Steiner Predicts

 

Rudolf Steiner was preoccupied with rankings. He promoted hierarchical lists of  gods, races, mythologies...almost anything. The thinking behind some of these lists is hateful, while in other cases it is merely foolish. Let’s look at a few examples.

We’ll begin with the hateful. Steiner’s defenders insist that he was not a racist. This horrible subject can be approached in various ways. One that is sometimes overlooked: Steiner’s remarks about aboriginal Americans.

Steiner discussed the “extinction” of the “American Indian race.” He described this extinction within the context of the decline of mankind in general. In “the abnormal Spirits of Form [spiritual beings—we’ll get back to them] who have their centre in Saturn [sic]...we must expect to find the combination of the forces leading to the twilight of mankind, forces which set the seal upon its development and sow the seeds of its ultimate decline. This...can be seen in the American Indian race and was the cause of its ultimate extinction.” [1] Notice how Steiner discusses the Indians’ end as something that has already happened (“was the cause”). It is undeniable that the native peoples of America were victims of an horrific genocide—but they were not pushed to their “ultimate extinction.”

Steiner says the American aborigine became (or will become) extinct due to a) Saturn and Saturn’s allies, and b) the encroachment of Europeans: “Here we have an example of the Saturn forces and their activity and of what follows from the cooperation between Saturn and other Spirits at such a moment as this when two contrasting civilizations [European and aboriginal American] meet.” [2] Thus, Europeans effectively exterminated (or will exterminate) the Indians, but the real culprit is Saturn and friends. Note that not only is time (past and future) jumbled in Steiner’s account, but so is the nature of Saturn: part planet, part Spirit (and elsewhere part evolutionary stage). Cutting the seer a little slack, we can deduce that Steiner speaks of future events as having already happened because he stands outside time and is therefore able to see the past and the future simultaneously as part of a vast tableau. His perspective, in other words, is not just “suprasensory” (as he often claimed, the meaning of “supra” be damned) but supratemporal as well. And if you believe that...

Two other points of interest. Steiner’s lectures and books are studded with references to astrological powers—in this case, the forces of Saturn, et al. We might think that we humans could escape the fall of our twilight by disengaging from Saturn. But no. Again, the Indians’ (future) history is indicative. Saturn actually disengages itself from the Indians, leaving the dire results of its operations to continue in his/its absence: “In a race such as this [i.e., “the old American Indians”] everything pertaining to the forces of the Saturn evolution has become realized in a special manner; then Saturn withdrew into itself, abandoned man to his bony system and thus hastened his decline.” [3] Indians, Steiner says, are unique (“special”) but they are also just one race among similar races (“such as this”). Steiner also blurs present tense (“has become”) and past tense (“withdrew,” “abandoned”). These are typical Steinerian confusions. (I, too, use both past and present tenses, but not because of any Waldorf brainwashing. When I speak of past events, I use the past tense. When I speak of books that presently exist, I follow the literary convention of using the present tense. In case you wondered.)

Point two: The coming “ultimate decline” of mankind in general seems to run counter to Steiner’s frequently reiterated forecast that mankind will evolve upward. Indeed, Steiner’s evolutionary doctrine is fundamental to Anthroposophy: e.g., “Evolution is the great theme of...Steiner’s life work.” [4] We can haul Steiner’s nuts out of the fire by concluding that “twilight” will come only to some backward portions of humanity, those who—like the American Indian—fall by the wayside. Thus, the surviving, upwardly developing portion of mankind will leave its merely human identity, climbing higher and higher to assume superhuman and eventually divine identities.

There is no way to completely reconcile Steiner’s various teachings. Drawing logical inferences from them is parlous. Steiner contradicted himself pretty often. MISSION OF THE FOLK SOULS consists or lectures from 1910. Statements Steiner made after 1920 come closer to expressing his “mature” teachings, although they too are sometimes inconsistent. We will see that Steiner’s taught that the American aborigines deserve their fate, below.

It is possible (but unprofitable) to spend a great deal of time and effort trying to untangle Steiner’s semantic confusions. The inherent weirdness of Steiner’s doctrines is compounded by such confusions, which may or may not have been intended, since they may or may not reflect the actual, occult teachings Steiner sought to convey (and obscure). By and large, Steiner’s language is opaque and slippery. Possible errors in transcription and/or translation may make this worse. In quoting texts published by the Anthroposophic Press, the Rudolf Steiner Press, and their ilk, I’m at least quoting Anthropop-approved language. Steiner’s statements have sometimes been bowdlerized or suppressed in English translations (see my essay, “Unenlightened,” with thanks to Peter Staudenmaier: http://homepage.mac.com/nonlevitating/one.html). For this reason, we can assume that statements that seem appalling in English may have been even worse in the original German.

In any event, the larger part of the confusion in Steiner’s words was created by Steiner himself: He intended to wow people with wild visions, including his “knowledge” of the prehistory and future history of the universe, most of which exceeds ordinary understanding and is virtually ineffable. This is a fine defense he established for himself: If you disagree with him, you are benighted, unable to see what he was getting at. Only his devotees can understand him. (To know him is to love him.) Thus, he prevented anyone from pinning him down. He always could claim that he meant something different from, or additional to, or far far deeper than, what he actually said. Steiner insistently asserted Maya: All in this physical realm is illusion: Nothing is as it seems. “I must emphasize this again and again, that the saying ‘the world is Maya’ is so vitally important.” [5] At least, Maya certainly applies to Steiner’s doctrines—Steiner specialized in obfuscation.

Coming down from the clouds, let’s consider whether Steiner’s comments about aboriginal Americans are racist. Lecture Six of THE MISSION OF THE FOLK SOULS is titled “The Five Root Races.” “The abnormal Spirits are centered in the five planets [sic] and create the five root races: Mercury, the Negro race; Venus, the Malayan race; Mars, the Mongolian race; Jupiter, the Caucasian race; Saturn, the Red Indians. This took place in Atlantis.” [6] (I’ll discuss “abnormal” spirits, Spirits of Form, etc., in a minute. I promise.) Now, merely mentioning races is not necessarily racist. But you can start to intuit (to use a Steinerian term) which way Steiner’s wind blows. Note also the astrological component that pokes up, here, as well as the reversion to one of Steiner’s pet fantasies, Atlantis.

Falling into the category of racists who think they can learn something essential about people by studying their physical appearances (shape of nose, color of skin, degree of boniness, etc.), Steiner attributes the physical appearance of the “moribund Red Indian” to the “process of ossification”: “This slow decline is characterized by a kind of ossification which is clearly reflected in [the Indians’] external form. If you look at pictures of the old American Indians the process of ossification described above is evident in the decline of this race.” [7] So, “Red Indians” are/were uncommonly bony (just look at snapshots of them): ossification is/was characteristic of their race, and it inevitably led/will lead to the race’s decline: which is to say, Indians have/had a flawed nature that doomed/will doom them. Is attributing a congenitally flawed nature to a race racism? Clearly. Is the belief that physical appearance reveals racial identity racist? Clearly. And there’s worse ahead.

Is/was the Indian “race” high or low in the hierarchy of human races? (Steiner’s terms, not mine.) [8] According to Steiner, “Red Indians” clung to obsolete human consciousness; they failed to evolve as Europeans did. According to Steiner, Indians preserve/preserved “a memory of that great Atlantean civilization which could not adapt itself to later evolution...What the Red Indian valued most highly was that he was still able to sense something of the former greatness and majesty of a period which existed in the old Atlantean epoch...The Atlanteans had not assimilated all that the Venus, Mercury, Mars and Jupiter Spirits brought about in the East, to whom we owe all the civilizations which reached their zenith in Europe...The descendant of the brown race did not participate in this development. He held firm to the Great Spirit of the primeval past [i.e., an obsolete vision of the divine].” [9] This passage explicitly discusses races that have evolved and those that haven’t. We might dub this the “higher” racism. The Red Indian, descendant of the inferior portion of the population of Atlantis, remained anchored in the past, and thus failed to participate in the human advances that were eventually brought to a “zenith in Europe.” According to Steiner (by sheer coincidence, a European), the Red Indian is/was backward as well as bony—hence his decline. Is this racism? Is there any doubt?

Anthroposophists sometimes defend Steiner by saying that his doctrines do not reveal hatred of any race. Steiner did not hate Red Indians, evidently. He was speaking “objectively” about racial traits and destinies. But whatever was in Steiner’s heart—hatred or paternal solicitude—is both irrelevant and unknowable. His “objective,” “hate-free” doctrines are grotesquely biased, i.e., racist. We see this over and over. Did you know, for instance, that blacks are inherently childish? It’s not their fault. We mustn’t hate them for it. But due to the influence of local spiritual “forces” on “racial character,” blacks remain caught in a sort of perpetual childishness. Steiner says “[A] centre of cosmic influence [is] situated in the interior of Africa. At this centre are active all those terrestrial forces emanating from the soil which can influence man especially during his early childhood...The black or Negro race is substantially determined by these childhood characteristics.” [10]
 

Just as Steiner ranked human races, he also ranked the  entities below and above humanity. There are many more above us than below, which just shows how far we have to go in our future evolution. “Now, as we know, other Spirits and Hierarchies are active in the world.” [11] As always, Steiner’s loose use of language causes barriers to comprehension, but these hurdles are surmountable. I’ll summarize. (For more, see Steiner’s books COSMIC MEMORY and OCCULT SCIENCE, AN OUTLINE.) Fortunately, Steiner took most of the following from traditional teachings that most of us are more or less familiar with. Directly above humans are Angels, and above them are Archangels. A complication is that there are “normal” and “abnormal” varieties of various Spirits. For example, “The abnormal Archangels have shown themselves to be, in reality, Spirits of Form or Powers who have only renounced in part the attributes of their evolution.” [12] It’s always diverting to see Steiner using terms such as “in reality.” But, passing along: “Abnormal” spirits are those that have not yet fully shed the “attributes” of lower levels of spiritual evolution. So an “abnormal” Archangel is sort of halfway between real “Archangels” and mere “Angels.” (Notice the nasty symmetry in Steiner’s teachings. There are higher and lower races, real and unreal human beings [13], real and not-quite-real Archangels, etc.)

The overall ranking of beings goes like this: Minerals, Plants, Animals, and Man [14]; then in ascending order [the following can be called the Third Hierarchy] Angels, Archangels, and Archai (Spirits of an Age, or Zeitgeists); above them, the Second Hierarchy (which works in the three “Ethers” [15]): Spirits of Form (also called Spirits of Love, creators of ego; Powers, Exusiai), Spirits of Movement (Dynamis, Mights), and Spirits of Wisdom (Kyriotetes, Dominions) [16]; above them, still ascending, the First Hierarchy: Spirits of Will (Thrones), Cherubim, and Seraphim [17]; and finally, beyond hierarchies, the members of the Godhead: the Holy Ghost, Jesus, and God the Father (in that order).

But additional complications crop up all long the way. For instance, “The attendant Nature-spirits of the highest Hierarchy [are called] Undines, Sylphs, and Salamanders.” [18] Or, “Archangels have three modifications of their etheric body [sic] which correspond to the three members of the human soul.” [19] And bear in mind that, as I reported above, abnormal Spirits are centered in various planets, and the planets (as places and/or evolutionary stages) loom large in humanity’s evolution.

(Detour: Re. salamanders, etc.: A leading Anthroposophist has this to say about “fairies or nature spirits”: “To be aware of them, the special faculty of spiritual vision [i.e., clairvoyance] is necessary; otherwise we must accept the information given to us by one [i.e., Steiner] who has [i.e., claims] this faculty...Gnomes...are active in the earth...They maintain the structure of the mineral kingdom...Undines...water spirits who live in the element where air and water meet [? what element is that? not water, not air, so...?]...Sylphs...dwell in the warm vibrating currents of air and have an affinity to the birds...Salamanders...a kind of lizard who, it was thought at one time, could live in fire [when did we learn otherwise?]...friends of the insects who visit the flowers [and are then eaten by the lizards?]” [20. I love this stuff.] The subtitle of the book from which I just quoted is “The Waldorf School Approach.” Let that sink in. Then peek at chapter 12: “Esoteric Development and the Teacher,” which tries to tell Waldorf teachers how to attain clairvoyance. [21])

There are Christian elements in Steiner’s scheme. But there are also many elements that are neither Christian nor Biblical. E.g., Steiner affirmed both monotheism and polytheism (see Lecture Seven of THE MISSION OF THE FOLK SOULS [22]). If you spot an apparent contradiction in this, you’re not alone. But don’t look for much logic in Steiner’s teachings. As we have seen, Steiner repeatedly rejected logic or brain work in favor of imagination, intuition, and clairvoyance — i.e., fantasy.

You’ll find Anthroposophical references to the “gods” scattered throughout the passages I’m quoting here.

 

 

 

For Anthroposophists, myths reflect human evolution. [23] According to the editors of THE MISSION OF THE FOLK SOULS, Steiner ranked human civilizations and their mythologies thus, in ascending order: India, Persia, Egypt and Chaldea, Greece, Rome, and modern Europe. You will not be surprised to learn that Steiner and his followers found/find special virtues in Northern European mythologies, particularly the Norse and Teutonic (German). E.g., “Pictures or symbols of Teutonic mythology contain occult truths.” [24] “No other mythology gives a clearer picture of evolution than Northern mythology. Germanic mythology in its pictures is close to anthroposophical conception [sic] of future evolution.” [25] “We can scarcely understand the fundamental character of Teutonic mythology unless we review once more the five successive stages in the post-Atlantean epoch. These five [were]...primeval Indian civilization...Persian...Egypto-Chaldean-Babylonian, then the Greco-Roman civilization and finally our own.” [26] This is not entirely consistent with the lineup we saw a moment ago, but we must steel ourselves to these contradictions. If Anthroposophists can bear up under them, I suppose we can as well. In this instance, the discrepancy is relatively small: Babylonia is added, and Greece and Rome are conjoined. Still, we wind up with five stages of progress instead of six. And since the latter description comes from Steiner himself, no other rankings should be considered. (I sometimes wonder whether Anthroposophists study Steiner’s works with anything approaching diligence. They cannot read him skeptically—that would undo their faith—but the exercise of critical intelligence doesn’t seem too much to ask.)

Anyway: Some myths reveal higher evolutionary stages than others; those of the higher races are themselves higher. Northern mythologies are the highest; they can be compared very favorably, for instance, to the spiritual development of the lowly Indians (not Red Indians, this time: Sub Asian Indians) who were so backwards that they were “Unable to apprehend the Christ Impulse.” [27] Throughout Steiner’s oeuvre, the stages of human consciousness and the myths of various peoples are presented as reflecting human evolution. Indeed, in the past, humans had direct awareness of evolutionary progression: “In old Atlantis [sic] man...enjoyed direct perception into the old primeval [sic] states of human evolution.” [28] American Indians, as we have seen, preserved much of the old Atlantean perception, but this cost them in the end. They failed to keep up with the forward march of evolution. Northern Europeans, by contrast, attained a more progressive consciousness of the divine. “Nordic man perceived the figures of the Gods [sic], the divine Beings working directly on his soul...This was direct experience to him.” [29] “[Nordic man] came to know Odin as one of the abnormal Archangels...Nordic man experienced the activity of Odin....” [30] Ponder what Steiner is saying in these passages. Norse/Teutonic accounts of the gods, what we call myths, are actually eyewitness accounts of reality. Northern “myths” are true; they are literal. (So let’s feed them as such to our kids.)

As Anthroposophist Eugene Schwartz details in his book WALDORF EDUCATION, Waldorf students are led through a sequence of mythologies, recapitulating human evolution and promoting the students’ own individual development. The culminating phase in this process entails the glories of Norse and Teutonic fables (which tell of two “races” of “gods;” the god of blood and pigmentation, Lodur; the hammer of Thor, which reflects the incarnation of ego in the blood; and other good stuff). But wait. Has anyone noticed an additional complication? The sequence of mythologies presented in Waldorf schools, according to Schwartz, et al., is somewhat different from the hierarchy of human civilizations with their attendant mythologies. Thus, Eugene Schwartz reports that Norse myths are studied in fourth grade, and “myths of India, Persia, Egypt, Babylonia, and Greece” in fifth grade. [31] If Waldorf teachers followed Steiner’s cultural hierarchy, they would start with Sub Asian Indian myths and work up toward Northern European myths. How to account for this disparity?

To understand, we need to go all the way back to the earliest grades. The youngest students get fairy tales. Then, as they progress from grade to grade, students usually are given legends and stories about saints, then Old Testament stories, then Norse myths, and then the myths of India, Persia, Egypt, Babylonia, and Greece—generally in that order. Thus, the children start with stuff that is easy for them, that were even concocted for them (fairy tales), then they get a grounding in Judeo/Christian religion (saints, Old Testament), and then they proceed to myths. The major set of myths taken out of sequence is the Norse. Why? The highest of myths are given to students in fourth grade, when the kids have a) been prepped and b) are still pliable. Receiving the creme de la creme of mythology opens them to the remaining mythologies (Indian, Persian, etc.) later when their minds and egos are a bit sharper and their appetite for mythology has been whetted.

The Waldorf curriculum uses the study of myths and literature in general—and, indeed, art in general—to promote religious ends, which for Anthroposophists, of course, means Anthroposophy. “Music and language have their origins in the ‘Music of the Spheres’...What is the ‘Music of the Spheres’? It is a supersensible experience of the initiate who can penetrate to higher realms and hear—so to speak—the voices of the gods. Those who have such a gift tell us that music and language are reflections of those heavenly voices...the origins of art lie in the religious life.” [32] “Supersensible experience,” as we know, is knowledge derived without the use of ordinary human senses—it derives from clairvoyance as practiced by those who have the “gift.” Foremost among the gifted, obviously, was Rudolf Steiner. Hence, short of becoming clairvoyant (give it a try), we once again find ourselves required to accept Steiner’s assertions on his own authority; we must proceed in faith in him. (Or we can elect not to.)

To summarize the view as seen from Germanic/Nordic heights, I give you R. Steiner: “German-Nordic man has an interest in an Angel-being who is endowed with special power, but who at the same time is closely related to the single human being...And that Being is [the Norse god] Thor...a Being who could have risen to far higher rank had he followed the normal course of evolution, but who renounced advancement comparatively early and remained at the stage of a [sic] Angel in order that, at the time when man awoke to ego-consciousness in the course of his soul’s evolution, he [sic: Thor] could become the guiding Spirit...” [33] This is a semantically challenged but informative analogy for the Waldorf approach. Students are introduced to the Norse gods (whom Steiner reworked as Angels and Archangels) in order to receive guidance in the process of their spiritual evolution. Evolution is the key concept. “The human being...is an evolving spiritual entity, a creation of the gods [sic: plural] in a continual process of evolution.” [34]

At Waldorfs, myths usually give way to recorded human history (albeit with a distinctly Steinerian twist, and with the same evolutionary goals) in the sixth grade: “At the age of 11 children begin to develop a sense for what is historical...then is the right time to present pictures of the civilizations...which stretch from Atlantis to the present. Without it being said in so many words, these descriptions also contain the idea of the spiritual development of man...they also mirror the individual development from babyhood to self-conscious maturity—in other words, to the full incarnation of the ego.” [35] A great deal is conveyed in this passage. Human development is recapitulated in individual development. The objective is to covertly (“without it being said in so many words”) infuse students with these concepts (I’ve called this brainwashing). For “development,” read “evolution”: The child evolves to higher stages of humanity just as civilizations followed this evolutionary course in the past. Why is Waldorf education covert? Waldorf education is almost always indirect, subliminal, secretive. Steiner often urged Waldorf teachers to keep mum about this or that. His stated intention was to work upon children's souls quietly, with or without the parents' knowledge. Steiner once said to his teachers “[W]hat you are inserting into the children in a roundabout way...continues in the astral body and the ego.” [36] Inserting. By roundabout means. Troubling terminology. Everything in the physical world has, according to Steiner, ramifications in the spirit realm. This is what he wanted Waldorf teachers to bear constantly in mind. They were to lead children toward Anthroposophy, quietly. This is the covert purpose of Waldorf education.

The consequence of all we’ve seen here is that, for most of their schooling, Waldorf students are given outdated information and perspectives, wholly unsuitable to the modern world and the lives the students presumably will have to lead in that world. For instance, the astronomy course Anthroposophist Hermann von Baravalle lays out for Waldorf kids (see my essay, “Oh My Stars”) presents a picture of the skies that is centuries out of date. Thus, von Baravalle calls all lights in the sky “stars,” disregarding the difference between planets, stars, nebulae, and galaxies, all of which appear to the naked eye as points of light. Steiner’s defenders claim that Waldorf students are aided, not harmed, by ingesting large dollops of misinformation: The curriculum theoretically leads students through humanity’s developmental stages, arriving—in the high school years—at a clear-eyed presentation of the contemporary world. This defense is flawed in at least two ways. 1) A young child who internalizes misinformation is molded by such falsehoods. S/he will probably retain these flawed concepts in consciousness and subconsciousness for many years if not for life. 2) The view of the modern world often presented in Waldorf high schools is skewed against modernity. It is false. To remind anyone who has read my memoir, “Unenlightened,” at my Waldorf school all seniors were required to read THE FAILURE OF TECHNOLOGY, and we were encouraged to read SCIENCE IS A SACRED COW among other books that assail science and posit the existence of UFOs, ghosts, sea serpents, and so on. Such schooling is not preparation for the modern world but a flat denial of reality.

A final note about Norse myths: I can attest that these myths were the favorites for most of my Waldorf classmates and me, and Thor was usually the chief god in the stories we were told (whereas Odin was actually the top of the Norse pecking order). Significantly, we were fed myths in the classic Anthropop order. Here’s an excerpt from my class’s history: “In the third grade we began our study of the Bible, and put on a play about Joseph’s coat of many colors...[T]he fourth grade was occupied with the study of Norse myths. The high point of the year was the building of Yggdrasil, the Norse tree of life, out of paper. The fifth grade, where we learned about Greek and Egyptian myths...” [1964 PINNACLE, The Waldorf School of Adelphi University (Kansas City: Inter-Collegiate Press, 1964).] We lingered over those Norse myths. They nearly filled the year. Building Yggdrasil was a profoundly engaging process. Most of us boys wanted to stride through life as mighty warriors, wielding Thor’s hammer (the incarnation of ego in the blood: chilling).

A friend recently pointed out to me that, several decades after graduating, I became the class troublemaker, writing such stuff as this. Why? What happened to me? One clue: My favorite Norse god was actually Loki, the trickster, prankster, troublemaker. At age 30, I named one of my dogs Loki. I named my other dog then Beowulf, the monster-slayer. Thank you, Loki, and thank you, Beowulf. You were there when I needed you.

 

Franz E. Winkler, MD, was a presiding Anthroposophical presence at my Waldorf school. Winkler was—I can attest: I knew him—a gentle, quiet man. In 1960, he published a well-reviewed book, MAN, THE BRIDGE BETWEEN TWO WORLDS. It is essentially a disguised presentation of Anthroposophical dogma. At one point in the book, Winkler discusses fairy tales. His comments bear on several subjects we have considered here.

“When we tell a fairy tale to a child, we must never forget that it deals primarily with man’s inner life, his soul life. Its characters represent psychological qualities rather than people of flesh and blood. Its kingdoms are not of this world; they symbolize the vast, partly hidden realms of the human soul...fairy tales reveal the most intimate secrets of the human soul due to a knowledge which is not analytical but creative, and capable of speaking directly to a child’s innate understanding. [paragraph break] If critics of folklore would only accept the obvious—namely, that the evil witch and the magician represent greed and cruelty—they would be less shocked by the punishment dealt out to them. For in the crucial struggle within the human soul there is no room for leniency toward evil.” [37]

What do we find in these sentences?

o Winkler asserts that fairy tales reveal deep truths about the human soul’s “most intimate secrets.” Fairy tales.

o “Psychological” is one of the words Winkler and others have used to disguise Anthroposophical convictions. (Steiner himself called the “I,” the highest of man’s nonphysical bodies, the “ego.”) As should be obvious, Winkler was actually writing about spiritual matters, not psychological ones: “man’s inner life, his soul life...the vast...realms of the human soul...the most intimate secrets of the human soul....”

o Waldorf schools encourage a form of “thought” that is irrational, emotional, fanciful, rather than logical or (using Winkler’s word) “analytical.” We have seen that Waldorf-style thought boils down to intuition or imagination—or, for those can attain it (none can) clairvoyance. Here, Winkler endorses Waldorf-think. [38]

o Anthroposophists believe that children (who have lived many previous lives, thanks to reincarnation—another Steiner doctrine) arrive at birth with innate knowledge of the spirit realms. Winkler endorses these views.

o Rudolf Steiner often described mankind’s story as a long battle between good and evil. Much of the evil he deplored resides in the human soul—or at least in the souls of people who are not really human, or who are robotic, or who belong to inferior races, or who are possessed by demons... [39] Thus, he advocated relentlessness in punishing wrongdoing at Waldorf schools, because relenting would weaken the authority of teachers who are doing the work of the “gods” work (e.g., "We may never place ourselves in a situation where we may have to relent in a disciplinary decision...With punishment, we cannot relent." [40].) Here, Winkler supports exposing children to visions of relentless, severe punishment. So much for love and mercy, such as we find in the teachings of Jesus. This is the militant, spiritual “crucial struggle” waged at Waldorf/Steiner schools in the service of the “gods.” Plural. As in polytheism.

If you enroll your children in a Waldorf/Steiner school, please do so with your eyes open.

[1] Rudolf Steiner, THE MISSION OF THE FOLK SOULS (Rudolf Steiner Press, 2005), p. 108: facsimile of 1970 edition.

[2] Ibid., p. 110.

[3] Ibid., p. 108.

[4] Rudolf Steiner, AN OUTLINE OF ESOTERIC SCIENCE (Great Barrington, MA: Anthroposophic Press, 1997), p. xii, introduction by Clopper Almon.

[5] THE MISSION OF THE FOLK SOULS, p. 64.

[6] Ibid., pp. 15-16].

[7] Ibid., p. 108.

[8] “A  race or nation stands so much the higher, the more perfectly its members express the pure, ideal human type...” Rudolf Steiner, KNOWLEDGE OF THE HIGHER WORLDS AND ITS ATTAINMENT (Anthroposophic Press, 1944), p. 149.

[9] THE MISSION OF THE FOLK SOULS, pp. 108-109.

Secondary: During a seminar for adults held at my Waldorf school, a participant quoted Steiner as saying that American Indians had a gift for intuitive ideas [Sylvester M. Morley, AMERICAN INDIANS AND OUR WAY OF LIFE (New York: The Myrin Institute Inc. , 1961), p. 6.] This is consistent with Steiner’s statement that Indians remain/remained attached to the perspective of an earlier stage of evolution, “still able to sense something of” Atlantis and the “Great Spirit of the primeval past.” Indeed, this statement may the source of the notion that Steiner attributed intuitive powers to the Indian. In any case, Anthroposophist Morley worked to ferret out Steiner’s meaning. As Morley expresses it in his booklet, the underlying difference between Indians and whites is that “The white man has been swept along in the tide of evolution....” [Ibid., p. 18] whereas the “red man” remained stuck at a prior stage. White humanity’s supposed evolutionary advantage is Steiner’s basic rationale for asserting the superiority of the white races.

[10] Ibid., p. 75. In Rudolf Steiner, VOM LEBEN DES MENSCHEN UND DER ERDE {On the Life of Human Beings and of the Earth} (Dornach: Verlag Der Rudolf Steiner-Nachlassverwaltung, 1961), Steiner speaks of races becoming “extinct” when they move away from their allotted places on earth. This happens because races tend to have deep spiritual bonds with their allotted places on the earth. “To a certain extent the etheric forces emanating from the soil permeate the human organism so that man becomes dependent upon the soil of a particular geographical area.” MISSION OF THE FOLK SOULS, p. 74. Such doctrines are troublingly close to the Nazis’ belief in blood and soil.

[11] Ibid., p. 64.

[12] Ibid., p. 64.

[13] “Imagine what people would say if they heard that we say there are people who are not human beings...” Rudolf Steiner, FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER (Anthroposophic Press, 1998), pp. 649-650].

[14] THE MISSION OF THE FOLK SOULS, p. 83.

[15] Ibid., p. 15.

[16] Ibid., pp. 65 & 83.

[17] Ibid., p. 84.

[18] Ibid., p. 15.

[19] Ibid., p. 14.

[20] Roy Wilkinson, THE SPIRITUAL BASIS OF STEINER EDUCATION, The Waldorf School Approach (Sophia Books, The Rudolf Steiner Press, 1996) “History,” p. 90.

[21] Ibid., pp. 115-123.

[22] THE MISSION OF THE FOLK SOULS, p. 16. In the seventh lecture in this volume, Steiner discusses two pairs of concepts, monotheism/monism on the one hand and polytheism/pluralism on the other. Monism is the proposition that everything in the universe consists of a single fundamental substance and/or derives from as single principle, while pluralism says there are two or more basic substances/principles.

Steiner confuses matters by treating monotheism and monism as essentially the same: "Monotheism or monism in itself [note: he says they are one: "it"] can only represent an ultimate ideal; it could never lead to a real understanding of the world...." [Ibid., p. 115]

Steiner asserts that both monotheism and polytheism contain truth: monotheism is the "ultimate ideal" toward which evolution is moving, but polytheism gives a "real understanding of the world" as it is until the ideal may be attained. In this sense, there is no contradiction in affirming both theisms. Illogic and contradiction do, however, swirl around these and other Steiner teachings. See my essay, "Steiner's Logic" at  http://waldorf-problems.com/logic. 

[23] THE SPIRITUAL BASIS OF STEINER EDUCATION, pp. 61-66.

[24] THE MISSION OF THE FOLK SOULS, p. 19.

[25] Ibid., p. 17.

[26] Ibid., pp. 125-126.

[27] Ibid., p. 17.

[28] Ibid., p. 131.

[29] Ibid., p. 132.

[30] Ibid., p. 132.

[31] Eugene Schwartz, WALDORF EDUCATION (Xlibris Corporation, 2000), pp. 75-76. See also Roy Wilkinson, THE SPIRITUAL BASIS OF STEINER EDUCATION, pp. 62-63,;and Wilkinson, TEACHING ENGLISH (Rudolf Steiner College Press, 1976, reprinted 1997), pp. 13-30; also von Baravalle, WALDORF EDUCATION FOR AMERICA (Parker Courtney Press, 1998), pp. 21-30. Note that in WALDORF EDUCATION, Schwartz omits Chaldea and Rome. In TEACHING ENGLISH, he prescribes a somewhat different sequence for the study of myths, etc., and he adds fables, folk tales, and Irish myths.

Wilkinson covers the same ground in RUDOLF STEINER ON EDUCATION (Hawthorn Press, 1993). Wilkinson also reminds us that Steiner's first Waldorf school was in Germany: "Dr. Steiner gave indications for literary studies but as they were for German schools, they are not entirely suited to English speaking schools [sic]...." [p. 93] So, there may be some doubt as to the proper sequence of study for English-speaking students. Nonetheless, Wilkinson stresses that the order in which myths, etc., are presented is important: "There is, however, still a central theme which is of special educational value to each age." [p. 87] The main objective is to provide "food for the soul" [p. 87], and the underlying theme is "the development of man." [p. 94] We understand what these phrases mean for Anthroposophists. Chillingly, Wilkinson indicates that students should study "folklore of different races." [p. 87] Not peoples. Not nations. Races.
 

[32] THE SPIRITUAL BASIS OF STEINER EDUCATION, pp. 60-70.

[33] THE MISSION OF THE FOLK SOULS, p. 134. Imagine the hypnotic (not to say catatonic) effect of sitting in an auditorium and hearing sentence after sentence like this wash over you. I’ve argued that susceptible Waldorf students are brainwashed. Ditto for susceptible lecture attendees.

[34] THE SPIRITUAL BASIS OF STEINER EDUCATION, p. 53.

[35] Ibid., pp. 63-64.

[36] Rudolf Steiner, EDUCATION FOR ADOLESCENTS, Foundations of Waldorf Education (Anthroposophic Press, 1996), pp. 46-47. The “astral body” and “ego” are nonphysical human bodies, according to Steiner. (Steiner's use of the term "ego" should not be confused with Freud's, any more than Steiner's "evolution" should be confused with Darwin's.)

Steiner sometimes explicitly told Waldorf teachers to be secretive, as when he told them to disguise the morning prayers Waldorf students recite in unison [FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER, p. 20]. At other times, his instructions to Waldorf teachers were more on the up and up. Talking about "roundabout" methods of instruction is close to the line. The kindliest interpretation is that Steiner meant that all instruction in the physical world has indirect effects in the spiritual. Is this, then, unobjectionable? It shows us what Steiner wanted: He had almost no interest in giving students a regular education in the real world—he wanted his teachers always to be working toward effects in the spiritual realm. If Steiner's conception of that realm was mistaken (as almost certainly it was), then the best we can say about Waldorf schooling is that it is directed toward sad illusions, not reality.

 

[36] Franz E. Winkler, MAN, THE BRIDGE BETWEEN TWO WORLDS (Harper & Row. 1970), pp. 206-207.

[37] See my essay, “Thinking Cap.”

Steiner’s advocacy of “imagination” can be found in many of his lectures and books; ditto his dismissal of rational thought and the testimony of the five physical senses; and ditto his use of language that obscures as much as it enlightens. Here’s a characteristic, elusive yet revealing example. Analyzing a Rosicrucian text, THE CHEMICAL WEDDING OF CHRISTIAN ROSENKREUTZ, Steiner describes a vision is of a unicorn showing deference to a lion. I’ll quote Steiner, then circle back and discuss the passage in detail. The spiritual seeker “feels the possibility arising of using his faculties of understanding in a way suited to the spiritual world. His possession of this capacity appears before his soul in the imagination [sic] of ‘the unicorn bowing before a lion’...Were we to consider this as a symbol rather than a real imagination [sic], we might say that it pictures an event in the soul of the spiritual seeker through which he feels himself capable of thinking what is spiritual [sic]. But such an abstract idea would not express the full essence of the soul event that we are considering. For the event is experienced in such a manner that the sphere of personal sensory perception is extended beyond the boundary of the physical body. In the spirit realm the seer experiences beings and events external to his own essential being...When such extended consciousness arises, mere abstract conceptions cease, and the imagination appears as the necessary form of expression for what is experienced.” [Rudolf Steiner, THE SECRET STREAM (Anthroposophic Press, 2001), p. 174.]

Why didn’t Steiner express himself more clearly? A self-professed savant who does not want to be challenged would find obscure, stunning language useful. Listeners may feel inadequate to challenge such language; some, indeed, may figure that such semi-unintelligible language must proceed from profound depths of wisdom. Well, let’s see. Taking it from the top:

The seeker “feels the possibility arising of using his faculties of understanding in a way suited to the spiritual world. His possession of this capacity appears before his soul in the imagination of ‘the unicorn bowing before a lion’” So, the seeker “feels” (not thinks) that s/he may be developing the ability to understand spiritual truths (“the possibility of understanding...the spiritual world”). This ability entails a different way of seeing, one that is appropriate for spiritual matters (“understanding in a way suited to the spiritual world”). The seeker possesses this this ability when an image (an “imagination”) appears “before his soul,” as if projected there or seen with one’s (spiritual) eyes (one’s new “faculties of understanding,” which can be variously termed second sight, psychic power, or clairvoyance).

Steiner continues: “Were we to consider this as a symbol rather than a real imagination, we might say that it pictures an event in the soul of the spiritual seeker through which he feels himself capable of thinking what is spiritual.” A crucial point. If we take the image (a unicorn bowing before a lion) as a mere symbol or picture, we might think that the seeker is merely describing an event occurring within his/her soul (“it pictures an event in the soul of the spiritual seeker”). But if we think this way, we fail to grasp the true nature of what the seeker has perceived:

“But such an abstract idea would not express the full essence of the soul event...For the event is experienced in such a manner that the sphere of personal sensory perception is extended beyond the boundary of the physical body.” That is to say, our “abstract idea” (that the seeker is presenting a symbol) is too weak to “express the full essence of the soul event.” The seeker has used a supersensory mode of apprehension (his/her “sphere” of “perception” has reached “beyond the boundary of the physical body”) to perceive a true spiritual event: the “essence of the soul event,” which is accurately conveyed as a unicorn bowing to a lion.

Steiner goes on, “In the spirit realm the seer experiences beings and events external to his own essential being...When such extended consciousness arises, mere abstract conceptions cease, and the imagination appears as the necessary form of expression for what is experienced.” Using his/her super-method of seeing, the seer “experiences” spiritual beings (such as may appear as unicorns) and events (such as may appear as bowing). The faculty of imagination provides “the necessary form of expression” enabling the seer to formulate an accurate representation of a spiritual experience that otherwise would remain beyond human apprehension (the event is “external to his own essential being”—it is alien but it objectively exists and can be experienced by an adept).

In this passage, we may recognize a subtle distinction between clairvoyance (the ability to apprehend spiritual beings and events) and imagination (the means of expressing what clairvoyance has revealed). This is, however, a distinction without an effective difference. If the imagination were to create a false image (e.g., the lion bows to the unicorn) all would be undone. So the imagination needs to express what clairvoyance has truly apprehended (the unicorn bows to the lion) and do so in a true image (the unicorn bows to the lion).  

Whew. While Steiner does not use to term “clairvoyance” in the sentences we’ve just examined, we can hardly mistake his meaning, given that he often spoke of clairvoyance and sometimes explicitly equated it with imagination: e.g., “Essentially, people today have no inkling of how people looked out into the universe in ancient times when human beings still possessed an instinctive clairvoyance.... If we want to be fully human, however, we must struggle to regain a view of the cosmos that moves toward Imagination again....” [Rudolf Steiner, ART AS SPIRITUAL ACTIVITY (Anthroposophic Press, 1998), p. 256.]

In the real world, perception and expression are distinct activities, but they blur in Steiner’s teachings. For him, they are components of clairvoyance/imagination which is the path to truth. Well, let’s consider that. William Wordsworth recognized the magical allure of images that we half-create and half-perceive (“Lines Written Above Tintern Abbey,” ll. 106-107). Steiner skims past such recognition. To become Steiner’s followers, we would need to do the same. Specifically, we would need to employ supersensory methods that deny the evidence of our physical senses and the operations of our rational brains (or, more realistically, we would need to accept the accounts given us by one who claims to have transcended physical limitations). In other words, we would need to embrace blurred perceptions that arise, at least in part, from subjective, “felt” fantasies (or, more realistically, we would need to embrace the dissimulated visions served up by one who claims the “gift”).

That way lies madness. We can “imagine” or “half create” almost anything. Hogwarts. The Imperium. Mordor. The Seven Cities of Gold. Atlantis. Ancient cities inside the Moon. Ancient beings wandering through the bowels of the Earth. Nessie. Little green men. Anything. What fun. But such conceptions are not knowledge—they are fancy run amok.

[38] Robots: FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER, p. 115. People who aren’t human and/or who are filled by demons: Ibid., pp. 495-496. Higher and lower races: KNOWLEDGE OF THE HIGHER WORLDS AND ITS ATTAINMENT, p. 149.

[39] FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER, p. 109.