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

Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Steve's question, was betrayal etc.

Expand Messages
  • dottie zold
    Dear Joel, I have to say I am somewhat surprised to hear you say that Dennis seems to work from Knowledge of Higher Worlds versus what you seem to work from
    Message 1 of 2 , Jun 26 4:22 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear Joel,

      I have to say I am somewhat surprised to hear you say
      that Dennis seems to work from Knowledge of Higher
      Worlds versus what you seem to work from Philosophy of
      Freedom.

      It seems to me if someone looks very closely you will
      see that Dennis has both of them and actually what it
      appears he is teaching is from the central fruits of
      what happens when one accomplishes both of those
      works. I think if you have had a chance to read his
      work The Seers Handbook and also the Death of the
      Mysteries, and also the ..darn I can not remember his
      latest, anyhow, those books seem to come from
      Philosophy of Freedom in the way that he has broken
      through to the Higher Worlds in thoughts which then
      also reveal the nature of those words in the three
      Thinking Feeling and Willing. He seems to have pierced
      the Veil on all levels. From what I can see, and maybe
      its not proper to say such a thing but we are dealing
      with an Initiate that not many people are aware of.
      The reason I say this is because if anyone has a mind
      to stand next to one who has pierced the Veil, we have
      one working out of California. I have not noticed
      another who has pierced that Veil in such a Rudolf
      Steiner manner. Anywhere.

      It's as if we have one who has truly and can truly
      share the path to initiation like no other yet he is
      still rather unknown in a way. He kinda feels like
      people are just starting to wake up to him. In his
      Coros Institute there were about 50 or 60 people. I am
      thinking that this either means only a few are truly
      aware of what he offers or that many are just not
      committed to the initiate path. Which is all well and
      good but then again we get to ask what do we want for
      our lives in this lifetime. Is it about us or about
      the world. What are we in service to.

      In your comments about Philosophy of Freedom and such
      I find what seems to be lacking is a real objective
      view of other points that are raised from other works
      of Rudolf Steiner. I think that this objectivity
      really is what can guide us onward once we reach some
      basic abilities. To not have this objectivity and to
      not include others to ask if it appears we are being
      objective we really walk in our sympathies and
      antipathies although we claim not to.

      Betrayal of Anthroposophy is a really interesting
      subjective pattern I see going on with you and a few
      others. No spiritual reality understanding of this
      matter just all physical subjective to ones own
      opinion of what Anthroposophy is what its not what it
      coulda been if they only listened to you and so forth.
      If you are one who considers the Society failed I hae
      to say this is one of the places I would consider
      betrayal. Yet, I wonder how it could be betrayal if
      you don't know any better. It seems you should by all
      you share yet there seems to be this bridging that
      still needs to occur. It's like the bridge had not
      been built between your thinking and the real
      spiritual activity going on behind the scenes in an
      objective manner. We can all think this or think that
      and feel this and feel that, but if we can not truly
      enter into an objective relationship as an observer
      than I do not know how one can know a spiritual
      reality.

      I have to run,
      Dottie


      --- Joel Wendt <hermit@...> wrote:

      > Steve wrote:
      >
      > "I once told you that my approach was to
      > conceptualize in the dark;
      > meaning no mental pictures for image-building at
      > all. And that is
      > what stands behind efforts of sense-free thinking
      > conducted for 20
      > years now. So, for example, when a spiritual
      > experience occurs that
      > has no knowledge or understanding other than that it
      > took place, and
      > has a reason and a purpose that must be striven for
      > in order to
      > achieve its comprehension (knowedge +
      > understanding), then knowledge
      > acquisition becomes the trail of self-discovery.
      > Spiritual-scientific
      > study has progressively brought forth this knowledge
      > and recognition of
      > the Etheric Christ, based on a combination of
      > anthroposophy and
      > independent efforts of sense-free thinking that was
      > conducted for
      > fourteen years until revealed in a stroke of light
      > in April, 1994.
      >
      >
      > 'Now, you practice a methodology called: Exact
      > Sensorial Phantasy.
      > Please describe for me how your method avoids the
      > construction of
      > mental pictures and images, which then become a part
      > of your
      > cultivated experiences?"
      >
      > Lets start with what Dennis Klocek had published in
      > a recent news for
      > members, as his version of the Rosicrucian-Manichean
      > alchemical path of
      > Anthroposophy (and which Dottie posted to the list I
      > believe) - a brief
      > summary:
      >
      > Earth (freedom) leads to Water (phenomenology) leads
      > to Air (silent
      > practice) leads to Fire (dialogue).
      >
      > Dennis seems to work more for the Knowledge of
      > Higher Worlds side, while
      > I seem to work more from the PoF side. Emphasis on
      > "seem".
      >
      > What you call Exact Sensorial Phantasy is not really
      > what I do, although
      > it bears a relationship to that. The social world
      > is not the sense
      > world, but rather a complex of arrangements or
      > intrinsic living social
      > order. The writings of Francis Edmonds (Fields of
      > Form, for example)
      > speaks of polar-goethean thinking, which remains
      > phenomenological, but
      > still has to deal with abstractions.
      >
      > So it becomes necessary to be scientifically
      > introspective on our own
      > process of abstraction, to do consciously what for
      > others is mere
      > instinct. Not entirely sure, for example what the
      > heck you mean by
      > "conceptualize" in the dark that doesn't reduce in
      > the end to mental
      > pictures. Of course, if we used the vocabulary of
      > PoF, we would
      > distinguish between mental pictures, abstract
      > generalized concepts, pure
      > concepts and ideas.
      >
      > I am not sure that you can skip being
      > phenomonological (the water step),
      > by the way. To me thinking becomes, at its highest,
      > an art. On the way
      > to becoming an art, we have a lot of skills to
      > acquire and have to
      > develop first these skills into craft. The water
      > step is a necessary
      > craft or skill, whether it is applied to the sense
      > world or to the
      > spiritual world. One still remains rooted in the
      > craft of knowing how
      > to think only the experience, and in letting the
      > experience speak.
      > Concepts come from experience, so my question then
      > remains, when you
      > write about Christ's effects on the electricity of
      > cells (or whatever
      > that was), what is your experience?
      >
      > I am planning some lectures for the Fall, around the
      > time of Michaelmas,
      > here in Fair Oaks. As I preparing for this I have
      > been reviewing in
      > great detail the nature of my development over time
      > as a thinker, as an
      > artist of thought.
      >
      > The first stages were all moral by the way. The
      > work product was
      > understood almost immediately to be the result of
      > the application of
      > moral choices, both as to why I asked the questions
      > I asked (selfish
      > curiosity was of no use whatsoever, for example),
      > but also as to
      > method. Since why I did my research, and the method
      > of research were
      > acts of will, I had to find the ground from which I
      > proceeded in a moral
      > ideal (basic PoF stuff about moral action).
      >
      > This moral ideal changes over time, especially the
      > deeper my
      > introspection in the sense of a better understanding
      > of myself.
      > Mistakes were made, delusional self judgments
      > discovered. Pride and
      > showing off were motives that had to be discovered
      > and set aside. The
      > whole three steps forward in moral development for
      > each single step in
      > spiritual development. The astrality has to be
      > purified, not only as to
      > my inner actions, but my outer actions in life.
      >
      > If a matter of conscience is being ignored from my
      > biography, there is
      > no way to work inwardly. New thought will not come,
      > no help offered by
      > the spirit (the wind), if I have been leaving
      > matters of life
      > unattended. Those on the list who do 12-Step work
      > will know that this
      > process never ends. We are always discovering new
      > ways in which we live
      > in denial. One can be a spiritual junkie too, not
      > just a cocaine or
      > heroin junkie.
      >
      > Phenomonology then begins to work, but it is mostly
      > descriptive if one
      > is working in a polar-goethean way. The water work
      > has its own
      > requirements.
      >
      > Then we have to give it up. Dennis speaks of
      > rolling backwards the
      > already thought thoughts as preparation for silent
      > practice. My
      > experience is a bit different, and what I used to
      > call sacrifice of
      > thoughts or poverty of thought, I now call
      > renunciation. Any strongly
      > produced thought content has to be periodically
      > undone. I have to empty
      > my soul of my egotistic attachment to it. If I like
      > it too much, if I
      > am too proud of it, then my moral work is defeated
      > by the ongoing
      > actions of the double-complex.
      >
      > This is the air practice or trial.
      >
      > Then comes dialogue. For Dennis he finds
      > conversation speaks to him.
      > Others bring him new questions or thoughts which
      > answer his questions.
      > He finds this a working with the dead. For me that
      > has been different,
      > dialogue is this presence of Fullness, and fullness
      > of Presence. When I
      > have poverty of thought (silent practice) and
      > chasity of thought
      > (morally purified intention), then "it thinks in
      > me", and to that
      > insight I become obedient.
      >
      > This is not an obedience which is a surrender of
      > will forces. It is
      > something more complicated.
      >
      > The spiritual beings have not given me orders, but
      > in their
      > participation, in our co-creation of the thought
      > content in answer to
      > the selfless question, something lives. To this
      > living thought
      > content, which I characterize as the "garment" of a
      > spiritual being, I
      > now owe a self chosen duty. Its truth and goodness
      > springs from the
      >
      === message truncated ===


      __________________________________________________
      Do You Yahoo!?
      Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
      http://mail.yahoo.com
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.