What a Guy (Waldorf Watch)

Rudolf Steiner

[Rudolf Steiner, THE STORY OF MY LIFE

(Kessinger Publishing, facsimile of 1928 edition,

Anthroposophical Publishing Co.), facing p. 320.]

“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]

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.

◊◊◊◊

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 [a Steiner critic] 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.

[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.

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 my essay, "Steiner and the Warlord".) His petty, fierce, and entirely human 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.

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

To see images of Rudolf Steiner,

click here: Google/Steiner

◊◊◊◊

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 omnisicient — 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.

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.

◊◊◊◊

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 grasp his immodesty. His ego was almost always on display (and by "ego", I mean the ordinary sense of self-esteem, not the mystic concept of the "I"). He was a self-promoter, perhaps not much more than many other traveling preachers, but surely not much less. His strongest argument for most of his teachings boiled down to "Because I say so." So 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 the....” [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.” [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.” [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.]

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 sum, as I have shown, I am right.