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

38122Re: Michael and Lucifer and Christ

Expand Messages
  • Kim
    Nov 1, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Dottie, Yes I have thought about it, but it is a little complicated.

      There are some occurrences which are vital in any discussion of who is who and when of The Trinity and what starts our phases: The Deeds of Christ.

      The Luciferic forces was cast down to man when Michael raised to Archangel (a Deed of Christ). When he entered the Earth cycle he was Angel and had those lunar spirits with him, which still was on the stage of man, the Luciferic host. As he was raised to Archangel by Christ, the lunar men was cast down to us. Therefore the Name Lucifer. He is also 'The Father' as he was the Creator of the Angels back on the Old Uranus.

      In 1879, a new Deed of Christ, raises the old Michael to Archai, and becomes The Holy Spirit. This is the reason Steiner Calls Lucifer the New Holy Spirit.


      Left Pillar, Ahriman, and Right Pillar, Lucifer, The Middle Pillar, The Son, Christ.
      In 1879 Yahve joins the other Elohims.

      Love,
      Kim
      --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, dottie zold <dottie_z@...> wrote:
      >
      > Kim, I was thinking that the four worlds, and the closest one to the physical, where Malkuth resides, is the Fall of Lucifer. This is the kingdom of Lucifer ultimately. And so the question is if there is a Tree portion that is below as well? I think it matters if we are to get to the bottom of the Mystery in its totality. Well, maybe you have already and so I am just thinking here.
      >  
      > So, if Lucifer is rising as the Fallen One, we can see how it would ulitmately be Michael and Christ who would be the ones responsible for the return. It's funny to read Jakob and to realize it was this 'loving of ones' sound' in a sense that produced this Fall in a way, but interestingly enough, it kinda also involves this portion of 'be careful who you hang out with' as it was not just Lucifer, but the hosts that were produced by Lucifer during the creation of his Tone that was overwhelmingly to beautiful and had no concept of stopping the rise so to speak towards the balance. And just through its thrust upward, it produced in 'feeling' and no thought'. Thought came after the Willing and the Feeling in a way.
      >  
      > Well, main point is that I am wondering about us looking at the closest Tree as the one that is Lucifer's Kingdom in all ways and the one below it.
      >  
      > All good things,
      > Dottie
      >  
      > p.s. it is so much better inside me than outside me, this pondering and then trying to put the question into a written word. Oh well.
      >
      > --- On Fri, 10/31/08, dottie zold dottie_z@... wrote:
      >
      > From: dottie zold dottie_z@...
      > Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Michael and Lucifer and Christ
      > To: anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com
      > Date: Friday, October 31, 2008, 4:39 PM
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > I really really liked the simplicity of this statement:
      >  
      > His most popular work was a collection of some of his devotional tracts, called The Way to Christ. In it he said, "For what good does it do the soul to know the Way to God, if it will not walk in it, but goes on in a contrary path? What good will it do the soul to comfort itself with the brotherhood of Christ, with His passion and death, and so flatter itself with the hopes of getting the inheritance thereby, if it will not enter into the brotherly birth, that it may be a true child, born out of the Spirit of Christ, out of His suffering, death and resurrection?"
      > At times, Boehme's adoration of Christ is very moving. "...He [Christ] must get [his] form in us, or we shall not be in Heaven..."
      >  
      > I really really like the simplicty. I will say I am shocked to smithereens to see the names of his books: all very very similar to the works of Rudolf Steiner.
      >  
      > All good things,
      > Dottie
      >
      > --- On Fri, 10/31/08, dottie zold dottie_z@... wrote:
      >
      > From: dottie zold dottie_z@...
      > Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Michael and Lucifer and Christ
      > To: anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com
      > Date: Friday, October 31, 2008, 4:27 PM
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > http://www.gnosticliberationfront.com/unification_of_opposites.htm#jacob%20boehme
      >  
      >
      >
      > --- On Fri, 10/31/08, dottie zold dottie_z@... wrote:
      >
      > From: dottie zold dottie_z@...
      > Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Michael and Lucifer and Christ
      > To: anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com
      > Date: Friday, October 31, 2008, 9:36 AM
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Dear Friends,
      >  
      > In trying to find Lucifer rightly and how this all came about and what his name is, I have to go to the Hebrew tradition, and my Rabbi has no idea who this Lucifer is: maybe I have just not framed the question rightly.
      >  
      > See, the Jews, or so I understand from my Rabbi and my studies, find that Eve reached up to be like her Father in Heaven. Now, if we consider Yahweh in all of this, then we have to consider what 'Father' she was talking about. It seems to me, boy my Rabbi is going to love me for this thought although not the full on follow through, it seems to me that it would be true if Lucifer was the Father/Mother in a sense as Eve strove to be in freedom/consciousness in the same way that Lucifer did indeed strive. AND it is understood from the Rabbi's, well my Rabbi, that Eve thought about it first as can be seen through the passage in the Bible in Genesis 3:      6 When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it. 7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were
      > naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves.
      >  
      > Dottie:
      >  
      > Now, it seems to me that we must reciptulate what we understand from our own past biographies before we can move to the new thing. It seems to me that one can claim others are being attavistic or experienced something through this old way, however I think we have a choice to continue receiving something in that manner or to work towards the new. Students of Rudolf Steiner, those with past experiences of the Christ Initiation and those not, have a responsibility to lift themselves to the next portion of their ongoing concious evolution as a human being.
      >  
      > It seems to me that there are certain things that come before me as I seek that are very familiar and why I can connect the dots so easily although initially haphazardly according to this personality of mine and the time I was born in. We each have our own way, some conservative, some not so conservative, and some definitly flying on a wing and a prayer. I tend to be the last one. Yes I am sustained by my goodwill wanting to serve Michael onwards ever to the Christ and Sophia.
      >  
      > I always wanted to know why the 22 represented the feminine to me. And when I was seeking to understand th feminine mysteries peeking out of the Fifth Gospel, I kept encountering this 22 and then 222 as a sign that it was actually something deemed via Sophia. That She was allowing this mystery, a part of helping to find this mystery. Lately as I travel through some very interesting waters personally I find this number shows up in front of me at great times of testing, and then I feel graced in a way, a thought of 'I am with you' appears and I am knowing things will be well. And sure enough it does indeed move this way. I believe Sergei's book on Anthroposophia, his intro or something important is written on this day, most of the good books pertaining to the Magdalene, and even those not so good, appear with these numbers as well, 22, as do my own screenplays. I mean it was just so apparant but I had no understanding of why until today.
      >  
      > See, in Genesis 2:22 Woman is created. And that is the secret to understanding why this number would appear at times in my life as I am looking at the Feminine mysteries specifically. I was looking there to bring forth the passage I share above regarding the concept of Eve as a thinker. And even in Genesis 1 we find that Havah is gold and is one of the rivers. I mean what is going on and why have we missed it.
      >  
      > I think we missed it for we are not yet in the space of sense free thinking. Well, first we have to rise ourselves in thinking to come to sense free thinking if we are to meet this age properly. So, now, it seems to me that we can begin to 'see' this story anew, out of Imagination, Inspiration, and Intuition...well, Intuition is a little tricky if we have not handled the antipathies and sympathies yet it seems.
      >  
      > I was thinking that the Jews have not spoken of and no concept of this Lucifer. It reminds me of the point that there was this story I thought was just a legend, and in fact came to understand it was my own biography. Maybe this is what is true for this understanding of the Fall, and of course it would be, as they would be the first to truly separate from all the other Gods! I mean think of that language 'first to truly separate from all the other Gods...that is really interesting if we consider it from various points of view.
      >  
      > Well, I am going to stop there with this point as it seems something is about to change moving into 46.
      >  
      > Regarding the Feminine I do want to share a few things I worked with last night from Torah of the Mothers: "At the outset we must put aside the most common translations of the name EHYEH as 'the Eternal,' or as 'I am what I am.' The changeless duration of eternity,  like the more immediate but equally static continuous present, fail to reflect the essence of this Name. Rather, in keeping with the most basic rules of Hebrew grammar, we note that the letter aleph with which EHYEH begins signafies the verbal future tense: (...) I am ready to give birth.
      >  
      > Dottie: She goes on further, and from her words I find the beginning of the birth towards the I Am being birthed here on Earth. As this takes place, this naming from the Burning Bush that was not consumed, she finds it referring to the Exodus, which would be true. And then higher still, I believe we can find when it is that it becomes fully outwardly known that God's Presence, the Shekinah at that time, I can imagine the archetypal Soul path, pardon my expression, will now move through the various stages towards the whole epoch fullness of the seven,  ulitmately, and therefore to a prayalaya after it has been completed. Oh boy dottie.
      >  
      > On the right and left we have t his from the same woman Ora Wiskind Elper: Later in mystical thought, the attributes of din and rahamim - of censure and mercy - acquire explicit gender differentitation. The feminine 'left side of judgement and severity is often portrayed in dialectical opposition to the masculine 'right side' of grace.
      >  
      > Okay, I gotta run.
      >  
      > All good things,
      > Dottie
      >
    • Show all 511 messages in this topic