“Those who come to me wanting to hear the truths available through esotericism and nevertheless refuse to walk the path are like schoolchildren....” — Rudolf Steiner [1]  Rudolf Steiner [Rudolf Steiner, THE STORY OF MY LIFE (Kessinger Publishing, facsimile of 1928 edition, Anthroposophical Publishing Co.), facing p. 320.] WHAT A GUY Sanctifying Rudolf Steiner
I’d like to examine another of Hermann von Baravalle’s intriguing publications. To remind you, von Baravalle, an Anthroposophist, taught at the first Waldorf school, where he attended faculty meetings run by Rudolf Steiner. Later, von Baravalle was instrumental in bringing Waldorf education to America. The pamphlet I want to discuss is von Baravalle’s RUDOLF STEINER AS EDUCATOR. [2] The pamphlet goes well beyond hagiography; it describes Steiner as virtually a flawless individual, nearly godlike in his perfection. To some of us, this will raise questions of plausibility and truthfulness, but it may also help us to understand how Steiner is viewed by his adherents. At the Waldorf school I attended, whenever a teacher uttered Steiner’s name, the tone was always reverential. Subsequently, I’ve noticed that when Anthroposophists refer to any statement made by Steiner, the point seems to be: Here is the unarguable truth. Why is it true? Because Steiner said so. This, of course, is the mode of argumentation called “appeal to authority.” A true authority ought to know what s/he is talking about, so citing an authority can buttress a case. However, if the “authority” is not “truly an authority on the subject under consideration,” then the appeal to authority is a logical fallacy. [3] Since Steiner’s statements were so often demonstrably wrong or at least extremely implausible, citing him as an authority is dubious at best. OK. On to RUDOLF STEINER AS EDUCATOR. “Dr. Rudolf Steiner (1861-1925), the Austrian philosopher and educator, is outstanding in our age and universal in his perceptions and achievements.” [4] “A member of the faculty of the new school [i.e., the first Waldorf] described the opening day ... September 7th, 1919, as follows: ‘The celebration lasted from morning to night. Humor and gaiety stemmed from Rudolf Steiner ... How untiring this man was in all varieties of human response! To such a man children are greatly attracted ... Parents and pupils ... were present. Rudolf Steiner was constantly surrounded. He had a kind word for everyone — a different remark for each individual person. Even to the youngest he seemed to make himself understood.’” [5]  I’ve argued that there is little if any intentional humor in any of Steiner’s works (though there are plenty of unintentional knee-slappers). I’ve also noted that Steiner’s language is often difficult to parse (since so much of it seems senseless), and that in his lectures and even faculty meetings, his role always seemed to be that of a self-proclaimed savant delivering pearls of (questionable) wisdom, not a conversationalist eager to hear what others had to say. But von Baravalle would have us believe otherwise: “One of Rudolf Steiner’s outstanding characteristics was his ability to listen to another person. And the other person, whether in conversations, in discussions or in faculty meetings, felt thoroughly understood and at ease. Workmen for whom he held special courses and discussions ... as well as personalities representing many different walks of life, expressed almost identical reactions: ‘He is our kind. He speaks our language.’ Rudolf Steiner’s answers to the frequent requests for advice that came to him were the outcome of this careful listening ... His personal concerns were submerged to the point of non-existence; [his] answers were wholly unbiased simply because they arose out of the specific issues and life situations themselves. The facts spoke, not he.” [6] So there you have it. Steiner conversed and discussed and gave special courses — and his role was to give answers. He was not merely a savant, he almost transcended individual existence: “The facts spoke, not he.” His answers, in other words, were transparently true. He was, in this sense, almost godlike. (In the beginning was the word ... and the word was God. [7] In the present epoch were the facts, and the possessor/speaker of the facts was Steiner.) As to whether any workmen in Germany, Austria, Switzerland, etc., would really have thought that Steiner “speaks our language,” I’ll leave that judgment to those who are fluent in German. (I can translate German, but it is a laborious process.) In English translation, Steiner’s language is about as far from an ordinary workman’s as is possible to conceive. Of course, like any lecturer, Steiner probably attempted to adjust his delivery to suit each audience. Fine. Yet everything I’ve read of Steiner’s has had much the same tone and loopiness. Here is a quote from a lecture Steiner gave specifically to working men. Bending over backwards to be fair to Steiner, I’ve selected a passage that is less recondite than others. Rather, I’ve chosen one that might be particularly interesting to the average working man: “Women discharge ... human eggs every four weeks. At first they are given up to the moon’s influence for a short time and are protected. But when the female organism dispatches the human egg during the course of the monthly period, it comes under the influence of the earth and is destroyed. The human organization is so marvelously arranged that it represents the opposite to the bacilli. Cholera bacilli, for example, remain in the intestines and are careful not to venture too far out.” [8] I’ve spent a lot of time with workmen. I respect them. I used to be senior editor of a magazine having to do with home construction. I doubt that many (if any) of the carpenters, plumbers, electricians, etc., I’ve worked with would say that this passage is “our language.” Indeed, I doubt that any of my editorial or academic colleagues would have said so, either.  After discussing the stages of childhood development and how they are reflected in the Waldorf curriculum, von Baravalle returns to the subject at hand: Rudolf Steiner as an educator. He does this primarily by giving quotes from Steiner. Some of them are, to a non-Anthroposophist, shocking. Steiner: “In the Waldorf School what a teacher IS is far more important than any technical ability he may have acquired in an intellectual way. The essential thing is that the teacher not only love children, but also love the methods he uses and in fact, the whole school procedure.” [9] Love of children is undeniably a virtue. No argument there. But what of the rest of this statement? “[W]hat a teacher IS” surely means that the teacher must possess the proper values and wisdom — which to Anthroposophists can only mean that s/he must be an Anthroposophist or at least a fellow traveler. The rest of the statement bears this out. It is not very important for a teacher to have acquired “any technical ability ... in an intellectual way” — that is, the teacher need not have mastered much if any subject matter or be particularly bright, but s/he must “love the methods he uses and in fact, the whole school procedure.” In other words, the teacher must be totally committed to the Waldorf approach; s/he cannot explore other approaches, improve her/his methods, use her/his initiative. The teacher must unwaveringly follow Steiner’s dictums. Steiner: “Any attempt to improve the methods of education should consist in modifying the intellectual element which has become over-dominant since the fourteenth century ....” [10] A modern paraphrase of this statement would be something like: We must dumb down the curriculum. Steiner: “As much as I appreciate the achievements of experimental and statistical methods in education, I also know that they are a symptom of the loss of direct inner contact between human beings. We have become alienated to what is inwardly human ....” [11] Some of this is just Anthroposophical jargon. No one can know the inner reality of anyone else; there is no such thing as “direct inner contact between human beings.” But put that aside. Note the gist of the statement. As so often, Steiner declares his opposition to objective, scientific knowledge (“statistical methods in education”). Even more startlingly, he expresses opposition to “experimental ... methods in education.” Yet what was Waldorf, in 1919, but an experiment? Steiner, I’m sorry to say (well, maybe not very sorry) often contradicted himself. (I’m as sorry about this as Steiner was appreciative of “the achievements of experimental and statistical methods in education.” We’re both pulling our audiences’ legs.) Steiner: “The artist does not bring the divine to the earth by letting it flow out into the material world, but rather raises the world into the sphere of the divine.” [12] I’ve written on the subject of art in Waldorfs at some length elsewhere. Suffice it to say that Steiner found mystical powers in art, and his interest in art had to do with directing children toward Anthroposophy. All the pretty paintings hanging in Waldorf schools have much deeper (and loco) meanings than meet the eye. That’s probably enough for now. Von Baravalle was less diverting than his master, but he nevertheless gives us plenty to mull over. He tries to show Steiner — the man Anthroposophists revere — in the best possible light. But all he accomplishes (speaking personally) is to produce a case of the heebie-jeebies.  [Rudolf Steiner Press, 2002.]  [Health Research, 1972.]  [Anthroposophic Press, 1987.]  [Kessinger, 1996.]x  [Anthroposophic Press, 1993.]  [Rudolf Steiner Press, 1982.]  [Rudolf Steiner Press, 2005.]xxx  [Anthroposophic Press, 1996.]  [SteinerBooks, 2007.]  [Rudolf Steiner Press, 1983.]  [Rudolf Steiner Press, 1995.]xxxx Steiner did not write most of the books attributed to him. Most consist of transcripts of his lectures and other spoken remarks painstakingly transcribed by his devout followers. AFTERWORD I prefer to think that Steiner was sane. This keeps our attention on his statements, not on him as an individual. He is gone, we cannot interview him, we cannot really know him. But his doctrines are still with us. We can read his statements. We can form our opinions of those statements. The other view is certainly possible, however. He may have been a lunatic. Certainly his doctrines have a lunatic quality.  Steiner said he had his first spiritualistic experience when he was a young child, between five and seven years old. He claimed that the soul of a dead relative visited him. Biographer Gary Lachman writes “Although he hadn’t met her before, Steiner could tell that she looked like people in his family. She then spoke to him, saying, ‘Try now, and later in life, to help me as much as you can.’ ... It eventually came out that a close relative had committed suicide on the same day that Steiner had his vision.” [13] If Steiner truly believed he had seen a ghost or spirit, then it is possible that he was cracked all his life, boy and man. In that case, his decision to turn to spiritualism as an adult makes a sort of antic sense — esoteric theories may have enabled him to get a grip on the visions that haunted him. Some of his biographers acknowledge the possibility that he was a bit deranged. Describing the young Steiner’s obsessiveness, Lachman says “Such unhealthy pursuits — at least from the point of view of the average person — may indeed be the start of what Anthony Storr calls a ‘schizophrenic’ personality....” [14] Where does this get us? The two possibilities are that Steiner’s “clairvoyant” visions were intentional lies told by a sane charlatan, or they were the hallucinations suffered by a madman. The practical difference, for us, is slight. Steiner set forth an amazing array of nutty propositions, insisting that they are the truth. They are anything but that. They are falsehoods told by a crackpot, define that term however you like. Some illustrations on each page here at Waldorf Watch are closely connected to the essay on that page; others are not — they provide general context.  [Astronomy, ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, 1771.] CHRONOLOGY Here is a brief summary of Rudolf Steiner’s life: [15] Born Feb. 27, 1861, in Austria-Hungary. Raised in various Austrian towns, as his father — a railroad employee — is transferred from post to post. 1867 Rudolf enters local school; removed after being accused to causing a disturbance; homeschooling. 1868 Rudolf is visited by a ghost in a railroad station, or so he later claims. 1869 after the family moves, Rudolf enrolls in local school; assigned extra lessons because his work is unorthodox. 1876 Rudolf begins tutoring classmates and others. 1879 enrolls in Vienna Institute of Technology. While there, he begins editing the scientific work of Goethe. In later years, Steiner claims he was initiated into occult mysteries during this period. 1883 Rudolf Steiner graduates; works still as a private tutor. Becomes politically active in the German nationalist movement within Austria. 1886 Steiner publishes his first book, A THEORY OF KNOWLEDGE IMPLICIT IN GOETHE'S WORLD CONCEPTION. Like other early works, this is a philosophical treatise largely unrelated to Steiner's later occult works. [16] 1888 Steiner becomes editor of Deutsche Wochenschrift magazine. 1891 Steiner receives doctorate in philosophy from University of Rostock, Germany. 1893 Steiner publishes THE PHILOSOPHY OF FREEDOM. [17] 1897 Steiner moves to Berlin, becomes editor of Magazin für Literatur. Seeks to establish himself as a philosopher. Takes rationalist view, criticizes Theosophy, is involved in socialistic intellectual circles. [18] 1899 Rudolf Steiner marries Anna Eunicke, a union about which he is later reticent. Also in 1899, he becomes instructor at a working men's institute in Berlin, then becomes involved in Theosophy and starts lecturing on occultist themes. 1902 Steiner joins German Theosophical Society, becomes General Secretary. Indicates that he is clairvoyant and always had been. Begins referring to his doctrines as Anthroposophy (knowledge or wisdom of the human). [19] Meets Marie von Sievers, who will become his second wife. 1903 Steiner separates from his first wife, Anna Steiner (née Eunicke), who has been perplexed by his turn from liberal academia to Theosophy . 1904 Steiner publishes KNOWLEDGE OF THE HIGHER WORLDS AND ITS ATTAINMENT, one of his fundamental occultist expositions. Appointed leader of Esoteric Society for Germany and Austria. 1905 Steiner is active in politics during this period; he presses for reforms in German society and culture. 1907 Steiner organizes world conference of Theosophic Society in Munich, Germany. Thereafter, over the course of several years, he writes four "mystery plays" that are still performed by Anthroposophical groups. 1910 Steiner publishes OCCULT SCIENCE - AN OUTLINE, framing his overall occultist conceptions. He later revises the book several times. 1911 Anna Steiner dies. 1912 Rudolf Steiner creates eurythmy, a dance form representing visible speech, with the purpose of connecting practitioners to the spirit realm. 1913 Steiner breaks from Theosophy, establishes Anthroposophy. Work begins on the first Goetheanum, a wooden structure, to be the Anthroposophical headquarters. The General Anthroposophical Society is established. 1914 Rudolf Steiner marries Marie von Sievers, who takes the name Marie Steiner. Most of Rudolf Steiner's time in this and following years is devoted to lecturing. 1919 Steiner directs formation of the first Waldorf school, Stuttgart, Germany. The school is sponsored by Emil Molt, owner of the Waldorf Astoria Cigarette Factory. Rudolf Steiner remains involved with the school throughout the following years. 1921 Steiner founds first Anthroposophic medical clinic. 1922 Steiner oversees establishment of the Christian Community, the overtly religious offshoot of Anthroposophy. The first Goetheanum is destroyed by fire — Anthroposophists claim arson by right-wing enemies, but no proof is forthcoming. 1923 Steiner oversees design of the second Goetheanum, to be built of concrete; construction begins in 1924 and is completed in 1928. 1924 Steiner becomes ill. Rudolf Steiner dies March 30, 1925, in Dornach, Germany.  Rudolf Steiner [public domain]. Steiner occasionally revealed himself to be quite human — which shouldn't surprise us. Despite his pretensions, he was not much different from the rest of us. He was, after all, just a guy. One interesting example: Steiner was a German nationalist. He was closely associated with the leader of Germany's military at the beginning of World War I. (See "Steiner and the Warlord".) His fierce devotion to his own nation led him to make a series of remarkably nasty comments about President Woodrow Wilson, who brought the USA into the war on the side of Germany's enemies. (See "Steiner Static", messages 73-81.) Another interesting bit of self-revelation on Steiner's part: He was concerned with how he appeared in the press, and he lashed back at his critics. (See "Was He Christian?", the Addendum, in which Steiner expresses his annoyance at Christian and American criticism of himself and Anthroposophy.) Steiner was a polymath, trying his hand at a great variety of projects. Above is the entrance to the first Goetheanum, designed by Steiner. When the building was destroyed by fire, Steiner designed a replacement to be made of concrete. [R.R., 2009 - based on photo, p. 155, Rudolf Steiner, ARCHITECTURE (Rudolf Steiner Press, 2003).]  Exterior detail of the second Goetheanum. [R.R., 2009 - from cover, ARCHITECTURE.] The first Goetheanum was meant to embody global forms, the second crystal forms. Steiner had many talents, yet his influence has been minimal except within Anthroposophical circles. Here is an item from the Waldorf Watch "quote of the day" page: “The ashes that a thought leaves strengthen bones, and so people with rickets do better if they think abstractly.” — Rudolf Steiner, FROM THE CONTENTS OF ESOTERIC CLASSES, 3-14-08, GA 266. Rudolf Steiner was impressive. Ask him a question about almost anything — how people lived on the continent of Atlantis, how to know higher worlds, how to treat rickets — and he had an answer. And not just any answer, but an elaborate answer, a startling yet authoritative-seeming answer. He displayed surprisingly wide knowledge. He cited authorities, scholars, mystics, ancient savants. He poured out a torrential flood of verbiage that could sweep you far from the shores of your old reality. He was impressive. Read his lectures and come away stunned. Here was a brilliant man. Just think what he might have contributed to humanity if he had used his brilliance constructively! But something went wrong. We can’t know what it was. Perhaps he was an intentional con man, a fully self-aware charlatan. Or perhaps he was insane — a sort of lunatic savant, if you will. In either case, the value of his teachings is essentially nil. (Also essentially nil is the likelihood that he was what he claimed to be, an occult initiate with clairvoyant access to virtually unlimited information about just about everything.) I’m not a betting man, but if forced to put choose one of these possibilities, I’d choose Door Number One. Charlatan. I could be wrong, of course. I could be mistaken, for instance, in thinking that abstract thought is not a plausible treatment for rickets. But whether I am right or wrong is not very important. What is important is your own opinion. Are you a gambler? Are you prepared to put you money down — or, more to the point, put your children’s lives down — in the Great Steiner Gamble? If you send your children to a Waldorf school, you are gambling that your children will be best served by teachers who think that Steiner was almost always right about almost everything. To my mind, you would be taking a huge gamble for very high stakes. So I would suggest this: Pause. Let the flood of Steiner’s verbiage recede. And then, in the cool of the evening, think things over. Do you believe that goblins exist? Do you believe that the heart does not pump blood? Do you believe that there is an invisible celestial storehouse of wisdom hidden from you but accessible to clairvoyants? Do you believe that the continents float in the sea and are held in place by the stars? Do you believe that abstract thought is a plausible treatment for rickets? Rudolf Steiner affirmed all of these astounding propositions and a great many more. Anthroposophists believe him. Do you? For more of Steiner’s astounding propositions, see “Steiner’s Blunders”. But there I go again. I gave that essay its title. Perhaps a less pointed title would have been better. Perhaps when reading the Steiner quotations I present in that essay, you will conclude that they are pearls of great wisdom. I doubt it. Indeed, I think the essay presents example after example of things Steiner said that are clearly, factually, well-nigh indisputably wrong. Flat wrong. Astoundingly wrong. But read “Steiner’s Blunders” and/or any of the other essays here at Waldorf Watch — "Steiner’s ‘Science’”, "Steiner Static", and “Steiner’s Quackery” leap to mind — and draw your own conclusion. BIBLIOGRAPHY Here is a reasonably complete chronological list of the books authored by Rudolf Steiner. Other books attributed to him consist of documents such a letters and transcripts of lectures, lessons, discussions, and sundry remarks. They are extremely numerous (Steienr gave well over 5,000 lectures, for instance), and they are important for anyone studying Anthroposophy, but Steiner did not review or correct most of them for publication. GOETHE THE SCIENTIST (1883) THEORY OF KNOWLEDGE IMPLICIT IN GOETHE’S WORLD CONCEPTION (1886) TRUTH AND KNOWLEDGE (1892) PHILOSOPHY OF FREEDOM (1894) FRIEDRICH NIETZSCHE, FIGHTER FOR FREEDOM (1895) GOETHE’S CONCEPTION OF THE WORLD (1897) MYSTICISM AT THE DAWN OF THE MODERN AGE (1901) CHRISTIANITY AS MYSTICAL FACT (1902) THEOSOPHY (1904) KNOWLEDGE OF THE HIGHER WORLD AND ITS ATTAINMENT (1904 - expanded as A ROAD TO SELF-KNOWLEDGE in 1912) ATLANTIS AND LEMURIA (1904 - later expanded as COSMIC MEMORY) THE STAGE OF HIGHER KNOWLEDGE (1905) EDUCATION OF THE CHILD (1909) OCCULT SCIENCE - AN OUTLINE (1910) PORTAL OF INITIATION (1910) SPIRITUAL GUIDANCE OF MAN AND HUMANITY (1911) CALENDAR OF THE SOUL (1912) THRESHOLD OF THE SPIRITUAL WORLD (1913) FOUR MYSTERY DRAMAS (1913 - first installment in 1910) RIDDLES OF PHILOSOPHY PRESENTED IN AN OUTLINE OF ITS HISTORY (1914) GUIDANCE IN ESOTERIC TRAINING (1914 - first installment in 1904) THE CASE FOR ANTHROPOSOPHY (1917) GOETHE’S STANDARD OF THE SOUL (1918) TOWARD SOCIAL RENEWAL (1919) COSMOLOGY, RELIGION AND PHILOSOPHY (1922) ANTHROPOSOPHICAL LEADING THOUGHTS (1924) FUNDAMENTALS OF THERAPY (1925 - published posthumously) STORY OF MY LIFE (1925 - published posthumously) In addition, here are books that report statements made by Steiner on educational matters. Anyone who wants to understand Waldorf education should become acquainted with them: DISCUSSIONS WITH TEACHERS (Anthroposophic Press, 1997) FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER (Anthroposophic Press, 1998) THE FOUNDATIONS OF HUMAN EXPERIENCE (Anthroposophic Press, 1996) THE SPIRITUAL GROUND OF EDUCATION (Anthroposophic Press, 2004)  Rudolf Steiner [public domain]. In the 1920s, in Germany, Steiner was immensely famous. Indeed, his admirers came to see him as a potential savior for the German nation. To understand this, it is necessary to remember how chaotic and down-beaten Germany was in those years. The loss of World War I was a calamity that spread its dire consequences throughout the land for many years. The Versailles Treaty had dismembered the nation and burdened it with the obligation to pay ruinous reparations to the victorious Allies. Germany indeed needed salvation, and desperate citizens cast their eyes everywhere, looking for any sign of hope. All of this helps explain, also, why Adolf Hitler once attacked Steiner in print. “Who is the driving force behind all this devilishness? The Jew! The friend of Doctor Rudolf Steiner....” [Adolf Hitler, “Staatsmänner oder Nationalverbrecher?” (Völkischer Beobachter, Mar. 15, 1921.)] [20] Hitler's anti-Semitism was so extreme, he may well have thought Steiner a friend or dupe of the Jews. Actually, Steiner was himself an anti-Semite (see "RS on Jews"), but a somewhat muted one. Steiner associated with Jews and occasionally had good things to say about the Jewish people as a whole. Certainly Steiner never advocated the extermination of all the world's Jews — he never imagined the Holocaust. He taught that Jews should merge into other races and peoples, thereby peacefully ceasing to exist as a separate people. Hitler became notorious for turning on his friends, conniving and even actively participating in their murder, as in the Night of the Long Knives. Steiner, as far as we know, was no friend of Hitler or National Socialism, but there were more affinities between Nazism and Anthroposophy than anyone on either side was entirely comfortable with. (See "Sympathizers?") And Hitler would have been incensed at any suggestion that Rudolf Steiner might be Germany's savior. Hitler had someone else in mind for that job. The following also appears in "Foundations". If you read it there, you may not need to read it here. Does Rudolf Steiner matter? Are Waldorf schools important? How about Anthroposophy — is there any point in spending time thinking about a minor, cultish, gaga religion that denies it is a religion, bearing in mind that almost no one has ever heard of it, and fewer still can even pronounce its name? What are we doing? Wasting what little life we are given? Digging into this stuff is a waste of time. Except ... One could argue that Waldorf schools are important because they constitute a fast-growing “educational”/occult movement that sucks in ever-growing numbers of children, at least some of whom may be severely damaged. Absolutely, seen in this way, Waldorf schools are important. But there’s an even larger perspective in which, although they are minor, Waldorfs are major: They are one manifestation of humanity’s predilection for self-deception; one instance of our willingness to buy snake oil. Not just willingness but, indeed, desperate enthusiasm. Deliver us. Show us the way! SAVE US! Save us from what, exactly? From the wonder and beauty of life? Quarks. Muons. Galaxies. The aurora. Cheetahs. Whales. Sunrise. Wildflowers. (Okay, Cheetahs can bite. Save us from them.) Is this what we are so desperate to transcend? Life is hard, life is short, our condition is difficult, we will die. But in the meantime, here we are, alive, in the cusp of magnificent creation — it is all around us, free for the taking. Yet we desperately want to escape, to believe lies, to embrace fantasy — even though it pales in the face of reality.
We humans are the dissatisfied ones. That's why we clawed our way to the top of the heap. If at any stage of our long history we had been satisfied, we would have sat on the bank of the stream, watched the pretty fish swim by, and been happy. But that's not our way. Human history is a dreadful succession of struggles, conflicts, wars... Our hearts are seldom light. Our dissatisfaction has been built into us by evolution: The biggest and baddest guys too often have clubbed the rest into submission, gotten the most mates, and monopolized the pick of the foodstuff. The genes of these striving conquerors have been passed on to their numerous offspring, so that subsequent generations have continued their struggling, battling ways, seeking to scratch the unending itch. We are dissatisfied. So, among other consequences, we have repeatedly fallen for the offers of illusory satisfaction held out by a long, long line of false prophets. Of course, rather than bringing us to the light, these frauds have generally led us even farther into darkness. That is the very definition of false prophecy. Enter Steiner, his nutty religion, and his awful educational scheme. They are one particularly odd version of mankind’s rush into darkness. It’s a rush we must stop if we, and all the creatures of the Earth that are subject to our dispensation, are to survive. Steiner, and Anthroposophy, and Waldorf schools occupy one little corner of the loony bin we have built for ourselves. If we can disassemble this little corner, maybe we can move on to disassemble the rest, and maybe one day mankind can face the light unflinchingly, and the future will be bright. I hope so. I’m not confident that humankind will opt for sanity — our record so far isn’t very good — but I do hope. — Roger Rawlings
 MYSTIC SEALS AND COLUMNS by Rudolf Steiner [Health Research, 1969]. "All his adult life Steiner participated in various secret societies and magical orders, establishing some of his own. For example, he joined the Masonic rite led by Heinrich Klein and Franz Hartman, who initiated Steiner into the 'Brothers of Light and the Rosicrucian Illuminati' (King, 1970, p. 206). He also bought a membership in 'Memphis-Misraim' from Theodore Reuss in 1905 (Koenig, http://www.cyberlink.ch/~koenig/steiner.htm paragraph 8), and used that ritual as a basis for his 'Mizraim Aeterna,' which he hoped would restore the Eleusinian mysteries. Rituals of 'Mystica Aeterna' were celebrated only in the presence of Rudolf Steiner and by members of the Theosophical Society (Koenig, paragraph 17). The mystagogue [i.e., Steiner] created an 'Esoteric School' that held closed meetings and utilized some Masonic rituals. In 1921, the 'Esoteric School' was transformed into the 'Free University for Hermeticism' (Koenig, paragraph 39).* Steiner borrowed extensively from Blavatsky's doctrine and took from the French occulist Eliphas Levi's Dogma and Ritual of High Magic (Koenig, paragraph 45). Steiner's Apocalyptic Seals are almost identical to Levi's seals pictured in the book. Steiner inspired others, like Max Heindel, to found the Rosicrucian Fellowship in Oceanside, California (Jenkins, 2000, pp. 82-83), and L. Ron Hubbard of the Church of Scientology. "Steiner told followers of his clairvoyant abilities and other psychic powers, claiming to read the Akashic record to obtain information and channel Zarathustra. The Akashic Record is believed to be an invisible chronicle that records every word spoken and deed performed by mankind since the beginning of time. Occult believers say this record can be found in the ether and read by clairvoyants. Steiner taught believers how to read to the dead and to meditate on the deceased's handwriting in order to communicate with those that have died. He lectured profusely on topics such as reincarnation, hypnotism, occult science, Rosicrucianism, Theosophy, mystery centers of the middle ages, astral bodies, gnomes as life forms, angels, karma, Christian mysticism, how to see spiritual beings, modern initiation, Atlantis, Lemuria, etc. Steiner's sermons, setting out his occult teachings, were recorded by his disciples and published in more than 350 volumes.... "During his time as General Secretary of the Theosophical Society, Steiner built Rosicrucian Temples. One lay beneath the Stuttgart House, although many of his followers who met upstairs knew nothing of its existence. In 1912, after a doctrinal rift with [Theosophist] Annie Besant over her claim that Jiddu Krishnamurti was a reincarnation of Christ, the charismatic prophet [Steiner] instigated a schism in the Theosophical Society. Steiner took most of the German and Austrian believers with him to establish his own esoteric religion, Anthroposophy, in order to be free from Besant's theological restraints and impositions. Steiner and some followers moved to Dornach, Switzerland, to build their utopia which included an enormous mystical temple known as the Goetheanum. The original intricately carved and painted wooden building burned down during Steiner's day but was replaced by a subsequent temple designed by Steiner and constructed out of concrete. The second Goetheanum remains the world headquarters and spiritual center for Anthroposophy today." [Sharon Lombard, "Spotlight on Anthroposophy" http://www.icsahome.com/logon/elibdocview.asp?Subject=Spotlight+on+Anthroposophy] *Koenig, P. (n.d.). ANTHROPOSOPHY ORDO TEMPLI ORIENTIS: Theodor Reuss and Rudolf Steiner. Retrieved September, 9, 2001 from http://www.cyberlink.ch/~koenig/steiner.html One of Steiner's most basic premises is the idea that the ancients were wise, because they had clairvoyant powers. Thus, their legends, myths, and "sciences" were right. Of course, the ancients stood at a lower level of evolution than we stand at today, Steiner said, so their teachings are no longer sufficient. We must move to higher, more acute spiritual wisdom. But our new spiritual discoveries will stem from the basic truths the ancients grasped (and that modern science entirely overlooks). This premise led Steiner to affirm amazing swaths of nonsense. Here's a small example: phlogiston. Before people learned better, they thought that things burn because of a substance called phlogiston. Steiner more or less conceded that there is no such material substance as phlogiston; he more or less agreed that, at one level, modern science is correct in speaking of oxygen, not phlogiston. However, Steiner said that the physical world where oxygen is found is merely an outward covering for the real universe, the etheric or spiritual realm, where phlogiston does indeed exist.  “[P]hlogiston simply belongs to the things Dante observed, whilst oxygen belongs to the things Copernicus observed. Phlogiston is the invisible principle that disperses, the ether." [Rudolf Steiner, FROM LIMESTONE TO LUCIFER (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1999), p. 50. R.R. sketch, 2009, based on illustration on p. 47. The purple area is "phlogiston; fire stuff".] You can take Steiner's statement as saying that phlogiston disperses the ether or that phlogiston is the ether. It makes little difference. Neither phlogiston nor the universal ether exists — they are concepts discarded by science. But Steiner affirms them because his method was to accept virtually all "clairvoyant" knowledge while rejecting virtually all real knowledge. He reinterpreted many of the concepts he accepted, hammering them into a unified esoteric system. But he wound up accepting enormous quantities of nonsense. Gnomes, sylphs, fairies, giants, Norse gods, specters, ghosts — they all exist, one way or another, he taught.  Here is an explanation Steiner offered for plant growth. “And so we picture, from below upwards, in bluish, blackish shades the force of gravity, to which an upward impulse is given by the gnomes; and flitting all around the plant ... the undine power that blends and disperses substances as the plant grows upwards. From above downwards, from the sylphs, light is made to leave its imprint in the plant and molds and creates the form which descends as an ideal form and is taken up by the material womb of the earth; moreover fire spirits flit around the plant and concentrate cosmic warmth in tiny seed points. This is sent down to the gnomes together with the seed power, so that down there they can cause the plants to arise out of fire and life." [Rudolf Steiner, HARMONY OF THE CREATIVE WORD (Rudolf Steiner Press, 2001), pp. 125-126. R.R. sketch, 2009. There is no plant in my sketch because there is none in the book's sketch.] It's good to see Steiner affirm the force of gravity, here. At other times, he said something quite different. His consistent stance was to claim that modern science is either wrong or irrelevant — Truth comes not from science or the rational brain but from clairvoyance which is seated in nonphysical organs. Given the choice between modern knowledge and superstitious error, he almost always opted for the latter. Okay, Steiner admitted, oxygen and gravity can be spoken of in the material universe, just as we have physical bodies in the material universe. But our realer selves exists in the realer reality, in the ether and beyond the ether.  “Here (outline) we have the physical body and the ether body (yellow). It fills the whole of the physical body. And here (right) we have the astral body, which is outside the human being at night (red). At the top it is very small and hugely bulging down below. Then we have the I (violet). This is how we are at night. We are two people in the night." [Rudolf Steiner, BLACKBOARD DRAWINGS 1919-1924 (Rudolf Steiner Press, 2003), p. 102. R.R. sketch, 2009, based on image in the book.] The only flaw in Steiner's doctrines is that, by and large, nothing he described actually exists. By and large, it's all fantasy. We don't have four bodies, we have one. We aren't two people, each of us is one person. There is no etheric universe. There is no ether. There is no phlogiston. IMO, anyway. What do you think? Steiner celebrated the human being, assuring his followers that to be human is to stand at the center of the universe. "[H]igher beings, the gods, also have a religion: they too look up to something in awe and reverence. What is this religion of the gods? What is it that the gods revere? It is man. Man is the religion of the gods." [Rudolf Steiner, quoted by Charles Kovacs, THE SPIRITUAL BACKGROUND TO CHRISTIAN FESTIVALS (Floris Books, 2007), pp. 72-73.] This is a flattering idea (although some will consider it blasphemous). But before we base our lives on it, we might want to ask whether we have any evidence whatsoever to support it. The word "Anthroposophy" means human wisdom or knowledge of the human. "Theosophy" means knowledge of God or gods. When Steiner broke with Theosophy to found Anthroposophy, he shifted the center of his focus from the gods to man. A few more Anthroposophical images of the human being:  “We must be really clear about this. It is sheer nonsense to regard the human form as physical; we must see it as a spiritual form. The physical in it is everywhere present as minute particles ... If someone were to take any of you by the forelock and extract your form, the physical and also the etheric [bodies] would collapse like a heap of sand ... Man, however, still possesses his form when he goes through the gate of death. One sees it shimmering, glittering, radiant with colours. But now he loses first the form of his head; then the rest of his form gradually melts away. Man becomes completely metamorphoses into an image of the cosmos. This occurs during the time between death and a new birth...." [Rudolf Steiner, HARMONY OF THE CREATIVE WORD (Rudolf Steiner Press, 2001), pp. 208-209. R.R. sketch, 2009, based on image on p. 208.] Steiner's weird doctrines flatter the human ego. On this basis, many people are drawn to such teachings. A respect for reason, reality, and truth may lead us in a different direction. People of faith, who may agree with Steiner on some points, may find that on other points he strains credulity. Securalists will certainly consider Steiner's teachings bizarre.  “When we place man in the universe in accordance with his true identity — on earth he is, so to speak, a miniature image of himself — we must place him in the eagle sphere as regards his head ... The lion is the representative of the animals which are in the real sense sun animals ... The lion prospers best when the planets above the sun and the planets below the sun are in a constellation where they exert the least influence on the sun itself ... [W]hat lives in the lion's gaze lives also in the organization of the human chest and heart ... [W]e must put the human being into the diagram in such a way that we place the heart and lungs in the region of this sun activity ... When we turn to the inner planets ... we have first the Mercury sphere. This has to do with the finer parts of the metabolic system ... [T]he region of Venus ... is connected with the somewhat coarser parts of man's metabolic system ... We come next to the sphere of the moon. (I am drawing this in the sequence customary today in astronomy; I could also draw it differently.) There we enter the region which exerts influence on the metabolic processes, for these are connected with the moon ... [T]he facts of human earthly evolution are such that, to an ever increasing degree, eagle forces wish to concentrate one-sidedly on the human head, lion forces on he human rhythmic system, and cow forces on the human metabolism and all human activity on earth." [Rudolf Steiner, HARMONY OF THE CREATIVE WORD (Rudolf Steiner Press, 2001), pp. 23-26. RR sketch, 2009, based on the one on p. 23.] According to Anthroposophy, we are microcosms — we contain within ourselves the distillation and potentiality of all the high universe. We're It, the center, the berries, the cat's pajamas, the Sun and the Moon. Some of this may be seem attractive, but some of it is quite clearly an occult fantasy. "Educating" children under the influence of occult fantasy may not be best for the children individually or for mankind as a whole.  "When the child is very young, all development comes from the head. Once the second teeth have developed [around age seven], and one is therefore older, all development comes from the chest. This is why one has to be so careful about children's breathing between their 7th and 14th years ... [I]t will only be when a person has reached sexual maturity [according to Steiner, around age 21] that development comes from the whole human being, from the limbs ... We develop further in our 20s and 30s ... Coming from the 40s into the 50s, one needs to use the chest more again, and in old age one needs to use the head more again. But at that time, in old age, one should not use the physical head but the more subtle ether head." [Rudolf Steiner, FROM MAMMOTHS TO MEDIUMS (Rudolf Steiner Press, 2000), pp. 144-145. R.R. sketch, 2009, based on sketch on p. 144.]  "Over there in Asia, people who still had some knowledge learned to read in the world of the spirit using the Sephiroth Tree. And in the early Christian centuries people who still knew something of the world of the spirit learned to read using the Aristotelian tree of life ... Bit by bit, however, all of them — those of the Sephiroth Tree and those of the Aristotle tree — forgot what these things really were for ... [T]oday we can only gain insight into these things through the science of the spirit [Anthroposophy] ... [M]odern science no longer knows of the things people did know in the past. They have to be regained ... [P]eople simply have no feeling any longer for the way these things hang together ... [W]e have an old German word that is used primarily when people have particular dreams. When a spiritual human being oppresses them, this is called the Alp. People say something comes and possesses a person. Later Alp became Elp, and then elf — those spirits the elves. Man is merely a condensed elf ... [O]ne says: the aleph in man, the Alp in man. If you leave off the vowels, as is customary in Hebrew, you actually get alph — elf — for the first letter. Human beings say elf to speak of this spiritual entity. We talk about elves. Of course, people will now say that these were invented by the ancients, a product of their imagination, and that we no longer believe in them today. But the ancients would say: 'You only have to look at the human being and you have the alph, only the alph is inside the body and is not a subtle etheric entity in man but a dense, physical one.' But people have long since forgotten how to consider the human being." [Rudolf Steiner, FROM BEETROOT TO BUDDHISM (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1999 ), pp. 175-177.] And here is an image of the context of human life:  This is a pencil sketch of a set of windows in the Goetheanum, designed by Steiner. We see multiple gods and demons, the abyss, animals, angelic assistance, astrological powers, mystic signs... We see an occult vision, quite different from mainstream religions and equally different from modern science. This is the universe of Anthroposophy, the universe Waldorf schools would like to lure students toward. [R.R. sketch, 2009, based on photograph on p. 17 of THE GOETHEANUM: School of Spiritual Science (Philosophical-Anthroposophical Press, 1961.] All such images derive from the faculty Steiner claimed to possess: clairvoyance.  Clairvoyance, according to Steiner, is connected to feeling, subjective experience, imagination... These are states that science views askance, but Steiner affirmed them. This led him to make some remarkable statements. “[W]e need to acquire an inner feeling, an inner response to the natural world ... [T]he earth is solid rock. Materialists believe in this solid rock ... But someone who is hoping to gain higher insight develops some degree of anxiety on coming face to face with this very rock. This anxiety does not appear at all when we are in heated air ... But one can also reach a point where the heated air makes one anxious ... The more you feel at ease in it, the more does the heated air make you anxious ... But if you put up with the heat, if you stay with it, and actually feel comfortable with it, the parts I have drawn rather schematically in the air here [yellow] oddly enough begin to fill up with all kinds of images [upper white blotches] and the world of the spirit literally begins to show itself, the world of the spirit that is always present in the air though people do not feel it because they do not want to put up with the heat ... Once one has got used to seeing all these spirits that are in the air ... you will gradually also begin to perceive something where the solid rock is concerned ... [Y]ou yourself slip out of your body far enough so that you'll no longer feel the stones to be an obstacle but enter into the sold ground the way a swimmer does the water." [Rudolf Steiner, FROM MAMMOTHS TO MEDIUMS (Rudolf Steiner Press, 2000), pp. 190-192. R.R. sketch, 2009, based on Steiner's on p. 191. The white area near the bottom is "solid" rock that one begins to penetrate, as shown in red. The red line crossing through the upper white areas is also penetration by human consciousness.] Steiner was highly educated and highly intelligent. Many people who met him found him a compelling figure. The uses he made of his gifts are questionable, however. In developing Anthroposophy, he created what is in effect an occult theory of everything. It is an impressive edifice, structured and orderly. But is it true — does it, in fact, provide an explanation of reality? Consider the numbers seven and twelve. Steiner insistently ranked phenomena in hierarchies, listings that range from low to high. He particular liked to offer rankings consisting of seven or twelve stages — seven being the occult number of perfect, the sum of three (divinity) and four (creation), as well as the number of "sacred planets"; twelve being the occult factor of three (divinity) and four (creation), the number of "macrocosmic powers", and the number of constellations in the zodiac. The resulting system impresses some people, including some very smart people. Steiner evidently penetrated to the divine order of things — he pulled everything together and "made sense" of it by showing how it all fits together. The problem, however, is that so many of Steiner's categories are arbitrary — stretched or trimmed to suit his predetermined intention. He didn't discover real results, he simply imposed a plan of his own invention (borrowed in large part from others, but reworked to suit his own purposes). We can speculate about Steiner's motives and convictions. Did he believe what he taught? Did he convince himself (a frequent occurrence for intellectuals, who can be bowled over by their own cleverness)? It isn't important. He convinced others, who became his followers. But he need not convince us today, so long as we're willing to keep our eyes open and to insist on real results rather than arbitrary designs created on the basis of occult fallacy. Sometimes, of course, Steiner did not have to invent his preferred groupings. Sometimes he did indeed discover them in the wide world outside his imagination. But what, precisely, did these discoveries amount to? Here's a brief example: "In the course of these lectures we have heard how certain high-ranking Powers of the Hierarchies have worked, through human beings, into all the civilisation-epochs since the Atlantean catastrophe. "...The pupils of Zarathustra saw twelve powers proceeding from the twelve directions of the Zodiac ... [T]he Persian conceived of the macrocosmic forces coming from the twelve directions of the universe and penetrating into, working into humanity, so that they are immediately present in man. Consequently, what unfolds through the working of the twelve forces must reveal itself also in its microcosmic form, in human intelligence; that is to say, it must come to expression in the microcosm, too, through the twelve Amshaspands (Archangels), and indeed as a final manifestation, so to say, of these twelve spiritual, macrocosmic Beings who had already worked in former ages, preparing that which merely reached a last stage of development during the epoch of Persian civilisation. "It should not be beyond the scope of modern physiology to know where the microcosmic counterparts of the twelve Amshaspands are to be found. They are the twelve main nerves proceeding from the head... [S]uch indications must be given if a spiritual-scientific conception of the world is to be spoken of in the true sense, and attention called, not merely in general phrases, to the fact that man is a microcosmic replica of the macrocosm. "In other regions, too, it has been known that what comes to manifestation in the human being flows in from outside. For example, in certain periods of Germanic mythology mention is made of twelve streams flowing from Niflheim to Muspelheim. The twelve streams are not meant in the physical-material sense, but they are that which, seen by clairvoyance, flows as a kind of reflection from the macrocosm into the human microcosm, the human being who moves over the earth and whose evolution is to be brought about through macrocosmic forces." [Rudolf Steiner, OCCULT HISTORY (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1982), pp. 86-90.] If we are prepared to accept the existence of Atlantis, and the truth of astrology, and the esoteric significance of Norse myths — then, perhaps, the remarkable recurrence of the number twelve may strike us as meaningful, and we may therefore accept the doctrine Steiner was determined to press, that human beings as microcosmic replicas of the divine macrocosm. It's a pretty conceit. But if we pause to reflect that Atlantis never existed, and astrology is bunk, and Norse myths are mere fantasies — and that there are far more than twelve "major nerves" proceeding from the head [21] and that the number of archangels is debatable [22] — then the significance of Steiner's teaching evaporates, the mist clears from our eyes, and we have the renewed opportunity to look upon reality realistically.  Perhaps the silliest-looking building in the known universe, this is the boiler house on the Goetheanum campus. The Goetheanum itself is impressive, and some of the secondary buildings on the campus are at least defensible as works of architecture. But then there is this. When some Waldorf schoolmates and I toured the campus in 1963 and came upon the boiler house, we could hardly believe our eyes — and the shock has scarcely lessened with the passing of the years. Steiner himself drew up the overall concept for the boiler house, and he was proud of his work. He gave the boiler house twin domes, much as he had the Goetheanum itself. The domes at the boiler house do not intersect, which is presumably appropriate since large machinery is housed inside, making this an ahrimanic building. “Now look at the double dome [on the Goetheanum] and its interpenetration of the dome motif ... They represent a kind of innovation in architecture ... A very great deal is contained in this interpenetration of the two dome motifs — an infinite number of different aspects ... If we were to cancel the interpenetration and separate the dome motifs, we move toward the ahrimanic principle. If we bring them closer together or overlap them completely, by building one inside the other, we would approach the luciferic principle.” [Rudolf Steiner, ARCHITECTURE (Rudolf Steiner Press, 2003), p. 116. R. R, sketch, 2010, based on photograph on p. 122.] Ahriman and Lucifer are the two chief demons in Anthroposophy. According to Steiner, their influence in architecture is found when we are pulled too far downward (Ahriman) or upward (Lucifer). Steiner's ambitions, justified or not, were enormous. Here is one of the defining Anthroposophical beliefs, as stated by Anthroposophist Dr. Ronald E. Koetzsch: "Human culture needs to be transformed according to a spiritual vision of the human being. Every domain of human thought and activity — education, medicine, agriculture, social, economic and political life, art, architecture, religious life, care for the elderly, and so on — must be renewed on the basis of a spiritual understanding of the human being [i.e., Steiner's Anthroposophy]. Only if we do this will the development of humanity and of the Earth continue in a positive way." — Dr. Ronald E. Koetzsch, "Anthroposophy 101" [http://waldorfcritics.org/active/articles/anthroposophy101.html]  Rudolf Steiner near the end of his life [public domain]. To see more images of Rudolf Steiner, click here: Google/Steiner Another item from the "daily quotes" page: “Anti-Christian influence is directly visible in Moorish architecture with its arches that run up into a point instead of being rounded. This is the mark of [the demon] Ahriman. In architecture Ahriman worked as the Antichrist when he replaced rounded Romanesque arches with horseshoe and pointed arches.” — Rudolf Steiner, ARCHITECTURE (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1999), p. 153. Rudolf Steiner had opinions about everything. He expatiated on any and all topics. He was a polymath. The breadth of his apparent knowledge stuns his followers. But should we be impressed? Should we join the band of his devotees? How brilliant was Steiner, really? Consider the following quotation. The view taken of pointed arches is different (the speaker did sometimes contradict himself), but otherwise... “When all's said, we should be grateful to the Jesuits. Who knows if, but for them, we might have abandoned Gothic architecture for the light, airy, bright architecture of the Counter-Reformation? In the face of Luther's efforts to lead an upper clergy that had acquired profane habits back to mysticism, the Jesuits restored to the world the joy of the senses ... Fanaticism is a matter of climate — for Protestantism, too, has burnt its witches. Nothing of that sort in Italy. The Southerner has a lighter attitude towards matters of faith. The Frenchman has personally an easy way of behaving in his churches ... It's remarkable to observe the resemblances between the evolution of Germany and that of Italy. The creators of the language, Dante and Luther, rose against the ecumenical desires of the papacy. Each of the two nations was led to unity, against the dynastic interests, by one man. They achieved their unity against the will of the Pope ... Italy is the country where intelligence created the notion of the State. The Roman Empire is a great political creation, the greatest of all. The Italian people's musical sense, its liking for harmonious proportions, the beauty of its race! The Renaissance was the dawn of a new era, in which Aryan man found himself anew ... The magic of Florence and Rome, of Ravenna, Siena, Perugia! Tuscany and Umbria, how lovely they are!” Here we find a man capable of discoursing on an almost infinite array of subjects, spiritual and mundane, artistic and political, historical and racial, intellectual and emotional. Here we find a polymath, a man of many parts, verily a man for all seasons. Such a man, Anthroposophists assure us, was Rudolf Steiner. There is a difficulty, however. The polymath I have quoted (“When all's said ... how lovely they are!”) is not Rudolf Steiner. The speaker here is Adolf Hitler. [See HITLER’S TABLE TALK 1941-1944 (Enigma Books, 2000), p. 9.] Now, before Anthroposophists blow a gasket, let me quickly assure everyone that I am not saying that Steiner was indistinguishable from Hitler.* My point is that, as different as Steiner and Hitler were in many, many ways, self-approving polymaths are alike in at least a few ways: They think they know everything, or they pretend that they do. They love to hear themselves talk, and they expect respectful attention from everyone around them. In HITLER’S TABLE TALK, we find Hitler playing the polymath, just as we find Steiner playing the polymath in all of his books and lectures. Steiner’s performances were generally impressive. But our admiration diminishes when we begin to suspect charlatanry, and it disappears almost completely when we pay close attention to what Steiner actually said. When the torrent of his monologues subsides and we can think again, we find that he has given us almost nothing worth keeping. Steiner wrote and spoke incessantly, voluminously, vaingloriously, but he said very, very little of value. To a shocking degree, his teachings are pure, puffed-up, elaborated nonsense. [See, e.g., “Steiner’s Blunders”, “Steiner Static”, “Steiner’s ‘Science’”, “Steiner’s Illogic”, and “Say What?”.] * Lest there be any confusion, allow me to stress that, although there were some similarities between the two men, there were also vast differences between them. Both were short, dark-haired know-it-alls. Both had delusions of grandeur. Both, born in Austria, were German nationalists. Both were devoted to the Aryan race, both were anti-Semites, both reveled in Nordic mythology. But Steiner was, in practice if not wholly in ideology, a man of peace; Hitler was, first and last, a man of war. Steiner didn’t outfit his followers with uniforms and send them into the streets to brawl with the opposition. He didn’t violate international treaties, amass an army, and plunge the world into war. He didn’t establish death camps where innocents were butchered and gassed. Hitler did these things. Hitler was a mass murderer, a maniac, a monster. Steiner was merely a crank. If we have to choose between Austrian-German delusional know-it-alls, Steiner is clearly the better choice. But perhaps a better course for us would be to dispense with delusional know-it-alls altogether. How about taking guidance from philosophers, scholars, and scientists who actually know what they are talking about? That would be a start, anyway. [Concerning my odd formulation of Steiner's position on war and peace, see "All v. All", "Steiner and the Warlord", and "War".]  [Rudolf Steiner Press, 2005.]  [Rudolf Steiner Press, 1987.]  [Rudolf Steiner Press, 1993.] xxx  [Anthroposophic Press, 1972.]  [Kessinger, 2006.]  [Rudolf Steiner Press, 2006.]  [Rudolf Steiner Press, 2001.]xxxx  [Rudolf Steiner Press, 1968.]  [Rudolf Steiner Press, 1976.]  [Anthroposophic Press, 2001.]  [Anthroposophic Press, 1968.]xxx Although Anthroposophists and Waldorf teachers may often be evasive when speaking with outsiders, the titles given to books of Steiner's work are often quite informative. If you become interested in Waldorf education, you really should buy some of these books and study them carefully. I posted the following message in September, 2011 [http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/message/21014] --- In waldorf-critics@yahoogroups.com, "petekaraiskos" <pkcompany@...> wrote: Discussions of insanity are always touchy, perhaps never more so than when they occur in the context of Anthroposophy. It would be difficult, for instance, to argue against the proposition that Rudolf Steiner was insane. But we cannot *prove* that he was insane, and in any case the question is irrelevant. What we can know with great clarity is that Steiner's teachings are insane, and this is really all that need concern us. This, and the knowledge that Waldorf education is built on the foundation of Steiner's insane teachings. Steiner's followers will assure you that everything Steiner said was true. Some of his statements can be made to *seem* loony, they argue, but only when these statements are taken out of context. So don't just read an excerpted sentence, read the entire lecture or book and you will see that what Steiner said was perfectly sensible. This is a standard Anthropsophical claim. Sadly, however, it is untrue. The context of Steiner's looniest statements is more of Steiner's loony statements. Not to put too fine a point on it, generally speaking each loony sentence of Steiner's comes out of a loony paragraph of Steiner's which in turn comes out of a loony lecture or chapter of Steiner's. Nonetheless, I agree that you should not be content reading a few excerpts from Steiner's works. As I have recommended for, lo, the past many years, I urge you to read some of Steiner's books and lectures in their entirety. If you are considering sending a child to a Waldorf school, I absolutely recommend that you read FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER from cover to cover. Waldorf teacher-trainees usually study this book in some detail, and they tend to treat it as a sort of Bible. So, if you want to know what Waldorf teachers think and believe, this is an invaluable source. The problem with tackling FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER is that it is extremely long — 811 pages spread over two volumes. Perhaps you would prefer to start with something less overwhelming. Okay, allow me to recommend THE OCCULT SIGNIFICANCE OF BLOOD. This is a very manageable 44 pages. Warning: THE OCCULT SIGNIFICANCE OF BLOOD is both lunatic and horrid. But then, so are many passages in FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER. Indeed, the Steiner statement that I have nominated as *The Worst Thing Rudolf Steiner Ever Said* comes out of FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER. Here it is, in toto. (Steiner was addressing Waldorf teachers. At one point one of the teachers is quoted. All the rest of the passage comes from Steiner's mouth.)
- Roger (Don't Blame the Messenger) Rawlings
 Steiner's death mask. This image appears at several places on the Web. I have reproduced it from http://www.waldorfcritics.org/active/links.html ENDNOTES [1] Rudolf Steiner, FIRST STEPS IN INNER DEVELOPMENT (Anthroposophic Press, 1999), p. 25. Steiner's followers sometimes look upon him as virtually a second Christ. Steiner did not entirely discourage this attitude, as this quotation suggests. Here it is again, with the remainder of the sentence: “Those who come to me wanting to hear the truths available through esotericism and nevertheless refuse to walk the path are like schoolchildren who want to electrify a glass rod and refuse to rub it.” If you want spiritual truth, come to Steiner. But don't persist in childish attitudes — take the truths and advice he offers you. After Steiner's death, his wife — intentionally or not — promoted the notion that Rudolf Steiner was a Christ figure: “His life, consecrated wholly to the sacrificial service of humanity, was requited with unspeakable hostility; his way of knowledge was transformed into a path of thorns. But he walked the whole way, and mastered it for all of humanity.” [Rudolf Steiner, THE STORY OF MY LIFE (Anthroposophic Press, 1928), p. 340, Conclusion by Marie Steiner.] Of course, in the Bible Jesus is depicted as wearing a crown of thorns and carrying his cross on the arduous path — afterwards called the Via Dolorosa — to Calvary, where he died for all of humanity. Anthroposophists may consider Steiner to be Christly for a specific reason. Steiner taught that Christ was not so much our Savior as our role model. “Christ shows himself to him as the great human Prototype and Example.” [Rudolf Steiner, OCCULT SCIENCE - An Outline (Anthroposophic Press, 1969), p. 272.] In progressing so very far along the spiritual path, Steiner fulfilled the Christ Impulse more than almost anyone else since Christ. His teachings are Gnosis, the hidden meaning of the Scriptures. “This history is written in other than ordinary characters, and in Gnosis, in Theosophy, is called 'The Akashic Record.'” [Rudolf Steiner, ATLANTIS AND LEMURIA (Rajput Press, 1911), p. 4.] Bear in mind that whenever Steiner praised Theosophy, he meant his own doctrines, which as early as 1902 he began calling Anthroposophy. The meaning of Theosophy/Anthroposophy/Gnosis is the hidden meaning of Logos, the Word of God, which Christ embodied. “This took place through the Divine-Spiritual Logos, Christ, uniting His cosmic destiny with the Earth....” [ANTHROPOSOPHICAL LEADING THOUGHTS (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1973), “A Christmas Study: The Mystery of the Logos”.] This is what Steiner brought us, or so he and his followers have assured themselves. Steiner did not literally claim to be a god — he said that spiritually correct humans will become gods, but none of us is there yet. Accordingly, Steiner did not claim infallibility. Yet he presented himself as virtually omniscient — a pose that caused him problems, as he occasionally complained. “Numbers of individuals come to me asking questions out of the blue about this or that, and often requesting information about matters that, at the time of questioning, are remote from my concern. They demand that I give them the most exact information. People are commonly convinced that a person who speaks out of a connection with the spiritual world knows about everything it contains and is always in a position to give out any information desired.” [Rudolf Steiner, CHANCE, PROVIDENCE, AND NECESSITY (Anthroposophic Press, 1988), p. 74.] Despite the inconvenience he created for himself, Steiner persisted in his pose of near-omniscience. If he didn't want to be considered a spiritual know-it-all, he shouldn't have acted like one. But he clearly did want to be seen as an occult sage. He claimed to be the bearer of truth concerning a nearly unlimited array of subjects, a claim he underscored by peppering his statements with such refrains as "I am right." He knew so very much about so very much because of his high spiritual consciousness, clairvoyance. So he was right about just about everything. Thus: ”You will have to admit that I am right in saying that our children....” [Rudolf Steiner, RUDOLF STEINER IN THE WALDORF SCHOOL (Anthroposophic Press, 1996), p. 45.] “Consult any botanist you like and you will see that I am right....” [Rudolf Steiner, THE TEMPLE LEGEND AND THE GOLDEN LEGEND (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1997), p. 350.] “Consider the characteristic nature of those great minds and you will see that I am right in what I am saying. Take Fichte, Schelling, even Goethe....” [Rudolf Steiner, POLARITIES IN THE EVOLUTION OF MANKIND (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1987), p. 124.] Especially in spiritual matters, Steiner claimed to be almost always correct. He claimed to use “exact” clairvoyance, thus obtaining exact results. “The method applied in Dornach [i.e., at Steiner’s headquarters, the Goetheanum] can be designated as ‘exact clairvoyance.’” [Rudolf Steiner, WALDORF EDUCATION AND ANTHROPOSOPHY, Vol. 1 (Anthroposophic Press, 1996), p. 205.] Steiner said that he gained increasing knowledge of spiritual matters as he progressed in clairvoyant insight. He said that his early books, such as THEOSOPHY, did not present a complete picture because his clairvoyant insights were not yet wide and deep enough. But, later, he was able to fill in the picture more and more. His original views had not been wrong — merely incomplete. Essentially, he had been right all along. The following are some of the last words Steiner wrote; they appear in the 1925 edition of his magnum opus, OCCULT SCIENCE - AN OUTLINE. The original edition of OCCULT SCIENCE had appeared fifteen years earlier. Steiner died not long after penning these words: “At the time when THEOSOPHY was written the subject-matter of the present volume [i.e., OCCULT SCIENCE] could not be brought into an equally finished form. In my Imaginative perceptions I beheld the spiritual life and being of individual Man and was able to describe this clearly. The facts of cosmic evolution were not present to me to the same extent. I was indeed aware of them in many details, but the picture as a whole was lacking ... Since the Imaginations described in this book [i.e., OCCULT SCIENCE] first grew into a total picture in my mind and spirit, I have unceasingly developed the researches of conscious seership [i.e., exact clairvoyance] into the being of individual Man, the history of Mankind, the nature and evolution of the Cosmos. The outline as presented fifteen years ago has in no way been shaken. Inserted in its proper place and context, everything that I have since been able to adduce becomes a further elaboration of the original picture.” [Rudolf Steiner, OCCULT SCIENCE - AN OUTLINE (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1969), pp. 7 - 12; preface to the 1925 edition, written January 10, 1925.] Steiner died on March 30, 1925. At the end of these endnotes, I will give a few more examples of Steiner's insistence that he knew best about just about everything. [2] Hermann von Baravalle, RUDOLF STEINER AS EDUCATOR (St. George Books, 1960 revised edition). Anthroposophists often claim that they do not slavishly follow Steiner. To some degree, this is true. Steiner advocated subjectivity — he urged his followers to trust their own intuitions, their own “clairvoyance,” their own felt “spiritual insight.” This naturally leads to differences of opinion among Anthroposophists — what one person “intuits” may be quite different from the revelations produced by someone else’s “spiritual insight.” Anthroposophists may find that they inner guides actually lead them to differ from Steiner himself, occasionally. Yet there can be no question that a form of virtual Steiner-worship exists among Anthroposophists. The speculation about when he will next be reincarnated is one indicator. Others can be found in the tellingly titled book, A MAN BEFORE OTHERS: Rudolf Steiner Remembered (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1993). This collection of reminiscences by Steiner’s acquaintances contains numerous gems such as the following. Merely looking upon Steiner walking across a stage filled his followers with reverence: “Slowly, Rudolf Steiner walked over to the lectern. The way he walked revealed something of the balance between a soaring freedom from the body and the permeation of earth substance with will.” [A MAN BEFORE OTHERS, p. 209.] Golly. [3] Robert Baum, LOGIC (Harcourt Brace, 1996), p. 556. [4] Ibid., p. 5. [5] Ibid., p.14. [6] Ibid., p. 17. [7] John 1:1. [8] “Concerning Soul Life in the Breathing Process,” HEALTH AND ILLNESS, Vol. 1, Lectures to the Workmen (The Anthroposophic Press), 1981, p. 127. [9] Ibid., p. 31; lecture delivered at Oxford in August, 1922. [10] Ibid., p. 33; lecture delivered in Stuttgart, April, 1924. [11] Ibid., pp. 34-35; opening address for the Waldorf School, September 1919. [12] Ibid., p. 37; no indication of when or where Steiner said this. [13] Gary Lachman, RUDOLF STEINER (Jeremy P. Tarcher/Penguin, 2007), pp. 12-13 [14] Ibid., p. 15. Anthony Storr’s book, FEET OF CLAY (Free Press, 1997), deals with many self-proclaimed visionaries and leaders, including Steiner. [15] For Steiner on Steiner, see Rudolf Steiner, THE STORY OF MY LIFE (Kessigner Publishing, 2003; facsimile of 1928 edition) and Rudolf Steiner, AUTOBIOGRAPHY (Anthroposophical Press, 2006) — essentially the same book but with a useful chronology, pp. xvi-xxix. In addition to Lachman's biography, mentioned above, see Henry Barnes, A LIFE FOR THE SPIRIT (Anthroposophic Press, 1997) and Peter Washington, MADAME BLAVATSKY’S BABOON (Secker & Warburg, 1993).
Additional sources: Rudolf Steiner, Portrait circa 1915 http://www.rsarchive.org/RSBio.php Rudolf Steiner Timeline http://oaks.nvg.org/wm6ra6.html#bio Waldorfcritics posting 10482 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/message/10482 Waldorfcritics archive http://www.waldorfcritics.org/active/articles/JanusFaceOfAnthroposophy.html Waldorfcritics posting 10511 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/message/10511 These and other sources do not always agree, so the chronology presented here is not gospel. [16] Steiner was a secularist before his sudden conversion to Theosophy. Here, for instance, are comments he made about the occultism movement he himself would soon join: "Theosophists ... gaze upon the totality of European science and merely shrug their shoulders. They smile at the sobriety of reason and intellect, while they worship the Eastern way of seeking truth as the one and only way. Oh, it is really rich to observe the demeanor of superiority whenever you engage a Theosophist in conversation about the value of the more Western ways of knowing. "...I advise anyone who meets with a Theosophist to stand fast, look him in the eye and with total sincerity, genuinely endeavor to glean something from the revelations of such a consummate 'enlightened one' who radiates Eastern wisdom from 'his inner being.' You will of course hear absolutely nothing, nothing but hollow phrases lifted from the Eastern scriptures, without even a hint of content. "These 'inner experiences' are nothing short of hypocrisy. After all, it's not much of a trick to pull phrases out of a profound literature and then use them to declare that the sum and substance of Western expertise is totally worthless. Yet, [in reality], how much depth, how much inwardness actually lies behind the supposedly superficial intellect, behind the external concepts of Western science, of which the Theosophists haven't the slightest idea! "But ... the mystical way in which they assert incomprehensible foreign wisdom actually seduces a fair number of their contemporaries. "It also proves advantageous to the Theosophists that they are able to stay on good terms with the Spiritualists and other off-beat, like-minded seekers of the spirit. Oh, sure, they [the Theosophists] contend that these Spiritualists treat the phenomena of the spirit world as external; whereas, they themselves [the Theosophists] seek to experience such phenomena as strictly within as well as totally spiritual. But they are not above walking hand in hand with the Spiritualists when they deem such an alliance to help them wage war on the unfettered science, the straightforward science of the modern era, which is solely supported by reason and observation." [Rudolf Steiner's, "Theosophists" ("MAGAZINE FOR LITERATURE", No. 34, 1897), translated by Tom Mellett. The essay is reprinted in "STEINER, COLLECTED ESSAYS IN LITERATURE", GA 32, pp. 194-196.] Note how Steiner's comments undercut his own later views, such as the emphasis he placed on inner experiences, and his opposition to what he called "natural" science — i.e., what he here calls "Western ways of knowing" or "Western science." [17] This book is widely used today by Anthroposophists. The original text had no occultist content; in 1918, Steiner released a significantly altered edition that may be interpreted as more with Anthroposophy. [18] "Steiner’s published polemics against Theosophical and other occult tendencies, from the 1890s, are very explicit. Examples include: Rudolf Steiner, “Allan Kardec, Der Himmel und die Hölle” (1891) in Steiner, Methodische Grundlagen der Anthroposophie, 493-95; Steiner, “Das Dasein als Lust, Leid und Liebe” (1892) in ibid., 510-11, attacking a recent anonymously published book by a leading Theosophist, Wilhelm Hübbe-Schleiden, whom Steiner later came to view as a Theosophical colleague and mentor; and above all Steiner’s fundamental critique, “Theosophen,” published in his Magazin für Litteratur in 1897 and reprinted in Steiner, Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Literatur, 194-96. "In another 1897 text Steiner expressed stark disapproval of “Christian and mystical notions”; see Steiner, Goethes Weltanschauung (Weimar: Felber, 1897), 81. See also the published report from 1893 on Steiner’s critical lecture in Weimar on spiritism and related phenomena, in which he roundly rejected supernatural explanations and the notion of “otherworldly beings”: “Hypnotismus mit Berücksichtigung des Spiritismus,” unsigned report originally published in the newspaper Deutschland, March 26, 1893; reprinted in Beiträge zur Rudolf Steiner Gesamtausgabe 99 (1988), 11-12. Similar sentiments appeared his 1895 Nietzsche book as well. As late as 1900, Steiner still flatly rejected the notion of a “supernatural order of the world”: Steiner, Haeckel und seine Gegner, 30. The epistemological position outlined in Steiner's philosophical works from the 1890s is decidedly this-worldly and makes no reference, even obliquely, to the “higher worlds” that stand at the center of Theosophical and Anthroposophical thought." [Peter Staudenmaier http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/message/12190] [19] He may have first used the term even earlier — at least one source indicates 1900. Others indicate 1903. [20] Hitler's primary target was not Steiner but the German foreign minister, Walter Simons. Hitler tried to smear Simons by associating him with Steiner: "[Simons is] an intimate friend of the Gnostic and anthroposophist Rudolf Steiner, a supporter of the threefold social organism [a societal scheme advanced by Steiner] and whatever they call all of these Jewish methods for destroying the normal spiritual condition of the peoples." [See Peter Staudenmaier's "Between Occultism and Fascism: Anthroposophy and the Politics of Race and Nation in Germany and Italy, 1900-1945", 2010, p. 140.] In reality, Steiner and Simons were not friends. [21] There are 31 pairs of spinal nerves and seven pairs of major peripheral nerves. See, e.g., "Spinal and Major Peripheral Nerves", http://innvista.com/health/anatomy/spinal.htm. Also see "human nervous system." ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA. 2010. Encyclopedia Britannica Online. 17 Feb. 2010 <http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/409709/human-nervous-system>. [22] Christians generally accept the existence of four archangels, although the total number may be as high as fifteen. Jewish and Islamic traditions differ. See, e.g., http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/32645/archangel and http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Archangel. "archangel, chief angel . They are four to seven in number. Sometimes specific functions are ascribed to them. The four best known in Christian tradition are Michael , Gabriel , Raphael , and Uriel ." [The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition | 2008 | ]  This is a sketch of scenery used at the Goetheanum to stage one of Steiner's mystery plays. [R.R., 2009.] ◊◊◊◊ POSTSCRIPT The following doesn’t prove much. All writers present their thoughts in the belief that much, if not all, of what they say is true. You might infer, for example, that I believe I am correct in my criticisms of Waldorf schools and Anthroposophy. Still, if you want to form of clear picture of Rudolf Steiner, you probably should try to note the extraordinary position he held in his followers' eyes and even in his own. He was the font of wisdom. What he said was true. There could be no argument. He had the answers. Accordingly, he continually told everyone what to think about almost everything. Here are some additional examples of Steiner claiming a remarkable purchase on the truth. A quick dash around the Internet produced these; you could find many more: “He who can follow History with spiritual insight will find it as I have said.” [THE MYSTERY OF GOLGOTHA (Anthroposophical Publishing Co., 1926).] ”...the spiritual world (which as I have said is permanent, eternal, having nothing to do with time) passes into time....” [THE EAST IN THE LIGHT OF THE WEST (Rudolf Steiner Publishing Co., 1940).] “I have shown the erroneous aspect of this train of thought....” [MYSTICISM AT THE DAWN OF THE MODERN AGE (Rudolf Steiner Publications, 1980), “Valentin Weigel and Jacob Boehme”.] ”I have shown that everything evolves — therefore....” [REINCARNATION AND KARMA (Anthroposophic Press, 1962).] “There is no doubt that....” [Ibid.] "I have shown how these ancient philosophers formed their philosophies from the human temperament.” [PERCEPTION AND THE NATURE OF THOUGHT, "Sun Activity in Earthly Evolution", GA 161.] “I have shown which direction the observation of world phenomena must take if it wants to penetrate into regions which...” [GOETHEAN WORLD VIEW (Mercury Press, 1985).] “I have shown how an opinion of long standing, prevailing in natural science....” [THE SOCIAL FUTURE (Anthroposophic Press, 1945).] “I have shown how the Platonic stream and the Aristotelian worked together....” [KARMIC RELATIONSHIPS, Vol. 4, p. 262.] “I have shown — and my philological training stood me in good stead — that....” [ASPECTS OF HUMAN EVOLUTION, p. 74.] “I have shown in a public lecture that I gave recently how....” [THE KNIGHTS TEMPLAR, p. 65.] “Our first task, as I have shown you....” [THE KINGDOM OF CHILDHOOD, p. 100.] “I have shown how mysticism can err in [his book] INTUITIVE THINKING AS A SPIRITUAL PATH [sic]....” [MYSTICS AFTER MODERNISM, p. 199.] “As I have shown already in these lectures, everything that enters as....” [WORLD-ECONOMY, p. 151.] “For this reason I have given you such pictures as could....” [Ibid., p. 173.] “And the objective observer cannot fail to see that the aim was indeed the one about which I have given you a number of hints — it is only possible to hint.” [THE KARMA OF UNTRUTHFULNESS, p. 45.] “I have given you a few results of recent research into the conditions of life between death and a new birth, and I hope there will be another opportunity....” [LIFE BETWEEN DEATH AND REBIRTH, p. 32.] “And I have given you the technique whereby....” [SPEECH AND DRAMA, p. 374.] “Now I have given you my own humble opinion [sic]....” [COMMUNITY LIFE, p. 168.] OK. We'll give him this one. “I have given you an idea of how you can work your way upwards to the sphere of the....” [GUARDIAN ANGELS, p. 78.] “The examples I have given you will illustrate the path our teaching must take if....” [EDUCATION FOR ADOLESCENTS, p. 57.] “Now you see, gentlemen, the whole of this explanation which I have given you allows you to see that....” [FROM MAMMOTHS TO MEDIUMS, p. 248.] “And that requires the kind of background which I have given you.” [THE ANTHROPOSOPHIC MOVEMENT, p. 41.] “The revolution of the earth is the result of the ego rhythm. And this is true, however astonishing it sounds.” [THE BEING OF MAN AND HIS FUTURE EVOLUTION, p. 59.] “This is true in quite a special degree of one property of the soul that is of outstanding....” [OCCULT SCIENCE - AN OUTLINE, p. 272.] “This is true not only of speech but of....” [WHAT IS WALDORF EDUCATION?, p. 64.] “This is true of all poisonous plants....” [TRUE AND FALSE PATHS OF SPIRITUAL INVESTIGATION,. p. 153.] “And this is true of everything in life. [sic!]” [SPEECH AND DRAMA, p. 142.] Zowie. “This is true....” [ANTHROPOSOPHICAL LEADING THOUGHTS, p. 103.] “This is something you must understand, or you will not get anywhere in life. [sic!]” [RUDOLF STEINER IN THE WALDORF SCHOOL, p. 103.] “Yes, indeed, but you must understand it correctly.” [PRACTICAL ADVICE TO TEACHERS, p. 29.] “...these are the sort of things you must understand....” [COLOUR, p. 203.] “You must understand how this....” [THE SPIRITUAL GROUND OF EDUCATION, p. 39.] “And now you must understand....” [EDUCATION FOR SPECIAL NEEDS, p. 178.] “You must know that Eurythmy....” [STUDY OF MAN, p. 181.] “You must know that these are questions of the most earnest spiritual research, far removed from what is imagined by the layman who stands outside this....” [KARMIC RELATIONSHIPS,Vol. 4, p. 104.] “You must know that each limb of a human being is a complete human being, but with the head and chest stunted....” [THE FOUNDATIONS OF HUMAN EXPERIENCE, p. 211.] “You must know that the ancient initiation wisdom, which described these things quite correctly in the way I have been doing....” [THE BOOK OF REVELATION AND THE WORK OF THE PRIEST, p. 240.] “[A]s you will have understood from my book CHRISTIANITY AS MYSTICAL FACT....” [KARMIC RELATIONSHIPS, Vol. 4, p. 166.] Steiner flogged his own work over and over and... “[B]y taking as a basis what is set forth in my book THEOSOPHY....” [DEED OF CHRIST, lecture 2, GA 107.] “I have described it in this way in my book THEOSOPHY, in accordance with the perceptions of of the soul-organ most immediately accessible by man [i.e., his own organ of clairvoyance]....” [“The Cosmic Word and Individual Man” (THE GOLDEN BLADE), GA 224.] ”In my book I have described this crossing of the threshold by pointing out....” [“The Crossing of the Threshold and the Social Organism” (ANTHROPOSOPHICAL NEWS SHEET), GA 193.] “If you look at the way in which I have dealt with the subject in my book, CHRISTIANITY AS MYSTICAL FACT ... The only possible course was to give real answers...by writing my book THEOSOPHY ... [T]he description given by its leaders could only be put in a proper context in my book THEOSOPHY....” [THE ANTHROPOSOPHIC MOVEMENT, p. 66ff.] “[A]s you will have gathered from my lectures, as well as from my book RIDDLES OF THE SOUL...” [“Elemental Beings and Human Destinies” (THE GOLDEN BLADE), GA 194.] “In my book CHRISTIANITY AS MYSTICAL FACT the Lazarus miracle among others is described in its real....“ [RELIGION, p. 83.] “In my book RIDDLES OF PHILOSOPHY I have shown that although....“ [THE SUN-MYSTERY IN THE COURSE OF HUMAN HISTORY, GA 208.] “[A]bout the use of the principle of the number seven — as you will find in my book THEOSOPHY....“ [THE INFLUENCES OF LUCIFER AND AHRIMAN, p. 69.] Perhaps that’s enough. You must understand that I have only scratched the surface. As I have told you, many more examples can be found. There can be no doubt about this. In my book, as I have shown, I am right.  [Pierre le Bourgeoys, ~1615.]  [Jacques Callot, ~1617.]  Magazine decoration, ~ 1900.
[Rudolf Steiner, ~1920.] Steiner's vision — which strikes many moderns as bizarre — is rooted in ancient, persistent mythologies and esoteric traditions. This doesn't make it, or them, true or false, but seeing Steiner in historical context can be helpful. Here is a small example — unimportant but perhaps suggestive: the strange winged head atop Steiner's sculpture, "The Representative of Humanity". It has many antecedents, in both recondite and popular sources. Steiner claimed that his spiritual "knowledge" came from his own "exact clairvoyance" — a claim that would be more credible if there were any real evidence that clairvoyance is possible. But there isn't. [See "Clairvoyance".] In fact, Steiner was a busy scholar of the occult and also a cultural scavenger, reading and borrowing widely. His teachings incorporate borrowings from profound religious and philosophical works cheek-by-jowl with popular legends and superstitions. The fundamental project in Anthroposophy — tying together all religions in a single über-faith — comes out of Theosophy, which in turn was influenced by an early effort to summarize the world's religious practices: RELIGIOUS CEREMONIES OF THE WORLD, by Bernard Picart and Jean Frederic Bernard, published in folio volumes from 1723 through 1737. Much information and misinformation from this work found its way into the later efforts.  "Puzza, or the 'Chinese Cybele,' sitting on a lotus flower" [Bernard Picart; Getty Research Institute]. |
