- --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "write3chairs" <write3chairs@...> wrote:
>J: I hope you find relief soon, Dottie! I for one am relieved you
> --- In email@example.com, dottie zold wrote:
> > Frank! Jennifer, donna lissen to that Franke, isse not trru
> are not a troll. ;)They always deny it, don't they? I mean if you were a troll with an Italian accent, would you admit it?
> > --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "cinnamon94@" <cinnamon94@> wrote:Cinn.:
> > > In my view, the reason to understand the criticisms is because its 1) always good and useful to have the fullest understanding of your own biography and this includes some investigation of how others see you and 2) because of the affect this is having on the practical projects. These are wonderful contributions and are inspirational to people who have no interest in esoteric worldviews. These projects are already having difficulty because they are so different from "materialistic" medicine, agriculture, curative care, and education. That part won't go away any time soon. But on top of that friction (which I find to be a relatively good thing, actually) is this little understood deeper level (ie anthroposophy) that is thoroughly abused for the purposes of attack. It goes like this: "If your doctor believes in fairies and Atlantis, good luck ever curing your illness. Its quackery, my good man, quackery!!" The foundation for discussion shifts *there* because, after all, who in their right mind would trust their health, their farm or their kid's education to people experiencing such flights of fancy! It becomes all about the apparent flights of fancy (and how these might be related to the pure evils of the world). The issue of what happens when you take an unrepentant holistic and human view of what we (as societies needing to cure people, educate people and grow things) do and how we should do it becomes lost. I think the world needs a whole lot more discussion about the essence of the human being (anthroposophical or not). The atomistic view of the human being is not serving us well. Retreating makes this kind of discussion less likely to happen on the scale it needs to.> --- In email@example.com, "bikhe hozho" hozhonahasglii@ wrote:
Absolutely spot on!!! Clear as a bell. It is Outsider who can usually spot the wart on the nose that the owner cannot see, or whatever it is that is lurking in the blind spot of the Shadow. Whether we like them or not and regardless of whether they like us or not, critics of any sort provide useful information, and the truly committed truth-seeker will not overlook any opportunity to improve his outlook, even if it is on the basis of "Know the enemy." But few critics are really either principled or effective enemies, and one must avoid demonization of those with different ideas. Steiner preached equanimity towards criticism!
> > Again, kudos for stating this so clearly!
> > Stephen
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "cinnamon94@..." <cinnamon94@...> wrote:
Thank you. I agree that one must avoid demonization and I would be interested in reading passages by Steiner on equanimity if anyone has got some. If there is any truth to the idea that this is still about apostasy and idealism/materialism on some level, Steiner's perspective would be quite helpful. Surely someone in Dornach has already done this work?
From the Contents of Esoteric Classes
EL, Hamburg, 5-24-'08
Today desire goes out of the astral body, interest lies in the I, and pleasure is in the etheric body. Previously interest was in the astral body, desire was in the etheric body and pleasure was in the physical body; this was in the Lemurian epoch when there was no disease, food flowed in and out, and egoless people without interest in outer things changed bodies like clothes. Picture rose in the astral body that told a man what was good or harmful for him He was interested in the pictures that arose within him and this interest remained when he changed bodies. This was a permanent astral consciousness This changed when the I that had been in the spiritual world sank into man and permeated him more and more. Interest moved into the I. The I drew interest up to itself, it drew everything up to its own realm. Thereby it tied itself off from the Gods, and the result was death. Everything that doesn't happen for the whole but for a single something that's separated from the whole, and therefore is egoism, finally leads to the destruction of this single thing, to death.
Rosicrucianism calls this interest that goes out from the ego estimatio. We must raise our interest to the astral plane again; whereby we gain imaginatio. When desire is brought back into the etheric body we attain incantatio or inspiratio. And by putting pleasure back into the physical body we get intuitio.
When we no longer follow personal interests in our actions, when we do what we have to do in such a way that we follow the inner necessities that a rightly understood law of karma places on us, when we give our deeds to the outer world with inner equanimity and in accordance with this law, then we overcome estimatio through our own higher I who is then the doer. And when bound by the strength of this I we no longer let ourselves be driven by the streams and influences that storm in on us from the outer world we can then make right judgments about the outer world and we gather wisdom from it. It reveals its inner nature to us when we stand before it with equanimity, and when we think and act in such a way that we know: All of my thoughts, feelings and deeds influence the whole, nothing exists for itself; I want to give everything to humanity, let everything be dedicated to the service of mankind. When this lives in a pupil as the basic feeling, he then develops Buddhi, the Christ principle. Thus he lets the higher triad arise from the given figure: Manas, Buddhi, Atman.