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

Fundamentalism Revisited in the Hole

Expand Messages
  • elfuncle
    In the Hole, Brad Martin has been stirring up all kinds of hostilities by putting Rudolf Steiner in a positive light side by side with prominent Nobel Prize
    Message 1 of 1 , May 29, 2008
      In the Hole, Brad Martin has been stirring up all kinds of hostilities by putting Rudolf Steiner in a positive light side by side with prominent Nobel Prize laureates, academics and what have you -- not as an anthroposophist by any means, but as a defender of new ideas, including New Age and anthroposophy.

      So the hole-beasts are trying to eat Brad for lunch, but he won't go down, not even with their love-bites all over his heck and back. He hasn't been bitten in the ass by an asuric rat, though, like what happened to Joel when he went to take a dump at the Unthinkable Facility.

      I just peeked into Abominablus Abysmicus , and there I glimpsed a thread with my misspelled name in its title. Brad had revived some old hole-threads from April 1999 where I was debating John Morehead and mistakenly identified Morehead as the PLANS lawyer. In addition to jumping all over Brad for these errors, they also reminded him several times over that I am a fanatical fundamentalist.

      This is indeed ironic when John Morehead is in fact PLANS' Christian fundamentalist propagandist whose mission in life is to rescue young people from New Age to Old Age:


      The old dialogue that Brad was exhuming here is also posted on my old website:


      I remember distinctly that at this time, Paulina and I were corresponding, and she stated emphatically that John Morehead was "a fundamentalist son of a bitch" <sic>

      As for the other hole-dwellers, they lean on atheism for the most part and tend to curse such old-style religions along with New Age movements, with an occasional reminder from Dan Dugan that they should not offend and alienate their allies that way. (But their fundamentalist allies fomfort themselves with the thought that Diana and Zooey and Pete and Dan and Peter and the others will be roasting for eternity with the rest of us, so we're talking one helluve happy party here.)

      It's quite natural, therefore, that I am the one being characterized as a fundamentalist.

      Bruce (baandje) writes:

      "Tarjei and several of the other regulars over at
      Anthroposophy Tomorrow are not representative of how thoughful,
      reflective anthroposophists think or behave. They're anthropop
      fundies - the sort of individuals who create and cause many of the
      problems in Waldorf schools.

      "Tarjei is the kind of contracted, close-minded spiritualist you've
      been railing against all this time. Yet it seems that when the
      opportunity presents itself, you quote him to make some point about
      something you wish to communicate. I don't get it.

      "And if your point is to suggest anthroposophy somehow resembles
      Buddhism, maybe you could explain."

      And Peter S writes (to Brad):

      "More important, you seem to have no idea who Tarjei is and what sort of anthroposophy he stands for. As Baandje pointed out, Tarjei is the very archetype of the 'fundamentalist' anthroposophist you like to rail against. That you were evidently utterly unaware of this speaks volumes about your approach to the subject in general."

      PS also quotes Steiner in order to "prove" that Steiner utterly rejected Buddhism. This topic is too spiritually complex for mindgame-playing heads like his to comprehend -- it is multi-faceted:



      "No one who speaks with knowledge of Rosicrucian wisdom will ever expound anything that would be against any of the writings of the great Buddha, or say that anything in them is untrue. Every man who speaks from the sources of Rosicrucian wisdom shares the conviction of Buddha, no one denies it. `Yes,' such a man says, `what thou, great Buddha, through thy inner illumination, hast seen of the great truths about pain and life is exactly true, it is true to its last iota.' Nothing, absolutely nothing will be taken away from it. All of it remains as it was. And it is just because all of it remains as it was, because all is true of what the Buddha said about the pain of life, of illness, of old age and of death, just because of this, the Christ Impulse is such a powerful and important saving help to us, for it is just this which lifts the pain, because it is true that pain would be there, if the world could not be lifted beyond and above it through that great Impulse. Why could the Christ work effectively? Because the Buddha had spoken the truth. Humanity had to be brought down out of the spiritual heights where the primeval world wisdom is active in its purest form; man had to be led to independence, through physical existence with which life's pain and illness are bound up, and the great healing help had to oppose those unavoidable facts in the course of further evolution. Does that man deny the reality of facts who, while declaring that these realities exist, holds at the same time that remedy has been given us by which the facts, about which those truths have been said, can be brought to a salutary development; does he who says this deny any existing reality? Oh! in those heights of existence where we must look for the spheres of the spiritual hierarchies — there Buddhism is not opposed to Christianity, nor Christianity to Buddhism; there the Buddha gives his hand to the Christ, and the Christ to the Buddha. But every misconception regarding human evolution, every misconception as to its ascending development, is a misconception also of that spiritual act in our earthly evolution which is the Act of Christ."
      ( -- Rudolf Steiner: "The Spiritual Hierarchies, Lecture 1, Düsseldorf, 1909, GA 110 )


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