The Rudolf Steiner Archive

2. The Anthroposophical Society as a Living Being

[ 1 ] My dear friends! Yesterday I drew your attention to the fundamental difference that exists between a society such as ours and any other society or association. And I spoke of the fact that, with regard to its very nature, our society cannot be considered complete merely because it has bylaws and program points, and that even an increase or decrease in the number of bylaws and program points does not significantly add to or detract from the essence of what our society is meant to be. I also drew your attention to what most clearly distinguishes our society from an ordinary program-based association or society. I said: a society or association that is based on program points and has bylaws can dissolve at any moment or can be dissolved. But let us suppose that it became necessary to dissolve our society, and that it were actually dissolved; this fact would not change the real circumstances in the least. For our society differs from others precisely in that it is founded not on the fantasy and illusion of programmatic and statutory provisions, but on realities. And as one of these realities, we have initially highlighted only the fact that the cycles are in the hands of all our members, and that this fact would not change in the slightest if the society were to dissolve or were dissolved. And the same would hold true for many other realities upon which our society is founded.

[ 2 ] This shows that it is truly necessary to familiarize ourselves quite thoroughly with the living conditions of our society and not to harbor any illusions regarding these living conditions. Yesterday, I discussed these living conditions to some extent from an external perspective, and I would now like to explore them in greater depth.

[ 3 ] You see, among the various materialistic debates that exist today regarding the nature of life, one finds this or that definition, this or that explanation of what a living being is. I believe enough has already been said to you from the perspective of Spiritual Science to make it clear that all such explanations, all such definitions, can only be entirely one-sided. The great error, the great illusion of materialistically minded people, is precisely that they believe they can exhaust the essence of the matter with a single definition or explanation. To illustrate the absurdity of this belief, I have often pointed out to you that in a Greek school of philosophy, people once sought a definition of a human being and finally concluded that a human being could be defined as having two legs and no feathers. — Well, that is undoubtedly correct; one could say this is an absolutely correct definition. The next day, someone who had understood the definition brought in a plucked rooster and said: “This is a creature that has two legs and no feathers, so it must be a human being.”

[ 4 ] These are indeed the definitions that are frequently given, and one must understand that definitions are simply like that. And so there is also a materialist definition of life, which was proposed by a famous zoologist and which is also correct and useful within the limits to which it applies. This materialist definition of life states: A living being is that which, under certain conditions, leaves behind a corpse; everything that it leaves behind upon its destruction is therefore not a living being.

[ 5 ] Of course, my dear friends, this definition applies only to the outermost reaches of the physical plane. But within that context, this definition—that a living being leaves behind a corpse upon its demise—is valid. A machine, when destroyed, leaves no corpse behind, and we know we are speaking figuratively when we say that a watch leaves a corpse behind. But in the very real sense of the word, this would in fact be the case if our society were dissolved or were to dissolve itself. It would leave a real corpse behind.

[ 6 ] What, then, is the nature of the physical corpse? It consists in the fact that, once the soul has left the corpse, it no longer follows the same laws as it did when it was united with the soul. It begins to follow the physical laws of the earthly elements. Now, at the very moment our society were to be dissolved, the same would be true of the corpse of our society. Added to this would be that which serves as the vehicle of our society: the cycles. The corpse would thus also include all the cycles in the hands of the members.

[ 7 ] Now, this comparison can indeed be continued in a truly appropriate and scientifically accurate manner. With regard to a corpse, if it is not to have a harmful or corrupting effect on the environment, it must be cremated or buried. Just apply this absolutely true principle to the corpse that would undoubtedly remain if our society were to be dissolved. That is to say, the moment we become aware of what our society is, we realize that we have a responsibility toward its real foundations. A society or association built on statutes and program points is like a machine that, when smashed, leaves nothing behind but pieces; whereas our society, because it is an organism, a living being, would truly leave behind a real corpse if it were dissolved—something that would have to be conceived of and treated as a corpse.

[ 8 ] It is indeed necessary, my dear friends, that we reflect on the living conditions of our society. Turn your gaze for a moment away from what I would call the purely external aspects of the cycles, toward what lies within them—and what, as I said yesterday, has entered into a number of minds. By this I do not mean only those minds into which it has entered properly and harmoniously, but perhaps also—with the exception, of course, out of courtesy, of those present—those into which it has entered incorrectly and who are now spouting all sorts of nonsense. All of that is there as well; all of that lives within society. Just imagine how this would have to act as the corpse of society if society were to dissolve.

[ 9 ] We are therefore entrusted with the responsibility to safeguard the living conditions of our society. That is why, yesterday, I appealed to you in various ways to truly safeguard these living conditions.

[ 10 ] Well, I said earlier that if society were to be dissolved, a corpse would remain, and that we could recognize from this that it is something truly alive. But it is also alive because it possesses another characteristic of living things, namely that a living thing can become ill. I said that an association founded on a program and bylaws resembles a machine, a mechanism, and if a member does something that is not in accordance with the machine, they are expelled. The expulsion of members from an association founded on bylaws is, after all, always a rule applied “lovingly.” But, my dear friends, if we are dealing not with a mechanism but—as is the case with our society—with an organism, then the act of expelling a member will, in the rarest of cases, be of great significance. In the vast majority of cases, this does not improve the situation at hand very much. In most cases, when we expel a member who has done something wrong, it will be a matter of convenience. One can make use of this—I don’t want to discuss that now—but one must be clear that what matters far more is keeping the organism of our society healthy enough that it acts as a healer as a whole in the face of individual aberrations. After all, in the vast majority of cases, the healing of an organism consists in mobilizing the healing powers of the entire organism when any single member falls ill. It is therefore a matter of recognizing the process of “being able to be ill” within our society and becoming aware that the healing powers of the entire organism must truly be mobilized.

[ 11 ] I already pointed out yesterday that an important healing power lies in accustoming oneself to absolute precision in relation to the phenomena of the physical plane—truth in precision, precision in truth. In external, exoteric life, it really does not matter as much if a message passes from one person to another and is altered by gossip or inaccuracy as it would if we were to allow this to become the norm within our society. One of our most urgent needs, therefore, is to always remember to exercise precision in everything we say and do.

[ 12 ] Now, of course, one might ask: What exactly is it that one must do to help society? - And here it must be said: Above all, it is necessary for each individual to truly and properly feel like a member of society, to view society as an organism and to feel a part of it. But this is only possible if the affairs of society truly become the affairs of each and every one of us, if we think along with society. To be aware of and seek to understand the affairs of society is something of fundamental, truly essential importance. Of course, this requires a certain interest in society as such. And in order for us, in turn, to develop this interest in society as such, we must take very seriously the understanding that society is an organism—which is much more than a mere metaphor. To this end, we must know the following, for example, my dear friends.

[ 13 ] Isn’t it true that we have three points, so to speak, as points in our bylaws? However, the fact that bylaws are of only secondary importance to us is clear from what I have said; yet they exist and must exist. If we take these three points in our bylaws, we can best describe them by saying that they represent our work. It is indeed true that they represent the work of our society. But if anyone reflects on the relationship between work and human beings, they will come to the following conclusion: Work tires people; it wears them down. Yet work cannot be the sole essence of human existence. Nor can anyone with sound reason claim that the essence of our society is exhausted in the work involved in these three program points. Society, however, is worn down by performing the work associated with these three points. This means, then, that our society, just like a human being, requires care in addition to work. Just as the human organism still needs care, so too does society need care for its own organism. And it is not enough to believe that one is a member of society if one merely uses society as the place where one cultivates what is expressed in the three program points; rather, one must also take an interest in the governance of society as such. If one does not do so, then one actually believes that one does not agree with the very existence of society. Thus, merely being interested in what society produces does not mean one is interested in society as such. But if we need a society as a basis for our work, then there must be an interest in society as such—in the organism of society. This means that a certain principle of coexistence, of living together, must be cultivated within society.

[ 14 ] I already said yesterday that it is necessary, at times, to call certain things here by their proper names—and to describe them in the most radical terms possible—and also that it is part of the nature of our society to be able to trust that things will not be immediately made public. Isn’t that right? Yesterday, using the grotesque example of the man who walked into the barbershop and, because of the lifestyle habits he had adopted, clashed with the lifestyle habits of those around him, I wanted to illustrate that such clashes are often based on a completely different motive than the one that is claimed. I showed that in the case of the man in question, it was hysterical vanity.

[ 15 ] You see, karma has led us here to this area with our building, and our living conditions here are truly not exactly—I would say—flawless in every respect. I’ve already expressed this by saying that it could happen that every one of us were exemplary, and then people would spread an enormous amount of slander and the like about us, even if the members behaved in an entirely exemplary manner among the local population. From this you can already see that my point is not to say that we must take all prejudices into account, but rather that we must focus on the necessary living conditions for our society.

[ 16 ] Isn’t it true that, even when speaking of our human nature, we refer to the physical body; we know that it must adapt to external living conditions because it needs them, and that this necessitates a constant interaction between the external world and our physical organism. The same is true of the external organism of our society. It must develop within the social framework into which we have been placed through our karma. And so it is truly necessary for the members to take note of the conditions of life in our society. I do, in fact, point out these conditions of life in our society again and again from time to time.

[ 17 ] When a local pastor wrote an article against our society, I wrote a rebuttal. An important point in it was that I explicitly pointed out that our society, as such, has nothing directly to do with religion. It is not merely a matter of always saying the right thing, but of saying what is necessary in a given situation. That is what matters. Now, it is truly one of the most essential requirements for the flourishing of our entire movement that the outside world finally come to understand the idea I am trying to clarify by saying over and over again: Just as the Copernican worldview, when it first emerged, had nothing to do with a religious community, so our movement has nothing to do with religion. The fact that religious communities at that time rebelled against the Copernican worldview is their business, not that of the Copernican worldview. But we must strictly maintain the position that we do not wish to found a sect or a religious movement. I even found myself in a truly unpleasant situation once in a certain place because—albeit with the best of intentions—articles were written about our building in which it was referred to as a “temple.” This does us tremendous harm, because it portrays us as being in competition with religious societies, which need not be the case. That is why members have been repeatedly urged to popularize the title “School of Spiritual Science.”

[ 18 ] It is truly important that people hear time and again that we are not dealing with a religious sect, nor with the founding of a new religion, or anything of the sort. The members of our society, in particular, sin tremendously in this regard by failing to point out in the information they provide that our society has nothing to do with the establishment of a religion; indeed, not only do they fail to emphasize this sufficiently, but they even passively do much to cast our endeavors in the light of a religious foundation. And the point is that this must be taken into account even in minor matters—that we must repeatedly hammer into people’s thick skulls that we are not dealing with a temple or a church, but with something dedicated to scientific purposes.

[ 19 ] Sometimes, my dear friends, it is not only a matter of what is said, but also of the way it is said. We should be aware that outsiders will always get the impression that this is a sect or a religious foundation if we only know how to speak in terms that can be described—as someone once put it—well, it’s not a nice term, but an apt one—as if everything that happens in our movement is viewed with a “long face.” That is to say, everything is viewed with long faces, but only because some people have a mental image of this being the only way to characterize feelings related to religious life. But our aim must be to rid our movement of the prejudice that we want to found a church, a religion, or a sect, and to make it increasingly clear that we are dealing with a movement of Spiritual Science that positions itself in the world just as the Copernican system positioned itself in the world, so that everyone can see that the injustice lies on the other side. When the Church rejected the Copernican doctrine, it placed itself in the wrong, for it was later forced to accept it after all. And so it will be with our movement as well; the Church will have to accept this movement.

[ 20 ] This is an example of why we must get into the habit of speaking precisely. This should be regarded as the lifeblood of society in its relations with the outside world. This is one of the areas where we can truly make a significant contribution to our society. Anyone who is merely interested in reading the cycles—which is, of course, very useful and indispensable—but has no interest in the governance of society as such—especially where, as here, these cycles manifest in close interrelationships—anyone who does not wish to develop this interest is, as I have already said, not in agreement with society as such. One must develop an interest in society! It is not enough merely to be present to participate in some way in what society has to do; rather, one must develop an interest in society as such—that is what matters. But this means making the affairs of society, as a living being, part of one’s own consciousness. And the fewer statutes one needs for this, the better.

[ 21 ] You see, there is no doubt that it is necessary to increasingly create the conditions whereby, when someone from outside says this or that about our society, we can stand firmly on our own two feet and say that we can guarantee that such a thing is not possible in our society. We must be able to rely on the fact that in the vast majority of cases—though, of course, exceptions can occur anywhere—the slanders that have been spread are false. But this requires a genuine, active interest in the affairs of society. For suppose, for example, that a lapse in judgment were to occur in some matter. Let’s assume for the sake of argument—hypothetically, one can assume such a thing—that some man and a girl had been careless enough, on a beautiful May afternoon, to reveal something out in the open that should not have been revealed, so that people in the vicinity could have seen it. Let’s assume that something like this had happened once out of carelessness. What would be the natural response in a society—if it were to exist as ours must require? The natural response would surely be that the person to whom such a thing happened would realize within the next few days that he must seek out an elder member and say to him: “This and that has happened to me; what can be done?”—That would then mean that he is making his matter a matter for society.

[ 22 ] Please note carefully the kind of issue I have chosen as an example. It is not one in which one refrains from interfering because it is a private matter for the individual, but rather one that causes terrible harm to society. The principle must be that the knee does not say, “I have my own affairs,” but rather that the knee feels itself to be part of the whole organism. Of course, however, there must also be a corresponding interest in such matters. One must regard such matters as a matter of society, so that there must always be someone who not only knows what interests him at first glance, but who also knows a great deal about society and can thereby contribute to the ongoing conditions for society’s prosperity. This means we must be able to rise completely above the perspective: “I have someone in my close circle of acquaintances; I may even have the merit of having introduced this close circle into society myself, and this circle interests me.” The fact that someone develops friendships and relationships cannot, of course, be a subject of criticism; that is none of society’s business. What does, however, immediately affect society is the fact that he regards society as such only insofar as he is a part of it. We must, however, make the affairs of society our own; it must be impossible for a situation to arise in which, if something has occurred that has caused external annoyance, one within society only learns of the annoyance because it is reported to one from the outside world. This is immediately remedied when there is an interest in social life.

[ 23 ] For example, it happens that you can ask three, four, or five people here whether this or that person has been at our lectures in recent weeks, and that none of those three, four, or five people know. That certainly happens here. Of course, if someone knows nothing about it, that’s understandable; but if nothing at all can be found out by asking around—I mean among those whom one would expect to know—then that is a lack of interest and indicates that our society is a mechanism and not an organism; that people have no interest in its living reality. But that is precisely what I would like to emphasize again and again: this necessary interest in the living life of our society.

[ 24 ] You see, my dear friends, one is sometimes taken by surprise in society by events that need not have come as a surprise if the members—and I really do mean to use this word—felt their “obligations” in the sense that they would think, feel, and act in unison with society as an organism. For this to happen, it is necessary, first, that with regard to matters pertaining to society’s living conditions, everyone have the will not to treat them as a personal matter; and second, that everyone who desires such a thing find another person with whom they can share their inclinations and who will listen to them. If, now that we are in a crisis affecting that part of society associated with the Dornach building, you adopt even more regulations or draft even more new ones, you will still not be able to manage this situation within society and will not be able to prevent us from eventually ending up with the corpse I have alluded to. You can prevent this only by beginning to take a genuine interest in the affairs of the society—that is, by not merely employing, even once, I mean, “sharp” mind to formulate the best possible clauses and to establish the best possible tribunals for this or that “crime,” but by continually viewing society as the object of your interest within its living context. But above all, it is necessary that we truly not shy away from the inconvenience of thinking.

[ 25 ] I have already mentioned, haven't I, that we are now living in an abnormal period in European life—one that will hopefully come to an end soon. In times like these—I’m not talking about private matters, but about issues that pertain to society—it’s necessary to realize that you don’t need to send across the border and write down everything that comes to mind, even if it isn’t incorrect or offensive. But it is truly the case, my dear friends, that a large number of members have no intention of even giving a moment’s thought to what is appropriate or inappropriate at this very moment. Certainly, there is nothing wrong with these things; I do not wish to express any criticism, but only to urge you to think and reflect before you act. Don’t we know that a membership certificate or an application for membership is an innocent document that can never give rise to measures taken by one country against another? Yet the belligerent nations view these matters differently. Why, then, do members send membership certificates across the border? One perhaps out of thoughtlessness, another perhaps out of stubbornness, because he wants to make a point. But the Society cannot possibly continue to exist if such things keep happening on a large scale, because people will suspect all sorts of things that aren’t actually behind them. Our members should distinguish themselves precisely by thinking! This is exactly what we must pay attention to; otherwise, we really cannot continue the Society.

[ 26 ] Sometimes I have to revisit old issues. For example, we have always strived, when admitting members to the Society, not merely to follow the principle that members are admitted because they are such outstanding individuals that they stand apart from the rest of humanity due to their exceptional qualities—many hold this view, but it is not correct; some believe that a person admitted to the Society is no different from everyone else—but we also admitted people to help them recover. It then became possible for such a person—who should have been restored to health—to be admitted; but what happened? What happened was that the members saw in him someone who was meant to restore our society to health, so that he came to be regarded as an apostle.

[ 27 ] Why can something like this happen, my dear friends? Because people do not heed the means and methods provided to help them avoid such mistakes. Just think back for a moment to some of the things that have happened! And we must reflect on this if we wish to sustain an occult movement! Think back: Whenever a significant event occurred, the information needed to assess it was usually presented in lectures; it was explained. You only needed to pay attention to this, especially when danger was present. But this requires that we truly delve deeply into the relevant lectures that were given at that time. To do what is right, we need not fall into the error of focusing on the personal; rather, we can stick to the objective. But the objective must be understood in every single case.

[ 28 ] So one could already say: It is necessary—especially for the segment of our society centered around the Johannesbau—that something truly thorough and radical take place. But it is now, in essence, high time that this thorough and radical change not be sought once again through the wrong means—by believing that everything can be accomplished with just a few things, a few principles, a few observations, and a few stipulations. That accomplishes absolutely nothing thoroughly and heals absolutely nothing thoroughly.

[ 29 ] I must confess, my dear friends, that it is not at all easy for me to discuss these matters as I have done yesterday and today, for the simple reason that I would, of course, much rather speak of other things, and because I know that there are a large number of members here who do not want to hear this at all, since they tell themselves that we are here, after all, to hear all sorts of occult truths. But, my dear friends, if the danger exists—as it truly does—that the “impossibility” might confront us, forcing us to say: “Yes, if the Society proves itself to be as inadequate as some individuals have shown themselves to be of late, then it is absolutely out of the question to introduce Spiritual Science into the world through the Society.” - Just imagine for a moment what a discrepancy already exists between what I have just said and what I have often had to say here in recent weeks—that what we recognize as Spiritual Science must be the greatest impulse of our time, a reformatory force against the most presumptuous external insights, apparent insights, and scientific endeavors—as a fundamental step forward for humanity—and that it is therefore necessary to speak about all sorts of things that should actually be self-evident, and to do so despite the risk of being constantly misunderstood precisely regarding these very matters. For it is, after all, a universal principle that, deep down, everyone sees the sinner in the other and is unwilling to make the effort to conceive of our society as a real organism—that is, to feel oneself a member of such an organism.

[ 30 ] Certainly, my dear friends, it may happen that new members make mistakes. But I ask: Why have some members remained members for many years if they do not do their part to ensure that new members do not make mistakes? It ought to be a fundamental principle that no one joins us who is not truly noticed by the older members right from the very beginning, who is supported with advice and practical help, and who is protected from mistaking folly for worldly wisdom.

[ 31 ] It is in the nature of an occult society, my dear friends, that follies may occasionally occur within it. But there must be as large a number of members as possible who see through these follies and ensure that they are not carried out. This also includes what is contained in Dr. Goesch’s letter.” He claims, after all, that promises are made but not kept, and he inquires of a member whom he believes or suspects was given a promise. If this member tells him that this is not the case, Dr. Goesch does not say that he was mistaken, but rather claims that this is further proof that magic is at work whenever I have shaken someone’s hand; the promise has been erased from these people’s memories. — This is, after all, one of the main charges in Dr. Goesch’s treatise.

[ 32 ] One can see, my dear friends, that Dr. Goesch not only wrote these things but also said them to individuals. A genuine interest in the Society’s affairs would truly have required that someone go to an older, experienced member as quickly as possible and bring this to their attention. It is truly incomprehensible how it can happen that someone can allow Dr. Goesch to say something as preposterous as: “If someone says, ‘I was not given a promise,’ I do not conclude from this that he was truly not given a promise, but rather I assume that the memory of the promise has been suggested away from the person in question.” - If such things can happen without objection, then the society is truly not viable, and one cannot infuse it with occult truths.

[ 33 ] Two things, my dear friends, are clear to me. The first is this: Based on all my insights, I must regard it as an urgent necessity that Spiritual Science be brought to humanity. But the other is equally clear to me: that the institution founded for this purpose is in crisis. And that is why I had no choice but to, so to speak, “torment” you with what I had to say yesterday and today, for you have been told that meetings are being held to remedy this or that. If these meetings, in turn, pass just as many earlier ones did in similar cases, then we will make no progress.

[ 34 ] Just consider, my dear friends, that nothing can ever be achieved by the simple measure of expulsion. Expulsion does not, after all, decide anything regarding any matter of the society. Isn’t that right? We expelled Dr. Hugo Vollrath many years ago. Everything—absolutely everything—that this man later accomplished was accomplished despite the fact that he had been expelled. And so it will be in similar cases. One can certainly expel someone, but one cannot rest content with the expulsion alone.

[ 35 ] If you, my dear friends, open *Theosophy*—which is, in fact, the very first book I wrote on theosophy itself within the Theosophical Movement—and turn to the chapter “The Path of Knowledge,” you will find things there that, if you think them through, will enable you to easily articulate for yourselves everything I have explained yesterday and today. For all of that is contained in this chapter. But it also becomes clear from this that even this very first book has not been understood; otherwise, many of the things that have happened in recent times could not have occurred.

[ 36 ] We must therefore ensure that we approach matters such as those we intend to address tomorrow at the substitute general assembly with the utmost seriousness and dignity. ^{1See the appendix, page 183.} For we must ask ourselves whether we want to let matters come to the point indicated—that a time will come when we must say: Spiritual Science cannot be spread through such an organization. We would then have to try, if the Society makes it impossible, to nurture what remains as a corpse in some other way, and that would be noticeably much more difficult ...^{2Here, the stenographic record continues with a few lines that do not make coherent sense.}

[ 37 ] I am not responsible for tomorrow’s program. However, since the way in which tomorrow’s program is carried out will be a decisive factor in whether the Anthroposophical Society will continue to exist in the future, I will content myself with urging you to approach everything with the utmost sense of responsibility and not to take lightly matters that are of the greatest importance for the entire culture of humanity.