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

Re: sorry folks, but have to repeat myself once again

Expand Messages
  • Guenter
    Frank, that s wrong. The decision to make the the printed lectures public was met by Rudolf Steiner himself, when he saw, that they were availabale to anyone
    Message 1 of 22 , Aug 2, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Frank,

      that's wrong. The decision to make the the printed lectures public was
      met by Rudolf Steiner himself, when he saw, that they were availabale
      to anyone anyway. They got a kind of preamable, stating that

      1. they were printed for students of the Free University ...

      2. they may contain errors (which they do!)

      3. the content can only be understood by people who know the written
      works and is only discussed with such.

      many of the early lectures (1900 - 1906 approximately) are not
      reproduced from reliable stenograms, but from notes taken by different
      members.

      and there is another, even more important aspect of the lectures: most
      of them were addressed to a certain kind of people, who were once
      described by Steiner himself as "mehr schlichte Gemüter" (more simple
      minded). When he started to talk about logic & thinking, for example,
      they complained that they could not understand anything. This slowly
      changed after WW I when more young people from the universities
      entered the society. So most of the lectures must be considered as
      "popular anthroposophy", not as "Spiritual Science".

      Guenter


      >
      > I ain't pickin on you, Joel, but that's not quite the case, about the
      > lectures I mean. The lectures were recorded by stenographers almost
      from day
      > one, obviously with his blessing. (In fact almost every word the guy
      ever
      > said was recorded.) However, the printed lectures were only meant for
      > members of the Free University for Spiritual Science. Marie Steiner
      decided
      > after his death to make them public, at least partially because they
      were
      > circulating anyway, often in debased form.
      > Frank
      >
    • Frank Smith
      ... Guenter, Right, my error. Although I think another reson was that he didn t want to A.S. to be regarded as some kind of secret society. 1. they were
      Message 2 of 22 , Aug 2, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        On 8/2/06, Guenter <gkreidl@...> wrote:
        Frank,

        that's wrong. The decision to make the the printed lectures public was
        met by Rudolf Steiner himself, when he saw, that they were availabale
        to anyone anyway. They got a kind of preamable, stating that

        Guenter,
        Right, my error. Although I think another reson was that he didn't want to A.S. to be regarded as some kind of secret society. 

        1. they were printed for students of the Free University ...

         For "members" of the Free University.... (gotcha)

        2. they may contain errors (which they do!)


        3. the content can only be understood by people who know the written
        works and is only discussed with such.

        Actually,  "...the leadership of the University reserves the right to  deny in advance the validity of any judgement of these publications which are not based on the same training from they they have been derived..."

        Btw, did you ever reply to my query as to why you think that "understanding soul" (instead of "intellectual soul") is wrong for "Verstandesseele"?  I'm very interested in this because I don't want to make errors in future translations by insisting on  "understanding". Thanks.
        Frank
        many of the early lectures (1900 - 1906 approximately) are not
        reproduced from reliable stenograms, but from notes taken by different
        members.

        and there is another, even more important aspect of the lectures: most
        of them were addressed to a certain kind of people, who were once
        described by Steiner himself as "mehr schlichte Gemüter" (more simple
        minded). When he started to talk about logic & thinking, for example,
        they complained that they could not understand anything. This slowly
        changed after WW I when more young people from the universities
        entered the society. So most of the lectures must be considered as
        "popular anthroposophy", not as "Spiritual Science".

        Guenter


        >
        > I ain't pickin on you, Joel, but that's not quite the case, about the
        > lectures I mean. The lectures were recorded by stenographers almost
        from day
        > one, obviously with his blessing. (In fact almost every word the guy
        ever
        > said was recorded.) However, the printed lectures were only meant for
        > members of the Free University for Spiritual Science. Marie Steiner
        decided
        > after his death to make them public, at least partially because they
        were
        > circulating anyway, often in debased form.
        > Frank
        >



      • Joel Wendt
        So, Steve, in answers to my questions to you, you respond by quoting the anthroposophical bible (occult science) at me. how is this not anthroposophical
        Message 3 of 22 , Aug 2, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          So, Steve, in answers to my questions to you, you respond by quoting the
          anthroposophical bible (occult science) at me.

          how is this not anthroposophical fundamentalism? for all your special
          being touched by the divine stuff, don't you have anything to say for
          yourself?

          joel

          Steve Hale wrote:

          > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com
          > <mailto:anthroposophy_tomorrow%40yahoogroups.com>, Joel Wendt
          > <hermit@...>
          > wrote:
          > >
          > > Where in the below, is the free moral thinking of the individual
          > human
          > > being? What do you mean by schools? If this statement below has the
          > > meaning it seems to suggest (it is unclear to me, being considerably
          > > abstract), then why did Steiner say his enduring legacy would be The
          > > Philosophy of Spiritual Activity, rather than the lecture cycles
          > (which
          > > originally he didn't want recorded)?
          > >
          > > joel
          >
          > Joel,
          >
          > Have you ever read the chapter entitled: The Character of Occult
          > Science, from the book, "Outline of Occult Science"? It concerns the
          > free will and choice involved in taking up the effort to acquire
          > supersensible knowledge, which few do; except those drawn by their own
          > soul disposition to do so. And these make up the fraternity of the
          > anthroposophical movement. Steiner was counting on the fact that some
          > would hear, in the longing for something that most people would either
          > ignore, deride, or actively oppose. And he outlines it in this chapter
          > quite cogently.
          >
          > Steve
          >
          >
        • Steve Hale
          ... the ... special ... Yes, Joel. The starting point begins where the work of an initiate is made available to the neophyte; and also the aspirant. I refer
          Message 4 of 22 , Aug 2, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, Joel Wendt <hermit@...>
            wrote:
            >
            > So, Steve, in answers to my questions to you, you respond by quoting
            the
            > anthroposophical bible (occult science) at me.
            >
            > how is this not anthroposophical fundamentalism? for all your
            special
            > being touched by the divine stuff, don't you have anything to say for
            > yourself?
            >
            > joel
            >

            Yes, Joel. The starting point begins where the work of an initiate is
            made available to the neophyte; and also the aspirant. I refer to this
            chapter in OOS because it states it plainly. When PoF and KOHW are
            championed without the very important middle ground reserved for
            content of new knowledge, it becomes an issue of concern.

            If anthro fundamentalism is equatable with "Steiner says", and mere
            readings which have nothing to offer beyond the further expansion of
            the intellectual soul, as well as the belief that Steiner made mistakes
            in his research, but we don't know where, and the lectures contain a
            plethora of errors, which we cannot discern, then the only recourse for
            these seeming insurmountable problems would be a very thorough study of
            the book: Occult Science - An Outline. And thereby, we can gain our
            bearings.

            It was his magnum opus, in terms of content of supersensible knowledge,
            and served to make the lecture courses into the further elaborations
            that are no less than the transcendental humanities of an unseeing and
            unknowing world of pure potential in the advancement of conscience.

            Steve
          • Steve Hale
            ... the ... special ... Well Joel, let s read Rudolf Steiner s last preface to this book together. - Steve Fifteen years having now elapsed since the first
            Message 5 of 22 , Aug 2, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, Joel Wendt <hermit@...>
              wrote:
              >
              > So, Steve, in answers to my questions to you, you respond by quoting
              the
              > anthroposophical bible (occult science) at me.
              >
              > how is this not anthroposophical fundamentalism? for all your
              special
              > being touched by the divine stuff, don't you have anything to say for
              > yourself?
              >
              > joel
              >

              Well Joel, let's read Rudolf Steiner's last preface to this book
              together. - Steve


              Fifteen years having now elapsed since the first publication of this
              book, it may be suitable for me to say something more about the
              spiritual circumstances and my own state of mind when it originated. It
              had been my intention that its main content should form part of a new
              and enlarged version of my Theosophy, published several years before.
              But this did not prove possible. At the time when Theosophy was written
              the subject-matter of the present volume could not be brought into an
              equally finished form. In my Imaginative perceptions I beheld the
              spiritual life and being of individual Man and was able to describe
              this clearly. The facts of cosmic evolution were not present to me to
              the same extent. I was indeed aware of them in many details, but the
              picture as a whole was lacking.


              I therefore resolved to make no appreciable change in the main content
              of the earlier volume. In the new edition as in the first, the book
              Theosophy should describe the essential features of the life of
              individual Man, as I had seen it in the spirit. Meanwhile I would
              quietly be working at a new and independent publication, Occult
              Science — An Outline.


              My feeling at that time was that the contents of this book must be
              presented in scientific thought-forms — that is, in forms of thought
              akin to those of Natural Science, duly developed and adapted to the
              description of what is spiritual. How strongly I felt this "scientific"
              obligation in all that I wrote at that time in the field of spiritual
              knowledge, will be evident from the Preface to the First Edition
              (1909), here reproduced. But the world of the spirit as revealed to
              spiritual sight can only partly be described in thought-forms of this
              kind. What is revealed cannot be fully contained in mere forms of
              thought. This will be known to anyone who has had experience of such
              revelation. Adapted as they are to the exposition of what is seen by
              the outer senses, the thoughts of our every-day consciousness are
              inadequate, fully to expound what is seen and experienced in the
              spirit. The latter can only be conveyed in picture-form, that is, in
              Imaginations, through which Inspirations speak, which in their turn
              proceed from spiritual reality of Being, experienced in Intuition.
              (Concerning "Imagination, Inspiration and Intuition," the necessary
              explanations will be found both in the present volume and in my book
              Knowledge of the Higher Worlds and Its Attainment.)


              Today, however, one who sets out to tell of the spiritual world in
              Imaginations cannot rest content with such pictorial descriptions. He
              would be foisting on to the civilization of our time the outcome of a
              state of consciousness quite unrelated to existing forms of knowledge.
              It is to the normal consequences of the present age that he must bring
              home the truths which can indeed only be discovered by a higher
              consciousness of the present age that he must bring home the truths
              which can indeed only be discovered by a higher consciousness — one
              that sees into the spiritual world. The subject-matter of his
              exposition, namely the realities of the world of spirit, will then be
              case into forms of thought which the prevailing consciousness of our
              time — scientifically thoughtful and wide-awake, though unable yet to
              see into the spiritual world — can understand.


              An inability to understand will at most be due to hindrances that are
              self-imposed. The reader may have fixed in his mind some definition of
              the inherent limitations of human knowledge, due to a mistaken
              generalization of the limits of Natural Science. Spiritual cognition is
              a delicate and tender process in the human soul, and this is true not
              only of the actual "seeing" in the spirit, but of the active
              understanding with which the normal "non-seeing" consciousness of our
              time can come to meet the results of seership. People with half-formed
              notions who allege auto-suggestion in this regard have little idea of
              the real depth and intimacy of such understanding. For the scientific
              understanding of the physical world there may be truth or error in our
              theories and concepts. For the spiritual world, it is no longer a
              merely theoretic issue; it is a matter of living experience. When a
              man's judgment is tinged however slightly by the dogmatic assertion
              that the ordinary (not yet clairvoyant) consciousness — through its
              inherent limitations — cannot really understand what is experienced by
              the seer, this mistaken judgment becomes a cloud of darkness in his
              feeling-life and does in fact obscure his understanding.


              To an open mind however, though not yet "seeing" in the spirit, what is
              experienced by the seer is comprehensible to a very full extent, if
              once the seer has cast it into forms of thought. It is no less
              intelligible than is a finished work of art to the non-artist. Nor is
              this understanding confined to the realm of aesthetic feeling as in the
              latter instance; it lives in full clarity of thought, even as in the
              scientific understanding of Nature.


              To make such understanding possible, however, the seer must have
              contrived to express what he has seen, in genuine forms of thought,
              without thereby depriving it of its "Imaginative" character.


              Such were my reflections while working at the subject-matter of my
              Occult Science, and, with these premises in mind, by 1909 I felt able
              to achieve a book, bringing the outcome of my spiritual researches, up
              to a point into adequate forms of thought — a book moreover which
              should be intelligible to any thoughtful reader who did not himself
              impose unnecessary hindrances to understanding.


              While saying this retrospectively today I must however admit that in
              the year 1909 the publication of this book appeared to me a venture of
              some temerity. For I was only too well aware that the professional
              scientists above all, and the vast number of others who in their
              judgment follow the "scientific" authority, would be incapable of the
              necessary openness of mind. Yet I was equally aware that at the very
              time when the prevailing consciousness of mankind was farthest remote
              from the world of spirit, communications from that world would be
              answering to an urgent need. I counted on there also being many people
              feeling so weighted down by the prevailing estrangement from the living
              spirit that with sincere longing they would welcome true communications
              from the spiritual world. This expectation was amply confirmed during
              the years that followed. The books Theosophy and Occult Science have
              been widely read, though they count not a little on the reader's good
              will. For it must be admitted, they are not written in an easy style. I
              purposely refrained from writing a "popular" account, so-called. I
              wrote in such a way as to make it necessary to exert one's thinking
              while entering into the content of these books. In so doing, I gave
              them a specific character. The very reading of them is an initial step
              in spiritual training, inasmuch as the necessary effort of quiet
              thought and contemplation strengthens the powers of the soul, making
              them capable of drawing nearer to the spiritual world.


              Misunderstandings were soon evoked by the chosen title, Occult Science.
              A would-be science, people said, cannot in the nature of the case
              be "occult" or "secret." Surely a rather thoughtless objection, for no
              man will deliberately publish what he desires to be secretive about or
              to keep obscure. The entire book is evidence that far from being
              claimed as a special "secret," what is here presented is to be made
              accessible to human understanding like any other science. Speaking
              of "Natural Science" we mean the science of Nature. "Occult Science" is
              the science of what takes its course in realms which are "occult"
              inasmuch as they are discerned, not in external Nature — Nature as seen
              by the outer senses — but in directions to which the soul of man
              becomes attentive when he turns his inner life towards the spirit. It
              is "Occult Science" as against "Natural Science."


              Of my clairvoyant researches into the world of spirit it has often been
              alleged that they are a re-hash, howsoever modified, of ideas about the
              spiritual world which have prevailed from time to time, above all in
              earlier epochs of human history. In the course of my reading I was said
              to have absorbed these things into the sub-conscious mind and then
              reproduced them in the fond belief that they were the outcome of my own
              independent seership. Gnostic doctrines, oriental fables, and wisdom-
              teachings were alleged to be the real source of my descriptions. But
              these surmises too were the outcome of no very deeply penetrating
              thought. My knowledge of the spiritual — of this I am fully conscious —
              springs from my own spiritual vision. At every stage — both in the
              details and in synthesis and broad review — I have subjected myself to
              stringent tests, making sure that wide-awake control accompanies each
              further step in spiritual vision and research. Just as a mathematician
              proceeds from thought to thought — where the unconscious mind, auto-
              suggestion and the like can play no part at all — so must the
              consciousness of the seer move on from one objective Imagination to
              another. Nothing affects the soul in this process save the objective
              spiritual content, experienced in full awareness.


              It is by healthy inner experience that one knows a
              spiritual "Imagination" to be no mere subjective picture but the
              expression of a spiritual reality in picture-form. Just as in sensory
              perception anyone sound in mind and body can discriminate between mere
              fancies and the perception of real facts, so a like power of
              discernment can be attained by spiritual means.


              So then I had before me the results of conscious spiritual vision. They
              were things "seen," living in my consciousness, to begin with, without
              any names. To communicate them, some terminology was needed, and it was
              only then — so as to put into words what had been wordless to begin
              with — that I looked for suitable expressions in the traditional
              literature. These too I used quite freely. In the way I apply them,
              scarcely one of them coincides exactly with its connotation in the
              source from which I took it. Only after the spiritual content was known
              to me from my own researches did I thus look for the way to express it.
              As to whatever I might formerly have read — with the clear
              consciousness and control above referred-to, I was able to eliminate
              such things completely while engaged on supersensible research.


              But the critics then found echoes of traditional ideas in the terms I
              used. Paying little heed to the real trend and content of my
              descriptions, they focused their attention on the words. If I spoke
              of "lotus flowers," in the human astral body, they took it as proof
              that I was reproducing Indian doctrines in which this term occurs. Nay,
              the term "astral body" itself only showed that I had been dipping into
              medieval writings. And if I used the terms Angeloi, Archangeloi and so
              on, I was merely reviving the ideas of Christian Gnosticism. Time and
              again I found myself confronted with comments of this kind.


              I take the present opportunity of mentioning this too. Occult Science —
              an Outline, now to be published in a new edition, is after all an
              epitome of anthroposophical Spiritual Science as a whole, and is pre-
              eminently exposed to the same kinds of misunderstanding.


              Since the Imaginations described in this book first grew into a total
              picture in my mind and spirit, I have unceasingly developed the
              researches of conscious seership into the being of individual Man, the
              history of Mankind, the nature and evolution of the Cosmos. The outline
              as presented fifteen years ago has in no way been shaken. Inserted in
              its proper place and context, everything that I have since been able to
              adduce becomes a further elaboration of the original picture.


              Rudolf Steiner

              Goetheanum, Dornach,
              Switzerland
              10 January, 1925
            • Joel Wendt
              Let us review this thread... First Steve wrote: Then how should we approach the advancement of anthroposophical knowledge without starting with Steiner said
              Message 6 of 22 , Aug 2, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                Let us review this thread...

                First Steve wrote: "Then how should we approach the advancement of
                anthroposophical
                knowledge without starting with "Steiner said" over and over in the
                attempt to cultivate this undeniably new knowledge?"

                point one...
                To which I replied with a lot of stuff about something read not being
                knowledge, and basically questioning the basis for relying on Steiner as
                an authority, something Steiner asked us many times not to do. [We
                should also keep in mind prior posts of mine, suggesting that a
                distinction needs to be made between knowledge and understanding,
                wherein to which Steve replied he'd rather have understanding.]

                So to my remarks about knowledge and using Steiner as an authority,
                Steve then replied: "I do not insist that anyone believe what Steiner
                said, but it makes for a good start. And the lectures were meant to be
                the legacy left for us to work with in the form of schools that have yet
                to be started on the adult level, and may now be too late for this to
                happen."

                So I then asked him what he (Steve) meant by legacy and schools and the
                rest, and once more got a reference to "Steiner said" (Steve wrote):
                "Have you ever read the chapter entitled: The Character of Occult
                Science, from the book, "Outline of Occult Science"?"

                Then I asked, as noted below, how this answered any of my questions, and
                then later get the whole Chapter and verse of Steiner from Occult Science.

                So, in defense of the significance of relying on authority, which
                Steiner asked us not to do (see point one above), we rely on the
                authority of Steiner in his preface from Occult Science wherein he makes
                a couple of references to understanding and comprehension as the effect
                of OS, but not to knowledge, the subject of all his epistemological works.

                Is your brain spinning in circles yet? If someone can find some logic
                in this whole thread, please let me know.

                joel

                Steve Hale wrote:

                > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com
                > <mailto:anthroposophy_tomorrow%40yahoogroups.com>, Joel Wendt
                > <hermit@...>
                > wrote:
                > >
                > > So, Steve, in answers to my questions to you, you respond by quoting
                > the
                > > anthroposophical bible (occult science) at me.
                > >
                > > how is this not anthroposophical fundamentalism? for all your
                > special
                > > being touched by the divine stuff, don't you have anything to say for
                > > yourself?
                > >
                > > joel
                > >
                >
                > Well Joel, let's read Rudolf Steiner's last preface to this book
                > together. - Steve
                >
                > <snip> long quote of Steiner
                >
                > .
                >
                >
              • Steve Hale
                Joel said: Is your brain spinning in circles yet? If someone can find some logic in this whole thread, please let me know. No, because you purposely fuck it
                Message 7 of 22 , Aug 2, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  Joel said:
                  "Is your brain spinning in circles yet? If someone can find some
                  logic in this whole thread, please let me know."

                  No, because you purposely fuck it up! I kindly asked you to read
                  the first chapter of the book, which is freely available on the RS e-
                  lib archive. Then, in your inimitable fashion, you go ahead and
                  fuck up the very fact that you didn't even read it. And so, in
                  anticipation of this fact, I offered something more for your
                  consideration, relative to a book that you obviously have not, nor
                  will ever read.

                  Well, here's the fact in a nutshell: The conceptual uptake of new
                  knowledge has consequences on the astral body that form the basis
                  for the further exercises found in KOHW. And furthermore, if these
                  exercises from KOHW are undertaken in advance of this conceptual
                  uptake, it's no good.

                  Steve
                • Mike helsher
                  ... e- ... Well Joel, there you have it. If you add this response to those that you ve already posted, I think that you ll have enough evidence to make a
                  Message 8 of 22 , Aug 2, 2006
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "Steve Hale"
                    <sardisian01@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > Joel said:
                    > "Is your brain spinning in circles yet? If someone can find some
                    > logic in this whole thread, please let me know."
                    >
                    > No, because you purposely fuck it up! I kindly asked you to read
                    > the first chapter of the book, which is freely available on the RS
                    e-
                    > lib archive. Then, in your inimitable fashion, you go ahead and
                    > fuck up the very fact that you didn't even read it. And so, in
                    > anticipation of this fact, I offered something more for your
                    > consideration, relative to a book that you obviously have not, nor
                    > will ever read.
                    >
                    > Well, here's the fact in a nutshell: The conceptual uptake of new
                    > knowledge has consequences on the astral body that form the basis
                    > for the further exercises found in KOHW. And furthermore, if these
                    > exercises from KOHW are undertaken in advance of this conceptual
                    > uptake, it's no good.
                    >
                    > Steve
                    >

                    Well Joel, there you have it. If you add this response to those that
                    you've already posted, I think that you'll have enough evidence to
                    make a "Logical" conclusion, with a little help from your friends.
                    With your many years experience in the mental health field, combined
                    with a few of the diognosis' that Tarjei has already put forth, and
                    my expert experience in "Basementology", we should be able to
                    contrive some logical conclusion to all this.

                    More will be revealed

                    Mike
                  • Joel Wendt
                    Dear Steve, We are still spinning round and round about whether you can state this material as fact, on the basis that Steiner said it, that is on authority.
                    Message 9 of 22 , Aug 3, 2006
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Dear Steve,

                      We are still spinning round and round about whether you can state
                      this material as fact, on the basis that Steiner said it, that is on
                      authority. That was the original question, and remains the question,
                      however many times you quote Steiner.

                      A truth is not to be asserted to be true, because Steiner said it
                      was true. We can, and should when we are able, say: I tested this that
                      Steiner said, and was able to verify to myself that it is so. Or we can
                      argue logically, such as by starting with a definition (for example)
                      that knowledge is the union of percept and concept (experience and
                      thought), and if all we have is concept (that is thought without
                      experience, then we can't have knowledge. At the same time we can have
                      understanding, which we can also define as a mental picture created from
                      reading something given to us by an expert in the field.

                      This process of understanding is "explained" (made understandable)
                      to us in the material you quoted from Occult Science (which I've read
                      many times by the way).

                      A biologist, who buys into the latest version of natural selection,
                      understands the world via that paradigm. We, as students of
                      Anthroposophical Spiritual Science, can understand the world via that
                      paradigm. This understanding, yes, can be an aid in futher development,
                      but not because Steiner says it. Rather, because we experience this aid
                      for ourselves. We take in this understanding, and it helps us further
                      our own development, which development is something entirely different
                      from this understanding itself.

                      The ladder I stand on to paint my house, is not the action which
                      enable me to paint my house.

                      The mental pictures I stand on, while I pursue coming to knowledge
                      of my own spiritual activity as a thinker, are not the Imaginations I
                      perceive once I have developed my own ability to paint with thought my
                      pictures of spiritual reality. Once I do this, I have no need for the
                      ladder any more at all, and in point of fact, if I rely too much on the
                      ladder, I am in danger of never developing my own ability to fly.

                      Step off the ladder Steve...and use your own wings.

                      "In the beginning, various kinds of thoughts will arise when we are
                      trying to be silent during prayer and meditation. Notice them, but do
                      not worry about them. They are pictures of your own soul and spirit
                      being reflected there for your appreciation and consideration. After
                      time you will discover that you can control what appears here in ways
                      that will surprise you. Wings (limbs) of inner will-on-fire (spirit)
                      are being born in the soul.

                      "Remember, we are spiritual children trying out our adult wings. Christ
                      has promised: we can learn to fly (the Kingdom of Heaven is within you)."

                      from my book: "the Way of the Fool"
                      http://ipwebdev.com/hermit/twotf.html

                      joel

                      Steve Hale wrote:

                      > Joel said:
                      > "Is your brain spinning in circles yet? If someone can find some
                      > logic in this whole thread, please let me know."
                      >
                      > No, because you purposely fuck it up! I kindly asked you to read
                      > the first chapter of the book, which is freely available on the RS e-
                      > lib archive. Then, in your inimitable fashion, you go ahead and
                      > fuck up the very fact that you didn't even read it. And so, in
                      > anticipation of this fact, I offered something more for your
                      > consideration, relative to a book that you obviously have not, nor
                      > will ever read.
                      >
                      > Well, here's the fact in a nutshell: The conceptual uptake of new
                      > knowledge has consequences on the astral body that form the basis
                      > for the further exercises found in KOHW. And furthermore, if these
                      > exercises from KOHW are undertaken in advance of this conceptual
                      > uptake, it's no good.
                      >
                      > Steve
                      >
                      >
                    • Steve Hale
                      ... state ... on ... question, ... What I am simply trying to say is that a conceptual intake of this knowledge is what is required to begin with. It must be
                      Message 10 of 22 , Aug 3, 2006
                      • 0 Attachment
                        --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, Joel Wendt
                        <hermit@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > Dear Steve,
                        >
                        > We are still spinning round and round about whether you can
                        state
                        > this material as fact, on the basis that Steiner said it, that is
                        on
                        > authority. That was the original question, and remains the
                        question,
                        > however many times you quote Steiner.

                        What I am simply trying to say is that a conceptual intake of this
                        knowledge is what is required to begin with. It must be read; taken
                        in as "mere thoughts", which is the initial experience for the
                        reader who begins to study the content of supersensible knowledge.
                        This begins the process that then leads to the path wherein the so-
                        called "understanding" leads to self knowledge. Here is the primary
                        excerpt from this first chapter of "Outline of Occult Science" that
                        convinced me of the worthiness and validity of making this path my
                        true vocation in life - Steve

                        "...it is true in principle that the reader will find in the
                        expositions of Occult Science a description of experiences of soul
                        which, if he follows them, can lead him towards the supersensible
                        realities. In practice, however, this is an ultimate ideal. The
                        reader must first receive as simple communication a wealth of
                        supersensible discoveries which he cannot yet experience for
                        himself. It cannot be done otherwise, and will be so in this book.
                        The author will be describing what he believes himself to know about
                        the being of man, including what man undergoes in birth and death
                        and in the body-free condition in the spiritual world; also about
                        the evolution of the Earth and of mankind. It might then seem as
                        though he were putting forward all these alleged items of knowledge
                        as dogmas, which the reader was being asked to accept on the
                        writer's authority. But it is not so. For in reality, whatever can
                        be known of the supersensible world, lives — as a living content of
                        soul — in the spiritual investigator who expounds it, and as the
                        reader finds his way into this living content it kindles in his soul
                        the impulses leading towards the supersensible realities in
                        question. The way we live in reading the descriptions of Spiritual
                        Science is quite different from what it is when reading
                        communications about sense-perceptible events. We simply read about
                        the latter; but when we read communications of supersensible
                        realities in the right way, we ourselves are entering into a stream
                        of spiritual life and being. In receiving the results of research,
                        we are receiving at the same time our own inner path towards these
                        results. True, to begin with, the reader will often fail to notice
                        that this is so. For he is far too apt to conceive the entry into
                        the spiritual world on the analogy of sensory experience. Therefore
                        what he experiences o this world in reading of it will seem to him
                        like "mere thoughts" and nothing more. Yet in the true receiving of
                        it even in the form of thoughts, man is already within the spiritual
                        world; it only remains for him to become aware that he has been
                        experiencing in all reality what he imagined himself to be receiving
                        as the mere communication of thoughts.

                        The true character of the experience will be made fully clear to him
                        when he proceeds to carry out in practice what is described in the
                        later portions of this book, namely the "path" leading to
                        supersensible knowledge. It might easily be imagined that the
                        reverse was the right order — the pathway should first be described.
                        But it is not so. One who, without first turning his attention to
                        some of the essential facts of the supersensible world, merely
                        does "exercises" with the idea of gaining entrance there, will find
                        in it a vague and confusing chaos. Man finds his way into the world —
                        to begin with, as it were, naively — by learning to understand its
                        essential features. Then he can gain a clear idea of how — leaving
                        this "naïve" stage behind him — he will himself attain, in full
                        consciousness, to the experiences which have been related to him.
                        Anyone who really enters into Occult Science will become convinced
                        that this and this alone is the reliable way to supersensible
                        knowledge. As to the opinion that information about the
                        supersensible world might influence the reader by way
                        of "suggestion" or mere dogma, he will perceive that this is quite
                        unfounded. The contents of supersensible knowledge are experienced
                        in a form of inner life which excludes anything in the nature of
                        suggestion and leaves no other possibility than to impart the
                        knowledge to one's fellow-man in the same way as any other kind of
                        truth would be imparted, appealing only to his wide-awake and
                        thoughtful judgment. And if, to begin with, the one who hears or
                        reads the description does not notice how he himself is living in
                        the spiritual world, the reason lies not in any passive or
                        thoughtless receiving of the information, but in the delicate and
                        unwonted nature of the experience.

                        Therefore by studying the communications given in the first part of
                        this book, one is enabled in the first place to share in the
                        knowledge of the supersensible world; thereafter, by the practical
                        application of the procedures indicated in the second part, one can
                        gain independent knowledge in that world.

                        A scientific man, entering into the spirit of this book, will find
                        no essential contradiction between his form of science, built as it
                        is upon the facts of the sense-perceptible world, and the way the
                        supersensible world is here investigated. Every scientist makes use
                        of instruments and methods. He prepares his instruments by working
                        upon the things which "Nature" gives him. The supersensible form of
                        knowing also makes use of an instrument, only that here the
                        instrument is Man himself. This instrument too must first be
                        prepared — prepared for the purposes of a higher kind of research.
                        The faculties and forces with which the human instrument has been
                        endowed by "Nature" without man's active cooperation must be
                        transformed into higher ones. Thus can man make of himself the
                        instrument of research — research into the supersensible world."

                        Excerpted from "The Character of Occult Science", Chapter One of the
                        book, Occult Science - An Outline.
                      • Tarjei Straume
                        Spock: Fascinating. Dr. McCoy (suspicious): Fascinating, Spock? Spock: Affirmative, doctor. Dr. McCoy (irritated): What is so fascinating to that cold
                        Message 11 of 22 , Aug 3, 2006
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Spock: Fascinating.

                          Dr. McCoy (suspicious): Fascinating, Spock?

                          Spock: Affirmative, doctor.

                          Dr. McCoy (irritated): What is so fascinating to that cold intellect
                          of yours this time, Spock?

                          Spock: I am endeavoring, doctor, to discover the reason why this
                          hot-headed, emotional fanatic responds to a request to speak for
                          himself without quoting Steiner, to simply excerpting him instead,
                          apparently under the illusion that there is a vital difference between the two.

                          Dr. McCoy (thoughtful): You are right, Spock, that is strange. We
                          red-blooded humans are prone to certain pathologies that you
                          green-blooded Vulcan-monsters are immune to.

                          T
                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.