Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] STEINER'S KRISHNAMURTI??
- Christopher wrote:
>The most disturbing thing I ever read about Steiner was from a shortI don't see any connection between your "little gem" from 1946 and
>lecture given in 1946 at the Threefold Community in NY state. I
>always thought Steiner was the rational one during the Krishnamurti
>fiasco of the Theosophical Society. From what I understood, Steiner
>completely rejected Theosophical attempts to pass a boy off as the
>reincarnation of Maitreya. However, then I discovered this little gem:
the Krishnamurti scandal of Annie Besant and Charles Leadbeater.
Could you explain this connection, what Manes has to do with
Krishnamurti and the Theosophical Society?
>"The threefold social order of Rudolf Steiner is particularly aI see nothing problematic with the notion of an avatar, Manes,
>preparatory work to bring about a future incarnation of Manes.
looking for an opportunity to incarnate. Again, what does that have
to do with Krishnamurti, alleged by Besant and Leadbeater to be the
reincarnation of Jesus Christ?
>I once discussed with Rudolf Steiner the question of when would bePersonally, I don't know who Ehrenfried Pfeiffer was; perhaps some
>the proper time for the application of etheric forces for technical
>uses. He said that this would be when the threefold order is
>established. He said that Manes could not find a suitable body yet,
>that all the forces he would be able to bring to an incarnation
>would be destroyed by modern education. Therefore he said that
>Waldorf education needed first to come into being and that the
>threefold social order must also come into being. Therefore I would
>see it as our immediate task to bring about this threefold order
>first through thought and then through action, so that Manes can
>incarnate. By karma, Manes' incarnation would be due by the end of
>the century. Whether this will be possible I do not know, but if the
>threefold social order and Waldorf education were established he
>could incarnate. I see it as our task to make the preparations so
>that he can incarnate again."
>THE TASK OF THE ARCHANGEL MICHAEL
other listmates may enlighten us. But frankly, I don't understand
what is supposed to be disturbing. The incarnation of progressive
avatars is always an advantage for humanity, especially now when we
are approaching Ahriman's physical incarnation, which is disturbing indeed.
>And to confirm this, I also quote Bernard Lievegoed from his THEI wouldn't know. Why do you think this is something sinister and
>BATTLE OF THE SOUL ( 1993 ):
>"Rudolf Steiner once said to Pfeiffer that he had started the
>Waldorf school and the threefold social order to make the
>incarnation of Manu and his helpers possible. Let us hope there are
>enough active anthroposophists to accomplish what Manu needs for his
>development. And let us hope anthroposophists will recognize him
>once he is here."
>My question is this: How many people who are involved in Waldorf
>education, whether they be teachers, parents, students, etc, are
>aware that the grand purpose of Waldorf is to create a culture
>conducive to the incarnation of a spirit being named Manes/Manu??
disturbing? WE is for the benefit of the students, the children, and
the incarnation of an avatar would serve the same purpose. Avatars do
not incarnate for their own benefit like the rest of us; for them
incarnation is a sacrifice so they can teach and help progressive
humanity. Why is this disturbing to you?
- Chris on vindexeurope:
"Alas, what we do in life echoes in eternity!"
35 years old
Last Login: 5/02/2007
Is it disturbing that you don't know more about your research question? and that this movement has a lot interesting aspects, but unfortunately is by default so ugly to the individual via the path of initiation, ...
So, sadly, the abuses of language by the Sirs of this camp, which were certainly more then lapsi calamae, are not to be, because they do it by purpose. But is ignorance not also purposeful?
Please research where you find things said about Manu/Manes and you will be in the eye of the storm. You ask a lot if we should do research for your own research, except, you were desperate. Yu will come to the question "What ails thee" rather then telling a forum
Chris , you wrote
"The mostdisturbing thing I ever read about Steiner was (...)My question is this: How many people who are involved in Waldorfeducation, whether they be teachers,parents, students, etc, are aware ..."
Don't get me wrong: Disturbing is the right word. I am disturbed by somebodies feelings, who doesn't know any further out of ignorance how to research. There are methods, and they are clearly out there.