Tomberg and Anthroposophy

[AshvinP]

Yet, I think that, if we look back carefully within that process of development, we will find that the interest itself was cultivated through a leap into the phenomenological content.

How do you propose, then, that people be guided to willingly take that leap? The number of people in my life who I have persuaded to take serious interest in spiritual science in the manner of Rudolf Steiner is, sadly, zero. Whereas I have turned quite a few people onto Tomberg.

That's a good question, and in a certain sense, I can only answer it negatively. I can identify various qualities and ways of thinking through reality that will not make a soul more willing to take that leap, based on inner experience, and I think we have discussed many of those qualities and ways of intellectual thinking already.

It seems to me that if a soul has prepared itself in the discarnate state to potentially take the leap in its next incarnation, it will find its way into the vicinity of other souls who can help it during that incarnation. That could be on this forum or similar ones, at Church, at work, or wherever. Such souls will start thinking about the deeper existential questions and this thinking process will almost naturally lead them to others who have already ventured down the inner path. They will begin asking questions with genuine interest in the answers, and will stick around for some time with more questions. It is at this stage that we can really begin perfecting the phenomenological craft of building bridges from the familiar/known to the unfamiliar/unknown inner dynamics. Before other souls make it into this vicinity, I'm not sure how much value there is in going out to guide them toward the tipping point through more indirect methods. That's when we start veering into the realm of Cleric's point above:

This education needs even sterner individual initiative to initiate. In other words, we must completely part with the idea that we can ‘trick’ a soul into this higher education, let alone carry it all the way through. Of course, this doesn’t preclude the fact that we need to be gentle. Many souls, even if predisposed to this education, may still be drowsy, and like drowsy people, they may be irritable, grumpy, and so on. But after their ‘first coffee’, we should be able to tell whether that soul is called upon the higher education. Mechanically pushing it in that direction or tricking it there, can never lead to good results. The soul will feel like a rebellious teenager forced into school, and unsurprisingly, they’ll drop off at the first opportunity.

I have come across souls who have been 'turned on to' Steiner and spiritual science on Discord, but this turning on was of such a character that they consume spiritual science like any other theoretical philosophy, as a means of developing ever-greater conceptual correspondences and feeling comfortable and satisfied with the mental tableau thus created. And I've seen this 'rebellious teenager that drops off at the first opportunity' stance quite clearly. In a certain sense, the test of whether our turning on of other souls to Tomberg, Barfield, Jung, or anyone else, was of a deeper character, is precisely whether the soul makes it from there to an interest in PoF and spiritual science (as living phenomenological exploration). If not, and rather the soul remains infatuated with Hermeticism, not as a stepping stone to imaginative concentration work, but as an exercise in adding more esoteric content to the mental tableau, then they are simply using the author's work as an instrument of the old intellectual self's qualities and ways, and will likely rebel hard against the true inner work sooner or later.

I completely agree about MoT being complementary to PoF-spiritual science but not a substitute. What I'm suggesting is 1) that a bridge (such as MoT) is now necessary for most souls, and 2) that PoF-spiritual science itself would benefit from new forms of expression. Steiner's work is of course still there and easily accessible for anyone who feels called to pursue it.

I understand the resistance to pegging the continuation of Anthroposophy to an institution that seems to work at cross purposes to it. All of this, however, is prefigured in the historical events which contain the impulses for our time. Allow me to refer again to the story of St. Joan. She received spiritual communication leading to personal certainty. Knowing it to be true, this was something that could not be taken from her. However, in order for her message and mission to flow out into the world, she had to demonstrate her moral spotlessness to that organ of the social organism whose function it is to vouchsafe the authenticity of the spirit to those who cannot see into the spiritual world, namely the Roman Catholic Church. (Note that Rudolf Steiner himself led a morally unreproachable life). This did not go well, and she was burned at the stake and vindicated only later. If and when an invisible Johannine order enters the protective stream of Peter, it will do so not without a certain degree of danger, but also under the auspices of the inaugurator of the Consciousness Soul. That stream will also surely leverage the fact that Christ Jesus specifically told Peter to focus on his own task at hand and to allow John to do his work unhindered (John 21:22).

I suppose the 'pegging' part is the main issue. Everything you are writing generally makes sense to me, and I know the Catholic Church (or the Universal Church, in VT's broad sense) must continue to serve an important function in preserving and advancing spiritual feeling and knowledge. Yet, once we say it is the only way for John thinking to flow out into the world from here on out, it starts to feel more problematic and tenuous. In other words, we say that the RCC's cult and dogma is a necessary condition for most souls to come into contact with their higher spiritual nature.

I agree that a bridge, such as MoT, is now necessary for most souls, and I would say the essays and posts on this forum, for example, are also a great example of such a bridge that gives PoF new imaginative forms of expression. Is the RCC the most likely institution to cultivate an interest in such an intuitive thinking bridge? Will souls that go there asking questions about deeper existence receive responses that stimulate them to freely and imaginatively shape the answers to their questions within themselves? It is difficult for me to see how that would be the case, any more so than other existing institutions.

[Federica]

Regarding the bolded: that an organ or member - as a general endowment of mankind - once unfolded cannot be compromised is not the case, especially in the newer soul members. You correctly identify that the Intellectual Soul has its substantiality in the higher beings who imparted it to human beings and that this substantiality is secure. Members unfold "in due season" (to use Gospel terminology), meaning that the large majority of individuals undergo the particular stage of their development within the same window of cosmic time. However, in all cases the plan for this member has been laid down in the spiritual world far longer ago. When the "due season" comes around, the particular physical, psychic, and spiritual conditions of planetary evolution have reached a suitable point for incarnating the member. Then there are the "first fruits", after which the majority follows, usually after a lengthy intervening period. As soon as the angelic substantiality for the member becomes incarnated in human beings, compromised unfolding and retrogression becomes possible. The success of the "transfer" from higher worlds, so to speak, is now dependent on human action. One should never assume that success is guaranteed. To your point, success can happen in one group of people while failure happens in another. But failure, which can be pictured as a kind of rot, has a tendency to spread. And the fulfillment of human destiny is constantly threatened by this spread.

If a member is compromised, the member which is to proceed atop this foundation is threatened as well. When the season changes again, so to speak, the divinely ordained unfolding of the new member (which of course is only new on earth and has been prepared far in the past by spiritual beings) is at risk. In other words, the integrity of the former member is crucial. And - importantly, that integrity is a measure of its incarnated form, not its spiritual substantiality. In its incarnated form, the member maintains its integrity during the incoming season by remaining fully functional in its original element. Now, in the concrete case of the emergence of the Consciousness Soul from the Intellectual Soul, the original element of the Intellectual Soul is brain-based thinking. The Intellectual Soul, as the working of the 'I' into the life of thought, came about and was developed via the instrument of the brain. So long as human physiology retains its structural-functional relationship with the Intellectual Soul, the Intellectual Soul must remain healthy and operative at the level of brain-based thinking. A degradation in brain-based thinking (your "sound logical thinking" in contradistinction to the "Intellectual Soul at large") is a degradation of the incarnated Intellectual Soul, and this is a threat to the unfolding of the Consciousness Soul, whose season is now.

The Roman Catholic Church, as it has evolved to function in earth evolution, first arose in tandem with the Intellectual Soul and thus became a kind of extension of this member at the level of the collective social organism. The Church can now serve to maintain the crucial integrity of this member while the new member develops from out of it. If one looks carefully into the situation that presents us today, one will be hard pressed to find any other social organization serving this function. Anthroposophy is not capable of doing it on its own, either through the Anthroposophical Society or some other realization of it.

----------------------

As soon as the angelic substantiality for the member becomes incarnated in human beings, compromised unfolding and retrogression becomes possible. The success of the "transfer" from higher worlds, so to speak, is now dependent on human action. One should never assume that success is guaranteed. To your point, success can happen in one group of people while failure happens in another. But failure, which can be pictured as a kind of rot, has a tendency to spread. And the fulfillment of human destiny is constantly threatened by this spread.

The Intellectual soul can’t be compromised as a whole, but of course its manifestations in individual souls can. What I mean is that success is not guaranteed for this or that individual, but for the Intellectual Soul as a whole it is. It can’t be rolled back into inexistence, as a whole. And this collective manifestation is sufficient for an individual soul to benefit from its support, even if many other souls around are being compromised. Steiner explained how these things work even when the particular individual in which the soul/member is embodied and actively at work is unaware of that. In the Fifth Gospel, for example, he mentions how Haeckel and Darwin only could exist with their science as an expression of the Christian impulse, even without being conscious of it (especially Haeckel). So I think that the intellectual Soul today can’t be completely compromised in a way that would bar the possibility for evolving souls to leverage it as a solid foundation for the next evolutionary phase. And I think the spiritual streams show that success, not only failure, has a tendency to spread too.

And - importantly, that integrity is a measure of its incarnated form, not its spiritual substantiality. In its incarnated form, the member maintains its integrity during the incoming season by remaining fully functional in its original element.

Why would integrity be a measure of the Soul’s incarnated form? If there were such a law, that poor rates of incarnation of a Soul/Member - Such as the Intellectual Soul - compromise integrity in a generalized way that blocks the possibility for other souls to develop the Consciousness soul, forerunners could not even exist. But they do exist.

[AshvinP]

What he said is, spiritual science (SS) is the mill of death, and the Valentin Tomberg who abided by spiritual science is not who I am; that person has another name(!). Now I’ve just googled “mill of death”. The expression has stuck with me. And it might be just a coincidence, for those who believe in coincidences, but for my part I'm petrified by Google AI's response: “"Mill of death" most likely refers to the post-war Allied documentary "Death Mills", which graphically depicted the Nazi concentration camps to German civilians.” We know what SS means in general language. And we can imagine how much more than today the dark WWII aura was still far from dissolved in the years when VT had become critical of spiritual science, to the point of calling it the mill of death. Did VT see something that dangerous in spiritual science? Who are the beings he thought with in the Spirit world?

It probably isn't a coincidence because it seems that a major factor (not the only factor) in Tomberg's distancing from the Anthroposophical Society and joining the Catholic Church was the perceived failure of the former to serve as a practical means of upholding moral integrity in those horrendous conditions, while he perceived individualities within the latter as more directly contributing to resisting Nazism and Communism. As Steiner often said, Anthroposophy is only valuable insofar as it becomes a means of transforming practical life, and VT perceived that as sorely lacking in the WWII and post-war conditions. Perhaps, in retrospect, he was too harsh in that perception and evaluation, but of course, it's also quite understandable.

If we are going to talk about VT becoming critical of spiritual science, we should also include those Catholic works where he endorsed and praised it. The most critical comments were in private letters to single individuals, whereas the supporting and praiseworthy comments were in published works meant for the wider public. That is not to say these comments are mutually exclusive or contradictory - when we think through the wider context of his work carefully, I think they are easily reconciled, for reasons already discussed. For example, as late as 1972, he publicly expressed:

"The teaching on the heavenly hierarchies was renewed in the first quarter of the 20th century by the great Austrian seer and thinker Rudolf Steiner. The depth and breadth of Steiner's contribution to a new understanding of the spiritual hierarchies is such that this theme cannot be seriously considered today without taking into account his remarkable achievement, which, as far as wealth of stimulation, depth and multiplicity of viewpoints, inner lack of contradiction, and organic cohesion, is not to be compared with any seer or thinker - whether of the present, of the Middle Ages, or of antiquity - for it towers above them all."

[Federica]

It probably isn't a coincidence because it seems that a major factor (not the only factor) in Tomberg's distancing from the Anthroposophical Society and joining the Catholic Church was the perceived failure of the former to serve as a practical means of upholding moral integrity in those horrendous conditions, while he perceived individualities within the latter as more directly contributing to resisting Nazism and Communism. As Steiner often said, Anthroposophy is only valuable insofar as it becomes a means of transforming practical life, and VT perceived that as sorely lacking in the WWII and post-war conditions. Perhaps, in retrospect, he was too harsh in that perception and evaluation, but of course, it's also quite understandable.

It would be (vaguely) understandable if he had said "the anthroposophical society is the mill of death", if one takes the emotional factor into account, perhaps. Not justifiable, but understandable. The problem is, he wrote "Rudolf Steiner's spiritual science" is the mill of death - the very essence of what Steiner revealed to the world, the Michaelic impulse brought to the world, as it has been called now. Who cares if it's in public lectures, books, private letters, private discussion or else. This has been his expressed thought. And I am curious to see who has the effrontery to say that comparing this to the Nazi concentration camps is quite understandable.

[Cleric]

Apologies for jumping in the middle of all the subtlety with a few pointy questions. But I think they are important.


1/ Who are the beings intuited by Tomberg in Spirit world?

I am asking because I don’t understand the deliberate gesture of stepping back from the Spirit World, once one has lived in it to some extent. What I don’t understand are not the reasons why one would do that, but the gesture itself. To be clear, this is not the gesture of conceiving a second path for other souls, but the gesture of oneself stepping back after thinking together with certain spirits whose form must have expressed: “Un-know me now! Get outta here! For the sake of Life itself”. I don’t understand that.

I don't see the stepping back happening in this way. Let's remind that there are things that are easier to know in Inspiration and Intuition than others. As a whole, the general truths are easier to experience. The more specific the truths, like for example details of a human incarnation, the more difficult it is. We can understand this if we conceive that the more encompassing truths have many points of contact with any state of being, while the specific demand a far more flexible inner constitution such that we can attune to the corresponding state in its intricacy.

In that sense, it is not that difficult to have higher consciousness of certain more general evolutionary rhythms. The more we zoom into the concrete circumstances in the here and now, the more specific everything becomes. As a crude example, it could be relatively easy to be inspired that a house needs to be built, but the more we zoom into the concrete unfoldment of the idea, the more we have to make concrete decisions for the fractally-like exploding details. These decisions can be logically reasoned, but can also be inspired. In the perfect scenario, at every decision level, when decisions flow in the curvatures of positive inspiration, we should feel that the symphonic harmony is maintained along the full depth. Yet, at any of these decision levels, different inspirations can intervene and veer off the general plan.

At least this is the way things feel to me at present. So it's not that VT has glimpsed the full-spectrum plan of the house, from top to bottom, and saw that it had to be built of stone, yet decided the 'step back' from this intuition and, in opposition to it, he went to build it of bricks. It rather makes more sense to me that he saw both Steiner's work and his own as agreeing in the general idea, but after some time he felt that the way Steiner started to work out the details wouldn't lead to good results, and thus, he sought his own intuitions for the details.

Now, what are the beings that intervene at these decision levels, I cannot say, but clearly, they have their existence intertwined with the existence of the RCC. The question that is now interesting is whether these decisions are in symphonic harmony with the general plan. IOW, is the RCC indeed the body that Christ intends to manifest through, now and in the future? Is this the Divine Will? To me, this is a clear impossibility on so many levels.

If we continue the house metaphor, when we need to move toward the concrete implementation, we inevitably do that in accordance to the environment. For example, if from our experience we know only stone and brick, there's no way to choose some unknown material for building, even if only the latter could be suitable for the general plan. Thus, the context within which we accommodate our inspirations is of utmost importance (in fact, if the context is not right, certain inspirations, even if they are the Divine Will, may never reach us).

Because it’s crystal-clear that VT didn’t say, spiritual science is great, but for certain souls it’s too complicated. No. He was not playing a double game. What he said is, spiritual science (SS) is the mill of death, and the Valentin Tomberg who abided by spiritual science is not who I am; that person has another name(!). Now I’ve just googled “mill of death”. The expression has stuck with me. And it might be just a coincidence, for those who believe in coincidences, but for my part I'm petrified by Google AI's response: “"Mill of death" most likely refers to the post-war Allied documentary "Death Mills", which graphically depicted the Nazi concentration camps to German civilians.” We know what SS means in general language. And we can imagine how much more than today the dark WWII aura was still far from dissolved in the years when VT had become critical of spiritual science, to the point of calling it the mill of death. Did VT see something that dangerous in spiritual science? Who are the beings he thought with in the Spirit world?

I guess we need to understand what exactly is implied by spiritual science in this context. Clearly, VT's concern is that SS, as it is generally consumed, immediately dries out and piles on the mental tableau that Asvhin mentions above. As I proposed earlier, we shouldn't equate this with an attack on Steiner. For example, we know that in the past, the occultists have attempted to spread Spiritism in the hope that popular consciousness would open toward the invisible (this in itself raises the same question - was that Divine inspiration or other beings intermingled? But let's go with it anyway). The results, however, were quite the opposite, and in fact, much more materialistic tendencies were invoked. As such, this can be considered a failed approach. It seems to me fully possible that VT sees the SS approach as such a failed attempt. Not because something RS did wrong - he did what he was inspired to do (no matter the source) - but (probably that's how it can be rationalized) the adversarial forces turned out stronger and prevented this approach. The following quote exists in Prokofiev's book "'The impulse of the consciousness soul has failed' said Tomberg to Lubensky in Holland at the beginning of the nineteen forties, 'a direct path must be found from the intellectual soul to the we-soul (Spirit Self)'." I don't know if this is authentic, but if it is true, then this would immediately explain almost everything. It would certainly explain:

However, the inner descendent of this same person today believes that there is no spiritual science and never can be. Because even a spiritual science based on its central focus can only add to the mill of death.

It will unavoidably become intellectualised and ‘fossilised’.

Now, such statements can proceed from the conviction that something in the evolutionary dynamics has irrevocably shifted, and the SS approach can never be successful, thus 'a direct path must be found from the intellectual soul to the we-soul (Spirit Self).' This would also explain:

[it] doesn’t mean that there isn’t and never was knowledge of the spirit.

But knowledge of the spirit is not science but inner certainty – that means it is a condition that cannot be imposed on someone else. In any case it has to forego any claim to universal validity and scrutiny. It is based on the most personal inner experience and can possibly only be shared with very close companions who have been joined through destiny.

This basically splits human knowledge into the practical sphere and the sphere of mystical revelation, which is a matter of personal experience that shouldn't be talked about much (does this remind us of Eugene, who says that his meditative experiences are too intimate to share?). In other words, we should clearly feel that the tension between the inner, the intimate, the spiritual, and the outer, the conceptual, which is brought into contact with the mystical, will unavoidably sclerotize it. Thus, the failed spiritual soul, where the Imaginative thinking gradient would have to exist, must instead remain as a kind of buffer zone that protects the sacred from the profane.

This would explain why the sacred has to remain enshrined in the body of the Church, as if to constantly remind us that there are two spheres of human experience that should not be allowed to diffuse into each other lightly. In this scenario, humanity's evolution should proceed in such a way that it has to endure the time until the Spirit-Self begins to take the upper hand, and the intellectual sphere is no longer a threat. Thus, the absolute necessity of the RCC, which plays the role of the we-soul until the right time comes (toward the end of the physical incarnations, I guess).

Now, this would certainly explain a lot. Yet, it rests on the assumption that what VT has said about the failed consciousness soul is authentic. Whether that is the case, I don't know. But whether it is, or not, I think it is clear that for VT, the deep religious life stood higher than whatever transformed thinking could reach. This would mean, that even though the deep immersion in SS throughout his life, he could experience with the mentioned inner certainty (and consequently, with the corresponding inner warmth) only the more general facts of the spiritual world, while other details he was working on through intuitive thinking. Yet, it is only logical that if this intuitive thinking doesn't lead to the same inner certainty and warmth that glues the facts together, it is inevitable that the soul would feel a certain dissatisfaction. What remains is to focus on the warm innerly certain element, even though it remains as a more diffuse truth. This is a real possibility: it could be that the whole anthroposophic period of VT was one of intense intuitive thinking, without, however, experiencing these thoughts as condensing from true clairvoyant experience in the higher spiritual worlds. This would again explain a lot. He simply got exhausted and inspite of all the years of intense intuitive thinking, he still felt that in this way he still stands outside the strata that can be known through deep religious union. This would imply that not only did he fear that the SS path is unsuitable for most souls, but it was his own experience that was the prime instance. If I remain with my intuitive activity outside the warm inner core of certainty, what's left for all those other souls that are far more likely to sclerotize everything right from the beginning?

Today my life is prayer and contemplation and that – and only that – is what I live for; not study.

I'm sharing this simply as writing down my reflections from different directions. I think this discussion is of great value for everyone, and I'm willing to maintain certain fluidity while we bring everything to sharper focus.

2/ What is a “Catholic soul”?

Are we sure that VT sought ways to gently raise less sharp souls to the spiritual, without overwhelming them with the details of spiritual science? I don’t think so! And this is to Tombergs benefit, as I said. At least he was whole in that: he genuinely thought that spiritual science was against Life, and detrimental, for the “Catholic souls” and for everyone else too, himself included. Of course, I definitely have something against that. But the point is, even if (which I don’t believe) he was trying not to overwhelm simple souls with complications, I still (and even more so) have something against it. This is the duality of paths. It’s the idea itself of creating a double path. This idea, when one tries to accommodate it, then leads to: “For my part, I also would like to refine bridges that can help the scientifically minded souls…” Are you now induced to accept such a duality?

Tomberg wanted to rescue the Catholic souls and thus sought ways to gently raise them into a more spiritual, Johnian existence, without overwhelming them with too many details emerging from initiatic science. I don’t think anyone can have anything against this. For my part, I also would like to refine bridges that can help the scientifically minded souls of our age to find a secure path to phenomenological reality.

Are we sure that VT sought ways to gently raise less sharp souls to the spiritual, without overwhelming them with the details of spiritual science? I don’t think so! And this is to Tombergs benefit, as I said. At least he was whole in that: he genuinely thought that spiritual science was against Life, and detrimental, for the “Catholic souls” and for everyone else too, himself included. Of course, I definitely have something against that. But the point is, even if (which I don’t believe) he was trying not to overwhelm simple souls with complications, I still (and even more so) have something against it. This is the duality of paths. It’s the idea itself of creating a double path. This idea, when one tries to accommodate it, then leads to: “For my part, I also would like to refine bridges that can help the scientifically minded souls…” Are you now induced to accept such a duality?

For me this is a dangerous thing. It would be like creating an institutional machine to manufacture a retarded human stream - under the best proclaimed intentions. Not that a stream becomes retarded by various circumstances that couldn't be solved, giving in to external temptations, but rather, from within humanity itself (under the incitation of unknown beings, hence my first question) an impulse is sparkled to sidetrack part of itself institutionally, as if by law! That's disturbing, especially for the new man. As you say: “Something peculiar about the Catholic project is that we, who carry the impulse from the outside, feel to be playing a double game.” This double game is not simply "peculiar". It's really the most disturbing thing, in my view. Of course, there can be various ways to convey concepts, to encourage deeds and attitudes, various spheres of action to have in focus. But the path should be one and whole, in the multitude of efforts everyone brings to it, in order to help oneself and others at the same time, to progress. The “full Cosmic volume” should be in sight. So, who are those “Catholic souls” who deserve such a lovingly tailor-made, collinear baby track? And is the question really: “how can souls be led in a simpler way, such that the direction of their development is nevertheless collinear with the evolutionary trajectory of humanity?” And is the conclusion really: "So the conclusion is that the RCC itself must first transform if it is to help souls become proper members of the sixth culture."?


I have more questions, but I don’t want to dilute these two at this point.

I hope the above addresses these questions too. Yes, if indeed VT has concluded that the consciousness soul has failed and direct path must be sought to the Spirit-Self, what you have written above would be on track.

The reason I'm still maintining the fluidity (although in my mind I've always seen things around VT in more or less the above way) is because it is difficult for me to conceive that anyone could imagine that evolution could proceed in such a way that a certain step can be trodden over while seeking 'direct' path to the next. This seems like such an elementary blunder that it's difficult to conceive that anyone, especially someone as learned and sophisticated as VT, could entertain. That's why I'm ambivalent about the authenticity of the quote. Yet, if this were really the case, it would be simply scary. Not because of some global consequences (in all honesty, I don't think that if the RCC is to rise to dominion, it would be because of VT), but because it shows how one can be swimming in the Light his whole life, and nevertheless a serious blind spot remains utterly dark, preventing certain Divine inspirations, and giving way to others.

[Federica]

...

Thank you Cleric for sharing this. It's of tremendous help to gain orientation to the mystery in question, and in general.
Much to contemplate, as far as one's capacities allow.

[Rodriel Gabrez]

Others are aware, but Rodriel probably is not familiar with the work of the master Beinsa Douno, which practically covers all the above points, yet in a way, if I may say so, ‘softer’ than spiritual science. The best way I can describe it is that the life of the master and his word serve as a living example of the man of the coming sixth epoch. In that way, the method of teaching is more akin to the way the baby learns language and absorbs its habits, skills, knowledge, and way of thinking from the parents. Thus, the talks of the master seemingly lack the sharp focus and clear linear development of a given topic, which we witness in every lecture of Steiner. Instead, they feel more spread out, more simple, (even maybe boring for the intellectually sharpened mind that is used to strong concentrates). But on the flip side, such teaching gives precisely that which SS is often accused of lacking – Life. With simple words, and not in any particular order, all of the major points above are covered. This doesn’t negate the necessity that the soul must still have this determination to learn, to grow into new and unsuspected spheres of existence. The teaching also doesn’t replace spiritual science. The master doesn’t develop these fine and intricate details, nor the phenomenology of thinking, but nevertheless the soul is led into the Cosmic volume in full. Also, it does that without sparing any truths. Something peculiar about the Catholic project is that we, who carry the impulse from the outside, feel to be playing a double game. In a sense we 'infiltrate' the community and work from within with the hope that one day, without noticing, the souls will be led where we intend. Since the teaching emerges on its own grounds, there's no need for such a double game. The truths are given directly, simply because we need to set our aims high right from the start.

As said, all those essential points, the hallmarks of man in the sixth cultural epoch, the epoch of dawning of the spiritual soul, are there. Not only as concepts but as living currents that stream in all practical, artistic, and religious aspects of life. This life can be tasted right now, there’s no institution that first must be reformed. The master didn’t found a sect, he didn’t make an institution with a particular organization. He simply disseminated a living example of what the new man should strive for, how his understanding and ideals should change, and how study and serving the Divine All are the new walk of life.

Here’s just one example . The book can be browsed more or less randomly to get the flavor, because it doesn’t follow a particular thematic order (although the quotes are chronological within the period where the events take place).

Just like with Steiner, we shouldn’t expect that these teachings will feel right for everyone. But can’t the same be said about VT? In these discussions, we get the impression that he makes the John path universally accessible, but is it really so? MoT, for example, is a high bar on its own, and to be honest, I think that those who have the capacity to go through it, unless they have some special emotional bias, should have no particular cognitive difficulty in going through a SS book either.

I’m not writing all of this as an announcement of the ‘one and only true path of human evolution’ but I think that if we are to have a more complete picture of the greater flow, we cannot afford to dismiss such intuitive points. Many anthroposophists are well aware of this stream, most notably Robert Powell and Harrie Salman. Some more info here. It is interesting that VT, especially considering his Slavic origin, would have probably found a lot of what his soul was thirsting for in the master’s teaching. Especially the Life and the Word that speaks more directly to the heart and soul. However, as far as I know, there are no indications whether VT was aware of the existence of this stream.

It will take me a bit longer to respond to the bulk of this post, but just to touch on the final bit about Beinsa Duono: I am aware of him but not intimately familiar. I'm not sure about VT's familiarity either. It's hard to imagine him being completely ignorant of this stream. It's been a while since I've read Salman's biography of VT, so I don't remember whether this is touched on. Tomberg did however have much to say about the importance of the Slavic peoples, the fact that they constitute a separate stream, and the manner in which this stream will factor into the 6th epoch. His book Russian Spirituality, from his pre-Catholic period, is all about this and is a good resource.

I've mentioned before in this thread the notion that within the Eastern Orthodox Church are the seeds for a very important force that will contribute greatly to the unfolding of the Spirit Self. These souls - specifically those in the Russian/Slavic stream and not necessarily in the broader Orthodox Church - are being kept an earlier stage of development now in order to become a fructifying enzyme later. Steiner and Tomberg were in very close alignment on this point. But being kept at an earlier stage carries with it some interesting and nuanced complications. One of these is that the Orthodox Church as a whole has partaken in the RCC's development of the Intellectual Soul but stopped short of its full flowering - a fact which directly coincides with the splitting of the two Churches in the Great Schism. The Orthodox Church therefore has a formal theology and dogma which is rooted in the developing Intellectual Soul but for which the fully developed social organ is lacking. Unlike the RCC which formally leaves the door open for the Consciousness Soul through its centrally authorized intellectual tenets, the Orthodox Church recedes back into the decentralized Sentient Soul for its authorization of the same (or similar) tenets. This being the case, there is no real room left for conscience and true moral creativity, as anything that cuts against official teaching as perceived (I say "as perceived" because there is of course no actual official teaching) is reacted against in knee-jerk fashion, to the point where things like personally held sincere beliefs are grounds for excommunication. This is precisely what Tomberg experienced in his attempt to join the Orthodox Church; he was told that his "beliefs" around reincarnation - irrespective of public promulgation - were grounds for his expulsion. This is not something that happens in the RCC, at least not in the 20th century. Nonetheless, this stream is destined to give birth to something crucial for the 6th epoch, just as the RCC contains something of crucial importance but is nonetheless being held back in a certain way. I see a future in which both streams spiral together with the John stream, as James and Peter joined John on the Mount of Transfiguration.

[Rodriel Gabrez]

The Intellectual soul can’t be compromised as a whole, but of course its manifestations in individual souls can. What I mean is that success is not guaranteed for this or that individual, but for the Intellectual Soul as a whole it is. It can’t be rolled back into inexistence, as a whole. And this collective manifestation is sufficient for an individual soul to benefit from its support, even if many other souls around are being compromised. Steiner explained how these things work even when the particular individual in which the soul/member is embodied and actively at work is unaware of that. In the Fifth Gospel, for example, he mentions how Haeckel and Darwin only could exist with their science as an expression of the Christian impulse, even without being conscious of it (especially Haeckel). So I think that the intellectual Soul today can’t be completely compromised in a way that would bar the possibility for evolving souls to leverage it as a solid foundation for the next evolutionary phase. And I think the spiritual streams show that success, not only failure, has a tendency to spread too.

And - importantly, that integrity is a measure of its incarnated form, not its spiritual substantiality. In its incarnated form, the member maintains its integrity during the incoming season by remaining fully functional in its original element.

Why would integrity be a measure of the Soul’s incarnated form? If there were such a law, that poor rates of incarnation of a Soul/Member - Such as the Intellectual Soul - compromise integrity in a generalized way that blocks the possibility for other souls to develop the Consciousness soul, forerunners could not even exist. But they do exist.

I never said anything about the Intellectual Soul being "rolled back into inexistence." Of course once a particular level of morphology has been reached in human evolution it can't simply disappear. What I'm talking about is degradation, atrophy, erosion, etc. Once widespread degradation happens, it becomes more likely to spread and more difficult to reverse. Sure, if a small handful of people are still incarnated with the healthy member then all hope is not lost. But this would be a dire situation. The question of whether there are any true points of no return in human evolution is a profound one worthy of much discussion, but it is a fact that certain evolutionary trajectories lead to increasingly intractable scenarios. The eventual splitting of humanity into the good and evil races is an advanced manifestation of this.

[Rodriel Gabrez]

If we are going to talk about VT becoming critical of spiritual science, we should also include those Catholic works where he endorsed and praised it. The most critical comments were in private letters to single individuals, whereas the supporting and praiseworthy comments were in published works meant for the wider public. That is not to say these comments are mutually exclusive or contradictory - when we think through the wider context of his work carefully, I think they are easily reconciled, for reasons already discussed. For example, as late as 1972, he publicly expressed:

"The teaching on the heavenly hierarchies was renewed in the first quarter of the 20th century by the great Austrian seer and thinker Rudolf Steiner. The depth and breadth of Steiner's contribution to a new understanding of the spiritual hierarchies is such that this theme cannot be seriously considered today without taking into account his remarkable achievement, which, as far as wealth of stimulation, depth and multiplicity of viewpoints, inner lack of contradiction, and organic cohesion, is not to be compared with any seer or thinker - whether of the present, of the Middle Ages, or of antiquity - for it towers above them all."

I'd say you're right that this is generally the case - that Tomberg saw fit to be more critical in his personal communications. When one weights these personal communications against the full the context of his output and activities, one can easily come to understand that Tomberg's speech was highly pedagogical in nature, specifically crafted to have the most beneficial effect on the particular audience. When he wrote to Bernhard Martin, for instance, he was writing to a person who he knew full well was highly familiar with his work. He could reasonably and responsibly assume (or at least hope) that Martin would assess the personal statements being made in light of the broader context and come to the conclusion that the words are meant not as discursively interpreted opinions but as instructions and invitations for action. Statements like "spiritual science never existed" and the like are simply not meant to be read as statements of fact. Every such statement points directly back to the center of all Tomberg's activities: the Lazarus-John mystery. The above statement is to be read: "When Lazarus was raised as the unnamed beloved disciple, it was as if he never existed. Like Lazarus, Rudolf Steiner and his impulse have radiated their life forces out into the word such that the outer form could no longer be held together. These concentrated life forces were a source of death for their inaugurator who willingly took this death upon himself in order that it would become a spring of life for the future. Now come, let us enter this mill of death and make it our own! And may it be to the glory of the Lord!" Did Martin take Tomberg's personal comments this way? That's hard to tell from his book, to be honest. Anyway, you seem to be more or less on board with this. Just figured I'd elaborate this crucial point once more in hopes that it will land with others here.

[Rodriel Gabrez]

It occurred to me this evening that there is perhaps a better way to describe the Lazarus-John mystery in more directly anthroposophical terms. Consider the following:

Through natural science, the human being has selflessly given himself over to to the empirically observable world such that he has been emptied of certain levels of his soul organization. His life of feeling and morality, for instance, have escaped his focus, in order that he cultivate the very important independence of thought. The scientific sacrifice was actually a kind of soul death, a dying of the feeling and the moral will in order for the I to come alive in thought. Now, as the spiritual scientific impulse begins to reverse the direction of human evolution, from its midpoint of the logical intellect in the mineral world of sense up into the spiritual worlds, a new death takes place. This is the death of the world of mineral concepts. These mineral concepts - the carriers of the stability of the empirical world into the realm of thought - crumble to dust in thinking, and from the decaying matter living forms sprout forth. Spiritual science is the death and resurrection of man's conceptual life, of the layer of thinking for which he formerly sacrificed his deeper soul levels. Spiritual science is a mill of death whose glory is resurrected thought. It dies on the Cross with its inaugurator and thenceforth must live on in ever new and enlivened forms.