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

Re: Characteristics of Judaism

Expand Messages
  • Frank Thomas Smith
    ... F: Translators (including myself) tend to launder lectures somewhat, leaving out repetitions fe - which does make it look more elegant. In this case, RS
    Message 1 of 14 , Apr 7, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "cinnamon94@..." <cinnamon94@...> wrote:
      >
      > > F: No, it's a lecture with a question period, all taken down in shorthand, not prepared beforehand and not revised by R.S.
      >
      > C: That is what I thought yet the form of his response is elegant in the way that a prepared comment would be. His argument is presented in the form of a "proof." First, he begins by situating the discussion as lying somewhere between or beyond the most prominent polarities of the time (Zionism and Jew-hatred). These are the positions which have a propagandist character in Steiner's view.

      F: Translators (including myself) tend to "launder" lectures somewhat, leaving out repetitions fe - which does make it look more elegant. In this case, RS says at the beginning: "Have you any questions today?" So the replies were obviously not prepared beforehand.

      C: Then, he goes on to offer his view of the spiritual significance or "function," if you will, of monotheism in order to offer a rationale for the assimilationist perspective of the time. Frank, do you have the original German for this sentence? "Hence this particular mission is no longer a necessity in evolution; the only right course is for the Jews to intermix with the other peoples." I am interested in the verb used for "to intermix." There seems to be some difference in opinion about how this verb should be translated.

      F: "..Daher ist diese Mission erfüllt. Und daher ist diese jüdische Mission als solche, als jüdische, nicht mehr notwendig in der Entwickelung, sondern das einzig Richtige ist, wenn die Juden durch Vermischung mit den anderen Völkern in den anderen Völkern aufgehen.

      My *literal* translation: Notice that the translator has laundered a bit:
      "...Therefore this mission has been fulfilled. And therefore this Jewish mission as such, as Jewish, is no longer necessary in evolution; rather the only right thing is if the jews merge with the other peoples through intermixing with the other peoples..."

      In the original German is both "Vermischung" (noun) = "intermixing" (more elegant would be "assimilation" - which I would not have hesitated to use) and "aufgehen" (verb) = merge.

      C: A couple more things about this being from a Q & A. Perhaps Steiner had prepared notes for questions that he encountered often? What should account for the elegance of the presentation? Can it just be attributed to his thinking habits? I hear a lot of Q & A's by some pretty smart people but the elegance of the rhetorical structure here is difficult to achieve "off the cuff." I'm intrigued..

      F: See above.

      >
      > > F: I have no idea what you're talking about here and I read it twice...a record.
      >
      C: Thanks for granting me the honor of reading my comments twice.
      F: You're welcome.
      C: I apologize for whatever lack of clarity provoked this necessity. :) When I referred to German idealism, I was characterizing the whole response as coming from a worldview that sees mans' conceptions/understandings/ideas about the world as very important in explaining why things might be so. Since this philosophical perspective considers how objects appear to perceiving subjects, it is logical to put forth the explanation Steiner does regarding sculpture. It might not occur to someone living in a society in which it is believed that there is one G-d (and for which there are laws against making craven images of that G-d) to see a hunk of marble and feel an artistic impulse to produce something of a spiritual nature.

      F: OK, Steiner was certainly influenced by German idealism.
      >
      C: There are lots of legitimate rebuttals that could be made to Steiner's contention that would have nothing to do with anthroposophy or anti-semitism and it would be too much to get into them here. Yet I believe these rebuttals would offer Steiner, if he had taken note of them, the way out of presuming a kind of monolithic Jewish "mind." In his formulation, there are few options but to assume qualities about individuals from the context of the group. While it is clear that he was certainly not arguing that there has never been or never will be an exceptional Jewish sculptor he does leaves enough "space" in his discussion for a modern reader to see it that way. If such a modern reader wanted to say that Steiner was stereotyping, and that stereotyping ipso facto constitutes anti-semitism, then I'd have to grant that there is *something* in the text to support that. On the other hand, I would say that the rhetorical structure of the argument, the ontological and epistemological claims present and the overall historical context would suggest a quite different reading. Here is a good site for background on German idealism. Its been peer-reviewed by American philosophers.

      F: It does sound somewhat like stereotyping, but that, after all, is Steiner's style, at least in lectures. I think it should be understood (as you point out) that that is not the case. However, the tactic used by the Waldorf Critics is to take such remarks "out of context", as we say, in order to call it stereotyping, ergo antisemitic.

      C: > http://www.iep.utm.edu/germidea/
      >
      > Reform Judaism has had a very interesting history. I don't think one can really understand parts of Steiner's project, and his comments on Judaism, without understanding what was happening there within Judaism. This was a time of true interest and innovation regarding old forms of religious expression. There were a lot of ideas in circulation and it appears to me that Steiner's thoughts were crossing paths with them.

      F: "intersecting" to launder.
    • Charlie
      I was interested to read that Israel s Messianic Jews are facing persecution from the more orthodox communnity:
      Message 2 of 14 , Apr 8, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        I was interested to read that Israel's Messianic Jews are facing persecution from the more orthodox communnity:

        http://www.religionnewsblog.com/25846/israels-messianic-jews-face-orthodox-persecution

        here is an article from the same site about the controversy surrounding messianic Jews / 'jews' generally:

        http://www.apologeticsindex.org/2-messianic-jews

        And another about the problem faced by messianic jews from Jewcy, which is a curated platform for ideas that matter to young Jews today.

        http://www.jewcy.com/post/israels_state_sanctioned_persecution_messianic_jews_must_end

        Cx

        PS - hello again, and thank you for the bracelet, mittens, afghan rugs etc, I never look a gift horse in the mouth :-)

        --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" <ted.wrinch@...> wrote:
        >
        > Hi Cinnamon,
        >
        > Well, I only read through it quickly, but from what I remember I don't think that I can better Taz's take on it. In any event, my interest was always much more on Steiner's views of the very great importance of Judaism in general, in history and as part of his theory of the evolution of consciousness. In fact, before reading him, and meeting and getting to know a Jewish colleague at work, I knew very little about and consequently had little interest in Judaism.
        >
        > T.
        >
        > Ted Wrinch
        >
        > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "cinnamon94@" <cinnamon94@> wrote:
        > >
        > >
        > > Hi, Ted. You're right. Its at least ambiguous as to whether or not this went through a peer review process. Its a very good on-line source no matter what. Are you going to offer any interpretations of the lecture?
        > >
        > >
        > > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" <ted.wrinch@> wrote:
        > > >
        > > > Hi Cinnamon,
        > > >
        > > > You said:
        > > >
        > > > "Here is a good site for background on German idealism. Its been peer-reviewed by
        > > > American philosophers.
        > > >
        > > > http://www.iep.utm.edu/germidea/"
        > > >
        > > > I read that article a few years ago and thought it v. good too. But it's not actually peer reviewed (which is not necessarily a bad thing in my view) as there is a disclaimer at the bottom:
        > > >
        > > > " The author of this article is anonymous. The IEP is actively seeking an author who will write a replacement article.
        > > >
        > > > Last updated: April 16, 2001 | Originally published: April/16/2001."
        > > >
        > > > I laughed like a drain when I saw this: just shows how alien GI is to the Anglo-Saxon mind!
        > > >
        > > > T.
        > > >
        > > > Ted Wrinch
        > > >
        > > > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "cinnamon94@" <cinnamon94@> wrote:
        > > > >
        > > > > > F: No, it's a lecture with a question period, all taken down in shorthand, not prepared beforehand and not revised by R.S.
        > > > >
        > > > > C: That is what I thought yet the form of his response is elegant in the way that a prepared comment would be. His argument is presented in the form of a "proof." First, he begins by situating the discussion as lying somewhere between or beyond the most prominent polarities of the time (Zionism and Jew-hatred). These are the positions which have a propagandist character in Steiner's view. Then, he goes on to offer his view of the spiritual significance or "function," if you will, of monotheism in order to offer a rationale for the assimilationist perspective of the time. Frank, do you have the original German for this sentence? "Hence this particular mission is no longer a necessity in evolution; the only right course is for the Jews to intermix with the other peoples." I am interested in the verb used for "to intermix." There seems to be some difference in opinion about how this verb should be translated.
        > > > >
        > > > > A couple more things about this being from a Q & A. Perhaps Steiner had prepared notes for questions that he encountered often? What should account for the elegance of the presentation? Can it just be attributed to his thinking habits? I hear a lot of Q & A's by some pretty smart people but the elegance of the rhetorical structure here is difficult to achieve "off the cuff." I'm intrigued..
        > > > >
        > > > > > F: I have no idea what you're talking about here and I read it twice...a record.
        > > > >
        > > > > Thanks for granting me the honor of reading my comments twice. I apologize for whatever lack of clarity provoked this necessity. :) When I referred to German idealism, I was characterizing the whole response as coming from a worldview that sees mans' conceptions/understandings/ideas about the world as very important in explaining why things might be so. Since this philosophical perspective considers how objects appear to perceiving subjects, it is logical to put forth the explanation Steiner does regarding sculpture. It might not occur to someone living in a society in which it is believed that there is one G-d (and for which there are laws against making craven images of that G-d) to see a hunk of marble and feel an artistic impulse to produce something of a spiritual nature.
        > > > >
        > > > > There are lots of legitimate rebuttals that could be made to Steiner's contention that would have nothing to do with anthroposophy or anti-semitism and it would be too much to get into them here. Yet I believe these rebuttals would offer Steiner, if he had taken note of them, the way out of presuming a kind of monolithic Jewish "mind." In his formulation, there are few options but to assume qualities about individuals from the context of the group. While it is clear that he was certainly not arguing that there has never been or never will be an exceptional Jewish sculptor he does leaves enough "space" in his discussion for a modern reader to see it that way. If such a modern reader wanted to say that Steiner was stereotyping, and that stereotyping ipso facto constitutes anti-semitism, then I'd have to grant that there is *something* in the text to support that. On the other hand, I would say that the rhetorical structure of the argument, the ontological and epistemological claims present and the overall historical context would suggest a quite different reading. Here is a good site for background on German idealism. Its been peer-reviewed by American philosophers.
        > > > >
        > > > > http://www.iep.utm.edu/germidea/
        > > > >
        > > > > Reform Judaism has had a very interesting history. I don't think one can really understand parts of Steiner's project, and his comments on Judaism, without understanding what was happening there within Judaism. This was a time of true interest and innovation regarding old forms of religious expression. There were a lot of ideas in circulation and it appears to me that Steiner's thoughts were crossing paths with them.
        > > > >
        > > > > > F: Beside the point, assuming there is one.
        > > > >
        > > > > C: Ha! :)
        > > > >
        > > >
        > >
        >
      • ted.wrinch
        It seems rather like a reverse of the persecution the Jews suffered in Christian Europe in the Middle Ages for not accepting the religious tenets of the
        Message 3 of 14 , Apr 8, 2011
        • 0 Attachment
          It seems rather like a reverse of the persecution the Jews suffered in Christian Europe in the Middle Ages for not accepting the religious tenets of the majority. It's hard to see how 30 families of Messianics, not seeking to convert others, could be so threatening to the wider Orthodox community. And it's quite astonishing to see the Supreme Court abrogate Messianics' rights to Israeli citizenship under the Law of Return, whilst being happy to maintain similar rights for secularist returners. A clear case of discrimination I'd say.

          T.

          Ted Wrinch

          --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "Charlie" <charlottecowell@...> wrote:
          >
          > I was interested to read that Israel's Messianic Jews are facing persecution from the more orthodox communnity:
          >
          > http://www.religionnewsblog.com/25846/israels-messianic-jews-face-orthodox-persecution
          >
          > here is an article from the same site about the controversy surrounding messianic Jews / 'jews' generally:
          >
          > http://www.apologeticsindex.org/2-messianic-jews
          >
          > And another about the problem faced by messianic jews from Jewcy, which is a curated platform for ideas that matter to young Jews today.
          >
          > http://www.jewcy.com/post/israels_state_sanctioned_persecution_messianic_jews_must_end
          >
          > Cx
          >
          > PS - hello again, and thank you for the bracelet, mittens, afghan rugs etc, I never look a gift horse in the mouth :-)
          >
          > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" <ted.wrinch@> wrote:
          > >
          > > Hi Cinnamon,
          > >
          > > Well, I only read through it quickly, but from what I remember I don't think that I can better Taz's take on it. In any event, my interest was always much more on Steiner's views of the very great importance of Judaism in general, in history and as part of his theory of the evolution of consciousness. In fact, before reading him, and meeting and getting to know a Jewish colleague at work, I knew very little about and consequently had little interest in Judaism.
          > >
          > > T.
          > >
          > > Ted Wrinch
          > >
          > > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "cinnamon94@" <cinnamon94@> wrote:
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > Hi, Ted. You're right. Its at least ambiguous as to whether or not this went through a peer review process. Its a very good on-line source no matter what. Are you going to offer any interpretations of the lecture?
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" <ted.wrinch@> wrote:
          > > > >
          > > > > Hi Cinnamon,
          > > > >
          > > > > You said:
          > > > >
          > > > > "Here is a good site for background on German idealism. Its been peer-reviewed by
          > > > > American philosophers.
          > > > >
          > > > > http://www.iep.utm.edu/germidea/"
          > > > >
          > > > > I read that article a few years ago and thought it v. good too. But it's not actually peer reviewed (which is not necessarily a bad thing in my view) as there is a disclaimer at the bottom:
          > > > >
          > > > > " The author of this article is anonymous. The IEP is actively seeking an author who will write a replacement article.
          > > > >
          > > > > Last updated: April 16, 2001 | Originally published: April/16/2001."
          > > > >
          > > > > I laughed like a drain when I saw this: just shows how alien GI is to the Anglo-Saxon mind!
          > > > >
          > > > > T.
          > > > >
          > > > > Ted Wrinch
          > > > >
          > > > > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "cinnamon94@" <cinnamon94@> wrote:
          > > > > >
          > > > > > > F: No, it's a lecture with a question period, all taken down in shorthand, not prepared beforehand and not revised by R.S.
          > > > > >
          > > > > > C: That is what I thought yet the form of his response is elegant in the way that a prepared comment would be. His argument is presented in the form of a "proof." First, he begins by situating the discussion as lying somewhere between or beyond the most prominent polarities of the time (Zionism and Jew-hatred). These are the positions which have a propagandist character in Steiner's view. Then, he goes on to offer his view of the spiritual significance or "function," if you will, of monotheism in order to offer a rationale for the assimilationist perspective of the time. Frank, do you have the original German for this sentence? "Hence this particular mission is no longer a necessity in evolution; the only right course is for the Jews to intermix with the other peoples." I am interested in the verb used for "to intermix." There seems to be some difference in opinion about how this verb should be translated.
          > > > > >
          > > > > > A couple more things about this being from a Q & A. Perhaps Steiner had prepared notes for questions that he encountered often? What should account for the elegance of the presentation? Can it just be attributed to his thinking habits? I hear a lot of Q & A's by some pretty smart people but the elegance of the rhetorical structure here is difficult to achieve "off the cuff." I'm intrigued..
          > > > > >
          > > > > > > F: I have no idea what you're talking about here and I read it twice...a record.
          > > > > >
          > > > > > Thanks for granting me the honor of reading my comments twice. I apologize for whatever lack of clarity provoked this necessity. :) When I referred to German idealism, I was characterizing the whole response as coming from a worldview that sees mans' conceptions/understandings/ideas about the world as very important in explaining why things might be so. Since this philosophical perspective considers how objects appear to perceiving subjects, it is logical to put forth the explanation Steiner does regarding sculpture. It might not occur to someone living in a society in which it is believed that there is one G-d (and for which there are laws against making craven images of that G-d) to see a hunk of marble and feel an artistic impulse to produce something of a spiritual nature.
          > > > > >
          > > > > > There are lots of legitimate rebuttals that could be made to Steiner's contention that would have nothing to do with anthroposophy or anti-semitism and it would be too much to get into them here. Yet I believe these rebuttals would offer Steiner, if he had taken note of them, the way out of presuming a kind of monolithic Jewish "mind." In his formulation, there are few options but to assume qualities about individuals from the context of the group. While it is clear that he was certainly not arguing that there has never been or never will be an exceptional Jewish sculptor he does leaves enough "space" in his discussion for a modern reader to see it that way. If such a modern reader wanted to say that Steiner was stereotyping, and that stereotyping ipso facto constitutes anti-semitism, then I'd have to grant that there is *something* in the text to support that. On the other hand, I would say that the rhetorical structure of the argument, the ontological and epistemological claims present and the overall historical context would suggest a quite different reading. Here is a good site for background on German idealism. Its been peer-reviewed by American philosophers.
          > > > > >
          > > > > > http://www.iep.utm.edu/germidea/
          > > > > >
          > > > > > Reform Judaism has had a very interesting history. I don't think one can really understand parts of Steiner's project, and his comments on Judaism, without understanding what was happening there within Judaism. This was a time of true interest and innovation regarding old forms of religious expression. There were a lot of ideas in circulation and it appears to me that Steiner's thoughts were crossing paths with them.
          > > > > >
          > > > > > > F: Beside the point, assuming there is one.
          > > > > >
          > > > > > C: Ha! :)
          > > > > >
          > > > >
          > > >
          > >
          >
        • Charlotte Cowell
          What really interests me about this whole thing is the fact that it s been one of humanity s central debates for millenia, affecting so many aspects of world
          Message 4 of 14 , Apr 8, 2011
          • 0 Attachment
            What really interests me about this whole thing is the fact that it's been one of humanity's central debates for millenia, affecting so many aspects of world politics, culture, society, religion, theology, philosophy, mysticism, history.....there are different currents within all the religions that have Jerusalem at their centre - Judaism, Christianity, Islam. Perspective is key, who is to say which current (or stream) has the 'better handle' on or interpretation of their individual scriptures, tenets of belief etc?

            --- On Fri, 8/4/11, ted.wrinch <ted.wrinch@...> wrote:

            From: ted.wrinch <ted.wrinch@...>
            Subject: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Characteristics of Judaism
            To: anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com
            Date: Friday, 8 April, 2011, 19:56

             

            It seems rather like a reverse of the persecution the Jews suffered in Christian Europe in the Middle Ages for not accepting the religious tenets of the majority. It's hard to see how 30 families of Messianics, not seeking to convert others, could be so threatening to the wider Orthodox community. And it's quite astonishing to see the Supreme Court abrogate Messianics' rights to Israeli citizenship under the Law of Return, whilst being happy to maintain similar rights for secularist returners. A clear case of discrimination I'd say.

            T.

            Ted Wrinch

            --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "Charlie" <charlottecowell@...> wrote:
            >
            > I was interested to read that Israel's Messianic Jews are facing persecution from the more orthodox communnity:
            >
            > http://www.religionnewsblog.com/25846/israels-messianic-jews-face-orthodox-persecution
            >
            > here is an article from the same site about the controversy surrounding messianic Jews / 'jews' generally:
            >
            > http://www.apologeticsindex.org/2-messianic-jews
            >
            > And another about the problem faced by messianic jews from Jewcy, which is a curated platform for ideas that matter to young Jews today.
            >
            > http://www.jewcy.com/post/israels_state_sanctioned_persecution_messianic_jews_must_end
            >
            > Cx
            >
            > PS - hello again, and thank you for the bracelet, mittens, afghan rugs etc, I never look a gift horse in the mouth :-)
            >
            > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" <ted.wrinch@> wrote:
            > >
            > > Hi Cinnamon,
            > >
            > > Well, I only read through it quickly, but from what I remember I don't think that I can better Taz's take on it. In any event, my interest was always much more on Steiner's views of the very great importance of Judaism in general, in history and as part of his theory of the evolution of consciousness. In fact, before reading him, and meeting and getting to know a Jewish colleague at work, I knew very little about and consequently had little interest in Judaism.
            > >
            > > T.
            > >
            > > Ted Wrinch
            > >
            > > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "cinnamon94@" <cinnamon94@> wrote:
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > Hi, Ted. You're right. Its at least ambiguous as to whether or not this went through a peer review process. Its a very good on-line source no matter what. Are you going to offer any interpretations of the lecture?
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" <ted.wrinch@> wrote:
            > > > >
            > > > > Hi Cinnamon,
            > > > >
            > > > > You said:
            > > > >
            > > > > "Here is a good site for background on German idealism. Its been peer-reviewed by
            > > > > American philosophers.
            > > > >
            > > > > http://www.iep.utm.edu/germidea/"
            > > > >
            > > > > I read that article a few years ago and thought it v. good too. But it's not actually peer reviewed (which is not necessarily a bad thing in my view) as there is a disclaimer at the bottom:
            > > > >
            > > > > " The author of this article is anonymous. The IEP is actively seeking an author who will write a replacement article.
            > > > >
            > > > > Last updated: April 16, 2001 | Originally published: April/16/2001."
            > > > >
            > > > > I laughed like a drain when I saw this: just shows how alien GI is to the Anglo-Saxon mind!
            > > > >
            > > > > T.
            > > > >
            > > > > Ted Wrinch
            > > > >
            > > > > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "cinnamon94@" <cinnamon94@> wrote:
            > > > > >
            > > > > > > F: No, it's a lecture with a question period, all taken down in shorthand, not prepared beforehand and not revised by R.S.
            > > > > >
            > > > > > C: That is what I thought yet the form of his response is elegant in the way that a prepared comment would be. His argument is presented in the form of a "proof." First, he begins by situating the discussion as lying somewhere between or beyond the most prominent polarities of the time (Zionism and Jew-hatred). These are the positions which have a propagandist character in Steiner's view. Then, he goes on to offer his view of the spiritual significance or "function," if you will, of monotheism in order to offer a rationale for the assimilationist perspective of the time. Frank, do you have the original German for this sentence? "Hence this particular mission is no longer a necessity in evolution; the only right course is for the Jews to intermix with the other peoples." I am interested in the verb used for "to intermix." There seems to be some difference in opinion about how this verb should be translated.
            > > > > >
            > > > > > A couple more things about this being from a Q & A. Perhaps Steiner had prepared notes for questions that he encountered often? What should account for the elegance of the presentation? Can it just be attributed to his thinking habits? I hear a lot of Q & A's by some pretty smart people but the elegance of the rhetorical structure here is difficult to achieve "off the cuff." I'm intrigued..
            > > > > >
            > > > > > > F: I have no idea what you're talking about here and I read it twice...a record.
            > > > > >
            > > > > > Thanks for granting me the honor of reading my comments twice. I apologize for whatever lack of clarity provoked this necessity. :) When I referred to German idealism, I was characterizing the whole response as coming from a worldview that sees mans' conceptions/understandings/ideas about the world as very important in explaining why things might be so. Since this philosophical perspective considers how objects appear to perceiving subjects, it is logical to put forth the explanation Steiner does regarding sculpture. It might not occur to someone living in a society in which it is believed that there is one G-d (and for which there are laws against making craven images of that G-d) to see a hunk of marble and feel an artistic impulse to produce something of a spiritual nature.
            > > > > >
            > > > > > There are lots of legitimate rebuttals that could be made to Steiner's contention that would have nothing to do with anthroposophy or anti-semitism and it would be too much to get into them here. Yet I believe these rebuttals would offer Steiner, if he had taken note of them, the way out of presuming a kind of monolithic Jewish "mind." In his formulation, there are few options but to assume qualities about individuals from the context of the group. While it is clear that he was certainly not arguing that there has never been or never will be an exceptional Jewish sculptor he does leaves enough "space" in his discussion for a modern reader to see it that way. If such a modern reader wanted to say that Steiner was stereotyping, and that stereotyping ipso facto constitutes anti-semitism, then I'd have to grant that there is *something* in the text to support that. On the other hand, I would say that the rhetorical structure of the argument, the ontological and epistemological claims present and the overall historical context would suggest a quite different reading. Here is a good site for background on German idealism. Its been peer-reviewed by American philosophers.
            > > > > >
            > > > > > http://www.iep.utm.edu/germidea/
            > > > > >
            > > > > > Reform Judaism has had a very interesting history. I don't think one can really understand parts of Steiner's project, and his comments on Judaism, without understanding what was happening there within Judaism. This was a time of true interest and innovation regarding old forms of religious expression. There were a lot of ideas in circulation and it appears to me that Steiner's thoughts were crossing paths with them.
            > > > > >
            > > > > > > F: Beside the point, assuming there is one.
            > > > > >
            > > > > > C: Ha! :)
            > > > > >
            > > > >
            > > >
            > >
            >

          • ted.wrinch
            Perspective is key, who is to say which current (or stream) has the better handle on or interpretation of their individual scriptures, tenets of belief
            Message 5 of 14 , Apr 9, 2011
            • 0 Attachment
              "Perspective is key, who is to say which current (or stream) has the 'better handle' on or interpretation of their individual scriptures, tenets of belief etc?"

              How can one say? The pre-modern or traditionalist approach was that the correct interpretation was the one that lay within one's own culture. In Europe, post the Enlightenment and the following critical theology of C19 Germany and comparative religion of the West, it seems seems to be a situation of all truths or none: 'there's truth and there's religion'. The world has been thrown open to our gaze, which can now take in anything from Essenism and Gnosticism, to Rosicrucianism, Sufism and Cabala to exegesis of the mainstream Abrahamic scriptures and etc. What we are suffering from, it seems to me, is the lack of an interpretative key. One of the things that attracted me to Steiner was his attempt to provide such a key in his notion of the evolution of consciousness. He has been accused of being Euro-centric in his application of this key but I have yet to find better.

              T.

              Ted Wrinch

              --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, Charlotte Cowell <charlottecowell@...> wrote:
              >
              > What really interests me about this whole thing is the fact that it's
              > been one of humanity's central debates for millenia, affecting so many
              > aspects of world politics, culture, society, religion, theology,
              > philosophy, mysticism, history.....there are different currents within
              > all the religions that have Jerusalem at their centre - Judaism,
              > Christianity, Islam. Perspective is key, who is to say which current
              > (or stream) has the 'better handle' on or interpretation of their
              > individual scriptures, tenets of belief etc?
              >
              > --- On Fri, 8/4/11, ted.wrinch <ted.wrinch@...> wrote:
              >
              > From: ted.wrinch <ted.wrinch@...>
              > Subject: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Characteristics of Judaism
              > To: anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com
              > Date: Friday, 8 April, 2011, 19:56
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >  
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > It seems rather like a reverse of the persecution the Jews suffered in Christian Europe in the Middle Ages for not accepting the religious tenets of the majority. It's hard to see how 30 families of Messianics, not seeking to convert others, could be so threatening to the wider Orthodox community. And it's quite astonishing to see the Supreme Court abrogate Messianics' rights to Israeli citizenship under the Law of Return, whilst being happy to maintain similar rights for secularist returners. A clear case of discrimination I'd say.
              >
              >
              >
              > T.
              >
              >
              >
              > Ted Wrinch
              >
              >
              >
              > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "Charlie" <charlottecowell@> wrote:
              >
              > >
              >
              > > I was interested to read that Israel's Messianic Jews are facing persecution from the more orthodox communnity:
              >
              > >
              >
              > > http://www.religionnewsblog.com/25846/israels-messianic-jews-face-orthodox-persecution
              >
              > >
              >
              > > here is an article from the same site about the controversy surrounding messianic Jews / 'jews' generally:
              >
              > >
              >
              > > http://www.apologeticsindex.org/2-messianic-jews
              >
              > >
              >
              > > And another about the problem faced by messianic jews from Jewcy, which is a curated platform for ideas that matter to young Jews today.
              >
              > >
              >
              > > http://www.jewcy.com/post/israels_state_sanctioned_persecution_messianic_jews_must_end
              >
              > >
              >
              > > Cx
              >
              > >
              >
              > > PS - hello again, and thank you for the bracelet, mittens, afghan rugs etc, I never look a gift horse in the mouth :-)
              >
              > >
              >
              > > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" <ted.wrinch@> wrote:
              >
              > > >
              >
              > > > Hi Cinnamon,
              >
              > > >
              >
              > > > Well, I only read through it quickly, but from what I remember I don't think that I can better Taz's take on it. In any event, my interest was always much more on Steiner's views of the very great importance of Judaism in general, in history and as part of his theory of the evolution of consciousness. In fact, before reading him, and meeting and getting to know a Jewish colleague at work, I knew very little about and consequently had little interest in Judaism.
              >
              > > >
              >
              > > > T.
              >
              > > >
              >
              > > > Ted Wrinch
              >
              > > >
              >
              > > > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "cinnamon94@" <cinnamon94@> wrote:
              >
              > > > >
              >
              > > > >
              >
              > > > > Hi, Ted. You're right. Its at least ambiguous as to whether or not this went through a peer review process. Its a very good on-line source no matter what. Are you going to offer any interpretations of the lecture?
              >
              > > > >
              >
              > > > >
              >
              > > > > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" <ted.wrinch@> wrote:
              >
              > > > > >
              >
              > > > > > Hi Cinnamon,
              >
              > > > > >
              >
              > > > > > You said:
              >
              > > > > >
              >
              > > > > > "Here is a good site for background on German idealism. Its been peer-reviewed by
              >
              > > > > > American philosophers.
              >
              > > > > >
              >
              > > > > > http://www.iep.utm.edu/germidea/"
              >
              > > > > >
              >
              > > > > > I read that article a few years ago and thought it v. good too. But it's not actually peer reviewed (which is not necessarily a bad thing in my view) as there is a disclaimer at the bottom:
              >
              > > > > >
              >
              > > > > > " The author of this article is anonymous. The IEP is actively seeking an author who will write a replacement article.
              >
              > > > > >
              >
              > > > > > Last updated: April 16, 2001 | Originally published: April/16/2001."
              >
              > > > > >
              >
              > > > > > I laughed like a drain when I saw this: just shows how alien GI is to the Anglo-Saxon mind!
              >
              > > > > >
              >
              > > > > > T.
              >
              > > > > >
              >
              > > > > > Ted Wrinch
              >
              > > > > >
              >
              > > > > > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "cinnamon94@" <cinnamon94@> wrote:
              >
              > > > > > >
              >
              > > > > > > > F: No, it's a lecture with a question period, all taken down in shorthand, not prepared beforehand and not revised by R.S.
              >
              > > > > > >
              >
              > > > > > > C: That is what I thought yet the form of his response is elegant in the way that a prepared comment would be. His argument is presented in the form of a "proof." First, he begins by situating the discussion as lying somewhere between or beyond the most prominent polarities of the time (Zionism and Jew-hatred). These are the positions which have a propagandist character in Steiner's view. Then, he goes on to offer his view of the spiritual significance or "function," if you will, of monotheism in order to offer a rationale for the assimilationist perspective of the time. Frank, do you have the original German for this sentence? "Hence this particular mission is no longer a necessity in evolution; the only right course is for the Jews to intermix with the other peoples." I am interested in the verb used for "to intermix." There seems to be some difference in opinion about how this verb should be translated.
              >
              > > > > > >
              >
              > > > > > > A couple more things about this being from a Q & A. Perhaps Steiner had prepared notes for questions that he encountered often? What should account for the elegance of the presentation? Can it just be attributed to his thinking habits? I hear a lot of Q & A's by some pretty smart people but the elegance of the rhetorical structure here is difficult to achieve "off the cuff." I'm intrigued..
              >
              > > > > > >
              >
              > > > > > > > F: I have no idea what you're talking about here and I read it twice...a record.
              >
              > > > > > >
              >
              > > > > > > Thanks for granting me the honor of reading my comments twice. I apologize for whatever lack of clarity provoked this necessity. :) When I referred to German idealism, I was characterizing the whole response as coming from a worldview that sees mans' conceptions/understandings/ideas about the world as very important in explaining why things might be so. Since this philosophical perspective considers how objects appear to perceiving subjects, it is logical to put forth the explanation Steiner does regarding sculpture. It might not occur to someone living in a society in which it is believed that there is one G-d (and for which there are laws against making craven images of that G-d) to see a hunk of marble and feel an artistic impulse to produce something of a spiritual nature.
              >
              > > > > > >
              >
              > > > > > > There are lots of legitimate rebuttals that could be made to Steiner's contention that would have nothing to do with anthroposophy or anti-semitism and it would be too much to get into them here. Yet I believe these rebuttals would offer Steiner, if he had taken note of them, the way out of presuming a kind of monolithic Jewish "mind." In his formulation, there are few options but to assume qualities about individuals from the context of the group. While it is clear that he was certainly not arguing that there has never been or never will be an exceptional Jewish sculptor he does leaves enough "space" in his discussion for a modern reader to see it that way. If such a modern reader wanted to say that Steiner was stereotyping, and that stereotyping ipso facto constitutes anti-semitism, then I'd have to grant that there is *something* in the text to support that. On the other hand, I would say that the rhetorical structure of the argument, the
              > ontological and epistemological claims present and the overall historical context would suggest a quite different reading. Here is a good site for background on German idealism. Its been peer-reviewed by American philosophers.
              >
              > > > > > >
              >
              > > > > > > http://www.iep.utm.edu/germidea/
              >
              > > > > > >
              >
              > > > > > > Reform Judaism has had a very interesting history. I don't think one can really understand parts of Steiner's project, and his comments on Judaism, without understanding what was happening there within Judaism. This was a time of true interest and innovation regarding old forms of religious expression. There were a lot of ideas in circulation and it appears to me that Steiner's thoughts were crossing paths with them.
              >
              > > > > > >
              >
              > > > > > > > F: Beside the point, assuming there is one.
              >
              > > > > > >
              >
              > > > > > > C: Ha! :)
              >
              > > > > > >
              >
              > > > > >
              >
              > > > >
              >
              > > >
              >
              > >
              >
            • Kim
              My preferences for Steiner is his consistent vocabulary, all other systems are inconsistent over time and persons, as fex Theosophy. Steiner have a few changes
              Message 6 of 14 , Apr 9, 2011
              • 0 Attachment
                My preferences for Steiner is his consistent vocabulary, all other systems are inconsistent over time and persons, as fex Theosophy. Steiner have a few changes in the vocabulary between his Theosophy and Anthroposophy period, but that is a minor problem when you have found out:)
                Steiner describes many different esoteric and religious traditions, but without telling much about how one tradition relates to other traditions, it's left to the student to training his logic and independence. I have found that the Kabbalah Tree of Life to be a strong help relating one tradition with another. Examples:

                Third HierarchyBrahman Tree of Life

                Christian RosencreuzEuropean Esoteric Names for the Sephira

                Kaballah - Christian Angelic Hierarchy

                The Rosicrucian Cross

                Kim

                --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" <ted.wrinch@...> wrote:

                >
                > "Perspective is key, who is to say which current (or stream) has the 'better handle' on or interpretation of their individual scriptures, tenets of belief etc?"
                >
                > How can one say? The pre-modern or traditionalist approach was that the correct interpretation was the one that lay within one's own culture. In Europe, post the Enlightenment and the following critical theology of C19 Germany and comparative religion of the West, it seems seems to be a situation of all truths or none: 'there's truth and there's religion'. The world has been thrown open to our gaze, which can now take in anything from Essenism and Gnosticism, to Rosicrucianism, Sufism and Cabala to exegesis of the mainstream Abrahamic scriptures and etc. What we are suffering from, it seems to me, is the lack of an interpretative key. One of the things that attracted me to Steiner was his attempt to provide such a key in his notion of the evolution of consciousness. He has been accused of being Euro-centric in his application of this key but I have yet to find better.
                >
                > T.
                >
                > Ted Wrinch
                >
                > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, Charlotte Cowell charlottecowell@ wrote:
                > >
                > > What really interests me about this whole thing is the fact that it's
                > > been one of humanity's central debates for millenia, affecting so many
                > > aspects of world politics, culture, society, religion, theology,
                > > philosophy, mysticism, history.....there are different currents within
                > > all the religions that have Jerusalem at their centre - Judaism,
                > > Christianity, Islam. Perspective is key, who is to say which current
                > > (or stream) has the 'better handle' on or interpretation of their
                > > individual scriptures, tenets of belief etc?
                > >
                > > --- On Fri, 8/4/11, ted.wrinch ted.wrinch@ wrote:
                > >
                > > From: ted.wrinch ted.wrinch@
                > > Subject: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Characteristics of Judaism
                > > To: anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com
                > > Date: Friday, 8 April, 2011, 19:56
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >  
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > It seems rather like a reverse of the persecution the Jews suffered in Christian Europe in the Middle Ages for not accepting the religious tenets of the majority. It's hard to see how 30 families of Messianics, not seeking to convert others, could be so threatening to the wider Orthodox community. And it's quite astonishing to see the Supreme Court abrogate Messianics' rights to Israeli citizenship under the Law of Return, whilst being happy to maintain similar rights for secularist returners. A clear case of discrimination I'd say.
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > T.
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > Ted Wrinch
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "Charlie" <charlottecowell@> wrote:
                > >
                > > >
                > >
                > > > I was interested to read that Israel's Messianic Jews are facing persecution from the more orthodox communnity:
                > >
                > > >
                > >
                > > > http://www.religionnewsblog.com/25846/israels-messianic-jews-face-orthodox-persecution
                > >
                > > >
                > >
                > > > here is an article from the same site about the controversy surrounding messianic Jews / 'jews' generally:
                > >
                > > >
                > >
                > > > http://www.apologeticsindex.org/2-messianic-jews
                > >
                > > >
                > >
                > > > And another about the problem faced by messianic jews from Jewcy, which is a curated platform for ideas that matter to young Jews today.
                > >
                > > >
                > >
                > > > http://www.jewcy.com/post/israels_state_sanctioned_persecution_messianic_jews_must_end
                > >
                > > >
                > >
                > > > Cx
                > >
                > > >
                > >
                > > > PS - hello again, and thank you for the bracelet, mittens, afghan rugs etc, I never look a gift horse in the mouth :-)
                > >
                > > >
                > >
                > > > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" <ted.wrinch@> wrote:
                > >
                > > > >
                > >
                > > > > Hi Cinnamon,
                > >
                > > > >
                > >
                > > > > Well, I only read through it quickly, but from what I remember I don't think that I can better Taz's take on it. In any event, my interest was always much more on Steiner's views of the very great importance of Judaism in general, in history and as part of his theory of the evolution of consciousness. In fact, before reading him, and meeting and getting to know a Jewish colleague at work, I knew very little about and consequently had little interest in Judaism.
                > >
                > > > >
                > >
                > > > > T.
                > >
                > > > >
                > >
                > > > > Ted Wrinch
                > >
                > > > >
                > >
                > > > > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "cinnamon94@" <cinnamon94@> wrote:
                > >
                > > > > >
                > >
                > > > > >
                > >
                > > > > > Hi, Ted. You're right. Its at least ambiguous as to whether or not this went through a peer review process. Its a very good on-line source no matter what. Are you going to offer any interpretations of the lecture?
                > >
                > > > > >
                > >
                > > > > >
                > >
                > > > > > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" <ted.wrinch@> wrote:
                > >
                > > > > > >
                > >
                > > > > > > Hi Cinnamon,
                > >
                > > > > > >
                > >
                > > > > > > You said:
                > >
                > > > > > >
                > >
                > > > > > > "Here is a good site for background on German idealism. Its been peer-reviewed by
                > >
                > > > > > > American philosophers.
                > >
                > > > > > >
                > >
                > > > > > > http://www.iep.utm.edu/germidea/"
                > >
                > > > > > >
                > >
                > > > > > > I read that article a few years ago and thought it v. good too. But it's not actually peer reviewed (which is not necessarily a bad thing in my view) as there is a disclaimer at the bottom:
                > >
                > > > > > >
                > >
                > > > > > > " The author of this article is anonymous. The IEP is actively seeking an author who will write a replacement article.
                > >
                > > > > > >
                > >
                > > > > > > Last updated: April 16, 2001 | Originally published: April/16/2001."
                > >
                > > > > > >
                > >
                > > > > > > I laughed like a drain when I saw this: just shows how alien GI is to the Anglo-Saxon mind!
                > >
                > > > > > >
                > >
                > > > > > > T.
                > >
                > > > > > >
                > >
                > > > > > > Ted Wrinch
                > >
                > > > > > >
                > >
                > > > > > > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "cinnamon94@" <cinnamon94@> wrote:
                > >
                > > > > > > >
                > >
                > > > > > > > > F: No, it's a lecture with a question period, all taken down in shorthand, not prepared beforehand and not revised by R.S.
                > >
                > > > > > > >
                > >
                > > > > > > > C: That is what I thought yet the form of his response is elegant in the way that a prepared comment would be. His argument is presented in the form of a "proof." First, he begins by situating the discussion as lying somewhere between or beyond the most prominent polarities of the time (Zionism and Jew-hatred). These are the positions which have a propagandist character in Steiner's view. Then, he goes on to offer his view of the spiritual significance or "function," if you will, of monotheism in order to offer a rationale for the assimilationist perspective of the time. Frank, do you have the original German for this sentence? "Hence this particular mission is no longer a necessity in evolution; the only right course is for the Jews to intermix with the other peoples." I am interested in the verb used for "to intermix." There seems to be some difference in opinion about how this verb should be translated.
                > >
                > > > > > > >
                > >
                > > > > > > > A couple more things about this being from a Q & A. Perhaps Steiner had prepared notes for questions that he encountered often? What should account for the elegance of the presentation? Can it just be attributed to his thinking habits? I hear a lot of Q & A's by some pretty smart people but the elegance of the rhetorical structure here is difficult to achieve "off the cuff." I'm intrigued..
                > >
                > > > > > > >
                > >
                > > > > > > > > F: I have no idea what you're talking about here and I read it twice...a record.
                > >
                > > > > > > >
                > >
                > > > > > > > Thanks for granting me the honor of reading my comments twice. I apologize for whatever lack of clarity provoked this necessity. :) When I referred to German idealism, I was characterizing the whole response as coming from a worldview that sees mans' conceptions/understandings/ideas about the world as very important in explaining why things might be so. Since this philosophical perspective considers how objects appear to perceiving subjects, it is logical to put forth the explanation Steiner does regarding sculpture. It might not occur to someone living in a society in which it is believed that there is one G-d (and for which there are laws against making craven images of that G-d) to see a hunk of marble and feel an artistic impulse to produce something of a spiritual nature.
                > >
                > > > > > > >
                > >
                > > > > > > > There are lots of legitimate rebuttals that could be made to Steiner's contention that would have nothing to do with anthroposophy or anti-semitism and it would be too much to get into them here. Yet I believe these rebuttals would offer Steiner, if he had taken note of them, the way out of presuming a kind of monolithic Jewish "mind." In his formulation, there are few options but to assume qualities about individuals from the context of the group. While it is clear that he was certainly not arguing that there has never been or never will be an exceptional Jewish sculptor he does leaves enough "space" in his discussion for a modern reader to see it that way. If such a modern reader wanted to say that Steiner was stereotyping, and that stereotyping ipso facto constitutes anti-semitism, then I'd have to grant that there is *something* in the text to support that. On the other hand, I would say that the rhetorical structure of the argument, the
                > > ontological and epistemological claims present and the overall historical context would suggest a quite different reading. Here is a good site for background on German idealism. Its been peer-reviewed by American philosophers.
                > >
                > > > > > > >
                > >
                > > > > > > > http://www.iep.utm.edu/germidea/
                > >
                > > > > > > >
                > >
                > > > > > > > Reform Judaism has had a very interesting history. I don't think one can really understand parts of Steiner's project, and his comments on Judaism, without understanding what was happening there within Judaism. This was a time of true interest and innovation regarding old forms of religious expression. There were a lot of ideas in circulation and it appears to me that Steiner's thoughts were crossing paths with them.
                > >
                > > > > > > >
                > >
                > > > > > > > > F: Beside the point, assuming there is one.
                > >
                > > > > > > >
                > >
                > > > > > > > C: Ha! :)
                > >
                > > > > > > >
                > >
                > > > > > >
                > >
                > > > > >
                > >
                > > > >
                > >
                > > >
                > >
                >
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.