Comments on: A short history of brotherhood, sisterhood and religious tolerance

By: Katinka Hesselink - All Considering

Katinka Hesselink - All Considering — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 12:02:53 +0000

Co-masonry is still a fringe masonry, which is why I didn’t mention it here. Annie Besant didn’t just join that movement, she was a significant factor in spreading it – great orator that she was. There was a time when most theosophists were co-masons and most co-masons were theosophists.

By: katinka - spirituality

katinka - spirituality — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 11:58:14 +0000

Don’t read too much into it. These things are to a large extent taste. Of course Rudolf Steiner was brilliant. He had a PHD after all. No, there is nothing wrong with combining the scientific method and spiritual reality. In fact, i admire that. But it’s a risky adventure that often leads to too much intellectualizing – and missing important points.
I admire Steiner enough BTW to have made a tribute page for him: http://www.squidoo.com/Rudolf-Steiner

But that doesn’t mean I can read his books. Somehow. He is all over the place in a way that bugs me. Which is weird, because Blavatsky is also all over the place and in her work it does NOT bug me. Perhaps it’s the very claim that his work covers all the bases. Blavatsky merely claims to give out a series of important hints.

Perhaps a comparison to Ken Wilber (whose works I CAN read) is relevant. There too you have a brilliant man who combines his insights into spirituality with his knowledge of science. He has some great insights, but he misses the boat occasionally as well – and in ways that, if acknowledged, would topple his whole system. Which is the problem with having a water tight system in the first place.

I much prefer reading books by people who just share their insights and the reasons they feel those insights make sense – instead of people pretending it all fits together seamlessly – it never does, because all knowledge has its limitations as soon as it gets put into words anyhow.

One other issue I have with Steiner is that he focuses on the Western Esoteric tradition and therefor misses out on one of the important aspects of the Theosophical quest: finding a spiritual truth that can unite West and East. He stayed regional and therefor culturally limited. Given his place and time this is understandable, but it also did not help German consciousness overcome it’s cultural challenges.

By: Rick

Rick — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 02:45:46 +0000

You seem like a fairly reasonable person but I’m curious about one thing, how does Rudolf Steiner rub you the wrong way? I’ve been studying his work for over thirty years and find him to be absolutely brilliant. He essentially reconciled the scientific method with spiritual reality. How can this be wrong?

By: Derek

Derek — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 16:04:05 +0000

In the late 19th century, various orders of “co-masonry” were founded. These admitted both women and men. Annie Besant and her daughter Mabel Besant were both involved with co-masonry.

By: Katinka Hesselink - All Considering

Katinka Hesselink - All Considering — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 14:16:08 +0000

No I haven’t read Rudolf Steiner. I’m more of a Blavatsky person, but have also read a lot of Jiddu Krishnamurti. Steiner rubs me the wrong way somehow.

By: axel g

axel g — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 14:11:01 +0000

I find theosophy and anthroposophy great sources of inspiration.

Have you read Rudolf Steiner’s “How To know Higher Worlds”?

Nice site!