The History of the German Section of the Theosophical Society 1902-1913

GA 250 — 22 January 1905, London

19. Protocol of the Extraordinary General Assembly of the German Theosophical Society (DTG)

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."