An attempt is made
here to establish a relationship to the sources and basic philosophical ideas
that lay at the foundation of R. Steiner's work, to open him up for literary discussion,
something hitherto not possible due to the intuition-hypothesis. Steiner came
to Theosophy with a doctorate in philosophy, and a first step therefore would
be to approach his work from that viewpoint. Steiner involved himself in his
pre-theosophical period, from 1881 till 1901 as he describes in his biography,
with a study of Goethe. He separated himself from critical philosophy and
instead via Goethe [1] and German Idealism, aligned himself
with a Monism of a platonic and neoplatonic nature.
Especially Giordano Bruno [2] and Spinosa [3], were as Steiner
stated important in that context, and is exemplified by a description of his
worldview given at the end of his life in his self-biography [4]. We have detailed
descriptions of Goethe's library and archives where Steiner worked many years,
as the archivist. Goethe biographer R.C. Zimmerman [5] points out that in
the various hermetic books in Goethe's library of the 17th and 18th century we
find glimpses of Goethe's "private religion". Among others were found
here literature of the "Gold and Rosenkreuzer"
of the "Asiatic Brethern" also called
"Fratres Lucis,"
(who according to Introvigne [6] influenced
Cagliostro's Egyptian rite). Steiner admired on the Rosicrucians
of the 17th and 18th century that they developed Natural Science in a hermetic
context, without becoming materialistic. In his theosophical period Steiner's
developed an evolutionary concept that is similarly not materialistic, based on
a monistic, Body- Soul- Spirit concept.
By 1902
Steiner had found entrance to theosophical circles and as the newly formed
Society with as President Dr. Heubbe Schleiden needed
a General Secretary, Steiner accepted this as his new profession [7]. R.
Steiner stated [8] that: "I will only be available for an
organization ("movement") that connects to western occultism,
and only that". As he did not find sufficient welcome ears with his
Monism in the Giordano Bruno Bund [9], he did so in the Theosophical Society. After all,
there were indeed similarities between the Monism represented by H.P.B. and
that of Steiner, both saw the world and the Universe as one living organism.
And by referring to H.P.B., Steiner could expand his own Monism in relation to
Cosmology, History, and esoteric training. In a letter to his later wife Marie
von Sivers, he writes in 1904: "I joined the
theosophical movement because it has been in my blood and soul forever. And I
know that only with Theosophy did I find my right place" [10]. A
pattern thus emerges, where H.P.B. wrote "Isis unveiled" based
on Hermetism, Steiner took on this topic in his book
"Theosophy." In "The Secret Doctrine" H.P.B.
developed a Cosmology, Anthropology, and historical presentation, a topic that
Steiner took on in his "Occult (in German "Secret")
Science ". H.P.B. published in the 3. part of the Secret Doctrine
suggestions for an esoteric training, and Steiner commented on this in his
"Knowledge of the Higher Worlds." Steiner's later lectures were a
commentary based on these three basic works. In his autobiography Steiner
writes that he duplicated H.P.B's writings in his own way [11].
Steiner was familiar with the German edition of H.P.B.'s works edited by Froebe, who included a list of many of the sources used by
H.P.B.
And in
accordance to his being a University trained philosopher, he apparently looked
up many of these sources, and started as it appears a reconstruction of
H.P.B.'s writings. One can recognize in his "Theosophy" and
"Occult Science " the same elements contained in the "Corpus
Hermeticum" and "Trismegistos
Poimandros." The "higher reflects
itself in the lower ", that is according to Steiner the soul reflects
itself in what becomes the lower and by (re)uniting with it, develops higher
states of being counting seven levels of Man/consciousness. After death the
soul travels through the different spheres and returns to its origin. Steiner
places the ideas of new-platonic psychology (Nous, psyche, Hype) in a larger
hierarchical structure as a "Microcosm-Macrocosm" analogy and
extensive Cosmology. In this he follows the hellenistic
example, only its ultimate form and vocabulary (German), was his own. This
hierarchical structure differentiated somewhat from the one used by H.P.B. and
is however identical with that of Robert Fludd, who
also used the term "Theosophy and Anthroposophie"
before Steiner did.
Steiner
utilized many (directly or indirectly) cabbalistic elements, that were
available through the translations of Knorr von Rosenroth
(later popularized in Golden Dawn circles) and the works of 17th/18th century Rosicrucians. Where by sources like Isaac Luria and Gikatilla already, contained elements like "cosmic
cycles, the Guardian of the threshold, ancient worlds, "and so on, only
framed in a different vocabulary. The Kabbala had entered the Renaissance stage
at almost the same time the rediscovered hermetic writings were gaining wide dissemination
in Europe.
The
initial impetus for study of Kaballa as a Christian
Science and for ist integration with Hermeticism came
from Pico Della Mirandola (l463-94). And continued
with Agrippa Von Nettesheim, John Dee, Reuchlin,
Knorr von Rosenroth. And as we have seen transferred
to the teachings of Rosicrucians and Theosophical
Illuminates of the 17th/18th century and French masonry, where they were
especially promoted in the l9th century by Eliphas
Levi and Papus. H.P.B. during her visit to Paris in
the l850's probably studied these occult systems. It is from a mix of neuplatonic hermetic ideas, and Luria's Kaballa
that the idea of reincarnation especially during the l4th and l7th century
found entrance into European culture, long before similar teachings arrived
directly from India. Steiner's ideas of reincarnation appear to have derived
from these hermetic sources, and fits in with his "Western"
orientation. In his attempt to "re-write", Steiner in many instances
duplicated H.P.B., evidenced by errors in H.P.B.'s much earlier writings, that
reappeared uncorrected in Steiners work. For example
both H.P.B. and Steiner place the Corpus Hermetic in early Pharaoh times
instead of during the Hellenistic period. Both place the Kabbala of the middle
ages in Rabbinistic time periods. Both assumed that
the Greek mysteries had similar contents as the cabbalist- neuplatonic
ideas. Both assumed that all religions derived from one archetypal religion.
Steiner therefore, in contrast to what is claimed in recent [12]criticisms
was not so much interested in Gnosticism as he was in Hermetism,
because for him, based on H.P.B.'s work, Gnosis derived from Hermetism, whereby today we know it is the other way
around. It is at this juncture however that an important difference emerged in
how the further development of this archetypal, "one" religion was
seen by both Steiner and H.P.B. Steiner in his stanch Catholic upbringing stood
in contrast to the decidedly anti-Catholic, and some would argue, partly
anti-Christian, stanch of H.P.B. that Steiner attempted to "correct"
in his version of Theosophy [13]. And it is in this context not surprising that
Steiner followed the conservative Christian two phase model of revelation, started
with Augustin and the other church fathers at the time and led to a strict
separating Christianity from the old mysteries, projected in the writings of
Lukas and the words of Paulus. Again, this background has not been understood
even in the analysis of Steiner [14] and is due to other elements in Steiner's points of
view that derive from occult 19th century sources. Definitely Steiner did not
belong to the Ordo Templi Orientis. An rumour first started in Francis King "History of
Ritual Magic in England", based on a German correspondent that claimed
Steiner to be a member of the Hermetic Brotherhood of Luxor. And still leaving
unanswered certain remarks of Steiner indicating affiliations of an esoteric
nature other than the Theosophical Society (see insert) and would have to be
the subject of a separate study.
We can
characterize, Steiner's Theosophy-Anthroposophy in philosophical terms by
observing that he states: The world/Universe forms a spiritual physical whole.
He uses a Microcosm-Macrocosm analogy, he sees Man as a first member of cosmic
evolution, and not as its last (like the materialistic monists do). A human
being duplicate in his biographical development the history of the
world/Universe. In conclusion we can therefore observe a clear pattern emerging
from Steiner's early philosophical period till the end of his theosophical-antroposophical period and there is not, a hitherto assumed
"break" as of 1902. Instead both periods were marked by his
particular form of Monism worded in a different way.
Rudolf Steiner’s
"mystery plays"
[1]
Steiner, Rudolf: Einleitungen zu Goethes Naturwisschaftlichen
Schriften, Lizenzausgabe Freiburg, 1949, S116f. "So geht dann
freilich der Ausbau meiner Ansichten seit Jahren parallel mit dem Studium
Goethes und ich habe nie einen prinzipiellen Gegensatz zwischen meinen
Grundansichten und der Goetheschen wissenschaftlichen
Tätigkeit gefunden."
[2]
Steiner, Rudolf: Einleitungen zu Goethes Naturwissenschaftlichen Schriften,
S 199. Goethe "erhält von ihm (Bruno) einen so tiefen Eindruck,
dass wir ihn in jenen Teilen des Faust, die, der Konzeption nach, aus der Zeit
um 1770 stammen, (...), sprachliche Anklänge an Sätze von Bruno finden."
[3]
Steiner, Rudolf: Einleitungen zu Goethes Naturwissenschaftlichen Schriften,
S 68. "Die Wirkung dieses Philosophen auf Goethe war nun eine ungeheure":
"Der Gott Spinozas ist der Ideengehalt der Welt, das treibende, alles
stützende und alles tragende Prinzip."
[4]
Steiner, Rudolf: "Mein Lebensgang," S 268. "Dem, was
dem Menschen als Geist erscheint, und der Natur, liegt etwas zugrunde, das
weder Geist, noch Natur ist, sondern die vollkommene Einheit beider. Diese
Einheit: schaffender Geist, der den Stoff in seinem Schaffen zum Dasein bringt
und dadurch zugleich Stoff ist, der ganz als Geist sich darstellt: Diese
Einheit wird durch eine Idee begriffen, die den damaligen Denkgewohnheiten (er
meint zum Ende des 19. Jahrhunderts) so fern wie möglich lag. Von einer
solchen Idee aber hätte gesprochen werden müssen, wenn ( ... ) die heute noch
im Menschen selbst tätigen geistig-stofflichen Mächte hätten dargestellt werden
sollen, die auf der einen Seite seinen Körper bilden, auf der anderen das
lebendige Geistige aus sich hervorgehen lassen, durch das er die Kultur
schafft."
[5]
Zimmermann, Rolf Christian: Das Weltbild des jungen Goethe, Studien zur
hermetischen Tradition des deutschen 18. Jahrhunderts, 2 Bdd., München, 1969, Ge 69/7928(a).
[6] Introvigne: "Arcan
Arcanorum," Szyzygy,
1992.
[7]
Steiner, Rudolf: "Briefe 1890 - 1925", Bd. 2, GA 39, S. 434.
[8] Hg. Hella Wiesberger, Dornach. 1988, p.116.
[9]
Steiner, Rudolf: "Mein Lebensgang," S 227.
[10]
Steiner, Rudolf: "Briefe 1890 - 1925", Bd. 2, GA 39, S 434.
[11]
Steiner, Rudolf: "Mein Lebensgang," S 389.
[12]
Jan Badewien, Anthroposophie - Eine kritische
Darstellung, Konstanz, 1985 S125f.
[13]
Steiner, Rudolf: Die Geschichte und die Bedingungen der anthroposophischen
Bewegung im Verhältnis zur Anthroposophischen Gesellschaft, GA 258, S106.
Aber "alle diese Mysterien (des Altertums, welche Blavatsky
wiederbeleben wollte), können nur das begreifen, was Vorbereitung für den
Christus ist."
[14]
In einer ausführlichen Analyse der Steinerschen
Theologie hat der evangelische Theologe Gassmann, den augenblicklichen
Forschungsstand zusammenfassend, feststellen müssen, daß
sich Steiners Aussagen mit einem Verständnis der modernen Bibelexegese nicht
vereinbaren lassen: Gassmann, Lothar: Das anthroposophische Bibelverständnis,
Wuppertal/Zürich 1993.
For updates click homepage
here