what an amazing lecture! "we don't have to do all cruzifixion", one of his remarks, - sine who along with Steiner and Jung accepted - that knowledge, growth and insight were not to be reached without the price of great suffering, maybe even being crucified. So grateful to lectures like these, being a fan of Jung, and almost an admirer of Steiner. Bravo! for not being a new -age coward, but engage in the real battle of this and our life today. Naomi Klein, whom I listened to earlier,- an expert on clima change; it is, at the bottom, fundamentally, a spiritual battle. And very real. And yes, even they are tempters, that does not mean they have to win. !
Wonderful last question, now ten years later it already feels that much further into the future. The channel Kryon says that humanity passed through a threshold in 2012 that altered the timeline for the better, and it means that we will have success rather than destroy the planet.
I like a lot about the Waldorf movement and biodynamic farming, because of the people I have met in that context and because of the praxis and the outcomes. I totally support and admire Steiner’s standing for the “one world” non-dualistic view, mutuality and not separation of nature and human thought. What I don’t buy is this story about clairvoyance. In what is it different from hallucinations? Without evidence the two are indistinguishable. He genuinely believed it and tried to teach others how to achieve it, but it remains completely a matter of belief without provable evidence for any one else. In fact, if we really believe in unus mundus then clairvoyance and hallucination should be the same thing, but to show whether it exists requires evidence, not just internal consistency. Similarly about the story about Atlantis. Without evidence it remains a myth and a fairy tale telling us nothing more about what really was going on after the end of glaciation 11,000-8000 years ago. There are still lots of discoveries to be made, especially after the discovery of Göbeki Tepe, which requires quite some rethinking of the becoming of civilisation. Why then is anyone going to listen to Steiner’s outdated ideas about history and take it for real? Even if his general approach has merit, why dwelling on all the stuff that no one outside the anthroposophy “church” can believe in? It’s your own fault that you’re often seen as a cult. You make it really hard to defend you. Fortunately it’s not as bad as it seems - what the speaker explained at the end was a great push against misinterpretations and dogmatism: “there are no future facts”.
I suppose one problem I have with him is the same prob I have with Edgar Cayce, that is, that they both believed in Atlantis. Interesting lectures though :)
what an amazing lecture! "we don't have to do all cruzifixion", one of his remarks, - sine who along with Steiner and Jung accepted - that knowledge, growth and insight were not to be reached without the price of great suffering, maybe even being crucified.
So grateful to lectures like these, being a fan of Jung, and almost an admirer of Steiner.
Bravo! for not being a new -age coward, but engage in the real battle of this and our life today. Naomi Klein, whom I listened to earlier,- an expert on clima change; it is, at the bottom, fundamentally, a spiritual battle. And very real. And yes, even they are tempters, that does not mean they have to win. !
Fascinating!! Thank you so much for uploading this video!
What is the 'Christian yoga' Robert refers to please?
Wonderful last question, now ten years later it already feels that much further into the future. The channel Kryon says that humanity passed through a threshold in 2012 that altered the timeline for the better, and it means that we will have success rather than destroy the planet.
''Atlantis'' was the Mediterranean island of Thera or Santorini (see English historian Bettany Hughes on YT).
I like a lot about the Waldorf movement and biodynamic farming, because of the people I have met in that context and because of the praxis and the outcomes. I totally support and admire Steiner’s standing for the “one world” non-dualistic view, mutuality and not separation of nature and human thought. What I don’t buy is this story about clairvoyance. In what is it different from hallucinations? Without evidence the two are indistinguishable. He genuinely believed it and tried to teach others how to achieve it, but it remains completely a matter of belief without provable evidence for any one else. In fact, if we really believe in unus mundus then clairvoyance and hallucination should be the same thing, but to show whether it exists requires evidence, not just internal consistency. Similarly about the story about Atlantis. Without evidence it remains a myth and a fairy tale telling us nothing more about what really was going on after the end of glaciation 11,000-8000 years ago. There are still lots of discoveries to be made, especially after the discovery of Göbeki Tepe, which requires quite some rethinking of the becoming of civilisation. Why then is anyone going to listen to Steiner’s outdated ideas about history and take it for real? Even if his general approach has merit, why dwelling on all the stuff that no one outside the anthroposophy “church” can believe in? It’s your own fault that you’re often seen as a cult. You make it really hard to defend you. Fortunately it’s not as bad as it seems - what the speaker explained at the end was a great push against misinterpretations and dogmatism: “there are no future facts”.
I suppose one problem I have with him is the same prob I have with Edgar Cayce, that is, that they both believed in Atlantis. Interesting lectures though :)
And you, of course, know for sure that there was no Atlantis. Or that it was really just one of those small Greek islands.
A lot of ancient civilizations around the earth have stories and descriptions of Atlantis
Explains why the shamans exists around the world in different races and traditions