Rudolf Steiner’s worldview represents an aversion to reality, an aversion that he decked out in the garb of occult “wisdom.” His doctrines come, in part, from the heretical tradition of gnosticism. As Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke has pointed out: “Rudolf Steiner ... blended modern Theosophy with a Gnostic form of Christianity....” [1] Steiner claimed deep knowledge of gnostic Christian teachings. When critics said he “was merely reviving the ideas of Christian Gnosticism,”  Steiner asserted that he proved the truth of gnostic and occult teachings by using clairvoyance to penetrate the spiritual realm. [2]

In gnostic teachings, the physical universe was created not by God Almighty but by a demiurge — a subordinate god who opposes spirituality. Often, this lower god is said to be Yahweh, the god of Israel, whom we generally refer to as Jehovah (and whom most Western monotheists identify as God Almighty). The physical universe created by the demiurge is deemed inherently illusory and evil — we must get past it to find truth. [3] Most rationalists call the physical universe reality, without necessarily denying the existence of a spiritual plane beyond the physical. But for gnostics, nature, the physical world, is a dreadful place, to be avoided or transcended. A modified form of this antipathy to nature is reflected in Anthroposophical lore and, at least sometimes, in Waldorf school curriculums.

Obviously, teaching children to have an aversion to reality is potentially quite damaging. Even when Waldorf teachers stop short of that, they may lead their students toward confusion rather than clarity. If the unreal is more real than the real, a kid’s head can spin.

The teachers are my Waldorf school imparted a sort of bipolar appreciation of nature. Nature's beauties were important, apparently. Our teachers professed a love of nature — they displayed crystals and pine cones and colorful leaves in the classrooms. Yet at the same time, the teachers subtly urged us to look beyond nature — they conveyed the impression that nature was, in some unspoken way, unworthy of us. Certainly, we were shielded from an understanding of nature's true operations.

In elementary school, teachers would occasionally take us on "nature walks." On these, we were encouraged to note spiral patterns (e.g., in the petals of flowers), or striking symmetries (in plants with two or three nearly identical heads), or interesting branch patterns (as in young maples). These were patterns or archetypes that, it was implied, reflected "indwelling" forces — i.e., spiritual forces.

We were not taught Darwinian evolution, so the families of various plants and animals were largely unknown to us. We were also largely shielded from the knowledge that a) much of the color in nature is an evolutionary adaptation promoting procreation (sex — colorful, sweet-smelling flowers attract birds and insects that spread pollen — literally, the birds and the bees — and various female primates have bright-red rumps because ... ), and b) most creatures spend a great deal of their waking time searching for whom they may devour (nature is red in tooth and claw, and some species — e.g., deer — live their entire lives in a state of semi-panic). The "facts of life" were, for the most part, withheld from us. 

Instead, we were guided toward a misleading idea of the "purpose" behind natural phenomena. (The hallmark of Darwinian evolution is that no mutation is purposeful; changes occur randomly, and some serendipitously provide a survival benefit, so creatures with these characteristics tend to survive and reproduce, while the others fall behind in the competition for survival.) Waldorf covertly adopted what would today be called a creationist approach, emphasizing spiritual influences and intentions — but the school gave these some odd Steinerian twists. [4]

In his meetings with the teachers at the first Waldorf school, Steiner said that the Waldorf curriculum is meant to fulfill the “intentions of the gods” [5]. These intentions can be comprehended only through an appreciation of dualism: the stark contrast between physical and spiritual realities. We were constantly reminded of this dualism, although usually indirectly. One instance: In upper grades we were taught about the interactions of "telluric" and "etheric" forces — that is, Earth forces and super-Earthly forces [6]. There is some truth in this paradigm, of course. Almost any religious faith hinges on the idea there there is a spiritual realm beyond the reality our senses can perceive. Also, even on the purely physical plane, a sort of dualism can be identified: The things present on the Earth are affected by things above the Earth. The atmosphere and the Earth interact, as in the cycle of rainfall and evaporation. Moreover, astronomical bodies (mainly the sun and moon) have influences on the Earth (warmth, light, tides ... ). Looking farther out, it may be that meteors and comets delivered the basic building blocks of life (organic compounds) to the surface of the Earth. Extremely distant exploding stars may have produced most of the heavier elements that ultimately arrived on Earth. Possibly a planet once collided with Earth, creating the moon from the debris. Likewise, the Earth certainly influences the moon (capturing it in orbit and slowing its spin until it always holds one face toward us). Earth's influence on the sun or any other celestial object is, however, far smaller (and in the cases of truly distant objects, essentially nil). 

Now please understand: Nothing even slightly resembling the sensible things I have just said was included in our curriculum. When our teachers spoke of "telluric" and "etheric" forces, they were alluding primarily to spiritual and/or astrological forces. In his yearbook messages to both my class and the class before mine, our headmaster referred to the heavens in astrological terms. Preceding class: “In 1962 the heavenly constellation was such that at one time millions in the East feared the end of the world.” [7] My class: “For some onlookers, a special star has shone over your class from its beginning many years ago.” [8] To outsiders, such language may seem innocuous. Those who have studied Steiner, however, know that Anthroposophists do not use such language lightly. Steiner often spoke of the “powers” of celestial bodies and constellations: e.g., “In the course of its development, the good portion of humankind will learn to use the Moon forces to transform the evil part ... ” [9], or “In cholerics, you will generally find an abnormally developed sense of balance (Libra) [i.e., kids under the influence of the astrological sign, Libra] ... In sanguines (Virgo) ... the sense of movement predominates. In the same way, in melancholics (Leo) the sense of life predominates ... ”, etc. [10]

One minor, but fairly remarkable detail may serve to complete this snapshot of nature as seen from a Waldorf perspective. Our school stood on a large expanse of level land. For reasons that were never laid out, the school hired bulldozers and dump trucks to come in and create artificial hills, one for each playground. Steiner found significance in hills, evidently because they rise toward the sky and thus are infused with  etheric influences. “We could show that here is the Earth, and the Earth grows a little bump, a hill. This hill, however, is filled with the forces of the air and also of the Sun.” [11] I don’t want to make too much of my Waldorf’s playground mounds. Still, we can see here some tiny, telltale indicators of what lurks behind the happy Waldorf facade. The creation of these machine-made, totally unnatural hills was a betrayal both of the school's professed love of nature and of its sincere antipathy to technology. The little pseudo-hills stood as emblems of the proposition that nature, for Anthroposophists, has no real meaning or value. Reality is naught; the imaginary or contrived is all. And those bulldozers, used by a school where the book THE FAILURE OF TECHNOLOGY [12] was mandatory reading, reveal how, for Anthroposophists, the ends justify the means. Deceiving parents about the nature of the school [13], brainwashing children [14], using the implements of a soulless civilization — all is valid, if it serves the higher mission of Anthroposophy — i.e., “the intentions of the gods”.

II.

Nature is not utterly debased, according to Steiner. The natural world is infused by the spiritual world; indeed, all of physical reality is just a condensation of spiritual reality. In this sense, nature deserves our respect, even reverence. Moreover, with the Crucifixion, Christ's blood — his essence, as it were — flowed into the Earth. So, Steiner taught, the natural world of the Earth has a sort of holiness, and for this reason Anthroposophists are often advocates of "green" beliefs, promoting conservation, organic gardening, and ecological sensitivity.

But the other pole, the aversion to nature, still stands tall in Anthropological doctrines. Nature is not wholly evil, but elements of evil run through it. It is the abode of “elemental beings” or “nature spirits,” lowly and somewhat wicked beings. Some of these beings have been given names such as “goblins.” Yes, Steiner taught that such mythical creatures are real. They are more or less antithetical to humans, although their actions can benefit us — they represent stages of existence that are beneath us, and properly so. Animals also represent such low stages.

Let’s start by hearing about the animals, since they at least actually exist. During an early period of our evolution, according to Steiner, “The higher animals did not yet exist ... Man was there, but in quite a different form ... Afterward, man evolved higher, and left behind him the fish-form which had been contained within him ... Again man evolved higher, and separated the birds from himself. Next the reptiles and amphibians came out of man ... Later still, man put the mammals out from himself....” [15] The main point to note in Steiner’s absurd account is that animals are now completely beneath us. They represent inferior characteristics we had to shed on our evolutionary ascent — they are the debris we left behind. Unless we continue to reject them, we will slip backwards spiritually.

Nature spirits may represent another form of debris. Inferior humans who fail to climb the evolutionary ladder “fall out of evolution” [16], after which they deteriorate to subhuman status in the form of nature spirits. This fate entails losing the ability to be reincarnated, which means losing the capacity to make progress from life to life. “Such souls lose the possibility of incarnation and find no other opportunity ... [T]here are no more bodies bad enough [to house them] ... Beings that stay behind at such stages appear in a later epoch as subordinate nature spirits.” [17] Steiner said that losing the ability to reincarnate makes you a merely “natural” being. “Quite a number of people have been born [who] ... are not reincarnated, but are human forms filled with a sort of natural demon. There a quite a large number of older people going around who are actually not human beings, but are only natural.” [18] To be “natural,” in Steiner’s teachings, is to be inferior and wicked.

Goblins, undines, sylphs, phantoms, and so forth, are overlapping examples of nature spirits. One handy term to cover them all (not quite accurate, but handy) is fairies. As a rule, they are not our friends. Concerning goblins, for instance, Steiner said: “Their nature prompts them to play all sorts of tricks on man.” [19] They belong to a different “world” from ours — they are part of nature, we are not. “Gnomes are ... unable to grasp how there can be anything but an ineffectual relationship with our world.” [20] Other nature spirits have better intentions, but don't trust any of them without strong assurances.

Nature spirits can be detected by peering through seams in the natural world, Steiner claimed. It is “possible for occult vision to have an impression of other beings standing immediately behind the veil of nature ... This is especially the case if we devote ourselves to the peculiar play of a body of water tossing in a waterfall and giving clouds of spray, if we yield ourselves to the forming and dissolving of mist and to watery vapour....” [21] A rational explanation for “fairies” semi-seen semi-sporting in a swirl of mists is delusion, imagination run riot, optical illusion. Steiner, the opponent of rationality, accepts such false impressions as truth. For our present discussion, the point to note is the phrase “the veil of nature” — nature is a deceptive screen that we need to get past, according to Steiner.

Steiner was not always consistent. He generally said that there are four types of nature spirits: gnomes or goblins, sylphs, salamanders, and undines. But on other occasions he included other elemental beings, some of which are nastier than goblins. Let’s look at these, then circle back to consider the basic four. The nastiest group consists of phantoms, specters, and demons, and they literally represent wrongdoing. Phantoms, the mildest of the lot, are wraiths that come to Earth through the physical bodies of wrongdoers. They are “beings which have been created in the physical body through the effect of lying and slander ... Such beings ... now flit and whirr about in our world and belong to a class that we call ‘phantoms.’ They form a certain group of elemental beings related to our physical body and invisible to physical sight.” [22]

Specters embody transgressions associated with our “etheric” bodies. Steiner said that we have several nonphysical bodies in addition to the physical body — the etheric body, the astral body, and the “I.” “All that leads to want of harmony, all that makes for bad adjustments between people ... is continued into the etheric body.” [23] Wrongs committed by humans (unharmonious behavior, bad relationships) cause forms of vileness to detach from the spiritual worlds and manifest in our environment: “The accumulation in the etheric body caused through these [wicked] experiences of the soul ... brings about detachments from the beings working in the spiritual worlds and these likewise are now to be found in our environment — they are the ‘specters’ or ‘ghosts.’” [24] Don’t be misled by the idea that specters and ghosts come from the spiritual worlds — they are not truly spiritual beings. Steiner sometimes called nature spirits “elemental beings” precisely in order to stress their lack of spirit: “To call them elemental spirits shows the greatest possible ineptitude, for it is just [i.e., exactly] spirit that they do not possess. It is better to call them elemental beings....” [25]   

The worst nature spirits are associated with our “astral” bodies, which journey into spiritual worlds every night when we sleep. Evildoing can cause an astral body to pick up hitchhikers or “enclosures” that ride to Earth tucked inside. “In all that works [evilly] from soul to soul in our world, from the giving of bad advice to all those methods which people employ in order to overwhelm others ... [this] is expressed in the night in the astral body. The astral body gets these ‘enclosures’ and thereby beings are detached from other worlds and whirr through our world again as elemental beings. They belong to the class of demons.” [26]

Nature spirits can sometimes be beneficial to us, enabling us to develop and evolve above them. Steiner placed the four basic types of nature spirits in the soil, air, water, and fire: goblins, sylphs, undines, and "salamanders." These beings lay a sort of groundwork for us. But the hostility at least some of them feel for us in always imminent: "Take the gnomes and undines: they are, so to say, in the world which borders on human consciousness; they are already beyond the threshold. Ordinary consciousness is protected from seeing these beings, for the fact is that these beings are not all benevolent ... [I]n the moment when man breaks through into the world wherein they live and are active, he finds there not only the well-disposed beings but the malevolent ones as well ... The main difference between the ill-disposed beings and the well-disposed is that the latter are always drawn more to the plant and mineral kingdoms, whereas the ill-disposed are drawn to the animal and human kingdoms ... Now someone might say: Why then are these malevolent gnome and undine-beings there, if they engender parasites? Well, if they were not there, man would never be able to develop within himself the force to evolve the structure of his brain." [27] Most things can be turned to good account, even the actions of malevolent nature spirits. But their malevolence is real, and we must read cautiously.

The benefits we receive from nature spirits are not easy to describe (and not worth worrying about, since these doctrines are dross). Trying to explain, Steiner discussed our "auras," if you can believe it: "Here on earth, a person's aura carries a kind of remnant of the things he received when he had ascended to the spiritual world [in sleep or death]. Having left behind the realms of wisdom, of beauty, of truth [spiritual realms we exit when descending to Earth again], mankind must enter the mineral, plant and animal kingdoms [realms infused by nature spirits] ... The person who does not give in to his animal instincts is not necessarily wise. The wise human being — wise in the sense implied by strength of heart — is the one who possesses moral ideas [animal instincts are lowly, sometimes sexual: earthy] ... [O]ur materialistic age is distinguished by the way it so thoroughly involves the sphere of sexuality in artistic considerations — a piece of mischief for which our age is responsible ... Even though some of the things I have said have come out very badly — perhaps they will come out better later — I want to present something further to you, something that belongs in the context of the whole. One can say: Whereas it is our physical body that connects us with the realm of physical becoming, our brain connects us with certain elemental beings ... the elemental beings of the myths and sagas. There they are called elves, fairies, and so on.” [28]

Here is one of the most affirmative statements Steiner made about nature beings. See how it strikes you. “The predecessors of our Earth-gnomes, the Moon-gnomes, gathered together their Moon-experiences and from them fashioned this structure, this firm structure of the solid fabric of the Earth, so that our solid Earth-structure actually arose from the experiences of the gnomes of the old Moon ... Now let us pass over from the gnomes to the undines, the water-beings ... These beings have not the need for life that human beings have ... [They] have rather a need for death ... They only feel their life to be truly theirs when they die ... And now let us proceed to the sylphs. In the course of the year we find the dying birds ... Dying birds possess spiritualized substance ... they desire to give this spiritualized substance over to the higher worlds ... But here an intermediary is needed. And these intermediaries are the sylphs ... And when we pass over to the fire-beings [i.e, salamanders], only think how the dust on the butterfly's wings seems to dissolve into nothing with the death of the butterfly ... When in the course of the year the butterfly-world approaches its end, all this becomes glittering and shimmering ... [I]nto this glittering and shimmering the fire-beings pour themselves; they absorb it.” [29]

Some of Steiner's language and concepts may seem attractive, but his essential attitude toward nature was, at best, ambivalent. He found some value in the natural world — but he also found must that he considered lowly, vile, even evil. He wanted to turn away, toward "higher" worlds. That may or may not be advisable — such worlds may or may not exist. If turning away from nature means turning our backs on reality, his advice was surely perilous. Children can be educated to live in a world of Moon-gnomes, suicidal sylphs, and other imagined apparitions, or they can be raised to live and thrive in the real world, the one described in science and mainstream religions. Choosing to go with Steiner means choosing an alienating cult — alienating from reality, from ourselves, and from truth.