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

5111RE: [steiner] different approaches to anthroposophy

Expand Messages
  • Durward Starman
    Dec 16, 2009
      ******* Anyone who is doing his own spiritual research has to be independent and arrive at his own conclusions.  I don't blindly agree with all my friend Prokofieff's conclusions anymore than he agrees with mine, nor would I expect him to.  He finds my combining anthroposophy with the Edgar Cayce readings and astrology rather a bit too eclectic for him, and I find him rather too "anthroposophically orthodox";  notwithstanding that I consider his contributions to anthroposophy among the most valuable of our times.   I haven't read the entire article in the Files section (anyone in our group can upload files to it, by the way). 

          I was given Lowndes' book and read it carefully but it didn't do anything for me as far as adding to Knowledge of the Higher Worlds was concerned.  I did not find it inspired or showing that the author has experienced what you experience when you open the chakras. I would recommend people simply read/ work with Steiner's books. 

         And I don't agree with the attempt to remove the word "man" from English language.  It never meant "male".  The word had its origin in an ancient root word for "mind", signifying beings with minds;  the derivative "woman" meant  "man with a womb."  I feel that clear thinking requires clear use of language, and the masses are befuddled if you first corrupt their language, George Orwell pointed out.   I'd say convincing people that the ancient word for "thinking being" meant only males so that they would abolish it is pretty sad, so I declined to go along.

          As to the difficulty of philosophical thinking,  a certain brilliant thinker named Thomas Edison opined towards the end of his life, "5% of the people think; 10% of people think they think; and the other 85% would rather die than think."  Perhaps an exaggeration by a cranky old man, but I wonder.


      To: steiner@yahoogroups.com
      From: peter.lam41@...
      Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 18:47:18 -0800
      Subject: [steiner] different approaches to anthroposophy


      Thanks again to Starman, your piece again helps me get a fresh perspective on several things.  You touch on many relevant matters, which could also give rise to several new 'threads'.  To keep my piece from being too long, I won't take you up on everything here.  On reading through before sending, I hope my style does not appear unfriendly, it is not meant to be.
      Your post of 15 Dec suggests much less the conservative I had thought on the basis of your post of 13 Dec, although even the latter indicated a certain independence for example in the suggestion:  "If he were alive today, he'd probably start doing a series of lessons via the Internet, podcasting, etc...".   It just happens that of all the files I saw 'uplifted' to this site I have opened only one:  Prokofieff's "The Being of the Internet" dating from 2005.  Interesting to compare, especially if you read the whole article including towards the end 'The Exceptionality of the Class Texts'.
      The reference to the 'safest path' etc you have in mind is probably part of chapter 5 of Occult Science which appears in parenthesis:  "(The path that leads to sense free thinking by way of the communications of spiritual science is thoroughly reliable and sure.  There is however another that is even more sure, and above all more exact; at the same time, it is for many people also more difficult.  The path in question is set forth in my books The Theory of Knowledge implicit in Goethe's World-Conception and The Philosophy of Spiritual Activity....").  Quoted from G and M Adam's translation, oddly the more recent C E Creeger translation omits the bit about it being more difficult for many people.  Being more difficult for many people is somewhat different to your "the most difficult for men in our time".  (People generally also like to include women these days as in fact Steiner did.)
      On the question of these two paths, a very interesting more recent source is Florin Lowndes'  Enlivening the Chakra of the Heart, especially chapter 2 of part four.  Original German of 1996.  Lowndes in turn gives many further references to Steiner and quotes the same passage from Occult Science  referred to above.  One Lowndes' quote of Steiner reads:  "People have not managed to read the Philosophy of Freedom in a different way from other books.  And that is what is needed, and  must be emphasized in no uncertain terms, for otherwise the development of the Anthroposophical Society will lag far behind the development of anthroposophy.  In which case anthroposophy, taking a round-about path through the Anthroposophical Society, will be wholly misunderstood by the world - and nothing can result from this but conflict upon conflict!"  Although from 6 Feb 1923, this statement does not seem to me to be overtaken by events.

      Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. Get it now.
    • Show all 13 messages in this topic