Planets

From Anthroposophy


Planets, or better the the planetary symbols in general, describe and their influences relate and connect:

  • the spiritual communities at other levels of development than ours
  • the physical planetary bodies that we observe with our visual sensory perception and consciousness. This is from where we start our naming, thinking and relating.
  • the large spheres that correspond to these planetary bodies, of from which these bodies are just an 'expulsion' (1912-04-08-GA136). These spheres have an their etheric, astral and spirit perspective.

In each planetary stage in the evolution of our solar system, planets are created in the different stages to accomodate spiritual beings at various levels of development. Later on they are merged again.

Aspects

  • formation of a planetary body, see also 1912-04-08-GA136 as well as FMC00.271 and FMC00.271A on The two etheric streams
  • naming of the days of the week and link to the names of the planets

Illustrations


Lecture coverage and references

1909-04-18-GA110

Thus we see, that the planets of the present day which are visible to us in the heavens must be thought of as having originated during the time which we call the fourth period of the evolution of the earth.

In speaking of Old Saturn, I spoke of a globe of fire or of a large fiery egg, and then of a revolving motion. And it was in fact originally a sort of ball or egg. Whilst that globe, which corresponds to the very first Old Saturn condition, is revolving, the following is gradually formed: it acquires a sort of girdle, which does not surround the whole egg, but which is there as a sort of broad band. And within that belt these single forms collect which are being formed all around.

(Diagram.)

This belt formation is a general Cosmic law. This law - which rests on an accumulation in the form of an equator or belt - you can see exemplified in the Cosmos, as far as your sight can reach, in the Milky Way, which owes its existence to that law. When you look at the Milky Way, stretching like an external belt around the heavens, with the stars shining sparsely in between, you must think of its being the result of that law which causes things to draw together into a belt as soon as a rotatory process begins. Our world system, as we have it, has really the form of a bean; it is not round, as is usually accepted, and the belt is drawn around as a distant equator.

You must also think of such a belt when a planet originates.

If - trivially speaking - one took an egg desiring to make a diagram on it of these various conditions, one would have first to paint such a belt around it, with red if you like. One would not paint the whole egg red, but only just a belt. Along this belt assemble those bodies which were selected to form later a heavenly body. One would have to draw on it a point where all these were gathered together.

The lecture of 1912-04-08-GA136 describes how a physical planet emerges at the boundary of two opposing spiritual influences. The lecture focuses on the hollow indent produced by the luciferic SoF, it does not go into how that hollow is filled with mineral matter due to the ahrimanic influences. 1921-01-15-GA323 explains that inner planets are within space and polar coordinates, but outer planets such as mars and jupiter require etheric counterspace coordinates - see Mathemathics of the etheric (SWCC)

In like manner you must proceed if you are trying to understand the curves formed in the Heavens by the apparent paths of Venus and Mercury on the one hand, Jupiter and Mars on the other, I mean quite simply the apparent paths as we observe them with our eyes, — the loops and all.

If you use polar coordinates for example, then for the loop of Venus you may make the origin of your coordinate system in three-dimensional space. Here you can do so.

But you will not come to terms with reality if you adopt the same principle when examining the curve of Mars. In this case you must start from the ideal premise that the origins of any relevant system of polar coordinates will be outside three-dimensional space. You are obliged to take the coordinates in this way. In the former case you may start from the pole of the coordinate system, taking coordinates in the normal way, as in Figure 6.

But if you do this for the one planetary curve — say for the path of Venus with its loop — you will do equal justice to the paths of Jupiter or Mars with their loops, only by saying to yourself: This time I will not pre-suppose a polar-coordinate system with an origin such that I always have to add a piece to get the polar-coordinates, as in Figure 6. No, I will take as origin of my polar-coordinate system the encompassing Sphere (Fig. 6a), i.e. what is there behind it, indeterminately far. Then I get such coordinates as these (dotted lines), where in each case, instead of adding, I must leave so much out. The curve I then obtain also has something like a centre, but the centre is in the infinite sphere.

It might prove necessary then, for more profound research into the paths of the planets, that we make use of this idea:

  • In constituting the paths of the inner planets we must indeed attribute to these paths some centre or other within ordinary space.
  • But if we want to think of centres for the path of outer planets such as Mars or Jupiter and so on, we must go right outside this ordinary space.


We have to overcome space; we must transcend it. If you are conscientious in your efforts to comprehend the phenomena, the mere ideas of three-dimensional space will not suffice. You must envisage the interplay of two kinds of space.

  • One of them, with the ordinary three dimensions, may be conceived as issuing radially from a central point.
  • The other, which is all the time annulling and extinguishing the first, may not be thought of as issuing from a point at all. It must be thought of as issuing from the encompassing sphere — that is, the sphere infinitely far away. While in the former case the "point" is of zero areas which it turns outward, and a point with the area of an infinite spherical surface which it turns inward. Geometrically it may suffice to conceive the notion of a point abstractly. In the realm of reality it will not. We shall not do justice to reality with the mere notion of an abstract point. In every instance we must ask whether the point we are conceiving has its curvature turned inward or outward; its field of influence will be according to this.

But you must think still farther, there is a another thing.



Discussion


Related pages


References and further reading

  • Elisabeth Vreede: 'Astronomy and Spiritual Science'