Spiritual Hierarchy
Sarah reminds the list
of how heretical anthroposophical interpretations of Biblical
texts are from an orthodox Jewish perspective.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Sarah Stein
Subject: Re: spiritual hierarchy
Date: Sun, 2 May 1999 21:02:12 -0500
Hello,
Without turning this into a comparative religion
class, I would just like to add a bit from the Jewish point of
view, for balance, or perspective, or whatever you'd like to
call it.
On 30
Apr 99, at 22:53, Tarjei Straume wrote:
The word rendered as "authority"
is "Exusiai", which is the Greek name for what the
Hebrews called "Elohim." This signifies a specific
rank of spiritual beings, a hierarchy. According to the Masonic
Temple Legend, there were seven Elohim Spirits who created our
solar systen. One of these Elohim, Yahve or Jehovah, appropriated
the control of the Earth-evolution so to speak, and united himself
with the moon.
Readers should be aware that this explanation
is completely at odds with the Jewish (original) interpretation
of the Hebrew words in the story of the creation as told in Genesis
(Bereishis).
There are seven days of creation; and in relating
the events of each day, the word "Elohim" is used,
as in, "And Elohim said, Let there be light." Elohim
is one of several names of God used in the Torah (Bible); different
names express different attributes of God. (According to Kabbalah,
God may be understood as having ten general attributes -- seven
emotional and three intellectual. It is in relation to these
attributes that people are said to be created "in God's
image" -- that is, people reflect these same ten attributes.)
When the name "Elohim" is used,
it refers to God manifesting in the natural world (in fact, the
Hebrew letters of the word "Elohim" have the same numerical
value as the word "Hateva," meaning nature). So in
the creation story, God is acting through the natural world --
in this case, creating the physical world out of God's thoughts
or will. Elohim is also the name used when God is expressing
judgment or restraint; i.e., God as "king."
Other names are used at other times; for example,
the so-called "tetragrammaton," or four-letter, *unpronounceable*
name of God (YHVH) is used for God in His infinite, supernatural
manifestation -- that aspect which is above all comprehension;
i.e., God as *God*.
Please just be aware, for the sake of accuracy,
that to say that there are seven "Elohim Spirits" (and
that one can identify a certain individual as being one of these
seven) is completely anathema to the Jewish view.
To continue with one more quote: Tarjei wrote...
As the Bible says, man was created a little
lower than the angels, so the angels belong to the rank immediately
above man, followed by the archangels, then the archai, or time
spirits (Yom in Hebrew), and then the Elohim, or Spirits of Form
(I think). At the very top we find the eldest and highest hierarcies,
the Cherubim and the Seraphim. There are higher and older ranks
than these, but they do not influence our evolution directly.
"Yom" is the Hebrew word for "day."
It appears in the account of each day's creation, as in "There
was evening, there was morning: one day [second day, third day,
etc.]." Yom means day. It does not, according to thousands
of years of Jewish commentary, mean "time spirits."
You are free to re-interpret as it pleases you, of course, but
readers of this list should at least know that this is not at
all the original intent of the Hebrew text.
The original meaning of Cherubim and Seraphim
is also vastly different in the Jewish understanding, but I won't
go into it here, as I do not have enough knowledge of the concepts
to explain them clearly.
By the way, Jewish tradition holds that the
Hebrew Bible (Torah) *cannot* be understood either literally
or symbolically using the bare text alone. When the Torah was
given to Moses on Mount Sinai, it was given in two parts: a written
part and an *oral tradition* which was passed down from generation
to generation, until finally being put into written form by the
rabbis of the Talmudic era when the tradition was in danger of
being lost due to the Jews' dispersion. It is this oral tradition
-- which includes commentary on the entire text of the Torah
and later writings -- that elucidates the definitions, explanations,
underlying symbolism, and legal derivations of the written text,
which is itself, in effect, merely an outline. To study the Torah
without its commentaries is to lose its context entirely.
That all said, I will repeat that I am expressing
the Jewish viewpoint. I understand that this is not everyone's
view -- but it is certainly the original understanding of the
text, according to Jewish tradition, at the time the Torah was
given to Moses.
Respectfully,
Sarah
*****
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Tarjei Straume
Subject: Re: spiritual hierarchy
Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 03:54:51 +0200
Sarah wrote:
Hello,
Without turning this into a comparative religion class, I would
just like to add a bit from the Jewish point of view, for balance,
or perspective, or whatever you'd like to call it.
On 30 Apr 99, at 22:53, Tarjei Straume
wrote:
The word rendered as "authority"
is "Exusiai", which is the Greek name for what the
Hebrews called "Elohim." This signifies a specific
rank of spiritual beings, a hierarchy. According to the Masonic
Temple Legend, there were seven Elohim Spirits who created our
solar systen. One of these Elohim, Yahve or Jehovah, appropriated
the control of the Earth-evolution so to speak, and united himself
with the moon.
Readers should be aware that this explanation
is completely at odds with the Jewish (original) interpretation
of the Hebrew words in the story of the creation as told in Genesis
(Bereishis).
I am perfectly aware of that. The heresy and
unorthodoxy in anthroposophical interpretations of scriptures
does not only touch the Hebrew, but also the Greek, Latin, and
Aramaic. Even though many concepts coincide between exoteric
religions and esoteric teachings, there are also many collisions,
especially when it comes to semantics.
There are seven days of creation; and in relating the events
of each day, the word "Elohim" is used, as in, "And
Elohim said, Let there be light." Elohim is one of several
names of God used in the Torah (Bible); different names express
different attributes of God. (According to Kabbalah, God may
be understood as having ten general attributes -- seven emotional
and three intellectual. It is in relation to these attributes
that people are said to be created "in God's image"
-- that is, people reflect these same ten attributes.)
When the name "Elohim" is used, it refers to God manifesting
in the natural world (in fact, the Hebrew letters of the word
"Elohim" have the same numerical value as the word
"Hateva," meaning nature). So in the creation story,
God is acting through the natural world -- in this case, creating
the physical world out of God's thoughts or will. Elohim is also
the name used when God is expressing judgment or restraint; i.e.,
God as "king."
Other names are used at other times; for example, the so-called
"tetragrammaton," or four-letter, *unpronounceable*
name of God (YHVH) is used for God in His infinite, supernatural
manifestation -- that aspect which is above all comprehension;
i.e., God as *God*.
There is a close link here between Jewish
and Christian orthodoxy, making the names in questions "various
names for God" in a strict monotheistic sense rather than
names of different deities and beings. There is a professor of
Hebrew in Denmark who recently made quite a stir in clerical
circles by claiming that the Hebrew religion was originally polytheistic.
The students at Aarhus University, who are for the most part
agnostics and atheists, found some more backup for this and published
it in their magazine "Faklen" (=The Torch). The priests
from the Lutheran Church of Denmark became so upset that they
openly accused the authors of being satanists and church-arsonists.
The clergy literally went completely mad.
Please just be aware, for the sake of accuracy, that to say
that there are seven "Elohim Spirits" (and that one
can identify a certain individual as being one of these seven)
is completely anathema to the Jewish view.
It is also anathema to Catholicism and Proteatantism.
To continue with one more quote: Tarjei wrote...
As the Bible says, man was created a little
lower than the angels, so the angels belong to the rank immediately
above man, followed by the archangels, then the archai, or time
spirits (Yom in Hebrew), and then the Elohim, or Spirits of Form
(I think). At the very top we find the eldest and highest hierarcies,
the Cherubim and the Seraphim. There are higher and older ranks
than these, but they do not influence our evolution directly.
"Yom" is the Hebrew word for
"day." It appears in the account of each day's creation,
as in "There was evening, there was morning: one day [second
day, third day, etc.]." Yom means day. It does not, according
to thousands of years of Jewish commentary, mean "time spirits."
You are free to re-interpret as it pleases you, of course, but
readers of this list should at least know that this is not at
all the original intent of the Hebrew text.
Rudolf Steiner held that "Yom" was
a name used for living beings by the author of Genesis. His reason
for this assumption was that he investigated the origin of the
solar system empirically before checking Moses' version, and
also investigating how the spoken language was used and what
kind of associations they evoked. He said that literally, "Elohim"
means, "Those who beget the awe we feel."
The original meaning of Cherubim and Seraphim is also vastly
different in the Jewish understanding, but I won't go into it
here, as I do not have enough knowledge of the concepts to explain
them clearly.
By the way, Jewish tradition holds that the Hebrew Bible (Torah)
*cannot* be understood either literally or symbolically using
the bare text alone. When the Torah was given to Moses on Mount
Sinai, it was given in two parts: a written part and an *oral
tradition* which was passed down from generation to generation,
until finally being put into written form by the rabbis of the
Talmudic era when the tradition was in danger of being lost due
to the Jews' dispersion. It is this oral tradition -- which includes
commentary on the entire text of the Torah and later writings
-- that elucidates the definitions, explanations, underlying
symbolism, and legal derivations of the written text, which is
itself, in effect, merely an outline. To study the Torah without
its commentaries is to lose its context entirely.
That all said, I will repeat that I am expressing the Jewish
viewpoint. I understand that this is not everyone's view -- but
it is certainly the original understanding of the text, according
to Jewish tradition, at the time the Torah was given to Moses.
Thank you so much, Sarah, for your very useful
and interesting insights. I was going to do an article about
the Faklen story in Denmark, but somehow I decided to learn a
little Hebrew first. A friend of mine knew some, because he had
been stuudying the Kabbalah (which you must learn Hebrew to study).
But I didn't get very far. I was learning to recognize some of
the letters when I looked at the typed form and the translation
given, but then I got lost in the technicality of downloading
the alphabet and trying to write with it. I guess I'll have to
do without much knowledge of Hebrew if I am to write that article.
But it's very nice to get comments from someone who is familiar
with the original text. Again, thank you.
Cheers
Tarjei Straume
Greetings from Uncle Taz
http://www.uncletaz.com/
Anarchosophy, anarchism, anthroposophy, occultism,
Christianity, poetry,
plays, library, articles, galleries, marijuana, criminality,
death, skulls,
skeletons, banners, links, links, links. Big section in Norwegian.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Tarjei Straume
Subject: Re: spiritual hierarchy
Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 05:16:11 +0200
I think the following is an appropriate and
explanatory folow-up to my last post where I answered Sarah's
comments.
Just like anthroposophy asserts its right
to call itself a science, it also asserts the right to disregard
all philological "authorities" and scholars what ancient
religious writings are concerned.
The relationship of anthroposophy to Biblical
records and traditions (Jewish and Christian alike) are best
explained in the following excerpt from the introductory lecture
in "The Apocalypse of St. John" (17. June 1908) (GA
104):
"It may seem somewhat
far-fetched if we make the following comparison in order to show
the relation of Anthroposophy to ancient religious documents
(and today we shall be concerned with the ancient religious documents
of Christianity): Anthroposophy is related to ancient religious
documents as mathematics is related to the documents or books
on mathematics that have appeared in the course of mankind's
historical development. We have an old work which is really of
interest only to students of history versed in mathematics, namely
the geometry of Euclid. It contains for the first time in a scholastic
form the mathematical and geometrical facts that are now even
taught children in school. How few of the children are aware,
however, that all that they learn about parallell lines, triangles,
angles, etc., stands in that old book, that was given to humanity
then for the first time! It is quite right to make the child
conscious that one can realize these things in oneself, that
if the human spirit sets its forces in motion and applies them
to the forms of space it is able to realise these forms without
reference to that ancient book. Yet someone who has never heard
of the book and has been taught mathematics and geometry will
value and understand it in the right sense if he one day comes
across it. He will know how to prize what was given to mankind
by the one who set this work for the first time before the human
spirit.
"In this way one might
characterize the relation of Spiritual Science to ancient religious
documents. The sources of Spiritual Science are such that if
it is understood in its true impulse it is not to be dependent
on any kind of document or tradition. Just as mankind's other
knowledge gives us what we know about the sense world surrounding
us because man freely uses his powers, so the deeper spiritual,
supersensible forces and faculties, for the moment slumbering
in man's soul, provide a knowledge of all that is supersensible
and invisible underlying everything visible. When man uses the
tools of his senses he can perceive what the sense world offers
him and also link and join with his intellect what he perceives.
In the same way someone using the means handed down to him through
Spiritual Science can look behind the veils of sense-existence
to the spiritual origins, to where beings weave and work which
are imperceptible to the physical eye and ear and yet can be
perceived supersensibly. Thus it is in the free use of man's
forces, though they are still slumbering as supersensible forces
in the majority of humankind, that we have the source, the free,
independent source of spiritual knowledge, just as the source
of external knowledge lies in the free use of those forces that
are directed to the sense-world. And when man has come, by whatever
means, into possession of the knowledge that leads him into the
supersensible behind the sensible, the invisible behind the visible,
a knowledge as definite as his knowledge of outer objects and
events, then he may go to the traditional books and records.
Furnished with supersensible knowledge he may approach the records
through which, during the course of evolution, tidings have reached
man of the supersensible worlds, just as the geometrician approaches
the geometry of Euclid. And then he tests them from a standpoint
similar to that of the modern geometrician who tests the geometry
of Euclid; he can prize and recognize these documents at their
true value. Nor does one who approaches the records of the Christian
message equipped with knowledge of the supersensible world find
that they lose in value; indeed, on the contrary, they appear
in a more brilliant light than they showed first to those armed
only with faith. They prove to contain deeper wisdom than had
been dreamt of earlier, before the event of anthroposophical
knowledge."
Tarjei Straume
Greetings from Uncle Taz
http://www.uncletaz.com/
Anarchosophy, anarchism, anthroposophy, occultism,
Christianity, poetry,
plays, library, articles, galleries, marijuana, criminality,
death, skulls,
skeletons, banners, links, links, links. Big section in Norwegian.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Dan Dugan
Subject: Re: spiritual hierarchy
Date: Sun, 2 May 1999 22:01:39 -0700
Tarjei Straume, you wrote,
Rudolf Steiner held that "Yom"
was a name used for living beings by the author of Genesis. His
reason for this assumption was that he investigated the origin
of the solar system empirically before checking Moses' version,
and also investigating how the spoken language was used and what
kind of associations they evoked. He said that literally, "Elohim"
means, "Those who beget the awe we feel."
Sure, Steiner "investigated the origin
of the solar system empirically." Maybe people believe this
crap on Anthroposophical lists.
-Dan Dugan
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Tarjei Straume
Subject: Re: spiritual hierarchy
Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 17:51:14 +0200
I wrote:
Rudolf Steiner held that "Yom"
was a name used for living beings by the author of Genesis. His
reason for this assumption was that he investigated the origin
of the solar system empirically before checking Moses' version,
and also investigating how the spoken language was used and what
kind of associations they evoked. He said that literally, "Elohim"
means, "Those who beget the awe we feel."
Dan Dugan wrote:
Sure, Steiner "investigated the origin of the solar system
empirically." Maybe people believe this crap on Anthroposophical
lists.
All serious students of anthroposophy "believe
this crap". The definition of an anthroposophist is someone
who accepts spiritual science as a legitimate science - "initiation
science."
Because the empiricism involves the researcher,
the reported observations and conclusions may be classified as
a theory. The testing of theory consists of comparing it to other
cosmogeneses (including the "primordial soup" of the
materialists) and various theological explanations based upon
philological analyses of old texts, plus creation stories handed
down from various other cultures and peoples - creation stories
than may also have their origins in genuine clairvoyant visions.
My studies have not been that comprehensive,
but so far, Rudolf Steiner's rendition of Moses' Genesis makes
more sense to me than the alternatives I have seen. And the "one
god, one creator" idea has never made much sense to me.
Neither has the "primordial soup."
Tarjei Straume
Greetings from Uncle Taz
http://www.uncletaz.com/
Anarchosophy, anarchism, anthroposophy, occultism,
Christianity, poetry,
plays, library, articles, galleries, marijuana, criminality,
death, skulls,
skeletons, banners, links, links, links. Big section in Norwegian.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Sarah
Stein
Subject: Re: spiritual hierarchy
Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 01:35:02 -0500
After my explanation of the Jewish interpretation
of the various names of G-d, Tarjei wrote:
There is a close link here between Jewish
and Christian orthodoxy, making the names in questions "various
names for God" in a strict monotheistic sense rather than
names of different deities and beings. There is a professor of
Hebrew in Denmark who recently made quite a stir in clerical
circles by claiming that the Hebrew religion was originally polytheistic.
The students at Aarhus University, who are for the most part
agnostics and atheists ... <snip>
These students were also *ignorant* of the
fact that Judaism originated with Abraham (not Moses), who, as
a child of three years, observed the sun and the moon and the
trees and rivers etc. -- all of which had been worshipped, until
that time, as separate deities -- and he concluded that all of
these elements of the natural world must be governed by *one*
higher power. Therefore Judaism, at the time of its origin and
ever since, was and has been and always will be *monotheistic*.
This idea was and is the very foundation of Jewish thought --
as expressed in the central Jewish prayer, the Shema, recited
three times a day: Hear O Israel, G-d [YHWH] is our G-d [Eloheinu],
G-d is ONE."
Rudolf Steiner held that "Yom"
was a name used for living beings by the author of Genesis. His
reason for this assumption was that he investigated the origin
of the solar system empirically before checking Moses' version,
and also investigating how the spoken language was used and what
kind of associations they evoked. He said that literally, "Elohim"
means, "Those who beget the awe we feel."
I would like to know how he derived this "literal"
interpretation. Aside from the use of the plural form, it bears
zero resemblance to any of the Hebrew roots related to the word
"Elohim," to the best of my knowledge. (It should be
noted that even though the word "Elohim" is in the
plural form, it is always used, seemingly ungrammatically, with
the *singular* form of the Hebrew verb that may follow it; i.e.,
G-d, encompassing all of His emotional and intellectual attributes,
is *one*.)
Thank you so much, Sarah, for your very
useful and interesting insights. I was going to do an article
about the Faklen story in Denmark, but somehow I decided to learn
a little Hebrew first. A friend of mine knew some, because he
had been stuudying the Kabbalah (which you must learn Hebrew
to study). But I didn't get very far. I was learning to recognize
some of the letters when I looked at the typed form and the translation
given, but then I got lost in the technicality of downloading
the alphabet and trying to write with it. I guess I'll have to
do without much knowledge of Hebrew if I am to write that article.
But it's very nice to get comments from someone who is familiar
with the original text. Again, thank you.
You're welcome. I'm glad at least one person
wasn't bored or irritated by my somewhat off-topic post! Tarjei,
I would be happy to continue a discussion privately (but don't
expect same-day responses!), on Kabbalah or whatever interests
you. (You should know that learning Kabbalah out of a Jewish
context is a bit... unorthodox... but then I'm sure you're perfectly
aware of that! ;)
Be well,
Sarah
*****
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Tarjei Straume
Subject: Re: spiritual hierarchy
Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 18:28:22 +0200
I wrote:
Rudolf Steiner held that "Yom"
was a name used for living beings by the author of Genesis. His
reason for this assumption was that he investigated the origin
of the solar system empirically before checking Moses' version,
and also investigating how the spoken language was used and what
kind of associations they evoked. He said that literally, "Elohim"
means, "Those who beget the awe we feel."
Sarah wrote:
I would like to know how he derived this "literal"
interpretation. Aside from the use of the plural form, it bears
zero resemblance to any of the Hebrew roots related to the word
"Elohim," to the best of my knowledge. (It should be
noted that even though the word "Elohim" is in the
plural form, it is always used, seemingly ungrammatically, with
the *singular* form of the Hebrew verb that may follow it; i.e.,
G-d, encompassing all of His emotional and intellectual attributes,
is *one*.)
Last year, when I was debating on the ng talk.origins,
I began to type in the RS lecture cycle "Genesis, Secrets
of the Bible Story of Creation." I didn't even finish the
first of the ten lectures. Now I will, and I'll post the whole
thing on my website when I'm finished.
Not knowing Hebrew myself, I cannot answer
impromptu how Steiner arrived at his interpretations of the words.
In these lectures, he talks about the meaning of Ha'arets and
Haschamayim, the Seven Days of Creation, the Forming and Creating
of Beings by the Elohim, the Aeons or Time-Spirits, Light and
Darkness, Yom and Lay'lah, Jahve-Elohim, etc.
I'll post the first lecture whan I've wrapped
it up and add the other as fast as I can.
Thank you so much, Sarah, for your very
useful and interesting insights. I was going to do an article
about the Faklen story in Denmark, but somehow I decided to learn
a little Hebrew first. A friend of mine knew some, because he
had been stuudying the Kabbalah (which you must learn Hebrew
to study). But I didn't get very far. I was learning to recognize
some of the letters when I looked at the typed form and the translation
given, but then I got lost in the technicality of downloading
the alphabet and trying to write with it. I guess I'll have to
do without much knowledge of Hebrew if I am to write that article.
But it's very nice to get comments from someone who is familiar
with the original text. Again, thank you.
You're welcome. I'm glad at least one person
wasn't bored or irritated by my somewhat off-topic post! Tarjei,
I would be happy to continue a discussion privately (but don't
expect same-day responses!), on Kabbalah or whatever interests
you. (You should know that learning Kabbalah out of a Jewish
context is a bit... unorthodox... but then I'm sure you're perfectly
aware of that! ;)
I'm aware of that. But the Kabbalah seems
to be a very important study for all serious students of occultism.
It is definitely more challenging when you try to approach it
from outside the Jewish culture of which it is a part. I have
a few books on the Kabbalah in English after my mother (who read
everything), so I'll try to reads those first.
Thank you for inviting me to a dialogue on
this. I may take you up on it.
Cheers
Tarjei Straume
Greetings from Uncle Taz
http://www.uncletaz.com/
Anarchosophy, anarchism, anthroposophy, occultism,
Christianity, poetry,
plays, library, articles, galleries, marijuana, criminality,
death, skulls,
skeletons, banners, links, links, links. Big section in Norwegian.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Click to subscribe to anthroposophy_tomorrow
The Uncle
Taz "WC Posts"
Tarjei's
"WC files"