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

humorless pontificating - was today's Islam

Expand Messages
  • Joel Wendt
    I find the whole Islam thread to be so outrageous as to largely be a parody of itself. I would laugh if it weren t so sad. a list of the problems: the tread
    Message 1 of 8 , Oct 7, 2002
      I find the whole Islam thread to be so outrageous as to largely be a
      parody of itself. I would laugh if it weren't so sad.

      a list of the problems:

      the tread begins with the quoting of a Steiner lecture...

      Knowledge, in the light of Philosophy of Freedom, requires the uniting
      of concept and percept. Those who read a Steiner lecture have no
      knowledge, unless they can reproduce in their consciousness the same
      percept (spiritual experience) which Steiner had. Since this is clearly
      not the case, then the purpose of the use of the lecture is only to use
      Steiner as an "authority", something he expressly urged us not to do.

      In fact, the use of Steiner as authority for almost everything under the
      sun is one of the worst traits of anthroposophists. Just because he
      said it, doesn't make it so, and people need to stop borrowing his
      concepts to form their world pictures. The lectures are not a bad place
      to get questions, but without a careful thinking discipline, they are
      the worst place from which to borrow conclusions. Why worst? Because
      it is a crime against our own development to lay the foundations of our
      thinking on such sandy ground.

      The result of this is that the tread begins with a set of thoughts that
      are fundamentally speculative in nature. The thread then proceeds to
      add all manner of generalizations and abstractions. Most of the
      sentences are written as if "Islam" was a thing, an object which is
      everywhere the same in the minds and hearts of all adherents (far be it
      for fundamentalist anthroposophists to pay attention to the fact that
      100's of millions of Muslims live throughout the world, each of whose
      individual lives and biographies are spiritual treasures unto
      themselves). The thread further assumes that new and better information
      about the relevant spiritual realities is unavailable, and that current
      political events find their meaning in this presumptive association of
      Islam and Sorat.

      The whole dialog reads like something I recently read on a Rush Limbaugh
      list about liberals. Nobody really "knows" anything, except what they
      don't like - which antipathy then informs all following judgments. I am
      ashamed to participate in this group when such blatant religious bigotry
      and weak and senseless social/political thinking runs through the group
      like a mob justifying its next act of egregious aggression. Ill-formed
      thoughts are also aggressions - our world picture is a moral
      responsibility. To view Muslims through the pictures formed in this
      tread is not justified under any circumstances.

      Anthroposophists have been given the gift of a certain path to the
      truth, and it does not consist in believing Steiner, but in disciplining
      the soul life such that thinking only goes where it can, guided by the
      clear divination of conscience, AND NO FURTHER!. To go further is to
      succumb to the urgings of our doubles, Lucifer leading us to endless
      speculative dreaming, and Ahriman guiding us to rigid and dead
      pre-conclusions.

      this whole thread is a sad day for the anthroposophy list.
      joel
    • elaineupton2001
      Thank you, Joel, and that I will say again (and leave your post here below as it is, for any and all to read again): Thank you on what you offer on using
      Message 2 of 8 , Oct 7, 2002
        Thank you, Joel, and that I will say again (and leave your post here
        below as it is, for any and all to read again): Thank you on what you
        offer on using Steiner as an authority, and on the misguided
        assumptions and generalities some make about "Islam" as though the
        people of that religion were all one thing (something as absurd as
        generalizing about the Christianity of Christians). Danke Shoen.
        Gratia.
        elaine


        --- In anthroposophy@y..., Joel Wendt <hermit@t...> wrote:
        > I find the whole Islam thread to be so outrageous as to largely be a
        > parody of itself. I would laugh if it weren't so sad.
        >
        > a list of the problems:
        >
        > the tread begins with the quoting of a Steiner lecture...
        >
        > Knowledge, in the light of Philosophy of Freedom, requires the
        uniting
        > of concept and percept. Those who read a Steiner lecture have no
        > knowledge, unless they can reproduce in their consciousness the same
        > percept (spiritual experience) which Steiner had. Since this is
        clearly
        > not the case, then the purpose of the use of the lecture is only to
        use
        > Steiner as an "authority", something he expressly urged us not to
        do.
        >
        > In fact, the use of Steiner as authority for almost everything
        under the
        > sun is one of the worst traits of anthroposophists. Just because he
        > said it, doesn't make it so, and people need to stop borrowing his
        > concepts to form their world pictures. The lectures are not a bad
        place
        > to get questions, but without a careful thinking discipline, they
        are
        > the worst place from which to borrow conclusions. Why worst?
        Because
        > it is a crime against our own development to lay the foundations of
        our
        > thinking on such sandy ground.
        >
        > The result of this is that the tread begins with a set of thoughts
        that
        > are fundamentally speculative in nature. The thread then proceeds
        to
        > add all manner of generalizations and abstractions. Most of the
        > sentences are written as if "Islam" was a thing, an object which is
        > everywhere the same in the minds and hearts of all adherents (far
        be it
        > for fundamentalist anthroposophists to pay attention to the fact
        that
        > 100's of millions of Muslims live throughout the world, each of
        whose
        > individual lives and biographies are spiritual treasures unto
        > themselves). The thread further assumes that new and better
        information
        > about the relevant spiritual realities is unavailable, and that
        current
        > political events find their meaning in this presumptive association
        of
        > Islam and Sorat.
        >
        > The whole dialog reads like something I recently read on a Rush
        Limbaugh
        > list about liberals. Nobody really "knows" anything, except what
        they
        > don't like - which antipathy then informs all following judgments.
        I am
        > ashamed to participate in this group when such blatant religious
        bigotry
        > and weak and senseless social/political thinking runs through the
        group
        > like a mob justifying its next act of egregious aggression. Ill-
        formed
        > thoughts are also aggressions - our world picture is a moral
        > responsibility. To view Muslims through the pictures formed in this
        > tread is not justified under any circumstances.
        >
        > Anthroposophists have been given the gift of a certain path to the
        > truth, and it does not consist in believing Steiner, but in
        disciplining
        > the soul life such that thinking only goes where it can, guided by
        the
        > clear divination of conscience, AND NO FURTHER!. To go further is
        to
        > succumb to the urgings of our doubles, Lucifer leading us to endless
        > speculative dreaming, and Ahriman guiding us to rigid and dead
        > pre-conclusions.
        >
        > this whole thread is a sad day for the anthroposophy list.
        > joel
      • jackstrange11
        Joel: Having posted twice to this outrageous thread, I would like to know what enormities of misapprehension I passed along to the world in defending Islamic
        Message 3 of 8 , Oct 7, 2002
          Joel:
          Having posted twice to this outrageous thread, I would like to know
          what enormities of misapprehension I passed along to the world in
          defending Islamic culture? Being somewhat taken aback by the strong
          language of condemnation of a particular religion which I find hard
          to reconcile with my anthroposophical leanings, I rationally
          responded and other lists members responded in their own manner. I
          always think, "Well perhaps Mr Starman is right and so I must think
          about this" and then I ask him some questions that may or may not
          move his mind in a different direction. But I don't see anything
          here that deserves your blanket condemnation. If a list member really
          believes strongly in a certain position,then why not say it right out?
          If what they say seems beyond all sense and reason, then we can point
          that out in an equally powerful voice or in a more gentle and subtle
          fashion.
          But instead of addressing the issue directly, you accuse us of:
          1. Committing crimes against our own development.
          2. Being moved by nothing but antipathy.
          3. Religious bigotry.
          4. Mob mentality.
          5. Speculative dreaming with dead conclusions

          Here is my contribution to this thread. I may be pretty dense or
          perhaps not sufficiently inspired, but a religious bigot?

          Post 1:
          Starman:

          But isn't Islam, despite its present demonic elements, the source of
          the positive contributions of math, science, and rational thinking
          that has become the foundation of Western economics? The souls of
          Islam reincarnated in Western rationalism. The al-quada stream is a
          divergent development that draws on the Christ-rejection, but the
          merger of the rational Arabic stream into the West seems necessary
          for the achievement of human freedom. Or should we differentiate
          between Islam and the Arabic stream of Haroun al Rachid, etc?


          Post #2


          Starman,
          Thanks for the well thought-out reply.
          I think that Arabism's materialistic spin on Aristotle was a
          necessary part of the evolution of consciousness. This was the point
          where humans began to perceive the pure ideas of the spiritual world
          as a creation of their own thinking rather than the creations of
          higher beings acting through human consciousness. It enabled us to
          take hold of thinking and exercise our will in that complex web of
          creation, but at the same time it started us down the road away from
          recognition of spirit. So we must resist the danger, but at the same
          time incorporate the life giving elements of that way of thinking. So
          Aquinas can be seen as incorporating the Arabic sphere into Christian
          perception embracing it positively as well as giving it a well needed
          course correction.
          The Islamic thought that my mind sees is reflected in the great
          architecture of southern Spain and the mid-east which consists of
          complex webs of motives with organically integrated ornamentation.
          I believe that this stream combined with Christianity in the music of
          JS Bach, where the deepest Christian mysticism is expressed with
          complex counterpoint. Fugue, canon, and other forms of counterpoint
          are very Islamic in the numerical relations and mathematical
          exactitude and the interweaving of webs of motives. A comparison
          between plain chant and Bach's Bmin Mass indicates how the Arabic
          influence can help us attain the highest spiritual ends. I'm not
          saying that Arabs necessarily invented Baroque counterpoint, but that
          they created the thought form archetypes that the inventers
          subsequently used. This same type of thought is the basis of the
          hyper linking of information on the WWWeb which may or may not be an
          example of its negative potential.

          I agree that the Arab world passed on Greek thought, but I think we
          must emphasize the transformations of that thought and seek to
          visualize what it was. We cannot return to the Dark Ages but we must
          extract the gold that is there before discarding what is left over in
          the dust bin.

          Kenneth




          --- In anthroposophy@y..., Joel Wendt <hermit@t...> wrote:
          > I find the whole Islam thread to be so outrageous as to largely be a
          > parody of itself. I would laugh if it weren't so sad.
          >
          > a list of the problems:
          >
          > the tread begins with the quoting of a Steiner lecture...
          >
          > Knowledge, in the light of Philosophy of Freedom, requires the
          uniting
          > of concept and percept. Those who read a Steiner lecture have no
          > knowledge, unless they can reproduce in their consciousness the same
          > percept (spiritual experience) which Steiner had. Since this is
          clearly
          > not the case, then the purpose of the use of the lecture is only to
          use
          > Steiner as an "authority", something he expressly urged us not to
          do.
          >
          > In fact, the use of Steiner as authority for almost everything
          under the
          > sun is one of the worst traits of anthroposophists. Just because he
          > said it, doesn't make it so, and people need to stop borrowing his
          > concepts to form their world pictures. The lectures are not a bad
          place
          > to get questions, but without a careful thinking discipline, they
          are
          > the worst place from which to borrow conclusions. Why worst?
          Because
          > it is a crime against our own development to lay the foundations of
          our
          > thinking on such sandy ground.
          >
          > The result of this is that the tread begins with a set of thoughts
          that
          > are fundamentally speculative in nature. The thread then proceeds
          to
          > add all manner of generalizations and abstractions. Most of the
          > sentences are written as if "Islam" was a thing, an object which is
          > everywhere the same in the minds and hearts of all adherents (far
          be it
          > for fundamentalist anthroposophists to pay attention to the fact
          that
          > 100's of millions of Muslims live throughout the world, each of
          whose
          > individual lives and biographies are spiritual treasures unto
          > themselves). The thread further assumes that new and better
          information
          > about the relevant spiritual realities is unavailable, and that
          current
          > political events find their meaning in this presumptive association
          of
          > Islam and Sorat.
          >
          > The whole dialog reads like something I recently read on a Rush
          Limbaugh
          > list about liberals. Nobody really "knows" anything, except what
          they
          > don't like - which antipathy then informs all following judgments.
          I am
          > ashamed to participate in this group when such blatant religious
          bigotry
          > and weak and senseless social/political thinking runs through the
          group
          > like a mob justifying its next act of egregious aggression. Ill-
          formed
          > thoughts are also aggressions - our world picture is a moral
          > responsibility. To view Muslims through the pictures formed in this
          > tread is not justified under any circumstances.
          >
          > Anthroposophists have been given the gift of a certain path to the
          > truth, and it does not consist in believing Steiner, but in
          disciplining
          > the soul life such that thinking only goes where it can, guided by
          the
          > clear divination of conscience, AND NO FURTHER!. To go further is
          to
          > succumb to the urgings of our doubles, Lucifer leading us to endless
          > speculative dreaming, and Ahriman guiding us to rigid and dead
          > pre-conclusions.
          >
          > this whole thread is a sad day for the anthroposophy list.
          > joel
        • Br. Ron
          From: Joel Wendt ... In this case, laughter is preferable. :-) ... Are Steiner s views also speculative? Perhaps a close and critical
          Message 4 of 8 , Oct 8, 2002
            From: "Joel Wendt" <hermit@...>

            > I find the whole Islam thread to be so outrageous as to largely be a
            > parody of itself. I would laugh if it weren't so sad.

            In this case, laughter is preferable. :-)

            > the tread begins with the quoting of a Steiner lecture...
            > The result of this is that the tread begins with a set of thoughts
            > that are fundamentally speculative in nature.

            Are Steiner's views also speculative?
            Perhaps a close and critical critique of his
            words might serve to be more fruitful than
            melodramatic ejaculations.

            For instance, when Steiner identified Islam as holding the
            egregore of the antichrist, was he:

            1. Lying?
            2. Simply Deluded?
            3. Deranged,
            4. Under the influence of his double?
            5. All of the above?

            Or could it be that he understood some things that modern,
            trembling, 'political correctness cops' cannot yet fathom....
            ...things like the principles of knighthood, chivalry and the simple
            recognition that some things are indeed worth fighting for.

            > Most of the sentences are written as if "Islam" was a thing,

            It is an egregore...and as such, Islam IS a thing.

            > I am ashamed to participate in this group when such blatant
            >religious bigotry and weak and senseless social/political thinking
            >runs through the group like a mob justifying its next act of egregious
            >aggression.

            "Whaaaa! You talkin' to mee....yooouuuu talkin to meeee?"
            Garshk, Joel, you talk as if identifying and discerning good and
            evil is in itself evil. Well I don't think you are WHOLLY deluded
            in this. At least you acknowledge that evil exists. Now all we
            need to do is get you to side with the good guys :-)

            > To view Muslims through the pictures formed in this tread
            > is not justified under any circumstances.

            Rather than wholesale condemnation of the thread,
            perhaps you could be more specific?
            Perhaps we could discuss the teachings of Mohammed?

            Have you ever studied the Koran, Joel?
            Surely not, otherwise you would not be so quick to
            give succor to that which seeks to destroy everything
            that Anthroposophy and Christic Event itself stands for.........
            ........namely Freedom.

            > this whole thread is a sad day for the anthroposophy list.

            As the sky darkness and the dirge begins....boom.......boom......
            "Beat the drum slowly..play the fife lowly......."

            How could such a terrible thing happen? Woe, woe, woe.....
            How dare Steiner reveal what most truly courageous thinkers
            have known all along....that there really ARE forces that are
            anathema to the Solar Logos...How dare Steiner remind us that
            conflicting forces in the universe really do exist and some of
            them exist under the banner of 'Islam!'

            How dare Anthroposophists quote Steiner when his words don't
            agree with their already accepted notions of universal appeasement
            and the ostrich like desire for 'peace at any price......'

            Perhaps if we just ignore those who seek to place our daughters in
            binding burqas and fly airplanes into our buildings, they will just
            go away....ya spoze?

            Good Lord!........King Arthur...where are you when we need you!


            Br. Ron
          • Sören Groth
            ... Just as any other religious teaching the Koran is full of contradictions.... the holy Bible is another good example.. some can justify quite the opposite
            Message 5 of 8 , Oct 8, 2002
              --- In anthroposophy@y..., "Br. Ron" <rlloyd@d...> wrote:
              > From: "Joel Wendt" <hermit@t...>

              > Have you ever studied the Koran, Joel?


              Just as any other religious teaching the Koran is full of
              contradictions.... the "holy" Bible is another good example.. some can
              justify quite the opposite of another refering to the same book
              Islam have it's fundamentalists and it's liberators, just as
              christianity and for sure antroprosophy.
              I remember reading a lecture where RS get fed up with a bunch of wimsy
              people in Dornach asking him about a lot of details in the occult, and
              he sense that they don't know the heck of what they are asking about,
              he burst out in rage that if they're just sitting there wasting his
              time to collect facts about the occult as curiosa they ought to go out
              and find out what a trades union are instead :-) (made me happy as
              trade union activist)

              > Surely not, otherwise you would not be so quick to
              > give succor to that which seeks to destroy everything
              > that Anthroposophy and Christic Event itself stands for.........
              > ........namely Freedom.

              One qoute from the Koran "There is no compulsion in the religion"
              Mainstream islams picture of Allah, is that God is uncomprehensible
              for man, so we have to do our best with our lives in God's creation,
              which is perfect by nature... actually noone can determine for us
              what's the right thing to do... the radical islam is a heredisy to
              mainstream islam, just as any christian preacher who claims to know
              what is God's will .. as in wars, the protestant God says Northern
              Island is
              british, the Catholic God that it's irish...

              Fundamentalism and it's opposition is present everywhere, and the
              "christ impulse" (as we call it within our cultural context) is
              present in human souls no matter within which race, sex, religion,
              nation or culture they are born... if we are so wise tht we know this,
              we have a choice, how will I approach the individual soul born in Iraq
              .. ??


              > How could such a terrible thing happen? Woe, woe, woe.....
              > How dare Steiner reveal what most truly courageous thinkers
              > have known all along....that there really ARE forces that are
              > anathema to the Solar Logos...How dare Steiner remind us that
              > conflicting forces in the universe really do exist and some of
              > them exist under the banner of 'Islam!'
              and some under the banner of anthroposohy !!!


              >
              > Good Lord!........King Arthur...where are you when we need you!

              The king is dead, long live the free world ... As man develops freedom
              we don't even need a president any longer :-)
            • Br. Ron
              Let me clarify something that shouldn t even need clarifying. I don t judge individuals. I discern the patterns of egregore. There are many wonderful people
              Message 6 of 8 , Oct 8, 2002
                Let me clarify something that shouldn't even need clarifying.
                I don't judge individuals. I discern the patterns of egregore.

                There are many wonderful people who consider themselves
                "Moslems"....But this is neither here nor there.

                The intent of Islam, as Mohammed defines it, is to 'Moslemize"
                the world...even at the point of a sword if need be.

                Sorry...there is just no way to whitewash this away.

                Read the Koran...read it hard and long. THEN let us discuss this
                topic from an educated perspective. The facts are unavoidable.

                Change is simply impossible within the Islamic system.

                It is true that the Bible is also filled with "kill the infidels"
                but the difference is that it has a mechanism for growing
                out of this violence. IE...Christ...the Once and FUTURE King.

                The Surahs do not provide for this. This is why they can't
                leave the middle ages. To attempt to add a higher meaning to
                the words of Mohammed is a death sentence.
                (I can provide scriptural references if you want)

                Just ask the 100,000 dead Bahai in Iran. Just ask those in the
                all the other countries where Islam is currently carrying out it's Jihad....
                ..places like Israel, Lebanon, Bosnia, Chechnya, the Transcaucasus,
                Tajikistan,
                Pakistan, Kashmir, Sudan, the Philippines, Indonesia
                ...JUST TO NAME A FEW!

                This is to say nothing of those countries currently
                exporting terrorism: Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Libya,
                Turkey, Syria, etc....JUST TO NAME A FEW!

                In 1993, the New York Times identified that 48 locations had some
                59 ethnic conflicts. Of those, 28 were conflicts between the same ethnic
                groups and Islam was involved in 21 of those 28.

                Likewise in 31 conflicts between different ethnic groups, Islam was
                involved in 10 for a total of 31 of the 59 battles.

                In 1992, of the 12 groups of intercivilizational conflicts between cultures,
                of these Islam was involved in 9.

                Folks...what part of Violent Global Domination don't you understand?

                I know I know...
                "Don't bother me...I'm reading the Philosophy of Freedom."

                It's understandable. It's always easier to read about freedom
                than to go to the trouble of preserving it.



                Br. Ron
              • Sören Groth
                ... Jihad.... It is tiresome but necessary to point out.. most islamic scholars declare that the jihad these muslims proclaimed have no support in the Koran,
                Message 7 of 8 , Oct 8, 2002
                  --- In anthroposophy@y..., "Br. Ron" <rlloyd@d...> wrote:

                  > Just ask the 100,000 dead Bahai in Iran. Just ask those in the
                  > all the other countries where Islam is currently carrying out it's
                  Jihad....

                  It is tiresome but necessary to point out.. most islamic scholars
                  declare that the "jihad" these muslims proclaimed have no support in
                  the Koran, it is wrong teachings. The word "jihad" doesn't even means
                  "holy war" ... when your heart tells you to do an effort for a cause
                  you believe is right, to overcome yourself and devote yourself to do
                  the right thing, that is the real meaning of the concept "Jihad" !!
                  Sometimes it means using force .. When the world united to fight the
                  barbary of Nazi-Germany, it was "Jihad" ...

                  > ..places like Israel, Lebanon, Bosnia, Chechnya, the Transcaucasus,
                  > Tajikistan,
                  > Pakistan, Kashmir, Sudan, the Philippines, Indonesia
                  > ...JUST TO NAME A FEW!

                  And the anger putting the fire under the misconception of Jihad, is
                  based on our silent acceptance of cruel violations of human rights in
                  islam countries you don't mention at all... Bosnia, The Phillipines,
                  Indonesia, Turkey .. these countries aren't in the middle ages, and
                  most certainly not Libya (the onliest country in the world where women
                  are guaranteed 50% accesss to all positions in society) ..
                  No where middle age cruel islamic practice flourish, with a sultan
                  having the country as his personal asset and rule with absolute power,
                  with classes of nobles who can do what they like, it's the "good" guys
                  in your equation, the one's we like, because they don't make a fuss
                  about the oil and nicely spend all their money on shopping trips to
                  London, New York aso... Oman, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia,
                  Kuwait, Bahrain, Brunei. There's your middle age countries.
                • Sören Groth
                  ... Hmmm and tell the waldorfcritics to read Steiner, and they ll come back with a bunch of new quotes to prove they know the true nature of Anthroposophy
                  Message 8 of 8 , Oct 10, 2002
                    --- In anthroposophy@y..., "Br. Ron" <rlloyd@d...> wrote:

                    > Read the Koran...read it hard and long. THEN let us discuss this
                    > topic from an educated perspective. The facts are unavoidable.

                    Hmmm and tell the waldorfcritics to read Steiner, and they'll come
                    back with a bunch of new quotes to prove they know the true nature of
                    Anthroposophy better. This just turns out to a pointless quote-war
                    where everyone read the parts proving him right and close their eyes
                    for what prove them wrong

                    > I know I know...
                    > "Don't bother me...I'm reading the Philosophy of Freedom."
                    >
                    > It's understandable. It's always easier to read about freedom
                    > than to go to the trouble of preserving it.

                    Well, well .. you don't know :-)
                    I try to have a personal quoting policy going along the line, just to
                    quote what I personally have experienced is true ...
                    You are very welcome to walk a mile in my shoes and put your ass in
                    the line where I have it based on my reading that book, the personal
                    experiences that make me realise the quotes to be true.
                    I love my neighbour, who is a beautiful intelligent woman, who have
                    lived for 12 years with a apparantly nice guy, a guy who condemn
                    patriarchal behaviours in middle-age countries, and then went home and
                    beat this intelligent girl, because she acted like a whore, put her
                    down totally mentally...
                    Well for 2 years I have put my cute little butt in the line here,
                    standing between them... supporting her in regaining selfconfidence.
                    Well I haven't declared war on the guy, thanks to Mr.Steiner I have to
                    a certain extend managed to leave antipathy and sympathy behind me,
                    and this guy actually have had enough confidence in me, to sort of
                    choose me as his judge... I quote because these quotes are personal
                    pain in the process of reaching the heart of this "monster", find
                    images to enlighten his obsessions and darkness, and the only way to
                    really do that is to have the courage to meet these things in yourself....

                    Well to reach a conclusion here, though we no longer by mouth confess
                    to the patriarchal parts of the bible, and the middle age
                    subordination to the church or the sovereign subordination to the king
                    ... certainly do not mean that we don't have these things present in
                    our culture. You don't have to go to iraq or afghanistan or whatever
                    to find "talibans" .. just go and visit your neighbours.

                    Yes all of you quote-maniacs get real and practise :-)

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