Editing Anthroposophy (section)

==History==
[[File:Steiner um 1905.jpg|thumb|upright|[[Rudolf Steiner]]]]

The early work of the founder of anthroposophy, [[Rudolf Steiner]], culminated in his ''[[The Philosophy of Freedom|Philosophy of Freedom]]'' (also translated as ''The Philosophy of Spiritual Activity'' and ''Intuitive Thinking as a Spiritual Path''). Here, Steiner developed a concept of [[free will]] based on inner experiences, especially those that occur in the creative activity of independent thought.<ref name="Essential" /> "Steiner was a moral individualist".{{efn-lr|Ethical individualism is the opposite of ethical collectivism (meaning a moral code which is good for everyone).}}<ref name="t661">{{Cite book |last=Ryan |first=Alexandra E. |chapter=Anthroposophy |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=DouBAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA34 |title=Encyclopedia of New Religious Movements |publisher=Taylor & Francis |year=2004 |isbn=978-1-134-49970-0 |editor-last=Clarke |editor-first=Peter |page=34 |access-date=2024-07-19}}</ref>

By the beginning of the twentieth century, Steiner's interests turned almost exclusively to spirituality. His work began to draw the attention of others interested in spiritual ideas; among these was the [[Theosophical Society]]. From 1900 on, thanks to the positive reception his ideas received from Theosophists, Steiner focused increasingly on [[Rudolf Steiner and the Theosophical Society|his work with the Theosophical Society]], becoming the [[General Secretary|secretary]] of its section in Germany in 1902. During his leadership, membership increased dramatically, from just a few individuals to sixty-nine lodges.<ref name="ahern2edAnthSec">Of these, 55 lodges – about 2,500 people – seceded with Steiner to form his new Anthroposophical Society at the end of 1912. Geoffrey Ahern, ''[http://www.sun-at-midnight.com/ Sun at Midnight: the Rudolf Steiner Movement and Gnosis in the West, 2nd edition] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100117174448/http://www.sun-at-midnight.com/ |date=2010-01-17 }}'', 2009, James Clark and Co, {{ISBN|978-0-227-17293-3}}, p. 43</ref>

By 1907, a split between Steiner and the Theosophical Society became apparent. While the Society was oriented toward an [[Orient|Eastern]] and especially [[India]]n approach, Steiner was trying to develop a path that embraced [[Christianity]] and [[natural science]].<ref name="Lachman">Gary Lachman, ''Rudolf Steiner'', New York:Tarcher/Penguin {{ISBN|978-1-58542-543-3}}</ref> The split became irrevocable when [[Annie Besant]], then president of the Theosophical Society, presented the child [[Jiddu Krishnamurti]] as the [[reincarnation|reincarnated]] Christ. Steiner strongly objected and considered any comparison between Krishnamurti and Christ to be nonsense; many years later, Krishnamurti also repudiated the assertion. Steiner's continuing differences with Besant led him to separate from the [[Theosophical Society Adyar]]. He was subsequently followed by the great majority of the Theosophical Society's German members, as well as many members of other national sections.<ref name="ahern2edAnthSec" /><ref name="Lachman" />

By this time, Steiner had reached considerable stature as a spiritual teacher and [[List of occult writers|expert in the occult]].<ref>Ahern, Geoffrey. (1984): Sun at Midnight: the Rudolf Steiner movement and the Western esoteric tradition</ref> He spoke about what he considered to be his direct experience of the [[Akashic Records]] (sometimes called the "Akasha Chronicle"), thought to be a spiritual chronicle of the history, pre-history, and future of the world and mankind. In a number of works,<ref>especially ''How to Know Higher Worlds'' and ''An Outline of Esoteric Science''</ref> Steiner described a path of inner development he felt would let anyone attain comparable spiritual experiences. In Steiner's view, sound vision could be developed, in part, by practicing rigorous forms of ethical and cognitive self-discipline, concentration, and meditation. In particular, Steiner believed a person's spiritual development could occur only after a period of moral development.<ref name="Essential" />

[[File:Goetheanum Dornach.jpg|thumb|right|Second [[Goetheanum]], seat of the Anthroposophical Society]]
In 1912, Steiner broke away from the ''Theosophical Society'' to found an independent group, which he named the ''Anthroposophical Society.'' After [[World War I]], members of the young society began applying Steiner's ideas to create cultural movements in areas such as [[Waldorf education|traditional]] and [[Camphill Movement|special education]], farming, and [[anthroposophical medicine|medicine]].<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Uhrmacher |first=P. Bruce |date=Winter 1995 |title=Uncommon Schooling: A Historical Look at Rudolf Steiner, Anthroposophy, and Waldorf Education |journal=Curriculum Inquiry |volume=25 |issue=4 |pages=381–406 |doi=10.2307/1180016 |jstor=1180016}}</ref>

By 1923, a schism had formed between older members, focused on inner development, and younger members eager to become active in contemporary social transformations. In response, Steiner attempted to bridge the gap by establishing an overall School for ''Spiritual Science''. As a spiritual basis for the reborn movement, Steiner wrote a ''Foundation Stone Meditation'' which remains a central touchstone of anthroposophical ideas.<ref>{{Cite web |title=GA260 – The Foundation Stone Meditation |url=https://rsarchive.org/Lectures/19231227p02.html |access-date=2022-10-17 |website=The Rudolf Steiner Archive}}</ref>

Steiner died just over a year later, in 1925. The Second World War temporarily hindered the anthroposophical movement in most of Continental Europe, as the Anthroposophical Society and most of its practical counter-cultural applications were banned by the [[National Socialist|Nazi government]].<ref name="Hansen-Schaberg 2006 p. ">{{Cite book |title=Waldorf-Pädagogik |date=2006 |publisher=Schneider-Verl. Hohengehren |isbn=3-8340-0042-6 |editor-last=Hansen-Schaberg |editor-first=Inge |editor-link=Inge Hansen-Schaberg |publication-place=Baltmannsweiler |language=de |editor-last2=Schonig |editor-first2=Bruno}}</ref> Though at least one prominent member of the Nazi Party, [[Rudolf Hess]], was a strong supporter of anthroposophy,<ref name="g287">{{cite book | last=Staudenmaier | first=Peter | editor-last=Manthripragada | editor-first=Ashwin | editor-last2=Mušanović | editor-first2=Emina | editor-last3=Theison | editor-first3=Dagmar | title=The Threat and Allure of the Magical: Selected Papers from the 17th Annual Interdisciplinary German Studies Conference, University of California, Berkeley | publisher=Cambridge Scholars Publisher | year=2013 | isbn=978-1-4438-6586-9 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=VzYyBwAAQBAJ&pg=PA44 | access-date=15 November 2024 | pages=44–46 | quote=Without endorsing Steiner's doctrines as a whole, Nazi leaders like Hess, Ohlendorf, and Baeumler considered specific aspects of anthroposophy, both ideological and practical, to be compatible with and complementary to National Socialist principles.}}</ref> very few anthroposophists belonged to the National Socialist Party.<ref>Sources for 'Nazi Party':{{Bulleted list|{{harvnb|Dugan|2007|pp=74–76}}|{{cite book|title=Anthroposophie in Deutschland: Theosophische Weltanschauung und gesellschaftliche Praxis 1884–1945|first1=Helmut|last1=Zander|language=de|publisher=Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht|year=2007|location=Göttingen|isbn=978-3-525-55452-4|page=250}}|{{cite thesis |last1=Priestman |first1=Karen |date=2009 |title=Illusion of Coexistence: The Waldorf Schools in the Third Reich, 1933–1941 |type=PhD dissertation |publisher=Wilfrid Laurier University |url=https://scholars.wlu.ca/etd/1080/ |access-date=16 March 2023 |isbn=978-0-494-54260-6 }}|{{Cite web |last=Ernst |first=Edzard |title=Rudolf Hess (Hitler's deputy) on alternative medicine |url=https://edzardernst.com/2015/01/rudolf-hess-hitlers-deputy-on-alternative-medicine/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190929125131/https://edzardernst.com/2015/01/rudolf-hess-hitlers-deputy-on-alternative-medicine/ |archive-date=29 September 2019 |access-date=29 November 2018 |website=Edzard Ernst}}|{{cite book |last1=Staudenmaier |first1=Peter |title=Between occultism and Nazism: anthroposophy and the politics of race in the fascist era |date=2014 |publisher=Aries Books |isbn=9789004270152 |pages=101–145 |url=http://booksandjournals.brillonline.com/content/books/b9789004270152_005 |access-date=29 November 2018 |archive-date=29 November 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181129100522/http://booksandjournals.brillonline.com/content/books/b9789004270152_005 |url-status=live }}}}</ref> In reality, Steiner had both enemies and loyal supporters in the upper echelons of the Nazi regime.{{sfn|Staudenmaier|2014|pp=118–119}} Staudenmaier speaks of the "polycratic party-state apparatus", so Nazism's approach to Anthroposophy was not characterized by monolithic ideological unity.{{sfn|Staudenmaier|2014|p=104}} When Hess flew to the UK and was imprisoned, their most powerful protector was gone,<ref name="Rieppel 2016 p. 246" /><ref name="Douglas-Hamilton 2012 p. 106" /><ref name="Tucker 2018 p. 165" /> but Anthroposophists were still not left without supporters among higher-placed Nazis.{{sfn|Staudenmaier|2014|pp=103–106}}

The Third Reich had banned almost all esoteric organizations, claiming that these were controlled by Jews.<ref name="Sutin 2014 p. 506">{{Cite book |last=Sutin |first=Lawrence |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=p9iZAwAAQBAJ&pg=PT506 |title=Do What Thou Wilt: A Life of Aleister Crowley |publisher=St. Martin's Publishing Group |year=2014 |isbn=978-1-4668-7526-5 |page=unpaginated |quote=for the Third Reich had outlawed virtually all esoteric groups (alleged to be under covert Jewish control) in Germany |access-date=9 February 2023}}</ref> The truth was that while Anthroposophists complained of bad press, they were to a surprising extent tolerated by the Nazi regime, "including outspokenly supportive pieces in the ''Völkischer Beobachter''".{{sfn|Staudenmaier|2014|p=174|ps=: "Though anthroposophists complained regularly about negative publicity, Steiner's movement received remarkably positive press coverage in the Nazi era, including outspokenly supportive pieces in the ''Völkischer Beobachter''.<sup>108</sup> Anthroposophist authors generally encountered few difficulties in publishing their work,<sup>109</sup> SD specialists on occult groups made suppression of anthroposophist publications a priority, but met with relatively little success. They argued that misuse of terms such as "race, nation, community, Germanness" by non-Nazi authors, even if sincere and well-meaning, "must be regarded as an attack on the National Socialist worldview."<sup>110</sup> Criticizing "materialist misinterpretations" of Nazi racial theory, they contended that the Nazi conception of race united the biological with the spiritual, the physical with the soul, into one comprehensive synthesis. The SD was especially wary of spiritual groups claiming that Nazism had "adopted" some of their own ideas or that their teachings had all along been in concert with National Socialist precepts. Movements like anthroposophy, from this point of view, represented unwelcome competition."}} Ideological purists from [[Sicherheitsdienst]] argued largely in vain against Anthroposophy.{{sfn|Staudenmaier|2014|p=174|ps=: "Though anthroposophists complained regularly about negative publicity, Steiner's movement received remarkably positive press coverage in the Nazi era, including outspokenly supportive pieces in the ''Völkischer Beobachter''.<sup>108</sup> Anthroposophist authors generally encountered few difficulties in publishing their work,<sup>109</sup> SD specialists on occult groups made suppression of anthroposophist publications a priority, but met with relatively little success. They argued that misuse of terms such as "race, nation, community, Germanness" by non-Nazi authors, even if sincere and well-meaning, "must be regarded as an attack on the National Socialist worldview."<sup>110</sup> Criticizing "materialist misinterpretations" of Nazi racial theory, they contended that the Nazi conception of race united the biological with the spiritual, the physical with the soul, into one comprehensive synthesis. The SD was especially wary of spiritual groups claiming that Nazism had "adopted" some of their own ideas or that their teachings had all along been in concert with National Socialist precepts. Movements like anthroposophy, from this point of view, represented unwelcome competition."}} According to Staudenmaier, "The prospect of unmitigated persecution was held at bay for years in a tenuous truce between pro-anthroposophical and anti-anthroposophical Nazi factions."{{sfn|Staudenmaier|2014|pp=118–119}}

{{blockquote|The anti-esoteric faction ensconced in the SD and Gestapo recognized that they faced influential adversaries in other sectors of the Nazi hierarchy. They knew that Hess and his staff, Baeumler in the ''Amt Rosenberg,'' and Ohlendorf in the SD itself were willing to intervene on behalf of anthroposophical endeavors. Minister of Agriculture Darré and Lotar Eickhoff in the Interior Ministry were also seen as sympathizers of anthroposophy, and the SD considered the head of the party's "Examination Commission for Safeguarding National Socialist Writings," Karl Heinz Hederich, a supporter of occultists and astrologers.{{sup|52}}|{{harvnb|Staudenmaier|2014|p=228}}}}
{{blockquote|While anthroposophists were in the center of the SD's sights, they were supposed to receive relatively mild treatment compared to other occultists.|{{harvnb|Staudenmaier|2014|p=236}}}}

{{blockquote|Despite these measures, anthroposophist authors were able to write long after June 1941. Franz Dreidax, Max Karl Schwarz, Elisabeth Klein, Johannes Bertram-Pingel, Georg Halbe, Otto Julius Hartmann, Rudolf Hauschka, Jürgen von Grone, Wolfgang Schuchhardt and others continued to publish throughout the war. But serious disruptions were common.|{{harvnb|Staudenmaier|2014|p=238}}}}

Morals: Anthroposophy was not the stake of that dispute, but merely powerful Nazis wanting to get rid of other powerful Nazis.{{sfn|Staudenmaier|2014|p=215}} E.g. [[Jehovah's Witnesses]] were treated much more aggressively than Anthroposophists.{{sfn|Staudenmaier|2014|pp=173–174}}

{{blockquote|Yet, the relative moderation of Heydrich's action, which paled in comparison to measures taken against communists and socialists, Jews, homosexuals, Jehovah's Witnesses, as well as the mentally and physically disabled, continued to reflect the Third Reich's underlying ambivalence toward policing the occult.|{{harvnb|Kurlander|2015a|p=514}}}}

Kurlander stated that "the Nazis were hardly ideologically opposed to the supernatural sciences themselves"&mdash;rather they objected to the free (i.e. non-totalitarian) pursuit of supernatural sciences.<ref name="Black Kurlander 2015 p. 149">{{Cite book |last=Kurlander |first=Eric |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=hlS3CgAAQBAJ&pg=PA149 |title=Revisiting the "Nazi Occult": Histories, Realities, Legacies |publisher=Camden House |year=2015b |isbn=978-1-57113-906-1 |editor-last=Black |editor-first=Monica |series=German history in context |page=149 |quote=the Nazis were hardly ideologically opposed to the supernatural sciences themselves. |access-date=16 March 2024 |editor-last2=Kurlander |editor-first2=Eric}}</ref>

According to Hans Büchenbacher, an anthroposophist, the Secretary General of the General Anthroposophical Society, Guenther Wachsmuth, as well as Steiner's widow, Marie Steiner, were "completely pro-Nazi."<ref name="Büchenbacher">Staudenmaier (2014: 18, 79). Quote: Though raised Catholic, Büchenbacher had partial Jewish ancestry and was considered a “half-Jew” by Nazi standards. He emigrated to Switzerland in 1936. According to his post-war memoirs, “approximately two thirds of German anthroposophists more or less succumbed to National Socialism.” He reported that various influential anthroposophists were “deeply infected by Nazi views” and “staunchly supported Hitler.” Both Guenther Wachsmuth, Secretary of the Swiss-based General Anthroposophical Society, and Marie Steiner, the widow of Rudolf Steiner, were described as “completely pro-Nazi.” Büchenbacher retrospectively lamented the far-reaching “Nazi sins” of his colleagues.{{sup|59}}</ref> Marie Steiner-von Sivers, Guenther Wachsmuth, and Albert Steffen, had publicly expressed sympathy for the Nazi regime since its beginnings; led by such sympathies of their leadership, the Swiss and German Anthroposophical organizations chose for a path conflating accommodation with collaboration, which in the end ensured that while the Nazi regime hunted the esoteric organizations, Gentile Anthroposophists from Nazi Germany and countries occupied by it were let be to a surprising extent.{{sfn|Staudenmaier|2014|pp=103–106}} Of course they had some setbacks from the enemies of Anthroposophy among the upper echelons of the Nazi regime, but Anthroposophists also had loyal supporters among them, so overall Gentile Anthroposophists were not badly hit by the Nazi regime.{{sfn|Staudenmaier|2014|pp=103–106}}

{{blockquote|Yet when Hitler threatened to suppress the Anthroposophical Society, its executive council—which had recently expelled much of its membership—chose to collaborate rather than resist. Marie Steiner, Günther Wachsmuth, and Albert Steffen knew of Hitler's violent intentions toward the Jewish people, since Hitler's attacks on anthroposophy included the accusation that anthroposophy was aligned with the Jews. Rather than standing in solidarity with Hitler's other targets, they disavowed any sympathy for Judaism and assured Nazi leaders that both they and Steiner were of pure Aryan heritage.{{sup|44}}|{{harvnb|McKanan|2017|p=196}}}}

Staudenmaier's overall argument is that "there were often no clear-cut lines between theosophy, anthroposophy, ariosophy, astrology and the ''völkisch'' movement from which the Nazi Party arose."<ref name="Koehne 2016 pp. 281–283">{{Cite journal |last=Koehne |first=Samuel |date=2016 |title=Revisiting the "Nazi Occult": Histories, Realities, Legacies. Edited by Monica Black and Eric Kurlander. Rochester, NY: Camden House, 2015. Pp. 306. Cloth $90.00. ISBN 978-1571139061. |journal=Central European History |volume=49 |issue=2 |pages=281–283 |doi=10.1017/S0008938916000492 |issn=0008-9389 |s2cid=148281372 |quote=there were often no clear-cut lines between theosophy, anthroposophy, ariosophy, astrology and the ''völkisch'' movement from which the Nazi Party arose.}}</ref>

By 2007, national branches of the Anthroposophical Society had been established in fifty countries and about 10,000 institutions around the world were working on the basis of anthroposophical ideas.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Goetheanum |url=http://www.goetheanum.org/121.html?&L=1 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110930063201/http://www.goetheanum.org/121.html?&L=1 |archive-date=2011-09-30 |access-date=2013-12-31 |publisher=Goetheanum}}</ref>

===Etymology and earlier uses of the word===
''Anthroposophy'' is an amalgam of the [[Greek language|Greek]] terms {{lang|grc|[[:wikt:ἄνθρωπος|ἄνθρωπος]]}} ({{Lang|grc-latn|anthropos}} 'human') and {{lang|grc|[[Sophia (wisdom)|σοφία]]}} ({{Lang|grc-latn|sophia}} 'wisdom'). An early English usage is recorded by [[Nathan Bailey]] (1742) as meaning "the knowledge of the nature of man".<ref>"Anthroposophy", [[OED]]</ref>

[[File:Troxler Portrait 1830.jpg|thumb|right |upright|Ignaz Paul Vitalis Troxler]]
The first known use of the term ''anthroposophy'' occurs within ''[[Arbatel|Arbatel de magia veterum, summum sapientiae studium]]'', a book published anonymously in 1575 and attributed to [[Heinrich Cornelius Agrippa von Nettesheim|Heinrich Cornelius Agrippa]]. The work describes anthroposophy (as well as theosophy) variously as an understanding of goodness, nature, or human affairs. In 1648, the Welsh philosopher [[Thomas Vaughan (philosopher)|Thomas Vaughan]] published his ''Anthroposophia Theomagica, or a discourse of the nature of man and his state after death.''<ref>Thomas Vaughan (Eugenius Philalethes): ''Anthroposophia Theomagica, or a discourse of the nature of man and his state after death.'' Oxford 1648</ref>

The term began to appear with some frequency in philosophical works of the mid- and late-nineteenth century.<ref>The term was used for example in a [http://www.bodley.ox.ac.uk/cgi-bin/ilej/image1.pl?item=page&seq=1&size=1&id=nq.1863.5.9.3.71.x.373 discussion of Boehme] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180928235524/http://www.bodley.ox.ac.uk/cgi-bin/ilej/image1.pl?item=page&seq=1&size=1&id=nq.1863.5.9.3.71.x.373 |date=2018-09-28 }} in ''[[Notes and Queries]]'', May 9, 1863, p. 373</ref> In the early part of that century, [[Ignaz Paul Vitalis Troxler|Ignaz Troxler]] used the term ''anthroposophy'' to refer to philosophy deepened to self-knowledge, which he suggested allows deeper knowledge of nature as well. He spoke of human nature as a mystical unity of God and world. [[Immanuel Hermann Fichte]] used the term ''anthroposophy'' to refer to "rigorous human self-knowledge", achievable through thorough comprehension of the human spirit and of the working of God in this spirit, in his 1856 work ''Anthropology: The Study of the Human Soul''. In 1872, the philosopher of religion [[Gideon Spicker]] used the term ''anthroposophy'' to refer to self-knowledge that would unite God and world: "the true study of the human being is the human being, and philosophy's highest aim is self-knowledge, or Anthroposophy."<ref>''Die Philosophie des Grafen von Shaftesbury'', 1872</ref>

In 1882, the philosopher [[Robert von Zimmermann|Robert Zimmermann]] published the treatise, "An Outline of Anthroposophy: Proposal for a System of Idealism on a Realistic Basis," proposing that idealistic philosophy should employ logical thinking to extend empirical experience.<ref>''Anthroposophie im Umriß. Entwurf eines Systems idealer Weltsicht auf realistischer Grundlage'', 1882</ref> Steiner attended lectures by Zimmermann at the [[University of Vienna]] in the early 1880s, thus at the time of this book's publication.<ref>Robert Zimmermann ''Geschichte der Aesthetik als philosophische Wissenschaft. Vienna, 1858. Anthroposophie im Umriss-Entwurf eines Systems idealer Weltansicht auf realistischer Grundlage.'' (Vienna, 1882): Steiner, ''Anthroposophic Movement'': Lecture Two: ''The Unveiling of Spiritual Truths'', 11 June 1923.[http://wn.rsarchive.org/Lectures/GA258/English/RSP1993/19230611p01.html]</ref>

In the early 1900s, Steiner began using the term ''anthroposophy'' (i.e. human wisdom) as an alternative to the term ''theosophy'' (i.e. divine wisdom).