- Dear Dr.Starman,
It is good that you have emphasized this very important point
about the Ego (Self). It is certainly a unique aspect of Steiner's
teaching and differentiates him from the Theosophists and Gnostics
as well as the Eastern teachers.
So how do we develop the Ego without becoming egoistic?
It seems to me that Steiner's conception of the Ego is
different from the commonplace usage of the word. The "I" that we
normally speak of IS an illusion. To demonstrate that ask yourself,
"Where is the ' I ' located?"
Compare that with Steiner's words about the ego in Chapter 7
".....because Christ wishes to bestow the true ego upon every human
He will awaken the God in it and gradually enkindle the Spirit of the Lord
and King in everyone."
Further down on that page:
"When one man judges another, the one is always placing the
other under the compulsion of his own ego. However, if a person really
believes in the "I AM" in the Christian sense, he will not judge."
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, January 01, 2001 4:41 PM
Subject: Re: [steiner] To Love
> *******I'm surprised at two things in our 12 Nights study group online
> the first is that no one commented on what Steiner said in Lecture 3 and
> again in Lecture 6 about the "I AM". So many people interested in the
> but alienated from our dead Christian churches wind up reading Eastern
> that says over and over that the Self is bad, it's an evil illusion you
> get rid of and yadda yadda yadda, that I'm surprised no one responded with
> any comments about the enormous difference of Steiner's take on things,
> namely that the Ego is the immortal spirit in Man and the force that
> us up ever higher, transforming the astral, etheric and physical bodies
> Manas, Budhi and Atman. Wasn't anyone surprised?
> Second, about love. I wonder if anyone noticed the little passage
> struck me in Lecture 3 where he was talking about the Earth becoming a
> of Love (at the bottom of the 6th page of the lecture in my book): "What
> is essential for love? What is essential in order that one person love
> another? It is this---that he be in possession of his full
> self-consciousness, that he be wholly independent. No one can love another
> the full sense of the word if this love be not a free gift of one person
> another. My hand does not love my organism. Only one who is independent,
> who is not bound to the other person, can love him. To this end the human
> being had to become an ego-being." It's identical to the sentiments I once
> heard expressed by Ayn Rand: In order to say I love you, you must first
> to say the "I" part. Anything else is not love but "co-dependency" as we
> it now--- two weak people hanging together and reinforcing each others'
> negative traits, because the subconscious must rule such relationships.
> two fully self-conscious people can truly know love, he's saying. Then it
> seems to me that a mark of real love is that each will be made MORE able
> be their independent Self in the relationship, not less: each will
> & support the other's individuality, not weaken it or tear it down.
> how to recognize the real thing, then.
> Dr. Starman
> Post to firstname.lastname@example.org
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Recommended books by Rudolf Steiner at: