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

Openness

Expand Messages
  • golden3000997@cs.com
    Hello Starman and Everyone!! I have been following with interest this current discussion with its emphasis on Tomberg. I have some of his writings but it is
    Message 1 of 12 , Jun 22, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      Hello Starman and Everyone!!

      I have been following with interest this current discussion with its emphasis
      on Tomberg. I have some of his writings but it is years since I read them.
      But I do know that he is (was?) a serious student and teacher. I would
      respectfully ask that in this forum we all try to restrain from criticism,
      judgementalism and airing personal vendettas of any kind. I am sure that
      there are members reading, perhaps just not speaking right now, of all
      levels, from very newly introduced to Steiner and Anthroposophy (who may not
      know anything at all and hope to get a sense of it here) to those with many
      years of study and experience. Each person has his or her own path and
      journey both to Steiner and with Steiner's work. Steiner never put down any
      philosophy or really any practice. He "simply" explained their causes and
      effects and always left it for each individual to explore for him or her
      self.

      Catholicism has many, many levels and applications. It serves the poor and
      uneducated around the world and we have no right to criticize from our highly
      educated and advantaged viewpoint that which may bring comfort and
      consolation to millions, as well as perhaps the only relationship to the
      Christ that they are ready for at this moment. I have attended Catholic
      confirmation classes and a wonderful church in Gainesville, Florida whose
      priests were all intellectuals and who had very open minds and spoke very
      much to one's individual conscience and relationship to Christ. Of course
      there are still strict dogmatists, even in Anthroposophy!!! Have your read
      the poetry of Karol Wojtyla (Pope John Paul ll) ? I am just starting to. Here
      is a man of great depth, tremendous intellect and creativity who has been
      trying always to maintain a balance between the intellectual critics and
      dissenters of the US and Europe and so many around the world who need the
      stability of the Catholic Church in the midst of their political and social
      turmoils.

      There are the Catholic clergy who read and study Matthew Fox's creation
      centered spirituality - Fox is an ex-priest who has founded a college in
      California and who was instrumental in re-introducing the work of Hildegard
      of Bingen, Meister Eckhart and Julian of Norwich. There are many priests who
      study Jung and I have even heard of an underground movement where both
      priests and nuns study Eurythmy. I have known of prominent leaders of the
      Anthroposophical movement who were also Catholics. (Not everyone is fortunate
      enough to have a Christian Community close by.) I have known Christian
      Community members who don't want to have anything to do with the
      Anthroposophical Society, and Anthroposophists that don't want to have
      anything to do with the Christian Community. They ARE separate entities, you
      know.

      If we put down other people's paths, we will probably put off those who are
      investigating but are involved with other studies, too. Much better to refer
      objectively to Steiner's indications on a particular issue. I found Steiner
      circuitously through Yoga and I still find great value in Yogic teachings and
      practices. I think it helpful to consider yoga's evolution since the fall of
      Atlantis and maybe re-evaluate the breathing as meditation practices since we
      all have lungs now. But hey, deep breathing is still good for you!

      I have pictures of Krishna in my kitchen and hope eventually to evolve into
      being able to refrain from all meat products (I can't or won't yet - but its
      coming!) From my understanding and current personal belief system, Krishna
      was a pre-Christian manifestation - not Incarnation - of Christ. It's not a
      question for me of either/ or, it's a question of the most extreme gratitude
      to Steiner for putting together all of the "seemingly" disparate pieces of
      the cosmic puzzle. In "The Gospel of St. Luke" which has the most wonderful
      information on the Two Jesus Children, there is also the most wonderful
      description of Christ as the Vishnu Karma, the giver of Karma, surrounded by
      the twelve Boddhisatvas, of which Gautama Buddha was/ is one, meditating on
      HIM.

      In the introduction to the Bhagavad Gita, it is told that Krishna gave the
      instruction of the spiritual science of the universe and beyond to Manu,
      which is another name for Noah, the leader of the exodus from Atlantis. It
      has also been many years since I read "The Bhagavad-Gita and the Epistles of
      St. Paul" by Rudolf Steiner, but I will probably be taking another look again
      soon. Don't forget please, his "From Buddha to Christ".

      In regard to Astrosophy - I met Willi Sucher in Spring Valley many years ago
      and heard him lecture. It was all very mathematical and I couldn't begin to
      explain it to anyone, although I have several of his manuscripts, but I will
      say that what I was given to understand is that Astrosophy seeks to bring
      Astrology to a very different place than the natal and transit astrology that
      has come down from the pre-Christian era. His work centers around the cosmic
      timetables and rhythms involved in the Incarnation of Christ and since. There
      are deep meditative works based on his findings available. I had my chart
      done by someone who was studying with him at the time and some interesting
      points were a list of people I may have been influenced by on my way down
      through the planetary spheres into earth incarnation and the way he drew the
      embryo on the chart with my head at the point of conception and talked about
      its meaning. What I understand about this and all astrology today is that we
      were once "controlled" by the planetary influences we were born under. Before
      the birth of the "I am" in each individual through the Incarnation of Christ,
      we were more or less like puppets on strings in relationship to the cosmic
      influences. Only certain people through Initiation were brought to a level of
      development where they could be regarded as an individual. Even the Pharoahs
      were regarded as the highest representatives of their people as a whole.
      Moses was the first to bring a preview of the power of the individual "I am"
      to human conciousness (and boy, did HE have trouble!). But since the Deed of
      Christ, we have each been given our own individual "I am" that we can develop
      out of our own impulses (or to be more correct, to develop our relationship
      with the "I am"). The planetary and other cosmic influences are still there
      and very powerful, but now, as we descend into Earth incarnation through the
      planetary spheres, we "pick things up" along the way down. I like to think of
      it as our own personal "toolbox" or "make-up kit". What we use of the gifts,
      challenges and opportunities that we have brought with us and what we make of
      them is entirely up to us. Our angel holds the blueprint that we drew during
      the period between death and rebirth and he/she tries very hard to remind us
      from time to time exactly what this thing is supposed to look like, but we
      are free to cut and drill and hammer away to our heart's content (or
      discontent) with frequent trips to the Cosmic Emergency Room, at least in my
      case. : )

      The point to all of this is, please let's, for the sake of new people to
      Steiner's work especially, try to address everyone from their own starting
      point as much as possible. I don't know who Robert Powell is myself, but I
      felt by the tone of the person who asked the first questions about him that
      he is probably someone controversial in the movement (who isn't??). Instead
      of getting into that kind of personal "he said/ she said" kind of bickering,
      please let's ask more specific questions. So if someone wrote or said or did
      something we don't understand or agree with, let's ask about that specific
      topic in a sincere attempt to gain clarity. And if we reply out of ourselves,
      our own experiences, our psychic investigations or quoting Herr Doktor or
      another Anthroposophical writer or speaker or some other philosopher, etc.,
      let's do so in the spirit of investigation and in a way that allows others to
      add and develop the theme, rather than feel cut off.

      If you are someone new to all of this and have gotten the feeling that it is
      a limited and dogmatic philosophy of some sort, please forgive us and I hope
      that you will be tenacious and keep digging. The gold really is in there!
      Steiner's work is the most inclusive that you will ever find, regardless of
      the personal limitations of his students : )
    • evlogite
      Dear Everyone: Golden makes a very good point here by saying that so-and-so seems to be seen as controversial in some quarters. The fact is this, anyone
      Message 2 of 12 , Jun 23, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        Dear Everyone:

        Golden makes a very good point here by saying that so-and-so seems to
        be seen as controversial in some quarters. The fact is this, anyone
        willing to make a stand regarding the truth, (whether they are right
        or wrong)is seen as controversial.

        We tend to dive into a subject, as supporters or detractors , in
        spiritual and worldly matters. Yet there are spiritual exercises
        that develop our sense of discrimination so we needn't feel the
        compulsion to reject/accept something new out of hand. Remember, all
        great spiritual truth meets with opposition.

        Blavatsky, Steiner, Tomberg, Sucher, Powell are seen as radical
        because they bring something new to the table. It's not our task to
        espouse or reject their teachings uncritically. Just to use them
        as "working hypotheses" and to discover the truth for ourselves.

        evlogite



        --- In ste

        iner@y..., golden3000997@c... wrote:
        > Hello Starman and Everyone!!
        >
        > I have been following with interest this current discussion with
        its emphasis
        > on Tomberg. I have some of his writings but it is years since I
        read them.
        > But I do know that he is (was?) a serious student and teacher. I
        would
        > respectfully ask that in this forum we all try to restrain from
        criticism,
        > judgementalism and airing personal vendettas of any kind. I am sure
        that
        > there are members reading, perhaps just not speaking right now, of
        all
        > levels, from very newly introduced to Steiner and Anthroposophy
        (who may not
        > know anything at all and hope to get a sense of it here) to those
        with many
        > years of study and experience. Each person has his or her own path
        and
        > journey both to Steiner and with Steiner's work. Steiner never put
        down any
        > philosophy or really any practice. He "simply" explained their
        causes and
        > effects and always left it for each individual to explore for him
        or her
        > self.
        >
        > Catholicism has many, many levels and applications. It serves the
        poor and
        > uneducated around the world and we have no right to criticize from
        our highly
        > educated and advantaged viewpoint that which may bring comfort and
        > consolation to millions, as well as perhaps the only relationship
        to the
        > Christ that they are ready for at this moment. I have attended
        Catholic
        > confirmation classes and a wonderful church in Gainesville, Florida
        whose
        > priests were all intellectuals and who had very open minds and
        spoke very
        > much to one's individual conscience and relationship to Christ. Of
        course
        > there are still strict dogmatists, even in Anthroposophy!!! Have
        your read
        > the poetry of Karol Wojtyla (Pope John Paul ll) ? I am just
        starting to. Here
        > is a man of great depth, tremendous intellect and creativity who
        has been
        > trying always to maintain a balance between the intellectual
        critics and
        > dissenters of the US and Europe and so many around the world who
        need the
        > stability of the Catholic Church in the midst of their political
        and social
        > turmoils.
        >
        > There are the Catholic clergy who read and study Matthew Fox's
        creation
        > centered spirituality - Fox is an ex-priest who has founded a
        college in
        > California and who was instrumental in re-introducing the work of
        Hildegard
        > of Bingen, Meister Eckhart and Julian of Norwich. There are many
        priests who
        > study Jung and I have even heard of an underground movement where
        both
        > priests and nuns study Eurythmy. I have known of prominent leaders
        of the
        > Anthroposophical movement who were also Catholics. (Not everyone is
        fortunate
        > enough to have a Christian Community close by.) I have known
        Christian
        > Community members who don't want to have anything to do with the
        > Anthroposophical Society, and Anthroposophists that don't want to
        have
        > anything to do with the Christian Community. They ARE separate
        entities, you
        > know.
        >
        > If we put down other people's paths, we will probably put off those
        who are
        > investigating but are involved with other studies, too. Much better
        to refer
        > objectively to Steiner's indications on a particular issue. I found
        Steiner
        > circuitously through Yoga and I still find great value in Yogic
        teachings and
        > practices. I think it helpful to consider yoga's evolution since
        the fall of
        > Atlantis and maybe re-evaluate the breathing as meditation
        practices since we
        > all have lungs now. But hey, deep breathing is still good for you!
        >
        > I have pictures of Krishna in my kitchen and hope eventually to
        evolve into
        > being able to refrain from all meat products (I can't or won't yet -
        but its
        > coming!) From my understanding and current personal belief system,
        Krishna
        > was a pre-Christian manifestation - not Incarnation - of Christ.
        It's not a
        > question for me of either/ or, it's a question of the most extreme
        gratitude
        > to Steiner for putting together all of the "seemingly" disparate
        pieces of
        > the cosmic puzzle. In "The Gospel of St. Luke" which has the most
        wonderful
        > information on the Two Jesus Children, there is also the most
        wonderful
        > description of Christ as the Vishnu Karma, the giver of Karma,
        surrounded by
        > the twelve Boddhisatvas, of which Gautama Buddha was/ is one,
        meditating on
        > HIM.
        >
        > In the introduction to the Bhagavad Gita, it is told that Krishna
        gave the
        > instruction of the spiritual science of the universe and beyond to
        Manu,
        > which is another name for Noah, the leader of the exodus from
        Atlantis. It
        > has also been many years since I read "The Bhagavad-Gita and the
        Epistles of
        > St. Paul" by Rudolf Steiner, but I will probably be taking another
        look again
        > soon. Don't forget please, his "From Buddha to Christ".
        >
        > In regard to Astrosophy - I met Willi Sucher in Spring Valley many
        years ago
        > and heard him lecture. It was all very mathematical and I couldn't
        begin to
        > explain it to anyone, although I have several of his manuscripts,
        but I will
        > say that what I was given to understand is that Astrosophy seeks to
        bring
        > Astrology to a very different place than the natal and transit
        astrology that
        > has come down from the pre-Christian era. His work centers around
        the cosmic
        > timetables and rhythms involved in the Incarnation of Christ and
        since. There
        > are deep meditative works based on his findings available. I had my
        chart
        > done by someone who was studying with him at the time and some
        interesting
        > points were a list of people I may have been influenced by on my
        way down
        > through the planetary spheres into earth incarnation and the way he
        drew the
        > embryo on the chart with my head at the point of conception and
        talked about
        > its meaning. What I understand about this and all astrology today
        is that we
        > were once "controlled" by the planetary influences we were born
        under. Before
        > the birth of the "I am" in each individual through the Incarnation
        of Christ,
        > we were more or less like puppets on strings in relationship to the
        cosmic
        > influences. Only certain people through Initiation were brought to
        a level of
        > development where they could be regarded as an individual. Even the
        Pharoahs
        > were regarded as the highest representatives of their people as a
        whole.
        > Moses was the first to bring a preview of the power of the
        individual "I am"
        > to human conciousness (and boy, did HE have trouble!). But since
        the Deed of
        > Christ, we have each been given our own individual "I am" that we
        can develop
        > out of our own impulses (or to be more correct, to develop our
        relationship
        > with the "I am"). The planetary and other cosmic influences are
        still there
        > and very powerful, but now, as we descend into Earth incarnation
        through the
        > planetary spheres, we "pick things up" along the way down. I like
        to think of
        > it as our own personal "toolbox" or "make-up kit". What we use of
        the gifts,
        > challenges and opportunities that we have brought with us and what
        we make of
        > them is entirely up to us. Our angel holds the blueprint that we
        drew during
        > the period between death and rebirth and he/she tries very hard to
        remind us
        > from time to time exactly what this thing is supposed to look like,
        but we
        > are free to cut and drill and hammer away to our heart's content
        (or
        > discontent) with frequent trips to the Cosmic Emergency Room, at
        least in my
        > case. : )
        >
        > The point to all of this is, please let's, for the sake of new
        people to
        > Steiner's work especially, try to address everyone from their own
        starting
        > point as much as possible. I don't know who Robert Powell is
        myself, but I
        > felt by the tone of the person who asked the first questions about
        him that
        > he is probably someone controversial in the movement (who isn't??).
        Instead
        > of getting into that kind of personal "he said/ she said" kind of
        bickering,
        > please let's ask more specific questions. So if someone wrote or
        said or did
        > something we don't understand or agree with, let's ask about that
        specific
        > topic in a sincere attempt to gain clarity. And if we reply out of
        ourselves,
        > our own experiences, our psychic investigations or quoting Herr
        Doktor or
        > another Anthroposophical writer or speaker or some other
        philosopher, etc.,
        > let's do so in the spirit of investigation and in a way that allows
        others to
        > add and develop the theme, rather than feel cut off.
        >
        > If you are someone new to all of this and have gotten the feeling
        that it is
        > a limited and dogmatic philosophy of some sort, please forgive us
        and I hope
        > that you will be tenacious and keep digging. The gold really is in
        there!
        > Steiner's work is the most inclusive that you will ever find,
        regardless of
        > the personal limitations of his students : )
      • Will McGown
        I agree with much of what you wrote about openness. With reference to what you wrote below, I would recommend a small book called Sacred Initiations by
        Message 3 of 12 , Jul 1, 2002
        • 0 Attachment

          I agree with much of what you wrote about openness. With reference to what you wrote below, I would recommend a small book called "Sacred Initiations" by Michael Mandeville which you can read about at http://www.michaelmandeville.com

          In it there are good insights into the "relationships" of Christ, Krishna, Buddha, and even Islam, that are put forth in an ecumenical spirit that is worth considering. Even more beneficial, however, are the instructions on the breath and meditation that help the individual develop his/her own path of openness to the divine.

          golden3000997@... wrote:

          Hello Starman and Everyone!!

          I have been following with interest this current discussion...
          Steiner never put down any philosophy or really any practice. 

          I found Steiner
          circuitously through Yoga and I still find great value in Yogic teachings and
          practices. I think it helpful to consider yoga's evolution since the fall of
          Atlantis and maybe re-evaluate the breathing as meditation practices since we all have lungs now. But hey, deep breathing is still good for you!

          I have pictures of Krishna in my kitchen and hope eventually to evolve into
          being able to refrain from all meat products (I can't or won't yet - but its
          coming!) From my understanding and current personal belief system, Krishna
          was a pre-Christian manifestation - not Incarnation - of Christ. It's not a
          question for me of either/ or, it's a question of the most extreme gratitude
          to Steiner for putting together all of the "seemingly" disparate pieces of
          the cosmic puzzle. In "The Gospel of St. Luke" which has the most wonderful
          information on the Two Jesus Children, there is also the most wonderful
          description of Christ as the Vishnu Karma, the giver of Karma, surrounded by
          the twelve Boddhisatvas, of which Gautama Buddha was/ is one, meditating on
          HIM.

          In the introduction to the Bhagavad Gita, it is told that Krishna gave the
          instruction of the spiritual science of the universe and beyond to Manu,
          which is another name for Noah, the leader of the exodus from Atlantis. It
          has also been many years since I read "The Bhagavad-Gita and the Epistles of
          St. Paul" by Rudolf Steiner, but I will probably be taking another look again
          soon. Don't forget please, his "From Buddha to Christ".



          Do You Yahoo!?
          Sign-up for Video Highlights of 2002 FIFA World Cup

        • DRStarman2001@aol.com
          ... *******The old Theosophical Society was wide open to everything in an ecumenical spirit. Unfortunately this often results in reducing the Christ Being to
          Message 4 of 12 , Jul 1, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            freewill42@... writes:
            > I would recommend a small book called "Sacred Initiations" by Michael Mandeville....
            > In it there are good insights into the "relationships" of Christ, Krishna, Buddha, and even Islam, that are put forth in an ecumenical spirit that is worth considering. Even more beneficial, however, are the instructions on the breath and meditation that help the individual develop his/her own path of openness to the divine.

            *******The old Theosophical Society was wide open to everything in an ecumenical spirit. Unfortunately this often results in reducing the Christ Being to the same level as anyone else; but anthroposophy teaches this is not so. So we bear the accusation of being dogmatic or whatever, because we have to affirm the Christ as the Spirit behind all religions, as Edgar Cayce also put it. It's not the same as the Father-God that all religions recognize, and the man Jesus was not a teacher the same as Confucius or someone. We have to say this because we must recognize its truth, since we meet the Christ on the Path of Initiation. This certainly doesn't mean that what's called the Christian religion today is better than others: Steiner summed up his point of view in the title of one lecture, "Christianity Began As A Religion But It Is Greater Than All Religions." The Christ having come into the earth through his Resurrection has provided an actual force that everyone meets on the Path, and it's important to recognize what it is. Some ancient religions recognize it, some don't.

            The other thing spiritual science teaches is that we need to develop body-free thinking in the modern era. Concentrating on the breath brings you more into the body, not less. If one takes a non-physical reality like a mantra or image and meditates on it, the breath will regularize of itself, and this is better for most modern people. If this sounds dogmatic, well, just try it and see. This is a science after all, not a religion. Compare both methods and try to objectively examine the results. It's not that one is right or wrong but one may have the efect you want in this incarnation while the other may not.

            Starman

            > golden3000997@... wrote:
            > Hello Starman and Everyone!!
            > I have been following with interest this current discussion...
            > Steiner never put down any philosophy or really any practice.
            > I found Steiner circuitously through Yoga and I still find great value in Yogic teachings and practices. I think it helpful to consider yoga's evolution since the fall of
            > Atlantis and maybe re-evaluate the breathing as meditation practices since we all have lungs now. But hey, deep breathing is still good for you!
            >
            > I have pictures of Krishna in my kitchen and hope eventually to evolve into being able to refrain from all meat products (I can't or won't yet - but its coming!) From my understanding and current personal belief system, Krishna was a pre-Christian manifestation - not Incarnation - of Christ. It's not a question for me of either/ or, it's a question of the most extreme gratitude to Steiner for putting together all of the "seemingly" disparate pieces of the cosmic puzzle. In "The Gospel of St. Luke" which has the most wonderful information on the Two Jesus Children, there is also the most wonderful
            > description of Christ as the Vishnu Karma, the giver of Karma, surrounded by the twelve Boddhisatvas, of which Gautama Buddha was/ is one, meditating on HIM.
            >
            > In the introduction to the Bhagavad Gita, it is told that Krishna gave the instruction of the spiritual science of the universe and beyond to Manu, which is another name for Noah, the leader of the exodus from Atlantis. It has also been many years since I read "The Bhagavad-Gita and the Epistles of
            > St. Paul" by Rudolf Steiner, but I will probably be taking
            > another look again soon. Don't forget please, his "From Buddha to Christ".
          • evlogite
            Hi Everyone: Why is it that so many otherwise insightful streams confuse the role of Christ in the universe? I am currently trying to understand the blind
            Message 5 of 12 , Jul 2, 2002
            • 0 Attachment
              Hi Everyone:

              Why is it that so many otherwise insightful streams confuse the role
              of Christ in the universe? I am currently trying to understand the
              blind spot that some, such as Alice Bailey, Besant, et al, have
              regarding Christ. Bailey sees Christ as an cosmic position (office)
              which a number of beings periodically occupy (if I understand her
              writings correctly). Does anyone here have an insight into this? I
              would appreciate any help that you can give.

              evlogite


              > *******The old Theosophical Society was wide open to everything in
              an ecumenical spirit. Unfortunately this often results in reducing
              the Christ Being to the same level as anyone else; but anthroposophy
              teaches this is not so. So we bear the accusation of being dogmatic
              or whatever, because we have to affirm the Christ as the Spirit
              behind all religions, as Edgar Cayce also put it. It's not the same
              as the Father-God that all religions recognize, and the man Jesus was
              not a teacher the same as Confucius or someone. We have to say this
              because we must recognize its truth, since we meet the Christ on the
              Path of Initiation. This certainly doesn't mean that what's called
              the Christian religion today is better than others: Steiner summed up
              his point of view in the title of one lecture, "Christianity Began As
              A Religion But It Is Greater Than All Religions." The Christ having
              come into the earth through his Resurrection has provided an actual
              force that everyone meets on the Path, and it's important to
              recognize what it is. Some ancient religions recognize it, some don't.
              >
              > The other thing spiritual science teaches is that we need to
              develop body-free thinking in the modern era. Concentrating on the
              breath brings you more into the body, not less. If one takes a non-
              physical reality like a mantra or image and meditates on it, the
              breath will regularize of itself, and this is better for most modern
              people. If this sounds dogmatic, well, just try it and see. This is a
              science after all, not a religion. Compare both methods and try to
              objectively examine the results. It's not that one is right or wrong
              but one may have the efect you want in this incarnation while the
              other may not.
              >
              > Starman
              >
              > > golden3000997@c... wrote:
              > > Hello Starman and Everyone!!
              > > I have been following with interest this current discussion...
              > > Steiner never put down any philosophy or really any practice.
              > > I found Steiner circuitously through Yoga and I still find great
              value in Yogic teachings and practices. I think it helpful to
              consider yoga's evolution since the fall of
              > > Atlantis and maybe re-evaluate the breathing as meditation
              practices since we all have lungs now. But hey, deep breathing is
              still good for you!
              > >
              > > I have pictures of Krishna in my kitchen and hope eventually to
              evolve into being able to refrain from all meat products (I can't or
              won't yet - but its coming!) From my understanding and current
              personal belief system, Krishna was a pre-Christian manifestation -
              not Incarnation - of Christ. It's not a question for me of either/
              or, it's a question of the most extreme gratitude to Steiner for
              putting together all of the "seemingly" disparate pieces of the
              cosmic puzzle. In "The Gospel of St. Luke" which has the most
              wonderful information on the Two Jesus Children, there is also the
              most wonderful
              > > description of Christ as the Vishnu Karma, the giver of Karma,
              surrounded by the twelve Boddhisatvas, of which Gautama Buddha was/
              is one, meditating on HIM.
              > >
              > > In the introduction to the Bhagavad Gita, it is told that Krishna
              gave the instruction of the spiritual science of the universe and
              beyond to Manu, which is another name for Noah, the leader of the
              exodus from Atlantis. It has also been many years since I read "The
              Bhagavad-Gita and the Epistles of
              > > St. Paul" by Rudolf Steiner, but I will probably be taking
              > > another look again soon. Don't forget please, his "From Buddha to
              Christ".
            • DRStarman2001@aol.com
              ... *******I would say it simply shows how far along the Path a person has gotten. We meet the Christ Being at a certain point, the point of legitimate entry
              Message 6 of 12 , Jul 2, 2002
              • 0 Attachment
                evlogite@... writes:
                > Hi Everyone:
                > Why is it that so many otherwise insightful streams confuse the role of Christ in the universe? I am currently trying to understand the blind spot that some, such as Alice Bailey, Besant, et al, have regarding Christ. Bailey sees Christ as an cosmic position (office) which a number of beings periodically occupy (if I understand her writings correctly). Does anyone here have an insight into this? I would appreciate any help that you can give.

                *******I would say it simply shows how far along the Path a person has gotten. We meet the Christ Being at a certain point, the point of legitimate entry into the spiritual world with the ability to come and go at will from then on. Entry onto the astral plane does not require this. In the same way as a physical scientist can recognize whether a man has or has not mastered calculus, or has only reached a point of beginning to acquire the thinking needed to do so, a spiritual scientist can recognize whether a person has reached a particular level or not.

                For example, Dr. Steiner once discussed Mr. Leadbeater's book with its descriptions of the astral plane and lower Devachan. He confirmed that the description of the astral plane was real, but said quite objectively that the alleged description of Devachan there was merely a re-worked depiction of the astral again (because anyone who reaches it knows it is "heard", not seen).

                Similarly, look at Swami Yogananda's work. Though educated entirely in Eastern wisdom, he recognized that the Being he knew through Initiation was the same described by Western English Christianity in his country (as did his guru, Sri Yukteswar).

                Just as entering the spiritual world without self-knowledge does not enable one to orient oneself, and thus it's required to recognize one's alter ego as the Lesser Guardian first, so the final entry that enables one to come and go at will from then on requires one to recognize that Other, the One who became the Mediator. Many people in the West have become alienated from the Christ through the perversion of the Christian religion by the opposing Powers, and so have a great difficulty doing this. It is of critical importance to be able to do so, however, or else one's occultism will merely become 'Luciferic' or 'Ahrimanic'. Dr. Steiner came to rescue the impulse of the White Brotherhood we call Theosophy from this fate, so that it could be fruitful. One could even perhaps say he came to rescue Christianity from the same doom.

                Dr. Starman
              • antrolutz
                Interesting, Dr Starman! Somewhere with Steiner (karmic lectures??) I read about two streams, one with understanding Christ as the cosmic being, the other with
                Message 7 of 12 , Jul 2, 2002
                • 0 Attachment
                  Interesting, Dr Starman!

                  Somewhere with Steiner (karmic lectures??) I read about two streams,
                  one with understanding Christ as the cosmic being, the other with
                  more "Jesus" understanding/experience. Do you know more about this
                  aspect?

                  Lutz

                  --- In steiner@y..., DRStarman2001@a... wrote:

                  > *******I would say it simply shows how far along the Path a person
                  has gotten. We meet the Christ Being at a certain point, the point
                  of legitimate entry into the spiritual world with the ability to
                  come and go at will from then on. Entry onto the astral plane does
                  not require this. In the same way as a physical scientist can
                  recognize whether a man has or has not mastered calculus, or has
                  only reached a point of beginning to acquire the thinking needed to
                  do so, a spiritual scientist can recognize whether a person has
                  reached a particular level or not.
                  >
                  > For example, Dr. Steiner once discussed Mr. Leadbeater's book
                  with its descriptions of the astral plane and lower Devachan. He
                  confirmed that the description of the astral plane was real, but
                  said quite objectively that the alleged description of Devachan
                  there was merely a re-worked depiction of the astral again (because
                  anyone who reaches it knows it is "heard", not seen).
                  >
                  > Similarly, look at Swami Yogananda's work. Though educated
                  entirely in Eastern wisdom, he recognized that the Being he knew
                  through Initiation was the same described by Western English
                  Christianity in his country (as did his guru, Sri Yukteswar).
                  >
                  > Just as entering the spiritual world without self-knowledge
                  does not enable one to orient oneself, and thus it's required to
                  recognize one's alter ego as the Lesser Guardian first, so the final
                  entry that enables one to come and go at will from then on requires
                  one to recognize that Other, the One who became the Mediator. Many
                  people in the West have become alienated from the Christ through the
                  perversion of the Christian religion by the opposing Powers, and so
                  have a great difficulty doing this. It is of critical importance to
                  be able to do so, however, or else one's occultism will merely
                  become 'Luciferic' or 'Ahrimanic'. Dr. Steiner came to rescue the
                  impulse of the White Brotherhood we call Theosophy from this fate,
                  so that it could be fruitful. One could even perhaps say he came to
                  rescue Christianity from the same doom.
                  >
                  > Dr. Starman
                • DRStarman2001@aol.com
                  ... *******It was indeed in the Karma lectures he gave at the end of his life, on the karma of those of us who would be attracted to the Anthroposophical
                  Message 8 of 12 , Jul 2, 2002
                  • 0 Attachment
                    info@... writes:
                    Interesting, Dr Starman!
                    Somewhere with Steiner (karmic lectures??) I read about two streams,
                    one with understanding Christ as the cosmic being, the other with
                    more "Jesus" understanding/experience. Do you know more about this
                    aspect?
                    Lutz


                    *******It was indeed in the Karma lectures he gave at the end of his life, on the karma of those of us who would be attracted to the Anthroposophical Sopciety, in fact. But what he said was that there would be three streams: one, a group who were attracted to the cosmology (astrology, etc.) due to a strong influence from their incarnations in pre-Christian pagan wisdom schools; then a second group who had no such, but did have a simple heart-understanding of the Christ from their incarnations in the early Christian era; and a third group who would be sort of moving from one stream to the other. One can see this in those who take up the Christian teachings but have a hard time with "Ancient Saturn", "Fire Spirits" and what not, and others who can wax eloquently about occult cosmology but don't relate to "Jesus stuff" too well. For an example of the third, look at John Gardner, who published all the Myrin Institute "Proceedings" but towards the end of his life joined a born-again Christian group and saw how their simple heart-relation to Christ had such valid results for them, and wrote a little book, "Two Paths To The Spirit: Charismatic Christianity and Anthroposophy."

                    Dr. Starman


                    --- In steiner@y..., DRStarman2001@a... wrote:

                    > *******I would say it simply shows how far along the Path a person
                    has gotten. We meet the Christ Being at a certain point, the point
                    of legitimate entry into the spiritual world with the ability to
                    come and go at will from then on. Entry onto the astral plane does
                    not require this. In the same way as a physical scientist can
                    recognize whether a man has or has not mastered calculus, or has
                    only reached a point of beginning to acquire the thinking needed to
                    do so, a spiritual scientist can recognize whether a person has
                    reached a particular level or not.
                    >
                    >     For example, Dr. Steiner once discussed Mr. Leadbeater's book
                    with its descriptions of the astral plane and lower Devachan. He
                    confirmed that the description of the astral plane was real, but
                    said quite objectively that the alleged description of Devachan
                    there was merely a re-worked depiction of the astral again (because
                    anyone who reaches it knows it is "heard", not seen).
                    >
                    >    Similarly, look at Swami Yogananda's work. Though educated
                    entirely in Eastern wisdom, he recognized that the Being he knew
                    through Initiation was the same described by Western English
                    Christianity in his country (as did his guru, Sri Yukteswar).
                    >
                    >    Just as entering the spiritual world without self-knowledge
                    does not enable one to orient oneself, and thus it's required to
                    recognize one's alter ego as the Lesser Guardian first, so the final
                    entry that enables one to come and go at will from then on requires
                    one to recognize that Other, the One who became the Mediator. Many
                    people in the West have become alienated from the Christ through the
                    perversion of the Christian religion by the opposing Powers, and so
                    have a great difficulty doing this. It is of critical importance to
                    be able to do so, however, or else one's occultism will merely
                    become 'Luciferic' or 'Ahrimanic'. Dr. Steiner came to rescue the
                    impulse of the White Brotherhood we call Theosophy from this fate,
                    so that it could be fruitful. One could even perhaps say he came to
                    rescue Christianity from the same doom.
                    >
                    > Dr. Starman


                  • jla
                    Durwood, Might there be something else that may also blind some to the nature of the Christ? There must be some bias carried over into the spiritual world
                    Message 9 of 12 , Jul 2, 2002
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Durwood,
                       
                      Might there be something else that may also "blind some" to the nature of the Christ? There must be some bias carried over into the spiritual world that prevents even some very advanced souls from seeing the "fact" of the Christ Being. Great Teachers like Aurobindo, Meher Baba, the Dali Lama, and others reached very exalted transcendental states far beyond the astral yet missed the boat across Jordan, so to speak. And if the Christ is now active as the Etheric Christ, surely He must be present and noticeable in the lower realms as well????
                       
                       
                      Jeff
                       
                       
                       
                      ----- Original Message -----
                      Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2002 11:48 AM
                      Subject: Re: [steiner] Unique Place of Christ

                      evlogite@... writes:
                      > Hi Everyone:
                      > Why is it that so many otherwise insightful streams confuse the role of Christ in the universe?  I am currently trying to understand the blind spot that some, such as Alice Bailey, Besant, et al, have regarding Christ. Bailey sees Christ as an cosmic position (office) which a number of beings periodically occupy (if I understand her writings correctly).  Does anyone here have an insight into this?  I would appreciate any help that you can give.

                      *******I would say it simply shows how far along the Path a person has gotten. We meet the Christ Being at a certain point, the point of legitimate entry into the spiritual world with the ability to come and go at will from then on. Entry onto the astral plane does not require this. In the same way as a physical scientist can recognize whether a man has or has not mastered calculus, or has only reached a point of beginning to acquire the thinking needed to do so, a spiritual scientist can recognize whether a person has reached a particular level or not.

                          For example, Dr. Steiner once discussed Mr. Leadbeater's book with its descriptions of the astral plane and lower Devachan. He confirmed that the description of the astral plane was real, but said quite objectively that the alleged description of Devachan there was merely a re-worked depiction of the astral again (because anyone who reaches it knows it is "heard", not seen).

                         Similarly, look at Swami Yogananda's work. Though educated entirely in Eastern wisdom, he recognized that the Being he knew through Initiation was the same described by Western English Christianity in his country (as did his guru, Sri Yukteswar).

                         Just as entering the spiritual world without self-knowledge does not enable one to orient oneself, and thus it's required to recognize one's alter ego as the Lesser Guardian first, so the final entry that enables one to come and go at will from then on requires one to recognize that Other, the One who became the Mediator. Many people in the West have become alienated from the Christ through the perversion of the Christian religion by the opposing Powers, and so have a great difficulty doing this. It is of critical importance to be able to do so, however, or else one's occultism will merely become 'Luciferic' or 'Ahrimanic'. Dr. Steiner came to rescue the impulse of the White Brotherhood we call Theosophy from this fate, so that it could be fruitful. One could even perhaps say he came to rescue Christianity from the same doom.

                      Dr. Starman

                      Post to steiner@egroups.com

                      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                      steiner-unsubscribe@egroups.com

                      Search the archives of the group at:
                      http://www.esotericlinks.com/egroupsearch.html

                      Recommended books by Rudolf Steiner at:
                      http://www.esotericlinks.com/steinerbooks.html



                      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
                    • evlogite
                      Hi Jeff: Is it preconceived notion and bias that blinds us? Interesting. I know that it is possible to be very developed along one aspect of the spiritual
                      Message 10 of 12 , Jul 2, 2002
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Hi Jeff:
                        Is it preconceived notion and bias that blinds us?
                        Interesting. I know that it is possible to be very developed along
                        one aspect of the spiritual path (devotional path, for example) and
                        have a major blindspot regarding something that falls outside the
                        scope of one's training (tolerance for non-believers, for example).
                        I wonder what PARTICULAR aspect causes the individual to "miss the
                        boat" or reject the Christ Event. Is it merely the sometimes bad
                        track record of historical Christianity? Help me out here.

                        evlogite

                        PS I remember a killer quote by RS regarding the knowledge of the
                        Trinity; does anyone know exactly how it goes?

                        (Ignorance of the Father is a ... , of the Son an illness and of the
                        Holy Spirit a tragedy.--) If anyone knows how this goes, my thanks in
                        advance.


                        --- In steiner@y..., "jla" <pacbay@a...> wrote:
                        > Durwood,
                        >
                        > Might there be something else that may also "blind some" to the
                        nature of the Christ? There must be some bias carried over into the
                        spiritual world that prevents even some very advanced souls from
                        seeing the "fact" of the Christ Being. Great Teachers like Aurobindo,
                        Meher Baba, the Dali Lama, and others reached very exalted
                        transcendental states far beyond the astral yet missed the boat
                        across Jordan, so to speak. And if the Christ is now active as the
                        Etheric Christ, surely He must be present and noticeable in the lower
                        realms as well????
                        >
                        >
                        > Jeff
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > ----- Original Message -----
                        > From: DRStarman2001@a...
                        > To: steiner@y...
                        > Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2002 11:48 AM
                        > Subject: Re: [steiner] Unique Place of Christ
                        >
                        >
                        > evlogite@y... writes:
                        > > Hi Everyone:
                        > > Why is it that so many otherwise insightful streams confuse the
                        role of Christ in the universe? I am currently trying to understand
                        the blind spot that some, such as Alice Bailey, Besant, et al, have
                        regarding Christ. Bailey sees Christ as an cosmic position (office)
                        which a number of beings periodically occupy (if I understand her
                        writings correctly). Does anyone here have an insight into this? I
                        would appreciate any help that you can give.
                        >
                        > *******I would say it simply shows how far along the Path a
                        person has gotten. We meet the Christ Being at a certain point, the
                        point of legitimate entry into the spiritual world with the ability
                        to come and go at will from then on. Entry onto the astral plane does
                        not require this. In the same way as a physical scientist can
                        recognize whether a man has or has not mastered calculus, or has only
                        reached a point of beginning to acquire the thinking needed to do so,
                        a spiritual scientist can recognize whether a person has reached a
                        particular level or not.
                        >
                        > For example, Dr. Steiner once discussed Mr. Leadbeater's book
                        with its descriptions of the astral plane and lower Devachan. He
                        confirmed that the description of the astral plane was real, but said
                        quite objectively that the alleged description of Devachan there was
                        merely a re-worked depiction of the astral again (because anyone who
                        reaches it knows it is "heard", not seen).
                        >
                        > Similarly, look at Swami Yogananda's work. Though educated
                        entirely in Eastern wisdom, he recognized that the Being he knew
                        through Initiation was the same described by Western English
                        Christianity in his country (as did his guru, Sri Yukteswar).
                        >
                        > Just as entering the spiritual world without self-knowledge
                        does not enable one to orient oneself, and thus it's required to
                        recognize one's alter ego as the Lesser Guardian first, so the final
                        entry that enables one to come and go at will from then on requires
                        one to recognize that Other, the One who became the Mediator. Many
                        people in the West have become alienated from the Christ through the
                        perversion of the Christian religion by the opposing Powers, and so
                        have a great difficulty doing this. It is of critical importance to
                        be able to do so, however, or else one's occultism will merely
                        become 'Luciferic' or 'Ahrimanic'. Dr. Steiner came to rescue the
                        impulse of the White Brotherhood we call Theosophy from this fate, so
                        that it could be fruitful. One could even perhaps say he came to
                        rescue Christianity from the same doom.
                        >
                        > Dr. Starman
                        >
                        > Post to steiner@e...
                        >
                        > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                        > steiner-unsubscribe@e...
                        >
                        > Search the archives of the group at:
                        > http://www.esotericlinks.com/egroupsearch.html
                        >
                        > Recommended books by Rudolf Steiner at:
                        > http://www.esotericlinks.com/steinerbooks.html
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
                        Service.
                      • jla
                        Evlogite, Here is a point of view on this issue of knowing the Christ directly: It is clear from esoteric and spiritual reports that bias in not just within us
                        Message 11 of 12 , Jul 2, 2002
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Evlogite,
                           
                          Here is a point of view on this issue of knowing the Christ directly:
                           
                          It is clear from esoteric and spiritual reports that bias in not just within us but externalizes itself in the Astral realms as images, environments, and inclinations. We gravitate to certain regions and in contact with certain beings in the spiritual worlds based on bias or affiliation. If one is a Buddhist then one will gravitate and support Buddhist astral and devachanic imagery and beings; if one is a Jew or Hindu the same holds true;, and so on. Until one rids oneself of all presuppositions and can eliminate bias, one will see only what is within oneself as externalized and supported as a group astral environment. Eventually we are led to other cultures and religions but fundamental bias can carry over from life to life.
                           
                          If one thinks the Christ is just another adept or just a wise rabbi, then that is what will appear as "knowledge" to one in most cases. Often the shock of death or a traumatic spiritual experience will propel one out of bias and one will see things as they are.  There are other esoteric explanations involving actual deceptive practices but we will pass on that for now.
                           
                           Until one enters the spiritual worlds completely open, morally strong and with a predominance of objectivity, certain beings and events will be hidden or seen with limitations, it seems, and this would include the Christ.
                           
                           
                           
                          Jeff
                          -----
                        • antrolutz
                          Thanks, Dr Starman! Any ideas about wether/how the Aristotelian / Platonic streams fit into that? Do you have a view of how the Platonic return works out
                          Message 12 of 12 , Jul 19, 2002
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Thanks, Dr Starman!

                            Any ideas about wether/how the Aristotelian / Platonic streams fit
                            into that?

                            Do you have a view of how the Platonic "return" works out nowadays
                            and the cooperation Steiner hoped for?

                            I am ready for a looong answer, if it suits you.

                            Greetings, Lutz


                            Dr.Starman, earlier:
                            > *******It was indeed in the Karma lectures he gave at the end of
                            his life, on
                            > the karma of those of us who would be attracted to the
                            Anthroposophical
                            > Sopciety, in fact. But what he said was that there would be three
                            streams:
                            > one, a group who were attracted to the cosmology (astrology, etc.)
                            due to a
                            > strong influence from their incarnations in pre-Christian pagan
                            wisdom
                            > schools; then a second group who had no such, but did have a
                            simple
                            > heart-understanding of the Christ from their incarnations in the
                            early
                            > Christian era; and a third group who would be sort of moving from
                            one stream
                            > to the other. One can see this in those who take up the Christian
                            teachings
                            > but have a hard time with "Ancient Saturn", "Fire Spirits" and
                            what not, and
                            > others who can wax eloquently about occult cosmology but don't
                            relate to
                            > "Jesus stuff" too well. For an example of the third, look at John
                            Gardner,
                            > who published all the Myrin Institute "Proceedings" but towards
                            the end of
                            > his life joined a born-again Christian group and saw how their
                            simple
                            > heart-relation to Christ had such valid results for them, and
                            wrote a little
                            > book, "Two Paths To The Spirit: Charismatic Christianity and
                            Anthroposophy."
                            >
                            > Dr. Starman
                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.