Daniel's Musings: February 2004 Archives

That Steiner considered Anthroposophy - the results of his spiritual research - accessible to anyone is evident in the following quotes:

"These facts [spiritual truths] have been investigated and communicated, and they can be grasped by healthy human intelligence, if this healthy intelligence will be unprejudiced enough not to base its conclusions wholly on what goes by the name of proof, logical deduction, and the like, in regard to the outer sense world. On account of these hindrances it is frequently stated that unless someone is able oneself to investigate supersensible worlds, one cannot understand the results of supersensible research." (Page 81)

"Once again I would like to emphasize: if these things are investigated, everyone who approaches the results with an unprejudiced mind can understand them with ordinary, healthy human reason ?just as he can understand what astronomers or biologists have to say about the world. The results can be tested, and indeed one will find that this testing is the first stage of initiation-knowledge. For initiation-knowledge, one must first have an inclination towards truth, because truth not untruth and error, is one's object." (Page 101)

Rudolf Steiner. "Esoteric Development." New York: Anthroposophic Press, 1982. From GA 305, Lecture of 20 Sep 1922.

According to Steiner, esoteric training is open to anyone:

"Anyone can set out on the esoteric path; it is closed to no one. The mysteries are present in the breast of each human being. All that is required a serious inner work in the possibility to free ourselves of all the obstacles the block this subtle inner life. We must realize that the world's greatest and most distant aspects are revealed to us in the most intimate ways. Humanity's wisest members have no other means of attaining great truths in the path described here. They achieve these truths because they discovered the path with themselves, because they knew that they have to practice patients in steadfastness in carrying out these routines."

Rudolf Steiner. "First Steps in Inner Development." Hudson, NY: Anthroposophic Press, 1999. Page 23. Lecture of 15 Dec 1904 (GA 53) translated by Catherine Creeger.

On the other hand, no one is obligated to walk this path:

"No one is exhorted to become an occultist; one must come to occultism of one's own volition. Whoever says that we do not need occultism will not need to occupy himself with it. At this time, occultism does not appeal to mankind in general. In fact, it is extremely difficult in the present culture to submit to those rules of conduct which will open the spiritual world."

Rudolf Steiner. "Esoteric Development." New York: Anthroposophic Press, 1982. Pages 2-3. Lecture of December 7th, 1905 (GA 54).

I came across this recently, and found it interesting:

"We can even say that spiritual research reveals the source of humanity's materialistic attitude. In this day at age, there are indeed materialistically-minded souls who say either that it is impossible for us to speak of the spiritual world or that we should not worry about that world because our human capacity for knowledge is restricted to the sensory world. They also say that it is unscientific to speak of the life of in the spirit. Nowadays such people go by the genteel name of monists; we used is simply call them materialists. They deem themselves especially scientific when they completely denied the existence of a spiritual world war say that science has nothing to do with that world. Of course, when we state the truth about spiritual phenomena, we can scarcely expect to find support among dyed-in-the-wool monists. This truth remains the truth however, and it is fear, rather than any logical reasons or proof, that keeps souls imprisoned in materialism or monism. People do not recognize this fear as such and do not acknowledge it to themselves. Nonetheless, fear gives rise to the idea that it is unscientific to investigate the spiritual world. Anyone who understands the factors involved knows that materialistic organizations attract souls dominated by fear of the spiritual world. It is not pleasant tell people with that they are basically fearful souls and that they are simply cloaking their fear in a semblance of logic, as if they could prove that only the phenomena of the physical world are entitled to exist."

Rudolf Steiner. "First Steps in Inner Development." Hudson, NY: Anthroposophic Press, 1999. Pages 77-78. The lecture is titled: How does the soul discover its true being? (Kassel ? May 8th, 1914) Translated by Catherine Creeger.

Someone recently quoted the Bible to me with the following explanation:

"Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye."

The explanation was: "It doesn't mean I'm any more perfect, but it does mean I've been down in this hole, and I know how to get out."

I'm not sure I agree with this understanding. There is certainly another interpretation of this passage. In another context, Christ said "Let he who is without sin among you cast the first stone." The logic of this was, first, no one was without sin, and secondly, even if anyone was without sin, why would they wish obtain sin by casting a stone? Would such a person (an ideal self) really be casting stones at people? Likewise let us enter the parable of the beam in the eye. First of all it has been pointed out how absurd the image of a beam in the eye really is. And this is not just an issue of translation; the original is also means "really huge piece of wood". It has been suggested that Christ used this ridiculous image of a beam in the eye intentionally. What would a person look like with a really huge piece of wood in their eye? Blind. And after removing said beam from their eye, how well would a person see? Would they really be worried about motes in other peoples eyes? Would they really be in a position to fish them out? To me the point of the parable is not that once you have removed a beam from your own eye you are suddenly ready to start working on other people's motes. Rather, the point is that there are better things to do than fish motes out of other peoples eyes, and Christ is suggesting that we come to recognize this.

This quote is related to my last posting, and speaks to how we can practice thinking in opposites and overcoming our natural inclination to stay at our first conclusion.

"Step Four: Freedom from prejudice. This, the fourth characteristic, sees good in everything and looks for the positive element in all things. Relevant to this is a Persian legend told of Christ Jesus. On day Christ Jesus saw a dead dog lying be the wayside; he stopped to look at the animal while those around him turned away in disgust. Then Jesus said: "What beautiful teeth the dog has!" In that hideous corpse he saw not what was ugly or evil but the beauty of the white teeth. If you can acquire this mood, you will look everywhere for the good and positive, and you will find it everywhere. This has a powerful effect on the physical and etheric bodies."

Rudolf Steiner. "At the Gates of Spiritual Science" London, 1970. Page 111. Lecture of September 2nd, 1906 titled "Occult Development." This is the fourth of the six prerequisite exercises before beginning occult training.

I came across this quote recently. It pertains to the uses of thinking, something that I don't think a lot of people actually think about. Mostly, we simply take our thinking for granted and speak or write whatever pops out of our heads, without pausing to think wearing a particular idea comes from more why we might hold it. And certainly very few people indeed will take an idea they disagree with and actively attempt to find the circumstances under which is true.

"The undeveloped person, said Rudolf Steiner, uses his power of thinking for criticism; the developed person searches out viewpoints from which he can see how things are connected, and learns to survey causes and effects."

Albert Steffen. "Meetings with Rudolf Steiner." Dornach: Verlag Für Schöne Wissenschaften, 1961. Page 65. Translated by Reginald Ernest Raab, Erna McArthur and Virginia Brett.

Slings for carrying babies are much in vogue among attachment parenting circles. Books such Jean Liedloff's "The Continuum Concept" have also brought the importance of the carrying babies in slings to late 20th-century audiences. I find it interesting that Rudolf Steiner also recommended this practice.

"When I was back at home again Dr Steiner advised me to put the child in its pram in the garden or an the terrace when it was warm enough, but told me not to wheel it about in the pram but to carry it in its 'pillow-bag' as one used to do in the olden days, then it would experience the same rhythm as when it was in the womb."
Reminiscences of Rudolf Steiner and Marie Steiner-von Sievers
By Ilona Schubert
Temple Lodge Press, London 1991

Modern fiction writers, whether novel, short story, TV, film or comic book - understand the mechanics of evil extraordinarily well. All the various ways that human beings can transgress against their higher nature is detailed with chilling accuracy. And when the occult is brought in as a plot element, the evil always "comes alive" as it were. Demons have personality, hell is interesting. Heaven, on the other hand, is boring. It is full of straight-laced fundies playing harp. It even seems as if relinquishing freedom is the only way not to sin and therefore to get into heaven. Heaven is for conformists who held to the letter of the law as given in the Bible. There really is no understanding of the sublime role of Good in the world. Good is performed mostly by people who are not inclined to question why they are conforming to the letter of the Bible. This really is a curious phenomenon.

I've looked, and Steiner does not say anything about soccer in the Waldorf schools, either for or against. Those Waldorf educators who have decided that soccer and Waldorf Education are incompatible (such as Will Crane in Spring Valley) have done so out of their own work and have their own carefully elaborated reasons. I haven't pursued the issue in sufficient depth to have formed an opinion on it myself. Soccer is played in a large number of Waldorf schools, especially in the US. It is also not played in a number of Waldorf schools for various reasons, including the belief that Steiner spoke against it. Other reasons I have heard include a general aversion to competitive sports (which seems to originate more a cultural bias of one portion of the '60s counterculture than from a carefully examined pedagogical basis) and the opinion that engaging the feet instead of the hands would have negative pedagogical implications.

The German word "Geisteswissenschaft" (created by compounding the word "Geist" - meaning "spirit" - with "Wissenschaft" meaning "science/research/scholarship") is not one that Steiner made up. It is in general use in German, but primarily in one specific phrase: "in der Geisteswissenschaft tätig sein" where it means, "to work in research". "Wissenschaft" is built off the German verb "wissen" to know. The word "Wissenschaft" is actually also an obscure English word, borrowed from the German, and in English means "the systematic pursuit of knowledge, learning, and scholarship (especially as contrasted with its application)" according to the New Oxford Dictionary of English, 2002 edition. This really gets at the nuances of the word in German, even if every German-English dictionary lists the first meaning as "science". My Langescheit's German-English dictionary also lists "research" as a secondary meaning, along with "scholarship" and "academia". So "Wissenschaft", the first part of the compound, indicates the attempt to systematize knowledge. This is modified by appending "Geistes" (translated "spirit") to make "systematized knowledge of or research into the spirit". "Wissenschaft" can also be modified by other nouns, such as "Natur" (nature) where it means "natural science" or "systematized knowledge of or research into the natural world". In many cases where the translation "spiritual science" is used, I tend to think "systematic knowledge of the spirit" would be better.

Some time ago when I thought the MBA would be useful, I took a graduate course on Organizational Management. One of the case studies was the M&M Mars Corporation run by two billionaire brothers whose family had started the Mars confectionery company. These Mars brothers were used as an example of how not to manage. Their middle managers had found a name for their management style, and called it Fly-By Management. The Mars brothers would fly in from corporate headquarters, spend a single morning or afternoon poking around, upbraid everyone for incompetence, tell everyone how horrible everything was and what needed fixing, and then fly off again. This struck the middle managers as something like a seagull that would fly in, crap, and fly off again, hence the name. For future business managers there were obvious lessons in leadership and morale, as well as responsibility and follow-through.

In relating this I am reminded of certain "critics" of Anthroposophy who swoop in to anthroposophical mail lists, crap all over, and fly off again. The style is similar, and the results are likely to be the same: a bunch of annoyed people who are wondering: what's the point?