28/12/2023, 17:23 N.Berdyaev.

THEOSOPHY AND ANTHROPOSOPHY

N. Berdyaev. THEOSOPHY AND ANTHROPOSOPHY IN RUSSI

I.
The trend of this type, which I should want to characterize, only conditionally can be called religio
not have any separate outstanding representatives in Russian literature and it is impossible to define
particular one thinker. 1 We do not here meet with the psychology of an individual’s thought, [as wi
Merezhkovsky], but we endeavour to uncover the psychology of a thought typically impersonal.

The founder of the Theosophical society was the notable Russian woman, E. P. Blavatskaya, but th
trend itself cannot be called characteristically Russian, or essential to our religious thought. And if a
to speak about theosophy in the characterizing of the types of religious thought in Russia, then it is o
theosophy has begun to play a remarkable role in Russian spiritual life, within our cultural strata, an
undoubtedly will grow. Theosophy and its chief variant – anthroposophy – are peculiarly refracted w
soul.

Russian theosophy as regards its spiritual provisions has little resemblance to German or English t
rarely there can be discerned in it features of an apocalyptic construct, completely foreign to Wester
even contradicting the foundations of the theosophical doctrine. In investigating the religious search
has become impossible to bypass theosophy, since for certain of the strata of the contemporary cultu
quite the easiest to pass over to religion upon the ground of theosophy. Upon the theosophical pathw
not the least intellectual sacrifices and forbearance. It is not necessary to forswear the habits of ratio
cultural wonts, and it is possible to reconcile all the contradictions.

Popular theosophy purports to be the national supplement to positive science and positivist cultur
naturalism onto a new plane. Theosophy does not promulgate any type of creative religious thought
makes no pretenses to creative significance. Theosophy is contentious against creative natures and r
itself. Theosophical literature is but the popularization of ancient wisdom, primarily bestown throug
Theosophy first of all posits itself pedagogical, and not creative tasks. And it is difficult to find crea
the theosophists. The median level of theosophical books is not very high. Theosophists fight indepe
are little interested by the multiplicity of creative processes, that occur outside their circle. The seclu
circle is very characteristic for the theosophical and anthroposophical setting. But all the same it mu
Nicolay Berdyaev that theosophy responds to some very deep needs of contemporary man, deeply unsatisfied by offici
philosophy and official religion.

The spreading about of theosophy is a symptom of the crisis of official knowledge, at the basis of
not an abstract philosophizing, but rather a concrete mythologizing. And theosophy popularizes, not
dry and dull form, the great mythic-creative knowledge of former times. Theosophy is a contempora
wants to give the human soul neither a religious faith nor abstract scientific knowledge, but rather a
knowledge. The soul of contemporary man at a certain step of development thirsts for an all-wise kn
satisfied by neither a scientific, nor religious faith. But is it possible to acknowledge contemporary t
presented in the theosophical literature, as indeed the highest gnosis?

If there be taken up books of two of the chief theosophical writers of the present time – Anna Bez
Steiner, then the knowledge presented there is a descriptive knowledge, like geography or mineralog
through personal creative efforts nor personal revelations, but receivable through scholarly study. Th
their style and character have nothing in common with mystical books, nor philosophical books. Up
imprint of personal creative inspiration nor personal creative thought. Theosophical writers, evident
having their own thoughts and ideas.

They want to give a map of the construct of the world on all its planes, to give the pure descriptio
things. There flows the river, there stands a mountain. In this type is to be constructed the beloved c
per theosophy. Theosophy as it were does not strive to grasp the meaning of the mountain, to unrave
discover its ends and purpose. In this, contemporary theosophy is like contemporary science, but it d
plane of the cosmos, it discovers deeper levels. But problems of the origin of the world and the prob
and the meaning of the world process, are not only not decided, they are not even presented in conte
theosophical books.
Theosophy is but a descriptive, science-like and empirical knowledge of the cosmic structure and
Least of all is it any knowledge of meaning, the creative signification of being. At the very least the
unjustifiable, since there is no knowing of God and even the name of God rarely is mentioned in con
theosophical books. And thus in this contemporary theosophy does not come close to the theosophy
other great theosophists of former times, with whom there was an actual Divine-wisdom and Divine
contemporary theosophy it is difficult to find a teaching about God, then also in contemporary anthr
less difficult to find a teaching about man.

Both theosophy and anthroposophy are concerned not with God and not with man, but with the co
E. P. Blavatskaya and anthroposophy do not posit the question about the meaning of cosmic evolution, about its begin
the question about the meaning of cosmic evolution is already the question about God and about ma
from the cosmos, but rather into it bearing its own light. Ultimately, theosophy is compelled natural
fact of cosmic evolution, having neither end, nor beginning, and it demands from man an obedience
meaningless to him. The fate of man therein is not illumined by the light of God-knowing, – he is in
the fact of world-knowing.

Theosophical knowledge is too oriented to the natural sciences and it demands only their extensio
planes of being. Contemporary popular theosophy is very deferential towards science, but almost co

www.regels.org/Berdyaev-against-Theosophy.htm 1/9
28/12/2023, 17:23 N.Berdyaev. THEOSOPHY AND ANTHROPOSOPHY
philosophy. From the natural sciences it borrows a naive realism. Theosophy does not possess its ow
uncritically it makes do with the concepts of a gnoseological naive realism. With ease contemporary
the supra-sensual into a sensual terminology and it materializes the spiritual. But rarely does it revea
nature of the material. The vulgar mindset of theosophy is tainted by a completely uncritical materia
theosophical knowledge defines itself as being the knowledge of the non-creative, the passively-des
empiricism.

This – is an extended positivism. Theosophy provides an eclectic synthesis of bits of the old religi
together with bits of the new scientific knowledge. The pathos of theosophy is directly contrary to a
individualism. In theosophy contemporary man seeks salvation from psychologism, from self-absor
volition. Theosophy allures with the promise to unite contemporary man with the ancient world wis
modern soul into the chain of the Divine world evolution and the Divine world hierarchy. And for m
the sole bridge, over which they can cross over to spiritual life, by which they can withdraw from th
meaningless life of the contemporary world. Modern theosophy is not great, but it is connected with
it falls a reflection of the ancient Divine wisdom. This cannot but allure. There is too great a spiritua
days, and man senses himself forsaken. Contemporary man is alienated from the sources, and theoso
unite him with the [true] (sources). Theosophy warily leads modern man to the ancient sources of li
consideration of the habits of his thought and the terrors of his soul, a front the miraculous and the c
the growing popularity of theosophy is not occasional and superficial a mode, – it signifies a deep p
spiritual life of our times.

II.
Modern theosophy, in contrast to the revival of Orthodoxy with Bulgakov or the new Christianity o
goes from below upwards, from the contemporary consciousness, from contemporary science towar
consciousness, towards spiritual knowledge. Theosophy is very much the pedagogue, it trains mode
evolution, and it does not want to let go of him. Popular theosophy is intended to be on a not very h
intended not for creative people, not for thinkers and artists and not for saints, – it takes hold with th
cultural masses, endowed with spiritual claims.

Theosophy is connected with occultism, with ancient traditions and customs. But its esoteric core
and it itself is exoteric. In contemporary theosophical literature has been formed a peculiar exoteric
method of theosophy is always spiritual-evolutionary, and not spiritual-revolutionary, nor spiritual-c
pathway of theosophy – is a graceless path, on this path not a single ray of Divine light falls from ab
gained from below. In theosophy nothing is gratis, everything is difficult, nothing is through love, ev
justice. There is nothing Divinely bestown through theosophy, and therefore there is nothing giftedly

The human soul is doomed to wander through the cosmic corridors, and its fate – is a fate under la
the law, which likewise also is Divine justice. Theosophical consciousness, in distinction to the old-
new-Christian consciousness, is a decisive and extreme immanentism and monism. Theosophy iden
with the creation, God with nature. This immanentism and monism is received from the ancient reli
of India, it is purely Aryan and does not accommodate the Semitic religious grafting. But the imman
of modern theosophy bears the characteristic of the evolutional-naturalistic.

Theosophy, as a system of spiritual knowledge, carries over the laws of naturalistic evolution onto
other worlds, into the life of spirit. Not in vain does Steiner connect himself so with Haeckel, and de
Haeckel to new worlds. In the philosophy of Steiner there is quite much from naturalistic monism, n
philosophically-refined monism of Drews, but the popular nature-scientific monism of Haeckel. 2 A
Rudolf Steiner
popular theosophical book it is possible to discern elements of the vulgar naturalistic monism. In thi
seeks a centre external to man and his depths, it objectifies and materializes everything. The human
servile dependency upon a cosmic evolution of quite thousands of years, upon tremendous intervals
Theosophic-naturalistic evolutionism leads to a denial of the non-mediated connection of the human
Absolute. Theosophy denies the dualism of freedom and necessity, of spirit and nature.

The popular theosophical teaching about Karma is a teaching about the naturalistic evolution of th
about the wanderings of the soul, which draws behind it infinite threads from the past. Karma is the
identified with the law of Divine justice, the naturalization of Divine mysteries. And the Eastern tea
is a denial of graced love, of creative surfeit. Everything comes forth and everything is given only in
justice. But Divine love is not a matter of justice, in it is given immeasurably more, than in justice o
This also is of the mystery of Christ, of the mystery of supra-abundant graced love, which to the Go
today the gaining of the Kingdom of God. The Good Thief in justice and in necessity is not worthy
and behold the Kingdom of God, it becomes him yet to live through a thousand tormentive reincarn

Theosophy does not want to know this mystery of Christ, this miraculous and graced deliverance
of the past, from the might of time, of this shrinking of infinite time into a single instant. Everything
based on the terrible and irreversible measure of law, and it carries over into the very depths of Divi
– is just and commensurate with law, but it knows neither forgiveness nor mercy, it knows neither lo
Christianity however is first of all the religion of love and freedom, and not of justice and commens
From Eastern theosophy, from the teaching about Karma wafts a nightmare of the unredeemed past,
threads into the endless future.

For the human soul there is no exit from the endless cosmic evolution, into the Absolute and Divi
God and me there always lies the endless evolution of uncountable worlds. Man remains under the p
infinitude of the developing. There is no graced deliverance, no overcoming of all time with an exod
Absolute, Divine life. The mystery of redemption is not effected over the soul. Eternally, endlessly m

www.regels.org/Berdyaev-against-Theosophy.htm 2/9
28/12/2023, 17:23 N.Berdyaev. THEOSOPHY AND ANTHROPOSOPHY
stumble about through the dark corridors, living out its Karma. This – is the bad infinitude of the na
over as well into Divine life. The old Christian consciousness knew an ending, an exodus, a victory
and hell, for which things there was no yet natural evolutionary process.

Hell also was that dear value, which ransomed from the nightmare of the bad infinitude of reincar
evolution. But an eternal hell is (even) better, than this endless process. In the religious consciousne
tremendous role is played by the thirst for deliverance from the nightmare of endless reincarnation.
or torment in the Divine fire, but at least there is an ending within the Divine, and not an infinitude w
In hell itself there is (as it were) a Divine absoluteness. In this old Christian consciousness there is a
field of vision, but there is also the great truth of an exiting from the natural order into the Divine or
however does not know of an eschatology. Its immanentism – is naturalistic, and not Divine. And f
even farther from man, than with the transcendent dogmatic of the Church. But this – is the distanci
natural evolution.

In popular theosophy altogether unresolved is the question about time and eternity, about the rela
absolute. Eternity and the absolute are naturalized, they are made suitable for this world. In the teac
reincarnation is a great truth. Karma is the law of the natural life of the soul. Theosophy penetrates d
structure of the cosmos and its developing, than does the traditional churchly metaphysics. But the n
reincarnation is transformed within Christianity, it is transfigured, redemptive grace alters the ultima
evolution of souls, time is abridged and can be condensed into a moment. The Good Thief, having tu
Christ, in a single instant lives out more, than he would live out within infinite cosmic evolutions. A
always knows this victory over time and over the world, since it is oriented towards the depths of D
however is not known by an occultism, oriented towards the infinitude of cosmic life.

III.
Theosophy, having its sources in India, in the non-Christian East, does not constitute anything uniq
it does not know the mystery of the facial countenance, the countenance of Christ and the countenan
For the theosophical consciousness nothing is unique, everything is endlessly repeated, of Christ the
the human countenance is splintered into a multitude. Eastern theosophy is not the revelation about
3 It knows only an impersonal, non-human spirit, solely alone. But the impersonal pantheism is con
Anna Besant cosmic multiplicity, with a much-recurring repetition. A person metaphysics is completely alien to t

The ancient religious and philosophic wisdom of India in modern theosophy is popularized and si
Indian God-consciousness there is something inexpressible in our language, not able to be translated
concepts. Being and non-being do not at all mean in Indian wisdom, what it means in European phil
however adapts the wisdom of India into modern language and modern concepts and by this simplif
however aware, that the Christian truth about the person, about man, was foreign to ancient India. T
original stage of development of the religious revelation of the One. And it is but the one-only and u
appearance of Christ that reveals the uniqueness and unrepeatability of every human countenance.

Eastern theosophy does not know the God-man. For theosophy man is but a tool of cosmic evolut
Man is enveloped within the cosmos in various membranes, from the splintering of the planetary ev
is dissected into his component parts. Christ also is dissected and de-composited. There is no undiss
primordial and eternal countenance, nor Divine image. Theosophy does not know the First-Adam, th
coming forth prior to cosmic evolution and not derivable from it. J. Boehme taught about the First A
it with the New-Adam – Christ. His theosophy was Christian.

Christology and anthropology have an inseparable connection between them, – this is a matter of
and the selfsame truth. Our teaching about man depends totally on our teaching about Christ, they a
similar. And here the unbelieving Christology in modern theosophy, representing a giant step backw
with the theosophy of J.Boehme, begets also an unbelieving anthropology. In this type of theosophic
no religious anthropology. Theosophy knows man and Christ only as capsizing within cosmic life, w
evolution. In the cosmic evolution everything is formed and decomposes, and nothing unique and un
about.

The unique and unrepeatable countenance dwelleth in God, and not in the world. It is in God, and
that there must needs be seen both Christ, and man. And truly man through Christ – the Absolute M
within the very bosom of the Holy Trinity. Man is primordial and prior to the world, he is greater th
cannot be but its implement-tool. In the evolution of the world there forms and decays only the outw
man, and not his solely unique and unrepeatable facial-countenance, not his image of God. Thus oug
theosophy to teach, one very distinct from that, which is expounded in the contemporary theosophic

But God they all shun and separate off from the theosophical consciousness, He is to be attainable
cosmic evolution, which is not to have an end. The theosophical consciousness, totally oriented tow
evolution, does not know of an end, does not know of Divine eternity. The knowledge of the end or
infinity is indeed that knowledge, which is knowledge of the uniquely-personal. Bad infinity and ba
nature alone. Theosophy credibly teaches about the complexity and manifold-composition of man, a
of his fate with the cosmic evolution, about the enveloping of man. But the deficiency is in this, that
an human appear ultimately at the end of a long evolutionary process, and it is subjoined to other co
Theosophical immanentism does not liberate man and does not bring him nigh to God; God is not a
man, not in his depths, God is separated off from man by the cosmic evolution. And thus there appe
transcendent, transcendent for man, – the infinite and remote cosmic evolution.

IV.

www.regels.org/Berdyaev-against-Theosophy.htm 3/9
28/12/2023, 17:23 N.Berdyaev. THEOSOPHY AND ANTHROPOSOPHY
The modern theosophical tendency arose during the second half of the XIX Century, in the epoch
Europe of positivism and materialism, when man had forgotten about the ancient religious wisdom
alienated from all the sacred traditions. To the forsaken man it had begun to seem, that for him there
opened up, that he has received nothing by way of an inheritance and that everything must be gaine
work. The vanguard of Western mankind has ceased to feel itself Christian. It has had to proceed thr
and apostasy.

When the desolated soul of Western man waxed melancholy and grew aware of spiritual famine, i
light from the East. In the West as it were there had dried up the wellsprings of spiritual life, and the
spiritual life turned towards the ancient cradle of sacred wisdom, to India. The heavy remembrances
biases of the present gave hindrance to the European man of the XIX Century, who had lost his faith
Christianity, and he would the sooner instead consent to accept Buddhism or Brahmanism.

Eastern theosophy entered into the spiritual life of Western mankind at a very propitious moment
already plowed up. Western man, feeling his spiritual thirst, was unable to put to theosophy any sort
connected with Christianity, nor those connected with the Christian revelation about the human pers
especially Christian revelation and was unable to oppose it to the pre-Christian revelation of the Eas
deriving from the East, happened all at once to adapt itself to the scientific consciousness of the Eur
XIX Century, and to the modern evolutionism, to the contemporary avowal of the measure of law an
miracle.

Theosophy declared, that in Christianity is indeed that truth, which is common to all religions, an
religion of utmost truth. For the apostate to Christianity, theosophy makes it acceptable for his Chris
rendered innocuous. But in the subsequent decades there occurred radical changes in spiritual life, b
Europe and in Russia. We stand beneath the standard of religious searching, of religious renewal. It
possible to speak seriously, not only about materialism, but also about positivism. 4 Philosophic tho
more and more metaphysical. Science is undergoing a serious crisis, on the one hand – it has expand
artificial limits, and on the other hand – it has occupied a more modest place suitable to it. Man is m
bolder, and his boldness is manifest first of all in that he again dares to be Christian, and he turns him
riches of former times.

The human spirit turns itself towards Christian themes, and the impersonal revelation of the East c
In theosophy itself there occurs a change. Blavatskaya related negatively towards Christianity. But c
theosophists try to soften this attitude, and they all more and more introduce into theosophy, Christi
concepts. Theosophy moves from East to West. And the Christian West itself begins to remember its
traditions, its connections directly to the wisdom of Greece and Egypt. The Western occult tradition
itself, in contrast to the Eastern occult tradition. The existence of a Christian esotericism is being dis
basis there has occurred the separation off of anthroposophy from theosophy and therein has appear
current. The difference of opinion of anthroposophy with theosophy, of Steiner’s current from the cu
not so accidental and trivial, as it would seem at first glance. This split is deeply symptomatic and c
spiritual life of our times, and it is necessary to examine closely this movement of theosophy as rega
and the revelation about the human "I". Within theosophy itself is being effected a Christologisation
anthropolisation. But with Steiner and the Steinerians is it possible to find a revelation about man?

R.Steiner affirms his theosophy as being Western and Christian, and in distinction from Eastern th
it under the standard of Christ’s impulse. In his later years Steiner has particularly insisted upon the
own path. The Eastern theosophy – is prior to the cosmic activity of Christ’s impulse, prior to the re
"I". But a large part of the popular theosophical books by Steiner can only with difficulty be distingu
theosophical books of A. Bezant and the other Eastern, pre-Christian theosophists. In the books of S
can be found particular to him, and in them is impersonally expounded the usual, traditional theosop

All this is indeed the teaching about cosmic evolution and with a still strongly expressed imprint o
then the teaching about the planes, about the complexly constituted man, and then the teaching abou
transmigration of souls, this being the graceless path of the unredeemed soul, each step attained by t
achieving perfection. One of the best books by Steiner, “The Path to Devotion”, is written such as th
by Christ does not act within the world. In it are prescribed the usual practices of Eastern Yoga. Onl
when Steiner had turned from theosophy to anthroposophy, have there begun to sound new notes. 5

Christian occultism as it were conquers the Eastern occultism. But in the appearance of anthropos
name from man, it is as difficult to find man as it was in theosophy. True, for Steiner all our solar sy
evolution stands under the standard of Man, it is all Man at large. But the joy at this is small. Man st
same within the endless process of the past and the future, man is still all the same enslaved by the g
decaying forces of time, he does not have a point of support in eternity, in God, deeper than anythin
the world of creatures.

Man – is the means of the world evolution, the point of the intersection of the cosmic whirlwinds
for the anthroposophic consciousness the human person is united to absolute being only through wo
through the chain of Karmic reincarnation. Cosmic evolution itself is altered in the power of the effi
impulse, a new cosmic epoch begins, in which everything happens yet differently, than it did before
Himself is but a cosmic agent, but a moment of cosmic evolution. Steiner sees Christ only as a tiltin
cosmos, and he does not see Him in God, in the Divine Trinity.

His Christ – is naturalistic, is discovered in chemistry. Christianity for anthroposophy is the revel
and not the Divine. The anthroposophic teaching about the immanent acting of Christ’s impulse in m

www.regels.org/Berdyaev-against-Theosophy.htm 4/9
28/12/2023, 17:23 N.Berdyaev. THEOSOPHY AND ANTHROPOSOPHY
itself both doubtless and deep truth. But it does not go to the ultimate and the final, the Divine First-
in the midst of the created world process. The attitude towards Christ in anthroposophy is neither re
mystical, but exclusively occult. But pure occultism is powerless to behold the Singular Countenanc
occultism He is disintegrated into the world. Pure occultism is likewise impotent to behold a singula
man. It is because both the Countenance of Christ, and the countenance of man, reside in God, and n
their basis.

This is why the occult orientation of life, conjoined neither with the religious nor the mystical, ass
exclusiveness, denies the creative originality and the self-worth of the person, for it does not unders
nor greatness. Everything is regulated and directed by hidden cosmic agents, there is nothing creativ
theosophy, and anthroposophy, extinguish the passionate human nature, the Dionysiac-passionate cr
creativity. Everything freely-volitional, irrational, is denied. There is not that freedom and independ
is affirmed in mystery, when it is delimited by occult knowing. Mystery immerses one into the unut
Divine life. The denial of mystery within occultism puts everything into the endless middle of the w
mystery of the Divine depths defends man against being blown to atoms by the cosmic winds. But i
acknowledged, that in the more recent times within Steinerianism there is being all more and more u
Alice Bailey
about the "I".

V.
Around occultism has accumulated much charletanism and mystification – there is too much of the
secret and mystified sphere of human life. And up to now there has existed an insufficiently serious
and philosophic circles, in esteeming themselves as the preservers of the values of European culture
be termed not only unserious, but also thoughtless. For truly it is thoughtless to regard something on
sneering denial, something of which one is not readied to render a judgment of. The official teachin
are themselves saturated with a pitiful aridity and bias.

The world known to them and avowed by them is but pragmatically created by them and pragmati
activity for them. Entire planes of cosmic life were hidden for the ordinary European scientific and p
consciousness, by virtue of a peculiar pragmatic lack of knowledge, which can be set up alongside p
knowledge. For man at a certain stage of his spiritual development not only would it be not necessar
be dangerous to know certain of the cosmic powers and secrets. He would be defended by his ignor
point of growth. Christianity hid this from man with an hierarchy of natural spirits, it freed him from
the pagan demonology and by this it revealed to man the possibility to get spiritually on his feet.

In the pre-Christian pagan world man was enslaved to the demons of nature. By this closing off o
the inner life of nature, and expelling great Pan into the hidden depths, the Christian Church mechan
made possible the science and technology of the XIX Century. Man was alienated from the inner lif
resettled onto a restricted territory of natural and social life. In this was the meaning of positivism. B
man then enter into that maturity of their existence, when the ignorant lack of knowledge becomes a
man defenseless. Man begins to be aware of himself and conscious of himself as a cosmic being, an
great cosmos, immeasurable in its depth and extent. Man emerges from the restrictive provincialism
upon the outer shell of the earth. And if earlier it was a danger for man to see and to hear too much,
blinded nor deafened, then for now it becomes a danger not to see and not to hear, since unavoidabl
cosmic energies come at man from all sides and they demand from his side a clear-seeing, wise activ

I see the [tremendous and] serious significance of the theosophic and anthroposophic currents to b
currents turn contemporary man towards the mysteries of cosmic life, and they extend knowledge u
the cosmos. The theosophic type of thought becomes not an anthropologic, but rather a cosmologic
problem is not oriented [either the Orthodox consciousness of Bulgakov, nor] the Christian consciou
Merezhkovsky], since [their] consciousness fears gnosticism and is repulsed by any cryptic-knowle
occultism is it possible to find the true knowledge, that the material congealed subjective world is a
of cosmic evolution, and not something absolutely stable and unchanging.

Not only for realism, but also for idealism of the Kantian type, all this closed-in and law-governed
order is identified with nature, with the cosmos, with its boundaries immutable and unalterable, and
Vladimir Solovyov to other planes of the cosmos, and no sort of energies from other planes can penetrate through into t
closed-in world. Only consciousness of the theosophic type senses the mysteried spreading-about of
pouring through of cosmic energies from one plane to another, the transitory character of this synthe
natural world order, which the scientific consciousness assumes to be eternal and non-transitory, and
religious consciousness also connects itself too narrowly.

Thus, for example, the Akasha-Chronika, the Chronicle of the world, a visionary reading of the m
history imprinted upon the cosmos – involves artificial boundaries, isolating the known period of th
very frequently being represented by an eternal material world, separate from the preceding periods
not yet such a physical condensing-out, of our embodiment of the earth from its other embodiments
however is in this, that with Steiner for example in the Akasha-Chronika, the world as it were dema
spiritual knowledge is itself materialized. What is reported is not about the spiritual world, the partia
which is our material world, but rather it is about the external, empirical evolution of this material w
condensed-out and become diluted.

The secret-knowledge of Steiner produces an impression not of intuitive knowledge, not of an int
into the mysteries of being, but of an analytical anatomy-study of being. Such a clarity of sight ough
liness of the world. Everything organically whole is decomposed. All the boundaries are erased, all
confused. This is in conformity with some sort of stage of the cosmic process. But the clear-sighted

www.regels.org/Berdyaev-against-Theosophy.htm 5/9
28/12/2023, 17:23 N.Berdyaev. THEOSOPHY AND ANTHROPOSOPHY
the corpse-liness, occasioned by the cosmic decay and accretion, by disembodiment and atomization
with the corpsely poison, if a man does not oppose to these processes his own integral countenance
extending off into the very depths of Divine being. It is necessary to enter upon the path of the spirit
the cosmos, but it is needful also to preserve man within these cosmic whirlwinds. Man has a vocati
creator in cosmic life, and not a passive implement of the cosmic process, the meaning of which is a
to him.

VI.
The theosophical type of thought is not oriented towards history nor towards historical tasks. The
the significance of social questions is absent in theosophy and anthroposophy. Steiner is very conce
problems of Haeckel, but not at all concerned with the problems of Marx. For him the spirit of the X
spirit of the knowledge of nature. But more correctly might it be asserted, that the spirit of the XIX
of sociology. It can even be said, that during the XIX Century theology was substituted for by socio
thinking was tinged in a sociological light and in sociality they sought for the ultimate meaning of li

The surmounting of Marx is no less great a task, than the surmounting of Haeckel. Marx was a ma
same time when Haeckel – was a mediocre populariser, and his monism was painfully dull. But neit
nor with other theosophists, is it possible to find an understanding of the tremendous, directly religio
the social problem for mankind. The whole meaning of theosophy – is in its approach to the cosmic
this side it could shed light on the social problem.

The sociological consciousness has torn off human communality from cosmic life and hidden it on
narrow expanse of the earth. All the social utopias of an earthly total bliss are unrealizable and deplo
because they want to organize the social fate of mankind independent of the ordering of the huge co
which influence social life and enter into it. Communality is an inwardly-cosmic manifestation, and
comprehended the connection of communality with the cosmos. It is thus possible to get at the settin
of cosmic communality, of the world community. But theosophy does not do this and in the sphere o
remains elementary and naive. For theosophy the problem of communality is replaced by the proble
of the soul. In theosophy there is an inhospitable moral tendency, which renders the whole theosoph
creative. Theosophy replaces social and historical creativity by perfectibility and evolution, and to th
social and historical tasks it replies with a truth about the living-out of Karma and Karmic reincarna

It is difficult to combine creativity with the practice of Yoga, as preached by theosophists. Enterin
is deadly for creativity. In the theosophical path there is no inner upheaval in man, there is no true sp
And just as theosophy rebels against all the traditional religious authorities and against every faith, a
itself asserts a principle of authority and demands from man a blind faith. The authority of teachers
– this indeed is the basis of the theosophical path. The disciple must believe that which he (still) kno
knows usually very little, and only the teacher knows much.

The clairvoyant reading of an Akasha-Chronika within the memory of the world is a free knowled
reading of pocket-booklets of “Akasha-Chronika” as written by Steiner, is a dreadful entangle and m
with Jupiter, it is not a free knowledge, and it is rather more reminiscent of an authoritarian faith. Th
this, that the way of Steiner and the way of the Steinerians have little in common between them. The
way of gnosis, the way however of the Steinerians is a way of faith. Theosophy and anthroposophy
churchly faith, as being a childish condition, but they themselves demand faith of those lower down

It is impossible to demand faith in an occult mere teacher-man, on an equal in faith in Christ the G
uncritical, submissive attitude towards the teacher is recommended as the method, as a discipline an
initiation. The theosophic teachings themselves presuppose at first an acceptance on authority, on fa
criticism and examination by one’s own experience, and they promise that with time all this will be
autonomously and by experience. But why in such case should theosophy look down upon the dema
authoritarian faith in churchly teachings? Between man and God, and between man and the world th
series of teachers, a whole complex hierarchy. We approach here a very interesting question, for my
role and significance of the theosophical and anthroposophical current in Russia, and about the type
psychology of Russian theosophists and anthroposophists. What interests me is not an analysis of th
doctrines nor examination of all the theosophical schema, but rather an uncovering of the basic featu
theosophical manner of thought and experiencing of being.

VII.
The theosophical community bears an international character. Not without a bit of wit do they com
with the Volapiuk movement [trans. note: alternately “Volapuk” – a late XIX Century Esperanto like
language]. In contemporary theosophy there are not any sort of traces of creative national thought n
national experience. This is one of the principles of the amazing drabness of theosophical books, a v
absent in them. Theosophical ideas are bloodless, and in them is so little of a living colour, just like
language.

The anthroposophical community is empirically and occasionally connected with Germany, but in
likewise international, just like the theosophical. Some make a connection of Steiner with the Germ
Steiner’s theosophy there is no feeling of a vital creative inspiration, which could but be connected w
spirit, with the sap-juices of a national mode of being. Upon the whole of theosophic literature there
deadness of the international schema, of geographic maps of being. Theosophy makes anaemic. Pop
pamphlets have a formal resemblance to the popular Social Democratic pamphlets. This is not free c
“party” or “circle” type of literature, for propaganda. Free creativity is clearly subordinated to this p
propagandistic aims.

www.regels.org/Berdyaev-against-Theosophy.htm 6/9
28/12/2023, 17:23 N.Berdyaev. THEOSOPHY AND ANTHROPOSOPHY

Theosophical literature cannot bring anything new into national spiritual cultures, it does not parti
creativity of national spirits. Theosophy speaks much about races, but these races have little in comm
historical races. Theosophy fashions cosmopolitan, international types, wandering from land to land
search of guidance. And it is quite easy for theosophy to snatch onto souls, suffering in life a serious
torn away from their own land and their own people. It is difficult for theosophy to actively particip
life of its own people and in their unique historical destiny.

Theosophy usually renders itself neutral, it does not make a willful choice, for it is forbidden that
always nigh to passion. This then is a process of making anaemic, of extinguishing the passionate hu
more and more the direct acceptance of being is replaced by the acceptances of the schemae of bein
immediacy disappears and there appears an eternal apprehension, lest life and the values of life dive
teaching, from the doctrine, from the guidance of the teacher. This is to be felt particularly in the Ru
and anthroposophists, readily transformed into abstract beings, into bloodless and fleshless shadows
domesticated and submissive, too passive and timid in relation to all abstract spontaneous creativity

In this popularity of the theosophical and anthroposophical currents in Russia one senses the fem
P.D.Ouspensky. 1878-1947 Russian soul, the searching for masculine organizers on the side, on the outside, in the West, in Germ
by its own powers to organize its soul. The Steinerian discipline is especially popular with Russian
Russian Logos does not penetrate into the chaos of the Russian soul. The organizing, disciplinizing,
principle of the Russian soul is felt as (though) transcendent to itself, having its dwelling somewher

Russian theosophists and anthroposophists [are not at all immanent as regards the stock of their sp
they are totally transcendentists, they] seek a centre not in their own depths, but on the side, afar off
not a few “Russian boys”, about which Dostoevsky speaks, and these are the finest amongst them. M
that half-cultured layer, primarily composed of ladies, which are attracted to theosophy as regards th
motifs, which attract them towards charity, towards morality, to the small wonders of personal life. I
anthroposophical current is a great strenuousness and great spiritual depth.

The spreading about in Russia of the popular theosophical and anthroposophical currents can [also
positive role, by raising the median spiritual level. Theosophical morals, the preaching of a peculiar
perfectibility, remains for the majority of theosophists its chief attraction. It is difficult for man to be
and be left to his own devices, and theosophy speaks about initiations and teachers, helping people.
discipline to the soul, it saves from chaos and disintegration.

Many first receive from theosophy initiation into the spiritual moral life. But the wide dispersal o
currents can be an obstacle on the pathway of our national self-consciousness and national creativity
theosophy is a typical Westernism upon Russian soil, in such a degree of Westernism as is, for exam
positivism. But Russia ought ultimately to emerge from its period of Westernism, it ought to surmou
and Slavophilism.

Theosophy does not rouse to an immanent spiritual activity in Russian man, it does not enable the
free of person. But with the more creative and original natures, theosophy is uniquely surmounted in
element. Anthroposophy has taken on an apocalyptic hue. This can be observed in A.Bailey, perhaps
creative talent in Russia, who has recoursed off upon the apprenticeship to anthroposophy. A.Bailey
and his path is very characteristic for the Russian soul. But hardly can Steinerism be felicitous for ar
Creativity presupposes the surmounting of Karma and a victory over it, and not its endless being liv
presupposes a dualism between the world of spiritual freedom and the world of natural necessity. Bu
creative impulses in anthroposophy, and in this he is an unique case.

VIII.
The positive significance of the theosophical current in general for us also in Russia particularly m
in a turning towards gnosis, in the spreading and deepening of knowledge, towards spiritual knowle
ought to be reborn and forever enter into our life. The modern popular theosophy uncovers the ancie
teachings in a superficial and diluted form, too much adapted to the median level consciousness of t
time. But it constantly comes nigh to a new discovery in our time of gnosis, of wise, sophic knowled
ought anthroposophy, in a deeper more Boehmean sense of this word, to be nothing other, than a rev
the Divine Wisdom in man, its immanent discovery within man.

We ought to be re-united with the traditions of the theosophy and anthroposophy of J.Boehme, in t
Christian theosophy and anthroposophy. And moreover, even more deeply ought we to be re-united
of the esoteric, hidden Christianity. But the fruition of the great traditions of Boehme and of Christia
to be creative, it ought to guide along the path of a completely new, creatively-active knowledge.

Modern people, seeking God and the Divine life, are very afraid of thought and knowledge, and th
their will often becomes anti-gnostic. They admit the possibility only of a passive, abstract knowled
accept knowledge as a creative act, bearing life into the light of the world, of knowledge as being an
magicism of knowledge either repels or scares modern man, or it seems to him false and charletan. B
ought to be restored to its magic, world-dominant rights.

Particularly with Russians there is a dreading of thought in religion, and almost a persecution again
Russians this is connected with an exclusive avowal of moral values. Russian man, having entered u
path, finds himself within the exclusive domain of the cult of sanctity, he believes in only the sancti
desires only the sanctity of life. The gnosticism of Vl.Solov’ev seems already non-Russian and it rep

www.regels.org/Berdyaev-against-Theosophy.htm 7/9
28/12/2023, 17:23 N.Berdyaev. THEOSOPHY AND ANTHROPOSOPHY
moral path and the path of sanctity are acknowledged as the sole path to the light. Although even the ecstatic path in
Russian mystic sectarianism is acknowledged. Knowledge however is presented as opposed to being. But indeed true
knowledge itself is being. True thought is itself light. Religious thought itself is already religious deed. Gnosis is an
organic part of religious life. Life is transfigured from the light of knowledge. A religious lived-experience, deprived of
the light of knowledge – is an elementary, rudimentary lived-experience.

The contemporary striving for a primitive unrevealed, uninvestigated, simplicity and elemental spiritual life, as
though towards something genuine and authentic, is a creative feebleness and self-delusion, a denial of the theogonic,
cosmogonic and anthropogonic process. At present there is a fear of thought and of knowledge in Russian thought, as
being rationalization. But this fear is itself the result of a most extreme rationalism, for which both thought and
knowledge are always rational, always abstract, always inactive and non-vital. The great mystics did not fear
knowledge, they saw in gnosis not rationalization, but a communion with God and the working of God.

Contemporary irrationalism, alogism, adogmatism, the modern fear of light, the contempt for thought and disdain for
knowledge is but the reverse side of modern rationalism, intellectualism, the positivism of contemporary knowledge,
the despotic force of contemporary positivist science. From these sore straits it is necessary for us to emerge into
freedom, to creative thought, to creative knowledge, to a gnostic light, to a world transfigured. Modern theosophy does
not do this, but in souls it indirectly clears the soil, and prepares for this the mid-cultural level. It is with an especial
hostility towards religious knowledge, towards gnostic thought, that the representatives of non-Christian religious
tendencies avail themselves. They particularly love to insist on the modern irrationality, on the inexpressibility of
religious lived-through experiences. What impresses them is the moral, vitally-simple side of religion. Some of them
are prepared to affirm the obscure, irrational, the unmanifest, not knowing any sort of actual mysticism, and readily
mixing up the experience of the spiritually-mystical with that of the soulfully-psychological.

All of these tendencies ought resolutely to be countered by light-bearing religious thought, by creative gnosis, by the
revelation in man of Sophia the Divine Wisdom, the magicism of knowledge. This is the type of religious thought and
spiritual life, to which we at present approach, and it will all the more convince us of the significance of active religious
knowledge.

Nikolai Berdyaev, 1916

http://www.berdyaev.com

© 1999 by translator Fr. S. Janos

THEOSOPHIYA I ANTROPOSOPHIYA V ROSSII. Russkaya Mysl’. nov. 1916. Reprinted in YMCA Press Paris
in 1989 in Berdiaev Collection: “Tipy religioznoi mysli v Rossii”, (Tom III), ctr. 463-486.

N.B. of Fr.S.Janos. The Klepinina Bibliographie lists as #252 this article together with the article “Spiritual
Christianity and Sectarianism in Russia”, which also appeared in the nov. 1916 issue of Russkaya Mysl’. Neither the
Klepinina Bibliographie nor the YMCA 1989 reprint indicate the page numbers for either article in the nov. 1916
Russkaya Mysl’; I however follow the sequence in the YMCA text and also by Y. Krotov, and term this latter named
article on “Spiritual Christianity...” as the former, encoding it.

1 The most original and talented theosophic writer for us appears to be P. D. Uspensky.
2 Vide: Steiner: die Philosophie des Freiheit. This book is very characteristic in defining the philosophical sources of
Steiner.
3 It suffices to peruse the books of either Brahman Chatterji “The Concealed Religious Philosophy of India”, or of
Swami Bivekananda “The Philosophy of Yoga”, “About Raja-Yoga” or “The Voice of Silence”, -- to be persuaded of
the truth of this assertion.
4 This was written prior to the Russian Revolution, in which has appeared a new blossoming of materialism).
5 Of everything in print by Steiner for sale, most is revealed by his gnostic Christology, “Die geistige Fьrung des
Menschen und der Menshheit”.
6 Vide: Steiner. From the Embodiment of the World.
7 There is a (more) social character in the French occultism of Fabre d’Olive, Sainte Ive d’Alveidre and others.

Permission granted for non-commercial distribution

www.regels.org/Berdyaev-against-Theosophy.htm 8/9
28/12/2023, 17:23 N.Berdyaev. THEOSOPHY AND ANTHROPOSOPHY

www.regels.org/Berdyaev-against-Theosophy.htm 9/9