The Rudolf Steiner Archive

2. The Women’s Question and Theosophy

[ 1 ] Today, allow me to shed some light on a very timely topic that touches on the immediate present from the standpoint of theosophy, and to show that it is indeed appropriate to examine such a question—a movement that so directly impacts cultural life—in the light of our worldview; let me cite a small example from the last few days that is exceptionally telling in several respects. It shows that it is precisely those with a practical mindset who recognize the need to deepen our culture through the theosophical worldview, and that, on the other hand, in the broadest circles, theosophy still appears to be something quite unknown.

[ 2 ] Last Sunday, the *Tag* published a most peculiar article—the political content of which I have no intention of discussing—by Carl Peters, on Russia, Japan, and peace. Whatever one may think of the name Carl Peters, no one will dispute that he is one of the great practitioners of our time. In this article, he discusses the differing perceptions within the two countries regarding the peace that has been established between Japan and Russia. He mentions the manifesto with which this peace was proclaimed to the people of Russia, which contains the words that God may bestow His great blessing upon these people and upon the development of the Russian hinterlands. He then mentions the proclamation of peace to Russia. [The Mikado says in his peace manifesto]: “The outcome of the war is attributable to the benevolent spirits of our ancestors. Now that tranquility and peace have been secured, we invoke the great ancestors to enable us to pass on the fruits of this peace to our descendants.” The Emperor of Japan visits the shrine to bring news of the conclusion of peace to the imperial ancestors. ... [gap] I mention this because of what the author of the article says about it. He says: What the two have in common is that they appeal to a spiritual fate in the course of world history. The difference is that, according to the East Asian view, this is not a victory of the material world. The Japanese view is more pantheistic, while the Christian view is more [monotheistic]. Which view is correct cannot be determined by rational arguments. I would like to add the following remark: The Japanese are a [sober, in a sense mathematical] nation, so I do not assume that what we can believe plays a major role for them. If they assume an influence on the fate of the earth, this is hardly based on faith, but rather on knowledge. I would venture to suggest that Central and East Asia possess certain spiritual insights that the highly developed West cannot even imagine. If they are able and willing to introduce such knowledge into our more or less superficial culture, they would provide us with ideal values that go far beyond what we can offer them. ... [gap]

[ 3 ] We do not intend to examine the meaning of these words. Rather, we want to place at the forefront of our consideration the fact that they were spoken by a so-called [practitioner]. Two things must strike us here. The first is that the need for a spiritual deepening of our culture is emphasized in such strong terms—[referring to forces that do not dwell in the material world]— and that, on the other hand, reference is made to East Asia and the hope is explicitly expressed that our increasingly superficial culture should receive a renewal from the East—by expressing the hope that these wise ones can offer us more than we can offer them through our culture. A man of the world takes the fact very seriously here that one can know something about the forces emanating from people who no longer live in earthly existence.

[ 4 ] It is very strange that, on the one hand, this necessity is emphasized so strongly, and yet, at the same time, there is absolutely no awareness that for thirty years there has been a movement in Europe that does not stem from the remnants of an older people—whose spiritual consciousness cannot possibly be at its full height today—but rather, I say, that for thirty years there has been a spiritual movement in Europe itself, such as Theosophy. This is completely forgotten; and no consideration is given to the fact that we may be called upon here to establish this spiritual culture in a completely different way than those East Asian peoples. The whole thing sheds light, on the one hand, on the longing for spirituality, for knowledge of the spiritual world, and on the other hand—I would say—on a superficial understanding of our own European aspirations.

[ 5 ] More than with any other issue, what has been touched upon here may be of interest to us when discussing the women’s issue. The Theosophical Movement can in no way be suspected of treating this matter in any reactionary manner. The very way in which it has developed would directly contradict such a claim. Women have always been among the best founders and contributors to the Theosophical Movement. Indeed, the actual founder of the Theosophical Society—Helena Petrovna Blavatsky—was a woman. And nothing in the cultural works of the past centuries comes close to the body of knowledge contained in this woman’s writings.

[ 6 ] You don’t have to believe that. If you seriously delve into what this woman has taught, you will become increasingly convinced that what has just been said is the truth. And Annie Besant, her successor—again, a woman—understood in a truly extraordinary way how to unite modern scientific thought, modern thinking, and a progressive outlook on life with the theosophical spirit and the theosophical movement as a whole.

[ 7 ] Men and women work together within the Theosophical Society. Within the Society, one never has the feeling that gender plays any role in this regard. Yes, there are those—who have not truly grasped the essence of the Theosophical Movement—who have called it a “feminine” movement; partly because it was founded by a woman, and partly because, perhaps, women now make up the majority of those active in the movement. Above all, this fact protects us from the prejudice that we might view this matter in some regressive or hostile sense.

[ 8 ] But the Theosophist is called upon to view all these things in the light of spirituality, in the light of the highest spiritual culture. He must do the same with regard to this matter. Above all, we will notice that the women’s issue, as it presents itself to us now, is a product of our modern worldview, our modern thinking, and our modern sensibilities. As it presents itself to us today, it would not have been possible a hundred years ago. Insofar as Theosophy is always concerned with clearly and distinctly understanding the spirit of the epochs of humanity, we will also have to understand how, out of our culture, this very women’s issue has come to be what it is. Theosophy strives less to criticize and more to understand from all perspectives. Therefore, it will take a less programmatic stance on this women’s issue; rather, it will have to investigate the root cause of this issue.

[ 9 ] We cannot get to the bottom of this question as easily as we can with others. For theosophy leads us deep into human nature. And human nature is more diverse and complicated than one might think. While modern people could easily overlook the distinction between men and women, the theosophist must, from the depths of human nature, take a closer look at this difference and ask whether, despite this difference, that unique collaboration—which has developed specifically within the Theosophical Society—could also attract broader cultural circles, and perhaps even give rise to a general worldview regarding this issue in the present.

[ 10 ] When we look back over the ages, we find that women’s perception of themselves—as well as the perception they held of the opposite sex—has changed significantly over time. Likewise, the external structures within which the two sexes have lived have changed substantially. If one considers this only superficially, one will not arrive at the true cause and foundation. It is well known that at the beginning of that era—to which not history, but prehistory leads us—women played a fundamentally different role. It is known that patriarchy—the “patrilineal family,” with its distinctive system of inheritance and other social institutions—emerged from an original “matrilineal family”—matriarchy—and that women held a privileged position with regard to matters concerning offspring, such as inheritance rights and so on.

[ 11 ] The Theosophist must ask himself: How is such a thing related to the primordial spiritual forces of the world? This brings us to a discussion of a fact that has already been touched upon here on several occasions, but which we must apply to this particular case. The foundation of all human life in its historical development on Earth is a natural one—one that has evolved from an [instinctive] predisposition into conscious, clear thinking and into conscious, clear structures created by the intellect and certain moral concepts.

[ 12 ] The original bonds of humanity arose from nature itself. Blood kinship was the original bond. Institutions that established moral concepts later took the place of this ancient blood kinship.

[ 13 ] The materialist sees in this blood relationship nothing but the raw force of nature. But those who hold a spiritual worldview know that whatever manifests as instinct, whatever emerges as a drive, and whatever is expressed as kinship can all be traced back to spiritual forces—to spiritual beings that stand behind sensory existence. Just as human beings today, more or less consciously, guide the social order, so originally the Devas [or Dhyans], divine powers, guided the fabric of humanity [they ordered human relationships].

[ 14 ] This emergence from a spiritual foundation that is still unconscious to human beings appears as drive and instinct. The bearer of this original instinctive disposition, rooted in spiritual essence, was woman. The ancient myths and legends of the peoples bear witness to this fact. [From a theosophical standpoint, this is easily provable, but this view can also be demonstrated purely rationally.] There is just one point to mention here. If you look at the images that refer back to the earliest stages of the human race, you will find in them the tradition of an originally feminine foundation of the entire human race. The Greeks depicted [in their earliest representations] their Zeus with a female bust.

[ 15 ] The theosophical worldview takes us back to the dawn of time—as far back as we can trace time on Earth—to those times when there was still no separation of the sexes, to those times we cannot discuss in detail today, to those times when the sexes were not divided between two separate individuals but were united. Those familiar with scientific research will know that even natural science points to a prehistoric being that was not unisex but hermaphroditic. In this regard, I draw attention to the Darwinist Oskar Schmidt. Theosophy speaks of that time when the figuratively depicted “primitive man” was a reality. He was more inclined toward the female sex.

[ 16 ] Even a little thought can make this clear. Reproduction has always been tied to the female sex. What existed as a fundamental principle also played out in external social contexts. In early times, this natural foundation was translated into a kind of moral worldview, reflected in social structures, rights, and institutions.

[ 17 ] The fact that human spiritual power was particularly concentrated in women is demonstrated even by the view we find in Tacitus, where women were regarded as prophetesses, [called upon to proclaim from the spiritual world what will happen in the future—Velleda, Alruna—] who is to proclaim whether right or wrong prevails, and whether something should be undertaken or not. We find such views among various peoples. The fact that the spiritual, wherever it appears at the dawn of our times—where it appears as something new, as something wise—is rooted in the same natural foundation is evident from such facts.

[ 18 ] And now something else: If you go back to the earliest times of religious worldview, you will find a common underlying trait among all peoples—one connected, on the one hand, to this natural foundation of the human race, and on the other, to the consciousness from which humanity’s oldest institutions and its thoughts and aspirations have developed. In sexual symbols—in allegories connected to this natural foundation—the culture and religion of various peoples find expression at very specific times. These are naive, yet beautiful and magnificent times, when people, in sweet simplicity and innocence, associated nothing base or frivolous with these sexual symbols; when procreation was for them a force of nature, symbolized by woman, who manifested herself in various forms just as divine creation did for them. Attempts have been made to revive these views of a so-called “sexual religion.” There is no justification for doing so as has been done. For the current emotional foundation is not suited to recapturing that original and unblemished essence associated with these symbols, so that the way these ancient matters are discussed today strikes the connoisseur as somewhat offensive.

[ 19 ] Only slowly and gradually did those institutions, those states of consciousness that are linked to the feminine origin of the human race, transition into a different order—an order that, to put it briefly, was created by man, by the man who has been torn away from this natural foundation, by the man who, as such, has no part in the visible progression of the human race.

[ 20 ] It is only through the law—through legal regulation—that the man’s right is incorporated into the original right, which is based on blood kinship and derived from the female perspective. Thus we see that it is only on that original foundation of a religious worldview—one that proceeds from the creative forces of nature—that what we encounter in the remnants of ancient peoples [ancient Mongolian tribes] as ancestral culture first develops. A force that acted directly was venerated in woman.

[ 21 ] Then, in place of the sages and soothsayers, and in place of the veneration of the immediately present feminine principle, comes what is called ancestor worship—the veneration of deceased members of the people who have rendered distinguished service to the common good—namely, male ancestors. In their case, people revered what continued to have an effect beyond death. You can still see this when the Mikado carries news of peace and war to the graves of his ancestors. Here, then, we witness the transition from a feminine culture to a masculine culture.

[ 22 ] The conquest by male reason and thought of the faculties that have been linked to women since time immemorial by natural disposition is taking place slowly and gradually. But there is something else connected with this, something I can best describe as the transition from a primal conservatism to an idealism that is gradually gaining ground in the world.

[ 23 ] You can trace this back to those periods in world history when the ancient religious cultures I have spoken of developed. These date back either to times when people could perceive the divine creative power in the creative force of production, or to times when it had long since died out but still continues to exert an influence as something present. These cultures are built upon something from the past. First, we find in world history those that build upon the starting point of humanity, pointing to the ancient, to origin, to what has been sacred since time immemorial—to nature and to the ancestors.

[ 24 ] This is the starting point of the human race, and gradually this view gives way to a completely different one. Among all the peoples who provided the foundations for the culture to which we ourselves belong, you will find, in place of ancestor worship, the veneration of prophets—those who foretell the future and hold up lofty ideals before the people. Primitive conservatism gradually gives way to idealism. One turns from looking to the past to looking to the future, even among the people from whom Christianity itself sprang. The prophets were the truly great figures [who guided it], and hand in hand with them comes a detachment from the natural, from mere blood ties, from everything that points to the foundations of our lineage.

[ 25 ] When we consider this turning point, we are looking at the immense depth of human development. That which is connected with the relationship between the sexes—which today is the subject of much discussion among anthropologists and others, the so-called sense of shame—did not exist at the starting point of our culture. [What is connected with the procreation of humankind was not concealed; it was something natural and self-evident.] It only emerged at the time when the described transformation took place as a necessity. Where the force of nature gave way to reason and ideals, people began to conceal that which must be regarded as a remnant of the natural foundation of the human race.

[ 26 ] Take a closer look at this point. What does a person feel ashamed of? Consider this feeling of shame in other areas. Everywhere you will find that people feel ashamed when they have done something in such a way that they more or less acknowledge the fact that they could have planned it better, done it better—that the way they did it is actually not quite right. Psychologically, we can say something very similar about the feeling of shame in general. It is there and relates to something that stems from the past and can be overcome—something that, when viewed in light of the future, should not be the way it is today.

[ 27 ] Here, human instinct and intuition point to something that the theosophical worldview presents as to be realized in the distant future. I must point out today that the development of humanity through the two sexes is merely a transitional stage; just as humanity originated from the union of the two sexes in a single individual, humanity is once again heading toward a state in which there will be not two, but only one sex. Thus, from the perspective of the theosophical worldview, you can see our present development set within a distant past and a distant future that are similar to one another, that in a certain respect resemble one another.

[ 28 ] We can perceive how this fact, which has just been alluded to, manifests itself in the most intimate expressions of the human soul. Take a look at ancient artistic or semi-artistic depictions of the divine creative primal force; consider the ancient Egyptians’ conception of it, which they associated with the cult of Isis; and compare these with the distinctive quality that emanates from Raphael’s Madonna. What is natural, what is connected to the creative force, is expressed in ancient times in a semi-artistic manner. In a Raphael Madonna, the creative force is shyly veiled, and a [completely] different, [higher] aspect confronts us: love—a relationship that, as a spiritual one, takes the place of the old natural relationship. The mother with the child, enveloped in the magic of love. And the spiritual is expressed, as for example in the Sistine Madonna, in the emerging angelic heads. The creative power is suggested as a kind of spiritual resonance. Here you see a great universal truth, foreshadowed by the artist.

[ 29 ] Religions themselves follow this course. Ascetic religions—those that turn away from the world—do not mark the starting point of humanity. They emerge only after the aforementioned turning point has taken place. The times in which this turning point is being prepared are magnificent and awe-inspiring. The saviors in the development of humanity are mythically portrayed as having been conceived without sin. You see this in the case of Buddha and the other saviors of humanity, and ultimately in the Christian religion itself. In religion, the original natural foundation is elevated to the highest sanctity.

[ 30 ] [Compare, once again, the Egyptian cult of Isis with these spiritualized religions.] This is wonderfully hinted at in *The Transformation of Egypt*, with the ideal and the spiritualized sentiment at the starting point of our calendar. Then you will sense this transformation throughout all of humanity. That is why the theosophical worldview is clear on the fact that the natural foundation from which the human race originated is the outward, physiognomic expression of a spiritual entity. This spiritual entity is the very same one to which humanity will consciously draw near again in the future.

[ 31 ] If we bear in mind that we are progressing from the spirit in its natural form to the spirit in its immediate form, then we will better understand many of the developments that have taken place in the course of sexual evolution. Above all, we will better understand what I mentioned earlier: the replacement of ancient female institutions and female-based structures by a male culture, in which we still live today. The natural foundation was to be suppressed. At first, it could only be suppressed in the realm of external institutions; otherwise, it remained in place, and so we encounter a peculiar hybrid formation in our present-day institutions. Half of them are still based on what stems from the ancient natural foundation of blood kinship, and half are precisely those institutions steeped in human reason, in moral institutions that have been superimposed upon them. Both aspects peek out from our present-day institutions in a colorful mixture. [Essentially, man has merely whitewashed what the original natural foundation of women’s culture provided him; it shines through everywhere.] With his culture and competence, however, we shall turn toward the future. Then this spirit will reveal itself in its true, rightful form—and indeed in the light of a completely different perspective than the one that originally existed. If primitive man wished to rise to the divine, if he wished to lift his gaze to that which must be accorded the highest veneration and worship, then he turned to the naturally creative power that germinated and sprouted through man himself.

[ 32 ] More and more, this worldview is giving way to a completely different one, and today we are truly standing at the dawn of this new worldview. But among a select few, it has long since taken shape. Three words in the marvelous, ancient Indian Vedanta wisdom already express the essence of this worldview: Tat twam asi — that is you. — And what does this mean? It means a great deal. When the Vedanta sage immersed himself so completely in this “That is you,” he turned to the entire, vast universe; he turned to everything that is outside of himself; he turned to that with which he feels at one. Then he says to every stone: You are of the same nature and essence as I am—that is you. Just as my hand belongs to me, so the stone belongs to an essence to which I, too, belong.

[ 33 ] Through this worldview, everything in our surroundings becomes a call to turn our gaze outward, a call to seek the divine in the world itself, and not merely to worship the Spirit in the creative and generative forces that work through human nature itself. The “Tat twam asi” is the worship of the divine spirit in all of nature, and thus at the same time a call to carry this divine spirit into our entire surroundings, to transform these surroundings so that the original state from which humanity itself sprang may once again prevail around us.

[ 34 ] Gender arises from genderlessness. From the masculine-feminine arises the masculine and the feminine. This distinction will once again dissolve into the communal, objective, spiritual external world when human beings find their true selves within the vast universe, when they feel a sense of brotherhood and connection with the entire vast universe—which has no gender and is all the more perfect the more exalted it is above all such distinctions.

[ 35 ] When this idea is fully alive, so that it can permeate culture with this concept of the higher human being who is exalted above all matters of gender, then the sun will have risen. It is what shines before you today as the dawn of a new culture. Then the future of our culture—the culture into which we must move as idealism continues to develop—will be assured, and this culture must not bear anything in the outer world that has anything to do with gender. Thus we enter institutions and organizations that present us with a cultural and social environment that applies equally to men and women, and that is the same for men and women.

[ 36 ] This is the theosophical idea, and the theosophical ideal is to reshape our institutions—which have emerged [from an originally feminine culture that has passed through a masculine culture—and to lead them into a higher state in which these two epochs, in the Hegelian sense, will exist only as resolved moments].

[ 37 ] This can only exist in a culture that is spiritual in the best sense of the word—a culture based on something that has nothing to do with gender differentiation. The culture taking shape within the Theosophical Movement is precisely such a culture. For what does the Theosophical worldview seek to cultivate? The higher Self within the human being—that nature and essence which has absolutely nothing to do with man or woman. For that aspect of the human being upon which the theosophist focuses—that which he makes the object of his special contemplation and study—the higher human being, the spiritual human being—appears in one incarnation as a man and in another as a woman. The one who lives today as a man has, just like the other who lives as a woman, passed through male incarnations as well as an equal number of female ones. Man and woman were an outer expression of the inner higher individuality, which is neither male nor female.

[ 38 ] Thus, something that is both masculine and feminine already lives within modern human beings—something that unites both aspects. And a worldview that reveals this masculine-feminine aspect—through its various incarnations—as the foundation of both, a worldview that nurtures this, is what truly prepares the ground on which men and women are completely equal, not only in our legal institutions but also in terms of feeling. Through the “Tat twam asi,” we overcome gender distinctions, and the collaboration between men and women in the Theosophical Society serves as a kind of model, a modest beginning for a great and powerful culture that must develop in this direction in the future—a future in which the two genders will not live side by side in abstract equality, for the differences between them may be greater then than they are today. But what is the same is what matters. That is the external world shaped around us.

[ 39 ] What matters is not what we carry within us, but what lives outside, around us. As long as human beings are self-centered and selfish, as long as the entire culture is based on domination and personality, human beings will draw the impulses for their institutions from their feminine or masculine personalities. But as soon as they achieve what is rooted in the higher self, the inner self may be shaped however it pleases; the outer world, which is reflected within, remains the same. To use an analogy, set up two concave mirrors—one convex next to one concave—and place the same image in front of both. The convex mirror, which curves outward, will show a different image than the concave one, but in both cases it is the same image. As long as there are male and female aspects in the physical body, there will naturally still be a convex and a concave mirror, but the same external world will be reflected. It must not be shaped in a one-sided manner by one gender or the other.

[ 40 ] Those who have grasped the spirit will see in it something infinitely higher still. Only a materialistic view sees the spiritual as an effect of matter. The theosophist, however, comes to the conviction that all matter originates solely from the spirit, that everything that is material today once existed in a spiritual form, and that everything we could observe at the starting point stems from earlier, spiritual foundations. Thus, a future, natural, trans-gendered state will also emerge from the present trans-gendered state, which humanity itself creates. We will create the external institutions we bring into the world in equal measure from the spirit of the feminine and the spirit of the masculine. They themselves will be the cause of later natural effects. What humanity creates as a non-gendered culture will later give rise to a trans-gendered nature.

[ 41 ] It was therefore only natural that primitive culture was rooted in the veneration of what had been conservatively preserved from ancient times—the veneration of creative forces of nature and the veneration of ancestors. The spirit preceded nature. Through it, nature was created. If one wished to look up to the spirit, one had to look to the dawn of the world. But if one wishes to look into the future, one must participate as a human being—both in the unconscious and in the conscious state. Then the prophetic gaze into the future takes the place of the old cult of ancestors and the veneration of lineage. What is to become of the future, what kind of external culture is to exist there—we ourselves must prepare this today as culture.

[ 42 ] Thus, a broad, comprehensive worldview leads us to a solution to the women’s issue that opens up great prospects for us. If today, through the theosophical worldview, the higher human nature is sought in both men and women, and gender remains a completely private matter—that is, what is truly veiled is not taken into account—then in a certain sense this is that higher development of the emotion that emerges as a sense of modesty during times of transition; then what was once a shy concealment is today a sacred triumph.

[ 43 ] Such a sense of reaching out and looking beyond is a grand, powerful emotional ideal for the future. By developing the higher human nature in both men and women, the Theosophical worldview awakens in them feelings that are culture-creating. Noble, beautiful feelings that transcend all that is base must spring forth from this cultivation of higher human nature. Culture originated from a kind of feminine foundation. And when we look back to ancient times, we find that everywhere the feminine, creative, generative forces were revered as divine nature. This then transitioned into a [masculine] culture. First of all, we find a true contrast to this [masculine] culture in today’s women’s movement, which can also be explained by this: [the women’s movement today is a rebellion against this masculine culture, and it is entirely justified].

[ 44 ] But every one-sidedness in the world reveals its counterpart to us. What we encounter in external history is reflected to us ideologically in a kind of counter-image. The one-sided, older culture seeks a contrast. The ancient feminine culture, the culture of Isis, finds its ideal counterpart in the worship of Osiris, who was dismembered, perished, and for whom Isis yearns. It is an image through which the feminine seeks to complement itself, precisely where a new culture, born of [male] thought, takes the place of the old one.

[ 45 ] Then another ideal emerged in Christianity. In its early stages, Christianity must have represented a masculine cultural stage. But it was complemented. Just as the cult of Isis was complemented by a masculine ideal, so too was this masculine culture complemented by a feminine ideal: the medieval cult of Mary.

[ 46 ] Goethe also alluded to the contrast between feminine culture and masculine culture in his *Faust*. “The eternal feminine draws us upward,” he says in connection with the preceding verses. This is what he envisioned: The higher culture will be one in which the woman is no longer seen as the counterpart to the man, and in which the ideal of womanhood is no longer sought in masculine culture; a culture in which it is no longer the feminine that draws us upward, but rather the higher divine, the higher self, that appears as the drawing force within the human being. This higher Self, the whole human being, is what the theosophical worldview strives for. How could it be otherwise that women are the first to best understand what is now, in a kind of dawn, beginning to emerge before us as the culture of the future?

[ 47 ] We have had a male-dominated culture for millennia. Our entire culture is a male culture. Our modern justice system, theology, medicine, and so on are almost exclusively products of male culture. Anyone who delves deeper into these matters will easily find a physiological expression of the male soul. But if things are to change now, then it goes without saying that the catalyst must be the woman. If the Theosophical Movement is to be understood more quickly, then it must be understood in this light. Anyone who fails to see it this way may, in a derogatory sense, call it “feminine” today. But anyone who is clear about the fact that the great progress of culture unfolds from the feminine through the masculine toward the masculine-feminine will naturally find that women are best able to understand this theosophical worldview.

[ 48 ] It is more difficult for a man to [free himself from the prejudices of today’s culture], for he has, after all, grown up from youth onward amid the products of a male-dominated culture. He must undergo a genuine inner transformation. He will have to do so if he wishes to keep pace with the times. But everything that must come about also requires free cooperation—the completely free collaboration between men and women—and absolute equality in the perception of the higher self, the true spirit of the human being.

[ 49 ] Thus, the former ideal image of the Eternal in man, which we encounter in the cult of Osiris, and of the Eternal in woman, which has found a mystical, form-like expression in the new era and has been lived out by poets and mystics, will be transformed into the ideal image of the harmoniously structured human being, free from any one-sidedness. We can foresee a culture all around us that will bear the outward features of transcendental gender. That is the task of the theosophical worldview. We do not work with platitudes, with words and programs, or with demands; rather, from the perspective of the spirit, we seek to awaken living life within the soul and to tap into the source that is itself creative. We do not speak merely as theosophists; rather, we point out what, by the very nature of things, must develop within these souls.

[ 50 ] As you can see from this particular question, European Spiritualism and European Theosophy have something entirely different to say than merely repeating the remnants of old worldviews that have preserved the cult of ancestors. They possess spirituality—a connection to the spiritual realm—but they lack what we possess as those who must work toward ideals, not old habits. Spiritualism is certainly a necessity for us, and it must come into the world; but not a spiritualism that carries the achievements of our culture to the graves of our ancestors—although we can understand and respect such a thing—but rather a spiritualism that is prophetic, one that [carries] the best we can develop within ourselves to an altar to burn it as fuel for a fire that is to be the light of our future.