Anthroposophy for Dummies

Any topics primarily focused on metaphysics can be discussed here, in a generally casual way, where conversations may take unexpected turns.
LukeJTM
Posts: 88
Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2022 11:19 am
Location: UK

Re: Anthroposophy for Dummies

Post by LukeJTM »

I also bought two nice books at RS House. They are basically books containing verses for prayer or meditation, written by Rudolf Steiner. For example they have a meditation for a particular season of the year, or a morning and evening verse, and so on.

The books I bought are available online. I'm not sure if they are on RS-Archive. Here are links if anyone wants to read/buy them.

https://www.amazon.com/Meditations-Time ... 855845547/

https://www.amazon.com/Verses-Meditatio ... 1855841975


The second book has the verses Steiner wrote in German on the left page and the English translation on the right side. This is an example (I hope the photo embeds)

Image
User avatar
Federica
Posts: 1743
Joined: Sat May 14, 2022 2:30 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Anthroposophy for Dummies

Post by Federica »

In the first lines of this older post on the Redemption of Thinking, ML recommends two short documents with exercises implicit in PoF, chapter by chapter. One is for individuals, the other for individuals and groups, by Timothy Nadelle.

The documents are freely downloadable:

https://anthroposophy.ca/wp-content/upl ... rcises.pdf

https://anthroposophy.ca/wp-content/upl ... rcises.pdf


To whom it may concern.
In this epoch we have to be fighters for the spirit: man must realise what his powers can give way to, unless they are kept constantly under control for the conquest of the spiritual world. In this fifth epoch, man is entitled to his freedom to the highest degree! He has to go through that.
User avatar
Federica
Posts: 1743
Joined: Sat May 14, 2022 2:30 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Anthroposophy for Dummies

Post by Federica »

Again on PoF, I was recently offered this Steiner quote, from GA 103 The Gospel of John - Part XII The Nature of the Virgin Sophia and of the Holy Spirit which in turn I'd like to bring to the attention of anyone who recognizes, or at least senses, the cardinal value of this work:


"A person can go very far in this matter of katharsis if, for example, he has gone through and inwardly experienced all that is in my book, The Philosophy of Freedom, and feels that this book was for him a stimulation and that now he has reached the point where he can himself actually reproduce the thoughts just as they are there presented. If a person holds the same relationship to this book that a virtuoso, in playing a selection on the piano, holds to the composer of the piece, that is, he reproduces the whole thing within himself—naturally according to his ability to do so—then through the strictly built up sequence of thought of this book—for it is written in this manner—katharsis will be developed to a high degree. For the important point in such things as this book is that the thoughts are all placed in such a way that they become active. In many other books of the present, just by changing the system a little, what has been said earlier in the book can just as well be said later. In The Philosophy of Freedom this is not possible. Page 150 can as little be placed fifty pages earlier in the subject matter as the hind legs of a dog can be exchanged with the forelegs, for the book is a logically arranged organism and the working out of the thoughts in it has an effect similar to an inner schooling. Hence there are various methods of bringing about katharsis. If a person has not been successful in doing this after having gone through this book, he should not think that what has been said is untrue, but rather that he has not studied it properly or with sufficient energy or thoroughness."


By the way, this gives me an idea for a small new project. First I thought I would order a printed version of the book, but here's what I'll do instead: today I'll buy a new notebook and I'll start transcribing PoF, with the intention to progress daily. I will pick the 1964 Michael Wilson translation, report notes at the end of each chapter, and leave every other page blank for further use.
In this epoch we have to be fighters for the spirit: man must realise what his powers can give way to, unless they are kept constantly under control for the conquest of the spiritual world. In this fifth epoch, man is entitled to his freedom to the highest degree! He has to go through that.
User avatar
AshvinP
Posts: 5482
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2021 5:00 am
Location: USA

Re: Anthroposophy for Dummies

Post by AshvinP »

Federica wrote: Sat Apr 27, 2024 6:48 am By the way, this gives me an idea for a small new project. First I thought I would order a printed version of the book, but here's what I'll do instead: today I'll buy a new notebook and I'll start transcribing PoF, with the intention to progress daily. I will pick the 1964 Michael Wilson translation, report notes at the end of each chapter, and leave every other page blank for further use.

That's an interesting project, Federica. I hope it helps for your orientation. By the way, Luke brought my attention to this interesting YT channel that focuses on Steiner. There are a couple of videos about his thoughts on mistranslations in PoF (Wilson translation), which seemed to make sense to me. For example:


"Most people would sooner regard themselves as a piece of lava in the moon than as an 'I'"
User avatar
Federica
Posts: 1743
Joined: Sat May 14, 2022 2:30 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Anthroposophy for Dummies

Post by Federica »

AshvinP wrote: Sat Apr 27, 2024 3:45 pm
Federica wrote: Sat Apr 27, 2024 6:48 am By the way, this gives me an idea for a small new project. First I thought I would order a printed version of the book, but here's what I'll do instead: today I'll buy a new notebook and I'll start transcribing PoF, with the intention to progress daily. I will pick the 1964 Michael Wilson translation, report notes at the end of each chapter, and leave every other page blank for further use.

That's an interesting project, Federica. I hope it helps for your orientation. By the way, Luke brought my attention to this interesting YT channel that focuses on Steiner. There are a couple of videos about his thoughts on mistranslations in PoF (Wilson translation), which seemed to make sense to me. For example:
Thanks, Ashvin!
I've watched the video but I am surprised that it makes sense to you. First there is conflation, I believe, between archetype and concept, then when it comes to the translation issue specifically, it seems to me quite evident that Wilson's translation is literal in that passage. I don't see why the presenter has made a video about that passage. Can you please say more precisely how it makes sense to you? My first impression here is: much ado about nothing.

Same thing in his other video called "Another crucial translation discrepancy", that is not crucial at all. He states that "reunite concept and percept" is an enormous mistake, since the German reads "unite" and not "reunite". To me it's appropriate to say "reunite". As ML puts it, "THE human being—as an “I”—first, in a pre-conscious activity of destruction, strips reality of its coherence." Man first destroys, to then reunite. There's nothing wrong with that translation in my view. The guy is misunderstanding the whole thing, he argues that, if it was a reunification, that would threaten man's freedom...
In this epoch we have to be fighters for the spirit: man must realise what his powers can give way to, unless they are kept constantly under control for the conquest of the spiritual world. In this fifth epoch, man is entitled to his freedom to the highest degree! He has to go through that.
User avatar
AshvinP
Posts: 5482
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2021 5:00 am
Location: USA

Re: Anthroposophy for Dummies

Post by AshvinP »

Federica wrote: Sat Apr 27, 2024 4:39 pm
AshvinP wrote: Sat Apr 27, 2024 3:45 pm
Federica wrote: Sat Apr 27, 2024 6:48 am By the way, this gives me an idea for a small new project. First I thought I would order a printed version of the book, but here's what I'll do instead: today I'll buy a new notebook and I'll start transcribing PoF, with the intention to progress daily. I will pick the 1964 Michael Wilson translation, report notes at the end of each chapter, and leave every other page blank for further use.

That's an interesting project, Federica. I hope it helps for your orientation. By the way, Luke brought my attention to this interesting YT channel that focuses on Steiner. There are a couple of videos about his thoughts on mistranslations in PoF (Wilson translation), which seemed to make sense to me. For example:
Thanks, Ashvin!
I've watched the video but I am surprised that it makes sense to you. First there is conflation, I believe, between archetype and concept, then when it comes to the translation issue specifically, it seems to me quite evident that Wilson's translation is literal in that passage. I don't see why the presenter has made a video about that passage. Can you please say more precisely how it makes sense to you? My first impression here is: much ado about nothing.

Same thing in his other video called "Another crucial translation discrepancy", that is not crucial at all. He states that "reunite concept and percept" is an enormous mistake, since the German reads "unite" and not "reunite". To me it's appropriate to say "reunite". As ML puts it, "THE human being—as an “I”—first, in a pre-conscious activity of destruction, strips reality of its coherence." Man first destroys, to then reunite. There's nothing wrong with that translation in my view. The guy is misunderstanding the whole thing, he argues that, if it was a reunification, that would threaten man's freedom...

I agree neither of them is very crucial or 'enormous', but I just found them interesting to contemplate the text from a slightly different angle.

The first one made sense to me because Steiner uses "Self" at the beginning to refer to the percept in an act of will, 'the content of my existence as an individual', distinguishing that from the concept, 'the universal element in me'.

In willing the situation is different. The percept is here the content of my existence as an individual, whereas the concept is the universal element in me. What is brought into ideal relation to the external world by means of the concept, is an immediate experience of my own, a percept of my Self. More precisely, it is a percept of my Self as active, as producing effects on the external world

To later then equate the concept of the free spirit (the universal element) with 'the concept of his own Self', which was earlier characterized as the individualized content of active existence, just seems confusing.

The second one is less clear and I understand both ways of looking at it. Certainly, we can say that acts of knowledge are reuniting manifest perceptions with corresponding intuitive potential and that this relationship was previously sundered through the convolutions of our organization. As Plato says, 'all knowledge is remembrance'. On the other hand, we can say the instinctive or pre-conscious sundering is fundamentally different from a conscious realization of the intuitive potential, i.e. that a fundamentally new relationship comes into existence through our free act. In that sense, it could be a bit misleading to think of it as simply putting broken parts back together again, restoring the original.

But again I don't think either of them is a big deal and one can get by just fine with the Wilson translation. At the end of the day, it is simply about experiencing the thinking movements that are embodied in the sentences and a few inevitable ambiguities are not going to compromise that experience for us. In fact, I would say most of the value from even examining these seeming ambiguities is to exercise our thinking in slightly new configurations with respect to the core ideas.
"Most people would sooner regard themselves as a piece of lava in the moon than as an 'I'"
Post Reply