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

Re: Professor Staudenmaier's anti-Semitic obsession

Expand Messages
  • Kim
    My guess are that the original Jews are incarnating in Israel about 1750 from now, after they have incarnated clockwise through Europe. ... all that is said
    Message 1 of 228 , Mar 9 5:31 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      My guess are that the original Jews are incarnating in Israel about 1750
      from now, after they have incarnated clockwise through Europe.

      --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, Charlotte Cowell
      <charlottecowell@...> wrote:
      >
      > I think this is very well balanced view, I'd pretty much agree with
      all that is said here, and the point about polarity is especially
      pertinent. It is fairly easy to see that the Jewish people have a
      special mission (and have indeed kept their faith alive against all
      odds, partly accounting for the defensive position). What I have always
      wondered is when will the time come for them to 'come out', to lead the
      world into the state of unity being described....one hopes and indeed
      senses that the time is ever closer, but as you rightly point out, it's
      God who's running the schedule, we have to watch, learn and be patient
      while keeping the sacred fire alive and nurturing our own sparks in
      anticipation of the great event.
      >
      > --- On Wed, 9/3/11, Kim kimgm@... wrote:
      >
      > From: Kim kimgm@...
      > Subject: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Professor Staudenmaier's
      anti-Semitic obsession
      > To: anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com
      > Date: Wednesday, 9 March, 2011, 12:30
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Â
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Steiner have written the following about the mission of the Hebrew:
      > It is extremely important that this should be borne in
      > mind, and one who examines the continuation of the old Hebrew impulse
      > can still see at the present day Monotheism ruling in its greatest
      > extreme among the learned Rabbis, in their learned Rabbinism. It is
      > the task of this particular people to give as an impulse that the
      > world-principle can only be unity. Therefore we might say: All the
      > other nations, peoples, and Spirits of the Age had an analytic task,
      > the task of representing the world-principle as being composed of
      > different Beings; for example, the most extreme abstraction of the
      > Monon in India was soon divided into a trinity, as the one god of
      > Christianity is divided into Three Persons. All the other peoples
      > have the task of analyzing the foundations of the world and thus to
      > fill their several parts with rich contents, to fill themselves with
      > rich material for conceptions that may lovingly comprehend the
      > phenomena. The Semitic people has the task of ignoring all plurality
      > and synthetically devoting itself to the unity; hence, for example,
      > through this very impulse, the power of speculation, the power of
      > synthetic thought is the greatest imaginable in the Kabbalistic
      > studies.
      > All that could possibly ever be spun out of the unity by
      > the synthetic, inclusive activity of the `Â IÂ ',
      > has been spun out by the Semitic Spirit in the course of thousands of
      > years. That is the great polarity between Pluralism and Monism, and
      > that is the significance of the Semitic impulse in the world. Monism
      > is not possible without Pluralism, and the latter is not possible
      > without the former. Therefore we must recognize the necessity for
      > both.
      > The Mission of Folk-Souls .
      >
      >
      > All Creation starts by the One splitting in Two and ends by the Two
      joining into the One again.
      >
      > We
      > need the Monotheism of the Hebrew when we reach the time of the New
      > Jerusalem. It's necessary for the world to unite. The new Christianity
      > will build on the Hebrews Monotheism taking Messiah into it. And it
      will
      > happen when the Hebrews of the time of Christ incarnates in Israel
      > again.
      >
      > I know of no other people who could save their belief
      > under the hardship they have vent through the last 2000 years, and
      they
      > have to keep it alive at least 1750 years more. They had to go back to
      > Palestine for the possibility to develop their belief further, under
      > their exile they could only keep it alive.
      >
      > I know that Steiner
      > thought that it was not good for the Jewish people to go back to
      > Palestine, as he thought that the Anti Semithism was diminishing i
      > Europe, but story told something else.
      >
      > If it wasn't the will of
      > God, there would not have been an Israel today. They were less than 5
      > million Jews and have won against many times bigger forces, like the
      > David against Goliath. The timetable is fully under the control of
      God.
      > You have full freedom to take your decisions, but it don't change the
      > general historical outcome the least. From Message 40500.
      >
      > Kim
      >
      > http://kimgraaemunch.wordpress.com/%c3%82
      > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "val2160" wdenval@
      wrote:
      > >
      > >
      > >
      http://voiceofrevolution.askdrbrown.org/2009/02/11/why-have-jewish-peopl\
      \
      > > e-been-so-hated-and-persecuted-through-the-centuries/
      > >
      <http://voiceofrevolution.askdrbrown.org/2009/02/11/why-have-jewish-peop\
      \
      > > le-been-so-hated-and-persecuted-through-the-centuries/>
      > >
      > >
      > > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch"
      > > ted.wrinch@ wrote:
      > > >
      > > > Well they're still obsessing about their second favourite topic
      over
      > > in the hole. The prof has just responded to my speculation that his
      > > obsession with anti-Semitism seems like a fashionable left wing
      > > orientation, in the way that support of the Soviet Union was for
      > > leftists of previous generations. He thinks that by saying this I've
      > > said that there is a special association between the Soviet Union
      and
      > > Jewishness!!.
      > > >
      > > > After limbering up with this non-sequitur, he moves onto one
      another
      > > of his hoary old favourites: the link, as he conceives it, between
      > > Jewish high intelligence and anti-Semitism. It seems apposite to
      point
      > > out at this point that anti-Semitism, along with racism, is one of
      the
      > > subjects that is guaranteed to get the prof's adrenaline pumping and
      we
      > > can see him in action at attacking Hannah Arendt for not being
      Jewish
      > > enough at the a recent Yale seminar: YIISA/IASA Conference Panel:
      > > "Hannah Arendt and Antisemitism http://vimeo.com/15632864. It seems
      a
      > > shame that someone of the talent and stature of Arendt has to put up
      > > with mealy-mouthed criticism from the likes of the prof, but oh
      well.
      > > >
      > > > But, returning to the subject of Jewish high intelligence, the
      prof,
      > > of course, believes that there is no such thing - inconveniences
      like
      > > statistics, observations and measurements aside - and instead says
      that
      > > the notion is simply part of the usual and wider anti-Semitism that
      he
      > > expects to find amongst anthroposophists. This, and the rest of his
      > > tirade, is so groundlessly bonkers that I have to wonder if the
      prof's
      > > simply become unhinged. There's not a lot one can say to such
      > > solipsistic idiocy that ignores the facts.
      > > >
      > > > Frank : have you noticed that the prof is still addressing you in
      all
      > > this (I'm pretty much damned AFA he's concerned so it's no surprise
      that
      > > I'm included)?
      > > >
      > > > T.
      > > >
      > > > Ted Wrinch
      > > >
      > >
      >
    • Charlotte Cowell
      Yes, I think this has to be basically true for most such organisations and it s also well known that mystery religions ultimately fall into decline as culture
      Message 228 of 228 , Mar 26 6:57 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        Yes, I think this has to be basically true for most such organisations and it's also well known that mystery religions ultimately fall into decline as culture and civilisation changes. I think this is the natural order of things and it's how you distinguish movements such as Anthroposophy, Golden Dawn, the Fourth Way, etc, from actual religions. One might recognised Steiner as a great initiate and teacher, but it would be unreasonable to make him analogous with Christ and the lux aeterna.

        VT is quite interesting on the 'fate' of societies, saying that it should be the goal of 'secret circles' (which be definition are closed circles) to break free once their original mission is accomplished and to make their activities into a living spiral, which is achievable via the doorway offered by Christ. There are various discussions within MoTT pertaining to the closed and open circles. For example, within Letter X, The Wheel of Fortune:

        "The cosmic myth, the esoteric drama which underlies the exoteric 'process of evolution' sets forth, in the first place, the idea of the open circle and the closed circle. The open circle - or spiral - is the world before the Fall of the six days of creation crowned by the seventh day, the cosmic sabbath, which corresponds to what one designates in mathematics as the 'step of the spiral'. It suggests the idea of unlimited growth and advancement, being through its form only the introduction to the antechamber of eternity. It promises unlimited progress.

        For the AS, this means that while the rending of the closed circle following Steiner's death was protracted and painful, the opportunities and potential inherent in the opening out far exceed what was possible before. There is greater freedom in this state, as we are told:

        "The closed circle in contrast, is in principle only a prison, whatever its extent may be. It is a wheel which turns on itself and therefore suggests no advancement beyond its circle. The idea that the closed circle - or wheel - suggests, is that of eternal repetition."

        Of course this precisely describes the wheel of suffering that Buddha transcended and promised was possible for whomsoever was able to follow the same road (an almost endless process in the context of all souls). Then we received the perfection of this philosophy in the life of Christ, who not only transcended material existence, but returned in order to open a doorway for everyone else.

        The spiral is therefore a crucial symbol for any spiritual workers - any soul. In the letter of the Star (XVII), we are reminded that it represents growth and evolution and urged to consider that:

        "In our time it is a matter of the task of effecting the third step of the evolutionary spiral of the Hermetic tradition - the 'third Renaissance' on the subject of the Emerald Table. our time makes appeal to the collective endeavour of Hermeticists....[so that] the essence of modern wisdom [may] be saved in a spiritual 'Noah's Ark' from the deluge which is going to come, and may it thereby be transmitted to the future....this is the message of the woman kneeling under the stars on the bank of a current which flows from the past into the future."

        Earlier on in this letter - more specifically with regard to secret societies - it is explained that:

        "The circle of ceremonial magic - just like that of science - is closed in principle, but every individual human soul can leave it by embracing a more elevated ideal and by renouncing all the advantages that the circle offers. This is an important aspect of the meaning of the formula of Christ "I am the door", namely, that there is an exit from every closed circle, from all captivity of the spirit. "I am the door, if anyone enters by me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture." (John x, 9).  It is thus, for example, that Teilhard de Chardin could enter the closed circle of science without being captured, and he could leave his circle by transforming it into a spiral.....the spiral: this is the "good news" (ie, the Gospel) to all those in captivity in closed circles. Jesus Christ said to Nathanael:

        "Because I said to you, I saw you under the fig tree, do you believe? You shall see greater things than these....truly, truly, I say to you, you will see heaven opened and the Angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man." (John 1, 50 - 51).

        Cx

        --- On Sat, 26/3/11, Frank Thomas Smith <fts.trasla@...> wrote:

        From: Frank Thomas Smith <fts.trasla@...>
        Subject: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Marie Steiner
        To: anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com
        Date: Saturday, 26 March, 2011, 13:29

         


        Many moons ago, a mysterious guy, Alberto, Argentine, sort of initiate, told me that when the initiator of a spiritual movement dies, the organization he built inevitably degenerates. We were talking about the Anthroposophical Society, of which he knew little, but he did know Steiner's work, the little then available in Spanish.
        Frank

        --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, Charlotte Cowell <charlottecowell@...> wrote:
        >
        > I just think it's the nature of these types of societies - if they're based around the charisma/ability of one particular individual, it stands to reason that they can't continue in the same way after that person's death. There'll always be a void and yes, I guess there's a lot of anxiety that the wrong person should not fill that gap, but plenty of hope that some other person can and will continue the tradition. Inevitably some members will feel that this 'other person' should be their own self....so yes, I guess there was some rivalry, but it would have been nigh on impossible to agree on a successor, right? The English really took to VT but the Germans weren't keen - maybe he just didn't fit in, and certainly there was a political disagreement....
        >
        > --- On Fri, 25/3/11, cinnamon94@... <cinnamon94@...> wrote:
        >
        > From: cinnamon94@... <cinnamon94@...>
        > Subject: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Marie Steiner
        > To: anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com
        > Date: Friday, 25 March, 2011, 23:52
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >  
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Thanks, Charlotte. Is it fair to say that there was a certain amount of jockeying for position? This tale suggests that but maybe its not fair to characterize the period in that way?
        >
        >
        >
        > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, Charlotte Cowell <charlottecowell@> wrote:
        >
        > >
        >
        > > Cinnamon, this short wiki article has some points that may be helpful. Please note that Robert Powell's view is highly controversial with respect to the Bodhisattva, and not one VT himself would have agreed with.
        >
        > >
        >
        > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentin_Tomberg
        >
        > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > > --- On Fri, 25/3/11, cinnamon94@ <cinnamon94@> wrote:
        >
        > >
        >
        > > From: cinnamon94@ <cinnamon94@>
        >
        > > Subject: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Marie Steiner
        >
        > > To: anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com
        >
        > > Date: Friday, 25 March, 2011, 16:58
        >
        > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > >  
        >
        > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > > Charlotte's comments bring up something I'm interested in. What is the best source of information about what was going on in the AS in the years immediately after Steiner died? Thanks.
        >
        > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, Charlotte Cowell <charlottecowell@> wrote:
        >
        > >
        >
        > > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > > > As far as I'm aware he had a big fall out with the widow of RS, who along with a significant faction of the AS believed RS was the last true initiate and other people shouldn't have the temerity to display such authority on spiritual matters.....
        >
        > >
        >
        > > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > > > in my opinion this is the last thing RS himself would have thought or decreed. RS was personally very powerful and I'm sure would have taken some standing up to, but I don't think he would have denied the presence of grace, or qualities such as clairvoyance, in others. He had an incredibly friendly and mutually inspiring relationship with his Russian colleague for a number of years
        >
        > >
        >
        > > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > > > Also, I think some members of the AS believed they'd found an 'Avatar' - a point upon which many other people (not surprisingly) differed. You guys probably know that story better than I do.
        >
        > >
        >
        > > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > > > --- On Fri, 25/3/11, val2160 <wdenval@> wrote:
        >
        > >
        >
        > > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > > > From: val2160 <wdenval@>
        >
        > >
        >
        > > > Subject: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: VT and the Papacy - PS
        >
        > >
        >
        > > > To: anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com
        >
        > >
        >
        > > > Date: Friday, 25 March, 2011, 16:24
        >
        > >
        >
        > > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > > >  
        >
        > >
        >
        > > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > > > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "bikhe hozho" <hozhonahasglii@> wrote:
        >
        > >
        >
        > > > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > > > > The idea of freedom is paradoxical. Spiritually, as simple social freedom, it's nonsense. Freedom only makes spiritual sense if it is used to choose and commit in a way that is congruent with one's destiny, even if that be a self-chosen destiny. One can't live one's life without some sort of orienting commitment. Submitting to that imperative, gladly and knowingly makes every day a good day to die without fear.
        >
        > >
        >
        > > > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > > > > This is where the spirituality of the Will comes in and one's theories become grounded.
        >
        > >
        >
        > > > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > > > > Anthroposophy never got past twiddling its mental thumbs and VT may well have said to himself: "You can't fire me, I quit."
        >
        > >
        >
        > > > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > > > Not-you can't fire me because you don't have the authority to do so-interesting. I am reminded again of the twelve step programs:
        >
        > >
        >
        > > > ]We admitted we were powerless over alcoholâ€"that our lives had become unmanageable.Came to believe that a Power greater than ourselves could restore us to sanity.Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the care of God as we understood Him.
        >
        > >
        >
        > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelve-step_program
        >
        > >
        >
        > > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > > > > > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "Frank Thomas Smith" <fts.trasla@> wrote:
        >
        > >
        >
        > > > > > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > > > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > > > > > > Aye, there's the rub - the idea of obedience, however you trim it, and part of the rub with Tomberg. I don't see how someone in love with freedom can submit to the Catholic Church's dogma - and the Pope, or even the idea of an infallible pope. (see pg 99 of "Meditations of the Tarot", Letter V - The Pope). To travel from Catholicism to anthroposophy is a clear road (to me), but the opposite direction seems full of potholes.
        >
        > >
        >
        > > > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > > > > > > Frank
        >
        > >
        >
        > > > >
        >
        > >
        >
        > > >
        >
        > >
        >


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