The Rudolf Steiner Archive

Towards⁵⁶ the end of the meeting, Dr Steiner spoke the following words:

In addition to what I took the liberty of saying at the close of the last course which I was able to hold for the Swiss teachers, I have perhaps only a few more remarks to make in connection with the difficulties of the Swiss school movement. It seems to me that things do in part indeed depend on how the educational movement connected with Anthroposophy is run here in Switzerland.

The Waldorf School in Germany has remained essentially in a position of isolation. Though there have been one or two further foundations, in Hamburg, Cologne and so on, the Waldorf School in Germany, in other words in a relatively extensive area, has remained a solitary example. It will remain to be seen, therefore, whether what is to be started in England as a kind of Waldorf school, and also the school with three classes that already exists in Holland, will also to begin with remain as solitary examples.

Apart from everything else it has to be said that the reason why these schools are still only isolated examples, and also why it can be expected that they will remain so for a long time, is simply that the present social circumstances really do make it impossible for an attitude to come about that could lead to the financing of a larger number of such schools. Experience over the years has shown this quite clearly. And this challenges us to think carefully about the whole direction we should take with our educational movement.

This is especially necessary with regard to Switzerland. For Switzerland is pervaded by a very strong sense for everything represented by the state. And now that the Swiss school association for independent education has been founded, I do believe that the chief difficulties will arise from this Swiss sense of statehood. Even less than anywhere else will it be possible here in Switzerland to find an opening for the belief that a truly independent school could be an example for a model method of education, or that schools such as this could be founded on a larger scale. We should not allow ourselves to be under any illusion in this respect. Aversion to a system of education that is independent of the state is very great here.

Of course what Herr Gnädiger has just said is right, namely that there will be interest in how things are done in a model school.

Least of all here in Switzerland can you expect the president of the Schweizerischer Schulverein, of whom you have spoken, to have any interest in the school other than that pertaining to its status as a model. Perhaps his interest will turn out to be such that he would like to influence Swiss state schools to take up certain methodological aspects from this model school. But this seems to me to be the only aspect that can be counted on to attract interest here in Switzerland. That is why it seems to me to be important to take up these two things wherever educational associations of the kind you have mentioned are founded; and also that many such associations should be founded, more and more of them!

Another aspect is that the crux of anthroposophical education is its method. The schools apply a certain method. It is not a question of any particular political direction but purely and simply of method. It is also not a question of any particular religious creed, or of seeing Anthroposophy somehow as a religious creed. It is simply a question of method.

In the discussion that followed my lecture cycle⁵⁷ my answer to questions on this was simply that the educational method represented here can be applied anywhere, wherever there is the good will to introduce it.

If this is done on the one hand, and if on the other hand—in order to create an understanding in wider circles—it is clearly emphasized that this is the proper method and that it is being applied in a school that can serve as a model, if these two points are given the main emphasis in the programme, if it is stressed that every school could use these methods and that a model school could demonstrate how fruitful they are, and if things are worked out neatly, then I believe that something could be achieved even in Switzerland. And then on the basis of these two points educational associations ought to be founded everywhere. But it would have to be made clear to everyone that the aim was not to found as many private schools as possible to compete with the state schools. In Switzerland such a thing would be regarded as something very peculiar and it would never be understood. But there would be an understanding for a model school which could be a source of inspiration for a method of education. Progress cannot be made in any other way. It is important to present these things to people in principle again and again and wherever the opportunity arises.

I believe it would be a good thing if you could always give the greatest prominence to these two aspects. They are perfectly true, and much damage has been done to us by the constant repetition of the view that Waldorf education can only be carried out in schools apart from the main stream, whereas I have constantly repeated that the methods can be applied in any school.

This is what I wanted to say, for everything else is linked to this. I also believe that a financial basis will only be won when there can be an understanding of these things. There will be very little understanding in Switzerland for independent schools if they are not linked to what I have just been saying. But if this is done, I believe that our efforts could lead to a greater degree of success than has been the case hitherto. So far the existing financial situation is not sufficient basis for the founding of a school in Basel.

• 56. ‘Schulverein für freies Erziehungs- und Unterrichtswesen in der Schweiz’, later ‘Goetheanum-Schulverein’, Dornach. Founded 1922. From 1924, after the Christmas Foundation Conference, under the directorship of Rudolf Steiner.
• 57. See Rudolf Steiner Swiss Teachers' Course, Report by Albert Steffen. English text available in typescript only. GA 306.

DR STEINER:

My dear friends!

I would now like to open the meeting of the General Secretaries and the representatives of the Swiss branches. The best thing to do will be to include in the agenda our discussion about rearranging the affairs of the Swiss Anthroposophical Society. Wishes concerning this were expressed during the last meeting of delegates⁵⁸ and in the course of our further discussions about the General Anthroposophical Society it will be a good thing to take these various wishes into account in the hope that a satisfactory arrangement can be found concerning the relationship of the branch at the Goetheanum and indeed of the General Anthroposophical Society as a whole. Would you now please speak to this point on the agenda. Suggestions at the other meeting were voiced very energetically indeed.

Dr Hugentobler speaks on this point and asks questions.

DR STEINER: With regard to these matters we must take into account that basically they can all be traced back to a question of tact. It all started at a meeting of delegates of the Anthroposophical Society in Switzerland in the summer,⁵⁹ when the Swiss members felt themselves to be drowned out by members who happened to be in Switzerland at the time. They felt they were being pushed aside. Everything they felt thus comes down to a question of tact. The Swiss members felt that the others talked much too much, that they themselves had not been able to get a word in and that people from elsewhere had given them all kinds of advice which failed to take account of the situation in Switzerland. The whole matter obviously stems from that meeting. At the last meeting of delegates the matter was cogently discussed, but on the other hand a great deal was brought forward which people found impossible to understand. As I was in the chair at that meeting of delegates I know how certain things said met with absolutely no understanding, so it would be a good thing if the wishes expressed then could be brought forward again in a comprehensible form. This is what I hope from today's meeting. Who would like to speak?

Herr Geering-Christ explains his point of view.

DR STEINER: That is quite right. The matter is not at all complicated if you look at the facts, and Herr Geering has put it very clearly. If the matter is properly faced it will find a perfectly simple solution. I should also like to add that the whole matter has been put on a new footing by the foundation of the General Anthroposophical Society of which Herr Steffen, being the one who will represent the Swiss element within the General Anthroposophical Society, is the Vice-president. The whole matter has been placed on a new footing as a result of the institution of this Vorstand. Looking at the structure as a whole it becomes obvious that part of the trouble at the meeting of delegates in the summer, which made for such bad feeling,⁶⁰ stemmed from the fact that at that time the German council saw itself as the ‘Vorstand’ for the worldwide Society and behaved accordingly. This was what hurt the feelings of the Swiss delegates, was it not? So there are several contributory factors, which Herr Geering suggested in one way or another at the end of his speech. There is an administrative matter for the Swiss Anthroposophical Society which will naturally be settled at a meeting of Swiss members. So on the one hand there are the affairs of the Swiss Society and on the other there is a question of tact. I do hope that these matters of tact will be settled in the near future.

The General Anthroposophical Society, within whose framework our present discussions lie, can of course only discuss the arrangement of the relationship between the branch at the Goetheanum and the Swiss Anthroposophical Society. This is what we ought to be discussing today. Everything else should be left to a meeting which the Anthroposophical Society in Switzerland will hold. This question of bringing order into the relationship between the branch at the Goetheanum and the Anthroposophical Society in Switzerland is something that can concern us very much. At the last meeting of delegates on 8 December 1923, when the wishes on this matter were expressed, I believed that a solution could be found. You will agree that for external and internal reasons the branch at the Goetheanum cannot be seen by the outside world as something separate from the Swiss Society. But I thought that the solution could lie in arranging matters internally in such a way that the branch would have neither a seat nor a vote, or at least not a vote, at meetings of delegates of the Anthroposophical Society in Switzerland.

Today, however, I believe that the view expressed by Herr Geering is very much justified, namely that a change in this direction is not necessary. The moment our Swiss friends can come to a general conviction that they could get on perfectly well with the branch at the Goetheanum when other things are not allowed to interfere, at the moment when our Swiss friends can come to that conviction, there will, I believe, be no need to change anything. I would like you to have a specific discussion on whether there are any wishes that lie in this direction. Once this question has been fully discussed it will then be a matter for the Anthroposophical Society in Switzerland, who will elect their General Secretary or whatever kind of officer they may want to have. Once this has been discussed we shall actually have completed our consideration of the Swiss affair. I think the difficulty is partly due to the Swiss council having not been particularly strongly consolidated so far. The chairmen of the various branches had simply been nominated as the council. Obviously a council like this is a rather elastic entity and nobody really knows what it is, since the council does not function properly. If a properly functioning council can come into being in the Swiss Society, the whole matter will sort itself out. I do not believe that it will be possible for those not living in Dornach to form a majority in Dornach. So I would ask you to seize on a formulation which will bring about a change in the relationship of the branch at the Goetheanum with the Anthroposophical Society in Switzerland.

Herr Schweigler has something to say.

DR STEINER: Does anyone else wish to speak to this point?

HERR GEERING-CHRIST: Could we now proceed to a vote among the Swiss delegates?

DR STEINER: I was just about to ask the Swiss friends whether they agree with the aims set out by Dr Hugentobler, Herr Geering and Herr Schweigler. Would those Swiss friends who do, please raise their hands. (They do.)

This is a clear expression of the wish of our Swiss friends to keep the branch at the Goetheanum within the bosom of the Swiss Anthroposophical Society. All the other questions are matters for the Swiss Anthroposophical Society and do not belong in this meeting. So we have dealt with the matter that needed attention within the framework of the General Anthroposophical Society.

Does anyone else wish to speak about these questions while they can be discussed at this smaller meeting?

Fräulein Dr Vreede, as the secretary of the branch at the Goetheanum, states that of the 150 members of the branch 70 are in fact Swiss members.

Dr Grosheintz wishes to speak.

DR STEINER: That is quite correct. In a Society such as ours it will never be possible to avoid the appearance of questions in every field which have to be settled by tact alone. You will remember that in The Philosophy of Freedom tact plays a special part among the moral principles. However much may be regulated by means of statutes, I am actually convinced that pedantic statutes can be the source of much that has to be settled by tact. So I do agree that if things are carried out in the manner suggested by Dr Grosheintz just now, we shall manage things alright by means of tact. Much will depend on this.

Frau Weiss asks a question.

DR STEINER: I do not think that Dr Grosheintz meant this in a statutory way. He was speaking of something that has to be applied in each case as it arises if it is felt to be necessary. And this is exactly what I mean by a ‘question of tact’. You have to have at your fingertips a sense for what might be necessary. I am altogether of the opinion that in the management of a society not much can be achieved by a pedantic head. It may have its place elsewhere, certainly, but in the management of a society such as the one to be founded here a pedantic head is quite harmful. What we need are sensitive fingertips. The more we can manage the Society through our sensitive fingertips the better will things be.

Mr Monges asks whether the relationship of Honolulu to the General Anthroposophical Society is to be similar to that of the branch at the Goetheanum.

DR STEINER: Honolulu belongs to the General Anthroposophical Society. It has nothing to do with all these questions. Everything we have been discussing up to now has concerned the relationship between the branch at the Goetheanum and the Anthroposophical Society in Switzerland. The branch in Honolulu has nothing to do with the branch at the Goetheanum nor with the Anthroposophical Society in Switzerland.

Does anyone else wish to speak about anything, for instance matters which could do with a preliminary airing prior to the general discussion with all the members? Somebody might wish to bring up a point for preliminary discussion in this smaller circle.

HERR LEINHAS: There was the matter of the contribution to be paid to the General Anthroposophical Society.

DR STEINER: Perhaps I could ask Dr Guenther Wachsmuth to report on this.

Dr Wachsmuth reports.

DR STEINER: It will not help us much, my dear friends, if we discuss whether every country should participate in paying membership contributions. It will only help us if they do all pay. There is very little point in knowing now whether they will pay or not. The only fruitful thing to do is to take the general picture as the basis and to endeavour from this general picture to state a figure which promises to be sufficient for the General Anthroposophical Society to achieve what it has to achieve. I would therefore be in favour of stating a standard figure and then leaving open, of course, what the groups, the national groups, can agree to in practice. Of course the figure can be exceeded by an unlimited amount, approaching, though never achieving, the lavish scale on which Carnegie⁶¹ acted. And less can also be contributed, for instance by the countries with very weak currencies, down to what in mathematics is termed the vanishing point. In practice we shall see what can be done. I do not know how closely it will be possible to approach the scale of Carnegie, but I am quite certain that the vanishing point, as they say in mathematics, will have a definite part to play. Therefore, having regard to all that we can know today, I do believe that a standard figure should be fixed and that deviations from this can be arranged in individual discussions. So I think it would be right to lay down that each group should pay 12 Schillings for each of its members, that is 1 Schilling per month. I can assure you that even if this Schilling is really contributed we shall have the greatest difficulty in carrying out the things we intend to do here. This must not be allowed to weigh on people. For those who cannot pay, the amount will have to be reduced, and we shall have to reduce our plans accordingly. But I do believe that we could agree on a standard contribution, from the groups, of 12 Schillings per member. Any other arrangement would lead to the Anthroposophical Society being able neither to live nor die, so that once again for financial reasons nothing worthwhile would be achieved. We shall be criticized and people will not understand that we cannot achieve anything if our hands are tied.

So this is not intended to be an absolute demand. It is a general standard. If it turns out to be impossible, it nevertheless expresses what we would need; and we shall then simply have to reduce it. This is perfectly possible. But I do think that it is necessary to make a statement of where one stands.

Mr Collison asks about a joining fee.

DR STEINER: The joining fee would not be included in this. It is something that goes into the general fund. But the calculation can be made on the basis of the subsequent contributions. I am simply reckoning with a monthly amount for every member of 1 Schilling, or annually 12 Schillings. This is what I am reckoning with. Perhaps I may be allowed to disclose that the Vorstand did consider this but only spoke in pictures regarding how these matters might be settled. My suggestion is what has come to me personally as a result of those pictures.

Mademoiselle Sauerwein explains her point of view.

BARONESS DE RENZIS: That would amount to 50 Lire. It would be utterly impossible for Italy!

Mademoiselle Sauerwein replies.

DR STEINER: Of course this may be so. It would simply mean that the standard contribution for individual groups would have to be set at a sufficiently low level. But I do not see that this means we cannot set the standard at the level that seems to us necessary after making some very exact calculations. What will happen in reality? Try to imagine it! I can say that under the conditions pertaining at present there will definitely be payments from not more than at most three to four thousand members, or rather payments will not be made for more than three to four thousand members. If you picture this to yourselves you will also have a picture of the amount we shall have at our disposal here each year. So you see the only sensible thing to do is to set the level of membership contributions like a budget. To set the level without regard to the future is pointless. If we want to make calculations we have to make them with figures. We have to be able to count on a certain income. If this income fails to appear we are then obliged to replace the shortfall from other sources in another way, perhaps from voluntary contributions and so on. Simply to fix an amount which bears no relationship to what we need here seems to me impossible. If we are to fix an amount—otherwise we might as well go straight to voluntary contributions—then it must be on the basis of what we need here. No other basis can be fruitful.

Fräulein Schwarz asks some questions.

DR STEINER: The Verein des Goetheanum can only receive contributions towards the rebuilding of the Goetheanum. And the rebuilding of the Goetheanum has nothing to do with the administration of the Anthroposophical Society. These are two quite separate things. I presume you are referring to the membership fee for the Verein des Goetheanum? The relationship of the Anthroposophical Society to the Verein des Goetheanum is something that can still be discussed during this conference. With regard to the membership of the Verein I think some kind of method will have to be found if those gathered here in any way wish it. You have to consider that with regard to the rebuilding of the Goetheanum the membership fees for the Verein are so minimal as to be almost negligible. The membership contributions are almost negligible! And in future they will be negligible; in the past they were at least used for the most part for the payment of interest on loans. But for the building of the Goetheanum in future it will not be possible to get involved with loans. A sinking fund (à fonds perdu) will be the only option. So then the membership contributions to the Verein des Goetheanum will have to be put to a use other than that of paying interest. We shall be speaking about the building of the Goetheanum. In future perhaps it will be possible to bring about an agreement with the Ceneral Anthroposophical Society. This is a question that would go too far for the moment, since we have not yet got beyond the matter of the membership contribution.

Does anyone wish to speak to the question of the membership contribution?

Mr Kaufmann explains that a little while ago Dr Wachsmuth had mentioned an amount of 7 Schillings for the contribution and that the English delegates had come with the mandate to agree to 7 Schillings.

DR STEINER: If the method I have suggested is chosen, then it will encompass every other method. But I merely maintain that it is impossible to mention a sum from the start in the knowledge that it will be no good for anything. Whether or not something is obligatory is not so much the point. The point is that the amount can be counted on under all circumstances. In the picture that has emerged we have certainly counted—or I have certainly counted—on the countries with strong currencies treating the amount more or less as though it were obligatory. To go below the nominated sum would require individual negotiations. But if we want to go below it now, it would have been better if we had started by negotiating the amount in the first place. We could have started the discussion by considering the amount—I know this would have gone against our moral sense—and once the discussion had revealed that the General Anthroposophical Society could not be maintained we could have decided not to found it in the first place. There is no other way but to think realistically. We cannot found a Society which is incable of surviving. But now I have said that it will be possible to give less than the stated amount and then the centre here will have the task of raising the difference. This statement makes the payment of the membership contribution no hardship at all, for it is simply a statement of what is actually needed. I should be sorry if the matter of the membership contribution were to create a mood of dissatisfaction. But it is not necessary for this to happen, my dear friends. However, it is on the other hand necessary that the general enthusiasm for our cause which rightly exists, and which has been expressed over the last few days, should not come to grief over the bagatelle of the membership contribution. That would be ‘ahrimanic’. My dear friends, people are so quick to say this in other settings!

Dr Büchenbacher recounts that the Free Anthroposophical Society in Stuttgart made it possible for a colleague to exist by paying him 2, 5 or 10 percent of the weekly payments. He says that though conditions in Germany are very difficult, nevertheless if everybody pulls his or her weight things can be managed.

DR STEINER: I should merely like to point out that discussion leading to such matters cannot really belong in our present agenda. I am convinced that if we were to listen to all the pros and cons of paying or not paying the contribution we should of course hear as many justified reasons as there are people in this room, and later, in the meeting with all the members, that would mean eight hundred justified reasons. Surely we cannot make this the content of our discussion. If we are to continue, we must discuss how else we are to manage. We must discuss from the point of view of the General Anthroposophical Society how else we are to manage. I can see no possibility of managing in any other way. It seems likely that we shall not get what we need, but I see no way of managing with less. However, I do see a possibility that the special wishes might be taken into account. Assume that not a single group can pay the required amount. So instead of 36,000 Schillings we should receive 5,000 Schillings, and then we shall have to see how to replace the 31,000 Schillings with something else. Above all it will be an uncomplicated and obvious situation. But it will be different from situations elsewhere; we cannot proceed by fixing budgets. Imagine a national budget being fixed if every citizen is allowed to pay whatever he likes! You cannot fix a national budget in this way! Or can you, Duke of Cesaro? Can you ask each citizen what he wants to pay per year or do you have to fix a sum and tell him what he must pay?

THE DUKE OF CESARO: You can, but you can't force him!

DR STEINER: This is just it; we shall not be able to enforce anything! And this can be the very reason why it might be much more easy to agree than if it were a matter of being forced. We have taken into account the matter of not being forced.

Mr Collison asks whether this might not be a bit of an obstacle as regards acquiring new members.

DR STEINER: Suppose a group was in a position in which it could only expect a yearly sum of 4 Schillings or 4 Francs from each member. If this were the case it would of course not be able to pay 12 Schillings or 12 Francs to us. Perhaps it could pay only 2 Schillings or even nothing. The question of how to deal with new members is a matter that is left entirely to the groups, who will then say to us: We cannot pay more than so much for each member. Under these circumstances it will always be possible to manage.

Herr Ingerö declares on behalf of Norway that about 3,000 Schillings per year could be paid.

Dr Zeylmans van Emmichoven declares that taking Holland as a whole, the sum will be met.

DR STEINER: This is how the matter was always handled during the time when we were still the German Section of the Theosophical Society. Individual members were not forced to pay, but the groups were able to pay the full sum to the German Section by making up any shortfall out of larger payments by some members. In those days, though, the contributions were far smaller. This is no longer possible today. I have often described to you the conditions under which it was possible to manage with the old, modest contributions. I have described to you how Luzifer-Gnosis was produced and sent out in the early days.⁶² These are conditions which cannot be brought back today. So all in all, so far as I can see, there can be no other picture than that of needing 12 Schillings in the future for each member of the General Anthroposophical Society. Is there any member of the Vorstand who thinks differently?

FRAU DR STEINER: No indeed. While I was closing down the publishing company and our flat in Berlin recently I was so interested to find the endless envelopes again, all addressed by hand by Dr Steiner, while each entry in the post book had been checked by me. We saw to every little detail ourselves and then carried the whole mailing to the post office in a laundry basket. These memories came back to me in Berlin. Nobody likes doing things like this these days. But it was most interesting to look back and experience once again how every detail was attended to by Dr Steiner and myself in those days.

DR STEINER: These are things which simply come about and there is no point in arguing about them. You didn't argue about them; you didn't even talk about them. These things are simply there, to be done out of the necessity of the moment. But once something comes under discussion you simply have to state how much you need. It is only possible to discuss something if you have a proper basis. Does anyone else wish to speak about this?

FRAU PROFESSOR BÜRGI: I wish to commit myself to paying the contribution on behalf of the Bern branch.

HERR HAHL: I wish to agree to what has been said.

DR STEINER: My dear friends, we must adjourn the meeting now so that we can go to the lecture. I shall announce when and where we shall continue.

• 58. Meeting of delegates of the Swiss. Anthroposophical Society on 8 December 1923. See Note 22.
• 59.

59
• 60. The international meeting of delegates in July 1923. See Note 22.
• 61. Andrew Carnegie, 1835–1919. American industrialist. Amassed an enormous fortune the greater part of which he donated for scientific and social work.
• 62. See Rudolf Steiner The Anthroposophic Movement. Its History and Life-Conditions in Relation to the Anthroposophical Society, London 1933. GA 258.

DR STEINER:

My dear friends!

Today our agenda begins by giving us the pleasure of the lecture by Herr Werbeck.

Louis Werbeck gives his lecture on ‘The Opposition to Anthroposophy’.

DR STEINER: Dear friends, let us have a fifteen-minute break before continuing with yesterday's meeting of members.

DR STEINER: My dear friends! Let us hear again today the words which are to resound in our soul both here and later, when we depart and carry out with us what is intended here:

Soul of Man!
Thou livest in the limbs
Which bear thee through the world of space
In the spirit's ocean-being.
Practise spirit-recalling
In depths of soul,
Where in the wielding will
Of world-creating
Thine own
I Comes to being
Within God's I.
And thou wilt truly live
In the World-Being of Man.

For the Father-Spirit of the heights holds sway
In depths of worlds begetting being.
Seraphim, Cherubim, Thrones!
Let there ring out from the heights
What in the depths is echoed
Speaking:
Ex Deo nascimur.

Soul of Man!
Thou livest in the beat of heart and lung
Which leads thee through the rhythm of time
Into the realm of thine own soul's feeling.
Practise spirit-awareness
In balance of the soul,
Where the surging deeds
Of the world's becoming
Thine own I
Unite
With the World-I.
And thou wilt truly feel
In the Soul-Weaving of Man.

For the Christ-Will in the encircling round holds sway
In the rhythms of the worlds, bestowing grace on the soul.
Kyriotetes, Dynamis, Exusiai !
Let there be fired from the East
What through the West is formed
Speaking:
In Christo morimur.

Soul of Man!
Thou livest in the resting head
Which from the grounds of eternity
Opens to thee the world-thoughts.
Practise spirit-beholding
In stillness of thought,
Where the eternal aims of Gods
World-Being's Light
On thine own I
Bestow
For thy free willing.
And thou wilt truly think
In the Spirit-Foundations of Man.

For the world-thoughts of the Spirit hold sway
In the being of worlds, craving for light,
Archai, Archangeloi, Angeloi !
Let there be prayed from the depths
What in the heights will be granted
Speaking:
Per Spiritum Sanctum reviviscimus.

Let us once again take hold of these words in meaningful sections. Here we have:

[Rudolf Steiner writes on the blackboard as he speaks. See Facsimile 4, Page XV bottom.]

Practise spirit-recalling

What takes place in the soul of man is related to all being in the cosmos of spirit, soul and body. Thus this ‘Practise spirit-recalling’ especially points to what is heard in the call to the Seraphim, Cherubim and Thrones when the manner in which they work in the universe is characterized:

Seraphim, Cherubim, Thrones!
Let there ring out from the heights
What in the depths is echoed.

We have the right cosmic concept when we picture in our soul how the voices of Seraphim, Cherubim and Thrones resound in the universal word and are heard because they find an echo in the depths of the grounds of world existence, and how what is inspired from above and what resounds from below, the universal word, emanates from Seraphim, Cherubim and Thrones.

In the second verse we have:

Practise spirit-awareness

This is related to the second hierarchy: Kyriotetes, Dynamis, Exusiai. To characterize them we imagine their voices in the universal word working as expressed in the words:

Kyriotetes, Dynamis, Exusiai!
Let there be fired from, the East
What through the West is formed.

The third member of man's existence is:

Practise spirit-beholding

To this we add the indication of how the third hierarchy enters with its work into the universal word:

Archai, Archangeloi, Angeloi!
Let there be prayed from the depths
What in the heights will be granted.

[As shown on the blackboard]

Practise spirit-recalling
S. Ch. T.

Let there ring out from the heights
What in the depths is echoed.

Practise spirit-awareness

K. D. Ex.

Let there be fired from the East
What through the West is formed.

Practise spirit-beholding

A. AA. Ang.

Let there be prayed from the depths
What in the heights will be granted.

Here we have the opposite of the first hierarchy in whose case the voices resound downwards while their echo comes up from below. And we have here the voices heard coming from beings who pray for something from below and whose prayer is answered from the heights downwards into the depths. From above downwards: from the heights towards the depths; from the encircling round: East and West; from below upwards: from the depths into the heights.

My dear friends! Something left over from earlier is a letter to the Vorstand of the Anthroposophical Society in Dornach from the Polish Anthroposophical Society which has not been represented here: ‘The working groups in Poland—Cracow, Lemberg, Warsaw—have resolved to found the Polish Anthroposophical Society. The Society shall serve the ideas of Anthroposophy by revealing the treasures of its spiritual teachings to the widest circles and by working among the Polish people in a time of destiny, helping them to recognize their mission. For the celebration of the laying of the Foundation Stone, the newly-founded Anthroposophical Society in Poland sends to the leader and founder of the international Anthroposophical Movement, Dr Steiner, this expression of their highest respect. The Polish Anthroposophical Society urgently requests that he may concern himself with it and not deny it his protection and guidance. For its part, it commits itself ... (the final words were obscured by noise).

For the Warsaw circle:
For the Lemberg circle:
For the remaining circles:
Luna Drechsler as their representative.’

Furthermore from Cologne on the Rhine: ‘For the celebration of the laying of the Foundation Stone in 1923 I wish you and ... (unclear) that the significance of this laying of the Foundation Stone may be revealed to all the world. With cordial greetings, Gottfried Husemann.’

My dear friends, I now consider that for the moment the Vorstand has put before you the main concerns that had to be brought to you. In the next few days there will still be the matter of a draft of some By-Laws or rules of practice to be attached to the Statutes. But now our main concern, before any other discussions, is that our dear friends should have a chance to express what they wanted to say. Here is a list of those who wish to speak or report, and I think it would be best, in order to save time, not to proceed along given lines—for if you do this you waste time—but to bring to completion what our respected, dear friends have to say. So I would like to ask whether you agree that those friends who have already asked to speak should now have their say.

They are Herr Leinhas, Dr Kolisko, Dr Stein, Dr Palmer, Herr Werbeck, Dr Lehrs, Miss Cross, Mademoiselle Rihouët, Mr Collison, Frau Hart-Nibbrig, Herr de Haan, Herr Stibbe, Herr Zagzwijn, Frau Ljungquist.

Dr Wachsmuth points out that these requests to speak were made at the beginning and referred to general matters, not specific themes.

DR STEINER: Then let me ask for the names of those friends who now wish to say something. It is naturally necessary, for the further progress of the meeting, that those friends or delegates who are concerned about something should express this. So now in a comprehensive, general discussion let me ask all those who wish to do so to speak about what concerns them with regard to the Anthroposophical Society which has been founded here.

MR COLLISON: Later on could we please speak about education.

DR STEINER: Would anyone like to speak about something entirely general? If this is not the case, dear friends, then let us proceed to the discussion of more specific aspects. According to the programme we have a discussion on the affairs of the Society and on educational questions. Perhaps someone first has something to say with reference to Herr Werbeck's lecture and so on?

Herr Hohlenberg wishes to speak.

DR STEINER: Herr Hohlenberg will speak on the subject of the antagonism we face.

Herr Hohlenberg does this.

DR STEINER: The best thing will be if I leave what I have to say on this subject till the conclusion of the discussion. A good deal will still be brought forward over the next few days.

The next person who wishes to speak about the affairs of the Society, and also the Youth Movement, is Dr Lehrs. May I invite Dr Lehrs to speak.

Dr Lehrs speaks about the Free Anthroposophical Society.

DR STEINER: My dear friends! I do not want a misunderstanding to arise in respect of what I said here a few days ago. Dr Lehrs has understood me entirely correctly, and any other interpretation would not be correct. I did not mean that what was suggested then no longer applies today. I said that I had naturally felt it to be tragic that I had to make the suggestion of creating a division between the Anthroposophical Society in Germany and the Free Anthroposophical Society. But this suggestion was necessary; it was the consequence of the situation as it was then. And now it is equally necessary that this Free Anthroposophical Society should continue to exist and work in the manner described by our young friend from various angles. So please consider Dr Lehrs' interpretation of what I said a few days ago to be entirely correct.

I assume that Herr Hans Ludwig Pusch wishes to speak to what Dr Lehrs has said, so may I ask Herr Hans Ludwig Pusch to speak now.

Herr Hans Ludwig Pusch speaks about the aims and endeavours of German young people in Hamburg.

DR STEINER: Could I ask you to continue with your report at this point tomorrow. We have to keep to the times on the programme.

We shall continue this meeting tomorrow after Dr Schubert's lecture on ‘Anthroposophy, a Leader towards Christ’. May I now ask those friends who wish to speak, or who feel they must speak for definite reasons, to let me know this evening after the lecture so that I can gain an impression of the number of speakers and make room in the agenda. Please bear in mind that we must make the most fruitful use of the days at our disposal. Apart from what has already been announced in connection with my three last lectures, it will also be necessary to have some smaller, specialist meetings with the doctors present here. Other smaller meetings will also have to be planned.

Now let me announce the next part of the agenda: This afternoon at 4.30 the Nativity Play; in the evening at 8.30 my lecture. Tomorrow morning at 10 o'clock the lecture by Dr Schubert on ‘Anthroposophy, a Leader to Christ’. This will be followed by the continuation of today's meeting which we have had to interrupt in the middle of a speech. Unfortunately we shall probably have to do this again to enable us to carry out the proceedings in a rational manner. The meeting is now adjourned till tomorrow.

I still have a few announcements to make and would ask you to remain in your seats. First of all, please do all you can to avoid crowding at the entrance. I have been told that older people who are more frail than the young have been put in danger, so please avoid this and give consideration to others.

Secondly, Dr Im Obersteg, Centralbahn Platz 9, Basel, who has frequently arranged rail and sea travel for us, has offered to make the necessary arrangements for those who need them for their return journey. In our experience Dr Im Obersteg's service is exceptionally reliable. Chiefly it will be a matter of taking over ship and rail tickets for the western countries such as Norway, Sweden, England, Holland, France, Spain, Italy and so on. You can either go direct or arrange it through us. Will those who have wishes in this respect please approach Dr Wachsmuth.

DR STEINER:

My dear friends!

The first point on the agenda today is the pleasure of a lecture by Dr Schubert on Christ and the spiritual world: ‘Anthroposophy, a Leader to Christ.’

Dr Schubert gives his lecture. After an interval of fifteen minutes, Dr Steiner speaks:

My dear friends! Let us begin again today with the words of the self-knowledge of man coming from the spirit of our time:

Soul of Man!
Thou livest in the limbs
Which bear thee through the world of space
In the spirit's ocean-being.
Practise spirit-recalling
In depths of soul,
Where in the wielding will
Of world-creating
Thine own I
Comes to being
Within God's I.
And thou wilt truly live
In the World-Being of Man.

Soul of Man!
Thou livest in the beat of heart and lung
Which leads thee through the rhythm of time
Into the realm of thine own soul's feeling.
Practise spirit-awareness
In balance of the soul,
Where the surging deeds
Of the world's becoming
Thine own I
Unite
With the World-I.
And thou wilt truly feel
In the Soul-Weaving of Man.

Soul of Man!
Thou livest in the resting head
Which from the grounds of eternity
Opens to thee the world-thoughts.
Practise spirit-beholding
In stillness of thought,
Where the eternal aims of Gods
World-Being's Light
On thine own I
Bestow
For thy free willing.
And thou wilt truly think
In the Spirit-Foundations of Man.

Today, my dear friends, let us bring together what can speak in man in three ways:

[Rudolf Steiner writes on the blackboard as he speaks. See Facsimile 4, Page XVI top.]

This will properly be brought together in the heart of man only by that which actually made its appearance at the turning of the time and in whose spirit we now work here and intend to work on in the future.

At the turning of the time
The Spirit-Light of the world
Entered the stream of earthly being.
Darkness of night
Had held its sway,
Day-radiant light
Streamed into souls of men.
Light that gives warmth
To simple shepherds' hearts,
Light that enlightens
The wise heads of kings.

Light Divine
Christ-Sun
Warm thou our hearts,
Enlighten thou our heads,
That good may become
What we from our hearts would found
What we from our heads would direct
In conscious
Willing.

[Rudolf Steiner writes on the blackboard as he speaks]

That good may become
What we from our hearts would found,
What we from our heads would direct
In conscious
Willing.

[As shown on the blackboard]

DR STEINER: My dear friends! Yesterday's speaker, Herr Hans Ludwig Pusch, does not wish to continue. Instead, Dr Lehrs will say a few words on the theme. Please may I now ask him to speak.

Dr Lehrs completes what Herr Pusch had wanted to say the day before on the question of the Youth Movement.

DR STEINER: May I now ask Mrs Merry to speak.

Mrs Merry speaks about the work in England and brings the apologies of Mr Dunlop who has been unable to attend.

DR STEINER: My dear friends! I have spoken often and in different places about the extraordinarily satisfactory summer school in Penmaenmawr. [Note 63] Perhaps I may be permitted to add to what I have said so often. I truly believe that an exceedingly significant step forward will have come about for the Anthroposophical Movement if everything Mrs Merry has just sketched can come into being over the next few years as fruits of the seeds of Penmaenmawr. We may believe that the very best forces are at work promoting the endeavours of the Anthroposophical Movement in this direction, for Mr Dunlop took this summer school at Penmaenmawr in hand in an extremely active manner, an inward, sensitive and indeed esoteric manner. In Penmaenmawr conditions were fulfilled from the start which we have never found to be fulfilled anywhere else, conditions that were necessary for the success of Penmaenmawr.

You see, my dear friends, we expected Mr Dunlop in Stratford, in Oxford, and even once in London, and now here in Dornach. So my picture of Mr Dunlop is that of the man about whom it is always said that he is coming and then he doesn't come. But he did come to Penmaenmawr! And it went so exceptionally well, so well that I only wish he were here today so that we might once more thank him most heartily. I really did believe that Mr Dunlop would be here. In London he said to me that he would do it differently next time; he would not say he was coming but instead he would simply come. So in London he did not say he was coming. And yet he still has not come! So after all I shall have to ask Mrs Merry most warmly to take our thanks back to him, the cordial thanks of this whole gathering for that extremely significant inauguration of a movement within the Anthroposophical Movement which has such good prospects because of the summer school at Penmaenmawr. Out of the spirit of the descriptions I have given of Penmaenmawr I am sure that you will agree to my asking Mrs Merry in your name to take to Mr Dunlop out hearty thanks for the inauguration of the summer school at Penmaenmawr, and also to my requesting him to continue to take such work firmly in hand, for in his hands it will succeed well.

May I now ask Herr van Bemmelen, the representative of the Dutch school, to speak.

Herr van Bemmelen reports on the work of the school in The Hague.

DR STEINER: Now may I ask Dr Unger to speak. He wishes to refer to the problems of the Society.

Dr Unger gives his lecture about the problems of the Society and concludes with the following:

Dear friends. The way in which responsibility devolves for instance on the individual Societies and the larger groups, as a result of the new Statutes, means that it will be necessary to pass this trust and this responsibility on further. Ways and means will have to come about which must not be allowed to remain fixed in the old structure that has come to be adopted. Instead situations must be livingly transformed so that people can be found who are capable through their very nature of carrying the central impulses further. Thus a matter that appears to be merely organizational immediately leads to a further question: How shall we be able to bring this impulse into the public eye? Once again we shall have to let experience play its part. The other day I ventured to make some suggestions about working in public. What Herr van Bemmelen has just said shows us that Holland is no exception to the way in which everywhere people are waiting to hear about Anthroposophy in a suitable form and in the right way. People are asking about the soul of man and about cultivating the soul in its true nature. Beyond this it will fall to us to find people among the general public who want to work further in this realm. Everywhere it must be made possible to open our doors and welcome people to the Society. Necessary for this above all is an understanding of the human being which can arise out of the warmth of love for our fellows combined with serious work in the anthroposophical sense. So the question of the next generation coming to the Society will be a far-reaching one. It has always been difficult to find people who want to continue with the work because for this it is necessary to create a situation within the Society which enables younger people to make a connection in the first place.

Today, especially, if I may say so, in Germany, many of the supports and conditions of the past, and of life as it has been for so long, are in general breaking down. In this situation younger people in particular—perhaps students who are finishing their university courses or maybe people who would like to work out of the artistic impulses of Anthroposophy—are forced instead to creep into some corner of ordinary economic life, collapsing as it is, in order merely to make a living. It ought to be a task of the Society, and especially the individual groups, to find ways of creating a foundation within Anthroposophy on which young people can live out what they have learnt in their studies. And out of this arises the most important question of all: How can that which is coming towards us by way of young, striving, life-filled strength be taken up into the School of Spiritual Science? What form will make it possible, whether here in Dornach or elsewhere, to make studies possible that can lead to the future collaboration of these people? It is a problem which is already coming to the fore here and there but especially in Germany where there is a strong need for new colleagues but where those who ought to be working in the Society are often in such dire straits. We must find these people amongst the general public through our public work.

So the establishment of the School on the generous scale described to us so far can give us the hope that we need so badly. In the School as well as in the Society and in the groups there is a platform for tackling the problems which are arising.

The same applies to the scientific work in the institutions. Herr van Bemmelen has touched on the field of education, but similar questions could be asked with regard to scientific work. The influence of this Conference will lead to a flaring up of the will to work and to find ways. Other friends are sure to have questions about this too. Let us hope, when we return home and are asked about everything, that out of the experience of these discussions we shall be capable of giving genuinely concrete answers. So that we can come to this, problems that have arisen really must be brought forward, just as I have presumed to suggest certain things now. If other friends from the various countries bring forward these problems from different angles, let us hope that the new impulse in the General Society will be able to penetrate to every furthest corner, to all the groups and to all the individuals who are and who want to be members of this Society.

DR STEINER: May I now ask Herr van Leer to speak.

Herr van Leer speaks about the intention of sending in reports to Herr Steffen. He makes suggestions about how to divide up what is sent into different categories.

DR STEINER: I rather think that the purpose of this correspondence will best be served by taking the following into account. Without having discussed this with Herr Steffen I believe I can say more or less what he thinks, though perhaps he will have to correct me afterwards. The best reports will be those that come out of the individuality of the different correspondents. I think that all those friends I mentioned the other day, and also a number of others, are interested in what I meant by the life of the Society and cultural life in general. And I believe that most of these friends think about what comes to their attention with regard to either one or the other at least once a week, or even every day. Things go through one's mind; so one day they sit down and simply write down what has gone through their mind. As a result fifteen, or perhaps twenty, four-page letters will arrive here. It will be quite a task to read them all. Well, if twenty letters arrive, Herr Steffen will be kind enough to keep ten of them and give me the other ten. We shall manage. But we shall manage best of all if you spare us any categories. We need to hear how each individual feels in his heart of hearts, for we want to deal with human beings and not with schedules. Let everything remain a motley mixture; this will bring us the individuality of the writer in question and that is what interests us. We hope in this way to obtain the material we need, human material with which to fill our Supplements so that they in turn give a human impression with their all too human weaknesses.

Just write down on four pages, or sometimes even eight pages, what is in your heart of hearts. For us here the most interesting thing will always be the people themselves. We want to cultivate a human relationship with human beings and out of these human relationships we want to create something that will shine out even after it has gone through the process of being dipped in dreadful printer's ink. This is what I am talking about. It will be best of all if everyone can present himself in a human way to other human beings. Now, Herr Steffen, please correct me.

HERR STEFFEN: Certainly not. You have expressed exactly what is in my soul too. I only want to say that there is no question of this becoming too much work for me; it is part and parcel of my gifts as a writer that I enjoy reading reports of this kind. I always have to strive to see what is going on inside people's souls, so truly no letter can be too long. I don't believe it will be too much for me. I anyway enjoy reading several newspapers every day, but if interesting things come from our friends, then I greatly prefer to read them. As regards categories, an editor or a writer has only one, or rather two: the first is what he can use and the second is what he cannot use. That is all I wanted to say.

DR STEINER: Just imagine, after these discussions, what it would mean if these reports were to inspire Herr Steffen to write a novel or even a play! That would be the most wonderful thing I could think of.

MR COLLISON: I would like to know whether we might ‘sometimes’ receive a reply.

DR STEINER: I hope that the reply will be there every week in the Supplement. But if a special reply were to be necessary, then I would hope that one would be sent.

Now may I ask Herr Stibbe to speak.

Herr Stibbe reports on the opposition experienced in Holland, [Note 64] referring particularly to Professor de Jong.

DR STEINER (referring to Herr Stibbe's report with regard to Professor de Jong): Yes indeed. He has tried to form a methodical concept of mystery wisdom by bringing it down to all kinds of spiritualist phenomena, as he describes in his book.

Now, dear friends. It will still be possible in the next day or two to speak further on the questions that have arisen out of this discussion. So far as I can see, the questions that have arisen are: reporting, and then the opposition. These are the tangible questions that have arisen so far. I cannot see any others taking shape yet.

Tomorrow we shall start our meeting at 10 o'clock and I shall begin by asking those friends to speak who have reports to give about the results of their research. Frau Dr Kolisko and Dr Maier, Stuttgart. Now may I ask Dr Schwebsch to speak. When he has finished I shall ask for a report on eurythmy in America to be read out.

Dr Schwebsch expresses the gratitude of the Waldorf School for the manifold assistance it has received.

DR STEINER: Following on from this, please allow me to touch on a few things. The first is that once the grave financial position of the Waldorf School had become known, interest in it was awakened really everywhere. We have seen particularly in Switzerland how the efforts of the members of the school associations led to the creation of numerous sponsorships. Mrs Mackenzie has endeavoured to form a committee in England to carry out collections in aid of the Waldorf School. The first donation has already been sent to me and I shall ask the leaders of the Waldorf School to accept this small beginning.

Now I have something else to say: So many thanks are owed to the world on behalf of the Waldorf School—Dr Schwebsch has already mentioned a number of things—that it is impossible to encompass everything in a moment. We ought to make a long list of all those to whom we owe thanks in one way or another on behalf of the Waldorf School. The interest in it is indeed great. Yet we shall ever and again have to continue to ask for an even greater interest. The support given so far has in the main been for the school itself. Less thought has hitherto been given to the pupils or those who might become pupils of the Waldorf School. There is one case, or rather two, which really touch us deeply. At a time when those living in Switzerland were in a position to purchase a great deal in Germany with very few Swiss Francs, two workers here at the Goetheanum felt they could put into practice a very praiseworthy idea, namely to send their sons to the Waldorf School. Considerable sacrifices were made by our friend, Pastor Geyer, when he undertook to care for these two schoolboys. We at the Goetheanum take the view that we should finance the actual school fees and whatever is needed for the school in the same way as other firms such as Der Kommende Tag and Waldorf Astoria pay for the children of their workers. But now that life for the children has suddenly become so expensive in Germany, more expensive than it would be here in Switzerland, it is no longer possible for the families of the boys to pay for their keep. Now both families and boys are faced with the sad prospect of their being unable to return to the Waldorf School after the Christmas holidays. So I should like to ask whether it would be possible to make a collection here in order, at least for the near future, to pay for the keep of the two boys in Stuttgart so that they can continue to go to the Waldorf School. What we need is 140 Francs a month for both boys together. We shall try to set up a money box for this. Perhaps Mr Pyle will be prepared to lend us one for donations specifically for this purpose. Maybe this is how we can do it.

Now would Dr Wachsmuth please read the resume of the report on eurythmy in America.

Dr Wachsmuth reads a report from Frau Neuscheller on the progress made by eurythmy in North America.

DR STEINER: Dear friends, first I would like to ask those from further afield who wish to attend tomorrow's performance of the Three Kings Play to get their tickets today so that what remains can be available for Dornach friends tomorrow.

Secondly would you please note that my three last evening lectures will lead in various ways to a discussion of medical matters for the general audience. Then after the lectures there will be discussions about medical matters with the doctors who are here. Would therefore any practising doctors please come to the Glass House tomorrow morning at 8.30 for an initial meeting. [Note 65] I am referring only to practising doctors. After 1 January there will be opportunity for others interested in medical questions to participate in other sessions.

Tomorrow morning at 10 o'clock we shall start with the continuation of today's meeting. I would ask you to let us begin with the two reports already mentioned. Then, both tomorrow and the next day, I shall take the liberty of speaking briefly on the idea of the future building in Dornach and I shall ask you to let me bring up for discussion some points on how this idea of the building in Dornach might be carried into reality. It would not be right to recommend that this meeting should be allowed to pass without any reference at all to the financial side of the idea of the building in Dornach. I shall leave it to you to say something after what I shall be obliged to bring forward very briefly tomorrow and the next day about the artistic aspect of the idea of the building in Dornach.

Then I would ask for time to be set aside in the afternoon at 2.30 for a meeting of Swiss members or their delegates. Herr Aeppli has asked for this meeting and has requested that I attend, or indeed take the chair. So I would ask the Swiss members to hold this meeting tomorrow afternoon at 2.30. This refers only to Swiss members since the matters to be discussed apply solely to the Swiss Anthroposophical Society.

This afternoon at 4.30 we shall see a performance of eurythmy, and my lecture will take place this evening at 8.30.

DR STEINER:

My dear friends!

Once again as before we begin with the verses we have taken into ourselves:

Soul of Man!
Thou livest in the limbs
Which bear thee through the world of space
In the spirit's ocean-being.
Practise spirit-recalling
In depths of soul,
Where in the wielding will
Of world-creating
Thine own I
Comes to being
Within God's I.
And thou wilt truly live
In the World-Being of Man.

Soul of Man!
Thou livest in the beat of heart and lung
Which leads thee through the rhythm of time
Into the realm of thine own soul's feeling.
Practise spirit-awareness in balance of the soul,
Where the surging deeds
Of the world's becoming
Thine own I
Unite
With the World-I,
And thou wilt truly feel
In the Soul-Weaving of Man.

Soul of Man !
Thou livest in the resting head
Which from the grounds of eternity
Opens to thee the world-thoughts.
Practise spirit-beholding
In stillness of thought,
Where the eternal aims of Gods
World-Being's Light
On thine own I
Bestow
For thy free willing.
And thou wilt truly think
In the Spirit-Foundations of Man.

And drawing all this together in the remembrance of the Event of Golgotha which gives meaning to the whole of earthly evolution:

At the turning of the time
The Spirit-Light of the world
Entered the stream of earthly being.
Darkness of night
Had held its sway,
Day-radiant light
Streamed into souls of men.
Light that gives warmth
To simple shepherds' hearts,
Light that enlightens
The wise heads of kings.

Light Divine Christ-Sun
Warm thou our hearts,
Enlighten thou our heads,
That good may become
What we from our hearts would found
What we from our heads would direct
In light-filled
Willing.

And we imprint this into ourselves:

[Rudolf Steiner writes on the blackboard as he speaks. See Facsimile 4, Page XVI bottom.]

Light Divine,
Christ-Sun,

We imprint it in such a way that we especially relate to it the closing words, which will be spoken in their threefoldness once more tomorrow: how this Light Divine, this Sun of Christ shine forth so that like shining suns they can be heard from East, West, North, South. To this Light Divine and this Sun of Christ we relate especially the closing words which were spoken on the first day:

The spirits of the elements hear it
from
East, West, North, South:
May human beings hear it!

[As shown on the blackboard]

Light Divine
Chr.-Sun
The spirits of the elements hear it
from
E. W. N. S.
May human beings hear it!

DR STEINER: We come now, my dear friends, to the reports announced yesterday. Would Herr Maier please give his report first.

Dr Rudolf Maier, Stuttgart, speaks about ‘The Connection of Magnetism with Light’. [Note 66]

DR STEINER: It will be of the greatest importance that a truly anthroposophical method should be made customary in the different branches of scientific life by those individuals who are called to these branches within our anthroposophical circles. Indeed, seen from a certain point of view, this is of the utmost importance. If you seek the source of the great resistance of our time that has been appearing for decades against any kind of spiritual-scientific view, you will find that this resistance comes from the different branches of natural science. These different branches of natural science have developed in isolation, without any view of the world in general.

Round about the middle of the nineteenth century a general despair began to gain ground in connection with an overall view of the world. People said: All earlier overall views of the world contradict one another, and none of them has led anywhere; now it is time to develop the sciences purely on an exact foundation, without reference to any view of the world.

Half a century and more has passed since then, and now any inclination to unite a view of the world with science has disappeared from human minds. Even when scientific research itself urges an attempt to be made, it turns out to be quite impossible because there is insufficient depth in the spiritual-scientific realm.

If it should become possible for Anthroposophy to give to the different branches of science impulses of method which lead to certain research results, then one of the main obstacles to spiritual research existing in the world will have been removed. That is why it is so important for work of the right kind to be undertaken in the proper anthroposophical sense.

Today there is an abyss between art and science; but within science, too, there is an abyss between, for instance, physiology and physics. All these abysses will be bridged if scientific work is done in the right way in our circles. Therefore from a general anthroposophical point of view we must interest ourselves in these different things as much as our knowledge and capacities will allow. A scientific impulse will have to emanate from the Anthroposophical Society. This must be made evident at the moment when we want to take the Anthroposophical Society into entirely new channels.

Now, dear friends, since our stomach needs a very tiny interval between the courses of this feast of spirit and soul, we shall ask Frau Dr Kolisko to give her report in two or three minutes' time.

DR STEINER: May I now ask Frau Dr Kolisko to give her report on her special field.

Frau Dr Kolisko speaks about the biological work of the research institute in Stuttgart, ‘The Effects of Microorganisms’. [Note 67]

DR STEINER: Now, my dear friends, you have seen that quiet work is going on amongst us on scientific questions and that it is indeed possible to provide out of Anthroposophy a stimulus for science in a way that is truly needed today. But in the present situation of the Anthroposophical Movement such things are really only possible because there are people like Frau Dr Kolisko who take on the work in such a devoted and selfless way. If you think about it, you will come to realize what a tremendous amount of work is involved in ascertaining all these sequences of data which can then be amalgamated to form the curve in the graph which is the needed result.

These experiments are, from an anthroposophical point of view, details leading to a totality which is needed by science today more urgently than can be said. Yet if we continue to work as we have been doing at present in our research institute, then perhaps in fifty, or maybe seventy-five, years we shall come to the result that we need, which is that innumerable details go to make up a whole. This whole will then have a bearing not only on the life of knowledge but also on the whole of practical life as well.

People have no idea today how deeply all these things can affect practical daily life in such realms as the production of what human beings need in order to live or the development of methods of healing and so on.

Now you might say that the progress of mankind has always gone forward at a slow pace and that there is not likely to be any difference in this field. However, with civilization in its present brittle and easily destructible state, it could very well happen that in fifty or seventy-five years' time the chance will have been missed for achieving what so urgently needs to be achieved. In the face of the speed at which we are working and having to work, because we can only work if there are such devoted colleagues as Frau Dr Kolisko—a speed which might lead to results in fifty, or perhaps seventy-five years—in the face of this speed, let me therefore express not a wish, not even a possibility, but merely, perhaps, an illusion, which is that it would be possible to achieve the necessary results in five or ten years. And I am convinced that if it were possible for us to create the necessary equipment and the necessary institutes and to have the necessary colleagues, as many as possible to work out of this spirit, then we could succeed in achieving in five or ten years what will now take us fifty or seventy-five years. The only thing we would need for this work would be 50 to 75 million Francs. Then we would probably be able to do the work in a tenth of the time. As I said, I am not expressing this as a wish nor even as a possibility, but merely as an illusion, though a very realistic illusion. If we had 75 million Francs we could achieve what has to be achieved. This is something that we should at least think about.

In a few minutes I shall continue by starting to give a few indications about the idea of the future building in Dornach, indications which I shall continue tomorrow.

(A short interval follows, before Dr Steiner's lecture.)

My dear friends!

As you may imagine, I have recently given much thought to the idea of the building in Dornach, and the situation will most certainly necessitate the earliest possible execution of this idea of this building in Dornach.

A great many of you were present in the summer when the financing of the future Goetheanum was discussed. [Note 68] Everything that came to light then, when our friends revealed their willingness to make infinite sacrifices, and all the observations of the situation I have made since then, force me to the opinion that there is no other way but to proceed as rapidly as possible to the construction of a Goetheanum here, even if externally this Goetheanum cannot present the image we would dearly have liked to promise ourselves.

It seems to me that this Goetheanum must be erected in such a way as to make it usable as expediently as possible.

But if the idea about the building expressed at the meeting in the summer were to be realized, it would definitely not be possible to use it in a suitable way once it was finished. For is it not so that, in considering all the possibilities, we must look, might I say, through the walls, that is through the walls of the wallets of our dear friends. I know very well that what I am about to put to you will be met, out of the utmost good will, by many objections. And yet I still believe that the situation will prove me right when I say that the best way to proceed will be to plan for a Goetheanum of which the actual building costs do not exceed 3 to 3½ million Francs. Only then, even with the utmost willingness for sacrifice, shall we be in a position truly fruitfully to serve the intentions inaugurated in our new Statutes.

It would not be at all sensible if, as the Anthroposophical Society, we were to spend every last penny simply on the building itself. This would not be a good thing to do. So I do believe that the right idea would be to spend about 3 to 3½ million on the building to start with. If it is to be built in accordance with the situation as it actually is, then it must be as resistant as possible to damage such as that which unfortunately destroyed the old Goetheanum. And, as I have already pointed out in my articles in Das Goetheanum, [Note 69] it must make available as much space as possible for anthroposophical activities. So we shall have to restrict ourselves somewhat. But I believe that just because of this we can be all the more certain of achieving what was pointed out yesterday, especially on the part of the young people: that above all a spiritual Goetheanum must exist here as soon as is in any way possible.

Today I want to start by explaining the ground-plan of the Goetheanum to you and then tomorrow I shall speak more about the elevation, the facade. I want to shape the ground-plan and the whole distribution of the space to be taken up by the Goetheanum in the following way.

The Goetheanum will not be as round a building as the old Goetheanum was. It is all very well to ask why I have not brought the model to show you, my dear friends. But you must not forget that this new Goetheanum is to be built in a relatively new material, concrete. And to give a concrete building a truly artistic character in keeping with the material is exceedingly difficult; the solution to this problem is very demanding.

You know Dr Grosheintz has had a house built near here which I have attempted to design in a style appropriate to concrete. [Note 70] But though I still believe that this style might be considered satisfactory for a dwelling to a certain degree—but only to a certain degree—it would nevertheless be impossible to build a second house to exactly the same plan. In any case it certainly did not yield an architectural style for a Goetheanum built of concrete. For the new Goetheanum it will be necessary to depart—essentially—from the idea of a circular building; we shall come back not to a circular building but to one that is more rectangular, a building with angles.

You can see the intention in the small building lower down the hill that was built to provide a hall for eurythmy practice. [Note 71] It is built in a different material, but it shows that an angular building has considerable potential.

Now since there is the need to provide stages for eurythmy and the Mystery Dramas, it will be necessary to combine an angular building with a circular one. In addition, the new Goetheanum will have to provide space for the various activities. We shall need studios and we shall need lecture rooms. The single small white hall in which the fire first broke out a year ago had turned out to be quite inadequate for our purposes. So the next Goetheanum would have to be built in such a way that it would have a lower level—a ground floor—and an upper level. The upper level would, essentially, be the large auditorium for lectures and for those who come to hear and see the performances of eurythmy, the Mystery Dramas and other things. And on the lower level, beneath this auditorium, would be smaller rooms, divided off by walls, which would provide space for artistic and scientific purposes.

I also intend to create a space for the administration of the General Anthroposophical Society, so that this can be carried out direct from the Goetheanum.

In the idea of this building I also want to solve a certain problem in what seems to me a practical way. The plan will be such that there will be a stage at the rear with a rounded form. (Please don't take any notice of the proportions in this drawing.) The stage will essentially form a semi-circle. It will be enclosed by store-rooms. And then extending forwards there will be at the upper level the auditorium and at the lower level the various rooms, with a passage-way in between so that in future there will be more freedom of movement in this new Goetheanum than there was in the old. In the old Goetheanum you stepped straight inside from a vestibule at the entrance. Here, so that there can be freedom of movement, there will be a heated area in which it will be possible to meet and converse in all kinds of ways. And this passage-way will give access to the various rooms on the lower level. [See Facsimile 5, Page XVIII bottom.]

Then, going up a staircase, you will come to the large auditorium from which you look on to the stage or the space where lectures and other things will take place.

The practical problem I just mentioned is the following: In the old Goetheanum great inconvenience was caused by the fact that eurythmy rehearsals had to take place on the stage itself. When visitors came from elsewhere, and I hope they will continue to come in the future, they wanted to see everything; but the auditorium was needed for the work, so it was never possible to allocate time properly in a way that was needed for rehearsals and preparations for performances.

I now want to solve this problem by having on the ground floor, that is the lower level, a stage of exactly the same size as that on the upper level. The one on the upper level will serve for the actual performances while the one down below, having identical measurements, will be for rehearsals only. So there will be a room down below which can serve for all rehearsals up to the dress rehearsal, thus leaving the upper auditorium free at all times. The lower hall will have an ante-room just for those taking part in the rehearsals, where they may wait and sit down. On the upper level the stage will give straight on to the auditorium. The auditorium will be the same size as the plan of the rectangular part of the building.

In this way it will be possible to work in a practical manner in all the available space. It will not be necessary to make the new Goetheanum very much taller than the old Goetheanum, since I am not considering a new cupola. I am endeavouring to create a design for the roof which will consist of a series of planes arranged in relation to one another in a way which will, I believe, be no less aesthetically attractive than a cupola.

So we shall enter into the Goetheanum through a facade on the main front which I shall describe tomorrow. There we shall find the staircase leading to the main upper space; and we shall have a passage-way from which the different rooms are reached, and so on. There will also be entrances at the sides. By making the stage space smaller on plan than the store area, and by extending the walls forwards, we will gain space for the different rooms. At the top it will be possible to light the whole space with daylight, so that we can alternate between daylight, when it is there, and artificial light when we need it.

In this way it will be possible to have a really practical building in which every cubic foot of space can be used to the full. A great deal will be able to go on in this building all at once, whereas in the old building only one thing at a time could take place.

You must consider, my dear friends, that this is not simply intended to be an improvement—which perhaps some might consider a dis-improvement—but it is designed to take account of all the developments that have come about. I have often stressed amongst ourselves that if you want to live in reality and not in ideas, then the realities of the time must be given particular recognition. The time in which one lives is a reality. But it is difficult to generate an understanding for this time as being something real. There are still people today who represent the threefolding of the social organism with the very sentences I used to use with regard to the conditions prevailing at the time, in 1919. History is indeed advancing so rapidly just now that if someone describes things in the way they were described in 1919 this seems to be hundreds of years out of date. Thus, since things have after all been happening in the Anthroposophical Movement, you cannot build in 1924 as you did in 1913 and 1914. In 1913 and 1914 the idea of the Goetheanum arose simply out of the realization that an artistic space would have to be created for the Mystery Dramas. At that time we really only thought of the Mystery Dramas and the lectures. But much has happened since those days and I only wish that even more had happened, but I hope that quite soon a good deal more will happen even without the 75 million Francs I spoke about earlier. This must certainly be taken into consideration.

The thing that has happened since 1919 is that eurythmy has been developed. [Note 72] In 1913 it did not yet exist, it has only developed since. Therefore it cannot be maintained that what was good enough then can be good enough now. Furthermore, although I was assured at the time that the building could be executed at a cost of much less than one million German Reichs-marks, nevertheless, as you know, the cost in the end was at least seven or eight times as much. So we do not want to do our sums in the abstract this time. We want to reckon with certain quite definite figures. The building must now be executed in such a way that we can start to carry out what is contained in our Statutes as soon as possible. This can only happen if we erect it in the manner described.

Even so, it will be possible to win, from the intractable material of concrete, forms that offer something new to the artistic eye. The old forms of the Goetheanum—I shall have more to say to you about these things this evening—will have to belong to history, which means your hearts, my dear friends. Forms moulded in concrete will have to be something entirely different. Much will have to be done on the one hand to force the intractable material of concrete into forms which the eye of the human soul can follow artistically and on the other hand to mould seemingly decorative features, which are actually a consequence of the concrete itself, in an artistic and sculptural way, so that the material of concrete can for once be revealed in an artistic manner.

I ask you now to regard this idea as the seed out of which the Goetheanum shall actually emerge. I have stated that I alone am allowed to work on the artistic creation of the Goetheanum and it will not be possible to take on board to any great extent any of those offers or suggestions which have already been made—of course with the best intentions. There is no point in telling me of buildings in concrete that have been put up here or there, or of factories here or there that are working efficiently. If the Goetheanum building is to come about in concrete, it will have to emerge from an original idea, and nothing that has so far been achieved in concrete can serve as a basis for what is to come into being here.

This, my dear friends, is what I wanted to say to you today. It was not in any way intended to put a stop to the collections already set in train by our dear friend van Leer or by others representing the different countries. The sum originally envisaged will still be needed if we are to carry out what must, of necessity, be carried out. Perhaps I can spur on your zeal in this direction even more by saying that we shall try to use the money you collect in the most economical way by putting it towards anthroposophical work in the sense that it will be used for running the Goetheanum and that the Goetheanum will be built using the smallest amount possible. We shall endeavour here to bring a Goetheanum into being in the shortest possible time.

Tomorrow I shall speak about the image the Goetheanum will present to the outside, namely its facade.

I now want to return to something that is being brought to me from many sides like a kind of derivative of fear. On all sides I am being asked how the three Classes and the Sections of the School of Spiritual Science at the Goetheanum are to be handled. My dear friends, in the first place the Sections are no one's concern. The Sections are being set up for the work here. There is no need for us to discuss the Sections. They will exist in accordance with whatever is achieved. So really we can only speak about the General Anthroposophical Society as the foundation, and about the three Classes. And I believe that everything relevant is stated with absolute clarity in our Statutes. In Paragraph 5 it says: ‘Members of the Society will be admitted to the School on their own application after a period of membership to be determined by the leadership at the Goetheanum. They enter in this way the First Class of the School of Spiritual Science. Admission to the Second or Third Classes takes place when the person requesting it is deemed eligible by the leadership at the Goetheanum.’

‘Paragraph 7. The organizing of the School of Spiritual Science is, to begin with, the responsibility of Rudolf Steiner, who will appoint his collaborators and his possible successor.’

These sentences express, I believe, with absolute clarity that it is necessary to apply to me personally either in writing or in person; it would be better to start by saying in writing, since there will be too many personal applications to be dealt with on the spot. The matter will be taken from there. That is what it says here. The storm of queries is perhaps not so much the result of unclarity as of the necessity, my dear friends, to become accustomed to clarity. Perhaps unclarity is what is wanted in some quarters. Pedantry must be excluded, and bureaucracy will be banished across the border, but in everything that emanates from here—at least this is what we intend—absolute clarity shall reign. From what is written here it is clear that a little note is all that is needed. The little note should be addressed to me personally. And you will see how the answer will be given. You must have confidence.

That is what I wanted to say. Herr Hahl has asked to speak about the building of the Goetheanum. Please would you now speak.

Herr Hahl speaks on this subject.

My dear friends!

AT 2.30 in the afternoon of 31 December a meeting of the Swiss Anthroposophical Society took place in the Architects' Office. Herr Aeppli had called this meeting and had asked Dr Steiner to be present and take the chair.

Members of the Vorstand of the General Anthroposophical Society present are: Dr Steiner, Albert Steffen, Fräulein Vreede, Dr Wachsmuth. Later also Frau Dr Steiner.

Herr Aeppli greets Dr Steiner and requests him to take the chair.

Dr Steiner opens the meeting called for the purpose of a free discussion at the request of the delegates of the Anthroposophical Society in Switzerland:

I thank Herr Aeppli most warmly for his kind words. Now let us begin the meeting. Who would like to make a contribution to this open discussion? Would anyone wishing to speak please do so.

Frau Professor Bürgi, Bern, requests Dr Steiner to become the Chairman of the Swiss Anthroposophical Society.

DR STEINER: I am somewhat surprised by Frau Professor Bürgi's suggestion. For—at least in the long run—we cannot very well depart from the stipulation of the incompatibility of the offices of the central Vorstand with other offices. Thus I too would not be able to take on any other position in some part of the Anthroposophical Society in the long run. But quite apart from that, if we are to enter into a provisional arrangement for the time being, would not Herr Steffen be a better choice as General Secretary for Switzerland? It seems to me that if we are going to enter into a provisional situation, then Herr Steffen would be the right person. Of course it is entirely up to you to have a discussion about it. But it seems rather a problem, or indeed senseless, for me to assume the position of Chairman of the Swiss Society when the only reason preventing Herr Steffen is the fact that he is a member of the central Vorstand. I am in the very same position. Perhaps you would speak further on this.

HERR STEFFEN: I would want to decline. It does not seem to be fitting.

DR STEINER: But my dear Herr Steffen, why not? Since it is to be provisional, I cannot see why not! But perhaps there is another way of getting out of this fix. Perhaps we can achieve both ends, dear friends: bringing about a Swiss leadership for the Swiss Anthroposophical Society and, arising out of the local situation, creating a close link with the central Anthroposophical Society. Or ought it not to be possible for there to be a close link between the central Anthroposophical Society, which has its seat here in Switzerland, and the Swiss Anthroposophical Society? Perhaps we can get out of this fix by seeing to it that we in principle maintain the incompatibility while you express it by choosing a kind of General Secretary apart from us yet at the same time confer on both of us the chairmanship as members of the Vorstand of the central Anthroposophical Society. It would then be that the Swiss Society comes to the resolution, arising out of this meeting of its delegates, that it is an obvious thing for the central Vorstand to be regarded also as the head of the Swiss Anthroposophical Society. And the Swiss Anthroposophical Society then appoints an acting General Secretary. If we were to do it like this, it would not have to be provisional, for it would be an expression of the very best of all situations: The Swiss members have no fear for their independence in that they simply take into their bosom the whole of the Anthroposophical Society. This is how I think we could solve this problem. Herr Steffen and I together will take on the chairmanship in our capacity as Presidents of the Anthroposophical Society.

DR HUGENTOBLER: Truly we could not have come up with a better solution!

DR STEINER: Would anyone else like to speak?

Herr Keller suggests that the choice of General Secretary be left to the Vorstand.

DR STEINER: It is of course rather difficult for the Vorstand to make this choice if the matter is not discussed first. I am sure I am not giving away esoteric secrets by saying that it is extremely difficult to discover which individual is so popular all over Switzerland as to be generally accepted as the administrator. Perhaps a little discussion on the matter might contribute to achieving a result. The office will then be exercised in close contact with Herr Steffen and myself. And then what Frau Professor Bürgi said would probably no longer apply in the way it would have done had an independent General Secretary been chosen. What she said was that the Swiss Society was in an exposed position through being so close to the Goetheanum and so on, and that therefore it would be important for the office to be exercised in a suitable manner. But now, since you have been so good as to chose us to take on this office, these arguments may not apply quite so sharply any longer. I rather think that now the person's popularity will be all that matters. But would anyone else like to say something?

Dr Grosheintz believes that it is perhaps not necessary to have a General Secretary in addition to the present Vorstand.

DR STEINER: Would not people prefer that a person be nominated by the meeting so that the various administrative tasks can be better carried out? Surely people would prefer this? I would like to hear what people think.

EDGAR DÜRLER: We of the ‘New Generation’ branch suggest Dr Oskar Grosheintz.

DR STEINER: Dr Oskar Grosheintz has been suggested. Are there any other suggestions?

Herr Thut would like further clarification of the duties incumbent on this person.

DR STEINER: Now that we are making a new beginning, should we not start afresh with new arrangements and disregard the old ones? Could we not give up the old ways and reorganize things starting from the roots? From an objective point of view I don't think there is anything against the Swiss Anthroposophical Society being constituted in such a way that its main representation lies with the General Anthroposophical Society in the way we have just decided. However, on the level of feelings I do want to avoid a sense possibly arising later on that the Swiss Anthroposophical Society is being patronized in any way or treated as a second-rate child. In actual fact this would not be possible, for by embracing it in the first place it is shown to be a first-rate child. This would indeed have to be the case. But nevertheless, a hint of a feeling could arise somewhere that the Swiss Society is only an appendage of the General Anthroposophical Society. Tact also has a part to play in this, and in practice I don't think it would happen. But if anyone here does have a hint of any such feeling in his heart, then please do express it now, so that we can really come to a conclusion on this matter. Otherwise it would probably be best with regard to Switzerland simply to make allowances for the old ways to which people are so attached and to carry out the general administration ourselves. In this case Herr Thut's suggestion would be the right one: simply to let the Swiss Anthroposophical Society be administered along with the General Anthroposophical Society. And for any constitutional matters having a substantial inner significance for the Society we would then call a meeting of whatever representatives the different branches wished to send. By doing this from time to time we would be expressing what people have become so attached to in Switzerland, namely the democratic element. I think that would then be the best way to get on. We would always call on the individual members. This would be possible in Switzerland because it is such a small country, but it would not be possible in any other national Society. It would also not be necessary for these meetings to take place always at the Goetheanum. They could be in different places since it is so easy to get everywhere. In fact it would be quite a good thing if these meetings of members were what are usually called wandering meetings. Having meetings from time to time in Bern, Zurich, Olten and so on, always combined, presumably, with one of my lectures, would be the best way of managing our affairs in Switzerland.

HERR THUT: It was not my intention to cling to this old organization at all costs. I merely wanted clarity about which aspects would remain and which would not, so as to be as clear as possible about how the things that are still in question would work.

DR STEINER: In that case I would consider that Herr Thut, and probably most of you here, would prefer it if the representation of the Swiss Society were carried out here by the General Anthroposophical Society? Routine matters can easily be attended to by the administration and no special secretary would be needed for this. And then, in order to keep in contact with the different parts of Switzerland, it would be best if we could nominate, as an advisory group for the Vorstand here, three, four or five men and women who would be trustees, to whom we could turn when necessary and with whom we could hold the wandering meetings. These would not have to be so very frequent, but the group of trustees would give us contact with the different parts of Switzerland. Perhaps this is what people would like?

HERR STORRER: If this were to be the case, then of course the ‘New Generation’ group would withdraw its suggestion.

DR STEINER: Would anyone else like to speak?

Dr Usteri asks a question.

DR STEINER: Your question refers to the Programme. But this is a matter of the agenda each day. You said that you arrived this morning and found the meeting in the hall was not what you expected? Was it not? Well you see we have had to depart from the Programme because it was not possible in the plenary gathering to speak in depth about all the questions that need discussing unless we had constantly adjourned the meetings and had had a running agenda for the members' meetings. That is why I myself departed in the daily agendas from the original Programme. But the agenda for the following day has always been announced in detail the day before. Thus the meeting of doctors in question took place this morning. What a pity that you did not have a chance to ask someone who was here yesterday. Any member would have been able to tell you that there was going to be a meeting of practising doctors in the Glass House at 8.30 this morning.

For you see: We wanted to make this particular Christmas Conference as fruitful as possible and do as much as we could to prevent everything from being watered down in general discussion. That is why medical matters were to be discussed among practising doctors only; so they were removed from the general meeting and are to be dealt with in three meetings of which the first took place this morning at 8.30, the second tomorrow and the third probably also—the time is yet to be announced. Thus the things announced in the Programme are in fact being dealt with in an even better way than had originally been made known. A general discussion amongst all the members would not have led to any better outcome. I have even made sure that all the meetings which do not concern all members but only particular groups have also been announced in the general meeting, so that those not concerned with a particular meeting nevertheless know that it is taking place. That you did not find this out was probably due to the fact that you did not arrive before 8.30, when you would have had an opportunity to ask someone. I don't think a General Secretary would have been able to inform you any better than any of the members if you had got there this morning. In House Friedwart you could have obtained exact information.

But of course there could also be very good reasons for nominating a General Secretary. This is something we could discuss further. There was no vote about it, but I should like to take a vote on this. Would those friends who are in favour of Albert Steffen and myself continuing as chairmen of the Swiss Anthroposophical Society please raise their hands. (They do.) Would those who are against also please raise their hands. (Nobody does.) So, the suggestion has been adopted. Now it is a question of whether we decide to let the administrative office of the General Anthroposophical Society take over the routine administration of the Swiss Anthroposophical Society and whether we set up a group of elders, or for that matter younger people, to whom we can turn from time to time when necessary or when something has to be decided.

Dr Usteri supports this suggestion.

Herr Geering supports Dr Usteri.

Herr Thut asks whether representation by a General Secretary would not be more advantageous than that by the representatives of the groups.

DR STEINER: I think it would be best if the individual branches were to suggest their delegates to us. The group of delegates can be as large as the number of branches that exist. The disadvantage hitherto has been that the group of representatives of the branches has at the same time been seen as the council. A council like this is no good for anything. But here—perhaps I am boasting, but this is what we intend—if the administration is firmly taken in hand by the leadership of the Anthroposophical Society, then it will be up to this leadership to take the initiative and call the delegates of the branches together for a meeting. In such a case a rather large group of delegates would probably not pose any particular difficulty. So I think it will be quite manageable for every single branch to nominate a representative for this circle. This, it seems to me, will be the best way. But if any branches wanted to join together to send a delegate, that would also be possible. But it is not necessary for this to be done today. It would perhaps be better to have a thorough discussion in the branches themselves and let us know who has been chosen sometime during the next two or three weeks. Then our administration will be entirely democratic, which is much favoured in Switzerland.

Now I would like to ask whether there is anything else you wish to bring up. I cannot imagine that you do not also have other wishes, urges, longings on your mind.

Herr Aeppli would like to know whether the question of the administration has now been settled.

DR STEINER: The meetings would take place anyway, and as for the purely administrative matters, they would be reported to this group so that the administration would be relieved of the responsibility if the council would accept the responsibility. Would anyone else like to speak?

DR USTERI: Now that there has been such applause, I presume that a formal vote on the two points is not necessary.

DR STEINER: Actually, I would ask you to vote once there is no one else who wishes to speak. Now does anyone else wish to speak on the matter of this group or on what I have said about the group relieving the administration?

HERR STORRER: I should like to suggest that the small branches send one and the larger branches two delegates. But then we should have to define what we mean by ‘large’ and ‘small’.

Herr Trinler says that what matters is not whether there are one or two but that they are the right people!

DR STEINER: Would anyone else like to say something about this?

So are you making this proposal? The proposal is that the small groups send one and the larger groups two delegates.

Herr Trinler says something (inaudible).

DR STEINER: The two proposals are in agreement with one another, they are not contradictory; but we shall have to define ‘larger’ and ‘smaller’. So what is a large and what is a small group?

HERR STORRER: Looking at the Swiss branches, I would say that the large ones are those at the Goetheanum, in Bern, in Basel, in Zurich and in St Gallen.

DR STEINER: But you could imagine that a branch which is small today might grow large later on. We do need a figure to tell us when a group is starting to become a large one.

HERR STORRER: A small group has not more than ten members.

DR STEINER: So ten and less is a small branch; eleven and over a large branch.

HERR TRINLER: A branch with as many as a hundred members does not necessarily achieve any more than a small one.

HERR THUT: It is not a matter of what the branch achieves. Perhaps forty or fifty could be the number determining a large group.

Herr Schweigler asks how he should understand the matter of deciding about the delegates: Would this be by a vote or simply by acclaim? Which is best?

DR STEINER: The situation varies from one country to another. You will have heard that in England I suggested that the selection of representatives be made not according to branches but according to whatever figure is arrived at by dividing the total English membership by seven. I think this would be a very good method for England, but it would not be good to apply this way of thinking to Switzerland. Here I think we should aim in this group for two delegates from branches with over fifty members and one from those with fewer than fifty members. Apart from this, the difference is not particularly important. I think that would be best in this case. A branch with ten members can perhaps work better than a branch with two hundred members, certainly. But that applies to all forms of democratic representation, and I do not believe that you can base any particular rule on this. Otherwise you would have to say: Those branches which work well send two representatives and those which work badly send one. But this would be rather difficult to determine! And a branch which does not work well will certainly not believe such a thing of itself. (Laughter)

DR HUGENTOBLER: I don't think Herr Schweigler realizes that there are things about which you cannot vote.

Herr Schweigler denies this. Dr Hugentobler answers (inaudible).

DR STEINER: So if I have understood this correctly, then the proposal regarding the groups of delegates is as follows: Firstly the group of delegates is instituted, and secondly branches of over fifty members send two representatives and branches of under fifty members send one.

A MAN ASKS: Are the branch leaders not the people best suited?

DR STEINER: But the branch leaders are not decided by the meeting of delegates but by the branches themselves! It has nothing to do with whoever might be the branch leader at the moment.

A MAN: But (inaudible).

HERR GEERING-CHRIST: That is a misunderstanding on the part of this gentleman!

DR STEINER: The initiative has to lie with somebody. And now the initiative will lie with us here in Dornach and we shall be supported by the delegates. The meeting of delegates will be a kind of control body. It does not have to work as a council. A difficulty only arises if there is a council scattered all over the place that never does anything. That is where the difficulty lies.

DR USTERI: Have we accepted Dr Hugentobler's proposal that there should be a vote?

DR STEINER: It has been proposed that there should be a vote. Very well. Dr Hugentobler's suggestion was the most far-reaching, namely that the branches choose their own delegates and let us know in due course, whereby branches of over fifty members will send two and those with fewer than fifty will send one. Does anyone want me to divide this proposal into two parts? If that is not the case, then I now propose the vote for both the questions and ask those in favour to raise their hands. Who is against? The proposal seems to have been adopted.

So now the whole of the administration and leadership of the Society in Switzerland has been constituted.

Does anyone else wish to speak about a matter that concerns the Swiss Society?

HERR STOKAR: I should like to ask the present chairman, Dr Steiner, for his opinion on whether the Swiss Society should now come to grips with the Statutes. As stated in the Statutes, it is now up to us to discuss the Statutes and work out a suitable form for our national Society, perhaps by adding to the general Statutes.

DR STEINER: That will of course be the subject of the first meeting of delegates, and it will be our task, as the council of the Swiss Society, to work out a draft. On the basis of this draft the first meeting of delegates will be able to discuss with us how we adopt the draft statutes or else modify them or whatever. This will surely be in order on the basis of the decisions made today.

HERR STOKAR has another question: When there are official public announcements to be made, will they be made from here or will the representatives in the different towns be expected to make them?

DR STEINER: First of all there will be an official report in the first supplement to Das Goetheanum, [Note 73] and apart from this official report a good number of friends have been present and experienced it all for themselves. They will pass on anything they consider important. That is how I see it. As I see it, people are actually obliged to speak within the circle of the Society about what they have experienced here, and they could also speak about it wherever else they like in a tactful way such as is appropriate when speaking in public.

Dr Hugentobler wants the links with Dornach to be better.

HERR GEERING-CHRIST: Will nothing be made public?

DR STEINER: Let me repeat what I have just said: Members should feel obliged to speak amongst the members about whatever they have experienced. About whatever they have experienced! But they should also feel in duty bound to bring these things out into the world in, shall I say, a tactful manner. And I include the press in this. It will be possible to do it in a suitable way and we shall make sure that it is done in a suitable way. Indeed, I should like to say anyway—and as far as I know the whole Vorstand, which I have been so very instrumental in bringing into being, supports this—that I count courtesy as something that ought to exist extensively within our Society. We need courtesy. Some of us regard it as the most terrible thing that could have happened that one of our most valued members in Switzerland [Note 74] has been lost to us. He was a member of the Goetheanum committee and one of the reasons he was able to give was that he once entered the Goetheanum, as a member of the committee, and was then thrown out. There have been many such examples of ‘discourtesies’. We shall very urgently have to make it our task that courtesy is not the least of the unwritten paragraphs of our Statutes. We shall have to make very, very strenuous efforts in this direction. I presume that what Dr Hugentobler meant encompassed a good deal of this.

It was no small task for the provisional Vorstand to find quarters for all the many people who have come here, and some are indeed lodged in the most primitive and dreadful quarters. Yet they managed. But that does not make the work any less! In addition to all this—please be patient for a few more moments—we shall have to succeed gradually in being truly courteous in every way both towards Switzerland and towards the outside in general!

One speaker says that people could be more observant and take more into account: Yesterday evening someone had arrived in Dornach who had lost his membership card two or three years ago. Every seat was occupied and it was impossible to find one anywhere, and so on.

DR STEINER: In that particular case it would not have helped if the Swiss Society had had a representative or a council since it was a meeting of the General Anthroposophical Society. We should have been delighted if only you had come up to our table at the front. This is the very reason why I made sure that the Vorstand should be visible right from the start. They will be visible at every future meeting and I hope, knowing the Vorstand as I do, that they will also be courteous in future. So please be so good as to turn to the Vorstand during this Conference and things should be alright. Are there any more questions?

GENERAL REPLY: No.

DR STEINER: It seems to me that we have more or less reached the end of our agenda, and as far as the question of courtesy is concerned, let us rather carry it out in practice! I think we can now close this meeting. Please permit me to close the meeting.

My dear friends!

We stand today under the sign of a grievous memory and we shall by all means place what is to be the content of today's lecture within the sign of this grievous memory. Those of you who were present then will remember how the lecture I was permitted to give just a year ago in our former building [Note 75] followed a path which led from the description of earthly, natural conditions upwards into the spiritual worlds and into the revelation of these spiritual worlds out of the starry script. You will remember how it was possible, then, to link the human heart, the soul of man, the human spirit, and all that belongs to it, with all that can be discovered on the path outwards into not only the wide realm of the stars but also into what depicts the world of the spirit through the wide realm of the stars, like a cosmic script. The last thing I was permitted to write down on the blackboard in that hall which was taken from us so soon afterwards, that last thing was intended to raise the human soul up into spiritual heights. On that very evening the link was made with that to which our Goetheanum building was to be dedicated in its whole being. So now, as though in a continuation of that lecture given here a year ago, let me begin by speaking about that to which the link was then made.

If in the times before the burning of Ephesus men spoke about the Mysteries, then those who in their heart and soul understood something of the nature of the Mysteries said, in essence: Human knowledge, human wisdom has an abode, a dwelling place in the Mysteries. And if in those olden times there was talk of the Mysteries among the spiritual leaders of the world, that is if there was talk in super-sensible realms about the Mysteries—allow me to use these expressions even though they describe only figuratively how thoughts are sent down from the super-sensible realms and how the super-sensible works in the sense-perceptible realm—if in super-sensible realms there was talk about the Mysteries, then what was said went, in essence, like this: In the Mysteries, human beings set up an abode where we gods can find those human beings who bring us offerings and who understand us in their act of offering. For indeed those who knew about such things in the ancient world were generally aware that in the Mystery centres gods and human beings encountered one another and that all that carries and maintains the world depends on what takes place in the Mysteries between gods and human beings.

But there are words which have even come down to us in external history. These words handed down through history can deeply move our human hearts, especially when they can be seen taking shape out of very special events, when the shape they take is formed as though in letters of bronze, visible in spirit only for a moment and written into the history of humankind. Such words are always seen when one looks in spirit towards the deed of Herostratos, [Note 76] the burning of the temple at Ephesus. In the flames the ancient words stand out: The envy of the gods.

Among the manifold words that have come down to us from olden times, which can be seen in the life of those times in the manner I have described, I do believe that this is one of the most terrible to be found in the physical world: The envy of the gods. In those olden times the word ‘god’ was used to describe anything that lived as a super-sensible being without ever needing to appear on earth in a physical body. And in those times people distinguished between many and varied races of gods.

But those divine spiritual beings who are so closely linked with mankind that the human being in his inmost nature has come into existence through them and has been sent by them on his journey through the ages, those beings we sense in the majesty and in the minutest appearances of outer nature, those divine spiritual beings cannot become envious. Yet in olden times the envy of the gods denoted something very real. Following the human race in its development up to about the time of Ephesus we find that indeed the more advanced human individuals had taken for themselves much of what the good gods had been glad to give them in the Mysteries. It is quite right to say that an intimate relationship exists between the good human hearts and the good gods, a relationship made ever more close in the Mysteries. Thus the realization came about in the souls of certain other luciferic and ahrimanic godly beings that human beings were being drawn ever closer to the good gods. And thus arose the envy of the gods towards man. Again and again we hear in history that a human being striving for the spirit; if he meets with a tragic destiny, is described as having been a victim of the envy of the gods.

The ancient Greeks knew of this envy of the gods and they traced much of what took place in external human evolution back to this envy of the gods. The burning of the temple at Ephesus made it obvious that a certain further spiritual development of mankind is only possible if human beings realize that there are gods, that is super-sensible beings, who are envious of the further progress of humankind. This has coloured the whole of history since the burning of the temple at Ephesus, or I could say since the birth of Alexander. [Note 77] And a proper conception of the Mystery of Golgotha, too, must take into account that we look into a world that is filled with the envy of certain races of gods. From soon after the Persian wars the atmosphere of soul in Greece had been filled with the consequences of this envy of the gods. And what was then accomplished at the time of Macedonia had to be carried out in full awareness of the envy of the gods reigning over the face of the earth in the spiritual atmosphere. Yet it was carried out courageously, boldly, in defiance of misunderstandings on the part of both gods and men.

And there came down into this atmosphere filled with the envy of the gods the deed of that God who was capable of the greatest love that can possibly exist in the world. We see the Mystery of Golgotha in its true light only if we can add to everything else also the image of the clouds in the ancient world, in Hellas, Macedonia, the Near East, North Africa, Southern Europe; the image of those clouds that are an expression of the envy of the gods. Wondrously warming, gently gleaming, there falls into this cloud-filled atmosphere the love that streams through the Mystery of Golgotha.

This interaction was, if I may describe it thus, a matter which at that time took place between gods and human beings. Now, in our time, in the age of human freedom, it is something that has to take place down below, here in physical human life. And the manner in which it takes place can indeed be described. In olden times, down on the earth, one thought of the Mysteries thus: Human knowledge, human wisdom finds an abode in the Mysteries. But among the gods it was said: When we descend into the Mysteries we find there the offerings of human beings, and in the human being who makes his offering we are comprehended.

The burning of the temple at Ephesus marked the beginning of the age in which the Mysteries in their old form gradually began to disappear. I have told you how they continued to endure here and there, sublimely, for example, in the Mysteries of Hibernia, where the Mystery of Golgotha was celebrated in the divine cultus simultaneously with the actual physical event over in Palestine. They knew of it solely through the spiritual communication that existed between Palestine and Hibernia. There was no physical communication. Nevertheless, in the physical world the Mysteries receded more and more. The external abodes, which were places of encounter between gods and human beings, increasingly lost their significance. By the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries they had lost it almost entirely. Those who wanted to find the way, for example to the Holy Grail, had to know how to follow spiritual paths. In olden times, before the burning of the temple at Ephesus, the paths to be trodden were physical paths. In the Middle Ages the paths were spiritual.

In particular a spiritual path had to be followed by one who sought instruction in the truly Rosicrucian way from the thirteenth or fourteenth century onwards, but even more so from the fifteenth century. The temples of the Rosicrucians were profoundly hidden from any external physical experience. Many true Rosicrucians frequented the temples, but these temples could not be found by any external, physical human eye. But it was possible for pupils to find these aged Rosicrucians who lived here or there like hermits of wisdom, hermits of the holy human deed. They could be found by those who could comprehend the language of the gods speaking out of gently shining eyes. I am not talking figuratively. I do not want to speak in pictures. I am telling you of an actual reality which was extremely significant at the time to which I am pointing. The pupils found their Rosicrucian teacher if they had first gained the capacity to understand the language of the heavens speaking out of gently shining physical eyes. In the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries in Central Europe these remarkable personalities were to be found living in the most modest surroundings, in the most unassuming human accommodation. They were filled with the divine spirit; in their inner being they were linked to the spiritual temples which existed but to which access was truly as difficult to find as was that to the Holy Grail described in the well-known legend.

Looking at what took place between one of these Rosicrucian teachers and his pupil, we can overhear many a conversation that describes in the form appropriate for more recent times the divine wisdom as it exists on the earth. The instruction was profoundly concrete. A Rosicrucian teacher was discovered in his solitude by a pupil who had enthusiastically endeavoured to seek and find him. A pupil gazed into the gently shining eyes out of which flows the speech of gods and, modestly, he received something like the following instruction.

Look, my son, at your own being. You bear with you that body which your external, physical eyes can see. The very centre of the earth sends to this body the forces which make it visible. This is your physical body. But look around you at your own environment on the earth. You see stones; they are permitted to exist on the earth; their dwelling place is on the earth. Once they have taken on a shape, they can maintain it through the forces of the earth. Look at the crystal. It bears a form and through the earth it retains this form of its own nature. Your physical body is incapable of this. If your soul departs from it, then the earth destroys it, it dissolves it into dust. The earth has no power over your physical body. It has the power to shape and to maintain the transparent, wonderfully formed shapes of the crystal; but it has no power to maintain the shape of your physical body; it has to dissolve it into dust. Your physical body is not of this earth. Your physical body is of supreme spirituality. To Seraphim, Cherubim and Thrones belong the form and shape of your physical body. Your physical body does not belong to the earth; it belongs to those spiritual forces which are the highest as yet accessible to you. The earth can destroy it but never build it up.

And within this your physical body lives your etheric body. The day will come when your physical body is taken in by the earth in order to be destroyed. Then your etheric body will dissolve into the widths of the cosmos. The widths of the cosmos can dissolve this etheric body but they cannot build it up. Only those divine, spiritual beings belonging to the hierarchy of the Dynamis, Exusiai and Kyriotetes can build it up. You unite with your physical body the physical substances of the earth. But that which is in you transforms the physical substances of the earth in such a way that within them there is no longer anything resembling whatever is physical in the environment of your physical body. Your etheric body moves everything in you that is liquid or watery. The juices that stream and circulate are under the influence of your etheric body. See your blood: Exusiai, Dynamis, Kyriotetes cause this blood as a liquid to circulate through your arteries. You are human only in your physical body. In your etheric body you are still animal, but an animal enspirited by the second hierarchy.

What I have been saying to you compressed into a few words was the subject of long instruction by that teacher in whose gently shining eyes the pupil heard the speech of heaven. Then the attention of the pupil was drawn to the third member of the human being, which we call the astral body. The pupil was shown how this astral body contains the impulse to breathe and to be involved with everything that is aeriform in the human organism, with everything that pulses as air through the human organism. The earthly realm may endeavour, for ages after the human being has stepped through the portal of death, to rumble about in the aeriform realm. For years the clairvoyant eye can discern the astral bodies of those who have died rumbling about in the atmospheric phenomena of the earth. Yet the earthly realm with all its environment is incapable of doing anything to the impulses of the astral body except dissolve them. The beings of the third hierarchy, Archai, Archangeloi, Angeloi, alone can form it.

Thus, deeply moving the heart of his pupil, the teacher said: In your physical body, by taking in and transforming the mineral kingdom, by taking in the human realm and working on it, you belong to Seraphim, Cherubim, Thrones. In so far as you are an etheric body, you are animal-like in the etheric realm, but you belong to the spirits called the spirits of the second hierarchy, Kyriotetes, Dynamis, Exusiai; in so far as you weave in the fluid element you do not belong to the earth but to this hierarchy. And by weaving in the aeriform element you do not belong to the earth but to the hierarchy of Angeloi, Archangeloi, Archai.

Having undergone sufficient instruction in this way, the pupil no longer felt related to the earth. Going out, he sensed, from his physical, etheric and astral bodies were the forces that joined him through the mineral world with the first hierarchy, through the watery earth with the second hierarchy and through the encircling air with the third hierarchy. It was clear to him that he lives on the earth solely through the element of warmth which he bears within him. Thus the Rosicrucian pupil felt the warmth he bears within him, the physical warmth, to be what is actually the earthly, human element in him. And he learnt increasingly to feel that this physical warmth is related to warmth of soul and warmth of spirit. Human beings living in later times have increasingly forgotten how their physical content, their etheric content and their astral content is related to the divine world through the solid element, the fluid element and the aeriform element. But the Rosicrucian pupil knew this full well. He knew that the warmth element is that which is truly earthly and human. At the moment when the pupil of the Rosicrucian master realized this mystery of the connection between the element of warmth and the human, earthly element, he knew how to link his human element with the spiritual world.

Before entering those often quite unassuming dwellings inhabited by such Rosicrucian teachers, the pupils were shown, usually without their seeking it and in a seemingly miraculous manner—the one in this way and the other in another way, often coincidentally, so outwardly it seemed—they were shown that they must seek to link their own spirit with the spirit of the cosmos. And when the pupil had received from his teacher the instruction about which I have just been speaking, then, yes then he could say to his teacher: I now depart from you having received the greatest consolation possible on earth; by showing me that warmth is truly the element of earthly man you have enabled me to link my physical aspect with the realm of soul and spirit; I take the soul element not into my solid bones, not into my liquid blood, not into my airy breath, but into my element of warmth.

In utmost peace those who had received such instruction departed, in those days, from their teachers. And out of the peace in their countenance which expressed the outcome of that great consolation, out of the peace in their countenance there developed gradually that gentle glance through which the speech of heaven can resound. Thus profound instruction in the realm of the soul was available right into the first third of the fifteenth century, hidden away from those events of which external history tells us. An instruction took place which encompassed the total human being, an instruction that permitted the human soul to link its own being with the sphere of the cosmos and of the spirit.

This spiritual mood has entirely drained away during the course of the last few centuries. It no longer belongs to our civilization. A superficial civilization, estranged from the gods, has spread itself over what were once the dwelling places that saw what I have just described to you. Here one stands today with the memory, which can only be called up in the light of the astral world, of many a scene resembling the one I have described. Hence our basic mood when we first look back to those ages that are often described as being so dark, and then look out into our present time. But when we look back in this way our heart is stirred—through the spiritual revelations that can once more be received by mankind since the final third of the nineteenth century—by a deep longing to speak in a spiritual way once more to human beings. And this spiritual way of speaking is not dependent on abstract words alone; it calls for all manner of signs in order to be all-embracing. And a language needed for those spiritual beings who are to speak to modern mankind, such a way of speaking existed indeed in the forms of our Goetheanum, burnt down a year ago. Truly these forms were to have spoken out into the world the ideas told to the audience from the platform. Thus in a certain way the Goetheanum was something that could, in an entirely new form, remind us of something ancient.

When the one approaching initiation entered into the temple at Ephesus, his glance was drawn to that statue about which I have spoken during these days, that statue which called to him in words of the heart: Unite with the world ether and you shall see the earthly realm from etheric heights. Thus did many a pupil at Ephesus view the earthly realm from etheric heights. And a certain race of gods grew envious. But centuries before the Mystery of Golgotha courageous human beings nevertheless found ways, despite the envy of the gods, to carry forward—weakly, perhaps, but not so weakly that it remained without effect—that which had worked since the days of ancient and holy human evolution right up to the time of the burning of the temple. And if our Goetheanum could have been finally completed, then once again, as we entered from the West, our glance would have fallen on that statue which would have challenged the human being to know himself as a cosmic being placed between the forces of Lucifer and the forces of Ahriman with the inward, divinely sustained equilibrium of his being. And when our glance fell on the forms of the pillars, the architraves, they spoke a language that was a continuation of what was expressed from the platform in the ideas which worked as though interpreting the spirit. The words continued to resound along the sculpted forms. And up above, in the dome, were scenes to be seen, scenes which brought human evolution closer to spiritual sight. In this Goetheanum there was indeed, for those who had a feeling for it, a memory of the temple at Ephesus.

But that memory grew terribly painful when the burning torch was applied to this very Goetheanum in a manner that was not at all dissimilar to ancient times, not at all dissimilar especially as regards the moment of evolution in which the Goetheanum was, of itself, to have become the bearer of a renewal of spiritual life.

My dear friends, our pain was profound. Our pain was inexpressible. But we formed the resolve to continue our work for the spiritual world unhindered by the most sorrowful and most tragic event that could possibly have come upon us. For in our heart of hearts we could say that in the flames rising up from Ephesus was written the envy of the gods, at a time when human beings still had to follow rather more without freedom the will of good or evil gods.

In our day human beings are organized more towards freedom. And a year ago, in the night of New Year's Eve, we saw before us the devouring flames. The red blaze shot skywards. Dark blueish, reddish-yellow lines of flame curled through the seething sea of fire, generated by the metal instruments contained in the Goetheanum, a gigantic sea of flame containing the most varied shades and colours. And gazing into this sea of flame with the coloured lines darting hither and thither one could not but read words which spoke to the pain in one's soul: the envy of human beings.

Thus what speaks from epoch to epoch in human evolution comes together, link by link, even in the greatest of misfortunes. An unbroken thread runs from the words that give expression to the greatest misfortune at a time when human beings still looked up to the gods without freedom, a time when they ought to have been making themselves free of this unfreedom. An unbroken thread of spiritual evolution runs from that misfortune which bore, inscribed in the flames, the words about the envy of the gods. This unbroken thread runs right through to our own misfortune in a time when human beings ought to be finding the strength for freedom, a misfortune in which the flames bore the incription: the envy of human beings. In Ephesus the statue of the goddess; here in the Goetheanum the statue of the human being, the statue of the representative of man, Christ Jesus, into whom, identifying ourselves with him, in all humility, we thought to merge in knowledge, just as in olden times, in their own way, no longer quite comprehensible to mankind today, the pupils of Ephesus merged into Diana of Ephesus.

We do not lessen our pain by viewing in the light of history what took place on New Year's Eve last year. When I was permitted to stand for the last time on that platform that had been set up in harmony with the whole of the building, the intention had been to guide the eyes of the listeners, to guide the eyes of their souls towards the ascent from earthly realms into starry realms that express the will and the wisdom, the light of the spiritual cosmos. Many of the spirits who taught their pupils in the Middle Ages in the manner described just now stood, I know, as godparents at that moment. And an hour after the last word had been spoken I was called to the burning Goetheanum. We spent the night of New Year's Eve last year watching the Goetheanum burning.

The mere utterance of these words, dear friends, conjures up an inexpressible response in all our hearts, in all our souls. When something like this has swept across a hallowed place in human evolution, there have always been a few who have vowed to work on in the spirit devoted to what had once been physical even though whatever it had been was no longer present. And gathered now as we are on the anniversary of that misfortune of the Goetheanum, let us be aware that our souls will be living in the proper mood for this our gathering if we all vow to carry on in spirit through this wave of progress in human evolution that which was present in physical form, as a physical image and a physical shape in the Goetheanum, visible to our physical eyes, before being snatched away from our physical perception by a Herostratos-deed. Our pain attaches itself to the old Goetheanum. We shall only become worthy of having been permitted to build that Goetheanum if today in remembering it we vow, before whatever is best and most divine in each one of our souls, to keep faith with the spiritual impulses that had been given an outer form in that Goetheanum. It was possible for this Goetheanum to be taken from us. The Spirit of this Goetheanum, if our will is truly upright and honest, cannot be taken from us. And least of all will it be taken from us if at this solemn and festive hour, separated by so short a time from the moment a year ago when the flames leapt up from our beloved Goetheanum, if at this moment we not only feel the pain anew but also vow out of this pain to keep faith with that Spirit for whom, over ten long years, we were permitted to build this abode.

Then, my dear friends, when this inner vow flows from our heart in all honesty and uprightness, when we can transform the pain and suffering into the impulse for doing deeds, then shall we transform the sorrowful event into a blessing. The pain cannot diminish because of this, but it behoves us to find out of this very pain the incentive to act, the incentive to do deeds in the spirit.

And so, my dear friends, let us look back to the terrible flames of fire which filled us with such inexpressible sorrow. But let us also, in making that vow before whatever forces are the best and most divine in each of us, feel the holy flame in our hearts, the flame which is to enlighten and warm that which was willed in the Goetheanum, by bearing this will onwards through the waves of progress in human evolution. So now, more profoundly, we repeat those words which I was permitted to speak over there, a year ago almost at this very moment. I said, in essence: We are living on the eve of a new year, let us live towards a new cosmic year. If only the Goetheanum still stood amongst us, we could renew this exhortation at this moment! It no longer stands amongst us. Yet I believe that just because it no longer stands amongst us we are permitted, on this eve of another new year, to renew this exhortation with a force increased many times over. Let us bear the Soul of the Goetheanum over into the new cosmic year, and let us endeavour to build in the new Goetheanum a worthy monument to the body of the old Goetheanum, a worthy memorial!

My dear friends, may this link our hearts to the old Goetheanum which we had to consign to the elements. May it link our hearts also to the Spirit, to the Soul of this Goetheanum. With this vow before whatever is best within our being we want to live on not only into the new year. In strength of deed, bearing the spirit, leading the soul we want to live on into the new cosmic year.

My dear friends, you greeted me this evening by standing in memory of the old Goetheanum. You are living in the memory of this old Goetheanum. Let us stand once more as a sign that we vow to work on in the Spirit of the Goetheanum with whatever best forces we can find in the image of our inner human being. Indeed, so be it. Amen.

Thus let us continue, my dear friends, as long as we are able, in accordance with the will that unites our human souls with the souls of the gods with whom we wish to keep faith in the spirit, in the spirit out of which we sought this faith with them at a certain moment in our lives, at that moment when we sought the spiritual wisdom of the Goetheanum. Let us understand how to keep this faith.

DR STEINER:

Once more, my dear friends, we shall welcome to our souls what is to inspire us and bring us strength during this Conference:

Soul of Man!
Thou livest in the limbs
Which bear thee through the world of space
In the spirit's ocean-being.
Practise spirit-recalling
In depths of soul,
Where in the wielding will
Of world-creating
Thine own I
Comes to being
Within God's I.
And thou wilt truly live
In the World-Being of Man.

For the Father-Spirit of the heights holds sway
In depths of worlds begetting being:
Seraphim, Cherubim, Thrones!
Let there ring out from the heights
What in the depths is echoed
Speaking:
Ex Deo nascimur.

Soul of Man!
Thou livest in the beat of heart and lung
Which leads thee through the rhythm of time
Into the realm of thine own soul's feeling.
Practise spirit-awareness
In balance of the soul,
Where the surging deeds
Of the world's becoming
Thine own I
Unite
With the World-I.
And thou wilt truly feel
In the Soul-Weaving of Man.

For the Christ-Will in the encircling round holds sway
In the rhythms of the worlds, bestowing grace on the soul.
Kyriotetes, Dynamis, Exusiai!
Let there be fired from the East
What through the West is formed
Speaking:
In Christo morimur.

Soul of Man !
Thou livest in the resting head
Which from the grounds of eternity
Opens to thee the world-thoughts.
Practise spirit-beholding
In stillness of thought,
Where the eternal aims of Gods
World-Being's Light
On thine own I
Bestow
For thy free willing.
And thou wilt truly think
In the Spirit-Foundations of Man.

For the world-thoughts of the Spirit hold sway
In the being of worlds, craving for light:
Archai, Archangeloi, Angeloi !
Let there be prayed from the depths
What in the heights will be granted
Speaking:
Per Spiritum Sanctum reviviscimus.

Today we shall inscribe a simple rhythm into our souls:

[Rudolf Steiner writes on the blackboard as he speaks. See Facsimile 5, Page XVII top.]

Thou livest in the limbs

For the Father-Spirit of the heights holds sway
In depths of worlds begetting being.

Thou livest in the beat of heart and lung

For the Christ-Will in the encircling round holds sway
In the rhythms of the worlds, bestowing grace on the soul.

Thou livest in the resting head

For the world-thoughts of the Spirit hold sway
In the being of worlds, craving for light.

[As shown on the blackboard]

Thou livest in the limbs
For the Father-Spirit of the heights holds sway
In depths of worlds begetting being.

Thou livest in the beat of heart and lung
For the Christ-Will in the encircling round holds sway
In the rhythms of the worlds, bestowing grace on the soul.

Thou livest in the resting head
For the world-thoughts of the Spirit hold sway
In the being of worlds, craving for light.

I thus write down for you the rhythms as they resound together because they do indeed encompass an image of the starry constellations. We say: Saturn is in the sign of Leo, or Saturn is in the sign of Scorpio. Rhythms depend on this, rhythms that go through the world. An image of primeval spirit lives in such rhythms in the way I have written them down for you over the course of these last days, having taken them from our verses which are inwardly organized through and through in accordance with the realm of spirit and soul.

Now to continue with our meeting, Herr Krebs would like to speak.

Herr Krebs speaks.

DR STEINER: On the question of the opposition, Herr Wolfgang Wachsmuth and then Herr Hardt wish to speak.

Herr Wolfgang Wachsmuth speaks about books and the question of the opposition.

DR STEINER: Obviously, if such a group is formed, then if it needs advice in one matter or another it will find this advice here. That is what I would like to say as a direct reply to the question. Does anyone else wish to speak with regard to the question of the opposition?

Herr Werbeck speaks on the question of the opposition.

DR STEINER: I would now ask Herr Hardt to speak. (He does not respond.) Now Herr Leinhas would like to speak.

Herr Leinhas speaks about the question of the opposition and about the press.

DR STEINER: Dr Stein will speak next.

Dr Walther Johannes Stein speaks on the question of the opposition.

DR STEINER: I would now like your permission to proceed to the matter of the rebuilding of the Goetheanum.

I SHALL TAKE the liberty of adding a few remarks to what I said yesterday, after which I shall invite contributions from those who have asked to speak.

You will remember that I endeavoured to solve the problem of the outside of the Goetheanum as well as was possible at the time by treating it as a building problem. A number of aspects were, though, made more difficult than they need have been by the speed at which the building was expected to be constructed. Nevertheless I believe that the shaping of the facade, of the portals, of the windows and window surrounds did portray outwardly the inner content of the Goetheanum, which was essentially a circular building.

Now, as I attempted to describe it to you yesterday, the impression is to be of a building that is partly circular and partly rectangular, having no longer a ground-plan that is circular. And it will be necessary to find for the forms a modern style that is appropriate for concrete as a building material.

Such things are always exceedingly difficult. It is of course easier to work in an abstract way out of the forms, and then choose the material, than it is to accept the material as the necessary given factor and then search for the forms out of this material, forms which are also partly determined by the circumstances which I described to you yesterday. Now, since we do not have time to go into more detail, I want to show you one essential feature, the underlying theme of the portals and of the windows, so that you can see how I want to let the inner formative force that was latent in the old forms assert itself once more also in the new forms of the intractable material, concrete.

I want the walls, coming down from the roof which is shaped in flat surfaces, to give the eye a definite impression of load. I want to bring it about that this downward pressure is caught and held, also for the eye, by the portal as well as the window surrounds. I also want to bring it about that inwardly the spiritual impression is of a portal that draws you in, or a window that takes in the light in order to usher it into the space within. But at the same time I want to bring it about that in a certain way this form reveals how the Goetheanum is to be a kind of shelter for the one who seeks the spirit within it. This will also have to be expressed by the portal. So let me describe what is to be revealed. [See [See Facsimile 5, Page XIX.]

For instance, on the west front the roof will rise up like this. So I want the next thing appearing after the roof to be a kind of small form growing out of this roofing. Let me make it easier for you to see by using different colours to draw what will, of course, be all the same colour.

So this will jut out (lemon-yellow); it will be immediately above the head of someone who is standing before the portal, about to enter. Below that will be a portion, something that could be seen as a portion of a pentagon, but only a portion (reddish). The remainder of the pentagon would be above. And the whole of this is carried by a form which recedes (blue). So what you remember as rounded forms in the earlier Goetheanum [Note 78] will here appear as something angular. You must imagine that this comes forward like a kind of roof (lemon-yellow), this goes back inwards (blue), and this becomes visible in the background (whitish). And the whole of this is to be supported by a pillar shape to the left and to the right in such a way that this pillar or column receives this protective form which appears above the head of the one who enters; it receives this protective form in another form (orange-yellow) like this, but at the same time it carries the roof part with an appropriate form which grows out of it.

This form will be used for both the side and main portals and for the windows. And in the use of this form we shall be able to achieve a really integrated external impression. It will show on the one hand how the load pressing down from above is carried and on the other hand how the pillars rise up in order to support that which comes out from the inside, revealing itself and needing to be received.

The essential thing about an angular building is the harmony between the forces of support and load. If we are to carry this out in an organic building, every part must reveal the indwelling character of the totality. The pillars in the old building reached from bottom to top. Now they will be metamorphosed so that on the lower level, the ground floor, they will develop like roots—architecturally conceived, of course. Out of these the actual pillars will grow on the upper level, becoming bearers of the whole. They will then bring the forms of the roof to completion from within outwards. The roof will not be terminated horizontally but rather in the way the cupola was terminated. The pillars and columns will be metamorphosed into supporting elements while at the same time expressing what in the old Goetheanum was to have been expressed in the roundness of the building.

We shall have to endeavour to calculate how basic the forms will have to be, merely hinted at perhaps, in order to keep the whole building, given this shape, within 3 to 3½ million Francs. Once we have made this decision—and I do not believe that any other is possible—then we shall I hope, and if the willingness of our friends to make sacrifices does not let us down, soon be in a position to begin construction and the building will then appear as a new Goetheanum in the place where the old one stood and in a much more basic and simple form.

I would now like to call on Herr van Leer, who has asked to speak on this matter.

Herr van Leer wants to found a World Goetheanum Association, resembling a World School Association, for the running of the Goetheanum.

DR STEINER: Yes, my dear friends, I cannot see any objection to the creation of a body of people who are members of a Goetheanum Association or something similar even if they are not members of the Anthroposophical Society. The question will be, though, as to what the members of such an organization can be called upon to do. It will be very difficult to win members merely by saying that they should pay money for the Goetheanum or for any other of our ventures. But perhaps in future Anthroposophy as such, as represented now here in Dornach, will become more and more known in the world. Perhaps people who are not in the first instance courageous enough to become anthroposophists will see that fruitful work can be done out of Anthroposophy and with Anthroposophy. Then it might be possible to say to people: Look, this is a spiritual movement; maybe you are not interested now; but help it to mature, do something so that the people involved can get going and show what they can do. It is quite likely, if we carry out into the world what has been discussed here during this Conference, that an Association such as that envisaged by our dear friend van Leer might indeed become a possibility.

Do not forget that a good deal of what is now included in the Statutes is of necessity bound up with the complete openness of the Society. You will see that much will change in practice. And once there is an understanding everywhere of what is connected with this openness of the Society, then it could very well be that a form such as that suggested just now by van Leer will be found. This openness will have to be taken very, very seriously by us. And on the other hand we here at the Goetheanum, this Vorstand, will have to take very seriously the fact that in future there can be no more working under cover. It will no longer be possible to say: If we approach people about a threefold social order or about Anthroposophy, they don't want to know about this, but they are interested in the things themselves. This is something that has done us the most damage of all over the last few years, or indeed over a longer period too, because it has brought us inwardly into a sphere of untruthfulness. The work going out from Dornach in future in all realms of life will be uprightly and honestly declared in full openness as being for Anthroposophy. Then people will know for what they are giving their money. And if we work from this angle then I do believe that a form such as you have suggested will become possible. It will never be possible if people have to ask what they are supposed to give money for.

This is what I believed I ought to say. If this is done, then the prospects are quite good. Would anybody else like to speak on the question of the rebuilding?

Miss X believes that eurythmy can show the public a great deal of what Anthroposophy is about. She asks for pictures, pictures of eurythmy and the picture of Frau Dr Steiner for publication in South America.

Mr Monges hopes to arouse interest in America. ‘Americans have to see before they will give.’

DR STEINER: Does anyone else wish to speak?

Herr Donner speaks about the financial situation.

DR STEINER: Does anyone else wish to speak?

Mademoiselle Sauerwein asks whether the 12 Schillings are for the Society or the Goetheanum.

DR STEINER: In order to clarify the question Mademoiselle Sauerwein has brought to our agenda, I should report to you on the meeting in committee the other day of the General Secretaries of many different countries with the Vorstand and with representatives of the Swiss groups. I must tell you what conclusions were reached. It was a matter of completing the only point of the Statutes which could not be finalized before they were printed. We have adopted the Statutes, but one small point remained open because I said that it would be better to discuss it in a smaller circle first; and that was the matter of the annual contribution to be made by the groups for each member.

I brought the following points of view to that smaller circle. You see, an anthroposophist—let me say this, though of course it will be easily questioned—an anthroposophist does not entertain illusions but must think realistically, for the future too. To think realistically is to say that one will need this much money for a particular project, that is, to make a preliminary annual budget which is likely to be sufficient. For the founding of the Anthroposophical Society there is no sense financially in talking a great deal about what each individual thinks should be paid annually for each member. The only sensible thing to do is to say how much we need and then to calculate how much this is likely to come to when it is divided by the number of paying members. I have concerned myself very fundamentally with this question ever since I decided—with the agreement of the members of the Vorstand whom I considered to be the right ones—to take the Presidency of the Anthroposophical Society into my own hands. All I can do is to tell you the conclusion given to me as a result of my considerations: If we really want to run the Society which you yourselves have decided shall exist, the only thing we can do is ourselves lay down the amount which we need from every group for each member. All we can do is enter at this point in the Statutes the membership contribution to be made by every group for each of its members: 12 Schillings annually. That is only 1 Schilling monthly. You can work out what a minute amount that is per day! But we cannot manage without these 12 Schillings annually for each member. We could, of course, have started off the other way round, though I don't know whether this would have been more dignified. We could first have said: We need 12 Schillings from every member and then we shall found the Anthroposophical Society. Perhaps that would have been more practical. However that may be, the Society will only be realistically founded when we have these 12 Schillings annually.

Now, my dear friends, there are sure to be many groups who will say that they cannot raise this amount. There are groups whose membership fees would not even cover this, and they all want to keep at least half of the membership fee for themselves! So in the cases where this is so it will be a matter of negotiating with them how much they can reduce their contribution. And the missing amount will have to be raised in another way. We still need this missing amount. But this minimum sum which we need will have to be the standard, and then groups can go below it, which is bound to happen, as we well know from experience, down even to the vanishing point. The vanishing point is often reached. But I hope that there will also be instances of the opposite, right up to the level of Carnegie, though of course never quite reaching the infinite! Anyway, this is the suggestion that I wanted to make in a smaller circle. And this smaller circle did not by any means agree immediately. But I do believe that most have meanwhile come to see that there is no other way. Countries also do it like this. You cannot set up a budget and then ask every single citizen: How much can you pay? This is not how it is done. We admittedly have no means of enforcing collection, and of course we want no such thing, for there must be freedom amongst us, including that of saying how much we need. So if you like, please do say what you think, or at least vote on whether you agree in general, in principle, to the payment of 12 Schillings per member, always remembering that everyone can negotiate how much below this it is necessary to go. I had to say this if this matter was to be discussed. (Applause)

Mademoiselle Sauerwein says that these 12 Schillings will be contributed by France because they are needed and she would like to know the date by which payment is required.

DR STEINER: The date will be a matter of administration. In the very near future—since time is too short to do so at the Conference—we shall issue By-Laws to the various groups and in these we shall say when the contributions can be paid. They do not all have to come in at the same time. The method will gradually emerge, and agreements can be made with the different groups as to when it suits them to pay. Certainly we shall not shirk. Does anyone want to speak to this question of the membership contribution?

Mr Pyle suggests that agreement be expressed immediately on the point that the 12 Schillings per year would be raised somehow, since they were absolutely necessary.

DR STEINER: It has been suggested that we vote straight away on this question of the membership contribution. Does anyone want to speak about this suggestion, which is actually a matter for the By-Laws? Only on the suggestion, not on the question. If that is not the case, then I now call for a vote on this suggestion. Will those friends who are in favour of the standard membership contribution being set at 12 Schillings with the given proviso please raise their hands. (They do.) Will those member-friends not in favour now also please raise their hands. There seems to be cordial agreement on this point.

I intended to bring up this point at the end of today's agenda, but it has now been settled. So after this interruption we can continue with the agenda if anyone still wants to speak about the rebuilding of the Goetheanum or about Herr van Leer's suggestion.

Mrs Merry wishes to speak.

DR STEINER: Would anyone else like to speak on this?

Herr Koschützki touches on the question of finance. He considers that work at research institutes is the most suitable for obtaining money for the Goetheanum from non-anthroposophists.

DR STEINER: So long as these things are in future always shown to be intimately bound up with Anthroposophy. It would be wrong to give the impression of merely wanting to do some research through ordinary science. In future we want to put things before the world simply as they emerge from the central core of Anthroposophy. Of course there is a good deal which does have to be presented in public in a way that is not possible through pictures, since pictures at best bring something super-sensible into the realm of the sense-perceptible. But we are supposed to present the super-sensible to the world. This is of course difficult, more difficult than presenting something sense-perceptible, but we must succeed. And we shall succeed. But please have the courage to present the super-sensible and not something that appears as though through a mask. This has brought us enough harm.

Does anyone else wish to speak?

Herr Leinhas speaks about the building of the Goetheanum and about the organization. He believes that friends can be won on the basis of pointing out what is said in the Statutes.

DR STEINER: Does anyone else wish to speak?

Dr Kruger speaks of personal impressions and of his feelings for what has been experienced here as a primeval founding.

DR STEINER: Now, dear friends, let me throw the discussion open for any subject people might still want to mention.

Herr Geuter says that the journal Anthroposophie and the articles of Herr Steffen and Dr Steiner are particularly valuable for disseminating Anthroposophy.

DR STEINER: Does anyone else wish to speak about anything?

Dr Zeylmans speaks from the medical point of view. There is surely no realm more in need of renewal than that of medicine. About thirty-five doctors were present at the founding of the small clinic in The Hague and by the end they were very enthusiastic about the lectures. It can certainly be said that we do not want anything different but we do want more. The lectures heard up to now have been marvellous, but what is needed is not only a bridge such as this but also an entirely new kingdom in one's heart in order as a doctor to become a healer in the sense of earlier times. He therefore especially welcomes the founding of the Medical Section.

DR STEINER: You will allow me, my dear friends, to add a few words after my lecture this evening about such questions as, for instance, the shaping of the medical work and how we think about it. I shall do so then because I want to ask any friends who would still like to say something in brief about one thing or another to do so now. The farewell words I myself want to say and also what I want to say about questions such as that brought up so kindly by Dr Zeylmans just now I shall say in connection with my lecture this evening. So would anyone who still has a short contribution to make please do so.

Herr Wullschleger, a teacher, speaks about the question of a school in Switzerland, considers a school in Basel to be absolutely necessary and requests support of every kind.

DR STEINER: Now we have come to the end of our agenda. Or rather we should say that time has brought us to the end of our agenda. It will be satisfying this afternoon, on the very day on which we saw for the first time from the grounds just outside here the ruins still in flames, on this very anniversary of that terrible day we shall meet here at 4.30 for a social gathering. The thought of meeting for such a gathering on this very day can be particularly dear to us when for one or another it may be possible to speak together in the most intense and best and intimate way such as will seem suitable for this very day of mourning and remembrance and such as our heart must long for. So at 4.30 we shall assemble here for our social gathering. At 8.30 my final lecture will take place. The practising doctors are requested to meet me again tomorrow morning at 8.30 down in the Glass House. I shall make any further announcements this evening.

Anything which one or another of you might still have wished to say will now remain unsaid. But just as last time it was possible for one or two things intended for more than a personal conversation to be said to everyone during the Social Gathering, so this time, too, it will be possible to speak to the members during the Social Gathering if anyone wishes to do so.

Now will those friends from Germany who wish to travel tomorrow at 10.45 please raise their hands so that Dr Wachsmuth can see how many there are wishing to travel tomorrow morning. Now will those wishing to take the evening train please raise their hands. It will not be easy to arrange for anyone to stay any longer. Only those who have had their passes extended properly can remain. It is not possible to endanger future meetings here by allowing the authorities to notice that fifty or more people are leaving later than intended. If only a few depart, it will not be possible to arrange for extra lodgings. Also would you please hand in any unused meal tickets at House Friedwart. In addition would you please hand in the blankets you have used at House Friedwart because we shall need them for future meetings. Then would those friends who have not yet collected their passes from House Friedwart please do so, because we have no use for them. We would of course gladly travel away on behalf of every one of you if we only could. Finally, for those friends still here, there will be a eurythmy performance at 7 o'clock tomorrow evening. The programme will include a repeat of ‘Olaf Asteson’.