1021Unique Place of Christ
- Jul 2, 2002Hi Everyone:
Why is it that so many otherwise insightful streams confuse the role
of Christ in the universe? I am currently trying to understand the
blind spot that some, such as Alice Bailey, Besant, et al, have
regarding Christ. Bailey sees Christ as an cosmic position (office)
which a number of beings periodically occupy (if I understand her
writings correctly). Does anyone here have an insight into this? I
would appreciate any help that you can give.
> *******The old Theosophical Society was wide open to everything inan ecumenical spirit. Unfortunately this often results in reducing
the Christ Being to the same level as anyone else; but anthroposophy
teaches this is not so. So we bear the accusation of being dogmatic
or whatever, because we have to affirm the Christ as the Spirit
behind all religions, as Edgar Cayce also put it. It's not the same
as the Father-God that all religions recognize, and the man Jesus was
not a teacher the same as Confucius or someone. We have to say this
because we must recognize its truth, since we meet the Christ on the
Path of Initiation. This certainly doesn't mean that what's called
the Christian religion today is better than others: Steiner summed up
his point of view in the title of one lecture, "Christianity Began As
A Religion But It Is Greater Than All Religions." The Christ having
come into the earth through his Resurrection has provided an actual
force that everyone meets on the Path, and it's important to
recognize what it is. Some ancient religions recognize it, some don't.
>develop body-free thinking in the modern era. Concentrating on the
> The other thing spiritual science teaches is that we need to
breath brings you more into the body, not less. If one takes a non-
physical reality like a mantra or image and meditates on it, the
breath will regularize of itself, and this is better for most modern
people. If this sounds dogmatic, well, just try it and see. This is a
science after all, not a religion. Compare both methods and try to
objectively examine the results. It's not that one is right or wrong
but one may have the efect you want in this incarnation while the
other may not.
>value in Yogic teachings and practices. I think it helpful to
> > golden3000997@c... wrote:
> > Hello Starman and Everyone!!
> > I have been following with interest this current discussion...
> > Steiner never put down any philosophy or really any practice.
> > I found Steiner circuitously through Yoga and I still find great
consider yoga's evolution since the fall of
> > Atlantis and maybe re-evaluate the breathing as meditationpractices since we all have lungs now. But hey, deep breathing is
still good for you!
> >evolve into being able to refrain from all meat products (I can't or
> > I have pictures of Krishna in my kitchen and hope eventually to
won't yet - but its coming!) From my understanding and current
personal belief system, Krishna was a pre-Christian manifestation -
not Incarnation - of Christ. It's not a question for me of either/
or, it's a question of the most extreme gratitude to Steiner for
putting together all of the "seemingly" disparate pieces of the
cosmic puzzle. In "The Gospel of St. Luke" which has the most
wonderful information on the Two Jesus Children, there is also the
> > description of Christ as the Vishnu Karma, the giver of Karma,surrounded by the twelve Boddhisatvas, of which Gautama Buddha was/
is one, meditating on HIM.
> >gave the instruction of the spiritual science of the universe and
> > In the introduction to the Bhagavad Gita, it is told that Krishna
beyond to Manu, which is another name for Noah, the leader of the
exodus from Atlantis. It has also been many years since I read "The
Bhagavad-Gita and the Epistles of
> > St. Paul" by Rudolf Steiner, but I will probably be takingChrist".
> > another look again soon. Don't forget please, his "From Buddha to
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>