Countering Asuras
From: Steinerhead
Date: Tue Jan 6, 2004 9:59 pm
Subject: Countering Asuras
In a message dated 1/5/04 12:26:02 AM anthrouncle
writes, quoting Steiner:
<snip>...whereas the good Spirits made possible the working
of karma to the end that the Ahrimanic powers might be resisted
and the evil made good, it will not be so easy to counter the
Asuric powers as earth-existence takes its course. For these
Asuric Spirits will prompt what has been seized hold of by them,
namely the very core of man's being, the consciousness soul together
with the "I", to unite with earthly materiality. Fragment
after fragment will be torn out of the 'I', and in the same measure
in which the Asuric Spirits establish themselves in the consciousness
soul, man must leave parts of his existence behind on the earth.
What thus becomes the prey of the Asuric powers will be irretrievably
lost. Not that the whole man need become their victim - but parts
of his spirit will be torn away by the Asuric powers. These Asuric
powers are heralded today by the prevailing tendency to live
wholly in the material world and to be obliviouls of the reality
of spiritual beings and spiritual worlds. True, the Asuric powers
corrupt man today in a way that is more theoretical than actual.
Sounds to me that becoming aware of spiritual
realities could be the best defense against these Asuric powers.
Further more, he says that "it will not be so easy to counter
the Asuric powers as earth-existence takes its course."
So it may not be so easy, but it is counterable. He does not
say that it is impossible.
So nurturing a relationship with our true
selves, which is embedded with the Christ impulse, is indeed
a force to be reckoned with, when it comes to these "Asuric
powers," potent as they may be.
So there is more work to be done, once we
resolve our personal Arimanic/Luciferic/karmic difficulties.
We must learn to live Love from the center of the source; to
uncover it from beneath the mountains of illusory Darwinian human-animal-science;
to pay attention to the numerous syncronicities that spring up;
to understand all Twelve of our senses; to recognize and experience
the "I of the other"; to have wonder and reverence
for life; to observe the results of our own thinking process;
"to think with the power of Love in spiritual form";
And to "Love -- LOVE, and do what you will."
When I first read about these "Asuric
powers" I was shaken a bit. But now that I have thought
about it, I see no reason to believe that they have any power
over true Love that is realized.
I have seen many a person begin to grasp a
spiritual reality, and transform there lives from a living hell,
to a life of meaning and wonder. This living Hell was always
instilled by an understanding of ourselves that was given to
us from misinformed people.
And how informed is modern materialistic Science
about the nature of human consciousness? Not much in my opinion.
I have a friend that in finishing up his Ph.D. in neuroscience
at UCSD, who has been poking Leeches for the past six years,
to try to understand how Neurons function. There is a book out
that is about four inches thick entitled: "The Neuron."
Well, If we start from the Neuron, it might take a hell of a
long time for modern materialistic science to give us a definitive
description of ourselves, and our place in the cosmos.
I love the idea of "spiritual science"
because it really has opened up a whole new dimension to understanding
human constructs. I tried to read Steiner fifteen years ago and
found to difficult to grasp then. I needed the soul science Jung
and the Twelve steps first. But to each there own....
I wonder also if Bevis and Butt-head, or Daria
might be good counter efforts against the Asuric powers??? How
about Frank Zappa???.... Maybe if we play the "Were only
in it for the money" album (remember those?) at 78 speed
we could scare away these nasty Asuras beings.
Obviously I am getting very tired.
Truth and Love -- Realized!
Mike
...................................................................................................................................
From: Tarjei Straume
Date: Tue Jan 6, 2004 10:39 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras
At 06:59 07.01.2004, Mike wrote:
Sounds to me that becoming aware of spiritual
realities could be the best defense against these Asuric powers.
And:
But now that I have thought about it, I
see no reason to believe that they have any power over true Love
that is realized.
My thoughts exactly. Steiner had other "horror
stories" up his sleeve, i.e. how the secret occult lodges
of the West work to entrap some people after death and enslave
them, forcing them to serve the powers that bring deadly diseases
to children. But in that context he also said that spiritual
knowledge facilitated through Anthroposophy gave a certain protection.
(I'll try to get back to this with quotes and references.)
RS says about the Asuras that they are now
working theoretically and not yet practically. Such was the state
of affairs when he spoke about them 95 years ago, but we're looking
to the present and the future here.
I understand it, we see their effects in the
worst excesses of the Holocaust and crimes against humanity all
the way up to the present; we also see the Asuras, I think, in
the increased epidemic of pedophilia worldwide; we see them in
capital crimes of the most revolting kind. I am also inclined
to believe that the practice of capital punishment furthers the
powers and the influence of these Asuric Beings by releasing
them from their hosts and giving them the freedom to roam around
in pursuit of new victims, enriched by feeding on the former
victims. The cruelty and icecold deliberation involved in state
killings (executions) helps these beings, contrary to the 'popular'
belief that the (real) perpetrators of such crimes will never
repeat their acts.
Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/
...................................................................................................................................
From: Joel Wendt
Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 9:03 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras
Dear Tarjei,
Neither Jesus or Steiner is here to ask them
what they meant in the writings you quote, but you are here,
and so I have given some emphasis below to certain of your words,
by placing them in caps.
On Tue, 2004-01-06 at 23:39, Tarjei Straume
wrote:
I UNDERSTAND IT, we see their effects in
the worst excesses of the Holocaust and crimes against humanity
all the way up to the present; we also see the Asuras, I think,
in the increased epidemic of pedophilia worldwide; we see them
in capital crimes of the most revolting kind. I AM ALSO INCLINED
TO BELIEVE that the practice of capital punishment furthers
the powers and the influence of these Asuric Beings by releasing
them from their hosts and giving them the freedom to roam around
in pursuit of new victims, enriched by feeding on the former
victims. The cruelty and icecold deliberation involved in state
killings (executions) helps these beings, contrary to the 'popular'
belief that the (real) perpetrators of such crimes will never
repeat their acts.
Nowhere do you say that you know anything.
In this regard, why do you suppose that Steiner began his life
by carefully examining the problem of knowledge first, before
ever offering anything regarding spiritual research? Why do you
suppose he originally didn't want his lectures published? Why
do you suppose he urged us not to believe what he said, simply
because he said it?
But then, I don't believe you care about the
truth or knowledge, but rather are in love with your own opinions
more.
But that's just my belief, its not knowledge
(at least I don't think so, it could be true by accident. But
certainly, since it is only my belief, how can I be held responsible
for its effect?). Then of course there is the hypocrisy latent
in this view which you take, given that the same loose relationship
to knowledge and the truth could (which you justify as okay for
yourself) be claimed by Dan Dugan and Peter S as regards their
"beliefs". So how can you insist they speak the truth
and from knowledge, but you aren't held to the same standard?
AS near as I can tell, everything in the above
paragraph is, on your part, complete invention. What you don't
like in existence, and seems the most horrible, has been by you
characterized as coming from the Asuras. Yet, clearly you have
no knowledge of this - you do not see the supersensible relationships,
but only attribute toward that which you have antipathy, the
direst characterizations.
I don't see this as any different from the
thinking by which fundamentalist Christians believe that New
Age impulses come from Satan. You demonize what you don't like,
borrowing spiritual scientific vocabulary to support your biases.
Such thinking is not based upon anthroposophy.
joel
[Continued
in a different thread]
...................................................................................................................................
From: Tarjei Straume
Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 12:02 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras
At 18:03 07.01.2004, Joel wrote:
Nowhere do you say that you know anything.
We've been through that kind of dance before,
Joel, on other lists. I'll probably write more mosts, perhaps
also about "anthro-horror stories," but I choose to
ignore your barrage of questions that you throw at me when you
try to get manipulative. I suggest you answer them yourself.
They require essays, or tomes; and that's something I'll leave
to you.
Cheers,
Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/
Think twice before flaming the gurus on the
net.
- http://www.albion.com/
...................................................................................................................................
From: Kim Munch Michelsen
Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 11:56 am
Subject: RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras
Hi Tarjei
I think you have hit a both interesting and vital topic.
I think that 'Brain Wash' and 'Destroying of Ego' is two key
sentences when seeking Asuras. I have seen a hidden camera film
strip of a meeting between pedophiles. You have to look long
for more lousy and ego-weak persons, than these. What they do
are again both brain wash of and destroying of the childrens
ego. (Powerless. Misuse of Trust.)
Big Ahrimanian companies takes the initiatives from people, but
don't necessarily destroy the ego.
But what about stress? I am working with edb and know stress
in the computer industry. I have colleges which at the age of
27 has not enough ego left to change a light bulb (no pun intended).
Fanatism as in Islamic fundamentalism, communism, nazizm, scientology,
and every other ideology or organisation which uses methods like
brain wash.
Where and how does Lucifer, Ahriman, and Asuras wok, what are
their weaknesses and how do we counteract them.
Example:
It is said that Ahriman works through Lucifer, that without Lucifer
Ahriman had no power ower man. Is it then so, that without Ahriman,
Asuras would have no power over man?
Kim
Tarjei:
I understand it, we see their effects in
the worst excesses of the Holocaust and crimes against humanity
all the way up to the present; we also see the Asuras, I think,
in the increased epidemic of pedophilia worldwide; we see them
in capital crimes of the most revolting kind. I am also inclined
to believe that the practice of capital punishment furthers the
powers and the influence of these Asuric Beings by releasing
them from their hosts and giving them the freedom to roam around
in pursuit of new victims, enriched by feeding on the former
victims. The cruelty and icecold deliberation involved in state
killings (executions) helps these beings, contrary to the 'popular'
belief that the (real) perpetrators of such crimes will never
repeat their acts.
Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/
...................................................................................................................................
From: Tarjei Straume
Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 12:24 pm
Subject: RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras
At 20:56 07.01.2004, Kim wrote:
Fanatism as in Islamic fundamentalism,
communism, nazizm, scientology, and every other ideology or organisation
which uses methods like brain wash.
I haven't thought of brainwashing in this
context, but you may indeed have a point there.
Where and how does Lucifer, Ahriman, and
Asuras wok, what are their weaknesses and how do we counteract
them.
Example:
It is said that Ahriman works through Lucifer, that without Lucifer
Ahriman had no power ower man. Is it then so, that without Ahriman,
Asuras would have no power over man?
Again, that's something I've been thinking
too, but I'm a little confused about how these Cosmic Beings
are related to each other. Ahriman is Lucifer's karma in the
sense that he was brought into earthly evolution because this
was made possible though Lucifer's Deed: the Fall. It's possible
that the Asuras represent Ahriman's karma in the same way, but
the Asuras are fallen Archai from the progressive hierarchies
while Ahriman is an "alien" to the gods as well as
to the earthlings:
"We, the higher hierarchies,
are able to let an Earth proceed out of the Moon, on which there
are men who know nothing of death, and on which they cannot develop
the intellect. It is not possible for us, higher hierarchies,
to form the Earth in such a way that it is able to supply the
forces which lead man towards the intellect. We must rely, for
this, on an entirely different being, on a being who comes from
another direction than our own - The Ahrimanic Being. Ahriman
is a being who does not belong to our hierarchy. Ahriman comes
into the stream of evolution from another direction."
- Exoteric
and Esoteric Christianity
Yes, Ahriman is an Alien!
Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/
...................................................................................................................................
From: holderlin66
Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 1:55 pm
Subject: Re: Countering Asuras
--- In [email protected],
Tarjei Straume wrote:
"We, the higher hierarchies,
are able to let an Earth proceed out of the Moon, on which there
are men who know nothing of death, and on which they cannot develop
the intellect. It is not possible for us, higher hierarchies,
to form the Earth in such a way that it is able to supply the
forces which lead man towards the intellect. We must rely, for
this, on an entirely different being, on a being who comes from
another direction than our own - The Ahrimanic Being. Ahriman
is a being who does not belong to our hierarchy. Ahriman comes
into the stream of evolution from another direction."
- Exoteric
and Esoteric Christianity
Yes, Ahriman is an Alien!
Bradford hardly accepts that;
Ahriman is no easy nut to crack. WE have rightly
understood that his Time Period, the open season and wide open
incubation of the Ahrimanic mission, blew open in the 15th century
there abouts. Ahriman's history goes back to Atlantis and the
distrubution of matter and Spirit on the Altars of Atlantis.
We find him Genghising along the bumpy road
and we find him constantly making bids for power. He made a bid
for Power in Imperial Rome. We see the Symptomology of the Ahrimanic
as it affects or infects human consciousness in the advanced
and ripe condition of soul that Caiaphas displayed. Money-Guilt-Judas-Payment
and false witness. It is wonderful Symptomology that constantly
appears in the human soul. Learn think see -learn think see -
learn think see.
WE find Ahriman given open season to hunt
down Job and harasss the hell out of him. God's Point? Well He
has served a task for the Gods but really, like the Comets and
the Solar system, runs an agenda that counters the human divinity.
Yet, without this experience we cannot develop freedom, science
and Intellect.
More than 400 years ago, Giordano Bruno, an
Italian monk, wrote that "In space there are numberless
earths circling around other suns, which may bear upon them creatures
similar or even superior to those upon our human Earth."
Bruno deserves to be remembered -- he was burnt at the stake,
in Rome, in the year 1600. A damned martyr to Science and Luciferic
forces burned him.
Everything from 500 years ago can be pivoted
on the luciferic Karma of the Church to the Scientific karma
of Ahriman. Eveything we haven't learned yet. WE paid money for
comfortable luciferic SOUL conditions after death, now we pay
for bodily immortality with lifts and tucks, operations to stay
immortal on the Earth. The Karma pivot from the Luciferic forces
of the Church to the Church of Ahrimanic Science is bloated with
exacting karma. Churches/ Skyscrapers, we have merely shifted
the blame again from ourselves to Ahriman.
Christ had no interior karma on the Earth
so naturally he was a real alien, to do what he did, which is
what every sci-fi reality attempts to say. A superior alien intelligence
who comes to earth with healing powers and humanity destroys
it as a monster is a constant reminder of our stupidity. But
Ahriman was right in the mix of Earth from the very beginnings
otherwise we would never have left the garden of eden. Steiner
examines as well the reality that it wasn't meant to be such
a Fall into the well of Earth and he gives examples of the if
not then what.
But the threshold of daring and unforgiving
coldness that Ahriman represents brings precision into the intellect.
But the ramifications of the chill hinder the redemption of the
Ahrimanic forces, which are soley due to how humanity chooses
to remain unconsious of this potent being. Ahriman was right
there on conference call with Christ in the desert and all of
the vision and debating over the future human seedlings, was
set out in living color. We now are lucky, in all seriousness,
that the horror and films we see, they give us some indication
of the kind of danger humanity could get themselves into. It
is indeed humanities maturity and ability to come up with a real
working model of the Immortal forces of Courage at the root of
infected and diseased hypocrisy.
Nietsche as well as Bruno could be considered
martyrs to knowledge. In Nietzsche we have Ahriman finally getting
his two cents worth in writing. The efficient industrial corporation
of the Third Reich and the cleansing of the gene pool was finally
letting Ahriman into human consciousness. Would Ahriman prefer
that humanity remain hypocrites. Nay. The sooner we overcome
our hypocrisy the sooner we attend to the Science of Love, which
is a Science. Why in hell we don't treat it as a science baffles
me. But how can we have such a mature science when we prefer
to constantly pay homage to Ahriman instead of placing his contribution
in critical perspective?
We humans ask for and get everything we fail
to meet with consciously. It comes as a shock to experience the
horrors that humans do to each other and the other kingdoms.
The Nuclear Age is our answer, by abusing Ahrimanic contributions,
to reveal the bastard son of light. Could we do this another
way, indeed. Do we have to eat all these hard, hard lessons to
come to terms with the full mechanics of Immortality, Say it
isn't so, but it is. Ahriman would prefer that he doesn't arrive
at the Gods door and say, 'Gee I did what you guy required, and
still those little bastards did nothing to steer themselves.
God, your creation is a cowardly failure and now lets do lunch.'
Ahriman has voice and a symptomology and is
a stickler for the 'every last tittle of matter, better get human
love and concern or I'll take it for it was partly mine in the
first place'roberts rules of reason. Angels are aliens as far
as any type of intelligent human stupidity reasons, at least
when we look at life on other planets with our dumb outward staring
eyes.
Could we begin to explore space from the spiritual
side of Devachan communities of beings in the planetary spheres,
yes. Do we show signs of grasping the depth of the human structure
as a seven fold advancing and seeing being, who is a particpant
in these other worlds? No. We just don't want to see Christ or
Ahriman and we prefer the inspirations of Ahriman and we have
settled on taking the bad with the bad. Instead of insisting
with our Freedom and thinking for the good with the good.
We refuse to come to terms that this is how
the Beings behave if you intend to be a spiritual being amongst
spiritual beings you have to learn the rules of the road and
learn not to let Ahriman be taken in as an unconscious infection
in the soul life. Consciously Ahriman is a pretty serious task
master, but has offered us many wonders. Why we prefer to worship
the gifts but scorn the giver of soul, spirit, creation and thinking
logos that trains humanity to become gods is sheer and utter
misrepresentation of all that humans are.
Fenrir was a member of the Gods clan. If we
take the Wolf of Rome and the milk of the intellect of the wolf
fed to Romulus and Remus, we still have the Wolf in the Intellect
and it was a member of the Gods brigade according to rich Norse
legend. He was here before we were and he has every right to
mock us, scorn us, torture us because we are stupid little souls
who fail to learn from our mistakes. We've got it coming and
there is no way around it unless we change. We supply the compassion,
the Love by tapping the Christ Sciences, it ain't Ahriman's job
to do it, it is our job.
Bradford
[Continued
in another thread]
...................................................................................................................................
From: Kim Munch Michelsen
Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 2:08 pm
Subject: RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras
I have found this
We know that upon the ancient
Moon dwelt beings who passed that time through their human stage,
as we are now passing through it in the course of Earth evolution.
In the Cosmic Memory and in An Outline of Esoteric Science these
beings are referred to as Angels, Angeloi and Dhyanis - the name
does not matter. Within these beings took place a battle similar
to the luciferic battle within our own souls - a battle provoked
by those beings who had remained behind upon the Sun. This battle
upon the Moon is in no way concerned with our inner I for on
the Moon we did not yet possess our I. It is not concerned with
anything in which our I takes part. Upon the Moon it took place
"within the bosom of the Angels". And so these beings
developed in a way which was possible only through the influence
of the other beings who had stayed behind during the Sun evolution.
These beings who played the same part with regard to the Angeloi
that to-day the luciferic beings play with regard to ourselves
were the ahrimanic beings which, during the whole of the Sun
evolution, remained behind as did the luciferic beings during
the Moon evolution. That is why we can only indirectly encounter
these beings. It was Ahriman who, as it were, acted as tempter
within the breast of the Angeloi, and he was active within them.
Because of him the Angeloi had become what they then became,
and they have carried over with them what they acquired through
Ahriman, as well as the good they then acquired.
From
Manifestations of Karma
Lecture 7
FORCES OF NATURE, VOLCANIC ERUPTIONS, EARTHQUAKES
AND EPIDEMICS IN RELATION TO KARMA
Found at http://southerncrossreview.org/
Kim
Again, that's something I've been thinking too, but I'm a
little confused about how these Cosmic Beings are related to
each other. Ahriman is Lucifer's karma in the sense that he was
brought into earthly evolution because this was made possible
though Lucifer's Deed: the Fall. It's possible that the Asuras
represent Ahriman's karma in the same way, but the Asuras are
fallen Archai from the progressive hierarchies while Ahriman
is an "alien" to the gods as well as to the earthlings:
"We, the higher hierarchies,
are able to let an Earth proceed out of the Moon, on which there
are men who know nothing of death, and on which they cannot develop
the intellect. It is not possible for us, higher hierarchies,
to form the Earth in such a way that it is able to supply the
forces which lead man towards the intellect. We must rely, for
this, on an entirely different being, on a being who comes from
another direction than our own - The Ahrimanic Being. Ahriman
is a being who does not belong to our hierarchy. Ahriman comes
into the stream of evolution from another direction."
- Exoteric
and Esoteric Christianity
Yes, Ahriman is an Alien!
Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/
...................................................................................................................................
From: Steinerhead
Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 10:40 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras
In a message dated 1/7/04 5:22:54 Joel writes:
[Countering Asuras
/ Closet Manicheanism / Rudolf Steiner's personal moral character
/ Ahriman, Death, and Stephen King 1]
Dear Tarjei,
Neither Jesus or Steiner is here to ask
them what they meant in the writings you quote, but you are here,
and so I have given some emphasis below to certain of your words,
by placing them in caps.
On Tue, 2004-01-06 at 23:39, Tarjei Straume
wrote:
I UNDERSTAND IT, we see their effects in
the worst excesses of the Holocaust and crimes against humanity
all the way up to the present; we also see the Asuras, I think,
in the increased epidemic of pedophilia worldwide; we see them
in capital crimes of the most revolting kind. I AM ALSO INCLINED
TO BELIEVE that the practice of capital punishment furthers the
powers and the influence of these Asuric Beings by releasing
them from their hosts and giving them the freedom to roam around
in pursuit of new victims, enriched by feeding on the former
victims. The cruelty and icecold deliberation involved in state
killings (executions) helps these beings, contrary to the 'popular'
belief that the (real) perpetrators of such crimes will never
repeat their acts.
Nowhere do you say that you know anything.
In this regard, why do you suppose that Steiner began his life
by carefully examining the problem of knowledge first, before
ever offering anything regarding spiritual research? Why do you
suppose he originally didn't want his lectures published? Why
do you suppose he urged us not to believe what he said, simply
because he said it?
But then, I don't believe you care about
the truth or knowledge, but rather are in love with your own
opinions more.
But that's just my belief, its not knowledge
(at least I don't think so, it could be true by accident. But
certainly, since it is only my belief, how can I be held responsible
for its effect?). Then of course there is the hypocrisy latent
in this view which you take, given that the same loose relationship
to knowledge and the truth could (which you justify as okay for
yourself) be claimed by Dan Dugan and Peter S as regards their
"beliefs". So how can you insist they speak the truth
and from knowledge, but you aren't held to the same standard?
AS near as I can tell, everything in the
above paragraph is, on your part, complete invention. What you
don't like in existence, and seems the most horrible, has been
by you characterized as coming from the Asuras. Yet, clearly
you have no knowledge of this - you do not see the supersensible
relationships, but only attribute toward that which you have
antipathy, the direst characterizations.
I don't see this as any different from
the thinking by which fundamentalist Christians believe that
New Age impulses come from Satan. You demonize what you don't
like, borrowing spiritual scientific vocabulary to support your
biases.
Such thinking is not based upon anthroposophy.
joel
Hi Joel,
I guess I have the benefit of ignorance based
on innocence when it comes to this discussion, as I have only
in the last couple of years, been trying to digest the huge "cathedral"
(as Soesman calls it) we call Anthroposophy.
Metaphorically speaking, I can understand
what Tarjei is saying, when attributing the horrors of humanity
to these Asuras beings. I don't know for sure if what he says
is true, but I know that it rocked my world for a while, and
caused me to think deeply on the matter. If something makes sense
to me, then I need to think about it and weigh it against my
Life experience. I did this to the best of my current ability,
and realized all the more, the importance of "conversations
in the key of love" ;^)
Fragmented individuality on the physical plane
is bad enough, and obvious to me now that I have learned to think
about it. But the idea of fragmented and unrecoverable individuality
of the spirit! Well, I think it deserves some serious thought.
I wish that I could put a period at end of the sentences that
I might use to describe the concepts that I might come up with
when I think about such things. But I have thus far learned that
to do so (cherish fixed concepts) is very stifling and even often
painful.
So Tarjei's ideas made sense to me, and I
thought about them, and realized that there is something that
makes much more sense to me (on a scale of say...a billion to
one). In a word, I'd have to say that it is "Love."
Much of your ideas have made sense to me as
well Joel. Your participation on the WC list a couple of years
ago inspired me to dig into Steiner. Thanks.
On a more personal level, Am I detecting a
certain amount of animosity between you guys? Well, if so then
I think you should Kiss and make up. Newbies like me need to
see you old-timers getting along :)
Superdemons and Roaring Fires of LOVE
Mike
...................................................................................................................................
From: Tarjei Straume
Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 12:30 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras
Mike wrote:
On a more personal level, Am I detecting
a certain amount of animosity between you guys?
Yeah, isn't that fun? Anthroposophy Tomorrow
is never boring! (Tell your friends.)
Tarjei
...................................................................................................................................
From: Joel Wendt
Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 10:44 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras
Dear Tarjei,
Yea, whatever...denial is a wonderful thing
isn't it. No sense looking at ourselves, when we can so easily
see the horror in others (people who believe in the death penalty,
child molesters, perpetrators of the Holocaust, and other ausuric
phantoms of your fancy).
warm regards,
joel
On Wed, 2004-01-07 at 13:02, Tarjei Straume
wrote:
At 18:03 07.01.2004, Joel wrote:
Nowhere do you say that you know anything.
We've been through that kind of dance before,
Joel, on other lists. I'll probably write more mosts, perhaps
also about "anthro-horror stories," but I choose to
ignore your barrage of questions that you throw at me when you
try to get manipulative. I suggest you answer them yourself.
They require essays, or tomes; and that's something I'll leave
to you.
Cheers,
Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/
Think twice before flaming the gurus on
the net.
- http://www.albion.com/
* --
Joel Wendt
...................................................................................................................................
From: Joel Wendt
Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 10:40 am
Subject: RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras
Dear Kim,
Just to be consistent, as I usually don't
comment on your posts...
If you want to know about how evil works in
the world, you have to start with yourself. Knowledge of the
working of the double in yourself is the least dangerous path
to understanding the working of evil in the world.
When we look at the world for its evil, without
self knowledge, our thinking lacks a real experience of evil,
and therefore can only really project onto the world our antipathies.
So we see not the true nature of evil in the world, but rather
the mote in our brother's eye, instead of the beam in our own.
Just a note of caution...
warm regards,
joel
On Wed, 2004-01-07 at 12:56, Kim Munch Michelsen
wrote:
Hi Tarjei
I think you have hit a both interesting and vital topic.
I think that 'Brain Wash' and 'Destroying of Ego' is two key
sentences when seeking Asuras. I have seen a hidden camera film
strip of a meeting between pedophiles. You have to look long
for more lousy and ego-weak persons, than these. What they do
are again both brain wash of and destroying of the childrens
ego. (Powerless. Misuse of Trust.)
Big Ahrimanian companies takes the initiatives from people, but
don't necessarily destroy the ego.
But what about stress? I am working with edb and know stress
in the computer industry. I have colleges which at the age of
27 has not enough ego left to change a light bulb (no pun intended).
Fanatism as in Islamic fundamentalism, communism, nazizm, scientology,
and every other ideology or organisation which uses methods like
brain wash.
Where and how does Lucifer, Ahriman, and Asuras wok, what are
their weaknesses and how do we counteract them.
Example:
It is said that Ahriman works through Lucifer, that without Lucifer
Ahriman had no power ower man. Is it then so, that without Ahriman,
Asuras would have no power over man?
Kim
Tarjei:
I understand it, we see their effects in
the worst excesses of the Holocaust and crimes against humanity
all the way up to the present; we also see the Asuras, I think,
in the increased epidemic of pedophilia worldwide; we see them
in capital crimes of the most revolting kind. I am also inclined
to believe that the practice of capital punishment furthers the
powers and the influence of these Asuric Beings by releasing
them from their hosts and giving them the freedom to roam around
in pursuit of new victims, enriched by feeding on the former
victims. The cruelty and icecold deliberation involved in state
killings (executions) helps these beings, contrary to the 'popular'
belief that the (real) perpetrators of such crimes will never
repeat their acts.
Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/
* --
Joel Wendt
...................................................................................................................................
From: Kim Munch
Michelsen
Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 1:26 pm
Subject: RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras
Thank you, Joel,
You are right, the best place to start looking is in your own
self, and with the experiences I have, I think I can understand
the three principles of evil's function in the self.
But how does the evil functions in the world?
Not in extreme cases, but in everyday life!
I don't think that we, in most cases, understand wherein the
evil is.
Lucifer is the one who is the most simple to understand. It is
a direct expression of the persons ego with more or less respect
for others.
Ahriman is more difficult. The influence is generally not so
direct as Lucifer, but more collective in it's influence. Ahriman
is intelligence, without common sense. This is especially seen
in politics, administration's, and companies not to small. One
of the primary symptoms for an Ahrimanic organisation is it's
employees inability to make decisions. Common sense or expertise,
experience within a field, is not accepted as background for
taking responsibility. The primary solutions for handling problems
are: Same procedure as last time, or wait until it is burning,
or until it is not necessary any longer, or the customer makes
so much noise that the president of the organisation is notified
and can make a decision, or export the problem to a consultancy
company.
You will not define such an Ahrimanic organisation as evil, but
it is removing the will and feeling for moral from it's employes,
so they can't take a decision in the real world (that is outside
the organisation) based on moral or common sense. And you can't
point at one person and say that (s)he is the guilty.
Where Ahriman disables the will, goes Asuras a step longer, here
the will of the individual is replaced by others, and the ego
is eradicated. I think that one of the results of the action
of the Asuras is that the connection between the physical mind
and the spirit/ego is more or less destroyed, that is, man is
converted to a mechanical automaton. The military could be an
example, but in most cases I think it is Ahrimanic. 'Education'
by Scientology, Brain Wash by Islamic Fundamentalists are some
examples, but I think there is other not so clear examples. When
people are to hook'ed on computer games, especially shoot them
first, the fysical brain changes it's wiring, and looses it's
connection to the ego. There is an increasing number of unhandled
psychiatric patiens, which has left this world mentally, where
only hollow shell's is left back. I think that people pressed
under extreme stress, for a longer time, can loose their ego.
Warm regards to you too,
Kim
-----Original Message-----
From: Joel Wendt
Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 10:40 am
Subject: RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras
Dear Kim,
Just to be consistent, as I usually don't
comment on your posts...
[Continued
in another thread]
...................................................................................................................................
From: sr_joanna
Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 6:12 am
Subject: Re: Countering Asuras
Mike wrote:
On a more personal level, Am I detecting
a certain amount of animosity between you guys? Well, if so then
I think you should Kiss and make up. Newbies like me need to
see you old-timers getting along :)
Heya Mike,
Ummmm, I think you got it wrong here. What
newbies like you need to see is that serious anthroposophers
can disagree, even disagree quite vehemently, and not have the
world come to an end. If we all sit around nodding and smiling
all the time -- happy happy, joy joy -- where is the movement
and life in anthroposophy?
My vision of anthroposophy is more vibrant
-- and more inclusive -- than that!
Merrily,
JoAnn
...................................................................................................................................
From: Joel Wendt
Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 10:13 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras
Dear Mike,
As a side note, I will be giving a lecture
at Groh's farm on the anthroposophical background to my new seminar
practice (Conversations in the Key of Love: eros and agape in
the modern world), from 3-5 on Sunday Jan. 25th, should you be
free to come.
As to making nice to Tarjei, see my post to
Bradford in response to his Closet Manichean-ism.
warm regards,
joel
On Wed, 2004-01-07 at 11:40, Steinerhead wrote:
Hi Joel,
I guess I have the benefit of ignorance
based on innocence when it comes to this discussion, as I have
only in the last couple of years, been trying to digest the huge
"cathedral" (as Soesman calls it) we call Anthroposophy.
* --
Joel Wendt
...................................................................................................................................
From: Daniel Hindes
Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 11:29 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras
To Joel's position I would like to add that
it is of course always possible to be right, but for the wrong
reasons. The Asuras and the Mystery of the 8th Sphere are indeed
terrible to even begin to contemplate. To actually know such
a thing I get the impression that one would have to have successfully
faced Ahriman first, and very few people indeed have completed
that step. Joel's path is Steiner's path. It is not a path of
knowledge, it is a path of self-knowledge. Steiner himself discovered
Anthroposophy entirely out of himself, walking the path of self-knowledge.
He was then able to work creatively and as a teacher out of his
own experience. For us to take his "facts" without
his "path" is to misunderstand his teaching.
Daniel Hindes
----- Original Message -----
From: Joel Wendt
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 1:44 PM
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras [Countering Asuras / Closet Manicheanism
/ Rudolf Steiner's personal moral character / Ahriman, Death,
and Stephen King 2]
Dear Tarjei,
Yea, whatever...denial is a wonderful thing
isn't it. No sense looking at ourselves, when we can so easily
see the horror in others (people who believe in the death penalty,
child molesters, perpetrators of the Holocaust, and other ausuric
phantoms of your fancy).
warm regards,
joel
...................................................................................................................................
From: Steinerhead
Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 1:47 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Countering Asuras
In a message dated 1/8/2004 9:12:53 AM Eastern
Standard Time, sr_joanna writes:
Heya Mike,
Joanne wrote:
Ummmm, I think you got it wrong here. What
newbies like you need to see is that serious anthroposophers
can disagree, even disagree quite vehemently, and not have the
world come to an end. If we all sit around nodding and smiling
all the time -- happy happy, joy joy -- where is the movement
and life in anthroposophy?
My vision of anthroposophy is more vibrant
-- and more inclusive -- than that!
Hey Joanne,
I agree. I was surprised I guess. How about
some Happy happy joy joy and then some brutal honesty? kinda
like a breathing process?
Or we could be like Dori, the stupid fish
in "Finding Nemo"... Just keep swimming...just keep
swimming... swimming ...swimming...swimming...
Brutal Truth and flowing Love
Mike
...................................................................................................................................
From: golden3000997
Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 4:12 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Countering Asuras
Hey Mike!
Dori wasn't stupid - she had short-term memory
loss!!! : ) And she DID help!!! Just goes to show you, don't
it? We all have our place in the scheme of things. Even Bruce!
: ) Christine
...................................................................................................................................
From: Steinerhead
Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 8:21 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Countering Asuras
In a message dated 1/9/04 12:42:07 AM !!!First
Boot!!!, [email protected] writes:
Hey Mike!
Dori wasn't stupid - she had short-term
memory loss!!! : ) And she DID help!!! Just goes to show you,
don't it? We all have our place in the scheme of things. Even
Bruce!
: ) Christine
You are absolutely right Christine. She did
remember the address didn't she. Oh well, I'm eatin crow now....CHAW...CHAW...CHAW...
;^)
Who is Bruce?
Love and Truth
Mike
...................................................................................................................................
From: golden3000997
Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 8:57 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Countering Asuras
Duh, the Shark on the 12 step program! LOL
- LOL - LOL!!!
...................................................................................................................................
From: golden3000997
Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 9:00 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Countering Asuras
oh god, I'm still cracking up!!
and don't forget the most important point
of all, when they do catch us
SWIM DOWN! SWIM DOWN!! SWIM DOWN!!!
: ) : ) : )
...................................................................................................................................
From: golden3000997
Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 9:01 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Countering Asuras
Hey "Keep swimming" isn't such bad
advice, either, come to think of it (still giggling)
...................................................................................................................................
From: Joel Wendt
Date: Sat Jan 10, 2004 10:13 am
Subject: RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras
Dear Kim,
What I was trying to point to was not to be
found in our trying to look at our "ideas" of the human
organization, as if we could label some aspects of this "idea"
as luciferic or ahrimanic (or asuric). Rather I was suggesting
that in order to know how evil works in the world, we have to
face our shadow, our double.
This is not about ideas at all, but about
what is working in our soul from the inside outward in such a
way that we really don't appreciate its true nature.
Mostly we don't self observe carefully enough,
or practice the relevant inner discipline by which we would meet
the double. Instead what happens is that we act out of the double
on a regular basis, but never see it - it is too intimate, and
being that intimate we'd rather be in denial of it, than face
it.
Now the activity of the double leaves all
kinds of hints and clues behind, but in order to perceive this
activity we have to be more focused on the beam in our own eye,
than on the mote in our brother's eye. Appreciating the double
is more an act of confession, than it is an act of describing
the world we perceive.
So when folks describe businesses or governments
or others as possessing evil qualities, we can generally assume
that they don't know what they are talking about, because this
focus on the "other" and the mote in their eye really
only tells us something about the speaker or ourselves.
Careful self observation reveals that we adorn
the world with ideas that are first produced in our own consciousness,
most frequently though unconscious processes. We have a feeling
of antipathy (or sympathy), and this unredeemed feeling then
serves as a driver for the thought content. I use the term "unredeemed"
to point to the fact that the feeling is not within our conscious
mastery (as might be a cultivated mood of soul), but more likely
the antipathy is a product of the double itself.
The double influences how we see the world,
because until we can consciously take over that activity, and
thus the unfolding of our own karma, we are bound to the double
by necessity. We need the double in order to experience our karma.
So the initial difficulty is always within,
and our first clue as to the problem is when we find ourselves
seeing evil outside in the world (the mote), rather than facing
the more daunting task of facing our own shadow (the beam).
When Steiner first taught these matters, he
taught in a time in which the intellectual soul still predominated,
and mostly to a people (Central Europeans) who lived very much
in the ideal. This required that he give hints and point in certain
directions, but could not be very overt and blunt.
But that time is now long past, and as we
begin the new century, it becomes necessary to be more plain
spoken.
At present the best example of work with the
double is in 12 Step groups, wherein a certain practice (authored
by the Ethereal Return of the Christ) has flourished. Here is
one more or less accurate version: http://www.al-anon.alateen.org/12steps.html
Were anthroposophists to combine this practical
and pragmatic (very American) method of "confession"
together with a study of Steiner's Theory of Knowledge, great
strides forward in esoteric development could be made. You see,
in reality it is not about ideas at all, but about deeds - in
this case inner deeds which are then joined together in some
kind of wise group process.
It is the company we keep as we struggle to
understand and master the doubles that brings us forward into
the future along well grounded spiritual pathways. We could study
Steiner lectures, read all manner of books of ideas and ideals
about spiritual life, and never take the most dangerous step
at all - looking honestly at ourselves.
So on this list we talk about spiritual as
if we could see it in society, see lucifer here, and ahriman
there, and michael behind that, when the real serious work remains
undone - inside our own souls, in that place were ideas and feelings
are to become the conscious product of deeds - to will in the
thinking, and think in the willing.
But confession is hard to do. The last thing
our very protected and still too childish egos want to do, is
to confess to ourselves, much less to others. Far easier to point
fingers and blame, especially when someone has the temerity to
suggest we are full of shit.
Yet, of all the gifts another person can give
us, telling us when we are full of it is quite very much one
of the best. Hard to take - of course. Which is the main clue
to its real utility.
At the same time, groups need to be formed
where this is understood as a way of practice. No one goes long
to a truly functional 12 Step group without finding out about
confession and confrontation. "Hello, my name is Joel, and
I'm an addict" pause "hello Joel" says the group.
Confession and welcome, for we are brothers and sisters here,
all of us striving to overcome what seems beyond us to overcome.
So personal stories get told, and some stories
are from new people, and familiar to all for that reason, and
then once in a while someone who has been working the Steps for
twenty years gets up and speaks, and wisdom flows into the circle
- hard won wisdom - wisdom won through pain, and error, and trial
by fire.
Nothing from books here.
Now the 12 Steps have a weakness, in that
it wasn't possible to speak of the double in a blunt way - human
consciousness in the early years wasn't quite ready for this.
But now, as we more and more need to understand evil in order
to have any kind of intelligent civilization, it becomes necessary
to speak plainly of the double. For this anthroposophy was introduced
into the world, because our "psychological" paradigm
had to grow so as to better reflect the truth here.
Unfortunately, the anthroposophists have fallen
into Steinerism, into dogma and sectarianism, and a kind of lame
theological thinking. The hard part of anthroposophy, looking
squarely at one's self, and making self knowing the essential
goal, this has not come to pass as much as it needed to.
So we enter the new century a bit lamed -
something is missing. Anthroposophists don't know how to "confess",
how to meet each other as true ego beings (as I-ams with flaws
and doubles and all kinds of tendencies to error and stupidity
- that is as human beings). Instead we are on this high path,
students of the great doctor, far above the messy stuff of life.
Our dialogs are competitions in knowing (which one has the better
handle on the questions in the New Testament, or which one sees
social life more clearly), when they should be cooperative arts
of sharing (c.f. M. Spock's Group Moral Artistry).
Anyway, Kim, I can't really be supportive
of what your wrote below - it is still about the mote, not the
beam. Were you to tell us a story of how you finally noticed
how badly you treated your first husband, because you were more
interested in your own career than in his welfare, and how you
have began to see how this impulse still lives in you today and
that you need help in mastering it. And if you then related that
you had begun to pray to the Holy Mother on a regular basis,
for help from your higher power in dealing with this unredeemed
soul flaw which you have now confessed to having. Then further,
how you began to be able to notice this impulse rising in your
soul, very subtly as a kind of temptation whispering to your
spirit, your I-am, and that now you could recognize that this
was an aspect of the double complex in the soul, this temptation,
so now you could see it, and you were grateful to the Holy Mother
for this help, and truly humbled by how flawed you could now
see that you were. So then you went to your former husband, and
sought to make amends, because you knew that you had to at least
ask for his forgiveness (which it isn't necessary to receive)
before you can truly forgive yourself. Then after going through
this trial, which took several months and involved much agony,
you found that in your prayer life, you began to have better
insights into how to love your current husband better, in fact
you could place questions during prayer and receive answers.
If you were to tell such a story (which is
entirely made up by me of course, and isn't meant to do anything
but serve as an illustration) to others, this would not only
serve your own development indirectly, but also be an example
to others. Then if we were in a group that worked together in
this way, with many stories, we could begin to see that in practice
we now had started to understand the Gospel of John, and the
beginning steps outlined there - the washing of the feet, and
the scourging for example.
Then the need for discussions about things
we don't know anything about, like the ausuras, disappears, because
we are now truly meeting each other as struggling human beings,
in such a fine way that intellectual bull shit has no meaning
anymore.
warm regards,
joel
On Thu, 2004-01-08 at 14:26, Kim Munch Michelsen
wrote:
Thank you, Joel,
You are right, the best place to start looking is in your own
self, and with the experiences I have, I think I can understand
the three principles of evil's function in the self.
But how does the evil functions in the world?
Not in extreme cases, but in everyday life!
I don't think that we, in most cases, understand wherein the
evil is.
Lucifer is the one who is the most simple to understand. It is
a direct expression of the persons ego with more or less respect
for others.
Ahriman is more difficult. The influence is generally not so
direct as Lucifer, but more collective in it's influence. Ahriman
is intelligence, without common sense. This is especially seen
in politics, administration's, and companies not to small. One
of the primary symptoms for an Ahrimanic organisation is it's
employees inability to make decisions. Common sense or expertise,
experience within a field, is not accepted as background for
taking responsibility. The primary solutions for handling problems
are: Same procedure as last time, or wait until it is burning,
or until it is not necessary any longer, or the customer makes
so much noise that the president of the organisation is notified
and can make a decision, or export the problem to a consultancy
company.
You will not define such an Ahrimanic organisation as evil, but
it is removing the will and feeling for moral from it's employes,
so they can't take a decision in the real world (that is outside
the organisation) based on moral or common sense. And you can't
point at one person and say that (s)he is the guilty.
Where Ahriman disables the will, goes Asuras a step longer, here
the will of the individual is replaced by others, and the ego
is eradicated. I think that one of the results of the action
of the Asuras is that the connection between the physical mind
and the spirit/ego is more or less destroyed, that is, man is
converted to a mechanical automaton. The military could be an
example, but in most cases I think it is Ahrimanic. 'Education'
by Scientology, Brain Wash by Islamic Fundamentalists are some
examples, but I think there is other not so clear examples. When
people are to hook'ed on computer games, especially shoot them
first, the fysical brain changes it's wiring, and looses it's
connection to the ego. There is an increasing number of unhandled
psychiatric patiens, which has left this world mentally, where
only hollow shell's is left back. I think that people pressed
under extreme stress, for a longer time, can loose their ego.
Warm regards to you too,
Kim
-----Original Message-----
From: Joel Wendt
Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 10:40 am
Subject: RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras
Dear Kim,
Just to be consistent, as I usually don't
comment on your posts...
* --
Joel Wendt
...................................................................................................................................
From: Daniel Hindes
Date: Sun Jan 11, 2004 4:30 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras
Joel,
While much of what you speak is truth, somehow the telling of
it doesn't quite ring true for me. I would be the first to say
that each one of us has to look first and formost at ourselves,
and work there. You say the same thing, but somehow with such
force as to show some interest in changing the opinion of others.
To me, it is perfectly acceptable to speak the truth of the fact
that change comes from within, but it must be done in such a
way that it leaves the other completely free. Yet this response
to Kim seems to show a subtle desire to change her. As I said
to Tarjei in another context, it is possible to be right but
for the wrong reasons. Have you examined all your motivations
in writing this? Does it truly reflect Ethical Individualism?
Daniel Hindes
...................................................................................................................................
From: Kim Munch Michelsen
Date: Sun Jan 11, 2004 12:52 pm
Subject: RE: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras
Dear Joel,
People are different, and what is good for some are wrong for
others. With time we grow away from the systems each of us have
followed.
When I said that I could recognize evil in my self, it is not
as idea's, it is practical understanding of the way my brain
functions, nearly down to the electric currents in the brain.
I can go in and catch feelings like anger, when it's only a little
spark, look at it, decide if it should be deleted or allowed
to continue.
The 12 steps are good for some persons.
A method where you look through your actions of the day, backwards,
is another excellent method.
Steiner's books and lectures is a good way to develop the Ahrimanian
faculties of intelligence in the right way and in equilibrium
with the Luciferic energies. The reading and understanding of
his works is a kind of alchemistic work. The validity of the
content, or if it is intellectual bull shit, as you state, is
really not interesting in this context.
Another thing you misunderstood is that I am not looking for
evil people or organizations, I am looking for how the Ahrimanian
evil functions in the world, and what we can do against it.
Asuras is another story. I heard a satanist tell about his way
to reach the other side, and I got a frightening view into the
mechanics of the Asuras.
By the way, the name 'Kim' is primarily a male name in Europe,
and especially in Denmark, where I live!
I have a good connection to the physical world, and I am educated
in the most 'Ahrimanian' area I can think of: Computer Science.
I have worked within the field in 30 years, with great enthusiasm
(luciferic).
So, all together, I don't feel that your example is in any way
related to me.
The double is strongly connected to the physical body, the physical
brain. The primary goal for the uncontrolled double is to remove
the connection from the brain to the spiritual, and that can
be done by making never ending loops in the brain, by narcotics,
cigarettes, alcohol, extreme sex, sm, pedophilia, and (other)
different kinds of sickness in the mind. Some doctors have used
Electro Chocks to destroy these loops. The 12 steps is another
way.
-----
The only way to fight evil is to concentrate on good, and in
that way remove the energy from the evil.
Example:
--------------------------------------------------------
To stop smoking you have to convince yourself that smoking is
uninteresting, that it is boring...
Find every funny thing about your smoking, and laugh at it:
'Cigarettes tastes good': well, if you are
smoking 40 cigarettes a day, you are nearly breathing through
them, then you can't taste the cigarettes as little as you can
taste the air.
'Cigarettes and a cup of coffee is a good combination': well,
if I haven't smoked a cigarette in the last 15 minutes, I will
finish the first cigarette before I have the first sip of the
coffee.
In this way you can manipulate your brain
by removing the energy from the existing loop's.
One morning, when you feel right, you quit smoking. You have
one day of physical abstinences (after 40 cigarettes a day!).
You don't get irritated by other smokers. Every time you think
of a cigarette, you think of it as boring, and maybe of those
stupid problems you would get if you take a cigarette. After
a month you will not think of cigarettes more than once a month.
When it happens, remember how boring to smoke.
--------------------------------------------------------
Warm regards,
Kim
Dear Kim,
What I was trying to point to was not to
be found in our trying to look at our "ideas" of the
human organization, as if we could label some aspects of this
"idea" as luciferic or ahrimanic (or asuric). Rather
I was suggesting that in order to know how evil works in the
world, we have to face our shadow, our double.
...................................................................................................................................
From: Joel Wendt
Date: Mon Jan 12, 2004 6:03 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras
Dear Daniel,
Years ago (about 1997) I wrote a small journal
called Outlaw Anthroposophy, which can be found on my website
at http://ipwebdev.com/hermit/oajnr.html
Copies (less than 25) were delivered by hand to a conference
at Ann Arbor, where this work was labeled as "subversive"
by some.
As a consequence of my publishing this material
on the Internet, I was invited to join the anthroposophia list;
had the main articles copied positively to Bob and Nancy's Waldorf
Website where they are still available when you click there on
"anthroposophy" http://www.bobnancy.com/menu-steiner.html;
and was asked by Lorenzo Ravgali. whether he could translate
the articles into German and publish them in the jarbuch fur
anthroposophische kritik 1998, to which I said yes.
The two articles are (plus their German translation
titles):
The Study of Rudolf Steiner's Lecture Cycles,
and the Problem of Cognition - musings on the epistemological
swampland of the Anthroposophical Movement (Das Studium der Vortrage
Rudolf Steiners und das Problem der Erkenntnis)
The Anthroposophical Society: Is it a living
social form? Is die Anthroposophische Gesellschaft eine lebedige
Geminschaftsform?
The subtitle to the Journal: Outlaw Anthroposophy
was: "another declaration of independence: spiritual science
with passion - light and heat"
People have a little difficulty with passion,
mistaking it for some kind of judgmentalism, or perhaps some
kind of error, because they want their anthroposophy to be "cool"
and intellectual. I called my work "Outlaw Anthroposophy"
because I understood where I had to take a stand with regard
to the institutional problems in the Society. As Catherine points
out in her article, Steiner expected there to be nearly a million
anthroposophists by the end of the 20th Century - where do you
suppose they went?
Yes, there is a strong reaction to my posts,
and an assumption that they are strident, when all they really
are is confident, and unwilling to tolerate confusing a lot of
what goes on here for "spiritual science".
People here can do and say anything they want
- that is their right as members of the Life of Rights. But when
they claim to practice spiritual science, then that is a cultural
act, and in the cultural life, which is based upon freedom, it
remains true that you either know whereof you speak, or you don't.
When you don't, no one should be surprised if someone who does
has to call you on it (emphasis on "has").
There isn't a lot of choice, and questioning
my motives is okay as an act of free speech, but not very thoughtful,
considering that I have spent a lot of time talking about moral
imagination as applied inwardly as a truth test to our own speaking
and writing. Have you read Gordienko's book? I believe not, in
which case you are in for a shock, for she says, after the fashion
of her Russian soul and mathematical background, exactly what
I have been saying.
The sad thing is how simple this is. People
could easily discuss all this stuff using the vocabulary of the
books on the science of knowing (epistemology), but guess what?
They don't use that vocabulary, and don't contradict me on that
level. Instead they try insults, question my motives, make what
are often personal attacks, all at the same time as not really
addressing the questions I have been raising.
What is Spiritual Science? How do you practice
it? Is it being practiced here? How would we know?
Nothing very difficult at all.
Now we all have our swords and our shields,
and people will raise their shield unconsciously by being defensive.
But the truth remains the truth, and we can always discuss that
using the terminology of the epistemology and related material,
while leaving aside the need for defense and attack on a personal
level.
But the questions listed above remain. These
questions are far more important than some people seem to understand
or appreciate. Whatever Anthroposophy is to be Tomorrow, as we
take upon ourselves the task of regenerating it in this the 21st
Century, depends entirely upon our ability to answer those questions.
Casting aspersions at me or Catherine (who is not here to defend
herself) has nothing to do with the answer to these questions.
warm regards,
joel
On Sun, 2004-01-11 at 17:30, Daniel Hindes
wrote:
Joel,
While much of what you speak is truth, somehow the telling of
it doesn't quite ring true for me. I would be the first to say
that each one of us has to look first and formost at ourselves,
and work there. You say the same thing, but somehow with such
force as to show some interest in changing the opinion of others.
To me, it is perfectly acceptable to speak the truth of the fact
that change comes from within, but it must be done in such a
way that it leaves the other completely free. Yet this response
to Kim seems to show a subtle desire to change her. As I said
to Tarjei in another context, it is possible to be right but
for the wrong reasons. Have you examined all your motivations
in writing this? Does it truly reflect Ethical Individualism?
Daniel Hindes
--
Joel Wendt
[Continued
in another thread]
...................................................................................................................................
From: Daniel Hindes
Date: Mon Jan 12, 2004 7:44 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Countering Asuras
Joel,
A reply to a few of your thoughts:
Years ago (about 1997) I wrote a small
journal called Outlaw Anthroposophy, which can be found on my
website at http://ipwebdev.com/hermit/oajnr.html
Copies (less than 25) were delivered by hand to a conference
at Ann Arbor, where this work was labeled as "subversive"
by some.
You seem proud of your subversive label. I'll
read you article in depth when time permits.
People have a little difficulty with passion,
mistaking it for some kind of judgmentalism, or perhaps some
kind of error, because they want their anthroposophy to be "cool"
and intellectual. I called my work "Outlaw Anthroposophy"
because I understood where I had to take a stand with regard
to the institutional problems in the Society. As Catherine points
out in her article, Steiner expected there to be nearly a million
anthroposophists by the end of the 20th Century - where do you
suppose they went?
I have often pondered this question. It never
occured to me that was the lack of passion in the Anthroposophical
Society. I'll have to work with that idea for a while.
Yes, there is a strong reaction to my posts,
and an assumption that they are strident, when all they really
are is confident, and unwilling to tolerate confusing a lot of
what goes on here for "spiritual science".
I don't think people are reacting so much
to what you say, it is how you say it. You seem, subtly, to enjoy
confrontation and pissing people off. This goes beyond confidence
almost to the point where you seem to be feeding a desire to
feel ostracised. It is also possible to be calmly confident and
tolerant of other peoples error. It is possible to maintain this
soul attitude while still pointing out the error.
People here can do and say anything they
want - that is their right as members of the Life of Rights.
But when they claim to practice spiritual science, then that
is a cultural act, and in the cultural life, which is based upon
freedom, it remains true that you either know whereof you speak,
or you don't. When you don't, no one should be surprised if someone
who does has to call you on it (emphasis on "has").
The world is full of error, even in you and
me. You certainly talk the talk about about changeing from within
and confronting your own double, but you still harbor the desire
to change others, and it is quite evident. Perhaps you don't
see it.
There isn't a lot of choice, and questioning
my motives is okay as an act of free speech, but not very thoughtful,
considering that I have spent a lot of time talking about moral
imagination as applied inwardly as a truth test to our own speaking
and writing. Have you read Gordienko's book? I believe not, in
which case you are in for a shock, for she says, after the fashion
of her Russian soul and mathematical background, exactly what
I have been saying.
So it is not thoughtful of me to question
your motives, though you will conceed it is my right by free
speech. Your talking about moral imagination makes your opinions
immune to criticism. I will grant you no lack of confidence in
your own infallibility. I will not necessarily grant you that
infallibility, and further I would suggest that a belief in one's
own infallibility is downright dangerous on any spiritual path.
I have acutally read Gordienko's book. Several
times. I have gone over it in detail, and then checked her sources.
Did you notice that the page numbers of the citations did not
survive the tranlsation from Russian to German to English? The
numbers were there, but they were off, sometimes by dozens of
pages, to the pages in the English editions.
I must note your incipent glee in telling
me what I will learn were I to read the book. It goes beyond
a pure desire to enlighten, to a desire to affont the opinions
of another. This is not my understandig of the goal of the spiritual
path as indicated in POF.
The sad thing is how simple this is. People
could easily discuss all this stuff using the vocabulary of the
books on the science of knowing (epistemology), but guess what?
They don't use that vocabulary, and don't contradict me on that
level. Instead they try insults, question my motives, make what
are often personal attacks, all at the same time as not really
addressing the questions I have been raising.
I'm sorry to hear that you feel insulted.
Would it surpirse you to hear that you have that same effect
on others? If you would like your questions addressed, ask them
in a neutral manner that invites other people to respond out
of their own soul, from whatever level they might be on at this
time. You might be surprised what they can teach you. But if
your "questions" are really just demands that other
people change to conform to your view of perfection, then they
are not really questions, and people might be quite justified
in rejecting your demands. Even if what you desire is for people
or groups of people to achieve their higher self.
What is Spiritual Science? How do you practice
it? Is it being practiced here? How would we know?
These are the types of questions to ask. Now
if these were really questions, instead of not-so subtle ways
of telling others that they are not really practicing what you
belive these things to be, then they might be discussed, and
you might even lean a few things from the various answers. Just
don't be surprised if the answers differ from the ones you would
give.
Now we all have our swords and our shields,
and people will raise their shield unconsciously by being defensive.
But the truth remains the truth, and we can always discuss that
using the terminology of the epistemology and related material,
while leaving aside the need for defense and attack on a personal
level.
We all. Even you, Joel.
But the questions listed above remain.
These questions are far more important than some people seem
to understand or appreciate. Whatever Anthroposophy is to be
Tomorrow, as we take upon ourselves the task of regenerating
it in this the 21st Century, depends entirely upon our ability
to answer those questions. Casting aspersions at me or Catherine
(who is not here to defend herself) has nothing to do with the
answer to these questions.
I certainly hope I am not casting aspersions
your direction, Joel. I have asked you hard questions. I have
asked you to examine yourself and see if your actions are actually
a reflection of your ideal. This is a hard (even harsh) question
for anyone. In your case I feel it was invited by the attitude
that you take in dealing with other people whom you seem to feel
are inferior to you. This attitude I have questioned. You claim
that it is justified because you possess truth. You have stated
elsewhere that you feel compelled to correct the errors in others.
I am only asking you to examine this drive in your soul. Where
does it come from? What purpose does it serve? Is it really within
your control and only used consciously as a tool? As a tool for
what? And to what purpose?
Daniel Hindes
...................................................................................................................................
From: Daniel Hindes
Date: Mon Jan 12, 2004 9:01 pm
Subject: Death of the Anthroposophical Society
Joel Wrote:
Years ago (about 1997) I wrote a small
journal called Outlaw Anthroposophy, which can be found on my
website at http://ipwebdev.com/hermit/oajnr.html
Copies (less than 25) were delivered by hand to a conference
at Ann Arbor, where this work was labeled as "subversive"
by some.
Ok. So I went ahead and read your essay. Let
me focus in particular on the second portion: "The Anthroposophical
Society: is it a living social form?".
You lead off with a number of questions. Then
you mention Steiner's example of the poet as the archetype of
a human being, with enthusiasm as the essential human quality
(without a citation, I might add). Then you ask "Is it possible
there is some other idea which belongs to social forms, but which
has an order beyond the idea of life?" I'm not sure I understand
the question.
When you ask how "we" can answer
these questions, it is not clear whether you mean any given researcher,
or the entire society as a whole. Do you mean to suggest that
the entire society should take the time to practice goethean
observation of its history? In what manner do you imagine this
happening? Should Dornach send a directive that next March is
goethean History month, and every branch should devote the month
to considering the question of life in the society? Or do you
imagine that somehow, every branch in every country should suddenly
feel the urge to examine the history of the whole society? More
realistically, have you considered forming an initiative group
on the matter? Have you approached people asking if they want
to join you on this investigation? After all, Steiner said that
Anthroposophists must be first and foremost people of initiative.
As a point of history, the National Societies
did not break off from the General AS in the 1930's. Steiner
included them in the structure starting at the Christmas Conference.
They were there from the beginning.
"After some "light"
conversation, this writer spoke up and made the observation "...that
from his point of view the Society was dead, and had been dead
since, at least, before World War II. While there were many vital
individual initiatives, these were simply growing in the ground
made fertile by the rotting corpse...". After this the conversation
grew more animated, and members of the Council later reported,
during that period when the conversation spilled over into the
dinner hour, that this was a common theme (the absence of 'livingness")
heard by them in their travels."
Notice that I have not yet said anything about
your diagnosis. The absence of "livingness" is a problem
in some contexts. The answer, given by Rudolf Steiner, is the
ARTS. The arts are supposed to bring the heart life and the heart
sphere into Anthroposophy. I find that branches that are able
to perform the Mystery Dramas, for example, tend to have a lot
more life than those that only have study groups. So to the next
quote:
" "When I come to
the Society I get much for my head, but nothing for my heart!"
There were a number of variations on this theme - a common general
sense of something being absent, and very much desired."
I would suggest that there could be a lot
more art (including eurythmy) in Anthroposophy, and then people
would find more of the life that they are missing.
Pertaining to your experience that your study
groups are not sufficiently "alive" I could suggest
that the place to fix the problem is at that study group, and
not automatically in Dornach. Of course it is real work creating
a healthy and living group dynamic (and I claim no special talent
in this myself) so perhaps it is easier to blame Dornach.
In the next three paragraphs you describe
how "we" (you?) are killing the life of the group by
the manner in which the material is worked on. The problem is
"we" (everyone else) is talking dead "Steiner
says" and not living insight.
"It is the constantly
evoked egregore of Steiner that kills the life in our groups
and Society meetings. We manufacture a ghost, a shade, of Steiner,
and place this shadow as the superior ideal before which our
own soul understandings must give way."
Now I was not in your study group, but the
question does present itself: how universal is this phenomena?
Is it killing the life in Peru and the Ukraine? Is there something
specific to the US that makes this such a problem here? Is it
even such a problem here? I lack a comprehensive experience of
multiple study groups, but in my limited experience I have not
found it to be quite the same problem. Individuals may have this
problem. Whether it kills the whole study group depends on the
rest of the group.
"Within anthroposophical
groups something rather unusual is added, both consciously and
unconsciously. Each individual brings, within their own soul
life, some form of relationship to Rudolf Steiner. In addition,
through those social collective processes, which groups engage
in as a matter of course, the group will also form a certain
relationship to Steiner. But the question needs to be asked:
which Steiner? Steiner as a spiritual reality, as an ego presence
himself (assuming he is still dis-incarnate), or an image of
Steiner, both collective and individual, which has no relationship
to Steiner as a reality, but derives its nature solely from unconscious
and semi-conscious assumptions as to his nature, being, meaning
and intentions."
This is an interesting idea. Also interesting
is the answer that you give. You posit that a "dead"
counter-image of Steiner is actually what is created when Anthroposophists
gather in a group.
The first thing to point out is that you are
essentially claiming clairvoyant vision here. You have postulated
a dead anti-Steiner spirit-being present wherever Anthroposophists
gather. This point is a bit of a leap from the observable goethean
facts of a bunch of people gathering, beyond even an observation
of what they thing and feel. This is rather advanced intuition.
Is it accurate?
To my mind, if a group of people idealize
Steiner, it is not automatically a falsified image. It may or
may not be healthy, but I don't feel that an evil spirit-being
is necessarily the result. I leave open the possibility that
I am wrong, but to me it would have to be demonstrated more effectively
than this claim.
"The question was put
to me in the meeting referred to above: "Okay, so the Society
is dead, how to we resurrect it?""
I find it interesting that your experiences
of one study group lead you to posit that he entire society is
dead. This may or may not be true, but I feel that a larger sample
size is necessary.
"First, admit there is
no life. This ought to be done officially, although I do not
expect the formal leadership to have the necessary courage."
I think that this recommendation has some
validity for individual groups here and there. Whether we should
wait for Dornach to issue a proclamation to this effect is another
questions. In my occasional visits, I have not found the entire
place moribund. Of course there are problems, but it may also
be that the patient is merely ill, and if that is the case then
a funeral is a bit premature.
"Please do not arbitrarily
agree with me. Know it for yourselves, above all else."
Um. Ok, I won't.
"The temptation to quote
or speak of an idea as coming from the "authority"
needs to be resisted, and ultimately eliminated."
I can agree with this recommendation. However,
I don't think that it follows that those who have not perfected
this art are necessarily killing the whole society.
"Life is engendered in
the group through admitting into the circle the heart felt concerns
of each individual, irrespective of their familiarity with Steiner
or Anthroposophy. The neophyte has as much to contribute to the
life of the group as the long time practitioner."
This is true, and true of the best study groups
that I have been in.
SUMMARY:
Your central argument is that the creation
of an evil anti-Steiner spirit-being by worshipful Anthroposophists
has killed the Society, way back in the 1930's. To verify the
existence of the evil anti-Steiner spirit-being requires clairvoyant
insight, so I am not able to challenge you on this. You have
at least one error of understanding in the presentation of the
splitting off of the National Societies. They existed from the
Christmas Foundation. There was a crisis in the mid 1930's where
some national societies had issues with events in Dornach, so
perhaps you are mixing this up.
The lack of livingness that you see so much
of in the society, I suggest can be remedied to a good degree
with more art. And finally, since change comes from within, I
would suggest that someone really concerned with fixing this
would go out and lead by example. If meditative contemplation
of the Society's history is desperately needed, I suggest you
form an initiative group to work on this. I would even consider
joining you.
Finally, while you may feel Gordienko to be
a fellow traveler, her criticism is far more narrowly applied
and better supported. She does not use clairvoyant insight or
claim that the entire society is dead. Her method is to lay the
statements of Prokofieff next to those of Steiner and let the
inherent contradictions stand out. Her biting invective may make
reading her book difficult, but her essential points are supported
by texts that anyone can read and judge for themselves.
Daniel Hindes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Click to subscribe to anthroposophy_tomorrow
January/February
2004
The Uncle
Taz "Anthroposophy Tomorrow" Files
Anthroposophy & Anarchism
Anthroposophy & Scientology
Anthroposophical
Morsels
Anthroposophy,
Critics, and Controversy
