spiders, dragons and foxes — the coming of ahriman

Sergej Prokofieff, head of the international Anthroposophical Society, explains (link to pdf-file) how the internet is best understood from an esoteric viewpoint. Rudolf Steiner prophesied that “from the earth will well up terrible creations of beings who in their character stand between the mineral kingdom and the plant kingdom as automative beings with a super-natural intellect, an immense intellect” and they will spread over the world like ahrimanic spiders weaving a web. There will be evil intent and mankind “will have to unite with these terrible mineral-plant like spider creatures.” Prokofieff — ignoring the very fact he has himself observed in Steiner’s indications, i e, that this web is to be expected no sooner than about 6000 years from now — writes:

“It is as if Rudolf Steiner, with his spiritual gaze, described today’s Internet from beyond the threshold, categorically warning humanity that in a not too distant future, with the unification of moon and earth, this whole internet-computer-web and in fact everything connected with the development of the artificial intellect will suddenly come alive …”

Technology, thus, means problems, but what is Prokofieff suggesting as a cure? White magic. (Anthroposophy?)

“The frightening picture of an insect caught in the net of a huge and ravenous spider, trying in vain to free itself, outlines an appropriate picture of this future for mankind. And it will be a very special task of white magic to free such people from their bond to these beings.”

Secret occult circles are responsible for speeding up this development and they are also behind the name for the internet: that’s why it’s called www, the world wide web. That aside, it is not until this passage that I seriously begin to question Prokofieff’s sanity:

“This begs the question whether some of the other labels in the world have arisen from the same source e.g. the hotel chain in Germany called “Sorat” (the largest Hotel being in the centre of Berlin) or the satellite aerials which in the centre of their dish display in big red letters the name “SatAn;” or as with the latest computer system where one finds demonic pictures and words as for example the internet browser “Mozilla” which portrays the head of a red dragon etc.”

It’s a fox, dear mr Prokofieff, but I’m certain S:t Michael can slay foxes too, they’re usually smaller than dragons.

Then we learn that the letter “w” is the spiritual equivalent of the number “6” which is not a good thing at all: “www”, consequently, is “666” — the number of the beast. That is, satan. But, as Steiner has indicated, satan will use something man-made for his evil attacks on humanity; let’s return to Prokofieff:

“In my opinion the Internet and everything connected to artificial intelligence are part of this.”

What is going to happen, then, when the occult circles have their ways, and satan his?

“the aims of the … occult circles not only relate to the spiritual en-webbing of humanity but ultimately in the endeavour to put the whole undertaking into the service of ‘Sorat.'”

But the internet isn’t the only grave problem facing mankind. I bet most people don’t give much thought to the spiritual aspects of discs and data storage devices, more specifically the compression of data; this would be mistaken, because

“one has to remember that when the cosmic intelligence guarded by Michael descended from the sun to the earth in order there to become human intelligence, it went through a massive process of compression or contraction.”

Ahriman can interfere in this (of course, Ahriman can interfere everywhere), but if he doesn’t, the intelligence (or data) is set “free after death during the expansion of the ether body in the cosmos”. Ahriman tries to screw up the work of Michael (and his blessed forces) — and he can do this by messing with digitalized information. Like a pathologically jealous husband, he wants to gain control and power, in this case over human intelligence.

“Ahriman finds such favourable conditions especially in the world of the computer and digital industry.”

The digitalization of Rudolf Steiner’s collected works is perhaps paradoxical (the digital German Gesamtausgabe consists of hundreds of his works), as the material is also compressed (and then transferred to laser discs — oh the horror), and can make the spiritually conscious feel physical pain (why physical pain and not spiritual pain, I ask, but I suppose there’s no answer to that one…). This is a big drift into sub-nature.

“Don’t fall prey to the illusion that it is possible to ‘redeem’ the Internet or CD/ DVD in the way Rudolf Steiner indicated for printing. In the realm of sub-nature the obstacles are far greater.”

It is a task for the School of Spiritual Science to “consciously oppose the ahrimanic principle of the duad, which has spread worldwide in particular through computers …”.

For Prokofieff

“[i]t follows that the whole computer- and Internet industry is today the most effective way to prepare for the imminent incarnation of Ahriman or at least to allow his earthly task to run as smoothly as possible for him. The net of ahrimanic spider beings developing out of the internet around the earth stands right from the beginning in a direct relationship to Ahriman appearing in a physical body and will serve him particularly effectively and offer him extremely favourable potential to work.”

In addition to the work of ahrimanic forces, the internet has, according to Prokofieff, enabled vicious and defamatory attacks on the anthroposophical movement (or maybe these are the ahrimanic forces? well, I suppose so…). These “attacks” will become increasingly severe with the spread of Steiner’s collected works in digital form,

“because then all alleged ‘vulnerable passages’ in the collective works will be easily and quickly accessible.”

It’s easy to spot the warped logic. When people can read Steiner for themselves — instead of reading or hearing propaganda brochures on anthroposophy — they will reject much of what he had to say. When people can find out for themselves, they become dangerous. Unfiltered, uncensored access enables people to form their own opinions more easily. (But, contrary to Prokofieff’s bad feelings about this, I think that having the material accessible allows people to find out for themselves that the bad things in Steiner aren’t always as bad as we’ve suspected, and that there are many redeeming qualities about him, too. To know this, you need to read, you need the source. And wasn’t this what he wanted, to some extent — openness? Unlike the relative secrecy surrounding other esoteric or occult movements, groups and their teachings. More on this later, though. Suffice to say that Prokofieff claims that the online publication of the works contributes to an increasing intellectualisation of anthroposophy “through which it will be handed to Ahriman, the Master of Death.”)

This doesn’t mean people have to give up modern technology altogether (had Prokofieff suggested they had to, he would have boldly contradicted Steiner’s recommendations, although Steiner spoke about other types of applications of ahrimanic science and technology); it’s more crucial who controls whom. For Prokofieff, it’s about noticing what is happening “in reality”. Given the content of this particular article, I very much doubt he knows what “reality” is, but that’s just a side-note. I’m almost blushing when I read about phenomena such as the “ahrimanic seduction” though. Probably because I’m so totally under its spell. I am seduced. By the internet, by the glorious spiders offering an ahrimanic kingdom — I can’t resist! But then, of course, I am “an instrument for alien purposes” who “slowly slides into the sub nature [myself].” Damn it, I am

“cut … off from [my] ability to read in the astral light and thus to encounter Michael in the spiritual world.”

Sure, through the internet, people can connect with each other in an unprecedented manner, but instead

“mankind becomes increasingly separated from the cosmos and the hierarchies and thus is bound up with what was described above as an ahrimanic spider web.”

“The Michaelic intelligence came to earth from the spiritual world in order for man to achieve freedom through insight.”

Not the insight gained from reading — Steiner’s works? —  on the internet, I gather. Intelligence and freedom for mankind — but not to be used intelligently and freely? That’s also quite interesting, a kind of plea for restricted freedom and stupid intelligence? Anyway, the world wide web has enhanced the process of the human intellect becoming shadowy (spiritually speaking).

When anthroposophic works are published online, they “are being put into an occult prison.” Prokofieff is particurly worried about the fate of the so-called class texts (the Esoteric Lessons for the First Class of the School of Spiritual Science — available online, as far as I know, only in German). The class texts supposedly consist of “a substance, which comes directly from Michael himself (out of the Michael-School) and therefore contains imaginations in their original form” and consequently they must be treated differently than other Steiner works, according to Prokofieff (and, I’m certain, many others). However, the lessons are already there, and I’d say it’s good they are: it was inevitable.

Prokofieff speaks of a need of a place

“within man and for future mankind, where anthroposophical wisdom is protected from serving adversarial forces.”

Is anthroposophy too weak to subsist if or when it encounters adversity? Sometimes it strikes me: anthroposophists have very little faith in anthroposophy. And I mean faith as in confidence, not as in religious type faith.

And I, I am seduced. By everything bad and evil.

______________

A sort of long PS, but while I was writing, a friend sent me another link, namely of Eugene Schwartz’s reply to Prokofieff. It’s entertaining. For example the part about the unmentionable early computer in the Goetheanum’s basement. Schwartz also writes:

“So timely and important was this information [about the webs] that Steiner was not alone in presenting these inter-related Imaginations of intelligent spiders and world-saving supermen. In her ca. 1915 book, Woody, Hazel, and Little Pip, (Figure 1) the beloved children’s author Elsa Beskow pictured the telephone network as a web spun by a spider … And it is certainly no coincidence that in the 1930s, in the very years that Steiner had spoken of the possibility of humanity participating in the etheric reappearance of the Christ being, the Imagination of the supermen that Steiner had given in the previous decade appeared, in however distorted a form, in the medium of the comic book (the addictive mid-century equivalent of the video game) as figures such as Batman, Plastic Man, the Green Lantern, Wonder Woman, and, of course, Superman, the prototype of them all.”

Then Schwartz hints that perhaps Prokofieff’s scare-mongering will please Ahriman, since “such pusillanimity is precisely what Ahriman hopes to sow in us, opening us up even more to his impulses.”

And, of course, as I mentioned, the “dragon” is really a fox:

“It should also be noted that, rather than the ‘head of a red dragon’ that Prokofieff describes, Mozilla’s Firefox browser logo displays the body of a red fox encircling the world. From the time of Aesop, the fox has served as a symbol of cunning intellect and prevarication; somewhat less formidable that the Dragon, for sure, but certainly scary enough! Although I have not seen the SatAn satellite dishes mentioned by Prokofieff, there is the well-known ‘white hat’ hackers’ web site whose acronym SATAN stands for Security Administrator Tool for Analyzing Networks.”

Schwartz notes that the secret occult aren’t very cunning in their concealment of Ahriman’s activies:

“if, as Steiner clearly indicated, the aim of these occult brotherhoods is to hide the approach of Ahriman, why are they doing just the opposite? Indeed, it could be said that the hotel chain, the satellite communications system, the browser, and the World Wide Web are literally advertising Ahriman’s incarnation. And for all of those who still don’t get it, the brotherhoods, through their minions in the ‘entertainment industry,’ provide a never-ending spectacle of movies and video games replete with superheroes, giant insects, alien invasions, demonic automatons, and depressingly dystopic visions of the earth’s future (e.g. Bladerunner, Gattica, and Children of Men, which even portrays a world in which all women are barren). Short of shouting it from the rooftops, the occult brotherhoods that Prokofieff describes could hardly be broadcasting their aims for the future any more blatantly. For groups that consider themselves ‘occultists,’ these brotherhoods aren’t very good at keeping a secret.”

Most importantly, he asks

“If Steiner was not inclined to advise people to stay away from the telegraph, a system that was clearly a precursor of the Internet, then why should we assume that he would be so opposed to the Internet itself as a channel for communications about the spirit?”

and continues to say

“let us recognize that anthroposophists are already nestled in the Internet dragon’s skin, albeit semi-unconsciously and in a very advanced state of denial.”

____________________________________

Prokofieff, The Being of The Internet (pdf), published in Pacifica Journal 2006. (New link: http://www.waldorflibrary.org/images/stories/Journal_Articles/PacificJ29.pdf.)

Schwarz, Anthroposophy and Waldorf Education: The Web as Will and Idea.

Update April 1, 2015: Prokofieff’s article has moved, but can be found here now: http://www.waldorflibrary.org/images/stories/Journal_Articles/WJP11.pdf.

Advertisements

18 thoughts on “spiders, dragons and foxes — the coming of ahriman

  1. Pingback: Twitted by zzzooey
  2. This is very good – and fast: you’re a creature immured in the spider’s web.

    I noted later that Schwarz does a lot of business on the internet (paypal) so it’s in his interest for Steiner to be pro it. But now I realize that he’s laughing at Prokofieff in his eerie or his silk-lined coffin in the Goetheanum crypt or wherever he languishes, waiting for the Guardian of the Threshold to materialize however ineffectually, twiddling his thumbs and sighing. Such a wasted marketing opportunity, thinks Eugene: we could have made a mini-series. We could have nabbed David Tennant to play Steiner, after all he has that wild-eyed stare, surely he’s made for Higher Worlds… but no. The Vorstand creaks like a lampstand from Ikea missing one of its bolts and lurching on the edge of self-parody and dissolution. The time for heroism has passed, thinks Eugene: now there’s nothing for it but to let the gnomes go busking.

  3. Thank you!

    Brilliant comment. And I believe this is the difference between Prokofieff and Schwarz — the latter has mastered the art of making money on the internet. Surely, if Prokofieff realized his kind of art is comedy, they could earn enough money to build vault, an entirely closed grotto — under the Dornacher hill — for the imprisonment of all the ahrimanic forces in the whole world. (Under the basement. The basement is full of eurythmists and babies. Must dig deeper.) He’s really funny, Prokofieff. Schwarz has spotted the potential, but knows Prokofieff is too wrapped up in his own apocalyptic fears. He will have to rely on the gnomes, I’m afraid. Not even Steiner could save Prokofieff.

    Let’s just hope the Vorstand — and all other serious and/or official anthroposophists — remains on “the edge of self-parody and dissolution” for a very long time!!

  4. 6000 years… the age of the universe! Is that some kind of favorite number for cranks?

    Also Mozilla, the organisation behind Firefox, actually have a red dinosaur (T Rex is seems) as a mascot. It was remade 1998 from an older green cartoon lizard which Netscape used (and the internal code name for Netscape was Mozilla, standing for “Mosaic killer”, Mosaic being one of the earliest web browsers that popularized the web). So Netscape/Mozilla/SeaMonkey/Firefox is in the same family or tradition and is the historical opponent to Internet Explorer.

    If anthro-people reject the internet altogether as evil then they will not see that there is an ideological fight between the commercial & capitalist Microsoft Internet Explorer and the open software Mozilla Firefox, where most hackers (i.e. programmers, not crackers) supports Firefox against the “evil” MSIE. One way this shows (at leat immediately for me) is that with Firefox, I use the addon AdBlock Plus which removes almost all ads from the web. The proprietary MSIE doesn’t have that function and cannot be modifies.

    Now there’s some internet history for you youngsters. ;)

  5. No, no, you’re mistaken! The universe is very very old, much older than 6000 years. The ahrimanic web Steiner spoke of, and which Prokofieff refers to, will “happen” in about 6000 years from now.

    Funnily, they do have differing opinions. The Schwarz guy, whose comments on Prokofieff’s article were included above, also happens to be an anthroposophist — and a waldorf teacher and waldorf teachers’ educator as well. Although the sentiments reflected by Prokofieff’s arguments aren’t entirely uncommon, they are somewhat extreme even for the anthroposophic movement. (Thank Dog.) Lots of them, in contrast to mr Prokofieff perhaps, use the internet… happily and successfully.

    I posted a couple of links to a certain Software AG and the Software AG Stiftung earlier on Twitter — that’s an anthroposophic company. (It was founded by an anthroposophist and the foundation supports anthroposophic endevours. The Stiftung still owns large parts of the AG itself.) Siemens — also specializing in ahrimanic products, i e electrical devices — was also owned and founded by anthroposophists who donated lots of money to the anthroposophic movement.

    On the topic of AddBlock, I suppose I should get it. I have, I believe, a certain FlashBlock because I dislike the flash-ads, but sometimes they seem to play despite the block.

  6. Hey, Anthroposophical debunkers forgot to mention ” The Cloud” by Microsoft and how Mr A is knocking off (materially externalizing) the Reappearance of Christ in the Etheric (The Clouds ) through this software program. It is so funny to see how A & L work together nowadays to refute the remarkable genius of Steiner.But debunkers should have fun, the devil hates laughter and I am laughing in stiches at the debunkers of Anthroposophy, too funny!

  7. Maybe John and Clint could settle on one name, since the person behind these names seems to have very little of substance to say. Doesn’t magically become more interesting with multiple identities. (It’s the anthroposophical condition — the bogus multiple personality disorder.)

  8. “It’s a fox, dear mr Prokofieff.”

    Try again.

    The Firefox browser is a fox. The Mozilla Foundation and their original browser is a red dragon:

  9. “Try again.
    The Firefox browser is a fox. The Mozilla Foundation and their original browser is a red dragon:”

    Um… Try again… “Mozilla” is from “Godzilla” which is a dinosaur… not a dragon.

  10. No, correction, he actually talks about Mozilla but he talks about the *browser* not the company. But who the hell has ever seen the company’s dinosaur logo before? Unless you have a special interest in these things, it’s completely unknown. I never saw it. The Firefox logo, however, is well-known.

  11. I once heard from a devoted Anthro that when Prokofieff was in the USA at a conference in Ann Arbor, some American Anthro — could have been Joel Wendt or Dottie Zold? — tried to explain the difference to Sergei by saying that Firefox was Lucifer and Mozilla was Ahriman. Don’t know anything beyond that tidbit.

    Now if I had been there, I would have asked: “What about Safari?” But that would have been a conversation stopper since Safari implies Africa, which in turn evokes Hottentots and leads us of course to Goethe by contrast with them.

Comments are closed.