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

Re: [steiner] heretics of reality

Expand Messages
  • Cheeseandsalsa@aol.com
    Chantel; the meaning and history of heretic like in anti-organised belief systems? The history of the heretic. The history and definition. We all seem to be
    Message 1 of 10 , Nov 9, 2006
      Chantel; the meaning and history of heretic like in anti-organised
      belief systems?

      The history of the heretic.  The history and definition.  We all seem to be heretics don't you think?  Honestly, we all are heretics of everything.  American Heritage Dictionary definition: "One who holds opinions that differ from established beliefs, esp. religious beliefs."  Furthermore, who establishes belief systems?  Should we trust them?  What is really established anyway?  This topic reminds me of the Spanish inquisition.  Isn't it just madness?  This dimension creates madness and belief systems are held in place for thousands of years.  Hale, the progress of the consciousness soul!  Thank god we survived the intellectual one!  In good fun, Chantel 
    • Cheeseandsalsa@aol.com
      I agree on the infinite number of dimensions. Also the time=dimension idea I enjoy that theory. In our modern time shall we say a dimension of an ancient
      Message 2 of 10 , Nov 9, 2006
        I agree on the infinite number of dimensions.  Also the time=dimension idea I enjoy that theory.  In our modern time shall we say a dimension of an ancient civilization can pop up in the year 2006?  For example imagine Ancient Egypt popping up in 2006?  It seems crazy but entertaining enough as a theory.  I'm not even a beginner on this topic however. ~good things, Chantel
      • thepathofthesunflower
        ... seem to be ... everything. ... that differ from ... establishes ... anyway? ... madness? ... place for ... soul! Thank god we ... Hi Chantel Yes, you so
        Message 3 of 10 , Nov 10, 2006
          --- In steiner@yahoogroups.com, Cheeseandsalsa@... wrote:
          >
          > Chantel; the meaning and history of heretic like in anti-organised
          > belief systems?
          >
          > The history of the heretic. The history and definition. We all
          seem to be
          > heretics don't you think? Honestly, we all are heretics of
          everything.
          > American Heritage Dictionary definition: "One who holds opinions
          that differ from
          > established beliefs, esp. religious beliefs." Furthermore, who
          establishes
          > belief systems? Should we trust them? What is really established
          anyway?
          > This topic reminds me of the Spanish inquisition. Isn't it just
          madness?
          > This dimension creates madness and belief systems are held in
          place for
          > thousands of years. Hale, the progress of the consciousness
          soul! Thank god we
          > survived the intellectual one! In good fun, Chantel

          Hi Chantel

          Yes, you so right we all heretics of one thing or another! Also, for
          example, my perception of one thing might be entirely different from
          your perception. Although it is the same object or belief the
          meaning it gives to you might be totally different from the meaning I
          take from it. Just as well else we'd be clones, robotic clones; just
          imagine that :) Caryn
        • thepathofthesunflower
          ... dimensions. ... topic ... been ... and all ... was P.D. ... Edgar Cayce ... Cayce never ... under the ... perception ... I d say ... dimensions ... be ...
          Message 4 of 10 , Nov 10, 2006
            --- In steiner@yahoogroups.com, "Durward Starman" <DrStarman@...>
            wrote:
            >
            > ******* I don't know of anywhere Steiner said there are only 8
            dimensions.
            > He lectured a lot about the fourth dimension, which was a large
            topic
            > amongst Theosophists a century ago (those lectures have recently
            been
            > published and are available from Steinerbooks).
            >
            > The 4th dimension sort of stands as a symbol for "a possible 4th
            and all
            > other higher dimensions". One of the Theosophists working on this
            was P.D.
            > Ouspensky, whose book "Tertium Organum" was recommended by the
            Edgar Cayce
            > Readings fior understanding the 4th Dimension. (Interestingly,
            Cayce never
            > recommended any of his later works, done aftrer Ouspensky came
            under the
            > influence of Gurdjieff.) From working with the thinking &
            perception
            > exercises in that for many years and studying projective geometry,
            I'd say
            > there's no reason why there should be any limit on the number of
            dimensions
            > in the universe. From the mathematicians' point of view they must
            be
            > infinite.
            >
            > Starman
            >
            > www.DrStarman.com
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > >From: "thepathofthesunflower" <thepathofthesunflower@...>
            > >Reply-To: steiner@yahoogroups.com
            > >To: steiner@yahoogroups.com
            > >Subject: [steiner] heretics of reality
            > >Date: Thu, 09 Nov 2006 07:28:13 -0000
            > >
            > >Hi Chantel
            > >
            > >Thanks for your reply. What you said makes good sense; looking at
            > >things from a different perspective. This saying lends towards
            this;
            > >
            > >"If the nature of the correspondence between the higher and the
            lower
            > >is understood, then the spiritual may be read through its physical
            > >symbol". If i am correct Blake said this.
            > >
            > >I do think there a many dimensions to reality (did Steiner say
            there
            > >are eight known dimensions in the physical plane) although the
            > >physical also superimposed with the spiritual planes. How far or
            how
            > >deep can we penetrate into these dimensions; entering into the
            fifth
            > >dimension (although Im guessing at what number dimension) the world
            > >then seems to become a stage - the actors and props seem to become
            > >shadows waiting for senses to fill them in.
            > >
            > >This might be a follow on to Lee's discussions which I might just
            > >copy my last line and carry on there .. and ponder at bit more
            > >because his topic is the same as this 'heretic of reality' topic.
            > >And it is a great mystery!
            > >
            > >Chantel; the meaning and history of heretic like in anti-organised
            > >belief systems?
            > >
            > >My ponderings
            > >Caryn
            > >
            > >
            > >
            >
            > _________________________________________________________________
            >
            Thanks for pointing this out Dr Starman; I did read eight dimensions
            somewhere a time ago. It might not have been Dr Steiner; I will go
            through my literature again and hopefully find this passage.

            My regards
            Caryn
          • thepathofthesunflower
            ... time=dimension idea ... of an ... imagine Ancient ... as a theory. ... Chantel ... Yes, imagine Ancient Egypt popping up in a shopping mall! Somehow I
            Message 5 of 10 , Nov 10, 2006
              --- In steiner@yahoogroups.com, Cheeseandsalsa@... wrote:
              >
              > I agree on the infinite number of dimensions. Also the
              time=dimension idea
              > I enjoy that theory. In our modern time shall we say a dimension
              of an
              > ancient civilization can pop up in the year 2006? For example
              imagine Ancient
              > Egypt popping up in 2006? It seems crazy but entertaining enough
              as a theory.
              > I'm not even a beginner on this topic however. ~good things,
              Chantel
              >

              Yes, imagine Ancient Egypt popping up in a shopping mall! Somehow I
              think Gravity acts as a stopper for this to happen in real time, if
              I'm correct.

              I also enjoy thinking about : time / space (could) = dimensions. I
              have this on hand from Dr Steiner from the book 'Life beyond Death'
              pg 213 lecture Berlin 5 Feb 1918;

              quote Dr Steiner-
              'There the saying is true, spoken with remarkable intuition by
              Richard Wagner:'Time becomes space' (taken from a scene in
              Parsifal)
              In the supersensible world, time really does become space - one point
              of space here, another there. Time is not past, but only a point of
              space, near or far; time actually becomes supersensible space ... but
              the past is not 'past' in the supersensible world. It is there; it
              remains, and to encounter it one needs only to relate oneself to
              another place. The past is just as little done away with as the
              house we have left to come here to-night. The house is in its place;
              so, too, in the supersensible world, the past is not gone but is in
              its place. It depends upon ourselves and upon how far we have gone
              from them, how near or far we are from the dead. We can be very far,
              or very near'.

              :)
            • Durward Starman
              ******* Well, as I said, I have worked with the book Tertium Organum by P. D. Ouspensky for many years, and it contains thinking exercises derived from the
              Message 6 of 10 , Nov 11, 2006
                ******* Well, as I said, I have worked with the book "Tertium Organum" by P.
                D. Ouspensky for many years, and it contains thinking exercises derived from
                the work of the mathematician Hinton, the Theosophist that Steiner also
                lectured on. I'll tell you a bit out of the book, but it's just like
                iGoethe' s theory of colors ---- it's one thing to hear it as a theory, and
                another to do the exercises and arrive at the perception yourself. So I'll
                try to put it in a way we are you can see what's meant, rather than just say
                that the theory says this and that.

                One of the starting points mathematicians used to approach understanding
                the fourth dimension a century ago was what was then the well-known "
                Flatland analogy". If you imagine a plane of two dimensions and a being
                living in it, he or she or it would only be able to perceive what is in that
                plane. A three-dimensional object -- -- -- or rather, an object which WE can
                perceive in three dimensions -- -- -- could only be known by the plane being
                as the section of it which is in its plane. Imagine a cube, for instance,
                passing through the "flatlander's" plane: if it passed through it
                perpendicular to the plane, the plane being could perceive only a SQUARE. as
                that section of the cube passed through its plane. If it didn't pass
                through perpendicularly, but rather first one corner passed through, then
                the rest of the cube, the plane being would sense a changing variety of
                figures, starting from a point when the corner first penetrated the plane,
                expanding into a growing square, and so forth. {This would of course be
                easier to explain with the help of drawings, but most people here have their
                e-mail set to either not rerceive images included or attached, or else they
                just go to the web site to read the messages, and embedded images are not
                saved there, so if I go through all the trouble of creating the drawings and
                then refer to them, what I say would make no sense to somebody unable to see
                them. C'est la vie....)

                Hinton and Ouspensky go from this to analogize our experience of
                three-dimensional space. Whatever one a being cannot sense as a dimension of
                space, it senses as changes in the space it can perceive. So, if we see a
                series of changes in three-dimensional space, that can be understood as an
                object having a fourth dimension which we can't perceive as one, passing
                through our three-dimensional space. In other words, the higher dimensions
                of the objects in the world around us ---- which we cannot yet perceive as
                dimensions the way we currently perceive the length, width and depth of
                objects----- instead of being perceived as a static dimension of space in an
                object, appear to us as a series of CHANGES to our space, in other words
                what we call change in time.

                So, the appearance of a plant out of its seed into its young form, then
                the lower shoot becoming the root and the upper shoot the stem, the growth
                of leaves, then the formation of flowers and fruit---- all this is a series
                of changes in an object through time to us, but to a being who can see the
                fourth and other higher dimensions, those are all parts of the object's
                shape. It does not come into existence and then disappear in time, but
                rather that appears to happen to us because of the limitation of our
                perceptions----- just as, before a cube passes through the Flatlander's
                space, the square section of the cube that he will perceive, he would say is
                in the future, while once it passes through the plane, he would say the
                figures that appeared in his space are now something in the past.

                This is the true connection between the idea of the fourth dimension, or
                rather fourth and all possible higher dimensions, and Time. Many people were
                experimenting with these ideas a century ago, but the person who arrived at
                the true solution, Ouspensky, was largely ignored, while the person who
                arrived at the false solution, Einstein, was made into a god by people who
                proclaimed he had solved a great mystery while not understanding his stupid
                theory in the least. (I'm speaking about his general theory of relativity,
                which is an absurd mishmash and which has completely ruined the ability of
                people to think about these things in the way that helps lead to the
                spiritual aspect -- but then, one couldn't expect anything Einstein did to
                lead to the spiritual. Just look at the way he treated his wife, and the way
                he led a spaced-out life in New Jersey. It's absolutely amazing how the
                scientific establishment has put him over as an intellectual giant to people
                who never study what he actually speculated---- but then look how they've
                made everyone believers in Darwin whose followers have still found zero
                evidence for his theory. )

                In relation to human life, as you say this also leads to an understanding
                of how one period of time is related to another. There's another great book,
                " A Dweller on Two Planets", a history of Atlantis which was spirit-dictated
                in the 1880s to a young man in California by a being who called himself
                Phylos the Thibetan, which Edgar Cayce used to quote from in his readings
                and which is well worth studying by anthroposophists. In it he also explains
                the correspondence of epochs by the analogy of a screw thread passing
                through a plane: with a full turn, you are back at the same place on the
                screw but on a higher level. So he says we in America are Atlantis come
                back, but not exactly the same as Atlantis was, because we have progressed.
                Looking at a shorter period of time, our age can also be understood as a
                repetition of the Egyptian civilization according to Steiner.

                The correspondence, like many other phenomena, is understandable once
                you expand the concepts "object" and "dimensions" as Tertium Orgnaum shows a
                way to do. But as I said, just hearing someone summarize it is very
                different from doing the thinking/perception exercises yourself. That's a
                great place to begin.

                -Starman


                [steiner] heretics of reality/dimensions
                >Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2006 14:57:22 EST
                >
                >I agree on the infinite number of dimensions. Also the time=dimension
                >idea
                >I enjoy that theory. In our modern time shall we say Theosophist dimension
                >of an
                >ancient civilization can pop up in the year 2006? For example imagine
                >Ancient
                >Egypt popping up in 2006? It seems crazy but entertaining enough as a
                >theory.
                >I'm not even a beginner on this topic however. ~good things, Chantel

                _________________________________________________________________
                Add a Yahoo! contact to Windows Live Messenger for a chance to win a free
                trip!
                http://www.imagine-windowslive.com/minisites/yahoo/default.aspx?locale=en-us&hmtagline
              • thepathofthesunflower
                ... Organum by P. ... derived from ... also ... like ... theory, and ... So I ll ... just say ... understanding ... known ... being ... is in that ... which
                Message 7 of 10 , Nov 13, 2006
                  --- In steiner@yahoogroups.com, "Durward Starman" <DrStarman@...>
                  wrote:
                  >
                  > ******* Well, as I said, I have worked with the book "Tertium
                  Organum" by P.
                  > D. Ouspensky for many years, and it contains thinking exercises
                  derived from
                  > the work of the mathematician Hinton, the Theosophist that Steiner
                  also
                  > lectured on. I'll tell you a bit out of the book, but it's just
                  like
                  > iGoethe' s theory of colors ---- it's one thing to hear it as a
                  theory, and
                  > another to do the exercises and arrive at the perception yourself.
                  So I'll
                  > try to put it in a way we are you can see what's meant, rather than
                  just say
                  > that the theory says this and that.
                  >
                  > One of the starting points mathematicians used to approach
                  understanding
                  > the fourth dimension a century ago was what was then the well-
                  known "
                  > Flatland analogy". If you imagine a plane of two dimensions and a
                  being
                  > living in it, he or she or it would only be able to perceive what
                  is in that
                  > plane. A three-dimensional object -- -- -- or rather, an object
                  which WE can
                  > perceive in three dimensions -- -- -- could only be known by the
                  plane being
                  > as the section of it which is in its plane. Imagine a cube, for
                  instance,
                  > passing through the "flatlander's" plane: if it passed through it
                  > perpendicular to the plane, the plane being could perceive only a
                  SQUARE. as
                  > that section of the cube passed through its plane. If it didn't
                  pass
                  > through perpendicularly, but rather first one corner passed
                  through, then
                  > the rest of the cube, the plane being would sense a changing
                  variety of
                  > figures, starting from a point when the corner first penetrated the
                  plane,
                  > expanding into a growing square, and so forth. {This would of
                  course be
                  > easier to explain with the help of drawings, but most people here
                  have their
                  > e-mail set to either not rerceive images included or attached, or
                  else they
                  > just go to the web site to read the messages, and embedded images
                  are not
                  > saved there, so if I go through all the trouble of creating the
                  drawings and
                  > then refer to them, what I say would make no sense to somebody
                  unable to see
                  > them. C'est la vie....)
                  >
                  > Hinton and Ouspensky go from this to analogize our experience of
                  > three-dimensional space. Whatever one a being cannot sense as a
                  dimension of
                  > space, it senses as changes in the space it can perceive. So, if we
                  see a
                  > series of changes in three-dimensional space, that can be
                  understood as an
                  > object having a fourth dimension which we can't perceive as one,
                  passing
                  > through our three-dimensional space. In other words, the higher
                  dimensions
                  > of the objects in the world around us ---- which we cannot yet
                  perceive as
                  > dimensions the way we currently perceive the length, width and
                  depth of
                  > objects----- instead of being perceived as a static dimension of
                  space in an
                  > object, appear to us as a series of CHANGES to our space, in other
                  words
                  > what we call change in time.
                  >
                  > So, the appearance of a plant out of its seed into its young
                  form, then
                  > the lower shoot becoming the root and the upper shoot the stem, the
                  growth
                  > of leaves, then the formation of flowers and fruit---- all this is
                  a series
                  > of changes in an object through time to us, but to a being who can
                  see the
                  > fourth and other higher dimensions, those are all parts of the
                  object's
                  > shape. It does not come into existence and then disappear in time,
                  but
                  > rather that appears to happen to us because of the limitation of
                  our
                  > perceptions----- just as, before a cube passes through the
                  Flatlander's
                  > space, the square section of the cube that he will perceive, he
                  would say is
                  > in the future, while once it passes through the plane, he would say
                  the
                  > figures that appeared in his space are now something in the past.
                  >
                  > This is the true connection between the idea of the fourth
                  dimension, or
                  > rather fourth and all possible higher dimensions, and Time. Many
                  people were
                  > experimenting with these ideas a century ago, but the person who
                  arrived at
                  > the true solution, Ouspensky, was largely ignored, while the person
                  who
                  > arrived at the false solution, Einstein, was made into a god by
                  people who
                  > proclaimed he had solved a great mystery while not understanding
                  his stupid
                  > theory in the least. (I'm speaking about his general theory of
                  relativity,
                  > which is an absurd mishmash and which has completely ruined the
                  ability of
                  > people to think about these things in the way that helps lead to
                  the
                  > spiritual aspect -- but then, one couldn't expect anything Einstein
                  did to
                  > lead to the spiritual. Just look at the way he treated his wife,
                  and the way
                  > he led a spaced-out life in New Jersey. It's absolutely amazing
                  how the
                  > scientific establishment has put him over as an intellectual giant
                  to people
                  > who never study what he actually speculated---- but then look how
                  they've
                  > made everyone believers in Darwin whose followers have still found
                  zero
                  > evidence for his theory. )
                  >
                  > In relation to human life, as you say this also leads to an
                  understanding
                  > of how one period of time is related to another. There's another
                  great book,
                  > " A Dweller on Two Planets", a history of Atlantis which was spirit-
                  dictated
                  > in the 1880s to a young man in California by a being who called
                  himself
                  > Phylos the Thibetan, which Edgar Cayce used to quote from in his
                  readings
                  > and which is well worth studying by anthroposophists. In it he also
                  explains
                  > the correspondence of epochs by the analogy of a screw thread
                  passing
                  > through a plane: with a full turn, you are back at the same place
                  on the
                  > screw but on a higher level. So he says we in America are Atlantis
                  come
                  > back, but not exactly the same as Atlantis was, because we have
                  progressed.
                  > Looking at a shorter period of time, our age can also be understood
                  as a
                  > repetition of the Egyptian civilization according to Steiner.
                  >
                  > The correspondence, like many other phenomena, is
                  understandable once
                  > you expand the concepts "object" and "dimensions" as Tertium
                  Orgnaum shows a
                  > way to do. But as I said, just hearing someone summarize it is very
                  > different from doing the thinking/perception exercises yourself.
                  That's a
                  > great place to begin.
                  >
                  > -Starman
                  >
                  >
                  Hi

                  I have one book of PD Ouspensky's 'The psychology of man's possible
                  evolution' which I throughly enjoyed and think it deserve's a re-
                  reading soon. I wouldn't mind reading Tertium Orgnaum.

                  I totally agree with what you say regarding Einstein. If i am right
                  to say this train of 'undimensional squashed thought' started with
                  Aristotle disregarding the quintessence, the very susbstance which
                  holds things together. Because it cannot be measured it is
                  disregarded.

                  Democractic intelligence reaching its point of no return; me thinks.

                  It is co-incidential you write about Atlantis, Starman. Over the
                  weekend I was re-reading 'Lemuria the lost continent of the Pacific'
                  published by the Rosicrucian Order of California 1931. And what you
                  say in America .. Atlantis come back. It does seem like a cycle, Dr
                  Steiner's Samsara symbol might describe this well on a macro scale.

                  To me; what is happening in the world today is exactly the same prior
                  to the destruction of Atlantis the only thing which is different is
                  the background.

                  Although, the Atlantians and prior the Lemurians had reached
                  a 'civilization' (not our understanding of civilization today) far
                  beyond ours of today. They were so advanced in their relationship to
                  the Cosmic Mind. First of all operating in a moneyless society
                  (shows are great deal of maurity to do this) and second having their
                  pineal organ developed to such a degree that sixth sense connecting
                  to the Cosmic mind was normal. Also they had knowledge of the fill
                  potential use of minerals and metals; therefore having air and sea
                  vehicles.

                  With the sinking of these two great continents and migrating (to the
                  East and Egypt) This organ become under-developed. It was a literal
                  organ - a 'bump' protruding from the forehead. It is said with
                  practice in developing this organ it will come back through the
                  generations. California is part of the original Lemuria, very
                  special.

                  Interesting you also talk about the writings 'A Dweller on Two
                  Planets' dictated by the being Phylos talking about Atlantis, to
                  someone in California.

                  I have a book 'Atlantis to the Latter Days' It is known as
                  the 'Osirian Scripts' inspirationally dictated to HC Randall-Stevens
                  by the Masters Oneferu and Adolemy of the Osirian Group. Adolemy
                  being incarnate under the name Osiraes (not to be confused with
                  Osiris) in the reigns of Amenhotep III & IV and Oneferu been
                  incarnate under the name of Men-Aton during the reign of Akhnaton. It
                  is published by The Knights Templars of Aquarius 1957. It was said HC
                  Randall-Stevens is the incarnation of El Eros and a later incarnation
                  of Akhnaton.

                  It is a dedication of Adam Ptah El Daoud and his divine twin Evam, to
                  the master teachers of Earth.

                  A wonderful find (in a second hand-book shop a few years ago) I am
                  sure here we will find parallels to the writings you have on
                  Atlantis. It is said the 'latter' days is the shift of the sun from
                  Pisces into Aquarius.

                  Getting a bit off the subject of dimensions; but maybe not really
                  because possibly the dimensions is discovering these worlds; as the
                  metaphor of the plant - releasing the element of scent.

                  Have a great day.
                  Caryn
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.