Anthroposophical application areas
Spiritual science provides a worldview foundation: a way to look at and understand the world, as the basis for how Man stands and acts in the world.
From the foundational understanding of the spiritual realities underlying our current sensory experience with contemporary limited Waking Consciousness, follow angles of perspective to use these insights to conduct various human activities in the world. For example: education, agriculture, medicine, science.
Within anthroposophy, the language used to denote the above difference is that 'core anthroposophy' has been called 'the mother' of the other applied areas, 'daughters' or children. These application areas include a.o.: Biodynamic agriculture, Social threefolding, Eurythmy, Eurythmy therapy, and much more.
The essential point made by Rudolf Steiner in 1923 is that the application areas can only be effective in the world only if what is central to anthroposophy comes into its own, and that only by cultivating the most central part of anthroposophy, a real understanding for what has grown out of anthroposophy arises (and specifically for the educational movement which is so important for the world).
This point was also made by Daniel Dunlop in the statement to Rudolf Steiner that "the most important thing is to set out what must be the source of everything, and to put that before the cultivation of the 'daughter' movements".
Aspects
- Concern of activities in the application substreams being insufficiently penetrated by the general spiritual scientific foundation in terms of general human feeling and insight (1923-01-23-GA257)
- After one century
- Interestingly enough, after one century, Rudolf Steiner's core message to humanity has moved to the background and he is most known for his work in the applied areas. Today, anthroposophy and Steiner, in terms of brand name recognition in mass media, most often link to Waldorf education or biodynamic agriculture (mostly) or eurythmy.
- In contrast, in the mainstream culture and media, Rudolf Steiner's contribution does not 'stand for' (1) how the spiritual scientific worldview is a necessity to address the challenges humanity faces and will face in the future (2) the message of reincarnation and karma, (3) the importance of the Christ Impulse, Mystery of Golgotha and Second Coming
- key 'leads' who initiated the different 'daughter' initiatives - see also Communicating over spiritual science#About questions asked
- Waldorf education: Emil Molt
- anthroposophical medicine: Ita Wegman
- Christian community: Friedrich Rittelmeyer
- curative education and Camphill movement:
- biodynamic agriculture: Count Carl von Keyserlingk, follow up by Ehrenfried Pfeiffer, Ernst Stegemann, Eugen & Lili Kolisko, .. early practitioners were Ernst Stegemann, Franz Dreidax
- Eurythmy and speech:
- Social threefolding:
Inspirational quote
From 1922-GA217 (quoted by Fred Poeppig in 'Die Forderungen Michaels für das Ende des 20.Jahrhunderts')
One is not an anthroposophist just to have a worldview, but one is with his whole being as Man in the world.
1924-08-04-GA237
All the many possibilities that are there with respect to the most manifold things in life, demand from the anthroposophist initiative—inner initiative ... initiative of soul to enable undertaking something or to make some judgment or decision out of my own inmost being.
... “Be a Man of initiative, ... in your life all joy and sorrow, all happiness and pain will depend on the finding or not finding of your own individual initiative.”
This should stand written as though in golden letters, constantly before the soul of the anthroposophist. Initiative lies in his karma, and much of what meets him in this life will depend on the extent to which he can become willingly, actively conscious of it.
Illustrations
Schema FMC00.335: depicts the various anthroposophical application areas, practical applications of the spiritual scientific worldview. In the center core anthroposophy is called 'the mother' compared to the 'daughter' movements and impulses that derived from it.
Rudolf Steiner stressed the fact to 'not forget the mother' as "the child cannot prosper if the mother is neglected" and that "all other off-shoot movements can be be effective in the world only if what is central to anthroposophy comes into its own .. and therefore "cultivating the most central part of anthroposophy is required for a real understanding for what has grown out of anthroposophy to arise"
Notes
- Goethean science and the scientific method and epistemology is part of the core and underlies the worldview spiritual science
- the drawing is illustrative and not intended to be exhaustive, so should not give rise to debate on completeness. For example it does not include architecture, but then it does not include beekeeping either (which is not supposed to fit under agriculture).
Lecture coverage and references
1923-01-23-GA257
.. the fact that this situation prevailed in a certain field was what forced me to speak as I did about the Movement for Religious Renewal in my next-to-last lecture at the Goetheanum. I most certainly do not mean to criticize the Movement for Religious Renewal in the slightest, for it was brought into being three and a half months ago with my own cooperation and advice. It would be the most natural thing in the world for me to be profoundly delighted should it succeed. Surely no doubt can exist on this score. Nevertheless, after it had been in existence for three and a half months, I had to speak as I did at that time in Dornach, directing my comments not to the Movement for Religious Renewal but to the anthroposophists, including of course those attached to the Movement for Religious Renewal. What I had to say was, in so many words:
Yes, rejoice in the child, but don't forget the mother and the care and concern due her.
That care and concern are owed her by the Movement for Religious Renewal, too, but most particularly by the members of the Anthroposophical Society.
For what a thing it would be if the Society were to be slighted, if anthroposophists were to turn away from it to an offspring movement, not in the sense of saying that those of us who have grown together with the Anthroposophical Movement can be the best advisors and helpers of an offspring movement, but instead turning away from the Anthroposophical Movement of which they were members with the feeling that they have at last found what they were really looking for, something they could never have found in anthroposophy!
Though there is every reason to be overjoyed at the parent's concern for the child, it must be clearly recognized that the child cannot prosper if the mother is neglected.
If anthroposophists who join the Movement for Religious Renewal leave much to be desired as members of the Anthroposophical Society, we would face exactly the same situation as would have to be faced in the case of a Waldorf School teacher who, though a first-rate man in his field, contributed too little to the Society. But this is just the fate we have been experiencing since 1919, little as the fact has been noticed.
...
I am speaking a bit radically, but that may help to make my meaning clearer. I wanted, in this example, to show how important it is for the Society to be able to meet life's challenges.
Now let us turn our attention to another matter. For quite some time past, able members of the Society have been at work in the most varied branches of scientific endeavor. I am truly speaking with the greatest inner and outer restraint when I say that we have absolutely top-notch scientists who are not being given the appreciation they deserve from us. They have taken on the responsibility of developing the various branches of science within the Society. In the Society's beginning phase it had to approach people purely as human beings. It simply could not branch out into a whole range of different fields; it had to limit itself to speaking to people from its innermost heart, as one human being speaks to another. Its task was first to win a certain terrain for itself in the world of human hearts before going on to cultivate any other field. Then, since anthroposophy has the capacity to fructify every aspect of culture and civilization, scientists appeared as a matter of course in the Society and were active in their fields. But again, my dear friends, it is possible for a member to be a first-rate scientist and yet ignore the Society's basic needs. A scientist can apply anthroposophical insights to chemistry and physics and the like in the most admirable way and still be a poor anthroposophist. We have seen how able scientists in these very fields have withdrawn all their strength from the parent society, that they have not helped nurture the Society as such. People who, in a simple and direct way, seek anthroposophy in the Society are sometimes disturbed to hear, in the way these scientists still speak with an undertone reminiscent of the chemical or physical fields they come from, for though chemistry, physics, biology and jurisprudence are still connected by a thread with the universally human, the connection has become remote indeed.
The essential thing is not to forget the parent. If the Society had not fostered pure anthroposophy in its innermost heart for one and a half decades, the scientists would have found no place in it to do their work. Anthroposophy provided them with what they needed. Now they should consider how much their help is needed in so fostering the Society that some return is made to it for what anthroposophy has contributed to their sciences.
This will perhaps help us to look more closely at what has been going on in a wide range of activities and then to admit a fact that, though it may sound trivial, is actually anything but that. Since 1919, anthroposophy has given birth to many children, but the children have been exceedingly neglectful of their mother.
other
These [daughter] institutions that have come about [such as the Waldorf School and the Federation for Threefolding], they have not always been taken in such a way, by those who represent them, that the saying is felt, I would like to say, in a modern spiritual sense: Thou shalt honor thy mother and thy father, that it be well for you on Earth.
... For working in such institutions are also, and in fact mostly, members of the Anthroposophical Society. Now the question is: are these members of the Anthroposophical Society, who work in such a field that has arisen in connection with the Society, despite being the most excellent people in this field, also always mindful of the mother in the right way? Do they from their field work back upon the Anthroposophical Society in the right way? This question is quite separate from the question whether the people under consideration are excellent people in their fields or not.
...
If I am to express myself particularly radically, I would have to say the following. Someone can, for example, be quite an excellent Waldorf School teacher, quite in the spirit in which the Waldorf School was founded, out of the sense of the Anthroposophical movement, as a universal cause of humanity. He can fulfill his position as Waldorf School teacher as excellently as possible out of this spirit. The Waldorf School, precisely because it is not a school for Anthroposophy, can be formed, and work, out of the spirit of Anthroposophy. Within it, the particular Waldorf School teacher can be excellent in his place. But he still might not work in a sufficient sense as an Anthroposophist for the Anthroposophical Society.
1923
from: 'Rudolf Steiner und die Zivilisationsaufgaben der Anthroposophie'; here quoted from T.H. Meyer's book 'D.N. Dunlop'
not yet found in GA/rsarchive (probably in GA260A tbc)
Whoever if capable, in a deeper senses, of understanding certain aspects of the human soul, and, more precisely, whoever is capable of verifying in a deeper sense the relationships that exist between a movement such as the anthroposophical one and everything which can arise from it within the world at large - for any person it is clear that all other off-shoot movements can be correspondingly effective in the world only if what is central to anthroposophy comes into its own
...
I could no longer assure someone with inner truth that it might happen in the world that by bringing the educational movement into the front line this educational movement, as it has grown out of anthroposophy, could itself be completely understood ...
... The right thing in the truest sense of the word must be the opposite: that precisely through anthroposophy itself, by cultivating the most central part of anthroposophy, a real understanding for what has grown out of anthroposophy arises, and specifically for the educational movement which is so important for the world.
That is why Mr. Dunlop found a straight path to my heart at the time when he said to me that the most important thing was to set out what must be the source of everything, and to put that before the cultivation of the 'daughter' movements.
This is what touched me in his words. I am bound to say, when I think back on just that conversation, that when one stands as I do, within the spiritual scientific movement (which now happens to be called the anthroposophical movement), when one stands in it in the way I have to, then one can only impart what one is able to give if and because it has been requested - that is, requested in the right way.
1923-02-XX-GA259
Dr. Steiner himself described this regrettable phenomenon as follows: the daughter movements forgot the mother movement from which they had drawn their strength. They withdrew from it inwardly by concentrating exclusively on the interests of their particular sphere of activity, and harmed it by often seeking financial support from the impoverished Anthroposophists, despite promises not to do so because other possibilities were available, thus depriving the Society of the very limited funds available.
....
On February 25th, after the welcoming address by the chairman of the assembly, Mr. Leinhas, Dr. Kolisko gave a report on the serious situation in which society had found itself since 1919 due to the various new foundations; above all, the Federation for the Threefold Social Order, the School of Spiritual Science, the research institutes and the movement for religious renewal. The leading personalities of the individual institutions focused all their attention on their new foundations, which included, most gratefully, the Waldorf School, the Clinical Therapy Institute and the Kommende Tag.
But it is fair to say that the parent organization, from which the daughter movements drew their strength, was forgotten. It was, so to speak, neglected. The tasks that arose for the anthroposophical community were neglected. Instead of warm relationships from person to person, a sober bureaucracy gradually emerged; the leading personalities in the institutions faced each other individually, without mutual understanding. The branch offices on the periphery were not sufficiently informed about what was happening in the society. This is what has been called the “Stuttgart system.” It led to compartmentalization and isolation; now this must stop, and contact with the entire membership must be reestablished. The delegates are asked to provide a picture of the situation in the Society from their point of view and not to be afraid to express criticism.
However, a new phase of the movement began in 1919 with the founding of various initiatives by individuals from the bosom of society. I am referring to the movement for the threefold social order, the “Kommende Tag” (the coming day), the Waldorf school movement, the university movement, the research institutes and, finally, the movement for religious renewal. All the enthusiasm went into these foundations. The Society took action at that time. Leading circles emerged. Everyone flocked to Stuttgart. What disappeared, however, was the enthusiasm for the affairs of the Society itself. It was an enormous responsibility that the founders of the institutions took upon themselves. If these personalities did not stay the course, the consequences would fall back on the Anthroposophical Society. Through these foundations, something universal was to be given on the one hand, and wide circles were to be led to the anthroposophical movement. On the other hand, however, the Anthroposophical Society had to develop along with it, it had to keep pace with the foundations.
But the leading circles of the Society were not aware that the Society had to be consciously led in a new way. Dr. Steiner could no longer, as he had done before, take the leadership of the Society into his own hands. The leadership turned all its attention to representing the daughter movements. The individual members felt less and less supported by the leadership; they felt, so to speak, abandoned and isolated. The branch leaders also had no support from the leadership. They were completely alone. Members flocked to them, but no one took them under their wing. No measures were taken to turn the members into active participants in the common cause. In fact, the leadership had abandoned the periphery.
Looking back at developments in recent years, it must be said that the best forces in society went to Stuttgart, but did not give back to the membership at the periphery what they themselves gained through their work there. No information came out from the leadership to the members of the Society. There was no awareness that a continuous stream of messages about the spiritual wealth conveyed by Dr. Steiner, about the tasks of the Society, the achievements in the same, the opposition, etc. had to flow out.
And in Stuttgart, too, people had no heart for the Anthroposophical Society. We had good representatives of the individual daughter movements, good teachers, representatives of the three-folding movement, religious renewal, etc., but almost no good co-workers in the Anthroposophical Society. As Dr. Steiner mentioned in one of his last lectures here, the mother, the Anthroposophical Society, was increasingly neglected. The enthusiasm that people had from the early days was carried into the individual daughter movements, but they did not move on to working for the Society itself and looking at the necessity of continuing to cultivate the central anthroposophical life. “You can work without the Society.” That was the great error that existed in general.
This tendency developed particularly in Stuttgart. The individual personalities in the enterprises carried a scientific life, etc., that had not yet been completely transformed, into the Society from the daughter movements. Much specialization was carried into the branches in an unprocessed state, so to speak. The anthroposophical life of the branch could not keep pace with the rationalizations. In the face of the mostly successful conferences and other external events, people were unable to really solve the problems that arose for community life.
That was the “Stuttgart system”. In Stuttgart, researchers, teachers, etc. faced each other individually. A bureaucracy arose in Stuttgart. Many who came here felt a certain icy coldness. It was simply not possible to combine these two things in one person, when it was no longer possible, as it was before, to practice Anthroposophy only in one's private life and to have one's profession alongside it.
Actually, the leadership of the Society would have had to double, or even increase tenfold, its activities in order to continue anthroposophical life in the right way and to strengthen it. If the Anthroposophical Society as such does not make progress, ultimately the individual foundations will also suffer; for without the real Anthroposophical Society the foundations would not have been possible.
This duplication of concern for anthroposophical matters did not occur. There was a lack of awareness among the leaders and also among most members that the Society had to be brought to a level that could do justice to the fertility of anthroposophy in all fields. On the other hand, there was a lack of cooperation between the leadership and the members of the branches everywhere. Even at the time of the threefold social order movement, it was not pointed out that the central anthroposophical life should have been cultivated to an even greater extent than before. People heard about the tasks of the threefold social order movement, but not about the tasks of the mother, anthroposophy. The same lack of information also became apparent when the religious renewal movement came into being. Here too, the leadership did not provide the members with any information that could have clarified the situation.
... [cont'd]
1924-08-04-GA237
That is something which every anthroposophist should have written before his soul: the fact that initiative forms an integral part of his karma, and that much of what he encounters will depend on the extent to which he is actively able to bring these initiatives to consciousness.
long extract
The real karmic conditions and pre-disposing causes of all that impels a Man to anthroposophy will best be understood if we speak not in pedantic outline and definition, but rather hint at the things in one way or another, characterising more the atmosphere in which, if I may put it so, anthroposophists unfold their lives.
All this makes it necessary for the anthroposophist to pay heed to one condition of his karma—a condition that is sure to be present in him to a high degree. Much can be said,—and we shall still have to say many things—about the reasons why one or another character or temperament is drawn to anthroposophy after the events of the spiritual world which I have described. But all these impulses, which bring the single anthroposophists to anthroposophy, have as it were one counterpart, which the Spirit of the World has made more strong in them than in other men. All the many possibilities that are there with respect to the most manifold things in life, demand from the anthroposophist initiative—inner initiative of soul.
We must become aware of this. For the anthroposophist this proverb must hold good. He must say to himself:
“Now that I have become an anthroposophist through my karma, the impulses which have been able to draw me to anthroposophy require me to be attentive and alert. For somehow or somewhere, more or less deeply in my soul, there will emerge the necessity for me to find inner initiative in life,—initiative of soul which will enable me to undertake something or to make some judgment or decision out of my own inmost being.”
Verily, this is written in the karma of every single anthroposophist:
“Be a Man of initiative, and beware lest through hindrances of your own body, or hindrances that otherwise come in your way, you do not find the centre of your being, where is the source of your initiative. Observe that in your life all joy and sorrow, all happiness and pain will depend on the finding or not finding of your own individual initiative.”
This should stand written as though in golden letters, constantly before the soul of the anthroposophist. Initiative lies in his karma, and much of what meets him in this life will depend on the extent to which he can become willingly, actively conscious of it.
You must realise that very, very much has been said in these few words. For in our time there is extraordinarily much that can lead one astray with respect to all that guides and directs one's judgment; and without clear judgment on the conditions of life, initiative will not find its way forth from the deep foundations of the soul. Now what is it that can bring us to clear judgment on the things of life, especially in this our age? My dear friends, let us here consider one of the most important and characteristic features of our time. Let us then answer the question: How can we come to a certain clarity of judgment in face of it?
