spock thin and tall, intellect, memory, Vulcan, the most stoic,
          without feelings.

          Kirk average muscular build, will, action, leader, adventurous,
          the most american spirited I'd say.

          The Dr. , FEELINGS, that's not a coincidence that he was the
          Doctor...




          ...the central problem, which
          > is
          > learning to get along with each other.

          HOW RIGHT YOU ARE.
          If you're a bit sensitive you are probably able to see and feel how
          most of people who are to be in a social situation have their astral
          body kind of trembling; this is the result of the Christlessness of
          our time, this Christlessness-> root of the rotten social sphere we
          have nowadays. This of course(trembling) apply to those still having a

          soul...

          Recognizing the humanity in the other, looking to a person for what
          she or he is, there is a great accomplishment of the one who
          knows something..

          Danny



          __________________________________________________
          Do You Yahoo!?
          Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
          http://im.yahoo.com
        • elaine upton
          Lovely exchange, Danny and Joel. Thank you! Aspiring, in Christ and Sophia, elaine ... ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private,
          Message 4 of 4 , Feb 8, 2000
          • 0 Attachment
            Lovely exchange, Danny and Joel. Thank you!

            Aspiring, in Christ and Sophia,
            elaine


            >From: Danny Fortier <premabrahma@...>
            >Reply-To: anthroposophy@onelist.com
            >To: anthroposophy@onelist.com
            >Subject: Re: [anthroposophy] 2 initiates?
            >Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2000 11:29:35 -0800 (PST)
            >
            >
            >
            >--- "Joel A. Wendt" <hermit@...> wrote:
            > > From: "Joel A. Wendt" <hermit@...>
            > >
            > > Dear Danny,
            > >
            > > To my mind, having initiates is one of those "swords that cut
            > > both
            > > ways". You put it right on the issue when you wrote: " we need
            > > people
            > > speaking with authority..." Does this mean you don't want to think
            > > for
            > > yourself anymore? Would you like to be able to stomp on another's
            > > point of
            > > view by bringing out the words of an "authority"?
            > >
            > > I suspect that is not what you really mean.
            >
            >
            > That's right, by speaking with authority I rather meant the Word,
            > make the Word ours, make anthroposophy ours. In this way there shall
            > be no reason to deify Steiner nor than to deify the apostles or
            > anybody. To not rely on authorities but rather being ourselves our
            > own 'authority' by the very fact that our house is built on the rock
            > of the spirit and not a Steiner's book or anything coming from this
            > world. This aptitude to stand next to the 'Abyss' of nothingness, and
            > find this strenght that arise from the begging of the spirit, the
            > strenght that arise when we are weak as St-Paul says, or to use a
            > part of one of your last post: 'Tomberg called it "learning to think
            >on
            > your knees" and Steiner called it "sacrifice of thoughts'.
            >
            > Christ was speaking with authority and yet he says in essence: I'm
            > not your master but your friend. By authority I did not mean of course
            > anything of what your two questions above evoke, but rather the
            > state of spiritual 'solidity'. I heard that Steiner did not want his
            > lectures to be published has it happened, I know why and I'll tell
            > you, this is that it makes people intellectually active and 'greedy',
            > but rather spiritually lazy, and especially towards initiation; to
            > prefer remaining blind and being satisfied of a description of how
            > things are in the spiritual world through reading shortly.
            >
            > The common ground must be found in the Sophia and Christ, then shall
            > there be a true brotherhood in the Society and not division after
            > division, and pseudo-threats to be found against the Society.
            >
            > I find there's still the tendency to see initiation as something
            > for the few, and being something kind of suprahuman for the very
            > special ones, this is why arise the deification of the initiates; the
            > Mystery of Golgotha is not understood yet..
            >
            > 'Ye are gods', if the initiate culture has to be cultivated, let me
            > add the godly one as well, let's not find refuge in a false humility
            > in saying 'we ordinary people', that's too comfortable and aim not
            > towards a culture of excellence. Are we too weak to bear the presence
            > of initiates and what they could have to say that we prefer to not
            > have them intercourse in the social affairs of the Society? Let's
            > see then how this Society shall react towards the incarnation of
            > Ahriman, it might find itself in a great state of weakness...
            >
            > I think I would like to call the incarnation of Ahriman
            > 'the Test of godliness'. It might be in the likeness of what was be
            > found in the movie 'Ghostbuster', the creature to ask 'Are you a god?'
            > having for reply 'no', and the creature to say 'So perish'..
            >
            > You're right Joel by looking in the american movie culture, for
            >there's
            > a lot to be found in there, especially for an anthroposophist. I
            > personnaly found that there's almost always a moment at least that
            > could be called the Christ line , the hero as a moral entity, most of
            > the time the job of one man, a happy ending, hey! that's pretty
            > christian after all no?
            >
            > We will gain much if we are able to identify the presence and
            > manifestations of the Christ spirit as we might be able to do also
            > for the Adversary.
            >
            > This is also not a coincidence if the Star Trek trio was how it was
            > also: Spock thin and tall, intellect, memory, Vulcan, the most stoic,
            > without feelings.
            >
            > Kirk average muscular build, will, action, leader, adventurous,
            > the most american spirited I'd say.
            >
            > The Dr. , FEELINGS, that's not a coincidence that he was the
            > Doctor...
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > ...the central problem, which
            > > is
            > > learning to get along with each other.
            >
            > HOW RIGHT YOU ARE.
            > If you're a bit sensitive you are probably able to see and feel how
            > most of people who are to be in a social situation have their astral
            > body kind of trembling; this is the result of the Christlessness of
            > our time, this Christlessness-> root of the rotten social sphere we
            > have nowadays. This of course(trembling) apply to those still having a
            >
            > soul...
            >
            > Recognizing the humanity in the other, looking to a person for what
            > she or he is, there is a great accomplishment of the one who
            > knows something..
            >
            > Danny
            >
            >
            >
            >__________________________________________________
            >Do You Yahoo!?
            >Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
            >http://im.yahoo.com

            ______________________________________________________
            Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.