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

Conscience/Evolution of Consciousness

Expand Messages
  • Durward Starman
    ******* Steiner has quite a different take on history than the usual one. He sees it as an evolutiion of consciousness, where regular academic theory regards
    Message 1 of 5 , Jul 7 10:05 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      ******* Steiner has quite a different "take" on history than the usual one.
      He sees it as an evolutiion of consciousness, where regular academic theory
      regards our consciousness as pretty much the same all along---- people were
      the same us, only stupider, in the past, which is also their attitude to
      children today. There is, however, abundant evidence for the consciousness
      of ancient men being completely different than ours, once one's mind is
      opened to the possibility---- whereas closed-minded academics interpret the
      very things which should stand out as evidence in a way opposite to the
      truth because they just can't imagine things otherwise. For instance, the
      Egyptians' way of representing the human being with the torso turned
      sideways is dismissed as a mere stylism of depiction, not based on people
      then objectively perceiving differently; the same with no one being able to
      represent three dimensions before Leonardo, everything seen 2-dimensionally.

      But these ancient states of consciousness can be re-experienced and
      verified via the Akashic Records. According to these, Steiner states that
      there were a long line of "Zoroasters" stemming from the original great one
      about 6000 B.C.: it became a title, rather like High Lama, so that the
      historical Zoroaster or Zarathustra we know from about the 6th century B.C.
      was the last of a long line. Moreover, the "Gathas" or sacred scriptures of
      Zoroastrianism originated long before writing in the Farsi language and were
      passed down orally for a long time, like the earlier Sanskrit Vedas, only
      committed to writing sometime between 3000 B.C. and the Hellenic era-----
      and they were re-written or ordered by this very Zoroaster in the 6th-5th
      century B.C. Now, this was exactly the time of the first arising of
      conscience historically, and also the time when what we call the Old
      Testament was likewise compiled and put into the order IT still has. So, the
      scriptures were interpreted quite differently then, and a dimension added to
      them which the originals did not possess, as the consciousness of the
      priests had changed so much along the way. (An interesting study of this
      transformation of myth-pictures from earlier states of consciousness into a
      later literary one, which needs to be investigated in order to see how the
      later layers are superimposed upon the primary material, is "Hamlet's Mill"
      by Giorgio de Santillana---- which showed, among other things, that the
      ancients were aware of the precession of the equinoxes and Zodiac Ages long
      before its historical discovery by Hipparchus in the 3rd century B.C., and
      that the Danish legend of Hamlet that Shakespeare used, was originally a
      creation myth having to do with the overthrow of one god/king by another,
      like Zeus overthrowing Kronos or Saturn.)

      As we come down closer to our era, people naturally began to imagine
      that their ancestors had a similar consciousness to ours and they imposed
      meanings onto words and documents which they did not originally have.
      Compare, for example, the original words of the I Ching without the later
      commentary by Confucius, to how it stands combined with his much later layer
      of interpretations. Similarly, the Book of Job was only added to the
      canonical Hebrew scriptures (the Torah or 5 Books of Moses and the Haggadah
      or later writings & traditional tales) only in the final revision at the
      time of the return from the Captivity, although it's clearly from an older
      source (Edgar Cayce said in fact it was the OLDEST book of the Bible), with
      Man already in existence and yet Satan is still up in heaven, ahsn't fallen
      in the Garden yet. It, like Genesis, clearly came from a state of
      consciousness which the later writers could not re-enter. So I think the
      "back-dating" of conscience by students of Zoroastrianism in our time is an
      error. They are reading it in to documents from a time before its existence.
      The same thing is done when people assert that concepts of citizenship,
      justice etc. go back to Hammarabi's first Laws in Babylon, where actually a
      person was not conceived of as a 'citizen' until Rome, which Steiner also
      points out. As for that characterization of the Hebrews before contact with
      Persia, I think that's also erroneous. The Hebrews' agreement with their God
      was quite different than pagan religions contemporary with them: it was an
      experiemnt in eugenics, requiring purification and endogamy, to produce a
      body perfect enough for the Messiah to incarnate in. fortunately, they
      succeeded. Of course, people with no experience of the Christ easily have
      erroneous views of Judaism and of Christianity for that matter. (A great
      source for understanding both as well as Eduard Schure's The Great
      Initiates, and for the Aryan Zoroastrian 'fire religion' his later book From
      Sphinx To Christ: An Occult History, inspired by Steiner.)

      For a comparison of how radical Steiner's view of history is to our
      modern dogmas, consider his saying that the mathematical mind only
      originated with Abraham, that when God speaks to him saying "your
      descendents will be numbered as the sands of the shore or the stars in the
      sky", it's symbolic of the counting mind coming into existence for the first
      time. Anyone can immediately raise objections to such an idea, pointing out
      evidences of "counting" before this, etc. The difference is in what man was
      able to do FOR HIMSELF versus what the gods did IN Man. For instance, alll
      mathematical terms are of Greek origin. The Greeks of the 7th through 5th
      centuries B.C. discovered the ratio of the radius of a circle to its
      circumference and named it after a Greek letter, Pi. Historically we know no
      ordinary people before them knew of it: treatises for building are only
      empirical, based on using lengths of cord rather than pure ideas, with no
      abstract mathematical thinking shown. And yet if you take the height of the
      Great Pyramid and construct a circle on it, its area is equal to the square
      base of the pyramid. So the value of Pi is built into it. The modern man
      must conclude the Egyptians knew of Pi. But it was the initiates who built
      the Pyramid, in a time when a divine being could enter an initiate and think
      IN him, and he would direct the others. So you have the startling situation
      where ancient people could use principles yet not think principles. In the
      same way, what was done by initiates was not typical of the people of an age
      because their evolution had been accelerated far beyond their time.

      This is why the statements of Dr. Steiner are easily ridiculed by
      academia, like that logic originated with Aristotle: it's easy to come up
      with apparent contradictions, and difficult to accept at first because we've
      all been taught the exact opposite in our Ahrimanic public schools, where
      consciousness is as it is now when you're awake and always has been the same
      as we've experienced it as waking adults from Rome to our time. Almost no
      one outside of anthroposophy imagines anything any differently, although
      history as an evolution of consciousness used to be described by many great
      philosophers up to only a century or two ago, many of whom Steiner quoted,
      like Hegel.



      >From: "sarah" <sarahwh@...>
      >The Zoroastrians claim the Conscience first came from their teachings from
      >the word "Asha", which means universal moral Truth, which predates the
      >Greeks by many centuries. Zoroastrianism puts great value on the
      >development of wisdom and insight co-creating with a God of pure
      >compassion, over blind obedience to a wrathful God, making conscience the
      >guide, not fear. In fact, Christianity, Greek philosophy and Judaism are
      >all indebted to Zarathustra whose teachings spread when the Persians
      >invaded Babylon in 539BC. Before their education in Babylon, the Jews were
      >just henotheistic appeasement-based terrified pagans. (I've just done an
      >assignment on this and thoroughly enjoyed it!)
      >Most modern scholars date Zarathustra to 1000BC-1700BC. I think Steiner
      >dates him to 6000BC(?). One thing for sure; he predated Euripides!
      >Waldorf Doll Making DVD - NOW AVAILABLE!
      >e-Patterns, Dolls and More;
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.