The History of the German Section of the Theosophical Society 1902-1913
GA 250 — 25 June 1906, Berlin
30. Obituary of Countess von Brockdorff, Report on the Paris Congress, On the Fall of Leadbeater
Above all, I must express my satisfaction at being able to greet you once again in Berlin. I know full well that my absence, my all-too-frequent absences, cause some disruption. But you will understand, from a theosophical point of view, that today's work is necessary at the most diverse points in the German-speaking world – and is necessary in other ways as well. Right now we are at a very important stage of the development of the Theosophical movement, and each and every one of us must contribute to the development of occultism and Theosophy wherever we feel we can contribute. I hope that you will therefore also understand this matter, that I am not always able to work only in the place that is, after all, in a certain respect the starting point of my theosophical work; but circumstances have made it necessary for a temporary absence like the last one to occur more often, and we can hope that somewhat different times will arise for Berlin in the future. For my part, I will endeavor to be here as much as possible. However, I cannot neglect the comprehensive task of our Theosophical development during this time and ask you to be understanding in this regard.
Obituary for Countess Brockdorff
The next thing we have to do today is to remember the departure from the physical plane of one of our very dear members. Countess von Brockdorff, who, as especially the old members of the Theosophical movement in Germany know, devoted so much strength and devotion to this Theosophical movement in Germany, departed from the physical plane on June 8, after a physically agonizing ordeal. The older members of our group, and I myself in particular, are aware of the beautiful and devoted work of Countess von Brockdorff. At times when the Theosophical cause in Germany was often on the verge of dying out, it was the couple, Count and Countess Brockdorff, who, time and again, knew how to keep this Theosophical movement in Germany afloat in their loving and, at the same time, extraordinarily appealing way for the widest circles. Those who still remember the quiet and extremely effective way in which the countess knew how to gather individual minds in her house to send out individual rays of light will fully appreciate her work.
If I may first say a few words about how I myself came to be part of the circle in which Countess Brockdorff was active, inspiring in the broadest sense in theosophical and other intellectual matters, I would just like to say that one day a lady said to me whether I would like to give a lecture on Nietzsche in Brockdorff's circle. I accepted and gave a lecture on Nietzsche. The countess then took the opportunity to ask if I would like to give a second lecture in the same winter cycle. This second lecture - I think it was the 1901 winter series - was about the fairy tale of the “Green Snake and the Beautiful Lily”. Even then, the countess had the desire to take up again what had been dormant at the time - the actual theosophical activity.
The countess's work was extremely difficult because she became more and more rooted in the theosophical life with which she had come to various theosophical experiences.
It was difficult to continue the spiritual life under the name of Theosophy. Therefore, she had initially limited herself to her Thursday afternoons, but then felt the need to return to actual Theosophical activity and invited me - I was not even a member of the society at the time - to give lectures at the association, which took place during the first winter and were about German mysticism up to Angelus Silesius. An outline of this is given in the book 'The Mysticism of Modern Spiritual Life'. The following winter I gave the lectures on 'Christianity as a Mystical Fact'. This led to the creation of a kind of center for the gathering of theosophical forces in Germany, from which a foundation was laid for the actual founding of the section.
Now, when one thinks of the dear Countess Brockdorff, it must be emphasized that the Theosophical cause was repeatedly kept afloat by her extraordinarily sympathetic manner and work. The Countess had little sense for certain organizational issues and currents in the Theosophical movement. It was less her thing. She had less sympathy for it. But a certain basic tendency of her heart formed to work in the direction of the theosophical movement. She did this in a way that was truly rare in a human being, borne of the fullest devotion and extraordinary love.
It was probably her health that made it necessary for her to retire to her country residence in Algund near Meran at a time when we were forced by circumstances to develop a tighter and more cohesive organization in Germany. And, as was often the case, even this peace was not truly rest for the good countess. She soon began to suffer from ill health, and she went through difficult times in terms of her health in the last few years.
Objectively speaking, the history of the Theosophical Society in Germany in the 1890s and early 1900s will be linked to the name Brockdorff, as the achievements of the countess and the count cannot be praised enough. The older members will still remember our good count when he was still at the side of the companion he has now lost in the physical plane. But the members also know how deeply rooted the theosophical sentiment was, with which peace will be won from the theosophical world view. But even those who may have been younger members and did not know Countess Brockdorff will, in view of what she achieved for the Theosophical movement in Germany and particularly in Berlin, gratefully remember it, and look back with a certain – essentially Theosophical – emotion on the last days that brought physical death to the much-admired and beloved member. I ask you to honor the honored member by rising from our seats.
Report on the Paris Congress
Now it is my turn to speak briefly about the congress of the European section that took place at Whitsun in Paris and that coincided with my presence in Paris. It was not just a matter of attending the congress, but I also spent four weeks in Paris giving lectures and tried to cover the various fields of Theosophy and occultism in these lectures. These lectures – I may say this objectively – have aroused some interest. In the end, it was no longer possible to finish the lectures in the small venue. The French section has earned our special thanks by providing us with their club venue for these lectures.
I am particularly gratified by the fact that one man in particular took part in these lectures from start to finish, and he has achieved extraordinary things for the occult and spiritual movement in our time: namely Edouard Schur, whom you may also know from 'Lucifer'.
So our French congress took place at Pentecost. This congress, like all congresses of this kind, kept our French comrades and colleagues busy for a long time. Anyone who is able to look behind the scenes of such a congress and see what needs to be done will know that it is not without reason that we look back with gratitude on everything the French Section has achieved over many months, just as the English Section did last year. However, I have to add a bitter pill sweetened by joy by informing you that we will have the congress in Germany next year. I believe that the German Section will be able to take on the burden of this congress as the fourth of these sections. I hope that we will be able to welcome many friends from abroad here next year.
If I am to speak of the participants in the congress that began on Saturday, July 2 and ended on Wednesday, June 6, I have to mention President-Founder Olcott, who made the long journey from Adyar to Paris especially for the congress and who was the chairman of the congress this year. Then I can only give you a few of the names of the participants in this congress that may interest you. I can tell you that on the part of America, only one member was there – that is natural, because America does not belong to the European section – our member [Bernard]. Of foreign members, I would like to mention an Indian who is currently planning to give lectures in England: [...]. He will give lectures on Vedanta philosophy. Then there was a personality, a representative of the area north of India, who spoke in a few words during the congress, in a way that gave an idea of the shades of the theosophical view in this area.
Among the European participants, mention should be made of Mr. Mead, Mr. [Keightley], Secretary General of the European Section, [Kate Spink], then Misses Cooper-Oakley, then, from the English Section, Miss [Ward] and several other members who can hardly be known in Germany by name.
Our Scandinavian member [Arvid Knös] represented the Scandinavian Theosophical Society at the congress in an exceptionally pleasant manner. The Dutch section was represented by our friend [W. B. Fricke]. The French section was present in person. Then there was Pascal, the secretary general of the French section, who was not very active due to poor health and could only devote a little time to the work of the Theosophical Society. The main work of the French section lies with the three siblings: Monsieur and [Mesdames Blech], who have ensured that there is now a beautiful headquarters in France and who had a lion's share in the preparation of the congress. In addition, Mr. Ostermann, who lives in Alsace for most of the year and who has greatly supported our work through his activities, made it possible to give lectures in Strasbourg and Colmar. In Strasbourg, he had an audience of about 700 people. He supports the theosophical cause wherever he can.
From Spain, there was Monsieur [Rafael Urbano]. From Italy, there was our friend Professor Penzig, a professor in Genoa, who is also the Secretary General of the Italian Section. The German members Fräulein von Sivers, Baroness v. Bredow, Mr. Kiem; also from Cologne, Miss Scholl, Mr. and Mrs. Künstler, Miss Noss, Miss Link – Cologne, now Bonn. A lodge has recently been established in Bonn. From Hamburg there were: Miss Wagner, the sister of Günther Wagner, who could not be present. Then from Darmstadt: Mr. Kull, from Munich: Countess Kalckreuth, Miss Stinde and [Miss Stucky]. From Stuttgart: [Carl Kieser], from Regensburg: Mr. [Feldner]. Those are more or less the German members who were able to attend. So that was the list of participants.
The congress was opened by an exhibition held in the rooms of the French headquarters at [Avenue de la Bourdonnais 59] on the afternoon of June 2. In a series of partly symbolic and partly other images, the French section endeavored to make the artistic part of our congress. It is to be hoped that this part in particular will be developed more and more. It is certainly true that the French section did well to only allow works by French artists. Whether this can continue to be the case to this extent will have to be carefully considered. The artistic element was relegated to a mere secondary meaning by the fact that the congress was held in a large room at [14 Rue Magellan], but the smaller exhibition in the rooms a little way away could only be considered for those who could spare a quarter of an hour to look at the pictures. Nevertheless, just consider what it would cost such a congress committee to gather a larger number of images from all over France in order to organize the congress to the satisfaction of the members.
The opening of the congress by President Olcott took place the next morning, and was preceded by a very pleasant performance of the “Ode to the Sun”, which was written and composed by our French member [Edmond Bailly] and which introduced the congress in a very beautiful and dignified way. Then there was an address by our friend Dr. Pascal, the Secretary General of the French Section, in which he welcomed the assembled members (over 400 in number). Of course, the members of the [affected] country provided the main support. The number of German members has grown somewhat compared to the number that could be represented in Amsterdam and London. I can say that we had a very favorable number in Paris.
Then our president Olcott gave his speech, which he first delivered in English and then repeated in French. This opening speech – allow me to give you an objective report – probably belongs to a current in the theosophical movement that, I would say, no longer stands on the ground of the original intention of the theosophical movement. I do not wish to hide my views and convictions from the members of the German Section, but I would ask to be allowed to speak openly about the matters at hand during a relatively difficult period in our development. It is not a matter of in any way touching on the merits and virtues of President Olcott, but for me it is only a matter of speaking to the German members in a completely unbiased and honest way.
The speech that our president gave more or less culminates in expressing the aspiration that is prevailing in a large part of our society today, the aspiration to push back occultism. Within society, more superficial studies than can otherwise be found today, and in particular, as is often emphasized, the ethical direction, the moralizing direction, have come to the fore. I do not want to say that the theosophical movement today is already shaping itself similarly to a society for ethical culture. But there is clearly a certain turning away from actual occultism and a limitation to what is in the first principle, to an external study, to the results of scientific research, such as hypnotism, suggestion and so on; as I said, there is a reluctance to deal with the great occult problems, which we in Germany tried to place at the center of the movement. There is a tendency to push them more into the background.
I am not going too far when I note that there was a tendency in the speech to let the esoteric element in society recede somewhat. It is self-evident that within society every person can have their own opinion, and that the president must also have and can have his own opinion. However, I must say that for many members, what the president says carries more weight than what anyone else says. But what he says must not be taken democratically. I myself would not be dissuaded at any moment from the path I have taken, and which actually does not go in the direction that appears to be official, but emerged as the opinion of an individual in the opening speech of the congress. I do not want to say – I do not actually want to say what I am saying – that I myself [...] consider it right for the Theosophical movement to be gradually pushed aside by occultism, but that I consider the cultivation of the great aspects of occultism and esotericism to be the basic nerve that should make up the Theosophical movement.
I can also say that at the congress, where I had the opportunity, I never hesitated to speak about this view. I said that in Germany it could not be about anything other than the cultivation of esotericism and occultism, although sometimes I was all alone. But it seemed necessary to me not to hold back what I consider to be the main focus of the movement.
Recently, our German section has been accused – including by German members – of spinelessness and all sorts of other things because we did not engage with their matters, which were not worth the trouble, because we could not go along with this line. Where it will be a matter of objective opposition, we will hopefully not shrink from making that opposition. I am not saying that our president expressed his personal opinion as president, but that he did not actually fully observe the custom that a president should observe: namely, to speak in generalities and in a kind of greeting, that is, to speak in a comprehensive manner, so that he may have gone too far in a way that can very easily create the danger of also giving a certain impression in society. That would have to be avoided at all costs.
The next item on the congress agenda was the individual speeches of the general secretaries and then also of the representatives of other individual nations. There was a colourful mix of languages, as each person gave their welcome address in their own language, in keeping with the true spirit of an international congress.
Dr. Pascal spoke for France, [W. B. Fricke] for the Netherlands, [Arvid Knös] for Sweden and Norway, Penzig for Italy, and I for Germany. The British section – and this was a cute scene: the of the English section is our member [Kate Spink], who spoke in such a way that Miss [Ward], who has a good voice and is good at speaking, stood behind her and spoke those words that were to be considered the greeting of the English section.
The last thing was the announcement that our friend Johan van Manen, who for years has been the de facto secretary of the Federation's congress and has always organized this congress in an extremely busy and active manner, and who has devoted himself so intensively to this work that he had to take a vacation next year to recover, so that we will have to do without a permanent secretary. Fräulein Stinde from Munich has therefore been elected as secretary for the German work, and she will represent Johann van Manen next year.
That was the first morning. Then came the first afternoon, which was dedicated to one of the two discussions that were held. The questions were as follows. The first question was: “To what extent is the Theosophical Society purely a group of seekers after truth? And a group of students? Or is it a group of propagandists or of followers of some system?”
The second question was this: “Whether the Theosophical Society has no dogmas or whether any authority exists in it, and what the value of that authority is?”
The third question was: “Whether the moral character of individuals should influence admission to the Theosophical Society?”
This last point about admitting [morally questionable] individuals was not even included on the agenda. To approach this question would be a difficult experiment. It would then come about that members would be thrown out of the society under some form or other. We would be holding heresy trials.
A number of prominent figures spoke on the first question, and here two stages in particular emerged clearly in the discussion. If I am to characterize what lies dormant in the bosom of our society, I would say it in the following words: There is a group that is mindful of the purpose of the original society and desires that true occultism be practiced. But then it is necessary that those who know something can say it in some way. Then the others will listen first. It is in the nature of the facts that one cannot immediately control and test everything that someone who has progressed as a teacher proclaims. There will always be those who say: This is uncontrollable, anyone can make something up.
Then there is the other current, which says: There must be no authority in the Theosophical Society, no dogmas, only what everyone - and the word has been repeated in all variations - can understand in the sense of common sense, can be taught.
In Germany, there is someone who wanted to trace everything back to common sense. Even Fichte has risen to a pamphlet, because who has that kills gods. [...] You could also have a vote in the Reichstag on what should be valid as common sense. Then you could also come to vote on mathematics and so on.
There are those who know what is important and that what is true does not require the approval of others. There are those who understand the teachings and those who do not yet understand them. Therefore, it is necessary that there is a certain trust, a certain personal relationship between those who teach in society and those who receive it. This is so obvious that it should not be discussed. But there is a current in society that only talks about what everyone knows and everyone can talk about. That was the question that was discussed that afternoon and about authority in the sense that a certain field must be created in the theosophical movement for those who, from their own experience, from higher experience, can teach occultly. The Russian friend Miss Kamensky stood up for this, then Miss Winters, then myself. But then we are more or less finished with those who advocate this view. In fact, however, there is a very strong sentiment in favor of the other [current] within the Theosophical movement, and Messrs. Mead and [Keightley] have vigorously advocated this direction. That is a true report, and I think I have given you such a true report.
The evening was filled with two lectures. Mr. Mead spoke about the religious spirit. What he said was from the circle of his studies, which for years have been in the field of esoteric fraternities, which developed outside of Christianity in the first centuries of Christianity, namely the great fraternities of Egypt, which bear the name of Hermes Trismegistus, and he sought to show that the receptivity of those great brotherhoods has been able to achieve a wisdom that is capable of forming a complete harmony between research on the one hand and the demands of reason on the other. He showed how, at that time, there were currents existing alongside Christianity, and his tendency was to show how these have eliminated a personal master, how they have limited themselves to regarding the actual spirit as the actual inspirer and, instead of what is understood as initiation, namely the fertilization of one spirit by another that is further along, to set self-initiation, which in this sense is the actual initiation.
That same evening, Monsieur Bernard, who had been in India for two years, gave a lecture on “The Problems of the Present Hour”, on those problems that Theosophy is dealing with in the present hour, how the goal of brotherhood is made the high goal of the Theosophical movement, how difficult it is to understand and interpret this correctly, and how those who believe they are living this brotherhood can fall into all kinds of aberrations. In a more moralizing way, he tried to explain how this moral-ethical aspect of the movement should be fulfilled.
On Monday morning, the actual sectional work began. Now we had sections working in two halls next to each other. I can report little about this. The main event was a lecture by Mrs. [von Ulrich], a member of the Italian section. She spoke about old [Slavic] myths and legends; she tried to extract the occultism of such primitive peoples.
Then I myself spoke about “Theosophy in Germany 100 years ago”. It is not for me to give further details of my own lecture. The Spanish Section was discussed in terms of [Louis Desaint].
Another example: a lecture was given on [Henri Bergson] in order to put the relationship of modern scholars with Indian occultism into perspective. Mr. Whyte from England gave a lecture in which he discussed interesting relationships within the oriental esotericism referred to by the name Mahayana. Then something else was read about a group under the title “Yoga from Algiers”. Then there was a reading about... that was a lodge work, the result of all members together.
The afternoon of that Monday was filled with questions. The question: to what extent propaganda could be a goal for the movement, and whether directives should be given to individual lodges for joint work. The latter could be useful if there is time for those who can do such a thing.
Then came the question: why the Theosophical Society has not grown beyond 13,000 members. In relation to this question, those who believe that 13,000 members is already a very respectable number for the spiritual current worldwide will be right. And if we were to gradually shed the occult character of the Theosophical movement, the number of members would also decrease considerably, but our culture makes it self-evident that with the expanded concepts of occult knowledge, the number of members of the Theosophical movement will continue to grow.
Monday evening was filled with musical soirées organized by members of the Society in France, and which, with a rich program, earned all credit for the musical achievements of our French comrades. Then the evening was closed with a [r&ception du soir], a kind of hospitality with tea and other things.
Of the next day – Tuesday – I would like to highlight, of the work that was given, a treatise by [Edmond Bailly, who also wrote the “Ode to the Sun”], with discussions of certain [mantric type, from the English language of the gods [...1] – Then we heard a talk about Mozart's “Magic Flute”, then a suggestion from Dr. Pascal (France) and then a suggestion from Miss [Ward] that people in different countries should gather evidence to support what is written in Blavatsky's “secret doctrine” and to confirm it with new scientific discoveries. She expected a lot from the fact that this enormous treasure of science, which has been created over time, will be collected and used to support the secret doctrine.
Then a member of the French Society, [Commandant D. A. Courmes], spoke about what needs to be done in the Theosophical movement to cultivate the material side of Theosophy, the mutual support in a spiritual and material sense. No specific proposals were made. But there should be a suggestion in this direction to consider to what extent members can help each other on this issue.
Then there is a lecture by [Frederick Bligh Bond] that will be of interest to those who favor a more materialistic elaboration of the basic theosophical ideas. He has tried, by combining certain pendulum movements, to draw figures [...] that come about when one pendulum swings to one side and crosses another pendulum. This creates interesting vibrational relationships. Our friend Gysi in Zurich tried to cut out an ordinary piece of a tree and let a drop of liquid dye fall on it and then let it run into the channels. It turned out that one piece of wood gave the shape of a butterfly, another piece the shape of a flower. You can get beautiful shapes out of it. This is better because it is reality that lives on the astral plane, while the pendulum movement is more of a game.
On Tuesday afternoon, the congress was closed at four o'clock. The president had become indisposed and could not attend the closing of the congress. The congress was closed by an address from our French friend Pascal and by addresses from the various general secretaries. At the opening, not only the general secretaries spoke, but also the others. It was interesting to hear India and Persia, then to hear the member from Spain speak, or rather, I can almost say, to see him speak. I was reminded of the Viennese university lecturer Unger. He once said: “The individual nations differ in many ways, including their speakers. And while the Latin souls have speeches that have a harmony between gesture and speech, the Germans have no gestures. The Spaniard spoke with his head, with his hands and feet. He spoke warmly. He also spoke in a discussion; there he said that one must have theosophy in one's heart and mind, then one can also express it with the appropriate gestures. Kamensky spoke in Russian. Then a Czech speaker took the floor. The approximately ten members in Prague were represented by him. They belong to us in Germany. The next day, everyone gathered for an excursion to Meudon. You can see the city from a nearby point outside. The congress was closed.
It has been decided to hold the congress in Germany next year, and we have endeavored to invite the friends of the world to join us.
Regarding the Leadbeater case
We have been discussing this for a little too long, but I still have to discuss one more matter that I feel is necessary to discuss, which is somewhat related to the things I told you about as difficulties of the Theosophical movement. I remind those who were at our general assembly that our friend Hübbe-Schleiden, together with Mr. Deinhard, said that our movement is going through a severe crisis. I have already said that this crisis does not consist of an action by Hensoldt and Bresch, but that we have now fully entered into this crisis through a certain event.
I would now like to talk about this event that led to a major crisis. There was something like a black shadow operating in the background of the whole Congress mood, and those who, like the General Secretaries, had to deal with what belonged to the background had to deal with these difficult circumstances – some more than others. They know that Mr. Leadbeater is one of those personalities who have been most appreciated by a large number of Theosophists all over the world in the past years, and that the Leadbeater books are among the most popular literary works of the Theosophical movement. Recently, Leadbeater had given effective lectures for the Theosophical movement throughout America and Australia. You also know – the members of the Berlin branches know this best – that this veneration of Leadbeater was even greater outside of Germany than within Germany. They know that some outsiders, like [Schouten Beek] always said, “But Leadbeater says it differently.” So you can imagine that it was significant for certain members - though not surprising for occultists - when, after May 16, the various general secretaries received word that on May 16, President Olcott felt obliged to convene a committee consisting of English, American and French members to discuss Leadbeater, so that Leadbeater had now resigned or would have been expelled. It is a hard blow when one of the pillars of the Theosophical Society is now being excluded after serious accusations by the section in which he has otherwise worked successfully.
Now it is, I might almost say, an insurmountable difficulty to speak about the reasons that led to the exclusion of Leadbeater. You know – and this is a problem that I have emphasized time and again – that there is a boundary between what is called black and white magic that is as easy to break as a cobweb, and that it is very easy for highly developed personalities to fall away through all kinds of impossible arts.
This is indeed a fact that is understandable to the occultist, but of course in no way defensible – and at present has found no other solution than that which lies in the exclusion of Leadbeater. If I am to speak in generalities in order to clarify the serious case at hand, I must relate it to a number of contemporary conditions.
You must not forget that occultism leads people up to higher levels of spiritual life, that people must consciously go through what they have unconsciously gone through in the past.
I have guided you through the sublime mysteries of the past in a variety of ways. I have not yet spoken of the degenerations of the mysteries because I did not consider it necessary. But there are also degenerate mysteries that have dragged down the sacred teachings, which shine into the depths of the universe, to the basest level. There are mysteries that have degenerated into the most savage sex cult and the most savage abuse of the sexual organs, and the one that on the one hand leads to the most sublime can, if abused, actually lead to the most terrible. You will often have heard that this is symbolically expressed by the great teachers of ancient Egypt, that it is compared to words - Osiris, the male; Isis, the female principle - that sexual images are evoked to describe that which rises to the highest region of the spirit. It is the same with a person who rises above all teachings. It is just as easy for him to fall into the swamp.
Now, in Leadbeater's case, it is still the case that he has come to excesses that are extremely condemned by morality. He started out from priests who described the difficulties of life with an awakening sex drive and offered help, so that the view has developed that one must counteract what there was of excess in this area. He combined this with all kinds of practices that are called practices, which are mixed into his educational system. It is difficult to continue talking about this. This is an ugly case of a slide that the occultist has to understand, who condemns himself only within his own karma of life.
We must not forget that he has achieved an infinite amount. What he has achieved will be won. What he has done wrong will have to be worked off again through him. The outsider has no right to judge his fellow man, because karma is the incorruptible and just judge. That is why we do not interfere in personal matters either.
Olcott did not consider it appropriate to ask the General Secretary of the German Section about this question. So the German voice was not considered. I do not wish to call this an accident, because it would have been difficult for the occultist to take a definite position. Leadbeater is of the opinion that he has done the right thing and that, in terms of cultural development, he has done good with what he has done. But those who have judged him are of the opinion that he has done something bad, which is punished in the most severe way according to the laws of various countries, with the exception of Italy.
We have here a case that signifies a crisis, a difficulty within the Theosophical movement. And perhaps those who are just joining the Theosophical movement today or have only been part of it for a short time and are superficially familiar with what is going on in the Theosophical movement will say to themselves: If such things can happen in the Theosophical such things can happen in the theosophical movement, if a person who has written books that have brought countless students can fall into immorality and be accused of it, then stay away from us if it is such a dangerous thing. Others will become frightened when they hear that even someone so advanced can fall into such a state. Those who are more advanced will say to themselves: however many people fall away, it cannot harm the theosophical movement. It will show who has only joined the theosophical movement for the sake of its reputation when they fall away because of such events. Those, however, who recognize the significance and greatness and value of the Theosophical Society will join together more closely. They will experience the strangest things, especially in the fields of occultism and esoteric life. Not only those who have done something not quite right for the ethically thinking person leave the movement. There can also be reasons for this when the Theosophical movement and the members of the Theosophical movement are spoken about, when judged from points of view that are only able to put the Theosophical movement in a miserable light, - because of its assumptions. Our culture suffers from an evil that is the evil of many hideous dark sides of culture. It is the evil that is connected with sexual life. The one who has open eyes and can see into the miserable swamp that humanity is sailing into, who is a versatile one, can be a good and an evil to a certain extent. Those who have entered the white path ascend the good side of culture, those who have entered the black path ascend the reprehensible side, the evil side, so that everything they can hear from either side, about the evil sides of occultism, is nothing more than the grotesque, the caricature of occultism.
Of course, people can say that what our poets and artists achieve, the atrocities that are created in these directions, is already bad enough. There is no longer any need to ban occultism. They would simply have to cross out the occult, although it is so necessary because humanity would have to perish if it did not have it. I already said to our members in Paris: The case of Leadbeater can be settled by a simple analogy. He should not be excused and nor should he be defended: Where there is much light, there is also much shadow; where there is strong light, there is also black shadow. Now, occultism needs the light of the cultural movement. But it has black shadows. So it will be a matter of the Theosophical movement, despite its severe crisis, despite its severe impairments, gradually overcoming its shadows to a real fertilization of the light it has to practice.
It was not my intention to tell you about this somewhat painful event in the Theosophical movement just for the sake of being here one day longer. But I also had to tell you at the same time – and that is my duty – that in my own opinion such an event cannot affect the momentum and impetus of the Theosophical movement. Even if it should prove to be the case that persecutions may arise from a misunderstanding of the actual crux of the matter and from a mere looking at the dark sides of those who lead the Theosophical Society in the various crises that the Theosophical Society will experience in the near future, we must not waver for a moment if we recognize the greatness and cultural significance of the Theosophical Society. We will also overcome the Leadbeater crisis. But those who do not know what is at stake will fall away. They know that great tasks are knocking at the doors from all sides, which we know to be the doors of the culture of the future. See how the world is in flames, both physically and morally. Consider how the ground begins to shake underfoot, not only in the East but also in Europe, and understand the profound role that the realization of spiritual forces plays. Anyone who thinks this way will also look at the Leadbeater case differently. The storm rages and claims its victims. It is a great sacrifice, as will become apparent from the consequences that the Leadbeater case will have. In the next issue of 'Lucifer', I will give an account of the Leadbeater case and everything connected with it. At the same time, I apologize for the fact that “Lucifer” appears so irregularly, but the next issue will be published on the 31st. You will then be able to form an accurate judgment from reading about the case, the discussion of which is met with almost insurmountable difficulties.
This would have brought me to the end of my arguments.