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

New Age streams of various kinds....

Expand Messages
  • Tarjei Straume
    I have a bunch of occult and New Age literature on my shelf after my mother, who passed away in 1997. She had been an anthroposophist since 1960, and in
    Message 1 of 2 , Nov 16, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      I have a bunch of occult and New Age literature on my shelf after my
      mother, who passed away in 1997. She had been an anthroposophist since
      1960, and in addition to Steiner, she read everything occult she came
      across. Aleister Crowley made her laugh out loud; she thought he was so
      funny with his wild ambitions to be the Beast and all that, and his weird
      rituals. (Well now, Ron Hubbard also read Crowley studiously, but because
      the office of the Beast was already taken by him, Crowley had to settle for
      something else that seemed to be available, so he tried to make people
      think of him as the Antichrist, but that's a different story.)

      Anyway, my mother also had a heavy Dion Fortune period in her mature years.
      As the threshold was approaching, she felt that Steiner was too strict and
      tough with regard to demands upon the individual between death and rebirth;
      other occultists made it so much easier and more comfortable. So I also
      have collections of Alice Bailey, Emanuel Swedenborg, Max Heindel, Corine
      Heline (a pupil of Heindel), W. E. Butler, Mona Rolfe PhD, Dr. Carrington,
      a huge Dion Fortune collection (of course), plus some real oddballs like
      Rosemary Brown's book "Immortals at my Elbow," featuring automatic writing
      of compositions at the piano from celebrities like Liszt, Chopin, etc. And
      they have messages to the world as well, of course, plus pieces of wisdom
      from Shaw and Shakespeare. Makes me wish to join the Skeptics Society
      immediately. And then you have "Beyond the Horizon" by Grace Rosher.
      Automatic writing in sheer Spiritualist style.

      Max Heindel (founder of the Rosicrucian Fellowship in Oceanside,
      California) is a chapter by himself. He was described by Rudolf Steiner in
      a lecture held in Christiania [Oslo] Oct 6, 1913 in the cycle, "The Fifth
      Gospel" (GA 148):

      ***************************************************************************************

      We have quite enough enemies today already and the way they act is really
      very curious. I do not propose to enlarge upon this, for you probably know
      about it from the News Sheets. You are certainly aware of another strange
      fact. There are people who have been saying for a long time that the
      teaching I give is tainted with every kind of bigoted Christian dogma, even
      by Jesuitism. This malicious allegation is made chiefly by certain devotees
      of 'Adyar Theosophy', as it is called, and they talk sheer, unscrupulous
      nonsense. But our teachings have also been immeasurably falsified from a
      quarter which had violently attacked the intolerance, the distortions and
      the allegations. A man from America, who spent weeks and months getting to
      know our teachings, transcribed and carried them off in a watered-down form
      to America, where he has given out a plagiarised 'Rosicrucian Theosophy.'
      True, he says he learnt a good deal from us over here, but that he was
      summoned to the Masters and learnt more from them. He says nothing,
      however, about having learnt from us the deeper things which he had drawn
      from the then unpublished lecture-courses. When something like this happens
      in America, one may of course emulate the aged Hillel and be lenient; nor
      need one stop being lenient when these things make their way across to
      Europe. In a quarter from which the most violent attacks on us were
      launched, a translation was made of what these circles in America had taken
      from us, and in an introduction to this translation it was said: True, a
      Rosicrucian conception of the world is making its appearance in Europe,
      too, but in a bigoted, Jesuital form; this kind of thinking can thrive only
      in the pure air of California. Well... here I will pause! Such are the
      methods of our opponents. We may regard these things with leniency and even
      with compassion, but we should not shut our eyes to them. When things like
      this happen, even those who for years have been remarkably forbearing with
      people who acted so unscrupulously, must be wary. Perhaps one day everyone
      will have their eyes opened. If the service of truth did not demand it, I
      should much prefer not to speak about these matters, but they must be faced
      fairly and squarely.

      ***************************************************************************************

      My 1971 edition of Max Heindel's major work, "The Rosicrucian
      Cosmo-Conception, or Mystic Christianity," was first copyrighted in 1909,
      four years before RS held the lecture quoted above. Amazingly, whan I first
      bought this book in my youth, I bought the contents too, believing that
      Heindel was yet another initiate. I didn't notice that he made no mention
      of Ahriman whatsoever and that Rudolf Steiner was non-existent for him,
      although I did find it curious that his writing bore a distinct
      anti-Semitic coloring. It wouldn't have been surprising if Heinrich Himmler
      had a copy of "The Rosicrucian Cosmo-Conception" on his night table,
      especially when we take another work by Heindel into account, namely
      "Mysteries of the Great Operas." The Nazis chose precisely the opera as a
      tool to hypnotize and seduce the populace.

      According to a friend of mine who happens to be a CC priest, Emanuel
      Swedenborg was the reincarnation of Ignatius Loyola, although as Swedenborg
      he refuted what he had done as Loyola. Does anybody have any more info
      about this?


      Tarjei
      http://uncletaz.com/
    • Tarjei Straume
      ... Please read: .....Hubbard [not Crowley] had to settle for something else that seemed to be available... In other words, Ron Hubbard claimed to be
      Message 2 of 2 , Nov 16, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        I wrote in my previous post::

        > (Well now, Ron Hubbard also read Crowley studiously, but because
        >the office of the Beast was already taken by him, Crowley had to settle for
        >something else that seemed to be available, so he tried to make people
        >think of him as the Antichrist, but that's a different story.)

        Please read: .....Hubbard [not Crowley] had to settle for something else
        that seemed to be available...

        In other words, Ron Hubbard claimed to be Antichrist. Crowley aspired to be
        the Beast.

        Interesting ambitions.


        Tarjei
        http://uncletaz.com/
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.