Working with a broad definition of an anthroposophist I have found the Traditional anthroposophist who is more concerned with the traditions of the Anthroposophical Society as an institution and Progressive anthroposophists who are more concerned with anthroposophy today and how it relates to the present world.
This split seems to have existed throughout the history of the Anthroposophical Society. At the end of Lecture 6 (1923) in Awakening To Community Rudolf Steiner describes the two groups as one group which has a long history of experience within the Society and other newer anthroposophists who have no interest in that history.
He considered both views justified and surprisingly suggested two groups be formed, one he called the "Old Anthroposophical Society" whose task would be a continuation of the projects the Society has undertaken and the other group that has no interest in them would pursue a more narrowly anthroposophical path.
The new group would found a union of "Free Anthroposophical Communities". The two societies would work out ways of living together as "two devoted sisters, each going their own way and united only by a common ideal".
This was presented as a solution to the "hopeless situation" and "chaos" of trying to weld together the two groups. The history of the Society up to this day with the recent expulsion of 44 members in Dornach by the Executive Council shows the battle between the old and new lives on. The inability of the Society to sustain any new member growth for decades is another strong indicator that nothing has changed since 1923.
Back in 1923 both groups existed within one Society. Today, indicated by the lack of interest of new people to join the Society, the Traditionalists seem to have won the battle and avoided chaos by discouraging new participation and extinguishing fresh anthoposophical impulse.
This is not meant as a criticism of the Old Society but just an attempt to contrast differences with the New Communities. The Society has an important role to play in carrying out the old initiatives and should not be distracted from that task by calls for reform, in my humble (sometimes) opinion.
I am learning more about Free Anthroposophical Communities forming today, as Jesaiah Ben-Aharon describes it in The World Situation At Present. The new impulse is not rising from the centralized form of the Anthroposophical Society, but rather out from the periphery. This is an interesting topic which I plan to look into more.
It is a relevant topic at this start of a new 21st century as I am looking to discover who are the people that are open to the new impulse of anthroposophy today? If the missing Michaelic millions theory is correct only 1% of those inclined toward anthroposophy would be found in the Anthroposophical Society. 99% would be found somewhere else. But if you are looking for new anthroposophists they of course would be found somewhere else. Are they at the local food coop? Are they in Green Peace? Where do I look to fill up study groups for The Free Spirit (Philosophy of Freedom) study group program?
Centrals and Peripherals
Hey Tom (and Jay),
It seems to me an anthroposophist is someone who wants to enter the spiritual worlds more or less on his (her) own terms by means of certain exercises and by keeping a certain company. He (she) wants to have spagyric dreams and alchemical conversations. He (she) wants to attend great Festivals and to contribute to the ideals of the Youth. He (she) wants to understand the tremendous mystery of Christ, and to sense Venus in the gardens and Mars in the buildings. He (she) wants to see spiritual Beings behind the actions of those working not for themselves and their silly little stories, but for great ideals portending the transformation of the Earth herself.
There do indeed appear to be Central anthroposophists and Peripheral anthroposophists, the latter appearing by and large on this website. The Peripherals here don't seem to have a very high opinion of the Centrals, but I don't think that's the right attitude to take. It's not all that easy to be a Central, and from what I've seen of them, there are some very fine ones, both in Dornach and in Fair Oaks, for example. There are some very refined practices among the Centrals, and we can be sure they have a lot to offer us.
What's important, it seems to me, is for the Peripherals to begin to initiate some movement in relation to the Center. The Centrals need to sense that the Peripherals have it together to an extent. As soon as they do, one can be sure they will respond. But that Movement by the Peripherals needs to come out of Freedom and Good Judgment. It needs to be a sort of spontaneous order, a spontaneous force.
It seems to me that Jeff more or less has the right idea. He's willing to accept propositions having to do with spontaneous force in conversation on an As-If basis. He's not sure what those propositions portend altogether, he's not sure he believes them, he's got his priorities, etc, but he sees some value in trying them on, safely, and seeing how they work. More of that sort of thing, sufficiently capitalized, and the movement could unify at last.
Looking for those seeking freedom
I am not that concerned with the relationship between Traditional anthroposophists and Progressive anthroposophists because I see that they have different tasks and should support each other in those tasks while avoiding the chaos that has flared up in the past distracting everyone. The issue for me is understanding the people who have not discovered Rudolf Steiner's freedom philosophy but would benefit greatly if it were presented to them in the right way.
They would be those free spirits who are living the principles of intuitive thinking and ethical individualism but are not as conscious of the process. They are living a creative life but would benefit by developing a greater awareness of that process. They are not drawn to traditional institutions. With greater self-awareness and even POF study training they will increase their effectiveness and influence in the world.
Steiner mentioned POF may need to be rewritten at this time. I'm not aware of anyone up to that task but we can bring in more contemporary supplemental material to be used as examples for the text as part of a presentation suited for today.
My plan is to develop an introductory course that would discuss the basic principles and work toward developing an appreciation for the book by going into it's unique features and special reading requirements. After this they may choose to enter more serious study of the book. The question I am working with now is who should I target for promotion material? I have designed some cards I may start posting on bulletin boards in food coops or universities. Anywhere open-minded people could be found who would be interested in a "real" freedom philosophy.
A Cultural Change
Yo Tom,
Presumably "support" here means something material - time or capital - because otherwise it would be an empty notion.
What sort of mutual support between the Center and the Periphery can be imagined? Clearly you are trying to bring possible anthroposophists into this website, and that is a material contribution. You are contributing gobs of your own capital to that project.
My contribution is similar. I am contributing capital to the institution of Goethean conversation. If I weren't actively and substantially promoting it, anthroposophy would be pretty much in the dark about it.
I think it is also pretty clear that what we are doing here on the internet and with Goethean conversation represents a substantial amount of anthroposophical capital that in time will become economically significant. The internet and this website are an unprecedented development in anthroposophy because they represent unprecedented transparency in anthroposophy. Goethean conversation likewise represents transparency in real time interactions within groups of people. Transparency is something new to anthroposophy.
It has never been possible for anthroposophists to transcend space and time on behalf of their ideals in the way we are able to do here, or in the way promised by Goethean conversation. Up to now, anthroposophists have always needed to clarify their thinking and their agendas through real time interactions and through printed media, and only in that way. As a result, they have tended to operate somewhat secretly and on behalf of secretive interests. The internet and Goethean conversation represent a pressure to change that cultural tradition. At some point, the Center will need to take these 21st century Peripheral initiatives - internet and conversational transparency - seriously. Let us say,
(P8) Principle of transparency (the future of autonomy and freedom is public as well as private).
Does anyone else on this website see a moral necessity to connect the anthroposophical Center, represented perhaps by the Faust Branch in Sacramento and other Branches worldwide, and by the Goetheanum, and the anthroposophical Periphery, represented by what we are doing here? I for one just don't see an alternative. I think we must initiate dialog with the Center, or vice versa, and "support" will need to run in both directions. Am I alone in this perception?
Tom, I'm excited (always
Tom, I'm excited (always have been) by your bridging efforts and the wonderful intention behind them. I want to support your work in that area.
In Jesiaha-Speak I want to suggest that something has changed. At first PoF was a central force- the book worked centrically and attempted to move outward, to get into more and more people's hands, minds and hearts.
I'm thinking that it has flipped. What if now the attempt to make the book function as it did at first is antiquated and simply not possible. The great hope, however, is that PoF is more alive than ever on the periphery. The work around PoF is the same as the work around the Michaelites. It's not about finding correct language to help unconscious Michaelites easily slip into reading Steiner Lectures. And it's not, I think, about hoping we can get unconscious Michaelites to find a bridge into the book PoF.
You know darn well that I agree that PoF needs to be rewritten. But I don't mean that an actual book (THE NEW CLASSIC) needs to be written. I mean that more and more people need to realize that they are writing it again in their lives. Sure, some of those people will have personality structures that will lean them towards writing philosophical texts; that's important. But there is no longer a need for a book.
I might be wrong on this, but I feel strongly that there will never be a an upsurge of reader's of the 1894 book. I get a little worried when I read anthroposophical publications (last year's Steinerbook catelog introduction) that seem to be stuck in the fantasy that some type of cosmic window will open when, with the right marketing and presentation, The Philosophy of Freedom will be taken up by a larger quantity of people. I think my worry is based in the fact that I'm so hopeful for the future just because PoF is already being found. Anthroposophists should be trained at helping anybody who has found PoF (in their way) expresses it uniquely (in there way)....that way more and more people will become conscious of the motives for their wonderful social intuitions, but not because they have studied the 14 chapter's Steiner wrote.
If I'm wrong, if the world really does need more people to study the book...then, by all means, we need to find ways to excite the growing number of young people who are creatively devoting themselves to creating a new, vibrant and creative world-culture. Because I've been known to be wrong, I support your efforts even if they are primarily focused on getting people to become aquainted with the book itself.
My suggestion would be that while you continue to find wonderful and relavent modern texts to get people in the door, so to speak, we also entertain the idea of how can we help these poweful souls recognize that their true motive is their freedom, their love for the deed? Such a recognition requires not that they start thinking about connecting percepts and concepts, but that they reflect, more and more genuinely, on the impulse that is behind their power. I would like to see that the study guide you create would capture these people's attention because in reading it they begin to recognize the motive behind their efforts is really something much more intimate than they've thought thus far.
Typically these unconscious Michaelites believe that their powerfully creative impulses have to do with "helping the world", "making things better".....They get caught up in rational justifications for their impulse and, thereby, cut off from deepening their conscious participation in its cause. By trying to locate the source of their impulse in an idea, they obscure their actual and ongoing participation in the impulse itself. I think what they "need" is to re-cognize the impulse itself. They need resources that help them take the next step in what they already are. I can imagine a study guide that would use modern texts to help them recognize that they are already on a spiritual path. The book PoF could be used in such a study guide as an example of how one pioneer found words to express his understanding of the impulse in himself. That way, when they read about PoF it won't have the implicit suggestion that they are suppose to take time understanding the text as if they need IT to take their next steps of freedom. Sure, some people would become enthusiastic about the text itself (like us) and jump into a relationship with it. But most people- I think- would generate a warm appreciation for Steiner and realize that they need to jump into their freedom like he did and find what they have to say.
It might sound like I'm trashing your idea. I'm not. I think what you are doing is important even if you believe that the goal is more eyeballs studying Steiner's book. I'm just adding my voice to your song because I think of so many young people who really could be inspired to take some time and check in with the actual nature of their billiant and passionate impulses. I don't think many of them would be inspired by Steiner's text (although some might), but I know they would be inspired by his example if it was shown as an example of what they already know in their hearts.
Jeff
contemporary references
I think I agree with you that what is important is that people become more conscious of their own inner impulses and recognize that these (if intuitive) are free. That would be the self-awareness that POF can help with.
You speak of using more contemporary references which I also agree with. I am on the look out for these references as I want to present them with the POF chapter they relate too.
What remains unique about POF study is the thought training that develops an intuition appropriate for our age. This is unavailable any where else as far as I know. I believe it is the most effective and appropriate training available. If there is better training somewhere else we should go there. But many won't go that far to train. They will still benefit greatly by becoming more self aware through the descriptions of the cognitive process in the book and benefit by learning the anthroposophical principles in the book, especially if contemporary references are added.
If you have useful contemporary references that will match up with POF chapters please pass them on.
Belonging
Posted as a journal entry as this thread is really long and I'm in the middle of it somewhere here and may never find this place again.
Give it a try
Hi Tom,
With your love of PoF and your 15 years experience, why don't you try rewriting same for our time. There have been a lot of good philosophers that have appeared on the scene since the time the book was first written, that could be used. I know you said that you didn't think there was anyone up to the task, but I have an intutition you might have what is really needed to do this. Anyway, something to think about. As far as younger people being able to relate to or have an interest in studying PoF, I like you, think it is a matter of the way in which the book is presented to them. Your introductory course sounds most interesting.
Love,
patri
My long term work was to
My long term work was to morph POF into a new usable spiritual science Steiner describes in Human and Cosmic Thought as Spiritual Astrology. A brief mention of it is made here.
The prerequisite of being a Spiritual Astrologer is a thorough study of The Philosophy of Freedom. The lack of work with POF over the last many years meant the ground work for Spiritual Astrology didn't happen so I have had to work on basic study before Spiritual Astrology would make sense to anyone.
Does anything get done on Earth according to hoped for spiritual schedules?
In appreciation to PoF
Hi, just popping in - thanks for your reply Jeff.
I would like to thank Tom and Carl for their incredible depth and height in knowledge, not only your knowledge but your dynamic vision and energy in Philosophy of Freedom. It is greatly appreciated and respected.
May fountains of Love and Light flow down.
Love.
To whom do we feel connected?
Are the intentions of traditionalists and progressives a question of individual constitutional balance? Some people are more active in spirit remembering. Others are more able at spirit envisioning. I am thinking in the context of the Foundation Stone Meditation. A group can achieve a balance of spirit mindfulness that is difficult for individual members.
Central organisation - such as the Vorstand - are peripheral to widespread activity. The centre of active engagement can be lost without some reference to the goals of general human development.
I am a busy idealist. I have personal connections to various other Anthroposophical Society members and to non-members who are committed to what I would call anthroposophical activity. Does it matter? In my endeavour to represent anthroposophy as an individual in the world I see that one of the critical attitudes is to remain in touch with others throughout and beyond disagreements and misunderstandings. That is why I live in a Camphill community.
Is it not important to uncover all possible karmic relationships and heal and develop the whole? It seems so easy for the path to human freedom and individual ethical emancipation to become isolated and cliquish. Not least do we contribute by consigning the kind of reifying and separatist labels that Goethe tried so hard to eradicate in his work.
If Tom - or anyone - would like to post an A4 poster that advertises this site then I will happily distribute it.