Re: [anthroposophy] Re: does one need to be an anthroposophist to be an anthroposophist? part 5
- Andrea,The virtue of not "judging others" has become a socio-spiritual hot potato that few will address straight on, at least in America. The fact of the matter is: the hermetic axiom continues to hold true: as above, so below (and as within, so outside.) Though inconsistencies can exist between who a person is on the inside in their soul life and how they act and appear, a large degree of consistency must exist between the inner and outer. Generally, the fruits of inner work will manifest in greater clarity of mind, focus of attention, consistency in behavior, and so on. Devotional work will express itself as greater tolerance, understanding and the willingness to help and serve the needs of others. If Steiner weighed three hundred pounds or was slovenly in appearance, great doubt would be cast upon him as someone who has mastered his inner life. We all have faults and personality growth areas but there is virtually nothing that cannot be changed or improved upon through reflection, identifying a problem and working on it consistently. Often we fall prey to the non judgment syndrome and people involved in spiritual pursuits can continue to be rude, insensitive, lazy, undirected in life, space cadets, or whatever. And we hesitate to give supportive feedback or comment unless its interfering directly with work or family life.Often we hear: it's their soul nature. It's their temperament. It's their karma for now; they are working on something deep; and so on. This can lead to nonsense. If someone is a bigot, they are a bigot. If someone is bible dependent and must quote scriptures all the time to justify their position, they are insecure and close minded; if someone speaks unclearly about metaphysical studies, they are unclear and need to work on better understanding of the subject. The inner subtleties of meditation and prayer and deep karma issues are unseen conditions and need respect; but should not be an excuse for not moving forward in our lives and letting go of things that do not work or matter.There is also a tendency with some on the spiritual path to develop a mystique and personality split regarding spiritual work. We may see a normal everyday facade and then the inner person in special moments. This split cannot be healthy or balanced since one must always be hiding or repressing certain experiences and qualities while in normal life. I am not suggesting talking about astral travels at a social dinner or breaking out in uncontrollable tears but the influence of such inner experiences and sensitivities can deepen a conservation if done appropriately. We need not get specific and metaphysical but inner work can empower communication and transcend intellectual exercise.jeffFrom: VALENTINA BRUNETTISent: Sunday, February 02, 2003 6:40 AMSubject: R: [anthroposophy] Re: does one need to be an anthroposophist to be an anthroposophist?Dear Elaine and Jeff,
let's wait for Elaine's further steps, but, in the meantime I begin to smell
the scent of a somewhat disturbing "smoke", aka the one from the kitchen in
which we try to cook the food of "judgin' the others' inner life...".
If it is so I have to recall that in my post I was talking about the path in
itself: nothing was said about the way the Anthroposophist used to perform
or presently perform it.
Here we meet a fact about which everyone who lives in the middle of a
milieu of anthro-students got something to say.
It's easy here to ask oneself sometimes. " hey what is doing this guy ,
those are gestures contradictory of the path..." when this or that acts in
a "non-spiritual" mood.....
But if we take a breath and we try to go further we are compelled to think
If we should be path-trained in such a deep way to read others' aura and
karmic roots and to understand deeply why he acts this way , in the meantime
our training should be able to lead us to the real "absence of sentence" and
also to the road to find out the way to actually help our neighbour'
This was -and is- the way performed by a Spiritual Orienteer- like those
we was so lucky to know here in Italy.
They were able to talk "from I AM to I AM" : most of us did succeed to
grasp the exact meaning of a Massimo's or Mimma's answer sometimes after
Moreover if we look at the wholeness let's us think about the difficulty
when we try to gain a picture of the "inner state" of the Anthro-Movement
Certainly we are in front of the fruits by the means of which we can judge
the tree but it's not enough.
We actually need to get the level to be able to "talk with Michael" in
order to begin to understand something about what's goin' on here!.
I also recall that when Massimo and Mimma were among us they sometimes
gave us some input on "Heaven's Will" about the Earth events.
Following such an exacting heritage a good number of fellows of the
"scaligerian" movement- gathered in Rome about 25 days ago.
These 120 or 130 representative of the inner core of the Italian and
European Spiritual Movement tried to gain some further insight in order to
be able to "Help God to Help Us", and the true Light in all this lies in the
fact that all of us keep on tryin' to perform such a giant task in the
midst of oneself fragility and shaking and karmic troubles !
There is a secret behind this all: when we perform a concentration exercise
there is the real I or Individuality who begins to act, in spite of our
shaking and weak everyday personality.
There's really no reason to cry if we are able to be , maybe three times a
day, the I we say to be.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, February 02, 2003 1:53 AM
Subject: [anthroposophy] Re: does one need to be an anthroposophist to be an
Dear Jeff and Andrea,
I am reading your replies, and I thank you very much for writing on
what is an Anthropop, who is in the Michael School (whether they
follow Steiner´s teachings or not), and the differences, as you each
see them,between eXoteric and eSoteric Christianity.
In general ways, I agree with much of what you both have said, and
yet I still have questions and what i suspect are (friendly)
disagreements,which I may be able to articulate next week. I probably
will not be online tomorrow (Sunday), but will sleep on all this over
the next nights til early next week , perhaps.
OK,just to take a minute now before I go--just to give you an idea of
one of my questions and views still: I´m not sure that I agree that
those who consciously follow anthroposophical terminology,methodology
(or that of Spiritual Science as taught by Steiner) or coming to any
more conscious knowledge of the Cosmos and Spirit World than many
others who follow other Christian (or other) paths. Many of these
souls have tremendous insights, tremendous, and do wonderful work in
the world. They just use different terms than Steiner-ites or
anthropops.These terms,the languages,do make a difference, of
course,i feel,but the difference is not,as i see it,one of
inferiority or that they are less conscious(I refer to certain
enlightened ones, not to your everyday unconscious casual Christian
or Muslim or Jew or Buddhist, etc.).
So,I would question of those who follow what they/we term the Michael
School or term ¨Spiritual Science¨really have something ¨plus¨, as
one of you put it. I don´t see this when I look around in the world
of those who are really dedicated to their spiritual path, those who
are quite advanced.
Maybe I´ll give examples next time.
At any rate,whether we agree or disagree,keep the discussion coming.
I will read you and find your posts helpful!
List owner: email@example.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
List owner: firstname.lastname@example.org
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.