RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Prejudice
- Mike T, you wrote:
>I appreciate the come back, but I want to say in reference toI appreciate your opinion about having the right to judge, and nobody
>'prejudice' and prejudge - I think one has the right to judge when
>one see's so many pseudo operations 'moving in' so to speak.
can take that away from you. On the other hand, the fact that other
people feel that they do not have that same right should also be
respected. I also think it's sound for any anthroposophist to assume
that there may be non-anthroposophists in existence who are more
spiritually advanced than oneself.
>These 'guys' guru's are out to make money.So am I, because we all need to eat, although my attempt to play guru
was a total financial failure. Don't seem to have the knack for it.
So I'm trying out other ways to make money, like in telecom services.
The gurus out to make money on their guruhood remind me of gypsies. I
remember having my palm read for money by a gypsy woman when I was a
teenager. They lived in caravans and migrated around. I've known a
few gypsies personally too, they're real hustlers, they're witty,
charming and full of life, and they can burst into song at any
moment, anywhere, on the bus, in a public restaurant, on the street.
>There seems to be something of an illusion when it comes to ChristWhat a shame. I thought we had covered that very well a little time
>and the spiritual world being all just Love.
back. But a good thing can't be repeated too often, so here are a few reruns:
"The all-encompassing attribute of the Godhead is not omnipotence,
neither is it omniscience, but it is love - the attribute in respect
of which no enhancement is possible. God is uttermost love, unalloyed
love, is born as it were out of love, is the very substance and
essence of love. God is pure love, not supreme wisdom, not supreme might."
(Rudolf Steiner: "Love and its Meaning in the World" Zurich, 17th
December, 1912, GA 143)
"On top of the rock there will be another figure, winged but with his
wings broken, who for this reason begins to fall into the abyss. One
feature in the Christ figure that must be worked out with special
artistic care is the manner in which he raises his left arm, for it
is precisely this gesture that precipitates the breaking of the
wings. It must not appear, however, as if the Christ Himself were
breaking the wings of this being. Rather, the interaction of the two
figures must be portrayed artistically to show how the Christ, by the
very motion of raising his hand, is expressing his infinite
compassion for this being. Yet this being cannot bear the energy
flowing upward through arm and hand, an energy that is evidenced by
indentations that the fingers of the extended hand seem to leave in
the rock itself. When this being comes into proximity with the Christ
being, he feels something that may be expressed in the words: I
cannot bear the radiation of such purity upon me.
"This feeling dominates so essentially as to break this upper beings
wings and cause his imminent plunge into the abyss."
(Rudolf Steiner: Christ in Relation to Lucifer and Ahriman, Linz, May
18, 1915, GA 159)
"According to the Law of Moses, adultery was a capital crime. The
clergy brought to Jesus a woman they had caugh in the act. The law
demanded she be stoned to death. Christ bent over and wrote in the
sand. When Christ was alone with the woman, he asked her if they had
not convicted her. She answered no. Christ said: "Neither do I
convict you. Go your way and do not sin any more."
"Christ wrote in the sand, in the earth, because the woman's sin was
registered in the earth's karma. The law of karma is the only just
punisher. For this reason, no human being has the right to punish or
seek revenge upon other human beings."
"Hennacy was inspired by the "true rebel Jesus" and his idea about
God "was not an authority I obeyed like a monarch, but a principle of
kindness as it was presented by Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount." If
the forces of government conflicted with his ideals, he would follow
his ideals and disobey the government. Hennacy spoke of the "one man
revolution in the heart" based upon voluntary poverty and pacifism.
When summing up his spiritual heritage, he wrote: "Jesus, St.
Francis, Tolstoi, and Gandhi followed a path which teaches us to love
our enemy, create justice, abolish exploitation, and to trust God
instead of politicians and governments."
"In the preface to his autobiography, Hennacy gave the clearest and
most expressive declaration of his principles and their origin in Christianity:
' Christian Anarchism is based upon Jesus' reply to the Pharisees
when he said that he who was without sin should throw the first
stone; and upon the Sermon on the Mount which suggests that we answer
evil with good and turn the other cheek. Therefore, when we
participate in government in any way by casting votes for
legislating, judging, or ruling bureacracies, then we make these
people into our arm with which we throw a stone and deny the Sermon
on the Mount.
' The dictionary definition of Christian is: One who follows Jesus,
kind, good, Christ-like. Anarchism is voluntary cooperation for the
good, with right to emulation. A Christian anarchist is, therefore,
one who turns the other cheek, throws over the money table in the
temple, and does not need a cop to tell him how to behave. A
Christian anarchist does not invest his trust in bullets or ballots
to reach his ideal; he achieves this ideal daily through his one man
revolution with which he meets a decadent, confused, and dying world. ' "
(TS: "Christos Anarchos", 1996)
>He and his servants are also fighters.Yep, but it is not necessary to be disdainful or prejudicial in order
to fight. On the contrary, it is the adversary who fills one's heart
with prejudice, judgementalism, disdain, contempt etc. The enemy to
be fought is inside ourselves.
>If one doesnt fight, the adverserial powers win the day.True. If the Opposing Powers have succeeded in making oneself
prejudicial or disdainful, they may have won a battle, but if we put
an end to such feelings, we still have a chance to win the war.
>I see these infiltrations as nothing less than the adversaries.Human beings are more than inflitrations. You didn't say you
disdained "these infiltrations" but "these people". Their young
children included? Even at the moment of grief when having lost a
loved one, perhaps a child, would you feel nothing but disdain for them?
>And it calls to mind that Steiners writings should always bePersonally, I try to be on the lookout for cancerous dirt in my own
>associated to his name - this is what he wanted; and why? because
>exactly of this type of cancer spreading and usurption of all that
>stands for something that we see today.
soul and in my own behavior. As my posts can testify, I'm certainly
not free from these things, but I don't pretend to be either, which
means that I always look up to and admire people with better souls
than mine, and most such people are not anthroposophists.
>>> Having children `at our disposal for demonstration'!!!!!I am not sure if I want to read on :( :(
Hello Adrian. Personally, between translations and the time period, I
wouldn't put any merit to the words "at our disposal". Could be as
well you're simply not interested in reading on, which is fine of