Choosing (Waldorf Watch)

CHOOSING

Why to Be An Anthroposophist

Or Not

(including What Is It?)

Rudolf Steiner discoursed on any and all subjects, regardless of factual or intellectual support. He was impressive that way. It is one reason he won adherents. Another reason is that — incoherent, circular, repetitious, and contradictory as his statements often were — he was clearer than Theosophist Helena Blavatsky, from whom he appropriated the bulk of his doctrines.

Another advantage Steiner had over Blavatsky is that he was, in his words (not mine), more "scientific" as well as more "Christian." He called his doctrines "spiritual science." This sounds pretty good, if we overlook the oxymoronic component. But why would anyone turn to this extremely unscientific form of "science"? Let's step back to consider Anthroposophy's context. There are many other spiritualistic systems from which to choose. Almost all of them have more adherents than Steiner's derivative system does. Steiner claimed that Anthroposophy had become a large movement, but in this — as in so much else — he was mistaken. Anthroposophy is a dangerous movement, but it remains a small, fringe faction. But this begs the question, why would anyone enlist in that faction?

Theosophy, the system from which Steiner borrowed so heavily, is the most obvious alternative to Anthroposophy. But there are many others, some of which offer the same rewards Steiner promised to deliver. Christian Science, for instance. [1] Or transcendental meditation. [2] Christian Science meets both of Steiner's criteria: It is both scientific (according to its founder) and it is Christian (in fact, far more clearly so than Steiner's system). Why not turn to it instead of Anthroposophy? (This may come as a shock to Anthroposophists, but actually far more people opt for Christian Science — and for Scientology, for that matter — than for Anthroposophy.)

Anthroposophy, Transcendental Meditation, and Christian Science all claim to be therapeutic disciplines that enable suffering humans to find the true path to self- and universal improvement. [3] There are other such disciplines, of course, and some are far more widely accepted. Buddhism is one: All of the Buddha's teachings are aimed at the alleviation of human suffering. [4] Or, let's take just one example from within mainstream Christendom. Methodism aims at methodical worship leading to salvation. [5] All in all, a seeker doesn't need to poke around in the dark corners of heretical cults to find the "true path." Why choose a dark corner, then?

Let's list some of the other options that are currently on the table. Mormonism builds on Christianity, as Anthroposophism seeks to do, and it has a huge volume of additional scripture that is fully as convincing as Steiner's teachings. [6] Why not turn to Mormonism instead of Steiner's sideline cult? Of course, secretive cults have their own allure: The possession of privileged, holy secrets can be invigorating. But Mormons, too, keep various practices and beliefs to themselves.

If we seek privileged revelations coming from completely unearthly sources, we could turn to the teachings of Edgar Cayce [7] or Nostradamus [8] — both were able to read the "Akashic Record(s)", or so they said. The Record(s) (singular or plural, depending on which psychic testimony we accept) are a celestial storehouse of all knowledge. Steiner claimed he had access to this storehouse, citing himself as the authority for his claim. Why not believe Cayce and/or Nostradamus instead of Steiner, or at least alongside him? The latter approach would necessitate overlooking enormous inconsistencies in what various Akasha-reading seers report, but there are also important inconsistencies within Anthroposophy, so leaping that hurdle should not be difficult.

Alternate sources of surprising unearthly knowledge can be found on the planets in our own solar system. To pick an almost random case, George Adamski traveled to Venus, which he found quite pleasant [9] — although science tells us the planet is shrouded in sulfuric acid, and it averages about 800 degrees F. at the surface. But why not believe him? He says he's telling us the truth, based on his firsthand, eyewitness observations. What could be more reliable that eyewitness testimony? Steiner offered his own firsthand, psychic-eye accounts attesting of his supersensory experiences. He wouldn't lie about a thing like that, would he? So which sage should we follow? Choosing gets tough.

[1] Christian Science (created by American Mary Baker Eddy) denies the divinity of Jesus, but it accepts Jesus's healing powers and his victory over death as models all can follow. The "science" of this Christian subsidiary lies in employing Jesus's anti-illness and anti-mortality techniques. For a skilled Christian Scientist — or for any who accept a Christian Scientist's ministrations — medical treatment is unnecessary. Prayer and devotion are all one needs. [See, e.g., http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-8361/Christian-Science. {Disclosure: It is now June, 2009. I wrote this essay a few years back. The Web addresses may no longer be active.}] Full disclosure: My grandparents were Christian Scientists until I, as a young child, developed a severe ear infection one summer while visiting them. Following many days of intense pain and screaming, accompanied by intense efforts by all to offer my suffering up to God, Gram and Granddad called in a doctor and left the church. (In 1907, Mark Twain published CHRISTIAN SCIENCE, a muddled but interesting book. On pp. 41-42 appears a list of people Twain considered insane. [i] Christian Scientists are high on the list. There's a tragic reason. Twain's daughter, Susy, had been intrigued by Christian Science. When she developed spinal meningitis, she refused medical treatment until it was too late. [Isabel Lyon, "The Gilded Age. 1873," quoted by Hamlin Hill, Afterword, Mark Twain, CHRISTIAN SCIENCE (Oxford University Press, 1996).])

[2] Transcendental meditation (TM) is an Eastern technique for attaining spiritual peace and enlightenment. In Hippie times — the late 1960s and early 1970s — TM was brought to the West by Maharishi Mahesh Yogi. He won many adherents, including celebrities, the foremost being the Beatles. It was said that experts in TM could levitate, and that levitations were often performed during TM sessions. Some films of the phenomenon seemed less than conclusive: Practitioners seemed to be bouncing around while folded in the lotus position. When the Beatles became disenchanted (perhaps with sore butts), they wrote a song beginning "Maharishi, what have you done?/ You made a fool or everyone./ Oh, what have you done?" Prudence later dictated changing the song to "Sexy Sadie." TM is still widely practiced and advocated (e.g., "Creating Heaven on Earth, Transcendental Meditation" at http://www.alltm.org/Transcendental_Meditation.html), and it is also widely dismissed as bogus (e.g., "Probably the least believable claim of TMers is that they can fly — well, not really fly, more like hop. TM loudly promoted levitation in its early days." http://www.skepdic.com/tm.html).

[3] Steiner offered Anthroposophy as the cure for humanity's ills. "[W]e may point to spiritual science as a bearer of the redemption of human longing ... spiritual science now provides what tempestuous but also woeful human beings have sought for a long time." [Rudolf Steiner, THE SPIRITUAL HIERARCHIES AND THE PHYSICAL WORLD: Reality and Illusion (Anthroposophic Press, 1996), p. 225.] Full disclosure: After my earache episode, my parents sent me to regular MDs, from whom I received medications. But they also sent me to an Anthroposophical doctor, from whom I received few nostrums except herbs. Instead, this doctor prescribed mental exercises such as visualizing a pencil in complete detail and then visualizing all the steps in its manufacture. This is the sort of exercise Steiner prescribes in such books as KNOWLEDGE OF THE HIGHER WORLDS AND ITS ATTAINMENT (Anthroposophic Press, 1944) — steps used to gain complete conscious control of the mind, which makes for both physical health and the ability to become clairvoyant. I can't say what, if anything, the herbs did for me, but I never developed psychic powers. My own fault, probably. [For more about Anthroposophical doctoring, see my essay, "Steiner's Quackery".] (Among the people Twain considered insane are Theosophists. If he had heard of Anthroposophists — who are really just turncoat Theosophists — he would have included them. Twain couldn't include them because he published his book five years before Steiner founded Anthroposophy. Full disclosure: Among the insane, Twain also lists agnostics, which would include me.)

[4] Buddhism is explicitly a therapy. Quite unlike Steiner, Buddha refused to say whether God exists, whether there is life after death, etc. "[I]t's not that I know the answers to these questions and I'm not telling you, or that I don't know the answers to these questions. It's just that I know for sure that speculating on these questions does not help to live the life that we want to practice ... Suffering and the end of suffering, that is what's important. About that I have spoken." [www.everydayzen.org.] (Buddhists, by the way, are on Mark Twain’s list of the insane. Also included are "Blavatsky Buddhists," meaning Eastern-leaning followers of Madame Blavatsky, the Theosophical leader. "Steiner Gnosticists" would have made his list if he knew that Steiner had broken with Blavatsky and set up his own insane religion.)

[5] Methodism arose from an evangelical religious movement intended to correct the staid Church of England by pointing out the true path to salvation: systematic Bible study, practical application of Christian teachings, and enthusiastic devotion fostered by the Holy Spirit. Members of the movement emphasized cleansing, joyous religious experience forging a personal relationship with the Lord. Salvation becomes possible through "justification" — God's "justice" given to penitent sinners by grace, allowing entry into the ranks of the righteous. When the schism among Anglicans became too great, Methodists broke away and established their own church (among Anglicans, "enthusiasm" became a byword for the elements of Methodism they found unacceptable). Today many churches around the world identify themselves as Methodist, but there are doctrinal differences between them. [See, e.g., http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-41590/Protestantism.] (Methodists, by the way, are on Mark Twain's list of the insane.)

[6] The moral teachings of Mormonism are quite consistent with Christianity, unlike Steiner's more heterodox preachments. Where Mormonism most clearly distinguishes itself from other forms of Christianity is in its central narrative, which discloses the emigration to America of Hebrews long ago, followed eventually by Christ's physical arrival in America, where He taught, healed, and assembled twelve new disciples. [See, e.g., Christopher Kimball Bigelow and Jana Riess , MORMONISM FOR DUMMIES (For Dummies, 2005).] (Mormons, by the way, are on Mark Twain's list of the insane.)

[7] Cayce, an American Presbyterian clairvoyant, was into astrology and Atlantis, among other similarities to Steiner. [See, e.g., http://www.edgarcayce.org/] Amazingly, long before Sept. 11, 2001, Cayce predicted that New York would be destroyed by a cataclysm, and that California will "slide into the sea." [http://skepdic.com/cayce.html] The Big One hasn't hit California yet, and come to think of it, NYC still stands, but when these disasters do occur, we'll be sorry that we didn't listen up. A faith healer, Cayce also recommended various home remedies, such as creosote applied to a sore leg and the use of bedbug juice to treat dropsy. (Spiritualists, by the way, are on Mark Twain's list of the insane.)

[8] Nostradamus, a French astrologer, made many wonderful predictions in verse form. He foresaw the advent of Adolf Hitler, thus:

"Beasts mad with hunger will swim across rivers,

Most of the army will be against the Lower Danube.

The great one shall be dragged in an iron cage

When the child brother will observe nothing."

[http://skepdic.com/nostrada.html]

If you don't see Hitler in those lines, try harder. Nostradamus also predicted the arrival of Planet X:

"Mabus then will soon die, there will come

Of people and beasts a horrible rout:

Then suddenly one will see vengeance,

Hundred, hand, thirst, hunger when the comet will run."

The Nostradamus Namus Project comments "Some say that Planet X is due to arrive shortly...." And, citing NASA's recent discovery of a miniplanet beyond Pluto, the Project states: "[M]any people feel that this is in effect Planet X. We have created a forum for people to discuss this breaking news." [http://www.mabus.biz/planetx/index.php] (Bad French poets are not on Twain's list, but I'm sure Nostradamus fits in somewhere. Twain asserted that "there's no end to the list; there are millions of them!" (p. 42))

[9] Adamski was escorted to Venus in a saucer-shaped craft by a Venusian named Orthon (who, regrettably, refused to be photographed). Later, Adamski had dealings with a Martian named Firkon and a Saturnian named Ramu (who were also camera-shy, drat it all). Some of Adamski's teachings are quite similar to Steiner's: e.g., "Looking down upon the world of the mortal we see the various planes of manifestation, which are designated as mineral form, vegetable form, animal and fowl ... Gradually the mortal man evolves ... Matter is constantly moving toward the divine state and our flesh, as men know flesh to be, shall become universal...." [George Adamski, "The Possibility of Life on Other Planets," 1946, see http://www.gafintl-adamski.com/html/GAArt.htm.] If we believe Rudolf Steiner's ravings, why not believe George Adamski's? Despite his failure to snap his alien pals, Adamski gave more evidence for his claims than Steiner ever did: Adamski published many photos of UFOs he had personally seen (albeit some of these flying saucers look oddly like the top section of a 1937 canister vacuum cleaner: see http://www.bermuda-triangle.org/html/edwards_on_adamski.html). Full disclosure: When she was a young girl, my future wife wrote to Mr. Adamski and asked how things are on Venus. He wrote back, saying that things on Venus are just fine. But he was disappointingly short on details. (UFO spotters and abductees are not on Twain's list, but that's because the UFO craze didn't really kick in until 1947 — see Edward J. Ruppelt, THE REPORT ON UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS (Ace, 1956 — by arrangement with Doubleday & Co.). The US Air Force first shot at a flying saucer in 1952. Twain would have questioned this use of taxpayers' money.

[i] Here's Twain's list, in order: Atheists, infidels, agnostics, Methodists, Christian Scientists, Theosophists, Swedenborgians [ii], Shakers, Millerites, Mormons, Laurence Oliphant Harrisites [iii], Catholics, members of Christian sects (except Presbyterians), members of Mohammedan sects, Buddhists, Blavatsky-Buddhists, nationalists, Confucians, spiritualists, members of East Indian sects, the Peculiar People [iv], the Grand Lama's people, monarchists, imperialists, Democrats, Republicans (except Mugwamps), mind-curists, faith-curists, Mental Scientists [v], allopaths, homeopaths, electropaths, [vi] and __________ (fill in the blank).

[ii] Swedenborgians are Christians whose faith is pegged to the teachings of Emmanuel Swedenborg. (See "The Swedenborgian Church," http://www.swedenborg.org/.) Emmanuel Swedenborg was a European Romantic who influenced, among others, Ralph Waldo Emerson. Emerson was a great American genius who rejected the established Christian church of his time and place. Shouldn't we, in our time and place, follow the lead of this great American genius? Swedenborg didn't go quite so far as Emerson, advocating instead a new church to be known as the New Jerusalem. Swedenborg's discussion of the New Jerusalem arose from his reading of the Book of Revelation (which differed significantly from Steiner's reading of the Book of Revelation). Given that the Book of Revelation is very hard to understand, and that Swedenborg was a great European genius, shouldn't anyone who fails to follow Emerson decide instead to join the Swedenborgian Church? (See http://swedenborg.newearth.org/ and http://swedenborg.newearth.org/hcsg/chap_intro.html.)

[iii] Laurence Oliphant Harrisites follow in the footsteps of Laurence Oliphant Harris. And why not?

[iv] The Peculiar People (meaning people who are set apart) were lapsed or reformed Methodists who foreswore medical treatment. In this, they set a spiritual precedent for Christian Scientists. They made an exception in cases requiring surgery, which may or may not explain why many of them were tried for manslaughter. The sect throve in rural Essex, especially on the Dengie Hundred. Not much has been heard from them recently. See http://www.bbc.co.uk/essex/faith/peculiar_people/index.shtml.

[v] Followers of Thomas Troward. Like Steiner (and like Blavatsky), Troward synthesized Eastern and Western thought, and like Steiner (and unlike Blavatsky) he stressed Jesus. Troward is at least as persuasive as Steiner* (and he is much more persuasive than Adamski, photographs of vacuum cleaners aside). See, e.g., Thomas Troward, THE WISDOM OF THOMAS TROWARD VOL I: The Edinburgh and Dore Lectures on Mental Science, The Law and the Word, The Creative Process in the Individual (Wilder Publications, 2007). I haven't cracked Vol. 2 yet (and probably won't).

[vi] Electropathy was fairly widespread between 1850 and 1900. It was a system for curing many ailments, including mental illnesses, through the application of powerful electric shocks. Patients held electrodes in their hands whilst healers applied other electrodes to other body parts. Batteries or magnetos supplied the curative electrical jolts. The practice of electropathy faded in popularity for some reason. See http://www.museumofquackery.com/devices/magneto.htm

*A prominent follower of Steiner's, John Fentress Gardner, eventually turned toward Charismatic Christianity late in his life. See TWO PATHS TO THE SPIRIT: Charismatic Christianity and Anthroposophy (Great Barrington, MA: Golden Stone Press, 1990).** Gardner is at least as convincing as Steiner. Given that he was a major American Anthroposophist, some of whose works are still available from Anthroposophical publishers, shouldn't we follow his lead and become Charismatic Christians instead of Anthropops, or (disregarding inherent contradictions) shouldn't we try to embrace them both, or something?

**There are layers within layers: a mystic onion, as it were. Full disclosure: John Fentress Gardner was headmaster at the Waldorf school I attended.

— Roger Rawlings

◊◊◊◊

WHAT IS IT?

Contrary to what some Waldorf defenders may claim, "Anthroposophy" has a clear and specific meaning.

Anthroposophy (meaning human wisdom) is "spiritual science" — it is the use of "exact clairvoyance" to study the spirit realm. "From 1902 onward, Steiner began using the term Anthroposophy to describe both the results of his spiritual research and the methods by which it was achieved." [Rudolf Steiner, ANTHROPOSOPHY, A Fragment (Anthroposophic Press, 1996), p. 12 - introduction by James A, Dyson.] (Note: In this quotation, "Anthroposophy" is italicized.)

Steiner said "Anthroposophy is a way of knowledge — a cognitive path — that leads the spiritual in us to the spiritual in the universe." [Rudolf Steiner, WHAT IS ANTHROPOSOPHY? (Anthroposophic Press, 2002), p. 8.]

As for "exact clairvoyance," Steiner's method, Steiner said "Yesterday I spoke about the path leading into the supersensible world [i.e., the spirit realm] from the physical world of the senses, the one that today's anthroposophy describes as the one leading to exact clairvoyance. I spoke about exact clairvoyance because it is in effect an imperative requirement of our age. Clairvoyance, which is the basis of the modern science of initiation, has always existed." [Rudolf Steiner, RUDOLF STEINER SPEAKS TO THE BRITISH (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1998), p. 27.] Note that exact clairvoyance leads to the "knowledge" incorporated in Anthroposophy, and Anthroposophy leads to exact clairvoyance leads to Anthroposophy. They are, in effect, indistinguishable.

The modern "science of initiation" is also effectively indistinguishable from Anthroposophy, while older forms of the "science of initiation" are forerunners of Anthroposophy. "Today, however, I would like to discuss the relationship of Anthroposophy to its source, which is the Science of Initiation." [Rudolf Steiner, ANTHROPOSOPHY AND THE INNER LIFE (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1994), p. 39.] Initiation means entry into the inner circle of spiritual wisdom, "Mystery knowledge" of the spirit realm. In the past, people gained such "knowledge" through old, natural but somewhat imprecise forms of clairvoyance. Today, Steiner taught, exact clairvoyance is attainable. This is the content and/or the method of Anthroposophy, "Spiritual Science." Returning to the first quotation, above: Anthroposophy is "both the results of [Steiner's] spiritual research and the methods by which it was achieved."

In reality Anthroposophy is a religion. Practitioners of Anthroposophy may try to "do" Anthroposophy as if it were, as Steiner said, a science or clairvoyant method. But clairvoyance is a fantasy — it does not exist. Anthroposophists can "us" clairvoyance only if they are deluding themselves: They imagine something or other about spiritual realities, and they take this for a clairvoyant observation. Short of this, Anthroposophists must take Steiner's word for things, which means essentially following a religion, accepting Steiner's teachings on faith.

Steiner urged his followers to accept the guidance of "Initiates" such as himself, and to do so unquestioningly. This is faith. How can one "unseal the lips of an Initiate"? [Rudolf Steiner, KNOWLEDGE OF THE HIGHER WORLDS AND ITS ATTAINMENT (Rudolf Steiner Publishing Company, 1944), p.9.] We have to "begin with a fundamental attitude of the soul. In Spiritual Science this fundamental attitude is called the path of veneration." [Ibid., p.9. ] Veneration of worthy objects and beings is surely meritorious. Venerating God is the highest virtue. But Steiner means that veneration should be extended to himself and his doctrines, without pausing to assess their worth. True seekers "have learnt to venerate where veneration is due; and veneration is always due when it flows from the depths of the heart." [Ibid., p. 10.] Critical thought, rational analysis, is ruled out. "Have you ever paused outside the door of some venerated person, and have you, on this your first visit, felt a religious awe as you pressed on the handle to enter the room which for you is a holy place?" [Ibid., p. 10.] You will be inclined to do so if, from childhood on, you have cultivated "a respect that forbids [you], even in the deepest recess of [your] heart, to harbour any thought of criticism or opposition." [Ibid., p. 10.]

If you want to enter Steiner's room, you must consider it a holy place; you must feel religious awe at the prospect of meeting the great man. But what if the man on the other side of the door does not merit reverence? What if he has no wisdom to impart? What if your heart has misled you? Hearts do this, quite often. Hearts can be broken. Lives can be wasted. Truth can be spurned while fantasies are worshiped. Steiner's prescriptions may lead us toward precisely such perils. Perhaps children should forswear critical thinking; adults must not.