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

Re: The 5th Gospel - Comprehension or Sensitivity S

Expand Messages
  • Juan Revilla
    ... Dottie, I appreciate your effort to keep the communication open; even if we don t understand each other, it gives me the opportunity to keep working with
    Message 1 of 4 , Mar 1, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      And I'm not bothered that you try to show him in error for if he is he is, however it seems to me that you fail to grasp the reasoning behind... All good things, Dottie

      Dottie, I appreciate your effort to keep the communication open; even if we don't understand each other, it gives me the opportunity to keep working with words and put them in paper.

      I don't think anything of what Steiner has to say regarding karma and reincarnation is "an error".

      Being "limited" is an unavoidable condition of being human. We are all children of our times and our culture, and just being human incarnated in a physical body imposes limitations on what we are able to do,

      ... but I can see and accept that you have a problem accepting the idea of seeing Steiner that way.

      For example, Rudolf Steiner's statement that his mission was first and foremost the teaching of Karma and Reincarnation needs to be qualified. At the time(s) he said this, they were an integral part of other cultures, so the statement should be: "teaching of karma and reincarnation in the West" or "in a form adequate to the West".

      Seen in retrospect, however, the wide-spread acceptance of karma and interest in reincarnation outside of Europe (e.g. USA and Latin America) that can be observed today is not due to Anthroposophy but to Theosophy and to the influence of eastern philosophies and the massive "New Age" cultural wave.

      The theosophical concept of reincarnation differs from the buddhist in the recognition of the cumulative development of the "ego", which as Steiner explains has no place in Buddhism, and rejects the common belief in the possibility of reincarnating in animals, plants, or minerals, so it already shows a particular Western evolutionary and progressive tint.

      This raises some questions, neither of which can be answered with ready-made formulas:

      1) in what way Steiner's teachings on karma and reincarnation differ from the commonplace theosophical and new-age concept?

      2) why did Anthroposophy not reach the massive spread of Theosophy and eastern doctrines outside of Europe?

      3) what would be a Christian understanding of karma and reincarnation?

      Today, the wide acceptance or social tolerance of the doctrine of karma by the masses is in the form of a rationalization based on theory that "feels" true, and belongs to the rational and the sentient soul. With the consciousness soul, this is no longer a rationalization, but an experience direcly through the "I" that shows karma in the form of "our life", or "what life brings to us."

      When one is in front of an experience directly with the "I", there is thinking, but it is no longer a rationalization or a theory that goes around or dances about the experience: the vitalized, emancipated thinking penetrates the experience transforming it into something new, and we transform ourselves with it, so the experience and us and the thinking are the same, we all become part of the trasnformative movement of thinking.

      At this point theory or rationalization concerning the role of karma and reincarnation begins to loose meaning. Karma is no longer conceived or talked about in the same way, as a concept or a law, because it has become the intense and irrevocable experience of LIFE. Instead of the concept of "destiny" and considerations about the past or the future or about the causes, we have something far more powerful than brings us down to earth to the full presence of the I Am that says to us: "I, this Life, this experience, Am You".

      This is completely at the level of ethics and freedom, not of Theology or Gnosis. It doesn't have anything to do with "teachings" but with direct personal experience, a personal relationhip with karma that present to us in the now as Life full of strength.

      It is not in the distant future, but right here. Once in it, there is no space for "laws" or mere teachings. The conceptual dancing of the brain and theoretical studies go on in the life of my soul, but now a new place has been formed in the consciousness soul where nothing of that is needed and my cup overflows.

      Juan
    • Kim Graae Munch
      I will just mention that esoterics from all over the world have been on Steiners esoteric school even if they werent Atroposophics, as examples can be
      Message 2 of 4 , Mar 1, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        Message
        I will just mention that esoterics from all over the world have been on Steiners esoteric school even if they werent Atroposophics, as examples can be mentioned Max Heindel, initiator of the Rosicrucian Fellowship, and Eli Wamberg, leader of the Rosicrucians in Denmark, and many more. These students have had profound influence on all spiritual groupings and the new religious movements. All new esoteric movements in the fiftieth tried to refer back to Steiner as a guarentee for quality. By the way I am not an Anthroposoph.
        In the cases where priests believe in Reincarnation it's typical because of Steiner, as he is the only one who can speak the language of a university educated Theologian.
        Kim
         
        -----Original Message-----
        From: anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com [mailto:anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Juan Revilla
        Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 1:26 PM
        To: anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: The 5th Gospel - Comprehension or Sensitivity S

         

        And I'm not bothered that you try to show him in error for if he is he is, however it seems to me that you fail to grasp the reasoning behind... All good things, Dottie

        Dottie, I appreciate your effort to keep the communication open; even if we don't understand each other, it gives me the opportunity to keep working with words and put them in paper.

        I don't think anything of what Steiner has to say regarding karma and reincarnation is "an error".

        Being "limited" is an unavoidable condition of being human. We are all children of our times and our culture, and just being human incarnated in a physical body imposes limitations on what we are able to do,

        ... but I can see and accept that you have a problem accepting the idea of seeing Steiner that way.

        For example, Rudolf Steiner's statement that his mission was first and foremost the teaching of Karma and Reincarnation needs to be qualified. At the time(s) he said this, they were an integral part of other cultures, so the statement should be: "teaching of karma and reincarnation in the West" or "in a form adequate to the West".

        Seen in retrospect, however, the wide-spread acceptance of karma and interest in reincarnation outside of Europe (e.g. USA and Latin America) that can be observed today is not due to Anthroposophy but to Theosophy and to the influence of eastern philosophies and the massive "New Age" cultural wave.

        The theosophical concept of reincarnation differs from the buddhist in the recognition of the cumulative development of the "ego", which as Steiner explains has no place in Buddhism, and rejects the common belief in the possibility of reincarnating in animals, plants, or minerals, so it already shows a particular Western evolutionary and progressive tint.

        This raises some questions, neither of which can be answered with ready-made formulas:

        1) in what way Steiner's teachings on karma and reincarnation differ from the commonplace theosophical and new-age concept?

        2) why did Anthroposophy not reach the massive spread of Theosophy and eastern doctrines outside of Europe?

        3) what would be a Christian understanding of karma and reincarnation?

        Today, the wide acceptance or social tolerance of the doctrine of karma by the masses is in the form of a rationalization based on theory that "feels" true, and belongs to the rational and the sentient soul. With the consciousness soul, this is no longer a rationalization, but an experience direcly through the "I" that shows karma in the form of "our life", or "what life brings to us."

        When one is in front of an experience directly with the "I", there is thinking, but it is no longer a rationalization or a theory that goes around or dances about the experience: the vitalized, emancipated thinking penetrates the experience transforming it into something new, and we transform ourselves with it, so the experience and us and the thinking are the same, we all become part of the trasnformative movement of thinking.

        At this point theory or rationalization concerning the role of karma and reincarnation begins to loose meaning. Karma is no longer conceived or talked about in the same way, as a concept or a law, because it has become the intense and irrevocable experience of LIFE. Instead of the concept of "destiny" and considerations about the past or the future or about the causes, we have something far more powerful than brings us down to earth to the full presence of the I Am that says to us: "I, this Life, this experience, Am You".

        This is completely at the level of ethics and freedom, not of Theology or Gnosis. It doesn't have anything to do with "teachings" but with direct personal experience, a personal relationhip with karma that present to us in the now as Life full of strength.

        It is not in the distant future, but right here. Once in it, there is no space for "laws" or mere teachings. The conceptual dancing of the brain and theoretical studies go on in the life of my soul, but now a new place has been formed in the consciousness soul where nothing of that is needed and my cup overflows.

        Juan

      • dottie zold
        Oh my goodeness....can any one see what is being depicted here from the spiritual worlds? That is so touching to me.  
        Message 3 of 4 , Mar 1, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          Oh my goodeness....can any one see what is being depicted here from the spiritual worlds? That is so touching to me.
           
          "Hence only by means of love can we give real help for karma to work out in the right way." Rudolf Steiner



        • dottie zold
          Dear Juan, my experience is that I am not the only one who is not communicating with you it is your brothers as well. Although i will say that Fred has a good
          Message 4 of 4 , Mar 2, 2010
          • 0 Attachment
            Dear Juan, my experience is that I am not the only one who is not communicating with you it is your brothers as well. Although i will say that Fred has a good bead on you and can communicate a little more closer to what you are trying to show.
             
            I don't really have too much time, I can make it but you are entrenched in your view and so it makes no sense to me to enter into these conversations when I am overwhelmed in my life in a way....this entrenchness of yours you can not see and you are in error.
             
            Your whole premise is built around the idea that Steiner did not have a christian upbringing and therefore was unaware of somethings already stated in christianity. What you fail to understand and this can be seen throughout all of your writings of late, is that his karma, his ongoing incarnations led the way to the Christ and from the Christ and he is the announcer of the Christ in the Etheric.
             
            You are entrenched and this is not a judgement rather an observation. And it seems to me only Fred can walk you out. Or maybe Dan.
             
            All good things,
            Dottie

            "Hence only by means of love can we give real help for karma to work out in the right way." Rudolf Steiner



            --- On Mon, 3/1/10, Juan Revilla <hylonome@...> wrote:

            From: Juan Revilla <hylonome@...>
            Subject: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: The 5th Gospel - Comprehension or Sensitivity S
            To: anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com
            Date: Monday, March 1, 2010, 4:26 AM



            And I'm not bothered that you try to show him in error for if he is he is, however it seems to me that you fail to grasp the reasoning behind... All good things, Dottie

            Dottie, I appreciate your effort to keep the communication open; even if we don't understand each other, it gives me the opportunity to keep working with words and put them in paper.

            I don't think anything of what Steiner has to say regarding karma and reincarnation is "an error".

            Being "limited" is an unavoidable condition of being human. We are all children of our times and our culture, and just being human incarnated in a physical body imposes limitations on what we are able to do,

            ... but I can see and accept that you have a problem accepting the idea of seeing Steiner that way.

            For example, Rudolf Steiner's statement that his mission was first and foremost the teaching of Karma and Reincarnation needs to be qualified. At the time(s) he said this, they were an integral part of other cultures, so the statement should be: "teaching of karma and reincarnation in the West" or "in a form adequate to the West".

            Seen in retrospect, however, the wide-spread acceptance of karma and interest in reincarnation outside of Europe (e.g. USA and Latin America) that can be observed today is not due to Anthroposophy but to Theosophy and to the influence of eastern philosophies and the massive "New Age" cultural wave.

            The theosophical concept of reincarnation differs from the buddhist in the recognition of the cumulative development of the "ego", which as Steiner explains has no place in Buddhism, and rejects the common belief in the possibility of reincarnating in animals, plants, or minerals, so it already shows a particular Western evolutionary and progressive tint.

            This raises some questions, neither of which can be answered with ready-made formulas:

            1) in what way Steiner's teachings on karma and reincarnation differ from the commonplace theosophical and new-age concept?

            2) why did Anthroposophy not reach the massive spread of Theosophy and eastern doctrines outside of Europe?

            3) what would be a Christian understanding of karma and reincarnation?

            Today, the wide acceptance or social tolerance of the doctrine of karma by the masses is in the form of a rationalization based on theory that "feels" true, and belongs to the rational and the sentient soul. With the consciousness soul, this is no longer a rationalization, but an experience direcly through the "I" that shows karma in the form of "our life", or "what life brings to us."

            When one is in front of an experience directly with the "I", there is thinking, but it is no longer a rationalization or a theory that goes around or dances about the experience: the vitalized, emancipated thinking penetrates the experience transforming it into something new, and we transform ourselves with it, so the experience and us and the thinking are the same, we all become part of the trasnformative movement of thinking.

            At this point theory or rationalization concerning the role of karma and reincarnation begins to loose meaning. Karma is no longer conceived or talked about in the same way, as a concept or a law, because it has become the intense and irrevocable experience of LIFE. Instead of the concept of "destiny" and considerations about the past or the future or about the causes, we have something far more powerful than brings us down to earth to the full presence of the I Am that says to us: "I, this Life, this experience, Am You".

            This is completely at the level of ethics and freedom, not of Theology or Gnosis. It doesn't have anything to do with "teachings" but with direct personal experience, a personal relationhip with karma that present to us in the now as Life full of strength.

            It is not in the distant future, but right here. Once in it, there is no space for "laws" or mere teachings. The conceptual dancing of the brain and theoretical studies go on in the life of my soul, but now a new place has been formed in the consciousness soul where nothing of that is needed and my cup overflows.

            Juan



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