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

Apocalypse Revisited

Expand Messages
  • elfuncle
    I can t find GA 104 online (the 1908 Nuremberg lectures on John s Apocalypse), so this may be my next donation to the Steiner Archives. In the meantime, I d
    Message 1 of 11 , Apr 10, 2008
      I can't find GA 104 online (the 1908 Nuremberg lectures on John's Apocalypse), so this may be my next donation to the Steiner Archives.

      In the meantime, I'd like to share some illustrations from that book -- there are the seven apocalyptic seals, of course, but here first off is a nice outline of our planetary evolution -- from the eye of a cosmic eagle it seems:






      If you click on it, you should get the full sized jpg. It looks like it needs some serious Photoshop-work for clarity; I may get around to that later.

      Tarjei

    • James Stewart
      The Archive already has this volume, and it will be available shortly. I was working on that and 18 other books and lecture series when you were sending Book
      Message 2 of 11 , Apr 10, 2008
        The Archive already has this volume, and it will be available shortly. I was working on that and 18 other books and lecture series' when you were sending Book of Revelation ..., Elfie (that was a movie starring Michael Caine, wasn't it?! Or is that the guy on the covers of Mad Magazine?!). I'm working on all of that ...

        e.Librarian

        elfuncle wrote:

        I can't find GA 104 online (the 1908 Nuremberg lectures on John's Apocalypse), so this may be my next donation to the Steiner Archives.

        In the meantime, I'd like to share some illustrations from that book -- there are the seven apocalyptic seals, of course, but here first off is a nice outline of our planetary evolution -- from the eye of a cosmic eagle it seems:






        If you click on it, you should get the full sized jpg. It looks like it needs some serious Photoshop-work for clarity; I may get around to that later.

        Tarjei

      • Valerie Walsh
        ... I object.-Val
        Message 3 of 11 , Apr 10, 2008
          --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "elfuncle"
          <hisholiness@...> wrote:

          >first off is
          > a nice outline of our planetary evolution -- from the eye of a cosmic
          > eagle it seems:

          > <http://uncletaz.com/ga_104/epochs.jpg>

          I object.-Val
        • elfuncle
          ... shortly. I ... were ... Eighteen other books -- simultaneously? When do you sleep man? ... Alfie (1966) with Michael Caine:
          Message 4 of 11 , Apr 10, 2008
            --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, James Stewart <jds@...>
            wrote:
            >
            > The Archive already has this volume, and it will be available
            shortly. I
            > was working on that and 18 other books and lecture series' when you
            were
            > sending Book of Revelation ...,

            Eighteen other books -- simultaneously? When do you sleep man?

            > Elfie (that was a movie starring Michael
            > Caine, wasn't it?! Or is that the guy on the covers of Mad Magazine?!).
            > I'm working on all of that ...

            Alfie (1966) with Michael Caine:
            http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0060086/

            Alfie (2004) with Jude Law:
            http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0375173/

            Was there an Alfie or an Elfie in Steiner's circles I wonder -- a
            buddy of MacKay in Berlin back in the 1890's maybe? Only kidding...

            Tarjei
          • Tarjei Straume
            Anyway, James, let me know when you ve downloaded all the files from http://uncletaz.com/revpriest/ -- the MS Word files there should all be free from those
            Message 5 of 11 , Apr 10, 2008
              Anyway, James, let me know when you've downloaded all the files from http://uncletaz.com/revpriest/ -- the MS Word files there should all be free from those hyphen-bugs I mentioned, so replace the first ones I sent you as email attachments. The plates are at http://uncletaz.com/revpriest/plates/ All those images are tifs.

              I've also put the volume out in html with anchored footnotes and all at http://uncletaz.com/priest/ which many be helpful, I don't know. (Here the images are all jpgs.)

              Cheers,

              Tarjei



              James Stewart wrote:

              The Archive already has this volume, and it will be available shortly. I was working on that and 18 other books and lecture series' when you were sending Book of Revelation ..., Elfie (that was a movie starring Michael Caine, wasn't it?! Or is that the guy on the covers of Mad Magazine?!). I'm working on all of that ...

              e.Librarian


            • elfuncle
              I can t seem to find GA 93 online either -- The Temple Legend (20 lectures in Berlin between May 1904 and January 1906). This topic itself is a fascinating
              Message 6 of 11 , Apr 10, 2008
                I can't seem to find GA 93 online either -- "The Temple Legend" (20 lectures in Berlin between May 1904 and January 1906). This topic itself is a fascinating one, and I published a brief synopsis some years ago at http://uncletaz.com/templelegend.html 

                What I'd like to share here right now is one particular page from the Notes in the book (Rudolf Steiner Press, London, 1985) as an addition to the other evolutionary outline I just posted.





                By clicking on it, you get the larger image (original scan-Ps-size)

                Manvantaras (Planetary Conditions, on top) are a very interesting subject in the context of cosmo-genesis. It's a Sanskrit term that dates back to Hindu lore as described in the Puranas.

                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manvantara 

                The actual duration of a Manavantara, according to the Vishnu Purana is seventy one times, the number of years contained in the four Yugas, with some additional years, adding up to 852,000 divine years, or 306,720,000 human years.

                Oh yeah, so a Manvantara is only about three hundred million human years, how about that. Other places we can read that a Day of Brahma is 4,32 billion years based upon the Hindu definitions of time. But we're dealing with very lofty cosmic spiritual concepts here where human measurements and intellectual calculations come up short, making it very understandable that Rudolf Steiner rarely gave exact dates or number of years -- which btw is absurd in such cases for the following reason --

                On May 18, 1908 in Hamburg, in a lecture entitled "The Doctrine of the Logos" (the second of twelve lectures in the Das Johannes-Evangelium series, GA #103), Rudolf Steiner said:

                "We must not imagine that in any of the authoritative explanations of the Middle Ages concerning the Story of Creation, the six days of Creation were interpreted to mean days of twenty-four hours, such as we have today. This interpretation would never have entered the minds of any of the leading theological teachers, because they understood what was presented in these documents. They still knew how to attach a meaning to the words of the Bible. Has it any meaning whatsoever in discussing these documents about the crea­tion, to speak in our present manner of days of creation twenty-four hours long? What is the meaning of a day? A day is what results from the mutual relationship between the rotating earth and the sun. We can only speak of days in our sense when we think of the relationship between the sun and the earth with its movement as it is at the present time. But we find in the Book of Genesis the first narration of any such mutual rela­tionship between sun and earth in connection with the fourth period, the fourth "day" of creation. Therefore "days" in our sense could not pos­sibly have had their beginning prior to the fourth day of the history of creation. Before that time it would have been foolish to imagine days as we have them now. Since only on the fourth "day" conditions arose which made day and night possible, one cannot speak of days in the present sense before that. Then came a time when men no longer recog­nized the spiritual significance of the words day and night, when they were of the opinion that the only kind of time possible was what they knew in connection with physical days. So to the materialistically minded man and even to the theologian, a day of creation also meant a day like our present day, because they knew of no other.

                "The older theologians spoke differently about these things. Such an one would have said, first and foremost, that nothing non-essential was to be found in important passages in the old religious documents. To illus­trate this, let us consider one special passage. Let us take the twenty-first verse of the second chapter of the First Book of Moses. There we read: "Then the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the human creature, and he slept." The earlier commentators laid very special importance upon this passage. Those who have understood a little of the evolution of the spiritual forces and capacities of mankind know that there are different states of consciousness, that what we call sleep in the average man is only a transitory state which in the future will develop into one in which the human being, independent of the body, will perceive the spiritual world. (This is today already the case with the initiates.) There­fore the commentators said: God permitted Adam to fall into a deep sleep and then he could perceive what he could not otherwise perceive with the physical sense-organs. This means a clairvoyant sleep—and what is related here is the experience of a higher state of consciousness. So Adam fell into a deep sleep. This was an old interpretation and it was said that a religious document would not have spoken of God's permitting a deep sleep to fall upon the human being if, at an earlier time, he had already gone through such an experience. We are thereby shown that this is the first sleep and that before this time the human being was in states of consciousness in which he was still able constantly to perceive spiritual things. This is what was related to the people."


                [I also find GA 103 missing online (12 lectures on the Gospel of St John in Hamburg,  May 18-31, 1908) -- let me know if you need it, James.]

                The interesting part about Manvantaras is that even arch-materialistic astronomy-pundits have been attracted to this concept of a breathing universe -- a breathing out and breathing in, and from a materialistic point of view, the latest breathing out looks like a Big Bang, or so it's interpreted. And astronomers do predict that the present expansion will be slowing down and eventually reverse.

                Tarjei
              • James Stewart
                Temple Legend is at the Archive, also ... but the text that I have has images that need a lot of work, and I just haven t had the time to spend doing image
                Message 7 of 11 , Apr 10, 2008
                  Temple Legend is at the Archive, also ... but the text that I have has images that need a lot of work, and I just haven't had the time to spend doing image reconstruction. It will be done ... eventually. See this page for a list of things to come:

                    http://www.rsarchive.org/Whats/WhatsCom.php

                  Not all of the 18 books are on this page, though. The current work list is down to 16, now.

                  JDS

                  elfuncle wrote:

                  I can't seem to find GA 93 online either -- "The Temple Legend" (20 lectures in Berlin between May 1904 and January 1906). This topic itself is a fascinating one, and I published a brief synopsis some years ago at http://uncletaz. com/templelegend .html 

                  What I'd like to share here right now is one particular page from the Notes in the book (Rudolf Steiner Press, London, 1985) as an addition to the other evolutionary outline I just posted.





                  By clicking on it, you get the larger image (original scan-Ps-size)

                  Manvantaras (Planetary Conditions, on top) are a very interesting subject in the context of cosmo-genesis. It's a Sanskrit term that dates back to Hindu lore as described in the Puranas.

                  http://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ Manvantara 

                  The actual duration of a Manavantara, according to the Vishnu Purana is seventy one times, the number of years contained in the four Yugas, with some additional years, adding up to 852,000 divine years, or 306,720,000 human years.

                  Oh yeah, so a Manvantara is only about three hundred million human years, how about that. Other places we can read that a Day of Brahma is 4,32 billion years based upon the Hindu definitions of time. But we're dealing with very lofty cosmic spiritual concepts here where human measurements and intellectual calculations come up short, making it very understandable that Rudolf Steiner rarely gave exact dates or number of years -- which btw is absurd in such cases for the following reason --

                  On May 18, 1908 in Hamburg, in a lecture entitled "The Doctrine of the Logos" (the second of twelve lectures in the Das Johannes-Evangelium series, GA #103), Rudolf Steiner said:

                  "We must not imagine that in any of the authoritative explanations of the Middle Ages concerning the Story of Creation, the six days of Creation were interpreted to mean days of twenty-four hours, such as we have today. This interpretation would never have entered the minds of any of the leading theological teachers, because they understood what was presented in these documents. They still knew how to attach a meaning to the words of the Bible. Has it any meaning whatsoever in discussing these documents about the crea­tion, to speak in our present manner of days of creation twenty-four hours long? What is the meaning of a day? A day is what results from the mutual relationship between the rotating earth and the sun. We can only speak of days in our sense when we think of the relationship between the sun and the earth with its movement as it is at the present time. But we find in the Book of Genesis the first narration of any such mutual rela­tionship between sun and earth in connection with the fourth period, the fourth "day" of creation. Therefore "days" in our sense could not pos­sibly have had their beginning prior to the fourth day of the history of creation. Before that time it would have been foolish to imagine days as we have them now. Since only on the fourth "day" conditions arose which made day and night possible, one cannot speak of days in the present sense before that. Then came a time when men no longer recog­nized the spiritual significance of the words day and night, when they were of the opinion that the only kind of time possible was what they knew in connection with physical days. So to the materialistically minded man and even to the theologian, a day of creation also meant a day like our present day, because they knew of no other.

                  "The older theologians spoke differently about these things. Such an one would have said, first and foremost, that nothing non-essential was to be found in important passages in the old religious documents. To illus­trate this, let us consider one special passage. Let us take the twenty-first verse of the second chapter of the First Book of Moses. There we read: "Then the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the human creature, and he slept." The earlier commentators laid very special importance upon this passage. Those who have understood a little of the evolution of the spiritual forces and capacities of mankind know that there are different states of consciousness, that what we call sleep in the average man is only a transitory state which in the future will develop into one in which the human being, independent of the body, will perceive the spiritual world. (This is today already the case with the initiates.) There­fore the commentators said: God permitted Adam to fall into a deep sleep and then he could perceive what he could not otherwise perceive with the physical sense-organs. This means a clairvoyant sleep—and what is related here is the experience of a higher state of consciousness. So Adam fell into a deep sleep. This was an old interpretation and it was said that a religious document would not have spoken of God's permitting a deep sleep to fall upon the human being if, at an earlier time, he had already gone through such an experience. We are thereby shown that this is the first sleep and that before this time the human being was in states of consciousness in which he was still able constantly to perceive spiritual things. This is what was related to the people."


                  [I also find GA 103 missing online (12 lectures on the Gospel of St John in Hamburg,  May 18-31, 1908) -- let me know if you need it, James.]

                  The interesting part about Manvantaras is that even arch-materialistic astronomy-pundits have been attracted to this concept of a breathing universe -- a breathing out and breathing in, and from a materialistic point of view, the latest breathing out looks like a Big Bang, or so it's interpreted. And astronomers do predict that the present expansion will be slowing down and eventually reverse.

                  Tarjei
                • Simone
                  ... -- ... is ... it ... that ... I uploaded the picture to the photos section but it was shrunk to 22 KB in the process. Anyway, here it is:
                  Message 8 of 11 , Apr 11, 2008


                    --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "elfuncle" <hisholiness@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > I can't find GA 104 online (the 1908 Nuremberg lectures on John's
                    > Apocalypse), so this may be my next donation to the Steiner Archives.
                    >
                    > In the meantime, I'd like to share some illustrations from that book --
                    > there are the seven apocalyptic seals, of course, but here first off is
                    > a nice outline of our planetary evolution -- from the eye of a cosmic
                    > eagle it seems:
                    >
                    >
                    > If you click on it, you should get the full sized jpg. It looks like it
                    > needs some serious Photoshop-work for clarity; I may get around to that
                    > later.
                    >
                    > Tarjei
                    >

                    I uploaded the picture to the photos' section but it was shrunk to 22 KB in the process. Anyway, here it is:

                    http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy_tomorrow/photos/view/d50e?b=22&m=f&o=0

                    Did it work?

                    http://us.a2.yahoofs.com/groups/g_hr_11357692/d50e/__hr_/a50c.jpg?grAN8_HBDKQp.VHS

                    Let's see...

                    Simone

                  • SCos
                    a breathing out and breathing in, and from a materialistic point of view, the latest breathing out looks like a Big Bang, or so it s interpreted. And
                    Message 9 of 11 , Apr 11, 2008
                      "a breathing out and breathing in, and from a materialistic point of view, the latest breathing out looks like a Big Bang, or so it's interpreted. And astronomers do predict that the present expansion will be slowing down and eventually reverse."
                       
                      tarjei, the big bang theory is not compatible with the day and nights of brahman hindu theory. the steady state theory is such a breathing out and in. the knock on the steady state theory is that there is no good explanation for the creation of NEW matter, but this is based upon the assumption that no new matter is created.
                       
                      so far scientists have not looked to the chain of events coming from cosmic rays, which is in fact, the source of new matter in our sector of the universe, thus balancing the creation/destruction cycle of shiva and the steady state.
                      stephen  
                    • elfuncle
                      ... of brahman hindu theory. Perhaps, but whether or not any set of abstract theoretical ideas has compatibility is entirely up to whoever happens to be doing
                      Message 10 of 11 , Apr 11, 2008
                        --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "SCos" <vtsophia@...> wrote:

                        > tarjei, the big bang theory is not compatible with the day and nights of brahman hindu theory.

                        Perhaps, but whether or not any set of abstract theoretical ideas has compatibility  is entirely up to whoever happens to be doing this abstract thinking in the first place. I remember debating a Christian fundamentalist theologian in the hole back in 1999, he was a self-proclaimed expert on the New Age Cult of Anthroposophy, and he insisted that Christianity and Buddhism are not compatible, invoking the authority of the Dalai Llama to corroborate his claim. Others may think that Buddhism and Atheism are not compatible, but I have encountered several atheist Buddhists.

                        True, theology is not science, but scientific thinking has its genesis in the logic developed by the Church Fathers and the Scholastics who were using Aristotle and the Bible as tools, and also by the Arabs, of course, especially prior to the influence of Islam. And the Big Bang theory is simply an endeavor to trace the observation of an expanding universe -- an expansion that is beginning to slow down -- back to its origin by asking: How did this start in the first place? When science has become utterly materialistic, any talk of harmony of the spheres as formative forces, or of breathing, which indicates that the universe is a living organism, will appear absurd, or as certain hole creatures call it, nuts.

                        So the theory is concocted that the expanding universe began with one huge chemical explosion (the Big Bang), and added to this is the primeval chemical soup as the random and accidental mother of all biological life, and therefore also the random and accidental mother of consciousness, existence. (Some sort of unplanned parenthood, though no atheist will accuse a god of accidentally dropping a living seed into that lifeless soup.)  One can easily say, of course, that such conclusions are not compatible with any philosophy, cosmic theory, theology, ancient texts or what have you, but anyone who is trapped in this materialistic conception without being entirely satisfied with it will be bound to seek more comprehensive answers.

                        It's against this background that some materialists have flirted with Hinduism in order to arrive at a theory that makes more sense than the one they're stuck with. But then they've rejected it, or kept quiet about it, due to lack of support rather than incompatibility. So we have the late Isaac Asimov, the late Carl Sagan, and the present keeper of that flame, Stephen Hawking.

                        > the steady state theory is such a breathing out and in. the knock on the steady state theory is that there is no good explanation for the creation of NEW matter, > but this is based upon the assumption that no new matter is created.

                        The core idea is that no matter has ever been created, simply because there are no creators. So what is, has always been, only in a different form. the concepts are energy becoming matter and matter becoming energy and so on, and the forces that keep such things in motion are mechanical, chemical, and lifeless.

                        > so far scientists have not looked to the chain of events coming from cosmic rays, which is in fact, the source of new matter in our sector of the universe, thus >balancing the creation/destruction cycle of shiva and the steady state.

                        Frankly, I have no idea what scientists have not looked into.  And I'm less certain than earlier what defines a scientist. It has become some sort of guru title. Those popular science documentaries on BBC and the Discovery Channels and so on keep talking about scientists all the time -- not merely what they've discovered, proved, achieved, but what they theorize, speculate, privately believe and opine and so on. A lot of it may be utter nonsense, but the very notion that they're "scientists"  is invoked as authority, and it's especially interesting when this kind of authority is invoked when they don't mention any prominent researcher by name, and sometimes not even by field of research, but anonymously say, "Scientists believe...." the documentary voice-over is anonymous, or at least comes across as such, and the "scientists" are without names or titles, occasionally even without specialty fields, they're just "scientists", period, which means they're high priests whose unproven and untested blind beliefs and opinions should be swallowed as Gospel truth.

                        And the hole creatures accuse anthroposophists -- all anthroposophists mind you -- of being cultic followers of blind faith in Rudolf Steiner's utterings. Time and time again we hear how "anti-scientific" Steiner was, that he "attacked science." They don't fail to notice, but they deliberately exclude, omit, the fact that Steiner did not criticize scientific discoveries and achievements, quite the contrary, but he called opinions and speculations held by contemporary science of his day utter nonsense, illusion, fantastic fables and so on. And anyone can look back half a century or more and see all kinds of nonsensical opinions held by prominent scientists in times past.

                        Cheers,

                        Tarjei
                      • elfuncle
                        ... http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy_tomorrow/photos/view/d50e ...
                        Message 11 of 11 , Apr 11, 2008
                          --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "Simone"
                          <simonedim@...> wrote:

                          > I uploaded the picture to the photos' section but it was shrunk to
                          > 22 KB in the process. Anyway, here it is:
                          >
                          http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy_tomorrow/photos/view/d50e\
                          > ?b=22&m=f&o=0
                          >
                          <http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/anthroposophy_tomorrow/photos/view/d50\
                          > e?b=22&m=f&o=0>
                          >
                          > Did it work?

                          Works just fine -- Thanks!

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