The Rudolf Steiner Archive

Before I set out on my journey to southern and western Germany, I would like to speak to you once again about the nature of the Theosophical movement and its relationship to the Theosophical Society, for the Theosophical movement is of such comprehensive significance that at the beginning of a new year - which may be a very fruitful one for our work - we may recall the task, goals and working methods of this Theosophical movement.

The theosophical movement is not one that can be compared to any other movement in the present day, not even remotely. The most diverse people face this movement – which has spread across all developed countries of our earth in its not yet thirty-year existence – they face it in different ways and have faced it from the very beginning.

Ever since the emissary of our great and exalted masters, Mrs. Blavatsky, founded this movement, it has undergone many changes. She has seen people in her midst who have left her and others who have remained loyal and zealous since they entered it, and have also persevered with her. There have been members who have come to the Theosophical Society out of curiosity, who have come to learn about the insights that humans can gain into higher, spiritual worlds, among many other interesting things that one can learn about in the present.

But because the path that the theosophical movement can offer people is a safe one, it is not the easiest, not the most comfortable, not the one that can be taken from one day to the next, so that the highest spiritual phenomena immediately present themselves as an absolute truth. Rather, a zealous endeavor, a truly intense devotion, is necessary. That is why those who enter the theosophical movement out of curiosity become apostates over time, because they believe that they cannot achieve what they want to achieve in a short period of time; or because they believe that the theosophical movement has nothing to offer them.

Of course, the Theosophical Society did not expect many such curious people from the outset, although curiosity is often a detour to the truth and to theosophical knowledge. For many, curiosity later developed into a real theosophical pursuit. Others come to the Theosophical Society to truly undergo an inner psychological development. They really want to arrive at the certainty of a soul and spiritual life and achieve mystical deepening in order to become an important link in human development. These are better members. To begin with, they strive to recognize and experience as much as possible within themselves. In the higher sense, this is still a selfish pursuit; but even the highest pursuit of knowledge is a selfish and not a selfless pursuit. They also know that this is not the highest goal. But there is a beautiful saying that characterizes this state of affairs: “When the rose adorns itself, it also adorns the garden.” The detour via this egoism is thus a serious and good one, and those who take it can be worthy and genuine members of the Theosophical movement. Perhaps they are right to strive for their own perfection, because a person will only become a useful and valuable member of society when he has perfected himself. What use is an imperfect person to his fellow human beings? What use is someone who has only a superficial understanding of life? Only when one is able to look into human hearts and souls, when one is able to solve the great riddles of the world to some extent for oneself, can one intervene in the human hustle and bustle; only then can one do something for one's fellow human beings and for the world in the right way. Therefore, self-perfection, the absorption of spiritual knowledge, is a right and good path. No one can be reproached for being selfish if he seeks the path of self-perfection. And he who remains [true] will find that he has not searched in vain in the theosophical movement, that the path leads quietly but surely to what he seeks. Some may say that there are other paths. These other paths are not to be fought or opposed in the slightest. I know how the other spiritual movements serve the world. Not a word of contradiction will come from a true Theosophist. There can be no question of that.

But the one who seeks the spirit in the highest sense must seek this spirit through self-knowledge. Everyone has the spirit within them, and it is basically not useful to seek spiritual knowledge in the world around us if we do not want to recognize the most accessible spirit, the spirit within ourselves, in the true sense of the word. There are many who seek to recognize the spirit through all kinds of artificial means, and in doing so completely forget what spirit is in such close proximity: it is our own soul, our own spirit. We can find it if we want to search in the right way. But it lies deep within the human heart. We must search for it deeper and deeper in the layers of our own inner being. For what dwells within us is the same that dwells in the world as spirit and soul. The God who creates in the world, who has been creating in the world for millions of years, can be found in the human heart. And just as the natural scientist studies the world outside, seeking to understand the physical forces of stones, plants, animals and human beings, so too can no one truly recognize the soul and spirit in the world without really studying the soul and spirit. And the spirit, which has always created in the world and will always create in the world, dwells in a reflection, in a mirror image in ourselves. We develop further and further towards this spirit, our soul becomes ever more extensive.

Thus, theosophical striving is nothing other than the striving to become aware of the creative soul and spiritual beings in the world. What we carry within us today, what we find when we descend into the layers of our soul life, we once created and developed. If we could go back – and the theosophist gradually learns to go back into the distant past – then we would find the same soul forces building the world structure before there was any physical substance out there. And we would find the spirit that lives as a spark within us, creating out there in the world before there were chemical and physical forces. Spiritual and divine forces were at work. And higher than all physical existence, than all corporeal existence, is this spiritual existence; and not only higher, but older is this spiritual existence than the corporeal.

So we descend within ourselves and bring up from our own heart and soul layers the primal riddle-question with its solution, through which the world itself came into being. Those who immerse themselves in theosophy and descend into the layers of their own soul and spiritual life will find the forces that were at work before an eye saw or an ear heard. Before fire, air and water were on our earth, soul and spirit were in the sky and brought all this into being. We find something lasting and superior to the physical when we descend into these layers of our heart and mind. And then we do not draw from ourselves, but from the formative forces of the world. The great teachers and all those you have met among the great souls and spirits have gone down into the human interior. They have not only recognized themselves, but have opened their view beyond the stars and infinities.

Through self-knowledge, we are also able to recognize how the worlds were created and where man had his origin; and also the goals of man, the distant and the near, and our world task we are able to get out of the layers of the spirit through self-knowledge. What we know about the origin of planets, rounds and races, what we know about solar bodies and solar systems, and what we know about the emergence of living beings from the solar system and the world bodies, has been gained through self-knowledge, through that self-knowledge which has struggled to recognize in one's own spirit what it is today, what has been drawn into it through eons. What is present in him today leads us to the realization of what has always been present in him – present in him and at the same time outside in the world.

When you look at a tree, it has annual rings. But you first have to cut through the trunk to be able to see the annual rings. In the same way, the soul has received its rings for the one who can observe it. Each year such rings are added. The soul has passed through the cycles, the rounds and the races, and everywhere it has formed such an annual ring. This view is not seen by man today. But when he has become seeing, he sees what has remained as a result of the development. That is the way of self-knowledge, of self-perfection. Thus, through self-knowledge, the world unlocks. Thus man gets to know his task through this self-knowledge. And then he comes to an understanding of [the task of] the theosophical movement.

And that is the realization that presents itself to us, that the theosophical movement is a necessity for present and future humanity. I can only hint at what I have often said. Other races preceded our race; other races that still had spiritual knowledge. The Lemurian race, although not so advanced in mind and imagination and then perished by fire, still had a direct connection with the spiritual beings of the world, a direct knowledge of people was present. Man has lost his spiritual knowledge because he was called to develop his mind, because he was called to develop his mind through the senses.

The Atlanteans were still able to connect spiritually with other superior beings. We know that the Lemurians were brought over to the Atlanteans in small colonies to form the new root race. And we also know that when the floods began to break in, through which the Atlantic continent perished, the Manu sent a small group to the center of Asia. And when the old Atlantis was drawing to a close, the Manu led his little band, which was to form the basis for our race, into the Gobi or Shamo desert. There they were protected from the decadent inhabitants who had remained from the Atlanteans and Lemurians. And so the first sub-race of our race formed. They moved to the west. The other races remained behind. We ourselves descend from this small group. Our fifth root race will not meet its downfall through fire or water, but in a different way our present race will experience its twilight, in order to be led to a new stage, to a new existence. The theosophist learns about this stage, and he does preparatory work for the future of humanity, for the coming race. The struggle for existence will be the form of our

It will be saved in a small group. This will be recruited from those who have recognized that they must lead, and who have sought soul and spirit again.

Unlike in the past, work must be done in the present time. In the past, people were separated into small cultural areas, and each culture could only work in a small area. Even during the ancient Indian culture, and also during the Persian, Egyptian, Greek and Roman cultures, people were limited to smaller territories. Now the whole earth has become our dwelling place. Our technology, which is the greatness of our race, spans the whole earth. There is no longer any separation. Goods produced far from us are distributed all over the earth. The earth has become a common dwelling place. People can no longer be distinguished by individual colors, races, climates; they now exchange not only goods but also opinions.

Nothing can exist anymore for a small group only. Today we have a new task through which we can all grow into a new future. It is the task of the Theosophical movement to grasp this.

The leaders of humanity at the beginning and during the [first sub-race] of the fifth root race were the Rishis in India, of whom the modern researcher knows almost nothing. Only those who have come to the vision of the higher worlds through mystical knowledge can tell of them. They created that wonderful culture of which the Vedic culture is only a faint reflection. All that we know of Vedic culture originated in much later times. For those who are able to observe the world spiritually, there is a time of which no document reports, a time when in ancient India, God-gifted spirits, the Rishis, taught directly. That was a land culture.

Then comes a culture that is again limited to one country: the ancient Persian, the Zarathustrian culture. There have been seven Zarathustras. The Zarathustra who is usually mentioned is the seventh. He is the incarnation of all previous Zarathustras. What is preserved in the books of the Persian religion was only recorded in much later times. Here we look back on a second inspired creed in our racial development.

We now move west. We encounter the wonderful Egyptian culture, a culture of which books give us knowledge. The Egyptian Book of the Dead is a result of the culture of Hermes. Then we come to Greece and Italy to the Orphic primeval culture, which arose on European soil and from which we still draw. Then we come up to the sublime religion of the founder of Christianity and finally into our time.

We have thus glimpsed a series of human religious beliefs that originated with individual great founders of religions. For us, these great, exalted founders are nothing more than members of a spiritual community of beings and individualities that stand highly exalted above our humanity, so highly exalted that today man can only look up with admiration and humility to the great ones who have brought the spiritual [impulses] of our development. But at the same time, as we look up to them, we know that we too are called to ascend to such clarity and spirituality. The holy men have emerged from what we call the lodge of exalted human leaders.

Those who brought Egyptian culture then moved west and, when they came as emissaries to the west, to Europe, they brought the peoples the knowledge that they used according to their circumstances. The White Lodge has worked so that every people could understand it. Every people needed something special over time. Each nation was confined to a narrower space. What did the ancient Indians know, for example, of what was happening in Europe? They lived in very special social conditions. The great initiates spoke to them as they needed to. And so they spoke to all nations.

Today, humanity is called upon to become one family, today people are called upon to engage in exchange, not only of goods, but also of what people recognize as truth. What the ancient Rishis taught is no longer closed to people. So it had become necessary for the Exalted Ones of the Great White Lodge to speak to humanity again. The same Beings who were once active in the founding of ancient Hinduism, the same Beings who were active in the founding of ancient Zoroastrianism and in the founding of the religion of the Egyptians, had to speak to humanity in a new form, in a new sense; the same Being who once offered the body of the Christ to the Deity in order to be able to work here on earth, Jesus of Nazareth. That is why these entities speak in such a way that in their language no distinction is made between race and language, no distinction between gender and class. There can no longer be any special alliances, but humanity must have something in common. And such a commonality is our theosophical teaching, through which we develop into the new race. That is the meaning, the spirit of the modern theosophical movement.

Those who understand the theosophical movement as the spoken word of those who have given [wisdom and] the harmony of feeling from the beginning of humanity, know that Theosophy is nothing other than the pioneering movement that can prepare the way for a new humanity that is to bring happiness to humanity. Those who believe that all the big questions that are knocking at the door must be solved by the theosophical central movement understand the theosophical movement correctly.

Some seek their salvation through a social movement, others through a spiritualist movement, others through a moral reform of food and drink, and still others through a reform of food and drink. All [such movements] are great, significant and useful. But they are only preliminary. They will only be able to bear fruit if they become branches of the great theosophical movement. Not through external improvements in food, industry, or work can anything be achieved, but only by helping souls to progress. Anyone who has carefully studied all these movements knows how they must merge into the theosophical movement.

Demand of your fellow human beings that they should not be so terrible to each other in the struggle for existence, but should behave as you would wish them to behave towards you, and it will be bearable. But if you write “struggle” on your banner, you will achieve nothing. Only through love, through union, through the harmony of all our souls can salvation be found. Only when we have realized once more that we are all spiritual beings, and that our soul and our spirit are sparks of the primal fire and our mission is to unite in this primal fire, will we work for the good of our future. Then we will live into the time in which we must live, but which we must also shape. And that will depend on the work we do on our own soul.

Many demand that people change: this class, that state should change, people are needed differently. They fight against them. But who can guarantee that such a fight will ever succeed? One thing must succeed, however: We can never go wrong if we improve our own inner being, if we each begin to reform our own inner being, that is, if each of us improves himself. In this endeavor, there can be no distinction of class, race, station, or sex. And that is the meaning of the Theosophical movement, which makes it a great movement of the future. The exalted beings who have spoken to us in tones that promise the future have taught us this. Many have come to the theosophical movement and ask: You tell us that so-called “masters” are at the head of the movement; but we do not see these masters. That is not surprising. Do not believe that it is in the will of the masters not to come and speak to you themselves. If they could, if they were allowed to, each of them would do so. But I would like to give you just a small idea of why the master must be separated from those he loves and why he must seek messengers who proclaim his word with their physical word.

The laws by which the world and humanity are governed are infinitely higher than what the average person of today can imagine. Only someone who works solely in the service of these exalted cosmic laws – after he has recognized them – can guide humanity in a spiritual and mental way. The master sees not only years, but centuries and millennia. He sees into the distant future. The teachings he gives are those that should serve as a goal for humanity to advance. The Master does not give idle teachings for curiosity, but teachings of great human love that will lead to the happiness of humanity in the future.

Look at people, how they live, how they depend on a thousand little things of the day. And I do not even want to point out the thousand little things of the day, but only how they depend on space and time, how they find it difficult to gain a free judgment, to admit to themselves what is necessary to help their fellow human beings. A thousand and a million considerations to which man is hourly bound make it impossible for him to gain a free, independent judgment. If one can only follow the innermost voice of the divine within, then one is called to lead, guide and direct people. That is the task of the Master.

Few can imagine the extent of the freedom of judgment that the Master has to express, unfettered by any consideration. Only in a weak ray, in a darkened reflection, can we express in the physical realm what the Masters express from their exalted seat.

Consideration must be given to country, culture and education. Only in a refracted ray can that which the divine leader can impart as the great law of the world come to humanity. Only the one who is able to listen to the master so that not the slightest contradiction stirs in the heart, who does not take time and space into consideration, but completely devotes his ear to the master in perfect devotion, only he is called to hear the master, who does not respond to everything with “yes and but,” but knows that the master speaks from the divine.

Everyone must fall silent in the face of divine truths. What is most prevalent today must cease: the insistence on one's own judgment. The Master does not impose his judgment on us, but he does want to inspire us. As long as we criticize, we are dependent on time and space, and until then, the voice of the Master cannot reach our ears. When we develop a ruthlessness towards everything that binds us to the personal, the temporary, the ephemeral, when we leave these considerations behind us, create moments of celebration for ourselves, tear ourselves away from what lives around us and only listen to the inner voice, then the moments are there in which the master can speak to us. Those who have gained that great freedom have also gained the opportunity to have a master themselves; they have managed to have the certainty that they exist in the glory of these high beings, surrounded by light.

They have given up the “test everything and keep the best”, because those who want to approach the master have to give that up. In doing so, they establish principles about things that one truly already knows. But if one wants to learn, then this principle ceases to exist. Who is to decide what is best? Those who have it, or those who have recognized it? We should not become judgmental or uncritical, but should be able to put ourselves in a truly independent frame of mind if we want to ascend to these lofty heights.

Above all, this is something that must flow through the theosophist as a feeling. And if he imbues himself more and more with this feeling, then he himself will be led up to the heights where the Master can speak to him.

Do not ask: Why are the masters in separate places? Because it is true that in St. Petersburg, Berlin and London and so on, the masters are staying and can be spoken to by those who want to speak to them and can do so; for those who have attained the necessary mood through inner self-conquest. When the theosophist imbues himself with this mood, he becomes a member of that part of humanity that is being led up to a new, elevated existence. And because that is the case, the Theosophical movement is also the most practical movement we can have in the present day. Many object that it is idealistic, fantastic, impractical.

Now, ladies and gentlemen, a little reflection can teach you that this movement does not have to be impractical just because many practical people – that is, people who call themselves such – consider it impractical. But just take a look at the people who consider themselves so practical. It is a strange thing about such people who have found themselves so practical. Some examples of what the practitioners did in the world of the 19th century may show this. For example, until the middle of the 19th century, the practitioners had a highly impractical postal system. With this postal system, the practitioners, just as today, insisted on their practice. But then a school teacher came along in England who invented the postage stamp. He was an “impractical” idealist named Hill. At the head of the English postal service was a “practitioner” named [Lord Lichfield]. He declared in Parliament that the introduction of the postage stamp could not be implemented. He said: The “practitioner” knows that it won't work. The traffic could increase, but then the post offices would no longer be sufficient, so the idea is bad. - That was roughly the response to an “unpractical” invention like the postage stamp.

Likewise, Gauss had invented an electromagnetic telegraph as early as the first third of the 19th century. It was not introduced. It was the idealists who made the inventions, and the practical people refused the funds.

The same applied to the railroad. What did the practitioners do when the railroad was to be set up? Postmaster Nagler said at the time: Why a railroad? I already have sixteen buses going to Potsdam every day and nobody is sitting in them. So what about the railroad? In addition, the Bavarian Medical Council issued a statement on the construction of the railways. The document can still be seen today. They said that no railways should be built because people would get concussions if they were to drive on them; at the very least, the railway line would have to be surrounded by wooden fences on both sides so that the people it passes by would not suffer from concussions or other damage.

All great achievements of mankind have never arisen from the minds of those who think they are practitioners. The practitioners have no judgment about true human progress. Only when man rises to the great culture-moving factors that come from the spirit and the soul, only when he is under spiritual guidance, can he give great impulses to humanity. Unconsciously, these inventors were influenced by the masters. Without the chemist knowing it in the laboratory or in the factory, he is influenced by the spiritual hierarchy of the masters, whom we shall get to know better through the theosophical movement. The theosophical movement will intervene in the immediate movement of the day, will not only live in the hearts and minds. Yes, it will live in the hearts, but it will inspire people to the tips of their fingers and transform their whole lives. Then it will be the most practical movement, directly influencing what surrounds us every hour, every minute.

This is not said by someone who wants to preach the movement fanatically, but by someone who is called to do so. We have gone through many errors; we have sought the factors that bring social progress in the world, but we have realized that progress must be sought in the soul, that progress must spring from the soul, and that it must also be implemented. Wherever this is in the background, we unite in the right way in the Theosophical Society.

The Theosophical Society is only the outer tool for those who believe that they must take part in the cultural movement prescribed by the theosophical movement. When the Masters are asked what must be done to come into contact with them, they answer: A person can make contact through the Theosophical Society; this gives the person a claim. What comes to life in us is what the Theosophical movement is about. The teachings we spread are the means to ignite the [inner] life in man. For the one who speaks to his fellow human beings, it is not the word that works, but rather what flows mysteriously through the word. It is not only the sound waves, but rather the spiritual power that is to flow through the word to us. Through this spiritual power, the word, the power of the masters, the great leaders, works on us so that we are united in spirit and our hearts beat together. That is what matters: that we feel in harmony with each other, that we feel within ourselves; when the current weaves from heart to heart, from soul to soul, the power that stands behind us goes through them.

It depends on the attitude. That is why we work in our branches in such an attitude, that is why the masters teach us that we should not acquire knowledge out of curiosity, just to constantly know more, but so that we can unite in the harmony of feelings. That is why we will never leave theosophical meetings as one would leave other meetings. Annie Besant once said that it is out of place to complain, “How little I got out of this meeting today!” That is not the point. The theosophist should not ask, “How boring was it?” but rather, “How boring was I?” We do not come together to learn, but we do work with our soul and spirit when we create thought forms that resonate with each other. Every theosophical gathering and every branch should be an accumulator of power. Each such branch has an effect on the surrounding area. The spiritual power does not need anyone to spread the word. The power of such a branch goes out into the world through mysterious waves. Anyone who believes that there is a spiritual reality will understand this, will know that a powerful movement emanates from such theosophical lodges. Every theosophical lodge is an invisible, sometimes incomprehensible force. A preacher teaches differently. No teacher teaches us, no connection was with a theosophical lodge and yet the spiritual word finds its way to his community. Chemists and physicists in the laboratory receive new ideas: it is an effect of the theosophical association. Only those who have the stated attitude, who cherish and cultivate what they possess of love and kindness and who also appear when there is no interesting speaker to be heard, know that effects are also present where they are not materially visible, and are true Theosophists. Because some things in the Theosophical movement have faltered, [the Masters] have given us the impulse to speak as I have now spoken to you. This is how it was recently spoken in England, America and India. This has been done on behalf of the masters, that we draw attention to the true spiritual attitude of a theosophical lodge. Leadbeater speaks in America, Annie Besant in London and in India, and so we must speak. It is not a question of whether we like one more or less according to our personal ideas, but that we come together unselfishly. Then we not only take, but we also give. We also give above all when we give our soul. And that is the best gift. In this sense, we want to unite in our branch as well. More and more, the theosophical branches must take on this form, so that all criticism and all knowing-better must fall silent, so that we work as positively as possible, so that we work in our soul, as has been indicated.

If we can be convinced that the effects are not outwardly visible, but invisible, then our theosophical attitude will be such that we make the theosophical movement what it should be.

All great spiritual movements have worked in silence. No contemporary messages have been handed down from Jesus Christ. Philo of Alexandria has brought us no message from the Master. Only later documents tell us about the master. The master of the Christian religion was also known in his true form only by the great and the faithful. Herein lies his strength and his tremendous impact, which is far from exhausted and will continue to have an effect in the distant future.

Do you believe in the spirituality of the words, which does not have to be manifested in external success, then you understand the earnest meaning of the theosophical movement. Let us truly take this to heart at the beginning of the new year, let us come together in this spirit, and may this New Year's greeting flow from every single soul, that we will do our theosophical work in the spirit of our exalted beings who stand above us.

First Dr. Steiner: “Today it is mainly about misunderstandings. I don't think much of discussing them and believe that they can be overcome through work. The divisions that usually arise are mostly based on misunderstandings. I have often found this on my lecture tours. Today I will try to dispel a real misunderstanding, because what should inspire us in society is a unity built on the heart and on feelings. Without this, it is hardly possible to move forward. I therefore propose forming an executive committee; this committee should make suggestions for the branch's events. I believe that this will help to avoid misunderstandings and also the differences that lead to divisions. As I have heard, members of the Theosophical Society meet at each other's homes; they unite in smaller groups. But that is not my concern. The assemblies that are of interest to me should be convened by the branch's board. If other assemblies are organized, it is tantamount to a vote of no confidence in the board. This is a matter that must be treated as a symptom. The question is whether the members of the Berlin branch believe that the current approach is not the right one and whether it is necessary to initiate a different way of doing business. We want to start with an opportunity to ask questions and discuss them."

Fräulein Schwiebs: “The meeting that took place at our house arose out of a completely harmless intention. It is not intended to confront the leadership or the management of the branch.”

Herr Quaas: “At the general meeting, Dr. Steiner pointed out that Fräulein von Sivers had so far provided her private rooms voluntarily. The Berlin branch, however, pays 300 marks for the library. But since there is a possibility that the library room may be needed by both Ms. von Sivers and the branch at the same time, the question arises as to what rights the Berlin branch has acquired for paying the 300 marks. Trust is not a patented thing, but something that one must make an effort to earn. I would therefore like to ask how this whole matter has been handled and whether there are no funds available to obtain premises that are completely neutral. It will not be possible to achieve agreement among individuals by listening to large crowds. I was sorry about the attitude that Dr. Steiner took towards my proposal. You can't say it's none of my business. Either the board has to deal with it or the board has to be bypassed. But now the question is: Do we have the means to bring about an improvement, or do we not have the means? I believe that the events organized by Schwiebs and Eberty are to be welcomed with thanks. It is true that they have not yet taken place in the time since the Berlin branch of the Theosophical Society has existed.

Mr. Fränkel: “I attended the meeting; it was not an official or semi-official gathering, it was purely private. Its only purpose was to bring members together. However, the members of the Theosophical Society should form the basis of the gatherings. I regret that thoughts have been expressed that do not correspond to the Theosophical guidelines. But one should not approach things with suspicions.

Dr. Steiner: “It is not about the cards, nor is there anything wrong with the meeting. But it is particularly important to get to a certain basis, because Mr. Quaas' speech has revealed that there are other things involved, other symptoms. Mr. Quaas has therefore also consulted with me. However, we must not mix up two things. We must not mix up the library issue and the issue of the Besant branch. I cannot get involved in private discussions. You have to have the right foundations for that.

And now for another matter. It is claimed that no insights into the financial situation of the Berlin branch are available. Then there were also remarks regarding the private rooms. In response to this, I must say that, in the beginning, my concern was to slowly take up the work of the branch and continue it in the same way. The work was done in the theosophical sense. Lectures were given on Christianity as a Mystical Fact and on Mysticism in the Rise of Modern Spiritual Life. The theosophical work is the main thing. But it can only be done if one has the fundamentals of the theosophical world-view. It is nice that members are approaching each other, but it must go hand in hand with becoming familiar with the theosophical world-view. This work could not be done if sacrifices were not made by private individuals. I have always felt that I was among Theosophists in this room. I did not have the impression of being in a private room. This year, members should divide into groups and work together. That is the second thing that will have to be done gradually. But it must be done in harmony with the central leadership.

The proposals must be within the framework of what currently exists. The continuity of the Theosophical Society must be maintained. I am called to maintain the continuity of the Theosophical movement. Until now, the only means of doing this was to hold meetings in this room. The library has been given to Miss von Sivers on condition that she has it in her home. It goes without saying that the library needs a room; and that something is paid for it is also self-evident. However, it is not a requirement that it should also be possible to hold meetings there. It is therefore advisable to leave the library issue out of it altogether. The Berlin branch has not yet had any reason to create a center. So we will stick with the old conditions as long as they are sufficient for the real work."

Krojanker: “I would like to say that a harmonious atmosphere no longer exists. The Berlin branch has no home at all, and now we are not even allowed to hold meetings in the library room. The situation of the Berlin branch is such that an executive committee is quite impossible under the current conditions. What has been on paper for years has now been summarized in a few proposals that have been discussed. We have the feeling that the lectures in the architects' house do not take place within the framework of the Berlin branch. These are separate events that we can or cannot attend, but with which we as the Berlin branch have nothing to do. They have statutes, but everything is dictated. We have every reason to accept your advice, Doctor, in every way. However, the administration of a branch does not quite coincide with this. Further misunderstandings should be avoided in the future. To convene a general assembly requires completely different preconditions. But then there are also other issues to be discussed: How are the general assemblies to be regulated? Where and how should they take place? What resources does the Berlin branch have for this? And how must the Berlin branch ensure that the external conditions are provided for regular meetings? These are the questions that the discussions came down to. The library question will hardly be able to be settled. There is a desire to feel at home among Theosophical members. For the Theosophical work that you describe, you have to choose the members yourself who can do such work."

Dr. Steiner: “We will then have to call an extraordinary general meeting. I don't see why an executive committee should be impossible given the circumstances of the Berlin branch. The lectures at the Architektenhaus are my events; the board must represent the Society. But the meetings at the Architektenhaus don't see why they can't be seen as branch events. I can't quite see how such a center should be created. The Berlin branch should consider the lectures as theirs."

Fräulein von Sivers: ”It's all very well to form groups, but it takes more than that. You need people, capital and staff. Before it was set up, there was no one at the library who could have taken care of it. It should have been sold or distributed. At that time, I was active in the Theosophical movement. It had adopted more fixed paths. The library was given to me because the branch could not spend the 300 marks. However, the continuity of the library and Dr. Steiner's lectures were to be maintained. The library was linked to my private rooms. Since they were not public, no one came.

The lectures that we have here were set up later, and the invitations from Miss Schwiebs and Mrs. Eberty to gatherings at their home have been quite successful.

Mr. Quaas: “The accounts should be duplicated and made available to the members. We do not need to completely dismiss the library question. We can also build and work on a solid foundation for the general meeting. The board has to make suggestions for convening the general meeting.

Dr. Steiner: ”I have heard something about a harmonious atmosphere that no longer exists.

Krojanker: “I believe that the assemblies at Schwiebs and Eberty will be able to bring the discord back into harmony.”

Dr. Steiner: “I would like to note: It is something different to work positively spiritually than to be active in administration. With attorney Quaas, [it] appears as disharmony, even a certain animosity comes to light. As long as animosity exists, I consider the positive work in society to be fruitless. This animosity was noticeable from the conversation.”

Fränkel: “I did not concern myself with the theosophical circumstances. Therefore, I did not know about the animosity either.”

Quaas: “The criticism is being forced upon the members.”

Fräulein Schwiebs: “I don't understand why heavy artillery is being brought up against us, although you were partly present at the first meeting. I didn't want to bring up this unfriendliness, but it hurt me. Fräulein von Sivers couldn't make the meeting because she had too much to do.”

Dr. Steiner: “Several errors seem to have occurred here. No one ever said anything about intending to hold meetings every fortnight. At the time, I asked that such meetings be officially recorded. It seems that invitations were sent out once. I knew nothing about the intention to hold permanent meetings. The fact that meetings are held on a regular basis has been presented to me as something new today. Personal discussions would not have satisfied the need. So it was probably not correct to speak of the members' meetings.” Miss Schwiebs: ‘We and Mrs. Eberty were together every first and third Sunday of the month.’

Mr. [Georgi] regards dissatisfaction as explosives. Working on oneself is the main thing. Then the walls that have been knocked down will disappear, and so will the dissatisfaction, so that we can devote ourselves entirely to the future.

Dr. B...: “Too many private relationships are discussed, but no one has really taken the actual study seriously. We want to approach everyone with love, we want to shake off what has made society disharmonious, so that in the future, instead of destroying, we will continue to work with a strong hand.

Quaas believes that the contact between the board and the members has been completely lost (objections are raised).

Krojanker: “This is a society that has certain forms. These must be adhered to and maintained. There can be no question of real animosity. Hold more general meetings.”

Ms. Motzkus: “The meetings were actually intended to facilitate closer contact with Dr. Steiner.”

Ms. von Holten: “I felt sorry for having let strangers write my letter. I missed a female touch here.”

Dr. Steiner: “This is a letter that interferes in my private affairs without justification, a letter that arises out of ignorance. I have not given a reply to it. It should never have been written in this form, for I would have forgiven myself something if I had replied to it. The impression was as if you had seen someone at whose sight you were frightened.”

Mrs. B.: “It is actually only about the form of the meetings. I am not one of those who absorb gossip and pass it on. But I have to say that there is a tremendous dislike of Miss von Sivers, so members feel cold, catch a cold. This coldness is brought in and is contagious. People should look within themselves and approach the people with real devotion and love. The aversion must be removed; goodwill must be cultivated and what has happened must be forgotten. Only in inner harmony lies real work in the spirit of Theosophy. Otherwise we cannot help with the work. We must approach Fräulein von Sivers with different feelings."

Krojanker: “You can have reverence for a personality without extinguishing your own ego in the face of that personality. I think we need to have more general meetings and more board meetings.”

Dr. Steiner: “You can't have meetings that don't go harmoniously, that don't enable harmonious work. Those who have the best intentions are ultimately the sacrificial lambs. My work would be undone if what lies at the bottom of the soul were not openly and honestly expressed. There must be no wall between me and the members, for the following reasons: I myself am not dependent on anyone for my work and will never be dependent on anyone for my theosophical work. If someone says that a wall could be built between me and the members, then that would be the worst kind of mistrust. Anyone who has done that cannot receive anything from me. If such statements are made, then my work is stopped.

Krojanker: He complains that such personal matters are being made the subject of the General Assembly and asks: “Do you have any objections to the members' meetings at Fräulein Schwiebs's?”

Dr. Steiner: “It is not about the general meetings at Schwiebs and Eberty. My idea was to organize the sequence of the general meetings because it is desirable today that work continues within group meetings. These meetings should not serve to attack, but to recognize that dissatisfaction prevails and to ask how it can be organized away. The people in such groups must be selected. People who are completely sympathetic to each other must come together in such groups. That is why I asked for the establishment and regulation of general meetings. I wanted to gain a foothold because some members in society have so much against each other that it is impossible to bring them together in such group meetings. If my theosophical work had not been stopped, I would not have put it forward. When someone says that a wall is being erected between me and the members, it is not just a private matter; it is an accusation against a member who has led the events in my interest of thwarting relations. When they erect a wall, it is a criticism that is directed at our entire society. A wall against Miss von Sivers is a matter for the Society.

[Georgi]: Speaks against Mrs. Braun and says: “Criticism is unnecessary, it has a bad effect, you have to starve this force.”

Mrs. Braun: “I am against the attitude, I will not participate in it, I have renounced all forms.”

Krojanker: “As the head of the Berlin branch, you have to deal with matters that you don't have to touch on as a theosophist. You don't feel constrained at the branch's events, so you don't have to have anything to do with the administration of the Berlin branch. It's a two-way street.

Dr. Steiner: “It is indeed my opinion that the chairmanship is not tied to me and Fräulein von Sivers. This society has existed for years, but it has not developed any particular activity. We have tried to love the Theosophical Society and bring it to life in Berlin. Count and Countess Brockdorff have said that they were only stopgaps to keep it going. If a different activity is desired, I would cede the chair to whomever is able to procure better premises and more success.

Krojanker: “What is said is said in the interest of the Theosophical Society. Dr. Steiner is above all debate. However, business matters that arise when Dr. Steiner retains leadership and remains united with us through his work must be dealt with in an orderly manner.”

Dr. Steiner: “My activity as chairman is not tied to my other activities because the administrator and the spokesperson can be separated. This is how it has been kept, and that seems to me to be the desirable state of affairs. For a long time, the Society lay fallow. We tried to revive it. I proceeded according to my thoughts, I tried to get to know the Theosophical Societies around the world. You should not have the impression that you have been called together for trivial reasons. If, during the meetings, younger members speak out against their superiors, then I am prevented from being effective. I was not trying to assure sympathy. There seems to be no inclination and no desire for it.

Group work: A number of members who get along well and meet to discuss with each other is an especially important thing. They should then write down the questions that arise in order to ask me about them in the big meeting, so that a theosophical understanding among the members can take place in this way. I have found something similar in England, in India and especially in Holland. Exemplary work has been done in Düsseldorf. The group members meet twice. One member, Lauweriks, explains the secret doctrine to people in an extraordinary way. But this work can only be made fruitful if it is organically integrated into our lectures, so that people can enter into the theosophical worldview. I have thought of this in order to be able to make suggestions and so that people can see why they cannot be in a particular circle. Disharmonious currents are very fatal in smaller working groups. My wish has only been granted to a small extent. I do not know why it has not been used to a greater extent. This disharmonious mood is also likely to affect me in my work. It could prevent me from working for the Berlin branch. It is something that marks my work as unfree. What can be done? 'For example, when the administration decides on something that I cannot go along with. That is why it was necessary for me to ask you to express what is in the air here.

I ask those who wish to participate in groups to express their willingness to do so. This is the only way to get deeper into Theosophy. It is nice to socialize, but there are many opportunities for that. Theosophy does not have to be the reason for that. Theosophical work requires a certain foundation based on work. There is no limit to the size of the group. I will be here again tomorrow for eight days, and I will be back in Berlin on Thursday. Perhaps the suggestion of a center will take on a more concrete form, because there are probably still some who have an idea of how it could be done better, but you just have to stretch yourself to the limit. But this criticism is creating bad blood. I had hoped that whatever was to be said against me or Miss von Sivers would be said bluntly. Since this has not been the case, however, the time we have spent on it should not be considered wasted.

There is no reason to find fault with the work of Miss von Sivers. Take a more intimate approach to her work, not just business. But I cannot help it if the Berlin branch should be damaged. I know what the Berlin branch needs, and I also know what the duty of an occultist is. The great spiritual world stands above that. But it also requires that my freedom not be interfered with. To put up a wall between me and the members is an act of humiliation, and an occultist must not be humiliated. Anyone who has such conditions cannot receive anything more from me as an occultist."

Dr. Steiner: “Careful scrutiny of the lines along which we were moving showed me that it is necessary to contribute something to clarify the things that were suggested at the time. That is why I asked you to appear at this General Assembly. I would like to emphasize from the outset that it will not be a matter of somehow interpreting the steps that three members of the Executive Board felt compelled to take in such a way that they could be directed against anyone, even remotely. The aim is to clarify the situation by means of a full clarification that cannot be achieved in any other way. In order to make this completely clear, I must still refer to a few words on the essentials, to the history of the Theosophical movement since the founding of the German section, namely insofar as it concerns members of the board, who come into consideration above all.

When the German Section was to be founded, the leaders of the Theosophical movement, insofar as they belonged to the Adyar Society, were to be persuaded to hand over the leadership to others. The personalities involved in the continuation of the theosophical work were Fräulein von Sivers and I. I myself was not yet ready to join the Theosophical Society, even a few months before I was called upon to contribute not only to the Berlin group but also to the entire movement of the Theosophical Society in my capacity as General Secretary of the German Section. I had already given lectures for two winters, in the Berlin branch. Two courses that have been printed, so that I am connected with the Theosophical Society in Berlin in a certain respect, am connected only personally.

When Count and Countess von Brockdorff left Berlin, I had already been a member of the Theosophical Society for several months, and when other measures failed, I was designated as General Secretary. I did not oppose the request at the time. I had no merit in the Theosophical Society at the time.

Berlin was considered a kind of center in Germany. Berlin was to become a kind of parent company. The German Theosophical Society (DTG) was built on this. The aim was to run the society from Berlin. At that time, Count and Countess Brockdorff went to great lengths to recruit Fräulein von Sivers, who was in Bologna, for their Berlin lodge. Even after she had been asked, she was not at all inclined to accept. Only when the leaders of the Theosophical Society deemed it necessary did Miss von Sivers decide to go to Berlin and lead the Theosophical movement with me under the conditions that were possible at the time.

We adapted ourselves to the circumstances in an absolutely conservative way. The circumstances naturally required that we take the initiative of the German movement into our own hands and try to bring the intentions to fruition in the right way. The situation in Germany was such that it would not have been possible at that time without initiative in a material sense. In addition to this material theosophical work, there were many other things, such as, for example, the management of the library, which was in a loose connection with the German Theosophical Society, the later Berlin branch of the Theosophical Society. This management of the library naturally required a certain amount of work, which had to be done between classes. The actual Theosophical work could only be done in the free breaks. I myself could devote myself to these library matters only in an advisory capacity. I had more important things to do. Besides, for two years I had been able to study the way the branch had been run, and I had no intention of making any kind of change in the external administration. What was factually given should be preserved.

It was our endeavor to operate within the framework and to throw what we had to give into the framework of the Theosophical movement. That was our endeavor. The basic prerequisite for Fräulein von Sivers to take over the management of the various agencies of the Theosophical Society in Berlin was that complete trust prevailed. Without this trust, nothing can be done in the practical part of the Theosophical movement. Trust in the practical part of the movement itself is necessary. The administration is a kind of appendage. Since we could not engage in any particular pedantry, it was natural that we expected complete trust in what is the basic requirement for working together in the theosophical field. This trust does not appear to have been given to the extent that we would need it to conduct the business calmly and objectively. We will only make the final point by linking it to the meeting two weeks ago and contrasting it with it. This meeting was based on things that were even referred to as gossip; they were based on public appearances. Everything is to be discussed in public. The fact that there is dissatisfaction was admitted in the meeting, and the expression of a mood of discontent is in itself enough to bring about such a step as is to be taken today. I am - let this be accepted as an absolutely true interpretation - I am, not only because every occultist is, but on much more esoteric principles, opposed to all aggression. Every act of aggression hinders the activity that I would be able to unfold. Please regard this step as something that merely follows from the principle of not acting aggressively. Everyone must behave in such a way that the wishes of all can be fully expressed. Everyone must suppress their personal desires so that our work can be done. Otherwise, the Berlin branch cannot be managed as desired. That is what I would like to achieve. When opposing views are expressed, it is impossible to work together.

If we work in such a way, as desired from various sides, then in my opinion we would flatten the Theosophical movement, we would reduce it to the level of a club.

The words that were spoken at the last meeting must be heard, the words: that I am in diametrical opposition to those who want a club-like community. I do not intend to attack anyone. I just cannot be there. Anyone who considers this properly will have to say that this is the absence of any aggressiveness. I would like to set the tone for this matter. This is what I emphasized at the general assembly in October, where I emphasized that I do not conform to such a form, that I cannot conform to a club-like society. Those who wish that the Berlin branch be administered differently, that the members interact with each other in a different way, must act accordingly. It is necessary for them to take matters into their own hands and carry them out for themselves, so that it seems self-evident that no one can object if their wishes are fulfilled in the manner mentioned. I could not fulfill these wishes. I have always tried to satisfy wishes as best I could. In order for the Theosophical Society to continue to develop peacefully, I have to take this step. I have the task of maintaining the continuity of the movement in Germany. It is clear to me that only on an occult basis – given our confused circumstances in the world – can this movement be taken forward. A movement on a social basis does not need to be Theosophical; its people may already have ideal aspirations and become dear to one another, and that does not need to be Theosophical. But we need a theosophical movement, and that is why I cannot be a leader in a club-like organization. Please understand that I am obliged to bring the full depth of the theosophical movement, which is based on occultism, to it. Today, only those who live by the Aristotelian principle are truly called to actively participate within the Theosophical Society: Those who seek truth must respect no opinion.

Perhaps I would also like to work in a different way. But here it is a matter of duty, and therefore I will take this step because I have this obligation to build the Theosophical movement on a truly deeper foundation, and in the process of building, any attempt to run the society in a club-like manner will lead to a flattening out. No one can better understand that such things are necessary for some, and no one's relationship with me should change. Everyone will always be welcome with me. I will continue to conduct the business that relates to the material aspects of Theosophy in the same way, so that in the future everything can be found as it has been found. But precisely for this reason I must withdraw.

The consistency is, of course, in the lines that I have executed. I cannot and must not lose sight of the theosophical movement at any point. That is why I have asked those members of our Theosophical Society – all the other organizations are of a secondary nature – individual members of the Theosophical Society, to hold a meeting with me and asked them whether they would be willing to continue the Theosophical movement with me in the way I have led it, against which a discord has arisen and dissatisfaction has been expressed. This had to be so, because I must maintain continuity. I will only mention the case I have in Munich. There is a strictly closed lodge there that only accepts those who meet the requirements of the whole. But now we will have a second lodge in which all others can be admitted. I have endeavored to draw attention to the conditions of the work of the lodges, which is the daily bread of a lodge. I also want to found a Besant Lodge soon, for whose name I will ask Annie Besant for permission soon. In addition, there will be completely free activity from which no one can be excluded. That is the reason for my resignation.

(The names of a number of members are then listed.)

Krojanker: “After these explanations from Dr. Steiner, those who were unable to attend the last meeting will have gained an insight into the cause of the discord and also the background to the matter, which led three members of the board to take the above-mentioned step. There must have been trouble brewing long before those involved knew anything about it. Since I have known about these things, it has been impossible for me to get over them. At first it was impossible for me to realize that these things could drive the gentlemen to this conclusion. What was it actually? The starting point for me was simply the decision of City Councillor Eberty and Miss Schwiebs, who had set out to see the members in their home for free, informal discussions. It was not foreseeable that such conclusions could be drawn from this. The suggestion came from Miss von Sivers; members should be encouraged to approach each other, and the feeling should not arise that one does not quite feel at home, so that everything rushes home immediately after the lecture. But even with Miss von Sivers, this was noticeable to a certain extent. As long as we had no headquarters, she had to help herself in a different way, visiting friends and talking to them. These are things that were purely personal and private in nature, and in the previous session I had hoped that they would not affect us. I still have the same opinion of these things today, the opinion that they must not be touched. The polite couple who had invited us were not yet part of the branch. A distinction must be made between association work, associationism and theosophical work. But committees are not formed and elected, and members of the board are not elected, for nothing, so that they do not have to worry about running the association. They are elected and will then also have the authority to speak about business matters and to allow themselves to make judgments from time to time. If autocratic management [...] is desired, then statutes and so on would not be necessary either. If Dr. Steiner had said at the time: We must renounce such a form, had he shown or said, only under such and such conditions is it possible for me to work and participate, then things would have happened immediately and quite naturally. Those who would have liked it would have gone along with it, and the rest would have stayed out. I don't understand why a whole business apparatus has been set up and why it is resented if, as a member of one of its branches, I take an interest in it. I think it cannot be considered a crime to inquire about these things. I would recommend the introduction of wish lists. I must protest against the accusation that we are aggressive. We have heard Dr. Steiner speak for two years about what Theosophy is and what Theosophical life entails. Surely other ways could have been found to steer the discussions in a different direction. But now that it has come to this, the consequences must be drawn under all circumstances. I imagine them to be – I don't know if I have understood correctly – that this Berlin branch continues to exist as a continuation of the Berlin branch of the German Theosophical Society, and that the three board members and the other gentlemen whom Dr. Steiner has read out are now founding a new lodge.

Further negotiations and consultations will be needed before this step can be taken. The first task will be to elect a committee, because the Berlin branch currently has neither a committee nor a leadership. We will therefore have to form a provisional committee to discuss how this is to be done. I would like to leave it up to you to make proposals in this regard. In any case, we deeply regret the way in which the matter has been handled so far. When Dr. Steiner speaks of discord and soul currents, there is in fact nothing that I know and perhaps some personal matters that must never be made the business of the Berlin branch."

Dr. Steiner: “I myself had good reason to take the personal into account. At the general assembly, 300 marks were approved for my work last year. I had already raised concerns at the time, but soon after that I felt compelled to put these 300 marks back into the treasury because of the prevailing mood, because I did not want to work on the basis of ill will. You see that I have kept quiet for long enough. 'I also wanted to let this matter pass quietly, to bridge the gap with positive work. In the long run, this was not possible for good reason. Of course, we are not discussing private matters here, nor is a conversation about professional life appropriate. I have said that, as far as I am concerned, what was requested has been largely satisfied. The wish had arisen that we should have lectures elsewhere than here or in the architects' house, and I agreed to give lectures at Wilhelmstraße 118 as well. But now we have to make a few comments about such a matter. The things are not as crude as they might initially appear, but are more subtly connected. At the time, I readily agreed to fulfill this wish, and in the pursuit of this matter, I asked to form an executive committee. I did not dream what came of it. We still have no branch in the north, south, or east. It was my intention to work not only in the west, but in all parts of the city. When an executive committee was formed in the Berlin branch, it was intended that this committee should take charge of the actual agitation. No one here has ever been prevented from taking care of business matters, but the view is that anyone who wants to do something has to create the space for themselves. No one could demand anything from us. If someone had come to us with positive suggestions, we would have taken them up. But when it is said that our activities have not been attacked, I say that only this week I received a written accusation that we are managing the library in such a way that one can threaten to go to court about it. We cannot accept hidden accusations. We will also hand over the library. When I have presented these things, you can assume that they are based on the firmest possible foundation. The statutes and so on could have been adhered to if there had been goodwill. When one talks about business, it must be practical. What was done at the time was impractical. I spoke three times in relatively beautiful rooms, but then in a room that was referred to as a stable, and finally in a room where speaking was almost impossible. I had to speak with glasses knocking behind me and so on. That was no atmosphere for Theosophy. I had to think of doing things in a practical way. This was the reason for my decision to hold the lectures in the architect's house. Such measures were in favor of the Berlin branch. Nevertheless, I was told: These lectures are ones that we can attend or not attend. - So you see that this is a silent discourtesy. Nothing has been done precisely because the other view of business matters, of statutes and committees, gave the opportunity to try out how it works. A letter from a theosophist reads: “I would like to see the Berlin branch work well for once. Most of all, I would be pleased if it could work in a favorable way.“ But then a wish list has also been worked out, you think - on the wish list it said: ‘The chairman has to be there half an hour before the start’ - that's what made the step so special.” Ms. Eberty: “Don't you think this fragmentation is very sad?”

Dr. Steiner: “I have worked against these things. Whether a fragmentation will result from it remains to be seen. If the members of the Berlin branch will understand how to act in a theosophical way, there will be no need for fragmentation at all. There is no need to speak of fragmentation, I will do nothing to promote it.”

Mrs. Eberty: “If you had had something against the meetings, it would have been enough to say: There are reasons why the meetings cannot take place. We had the best intentions for this. We only did it to serve the cause of Theosophy. It did not even remotely occur to us that this was against your intentions, not even when it was on the agenda eight days ago, when there were indications that our afternoon could be meant by it."

Dr. Steiner: “If the form is dropped, there is no objection to the private meetings. What has happened at my request? That the teas at Fräulein von Sivers's have been abolished because I have not seen any benefit for Theosophy in such tea meetings. It was difficult for me that Countess Brockdorff took it badly. But nevertheless, I just said it. We ourselves would not be able to manage things differently.

Krojanker: “It seems that the Executive Committee is being made the scapegoat. If you are on the Executive Committee, useful work is only possible if you are informed about the entire business situation. If you don't have insight and don't find opportunities to gain insight, what do you want to make suggestions for? The Executive Committee needs this knowledge because it has to report to the Board. I am increasingly lacking tangible documents that have given rise to these matters.

Now comes the library question. A library commission has been set up. It is not really understandable why the members of the branch should be held responsible for this.

Mr. Werner: “Dr. Steiner is a man called from a higher place. Now it is difficult to get what is needed to perfect us. If you approach him now with demands and questions, such as, ”Where did you leave the money you raised with your lectures? Give us information about what you got out of these lectures! Give us information about where the money has gone. If you say, 'We decide here, because we have a completely free hand to say what you have to do', then that is not the way to harmonious cooperation. I think that when you first accept teachings and instructions from someone, the demands and questions should not go so far that they are unbearable in detail. These would be thoughts that shun the light and lead to disharmony. But we can prevent disharmony if we want to. If that is not the case, then we have no right to come here and quibble about what has happened.

Krojanker: “A distinction must be made between the theosophical teaching and the leadership of the Berlin branch. This will make it possible to avoid any mistrust.”

Dr. Steiner: “The harmony may have to be bought at the expense of excluding some members. The arranged lectures were intended for the Berlin branch. It is true that we could not have done the work better. I am of the opinion that for the time being we have done the work as well as we could, since nothing better has been offered to us from the other side. At the moment something better would have been offered to us from the other side, we would not have ignored it. But what we have done, I consider to be the best so far.

Fränkel: “Two meetings have been convened that have caused the discord. On both occasions, accusations have been made, followed by disharmony, so that a club has been formed, as it were, and we consist of two classes of members, so to speak. There are two ways of proceeding. There is a civil case and a criminal case. This is a public matter, not a private one. The complaint should therefore be made. However, it is not clear what is actually at issue. The first point is the tea with the ladies, the second point is that only the business committee has taken the wrong measures. The error seems to lie in the fact that at the founding, there was no discussion about how the business of the committee should be handled. There is no real discord yet, only the complaint of a few gentlemen based on factual reasons.

Dr. Steiner: “If we had come to accuse anyone, then you could blame us for something. We are returning the management to those who have a wish list. The way of thinking expressed in the wish list is such that it cannot lead to anything in the Theosophical Society.”

Krojanker: “A desire for power emerges from those who perhaps believe they are superior. But I have heard from Dr. Steiner that Theosophy does not submit to any authority.”

Tessmar: “It is all much too materialistic. We are members of the Theosophical Society, but the whole Berlin branch can go home if Dr. Steiner says, ‘I will no longer give lectures here.’ Dr. Steiner gives Theosophical lectures, not lectures about speakers. I myself do not want to be held accountable; I want to hear Theosophical lectures in order to progress. And now the complaint about authority comes up. The theosophical lectures are authority for me. I show trust by not asking: What does the library do, what do the six Dreier do, who come in?"

Krojanker: “I now see where the debate is leading us today. We have to come to terms with the facts. From Dr. Steiner's reply, I see that he is not to be convinced in any way, and that perhaps only time can bring understanding of the individual things. We are faced with the fact that this separation is taking place. What must happen now? Perhaps we should devote another hour to this question.”

(A motion is made to end the debate, which is carried.)

(Dr. Steiner, Fräulein von Sivers and Mr. Kiem resign.)

Dr. Steiner: “My only remaining duty is to recommend that a managing director be elected for the time being. The process will be as follows: The managing director will have the task of informing the other members of the resignation. I myself will also inform the external members that I have resigned on my part.” Krojanker: ‘Can't a general statement be communicated to the members from both sides about what has happened here?’

(A number of members declare their resignation from the Berlin branch.

Krojanker: Asks what he has done wrong and is told that he disagrees with the management.

Dr. Steiner: “Why did I do it in general? It is done this way because it could not be done any other way. The Berlin branch can now experiment and so on, and do its own things.

Mrs. Eberty: “We all received invitations.”

Dr. Steiner: “I invited some with my name and with a personal greeting. But the list is not complete.”

Mrs. [Johannesson]: “We felt separated by the tone of your address. We felt as if you had carried out a separation.”

Ms. [Voigt]: “Could the ladies be asked which topic was discussed? And also about the question from which Mr. Fränkel started. It is perhaps of interest.”

Tessmar: “I belong to Dr. Steiner. I will not be influenced. Please make a note of that if necessary. I really feel offended. As a seasoned seaman, I would choose different words. I forbid personal tapping.”

Dr. Steiner: “It has therefore been decided that a manager must be appointed for the German Theosophical Society. It would have been impossible for me to continue my work without taking this step. I cannot give intimate lectures in this mood. I only had the choice of either leaving Berlin or taking this step. Maintaining continuity was the reason for this. Mrs. Annie Besant said, when she saw the current here, that I should go to Munich, where the work that Miss von Sivers has done can be continued. But I will not change my whole relationship into a mere point. It is precisely the outward appearance that is at issue here, not the inwardness.

Present were: about 30 members. The meeting ended at eight o'clock [in the evening].

Report by Rudolf Steiner in “Lucifer - Gnosis”, July-August, No. 26-27/1905

This year [1905], the Federation of European Sections held its congress in London at the beginning of July (6, 7, 8, 9, 10). In general, the nature and organization of the events of this second meeting of its kind were similar to those held in Amsterdam the previous year. The beautiful feeling of belonging together again flowed through those who were able to come from the most diverse areas of Theosophical work to exchange ideas about methods of action, to bear witness to the progress of Theosophical ideas in the individual countries, and to receive suggestions for achievements in their home countries. Just as our Dutch friends spared no efforts and sacrifices last year to make the course of the congress a worthy and fruitful one, so did our members in London this year. Those who can appreciate the time and dedication required for the preparatory work and the management of such a meeting will be filled with warm gratitude for our English friends.

Mrs. Besant took over the presidency of the congress. The day before the actual start of the meeting, the assembled guests were able to attend a meeting of the Blavatsky Lodge to hear a momentous lecture by Annie Besant on the “Requirements of Discipleship”. The speaker followed up on various remarks that had been published recently about various minor weaknesses and faults of the great founder of the “Theosophical Society”, H. P. Blavatsky. Out of a deep sense of gratitude, the speaker spoke about the personality of the bringer of light on the path to truth and peace of soul. It is not important to see the small spots and weaknesses, but the great impulses that emanate from such personalities. We should hold on to them and find our own way through them. When we hear much about the life of the “initiates” that we say we did not expect, perhaps our expectations are based on misunderstandings. Where there is sun, there may also be sunspots; but the beneficent power of the sun works despite these spots. On the same day (Thursday, July 6), Annie Besant opened the “Arts and Crafts” exhibition, which then remained open for all days of the congress. It is natural that such an exhibition, which has the purpose of bringing artistic achievements influenced by theosophical ideas or originating from theosophists to the attention of the members, cannot be perfect in terms of the composition and value of the individual pieces. But it is a highly valuable addition to the congress; and anyone who does not see the purpose of the society in merely spreading theosophical ideas, but in developing theosophical life in all its aspects, will certainly not dispute its legitimacy. It is impossible to go into the details here, given the abundance of exhibits. It should only be noted that in the pictures of G. Russell, the interesting attempt was noticeable to give something of the astral reality in the symbolic color drawings around the figures depicted in the pictures, and in the coloring of the landscapes in which they are placed. How much of this is achieved is another question and cannot be considered today. The works of our member Lauweriks, who used to belong to the Dutch section and now belongs to the German section because he has been working as a teacher at the School of Applied Arts in Düsseldorf for some time, deserve special mention. His arts and crafts show the subtle mind and excellent artist everywhere. German works on display included an interesting picture of the chairman of our Düsseldorf lodge, Otto Boyer, the “Alchymist”, and a portrait study of the same excellent artist, who had also taken the trouble to participate in the work of the art committee as a German representative.

Miss Stinde, our member active in Munich, has contributed from the rich treasure trove of her landscapes. Furthermore, a picture by our member Miss Schmidt from Stuttgart was exhibited.

On Friday evening, Annie Besant gave a lecture on “The Work of Theosophy in the World” in front of thousands of people in the large “Queens Hall”. In a few concise strokes, she characterized the task that the wisdom teachings of Theosophy have in modern life today. Not only as a confession, but through all areas of life, science, art and so on, they should come into their own if they are to fulfill their mission. What the Theosophical movement has achieved in terms of artistic and scientific circles, which are far removed from the Theosophical movement, has been admirably demonstrated.

On Saturday morning, the actual congress proceedings were opened by Annie Besant's forceful introductory words. Here she pointed out how nations must work together in brotherly cooperation for the great work, and she characterized the approaches to deepening spiritual life in the theosophical sense that are present here and there. For example, she pointed to the work of an Italian sculptor Ezekiel, a “Christ” in which the theosophist could see his image of Christ. For Germans it will be particularly interesting to hear that Annie Besant pointed to the art of Richard Wagner, in whose tones influences of the astral world can be felt. - What followed was a beautiful symbol of the fraternal international character of the Society. In accordance with a decision of the committee, the individual representatives of the various countries gave short welcoming speeches in their national languages. And one could now hear such speeches in the following languages one after the other: Dutch, Swedish, French, German, English (for America), Italian, Spanish, Hungarian, Finnish, Russian and an Indian idiom. Mr. Mead spoke last for England. The morning session closed with business announcements from J. van Manen, the secretary of the congress.

In the afternoon, the individual lectures and departmental meetings began. Papers were presented by the individual members who had registered to do so, covering a wide range of topics: philosophy, science, ethnology, theosophical working methods, art, occultism, and so on. It is quite impossible to even hint at the rich abundance of what is presented here. Lectures are given in various rooms on a wide variety of subjects, followed by discussions. Only a few of them will be mentioned here: Mr. Mead spoke on an interesting Gnostic topic, Pascal, the General Secretary of the French Section, presented a paper on the “Mechanism of Clairvoyance in Humans and Animals”. Mr. Percy Lund had contributed a paper on the “Physical Evidence for Atlantis and Lemuria”. In the Occult Section, Annie Besant gave a most illuminating talk about the requirements and difficulties of occult research methods. She showed what precautions and reservations the occult researcher must take despite the greatest caution, and how his results must be received with equal caution despite his utmost conscientiousness. Dr. Rudolf Steiner spoke in the “Science” section about the “Occult Foundations of Goethe's Life Work”. M. P. Bernard was able to make a contribution on “Instinct, Consciousness, Hygiene and Morality”. M. H. Choisy discussed the “Foundations of Theosophical Morality”. Mr. Leo provided extremely valuable insights into “Astrology”.

Mr. Mead spoke at a final meeting about Gnosticism in the past and present and from there shed light on the similarities in all mystery wisdom. On Saturday evening there was a theatrical performance, two symbolic dramatic works, the first attempt to cultivate this art at our congresses as well. On Sunday and Monday afternoons there were musical performances; vocal performances in the different national languages again symbolically and beautifully expressed the principle of brotherhood. Annie Besant ended the congress on Monday evening with a short closing speech. The following were present from Germany: Fräulein Scholl (Cologne), Frau Geheimrat Lübke (Weimar), Gräfin Kalckreuth, Fräulein Stinde, Herr und Frau v. Seydewitz (Munich), Gräfin Schack (Döringau), Dr. H. Vollrath (Leipzig), Herr Kiem, Fräulein v. Sivers and Dr. Rudolf Steiner from Berlin, Herr und Frau Dr. Peipers (Düsseldorf). Our members J. v. Manen and [Miss] Kate Spink, who did all the secretarial work for the congress, deserve special thanks. It has already been mentioned that Otto Boyer participated in the work of the committee for visual arts. Adolf Arenson (Stuttgart) represented Germany on the committee for musical performances.

The lectures and all the assembly reports from last year's congress of the Federation of European Sections of the Theosophical Society will soon be published in a handsome volume, the “Congress Yearbook”. It can be understood that publishing this book in its first year presented a great challenge to the collectors and editors (J. van Manen, Kate Spink), and that it is therefore only now that it can be published. This year's lectures and discussions will be completed in a shorter time. The Max Altmann publishing house in Leipzig has taken over the distribution of the “Yearbook” for Germany, and one should contact them for the purpose of purchase.

The Annual General Meeting of the British Section of the Theosophical Society took place on July 8. At the meeting, Mr. Keightley resigned from his post as General Secretary and Miss Kate Spink was elected in his place. Dr. Rudolf Steiner welcomed the meeting on behalf of the German Section.

As you can see from the announcement, we will have a weekly meeting every Monday. This is to be considered a meeting of the Besant branch. The notes on the invitation are to be taken into account. Last year's work has made the venue too small. It is not at all our intention to be exclusive and to hold these Mondays for the branch alone. We would like to expand the matter, but on the other hand it seems a bit harsh to the members if non-members without excuse have access throughout the year, especially this year, when perhaps even more intimate things could be discussed in these Monday meetings than last year. We are getting deeper and deeper into it. The other meetings are then in the architect's house. This year, particular attention will be paid to demonstrating the significance of Theosophy and its importance for the present. I will speak about important questions in their relation to current affairs. Next Thursday, I will speak about Haeckel's world riddle, then about our world situation, and then about the question of inner development. The cycle will then conclude with a reflection on Christmas.

I have just completed a major lecture tour. A tour such as this is not only educational for the one undertaking it, but it can also be educational for the widest circles of those who are interested in Theosophy. I was in St. Gallen, Freiburg, Stuttgart, Heidelberg, Frankfurt am Main, Kassel, Weimar. In most places I was able to give a public lecture, and then in the following days I had a discussion with those listeners who were more interested. We do not yet have branches in all these places. But that is not to say that we will not. We do not want to proceed in a stormy, agitating way. Those who come to the Theosophical Society should come because they have an inner urge to do so. Therefore, it will be good to cultivate Theosophy as much as possible and to tell the audience what it is all about. I am convinced that those who are predestined to participate will come. I was able to perceive that there is a great longing for what the Theosophical Society has to offer humanity. The Theosophists within it are deeply responsive to what people need and desire today. On the other hand, there is a certain despondency, a certain sum of prejudices with which people are afflicted, and which prevent them from immediately dealing with Theosophy. There is much to be overcome. This is shown by such a journey, on which one gets to know the most diverse moods. Despite all discouragement, such a journey has a certain satisfying impression. One sees in the hearts of men that which must live if we want to move towards the future, which the theosophical movement wants to strive for.

So let us touch on a few questions that may be of particular interest to us, without making any judgments. You only need to take a look at the current world situation to be able to recall at any moment how necessary Theosophy and Theosophical striving are today. You can look at all parts of the world, everywhere you see peoples and classes in a hard struggle for existence. Races are fighting each other, nations are at war with each other, individual classes in individual countries are sharply opposed to each other. Against this, we have nothing much other than our first principle: to establish the core of a universal brotherhood, without distinction of race, sex, class or creed. That is a powerful principle, people say. But many appeal to what Schopenhauer has already said: preaching morality is easy, but establishing morality is difficult. The theosophical movement is not a doctrine, not a foundation. It differs from the other movements of the new time in that it is real life. And the teachings we spread are not the main thing. It is not the teachings that matter to us. They are all only the means to life. And no matter what teachings are proclaimed in the various branches of the movement or at its public events, whether we believe these teachings or do not believe them, whether we can repeat them or cannot repeat them, that is not the point. The point is that the teachings are something quite different from other teachings of present-day science or from the teachings of even the traditional concepts of the Logos. As long as the theosophical teachings are not what they should be, as long as they are the same as other dogmas, as other doctrines and sciences. Only when they are great, when they live into the soul like a magnetic force and work in the soul, will they become what they should be. This is not a lodge where reincarnation and karma, the world view, the origin and purpose of man are merely taught and beautiful sentences are coined, but this is a lodge where these thoughts buzz through the room and touch the deepest part of the heart, so that man feels these teachings as intimately related to him, so that it is as if these teachings come from within him. When these things become so powerful that he not only becomes wiser but also better, then it is the right thing.

This difference will not be immediately understood by many. Many today present themselves as teachers of ethics, of morals, or as teachers of a creed or as educators. We hear people talking about monistic teachings, about a renewal of this or that teaching – all these teachings come across as being deeply different from what the theosophical teacher wants, what we want in general within the theosophical movement. All the others preach or proclaim their supposed truths, they stand there and say, this is our confession, this is our opinion, this is the truth, in my opinion. No Theosophical lecturer could approach an audience in this way. It is not about an opinion. We carry within us the awareness that truth is within ourselves, that it lives in every human breast, that we do not have to bring it in, but at most have to bring it out – that we stimulate our fellow human beings. Thus, what is necessary lies in what has been said, in the bond that unites the Theosophical members. What is discussed in the branches should be a kindling of the inner life in the souls. We bring thoughts from the spiritual world, the great laws from the supersensible existence, which have formed the world, brought forth man, the great laws according to which the wise teachers and masters taught our ancestors millennia ago and still teach us today. We draw on these great laws, and they are at the same time that which carries us forward, which gives us security, courage and hope for life. These laws should permeate the spaces in which we live. And by feeling them, these laws, we recognize the world and ourselves. Then we should let these laws influence our daily activities in the most mundane things we do. Then the members of the Theosophical Society will be like leaven; they will be everywhere on the outside like a new spirit - if that is the case, we will know that the spirit is something true and real.

Anyone who comes here just to hear teachings comes here in vain, because they don't have the right attitude. And this is what matters when faced with the spirit. It is important that the person who comes here knows that the spirit is a reality, a truth, that I do not just get well and ill from [a] medicine, not just from wind and weather, but that what our body and our reality actually is also emanates from what I think, feel and will, that health can only come from a spirit that works healthily. It is even more important that our thoughts are healthy than that our thoughts are true. You will not be able to notice tomorrow or the day after that a source of health emanates from what is done in the theosophical lodge. Think wrongly in the world and you will bring illness into the world, not tomorrow or the day after, but one day for sure. All evil stems from untruth, from an incorrect inner life. This connection will become clear to you in the next Monday lecture. To give humanity a new health, a new harmonious life, that is our main goal. Therefore, our thoughts are not just teachings, but forces. They do not just enlighten, but heal and harmonize, healing the body and healing the legal and social aspects of human coexistence. Those who grasp this so deeply have the core of the theosophical movement. Those who merely ask how this or that relates do not know about theosophy. But the theosophist knows that when he sits together with the others in the branch and the great thoughts of the world order pass through his soul for an hour, he makes himself the sounding board of a new, healthy and harmonious life. Well, ladies and gentlemen, the fact that such a life springs up and exists in the theosophical movement is evident in some phenomena. We started from the premise that we said: you cannot preach morality, you have to establish it. But it seems as if the Theosophical Society has already achieved something that corresponds to and serves the principle of the brotherhood of peoples. There was a beautiful moment at the opening of this year's congress. It was decided that each delegate would give a short speech in his or her mother tongue. There they were, people who, in the external political situation, are in a fierce struggle against each other. A prelude to what can become reality when the spiritual life takes hold of souls was played out at the opening of the London Congress. The following languages could be heard, as a symbol of our principle: Dutch, English, Swedish, French, German, Spanish, Italian, Hungarian, Finnish, Russian. There you have a symbol of the same will and the same feeling flowing in the different languages. This is the life that the Theosophical movement has achieved in the thirty years since its inception. There was one of the most beautiful and wonderful moments at this conference – not during the conference itself, but on one of the evenings before – for some members who gathered here during the summer. They were invited to attend a meeting of the Blavatsky Lodge. At that meeting, Annie Besant gave a lecture on the requirements of discipleship. As you know, discipleship is something very high. That evening, it was not so much a matter of discussing the requirements of discipleship in general, but rather of the greatest of Helena Petrovna Blavatsky's disciples speaking out about critical minds. Allow me to say a few words about the actual subject. I need only mention here that everything that is the Theosophical Society is owed to the fundamental work of Helena Petrovna Blavatsky. None of the disciples can claim to have fully grasped what lived in Helena Petrovna Blavatsky. Those who delve into the works of Helena Petrovna Blavatsky see more and more that they are entering unfathomable depths, and that in her time the truth flowed through this unique personality as it has only flowed through the greatest religious founders and leaders of humanity. I can understand that in the beginning, when one approaches Helena Petrovna Blavatsky's achievements, one believes that one has understood many things. This can happen to anyone. But then there comes a time when one realizes that the content of the 'Secret Doctrine' contains writings of such spiritual depth that no one, without exception, has ever fully grasped it since Helena Petrovna Blavatsky. You could hear these words from Mrs. Annie Besant at any time.

There is the possibility, even for the greatest leading minds of humanity, to never stop. At least no one has yet found the end point. Deeper and deeper foundations of truth are found when you go deeper. That is what ultimately brings those who have the will to penetrate into a spiritual connection with Helena Petrovna Blavatsky. Helena Petrovna Blavatsky is still in contact with the Theosophical movement today. She is still one of the aids for the Theosophical Society today. If we have the right to turn to her, then she will help. One only has to look at what she has done historically. Take a look at her writings. You will find things in them that some scholars say: “This could be cobbled together from all the books in the world.” Yes, but no one has ever found what was available in different places around the world. Some things are in the most hidden places, in places that no other soul has had access to before; you will find exact quotes from writings that no human eye has rested on for centuries in Blavatsky's writings. She wrote so many of them in [Würzburg], while the books [in truth] were in the Vatican.

Of course she also made mistakes. But if you look into them, you will find that the mistakes are based on something specific, namely on a certain uncertainty of reading that always occurs when one has to grope in the astral light. We do not only live in the physical world, we also live in the higher worlds. We see not only the physical, but also the spiritual. We see not only physically, but also spiritually, and there you can also read books that are in the Vatican in Rome, but you can easily read wrong, you can easily read 136 instead of 631. Where mistakes have been made, it turns out that they have always been made in this way. Every objection that is raised against the truly valuable, the great and significant aspects of this personality can be easily refuted by anyone who really engages with it. But it seems that not many people are willing to get to the bottom of the matter, despite everything. Otherwise it would not have been possible for small mistakes by Helena Petrovna Blavatsky to have been ridiculed here and there in recent times – even in the English “Vâhan” – that Helena Petrovna Blavatsky was sometimes passionately agitated, used a harsh, passionate word, smoked cigarettes. The question was raised as to whether someone who smokes cigarettes can really be a great person, can sometimes be agitated. This was the reason for Mrs. Besant's lecture on Helena Petrovna Blavatsky. Now this greatest disciple of Helena Petrovna Blavatsky spoke from her innermost being. Everyone who was there will have found that something tremendous emerged from within, everyone had to feel that something deep was alive there. She discussed the fact that there may be people who have not gone astray – but [she also] asked whether they also have the great qualities of Helena Petrovna Blavatsky. Of course, there are also many who do not smoke cigarettes, but do they have the great qualities of Helena Petrovna Blavatsky? The sun also has sunspots, but these do not illuminate the earth. It is light that has a warming and fertilizing effect. Those who want to have it, who want to achieve what Helena Petrovna Blavatsky was able to give to humanity, must also be able to see it - and be satisfied with what is great and powerful about it. Then they will come closer and closer to the impersonal source of wisdom, truth and life.

The fact that this was spoken out of a deeply serious experience was what mattered, and it was spoken by a personality who herself admitted that evening that [Helena Petrovna Blavatsky] was the Bringer of Light for her. Then came the beautiful, profound words in which Annie Besant, as everyone could feel, was in complete harmony with all the students of the great teacher Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, at the head of whom she placed those who said that that one should bear in mind that the disciple, the beginner above all, before he can grasp the greatness of the great, harms himself if he blocks his path to these great ones by hasty, unintelligent criticism. To have such an attitude, to get into such a mood, to really feel what is right in the face of greatness, that is the gain of life, that is the beginning of the highest spiritual knowledge. No one needs to venerate anyone else, everyone may criticize as much as they want in the world, but by doing so, they harm themselves most of all when they want to gain knowledge. Then they put the greatest obstacles in their own way.

There is one thing that must not be misunderstood. It is often said in theosophical writings: Don't criticize, seek to understand first, before you judge. And this is taken as if it were a prescription for everyone. The Theosophical Society does not oblige anyone to follow such a prescription. But there is something else we need to know, and that is that we must be in this mood of unbiased acceptance if these truths are to flow into us. You can't have one without the other, and anyone who wants one without the other is like someone who has a glass rod and wants it to be electric. If he wants it to be electric, he has to rub it. If he does not want to rub it, it will not become electric. He who wants knowledge must have this mood. You cannot achieve one without the other. It is a contradiction in terms to want to achieve one without the other.

You just have to understand the theosophical view correctly. It is nothing more than a narrative. It never demands anything of any of its members. That is something we are very far from, especially those who know what is important in the theosophical movement. We are not asked to believe in any authority, to engage in any personality cult. The less the cult of personality is demanded, the higher the status of those to whom it is applied. All speaking against personality cult is speaking against things that are not there. The great moment I wanted to characterize was to see a personality looking up. And the whole lecture was looking up. That was the significant thing about it.

I wanted to emphasize these two moments for you because they symbolically show something of the gain in life that one can have today within the Theosophical Society. There are two things that will become more and more important: One is the realization of our first principle: to establish the core of a human brotherhood, to present the great core of humanity, and the second is to learn to worship without belief in authority, without worship of persons, to worship out of freedom, out of knowledge. To offer worship as a gift that is free, without compulsion. This can be achieved. This is what we have achieved in thirty years. When we do that, it is as if a different kind of spirit were to pass through the room and fill everyone. Little by little, the theosophist comes to realize that this is something much more real than what can be grasped with hands. The thought should occur to every member at the entrance gate to the Theosophical Society: Here you enter a society in which people believe in the truths and realities of the spirit, in which they believe that spirit lives in you. This is connected with the central phenomenon of our society.

We recognize the great progress of the outer life, we are not reactionaries, we know what it means to have achieved outer science, that in the eighteenth century in one of the big cities 77 out of 1000 people died, while now only 22 out of 1000 die. We know what it means that our industry has conquered the world. In the face of all these achievements, there is one thing within this modern science that claims authority, one thing that you will encounter again and again, and that is an uncertainty regarding the great questions of the divine, regarding the great questions of the immortal powers in man. And there you hear from those who are most learned, most scientific: We know nothing, we can know nothing. And that is only natural, for it lies in the present development. But what knowledge have we acquired? To understand this properly, we have to look back a little in history.

Anyone who studies culture from a historical perspective from the point of view of the school of thought will be told that there were originally primitive, uneducated, uncultivated peoples. They still live in some parts of the world. We are descended from them. We will not examine whether this is the case. But when we examine religious beliefs, legends and myths, these world scriptures, we are amazed when we look into the deep wisdoms for which these myths and legends are the expression. We can glimpse the deepest wisdom in the mythical images of the seemingly most primitive peoples. We do not import it. Those who study them will find that it takes much more skill to import it than to extract it. These peoples did not have our means of understanding and our instruments. It is a miracle that the secret of the material is presented in a similar way to that given to us by science today. But now read a lecture given at the naturalists' meeting on the brain conditions. Everything appears chaotic to you compared to the old wisdom. There is a difference in how our people think and how our ancestors thought. What does today's man say? I have invented the truth. - Your ancestors would have referred you to their teachers, to higher and higher teachers. A sense of profound humility permeated the whole thing, a humility that can listen, that says to itself, the human being is in a state of development, knowledge and wisdom are also in a state of development, and if I want to know that which I cannot know myself, I must look up to other teachers. We should not accept knowledge on authority, no, when we have heard the truth, the knowledge, we can also find it ourselves.

It is true that the personal cannot know anything about things that go beyond the tangible. If we want to know something about this, we have to turn to such teachers who have kindled the light within themselves, in order to be able to show us what it looks like in the worlds that extend beyond the physical world. They will bring the teacher principle home to us.

What has the man of today achieved with all his science? He has been able to build the outer house and to bring about the greatest conceivable progress in the outer world of the senses. But one thing must be borne in mind. Think of it: all of science and culture has made our Earth a veritable palace for the people living on it. But it also teaches us something else: namely, that this physical Earth will no longer be here, because all the greatness and infinity that material culture has achieved will disappear, will disperse into its atoms. What does this physical science teach us? What will happen to all that man has been here and has achieved? A “I don't know,” this science must say, which is limited only to this earth. Only those who have experienced more than what is connected with the earth can know something about this question – and they do not speak about it that way. We must turn to the great teachers. Therefore, theosophical teaching ultimately leads to the great masters and teachers of the human race. Then one comes to the point of saying that a certain human knowledge is vain. But there are human beings who are beyond this point of view and have achieved something that will still be there when the earth has long since been scattered. We must find the way to the higher individualities who speak to the people who want to hear them. The Master does not speak to those who are arrogant, only to those who are truly humble in the highest sense, who make themselves a vessel and tool of the Master.

The Master speaks to them in the highest sense. Did the founder of the Theosophical Society, Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, also have this humility? How easily she could have said: What is in my books comes from my knowledge. But she always referred to those who stood behind her, to the enlightened guides and masters of wisdom. So Helena Petrovna Blavatsky had that great modesty.

There are many who do not want to hear about the so-called higher worlds, who want to avoid the Theosophical Society precisely because it talks about a devachan plan and an astral plan. But whether we are afraid and afraid of these things is not the point, but whether they are true. The masters have told us more about these things because we need them in life. Certainly, you can learn a lot by observing life, the mind can tell us a lot. Even the moral teachings can be grasped by the intellect. From the ordinary point of view, many a person can be moralized about envy, cowardice, lies and so on. But envy, cowardice and lies are things that are observed in truth in the higher world. In the physical world, lying is a relatively light offense. But it is nothing compared to what it is on the astral plane. The moment you tell a lie, you cause something that is like the destruction of a living being. You then carry this killing with you. It mixes with your own astral body. What we otherwise only know from the lie as an external world, we then get to know in its liveliness. What is sensual here becomes spiritual. Today we need to be reintroduced to the spirit, to sense it first and then be led to certain knowledge. This is the life that must pulsate through the theosophical movement. If this life does not pass through the theosophical movement, then it will not achieve what it is meant for. These guiding masters, all our beautiful teachings and theories are in vain if there are not a number of people in the world who come together in the mood we have described, in the mood that they already say to themselves at the entrance: Here we only live in the awareness that the spirit is a reality. - When every listener is filled with this mood, then our branch has meaning, then you yourself are the source of something living. When we are together in the consciousness of the truth of the spirit, then this consciousness is a force, and the people who are there and have this consciousness form an electrical receiver. And when thoughts are expressed, whether by anyone in particular, that are in harmony with the laws of the universe, and are grasped by all the souls in us and a center is formed, then they go out from there through the whole city and influence the whole city, when we have the consciousness of the spirit. My words have no meaning if there are no people who take them up and carry them out into the world. That is why we come together in the Society. When we have this consciousness, only then are we truly a Theosophical Society. That this consciousness becomes more and more intense, stronger and stronger with us, that we really show a power through faith and through the knowledge of the spirit and of the spirit, that is what our meetings should achieve. What really matters is not that we read books or listen to teachings, but that we accept and appropriate this consciousness of the spirit. And then, when there are as many branches as there are people who have this consciousness of the spirit, only then will there be a Theosophical Society. But not before. It is not the doctrine, not the dogma, but the consciousness of the spirit that is important.

Report in the “Communications for the members of the German Section of the Theosophical Society (Adyar Headquarters) published by Mathilde Scholl”, No. 1/1905

At half-past ten, Dr. Rudolf Steiner, as General Secretary of the German Section, opened the third ordinary General Assembly and welcomed the representatives of the foreign branches and all other guests.

After reading and approving the minutes of the General Assembly of October 30, 1904, the number of votes of the various branches was determined, with the following result:

Absolute majority 21 votes

Two-thirds majority 28 votes.

Mr. Hubo proposes the following procedural motion: The General Assembly shall decide to grant the Secretary General the exclusive right to publish the General Assembly; however, any other publication shall be declared inadmissible. After a lengthy debate, in which Dr. Löhnis, Mr. Ahner, Mr. Krojanker, Mr. Arenson, Mr. Stübing, Mr. Kieser, Dr. Paulus, Dr. Steiner took part, the Hubo motion was adopted as follows, with all but two votes in favor:

“The report of the General Assembly is to be duplicated by the General Secretary and sent confidentially to all members. It may not otherwise be published or sent.”

Dr. Rudolf Steiner makes the following statement on the first item on the agenda - the Secretary General's report:

"The Theosophical movement has spread extensively and intensively within Germany and Switzerland. The Theosophical idea seems to be understood more and more. During my visits to Munich, Nuremberg, Regensburg, Stuttgart, Frankfurt am Main, Bonn, Cologne, Düsseldorf, Weimar, Zurich, Basel, Kassel and so on, it has become clear that there is a great longing in people's hearts for a spiritual deepening of life. In these cities, we either already have branches or their establishment is in prospect. Branches have been established in Freiburg im Breisgau and Karlsruhe, and in other cities: Sankt Gallen, Frankfurt am Main and so on, such branches are likely to be established soon. In Basel and Heidelberg, the circumstances are more difficult; there, the understanding that the high spirit, which was sent into the world thirty years ago, flows through our society, must first be created. There is still much misunderstanding to be cleared up, which has been caused by the split-off theosophical movements.

This longing should give us strength. It is essential that we not only cultivate theosophical teachings, but also theosophical life. Only when art, science and all other branches of life radiate out of theosophy, only then has the mission been fully grasped. The significance of the Theosophical movement was beautifully demonstrated at the Congress of the Federation of European Sections in London. One may object to such congresses as one likes; perfection has not fallen from heaven; but here we are dealing with intentions. We must set ourselves the ideal of improving what needs improvement, of working to improve it, not of criticizing it.

Before I move on to the Congress report, I would like to mention an event that relates to certain recent events. On the eve of the Congress, Mrs. Besant spoke at the Blavatsky Lodge about the needs of the student body in connection with Helena Petrovna Blavatsky. All those present at the time will not contradict me when I say that it was an hour of intimate Theosophical togetherness, from which one could take away a lasting impression in one's heart and mind. I have seldom heard Mrs. Besant speak in such an inward and heartfelt way. In the English “Vâhan” it had been expressed some time before that the qualities of Helena Petrovna Blavatsky were in contradiction to the discipleship, and the question had been raised: Can someone possess the qualities and yet not be free from such faults as smoking, intermittent passionate outbursts and so on? Mrs. Besant took up this remark about “Vâhan” and said that Helena Petrovna Blavatsky was a personality who was the bringer of light for her; she was the one who led her out of darkness towards the light. Well, it is true that Mrs. Helena Petrovna Blavatsky smoked and flew into a rage; but do such questioners know what it means to go through the storms and struggles that someone has to endure before they have worked their way to this level of knowledge? Even the sun has sunspots, but we should not judge it by these spots, but as the bringer of light and warmth. The younger members should first try to understand the older members whom they cannot recognize in their greatness before they begin to criticize.

Let us tie this in with a few words about personality cults and belief in authority, because such things have also been discussed in our section. It might seem that I myself now wanted to engage in such personality cults and belief in authority with regard to Mrs. Besant. Before I knew Mrs. Besant, I was as far removed as possible from engaging in personality cults; it was more important to me to continue searching for the truth in the world. Then I met Mrs. Besant. Not out of personality cult, but out of the spiritual content of the personality, I became convinced that she lives in what leads to the higher spiritual worlds. Fifteen years ago, I still stood before Helena Petrovna Blavatsky as before a mystery, but through Mrs. Besant I also found my way to Helena Petrovna Blavatsky. Mrs. Besant demands the least cult of personality; nothing is more unpleasant to her than this. Mrs. Besant has never demanded the slightest cult of personality from me.

At the congress, a scene took place that seems to symbolize the global reach of the Theosophical Society. In addition to Mrs. Besant, there were representatives of the various sections and countries. Everyone spoke in their mother tongue. The idea of Theosophy, which is common to all, was heard in the languages of the most diverse peoples of the earth: Dutch, English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Swedish, Russian, Finnish, Hungarian, and Indian. The course of the congress was the usual one. There was an exhibition, in particular of works of art by our members. Among the German exhibitors, I would like to highlight Lauweriks (Düsseldorf), Seydewitz (Munich), Boyer (Düsseldorf), Miss Stinde (Munich), Miss Schmidt (Stuttgart). The pictures of the Irishman Russell should be mentioned, who tried to express inner astral life in the environment and also in the symbolism in his landscapes and persons. Besant also pointed out that those who want to find theosophy in art can find it in Richard Wagner, for example. The sculptural work of a sculptor named Ezekiel, who lives in Italy, was also mentioned. Besant said that it reflects well what a theosophist can imagine of Christ.

Ms Besant's lecture on occult research, its methods and dangers on Sunday evening should also be mentioned. No one should accept anything that is claimed about occult research on good faith or on authority, but should consider it only as a suggestion at first. What comes to light is researched in difficult ways. Therefore, anyone who does such research should only want to suggest.

I myself was allowed to give a lecture on the occult basis in Goethe's works.

Regarding last year's Federation Yearbook, I note that it was completed by the beginning of July, except for the index, which I assume has been finished by now.

This year's Yearbook should be ready in less time.

The location of the 1906 congress is Paris. It is expected to take place in May.

This concludes the factual information. However, I would like this information to be understood as it is meant, and that these messages are not understood as meaning that all theosophical teachings, dogmas and thoughts are only valuable if they flow directly into life.

Those who enter Theosophical Society should know that everyone who sits there should be a battery of power for the mind. We are clear about the living weaving and living of the mind. We do not want to spread the teachings through mere words on the physical plane. We know that the spirit flows out like the current of an electrical power source. Wherever theosophists sit together, there should be such a power source. Then those who receive these waves will also be found. One should feel like one is a member of a spiritual community.

The treasurer, Mr. Seiler, now gives an account of his stewardship:

The total income in the past
financial year was 1462 marks
The total expenditure was 936.67 marks
Thus there was a surplus of 525.33 marks.

Added to this are 1000 marks in the bank, giving a total cash wealth of 1525.33 marks.

Dr. Steiner also reports that Countess Wachtmeister has provided him with 50 pounds for Theosophical work in Germany. He asks that these be used exclusively for propaganda and that he be allowed to administer them together with Miss von Sivers. The General Assembly agreed.

Fräulein von Sivers, as secretary of the German Section, gives the following report on the course of Theosophical life in the past year:

The number of branches is 18 compared to 13 last year, an increase of 5 (Besant Branch, Stuttgart II and III, Freiburg, Karlsruhe).

Total number of members: 377 (previous year: 256), an increase of 121.
8 have left
3 have died
132 have joined (previous year: 121).

Members in the individual branches:
Besant branch [newly founded] 83
Berlin branch [DTG] 18
Charlottenburg 5
Weimar 11 Munich 33
Stuttgart I 9
Stuttgart II (Kerning-Loge) 11
Stuttgart III 11
Freiburg i. Br. 10
Lugano 9
Karlsruhe 9
Cologne 22
Düsseldorf 15
Hamburg 21
Hannover 25
Leipzig 26
Dresden 9
Nuremberg 18

Section members 22

Reports from the individual branches:

Mr. Ahner reports on Dresden that there has been much struggle in the theosophical movement there, especially with the secession. The circumstances had led to the founding of an Adyar Lodge, which, however, found it very difficult to maintain its membership, as there were very few funds available. Therefore, work could only be done in a smaller circle. Mr. Ahner concluded with a general appeal to the generosity of the members with means. Mr. Hubo called for such voluntary donations to be made immediately after the General Assembly.

After the report of the auditor, Mr. Krojanker, the treasurer is granted discharge, as are the other members of the board.

The next item on the agenda is the election of the board:

Mr. Bresch takes the floor to speak about the election of the General Secretary and says something along the following lines: He is against the re-election of Dr. Steiner. Three years ago, he himself had urged Dr. Steiner to accept the position. At that time, Dr. Steiner was to be seen as a scholar. Since then, he has been working as an occultist, and it must be said that such personalities are not suitable for administrative positions. Dr. Steiner could better perform his services as a teacher if he were not burdened with the post of General Secretary. Furthermore, it is dangerous to have people with occult pretensions in such posts. The case of Judge proved that. Occult life is only too easily associated with fraud, imposture, deception, and so on. Mr. Bresch would therefore like to ask Dr. Steiner to refrain from re-election himself.

Dr. Steiner first notes that no motion for re-election has yet been made. He acknowledges Mr. Bresch's reasons to a certain extent; however, as things stand today, he feels obliged to accept the election if he is elected.

Proposal Arenson: Dr. Steiner shall be re-elected as Secretary General.

For the duration of this vote, Dr. Steiner hands over the chair to Miss Scholl.

Mr. Stübing asks if it would not be possible for Dr. Steiner to devote his activities entirely to propaganda.

Dr. Steiner replies that this has been his wish for a long time, but given the circumstances, he would be failing in his duty to the Theosophical Society if he did not accept the election at the moment.

Mr. Hubo proposes the middle way of re-electing Dr. Steiner but relieving him of mechanical work by paid assistants. Dr. Steiner requests that these motions be treated separately. After a lengthy debate, in which Mr. Ahner, Dr. Paulus and Mr. Arenson take part, Dr. Steiner is re-elected by roll call with all but two votes in favor of the motion to end the debate.

Dr. Steiner resumes the chair.

The remaining twelve members of the executive committee are then elected; they are elected individually by roll call.

The results of the election are as follows:

1. Miss von Sivers
2. Miss Scholl
3. Mrs. Lübke
4. Miss Stinde,
5. Mr. Arenson,
6. Mr. Kolbe,
7. Mr. Kiem,
8. Mr. Wagner,
9. Mr. Deinhardt,
10. Mr. Bauer,
11. Mr. Hubo,
12. Mr. Ahner.

The treasurer is then elected. At the request of Mr. Wagner, Mr. Seiler is re-elected. Since Mr. Krojanker declines re-election, Miss Motzkus and Mr. Tessmar are proposed and elected as auditors. Proposal by the Secretary General: For reasons of fairness, the section members, of whom we currently have 22 in Germany and who do not belong to any branch, should also have representation at the General Assembly. On behalf of the board, he proposes that they be treated as a single branch, that is, in addition to a joint delegate, they should have one additional delegate for every 25 members (or part thereof). Adopted.

Dr. Steiner requests the mandate to greet the general secretaries of the remaining sections on behalf of the general assembly. Accepted.

Proposal Bresch and Dr. Löhnis, regarding the Fuente matter, Leipzig, August 30, 1905: Proposal: The general assembly of the German section of the Theosophical Society should decide as follows:

1. The President of the Theosophical Society, Mr. H. 8. Olcott, is hereby informed of the displeasure of the members of the German Section of the Theosophical Society at his having allowed Mrs. Besant to use half of the estate of Don Salvador de la Fuente for the purposes of the Central Hindu College, although according to the arbitral opinion in the testator's papers this does not mention the college and rather states that the legacy should be used for the purposes of the Theosophical Society.

2. The President of the Theosophical Society is further expressed dissatisfaction because he has responded to factually justified complaints from individual members with personal insults (“impertinences” and “selfishness”, according to “Theosophist”, July 1905, p. 622).

3. The President of the Theosophical Society is requested to hand over to the Theosophical Society, as it has now acquired corporate rights, the foundations and bequests in his possession that were given to him as a representative of the Theosophical Society.

4. The President is further requested to always obtain the prior consent of the Central Board when using foundations and bequests intended for the purposes of the Theosophical Society, since, according to Clause 11 of the statutes of the Theosophical Society, he himself only acts as a co-administrator, not as the sole administrator of the Society's property.

5. The Vice President and the Secretaries-General of the various sections are to be expressed, as members of the Central Board, the displeasure of the members of the German Section for failing to object to the unlawful actions of Mr. Olcott and Mrs. Besant in matters concerning the Fuente bequest.

6. The Central Committee is requested to have the documents of the Fuente legacy submitted to it by the President and to duly settle this matter with the assistance of a court of law.

7. The General Secretary of the German Section shall issue the resolutions listed in Nos. 1 to 6 in the required number of copies within four weeks and then immediately send one copy each by registered mail to the President, the Vice President and the General Secretaries of all Sections of the Theosophical Society.

Richard Bresch, Dr. F. Löhnis

Dr. Steiner reports that the following is available:

1. Counter-motion from the Munich Lodge and several other lodges: “To the Secretary General of the German Section of the Theosophical Society.” Mr. Bresch publishes a motion to the General Assembly of the German Section of the Theosophical Society in number 3 of “Vâhan,” volume VII, according to which the General Assembly should decide: “To express to the President and Vice-President as well as the General Secretaries of the various sections of the Theosophical Society the displeasure of the members of the German Section of the Theosophical Society for allowing or not objecting to Mrs. Besant's use of half of the Certral Hindu College.

Although the arbitrator Sir Subramania Iyer recognized in his verdict that “Mrs. Besant is entitled to one half of the property bequeathed by Colonel Olcott and her, although on the other hand, Mr. Bresch had already once raised an accusation against President Olcott and Mrs. Besant in this matter, which he had to recognize as “(“Vâhan” No. 12, Volume VI, page 280), Mr. Bresch and his friends would like to put Mrs. Besant on trial because Mr. Bresch wants the money distributed, and because Mr. Bresch and his friends have no confidence in any of the leaders of our movement. Dr. F. Löhnis, co-signatory of the aforementioned motion, accuses Mr. McAd of dishonesty, Mr. Olcott of partiality, Mrs. Besant of pride, and the majority of the members of servility in an article that precedes the reasoning behind this motion (“Vâhan” No. 3, Volume VII). The undersigned members of the Theosophical Society consider the motion of Mr. Bresch and his friends to be unjustified and see in the arguments of Dr. Löhnis an unjustified insult to the highly esteemed leaders of our movement and to the majority of the members of the Theosophical Society. In order to express the trust of the members of the German Section in the esteemed leaders of the movement, the undersigned members request that the General Assembly of the German Section of the Theosophical Society vote on the following motion instead:

Proposal: “The General Assembly of the German Section of the Theosophical Society expresses its fullest confidence in Mr. H. $. Olcott and Mrs. Besant, in grateful recognition of the great services they have rendered to the Society, the fullest confidence of the members of the German Section of the Theosophical Society. The General Assembly expresses the conviction that Mrs. Besant acted fully within her rights in appropriating half of the assets bequeathed to her by Don Salvador de la Fuente Colonel Olcott.

Munich, September 22, 1905.
Rosa von Hofstetten, 1st Chairwoman of the Munich Lodge.
Sophie Stinde, 2nd Chairwoman of the Munich Lodge.
Heinrich Hiernickel.
Countess Pauline von Kalckreuth.
Emmy von Rumpler.
Harriet Vacano.
Marie von Seydewitz.
M. M. von Scherpenberg.
Hermine von Scherpenberg.
Max von Seydewitz.
Emmy von Gumppenberg.
Gertrud von Tschirschky née Scholtz.

2nd proposal from the Hanover branch: Hanover, October 12, 1905. Regarding the proposal from Bresch and companions. Contrary to the proposal from Mr. Bresch and companions (printed in the “Vâhan” of September this year), the Hanover branch decided at its meeting on October 9 this year to submit the following proposal to the general assembly on October 22 this year:

Proposal: “With regard to the proposal submitted by the Leipzig branch, or rather by Mr. Bresch and his associates, as published in the September issue of Vâhan, the Hanover branch proposes that the agenda be changed to address this matter on the grounds that – quite apart from the question of whether or not the individual complaints can be justified factually – it is formally quite inexpedient to discuss such matters of the Society in a public journal, and even more so to do so on behalf of a section. This must damage the reputation of our society and impair the influence of our movement. Such expressions of opinion should only be expressed personally and privately on the basis of expert examination rather than formal judgment, and they should never be settled in public, but at most in closed negotiations between the parties involved.” The board of the Hanover branch of the Theosophical Society.

Wilhelm Eggers.

The Secretary General announced that the following branches had joined the Munich application:

The following signed:
Cologne Lodge,
Weimar Lodge,
Hamburg Lodge,
Hanover Lodge,
Lugano Lodge,
Düsseldorf Lodge,
Nuremberg Lodge,
Munich Lodge
and the Besant branch in Berlin.

The delegates Bauer (Nuremberg), Mücke (Besant branch), Lübke (Weimar), Arenson (branch III, Stuttgart) then communicate the decisions of their branches: to support the motion from Hannover to move on to the agenda. The motion will be discussed first as it is the most far-reaching.

The following spoke against the motion: Messrs. Krojanker, Jahn and Stübing, the latter two emphasizing that Messrs. Bresch and Löhnis had been misunderstood. Furthermore, a new motion had already been drafted in a less harsh form; in the interest of fairness, the gentlemen should be allowed to speak. It would be intolerant and un-Theosophical to accept the Hanover motion. The delegates Arenson, Bauer, Huchthausen, Hubo, and von Sivers speak in favor of the motion, which has been well thought out. There can be no question of intolerance. A debate would hardly bring anything new to light, and the assembly would have better things to do than to listen again to everything that has been said in this regard in recent weeks. The form and content of the Bresch motion are so seriously offensive that, also in view of what became known at the board meeting, the only dignified thing to do is to accept the Hanover motion.

After a motion to close the debate has been adopted, the motion for Hanover is adopted by an overwhelming majority, whereupon Mr. Bresch and Mr. Löhnis and a supporter of the same demonstratively leave the meeting.

A letter from Dr. Hübbe-Schleiden and Mr. Deinhard is now read out about the brochure by Dr. Hensoldt that has been distributed from Leipzig in recent weeks; the same reads:

"To the annual meeting of the German Section of the Theosophical Society in Berlin, October 22, 1905. Regarding the proposals of Mr. Bresch and his colleagues regarding the use of the De la Fuente legacy, the undersigned request permission to express their personal views: We have in our possession a pamphlet by Dr. Heinrich Hensoldt entitled “Annie Besant, a Whimsical Saint”, which was sent to us from Leipzig. We cannot help but suspect that this pamphlet was the cause of the agitation that has spread from there against the leaders of our society. This pamphlet has the sole purpose of fighting and suppressing our society. It mixes incorrect statements of fact with a spiteful distortion of real circumstances. The description of the character and endeavors of Mrs. Besant and Colonel Olcott (page 42 and following) is in the main the exact opposite of reality. The picture they paint contradicts the judgment of all those close to them regarding their moral and intellectual value; and to be able to judge such personalities validly, one must have known them for decades. The same requirement applies to the assessment of the factual circumstances.

As for the use of de Ia Fuente's legacy, it has been used in accordance with the wishes of the testator. Dr. Hensoldt (page 46) only objects to the donation to the large Adyar Library. But this is undoubtedly the most important creation of our movement. Therefore, its support had to be considered first and foremost. Under the direction of Dr. Otto Schrader, an outstanding German Sanskrit and Pali scholar, this collection of rare books and unique manuscripts is now on the verge of developing into a world-class library. The capital contribution from the legacy serves as a necessary prerequisite for this. Even if this had not been the testator's wish, his gift could not have found a more beneficial use. Incidentally, we older members are familiar with the fact that our society tends to go through a crisis every ten years, during which the same objections are always raised against it. Its founding took place in [1875], the Coulomb crisis in 1885, the Judge crisis [1895], the current crisis in 1905: but the effect of all these crises has always been that all those who judge the essence of our society only intellectually fall away from it because they do not possess the necessary intuition to sense the spirit that is effective through the leaders of our society."

Döhren near Hannover, October 12, 1905.
Hübbe-Schleiden.
Ludwig Deinhard.

Dr. Steiner declares the brochure to be a terrible pamphlet and reports that Mr. Bresch said at the board meeting that he provided Mr. Hensoldt with printing and address material.

As a representative of the Leipzig lodge, Mr. Jahn objects to this. He believes that the condemnation of Mr. Bresch and Mr. Löhnis has gone too far. Although he himself is against the attacks made in “Vâhan”, he must nevertheless take the gentlemen into his protection, since he is of the opinion that Mr. Bresch is a fanatic, but that he is not guided by bad motives. From this point of view, he asks to be judged by him.

Dr. Steiner remarks that no one should be denied the [subjective] feeling of fighting for the truth. But here, any sense of a basis for the truth is completely lacking. This is proven by the way in which “Vâhan” has behaved towards eyewitnesses of true facts that he has distorted. The behavior towards Miss Scholl, Mrs. Lübke and Dr. Vollrath clearly shows that Mr. Bresch and Dr. Löhnis simply lack a sense of the necessary factual basis for the truth.

Dr. Paulus proposes that the meeting move on to the agenda, since it is really not worth engaging in lengthy debates about such an elaborate piece of work by a non-member. Mr. Stübing notes that the brochure is not to be understood in the context of the Bresch-Löhnis motion.

Mr. Ahner disagrees. Anyone who reads “Vâhan” and the brochure recognizes the connection. Hensoldt is, so to speak, held up on a shield in “Vâhan”.

After Fräulein von Sivers speaks against the opinion of Her Stübing and Frau Geheimrat Lübke announces that Mr. Bresch stated at the board meeting that he is indebted to Mr. Hensoldt for the unveiling, the motion to move on to the agenda is adopted.

This is followed by a motion from Dr. Paulus for the Stuttgart I branch. The applicant refers to the circular of the Stuttgart branch dated June 27 of this year and proposes that a “news sheet” be established for the German Section in the following form:

“The General Assembly resolves to publish a newsletter for members and to have it appear as soon as possible, as a supplement to Luzifer, at the expense and risk of the section, since there is a need for it.”

A further motion is made in this regard:

“To ask a member to take on the publication of this newsletter. The costs for this are to be covered by voluntary contributions.”

Mr. Hubo, Ms. Stinde, Mr. Bauer and Dr. Paulus take part in the debate.

Dr. Steiner proposes “that the newsletter be published officially and sent to each member separately from ‘Lucifer’, free of charge and on a mandatory basis”.

After further debate by members Ahner, Peipers, Bauer, Hubo, Arenson and von Sivers, it was deemed appropriate to place the entire matter in the hands of a suitable member, who could then initiate the process as they saw fit.

The following motion is proposed: Miss Scholl would first like to deal with the publication of a newsletter and to contact personalities she considers suitable for this purpose. The motion is adopted.

Proposal from the Leipzig Lodge:

“The General Assembly shall decide: ‘All motions received by the date of dispatch of the invitations to the General Assembly shall be sent to all members with this invitation’.”

The motion is adopted.

Proposal Scholl:

“The General Assembly shall decide: Mr. Bresch and Dr. Löhnis are to be asked to resign from the society.”

Mr. Jahn then says that the two gentlemen should not be treated equally with regard to the assessment, since they certainly have different motives.

Mr. Engel, Mr. Stübing, Mr. Krojanker and Mr. Feldner speak against this motion. Mr. Ahner asks Ms. Scholl to withdraw this motion. Ms. Scholl remarks that she has thought about this matter carefully and cannot in any way comply with this request.

Mr. Stübing proposes: “To move on to the agenda item regarding Ms. Scholl's motion.”

This proposal is rejected.

Scholl's proposal is rejected.

It is now proposed that the “Theosophical Library”, which has been under the direction of the “Berlin Branch” and in the possession of a few private individuals, be transferred to the direction of the German Section. The General Assembly generally expresses its approval of this proposal.

Preparatory work for a possible congress of European sections in Germany is assigned to the board.

The Munich branch once again puts forward the request, already made last year, to move the general secretariat to Munich. The matter is taken note of again.

Dr. Steiner then closes the business part of the meeting at half past three and invites the members to attend the substantive part of the General Assembly at half past four. With regard to a report on the General Assembly of the German Section contained in the November 1905 issue of 'Vâhan', we note that it is impossible and also quite useless to engage in polemics with people who adopt such a way of fighting. We want to work and not argue. However, we do want to register the following 'objective untruths':

1. Dr. Löhnis writes: “Instead of the factual annual report that the General Secretary is obliged to present, Dr. Steiner offered his faithful followers a brilliant apotheosis of Mrs. Besant, and he he increased his own nimbus by declaring that he had been in contact “on higher planes” with Mrs. Blavatsky, the “great teacher, to whom all who ‘know’ look up out of true knowledge.”

This is an objective untruth. It is much more true that the report was given entirely in part by Dr. Steiner and in part by Miss von Sivers, and that the alleged “apotheosis” was necessarily part of this factual report on the congress of European sections. Regarding Mrs. Blavatsky, Dr. Steiner only said that Mrs. Besant had opened his understanding for her. Nothing was said about “higher plans”.

2. Dr. Löhnis writes here with all sorts of combinations of his imagination that are too indifferent for us that Countess Wachtmeister “has donated a considerable amount to promote the Theosophical movement in Germany. It was deemed unnecessary to provide more precise information about the amount. Only so much was communicated that about 1000 marks are available annually.

This is another objective untruth. What was actually said was that 1000 marks had been given once (not annually) by Countess Wachtmeister.

3. It is also objectively untrue that Dr. Steiner himself stood for election as General Secretary; he merely said a few words after Mr. Bresch's speech against this election to say that he would accept the election if he were elected because he currently still considered it his duty.

4. It is objectively untrue that Miss Scholl proposed the motion to expel Mr. Bresch and Dr. Löhnis. Rather, it is true that the motion was to request the aforementioned gentlemen to resign. That's enough; anyone who illustrates the principle “No law is above the truth” with such “objective untruths” can justifiably use it in conversation or write it in their letters every now and then!!!

The following have resigned from the Theosophical Society:

Mr. Richard Bresch, Dr. Löhnis, Mr. Haase, Mr. Heyne, Mr. Emil Hubricht.

Newly admitted are:

Miss Clara Rettich, Mr. Paul Weiß, Mr. Eduard Bachmann, Mrs. Helene von [Gillhaußen], Mrs. Anna Werner, Mrs. Eliza von Moltke, Mr. Ludwig Weiß.

by Felix Löhnis in “Vâhan”, Volume VII, No. 5, November 1905

The General Assembly of the German Section of the Theosophical Society took place on October 22, a.c. in Berlin. We can summarize our report briefly. Cult of personality and servility have triumphed there. Not only for the board meeting held the day before, but also for the general assembly itself, it was decided, at the request of Mr. Hubo (Hamburg), that the strictest silence must be maintained regarding the course of the negotiations. The Secretary General was to report exclusively to the members and in strict confidence at a time and in a form of his own choosing. The vast majority of the delegates agreed to such a restriction of freedom of expression. Instead of the factual annual report that the General Secretary was obliged to give, Dr. Steiner offered his faithful followers a brilliant apotheosis of Mrs. Besant, and he increased his own nimbus even more by declaring that he had been in contact for a long time “on higher planes” with Mrs. Blavatsky, the “great teacher,” to whom all those who “know” “look up from true knowledge.” During the discussion of the financial matters, it was mentioned that Countess Wachtmeister had donated a considerable sum to promote the Theosophical movement in Germany. It was not considered necessary to provide exact details of the amount. Only so much was communicated that about 1000 Marks are available annually, which, according to a proposal by the Secretary-General, which was of course very favorably received, do not flow into the section's treasury, but are transferred to him, together with Fräulein von Sivers, for his free disposal, in order to make accounting superfluous. (!) The “revered leaders” of the Theosophical Society are also setting an example in this respect. Under such circumstances, it was also very understandable that Dr. Steiner himself campaigned vigorously for his re-election as General Secretary during the election of the new board. Mr. Bresch spoke against the re-election. He pointed out the serious concerns that arise in this regard with regard to the alleged clairvoyance that Dr. Steiner boasts of, compared to the experiences in a very similar situation in America ten years ago. The same fate befell the motion printed in issue 3 of Vâhan, which was intended to remedy the violations of rights and duties mentioned at the locations listed, of which the president and the central committee of the Society have been proven to be guilty. It was not admitted to the proceedings at all. In accordance with a motion from the Hanover branch, it was decided by a large majority to “proceed to the agenda”. (!) And how did the Hanover branch justify its motion? Literally as follows:

“Quite apart from the question of whether or not the individual complaints can be justified factually, it is formally quite inexpedient to discuss such matters of the Society in a public journal and even less to represent them from the point of view of a section. This must damage the reputation of our Society and impair the influence of our movement.”

Thus, in the Theosophical Society, no longer are objective reasons valid, but only formal ones. It does not matter if the Society itself suffers harm at the hands of disloyal officials; only its reputation must be protected at all costs. The motto of the Society is still: “No law above the truth!” But under no circumstances may the members publicly stand up for justice and truth; the “fear of the truth” reigns in the Society and demands strict secrecy. - For historical reasons, it may be mentioned in passing that Miss Scholl (Cologne), probably to make up for the “Autodafé” in London (see numbers 2-4 of “Vâhan”) that she denied, made a motion to expel Mr. Bresch and the reporter from the Society. A quarter of the votes were in favor of this first heresy trial; over the course of a year, it might be the majority. In fact, such a motion was completely superfluous in this case. Because – however shamefully this General Assembly went otherwise – it did produce a result that was beneficial to the cause: It has now made it completely clear to anyone who can and wants to see that, given the current state of affairs, one can no longer serve the truth and the progress of humanity within this society.

Finally, on behalf of the editor of 'Vâhan', I would like to point out that this magazine will no longer deal with the affairs of that 'Theosophical Society' in the future.

Report by Rudolf Steiner in “Lucifer - Gnosis” no. 31/1906

In the first days of June [1906] (on the 3rd, 4th and 5th), the third congress of the federated European sections of the Theosophical Society took place in Paris. Around 450 members from various European countries were present. The welcoming speeches that the representatives of the various nations gave in their own languages at the first official meeting therefore expressed a common human interest in the most diverse forms. One could hear this interest expressed in English, French, Swedish, Italian, Dutch, German, Russian, Spanish, Czech; one could hear it expressed by a Hindu and a Parsee. There were over twenty German members present.

The President-Founder of the Theosophical Society, H. $. Olcott, presided over the meeting. The preparatory work had been done by the members of the French section in a devoted and sacrificial manner. It is, of course, impossible to list all those esteemed members of the Society who have earned recognition on this occasion. Those who have even a slight idea of how much work is involved in such an undertaking can appreciate what those members who are at the venue of the meeting at such a time have to accomplish. In particular, however, we would like to mention the ladies Aimee Blech and Zelma Blech, the gentlemen Commandant Courmes, Charles Blech, P. E. Bernard, M. Bailly, Jules Siegfried fils, A. Ostermann and, above all, the Secretary General of the French Section, Dr. Th. Pascal.

Thanks to the efforts and sacrifices of our French friends, the Society has a beautifully furnished French headquarters at 59 Avenue de la Bourdonnais in Paris, which is ideal for lectures and visits. It not only has a spacious and friendly lecture hall, but also good rooms for work, a library and a book depository for Theosophical works in French. There is a lot of work going on at these headquarters. The Secretary General receives visitors there on the first and third Sunday of the month from 10:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. Public lectures are held on the first Sunday of the month (4 p.m.) and every Thursday at 8% p.m. A meeting for members takes place every third Sunday of the month at 4 p.m. In addition, a course is held on Tuesday at 4 p.m. in French and one on Monday at 4 p.m. in English.

During the congress, these rooms also housed the “Exhibition of Arts and Crafts”, which was opened by President H. S. Olcott on Saturday, June 4 (4 p.m.). Our French friends put a lot of effort into tastefully assembling works of art and art objects that testify to the endeavor to also depict the Theosophical interest in pictures.

The actual meetings of the congress took place in the magnificent hall of the Washington Palace (14 Rue Magellan). The first official session opened at 10 a.m. on Sunday, June 3 [1906]. M. Ed. Bailly had written and composed an opening chorus for the occasion: “Ode to the Sun”. This provided a beautiful, atmospheric introduction. This was followed by a warm welcome from the Secretary General of the French Section, Dr. Th. Pascal. The next item was a longer address by the President-Founder H. S. Olcott. It was possible to see from it how the Society is growing all the time (it has now spread its branches to forty-four different countries around the world). In particular, the gratifying growth of the movement in France was emphasized, considering its current state compared to its modest beginnings in 1884, when he, the President, and H. P. Blavatsky first endeavored to stimulate interest in Theosophy from Paris. Olcott presented the nature of the Theosophical work in its most important aspects to the assembled members. He characterized the importance of the headquarters in Adyar, the library there with its treasures of old manuscripts and a rich collection of books containing invaluable material for the study of occultism, the various religions, and so on. In his speech, Olcott was particularly concerned to emphasize the universal human character of the Society. It wanted to keep away from anything that could somehow give rise to disharmony between people. Nothing should be included in its endeavors that had to do with the one-sided, special interests of gender, race, class, creed, and so on. Society as a whole should stand above the achievements, reputation, etc. of individual leaders and teachers of the same. One should not put individuals on a pedestal and expect absolute perfection from them, and one should not be immediately disappointed when one finds faults in those from whom one would not expect them. One should behave in such a way towards particular questions, directions and views that one never loses sight of the broad basis of society. Esoteric, Masonic and so on currents are none of the Society's business. It can only deal with the overarching goal of leading to human brotherhood and must not identify with the aforementioned currents.¹

The President read his address in English. It was repeated in French by Mr. Jules Siegfried fils. After this “presidential address”, the representatives of the individual regions were welcomed in the corresponding languages, as already described above.

This year, the permanent secretary of the Federation, Johan van Manen, was once again in charge of the business of the congress. It must be said that J. van Manen deserves the special thanks of the society for his dedicated work. He has to conduct extensive correspondence with all section leaders and many individual members many months before the annual meeting. He has to take care of the difficult arrangements. And J. van Manen has now taken on this task for the third time in his pleasant and personable way.

On the afternoon of June 3, from 2:00 to 5:00 p.m., the first of the general debates took place. Two questions were debated:

1. “To what extent is the Theosophical Society only a group of people seeking the truth; to what extent does it unite learners or those who propagate or adhere to a particular direction of spiritual science?”

2. “If the Theosophical Society has no dogmas, it does recognize authorities, and rightly so. Is the relative value of these authorities merely a matter of individual acceptance? What qualities or abilities should such authorities possess?”

A wide variety of views were expressed in the debate, from the strict rejection of all authority to the emphasis on the necessity of such. At present, it seems, as was noted in the debate, there is a strong tendency towards the view that it is dangerous to rely too much on authorities. But those who recognize that the necessary authority should not be disregarded also spoke up, which arises wherever those who have already progressed in some knowledge are to have an effect on those who have yet to learn in one way or another. The participation in the debate was very lively; the third question envisaged could no longer be tackled. According to the program, it should read: “Should the moral character of a person influence his admission to the Theosophical Society? Can persons whose morality does not coincide with prevailing social views be within the Theosophical Society? Can there be any general rules in this direction?” - Bertram Keightley chaired this debate in his sympathetic and judicious manner.

That same evening, two lectures were held. The first was given by Mr. G. R. S. Mead, the scholar of Gnosticism. He spoke about “The Religion of the Mind”. He started from his studies of the Theosophical-Gnostic views of life at the time of the origin of Christianity, which spanned many years of his busy life. He explained the essence of the teachings of Hermes Trismegistus and his followers. Through these teachings, a wisdom was to be found that, in perfect harmony of head and heart, would lead the soul of man to its union with the “higher divine self.” A religion based on science, leading to the highest levels of experience, was outlined as that of certain ancestors and contemporaries of the emerging Christianity. A French translation of this speech, delivered in English, was distributed among the audience. The second lecture was given in French by M. Bernard on “Problems of the Present Moment.” He spoke about the current tasks at hand in society, the attitudes required of its members, and the best way to achieve the goals of the Theosophical Society.

On Monday, June 4, lectures were given by members in two sections in the morning hours. One of the sections, which had to deal with religion, mysticism, mythology, and folklore, was chaired by Dr. Koopmans, a member of the Dutch section. The second section was concerned with philosophy; its chairman was Dr. Steiner, and later, when he had to speak in the first section, Miss M. von Sivers. Mr. Becker from London served as secretary for the first section, and Mr. Max Gysi from London for the second. In the first section, Mrs. Sharpe first read an essay by Edward E. Long entitled “Insight into Islam”. The aim was to present the moral foundations and beauties and the sublime teachings of this religion, which are so often misunderstood. It was shown in what particular way the followers of this religion strive for “union with God” in order to achieve inner harmony and peace of mind. The original nobility of this religion and its later decline into idolatry and superstition were presented, but also the more recent efforts around this belief, and the theosophical points of view that can be found in it. - Georg Doe then spoke about “Some research results in folklore, especially with regard to Devonshire”. - This lecture was followed by one by a member of the Italian section, Mrs. von Ulrich, on “The old Slavic religions”. The lecturer spoke about the simple lines of Lithuanian and Latvian religious forms, within which a kind of worship of the forces of nature prevails. There are no priests or temples; every head of the household is a priest. She went on to say that the Russians started out with similar religions, but later adopted Germanic gods and gave them Slavic names. Then it was shown how the transition from this form of religion to Christianity took place. There was also talk of the part of the Russians who occupied the north of the Germanic territories and changed their faith in the eleventh and twelfth centuries, of their richly endowed temples and images of the gods. The conclusion in this section was a lecture by Dr. Rudolf Steiner on “Theosophy in Germany a Hundred Years Ago”. The lecturer explained that in the spiritual movement in Germany at the end of the eighteenth and the beginning of the nineteenth century, which is associated with the names Schiller, Goethe, Fichte, Schelling, Novalis, Hegel and so on, there is a significant undercurrent whose origins are to be found in esoteric, occult brotherhoods. Such occult fraternizations have existed in German-speaking areas since the fourteenth century. Personalities such as Paracelsus and Jakob Böhme were not members of such societies; however, what they taught emanated from them in a certain way. In particular, the speaker showed how Schiller can only be fully understood if the mysterious foundations of his thinking and writing are revealed. Knowledge of German occultism contains not only the key to his youthful essay “Theosophy of Julius,” but also to his later work. Then the occult basis was uncovered in the philosophy of J. G. Fichte. Finally, the speaker pointed to the intimate esotericism of Novalis, to the actual psychological studies of Ennemoser, [Eckartshausen], Justinus Kerner, but especially to a no longer known theosophist who only called his theosophy “biosophy”, namely Troxler, who gave the most beautiful discussions about the “astral body”, for example. The speaker concluded by discussing why the idea of reincarnation had to be absent from this “German theosophy” and what relationship this idea has to that world view. Miss Kamensky from St. Petersburg then gave a summary of this lecture in French.

In the second section, which was dedicated to philosophy, Herbert Whyte spoke first about “Agvaghosha's Awakening of Faith in the Mahayana”. He explained that the essence of Mahayana is the same as that of the Upanishads and the Bhagavad Gita, and he showed the similarities between Agvaghosha's teachings and Annie Besant's explanations of the expansion of self-awareness in “Studies in Consciousness.” True enlightenment cannot be attained through anything external, but only through the inner life of the mind. The spirit is the source from which the higher life must flow. And it must be supported by the following forces: compassion, patience, concentration, energy, inner harmony and calm. - Then Mr. Xifré read an excerpt from a longer work by Rafael Urbano, which dealt with Spanish mysticism and explained it with examples such as St. Teresa, St. John of the Cross and so on. Then an essay was excerpted that the study group “Yoga” in Algiers had worked on “Devotion and Wisdom.” It is shown in it how for much that the still ignorant man undertakes, the “masters” on the higher planes are the leaders. Then, as the person develops, he enters into a relationship with these masters. This union with them leads to wisdom and to “yoga”. - Mr. Wallace then spoke about “diagrams and symbols”. He distinguishes between static symbols, which contain nothing essential of what they represent, and dynamic symbols, which in their whole structure reflect the essence of the laws of nature. He expressed the demand that true symbolism must be taken from the essence of things. After this lecture, Louis Desaint spoke about “Bergson's Philosophy in Relation to Ancient Indian Philosophy”. According to this philosophy, the spirit is understood as an entity independent of matter. Maurice Largeris gave an excerpt from his work “The Alleged Pessimism of the Indians and the Moral Theory of Happiness”. He showed how inaccurate the widespread views of this pessimism are. They find their correction in the idea of that “freedom” that is attained through union with the “own divine self”. Finally, in a lecture entitled “An Attempt at a Way of Life”, Eugene Levy presented a series of rules that can be applied in the daily life of those who aspire to higher spiritual development.

On the afternoon of June 4, 1906, the second general debate took place under the chairmanship of Commandant D. A. Courmes, who led it in a tasteful and judicious manner. The following questions were discussed:

1. Is propaganda an essential goal of the Theosophical Society?

2. How is it that despite the long existence of the Theosophical Society and despite the propaganda it has conducted, the number of members today is still relatively small (13,000 in 1905)? Can it be said that the Theosophical Society lacks a method or a system? If it did, would that be regrettable? If it did, how could it be remedied?

Many members also took part in this debate, which again lasted from 2 p.m. to 5 p.m., and again the most diverse views came to light. There was discussion about the usefulness of propaganda, as well as about the best way to do it. There were also warnings that some clumsiness happens when individual overzealous members do the propaganda work. It was said that it was above all a certain way of thinking and feeling that made a Theosophist, but less the acceptance of certain dogmas and teachings.

Another question that was discussed was: “Should the Theosophical Society or its parts (sections, branches, etc.) officially bring everything related to the course of the movement to the attention of the members?” Regarding this question, it was agreed that the president would send a detailed annual report on the events to the sections, which would then be passed on to the members. There was little time left for the fourth question: “Are measures for material assistance among members necessary?”

In the evening of the same day, an interesting concert took place, in which the French members participated in an appreciable way: Mme Revel, M. Gaston Revel and M. Louis Revel, Mme Pauline Smith, Mme Andre-Gedalge, Mme Lasneret, Mile Roberty, Mme Strohl and Mme Alice-Heres, Mlle Jeanne Bussiere, M. Rene Billa and M. Henry Farre.

On Tuesday morning at 10 o'clock, the individual members' lectures began again. The following sections were active: 1. proposals, discussions, criticisms, requests, resolutions and so on; 2. art; 3. history of the Theosophical Society and the Theosophical movement; 4. science and border areas in the various directions; 5. brotherhood; 6. administration, propaganda, working methods and so on.

In the first section, the possibility and usefulness of a unified world language, “Esperanto”, was discussed. In the second section, Ed. Bailly gave a presentation on ancient Egyptian music, accompanied by singing samples. It was an “invocation of the planetary spirits”; the relationship of the seven vowels to the planetary spirits was discussed. Madame Andre-Gedalge also developed a mystical interpretation of Mozart's “Magic Flute”. She explained how Mozart, Beethoven and Haydn, through their initiation into the “Scottish Rite” of Freemasonry, were able to give their musical works an occult foundation. In the third section, P. C. [Taraporewalla] spoke about the Theosophical movement in India and its significance for religious life in that country. In the fourth section, Dr. Th. Pascal gave a lecture on: “Le mécanisme du rêve cérébral”. It is hardly possible to reproduce the subtle arguments of the French theosophical researcher, who is trying to gain a truly scientific basis for certain theosophical views. —After that, F. Bligh Bond gave a discussion of “Rhythmic Energies and Form Design with Illustrations”. By combining pendulums that swing in different directions and at different speeds and which fix the movement on a sheet of paper with an attached pen, very complicated oscillation patterns are created. This can give an idea of the forces at work in matter. Miss Ward then spoke of how it would be desirable to find suitable people in a wide variety of places who would collect everything that recent scientific and other research could produce as evidence for the theories contained in H. P. Blavatsky's “Secret Doctrine”. Science has found many new things since the book was published. If one were to collect it and compare it with the “Secret Doctrine” in an appropriate way, one would first see what a treasure of wisdom humanity has received in the said work. Monsieur le Commandant D. A. Courmes spoke in the fifth section on “Material Assistance within the Theosophical Movement”. In the sixth section, Ré Levie gave a discussion on the systematic study of Kabbalah using the Theosophical key.

In the afternoon, the closing session of the congress took place. Unfortunately, President Olcott was unable to attend this session due to feeling unwell. First, it was announced that a telegram of welcome should be sent to Mrs. Besant and that next year's congress should take place in Germany.

Then the general secretaries of the various countries spoke on behalf of their sections: Dr. Th. Pascal for the French section, Arvid Knös for the Scandinavian section, Miss Kate Spink for the British section, W. B. Fricke for the Dutch section, Professor Dr. O. Penzig for the Italian section and Dr. Rudolf Steiner for the German section. The secretary of the Federation, Johan van Manen, gave business announcements. The conference was closed in a moving way by a 'final chorus', composed by Rita Strohl.

In particular, it should also be emphasized that during the debates, Mr. P. E. Bernhard, Mr. Johan van Manen and Mr. Xifré took the trouble to translate the statements made in different languages into French.

On Wednesday, there was an excursion to Meudon, by boat on the Seine. The gracious way in which our French friends took care of the foreign visitors on this afternoon was a wonderful way to end the entire congress.

• 1. It is expressly noted here that the above is intended to be an objective report, that the President's remarks are therefore to be reproduced factually and that the rapporteur is not to mix his own views into the report.

Rudolf Steiner's lecture at the Congress of the Federation of European Sections of the Theosophical Society

Those who portray the spiritual life of Germany from the end of the eighteenth and the beginning of the nineteenth century usually see, alongside the high point of art in Lessing, Herder, Schiller, Goethe, Mozart, Beethoven and others, only an epoch of purely speculative thinking in Kant, Fichte, Schelling, Hegel, Schopenhauer and a few less important philosophers. It is frequently held that the latter personalities are to be recognized as mere laborers in the field of thought. It is admitted that they have done extraordinary work in the speculative field; but one is all too easily inclined to say that these thinkers were quite far removed from actual occult research and real spiritual experience. And so it happens that the theosophically striving person expects little gain from delving into their works.

Many who attempt to penetrate the thought-web of these philosophers give up the work after a time because they find it fruitless. The scientific investigator says to himself: These thinkers have lost the firm ground of experience under their feet; they have built up in the nebulous heights the chimeras of systems, without any regard for positive reality. And anyone interested in occultism will find that they lack the truly spiritual foundations. He comes to the conclusion: They knew nothing of spiritual experiences, of supersensible facts, and merely devised intellectual constructs.

As long as one stops at merely observing the outer side of spiritual development, it is not easy to come to a different opinion. But if one penetrates to the undercurrents, the whole epoch presents itself in a different light. The apparent airy-fairy notions can be recognized as the expression of a deeper occult life. And Theosophy can then provide the key to understanding what these sixty to seventy years of spiritual life mean in the development of mankind. During this time in Germany, there are two sets of facts, one of which represents the surface, but the other must be regarded as a deeper foundation. The whole thing gives the impression of a flowing stream, on the surface of which the waves ripple in the most diverse ways. And what is presented in the usual [literary histories] are only these rising and falling waves; but what lives in the depths is left unconsidered, and from which the waves actually draw their nourishment.

This depth contains a rich and fertile occult life. And this is none other than that which once pulsated in the works of the great German mystics, Paracelsus, Jakob Böhme and Angelus Silesius. Like a hidden power, this life was contained in the worlds of thought that Lessing, Herder, Schiller, Goethe, Fichte, Schelling and Hegel found. The way in which, for example, Jakob Böhme had expressed his great spiritual experiences was no longer at the forefront of the leading literary discussion; but the spirit of these experiences continued to live. One can see how this spirit lived on in Herder, for example. Public discussion led both Herder and Goethe to the study of Spinoza. In the work that he called “God”, the former sought to deepen the conception of God in Spinozism. What he contributed to Spinozism was nothing other than the spirit of German mysticism. One could say that, unconsciously to himself, Jakob Böhme and Angelus Silesius were guiding his pen. It is also from such hidden sources that we can explain how, in the “Education of the Human Race”, the ideas of reincarnation emerged in a mind as rationally inclined as Lessing's was. The term “unconscious” is, however, only half accurate, because such ideas and intuitions led a full life within Germany, not on the surface of literary discussion, but in the most diverse “occult societies” and “fraternities”. But of the above, only Goethe can be considered as having been initiated into the most intimate life of such “fraternities”; the others had only a more superficial connection with them. Much of it found its way into their lives and work as inspiration, without them being fully aware of the real sources.

In this respect, Schiller represents an interesting phenomenon of intellectual development. We cannot understand the real intellectual nerve of his life if we do not delve into his youthful works, which can be found in his writings as “Correspondence between Julius and Raphael”. Some of the material contained in it was written by Schiller while he was still at the Karls School in Stuttgart, while some of it was only written in 1785 and 1786. It contains what Schiller calls the “Theosophy of Julius,” by which he means the sum of ideas to which he had risen at that time. It is only necessary to cite the most important thoughts from this “theosophy” to characterize the way in which this genius assembled his own edifice of ideas from the rudiments of German mysticism that were accessible to him. Such essential thoughts are, for example, the following: “The universe is a thought of God. After this [idealized] image of the spirit entered into reality and the born world fulfilled the plan of its creator – allow me this human representation – so the task of all thinking beings in this existing whole is to find the first drawing again, the rule in the machine, the unity in the composition, the law in the phenomenon and to transfer the building backwards to its ground plan... The great composition that we call the world now only remains strange to me because it exists to symbolically describe the [manifold] expressions of that [being]. Everything in me and outside of me is only a hieroglyph of a force that is similar to me. The laws of nature are the ciphers that the thinking being combines to make itself understandable to the thinking being – the alphabet by means of which all spirits negotiate with the most perfect spirit and with themselves... A new experience in this [realm of truth], gravity, the discovery of blood circulation, Linnaeus's system of nature classification: these things seem to me to be, in their very origin, what an antique, unearthed in Herculaneum, reveals to me – both mere reflections of a spirit, a new acquaintance with a being similar to myself. [...] There is no longer any wilderness in all of nature for me. Where I discover a body, I suspect a spirit. Where I perceive movement, I guess a thought... We have concepts of the wisdom of the supreme being, of his benevolence, of his justice – but none of his omnipotence. To express its omnipotence, we help ourselves with the piecemeal idea of three successions: nothing, its will [and] something. It is desolate and dark – God calls: light – and there is light. If we had a real idea of its active omnipotence, we would be creators, like Him.” Such were the ideas of Schiller's theosophy when he was in his early twenties. And from this basis he rises to the comprehension of human spiritual life itself, which he places in the context of cosmic forces: “Love, then, the most beautiful phenomenon in the creation of the soul, the almighty magnet in the spiritual world, the source of devotion and the loftiest virtue. Love is only the reflection of this one primal power, an attraction of the excellent, based on an instantaneous exchange of personality, a confusion of beings. When I hate, I take something away from myself; when I love, I become richer by what I love. Forgiveness is the recovery of a lost possession; hatred of men is a prolonged suicide; egotism is the greatest poverty of a created being.” From this starting-point Schiller seeks to find an idea of God corresponding to his own feeling, which he presents in the following sentences: ”All perfections in the universe are united in God. God and nature are two entities that are completely equal to each other... There is one truth that runs like a fixed axis through all religions and systems: Approach the God you mean.

If one compares these statements of the young Schiller with the teachings of the German mystics, one will find that in the latter, there are sharply defined contours of thought, which in Schiller's works appear as the exuberant outpourings of a more general world of feeling. Paracelsus, Jakob Böhme, Angelus Silesius have as a certain view of their intuitive mind what Schiller has in mind in the vague presentiment of feeling.

What comes to light in such a characteristic way in Schiller is also present in other of his contemporaries. Intellectual history only has to present it in the case of Schiller because it has become a driving force of the nation in his epoch-making works. It can be said that in Schiller's time, the spiritual world of German mysticism as intuition, as direct experience of spiritual life, was hidden as if under a veil; but it lived on in the world of feeling, in the intuitions. People had retained devotion and enthusiasm for that which they no longer saw directly with the “sense organs of the spirit”. We are dealing with an epoch of veiling of spiritual vision, but of a kind that is based on feeling, on an intuitive sense of this world.

This entire process is based on a certain law-governed necessity. What entered the hidden world as spiritual insight emerged as artistic life in this period of German spiritual life. In occultism, one speaks of successive cycles of involution and evolution. Here we are dealing with such a cycle on a small scale. The art of Germany in the epoch of Schiller and Goethe is nothing more than the evolution of German mysticism in the realm of outer, sensual form. But in the creations of the German poets, the deeper insight recognizes the intuitions of the great mystical age of Germany. The mystical life of the past now takes on a completely aesthetic, artistic character.

This is clearly expressed in the writing in which Schiller reached the full height of his world view, in his [letters “On the Aesthetic Education of Man”]. The dogmatist of occultism will perhaps find nothing in these “letters” either but the spirited speculations of a fine artistic mind. In reality, however, they are dominated by the endeavour to give instructions for a different state of consciousness than the ordinary one. A stage on the way to the “higher self” is to be described. The state of consciousness Schiller describes is indeed far removed from the life of experience of the astral or devachanic, but it does represent something higher than our everyday life. And if we approach it with an open mind, we can very well recognize in what can be called the 'aesthetic state', according to Schiller, a preliminary stage of those higher forms of intuition. Schiller wants to lead man beyond the standpoint of the 'lower self'. This lower self is characterized by two qualities. Firstly, it is necessarily dependent on the influences of the sensual world. Secondly, it is subject to the demands of logical and moral necessity. It is thus unfree in two directions. The sensual world rules in its drives, instincts, perceptions, passions, and so on. In his thinking and in his morality, the necessity of reason prevails. But only the person who has ennobled his feelings, drives, desires, wishes, etc., so that only the spiritual is expressed in them, and who, on the other hand, has so completely absorbed the necessity of reason within himself that it is the expression of his own being, is free in the sense of Schiller. A life led in this way can also be described as one in which a harmonious balance has been established between the “lower and higher self”. Man has so ennobled his desire nature that it is the embodiment of his “higher self”. Schiller sets this high ideal in these “Letters”; and he finds that in artistic creation and in pure aesthetic devotion to a work of art, an approach to this ideal takes place. Thus, for him, life in art becomes a genuine means of educating the human being in the development of his “higher self”. For him, the true work of art is a perfect harmony of spirit and sensuality, of higher life and outer form. The sensual is only a means of expression; but the spiritual only becomes a work of art when it has found its expression entirely in the sensual. Thus, the creative artist lives in the spirit; but he lives in it in a completely sensual way; through him, everything spiritual becomes perceptible through the senses. And the person who immerses himself aesthetically perceives through his external senses; but what he perceives is completely spiritualized sensuality. So one is dealing with a harmony between spirit and sensuality; the sensual appears ennobled by the spirit; the spiritual has come to revelation to the point of sensual vividness. Schiller would also like to make this “aesthetic state” the model for social coexistence. He regards as unfree a social relationship in which people base their mutual relationships only on the desires of the lower self, of egoism. But a state in which mere legislation of reason is called upon to rein in the lower instincts and passions also seems no less unfree to him. As an ideal, he presents a social constitution within which the individual feels the “higher self” of the whole to be so strong that he acts “selflessly” out of his innermost urge. The “individual ego” should come to the point where it becomes the expression of the “total ego”. Schiller perceives social action that is driven by such impulses as the action of “beautiful souls”; and such “beautiful souls”, which bring the spirit of the “higher self” to revelation in their everyday nature: for Schiller, they are also the truly “free souls”. He wants to lead humanity to “truth” through beauty and art. One of his core statements is: “Only through the dawn of the beautiful does man penetrate into the realm of knowledge.”

Thus, from Schiller's view of the world, art is assigned a high educational mission in the evolutionary process of humanity. One can say: What Schiller presents here is the mysticism of the older period of German intellectual life that has become aesthetic and artistic.

It might now appear that it is not easy to build a bridge from Schiller's aestheticism to another personality of the same time, but who is no less to be understood as coming from an occult undercurrent, to Johann Gottlieb Fichte. On superficial examination, Fichte will be seen as a mere speculative mind, as an intellectual thinker. Now it is true that thought is his domain and that anyone seeking spiritual heights above the world of thought will not find them with Fichte. Those who want a description of “higher worlds” will look for them in vain with him. Fichte has no experience of an astral or mental world. According to the content of his philosophy, he is concerned only with ideas that belong to the physical world. But the matter presents itself quite differently when one looks at his treatment of the world of thoughts. This treatment is by no means a merely speculative one. Rather, it is one that corresponds completely to occult experience. Fichte considers only thoughts that relate to the physical world; but he considers them as an occultist would. It is for this reason that he himself is thoroughly conscious of living in higher worlds. We have only to refer to his lectures in Berlin in 1813, where he says: “Imagine a world of the blind-born, who know only those things and their relations that exist through the sense of touch. Stand among them and speak to them of colors and the other qualities that are only present through light for those who can see. Either you speak to them of nothing, and that is fortunate if they say so; for in this way you will soon notice the error and, if you are unable to open their eyes, stop the futile talking. Or they want to give your teaching a reason for some reason: so they can only understand it from what they know through touch: they will want to feel the light and the colors and the other relationships of visibility, feel that they are feeling, and lie to themselves about something they call color. Then they misunderstand, distort, and misinterpret it.” At another time, Fichte states directly that for him his contemplation of the world is not merely a speculation about that which the ordinary senses give, but that a higher sense, one that reaches beyond them, is necessary for it: ”The new sense is is the sense for the spirit; for which there is only spirit and absolutely nothing else, and to which even the other, the given existence, takes on the form of the spirit and is transformed into it, to which therefore existence in its own form has in fact disappeared... It has been seen with this sense ever since man has existed, and all that is great and excellent in the world, and which alone makes humanity endure, comes from the visions of this sense. But that this sense should have seen itself, and in its difference and contrast to the other ordinary sense, was not the case. The impressions of the two senses merged, life disintegrated into these two halves without a unifying bond.” These last words are extremely characteristic of Fichte's place in the world of intellectual life. It is indeed true of the merely external (exoteric) philosophical striving of the West that the sense of which Fichte speaks “did not see itself”. In all mystical currents of intellectual life that are based on occult experience and esoteric contemplation, it is clearly mentioned; but its deeper basis was, as has already been explained, unknown in Fichte's time for the prevailing literary and scholarly discussion. For the means of expression of German philosophy at that time, Fichte was indeed the scout and discoverer of this higher meaning. That is why he took something quite different as the starting point of his thinking than other philosophers. As a teacher, he demanded of his students, and as a writer, of his readers, that they should, above all, perform an inner act of the soul. He did not want to impart knowledge of anything outside themselves, but rather he called on them to perform an inner action. And through this inner action they should ignite the true light of self-awareness within themselves. Like most philosophers of his time, he started from Kant's philosophy. Therefore, he expressed himself in the form of Kant's terminology, just as Schiller did in his mature years. But in terms of the height of inner, spiritual life, he surpassed Kant's philosophy very far, just like Schiller. If one attempts to translate Fichte's demands on his readers and listeners from the difficult philosophical language into a more popular form, it might go something like this. Every thing and every fact perceived by a person imposes its existence on that person. It is there without any action on the part of the person, at least as far as their innermost being is concerned. The table, the flower, the dog, a luminous apparition and so on are there through something foreign to man; and it is only for him to establish the existence that has come about without him. For Fichte, the situation is different for the “I” of man. The “I” is only there to the extent that it attains being through its own activity. Therefore, the sentence “I am” means something completely different than any other sentence. Fichte demanded that one become aware of this self-creation as the starting point for any spiritual contemplation of the world. In every other realization, man can only be receptive; in the “I” he must be the creator. And he can only perceive his “I” by looking at himself as the creator of this “I”. Thus Fichte demands a completely different way of looking at the “I” than at all other things. And he is as strict as possible in this demand. He says, “Most people would be more easily persuaded to consider themselves a piece of lava in the moon than an ego... Anyone who is not yet at peace with himself on this point does not understand fundamental philosophy, and does not need it. Nature, of which he is a machine, will guide him in all his affairs without any effort on his part.” To philosophize requires independence: and this one can only give oneself. We should not want to see without an eye; [but should] also not claim that the eye sees.

This very sharply defines the boundary where ordinary experience ends and the occult begins. Ordinary perception and experience extend as far as the human being's objective perception organs are built in. Occultism begins where man begins to build higher organs of perception for himself through the dormant powers within him. Within ordinary experience, man can only feel like a creature. When he begins to feel like the creator of his being, he enters the realm of so-called occult life. The way Fichte characterizes the “I am” is entirely in line with occultism. Even if he remains in the realm of pure thought, his contemplation is not mere speculation, but true inner experience. But for this very reason, it is also so easy to confuse his world view with mere speculation. Those who are driven by curiosity into the higher worlds will not find what they are looking for by delving into Fichte's philosophy. But for those who want to work on themselves, to discover the abilities slumbering in their souls, Fichte can be a good guide. He will realize that what matters is not the content of his teachings or dogmas, but the power that grows in the soul when one devotedly follows Fichte's lines of thought. One would compare this thinker to the prophet who did not enter the promised land himself, but led his people to a summit from which they could see its glories. Fichte leads thought to the summit from which entry into the land of occultism can be made. And the preparation that one acquires through him is as pure as can be imagined. For it completely transcends the realm of sense perception and the realm of that which originates from the nature of human desire and covetousness (from the human being's astral body). Through Fichte, one learns to live and move in the very pure element of thought. One retains nothing of the physical world in the soul except what has been implanted from higher regions, namely thoughts. And these form a better bridge to spiritual experiences than the training of other psychic abilities. For thought is the same everywhere, whether it occurs in the physical, astral or mental world. Only its content is different in each of these worlds. And the supersensible worlds remain hidden from man only as long as he cannot completely remove sensual content from his thoughts. If the thought becomes free of sensuality, then only one step remains to be taken and the supersensible world can be entered.

The contemplation of one's own self in Fichte's sense is so significant because, in relation to this “self”, man remains without any thought content at all if he does not give himself such a content from within. For all the rest of the world's content, for all perception, feeling, will and so on, which make up the content of ordinary existence, the outer world fills man. He needs - according to Fichte's words - basically nothing but the “machine of nature”, which “manages its business without his intervention”. But the “I” remains empty, no outside world fills it with content, if it does not come from within. The realization “I am” can therefore never be anything other than the human being's most intimate inner experience. So there is something speaking in this sentence within the soul that can only speak from within. But this apparently quite empty affirmation of one's own self is how all higher occult experiences take place. They become more meaningful and full of life, but they retain the same form. Through the ego experience as presented by Fichte, one can get to know the type of all occult experiences, initially in the purely intellectual realm. It is therefore correct to say that with the “I am” God begins to speak in man. And just because this happens in a purely mental form, so many people do not want to recognize it.

Now, however, a limit to knowledge had to be reached precisely by the keenest minds that followed in the footsteps of Fichte. Pure thinking is namely only an activity of the personality, not of the individuality, which passes through the various personalities in recurring reincarnations. The laws of even the highest logic never change, even if in the stages of re-embodiments the human individuality ascends to the stage of the highest sage. The spiritual perception increases, the perceptive faculty expands when an individuality that was highly developed in one incarnation is re-embodied, but the logic of thought remains the same even for a higher level of consciousness. Therefore, that which goes beyond the individual incarnation can never be grasped by any thought-experience, no matter how refined, even if it rises to the highest levels. This is the reason why Fichte's way of looking at things, and also that of his contemporaries who followed in his footsteps, could not bring them to a realization of the laws of reincarnation and karma. Although various indications can be found in the works of the thinkers of this epoch, they arise more out of a general feeling than out of a necessary organic connection with their thought-structures. It may be said that the mission of these personalities in the history of thought was to present pure thought experiences as they can take place within an incarnation, excluding everything that reaches beyond this one embodiment of the human being.

The evolution of the human spirit proceeds in such a way that in certain epochs portions of the esoteric original wisdom are transferred into the consciousness of the people. And at the end of the eighteenth and the beginning of the nineteenth century it fell to the German national consciousness to shape the spiritual life of pure thought in its relation to the individual personal existence. If we consider what has already been said in connection with Schiller's personality, that art at this time was to be brought to the center of spiritual life, then we will find the emphasis on the personal point of view all the more understandable. Art is, after all, the living out of the spirit in sensual-physical forms. But the perception of these forms is conditioned by the organization of the individual personality living within the one incarnation. What extends beyond the personality into the supersensible realm will no longer be able to find immediate expression in art. Art does cast its reflection into the supersensible realm, but this reflection is only carried over as the fruit of artistic creation and experience by the abiding essence of the soul from one reincarnation to another. That which enters into existence directly as art and aesthetic experience is bound to the personality.

Therefore, in the case of a personality of the marked epoch, a theosophical world view in the most eminent sense also has a thoroughly personal character. This is the case with Friedrich von Hardenberg, who as a poet bears the name Novalis. He was born in 1772 and died as early as 1801. What lived in this soul, which was entirely imbued with a theosophical attitude, is present in some of his poetry and in a series of poetic-philosophical fragments. This attitude flows from every page of his creations to the reader; but everything is so that the highest spirituality is coupled with an immediate sensual passion, with very personal drives and instincts. A truly Pythagorean way of thinking lives in this young man's nature, which was further nourished by the fact that Novalis worked his way up to become a mining engineer by undergoing thorough mathematical and scientific training. The way in which the human mind develops the laws of pure mathematics out of itself, without the help of any kind of sensory perception, became for him the model for all supersensible knowledge in general. Just as the world is harmoniously structured according to the mathematical laws that the soul finds within itself, so he thought this could be applied to all the ideas underlying the world. That is why man's relationship to mathematics took on an almost devotional, religious character for him. Sayings such as the following reveal the peculiarly Pythagorean nature of his disposition: “True mathematics is the actual element of the magician... The highest life is mathematics... The true mathematician is an enthusiast per se. Without enthusiasm, there is no mathematics. The life of the gods is mathematics. All divine messengers must be mathematicians. Pure mathematics is religion. One can only attain mathematics through a theophany. Mathematicians are the only happy people. The mathematician knows everything. He could do it even if he didn't know it. ... In the East, true mathematics is at home. In Europe, it has degenerated into mere technique. He who does not grasp a mathematical book with devotion and read it like the word of God does not understand it. ... Miracles, as unnatural facts, are amathematical, but there is no miracle in this sense, and what is called that is precisely understandable through mathematics, because there is nothing miraculous about mathematics."

In such sayings, Novalis has in mind not merely a glorification of the science of numbers and spatial dimensions, but the realization that all inner soul experiences should relate to the cosmos as the purely sensual-free mathematical construction of the mind relates to the outer numerical and spatially ordered harmony of the world. This is beautifully expressed when he says: “Mankind is the higher meaning of our planet, the nerve that connects this limb with the upper world, the eye that looks up to heaven.” The identity of the human ego with the fundamental essence of the objective world is the leitmotif in all of Novalis's work. Among his “Fragments” is the saying: “Among people, one must seek God. In human affairs, in human thoughts and feelings, the spirit of heaven reveals itself most brightly.” And he expresses the unity of the ‘higher self’ in all of humanity in the following way: ”In the I, in the point of freedom, we are all in fact completely identical – only from there does each individual separate. I is the absolute total place, the central point.” At Noyalis, Noyalis's position is particularly evident, which was dictated by his awareness of art and artistic feeling at the time. For him, art is something through which man rises above his narrowly defined “lower self” and connects with the creative forces of the world. In the creative artistic imagination, he sees a reflection of the magical forces at work. Thus he can say: “The artist stands on man as the statue stands on the pedestal.” “Nature will be moral when, out of true love for art, it surrenders to art and does what art wills; art, when, out of true love for nature, it lives for nature and works after nature. Both must do it at the same time, out of their own choice for their own sake and out of the other's choice for the sake of the other.... When our intelligence and our world are in harmony, then we are equal to God.” Novalis's lyrical poems, especially his ‘Hymns to the Night,’ are imbued with such sentiments, as are his unfinished novel ‘Heinrich von Ofterdingen’ and the little work ‘The Apprentices at Sais,’ which is rooted entirely in mystical thinking and feeling.

These few personalities show how German poetry and thought in that period were based on a theosophical-mystical undercurrent. The examples could be multiplied by numerous others. Therefore, it is not even possible to attempt to give a complete picture here, but only to characterize the basic note of this spiritual epoch with a few lines. It is not difficult to see that individual mystical and theosophical natures with a spiritual and intuitive mind found the theosophical basic ideas in their own way. Thus, theosophy shines out beautifully from the creations of some personalities of this epoch. Many could be cited where this is the case. Lorenz Oken could be mentioned, who founded a natural philosophy that on the one hand points back to Paracelsus and Jakob Böhme through its mystical spirit; on the other hand, through ingenious conceptions about evolution and the connection of living beings, it is a forerunner of the justified parts of Darwinism. Steffens could be cited, who sought reflections of a cosmic spiritual life in the processes of earth development; Eckartshausen (1752–1803) could be referred to, who sought to explain the abnormal phenomena of nature and soul life in a theosophical-mystical way ; Ennemoser (1787–1854) with his “History of Magic”, Gotthilf Heinrich Schubert with his works on dream phenomena and the hidden facts in nature; and the brilliant works of Justinus Kerner and Karl Gustav Carus are rooted in the same school of thought. Schelling moved more and more from pure Fichteanism to theosophy, and then, in his “Philosophy of Mythology” and “Philosophy of Revelation”, which were not published until after his death, traced the developmental history of the human spirit and the connection between religions back to their starting point in the mysteries. Hegel's philosophy should also be viewed in theosophical light, and then one would see how wrong the history of philosophy is in regarding this profound spiritual experience of the soul as mere speculation. All this would require a detailed work if it were to be treated exhaustively. Here, however, only a little-known personality is to be mentioned, who, in the focus of his mind, combined the rays of theosophical world-view and created a structure of ideas that in many respects completely coincides with the thoughts of theosophy that are being revived today. It is I. P. V. Troxler, who lived from 1780 to 1866 and whose works, in particular, the “Blicke in das Wesen des Menschen” (Glimpses into the essence of man), published in 1812, come into consideration. Troxler objects to the usual division of human nature into soul and body, which he finds misleading because it does not exhaust nature. He initially differentiates between four parts of the human being: spirit, higher soul, soul (which he considers the lower soul) and body. One need only see this classification in the right light to recognize how close it is to the one commonly found in theosophical books today. The body in his sense coincides completely with what is now called the physical body. The lower soul, or what he, in contrast to the body, calls the body, is nothing other than the so-called astral body. This is not just something that has been inserted into his world of thought, but he himself says that what is subjectively the lower soul should be characterized objectively by falling back on the term used by the ancient researchers, the astral body. “There is therefore,” he explains, ”necessarily something in man which the sages of ancient times foresaw and proclaimed as a σῶμα αστροιδες (Soma astroeides) [and ομραγιον σῶμα (Uranion soma)], or as a σχημα πνευματιχον ([scheme] pneumatikon) [sensed] and proclaimed, and what is the substrate of the middle sphere of life, the bond of immortal and mortal life.” Among the poets and philosophers who were Troxler's contemporaries, theosophy was alive as an undercurrent; but Troxler himself became keenly aware of this theosophy in the intellectual world around him and developed it in an original way. Thus, he himself comes upon much of what is found in the ancient wisdom teachings. It is all the more appealing to delve into his thought processes, since he does not directly build on old traditions, but rather creates something like an original theosophy out of the thinking and attitudes of his time.

[Rudolf Steiner:] “The first condition for an occultist who acquires powers to lead others is a willingness to make sacrifices. The good that such a self-sacrificing occultist has done cannot be erased. It continues to have an effect, it remains. And it would be highly unchristian and even more untheosophical to judge a fallen occultist without love. Every person who joins the Theosophical Society must be able to count on brotherly feelings. Those who join the Society only to learn have the wrong idea. Those who give their best to help their brothers and thereby support the brotherly spirit have correctly recognized the purpose of the Society.

Now there is the case of a member who has done a lot of good being rejected. What is it that rejects?

It is very difficult to talk about this matter in public. It is a matter of opinions here. By doing things that are not approved by ordinary morality, Leadbeater had the ideal in mind of counteracting precisely this sexual evil. He thought he had done nothing wrong, he saw the matter as a remedy.

One cannot say: “Leadbeater does not want to improve.”

The Society has excluded him. In doing so, it has set itself up as a judge of an idea. In so doing, it has acknowledged its own infallibility. During the congress, there was some talk about common sense. Here, an occult case has been brought before the forum of “common sense”. This means that any occultist could be brought before this forum.

The case has been created and society must see how it deals with it.

Dr. Steiner: “We have only been informed of the fact. We have no right to judge the actions of others; if we do that, we make heretics. Everyone should answer for their own actions.

The exoteric leadership of the Society has only to occupy itself with administrative matters. The rest they have to place in the hands of those who stand behind them. They should not exercise police power.

If they want to start judging the faults of the members, they are beating their own faces. There are seemingly quite harmless things, but they are not as harmless as they seem. These include, for example, the ladies' coffee klatch and the gentlemen's early or evening drink. This is where lust is encouraged. And those affected are, to a certain extent, committing fornication on the astral plane. They are performing a veritable witches' sabbath there. Certain astral beings feed on this gossip.

Only the intention of the culprit determines the difference between white and black magic.

The question at issue here is: Did the culprit act out of lust for his own sake?

Kieser, Stuttgart: “How did Leadbeater behave during the interrogation? Did he confess?”

Miss Bright: “Yes. He fully confessed it and retired from the Society for the good of the Society. He does not want to attach his karma to that of the Society, so he resigns. He has firmly declared that he did not do it to satisfy his lust.”

Dr. Steiner: “So Leadbeater acted in good faith. If the method he used to fight the evil is wrong, it shows in the fruits it produces. If it is right, that can also only be recognized by the fruits.

A similar case is celibacy. Society has no right to judge occult matters. If it does so, it makes itself into a sect that establishes dogmas. The dogma is the establishment of a doctrine whose meaning is not understood. The Trinity, for example, is a dogma as long as it is not understood. If one understands it, it ceases to be a dogma.

The things that are in question here have always been practiced in occult societies. Occultism is the wisdom of the future. Through the heroism of the occultists, they often prepare a tragic end. The occultist lives the morals of the future and that is not understood by his fellow human beings.

This case will become clearer to us if we consider the evolution of man. Wisdom teaches us to look from the bottom up, from man to God. There we saw a whole hierarchy of spiritual beings, a hierarchy, a spiritual state. In this hierarchy, the occultist occupies a very specific place; it is not appropriate for a less developed person to accuse an occultist, because that would be like accusing the gods. The gods have brought illness and sin into the world. Where there is much light, there is also much black shadow. Therefore, the gods could not bring us good without also causing evil. To look for the shadow in the light is nonsense; but the shadow is the consequence of the light. Man first had to emerge completely onto the physical plane before he could become self-aware on the higher planes. First he should explore the physical plan independently. Once in ancient Greece, man was not yet independent, he did not yet feel as an individual, that only developed in Rome. So three to four hundred years before Christ, the Romans developed this sense of independence. We actually owe independent thinking to the ancient Romans. But the decline of sexual morals is connected to the development of thinking. All this is known to the occultist, and we have high occultists to thank for the institution of prostitution. We have to tie in with this if we don't want to go around blindfolded in the world.

A large percentage of humanity is afflicted with sexual vices. That is a fact and there is little that can be done about it. Anyone who thinks that moral sermons can remedy the evil is mistaken. The occultist knows that other things are needed to do so. Even if these things stink, they are necessary and we cannot completely escape them, just as we cannot escape the stench of the faeces we ourselves secrete. Man must go through the swamp. The only question is whether he will wallow in the mud like a pig or whether he will go into the mud to transform it, as it is well known that the most beautiful scents can be developed from feces. Anyone who undertakes this for humanity is acting in an apocalyptic sense. He anticipates something that humanity as a whole will only come to in later times. What he wants to accomplish in view of the future, he must carry out in a physical body that, especially in his brain, does not offer him the necessary conditions to carry out what he has already anticipated in spirit before the rest of humanity. He is crucified in the flesh. He has skipped a step and his physical body does not offer him the necessary conditions.

Let the matter speak as it speaks through the personality. Let it not become a dogma that can be discussed. The interdependence of people, who are all working at different levels of humanity, means that when one person falls, many fall with him.

The point here (with Leadbeater) is that something has happened with the best, noblest of intentions that is incompatible with the current order of things.

Question: “What should we say about this case when we are asked?”

Dr. Steiner: “Right and wrong can only be distinguished according to the attitude from which an act is done.

The higher beings send us teachings through society. Those who do not want them have no place in society. When a teacher falls, we do not want to sing dirges because of it; we need not fear. There are still more suitable teachers to lead the good cause to victory. It depends on the person, not on the idea he has; not on the organization of society, but on the spiritual individuality of the person in whom we have or have no trust."