From: golden3000997
Date: Thu Nov 6, 2003 8:27 pm
Subject: Response to Dottie
Dear Dottie,
Thank you for your response to my posting.
I must admit, I was afraid of worse! I will try to do justice
to your questions, although a lot of the things I brought up
are big topics. It's getting late, so I will have to work on
it this weekend, probably.
I am 48 years old and I was a Waldorf teacher
for around 15 years. I have been away from it for a decade and
would like to go back if I can find a school community that can
handle my radicalism.
I understand the heart impulse very well.
My own heart is very deeply involved. But Anthroposophy per se
requires a lot of "head" work, too! We have to really
understand what is going on around us on sense-perceptible and
super-sensible planes.
Just a few points:
1. You noticed the simplistic element in the
Koran - that's what I meant by a mish mash re-telling of Old
Testament stories - very popular all over the middle east at
the time.
2. I would never equate the "Deed of
Christ" and man's choices in his actions at any level. This
is really off the mark. What Christ chose to do and why is far,
far beyond man's capacity of choice at any level. He was not
a "man" though incarnated in the flesh. Men's choices
are mundane in comparison, but this does not, to me, mean that
mankind has to be so very stupid and greedy about them!
3. I have worked through a lot of Christology
in myself through reading and discussion. I won't claim any special
revelation or vision, but I have had very strong experiences
supported by my studies. What future ages may have the maturity
to understand, once we grow past the patriarchal power structure
of the past ? 5,000 years, is that "God" is not male!
"God" (and I put this most carefully in quotes because
it is so presumptuous in a way to say what God is or is not)
is the Divine Oneness of the Universe from which all eminates,
or has its being. I don't know if you have studied the Bible
in the light of Anthroposophy yet, but there are many "open
secrets". If you really do read it and take it word for
word as truth, you really have to come to vastly different conclusions
than any church I have encountered so far. Read Genesis and the
line
(mind you this is BEFORE Adam and Eve)
Genesis 1:27 So God created humankind in his
image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he
created them."
New revised standard version, but the same
words "male & female he created them" in all versions
I have read so far. Only later comes the Adam & Eve story.
Read Steiner's "Occult Science"
for the explanation.
Anyway, this to
illustrate the male/female unity of God and the manifestation
of God as male and female on the physical plane. Why then interpret
the Trinity as God the Father, God the Son (Sun - shouldn't really
be male in a strict sense, but another topic) and God the Holy
Spirit and interpret this as a "He"? It is the Holy
Spirit which INCARNATES the LOGOS or Sun of God, and through
whom did He incarnate in the physical? And who was specifically
present in the upper room at Pentecost with the disciples? I
have some pictures somewhere around here of Mary in the middle
of the circle as they receive the flame above their heads - most
rosary pictures have it that way. Again, SHE brings it down into
them. SHE IS the manifestation of the Divine Female. And not
just ONE Mary - but THREE Marys. You need to read The Gospel
of St. Luke by Steiner for a really good
explanation of the two Mother Marys - the Eva Maria and the Maria
Sophia. But I see Mary Magdalene as the third in the Female Trinity
of God. She was the one who first saw the Risen Christ. There
were three Marys accounted for at the foot of the cross, also.
Mind you, this is not a full answer, just
pointing in the direction of one. Of course the Maria Sophia
is of the past in terms of mankind's past. But her IMPULSE is
of the future - it is the impulse of TRANSFORMATION. God = BEING
Christ = CREATION Holy Spirit = TRANSFORMATION. Everything that
is alive, physically or spiritually must transform, change, must
dissolve and resurrect in a new form. Otherwise it stagnates,
dies and decays or crystallizes. That is what Ahriman wants the
world to do. Achieve "perfection" then crystallize
and stay frozen for all eternity. Lucifer wants us to wallow
in a spiritual mire - caught in our own spiritual cesspool of
stagnant, individualized spirituality which has no relationship
or connection with the true spiritual world. Ahriman and Lucifer
have their reality both internally and externally. They also
have their rightful place in which their works are not "evil",
in fact necessary and good. But when man succumbs to them unknowingly
and allows them to take over his ego and limit or corrupt his
progress, then they become "evil" on our plane of existence.
Read "Lucifer and Ahriman" by Steiner. It is not a
question of hating either of them. The peach window of the Goetheanum
is wonderful where it depicts The Christ loosening Ahriman from
his chains. But it is the Christ in us that must do this work.
It is the I AM in us that must learn to fact reality and to deal
with it in a transformative way.
If you want to look at the question of war
with your heart - read Mark Twain's "The War Prayer."
Pretty much sums it up, I think.
In regard to being "as a child"
in heart-openess and a willingness to learn and to share with
others, I think that it is a natural and good part of activating
that love-force within you. However, there is a spiritual maturity
that comes from thinking that can, for some people initate that
heart force, for others, strengthen and support it. From "A
Wind at the Door" by Madeline L'Engle, there is a passage
about love that really defines it for me. It is not an emotion
- love is what you do!!!!
Again, it's late and I have to go work in
the belly of the beast tomorrow, so I will say good night and
promise to give more later, if you really want me to.
Blessings,
Christine
..........................................................................................................................................
From: dottie zold
Date: Fri Nov 7, 2003 9:25 am
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Response to Dottie
Christine
I am 48 years old and I was a Waldorf teacher for around 15
years. I have been away from it for a decade and would like to
go back if I can find a school community that can handle my radicalism.
Hi Chrstine,
What do you mean by your radicalism? What
class did you teach in Waldorf and what age group I am wondering?
What did you feel you were supposed to lie about when you were
there? How do you think Dr. Steiners teachings are more in line
with how you would do things versus the way they are being done?
Christine
I understand the heart impulse very well. My own heart is
very deeply involved. But Anthroposophy per se requires a lot
of "head" work, too!
Dottie
Well the way I see it the two must be married
in a sense. It seems to me they mostly work seperately and the
more enlightened we become the more chances are that the mind
is won over by the spirit.
Christine
Just a few points: 1. You noticed the simplistic element in
the Koran - that's what I meant by a mish mash re-telling of
Old Testament stories - very popular all over the middle east
at the time.
Dottie
Yes but the same thing happened with the stories
of the Bible as well as the Torah. These can be traced back to
the Buddist/Hindu Traditions as well. The story has been told
for thousands of years before Christ came. We may have a different
take on them but most of their forms come from the ancient archtypes
of humanity itself. We just found another way to tell the story
imo.
Christine
2. I would never equate the "Deed of Christ" and
man's choices in his actions at any level. This is really off
the mark. What Christ chose to do and why is far, far beyond
man's capacity of choice at any level.
Dottie
Well, I would have to disagree. I believe
what Christ did is what we all must do to know the Father. I
don't believe there is another way.
Christine
He was not a "man"
though incarnated in the flesh. Men's choices are mundane
in comparison, but this does not, to me, mean that mankind has
to be so very stupid and greedy about them!
Dottie
Again, I disagree. It will take great Christ
like courage and Christ like will power to ward off all that
has been given to us in this physical incarnation. We must reach
up and touch the Heavens with our hearts. No easy task. Christ
reached down and touched the Earth with His heart. And he did
become human in my mind. Christ chose the same path, albeit a
bit differently, that happens when we become human from the spiritual
world. imo. Christ got to become man and to experience it just
as our spirits experience this physical reality. And the spirit
of Christ 'sank' down in man to know all that we as man know
and feel. I can't take that away from Christ.
Christine
3. I have worked through a lot of Christology in myself through
reading and discussion. I won't claim any special revelation
or vision, but I have had very strong experiences supported by
my studies. What future ages may have the maturity to understand,
once we grow past the patriarchal power structure of the past
? 5,000 years, is that "God" is not male! "God"
(and I put this most carefully in quotes because it is so presumptuous
in a way to say what God is or is not) is the Divine Oneness
of the Universe from which all eminates, or has its being. I
don't know if you have studied the Bible in the light of Anthroposophy
yet, but there are many "open secrets". If you really
do read it and take it word for word as truth, you really have
to come to vastly different conclusions than any church I have
encountered so far. Read Genesis and the line (mind you this
is BEFORE Adam and Eve)
Dear Christine,
I have had confirmation on many of the things
you speak of above. This is my study for some reason. It did
not start out as that but I was guided to find much of what you
speak of regarding the Marys. And most of it came through vision
type of experiences or at least guided type of experiences. And
it was mostly shocking although it was also instantaneously self
evident. But then I am a doubting Thomas in a sense and my spirit
has to work double for me to really believe of a thing that has
been shown or seen by me.
Christine
Genesis 1:27 So God created humankind in his image, in the
image of God he created them; male and female he created them."
Dottie
But what does that really mean? See for me,
my work is leading me to find the Father and I think the Father
is the physical reality and that is why we are all male and female.
I think that is what Magdalene meant when she said 'he is going
to make males of us all' (meaning Christ)...to me that means
they are all going to become Suns or rayers of God. I believe
the female part of us is the spirit. Therefore we, as human beings
are all male and female. This thought is not really confirmed
in me but it is jostling around looking for the Father. As well
I recall Dr. Steiner stating that the Father is asleep. Well,
what does that mean? Asleep?
Christine
Anyway, this to illustrate the male/female unity of God and
the manifestation of God as male and female on the physical plane.
Why then interpret the Trinity as God the Father, God the Son
(Sun - shouldn't really be male in a strict sense, but another
topic) and God the Holy Spirit and interpret this as a "He"?
It is the Holy Spirit which INCARNATES the LOGOS or Sun of God,
and through whom did He incarnate in the physical? And who was
specifically present in the upper room at Pentecost with the
disciples? I have some pictures somewhere around here of Mary
in the middle of the circle as they receive the flame above their
heads - most rosary pictures have it that way. Again, SHE brings
it down into them. SHE IS the manifestation of the Divine Female.
And not just ONE Mary - but THREE Marys.
Dottie
I am wondering if you see Magdalene sitting
to the left of Jesus at the last Supper? Do you see her in the
room? Have you ever seen the painting, don't know whose it is,
where the finger of God reaches out and touches the finger of
man? Up until this year I thought that was the whole painted
picture. It is not. Under the bridge of a place I drive past
is a mural of the whole picture or at least what I can feel is
the whole picture: God with his arms enfolding a woman and a
child. Incredible.
There is a book called Crone, don't recall
the author at the moment, that really allowed me to move further
on my search for the Marys' mystery. It was there that I was
able to connect the symbolism of the three Marys. And they can
be found throughout history of the OT as well as Hindu/Buddist/Sumerian
texts.
Christine
But I see Mary Magdalene as the third in the Female Trinity
of God.
Dottie
I see her there as well. For me she is the
Daughter Voice of God. Never really thought of it being the third
but it makes sense if we look at mother father child.
Christine
She was the one who first saw the Risen Christ. There were
three Marys accounted for at the foot of the cross, also.
Dottie
I am wondering if you see her at the end of
John on the beach with Christ? Do you see her as the one Peter
takes issue with and Christ tells him to mind his own business
in a sense?
Christine
Mind you, this is not a full answer, just pointing in the
direction of one. Of course the Maria Sophia is of the past in
terms of mankind's past. But her IMPULSE is of the future - it
is the impulse of TRANSFORMATION. God = BEING Christ = CREATION
Holy Spirit = TRANSFORMATION.
Dottie
When you say Transformation I think of creative.
To me She is the creative energy and it transcends any past present
or future ideals in my thoughts.
Christine
Everything that is alive, physically or spiritually must transform,
change, must dissolve and resurrect in a new form. Otherwise
it stagnates, dies and decays or crystallizes. That is what Ahriman
wants the world to do. Achieve "perfection" then crystallize
and stay frozen for all eternity. Lucifer wants us to wallow
in a spiritual mire - caught in our own spiritual cesspool of
stagnant, individualized spirituality which has no relationship
or connection with the true spiritual world.
Dottie
I see Lucifer as my lower self. I find Luci,
the feminine aspect of Lucifer is very seductive off our own
wants and desires. I watch her kick mans ass all the time through
artists and musicians particulary and it makes me laugh so hard
when it is my friends. She's just waiting to be played with in
a sense. And she puts herself in front of all hoping to tempt.
But it is us who are tempted. It is not her fault as far as I
can see.
Christine
Ahriman and Lucifer have their reality both internally and
externally. But when man succumbs to them unknowingly and allows
them to take over his ego and limit or corrupt his progress,
then they become "evil" on our plane of existence.
Dottie
I don't know about 'them' taking over mans
ego. I am thinking it is man who gives it over out of laziness
or lethargy, loss of hope due to interaction with other humans
who have lost hope and the spirit not being put forth as the
most important. And then we blame them.
Christine
Read "Lucifer and Ahriman" by Steiner. It is not
a question of hating either of them.
Dottie
The problem I have is people blaming them.
Tarjie has an amazing poem/story on his page of Christ and Lucifer.
I will see if I can find it.
Christine
In regard to being "as a child" in heart-openess
and a willingness to learn and to share with others, I think
that it is a natural and good part of activating that love-force
within you. However, there is a spiritual maturity that comes
from thinking that can, for some people initate that heart force,
for others, strengthen and support it.
Dottie
I am teaching my heart to think not my mind
to feel.
Christine
Again, it's late and I have to go work in the belly of the
beast tomorrow, so I will say good night and promise to give
more later, if you really want me to.
Christine, I love your thoughts and forwardness
in them. You are right about the Marys and there is so much more
to learn about the mystery. And its good and I believe this is
what the war is leading to: the opening of the Feminine force
within all of us on a conscious level.
Good Work,
Dottie
..........................................................................................................................................
From: Tarjei Straume
Date: Fri Nov 7, 2003 8:50 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Response to Dottie
At 05:27 07.11.2003, Christine wrote:
I am 48 years old and I was a Waldorf teacher
for around 15 years. I have been away from it for a decade and
would like to go back if I can find a school community that can
handle my radicalism.
Whatever you do, Christine, don't go anywhere.
Please stick around. You "sound" anarchosophical.
Tarjei
http://uncletaz.com/
Continued
in a different thread
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Click to subscribe to anthroposophy_tomorrow
November/December
2003
The Uncle
Taz "Anthroposophy Tomorrow" Files
Anthroposophy & Anarchism
Anthroposophy & Scientology
Anthroposophical
Morsels
Anthroposophy,
Critics, and Controversy
