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

Re: Edgar Cayce

Expand Messages
  • carynlouise24
    I trace it to the Old Moon stage of clairvoyance for specific corresponding reasons. Arhimanic and his sidekick the untamed Luciferic. We understand during
    Message 1 of 18 , Jul 14 3:59 AM
      I trace it to the Old Moon stage of clairvoyance for specific
      corresponding reasons. Arhimanic and his sidekick the untamed
      Luciferic. We understand during the Old Moon period the astral body
      was in development and the mineral was not yet included in the human
      body, this was a predominately Luciferic stage.

      In Rudolf Steiner's `Polarities in the Evolution of Mankind' eleven
      lectures given to members of the Anthroposophical Society in
      Stuttgart 5 March to 22 November 1920 pg 108 – we read

      `The Jesuit literature on the material world is much more brilliantly
      written than the works of many others writers on the subject today.
      Father Erich Wasmann's work on ants, for example, is really good, you
      will gain more from reading it than from the pedantic, uninspired
      writings of other scientists. Many more examples could be given.

      The (work of the) Jesuits would be excellent if they confined
      themselves to the material world; it is a deliberate aim (of the
      Jesuits) to use their description of the material world to encourage
      people to associate knowledge with the materialistic aspect of the
      physical world only.

      The intention is to pretend to human minds that the methods used to
      gain knowledge cannot be used to investigate the supersensible
      world. In ancient times Lucifer-dominated individuals suggested that
      human beings would gain mastery of the world if they made use of
      ancient divine knowledge, yet evolution had already gone beyond this
      point.

      Now we have late followers of those people from post-primeval times
      pretending to the world that it is not possible to extend knowledge
      to the supersensible sphere and that knowledge cannot go beyond the
      sense-perceptible world. In those early times the intention had been
      to drug people with supersensible knowledge.

      Now human beings of the same ilk want to use all possible means to
      push humanity into the physical world; they want human beings stuck
      in that world and grasp the supersensible world only with the
      nebulous impulse of faith.

      In post-primeval times the aim had been to inundate humankind with an
      excess of supersensible knowledge. Today those late followers want
      human beings to have less than the right amount of knowledge in this
      sphere. Past intent was to provide supersensible knowledge that was
      no longer appropriate. Present intent is to let people have only
      sense-bound knowledge, making the supersensible world an area where
      every individual may hold whatever views he or she likes.

      What would be the outcome if the group of people to whom we are
      referring were to achieve some kind of victory? These are the people
      who deliberately make a sharp distinction between knowledge and
      belief. There are of course large numbers of easily led people who
      come across the diatribe on the `clear distinction between faith and
      knowledge' and repeat it; they merely repeat it.

      What is all this about? The aim is to do the opposite of what those
      individual in post-primeval times did in their way. In the old days
      the intention was to prevent humanity from descending completely and
      taking up its mission on earth. Today the intention is to keep
      people tied to that mission on earth to prevent their further
      development, for which the earth would provide the basis. The very
      people who are now supporting materialism call
      themselves `spiritualists', or priests of some faith or other,
      representatives of the supersensible world.

      In those ancient times the people offering a life in the spirit that
      was no longer justifiable called themselves materialists. They did
      so from the point of view which I have characterized. Today a large
      number of people who really wish to keep humanity bound to the
      material world call themselves representatives of the spiritual
      world.'

      Page 50

      Think of all the efforts we go to in spiritual science working
      towards anthroposophy to form sufficiently clear ideas; for
      instances, as to how far the things we become aware of in human
      minds, in the form of dreams, may or may not be reflecting the
      truth. As human beings we cannot immediately distinguish truth from
      falsehood when something appears in the course of a dream. The same
      state of mind arises for a congregation when they are told lies by
      people who know those lies will be believed. The soul is brought to
      a state, a mood, by those lies where it becomes the willing tool of
      those desiring power. It is easiest to get people into your power by
      planting illusions in their unsuspecting minds'.




      --- In steiner@yahoogroups.com, Durward Starman <DrStarman@...> wrote:
      >
      >
      > ******* Why do you connect this to the planet Mars? I connect the
      trance state to Saturn, as it's a reversion to the state of
      consciousness of Ancient Saturn.
      > -starman
      > www.DrStarman.com
      >
      >
      >
      > To: steiner@...: carynlouise24@...: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 08:19:09
      +0000Subject: [steiner] Re: Edgar Cayce
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Interesting reactions – Well it is interesting Mars is the
      reincarnation of the Old Moon. Explains the `trance' state.One thing
      in life which I cannot stand is when people say `blessings' or `God
      bless you' – like they have this authority to tell God who to bless
      who not to bless!Well back to Billy … then --- In
      steiner@yahoogroups.com, Durward Starman <DrStarman@> wrote:>> >
      *******Well, I'm sorry but I have to tell you that some of your
      information is woefully inaccurate! You could verify this by doing a
      search online or reading a few books about the Cayce Readings. I'd
      recommend reading a biography of the man first, such as "There Is A
      River" by Tom Sugrue, then look through whatever books of excerpts
      from his psychic readings interest you, like Edgar Cayce on Atlantis,
      Edgar Cayce on Jesus and His Church, etc. You'll find the information
      quite similar to Theosophy and anthroposophy, frequently identical.>
      > The objection of Rittlemeyer's was about people claiming to be an
      authority because of who they supposedly were in another life. This
      has nothing to do with telling what other peoples' past lives were---
      which of course Dr. Steiner also did, so Rittlemeyer's criticiism
      about "claiming authority" on the basis of previous incarnations
      couldn't possibly include. He meant saying 'Well, I was so-and-so in
      a past life and so you should listen to me' (as one poor soul
      currently does who claims to have been Cayce himself, while producing
      no evidence of any abilities in this life). Telling people they
      should study music because they have an unrealized musical gift due
      to having been a musician in ancient Greece, as the Cayce Readings
      might do--- well, that's a completely different thing than what
      Rittlemeyer was talking about, clearly. Dr. Steiner also would
      identify learning disabilities in children as coming from past lives
      and use this knowledge in treatment.> > Also, the Readings did not
      identify Cayce as having been Pythagoras. He did say that in a past
      life he was an Egyptian initiate unknown to history named Ra Ta,
      whose memory later became mixed in with the mythological Ra. But he
      didn't claim people should listen to him because he was that priest
      in the time of the building of the pyramids. In fact, Cayce didn't
      ask people to listen to him at all, as he was not a teacher like
      Steiner. He was a freakish case of an ordinary-seeming man who,
      because of his past lives, could go into a trance state and connect
      with the same sources as Blavatsky and Steiner. In his trances, he
      mainly was asked medical questions about people who were sick. Other
      stuff was secondary to him and he wasn't sure how much to trust it
      himself.> > -starmanwww.DrStarman.com> > > > To: steiner@:
      carynlouise24@: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 11:51:19 +0000Subject: [steiner] Re:
      Edgar Cayce> > > > > The Edgar Cayce's I have read are:The Life Story
      of JesusThe Origin and Destiny of ManRevelationMany Happy Returns My
      thoughts are:In Friedrich Rittelmeyer's `RUDOLF STEINER ENTERS MY
      LIFE' Friedrich writes:`His (Rudolf Steiner) attitude in the
      Krishnamurti affair shows that he regarded it as the greatest occult
      sin to claim authority for anyone on the ground of previous
      incarnations. In the age of the "Consciousness Soul" everyone must
      appeal with his teaching simply and solely to men's own objective
      sense of truth, and convince them purely on the basis of
      reason'.Edgar Cayce in an unconscious state claimed authority for
      person's previous incarnations and this should be a reason for
      concern. For instance; say someone like Edgar Cayce had to say to me
      `you were Mickey Mouse in your previous incarnation' – if I was naïve
      enough to believe this (because I was seeking the fundamental
      question of life `who am I') I would spend the rest of my life
      prancing around thinking to myself `I am Mickey Mouse' and further
      begin to act, take on the role of, Mickey Mouse - only to find when I
      pass through the portals of death I was actually Donald Duck in a
      previous incarnation and thus wasted a whole life in
      misconception.The age old wisdom comes to mind `Know Thyself' through
      yourself being yourself.Another factor; Edgar Cayce has claimed
      himself to be the great ancient leader Ra and the great mathematician
      Pythagoras in previous lifetimes.As far as I know not even Rudolf
      Steiner would claim to ascertain who he was in previous lifetimes in
      such an open manner; and further the true understanding of
      reincarnation of Initiates is not truly understood by the
      uninitiated.At this point I would like to say; Stephen Hale is
      greatly respected and (in my view) his investigations into the Karmic
      relationships between people is well thought through, done in a very
      concise manner and most importantly in a conscious manner. These
      investigations, on people who have already passed through the
      portals, namely Rudolf Steiner himself, directly proves the above
      writing by Friedrich Rittelmeyer on Rudolf Steiner's view on previous
      incarnations are done with an objective sense of truth based on
      knowledge and reason and is a gift invaluable to anthroposophy.I have
      spent years pondering Edgar Cayce and it is not without undue
      considerations I put this forward.--- In steiner@yahoogroups.com,
      Durward Starman <DrStarman@> wrote:>> > > > To: steiner@:
      Cheeseandsalsa@: Mon, 7 Jul 2008 13:32:21 -0400Subject: Re: [steiner]
      Edgar Cayce> > > > Barbara Handclow who isn't an anthro said that
      Cayce is a member and his father of the masons. She wrote that they
      were of the dark occult brotherhood...I personally do not resonate
      with what he brought to us. > I do agree - a balance is always good
      in communications.Any thoughts ... I wonder what Rudolf Steiner would
      have to say on Edgar Cayce?> > > 1> > .> *******> > > > > > Well, in
      this particular case I can say flatly that the lady is mistaken.
      Neither Cayce nor his father were Masons, I know that from personal
      study and contact with his family and many people who actually knew
      him here in Virginia Beach. He was not a member of anything, and in
      fact didn't know about Theosophy or anything esoteric until he began
      answering questions about such matters in his "readings." He almost
      never remembered anything he said in trance so they had to have a
      stenographer take it all down, and he read what he'd said afterwards
      along with everybody else. He was a simple Christian while awake and
      never joined anything except the local Presbyterian Church here. His
      father was a difficult man whom Edgar didn't get along with very
      well, but he also was not a member of any brotherhood or anything and
      had nothing to do with Edgar Cayce's work most of his life. > > As to
      what you don't resonate with in the Cayce Readings, well there's a
      lot that may be criticized in many ways. I don't know what you've
      read from them. > > Starman>
      __________________________________________________________> It's a
      talkathon – but it's not just talk.> http://www.imtalkathon.com/?
      source=EML_WLH_Talkathon_JustTalk> > > > > > >
      __________________________________________________________> Making
      the world a better place one message at a time.>
      http://www.imtalkathon.com/?source=EML_WLH_Talkathon_BetterPlace>
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > _________________________________________________________________
      > The i'm Talkaton. Can 30-days of conversation change the world?
      > http://www.imtalkathon.com/?source=EML_WLH_Talkathon_ChangeWorld
      >
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.