4830RE: [steiner] Re: Find (another) Steiner-said?
- Jul 8, 2008*******Yes, years as we know them now could not possibly have existed earlier in the Lemurian Age. The Earth and Moon separated in the middle of it, so neither were solid as now.
Sure, anthroposophy teaches that if you look at world-ages, the big changes are not at the turning-points but half-way or 2/3 of the way through an age, when the influences really take hold. So, for example, the Age of Pisces began about the time of Christ (the 209 AD figure you like is just one of many opinions, since the VE point was moving from the last star in Aries to the first star in Pisces for centuries--- just as it is now in the "empty space" between Pisces and Aquarius.) But it didn't take hold till about 1500, and thus our modern age began.
About when the Ice Age conditions ended: take the 2,160-year length as an average for a zodiac age. The Ancient Indian Epoch began when the Vernal Point entered Cancer from Leo (the last Age of Atlantis, symbolized by the Sphinx, built by refugees from Atlantis fleeing to Egypt then). 5 Zodiacal Ages--- Cancer (India), Gemini (Persia), Egypt (Taurus), Greece & Rome (Aries) and the European Age of Pisces ---- adds up to 10,800 years. If you take the start of the Age of Pisces as around the time of Christ, that puts the end of Atlantis [and thus the start of the Ancient Indian Epoch] at about 8,640 B.C. (If you were instead to take the start of it "spiritually" as being about 1500 AD, that would make "Ancient" India begin no earlier than about 7200 B.C.--- but I think the Flood was when the VE point entered PHYSICALLY, and thus the earlier time.)
Between about 8000 and 10,000 B.C. is a pretty good estimate of when the last climactic age ended, in other words the end of the last so-called "Ice Age". Mammoth skeletons are dated to around that time, it's the estimate for when the Mississippi River began flowing along its present bed, etc., etc. And when Plato about 400 B.C. has Solon being told a century before by an Egyptian priest that the war between the ancient Athenians and the Atlantides was about 9,000 years before his time, that tallies pretty well also.
These can be very interesting subjects adding to an understanding of history, of the evolution of consciousness, etc. What's the purpose here? I hope it's not just trying to say, "Steiner made a mistake!" In my study of geology thus far, the errors have all been found to be on the side of materialistic science. What I've put together quite supports the idea of the earth condensing into its present solidity only thousands, not millions, of years ago. The world before 15,000-25,000 years ago was totally different than present-day science thinks ... as it will be 15,000 years from now.
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 11:25:25 -0700
Subject: [steiner] Re: Find (another) Steiner-said?To *******, who wrote:
>>Steiner said (in "Ancient Myths", Lecture # 7, 13th Jan., 1918: "about 25-26,000 yrs ago the Lemurian age came to an end... 12 epochs ago, the sun was in the same position" . . . .<<Robert writes:
Yes, here are Steiner's words from that
<http://wn.rsarchive .org/Lectures/ AncientMyths/ 19180113p01. html>
"Let us turn our attention to the seventh epoch of the Lemurian civilization. It lies approximately 25,900 years before our epoch. It was about 25,000-26,000 years ago that this seventh epoch of the Lemurian age came to an end on earth. However remarkable it may sound, there is a certain resemblance between this seventh Lemurian epoch and our own epoch. Similarities are as we know always to be found between successive periods, similarities of the most diverse kinds. We have found a close similarity between our age and the Egypto-Chaldean. We will now speak of one which is more distant; there is also externally, cosmically, a resemblance. You know that our epoch which begins in about the 15th century of the Christian era is connected with the cosmos through the fact that since that time the sun has its Vernal Point in Pisces, in the constellation of Pisces, the Fishes. The sun had previously been for 2,160 years in the constellation of Aries, the Ram, at
the Vernal Equinox. Here in this seventh Lemurian epoch (left) there were similar conditions. Twelve epochs ago the sun was in the same position. So that towards the end of the Lemurian age there were conditions similar to ours."
Reading this in the natural way, it
does seem that RS is using *years* in
the usual sense, referring back to the
end of the Lemurian age. So apparently,
Davy got it wrong; maybe he meant the
middle of the Lumurian age?
-- A couple of cautionary notes:
The vernal point actually entered the
sidereal constellation of Pisces in 209 AD
(taking the Babylonian arrangement of the
sidereal Zodiac into 12 neat 30-degree
constellations) . Since we are now in the
Piscean cultural epoch (the fifth post-
Atlantean), which began in 1413 AD, there is
apparently a 1204-year lag between the entrance
of the vernal point into a sidereal
constellation and the beginning of its
corresponding 2160-year cultural epoch.
And: In the 6th lecture of Steiner's 3rd
scientific course (the so-called "Astronomy
Course") he says:
"The Ancient Indian epoch comes very near to the
time when glacial conditions prevailed in our
regions of the Earth. A culture like the
Ancient Indian could only develop when such
climatic conditions, more or less, as we enjoy
in the Temperate zone today, extended to what
is now the Equator. You can deduce it simply
from the relative advance or retreat of the
ice; tropical conditions did not come about in
India until a must later time, when in more
northerly regions the ice had receded."
So: Here Steiner seems to imply that the last
ice age persisted (at least in Europe) well
into the first post-Atlantean cultural epoch,
because the climate in India then had to be
temperate. That's about 3700 to 5800 years
after 11000 BC. -- A contradiction?
I guess that here, as so often, we have to
allow that Steiner was speaking
extemporaneously, hurriedly, and only
approximately. In this cycle he repeatedly
remarked about how he couldn't go into much
detail and had to leave it to his students to
work out the details. At least, it seems, we
have to allow that the phrase *very nearly* has
to be taken as only a rough approximation.
Need to know now? Get instant answers with Windows Live Messenger. IM on your terms.
- << Previous post in topic