- Stephen C.:
> I just thought of something else involved with continuity. I mentionedAgain, Stephen, I see the issue differently. I see it as a
> something about the ancestors. Although this is dealt with somewhat
> secondarily in Anthroposphy, Steiner made enough references to Ch.
> Rosencreutz, Zarathustra, etc. so that we should have some sensitivity
> to the issue, which is the same regardless of the tradition involved.
resposibility not a sensitivety for the personality. It is a
responsibility to carry on the message in a non corrupt form. The
Rosecrucians have returned in another form although it seems to me that
they mostly have to work from the spiritual worlds versus the earthly
world. And that may have something to do with corruption of their
symbols and such. What is interesting these things can not be corrupted
in Anthroposophy because they do not exist in that specific manner.
Rather it is what we each find within ourselves and what we commit to
the hole that carries forward.
I am not worried about my earthly ancestors as I consider every human
being my ancestor in many different forms. Rather it is what must be
wrought on behalf of mankind and the universe that one has to have a
sense of responsibility. And nothing more. I understand the idea of
working with the dead and with helping those that have gone before us
as it is really us here on the earthly plain that can make a difference
to those already passed. I mean it seems, from what Mr. Prokofieff
shared at the workshop, that this also is for the Angels as we here
have achieved the I before they and so our work helps them for their
future evolution as well.
> And that is Tradition; something which is at the heart of TraditionalSee, I don't know if I agree with this so much and would like to see
> cultures. We might learn something from them in this regard.
> There is also the principle of the Seven Generations; that
> decision-making processes need to take into account how the
> generations seven forward and seven back would view the proposals. In
> an active traditions, the Ancestors are present in this.
some writing on this. And yes, I will ask for Dr. Steiner, as he is
the principle guide that I am able to understand. I do not dispute what
you share but I still would like to see what you think this means for
Anthroposophy as a whole. My post to you was about people complaining
about the Vorstand and no initiations and such yet I haven't had
anything to chew on that speaks to what this has to do with people
being their own teachers as such. I mean, what do you think of the
point that Anthroposophy is not off track, and actually continued,
albeit shaky at times and authorotative, to the place it was supposed
to be? In the course of the intellectual soul and the understanding of
what Freedom is supposed to be don't you think this was the best way
for Anthroposophy to move forward: without one specific teacher to
say 'I am the One'?
- Okay, I shall check on it. This book has some serious
issues in it as for example the chapter noted as being
Chapter 8 has the inside pages noted as Chapter 7. And
I think its going to have to go into reprint as it is
one that speaks directly to this understanding of the
Being Anthroposophia in the community and the
importance of continuing forward as a Society that has
> dottie zold wrote:
> > Frank:
> >>Dottie and others have recently mentioned the book
> >>"Isis Mary Sophia". I
> >>was looking this over and found what I think may
> >>serious erroneous
> >>translations in the last entry: "A Christmas
> >>The Mystery of the
> >>Logos". On the first page: "...the unfolding of
> >>intellectual or mind
> >>soul..." 'intellectual' is ok for 'Verstand', but
> >>think that Gemüt
> >>should not be translated as "mind", although it
> >>often is. The problem is
> >>that there is no adequate translation for the
> >>I think, however,
> >>that Steiner didn't mean that Verstand and Gemüt
> >>synonymous, but
> >>rather that they are two parallel paths of
> >>development - one being
> >>intellectual or reasoning, the other being through
> >>heart, emotion or
> >>soul (Gemüt). I don't recall whether Bernard
> >>Lievegoed wrote it or I
> >>heard him say it, but he used the example of a
> >>kindergarten teacher (or
> >>assistant)who perhaps wouldn't understand
> >>of Freedom or isn't
> >>interested in it, but nevertheless intuits
> >>sufficiently to pass through
> >>the intellectual/Gemüt phase onward to
> >>soul development. I
> >>think this is appropriate for this list because of
> >>accusations that
> >>certain members are stuck in the sentient soul
> >>stage. Also in the same
> >>chapter the translator uses "spiritual soul"
> >>of "consciousness
> >>soul" for some reason.
> > Dear Frank, can we speak to the editors of the
> > publishing company about this issue you bring up?
> > think it is really important to the integrity of
> > Steiner's work.
> I don't think there's much point in that, first
> because I haven't come
> up with a suitable translation for "Gemüt, and
> secondly because they
> couldn't do anything about it anyway until a new
> edition came out, which
> is probably unlikely - and third, I don't have the
> tme right now.
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005