The History of the Esoteric School 1904–1914, Volume Two

GA 265

Two letters from Emil Adriányj to Rudolf Steiner

I

Nuremberg, September 3, 1906

... I deeply regret that your time did not allow you to give me a short, undisturbed hearing during one of your repeated visits to Nuremberg, which I asked Mr. Bauer to convey. I would have liked to ask you for your open and honest opinion on a certain matter, which is now very often associated with your name. Personally, I am very curious about how certain events, which have caused great astonishment in certain circles, are judged by you. Likewise, I find no explanation as to how it is possible that the head of the E. S. of the Theosophical Society in Germany could get in touch with similar people, whose names alone must be highly compromising for the reputation of a “Theosophical Society”, since the Society has not shied away from removing one of its oldest and most well-known members from its midst for similar acts of black magic, without a word or sound? ...¹

II

Nuremberg, September 8, 1906

I gratefully acknowledge receipt of your esteemed letter of the 4th of this month and am pleased to take note of its contents.²

The fact that your name has been mentioned in connection with Reuss ever since issue 1/6 of Oriflamme appeared and that it has also been discussed in the Masonic press is probably because, according to Oriflamme, you do belong to the Order and its Sanctuary, as well as to Mystica Aeterna. What judgment these publications pass on the other content of the Oriflamme can be seen from the following excerpt from a note in the Braunschweig Lodge Correspondence.³

I regret this, not least in the interest of the T.S., and would like to leave it to you to also deliver your declaration of having nothing in common with Reuss to the masonic journals, especially since something will be read about Reuss again soon.

This is not only about your own prestige, but also about the good reputation of people who must value you more than the Reussian order-making, which exploits your person as a reference.

Since you were kind enough to hint to me your concise views on the charges against Reuß, I will respond with the same candor by sharing with you my view, arrived at from Reuß's own letters, from Dotzler's latest statement, and from a thorough study of the Cerneau, Memphis and Misraim rites. that the Reussian order itself knows of, possesses, or has awarded no “exercises,” nor awards them abroad. The exercises that Reuss has announced to a select inner circle of disciples have been composed by him (supposedly after consultation with Dr. Kellner) or, in imitation of the T.S. [Theosophical Society], combined with the current “A. Pr. Rite“ [Alter Primitive Rite] were combined, whereby the advertisement with the ‘conscious union with the original creative power’ was made possible.⁴ Reuss's order does not have an actual authorization to issue occult “exercises”; it would be difficult to provide irrefutable proof in this regard. In any case, however, it is my personal opinion that the T.S. would not have needed the help of a Reuß for such exercises.⁵ Since the aforementioned has given his “exercises” without any kind of warning (such as that of Mme. Blavatsky in volume III of “Secret Doctrine”) and without emphasizing the necessity of a moral way of life (the “Address to the Pupils of the Occult Degree”, which now belongs to it, was first written by me to make up for this omission) and his successes manifested themselves, not on the devachanic plane, but on the astral plane, through a kind of mediumistic apparition, I soon came to suspect, after receiving the first “exercise,” that Reuß is either ignorant or terribly reckless in this area as well. In addition, the exercises had no success whatsoever, even after months of practice, for many people who are highly developed morally.