 Steiner, in rare prophetic mode, talks about an actual incarnation of Ahriman on the earth and its potential consequences. Just as Christ incarnated in a physical body, so would Ahriman incarnate in the Western world - before 'a part' of the third millennium had passed. |
Robert Powell, SteinerBooks author and speaker, and astrologer, gives us this exciting bit of speculation about the incarnation of Ahriman:
In the summer of 2009, on July 22, there is a total eclipse of the Sun at 2:36 AM Greenwich Mean Time. The path of the eclipse crosses India, Nepal, Bangladesh, Bhutan, China, the southern islands of Japan, and the western Pacific Ocean. The Moon will be at its perigee (its closest position to the Earth), making it larger than the Sun, resulting in a wider path and greater duration. (The arc of the partial eclipse path on this date swings as far north as 60° N, right across northern Russia, and as far south as 30° S, touching the North Island of New Zealand)
According to Rudolf Steiner, these are conditions that will allow for the maximum power of evil (the beast) to arise up from the interior of the Earth, should human beings remain unaware of the importance of aligning with Christ and maintaining their own consciousness in a state of wakeful awareness in relation to this event.
At the time of the July 22, 2009 eclipse, there is a triple conjunction of Jupiter, Neptune, and Chiron (formerly called an asteroid, it is now classified as a "centaur," suggesting its dual nature as half comet, half asteroid) -- all within less than a single degree, and also a heliocentric opposition of Saturn with Uranus.
At the time of a total solar eclipse, something sulphurous is stirred up. At the time of a solar eclipse, according to Rudolf Steiner, "that which spreads out as negativity upon the Earth can be borne up in a Luciferic way into cosmic space where it can bring about further damage." Demonic spiritual beings are more agitated than usual at the time of an eclipse, and thus -- according to Steiner -- eclipses offer special opportunities for the activity of black magicians. Very few people are able to discern this working of evil at the time of a solar eclipse.
Could it be that the solar eclipse of July 22, 2009 -- the longest eclipse (lasting 6½ minutes) of the whole 21st century -- signifies the start of the 3½-year period of the rule of the Antichrist? If so, the incarnation of Ahriman may take place at or around the time of this solar eclipse.
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| ahriman.mp3 | 3.67 KB |
| ahriman.jpg | 6.38 KB |
less speculation and more concrete thinking, please
A quite valid preliminary and necessary question has to be asked when such questions as above are posed. How are we to come to knowledge of the truth of such a question?
Speculation abounds, and Powell's book is one in which such speculation is rife. In August there will be a conference of the Social Science Section in New York, and Meg Gohrman, a Waldorf educator, intends to give a lecture on Ahriman's incarnation. Often this question is joined to another - namely that of the nature, being and work of the so-called: Anti-Christ.
Just about everything I have read so far suggests that the folks who make these speculations (including Powell and Gohrman) really don't do much serious research. Most, for example, never bother to look up where the term Anti-Christ originates (actually it in the first two letters in the New Testament attributed to someone named John (John 1, and John 2). Christian theological speculation later joined this term, given a very limited and precise conceptual background in the New Testament, to images out of Revelations, such that what seems to pervade human consciousness today is a kind of Giant Spiritual Bogeyman (Ahriman and/or the so-called Anti-Christ).
This is not any kind of scientific thinking, nor is it the kind of thinking encourage by PoF. In fact, most peope if they possess at least a little bit of modesty about their own talents, would never undertake to try to answer such questions in the first place. In the absence of a percept, the concept will not work. Speculation without experience is sterile.
joel
change of heart?
I could have sworn that I saw a post from you (Joel Wendt) on realitysandwich in which you stated to the authors that you 'had no doubt' that they were more or less correct in their main assertions...Was that not you or did you mean that in a different way or have you changed your opinion?
I have read Christ and the Maya Calendar, and agree that there is much speculation in it (especially they seemed to take as a major premise the communicated visions of Jeanne Dixon, which I thought awfully strange for an anthroposophist), but overall thought it a fun read and I learned a few things...whether they are correct or not is something that can only be proved with time.
Kevin Dann's and Robert Powell's Mayan Calender Book
I may have made a comment on realitysandwich, but without the actual text before me, I can't answer your question. I have known Kevin through the internet for a number of years and have read and heard lectures by Robert.
I also wrote (reluctantly and at a cost) my own version of the problem of when is and who is Ahriman's Incarnation. In the process of that writing (and the related pure thinking) I considered many factors, including certain problems of knowledge (how do you know how to answer such a question as who is etc.). When I read the work of others on this question of Ahriman, I also examine carefully how they construct the representation of their thought, and whether this "construction" gives evidence of any scientific thinking, and/or thinking rooted in Steiner's theory of knowledge material. I have yet to "read" in such texts evidence of an "awake" and fully conscious objective thinking process.
Mostly what I read (and this includes Robert Mason's very very long article) is material that uses "associative" thinking, which I define as the semiconscious joining of concepts from various sources (principally Steiner), without actually being awake to what this "associative" process can produce as regards the "truth". All such thought is speculative. Such writing may accidently have pieces of the truth, but most often gets this in a derivative sense from Steiner's work. Since we cannot get "knowledge" from reading Steiner, the writings borrowing his thought are a) relying on him as an "authority", something he said we should not do; and, b) sleeping through the process by which they add their personal "associative" thought content (subjective interpretations) to the perceptless concepts they have created while reading Steiner.
By subjective interpretations I mean generally a thought content driven by unconscious antipathy and sympathy, such that someone (such as Robert Mason, for example) will observe world facts throught the lens of their own subjective antipathy, and interpret these world facts as being the result of Ahriman's activity. This tendency among anthroposophists to categorize all kinds of facts according to whether they were "ahrimanic" or "luciferic" lead Valentin Tomberg to write in his book Meditations on the Tarot that this undiscipline involvement with (contemplation of) "evil" has the effect of stealing from the soul its vital elan' - its connection to the life force.
Having said all this wordiness above, what I probably meant by the idea that Dann and Powell were more or less correct, was written (briefly) so as to not cast complete doubt on their work. I have not, however, at all considered that they have the possiblity of getting close to the truth, given the processes being used. In addition, via the ahrimanic double in our soul life, I don't doubt that the ahrimanic hierarchies are very active in the present trying to sow as much confusion as possible.
Given the high interest in the subject, if the Anthroposophical Society was itself serious about developing reliable material here, it would foster a conference in which those who have been working on the problem could share their research. But the Society and Movement have lost any connection to a scientific or objective approach, so we are tragically destined to be awash in speculation from "leading" personalities for some time.
joel
Joel, If at all possible
Joel,
If at all possible and if you don't mind, I would very much like to take a look at what you call "your version of the problem of when is and who is Ahriman's Incarnation". I realize (and understand) that you did so as you state yourself "reluctantly and at a cost". If you published it on the internet, you might mention the URL.
You probably know about one author (on a site I remember having .ru as an extension, but with articles in English) in an article on Steiner's purported former incarnation as Plato, and who claims Ahriman's incarnation has already happened in the U.S., in the second half of 1999. If you know about this, you must have noticed the author just states his view of Ahriman's incarnation as a fact, without argumenting or giving any other detail.
I think I can rightly state that I myself have experienced some of the difficulties of trying to come to grips with this and other issues and confronting them with the "outer world", and the resulting effects on my life.
Ahriman's Incarnation
In my book American Anthroposophy ( http://ipwebdev.com/hermit/AmericanAnthroposophy.html ), the first essay (after extensive introductory material) is called Outrageous Genius. That is my essay on Ahriman's Incarnation.
"if .... was serious...."
1. Since we cannot get "knowledge" from reading Steiner,
Why can't a Steiner reader get knowledge from reading Steiner?
2. the writings borrowing his thought are a) relying on him as an "authority",
What do you mean by "borrowing" Steiner's thought?
3.something he said we should not do;
Where did Steiner say that?
4. b) sleeping through the process by which they add their personal "associative" thought content (subjective interpretations)
What is "personal" or "subjective" in this thought content?
5. to the perceptless concepts they have created while reading Steiner.
Why do you use the term "concept" if thought contents are somehow incomplete?
6. By subjective interpretations I mean generally a thought content driven by unconscious antipathy and sympathy,
Why should "thought content" be "driven"?
How do you know antipathy or sympathy is "unconscious" in another person?
7. such that someone (such as Robert Mason, for example) will observe world facts throught the lens of their own subjective antipathy
What is "subjective antipathy"? Why should "subjective antipathy" have to do with observation?
8. and interpret these world facts as being the result of Ahriman's activity.
What kind of "interpretation"?
9. This tendency among anthroposophists to categorize all kinds of facts according to whether they were "ahrimanic" or "luciferic"
Do you mean "categorize" or "classify" or don't you tink there is a difference?
10. lead Valentin Tomberg to write in his book Meditations on the Tarot that this undiscipline involvement with (contemplation of) "evil" has the effect of stealing from the soul its vital elan' - its connection to the life force.
Are you "borrowing" "thoughts" from an "authority" here?
11. Having said all this wordiness above
If you consider your own language use "wordy", why don't you change it?
12. Given the high interest in the subject, if the Anthroposophical Society was itself serious about developing reliable material here,
You personify the "Anthroposophical Society". Who do you mean by the "Anthroposophical Society"?
Request
Hi Joel and Tom
'Tis been a long time since I have written here. I am grateful for the space allocated to John Jocelyn's Meditations on the Signs of the Zodiac. I have a request now though seeing I am not a regular poster please may you remove my photograph. It kind of hangs around like an outworn form!
With love to all
Caryn
Caryn, I have kept your pic
Caryn, I have kept your pic up because it is a link to your astrosophy archive which still is read by many site visitors. I replaced your pic and removed your name from the front page but the link still goes to your journals. If you want I can change your name on your journals to something anonymous also.
Onward
Thanks Tom
No there is no need to change my name to anonymous! just the picture hanging around.
It is an interesting discussion you are having on Ahriman's incarnation - possibly though, may we consider this 'event' might take place under Oriphiel's Regency?
It just seems the whole 2012 has come a bit of a marketing opportunity - what do you think?
Caryn
The question of when/who
Caryn,
The question of Ahriman's incarnation is doubtless burning in many people's minds. One author I have seen - and I can't vouch for his authorititativeness - places it in the second half of the year 1999 and in the U.S.
This is not implausible. Steiner's indications were not clear in this matter, and an incarnation in the second half of 1999 would effectively put the incarnation at a moment "before even a part of the third millennium has passed".
The author I am speaking of writes this in an article at
anthroposophists.ru I think (I don't remember the exact URL - it is a Russian site however, with articles in English).
Possible percept
Above Joel asks for a percept. One possible percept would be to look at what's happening at the Health Care Townhall Meeetings to 'regular people'. vickie
About Demian
In this website I speak about the subject of Ahriman; www.gatsbyanddemian.com
Anonym
Anonymous wrote: ‘The question of Ahriman's incarnation is doubtless burning in many people's minds.’
Not really, the darkness has been here for many years and many have thought it good, so it is nothing new.
I think it is very sweet of you to show your soul to everyone yet I am sure you agree the spiritual science is lacking and therefore cannot be classified as anthroposophy. Your tale rather lends itself towards spiritualism and this is indeed a good study for the spiritual scientist in noting the behavioural habits of such.
A spiritual scientist will understand, in discussing this matter of ahriman’s incarnation, ahriman will have to learn how to die as ahriman has not experienced dying and death as the human being has through many life-times of experience; for daily we die in Christ.
And the second death, the burning of the astral body. Do you think the ahrimen will survive this?
The Revelation of Saint John the Divine 20: 14-15
And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.
Therefore; do you think it is a good thing or a bad thing ahrimen incarnate?
The fourth epoch was the mystery of death
The fifth epoch is the mystery of evil
The sixth epoch will be the mystery of evil akin to death
Caryn
Post new comment