- For me, this duality is reason and intuition, not reason and emotion. The
combination of reason and intuition is what the Greeks, the Romans and the
US Founders called Common Sense. The Common Sense that leads to statements
like, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created
equal . . ."
> Therefore, to transform the lower senses, or parts of the physical, astralYes, and the ego is a problem for many of us. If it weren't, we would be at
> and etheric bodies, the work must be done through the ego.
a higher stage of being.
I don't want to be in the position of arguing against emotion. What human
does not love emotion? But does Steiner say that angels have no emotions?
Does that say something about evolution? Are we talking about different
things when we say "emotion"? Are there higher and lower emotions? Probably
so, but we love them all.
>From: "John Massengale" <john@...>I'm not sure why you thought we'd think anything was "aimed" at all,
> > It's helpful to remember, as my grandmother would say, "if you can spot it,
> > you got it," thus revealing just where and in whom transformation must
>Sarah, Elaine --
>The following is NOT aimed at either of you.
except that we were 2 of several contributors to the thread.
>This is again a problem with interpretation. The only meaning I ever
>A recent study reported in the New York Times and probably elsewhere showed
>that the most incompetent people in most endeavors think they are competent.
>And the most competent do not feel that way.
>Similarly, the most angry, repressed, selfish, self-centered person
>constantly "sees" the faults of other people: "sees" is in quotes because
>what they are seeing is very often what they are projecting.
>I can imagine scenarios in which I would agree with your grandmother's
>quote, but it also justifies enormous self-justification. "I know I'm right,
>I got mad."
associated with the phrase is simply that one is *most likely*
observing one's own projections in the outer world. Only through
strenuous work on the self can this circumstance be rectified, thus
advocating humility, self control, humor etc., to best handle the
emotions thru the thinking. Sorry for the confusion. The meaning I
attribute to this phrase in no way involves self-justification, but I
can understand your point. Guess I should have stuck with
Actually, Steiner said this in a different (read better) way. To
paraphrase Steiner, "Look into the outer world to find the self, look
into your own soul to find the other."
Wishing strength and peace to all,
- Dearest John, What Sarah was saying (hi, Sarah ;o) now I know you are!), or
rather, what her grandmother meant was, that if something annoys you about
someone else (You SPOT something that irks you) then that is a signal to
search within yourself to see 1. what is it within you that is so easily
annoyed and 2. what work you need to do on that same annoying quality within
yourself (you GOT the same problem you are pointing out in others).. or to
paraphrase Christ (LOL! that sounds so funny) "If you see a speck of sawdust
in your brother;s eye, you better remove the plank from your own eye first,
so you can see well enough to really help your brother with his sawdust
problem!" Warmly and with great mirth, Demetra
- Thank you, dear Sarah, for your lovely post on transformation!
I love both ways you express the point of transforming emotion, anger, for
On another note: Cherry! We are having a few pink cherry blossoms here in
Charlottesville just now!
And Nashville! Ah! Well, i am a native of Tennessee, south of Knoxville. I
have a long lost anthroposophic friend, Terry Howell, who lives in Franklin,
Tennessee, near Nashville. I don't think he'd mind me saying on this list
that he used to be lonely for anthroposophists. Do you two know each other?
He is a psychologist, working as a consultant, sometimes for automobile
companies (Saturn?), so maybe you ran into each other. Maybe.--So, I am
holding him in the light of this list and of your presence near him.
Thanks for your reply, and Be Well,
>From: Sarah Cherry <sncherr@...>______________________________________________________
>Subject: [anthroposophy] transformation
>Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 12:08:22 -0600
>>From: "elaine upton" <elaineupton@...>
>>Hello again today, Sarah, and to all.
>>Sarah, where are you--in which city or town, if you don't mind saying?
>No, I don't mind saying at all. I am in the USA, near Nashville,
>Tennessee I am a graphic artist working for the Saturn Corporation,
>really as much of a geek-goddess as artist, being network-nanny to
>our small artist computer network .
>I'd like to comment on the issue of the emotion vs objectivity. A
>person can only work on a lower member of the individuality through a
>higher member. Therefore, to transform the lower senses, or parts of
>the physical, astral and etheric bodies, the work must be done
>through the ego. In addition, all of these emotions have the mission
>of being our teachers if we involve ourselves in the work of
>transforming them. For example, in "Metamorphosis of the Soul",
>Steiner says the mission of anger is to burn selfishness from the
>individual. For this reason, we work with Spiritual Science to imbue
>our feeling with thinking before it's directed toward the world as
>will. As I reread this paragraph, it sounded quite mechanical and
>intellectual, so I'll summarize with in a more human way. Getting
>really, really mad at another person can be anything from destructive
>to transforming. It's helpful to remember, as my grandmother would
>say, "if you can spot it, you got it," thus revealing just where and
>in whom transformation must take place.
>BTW, Elaine, like Demetra, I thought your translation of " Ninth
>Duino Elegy" was beautiful.
>Wishing strength and peace to all,
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com