Federica wrote: ↑Wed Aug 31, 2022 5:53 amAshvinP wrote: ↑Wed Aug 31, 2022 2:00 amFederica wrote:PS. With reference to the lecture on the Mystery of Golgotha - doesn’t Steiner suggest that the meaning of Christ’s words on the cross was not “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me”?
There are many, many layers of meaningful depth in scripture, especially the NT. They are not mutually exclusive to each other, but concentric to one another, just as our own current thinking consciousness is concentric to the higher Centers of consciousness. In general, once we become livingly aware of our soul-spiritual nature, we will at times feel like it is forsaking our physical nature. Which is not necessarily a bad thing overall, but a stark reality we must confront nonetheless.
Unless you are saying Steiner disagrees with the translation entirely? I hadn't heard that before.
Yes, I understand he disagrees. In this case the meanings do seem mutually exclusive, it’s in the lecture:
https://rsarchive.org/Lectures/MG1442_index.html
…words which are rendered as follows in the Hebrew language: “Eli, Eli, lama sabathani.” The pupil of the Mysteries woke up with the words: “My God, My God, how thou hast raised me!”
In the very last lines, it’s reinstated that a slight modification in the Hebrew language (language I don’t have any clue on) made for the switch from 'raised' to 'forsaken', the two expressions being apparently very close to each other in Hebrew:
To all who know something of the Mystery-truths, these words must have revealed that a Mystery had been enacted. A small correction in the Hebrew text therefore gave rise to the words contained in the Gospel: “Eli, Eli, lama sabathani!” “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me!”
How did you interpret that? I have now googled it and this review has come up, a coverage of all the places where Steiner mentions these Hebrew words. It seems it really was his opinion:
https://anthroposophy.eu/Eli_Eli_Lama_S ... ani_-_EELS
Do you think it is unreliable?
This is accurate, from what I understand. Steiner is not saying the Gospels got it wrong, but that they are presenting the older Mystery teaching from new angles which had now evolved. The angles which allow for more precise understanding, via Ego-consciousness, of what is taking place between the gradient of Earthly to Cosmic consciousness. Consider this lecture:
https://rsarchive.org/Lectures/GA123/En ... 12p02.html
Let us now picture the writer of the Matthew Gospel turning his gaze to the dying Jesus on the Cross. His gaze had always been directed to the aspect most important to him, to what he had taken as his starting-point. At the Crucifixion the spiritual forsakes the physical body and therewith also the divine forces that had been taken over into it. The writer of the Matthew Gospel directs his gaze to the separation of the inner nature of Christ Jesus from this divine element in His physical constitution. The words that always rang out in the ancient Mysteries when the spiritual nature of a man emerged from the physical body in order to have vision in the spiritual world, were these: ‘My God, my God, how thou hast glorified me!’ — The writer of the Matthew Gospel, with his attention fixed on the physical body, changes these words to: ‘My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me!’ Thou has gone from me, hast abandoned me (XXVII, 46). — The chief attention of the writer of the Matthew Gospel has been fixed upon this aspect.
The writer of the Mark Gospel describes the coming of the outer forces and powers of the Sun Aura, ho the Sun Aura, the body of the Sun Being, unites with the etheric body. The etheric body was in the same situation as our etheric body is during sleep. As in our own case the outer forces pass out with us when we sleep, so did they at the physical death of Jesus. Hence the same words are found in the Gospel of Mark (XV, 34).
The writer of the Luke Gospel also directs his attention at the death of Christ Jesus to what was his concern at the beginning: the astral body and the Ego-bearing principle. Hence the words he uses are different. His chief attention is directed to the astral body in which at this moment compassion and mercy and love reach their greatest intensity. Hence the words: ‘Father forgive them; for they know not what they do’ (XXIII, 34). These words of love that could issue only from the astral body to which the writer of the Luke Gospel has been pointing from the beginning. And it is upon these qualities of humility and resignation to God's will which have here reached their greatest intensity and issue from the astral body, that Luke directs his gaze at the end. Hence the words in the Gospel: ‘Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit.’ (XXIII, 46).
The John Gospel describes what must be fulfilled by man in Earth-existence: the ordering of existence according to the Sun Word. Hence his gaze is directed mainly to the ordering of life as proclaimed fro the Cross of Golgotha. He describes how in this hour Christ institutes a brotherhood of a higher kind than that based on blood-kinship. Brotherhood in its earlier forms arose from ties of blood. Mary was the mother of the child through blood-relationship. But soul united with soul in love — that is what was instituted through Christ Jesus. To the disciple whom He loved He gives, not the one who was the mother by blood, but He gives him the one who is his true mother in the spirit. And so the words resound from the Cross with their new meaning: ‘Behold thy son!’ — ‘`Behold thy mother!’ (XIX, 26, 27). The principle inherent in the life-ether by which the ordering of life is determined and community of a new kind established — that is what streamed into the Earth through Christ's Deed.
There is one supreme reality, the reality of Christ Himself behind everything the Evangelists describe. But each of them writes from the viewpoint he adopted at the beginning. Each had necessarily to direct his seership to what his particular preparation enabled him to understand; and the rest passed him by.