This appears well-conceived, and I endorse it.

It hope that people within the Society, particularly leadership, begin to interact with us here and establish some clear and distinct ideas about what anthroposophical community is.

Hi Tom

I think PD Ouspensky's 'The psychology of man's possible evolution' may be a good study to look at.  Although written in 1945 I think this work is timeless.  To quote an extract -

Man is not a completed being; Nature develops him only up to a certain point and then leaves him to develop further, by his own efforts, or to live and die as he was born.  Evolution of man, in this case, development of certain inner qualities, features which usually remain undeveloped, and cannot develop by themselves.  In this way of development, man must become a different being (if he wants to).

Man is a machine, he has no independent movements inside or outside.  He is brought into motion by external influence and external impacts.  Movements, actions, words, ideas, emotions, moods and thoughts are produced by external influences.  In the right circumstances and treatment, he can know that he is a machine realising this he may find the ways to cease to be a machine.

First man must know that he is not one, he is many.  Always different.  The illusion of unity is created by sensation of one physical body, his name, and a number of mechanical habits implanted in by education or imitation.  He believes himself to be always the same.  In relaity there is no oneness in man and no controlling centre, no 'I' or Ego.  Every thought, every feeling, every sensation, every desire and dislike is an 'I'.  These I's are not connected.  Although there are certain groups of 'I's' which are naturally connected.  Each I represents at every given moment a small part our our 'mind' but each means itself to represent the whole.

It is a worthwhile read.

my regards

Dear Caryn

I don't think R. Steiner would agree with this quote.  I certainly don't  Having known personally over the years, many personalities drawn to the Gurdjieff work, which Ouspensky was as far as I know, I can't say they got much out of it except a kind of guru complex and pretensions of power.

In my view this quote would have us mistake the astral body for the ego, for the astral body is certainly filled with a variety of sub-forms (habits etc.), but the true I is very real (unless one is drawn up out of the earthly realm by a fascination with certain luciferic excesses fostered in the Cutural East).  Anyway, this is not a small problem in any event, and Steiner warned us that if we did not properly give birth to true Western Occultism at the right time, spiritual forces out of the East would overwhelm Western Culture in a very destructive way.

This quote is a good example, although the impulse doesn't come in the same way as Yoga - East to West for example, but from Eastern Europe westward toward the West and seems to have been born in a decadent spirituality known at one time in the Persian Empire. I studied many systems years ago, during which time I read Ouspensky,and also Gurdjieff's' "Meetings with remarkable men" and "All and Everything: Bealzebubb's tales to his grandson".

I found in this material nothing of the Christ, who had been already for a while the main way I instinctifively "tested" various systems - that is: did they have a Christened heart center that I could feel when I read the material or experienced practicing students.  In the beginning, of course, this was based upon Faith, and only later when I encountered Steiner was I able to add the dimension of a scientific Gnosis to the heart centered feeling knowledge.

joel

Thanks Joel and Lori for the comments on Ouspensky's book - it is the only one I have of his and I am not that familiar with Gurdjieff's work.   I appreciate the corner stone in your comments.  Reading this book I have the feeling that Ouspensky was familiar with Steiner and I found this particular book to be written in an helpful way in understanding human nature.  Possibly he was indirectly refering to the astral body having many  I's  and with this offering a school of thought concentrating on discipline of the Ego.  If I may quote further from the book;

'Development cannot begin on the basis of lying to oneself, or deceiving oneself.  Man must know what he has and what he has not.  It means that he must realise that he does not possess the qualities already described, which he ascribes to himself; that is, capacity to do, individually, or unity, permanent Ego, and addition Consciousness and Will  (here I might say man does possess these qualities but they might be in a slumber state to be awakened although we must bear in mind the Ego is the human beings latest organ received - that's why we on earth to develop our ego - as far as I understand)

What is consciousness?  In most cases in ordinary language the word 'consciousness' is used as an equivalent to the word 'intelligence' in the sense of mind activity.  In reality consciousness is a particular kind of 'awareness' in man, independent from mind's activity - first of all, awareness of himself, awareness of who he is, where he is, and further, awareness of what he knows, of what he does not know, and so on.

It is in fact that the consciousness in man, whatever it means, never remains in the same state.  It is either there or not.  The highest moments of consciousness create memory.  Other moments man simply does not remember.  This more than anything else produces in man the illusion of continuous consciousness or continuous awareness.  I shall try to explain; take a watch and look at the second hand, trying to be aware of yourself, and concentrating on the thought, 'I am Peter Ouspensky', 'I am now here'.  try not to think about anything else, simply follow the movement of the second hand and be aware of yourself, your name, your existence and the place where you are.  Keep all other thoughts away.  You will, if you are persistent, be able to do this for two minutes.  This is the limit of your consciousness.  and if you try to repeat the experiment soon after, you will find it more difficult than the first.  This experiment shows that a man, in his natural state, can with great effort be conscious of one subject (himself) for two minutes or less.  The most important deduction one can make after making this experiemnt in the right way is man is not conscious of himself.  He does not realise that his consciousness can be completely absent while he still can act reasonably, think, observe.

And he goes on to talk about sleep consciousness, waking state consciousness, self-consciousness and objective consciousness ...

Peter's work does seem to stem from a school of discipline concentrating on psychology and offering an helpful service however, as always your comments are appreciated .. maybe this work is old already !

Best regards

Caryn

HI All,

Interesting to read about Gurdjieff and Ouspensky here. I studied them both quite thoroughly over 35 years ago, and it was a great lead up or should I say prelude to discovering Steiner & Anthroposophy, in that order.  While not professing to be an expert I am quite familiar with the goals and thus results achieved by following, Gurdjieff  [Ouspensky followed as a student]. In the end, I actually preferred Carlos Castaneda much more in the vein of developing personal power. Gurdjieff was a very dominant egotistical figure looming over Ouspensky. Although they did eventually go seperate ways.

In both men's works there are many interesting aspects of science, math and geometry and ancient knowlegde, all of which are available to anyone who searches. The key issue I have with Gurdjieff is that his whole motivation is one of power and control over others. He admits to being a con-man, and grifter of sorts, and revels in his stories of how he got rich taking advantage of stupid people. Not my kind of hero...His life works are filled with egotism and blatant self agrandization. Simply stated much of both mens work is "Know Thyself". From what I know nothing sublime has come of it.

Ouspensky' "In Search of the Miraculous" is worthy of a read and nice to have on the shelf along with other occult books. It is a great introduction to the esoteric path and nothing more than that. It is filled with false paths laid out by Gurdjieff, the egotist. Ouspensky is interesting in light of what you say Caryn, he was introduced to a great deal of Persian thinking meditations and  Sufi wisdom and all that contains natures truths that are clearly seen in Steiner' s work. Much of Ouspensky is terribly repetetive but if you are intersted in opinions on whether he is worthy of study, I would say why bother when there is Goethe, Steiner, Owen Barfield, Jesaiah Ben-Aharon and many others. As pointed out in other posts there is nothing of the Christ in either ones works which always was a mystery to me. This did however suprise me as both Gurdjieff and Ouspensky were keenly aware of the workings of the Theosophical Society and M Blavatsky so they must have known, althought it is not apparent, the works of Steiner. Look at the time they were hanging out in Paris cafes around the turn of the century. Gurdjieff's approach was one of keeping the very important esoteic knowledge to himself as a means of power over others.

My writing might appear very biased and arrogant but I assure you it is presented in a loving manner, It is biased though, thru personal experience. I believe there is much greater depth to anthroposophy than Gurdjieff and Ouspensky combined could ever provide.. They are important and significant in many ways but there is just too little time and if I can spare anyone some of that precious  time and work then I feel good about that.  It is a "Why or Why Not" kind of dilemma.

The other dilmma I have is that "anthroposophy" is difficult to type most of  the time, without making a typo. Am I the only one who has this problem?

With Love

Cisco

I must /'should get you back for this one from my own. and thru posophicles way!

Howdy jeff

Ciscp

Hi Cisco,

A friend who likes Carlos Castaneda is a good friend.  I went through all of the Carlos books over 20 years ago.  I actually had an out-of-body experience while reading one of Castaneda's novels.  It was in a part of the book where the protagonist is in the Mexican mountains somewhere, and has been left all alone by Don Juan.  Carlos is sitting in an indent in the middle of the mountain, with no way up the mountain or down, trying to meditate on what Don Juan has told him.   While reading this I actually experienced my self floating below the ceiling of my living room, looking down at myself lying comfortably on the sofa reading the book.  (All I was drinking was tea and lemon).   I've only shared this with one other friend, but as these kinds of things are written about so much now, I am sharing same with you.

Love,
patri

HI Patri,

I loved Castaneda and still do. I love the fact that many critics of Casteneda deride him for making it all up. Maybe he did? Maybe he didn't? I am glad to know there is another friend out there.

My out of body experience was assisted by hanging out with some Peyote. Yup a religious experience of youth not to be reproduced thru personal work. I travelled northern Mexicos seeking wisdom, again in my youth, found an old Brujo, magician of sorts, who looked about 35 years old and I was told by the locals he was 60. Every morning he got up poured a spoonful of Olive Oil, drank it and then filled another spoon with Ceyenne pepper as a chaser, then declared, I need a cafe.. I thought this dude "was not going to out do me" so I tried his morning ritual. sorry to say I did not have the constituion but did get the constipation.. Man that was some nasty morning treat. I was on fire for weeks and enlightened a whole lot about the ways of the Brujo:

• Don't mess with ways you don't understand, Gringo.

Love and thanks for loosening that memory.

I need a cafe

cisco

Hey, I recently read an interesting piece on Carlos: see if this link takes you there. http://www.salon.com/books/feature/2007/04/12/castaneda/index.html It's interesting in terms of distinctions that matter vs. amazing distinctions. The way people respond to this article is all one needs in terms of PoF....When I read it I went through a whole range of feelings/thoughts....Whether it is Guergieff (sp), Blavanski (sp), Steiner (spelled!) or Bubba Free John, we can probably find ways that lonliness showed its face in their lives (all sorts of different ways too) I'm a big fan of Castaneda's writing as well! Jeffffffry

Hi Jeff,

Quickly read the article you recommended.  Don't care if he had a lot of women (girl friends).  I don't believe a lot of the silliness in the article though.  The books are a great read and fun, what more can I say. 

Cheers,
patri

Hello Jeff,

I looked at the link you sent and maybe there is truth to the aritcles. I have a harum, don't you? Anyways the funny thing about articles like that is they are not aimed at those who read and love Castaneda neither are they totally fair to people mentioned like Clifford Irving. He did write one book they never seem to  mention that I rather liked, "Pancho Villa and Tom Mix"  Very entertaining and based on some true events. I once wanted to make a movie out of it. The true events in the book are an embarassment to the American government and the hero worship of Pershing and Gen. George Patton believe it or not. The Mexican viewpoints of their own revolution are not taught in America. Nor the invasions into Mexico to kill Villa.

Now gullibility is part of the ways of the GurJeffs, [no pun intended mon frere, it's this damn keyboard] the Clifford Irvings and possibly Castaneda. They were the forerunners of what modern media likes to pretend is  loosely based on a true story.......Now to my point. If I had  the internet in 1975 when I discovered Steiner, perhaps I would have run across reviews that talked primariy about his Faires, Elves, Sylphs, salamanders and other spirit beings and not actually about the essence of Steiner's works. Though the mere mention of invisible leprechauns is quite appealing.

I agree that Clifford Irving was a "FAKE" and the others have their short comings but Castaneda's whole point was for a generation to move beyond drugs and that method of initiaion. That message is very clear and quite useful and appropriate to this  day. True tales or not the message is still in his  works. I agree and add alcohol to the message.

Thanks for the inspirations.

Cisco

Well Patri,

To my Harum: All those that are, and those that would be, and [for Jeff ] those that should be, and those that could be, they must all know they are loved deeply and fondly.. Funny when I try to get in front of the mirror there is a host already there. I really must get on with my day but when I have a chance I will relate a wonderful true story of discovering God in the Mirror  as told by my Grandmother, a Christian Science practitioner, when homesteading in early years of 1900's.

Ciao and thank you all for this wonderfully entertaining and uplifiting morning.

Cisco

On a little reflection regarding Tom's original post here for suggestions it came to mind that Owen Barfield is a very important and gifted thinker and his "Speakers Meaning" is brief and leads one to many other of his works. I think one is quite difficult such as "What Coleridge Thought" but worthy of note. "Unancestral Voice" is one of my favourite works of his and is I believe his one important novel. The story revolves around conversations and time.

I like the idea of further study of Ben-Aharon and have just finished "The Spiritual Event of the Twentieth Century" and found a link to an article,
Lecture given by Jeaiah Ben-Ahron in Jarna Sweden for the Anthroposophical Society Feb. 2004 the first titled  "The World Situation at Present"

-- http://antroposofi.org/benaharon0204.htm --

Very interesting reading in light of many recent discussion here on this site.

Thanks

Cisco

Thanks Tom,

I like what you are doing here and look forward to the growth and interest this journal, group, inspires. I am awaiting the delivery of another book by Ben-Aharon called America's Global Responsibility: Individuation, Initiation, and Threefolding and once I review it is might be more appropriate for Joel's American Anthroposophy discussion but I am happy you included "The World Situation at Present". However, there most likely is a major stream between the direction of American and the World situation as we all can see by the daily news.

Cheers,

Cisco

The planned Sept. online and in-person study groups will begin in January rather than Sept. 2007.