The Rudolf Steiner Archive

After an absence of eighteen months, our esteemed Annie Besant returned to Europe in May from the scene of her work in India to spend a few months among us in Europe working to spread the theosophical teachings and theosophical life.

As you all know, we will also have an opportunity to hear Annie Besant here in Berlin in a few days. When Annie Besant comes to Europe, even if it is only for a short time, it is a celebration for the members of the Theosophical Society on our continent and in England. It is a celebration especially for those who, out of full knowledge and insight, appreciate the greatness and significance of this unique personality. There are many people in Europe who are attached to this personality with a love built on knowledge and insight.

In the arena of her activity, where she is mostly active now, Annie Besant is particularly well understood. One understands why Annie Besant is so extraordinarily well understood and loved in India. You understand it when you read the words, which are on the one hand full of deep wisdom and on the other hand full of strength, in the lecture that Annie Besant gave two years ago at the annual meeting of the Theosophical Society in England and which is now also available in print. The lecture that Annie Besant gave at the time on the task of her own, the English people, in India was – if I may use the worn-out word – it was an act. For it was based on what I would call the deepest historical insight into the needs, the true, heartfelt needs of a people.

Annie Besant, if I may say so, spoke to the conscience of her compatriots at the time. And they were words of love - because only words of love can come from true theosophy - but at the same time they were words that sound quite different from what England, what English imperialism, is still doing in India today. They were words that were entirely appropriate for a theosophist.

What Annie Besant called for was nothing less than a modern fulfillment of what Christians call the miracle of Pentecost. You all know that this Pentecost miracle expresses in a powerful symbolism that at that time the apostles, the messengers of Christianity, began to speak in all tongues. They began to speak in all tongues for the reason that this is necessary for someone who wants to bring the message of the divine world order into the world. God speaks to all hearts. But only with one's own tongue can a member of a nation hear the divine word. If you go to a nation and try to interest them in the spirit of divine wisdom or to teach the spirit of human comfort, then you must, above all, be understood by that nation. You must speak in the tongue of that nation. You must take the words, the ideas, the feelings in which you express yourself from this people. The Theosophist sets himself the goal of respecting and appreciating the peculiarities of each people if he wants to contribute to the spread of human and divine wisdom.

And that is what Annie Besant demands of her people with such fervor, one might say, when she says: If you go to this country, then do not be strangers, not rulers, not conquerors, but loving friends who want to learn the language – at least the spiritual language – of the one to whom you want to speak, to whom you want to convey a culture other than your own.

You see, that is the understanding that Annie Besant has been showing the Indian people for years, the active understanding that has led her to work in India for the benefit of the education of this people, for the development of the extraordinarily high spiritual culture to our present day there. Because she knows how to speak to each person in his own tongue, in the sense of the symbolic miracle of Pentecost, and because the Indian people in particular have an understanding of it, Annie Besant is so very much loved there. Those who understand this spirit of genuine theosophical sentiment in the West as well, who do not just know it intellectually, but have grasped it with the depth of their hearts, so that it is the very principle of their lives, are equally devoted to Annie Besant, and for them Annie Besant is currently the soul of the theosophical movement. She is because the spiritual life, which the theosophical movement wants to bring to modern humanity, flows through each of her words, can be felt in each of her words, so that each of her words, although it comes from a complete mastery of all present sciences, at the same time sinks deeply into the hearts of her listeners, can sink deeply into their hearts.

Now, esteemed attendees, Annie Besant may be called the soul of the theosophical movement, and we may greet it with particular satisfaction that this year's season, our work this year, may begin with the work of Annie Besant within our section.

I would like to say that the theme of Annie Besant's lecture in Berlin next Friday is indicative of the whole task of the Theosophical movement and of the importance of the Theosophical Society in our time. The theme is “The New Psychology”, the new doctrine of the soul. We will prepare ourselves for the lecture, which is to be a celebration for us, by realizing what this lecture, in the sense of the Theosophical movement, is actually supposed to convey. Psychology, as you know, is the study of the soul. A “new psychology” is what will be discussed here. The word “new” indicates that we are dealing with a doctrine that was not there before. And if it was not there, then in relation to which doctrine of the soul is the one that Annie Besant is talking about a new doctrine of the soul? That we can speak today of a new doctrine of the soul is something that is connected with the whole task, with the whole meaning of our Theosophical movement. And probably if we could not speak today of a new doctrine of the soul, the Theosophical movement would not have attained any importance, would not have solved its task in such a way, as is already the case today to a high degree.

What was the old doctrine of the soul? We shall understand this if we look back half a century in the development of our cultural life. What I am about to say applies not only to Germany, but to all civilized countries. If we look back to the middle of the nineteenth century, we find that peculiar thoughts about the nature of the soul and the nature of the human spirit prevailed at that time. At that time, so-called materialism was at its peak. Those who had the ear of their contemporaries, such as Ludwig Büchner, Vogt, Moleschott and others, spoke for materialism. The words spoken by the natural scientists Vogt in Germany and Clifford in England resounded throughout the world: “Thoughts are secreted by the brain just as bile is produced by the liver.” So that was the time when people wanted nothing to do with a special soul. Those who wanted nothing to do with a special soul were those who placed the physical above the soul, those who wanted nothing to do with it were those who believed at the time that they were at the cutting edge of science. The flowering of science in the modern age had just begun.

If we take a look at the science of more recent times, we have to say that tremendous developments and discoveries were made in the world at that time. The new science of life was invented under the microscope. It was at that time that people first looked through the microscope at the smallest living creatures, the so-called cells. The doctrine of the origin of the earth, which we now call geology, was still very young. The gale-force winds of Darwinism swept through the educated world. Discovery followed discovery, and the discoveries in the scientific field meant that our external life was changing as industry made its great conquests in the field of natural science, of natural forces. Man had completely settled in the physical world. He had celebrated his great triumphs in the physical world. At the same time, this was the epoch in which man – at least the man who had immersed himself in it – became disoriented about the truths of thousands of years, by denying what the fathers and the fathers of our fathers had regarded as the principle of their existence, as the support of their lives.

We may say that not all of the educated, perhaps only a small number of them, had embraced this materialistic worldview. But that is not the point in the development of the human race. What matters is not whether only a few or the masses grasp some new idea, but whether that idea has the potential to be absorbed into the development of culture, whether it is suitable for being absorbed into the hearts of people, into the minds of those who reflect. There have always been only a few in the world who were knowledgeable. Go back to ancient times and you will always see that there were only a few spiritual leaders. And it is true that the spiritual possessions of the spiritual leaders later become the almost universal possessions of a large part of humanity. Go back to the times when Christianity spread, when the gospel that we call Christian first came into the world, and of which we must say that at first only a few people adhered to it. Then more and more people did so, and later there were millions. And if you go back to the time of the dawn of new eras, to the time of humanity's scientific discoveries, and do some research, you will find that only a few people believed in what are now scientific facts that are common knowledge to countless people – our views of the starry sky, for example, the so-called Copernican worldview. Look at how few people confessed to this belief centuries ago. You will see that there were only a few. And then the current flooded into the minds of a large number of people. This is the case with ideas that have the power to fill people's hearts. With them, it does not matter whether they are initially held by a few or a large number. What matters is who they are held by. Whether they are those who are at the summit of the times or not.

If you follow the times and go back to the first decades of Christianity, you will find that a large number of people, namely the best within European culture, who were at the height of their time in terms of spirituality, were seized by the principles of Christianity. And if you go back to the sixteenth century, you will find that a large number of people, inspired by the few, were convinced by the ideas that Copernicus, Galileo, Giordano Bruno and others brought into the world. They are the leaders of humanity, and the question is whether these leaders of humanity will find the ear of their contemporaries. It was an important question in the mid-nineteenth century as to whether the few whose convictions found expression in the words “The brain sweats out thoughts as the liver does bile” would find the ear of their contemporaries. It was, I say, a big question. For those who spoke in this way, we must realize, were not the worst of their age in those days. They were the ones who spoke from erudition, from science. And science itself had taken on a form that was quite capable of instilling such views in the hearts of many. You can imagine what would happen if, instead of the spiritual, the spiritual world view, the purely materialistic doctrine I have mentioned were to become common knowledge among mankind. Anyone who has an inkling of the devastating effects that the materialistic doctrine would have to wreak on humanity, anyone who is able to observe how the destructive, devastating forces of human nature are connected with this world view in particular, also knows that there was a danger within our education, within our development at that time; but they also know that it is people themselves who are leading history.

Our revered first teacher, Mrs. Blavatsky, once said in her “Secret Doctrine” - and it is a profound truth: Certainly, what is necessary happens in the world. And when an age needs a teaching, a wisdom, a truth, then it will come. But people are called upon to receive it. Although the higher forces must flow into human nature, human resistance, the destructive, evil forces of human nature, can delay the inflow of the higher forces for a long time. Man is not a weak-willed tool of the divine world order, but through thought and human feelings, this divine world order speaks. If we realize this, then we must say to ourselves: Much depends on how humanity in the second half of the nineteenth century positions itself in relation to the materialistic world view, and what it will say to those who are at the height of the materialistic world view. It was close – and the one who cannot observe the times cannot imagine how close it was – that the materialistic worldview would have completely found the ear of its contemporaries. In 1875, that stream of spiritual wisdom was sent into the world, that stream of spiritual wisdom that comes from the same beings from whom spiritual wisdom has spread through all times.

Our first teacher, Mrs. Blavatsky, was commissioned to make herself the mouthpiece for this spiritual wisdom, and those who listened to the messenger of higher beings, to Mrs. Blavatsky, were the first to vigorously counteract the materialistic flood. But do not think that the stream I spoke of was only active within what we call the Theosophical movement or Theosophical Society. Oh no, in the last third of the nineteenth century a mighty spiritual wave began to sweep over all of civilized humanity. Everywhere, the longing arose to recognize the spirit again. Everywhere, the longing arose to gain clarity in the face of the materialistic shaping of science. Only the standard-bearers, the pioneers of this spiritual direction, wanted to be theosophists. Look at all countries and see how all countries long for a new spiritual life, and how this spiritual life lives as a longing in all souls that often deal with the riddles of human life. This longing lives in people who today can call themselves the best of culture, and more than anything else lives in this urge for a new idealism, for a new spirituality. This spiritual wave has also had an effect in science, and there has been a mighty change in science, especially in recent years. Whoever knows that what is decided by the so-called authorities is only a relatively small wave, but one that spreads in all directions and affects humanity, and who also knows how the materialistic movement was aroused at the time, also knows what significance this new wave will have for humanity. Mankind must surely look up to those who have the opportunity to study science and truth. Where should the ordinary person turn when they ask: What is the smallest living thing? They can only turn to science. What priests were in the broadest sense in the past, men of science have become for modern, cultured humanity. But with the psychology that Vogt expresses with the words “The brain sweats out thoughts like the liver sweats out bile,” science, which is at the cutting edge today, has broken thoroughly.

Those who fifteen years ago proclaimed with certainty materialistic science, who denied any life that extends beyond birth and death, precisely those who, just fifteen years ago, did this but seriously engaged with science, who did not remain with prejudices and opinions, who developed further, it is precisely they who today speak a completely different language.

Those who once said that man descended from the mere animal, that the human soul is nothing more than an expression of the mechanically acting organism, just as the activity of a machine is an expression of the mechanical nature of that machine, those who spoke or speak like that, are no longer considered by the truly insightful to be at the level of science. Those who have developed further have at least come to the one thing, they have come to admitting: With materialistic science, there can be no question of attaining the soul, of knowing about the soul, of real psychology. Take a look around Germany. Natural scientists who have done their studies in the last fifteen years and are beginning to talk about these questions: how cautiously they speak compared to the materialistic certainty that could be heard fifteen years ago. Compare what was said about Darwin in the past with what is being said about him today. There is a tremendous difference. And if you look at books that come from infinite erudition, such as those by [Fresnel] – I could also name some German naturalists in this field – you will see the turnaround that has occurred in scientific thinking. Fifteen years ago, you could still hear the same mechanical science at work in the laboratory and the dissecting room, examining tissues under the microscope, and so on. It cannot provide any insights into the soul. Laplace, who originated the doctrine of the movement of the heavenly bodies, once made a remarkable statement to the great Napoleon. Napoleon said: “I find that in your explanations about the movement of the heavenly bodies, there is no God.” To which Laplace replied: “I don't need this hypothesis!” Just as Laplace, at the beginning of the nineteenth century, believed that he did not need the “God” hypothesis, so science believes that it does not need the soul hypothesis. It says: We have examined and dissected the brain, and we have not found a soul.

Today, only a natural scientist whose insights are outdated would say this. No natural scientist at the cutting edge of his or her field would say this. Today, the natural scientist who is not yet ready to embrace the new paths of a new soul doctrine will at least cautiously say: My science must stop at the problems of the soul, at the riddles of life.

That is what the natural scientists say: it is agnosticism, that is, non-science or non-knowledge. For many, this is a buzzword. The conviction that materialistic science must be modest and must be agnostic with regard to the higher realms of existence is becoming more and more widespread. From this you can see that the psychology of fifty years ago, which is not a psychology at all but a denial of everything spiritual, is on the way to being completely overcome.

But this materialistic doctrine of the soul has brought us one thing: for centuries and millennia there was a doctrine of the soul that priests taught and that comforted people when they were dying. At that time, many people were able to doubt this doctrine of the soul and they believed that they had to doubt it in honest conviction because, in their opinion, their research demanded it. Certainly, the eternal truths proclaimed by the religions of all times are unshakable, they stand firm. They have not been shaken, not even by the fact that individual people have lost their way with them. It is no proof that the materialistic doctrine of the soul has spread, that at that time this doctrine of the religions did not have the power to bring about the conviction of its truth. But the spirit had become weak, especially in the inquisitive and striving seekers of truth. And because it had become weak, the spirit, through the floods of new physical truths that had befallen it under the splendor of the new cultural achievements, because it had achieved another, external, physical greatness, therefore it lagged behind in spiritual life, therefore it could not comprehend the truths in the old form. A new form for the teaching of the soul has therefore become necessary. And a completely new method of research has also become necessary. And while the natural scientists I have been talking about have become more modest over the last fifteen years, while they have moved towards non-knowledge, towards agnosticism, others are working on developing a new teaching of the soul.

They are working on it and investigating what does not present itself to external research, what only presents itself to the spiritual and soul view. Thus we see that within the last twenty years a new psychology has flourished, quite independently of all occultist movements. We see that within the circles of scholars, natural scientists, researchers, a new psychology is emerging. And while the Theosophists want to be the pioneers and standard-bearers for a spiritual deepening of humanity, here you see the work beginning from a completely different side. You see how the same results are being sought on a much larger scale, which the Theosophical Society wants to bring to the world. The spiritual forces work uniformly. Do not imagine that it is other forces than the spiritual beings who stand behind the Theosophical movement that are inspiring modern scholars to a new psychology. These beings choose many paths. They choose them unconsciously in human terms in order to advance humanity in the knowledge of the spirit and in the study of the soul. One of the paths that runs parallel to Theosophy is the path that the new psychology is taking. The theosophist already knows where this new psychology will lead in years to come. He knows that it is a tributary that will flow into the great stream of spiritual movement, which is represented by the theosophical teaching and by the theosophical life. In full foresight of what must come, and in order to truly bring humanity to an understanding of what must come, the theosophical movement has been called into the world by beings who transcend far beyond the measure of what the most highly educated person can achieve within our culture. Anyone who does not believe in all modesty that his wisdom is the sum of all wisdoms, that his judgment represents the highest judgment, will soon be able to observe that there are other people besides him who have more wisdom and more judgment, and he will listen to these personalities, will let himself be taught by them. When he gains some insight, he will come to say to himself: I still have the way to go that others have already gone. The more insight a person gains, the more humble he becomes in this regard, the more clearly he realizes how much he still has to learn, and the more likely he is to find those who have something to teach him from their spiritual heights, which he has not yet reached. If someone believes that they cannot learn anything from anyone, it is a sure sign that they have not progressed very far. The more advanced a person is, the more he comes to the certain knowledge that people are at different stages of development, and that there have always been those who have been spiritual guides to humanity and who have progressed further in their development than their fellow brothers, the most advanced brothers. They are the ones who are most difficult to understand, indeed, to be recognized, by their less developed fellow brothers. It was from such highly developed entities, difficult to understand and recognize, that the great spiritual stream emanated in 1875, which, with the help of the Theosophical movement, poured out over humanity, which longed for it.

People often ask why these highly developed entities do not show themselves, why they only make themselves felt to a limited extent. The answer can be found in one of the most profound works produced by the Theosophical movement, in the small booklet, which, however, encompasses a world of wisdom, in “Light on the Path”. What is said there, that the guiding beings, these highly developed individualities that tower far above their fellow human beings, can be there, yes, can be in the midst of a crowd without being recognized, that they can be in St. Petersburg, in Berlin, in London, in Paris, without anyone - except for a very few - knowing about it. This is literally true. There are reasons, certain reasons, why the advanced leader of humanity must

remain hidden. We cannot deal with such reasons today. But it is necessary for the highest teachers to build a kind of wall around themselves, and that only those who are prepared by a suitable way of life should have access to them. Such entities were and are continually the source of the movements we call theosophical. Such entities, in their infinite benevolence, also have great power, and much of what happens in humanity comes from these beings without humanity suspecting it.

When we speak of new currents in spiritual life, of a new psychology, which seems to be apart from the great theosophical stream, it is only seemingly so. The same entities and forces are at work there too, and they speak the language that can be understood in the circles of scholarship, in the circles of scientific research. For the observation of the miracle of Pentecost, of speaking in all tongues, is the principle of the theosophist, that is what completely fulfills him. That is why it speaks to each race, each people and each tribe in its own language. That is why it speaks in the language of the Hindus in India and in other tongues in other places, to the hearts of people who are accustomed to thinking and speaking in scientific terms, these beings are also able to speak to them in their language. And gently and mildly and slowly, Theosophy will also guide science in its paths.

This is the perspective for the future. The theosophist knows that what is to be will be. He knows that even though we have to speak of it today as a very young plant, he knows that this new teaching of the soul will grow into a mighty light in a short time, that it will radiate and fill people with a completely new consciousness of the times.

This new psychology has been established by the scholars and will continue to be developed by the scholars. But if we want to learn about its significance and its mission in the future, then we must hear about this new psychology from the theosophists, and our dear and esteemed Annie Besant will speak about the significance and essence of this new psychology in Berlin on Friday. You see how a single act of a theosophist is connected with the whole task of theosophy, and how in turn the whole task of theosophy is connected with the task of our time. We do not believe that the theosophical movement is called upon to explore the souls of people for new truths, as is happening in the field of new psychology, nor do we believe that these truths can be found in ancient wisdom. We are clear about one thing: wherever new life is sprouting in the present, wherever something new is emerging, it needs to be imbued with a spiritual breath, to be directly revitalized with new spiritual life. And this spiritual life, this breath, which should blow through the souls and hearts of our present-day humanity, this direct life in the face of the new truths, is what the theosophical movement wants to bring.

You will hear about the new truths in a new form from all lecterns and from all sides in the future. The theosophical movement wants to give the deepest life, which must permeate it, the soul itself of this new spiritual life. And he who is imbued with this life, who is imbued with this attitude, wants that all our new souls striving for truth be inspired, that what we explore from a warm heart penetrates into hearts, so that it gives us strength to live and comfort for our gaze into the farthest future for that which would have to remain a dead letter, dead science, if it remained merely scientific, the one who wants to bring it to life, he is a theosophist. For those who hear the inner voice speaking in quiet moments, for such men and women, the Theosophical Society is only the outer instrument. It does not depend on whether something is more or less good or bad in the Theosophical Society. It is built on human weakness and with human judgment, like all human institutions. The greatest masters themselves, who have brought us the theosophical wisdom, who speak to those who imbue the theosophical movement with life, cannot deal with external social foundations. They leave that to those who carry out their orders, who place themselves in their service as their messengers. It is not the external framework that matters. But we want to preserve it precisely because we do not overestimate it and because we need it, and because we would be disturbed and prevented from working if we did not have this external framework as an all-encompassing one that covers Europe, America, Asia, Africa and Australia. We want to draw attention to the fact that it is not this framework, but the spirit that humanity needs, and that through the theosophical movement flows to those who want it.

Thus, a society in which Theosophists are gathered is something different from a society in which others are gathered in the present time, something essentially different. Everyone seeks out societies, geographical, anthropological, philological, philosophical, and so on. They find that all cultural products must spread through society. But one thing is different in the theosophical movement. Where theosophists are united, they do not all want to be united by common truths, not all by common convictions, by dogmas, they want to be united in that which cannot be grasped by the mind, not by the intellect, but by the heart, the heart that comprehends and is filled with wisdom, which is at the same time the heart that loves. The theosophists want to be filled with a common spiritual life. When they are united, this common spiritual life should flood their souls. And wherever there is a theosophical lodge, wherever more or less theosophical personalities of the present have united, they want to form a center where they gather these powers of soul and spirit, this power from which this spiritual life then radiates in all directions. Every meeting and every branch should be such a center, and something invisible should radiate out from it. What matters in these gatherings is not what this or that person says, whether he is more or less learned, not whether he is this or that, but whether those who are gathered are filled with this true spiritual life that radiates from their center, so that the humanity of the present can grasp it more and more. What matters is not what I say here, not my words, but each and every one of us who is gathered here. What passes through all our souls at the moment we have gathered here is what matters. It is only by chance that one person speaks and only by chance that one person puts into words what needs to be said. What one person says is no more important than what is going on in the souls of the others, in the eyes of those who lead the theosophical movement. What is important is the spiritual life, which should flourish in all souls at this moment and radiate out to the rest of the world, to the present-day human civilization. That is the true teaching of our society. That is what is embodied in our Annie Besant, and that is why we can call her the soul of the Theosophical Society. That is why she embodies the task of the Theosophical Society before the others. That is why what she does is specifically Theosophical work. And if today we have tried to immerse ourselves for an hour in the spirit of the Theosophical Movement and in the task of the Theosophical Society, if we have tried to understand what will be embodied for all of us in the near future, as if alive, next Friday and Sunday, then this task of ours should stand before our soul, shining before us as the best Theosophical light in the present. Hopefully we will get beyond the preparations to what it has to say to us about important questions of the present in the theosophical movement.

The annual meeting was opened at around half past three by the First Chairman, Dr. Rudolf Steiner. After reading the minutes of the previous year's annual meeting, to which no objections were raised, Dr. Steiner took the floor again to give a brief review of the year's events. He gave a brief summary of the following:

Relocation of lectures from Wilhelmstr. 118 to the architects' house. The rooms are more pleasant and more worthy of the Theosophical cause. Nevertheless, there has been no increase in attendance.

Monday members' evenings: the Monday meetings would like to develop into real members' evenings, at which there should be lively discussion and real interaction between members.

Visit and lecture by Mrs. Annie Besant: “What has been said here is to be understood as a kind of business report, because the Theosophist cannot speak of success or non-success, cannot merely focus on the increase in membership. The Berlin audience has responded in various ways to this significant rally. I would like to report on just one fact that will show, in a flash, how the Theosophical movement is viewed in many significant places in Berlin. The chairman of the Giordano Bruno League, Mr. Wolfgang Kirchbach, took a stand against Theosophy in his lecture introducing the winter of 1904/5, which is characterized in the League's communications with the following words: [gap in the transcript]

These words show very clearly how little one knows about Theosophy and how reluctant one is to deal with its teachings. However, one would not be mistaken in assuming that this statement characterizes the position of the leaders almost without exception, but not that of the members.

Ms. von Sivers then reported on membership trends. Despite a great deal of activity, the number of members in the branch has grown relatively little. Last year, the Berlin branch had 58 members. Today, the number of members is 88, so there has been an increase of 30 members (14 women, 16 men).

This was followed by the cash report by Fräulein von Rosen. On [gap in transcript] 1903, the Berlin branch had a balance of 576.67 marks. The cash balance on October 20, 1904, was 653 marks, which is 76.33 marks more.

The income consists of:
Cash balance 1903: 576.67 Marks
Membership fees: 626.45 Marks
[Gap in the transcript): 691.56 Marks
Total: 1894.68 Marks

Expenses amounted to 1241.68 Marks,
therefore cash balance as of October 20, 1904: 653 Marks.

Last year, the library's cash balance was...

received in lending fees: Mark...
received in subscriptions: Mark...
together
[numbers missing from transcript]

Spent:

1. for renting the room: 300 Marks
2. book purchases: 218.66 Marks
[so together 518.66 marks]

Therefore, this year a shortfall of 124.15 marks.

It should be noted that the rent is paid until May 1905, when the shortfall would be only 24.14 marks as of October 1.

Account of the lecture by Mrs. Annie Besant. When Miss von Sivers wanted to hand in the account, the chairman Dr. Steiner noted that this was a matter for the Section, because Mrs. Annie Besant had donated the proceeds to the Section treasury.

This concluded the reports.

In response to Dr. Steiner's question as to whether there were any comments or questions to be made about the reports, Mr. Krojanker requested the floor and asked the following question regarding the library: “Who owns the library? The Berlin branch, the German Section or someone else?” To which Dr. Steiner replied: “The library is a separate entity and was originally founded as a kind of annex to the ‘German Theosophical Society’. Then a library fund was formed from voluntary donations and from the proceeds of a lecture by Emanuel Reicher, and at the same time the library was emancipated from the DTG. Supervision, administration and ownership were transferred to a committee. The Berlin branch has neither income nor expenses related to the library. The library was given to us privately. I would have put things in order, but I was unable to find a way and an authority or agency to deal with."

Julius Engel added the following to this report: ”Originally, the library belonged to the DTG; then came Emanuel Reicher, from whose lecture the library received a large sum of money. Since Reicher did not want to join the Theosophical Society and did not want to give lectures in favor of the library under the name of a Theosophical library, the name of the library was changed to: “Library for Comparative Religious Studies” and the ownership and administration was transferred to a commission that at that time consisted of Count and Countess Brockdorff, Krecke, Reicher, Hübbe-Schleiden."

Miss Motzkus also noted that the room for the library had been rented in order to have a home of their own. Miss von Sivers replied, “Yes, if we had our own headquarters, that would be possible, but not if we were in private rooms.”

Finally, the assembly agreed to appoint a commission to examine the facts and documents, after whose report further steps would be taken.

The following were elected to the examination commission: Mr. Krojanker, Mr. Engel, Mr. [Quaas.

Furthermore, Mr. Krojanker proposed: to award Dr. Rudolf Steiner 300 marks for the lectures he gave in the past year (1903). After Dr. Steiner had handed over the chair to the second chair, Miss von Sivers, because it was a personal matter for him, he took the floor to speak about this request as follows: “It would be more in line with the theosophical way of thinking if you did not provide the amount as a fee for lectures, but perhaps for the purpose of being able to do more effective propaganda for Theosophy, so that if something should be done sometimes, I would have 40 to 50 marks at my disposal without having to be given special compensation for it. Besides, I also have concerns of principle. It is common practice in the Theosophical Society that the most important officials, but especially those who work for the content of the movement (speakers, general secretaries), are not actually remunerated by the Society or the branches. For these reasons, I cannot accept a fee for the lectures.

Hlerr] Werner: “Little is known about our society; much more extensive propaganda should be carried out. If you want to accommodate the chairman with good advice, then that is small-minded. Dr. Steiner's work should not be paid for at all. [illegible] You must not curtail his wings in any way, and therefore I request that the chairman be given a free hand with regard to propaganda and financial matters.

Mr. Krojanker replied that there was a misunderstanding here. Nobody wanted to tie Dr. Steiner down, but rather to free him from the burden of subordinate work and to enable him to dispose of limited amounts of money more freely.

Elections:

Board: Mr. Kiem is unanimously elected to the board in place of the previous treasurer, Miss von Rosen; Miss Schwiebs is elected as a trusted representative in place of Baron von Reisner, who is ill.

Executive Committee: Baron von Reisner is replaced by Miss Frölich. The committee itself elects its chair and secretary. Mr. Krojanker will convene the first meeting.

Auditors: The following were appointed as auditors: Mr. Tessmar, auditor, and Mr. Georgi. The following were elected as delegates to the General Assembly of the German Section: Mr. Kiem, Mr. Krojanker and Mr. Seiler, in addition to the First Chairman, Dr. Steiner, and the Second Chairman, Miss von Sivers.

Book sale: The ladies Frölich, Mücke, [Voigt] agreed to help out.

Proposal for the section's general assembly:

Since Mrs. von Holten has resigned from her post as treasurer, a new treasurer must be elected. The Berlin branch proposes: Miss von Sivers as cashier, Mr. Seiler to keep the books.

Dr. Steiner then took the floor again to explain his position in more detail: “The Theosophical Society,” he continued, “is not in the same position as any other society with regard to such matters. Another society would be able to accept Krojanker's proposal. But with the Theosophical Society it is necessary to note the following: we are dealing with two different things; we have to distinguish between the Theosophical Society and the occult movement to which we belong. For me, the situation is that on the one hand I belong to the Berlin branch of the Theosophical Society and speak for members of the Berlin branch, but on the other hand I am part of an occult movement and speak as an occultist in all matters. There is no way to make any advance arrangements through the association for what I do at this point.

The Theosophical Society cannot easily be associated with the occult movement. It may be the case that the Society decides on a lecture cycle that I, as an occultist, cannot give for some reasons that often cannot even be explained. Although it is not likely that obstacles will arise in the relations between the Theosophical Society and the occult movement on which it is based, this circumstance must always be taken into account. On the other hand, it is also desirable for the members of the Berlin branch to be active in propaganda.

Mr. Werner requests that his motion be voted on first, as it is the more extensive one. It reads: To grant the board of directors, or rather Dr. Steiner, complete freedom of disposal. The meeting, however, considers Krojanker's motion to be the more extensive one and adopts it without further objection. The wording was: In addition to the freedom of disposal, Dr. Steiner is also to be given 300 marks for his personal disposal.

Lectures:

Krojanker: “It is necessary to distinguish between lectures held for the Berlin branch and those organized by Dr. Steiner himself. Only the former can be considered here. If the results were not very favorable, it is mainly because the arrangement was not handled very well. It seems better to me that the Berlin branch be given more autonomy in this regard, that is, that the board or the executive committee be consulted when arranging lectures, and that they then carry out the propaganda for the lectures. Tickets could be sold long before the event begins; the distribution of tickets could be handled in a more business-like manner. Then one would no longer be so dependent on how many happen to come up from the street. The individual measures should be discussed and decided in advance by the Executive Council or Executive Committee, and then the propaganda should be carried out with the help of all available resources. The members would then have to get tickets and try to find accommodation for them.

Private study groups:

Dr. Steiner is quite in agreement that groups and study courses should be formed among the members, in which more experienced Theosophists can sometimes participate.

Congress:

Miss von Sivers pointed out that the possibility existed of the General Theosophical Congress being transferred to Berlin, that a great deal of money would then be needed and that it might be a good idea to start collecting in good time.

Dr. Steiner replied: “As long as we don't have 700 members, we can't take on the congress. Besides, it has to be a theosophical congress. The presentations must not cause the participants' heads to turn in circles; a form must be found that does not contain such an abuse.

There were around 50 people in attendance, including Mr. Julius Engel as a guest. The meeting ended at half past six.

Report, presumably by Rudolf Steiner in “Lucifer – Gnosis” no. 19/1904.

The German Section of the Theosophical Society (Adyar headquarters) held its annual meeting on October 29 and 30. The German branches were represented partly by personal delegates (Berlin, Charlottenburg, Cologne, Weimar, Leipzig, Hamburg, Munich, Stuttgart), and partly (Düsseldorf, Dresden, Hannover, Nuremberg) by appointed proxies. Newly elected to the board were: Fräulein Stinde (Munich), Mr. Arenson (Cannstatt) and Mr. Seiler (Berlin). The number of members has increased from 130 to 261 since October 1, 1903. One particular point of discussion was the association's conduct towards the “theosophical” associations of Germany, which have not yet realized that it is impossible for divisions and antagonisms to prevail in a society based on the principle of brotherhood. Since these societies were all formed on the basis of the main society established in Adyar, they alone are responsible for the divisions, and not the main society. It was now decided to act objectively in accordance with the principle of brotherhood towards these societies, but not to participate in any way in their organizations, whatever their nature. The proposal adopted by the General Assembly reads: “The General Assembly of the German Section of the Theosophical Society of October 30, 1904, resolves not to participate in any undertaking originating from other so-called Theosophical Societies and considers it the duty of each branch to act in the same way. Any participation can therefore only be a private one by individual members.”

The following are currently members of the board of the German Section of the Theosophical Society: Dr. Rudolf Steiner (General Secretary), Marie von Sivers (Berlin Motzstr. 17, Secretary), Julius Engel (Charlottenburg), Richard Bresch (Leipzig), Bernhard Hubo (Hamburg), Helene Lübke (We , Sophie Stinde (Munich), Ludwig Deinhard (Munich), Adolf Arenson (Cannstatt-Stuttgart), Mathilde Scholl (Cologne), Franz Seiler (Berlin), Günther Wagner (Lugano), Adolf Kolbe (Hamburg).

On October 29th there was a free discussion among the members. On October 30th, from four o'clock on, lectures took place: I. Mr. Richard Bresch (Leipzig) spoke stimulatingly about: “Should we teach theosophy to young people?” II. Dr. Rudolf Steiner gave a lecture “On the Nature of Clairvoyance”.

Report by Richard Bresch in “Vâhan”, Volume VI, No. 5, November 1904

After the board meeting on Saturday at three o'clock, the actual general assembly was scheduled for Sunday morning at ten o'clock. All thirteen lodges were represented: Berlin with five votes, Leipzig with three, all the other lodges with two votes each, making a total of thirty votes. Düsseldorf, Hannover, Lugano and Nuremberg were not represented directly but by proxy, and Nuremberg, Dresden and Munich were represented for the first time as new lodges.

The General Secretary, Dr. Rudolf Steiner, welcomed those present and emphasized that we Germans are an advanced post for Central Europe for the spread of the great spiritual wave that poured over the Occident through the Theosophical movement in 1875. He then looked back over the past year and emphasized Mrs. Besant's visit as the most important event for the German Section, and he was convinced that it had a favorable influence. Dr. Steiner then spoke about his lecture at the Dresden Congress. As a Theosophist, he was not accountable for what had prompted him to do so, but as General Secretary he wanted to say a few words about it. He regarded the fact that the so-called Secessionist movement had adopted our title “Theosophical Society” as a mistake, regardless of whether it was moral or intellectual. Our relationship to others should therefore be understood to mean that we must help them. He would have given the lecture that was requested of him anywhere, regardless of what the society calls itself. Whether one should actively participate in the organizations is another question! He (Dr. Steiner) personally considers this a mistake, and that is why he did not participate in anything during the entire congress, even though he was in Dresden the whole time. Regarding voting, which had been a dubious point up to now, it was decided that the lodges should be free to decide whether they wanted to cast their votes in one hand or have them cast by several delegates. To avoid complications, all correspondence (including payments) intended for the German Section should be addressed to Miss Marie von Sivers, Berlin W., Motzstraße 17.

Dr. Noll (Kassel) was replaced on the board by Miss Stinde (Munich) and Mr. Oppel (Stuttgart) by Mr. Arenson (Cannstatt); Mrs. von Holten was replaced as treasurer by Mr. Seiler (Charlottenburg). Mr. Krojanker replaced Mr. Seiler as auditor.

As for the treasury, at the end of the financial year, the income amounted to 1795 marks, the expenditure to 795.04 marks. Of this, 427.51 marks were paid to the headquarters in Adyar, and the remaining expenses were distributed among the printing of the statutes, invitations to the congress, postage, and the German Section's contribution to the Amsterdam European Congress, so that the cash balance is currently 999.96 marks.

The number of members has increased from 130 on October 1, 1903 to 251, an increase of 121 members. 7 members have resigned or died.

Various reports have been provided about the activities of the representatives of the foreign branches. In particular, Lugano has expressed its thanks in writing and Dr. Steiner has expressed his thanks verbally through his representative in Stuttgart for their work over the past year.

Inspired by the editorial footnote on page 86 of the October “Vâhan”, Mr. Ffelix] L[öhnis] (for Dresden) had submitted two proposals. The first read, not in words but in spirit, as follows: The General Assembly should decide whether it considers it consistent with the spirit of the constitution and the decisions of the General Council and President of the Theosophical Society to allow Adyar members to participate in the convening of a general Theosophical Congress.

During the discussion of this proposal, however, the fear was expressed that the sharp tone sometimes adopted towards the secession at the “Vâhan” might do more harm than good, but in fact the view expressed in the footnote was generally agreed upon, with the exception of the proposer, as it also corresponded to the guideline set out by Dr. Steiner. Experience has shown that such congresses tend to form a new organization. Therefore, the co-convocation of such congresses by Adyar members cannot be approved, and such action can no longer be regarded as a mere private matter for members. Consequently, the following motion was adopted:

“The General Assembly of the German Section of the Theosophical Society of October 30, 1904, resolves not to participate in any undertaking originating from other so-called Theosophical Societies and considers it the duty of each individual branch to act in the same way. Any participation can only be a private one of the individual members.”

The second motion by Mr. Ffelix] L[öhnis] was to collect all the general resolutions and executive decrees scattered in “Theosophist” and (in German) in “Vâhan” and to attach them to the statutes, so that no one who, when joining the society, was only presented with the constitution and statutes, could not be ambushed by such a resolution, as happened to the applicant with the footnote in question, and also so that the police, to whom the constitution and statutes are to be submitted when a lodge is founded, are provided with everything and treated fairly. This motion was unanimously approved and adopted as a resolution. The only surprising thing is that it has not long since been recognized as a need throughout the entire society.

Now that this footnote has provided clarity in an important matter, thus protecting the members from missteps and also providing a truly not inconsiderable, lasting benefit, those readers who were offended by it will probably be reconciled to it. However, why all this could not be achieved without “taking refuge in the public sphere” must remain undiscussed here.

A proposal was made from Munich to move the headquarters to Munich because of the favorable prospects for theosophy there, but the general assembly merely took note of this proposal. Mr. B. Hubo then suggested calling for voluntary contributions to provide the society with a better financial foundation. After a short debate, it was decided that the board should be instructed to call for such contributions. At half past two, all the items on the agenda had been completed.

On the evening of October 30th, from half past four o'clock, lectures and discussions took place. First, our Mr. Bresch spoke on the topic: “Should we teach theosophy to young people?” Then Dr. Steiner spoke on “The Nature of Clairvoyance”. A report on the latter lecture can be found in this issue, and we will include the former in the next issue or two.

Before I set out on my journey to southern and western Germany, I would like to speak to you once again about the nature of the Theosophical movement and its relationship to the Theosophical Society, for the Theosophical movement is of such comprehensive significance that at the beginning of a new year - which may be a very fruitful one for our work - we may recall the task, goals and working methods of this Theosophical movement.

The theosophical movement is not one that can be compared to any other movement in the present day, not even remotely. The most diverse people face this movement – which has spread across all developed countries of our earth in its not yet thirty-year existence – they face it in different ways and have faced it from the very beginning.

Ever since the emissary of our great and exalted masters, Mrs. Blavatsky, founded this movement, it has undergone many changes. She has seen people in her midst who have left her and others who have remained loyal and zealous since they entered it, and have also persevered with her. There have been members who have come to the Theosophical Society out of curiosity, who have come to learn about the insights that humans can gain into higher, spiritual worlds, among many other interesting things that one can learn about in the present.

But because the path that the theosophical movement can offer people is a safe one, it is not the easiest, not the most comfortable, not the one that can be taken from one day to the next, so that the highest spiritual phenomena immediately present themselves as an absolute truth. Rather, a zealous endeavor, a truly intense devotion, is necessary. That is why those who enter the theosophical movement out of curiosity become apostates over time, because they believe that they cannot achieve what they want to achieve in a short period of time; or because they believe that the theosophical movement has nothing to offer them.

Of course, the Theosophical Society did not expect many such curious people from the outset, although curiosity is often a detour to the truth and to theosophical knowledge. For many, curiosity later developed into a real theosophical pursuit. Others come to the Theosophical Society to truly undergo an inner psychological development. They really want to arrive at the certainty of a soul and spiritual life and achieve mystical deepening in order to become an important link in human development. These are better members. To begin with, they strive to recognize and experience as much as possible within themselves. In the higher sense, this is still a selfish pursuit; but even the highest pursuit of knowledge is a selfish and not a selfless pursuit. They also know that this is not the highest goal. But there is a beautiful saying that characterizes this state of affairs: “When the rose adorns itself, it also adorns the garden.” The detour via this egoism is thus a serious and good one, and those who take it can be worthy and genuine members of the Theosophical movement. Perhaps they are right to strive for their own perfection, because a person will only become a useful and valuable member of society when he has perfected himself. What use is an imperfect person to his fellow human beings? What use is someone who has only a superficial understanding of life? Only when one is able to look into human hearts and souls, when one is able to solve the great riddles of the world to some extent for oneself, can one intervene in the human hustle and bustle; only then can one do something for one's fellow human beings and for the world in the right way. Therefore, self-perfection, the absorption of spiritual knowledge, is a right and good path. No one can be reproached for being selfish if he seeks the path of self-perfection. And he who remains [true] will find that he has not searched in vain in the theosophical movement, that the path leads quietly but surely to what he seeks. Some may say that there are other paths. These other paths are not to be fought or opposed in the slightest. I know how the other spiritual movements serve the world. Not a word of contradiction will come from a true Theosophist. There can be no question of that.

But the one who seeks the spirit in the highest sense must seek this spirit through self-knowledge. Everyone has the spirit within them, and it is basically not useful to seek spiritual knowledge in the world around us if we do not want to recognize the most accessible spirit, the spirit within ourselves, in the true sense of the word. There are many who seek to recognize the spirit through all kinds of artificial means, and in doing so completely forget what spirit is in such close proximity: it is our own soul, our own spirit. We can find it if we want to search in the right way. But it lies deep within the human heart. We must search for it deeper and deeper in the layers of our own inner being. For what dwells within us is the same that dwells in the world as spirit and soul. The God who creates in the world, who has been creating in the world for millions of years, can be found in the human heart. And just as the natural scientist studies the world outside, seeking to understand the physical forces of stones, plants, animals and human beings, so too can no one truly recognize the soul and spirit in the world without really studying the soul and spirit. And the spirit, which has always created in the world and will always create in the world, dwells in a reflection, in a mirror image in ourselves. We develop further and further towards this spirit, our soul becomes ever more extensive.

Thus, theosophical striving is nothing other than the striving to become aware of the creative soul and spiritual beings in the world. What we carry within us today, what we find when we descend into the layers of our soul life, we once created and developed. If we could go back – and the theosophist gradually learns to go back into the distant past – then we would find the same soul forces building the world structure before there was any physical substance out there. And we would find the spirit that lives as a spark within us, creating out there in the world before there were chemical and physical forces. Spiritual and divine forces were at work. And higher than all physical existence, than all corporeal existence, is this spiritual existence; and not only higher, but older is this spiritual existence than the corporeal.

So we descend within ourselves and bring up from our own heart and soul layers the primal riddle-question with its solution, through which the world itself came into being. Those who immerse themselves in theosophy and descend into the layers of their own soul and spiritual life will find the forces that were at work before an eye saw or an ear heard. Before fire, air and water were on our earth, soul and spirit were in the sky and brought all this into being. We find something lasting and superior to the physical when we descend into these layers of our heart and mind. And then we do not draw from ourselves, but from the formative forces of the world. The great teachers and all those you have met among the great souls and spirits have gone down into the human interior. They have not only recognized themselves, but have opened their view beyond the stars and infinities.

Through self-knowledge, we are also able to recognize how the worlds were created and where man had his origin; and also the goals of man, the distant and the near, and our world task we are able to get out of the layers of the spirit through self-knowledge. What we know about the origin of planets, rounds and races, what we know about solar bodies and solar systems, and what we know about the emergence of living beings from the solar system and the world bodies, has been gained through self-knowledge, through that self-knowledge which has struggled to recognize in one's own spirit what it is today, what has been drawn into it through eons. What is present in him today leads us to the realization of what has always been present in him – present in him and at the same time outside in the world.

When you look at a tree, it has annual rings. But you first have to cut through the trunk to be able to see the annual rings. In the same way, the soul has received its rings for the one who can observe it. Each year such rings are added. The soul has passed through the cycles, the rounds and the races, and everywhere it has formed such an annual ring. This view is not seen by man today. But when he has become seeing, he sees what has remained as a result of the development. That is the way of self-knowledge, of self-perfection. Thus, through self-knowledge, the world unlocks. Thus man gets to know his task through this self-knowledge. And then he comes to an understanding of [the task of] the theosophical movement.

And that is the realization that presents itself to us, that the theosophical movement is a necessity for present and future humanity. I can only hint at what I have often said. Other races preceded our race; other races that still had spiritual knowledge. The Lemurian race, although not so advanced in mind and imagination and then perished by fire, still had a direct connection with the spiritual beings of the world, a direct knowledge of people was present. Man has lost his spiritual knowledge because he was called to develop his mind, because he was called to develop his mind through the senses.

The Atlanteans were still able to connect spiritually with other superior beings. We know that the Lemurians were brought over to the Atlanteans in small colonies to form the new root race. And we also know that when the floods began to break in, through which the Atlantic continent perished, the Manu sent a small group to the center of Asia. And when the old Atlantis was drawing to a close, the Manu led his little band, which was to form the basis for our race, into the Gobi or Shamo desert. There they were protected from the decadent inhabitants who had remained from the Atlanteans and Lemurians. And so the first sub-race of our race formed. They moved to the west. The other races remained behind. We ourselves descend from this small group. Our fifth root race will not meet its downfall through fire or water, but in a different way our present race will experience its twilight, in order to be led to a new stage, to a new existence. The theosophist learns about this stage, and he does preparatory work for the future of humanity, for the coming race. The struggle for existence will be the form of our

It will be saved in a small group. This will be recruited from those who have recognized that they must lead, and who have sought soul and spirit again.

Unlike in the past, work must be done in the present time. In the past, people were separated into small cultural areas, and each culture could only work in a small area. Even during the ancient Indian culture, and also during the Persian, Egyptian, Greek and Roman cultures, people were limited to smaller territories. Now the whole earth has become our dwelling place. Our technology, which is the greatness of our race, spans the whole earth. There is no longer any separation. Goods produced far from us are distributed all over the earth. The earth has become a common dwelling place. People can no longer be distinguished by individual colors, races, climates; they now exchange not only goods but also opinions.

Nothing can exist anymore for a small group only. Today we have a new task through which we can all grow into a new future. It is the task of the Theosophical movement to grasp this.

The leaders of humanity at the beginning and during the [first sub-race] of the fifth root race were the Rishis in India, of whom the modern researcher knows almost nothing. Only those who have come to the vision of the higher worlds through mystical knowledge can tell of them. They created that wonderful culture of which the Vedic culture is only a faint reflection. All that we know of Vedic culture originated in much later times. For those who are able to observe the world spiritually, there is a time of which no document reports, a time when in ancient India, God-gifted spirits, the Rishis, taught directly. That was a land culture.

Then comes a culture that is again limited to one country: the ancient Persian, the Zarathustrian culture. There have been seven Zarathustras. The Zarathustra who is usually mentioned is the seventh. He is the incarnation of all previous Zarathustras. What is preserved in the books of the Persian religion was only recorded in much later times. Here we look back on a second inspired creed in our racial development.

We now move west. We encounter the wonderful Egyptian culture, a culture of which books give us knowledge. The Egyptian Book of the Dead is a result of the culture of Hermes. Then we come to Greece and Italy to the Orphic primeval culture, which arose on European soil and from which we still draw. Then we come up to the sublime religion of the founder of Christianity and finally into our time.

We have thus glimpsed a series of human religious beliefs that originated with individual great founders of religions. For us, these great, exalted founders are nothing more than members of a spiritual community of beings and individualities that stand highly exalted above our humanity, so highly exalted that today man can only look up with admiration and humility to the great ones who have brought the spiritual [impulses] of our development. But at the same time, as we look up to them, we know that we too are called to ascend to such clarity and spirituality. The holy men have emerged from what we call the lodge of exalted human leaders.

Those who brought Egyptian culture then moved west and, when they came as emissaries to the west, to Europe, they brought the peoples the knowledge that they used according to their circumstances. The White Lodge has worked so that every people could understand it. Every people needed something special over time. Each nation was confined to a narrower space. What did the ancient Indians know, for example, of what was happening in Europe? They lived in very special social conditions. The great initiates spoke to them as they needed to. And so they spoke to all nations.

Today, humanity is called upon to become one family, today people are called upon to engage in exchange, not only of goods, but also of what people recognize as truth. What the ancient Rishis taught is no longer closed to people. So it had become necessary for the Exalted Ones of the Great White Lodge to speak to humanity again. The same Beings who were once active in the founding of ancient Hinduism, the same Beings who were active in the founding of ancient Zoroastrianism and in the founding of the religion of the Egyptians, had to speak to humanity in a new form, in a new sense; the same Being who once offered the body of the Christ to the Deity in order to be able to work here on earth, Jesus of Nazareth. That is why these entities speak in such a way that in their language no distinction is made between race and language, no distinction between gender and class. There can no longer be any special alliances, but humanity must have something in common. And such a commonality is our theosophical teaching, through which we develop into the new race. That is the meaning, the spirit of the modern theosophical movement.

Those who understand the theosophical movement as the spoken word of those who have given [wisdom and] the harmony of feeling from the beginning of humanity, know that Theosophy is nothing other than the pioneering movement that can prepare the way for a new humanity that is to bring happiness to humanity. Those who believe that all the big questions that are knocking at the door must be solved by the theosophical central movement understand the theosophical movement correctly.

Some seek their salvation through a social movement, others through a spiritualist movement, others through a moral reform of food and drink, and still others through a reform of food and drink. All [such movements] are great, significant and useful. But they are only preliminary. They will only be able to bear fruit if they become branches of the great theosophical movement. Not through external improvements in food, industry, or work can anything be achieved, but only by helping souls to progress. Anyone who has carefully studied all these movements knows how they must merge into the theosophical movement.

Demand of your fellow human beings that they should not be so terrible to each other in the struggle for existence, but should behave as you would wish them to behave towards you, and it will be bearable. But if you write “struggle” on your banner, you will achieve nothing. Only through love, through union, through the harmony of all our souls can salvation be found. Only when we have realized once more that we are all spiritual beings, and that our soul and our spirit are sparks of the primal fire and our mission is to unite in this primal fire, will we work for the good of our future. Then we will live into the time in which we must live, but which we must also shape. And that will depend on the work we do on our own soul.

Many demand that people change: this class, that state should change, people are needed differently. They fight against them. But who can guarantee that such a fight will ever succeed? One thing must succeed, however: We can never go wrong if we improve our own inner being, if we each begin to reform our own inner being, that is, if each of us improves himself. In this endeavor, there can be no distinction of class, race, station, or sex. And that is the meaning of the Theosophical movement, which makes it a great movement of the future. The exalted beings who have spoken to us in tones that promise the future have taught us this. Many have come to the theosophical movement and ask: You tell us that so-called “masters” are at the head of the movement; but we do not see these masters. That is not surprising. Do not believe that it is in the will of the masters not to come and speak to you themselves. If they could, if they were allowed to, each of them would do so. But I would like to give you just a small idea of why the master must be separated from those he loves and why he must seek messengers who proclaim his word with their physical word.

The laws by which the world and humanity are governed are infinitely higher than what the average person of today can imagine. Only someone who works solely in the service of these exalted cosmic laws – after he has recognized them – can guide humanity in a spiritual and mental way. The master sees not only years, but centuries and millennia. He sees into the distant future. The teachings he gives are those that should serve as a goal for humanity to advance. The Master does not give idle teachings for curiosity, but teachings of great human love that will lead to the happiness of humanity in the future.

Look at people, how they live, how they depend on a thousand little things of the day. And I do not even want to point out the thousand little things of the day, but only how they depend on space and time, how they find it difficult to gain a free judgment, to admit to themselves what is necessary to help their fellow human beings. A thousand and a million considerations to which man is hourly bound make it impossible for him to gain a free, independent judgment. If one can only follow the innermost voice of the divine within, then one is called to lead, guide and direct people. That is the task of the Master.

Few can imagine the extent of the freedom of judgment that the Master has to express, unfettered by any consideration. Only in a weak ray, in a darkened reflection, can we express in the physical realm what the Masters express from their exalted seat.

Consideration must be given to country, culture and education. Only in a refracted ray can that which the divine leader can impart as the great law of the world come to humanity. Only the one who is able to listen to the master so that not the slightest contradiction stirs in the heart, who does not take time and space into consideration, but completely devotes his ear to the master in perfect devotion, only he is called to hear the master, who does not respond to everything with “yes and but,” but knows that the master speaks from the divine.

Everyone must fall silent in the face of divine truths. What is most prevalent today must cease: the insistence on one's own judgment. The Master does not impose his judgment on us, but he does want to inspire us. As long as we criticize, we are dependent on time and space, and until then, the voice of the Master cannot reach our ears. When we develop a ruthlessness towards everything that binds us to the personal, the temporary, the ephemeral, when we leave these considerations behind us, create moments of celebration for ourselves, tear ourselves away from what lives around us and only listen to the inner voice, then the moments are there in which the master can speak to us. Those who have gained that great freedom have also gained the opportunity to have a master themselves; they have managed to have the certainty that they exist in the glory of these high beings, surrounded by light.

They have given up the “test everything and keep the best”, because those who want to approach the master have to give that up. In doing so, they establish principles about things that one truly already knows. But if one wants to learn, then this principle ceases to exist. Who is to decide what is best? Those who have it, or those who have recognized it? We should not become judgmental or uncritical, but should be able to put ourselves in a truly independent frame of mind if we want to ascend to these lofty heights.

Above all, this is something that must flow through the theosophist as a feeling. And if he imbues himself more and more with this feeling, then he himself will be led up to the heights where the Master can speak to him.

Do not ask: Why are the masters in separate places? Because it is true that in St. Petersburg, Berlin and London and so on, the masters are staying and can be spoken to by those who want to speak to them and can do so; for those who have attained the necessary mood through inner self-conquest. When the theosophist imbues himself with this mood, he becomes a member of that part of humanity that is being led up to a new, elevated existence. And because that is the case, the Theosophical movement is also the most practical movement we can have in the present day. Many object that it is idealistic, fantastic, impractical.

Now, ladies and gentlemen, a little reflection can teach you that this movement does not have to be impractical just because many practical people – that is, people who call themselves such – consider it impractical. But just take a look at the people who consider themselves so practical. It is a strange thing about such people who have found themselves so practical. Some examples of what the practitioners did in the world of the 19th century may show this. For example, until the middle of the 19th century, the practitioners had a highly impractical postal system. With this postal system, the practitioners, just as today, insisted on their practice. But then a school teacher came along in England who invented the postage stamp. He was an “impractical” idealist named Hill. At the head of the English postal service was a “practitioner” named [Lord Lichfield]. He declared in Parliament that the introduction of the postage stamp could not be implemented. He said: The “practitioner” knows that it won't work. The traffic could increase, but then the post offices would no longer be sufficient, so the idea is bad. - That was roughly the response to an “unpractical” invention like the postage stamp.

Likewise, Gauss had invented an electromagnetic telegraph as early as the first third of the 19th century. It was not introduced. It was the idealists who made the inventions, and the practical people refused the funds.

The same applied to the railroad. What did the practitioners do when the railroad was to be set up? Postmaster Nagler said at the time: Why a railroad? I already have sixteen buses going to Potsdam every day and nobody is sitting in them. So what about the railroad? In addition, the Bavarian Medical Council issued a statement on the construction of the railways. The document can still be seen today. They said that no railways should be built because people would get concussions if they were to drive on them; at the very least, the railway line would have to be surrounded by wooden fences on both sides so that the people it passes by would not suffer from concussions or other damage.

All great achievements of mankind have never arisen from the minds of those who think they are practitioners. The practitioners have no judgment about true human progress. Only when man rises to the great culture-moving factors that come from the spirit and the soul, only when he is under spiritual guidance, can he give great impulses to humanity. Unconsciously, these inventors were influenced by the masters. Without the chemist knowing it in the laboratory or in the factory, he is influenced by the spiritual hierarchy of the masters, whom we shall get to know better through the theosophical movement. The theosophical movement will intervene in the immediate movement of the day, will not only live in the hearts and minds. Yes, it will live in the hearts, but it will inspire people to the tips of their fingers and transform their whole lives. Then it will be the most practical movement, directly influencing what surrounds us every hour, every minute.

This is not said by someone who wants to preach the movement fanatically, but by someone who is called to do so. We have gone through many errors; we have sought the factors that bring social progress in the world, but we have realized that progress must be sought in the soul, that progress must spring from the soul, and that it must also be implemented. Wherever this is in the background, we unite in the right way in the Theosophical Society.

The Theosophical Society is only the outer tool for those who believe that they must take part in the cultural movement prescribed by the theosophical movement. When the Masters are asked what must be done to come into contact with them, they answer: A person can make contact through the Theosophical Society; this gives the person a claim. What comes to life in us is what the Theosophical movement is about. The teachings we spread are the means to ignite the [inner] life in man. For the one who speaks to his fellow human beings, it is not the word that works, but rather what flows mysteriously through the word. It is not only the sound waves, but rather the spiritual power that is to flow through the word to us. Through this spiritual power, the word, the power of the masters, the great leaders, works on us so that we are united in spirit and our hearts beat together. That is what matters: that we feel in harmony with each other, that we feel within ourselves; when the current weaves from heart to heart, from soul to soul, the power that stands behind us goes through them.

It depends on the attitude. That is why we work in our branches in such an attitude, that is why the masters teach us that we should not acquire knowledge out of curiosity, just to constantly know more, but so that we can unite in the harmony of feelings. That is why we will never leave theosophical meetings as one would leave other meetings. Annie Besant once said that it is out of place to complain, “How little I got out of this meeting today!” That is not the point. The theosophist should not ask, “How boring was it?” but rather, “How boring was I?” We do not come together to learn, but we do work with our soul and spirit when we create thought forms that resonate with each other. Every theosophical gathering and every branch should be an accumulator of power. Each such branch has an effect on the surrounding area. The spiritual power does not need anyone to spread the word. The power of such a branch goes out into the world through mysterious waves. Anyone who believes that there is a spiritual reality will understand this, will know that a powerful movement emanates from such theosophical lodges. Every theosophical lodge is an invisible, sometimes incomprehensible force. A preacher teaches differently. No teacher teaches us, no connection was with a theosophical lodge and yet the spiritual word finds its way to his community. Chemists and physicists in the laboratory receive new ideas: it is an effect of the theosophical association. Only those who have the stated attitude, who cherish and cultivate what they possess of love and kindness and who also appear when there is no interesting speaker to be heard, know that effects are also present where they are not materially visible, and are true Theosophists. Because some things in the Theosophical movement have faltered, [the Masters] have given us the impulse to speak as I have now spoken to you. This is how it was recently spoken in England, America and India. This has been done on behalf of the masters, that we draw attention to the true spiritual attitude of a theosophical lodge. Leadbeater speaks in America, Annie Besant in London and in India, and so we must speak. It is not a question of whether we like one more or less according to our personal ideas, but that we come together unselfishly. Then we not only take, but we also give. We also give above all when we give our soul. And that is the best gift. In this sense, we want to unite in our branch as well. More and more, the theosophical branches must take on this form, so that all criticism and all knowing-better must fall silent, so that we work as positively as possible, so that we work in our soul, as has been indicated.

If we can be convinced that the effects are not outwardly visible, but invisible, then our theosophical attitude will be such that we make the theosophical movement what it should be.

All great spiritual movements have worked in silence. No contemporary messages have been handed down from Jesus Christ. Philo of Alexandria has brought us no message from the Master. Only later documents tell us about the master. The master of the Christian religion was also known in his true form only by the great and the faithful. Herein lies his strength and his tremendous impact, which is far from exhausted and will continue to have an effect in the distant future.

Do you believe in the spirituality of the words, which does not have to be manifested in external success, then you understand the earnest meaning of the theosophical movement. Let us truly take this to heart at the beginning of the new year, let us come together in this spirit, and may this New Year's greeting flow from every single soul, that we will do our theosophical work in the spirit of our exalted beings who stand above us.

First Dr. Steiner: “Today it is mainly about misunderstandings. I don't think much of discussing them and believe that they can be overcome through work. The divisions that usually arise are mostly based on misunderstandings. I have often found this on my lecture tours. Today I will try to dispel a real misunderstanding, because what should inspire us in society is a unity built on the heart and on feelings. Without this, it is hardly possible to move forward. I therefore propose forming an executive committee; this committee should make suggestions for the branch's events. I believe that this will help to avoid misunderstandings and also the differences that lead to divisions. As I have heard, members of the Theosophical Society meet at each other's homes; they unite in smaller groups. But that is not my concern. The assemblies that are of interest to me should be convened by the branch's board. If other assemblies are organized, it is tantamount to a vote of no confidence in the board. This is a matter that must be treated as a symptom. The question is whether the members of the Berlin branch believe that the current approach is not the right one and whether it is necessary to initiate a different way of doing business. We want to start with an opportunity to ask questions and discuss them."

Fräulein Schwiebs: “The meeting that took place at our house arose out of a completely harmless intention. It is not intended to confront the leadership or the management of the branch.”

Herr Quaas: “At the general meeting, Dr. Steiner pointed out that Fräulein von Sivers had so far provided her private rooms voluntarily. The Berlin branch, however, pays 300 marks for the library. But since there is a possibility that the library room may be needed by both Ms. von Sivers and the branch at the same time, the question arises as to what rights the Berlin branch has acquired for paying the 300 marks. Trust is not a patented thing, but something that one must make an effort to earn. I would therefore like to ask how this whole matter has been handled and whether there are no funds available to obtain premises that are completely neutral. It will not be possible to achieve agreement among individuals by listening to large crowds. I was sorry about the attitude that Dr. Steiner took towards my proposal. You can't say it's none of my business. Either the board has to deal with it or the board has to be bypassed. But now the question is: Do we have the means to bring about an improvement, or do we not have the means? I believe that the events organized by Schwiebs and Eberty are to be welcomed with thanks. It is true that they have not yet taken place in the time since the Berlin branch of the Theosophical Society has existed.

Mr. Fränkel: “I attended the meeting; it was not an official or semi-official gathering, it was purely private. Its only purpose was to bring members together. However, the members of the Theosophical Society should form the basis of the gatherings. I regret that thoughts have been expressed that do not correspond to the Theosophical guidelines. But one should not approach things with suspicions.

Dr. Steiner: “It is not about the cards, nor is there anything wrong with the meeting. But it is particularly important to get to a certain basis, because Mr. Quaas' speech has revealed that there are other things involved, other symptoms. Mr. Quaas has therefore also consulted with me. However, we must not mix up two things. We must not mix up the library issue and the issue of the Besant branch. I cannot get involved in private discussions. You have to have the right foundations for that.

And now for another matter. It is claimed that no insights into the financial situation of the Berlin branch are available. Then there were also remarks regarding the private rooms. In response to this, I must say that, in the beginning, my concern was to slowly take up the work of the branch and continue it in the same way. The work was done in the theosophical sense. Lectures were given on Christianity as a Mystical Fact and on Mysticism in the Rise of Modern Spiritual Life. The theosophical work is the main thing. But it can only be done if one has the fundamentals of the theosophical world-view. It is nice that members are approaching each other, but it must go hand in hand with becoming familiar with the theosophical world-view. This work could not be done if sacrifices were not made by private individuals. I have always felt that I was among Theosophists in this room. I did not have the impression of being in a private room. This year, members should divide into groups and work together. That is the second thing that will have to be done gradually. But it must be done in harmony with the central leadership.

The proposals must be within the framework of what currently exists. The continuity of the Theosophical Society must be maintained. I am called to maintain the continuity of the Theosophical movement. Until now, the only means of doing this was to hold meetings in this room. The library has been given to Miss von Sivers on condition that she has it in her home. It goes without saying that the library needs a room; and that something is paid for it is also self-evident. However, it is not a requirement that it should also be possible to hold meetings there. It is therefore advisable to leave the library issue out of it altogether. The Berlin branch has not yet had any reason to create a center. So we will stick with the old conditions as long as they are sufficient for the real work."

Krojanker: “I would like to say that a harmonious atmosphere no longer exists. The Berlin branch has no home at all, and now we are not even allowed to hold meetings in the library room. The situation of the Berlin branch is such that an executive committee is quite impossible under the current conditions. What has been on paper for years has now been summarized in a few proposals that have been discussed. We have the feeling that the lectures in the architects' house do not take place within the framework of the Berlin branch. These are separate events that we can or cannot attend, but with which we as the Berlin branch have nothing to do. They have statutes, but everything is dictated. We have every reason to accept your advice, Doctor, in every way. However, the administration of a branch does not quite coincide with this. Further misunderstandings should be avoided in the future. To convene a general assembly requires completely different preconditions. But then there are also other issues to be discussed: How are the general assemblies to be regulated? Where and how should they take place? What resources does the Berlin branch have for this? And how must the Berlin branch ensure that the external conditions are provided for regular meetings? These are the questions that the discussions came down to. The library question will hardly be able to be settled. There is a desire to feel at home among Theosophical members. For the Theosophical work that you describe, you have to choose the members yourself who can do such work."

Dr. Steiner: “We will then have to call an extraordinary general meeting. I don't see why an executive committee should be impossible given the circumstances of the Berlin branch. The lectures at the Architektenhaus are my events; the board must represent the Society. But the meetings at the Architektenhaus don't see why they can't be seen as branch events. I can't quite see how such a center should be created. The Berlin branch should consider the lectures as theirs."

Fräulein von Sivers: ”It's all very well to form groups, but it takes more than that. You need people, capital and staff. Before it was set up, there was no one at the library who could have taken care of it. It should have been sold or distributed. At that time, I was active in the Theosophical movement. It had adopted more fixed paths. The library was given to me because the branch could not spend the 300 marks. However, the continuity of the library and Dr. Steiner's lectures were to be maintained. The library was linked to my private rooms. Since they were not public, no one came.

The lectures that we have here were set up later, and the invitations from Miss Schwiebs and Mrs. Eberty to gatherings at their home have been quite successful.

Mr. Quaas: “The accounts should be duplicated and made available to the members. We do not need to completely dismiss the library question. We can also build and work on a solid foundation for the general meeting. The board has to make suggestions for convening the general meeting.

Dr. Steiner: ”I have heard something about a harmonious atmosphere that no longer exists.

Krojanker: “I believe that the assemblies at Schwiebs and Eberty will be able to bring the discord back into harmony.”

Dr. Steiner: “I would like to note: It is something different to work positively spiritually than to be active in administration. With attorney Quaas, [it] appears as disharmony, even a certain animosity comes to light. As long as animosity exists, I consider the positive work in society to be fruitless. This animosity was noticeable from the conversation.”

Fränkel: “I did not concern myself with the theosophical circumstances. Therefore, I did not know about the animosity either.”

Quaas: “The criticism is being forced upon the members.”

Fräulein Schwiebs: “I don't understand why heavy artillery is being brought up against us, although you were partly present at the first meeting. I didn't want to bring up this unfriendliness, but it hurt me. Fräulein von Sivers couldn't make the meeting because she had too much to do.”

Dr. Steiner: “Several errors seem to have occurred here. No one ever said anything about intending to hold meetings every fortnight. At the time, I asked that such meetings be officially recorded. It seems that invitations were sent out once. I knew nothing about the intention to hold permanent meetings. The fact that meetings are held on a regular basis has been presented to me as something new today. Personal discussions would not have satisfied the need. So it was probably not correct to speak of the members' meetings.” Miss Schwiebs: ‘We and Mrs. Eberty were together every first and third Sunday of the month.’

Mr. [Georgi] regards dissatisfaction as explosives. Working on oneself is the main thing. Then the walls that have been knocked down will disappear, and so will the dissatisfaction, so that we can devote ourselves entirely to the future.

Dr. B...: “Too many private relationships are discussed, but no one has really taken the actual study seriously. We want to approach everyone with love, we want to shake off what has made society disharmonious, so that in the future, instead of destroying, we will continue to work with a strong hand.

Quaas believes that the contact between the board and the members has been completely lost (objections are raised).

Krojanker: “This is a society that has certain forms. These must be adhered to and maintained. There can be no question of real animosity. Hold more general meetings.”

Ms. Motzkus: “The meetings were actually intended to facilitate closer contact with Dr. Steiner.”

Ms. von Holten: “I felt sorry for having let strangers write my letter. I missed a female touch here.”

Dr. Steiner: “This is a letter that interferes in my private affairs without justification, a letter that arises out of ignorance. I have not given a reply to it. It should never have been written in this form, for I would have forgiven myself something if I had replied to it. The impression was as if you had seen someone at whose sight you were frightened.”

Mrs. B.: “It is actually only about the form of the meetings. I am not one of those who absorb gossip and pass it on. But I have to say that there is a tremendous dislike of Miss von Sivers, so members feel cold, catch a cold. This coldness is brought in and is contagious. People should look within themselves and approach the people with real devotion and love. The aversion must be removed; goodwill must be cultivated and what has happened must be forgotten. Only in inner harmony lies real work in the spirit of Theosophy. Otherwise we cannot help with the work. We must approach Fräulein von Sivers with different feelings."

Krojanker: “You can have reverence for a personality without extinguishing your own ego in the face of that personality. I think we need to have more general meetings and more board meetings.”

Dr. Steiner: “You can't have meetings that don't go harmoniously, that don't enable harmonious work. Those who have the best intentions are ultimately the sacrificial lambs. My work would be undone if what lies at the bottom of the soul were not openly and honestly expressed. There must be no wall between me and the members, for the following reasons: I myself am not dependent on anyone for my work and will never be dependent on anyone for my theosophical work. If someone says that a wall could be built between me and the members, then that would be the worst kind of mistrust. Anyone who has done that cannot receive anything from me. If such statements are made, then my work is stopped.

Krojanker: He complains that such personal matters are being made the subject of the General Assembly and asks: “Do you have any objections to the members' meetings at Fräulein Schwiebs's?”

Dr. Steiner: “It is not about the general meetings at Schwiebs and Eberty. My idea was to organize the sequence of the general meetings because it is desirable today that work continues within group meetings. These meetings should not serve to attack, but to recognize that dissatisfaction prevails and to ask how it can be organized away. The people in such groups must be selected. People who are completely sympathetic to each other must come together in such groups. That is why I asked for the establishment and regulation of general meetings. I wanted to gain a foothold because some members in society have so much against each other that it is impossible to bring them together in such group meetings. If my theosophical work had not been stopped, I would not have put it forward. When someone says that a wall is being erected between me and the members, it is not just a private matter; it is an accusation against a member who has led the events in my interest of thwarting relations. When they erect a wall, it is a criticism that is directed at our entire society. A wall against Miss von Sivers is a matter for the Society.

[Georgi]: Speaks against Mrs. Braun and says: “Criticism is unnecessary, it has a bad effect, you have to starve this force.”

Mrs. Braun: “I am against the attitude, I will not participate in it, I have renounced all forms.”

Krojanker: “As the head of the Berlin branch, you have to deal with matters that you don't have to touch on as a theosophist. You don't feel constrained at the branch's events, so you don't have to have anything to do with the administration of the Berlin branch. It's a two-way street.

Dr. Steiner: “It is indeed my opinion that the chairmanship is not tied to me and Fräulein von Sivers. This society has existed for years, but it has not developed any particular activity. We have tried to love the Theosophical Society and bring it to life in Berlin. Count and Countess Brockdorff have said that they were only stopgaps to keep it going. If a different activity is desired, I would cede the chair to whomever is able to procure better premises and more success.

Krojanker: “What is said is said in the interest of the Theosophical Society. Dr. Steiner is above all debate. However, business matters that arise when Dr. Steiner retains leadership and remains united with us through his work must be dealt with in an orderly manner.”

Dr. Steiner: “My activity as chairman is not tied to my other activities because the administrator and the spokesperson can be separated. This is how it has been kept, and that seems to me to be the desirable state of affairs. For a long time, the Society lay fallow. We tried to revive it. I proceeded according to my thoughts, I tried to get to know the Theosophical Societies around the world. You should not have the impression that you have been called together for trivial reasons. If, during the meetings, younger members speak out against their superiors, then I am prevented from being effective. I was not trying to assure sympathy. There seems to be no inclination and no desire for it.

Group work: A number of members who get along well and meet to discuss with each other is an especially important thing. They should then write down the questions that arise in order to ask me about them in the big meeting, so that a theosophical understanding among the members can take place in this way. I have found something similar in England, in India and especially in Holland. Exemplary work has been done in Düsseldorf. The group members meet twice. One member, Lauweriks, explains the secret doctrine to people in an extraordinary way. But this work can only be made fruitful if it is organically integrated into our lectures, so that people can enter into the theosophical worldview. I have thought of this in order to be able to make suggestions and so that people can see why they cannot be in a particular circle. Disharmonious currents are very fatal in smaller working groups. My wish has only been granted to a small extent. I do not know why it has not been used to a greater extent. This disharmonious mood is also likely to affect me in my work. It could prevent me from working for the Berlin branch. It is something that marks my work as unfree. What can be done? 'For example, when the administration decides on something that I cannot go along with. That is why it was necessary for me to ask you to express what is in the air here.

I ask those who wish to participate in groups to express their willingness to do so. This is the only way to get deeper into Theosophy. It is nice to socialize, but there are many opportunities for that. Theosophy does not have to be the reason for that. Theosophical work requires a certain foundation based on work. There is no limit to the size of the group. I will be here again tomorrow for eight days, and I will be back in Berlin on Thursday. Perhaps the suggestion of a center will take on a more concrete form, because there are probably still some who have an idea of how it could be done better, but you just have to stretch yourself to the limit. But this criticism is creating bad blood. I had hoped that whatever was to be said against me or Miss von Sivers would be said bluntly. Since this has not been the case, however, the time we have spent on it should not be considered wasted.

There is no reason to find fault with the work of Miss von Sivers. Take a more intimate approach to her work, not just business. But I cannot help it if the Berlin branch should be damaged. I know what the Berlin branch needs, and I also know what the duty of an occultist is. The great spiritual world stands above that. But it also requires that my freedom not be interfered with. To put up a wall between me and the members is an act of humiliation, and an occultist must not be humiliated. Anyone who has such conditions cannot receive anything more from me as an occultist."

Dr. Steiner: “Careful scrutiny of the lines along which we were moving showed me that it is necessary to contribute something to clarify the things that were suggested at the time. That is why I asked you to appear at this General Assembly. I would like to emphasize from the outset that it will not be a matter of somehow interpreting the steps that three members of the Executive Board felt compelled to take in such a way that they could be directed against anyone, even remotely. The aim is to clarify the situation by means of a full clarification that cannot be achieved in any other way. In order to make this completely clear, I must still refer to a few words on the essentials, to the history of the Theosophical movement since the founding of the German section, namely insofar as it concerns members of the board, who come into consideration above all.

When the German Section was to be founded, the leaders of the Theosophical movement, insofar as they belonged to the Adyar Society, were to be persuaded to hand over the leadership to others. The personalities involved in the continuation of the theosophical work were Fräulein von Sivers and I. I myself was not yet ready to join the Theosophical Society, even a few months before I was called upon to contribute not only to the Berlin group but also to the entire movement of the Theosophical Society in my capacity as General Secretary of the German Section. I had already given lectures for two winters, in the Berlin branch. Two courses that have been printed, so that I am connected with the Theosophical Society in Berlin in a certain respect, am connected only personally.

When Count and Countess von Brockdorff left Berlin, I had already been a member of the Theosophical Society for several months, and when other measures failed, I was designated as General Secretary. I did not oppose the request at the time. I had no merit in the Theosophical Society at the time.

Berlin was considered a kind of center in Germany. Berlin was to become a kind of parent company. The German Theosophical Society (DTG) was built on this. The aim was to run the society from Berlin. At that time, Count and Countess Brockdorff went to great lengths to recruit Fräulein von Sivers, who was in Bologna, for their Berlin lodge. Even after she had been asked, she was not at all inclined to accept. Only when the leaders of the Theosophical Society deemed it necessary did Miss von Sivers decide to go to Berlin and lead the Theosophical movement with me under the conditions that were possible at the time.

We adapted ourselves to the circumstances in an absolutely conservative way. The circumstances naturally required that we take the initiative of the German movement into our own hands and try to bring the intentions to fruition in the right way. The situation in Germany was such that it would not have been possible at that time without initiative in a material sense. In addition to this material theosophical work, there were many other things, such as, for example, the management of the library, which was in a loose connection with the German Theosophical Society, the later Berlin branch of the Theosophical Society. This management of the library naturally required a certain amount of work, which had to be done between classes. The actual Theosophical work could only be done in the free breaks. I myself could devote myself to these library matters only in an advisory capacity. I had more important things to do. Besides, for two years I had been able to study the way the branch had been run, and I had no intention of making any kind of change in the external administration. What was factually given should be preserved.

It was our endeavor to operate within the framework and to throw what we had to give into the framework of the Theosophical movement. That was our endeavor. The basic prerequisite for Fräulein von Sivers to take over the management of the various agencies of the Theosophical Society in Berlin was that complete trust prevailed. Without this trust, nothing can be done in the practical part of the Theosophical movement. Trust in the practical part of the movement itself is necessary. The administration is a kind of appendage. Since we could not engage in any particular pedantry, it was natural that we expected complete trust in what is the basic requirement for working together in the theosophical field. This trust does not appear to have been given to the extent that we would need it to conduct the business calmly and objectively. We will only make the final point by linking it to the meeting two weeks ago and contrasting it with it. This meeting was based on things that were even referred to as gossip; they were based on public appearances. Everything is to be discussed in public. The fact that there is dissatisfaction was admitted in the meeting, and the expression of a mood of discontent is in itself enough to bring about such a step as is to be taken today. I am - let this be accepted as an absolutely true interpretation - I am, not only because every occultist is, but on much more esoteric principles, opposed to all aggression. Every act of aggression hinders the activity that I would be able to unfold. Please regard this step as something that merely follows from the principle of not acting aggressively. Everyone must behave in such a way that the wishes of all can be fully expressed. Everyone must suppress their personal desires so that our work can be done. Otherwise, the Berlin branch cannot be managed as desired. That is what I would like to achieve. When opposing views are expressed, it is impossible to work together.

If we work in such a way, as desired from various sides, then in my opinion we would flatten the Theosophical movement, we would reduce it to the level of a club.

The words that were spoken at the last meeting must be heard, the words: that I am in diametrical opposition to those who want a club-like community. I do not intend to attack anyone. I just cannot be there. Anyone who considers this properly will have to say that this is the absence of any aggressiveness. I would like to set the tone for this matter. This is what I emphasized at the general assembly in October, where I emphasized that I do not conform to such a form, that I cannot conform to a club-like society. Those who wish that the Berlin branch be administered differently, that the members interact with each other in a different way, must act accordingly. It is necessary for them to take matters into their own hands and carry them out for themselves, so that it seems self-evident that no one can object if their wishes are fulfilled in the manner mentioned. I could not fulfill these wishes. I have always tried to satisfy wishes as best I could. In order for the Theosophical Society to continue to develop peacefully, I have to take this step. I have the task of maintaining the continuity of the movement in Germany. It is clear to me that only on an occult basis – given our confused circumstances in the world – can this movement be taken forward. A movement on a social basis does not need to be Theosophical; its people may already have ideal aspirations and become dear to one another, and that does not need to be Theosophical. But we need a theosophical movement, and that is why I cannot be a leader in a club-like organization. Please understand that I am obliged to bring the full depth of the theosophical movement, which is based on occultism, to it. Today, only those who live by the Aristotelian principle are truly called to actively participate within the Theosophical Society: Those who seek truth must respect no opinion.

Perhaps I would also like to work in a different way. But here it is a matter of duty, and therefore I will take this step because I have this obligation to build the Theosophical movement on a truly deeper foundation, and in the process of building, any attempt to run the society in a club-like manner will lead to a flattening out. No one can better understand that such things are necessary for some, and no one's relationship with me should change. Everyone will always be welcome with me. I will continue to conduct the business that relates to the material aspects of Theosophy in the same way, so that in the future everything can be found as it has been found. But precisely for this reason I must withdraw.

The consistency is, of course, in the lines that I have executed. I cannot and must not lose sight of the theosophical movement at any point. That is why I have asked those members of our Theosophical Society – all the other organizations are of a secondary nature – individual members of the Theosophical Society, to hold a meeting with me and asked them whether they would be willing to continue the Theosophical movement with me in the way I have led it, against which a discord has arisen and dissatisfaction has been expressed. This had to be so, because I must maintain continuity. I will only mention the case I have in Munich. There is a strictly closed lodge there that only accepts those who meet the requirements of the whole. But now we will have a second lodge in which all others can be admitted. I have endeavored to draw attention to the conditions of the work of the lodges, which is the daily bread of a lodge. I also want to found a Besant Lodge soon, for whose name I will ask Annie Besant for permission soon. In addition, there will be completely free activity from which no one can be excluded. That is the reason for my resignation.

(The names of a number of members are then listed.)

Krojanker: “After these explanations from Dr. Steiner, those who were unable to attend the last meeting will have gained an insight into the cause of the discord and also the background to the matter, which led three members of the board to take the above-mentioned step. There must have been trouble brewing long before those involved knew anything about it. Since I have known about these things, it has been impossible for me to get over them. At first it was impossible for me to realize that these things could drive the gentlemen to this conclusion. What was it actually? The starting point for me was simply the decision of City Councillor Eberty and Miss Schwiebs, who had set out to see the members in their home for free, informal discussions. It was not foreseeable that such conclusions could be drawn from this. The suggestion came from Miss von Sivers; members should be encouraged to approach each other, and the feeling should not arise that one does not quite feel at home, so that everything rushes home immediately after the lecture. But even with Miss von Sivers, this was noticeable to a certain extent. As long as we had no headquarters, she had to help herself in a different way, visiting friends and talking to them. These are things that were purely personal and private in nature, and in the previous session I had hoped that they would not affect us. I still have the same opinion of these things today, the opinion that they must not be touched. The polite couple who had invited us were not yet part of the branch. A distinction must be made between association work, associationism and theosophical work. But committees are not formed and elected, and members of the board are not elected, for nothing, so that they do not have to worry about running the association. They are elected and will then also have the authority to speak about business matters and to allow themselves to make judgments from time to time. If autocratic management [...] is desired, then statutes and so on would not be necessary either. If Dr. Steiner had said at the time: We must renounce such a form, had he shown or said, only under such and such conditions is it possible for me to work and participate, then things would have happened immediately and quite naturally. Those who would have liked it would have gone along with it, and the rest would have stayed out. I don't understand why a whole business apparatus has been set up and why it is resented if, as a member of one of its branches, I take an interest in it. I think it cannot be considered a crime to inquire about these things. I would recommend the introduction of wish lists. I must protest against the accusation that we are aggressive. We have heard Dr. Steiner speak for two years about what Theosophy is and what Theosophical life entails. Surely other ways could have been found to steer the discussions in a different direction. But now that it has come to this, the consequences must be drawn under all circumstances. I imagine them to be – I don't know if I have understood correctly – that this Berlin branch continues to exist as a continuation of the Berlin branch of the German Theosophical Society, and that the three board members and the other gentlemen whom Dr. Steiner has read out are now founding a new lodge.

Further negotiations and consultations will be needed before this step can be taken. The first task will be to elect a committee, because the Berlin branch currently has neither a committee nor a leadership. We will therefore have to form a provisional committee to discuss how this is to be done. I would like to leave it up to you to make proposals in this regard. In any case, we deeply regret the way in which the matter has been handled so far. When Dr. Steiner speaks of discord and soul currents, there is in fact nothing that I know and perhaps some personal matters that must never be made the business of the Berlin branch."

Dr. Steiner: “I myself had good reason to take the personal into account. At the general assembly, 300 marks were approved for my work last year. I had already raised concerns at the time, but soon after that I felt compelled to put these 300 marks back into the treasury because of the prevailing mood, because I did not want to work on the basis of ill will. You see that I have kept quiet for long enough. 'I also wanted to let this matter pass quietly, to bridge the gap with positive work. In the long run, this was not possible for good reason. Of course, we are not discussing private matters here, nor is a conversation about professional life appropriate. I have said that, as far as I am concerned, what was requested has been largely satisfied. The wish had arisen that we should have lectures elsewhere than here or in the architects' house, and I agreed to give lectures at Wilhelmstraße 118 as well. But now we have to make a few comments about such a matter. The things are not as crude as they might initially appear, but are more subtly connected. At the time, I readily agreed to fulfill this wish, and in the pursuit of this matter, I asked to form an executive committee. I did not dream what came of it. We still have no branch in the north, south, or east. It was my intention to work not only in the west, but in all parts of the city. When an executive committee was formed in the Berlin branch, it was intended that this committee should take charge of the actual agitation. No one here has ever been prevented from taking care of business matters, but the view is that anyone who wants to do something has to create the space for themselves. No one could demand anything from us. If someone had come to us with positive suggestions, we would have taken them up. But when it is said that our activities have not been attacked, I say that only this week I received a written accusation that we are managing the library in such a way that one can threaten to go to court about it. We cannot accept hidden accusations. We will also hand over the library. When I have presented these things, you can assume that they are based on the firmest possible foundation. The statutes and so on could have been adhered to if there had been goodwill. When one talks about business, it must be practical. What was done at the time was impractical. I spoke three times in relatively beautiful rooms, but then in a room that was referred to as a stable, and finally in a room where speaking was almost impossible. I had to speak with glasses knocking behind me and so on. That was no atmosphere for Theosophy. I had to think of doing things in a practical way. This was the reason for my decision to hold the lectures in the architect's house. Such measures were in favor of the Berlin branch. Nevertheless, I was told: These lectures are ones that we can attend or not attend. - So you see that this is a silent discourtesy. Nothing has been done precisely because the other view of business matters, of statutes and committees, gave the opportunity to try out how it works. A letter from a theosophist reads: “I would like to see the Berlin branch work well for once. Most of all, I would be pleased if it could work in a favorable way.“ But then a wish list has also been worked out, you think - on the wish list it said: ‘The chairman has to be there half an hour before the start’ - that's what made the step so special.” Ms. Eberty: “Don't you think this fragmentation is very sad?”

Dr. Steiner: “I have worked against these things. Whether a fragmentation will result from it remains to be seen. If the members of the Berlin branch will understand how to act in a theosophical way, there will be no need for fragmentation at all. There is no need to speak of fragmentation, I will do nothing to promote it.”

Mrs. Eberty: “If you had had something against the meetings, it would have been enough to say: There are reasons why the meetings cannot take place. We had the best intentions for this. We only did it to serve the cause of Theosophy. It did not even remotely occur to us that this was against your intentions, not even when it was on the agenda eight days ago, when there were indications that our afternoon could be meant by it."

Dr. Steiner: “If the form is dropped, there is no objection to the private meetings. What has happened at my request? That the teas at Fräulein von Sivers's have been abolished because I have not seen any benefit for Theosophy in such tea meetings. It was difficult for me that Countess Brockdorff took it badly. But nevertheless, I just said it. We ourselves would not be able to manage things differently.

Krojanker: “It seems that the Executive Committee is being made the scapegoat. If you are on the Executive Committee, useful work is only possible if you are informed about the entire business situation. If you don't have insight and don't find opportunities to gain insight, what do you want to make suggestions for? The Executive Committee needs this knowledge because it has to report to the Board. I am increasingly lacking tangible documents that have given rise to these matters.

Now comes the library question. A library commission has been set up. It is not really understandable why the members of the branch should be held responsible for this.

Mr. Werner: “Dr. Steiner is a man called from a higher place. Now it is difficult to get what is needed to perfect us. If you approach him now with demands and questions, such as, ”Where did you leave the money you raised with your lectures? Give us information about what you got out of these lectures! Give us information about where the money has gone. If you say, 'We decide here, because we have a completely free hand to say what you have to do', then that is not the way to harmonious cooperation. I think that when you first accept teachings and instructions from someone, the demands and questions should not go so far that they are unbearable in detail. These would be thoughts that shun the light and lead to disharmony. But we can prevent disharmony if we want to. If that is not the case, then we have no right to come here and quibble about what has happened.

Krojanker: “A distinction must be made between the theosophical teaching and the leadership of the Berlin branch. This will make it possible to avoid any mistrust.”

Dr. Steiner: “The harmony may have to be bought at the expense of excluding some members. The arranged lectures were intended for the Berlin branch. It is true that we could not have done the work better. I am of the opinion that for the time being we have done the work as well as we could, since nothing better has been offered to us from the other side. At the moment something better would have been offered to us from the other side, we would not have ignored it. But what we have done, I consider to be the best so far.

Fränkel: “Two meetings have been convened that have caused the discord. On both occasions, accusations have been made, followed by disharmony, so that a club has been formed, as it were, and we consist of two classes of members, so to speak. There are two ways of proceeding. There is a civil case and a criminal case. This is a public matter, not a private one. The complaint should therefore be made. However, it is not clear what is actually at issue. The first point is the tea with the ladies, the second point is that only the business committee has taken the wrong measures. The error seems to lie in the fact that at the founding, there was no discussion about how the business of the committee should be handled. There is no real discord yet, only the complaint of a few gentlemen based on factual reasons.

Dr. Steiner: “If we had come to accuse anyone, then you could blame us for something. We are returning the management to those who have a wish list. The way of thinking expressed in the wish list is such that it cannot lead to anything in the Theosophical Society.”

Krojanker: “A desire for power emerges from those who perhaps believe they are superior. But I have heard from Dr. Steiner that Theosophy does not submit to any authority.”

Tessmar: “It is all much too materialistic. We are members of the Theosophical Society, but the whole Berlin branch can go home if Dr. Steiner says, ‘I will no longer give lectures here.’ Dr. Steiner gives Theosophical lectures, not lectures about speakers. I myself do not want to be held accountable; I want to hear Theosophical lectures in order to progress. And now the complaint about authority comes up. The theosophical lectures are authority for me. I show trust by not asking: What does the library do, what do the six Dreier do, who come in?"

Krojanker: “I now see where the debate is leading us today. We have to come to terms with the facts. From Dr. Steiner's reply, I see that he is not to be convinced in any way, and that perhaps only time can bring understanding of the individual things. We are faced with the fact that this separation is taking place. What must happen now? Perhaps we should devote another hour to this question.”

(A motion is made to end the debate, which is carried.)

(Dr. Steiner, Fräulein von Sivers and Mr. Kiem resign.)

Dr. Steiner: “My only remaining duty is to recommend that a managing director be elected for the time being. The process will be as follows: The managing director will have the task of informing the other members of the resignation. I myself will also inform the external members that I have resigned on my part.” Krojanker: ‘Can't a general statement be communicated to the members from both sides about what has happened here?’

(A number of members declare their resignation from the Berlin branch.

Krojanker: Asks what he has done wrong and is told that he disagrees with the management.

Dr. Steiner: “Why did I do it in general? It is done this way because it could not be done any other way. The Berlin branch can now experiment and so on, and do its own things.

Mrs. Eberty: “We all received invitations.”

Dr. Steiner: “I invited some with my name and with a personal greeting. But the list is not complete.”

Mrs. [Johannesson]: “We felt separated by the tone of your address. We felt as if you had carried out a separation.”

Ms. [Voigt]: “Could the ladies be asked which topic was discussed? And also about the question from which Mr. Fränkel started. It is perhaps of interest.”

Tessmar: “I belong to Dr. Steiner. I will not be influenced. Please make a note of that if necessary. I really feel offended. As a seasoned seaman, I would choose different words. I forbid personal tapping.”

Dr. Steiner: “It has therefore been decided that a manager must be appointed for the German Theosophical Society. It would have been impossible for me to continue my work without taking this step. I cannot give intimate lectures in this mood. I only had the choice of either leaving Berlin or taking this step. Maintaining continuity was the reason for this. Mrs. Annie Besant said, when she saw the current here, that I should go to Munich, where the work that Miss von Sivers has done can be continued. But I will not change my whole relationship into a mere point. It is precisely the outward appearance that is at issue here, not the inwardness.

Present were: about 30 members. The meeting ended at eight o'clock [in the evening].

Report by Rudolf Steiner in “Lucifer - Gnosis”, July-August, No. 26-27/1905

This year [1905], the Federation of European Sections held its congress in London at the beginning of July (6, 7, 8, 9, 10). In general, the nature and organization of the events of this second meeting of its kind were similar to those held in Amsterdam the previous year. The beautiful feeling of belonging together again flowed through those who were able to come from the most diverse areas of Theosophical work to exchange ideas about methods of action, to bear witness to the progress of Theosophical ideas in the individual countries, and to receive suggestions for achievements in their home countries. Just as our Dutch friends spared no efforts and sacrifices last year to make the course of the congress a worthy and fruitful one, so did our members in London this year. Those who can appreciate the time and dedication required for the preparatory work and the management of such a meeting will be filled with warm gratitude for our English friends.

Mrs. Besant took over the presidency of the congress. The day before the actual start of the meeting, the assembled guests were able to attend a meeting of the Blavatsky Lodge to hear a momentous lecture by Annie Besant on the “Requirements of Discipleship”. The speaker followed up on various remarks that had been published recently about various minor weaknesses and faults of the great founder of the “Theosophical Society”, H. P. Blavatsky. Out of a deep sense of gratitude, the speaker spoke about the personality of the bringer of light on the path to truth and peace of soul. It is not important to see the small spots and weaknesses, but the great impulses that emanate from such personalities. We should hold on to them and find our own way through them. When we hear much about the life of the “initiates” that we say we did not expect, perhaps our expectations are based on misunderstandings. Where there is sun, there may also be sunspots; but the beneficent power of the sun works despite these spots. On the same day (Thursday, July 6), Annie Besant opened the “Arts and Crafts” exhibition, which then remained open for all days of the congress. It is natural that such an exhibition, which has the purpose of bringing artistic achievements influenced by theosophical ideas or originating from theosophists to the attention of the members, cannot be perfect in terms of the composition and value of the individual pieces. But it is a highly valuable addition to the congress; and anyone who does not see the purpose of the society in merely spreading theosophical ideas, but in developing theosophical life in all its aspects, will certainly not dispute its legitimacy. It is impossible to go into the details here, given the abundance of exhibits. It should only be noted that in the pictures of G. Russell, the interesting attempt was noticeable to give something of the astral reality in the symbolic color drawings around the figures depicted in the pictures, and in the coloring of the landscapes in which they are placed. How much of this is achieved is another question and cannot be considered today. The works of our member Lauweriks, who used to belong to the Dutch section and now belongs to the German section because he has been working as a teacher at the School of Applied Arts in Düsseldorf for some time, deserve special mention. His arts and crafts show the subtle mind and excellent artist everywhere. German works on display included an interesting picture of the chairman of our Düsseldorf lodge, Otto Boyer, the “Alchymist”, and a portrait study of the same excellent artist, who had also taken the trouble to participate in the work of the art committee as a German representative.

Miss Stinde, our member active in Munich, has contributed from the rich treasure trove of her landscapes. Furthermore, a picture by our member Miss Schmidt from Stuttgart was exhibited.

On Friday evening, Annie Besant gave a lecture on “The Work of Theosophy in the World” in front of thousands of people in the large “Queens Hall”. In a few concise strokes, she characterized the task that the wisdom teachings of Theosophy have in modern life today. Not only as a confession, but through all areas of life, science, art and so on, they should come into their own if they are to fulfill their mission. What the Theosophical movement has achieved in terms of artistic and scientific circles, which are far removed from the Theosophical movement, has been admirably demonstrated.

On Saturday morning, the actual congress proceedings were opened by Annie Besant's forceful introductory words. Here she pointed out how nations must work together in brotherly cooperation for the great work, and she characterized the approaches to deepening spiritual life in the theosophical sense that are present here and there. For example, she pointed to the work of an Italian sculptor Ezekiel, a “Christ” in which the theosophist could see his image of Christ. For Germans it will be particularly interesting to hear that Annie Besant pointed to the art of Richard Wagner, in whose tones influences of the astral world can be felt. - What followed was a beautiful symbol of the fraternal international character of the Society. In accordance with a decision of the committee, the individual representatives of the various countries gave short welcoming speeches in their national languages. And one could now hear such speeches in the following languages one after the other: Dutch, Swedish, French, German, English (for America), Italian, Spanish, Hungarian, Finnish, Russian and an Indian idiom. Mr. Mead spoke last for England. The morning session closed with business announcements from J. van Manen, the secretary of the congress.

In the afternoon, the individual lectures and departmental meetings began. Papers were presented by the individual members who had registered to do so, covering a wide range of topics: philosophy, science, ethnology, theosophical working methods, art, occultism, and so on. It is quite impossible to even hint at the rich abundance of what is presented here. Lectures are given in various rooms on a wide variety of subjects, followed by discussions. Only a few of them will be mentioned here: Mr. Mead spoke on an interesting Gnostic topic, Pascal, the General Secretary of the French Section, presented a paper on the “Mechanism of Clairvoyance in Humans and Animals”. Mr. Percy Lund had contributed a paper on the “Physical Evidence for Atlantis and Lemuria”. In the Occult Section, Annie Besant gave a most illuminating talk about the requirements and difficulties of occult research methods. She showed what precautions and reservations the occult researcher must take despite the greatest caution, and how his results must be received with equal caution despite his utmost conscientiousness. Dr. Rudolf Steiner spoke in the “Science” section about the “Occult Foundations of Goethe's Life Work”. M. P. Bernard was able to make a contribution on “Instinct, Consciousness, Hygiene and Morality”. M. H. Choisy discussed the “Foundations of Theosophical Morality”. Mr. Leo provided extremely valuable insights into “Astrology”.

Mr. Mead spoke at a final meeting about Gnosticism in the past and present and from there shed light on the similarities in all mystery wisdom. On Saturday evening there was a theatrical performance, two symbolic dramatic works, the first attempt to cultivate this art at our congresses as well. On Sunday and Monday afternoons there were musical performances; vocal performances in the different national languages again symbolically and beautifully expressed the principle of brotherhood. Annie Besant ended the congress on Monday evening with a short closing speech. The following were present from Germany: Fräulein Scholl (Cologne), Frau Geheimrat Lübke (Weimar), Gräfin Kalckreuth, Fräulein Stinde, Herr und Frau v. Seydewitz (Munich), Gräfin Schack (Döringau), Dr. H. Vollrath (Leipzig), Herr Kiem, Fräulein v. Sivers and Dr. Rudolf Steiner from Berlin, Herr und Frau Dr. Peipers (Düsseldorf). Our members J. v. Manen and [Miss] Kate Spink, who did all the secretarial work for the congress, deserve special thanks. It has already been mentioned that Otto Boyer participated in the work of the committee for visual arts. Adolf Arenson (Stuttgart) represented Germany on the committee for musical performances.

The lectures and all the assembly reports from last year's congress of the Federation of European Sections of the Theosophical Society will soon be published in a handsome volume, the “Congress Yearbook”. It can be understood that publishing this book in its first year presented a great challenge to the collectors and editors (J. van Manen, Kate Spink), and that it is therefore only now that it can be published. This year's lectures and discussions will be completed in a shorter time. The Max Altmann publishing house in Leipzig has taken over the distribution of the “Yearbook” for Germany, and one should contact them for the purpose of purchase.

The Annual General Meeting of the British Section of the Theosophical Society took place on July 8. At the meeting, Mr. Keightley resigned from his post as General Secretary and Miss Kate Spink was elected in his place. Dr. Rudolf Steiner welcomed the meeting on behalf of the German Section.

As you can see from the announcement, we will have a weekly meeting every Monday. This is to be considered a meeting of the Besant branch. The notes on the invitation are to be taken into account. Last year's work has made the venue too small. It is not at all our intention to be exclusive and to hold these Mondays for the branch alone. We would like to expand the matter, but on the other hand it seems a bit harsh to the members if non-members without excuse have access throughout the year, especially this year, when perhaps even more intimate things could be discussed in these Monday meetings than last year. We are getting deeper and deeper into it. The other meetings are then in the architect's house. This year, particular attention will be paid to demonstrating the significance of Theosophy and its importance for the present. I will speak about important questions in their relation to current affairs. Next Thursday, I will speak about Haeckel's world riddle, then about our world situation, and then about the question of inner development. The cycle will then conclude with a reflection on Christmas.

I have just completed a major lecture tour. A tour such as this is not only educational for the one undertaking it, but it can also be educational for the widest circles of those who are interested in Theosophy. I was in St. Gallen, Freiburg, Stuttgart, Heidelberg, Frankfurt am Main, Kassel, Weimar. In most places I was able to give a public lecture, and then in the following days I had a discussion with those listeners who were more interested. We do not yet have branches in all these places. But that is not to say that we will not. We do not want to proceed in a stormy, agitating way. Those who come to the Theosophical Society should come because they have an inner urge to do so. Therefore, it will be good to cultivate Theosophy as much as possible and to tell the audience what it is all about. I am convinced that those who are predestined to participate will come. I was able to perceive that there is a great longing for what the Theosophical Society has to offer humanity. The Theosophists within it are deeply responsive to what people need and desire today. On the other hand, there is a certain despondency, a certain sum of prejudices with which people are afflicted, and which prevent them from immediately dealing with Theosophy. There is much to be overcome. This is shown by such a journey, on which one gets to know the most diverse moods. Despite all discouragement, such a journey has a certain satisfying impression. One sees in the hearts of men that which must live if we want to move towards the future, which the theosophical movement wants to strive for.

So let us touch on a few questions that may be of particular interest to us, without making any judgments. You only need to take a look at the current world situation to be able to recall at any moment how necessary Theosophy and Theosophical striving are today. You can look at all parts of the world, everywhere you see peoples and classes in a hard struggle for existence. Races are fighting each other, nations are at war with each other, individual classes in individual countries are sharply opposed to each other. Against this, we have nothing much other than our first principle: to establish the core of a universal brotherhood, without distinction of race, sex, class or creed. That is a powerful principle, people say. But many appeal to what Schopenhauer has already said: preaching morality is easy, but establishing morality is difficult. The theosophical movement is not a doctrine, not a foundation. It differs from the other movements of the new time in that it is real life. And the teachings we spread are not the main thing. It is not the teachings that matter to us. They are all only the means to life. And no matter what teachings are proclaimed in the various branches of the movement or at its public events, whether we believe these teachings or do not believe them, whether we can repeat them or cannot repeat them, that is not the point. The point is that the teachings are something quite different from other teachings of present-day science or from the teachings of even the traditional concepts of the Logos. As long as the theosophical teachings are not what they should be, as long as they are the same as other dogmas, as other doctrines and sciences. Only when they are great, when they live into the soul like a magnetic force and work in the soul, will they become what they should be. This is not a lodge where reincarnation and karma, the world view, the origin and purpose of man are merely taught and beautiful sentences are coined, but this is a lodge where these thoughts buzz through the room and touch the deepest part of the heart, so that man feels these teachings as intimately related to him, so that it is as if these teachings come from within him. When these things become so powerful that he not only becomes wiser but also better, then it is the right thing.

This difference will not be immediately understood by many. Many today present themselves as teachers of ethics, of morals, or as teachers of a creed or as educators. We hear people talking about monistic teachings, about a renewal of this or that teaching – all these teachings come across as being deeply different from what the theosophical teacher wants, what we want in general within the theosophical movement. All the others preach or proclaim their supposed truths, they stand there and say, this is our confession, this is our opinion, this is the truth, in my opinion. No Theosophical lecturer could approach an audience in this way. It is not about an opinion. We carry within us the awareness that truth is within ourselves, that it lives in every human breast, that we do not have to bring it in, but at most have to bring it out – that we stimulate our fellow human beings. Thus, what is necessary lies in what has been said, in the bond that unites the Theosophical members. What is discussed in the branches should be a kindling of the inner life in the souls. We bring thoughts from the spiritual world, the great laws from the supersensible existence, which have formed the world, brought forth man, the great laws according to which the wise teachers and masters taught our ancestors millennia ago and still teach us today. We draw on these great laws, and they are at the same time that which carries us forward, which gives us security, courage and hope for life. These laws should permeate the spaces in which we live. And by feeling them, these laws, we recognize the world and ourselves. Then we should let these laws influence our daily activities in the most mundane things we do. Then the members of the Theosophical Society will be like leaven; they will be everywhere on the outside like a new spirit - if that is the case, we will know that the spirit is something true and real.

Anyone who comes here just to hear teachings comes here in vain, because they don't have the right attitude. And this is what matters when faced with the spirit. It is important that the person who comes here knows that the spirit is a reality, a truth, that I do not just get well and ill from [a] medicine, not just from wind and weather, but that what our body and our reality actually is also emanates from what I think, feel and will, that health can only come from a spirit that works healthily. It is even more important that our thoughts are healthy than that our thoughts are true. You will not be able to notice tomorrow or the day after that a source of health emanates from what is done in the theosophical lodge. Think wrongly in the world and you will bring illness into the world, not tomorrow or the day after, but one day for sure. All evil stems from untruth, from an incorrect inner life. This connection will become clear to you in the next Monday lecture. To give humanity a new health, a new harmonious life, that is our main goal. Therefore, our thoughts are not just teachings, but forces. They do not just enlighten, but heal and harmonize, healing the body and healing the legal and social aspects of human coexistence. Those who grasp this so deeply have the core of the theosophical movement. Those who merely ask how this or that relates do not know about theosophy. But the theosophist knows that when he sits together with the others in the branch and the great thoughts of the world order pass through his soul for an hour, he makes himself the sounding board of a new, healthy and harmonious life. Well, ladies and gentlemen, the fact that such a life springs up and exists in the theosophical movement is evident in some phenomena. We started from the premise that we said: you cannot preach morality, you have to establish it. But it seems as if the Theosophical Society has already achieved something that corresponds to and serves the principle of the brotherhood of peoples. There was a beautiful moment at the opening of this year's congress. It was decided that each delegate would give a short speech in his or her mother tongue. There they were, people who, in the external political situation, are in a fierce struggle against each other. A prelude to what can become reality when the spiritual life takes hold of souls was played out at the opening of the London Congress. The following languages could be heard, as a symbol of our principle: Dutch, English, Swedish, French, German, Spanish, Italian, Hungarian, Finnish, Russian. There you have a symbol of the same will and the same feeling flowing in the different languages. This is the life that the Theosophical movement has achieved in the thirty years since its inception. There was one of the most beautiful and wonderful moments at this conference – not during the conference itself, but on one of the evenings before – for some members who gathered here during the summer. They were invited to attend a meeting of the Blavatsky Lodge. At that meeting, Annie Besant gave a lecture on the requirements of discipleship. As you know, discipleship is something very high. That evening, it was not so much a matter of discussing the requirements of discipleship in general, but rather of the greatest of Helena Petrovna Blavatsky's disciples speaking out about critical minds. Allow me to say a few words about the actual subject. I need only mention here that everything that is the Theosophical Society is owed to the fundamental work of Helena Petrovna Blavatsky. None of the disciples can claim to have fully grasped what lived in Helena Petrovna Blavatsky. Those who delve into the works of Helena Petrovna Blavatsky see more and more that they are entering unfathomable depths, and that in her time the truth flowed through this unique personality as it has only flowed through the greatest religious founders and leaders of humanity. I can understand that in the beginning, when one approaches Helena Petrovna Blavatsky's achievements, one believes that one has understood many things. This can happen to anyone. But then there comes a time when one realizes that the content of the 'Secret Doctrine' contains writings of such spiritual depth that no one, without exception, has ever fully grasped it since Helena Petrovna Blavatsky. You could hear these words from Mrs. Annie Besant at any time.

There is the possibility, even for the greatest leading minds of humanity, to never stop. At least no one has yet found the end point. Deeper and deeper foundations of truth are found when you go deeper. That is what ultimately brings those who have the will to penetrate into a spiritual connection with Helena Petrovna Blavatsky. Helena Petrovna Blavatsky is still in contact with the Theosophical movement today. She is still one of the aids for the Theosophical Society today. If we have the right to turn to her, then she will help. One only has to look at what she has done historically. Take a look at her writings. You will find things in them that some scholars say: “This could be cobbled together from all the books in the world.” Yes, but no one has ever found what was available in different places around the world. Some things are in the most hidden places, in places that no other soul has had access to before; you will find exact quotes from writings that no human eye has rested on for centuries in Blavatsky's writings. She wrote so many of them in [Würzburg], while the books [in truth] were in the Vatican.

Of course she also made mistakes. But if you look into them, you will find that the mistakes are based on something specific, namely on a certain uncertainty of reading that always occurs when one has to grope in the astral light. We do not only live in the physical world, we also live in the higher worlds. We see not only the physical, but also the spiritual. We see not only physically, but also spiritually, and there you can also read books that are in the Vatican in Rome, but you can easily read wrong, you can easily read 136 instead of 631. Where mistakes have been made, it turns out that they have always been made in this way. Every objection that is raised against the truly valuable, the great and significant aspects of this personality can be easily refuted by anyone who really engages with it. But it seems that not many people are willing to get to the bottom of the matter, despite everything. Otherwise it would not have been possible for small mistakes by Helena Petrovna Blavatsky to have been ridiculed here and there in recent times – even in the English “Vâhan” – that Helena Petrovna Blavatsky was sometimes passionately agitated, used a harsh, passionate word, smoked cigarettes. The question was raised as to whether someone who smokes cigarettes can really be a great person, can sometimes be agitated. This was the reason for Mrs. Besant's lecture on Helena Petrovna Blavatsky. Now this greatest disciple of Helena Petrovna Blavatsky spoke from her innermost being. Everyone who was there will have found that something tremendous emerged from within, everyone had to feel that something deep was alive there. She discussed the fact that there may be people who have not gone astray – but [she also] asked whether they also have the great qualities of Helena Petrovna Blavatsky. Of course, there are also many who do not smoke cigarettes, but do they have the great qualities of Helena Petrovna Blavatsky? The sun also has sunspots, but these do not illuminate the earth. It is light that has a warming and fertilizing effect. Those who want to have it, who want to achieve what Helena Petrovna Blavatsky was able to give to humanity, must also be able to see it - and be satisfied with what is great and powerful about it. Then they will come closer and closer to the impersonal source of wisdom, truth and life.

The fact that this was spoken out of a deeply serious experience was what mattered, and it was spoken by a personality who herself admitted that evening that [Helena Petrovna Blavatsky] was the Bringer of Light for her. Then came the beautiful, profound words in which Annie Besant, as everyone could feel, was in complete harmony with all the students of the great teacher Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, at the head of whom she placed those who said that that one should bear in mind that the disciple, the beginner above all, before he can grasp the greatness of the great, harms himself if he blocks his path to these great ones by hasty, unintelligent criticism. To have such an attitude, to get into such a mood, to really feel what is right in the face of greatness, that is the gain of life, that is the beginning of the highest spiritual knowledge. No one needs to venerate anyone else, everyone may criticize as much as they want in the world, but by doing so, they harm themselves most of all when they want to gain knowledge. Then they put the greatest obstacles in their own way.

There is one thing that must not be misunderstood. It is often said in theosophical writings: Don't criticize, seek to understand first, before you judge. And this is taken as if it were a prescription for everyone. The Theosophical Society does not oblige anyone to follow such a prescription. But there is something else we need to know, and that is that we must be in this mood of unbiased acceptance if these truths are to flow into us. You can't have one without the other, and anyone who wants one without the other is like someone who has a glass rod and wants it to be electric. If he wants it to be electric, he has to rub it. If he does not want to rub it, it will not become electric. He who wants knowledge must have this mood. You cannot achieve one without the other. It is a contradiction in terms to want to achieve one without the other.

You just have to understand the theosophical view correctly. It is nothing more than a narrative. It never demands anything of any of its members. That is something we are very far from, especially those who know what is important in the theosophical movement. We are not asked to believe in any authority, to engage in any personality cult. The less the cult of personality is demanded, the higher the status of those to whom it is applied. All speaking against personality cult is speaking against things that are not there. The great moment I wanted to characterize was to see a personality looking up. And the whole lecture was looking up. That was the significant thing about it.

I wanted to emphasize these two moments for you because they symbolically show something of the gain in life that one can have today within the Theosophical Society. There are two things that will become more and more important: One is the realization of our first principle: to establish the core of a human brotherhood, to present the great core of humanity, and the second is to learn to worship without belief in authority, without worship of persons, to worship out of freedom, out of knowledge. To offer worship as a gift that is free, without compulsion. This can be achieved. This is what we have achieved in thirty years. When we do that, it is as if a different kind of spirit were to pass through the room and fill everyone. Little by little, the theosophist comes to realize that this is something much more real than what can be grasped with hands. The thought should occur to every member at the entrance gate to the Theosophical Society: Here you enter a society in which people believe in the truths and realities of the spirit, in which they believe that spirit lives in you. This is connected with the central phenomenon of our society.

We recognize the great progress of the outer life, we are not reactionaries, we know what it means to have achieved outer science, that in the eighteenth century in one of the big cities 77 out of 1000 people died, while now only 22 out of 1000 die. We know what it means that our industry has conquered the world. In the face of all these achievements, there is one thing within this modern science that claims authority, one thing that you will encounter again and again, and that is an uncertainty regarding the great questions of the divine, regarding the great questions of the immortal powers in man. And there you hear from those who are most learned, most scientific: We know nothing, we can know nothing. And that is only natural, for it lies in the present development. But what knowledge have we acquired? To understand this properly, we have to look back a little in history.

Anyone who studies culture from a historical perspective from the point of view of the school of thought will be told that there were originally primitive, uneducated, uncultivated peoples. They still live in some parts of the world. We are descended from them. We will not examine whether this is the case. But when we examine religious beliefs, legends and myths, these world scriptures, we are amazed when we look into the deep wisdoms for which these myths and legends are the expression. We can glimpse the deepest wisdom in the mythical images of the seemingly most primitive peoples. We do not import it. Those who study them will find that it takes much more skill to import it than to extract it. These peoples did not have our means of understanding and our instruments. It is a miracle that the secret of the material is presented in a similar way to that given to us by science today. But now read a lecture given at the naturalists' meeting on the brain conditions. Everything appears chaotic to you compared to the old wisdom. There is a difference in how our people think and how our ancestors thought. What does today's man say? I have invented the truth. - Your ancestors would have referred you to their teachers, to higher and higher teachers. A sense of profound humility permeated the whole thing, a humility that can listen, that says to itself, the human being is in a state of development, knowledge and wisdom are also in a state of development, and if I want to know that which I cannot know myself, I must look up to other teachers. We should not accept knowledge on authority, no, when we have heard the truth, the knowledge, we can also find it ourselves.

It is true that the personal cannot know anything about things that go beyond the tangible. If we want to know something about this, we have to turn to such teachers who have kindled the light within themselves, in order to be able to show us what it looks like in the worlds that extend beyond the physical world. They will bring the teacher principle home to us.

What has the man of today achieved with all his science? He has been able to build the outer house and to bring about the greatest conceivable progress in the outer world of the senses. But one thing must be borne in mind. Think of it: all of science and culture has made our Earth a veritable palace for the people living on it. But it also teaches us something else: namely, that this physical Earth will no longer be here, because all the greatness and infinity that material culture has achieved will disappear, will disperse into its atoms. What does this physical science teach us? What will happen to all that man has been here and has achieved? A “I don't know,” this science must say, which is limited only to this earth. Only those who have experienced more than what is connected with the earth can know something about this question – and they do not speak about it that way. We must turn to the great teachers. Therefore, theosophical teaching ultimately leads to the great masters and teachers of the human race. Then one comes to the point of saying that a certain human knowledge is vain. But there are human beings who are beyond this point of view and have achieved something that will still be there when the earth has long since been scattered. We must find the way to the higher individualities who speak to the people who want to hear them. The Master does not speak to those who are arrogant, only to those who are truly humble in the highest sense, who make themselves a vessel and tool of the Master.

The Master speaks to them in the highest sense. Did the founder of the Theosophical Society, Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, also have this humility? How easily she could have said: What is in my books comes from my knowledge. But she always referred to those who stood behind her, to the enlightened guides and masters of wisdom. So Helena Petrovna Blavatsky had that great modesty.

There are many who do not want to hear about the so-called higher worlds, who want to avoid the Theosophical Society precisely because it talks about a devachan plan and an astral plan. But whether we are afraid and afraid of these things is not the point, but whether they are true. The masters have told us more about these things because we need them in life. Certainly, you can learn a lot by observing life, the mind can tell us a lot. Even the moral teachings can be grasped by the intellect. From the ordinary point of view, many a person can be moralized about envy, cowardice, lies and so on. But envy, cowardice and lies are things that are observed in truth in the higher world. In the physical world, lying is a relatively light offense. But it is nothing compared to what it is on the astral plane. The moment you tell a lie, you cause something that is like the destruction of a living being. You then carry this killing with you. It mixes with your own astral body. What we otherwise only know from the lie as an external world, we then get to know in its liveliness. What is sensual here becomes spiritual. Today we need to be reintroduced to the spirit, to sense it first and then be led to certain knowledge. This is the life that must pulsate through the theosophical movement. If this life does not pass through the theosophical movement, then it will not achieve what it is meant for. These guiding masters, all our beautiful teachings and theories are in vain if there are not a number of people in the world who come together in the mood we have described, in the mood that they already say to themselves at the entrance: Here we only live in the awareness that the spirit is a reality. - When every listener is filled with this mood, then our branch has meaning, then you yourself are the source of something living. When we are together in the consciousness of the truth of the spirit, then this consciousness is a force, and the people who are there and have this consciousness form an electrical receiver. And when thoughts are expressed, whether by anyone in particular, that are in harmony with the laws of the universe, and are grasped by all the souls in us and a center is formed, then they go out from there through the whole city and influence the whole city, when we have the consciousness of the spirit. My words have no meaning if there are no people who take them up and carry them out into the world. That is why we come together in the Society. When we have this consciousness, only then are we truly a Theosophical Society. That this consciousness becomes more and more intense, stronger and stronger with us, that we really show a power through faith and through the knowledge of the spirit and of the spirit, that is what our meetings should achieve. What really matters is not that we read books or listen to teachings, but that we accept and appropriate this consciousness of the spirit. And then, when there are as many branches as there are people who have this consciousness of the spirit, only then will there be a Theosophical Society. But not before. It is not the doctrine, not the dogma, but the consciousness of the spirit that is important.

Report in the “Communications for the members of the German Section of the Theosophical Society (Adyar Headquarters) published by Mathilde Scholl”, No. 1/1905

At half-past ten, Dr. Rudolf Steiner, as General Secretary of the German Section, opened the third ordinary General Assembly and welcomed the representatives of the foreign branches and all other guests.

After reading and approving the minutes of the General Assembly of October 30, 1904, the number of votes of the various branches was determined, with the following result:

Absolute majority 21 votes

Two-thirds majority 28 votes.

Mr. Hubo proposes the following procedural motion: The General Assembly shall decide to grant the Secretary General the exclusive right to publish the General Assembly; however, any other publication shall be declared inadmissible. After a lengthy debate, in which Dr. Löhnis, Mr. Ahner, Mr. Krojanker, Mr. Arenson, Mr. Stübing, Mr. Kieser, Dr. Paulus, Dr. Steiner took part, the Hubo motion was adopted as follows, with all but two votes in favor:

“The report of the General Assembly is to be duplicated by the General Secretary and sent confidentially to all members. It may not otherwise be published or sent.”

Dr. Rudolf Steiner makes the following statement on the first item on the agenda - the Secretary General's report:

"The Theosophical movement has spread extensively and intensively within Germany and Switzerland. The Theosophical idea seems to be understood more and more. During my visits to Munich, Nuremberg, Regensburg, Stuttgart, Frankfurt am Main, Bonn, Cologne, Düsseldorf, Weimar, Zurich, Basel, Kassel and so on, it has become clear that there is a great longing in people's hearts for a spiritual deepening of life. In these cities, we either already have branches or their establishment is in prospect. Branches have been established in Freiburg im Breisgau and Karlsruhe, and in other cities: Sankt Gallen, Frankfurt am Main and so on, such branches are likely to be established soon. In Basel and Heidelberg, the circumstances are more difficult; there, the understanding that the high spirit, which was sent into the world thirty years ago, flows through our society, must first be created. There is still much misunderstanding to be cleared up, which has been caused by the split-off theosophical movements.

This longing should give us strength. It is essential that we not only cultivate theosophical teachings, but also theosophical life. Only when art, science and all other branches of life radiate out of theosophy, only then has the mission been fully grasped. The significance of the Theosophical movement was beautifully demonstrated at the Congress of the Federation of European Sections in London. One may object to such congresses as one likes; perfection has not fallen from heaven; but here we are dealing with intentions. We must set ourselves the ideal of improving what needs improvement, of working to improve it, not of criticizing it.

Before I move on to the Congress report, I would like to mention an event that relates to certain recent events. On the eve of the Congress, Mrs. Besant spoke at the Blavatsky Lodge about the needs of the student body in connection with Helena Petrovna Blavatsky. All those present at the time will not contradict me when I say that it was an hour of intimate Theosophical togetherness, from which one could take away a lasting impression in one's heart and mind. I have seldom heard Mrs. Besant speak in such an inward and heartfelt way. In the English “Vâhan” it had been expressed some time before that the qualities of Helena Petrovna Blavatsky were in contradiction to the discipleship, and the question had been raised: Can someone possess the qualities and yet not be free from such faults as smoking, intermittent passionate outbursts and so on? Mrs. Besant took up this remark about “Vâhan” and said that Helena Petrovna Blavatsky was a personality who was the bringer of light for her; she was the one who led her out of darkness towards the light. Well, it is true that Mrs. Helena Petrovna Blavatsky smoked and flew into a rage; but do such questioners know what it means to go through the storms and struggles that someone has to endure before they have worked their way to this level of knowledge? Even the sun has sunspots, but we should not judge it by these spots, but as the bringer of light and warmth. The younger members should first try to understand the older members whom they cannot recognize in their greatness before they begin to criticize.

Let us tie this in with a few words about personality cults and belief in authority, because such things have also been discussed in our section. It might seem that I myself now wanted to engage in such personality cults and belief in authority with regard to Mrs. Besant. Before I knew Mrs. Besant, I was as far removed as possible from engaging in personality cults; it was more important to me to continue searching for the truth in the world. Then I met Mrs. Besant. Not out of personality cult, but out of the spiritual content of the personality, I became convinced that she lives in what leads to the higher spiritual worlds. Fifteen years ago, I still stood before Helena Petrovna Blavatsky as before a mystery, but through Mrs. Besant I also found my way to Helena Petrovna Blavatsky. Mrs. Besant demands the least cult of personality; nothing is more unpleasant to her than this. Mrs. Besant has never demanded the slightest cult of personality from me.

At the congress, a scene took place that seems to symbolize the global reach of the Theosophical Society. In addition to Mrs. Besant, there were representatives of the various sections and countries. Everyone spoke in their mother tongue. The idea of Theosophy, which is common to all, was heard in the languages of the most diverse peoples of the earth: Dutch, English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Swedish, Russian, Finnish, Hungarian, and Indian. The course of the congress was the usual one. There was an exhibition, in particular of works of art by our members. Among the German exhibitors, I would like to highlight Lauweriks (Düsseldorf), Seydewitz (Munich), Boyer (Düsseldorf), Miss Stinde (Munich), Miss Schmidt (Stuttgart). The pictures of the Irishman Russell should be mentioned, who tried to express inner astral life in the environment and also in the symbolism in his landscapes and persons. Besant also pointed out that those who want to find theosophy in art can find it in Richard Wagner, for example. The sculptural work of a sculptor named Ezekiel, who lives in Italy, was also mentioned. Besant said that it reflects well what a theosophist can imagine of Christ.

Ms Besant's lecture on occult research, its methods and dangers on Sunday evening should also be mentioned. No one should accept anything that is claimed about occult research on good faith or on authority, but should consider it only as a suggestion at first. What comes to light is researched in difficult ways. Therefore, anyone who does such research should only want to suggest.

I myself was allowed to give a lecture on the occult basis in Goethe's works.

Regarding last year's Federation Yearbook, I note that it was completed by the beginning of July, except for the index, which I assume has been finished by now.

This year's Yearbook should be ready in less time.

The location of the 1906 congress is Paris. It is expected to take place in May.

This concludes the factual information. However, I would like this information to be understood as it is meant, and that these messages are not understood as meaning that all theosophical teachings, dogmas and thoughts are only valuable if they flow directly into life.

Those who enter Theosophical Society should know that everyone who sits there should be a battery of power for the mind. We are clear about the living weaving and living of the mind. We do not want to spread the teachings through mere words on the physical plane. We know that the spirit flows out like the current of an electrical power source. Wherever theosophists sit together, there should be such a power source. Then those who receive these waves will also be found. One should feel like one is a member of a spiritual community.

The treasurer, Mr. Seiler, now gives an account of his stewardship:

The total income in the past
financial year was 1462 marks
The total expenditure was 936.67 marks
Thus there was a surplus of 525.33 marks.

Added to this are 1000 marks in the bank, giving a total cash wealth of 1525.33 marks.

Dr. Steiner also reports that Countess Wachtmeister has provided him with 50 pounds for Theosophical work in Germany. He asks that these be used exclusively for propaganda and that he be allowed to administer them together with Miss von Sivers. The General Assembly agreed.

Fräulein von Sivers, as secretary of the German Section, gives the following report on the course of Theosophical life in the past year:

The number of branches is 18 compared to 13 last year, an increase of 5 (Besant Branch, Stuttgart II and III, Freiburg, Karlsruhe).

Total number of members: 377 (previous year: 256), an increase of 121.
8 have left
3 have died
132 have joined (previous year: 121).

Members in the individual branches:
Besant branch [newly founded] 83
Berlin branch [DTG] 18
Charlottenburg 5
Weimar 11 Munich 33
Stuttgart I 9
Stuttgart II (Kerning-Loge) 11
Stuttgart III 11
Freiburg i. Br. 10
Lugano 9
Karlsruhe 9
Cologne 22
Düsseldorf 15
Hamburg 21
Hannover 25
Leipzig 26
Dresden 9
Nuremberg 18

Section members 22

Reports from the individual branches:

Mr. Ahner reports on Dresden that there has been much struggle in the theosophical movement there, especially with the secession. The circumstances had led to the founding of an Adyar Lodge, which, however, found it very difficult to maintain its membership, as there were very few funds available. Therefore, work could only be done in a smaller circle. Mr. Ahner concluded with a general appeal to the generosity of the members with means. Mr. Hubo called for such voluntary donations to be made immediately after the General Assembly.

After the report of the auditor, Mr. Krojanker, the treasurer is granted discharge, as are the other members of the board.

The next item on the agenda is the election of the board:

Mr. Bresch takes the floor to speak about the election of the General Secretary and says something along the following lines: He is against the re-election of Dr. Steiner. Three years ago, he himself had urged Dr. Steiner to accept the position. At that time, Dr. Steiner was to be seen as a scholar. Since then, he has been working as an occultist, and it must be said that such personalities are not suitable for administrative positions. Dr. Steiner could better perform his services as a teacher if he were not burdened with the post of General Secretary. Furthermore, it is dangerous to have people with occult pretensions in such posts. The case of Judge proved that. Occult life is only too easily associated with fraud, imposture, deception, and so on. Mr. Bresch would therefore like to ask Dr. Steiner to refrain from re-election himself.

Dr. Steiner first notes that no motion for re-election has yet been made. He acknowledges Mr. Bresch's reasons to a certain extent; however, as things stand today, he feels obliged to accept the election if he is elected.

Proposal Arenson: Dr. Steiner shall be re-elected as Secretary General.

For the duration of this vote, Dr. Steiner hands over the chair to Miss Scholl.

Mr. Stübing asks if it would not be possible for Dr. Steiner to devote his activities entirely to propaganda.

Dr. Steiner replies that this has been his wish for a long time, but given the circumstances, he would be failing in his duty to the Theosophical Society if he did not accept the election at the moment.

Mr. Hubo proposes the middle way of re-electing Dr. Steiner but relieving him of mechanical work by paid assistants. Dr. Steiner requests that these motions be treated separately. After a lengthy debate, in which Mr. Ahner, Dr. Paulus and Mr. Arenson take part, Dr. Steiner is re-elected by roll call with all but two votes in favor of the motion to end the debate.

Dr. Steiner resumes the chair.

The remaining twelve members of the executive committee are then elected; they are elected individually by roll call.

The results of the election are as follows:

1. Miss von Sivers
2. Miss Scholl
3. Mrs. Lübke
4. Miss Stinde,
5. Mr. Arenson,
6. Mr. Kolbe,
7. Mr. Kiem,
8. Mr. Wagner,
9. Mr. Deinhardt,
10. Mr. Bauer,
11. Mr. Hubo,
12. Mr. Ahner.

The treasurer is then elected. At the request of Mr. Wagner, Mr. Seiler is re-elected. Since Mr. Krojanker declines re-election, Miss Motzkus and Mr. Tessmar are proposed and elected as auditors. Proposal by the Secretary General: For reasons of fairness, the section members, of whom we currently have 22 in Germany and who do not belong to any branch, should also have representation at the General Assembly. On behalf of the board, he proposes that they be treated as a single branch, that is, in addition to a joint delegate, they should have one additional delegate for every 25 members (or part thereof). Adopted.

Dr. Steiner requests the mandate to greet the general secretaries of the remaining sections on behalf of the general assembly. Accepted.

Proposal Bresch and Dr. Löhnis, regarding the Fuente matter, Leipzig, August 30, 1905: Proposal: The general assembly of the German section of the Theosophical Society should decide as follows:

1. The President of the Theosophical Society, Mr. H. 8. Olcott, is hereby informed of the displeasure of the members of the German Section of the Theosophical Society at his having allowed Mrs. Besant to use half of the estate of Don Salvador de la Fuente for the purposes of the Central Hindu College, although according to the arbitral opinion in the testator's papers this does not mention the college and rather states that the legacy should be used for the purposes of the Theosophical Society.

2. The President of the Theosophical Society is further expressed dissatisfaction because he has responded to factually justified complaints from individual members with personal insults (“impertinences” and “selfishness”, according to “Theosophist”, July 1905, p. 622).

3. The President of the Theosophical Society is requested to hand over to the Theosophical Society, as it has now acquired corporate rights, the foundations and bequests in his possession that were given to him as a representative of the Theosophical Society.

4. The President is further requested to always obtain the prior consent of the Central Board when using foundations and bequests intended for the purposes of the Theosophical Society, since, according to Clause 11 of the statutes of the Theosophical Society, he himself only acts as a co-administrator, not as the sole administrator of the Society's property.

5. The Vice President and the Secretaries-General of the various sections are to be expressed, as members of the Central Board, the displeasure of the members of the German Section for failing to object to the unlawful actions of Mr. Olcott and Mrs. Besant in matters concerning the Fuente bequest.

6. The Central Committee is requested to have the documents of the Fuente legacy submitted to it by the President and to duly settle this matter with the assistance of a court of law.

7. The General Secretary of the German Section shall issue the resolutions listed in Nos. 1 to 6 in the required number of copies within four weeks and then immediately send one copy each by registered mail to the President, the Vice President and the General Secretaries of all Sections of the Theosophical Society.

Richard Bresch, Dr. F. Löhnis

Dr. Steiner reports that the following is available:

1. Counter-motion from the Munich Lodge and several other lodges: “To the Secretary General of the German Section of the Theosophical Society.” Mr. Bresch publishes a motion to the General Assembly of the German Section of the Theosophical Society in number 3 of “Vâhan,” volume VII, according to which the General Assembly should decide: “To express to the President and Vice-President as well as the General Secretaries of the various sections of the Theosophical Society the displeasure of the members of the German Section of the Theosophical Society for allowing or not objecting to Mrs. Besant's use of half of the Certral Hindu College.

Although the arbitrator Sir Subramania Iyer recognized in his verdict that “Mrs. Besant is entitled to one half of the property bequeathed by Colonel Olcott and her, although on the other hand, Mr. Bresch had already once raised an accusation against President Olcott and Mrs. Besant in this matter, which he had to recognize as “(“Vâhan” No. 12, Volume VI, page 280), Mr. Bresch and his friends would like to put Mrs. Besant on trial because Mr. Bresch wants the money distributed, and because Mr. Bresch and his friends have no confidence in any of the leaders of our movement. Dr. F. Löhnis, co-signatory of the aforementioned motion, accuses Mr. McAd of dishonesty, Mr. Olcott of partiality, Mrs. Besant of pride, and the majority of the members of servility in an article that precedes the reasoning behind this motion (“Vâhan” No. 3, Volume VII). The undersigned members of the Theosophical Society consider the motion of Mr. Bresch and his friends to be unjustified and see in the arguments of Dr. Löhnis an unjustified insult to the highly esteemed leaders of our movement and to the majority of the members of the Theosophical Society. In order to express the trust of the members of the German Section in the esteemed leaders of the movement, the undersigned members request that the General Assembly of the German Section of the Theosophical Society vote on the following motion instead:

Proposal: “The General Assembly of the German Section of the Theosophical Society expresses its fullest confidence in Mr. H. $. Olcott and Mrs. Besant, in grateful recognition of the great services they have rendered to the Society, the fullest confidence of the members of the German Section of the Theosophical Society. The General Assembly expresses the conviction that Mrs. Besant acted fully within her rights in appropriating half of the assets bequeathed to her by Don Salvador de la Fuente Colonel Olcott.

Munich, September 22, 1905.
Rosa von Hofstetten, 1st Chairwoman of the Munich Lodge.
Sophie Stinde, 2nd Chairwoman of the Munich Lodge.
Heinrich Hiernickel.
Countess Pauline von Kalckreuth.
Emmy von Rumpler.
Harriet Vacano.
Marie von Seydewitz.
M. M. von Scherpenberg.
Hermine von Scherpenberg.
Max von Seydewitz.
Emmy von Gumppenberg.
Gertrud von Tschirschky née Scholtz.

2nd proposal from the Hanover branch: Hanover, October 12, 1905. Regarding the proposal from Bresch and companions. Contrary to the proposal from Mr. Bresch and companions (printed in the “Vâhan” of September this year), the Hanover branch decided at its meeting on October 9 this year to submit the following proposal to the general assembly on October 22 this year:

Proposal: “With regard to the proposal submitted by the Leipzig branch, or rather by Mr. Bresch and his associates, as published in the September issue of Vâhan, the Hanover branch proposes that the agenda be changed to address this matter on the grounds that – quite apart from the question of whether or not the individual complaints can be justified factually – it is formally quite inexpedient to discuss such matters of the Society in a public journal, and even more so to do so on behalf of a section. This must damage the reputation of our society and impair the influence of our movement. Such expressions of opinion should only be expressed personally and privately on the basis of expert examination rather than formal judgment, and they should never be settled in public, but at most in closed negotiations between the parties involved.” The board of the Hanover branch of the Theosophical Society.

Wilhelm Eggers.

The Secretary General announced that the following branches had joined the Munich application:

The following signed:
Cologne Lodge,
Weimar Lodge,
Hamburg Lodge,
Hanover Lodge,
Lugano Lodge,
Düsseldorf Lodge,
Nuremberg Lodge,
Munich Lodge
and the Besant branch in Berlin.

The delegates Bauer (Nuremberg), Mücke (Besant branch), Lübke (Weimar), Arenson (branch III, Stuttgart) then communicate the decisions of their branches: to support the motion from Hannover to move on to the agenda. The motion will be discussed first as it is the most far-reaching.

The following spoke against the motion: Messrs. Krojanker, Jahn and Stübing, the latter two emphasizing that Messrs. Bresch and Löhnis had been misunderstood. Furthermore, a new motion had already been drafted in a less harsh form; in the interest of fairness, the gentlemen should be allowed to speak. It would be intolerant and un-Theosophical to accept the Hanover motion. The delegates Arenson, Bauer, Huchthausen, Hubo, and von Sivers speak in favor of the motion, which has been well thought out. There can be no question of intolerance. A debate would hardly bring anything new to light, and the assembly would have better things to do than to listen again to everything that has been said in this regard in recent weeks. The form and content of the Bresch motion are so seriously offensive that, also in view of what became known at the board meeting, the only dignified thing to do is to accept the Hanover motion.

After a motion to close the debate has been adopted, the motion for Hanover is adopted by an overwhelming majority, whereupon Mr. Bresch and Mr. Löhnis and a supporter of the same demonstratively leave the meeting.

A letter from Dr. Hübbe-Schleiden and Mr. Deinhard is now read out about the brochure by Dr. Hensoldt that has been distributed from Leipzig in recent weeks; the same reads:

"To the annual meeting of the German Section of the Theosophical Society in Berlin, October 22, 1905. Regarding the proposals of Mr. Bresch and his colleagues regarding the use of the De la Fuente legacy, the undersigned request permission to express their personal views: We have in our possession a pamphlet by Dr. Heinrich Hensoldt entitled “Annie Besant, a Whimsical Saint”, which was sent to us from Leipzig. We cannot help but suspect that this pamphlet was the cause of the agitation that has spread from there against the leaders of our society. This pamphlet has the sole purpose of fighting and suppressing our society. It mixes incorrect statements of fact with a spiteful distortion of real circumstances. The description of the character and endeavors of Mrs. Besant and Colonel Olcott (page 42 and following) is in the main the exact opposite of reality. The picture they paint contradicts the judgment of all those close to them regarding their moral and intellectual value; and to be able to judge such personalities validly, one must have known them for decades. The same requirement applies to the assessment of the factual circumstances.

As for the use of de Ia Fuente's legacy, it has been used in accordance with the wishes of the testator. Dr. Hensoldt (page 46) only objects to the donation to the large Adyar Library. But this is undoubtedly the most important creation of our movement. Therefore, its support had to be considered first and foremost. Under the direction of Dr. Otto Schrader, an outstanding German Sanskrit and Pali scholar, this collection of rare books and unique manuscripts is now on the verge of developing into a world-class library. The capital contribution from the legacy serves as a necessary prerequisite for this. Even if this had not been the testator's wish, his gift could not have found a more beneficial use. Incidentally, we older members are familiar with the fact that our society tends to go through a crisis every ten years, during which the same objections are always raised against it. Its founding took place in [1875], the Coulomb crisis in 1885, the Judge crisis [1895], the current crisis in 1905: but the effect of all these crises has always been that all those who judge the essence of our society only intellectually fall away from it because they do not possess the necessary intuition to sense the spirit that is effective through the leaders of our society."

Döhren near Hannover, October 12, 1905.
Hübbe-Schleiden.
Ludwig Deinhard.

Dr. Steiner declares the brochure to be a terrible pamphlet and reports that Mr. Bresch said at the board meeting that he provided Mr. Hensoldt with printing and address material.

As a representative of the Leipzig lodge, Mr. Jahn objects to this. He believes that the condemnation of Mr. Bresch and Mr. Löhnis has gone too far. Although he himself is against the attacks made in “Vâhan”, he must nevertheless take the gentlemen into his protection, since he is of the opinion that Mr. Bresch is a fanatic, but that he is not guided by bad motives. From this point of view, he asks to be judged by him.

Dr. Steiner remarks that no one should be denied the [subjective] feeling of fighting for the truth. But here, any sense of a basis for the truth is completely lacking. This is proven by the way in which “Vâhan” has behaved towards eyewitnesses of true facts that he has distorted. The behavior towards Miss Scholl, Mrs. Lübke and Dr. Vollrath clearly shows that Mr. Bresch and Dr. Löhnis simply lack a sense of the necessary factual basis for the truth.

Dr. Paulus proposes that the meeting move on to the agenda, since it is really not worth engaging in lengthy debates about such an elaborate piece of work by a non-member. Mr. Stübing notes that the brochure is not to be understood in the context of the Bresch-Löhnis motion.

Mr. Ahner disagrees. Anyone who reads “Vâhan” and the brochure recognizes the connection. Hensoldt is, so to speak, held up on a shield in “Vâhan”.

After Fräulein von Sivers speaks against the opinion of Her Stübing and Frau Geheimrat Lübke announces that Mr. Bresch stated at the board meeting that he is indebted to Mr. Hensoldt for the unveiling, the motion to move on to the agenda is adopted.

This is followed by a motion from Dr. Paulus for the Stuttgart I branch. The applicant refers to the circular of the Stuttgart branch dated June 27 of this year and proposes that a “news sheet” be established for the German Section in the following form:

“The General Assembly resolves to publish a newsletter for members and to have it appear as soon as possible, as a supplement to Luzifer, at the expense and risk of the section, since there is a need for it.”

A further motion is made in this regard:

“To ask a member to take on the publication of this newsletter. The costs for this are to be covered by voluntary contributions.”

Mr. Hubo, Ms. Stinde, Mr. Bauer and Dr. Paulus take part in the debate.

Dr. Steiner proposes “that the newsletter be published officially and sent to each member separately from ‘Lucifer’, free of charge and on a mandatory basis”.

After further debate by members Ahner, Peipers, Bauer, Hubo, Arenson and von Sivers, it was deemed appropriate to place the entire matter in the hands of a suitable member, who could then initiate the process as they saw fit.

The following motion is proposed: Miss Scholl would first like to deal with the publication of a newsletter and to contact personalities she considers suitable for this purpose. The motion is adopted.

Proposal from the Leipzig Lodge:

“The General Assembly shall decide: ‘All motions received by the date of dispatch of the invitations to the General Assembly shall be sent to all members with this invitation’.”

The motion is adopted.

Proposal Scholl:

“The General Assembly shall decide: Mr. Bresch and Dr. Löhnis are to be asked to resign from the society.”

Mr. Jahn then says that the two gentlemen should not be treated equally with regard to the assessment, since they certainly have different motives.

Mr. Engel, Mr. Stübing, Mr. Krojanker and Mr. Feldner speak against this motion. Mr. Ahner asks Ms. Scholl to withdraw this motion. Ms. Scholl remarks that she has thought about this matter carefully and cannot in any way comply with this request.

Mr. Stübing proposes: “To move on to the agenda item regarding Ms. Scholl's motion.”

This proposal is rejected.

Scholl's proposal is rejected.

It is now proposed that the “Theosophical Library”, which has been under the direction of the “Berlin Branch” and in the possession of a few private individuals, be transferred to the direction of the German Section. The General Assembly generally expresses its approval of this proposal.

Preparatory work for a possible congress of European sections in Germany is assigned to the board.

The Munich branch once again puts forward the request, already made last year, to move the general secretariat to Munich. The matter is taken note of again.

Dr. Steiner then closes the business part of the meeting at half past three and invites the members to attend the substantive part of the General Assembly at half past four. With regard to a report on the General Assembly of the German Section contained in the November 1905 issue of 'Vâhan', we note that it is impossible and also quite useless to engage in polemics with people who adopt such a way of fighting. We want to work and not argue. However, we do want to register the following 'objective untruths':

1. Dr. Löhnis writes: “Instead of the factual annual report that the General Secretary is obliged to present, Dr. Steiner offered his faithful followers a brilliant apotheosis of Mrs. Besant, and he he increased his own nimbus by declaring that he had been in contact “on higher planes” with Mrs. Blavatsky, the “great teacher, to whom all who ‘know’ look up out of true knowledge.”

This is an objective untruth. It is much more true that the report was given entirely in part by Dr. Steiner and in part by Miss von Sivers, and that the alleged “apotheosis” was necessarily part of this factual report on the congress of European sections. Regarding Mrs. Blavatsky, Dr. Steiner only said that Mrs. Besant had opened his understanding for her. Nothing was said about “higher plans”.

2. Dr. Löhnis writes here with all sorts of combinations of his imagination that are too indifferent for us that Countess Wachtmeister “has donated a considerable amount to promote the Theosophical movement in Germany. It was deemed unnecessary to provide more precise information about the amount. Only so much was communicated that about 1000 marks are available annually.

This is another objective untruth. What was actually said was that 1000 marks had been given once (not annually) by Countess Wachtmeister.

3. It is also objectively untrue that Dr. Steiner himself stood for election as General Secretary; he merely said a few words after Mr. Bresch's speech against this election to say that he would accept the election if he were elected because he currently still considered it his duty.

4. It is objectively untrue that Miss Scholl proposed the motion to expel Mr. Bresch and Dr. Löhnis. Rather, it is true that the motion was to request the aforementioned gentlemen to resign. That's enough; anyone who illustrates the principle “No law is above the truth” with such “objective untruths” can justifiably use it in conversation or write it in their letters every now and then!!!

The following have resigned from the Theosophical Society:

Mr. Richard Bresch, Dr. Löhnis, Mr. Haase, Mr. Heyne, Mr. Emil Hubricht.

Newly admitted are:

Miss Clara Rettich, Mr. Paul Weiß, Mr. Eduard Bachmann, Mrs. Helene von [Gillhaußen], Mrs. Anna Werner, Mrs. Eliza von Moltke, Mr. Ludwig Weiß.