22 THE ANTHROPOSOPHY OF RUDOLF STEINER

THE THEOSOPHISTS really have no reason to congratulate themselves on their relations with the so-called German Rosicrucians; we have spoken previously of Mme Blavatsky's disputes with Franz Hartmann; we just saw how, from the beginning of 1913, as regards the Alcyone affair, Rudolf Steiner, general secretary of the German section of the Theosophical Society, separated himself entirely from Mrs Besant.^[1] In revenge, she seized the pretext that Steiner (who was born in 1861 in Kraljevic, Hungary), belonged to a Catholic family (and not Jewish as some have claimed), and accused him of being a Jesuit.^[2] If that were true, it must be admitted that she took quite a while to perceive it, for Steiner had belonged to the Society for some fifteen years, and that her 'clairvoyance' did not serve her very well in this instance. This entirely gratuitous accusation of 'Jesuitism' is nearly as common as that of 'black magic' in neo-spiritualist circles, and certainly it is not worth lingering over. There are occultists for whom the fear of Jesuits or their more or less disguised emissaries has become a real obsession. On the other hand, certain authors, among them Mme Blavatsky (who may have borrowed this idea from the Masonic writer J.-M. Ragon), have not hesitated to attribute to the Jesuits the founding of the Rose-Cross in Scottish Masonry. Others claim that the Jesuits insinuated themselves into various Rosicrucian organizations in the eighteenth century and deflected them from their primary aim. Still others, going further, want to identify the Rose-Cross Brotherhood of the seventeenth century with the Jesuits. But all these pseudo-historical fantasies cannot bear the least scrutiny and we mention them only to show that here Mrs Besant has not invented anything; seeing an adversary of Catholic origin arise before her with references from a Rosicrucian school (which moreover was imprecise and perhaps

Later on we will see what business is referred to in the last lines of this quotation.

non-existent), she could not fail to denounce him as Jesuit.^[4] Some have believed that this quarrel between Steiner and Mrs Besant was a mere comedy;^[5] even though one always needs to be wary of appearances, we do not believe this was so, and in our view there was a real scission which, beyond the affair which was the avowed occasion for the breach, and apart from the question of personal rivalry, may also have had certain political motives. No doubt one is always enjoined from all sides not to engage in politics, but we will see further on that the Theosophical Society nevertheless faithfully served the interests of British imperialism; the Society's German adherents were hardly disposed to play this game, being Germans before they were Theosophists.

We have said that Steiner gave to his new organization the name 'Anthroposophical Society' with the manifest intention of competing with the Theosophical Society, and also to distinguish his own conception which in fact made of man the center of what he called 'spiritual science.' It must also be added that the word 'anthroposophy' is not, as might be believed, a neologism coined by Steiner, for a work by the Rosicrucian Eugenius Philalethes, or Thomas Vaughan that dates from 1650 bears the title _Anthroposophia Magica_. The Anthroposophical Society took as its motto 'Wisdom is only in the Truth', in imitation of the Theosophical Society's 'There is no higher religion than the Truth'; this latter is a very defective translation of the motto of the Maharajas of Benares.^[6] Here are the principles which the new organization declared as its basis, according to a propaganda brochure published at the time of its creation: In order to form a satisfactory and healthy life, human nature needs to know and to cultivate its own supersensible essence and the supersensible essence of the world exterior to man. The natural investigations of modern science cannot lead to such a goal, even though they are called upon to render inestimable services within the limitations of their task and their domain. The Anthroposophical Society intends to pursue this goal by encouraging serious and true research directed toward the supersensible, and by observing the influence these researches exercise on the conduct of human life. A true investigation of the mind, and the state of soul that results from it, must form the character of the Anthroposophical Society, whose expression may be summed up in the following guiding principles: (1) A fraternal collaboration can be established in the bosom of the Society among all men who accept as the basis of this collaboration a fund of spirituality common to all souls, whatever the diversity of their faith, their nationality, their rank, their sex, etc. (2) The investigation of supersensible realities hidden behind all the perceptions of our senses will unite with the concern to spread a true spiritual science. (3) The third object of these studies will be the penetration of the kernel of truth enclosed within the multiple conceptions of life and of the universe held by different peoples throughout the ages.^[7]

In fact these tendencies are analogous to those of the Theosophical Society: on the one hand, the idea of 'universal brotherhood' and the 'moralism' which is more or less closely associated with it, for

the Anthroposophical Society will aim at an ideal of human cooperation...and will attain its spiritual goal only if its members consecrate themselves to an ideal of life which may serve as universal ideal for the conduct of human life.^[8]

On the other hand, there is the statement of 'a method of spiritual investigation able to penetrate into the supra-sensible worlds,^[9] which obviously consists in the development of 'clairvoyance' or of some other similar faculty, whatever the name by which it may be designated.^[10]

Naturally the Anthroposophical Society disclaims any intent to form a religion or even to attach itself to any particular belief whatsoever:

Nothing must be more alien to the efforts of the Society than activity favorable or hostile to any religious orientation whatsoever, for its aim is spiritual investigation and not the propagation of any faith; thus any religious propaganda is foreign to its duties.^[11]

Certainly this is only logical on the part of people who have reproached Mrs Besant precisely for having forfeited Theosophical principles by giving herself up to 'religious propaganda. But what must be particularly noted in this regard is that it would be very wrong indeed to believe that the doctrines of Steiner have a specifically Christian character:

The spiritual investigator who contemplates the noblest creations of human genius over the course of its development, or who plumbs the philosophical conceptions or the dogmas of all peoples throughout all time, will not be attached to the value of these dogmas or these ideas; he will consider them as an expression of human effort, straining toward the solution of the great spiritual problems that interest humanity. Consequently a designation borrowed from a particular confession cannot express the fundamental character of the Society.

The religions are thus placed in the same rank as mere philosophical conceptions and treated as purely human facts, which is indeed an 'anthroposophical, or even 'anthropological' point of view. But let us continue: If, for example, the impulse impressed on human evolution by the personality of Christ is studied in the course of the investigations of spiritual science, this study will not proceed from the dogmas of a religious confession. The result obtained can be welcomed by the believer of any religious confession, just as an adherent of the Hindu religion or of Buddhism would familiarize himself with the astronomy of Copernicus which is no more than this a part of his religious documents. This impulse attributed to Christ is the exclusive result of investigations [sic]; it is presented in such a way as to be admitted by the believers of any religion and not only by the Christian faithful to the exclusion of others.^[12]

The comparison with Copernican astronomy is truly an admirable idea. Doubtless this can only be a wholly outward description, where there is no mention of Rosicrucianism and where by an excess of discretion Steiner's name does not even figure; it is only said that the Anthroposophical Society has at its head a 'Founding Committee' composed of Karl Unger, Marie von Sivers,^[13] and Michael Bauer, with its provisional seat at Berlin. To know something of Steiner's thought, one must go to his works, and it will then be seen that if his doctrine can from a certain point of view be regarded as a kind of 'Christian esoterism, it is still in a sense not greatly different from what is found under this name with other Theosophists. Here is an example:

In this way, students of the spirit are initiated into that same exalted mystery that is linked with the name of Christ. The Christ discloses Himself [to the initiate] as the great example for human beings on Earth.

To those who have recognized the Christ in the spiritual world as a result of their initiation, historical events on earth in the fourth post-Atlantean period (the Greco-Latin period) also become comprehensible. For students of the spirit, the intervention of the exalted Sun being, the Christ-being, in Earth's evolution at that time and His ongoing work within this evolution become a matter of direct experience and personal knowledge.^[14]

It is not a question here of a 'Bodhisattva', for the pseudo-oriental façade of Theosophy has disappeared; but the 'Great Solar Being' in question is probably identical to the Logos of our system, as conceived by Mme Blavatsky after what she thought she understood of Neoplatonism, and also as conceived by her successors,^[15] who made him the supreme chief of the seven planetary Logoi, and through them of 'the hierarchy of powerful Adepts who are raised up to the Divinity itself'^[16] in virtue of this attachment. Steiner therefore differs from Mrs Besant in that he sees in Christ the manifestation of a higher principle, if not merely a more direct manifestation of the same principle, by the suppression of a number (two to be precise) of intermediary entities, for there are always ways to reconcile such divergences when one wants to bring a little good will to both sides; and, moreover, they were never advanced to start the split.

Regarding the work of Steiner from which we took the preceding citation, it is worthwhile pointing out something rather curious. This book, called _La Science Occulte_,^[17] was published in Leipzig in 1910; now, the previous year there appeared in Seattle (Washington) another work entitled _The Rosicrucian Cosmo-Conception_, by Max Heindel, which put forward theories that on the whole were entirely the same. At first glance it might be thought that Steiner, who gives no explanation of the identity of his affirmations with those of Heindel,^[18] borrowed from the him; but on the other hand, as Heindel dedicated his book to Steiner, one may suppose that he drew his teachings from Steiner before these teachings were made public, unless both did not simply draw from a common source. In any case, the most appreciable difference between the two (aside from questions of form) is that Heindel does not hesitate to clearly attribute his teachings to the Rosicrucian tradition, while Steiner is most often content to speak of 'occult science' in an extremely vague and general manner, which is perhaps more prudent. In fact, it is not too difficult to see that the greater part of Heindel's teachings as well as Steiner's, are drawn directly from _The Secret Doctrine_ with a few modifications that touch only details, but carefully avoiding terms of an oriental appearance. Thus these conceptions have little connection with authentic Rosicrucianism, and even what is presented as 'Rosicrucian terminology' is almost always expressions invented by Mme Blavatsky. From another point of view also there is in Steiner's reserve the proof of a certain cleverness, for it has always been said that true Rosicrucians never proclaim themselves but on the contrary keep this hidden. This is doubtless one of the reasons why Steiner avoids saying expressly in his publications that he belongs to Rosicrucianism, which does not prevent him from letting this be guessed, and he would doubtless be greatly distressed if no one believed in such an attachment. We will add that a schism must have quickly occurred between Steiner and Heindel, for the dedication of _The Rosicrucian Cosmo-Conception_ has disappeared from more recent editions, and Heindel, who formed a 'Rosicrucian Fellowship' with its seat at Oceanside, California,^[19] wrote in another work published in 1916 that the first messenger chosen and instructed by the Rosicrucian Brothers to spread their doctrines failed certain tests, so that it was necessary to seek a second who was no other than Heindel himself;^[20] and although the first was not named, it was certainly Steiner who was meant. As to the organization of the Anthroposophical Society, here is some information found in the brochure from which we have already cited several extracts: The work of the Society will be organized in groups free to form themselves independently in every country or in every place. These groups may remain separate or unite to form societies among themselves or freer associations, as inspired solely by the conditions which their local circumstances might dictate. In its real objectives, the Anthroposophical Society is not a society in any usual sense of this word; the link uniting the members does not consist in an organization based on regulations or on any other outward framework. There is in this last phrase an idea which might be of interest, and all the more so since in fact the true Rosicrucians have never estab-lished societies; but if the word 'society' is improper, why use it in the very title of the organization? Only the culture of spiritual science in the ideal sense established in the preceding statement confers on the title of member its integral and true character. This title, however, involves certain rights as, for example, the access to certain writings of spiritual science reserved to members alone, ^[21] as well as as other preroga-tives of this kind. Outwardly, then, the bond of the Anthropo-sophical Society in no way differs from what would be found, for a temple built for humanitarian ends [sic] at Oceanside [California]' (Voile d'Isis, November 1922). There is a French branch of this organization, whose head, L. Krauss, seems to be actively propagandizing at this time; a Spanish branch was also formed in 1927.

example, within an anthropological society or some similar body.^[22] This obviously implies 'an interior point of view, a bond of another kind, but one that is not explained; we must thus recognize here the equivalent of a division of the Theosophical Society into an 'exoteric section' and an 'esoteric section. Indeed, the teachings said to be reserved for members are not given to all indiscriminately, or at least are so given only in part; in the Anthroposophical Society there is another organization, previously created by Steiner, which now constitutes the 'inner circle'; this organization, about which no information is given out publicly, calls itself Rosicrucian, and for the reception of members uses forms of initiation altogether similar to those used in Masonry,^[23] indeed, too similar, for this is yet one more reason among many others to doubt the authenticity of this Rosicrucianism. We can only recall what we have said before in this connection: most of the current groups which style themselves in this way can only claim a wholly imaginary filiation, or at the very most a mere theoretical attachment. This is, if you like, to be Rosi-crucian in intention, but we do not believe anything more can be seen here unless it is claimed that the use of certain symbols inde-pendently of all other considerations and even of their meaning is enough to constitute an effective link.^[24] Of course, we can say as much, and with much greater reason, about a supposed link to the mysteries of antiquity which is frequently mentioned in Steiner's works;^[25] we will see that the idea of 'restoring the mysteries' also prepared for them.^[27] The description is so strange that we must give some extracts:

The edifice carefully reflects Steiner's doctrine as expounded in a great number of works and conferences. Two vast domes rise above the hill that dominates a wooded amphitheater crowned with old ruins.... One of the domes, larger than the other, symbolizes the Universe with its harmonies and the successive stages of its evolution. Since in occultism the number seven represents the unfolding of things in time, so this dome is supported by seven immense columns on each side. These columns are in the form of pentagrams formed by triangles fitted perfectly into one another. Above each column an ornate capital represents one of the planetary forms of our world.... The small dome is so to speak fit into the larger from which it issues. Under this dome reigns the number twelve, the number of space. The twelve columns signify the twelve zodiacal influences that descend into the 'microcosm' or human world, while all around the edifice the stained glass windows designed by Steiner himself paint in lively colors the steps of the soul's progress.... Rudolf Steiner thinks that an edifice in which one studies the forces of nature must, in all its parts, express the ceaseless effort, the constant metamorphoses that mark the progress of the Universe.^[28]

To realize construction costs, which must have been as high as three million, he organized a real estate association called the 'Society of St John' (_Johannesbau-Verein_), in allusion to the old brotherhoods of operative Masons. The temple was to be completed toward the end of 1914, but the war interrupted the work or at least slowed it, and we believe it was only in 1920 that the building was finally dedicated. It contained, among other things, a theater where the 'esoteric dramas' of Steiner and Schuré^[29] were to be performed. Let us add that Steiner exercised an increasing influence on his disciples,^[30]

The 'Anthroposophical Society of France', centered at 3, avenue de l'Observatoire, has as its mouthpiece the review _La Science Spirituelle_, which seems to be published at quite irregular intervals. In addition, a 'World Congress to show the existence of a Spiritual Science and its practical applications' was held in London in July 1928. Here are some excerpts from the manifesto issued for this occasion: and they, who in 1914 already numbered some four thousand and among whom there were many women had for him an admiration and veneration equal to what the 'orthodox' Theosophists-if one may use this word here-professed for Mrs Besant.

> Analytical science, inflexible logic, and crystallized dogma have completed their tasks.... The time has come when man should develop within himself a superior form of knowledge. This will necessarily be by means of a Spiritual Science, which will cast a new light on the Divine Incarnation and the mission of Christ. But a vast and profound understanding of Christ's mission is only possible if one draws out the evolutionary direction of the Earth as a whole.... In the light of this knowledge, a clearer understanding of the role entrusted to each earthly nation will arise, and Individualization, Freedom, and Good Will shall constitute a Spiritual Reality penetrating all branches of human activity... Every age has had its guides. At present there has devolved on man the mission of discovering where Wisdom dwells, and, having found it, erecting the edifice of the new age on a solid foundation.