27870about Ahriman's incarnation
- Jul 15, 2006http://uncletaz.com/ahrimdec.html
"Just as there was an incarnation of Lucifer at the beginning of the
third pre-Christian millennium, as there was the Christ Incarnation
at the time of the Mystery of Golgotha, so there will be a Western
incarnation of the Ahriman being some little time after our earthly
existence, in fact, in the third post-Christian millennium. To form a
right conception of the historical evolution of mankind during
approximately 6000 years, one must grasp that at the one pole stands
a Luciferic incarnation, in the center, the incarnation of Christ,
and at the other pole the Ahrimanic incarnation."
( - Rudolf Steiner: "The Ahrimanic Deception", GA 193, Zurich, 27th
It's fairly safe to say that the notion of human existence on earth
being ruled by three major cosmic powers - Lucifer, Christ, and
Ahriman - is unique to Rudolf Steiner's anthroposophy. It should also
be noted that when Rudolf Steiner was asked toward the end of his
life which work was his most important, he answered without
hesitation: " 'The Philosophy of Freedom' will survive all my other
works." There lies the empiricism, the science, the
how-to-know-that-we know. There are no higher hierarchies in that
book, no Mystery of Golgotha, no Lucifer and Ahriman. And for this
reason, Joel was justified when he stated some time ago that
Steiner's cosmology and Christology and so on, is science fiction.
This doesn't mean that one has to think of it all as pure fiction,
but that we observe self-critical thinking and epistemological
discipline. If this puffs a few luciferic balloons, so be it. If this
prompts the luciferians to perceive Joel, myself, and also Arve
Mathisen, author of "Critical Reflections about Anthroposophy", as
errrand boys for Ahriman's ensnarement, so be it.
"An online search through Rudolf Steiner's collected works [-
http://rsv.arpa.ch/cgi-bin/auth.cgi -] reveals that the expression
"anthroposophical truths" or "spiritual-scientific truths" occurs
more than 300 times. What is an "anthroposophical truth"?"
"Valid research results shall be testable by others in an independent
way. In the least a scientific environment should emerge where
related experiences and theories are debated and critically
considered. The methodical foundation of research, its experiences
and its theoretical conclusions must be subject to continual review.
Such requests for science need not mean that Steiner's spiritual
science is erroneous, perhaps the future will show that more people
will develop spiritual-scientific clairvoyance which may produce a
scientific environment around Steiner's research. But until this
possibly happens, it is not right in my opinion to regard Steiner's
anthroposophy as results of scientific research."
"Where in his work does Steiner appear as "spiritual investigator" on
the basis of spiritual perceptions, where is he a 'well-read'
cultural personality, and where is it the private human being Steiner
who is expressing his opinions and frustrations? Because Steiner
consistently doesn't reveal sources for his statements, it is on
first reading impossible to distinguish between these three 'modes'."
"My experience is that very few of Steiner's texts bear the mark of
stemming immediately from clairvoyant perceptions."
My comment to Mathisen's last remark is that if any credence should
be given to Steiner's alleged spiritual-scientific research, the
human incarnations of Lucifer, Christ, and Ahriman, including the
opening quote in this post, would definitely count for one of those
"very few" instances where this may be assumed, because of the severe
struggle he describes.
From the same lecture:
"It is, however, extraordinarily difficult to speak about these
questions from the standpoint of initiation-science......."
"The incarnation that took place at the beginning of the third
millennium B.C is extraordinarily difficult to follow up, even with
the science of seership, of initiation."
This means that anthroposophists have good reason to find these
claims by Steiner highly credible if it also makes good logical sense
to them. But although one may treat this material as something more
than pure fiction, it is also true what Mathisen seems to be saying
that it is not right to treat it as results of spirituaol-scientific
research as long as one only has Rudolf Steiner's word for the claim
As I mentioned above, Lucifer, Christ, and Ahriman as the three major
cosmic influences on earth, is unique to Steiner's anthroposophy, and
so are their successive one-time human incarnations over time, in
three separate parts of the world: Lucifer in the Orient, Christ in
the Middle East, and Ahriman in the West. In the opening quote,
Steiner speaks specifically about "a Western incarnation of the
Ahriman being (....) in the third post-Christian millennium." He says
nothing about Ahriman incarnating in Asia, where Lucifer made his
appearance, and he says nothing about Ahriman incarnating prior to
the third millennium.
Mr. Hale, however, seems to have access to other sources that I don't
think he's shared with us when he says that Ahriman was supposed to
incarnate in Japan, but - hey, let's quote him:
"Ahriman has incarnated in the west; stolen from Japan ever since
President Fillmore got the clever idea to roust out the shogunate
from 200 years of hibernation in 1852, after manifest destiny had
been achieved on the west coast of the U.S. in September of 1850 with
the statehood of California. And finalized with the bombs that sealed
Roosevelt's "new deal" in 1945, after the bogus war in the Pacific."
What Rudolf Steiner reveals about the incarnation of the three Cosmic
Beings is a pattern related to geography over time: The East, the
Middle, and the West. So Ahriman's incarnation in the West would not
be based upon any "change of plans" what the cosmic blueprint is
concerned, unless Mr. Hale can cite a source that anthroposophists
regard as credible as they regard Steiner when he speaks in dire
earnest about his seership. But questions give him headaches, he
says, they're too Jewish for his taste. Furthermore, Mr. Hale does
not present the notion that Ahriman already incarnated in the 20th
century because of California's statehood and the Hiroshima bomb and
what have you, as a personal theory or belief, but as absolute
spiritual-scientific truth! What is clearly implied here is Mr.
Hales' claim to clairvoyant seership, unless he can cite a source
that carries at least a little weight with his readers.
Mr. Hale continues:
"As a result, Japan is a modern society rather than a primitive
culture having died out due to regressive inclinations. And America
rules the world in terms of the great economic god, or "nature god",
as foreseen by Jefferson and his masonic cronies; all haters of
Christ and the real Jesus in favor of the one and only Supreme Being."
What I have trouble with - and this was also pointed out by Deborah
btw - is that when Mr. Hale speaks about "haters of Christ" (a very
serious charge indeed), he does not speak of individuals, but ethnic,
national, religious, and cultural groups. Jefferson's masonic
cronies? This smacks again of bigoted Christian fundamentalism, where
Freemasons are demonized and targeted for all kinds of speculative
suspicion, just like the Jews. The Jews, the Freemasons, the
Bolsheviks, the Communists, they're all in it together, to rule the
world. And they are haters of Christ.
"And the Jews have this same regressive inclination, yet they are a
part of modern society, rather than choosing to remain isolated and
primitive. And this is their biggest threat to the world. They deny
the Christ that has shown Himself progressively for two thousand
years. And the war rages on because of it."
So the Jews, the Freemasons, and the Japs(?) are haters of Christ and
disciples of the Wicked One. (Me?)
I don't intend to be self-serving, I'd rather be humble as you all
know :) but Hale's final statement is one of those truly rare
compliments I sometimes get. Besides, it reveals how Hale reacts when
his apocalyptic visions are met with resistance, skepticism,
incredulity, or questions, so I'd like to finish my post by repeating it:
"This is merely a statement from me, and not an attempt to engage a
dialogue with Mr. Straume, who is a pompous idiot who should be
either a movie critic or writer of tabloid sensationalism."
- Next post in topic >>