262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: 223. Letter to Marie Steiner in Stuttgart
09 Nov 1924, Dornach |
---|
But shouting misery to the world and appealing to an instinctive ecstasy will not change anything. A bridge must be created to the understanding of the divine-cosmic in language, gesture and stage design, as it is striven for in my dramatic course. |
262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: 223. Letter to Marie Steiner in Stuttgart
09 Nov 1924, Dornach |
---|
223To Marie Steiner in Stuttgart Goetheanum, November 9, 1924 M. l. M. I was very pleased to receive the telegram from Eisenberg,41 This indicates that Kassel was also a success. And I am grateful for your letters, which give me a picture of how you have endured the hard work. I would like to send you these few lines to Stuttgart as a greeting of thoughts. You probably have your first performance there today. You can imagine that I am not at all satisfied with the very slow progress of my recovery. The matter has been in preparation for so long and will only start to take shape over a similarly long period of time. I thought I would be further along when you returned. Among the books that I have now looked at – but in this case really only looked at – is “The Ecstatic Theater” by Emmel, with the letter from Dumont. The thing is interesting. But the whole book is just one scream, or at most two screams. One scream about the corruption of the present stage and another that it must become different. But shouting misery to the world and appealing to an instinctive ecstasy will not change anything. A bridge must be created to the understanding of the divine-cosmic in language, gesture and stage design, as it is striven for in my dramatic course. Yes, there is much to be done and it is necessary to be healthy for it. The doctors were very happy to receive your greetings and send their warmest regards. My very warmest thoughts, Rudolf Dr. Rudolf Steiner
|
262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: 228. Letter to Rudolf Steiner
25 Feb 1925, Dornach |
---|
But that is the nicest thing about the book, the honey that you have scooped out of it. I understood that someone who emphasized the type of the “Jüngerin” 4 has emphasized the type of the “disciple” so strongly, has nothing left for a motif like that struck in “Gyges and his Ring” and even forgets the artistic perfection of the work, — I could also hold it against this disciple that her creator only sees the wife and the harlot in addition to her. But while reading this book, I wanted to hold another tripartite division up to him: 5 The Virgin, the Mother, the Queen. I try to understand why a man like Steffen does not know the Virgin, who is also a necessity within the whole and in and of herself, - and I cannot do so. |
262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: 228. Letter to Rudolf Steiner
25 Feb 1925, Dornach |
---|
228To Rudolf Steiner in Dornach Berlin, February 25, 1925, evening. Dear E., I have just managed to pull myself together after spending the day in bed. Yesterday was a bit too much for me to still let myself be talked into going to the opening at 5 p.m. at the Singakademie after the very solemn and impressive ceremony in the morning. The priests were so accommodating, picking me up at the train station, taking me home in the car, and then picking me up again; they even wanted to do it every day, but my strength is not enough for that. There was a terrible tumult at the Singakademie until one was inside, a great crush and pushing and shouting of the servants who kept order. But the opening was solemn – with the lighting of the seven-armed candelabrum in complete silence, the dignified march of the white-clad priests and a very strong speech by Rittelmeyer. In the evening I was at home, but I let myself be tempted to read 3.I read it yesterday and today, and I was really moved by it. I struggled through it with difficulty and was amazed at the wonderfully beautiful thing you have brought out of it. But that is the nicest thing about the book, the honey that you have scooped out of it. I understood that someone who emphasized the type of the “Jüngerin” 4 has emphasized the type of the “disciple” so strongly, has nothing left for a motif like that struck in “Gyges and his Ring” and even forgets the artistic perfection of the work, — I could also hold it against this disciple that her creator only sees the wife and the harlot in addition to her. But while reading this book, I wanted to hold another tripartite division up to him: 5 The Virgin, the Mother, the Queen. I try to understand why a man like Steffen does not know the Virgin, who is also a necessity within the whole and in and of herself, - and I cannot do so. At any rate, I do not find her with him, and I see in this the reason for his dislike of Rhodope,6 who, despite her husband, is a virgin. I felt somewhat unwell, mentally, from the dissection of the emotional experiences of those ladies, but at least I knew from what depths he drew the strength that was transformed into his poems. Such are the prices we must pay. Dear heart, sending you a telegram on Friday7, To mark Rudolf Steiner's birthday on February 27th. seems too banal to me. Hopefully this letter will arrive in time and convey all my love and reverence and gratitude for me and for humanity. Sincerely, Marie.
|
262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: 229. Letter to Marie Steiner in Berlin
27 Feb 1925, Dornach |
---|
Your kind letter was delivered to me an hour ago. I am so sorry that you were under such attack again. People mean well when they want you to be around for their things. But it does make one weak. I understand that the “roughness of the work” has upset you so much. And of course you are absolutely right when you speak of the woman's lack of understanding as you do. |
And the fact that Steffen is with us: I see a significant karma in that too. That he doesn't understand Gyges is not surprising, because he has a hard time empathizing with foreign art in general. And Rhodope is so very different from what Steffen can see in the nature of a woman. |
262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: 229. Letter to Marie Steiner in Berlin
27 Feb 1925, Dornach |
---|
229To Marie Steiner in Berlin Goetheanum, February 27, 1925 M.l.M. I am writing these lines at about the time when you would otherwise be sitting by my side. I can only think with the deepest inner emotion how wonderful it is when I can listen to a report of your work and we can discuss one or other aspect of it. And when you [I of you] occasionally read in my “life” the description of our joint activity, then I feel deeply how connected we are. That karma also brings other people close to me is just karma. And the illness has now shown how this karma is incisive. But you have struggled to understand; that is a blessing for me. I can only feel and think together with you. And it was already a deprivation for me that I could not present the last pages of the Steffen essay to you before they went to press (yesterday). Because I only allow you to judge my inner competence. But be assured, as much as I love having you here, I couldn't bear it if you cut your stay short by even an hour. Your kind letter was delivered to me an hour ago. I am so sorry that you were under such attack again. People mean well when they want you to be around for their things. But it does make one weak. I understand that the “roughness of the work” has upset you so much. And of course you are absolutely right when you speak of the woman's lack of understanding as you do. I had to bear in mind his spiritual treatment of poetic problems when writing about Steffen. Steffen must be understood by looking back at him as Giotto. The entire turn from Cimabue to Giotto is the turn from bright spiritualism, from spirituality in color, conception and form to naturalism; and only in Raphael and the great ones remains something of what was lost and only in Cimabue is something preserved. All this is expressed in Steffen's psyche. He works with the forces that arise from the turn of the century, and approaches reality in a way that is almost unique in the twentieth century. G. had beauty before him, but he had outgrown it. That idealizes his naturalism. Steffen had artlessness all around him; that materializes the spiritualism that slumbered in him from the beginning. And the fact that Steffen is with us: I see a significant karma in that too. That he doesn't understand Gyges is not surprising, because he has a hard time empathizing with foreign art in general. And Rhodope is so very different from what Steffen can see in the nature of a woman. Stay healthy and receive my warmest greetings; I am with you in thought. Rudolf Dr. Rudolf Steiner |
262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: 233. Letter to Marie Steiner in Stuttgart
13 Mar 1925, Dornach |
---|
Just to avoid any misunderstanding. It was only too understandable that my appetite was not in order due to the often elevated temperatures, etc., and that I could hardly eat for a while. |
262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: 233. Letter to Marie Steiner in Stuttgart
13 Mar 1925, Dornach |
---|
233To Marie Steiner in Stuttgart Goetheanum, March 13, 1925 M.l.M. I send you my warmest birthday wishes. I will think a lot on this day of all the beauty that has been and is in our joint work and that now always comes so beautifully before the eye of my soul when I describe it.13 I can assure you that I describe this with love. You telegraphed that you do not need the car until the 16th. It will be there then. But telephone if it is necessary before then. And thank you for your telegrams and letters. I am glad that everything has gone so well. The ranting in the newspapers is certainly unbearable. But the main thing is that our organizers do not let themselves be intimidated by this ranting, as has unfortunately happened in Christiania. Your work is so beneficial now. Hopefully it won't affect you too much. In Stuttgart, something seems to be happening again against Unger. They will approach you. But you will find the right position. It is self-evident that during my illness, circles such as the Waldorf School must try independent work. It is already happening in the organization of the conference. But now a lecture should be given by Unger during the conference. The administrative board of the Waldorf School is making that impossible. Unger is not to give a lecture during the conference of the Waldorf School - for the Anthroposophical Society, not for the conference. At this stage, the Stuttgart board writes to the Dornach board about what should be done. However, it is quite impossible for us here in Dornach to intervene at such a late stage in a matter that is so disastrous for Stuttgart. I can therefore only write to the Stuttgart board to say that we cannot intervene. Of course, this does not prevent you from doing what you think is right in Stuttgart if you are approached about the matter. My dear, I do not want to bother you with trivialities, and I have avoided doing so until now. But just to let you know, in case the matter comes up from the other side, I am writing this. Just to avoid any misunderstanding. It was only too understandable that my appetite was not in order due to the often elevated temperatures, etc., and that I could hardly eat for a while. Now Dr. Wegman, in her kindness, in which she wants to do everything possible for me, was thinking of a solution. And unfortunately she came up with the idea of having 14 When Dr. Wegman suggested this to me, I said that it was 'madness' and that she must not do it. Mrs. Walther cooks for me, as you know, and there is no reason to change that. Well, after a while I was told that Mrs. Breitenstein was coming after all. I forbade her from cooking. I don't want anything cooked by her, and everything stays the same. It's also insane to think that it would do me any good to be “cooked for in Viennese style”. I don't want to write the whole story here, but I just wanted to touch on it so that you are not confronted with something incomprehensible when someone in Stuttgart tells you that Mrs. Breitenstein came to cook for me. It's just nonsense, and they will get a few recipes from Mrs. Breitenstein as a token. But she won't cook. Once again, my warmest thoughts from your loving Rudolf Abs: Dr. Rudolf Steiner Dr. I. Wegman sends warmest birthday greetings. She is deeply pleased about your great successes and would like to express this in particular.
|
262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: Notes Written for Edouard Schuré
Barr |
---|
They, the Eastern Initiators, wanted to instill their form of anciently preserved spiritual knowledge into the Western world. Under the influence of this current, the Theosophical Society took on an Eastern character, and under the same influence, Sinnett's “Esoteric Buddhism” and Blavatsky's “Secret Doctrine” were inspired. |
But this little episode came to an end when Annie Besant surrendered to the influence of certain Indians who, under the influence of German philosophers in particular, developed a grotesque intellectualism, which they interpreted wrongly. |
Rudolf Steiner's master was one of those powerful people who live unknown to the world under the mask of some bourgeois profession to fulfill a mission that only their peers in the Brotherhood of “Masters of Renunciation” know. |
262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: Notes Written for Edouard Schuré
Barr |
---|
I.Very early on, I was drawn to Kant. Between the ages of fifteen and sixteen, I studied Kant very intensively, and before I went to university in Vienna, I studied Kant's orthodox successors very intensively, from the beginning of the 19th century, who have been completely forgotten by the official history of science in Germany and are hardly ever mentioned anymore. Then I began to study Fichte and Schelling in depth. During this time—and this already is related to external occult influences—the idea of time became completely clear to me. This realization had no connection with my studies and was derived entirely from occult life. It was the realization that there is a backward-going evolution that interferes with the forward-going one—the occult-astral. This realization is the condition for spiritual vision.1 Then came the acquaintance with the agent of the Masters. Then an intensive study of Hegel. Then the study of more recent philosophy as it developed in Germany from the 1850s, particularly of so-called epistemology in all its ramifications. My childhood passed without anyone outwardly intending to do so, so that I never encountered a person with a superstition; and when someone around me spoke of things of superstition, it was never without a strongly emphasized rejection. I did get to know the church cultus, as I was drafted into the cultic acts as a so-called altar boy, but nowhere, not even with the priests did I get to know any true piety and religiosity. Instead, certain dark sides of the Catholic clergy kept coming to my attention. I did not meet the Master immediately.2, but first one of his emissaries,3 who was completely initiated into the secrets of the effectiveness of all plants and their connection with the cosmos and with human nature. For him, dealing with the spirits of nature was something natural, which he presented without enthusiasm, but which aroused all the more enthusiasm. My official studies were directed towards mathematics, chemistry, physics, zoology, botany, mineralogy and geology. These studies offered a much more secure foundation for a spiritual world view than, for example, history or literature, which, in the absence of a specific method and also without significant prospects in the German scientific community at the time, were left without a secure footing. During my first years at university in Vienna, I met Karl Julius Schröer. At first, I attended his lectures on the history of German literature since Goethe's first appearance, on Goethe and Schiller, on the history of German literature in the 19th century, on Goethe's “Faust”. I also took part in his “exercises in oral presentation and written presentation”. This was a unique college course based on the model of Uhland's institution at the University of Tübingen.4 Schröer came from German language research, had conducted significant studies on German dialects in Austria, he was a researcher in the style of the Brothers Grimm and in literary research, an admirer of Gervinus. He was previously director of the Viennese Protestant schools. He is the son of the poet and extraordinarily meritorious pedagogue Christian Oeser. At the time I got to know him, he was turning entirely to Goethe. He has written a widely read commentary o n Goethe's Faust and on Goethe's other dramas as well. He completed his studies at the German universities of Leipzig, Halle and Berlin before the decline of German idealism. He was a living embodiment of the noble German education. The person was attracted to him. I soon became friends with him and was then often in his house. With him it was like an idealistic oasis in the dry materialistic German educational desert. In the external life, this time was filled with the nationality struggles in Austria. Schröer himself was far removed from the natural sciences. But I myself had been working on Goethe's scientific studies since the beginning of 1880. Then Joseph Kürschner founded the comprehensive work Deutsche Nationalliteratur (German National Literature), for which Schröer edited the Goethean dramas with introductions and commentaries. Kürschner entrusted me with the edition of Goethe's scientific writings on Schröer's recommendation. Schröer wrote a preface for it, through which he introduced me to the literary public. Within this collection, I wrote introductions to Goethe's botany, zoology, geology and color theory. Anyone reading these introductions will already be able to find the theosophical ideas in the guise of a philosophical idealism. It also includes an examination of Haeckel. My 1886 work is a philosophical supplement to this: Epistemologie. Then I was introduced to the circles of Viennese theological professors through my acquaintance with the Austrian poetess M. E. delle Grazie, who had a paternal friend in Professor Laurenz Müllner. Marie Eugenie delle Grazie has written a great epic “Robespierre” and a drama “Shadow”. At the end of the 1880s, I became an editor at the Deutsche Wochenschrift in Vienna for a short time. This gave me the opportunity to study the national psyche of the various Austrian nationalities in depth. The guiding thread for an intellectual cultural policy had to be found. In all of this, there was no question of publicly promoting occult ideas. And the occult powers behind me gave me only one piece of advice: “All in the guise of idealistic philosophy”. At the same time, I had more than fifteen years of experience as an educator and private teacher. My first contact with Viennese theosophical circles at the end of the 1880s had no lasting external effect. During my last months in Vienna, I wrote my little pamphlet Goethe as the Father of a New Aesthetic. Then I was called to the then newly established Goethe and Schiller Archives in Weimar to edit Goethe's scientific writings. I did not have an official position at this archive; I was merely a contributor to the great “Sophie Edition” of Goethe's works. My next goal was to provide the foundation of my world view, purely philosophically. This took place in the two works: Truth and Science and Philosophy of Spiritual Activity. The Goethe and Schiller Archives were visited by a large number of scholars and literary figures, as well as other personalities from Germany and abroad. I got to know some of these personalities better because I soon became friends with the director of the Goethe and Schiller Archives, Prof. Bernhard Suphan, and visited his house a lot. Suphan invited me to many private visits that he received from visitors to the archive. It was on one of these occasions that I met Treitschke. I formed a deeper friendship with the German mythologist Ludwig Laistner, author of Riddle of the Sphinx, who died soon after. I had repeated conversations with Herman Grimm, who told me a lot about his uncompleted work, a History of German Imagination. Then came the Nietzsche period. Shortly before, I had even written about Nietzsche in a hostile sense. My occult powers indicated to me that I should subtly allow the current of thought to flow in the direction of the truly spiritual. One does not arrive at knowledge by wanting to impose one's own point of view absolutely, but rather by immersing oneself in foreign currents of thought. Thus I wrote my book on Nietzsche by placing myself entirely in Nietzsche's point of view. It is perhaps for this very reason the most objective book on Nietzsche in Germany. Nietzsche as an anti-Wagnerian and an anti-Christian is also fully represented. For some time I was now considered the most unconditional “Nietzschean”. At that time the “Society for Ethical Culture” was founded in Germany. This society wanted a morality with complete indifference to all world views—A complete construct and an educational hazard. I wrote a pointed article against this foundation in the weekly Die Zukunft. The result was sharp replies. And my previous study of Nietzsche led to the publication of a pamphlet against me: Nietzsche-Narren (Nietzsche Fool). The occult point of view demands: “No unnecessary polemics” and “Avoid defending yourself where you can”. I calmly wrote my book, Goethes Weltanschauung (Goethe's World View), which marked the end of my Weimar period. Immediately after my article in Zukunft, Haeckel contacted me. Two weeks later, he wrote an article in Zukunft in which he publicly acknowledged my point of view that ethics can only arise on the basis of a worldview. Not long after that was Haeckel's 60th birthday, which was celebrated as a great festivity in Jena. Haeckel's friends invited me. That was the first time I saw Haeckel. His personality is enchanting. In person, he is the complete opposite of the tone of his writings. If Haeckel had ever studied philosophy, in which he was not just a dilettante but a child, he would certainly have drawn the highest spiritualistic conclusions from his epoch-making phylogenetic studies. Now, despite all of German philosophy and despite all of the other German education, Haeckel's phylogenetic thought is the most significant achievement of German intellectual life in the second half of the nineteenth century. And there is no better scientific foundation of occultism than Haeckel's teaching. Haeckel's teaching is great, but Haeckel is the worst commentator on his teaching. It is not by showing Haeckel's contemporaries his weaknesses that one benefits culture, but by presenting to them the greatness of Haeckel's phylogenetic ideas. I did this in the two volumes of my: Welt- und Lebensanschauungen im 19. Jahrhundert (World and Life Views in the 19th Century), which are also dedicated to Haeckel, and in my small work: Haeckel and his opponents. In Haeckel's phylogeny, only the time of the German intellectual life actually lives; philosophy is in a state of the most desolate infertility, theology is a hypocritical fabric that is not remotely aware of its untruthfulness, and the sciences, despite the great empirical upsurge, have fallen into the most barren philosophical ignorance. From 1890 to 1897 I was in Weimar. In 1897 I went to Berlin as editor of the Magazine for Literature. The writings Welt- und Lebensanschauungen im 19. Jahrhundert (World and Life Views in the 19th Century) and Haeckel und seine Gegner (Haeckel and his Opponents) already belong to the Berlin period. My next task was to bring an intellectual current to bear in literature. I placed the Magazin für Literatur at the service of this task. It was a long-established organ that had existed since 1832 and had gone through the most diverse phases. I led it gently and slowly into esoteric directions. Carefully but clearly: by writing an essay for the 150th anniversary of Goethe's birth: Goethe's Secret Revelation. which only reflected what I had already hinted at in a public lecture in Vienna about Goethe's fairy tale of the “green snake and the beautiful lily”. It was only natural that a circle of readers should gradually gather around the trend I had inaugurated in the Magazin. They did gather, but not quickly enough for the publisher to see any financial prospects in the venture. I wanted to give a literary trend in young literature an intellectual foundation, and I was actually in the most lively contact with the most promising representatives of this trend. But on the one hand I was abandoned; on the other hand, this direction soon either sank into insignificance or into naturalism. Meanwhile, contact with the working class had already been established. I had become a teacher at the Berlin Workers' Education School. I taught history and natural science. My thoroughly idealistic method of teaching history and my way of teaching soon became both appealing and understandable to the workers. My audience grew. I was called to give a lecture almost every evening. Then the time came when I was able to say, in agreement with the occult forces behind me:
I had now also reached my fortieth year, before the onset of which, in the sense of the masters, no one is allowed to publicly appear as a teacher of occultism.5 (Whenever someone teaches earlier, this is an error). Now I was able to devote myself publicly to Theosophy. The next consequence was that, at the urging of certain leaders of German socialism, a general assembly of the Workers' Educational School was convened to decide between Marxism and me. But the ostracism did not decide against me. At the general assembly, it was decided with all of them against only four votes to keep me as a teacher. But intimidation from the leaders caused me to resign after three months. In order not to compromise themselves, they wrapped the matter up in the pretext that I was too busy with the Theosophical movement to have enough time for the labor school in. From the very beginning of my theosophical work, Miss v. Sivers was at my side. She also personally witnessed the last phases of my relationship with the Berlin working class. II.Christian Rosenkreutz went to the Orient in the first half of the fifteenth century to find the balance between the initiation of the East and that of the West.6 One consequence of this was the definitive establishment of the Rosicrucians in the West after his return. In this form, Rosicrucianism was to be the top secret school for the preparation of what esotericism would have to take on publicly as its task at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, when external natural science would have come to a preliminary solution to certain problems. Christian Rosenkreutz described these problems as follows:
Only when these material discoveries have been fully assimilated by science, should certain Rosicrucian principles be passed on from the realm of esoteric science to the public. For the time being, the Christian-mystical initiation was given to the West in the form in which it was given by the initiator, the “Unknown from the Oberland”. 7 erfloss in St. Victor, Meister Eckhart, Tauler, etc. The initiation of Manes is seen as a “higher degree” within this entire stream.8 In 1459, Christian Rosenkreutz also received his initiation: it consists in the true knowledge of the function of evil. This initiation, with its underlying reasons, must remain hidden from the masses for a long time to come. For wherever even the smallest ray of light from it has found its way into literature, it has wrought disaster, as through the noble Guyau, whose disciple was Friedrich Nietzsche. III.FYI: It cannot be said directly in this form yet.9 The Theosophical Society was founded in New York in 1875 by H. P. Blavatsky and H. S. Olcott. This first foundation had a distinctly Western character. And also the writing “Isis Unveiled”, in which Blavatsky published a great many occult truths, has a distinctly Western character. However, it must be said that the great truths communicated in this writing are often distorted and caricatured. It is as if a harmonious countenance were to appear completely distorted in a convex mirror. The things said in Isis are true, but the way in which they are said is an irregular reflection of the truth. This is due to the fact that the truths themselves are inspired by the great initiates of the West, who are also the initiators of Rosicrucian wisdom. The distortion stems from the inappropriate way in which these truths were absorbed by the soul of H. P. Blavatsky. For the educated world, this very fact should have been proof of the higher source of inspiration for these truths. For no one could have had these truths through themselves, and yet presented them in such a distorted way. Because the initiators of the West saw how little chance they had of the flow of spiritual wisdom into humanity in this way, they decided to drop the matter in this form for the time being. But once the gate was open, Blavatsky's soul was prepared to receive spiritual wisdom. The eastern initiators were able to take hold of it. These eastern initiators initially had the very best of intentions. They saw how humanity was heading towards the terrible danger of a complete materialization of the way of thinking through Anglo-Americanism. They, the Eastern Initiators, wanted to instill their form of anciently preserved spiritual knowledge into the Western world. Under the influence of this current, the Theosophical Society took on an Eastern character, and under the same influence, Sinnett's “Esoteric Buddhism” and Blavatsky's “Secret Doctrine” were inspired. But both became distortions of the truth again. Sinnett's work distorts the high revelations of the initiators through an inadequate philosophical intellectualism carried into it, and Blavatsky's “Secret Doctrine” through their own chaotic soul. The result of this was that the initiators, including the Eastern ones, increasingly withdrew their influence from the official Theosophical Society, and that this became a playground for all kinds of occult powers that distorted the high cause. There was a brief episode in which Annie Besant, through her pure, lofty way of thinking and living, came into the initiators' current. But this little episode came to an end when Annie Besant surrendered to the influence of certain Indians who, under the influence of German philosophers in particular, developed a grotesque intellectualism, which they interpreted wrongly. That was the situation when I myself was faced with the necessity of joining the Theosophical Society. It had been founded by true initiates and therefore, although subsequent events have given it a certain imperfection, it is for the time being an instrument for the spiritual life of the present. Its beneficial further development in Western countries depends entirely on the extent to which it proves capable of incorporating the principle of Western initiation under its influence. For the Eastern initiations must necessarily leave untouched the Christ principle as the central cosmic factor of evolution. Without this principle, however, the theosophical movement would have to remain without a decisive influence on Western cultures, which have the Christ life at their starting point. The revelations of Oriental initiation would have to present themselves in the West as a sect alongside living culture. They could only hope to succeed in evolution if they eradicated the Christ principle from Western culture. But this would be identical with extinguishing the very purpose of the earth, which lies in the knowledge and realization of the intentions of the living Christ. To reveal this in its full wisdom, beauty and truth is the deepest goal of Rosicrucianism. Regarding the value of Eastern wisdom as a subject of study, only the opinion can exist that this study is of the highest value because the Western peoples have lost the sense of esotericism, but the Eastern peoples have retained it. But regarding the introduction of the right esotericism in the West, there should also only be the opinion that this can only be the Rosicrucian-Christian one, because it also gave birth to Western life, and because by losing it, humanity would deny the meaning and purpose of the Earth. Only in this esotericism can the harmony of science and religion flourish, while any fusion of Western knowledge with Eastern esotericism can only produce such barren bastards as Sinnett's “Esoteric Buddhism” is. One can schematically represent the correct path: Original revelation -> Evolution through Indian Esotericism -> Christ -> split between Modern scientific materialism AND Esoteric Rosicrucianism -> Synthesis: productive modern Theosophy the incorrect, of which Sinnett's “Esoteric Buddhism” and Blavatsky's Secret Doctrine are examples: Original revelation -> Synthesis of Evolution through Indian Esotericism AND Modern scientific materialism of which the Eastern world has not participated = Blavatsky and Sinnett. Appendix to Part IFrom the introduction by Edouard Schuré to his French translation of Rudolf Steiner's work Christianity as Mystical Fact (1908) 10
|
263. Correspondence with Edith Maryon 1912–1924: Letter from Edith Maryon
30 Mar 1913, |
---|
I don't think Dr. Felkin really understands me or the situation, though I know he thinks he does, so I am now going to do what I think is right. |
I read to him every day now and I told him that if he knew of anyone who would like to listen, he could bring them, provided they could understand me; I'm not sure about the possibilities. I forgot to ask you if you received my letter addressed to Banka-Straat, but it contained nothing but my thanks for all the help you gave me. |
Although he spoke quite interestingly about the meeting between the higher and the lower self, he did not give me a proper explanation of the meaning of your sentence, and my own understanding of it is too vague. |
263. Correspondence with Edith Maryon 1912–1924: Letter from Edith Maryon
30 Mar 1913, |
---|
6Edith Maryon to Rudolf Steiner 58, Grove Park Terrace Chiswick London 30.3.13 Dear Dr. Steiner, I think I should let you know that I have decided to leave England for good in May and, with your permission, to tie my fate completely to the Anthroposophical Society. If I am a little further on, I hope it will be possible for me to do some work in these contexts. Dr. Felkin is coming back on April 13th and I will tell him about my decision then. He has been very good to me and I fear he will not be very pleased, as he assumes that I am only going away for about a year. I wanted to tell you about this first, as he will undoubtedly bring it up when he meets you in London. I would like to devote the first few months in Munich entirely to my studies. It bothers me terribly not to understand German; it makes you feel like you're being a burden to others. When I go to Berlin - unfortunately I have no means of supporting myself - I will have to look for work, but I don't want to worry about that unnecessarily, because I feel that I have made the right decision and that a job will come along at the right time. You may have been a little surprised that I did not end up doing anything for Nevill Meakin, and I would like to explain. Dr. Felkin told me several times that he was unavailable during the first six months and that any attempt to contact him might harm him. I did not understand how anything I did could be harmful to him, but, assuming that Dr. Felkin knows much more than I do — that he has concrete knowledge — I have been content to do no more than send him some helpful thoughts and prayers — especially on Fridays. I don't think Dr. Felkin really understands me or the situation, though I know he thinks he does, so I am now going to do what I think is right. You may have thought that we [Meakin and I] were engaged, but we were not, and we would never have married, even though I would have done so at his request, because I thought he might live longer if he had someone to look after him. I read to him every day now and I told him that if he knew of anyone who would like to listen, he could bring them, provided they could understand me; I'm not sure about the possibilities. I forgot to ask you if you received my letter addressed to Banka-Straat, but it contained nothing but my thanks for all the help you gave me. I would have liked to have told you something else the other day, but it was too long and too difficult, and I didn't want to say it in front of others either. The thought of coming to Germany makes me very happy. See you in England. Yours sincerely, L. Edith C. Maryon I tried to find out from Mr. Schuré what you meant by “Knowledge is a metamorphosis of death”. Although he spoke quite interestingly about the meeting between the higher and the lower self, he did not give me a proper explanation of the meaning of your sentence, and my own understanding of it is too vague. |
263. Correspondence with Edith Maryon 1912–1924: Letter from Edith Maryon
03 Jun 1913, |
---|
I am of the opinion that an answer should be given by an English author, since only an Englishman can know and understand the English Church. Only such a person could convey a different understanding to the readers of the “Church Times”. |
263. Correspondence with Edith Maryon 1912–1924: Letter from Edith Maryon
03 Jun 1913, |
---|
8Edith Maryon to Rudolf Steiner Türkenstraße 27 I1 Dr. Steiner, please take a look at the enclosed clipping from the “Church Times” that my father just sent me. Unfortunately, the date is cut off, but I assume that it is last Friday's edition. This paper is read by practically all the English clergy, and certainly by the whole of the Anglican Church, and through the clergy reaches a large proportion of the laity. In addition, it is also read by many non-theologians. The matter seems to me, therefore, of considerable importance and an answer should be made to the many false views expressed. Will you let me know if you agree that an answer would be appropriate? I am of the opinion that an answer should be given by an English author, since only an Englishman can know and understand the English Church. Only such a person could convey a different understanding to the readers of the “Church Times”. The answer would have to be written by the most capable thinker we can find. The person who comes most to mind is Mrs. (Professor) Mackenzie. I believe you met her at Dr. Felkin's, she has been a member of his order for 7 or 8 years and is Professor of Education at Cardiff University (where her husband is a philosophy lecturer). Both are members of the Anthroposophical Society. I am personally friends with her, so I could ask her if she would write a reply, but of course I can't speak for you, nor do I know if you would agree, or perhaps you have a better suggestion. From the other clipping, you see that Mrs. Besant is giving a lecture in London. I don't see how she dare do that after the way the second suit turned out for her. We had a telegram with the judge's verdict, but so far no newspaper report (I mean the defamation suit). If a reply is to be made, I think it should be as soon as possible; perhaps you would let me know what you would wish, and in what direction the answer should go - or let someone convey it to me. Yours sincerely L. Edith C. Maryon Perhaps Prof. Mackenzie would agree to do it with me; in any case, I could provide her with the facts, which she would process in an article. If she accepts, it will be well done, she is extremely clever. |
263. Correspondence with Edith Maryon 1912–1924: Letter from Edith Maryon
20 Jun 1913, |
---|
I have a feeling that there might be something for me to do here, especially as I don't want to go back without being absolutely forced to do so. You will understand that I have to come to a decision about the kind of work I will do for the rest of my life. I need advice, so please forgive my request. |
263. Correspondence with Edith Maryon 1912–1924: Letter from Edith Maryon
20 Jun 1913, |
---|
9Edith Maryon to Rudolf Steiner Türkenstraße 27 II Dr. Steiner, Once you are back, if it suits you, would you answer one question for me? Would you tell me what I could best do after the end of the cycle? I can only continue studying and reflecting until the second week of September. After that date, I will have to find a job or be forced to return to England. I have a feeling that there might be something for me to do here, especially as I don't want to go back without being absolutely forced to do so. You will understand that I have to come to a decision about the kind of work I will do for the rest of my life. I need advice, so please forgive my request. If you tell me what you think is good, I will try in every way to do it, if at all possible. Your student L. Edith C. Maryon |
263. Correspondence with Edith Maryon 1912–1924: Letter from Edith Maryon
19 Jan 1914, |
---|
Show German 14 Edith Maryon to Rudolf Steiner [Translation] [No place given, presumably spring 1914] [No salutation] Sunday I didn't say anything about the most important thing on my mind, namely: is there anything that could help me understand the Mystery of Golgotha? If I could do it, I wouldn't find life and loneliness [in German] as hard as they are now, and I wouldn't have such stupid and weak thoughts about them. |
263. Correspondence with Edith Maryon 1912–1924: Letter from Edith Maryon
19 Jan 1914, |
---|
14Edith Maryon to Rudolf Steiner [No place given, [No salutation] Sunday I didn't say anything about the most important thing on my mind, namely: is there anything that could help me understand the Mystery of Golgotha? If I could do it, I wouldn't find life and loneliness [in German] as hard as they are now, and I wouldn't have such stupid and weak thoughts about them. If there is anything I could do to help, could you please tell me tomorrow, as I will be going to Miss von Sivers anyway to ask her a few things. However, if I should just continue to wait and keep doing the exercises I have been given, please consider the matter closed. Your student L. Edith C. Maryon |
263. Correspondence with Edith Maryon 1912–1924: Letter from Edith Maryon
04 Apr 1914, |
---|
Felkin is not in London, but I have written to him about what you said; it is only that I have sometimes said that you have so little time for letters, but perhaps if one does not live in Germany, one does not understand it so well. I hope that my karma will allow me to work a little more on the construction than I have done so far. |
263. Correspondence with Edith Maryon 1912–1924: Letter from Edith Maryon
04 Apr 1914, |
---|
15Edith Maryon to Rudolf Steiner 58, Grove Park Terrace Dearest Teacher, I feel I must write a few words, for it may be a very long time before I am able to come back to Dornach. There is nothing I can do, and I lack the German to express in words the immense gratitude I feel for my teacher; but it is a feeling that is always there and I want to say it one day. On the last evening you asked me if I had something on my mind, and I said no, but that wasn't true, I just didn't think it was the right moment to ask the question. Dr. Felkin is not in London, but I have written to him about what you said; it is only that I have sometimes said that you have so little time for letters, but perhaps if one does not live in Germany, one does not understand it so well. I hope that my karma will allow me to work a little more on the construction than I have done so far. Please accept my best regards from your student, L. Edith C. Maryon. |