FOREWORD
MICHAEL LIPSON, PH.D.
A MAN WHO LIVES BY
HIMSELF, scavenging from garbage in New York's Central Park, walks
into my office having already been diagnosed as a schizophrenic by
the previous psychologist who treated him. He says he wants
psychotherapy, and I ask him what his concerns are. He first asks if
he may clip his nails into my wastebasket, then pulls out some
clippers from one of the many plastic bags that serve him as a
portable apartment and proceeds to cut his nails (frighteningly deep
into the quick) as he ponders how to put his case. Finally, musing
over the waste-basket, he comes up with the key points of his
problem.
“Well,” he
says as he surveys a newly bleeding fingertip, “Two things.
First, I'm bothered by all this Muzak everywhere. You can't go into a
public space anymore without hearing this junk. And second, I'm
having a hard time understanding Shakespeare's play
The Tempest.
Can you help me?”
What kind of problem
does this man really have? I agree with him that Muzak is pernicious and
The Tempest
demanding. Does he have an illness at all? The loose way he moves his limbs,
the reekingly unwashed clothes he wears, the furtive glances he casts,
and the abruptness of his responses — even if it were not for
that self-harming behavior with the nail clippers — all suggest
oddities of soul and body. In the actual encounter with such a
person, labels like “schizophrenia,” “manic
depression,” or “schizoaffective disorder” can seem
painfully inadequate both to the depth of the problem and to the
glimpsed health of some of
his responses.
It becomes evident to
caregivers, at least during our more honest moments, that we do not
understand the immensity of the processes at work in this kind of
condition. Not only our diagnostic labels, but the concepts behind
them, can seem paltry in the face of intense psychic otherness. We
can sense that both psychiatric drugs and standard psychotherapy are
not adequate to the issues, even if they provide important relief at
times.
In the eleven lectures
that make up this volume, Rudolf Steiner attempts to reveal something
about the invisible structure of health and illness as they are seen
with the second sight of spiritual research. He delivered these talks
at a time of furious activity — September of 1924 —
during a month in which he offered a total of some seventy lectures
on themes as various as dramatic arts and the Apocalypse of St. John.
He also made room in that jam-packed schedule to receive over four
hundred people for private consultations. It was a last, incandescent
burst of generosity that many feel contributed to his death the
following March.
This particular
lecture course, formerly titled
Pastoral Medicine,
was given to a mixed
audience of priests and physicians to show the interpenetration of
medical and spiritual issues in caring for suffering humanity. While
Steiner insists that the two professions should remain quite
distinct, cooperating rather than merging, his exposition of the
nature of human frailty occupies a middle ground of equal relevance
to the priest and to the physician. This middle ground could be
called psychology, except that it includes descriptions of spiritual
principles, qualities, and entities that are as foreign to
contemporary psychology as to medicine and theology. On the one hand,
Steiner points out that “all processes in the human organism
are spiritual”; on the other hand, “even the lobe of an
ear can under certain conditions be clearly revealing of some
psychological peculiarity” so that we can hardly keep these
fields separate. He thus revives the ancient Greek understanding by
which their word psyche
meant both “soul” and “life of the body.”
As in many of his
talks, Steiner here throws out hints about the nature of this theme
that are enormously suggestive but not fully elaborated, or are
elaborated elsewhere. One such hint suggests the
developmental aspect of the soul-body
unity: “The forces that build the physical organism in the
first seven years of human life are the same forces by which later we
think.” On such a view, what we normally conceive of as bodily
and as mental are reenvisaged as facets of a single enormously
complex, living process of incarnation whose components shift and
interweave through time.
From the standpoint of
promoting normal incarnation, Steiner takes up the developmental
theme in those spiritual-scientific observations of child development
that serve as the basis of Waldorf education (for example, in his
Education of the Child).
The current lecture cycle, by contrast, can be thought of as examining
elements in this development as it occurs in adults who have
not developed harmoniously.
The lectures are, after all, addressed to those who work
professionally with human brokenness. To meet inner frailty with
truly adequate concepts (surely the necessary preamble to devising
adequate therapies) Steiner must describe experiences that escape
ordinary perception. In this lie both the promise and the pitfalls of
what he has to offer.
We have a tendency
nowadays, as spiritually inclined folk, to talk only in the vaguest
terms about “hidden depths” of the soul. Steiner instead
delineated specific inner structures in both healthy and unhealthy
states. We have a related tendency, when we feel more materialistic,
to ascribe spiritual experience to brain activity or even pathology
— like those contemporary analysts who see Hildegard von Bingen
and other visionaries as suffering from migraines. Steiner instead
acknowledged such experience as real even if unbalanced from a
certain standpoint. Thus in this book Steiner describes the extreme
states of ecstasy achieved by the sixteenth-century Carmelite St.
Teresa of Avila neither as merely pathological nor as exclusively
healthy, but as a particular configuration of human inner
structures.
The time has come to
consider these “inner structures” more directly. Steiner
talks not only about a physical but also about an
“etheric” and an “astral” body, which can
operate either more or less harmoniously and whose interconnections
can be felicitous or dangerous. The terms he used were familiar to
Steiner's anthroposophical audience, so that they needed no
explanation during this lecture course. He had been writing and
teaching about them for at least twenty years (see his discussions in
Theosophy,
published in 1904, and in
An Outline of Esoteric Science,
published in 1909). His audience in 1924 either knew
what he meant or at least found itself on familiar ground when, for
example, he said of certain mentally retarded persons that “the
physical body remains comparatively isolated because the etheric
body ... does not entirely penetrate it, so that now the astral and
etheric bodies and ego organization are closely united with one
another and the physical organism is separate from them.”
But what
kind of thing are all these bodies? We
are all too likely now to misread and misunderstand Steiner's real
viewpoint. For as Steiner himself emphasized repeatedly, these
aspects of the human being are only “bodies” in the sense
that they are structured and limited, but not in the sense of having
physical or temporal extension. They are thus not
things, not bodies in our normal sense
of the word. Elsewhere Steiner describes the etheric body (also
called “life body”) as the formative, living
idea of the plant, animal, or human
form. It is not a ghostly cloud of thin matter waving about in the
air around a living creature, but the divinely driven concept at its
ideal root. Here is Steiner in
Theosophy
on just this confusion of tongues:
The term “body” is used
here to designate what gives a being of any kind its form, shape, or
Gestalt. It should not be
confused with the sense-perceptible form of the material body. As
used in this book, the term “body” can also refer to
something that takes on form in soul or spirit.
With regard to the
related topic of spiritual seeing, Steiner again indicated the ideal
or conceptual nature of the process: “We must not confuse the
experience itself with its expression in pictorial form.” He
repeatedly emphasized that concepts such as the various spiritual
bodies can be validly approached only through a schooled
consciousness that thinks and feels its way into the world in a
radically new fashion:
Living thinking must be achieved
again.... Otherwise we shall all the time approach the situation
— which we already know here and there — in which the
knowledge, for instance, that the human being has a physical,
etheric, and astral body will only be known in the form of dead
thinking. But it must not be understood with dead thinking; for if it
is, then it is actually a distorted truth and not the truth
itself.
We can see this as
amplifying this statement in Lecture Ten of the current volume:
Humans cannot be known by uncreative
thoughts, because by their very nature human beings are creative. One
must re-create if one wants knowledge. With today's passive thinking
one can only understand the periphery of the human being, one has to
ignore the inner being.
Using his experience
of nonstandard inner structures and their possible misalignments,
Steiner analyzes everything from sleepwalking to hyperliteracy to the
visions of St. Teresa. At certain points he includes the perspective
of reincarnation or “repeated earth lives,” and so
extends the scope of etiology to causes of illness that contemporary
medicine, theology, and psychology routinely ignore. Here too our
normal thinking is inadequate to grasp the meaning of the terms. For
it would take an enlivened sense of I
(as well as an enlivened sense of You) to know even vaguely
what reincarnation means, let alone to investigate the course of a
particular personality through several earthly lives, as Steiner does
here with the nineteenth-century Austrian playwright Ferdinand
Raimund.
Discussing the
possible disasters of spiritual structure in this way, Steiner points
to the psychological truth that a broken human being is often a human
being who is broken open. He
can even call illness a kind of “superspirituality,”
although it is in need of treatment (Lecture Eight). It was John
Dryden who famously wrote that “great wit to madness nearly is
allied.” Steiner's comments about the opening to spiritual
worlds that can accompany severe mental retardation or illness
foreshadow some of the most important alternative psychiatry of our
own times. He anticipates elements in the work of R. D. Laing, the
Windhorse movement of Podvall, and also the new practice of
“facilitated communication” whereby some autistic
patients have been aided in expressing a full and conscious inner
life to which their bizarre outward behavior gives no clue. Another
recent contribution that develops this theme appears in Oliver
Sacks's story of the twin “idiot savants” who could
“see” very large prime numbers although they were unable
to calculate the simplest sums.
We can ask in this
regard: Why should it be the
case that our misadjustments, our unrhymedness, our brokenness,
sometimes links us to a wider world of understanding or love that
reaches beyond life's normal boundaries? The answer lies in the
question, for it is indeed a matter of boundaries. When inwardly
broken, we may emerge from the network of accustomed concepts that
normally paralyzes the world for us. The writer Flannery O'Connor
suggested a similar view in her reply to an interviewer who asked her
why the best American literature was from the South. “Because
we lost the war,” she said, meaning the Civil War. The assault
on ossified structure led, in some cases, to fruitful openings.
Of course suffering
does not necessarily promote creativity, any more than illness
necessarily leads to insight, but it
can do so at times precisely because the
“doors of perception,” which Blake suggested we cleanse,
have instead been selectively battered down, and let in sometimes
disastrous quantities of light. In Lecture Two Steiner describes how
a “so-called sick man” may come to a priest and reproach
him from a position of greater spiritual authority:
“The things you pronounce from
the pulpit aren't worth much. They don't add up to anything, they
don't reach up to the dwelling place of God, they don't have any
worth except external worth. One must really rest in God with one's
whole being.” That's the kind of thing such people say. In
every other area of their life they behave in such a way that one
must consider them to be extremely retarded, but in conversation with
their priest they come out with such speeches.
One way to think about
the poor alignment of inner structures and the great variety of
psychic difficulty Steiner describes would be in terms of blockages
to wholehearted giving — just as here the man recommends to his
priest that one must rest in God with “one's whole
being.” Throughout his works, Steiner continually emphasizes
the fundamental deed of the human being as giving attention to his or
her chosen tasks. The more wholly we give, the more we are giving of
our selves — and our
essential self is precisely our attentiveness, for which another name
is love. Steiner refers to this issue in innumerable places. Thus, at
the end of Lecture Six in the present book, we are told that
physicians must “observe these things with their whole
being,” and that the patients can be helped only when they work
“with their whole soul.” It is just this that can make
healing into what Steiner calls “a divine service.” Later
he will advocate deeper and deeper immersion in the spiritual beings
that permeate and are our cosmos, saying in Lecture Ten that
“this is a path of personal development that requires the
effort of the whole human being. ... Not just the head can be engaged
... but the whole human being is needed.”
Such whole giving is,
from the standpoint of spiritual structure, equivalent to a process
of heightened wakefulness and heightened presence in the world, so
that the various super-sensible members of the human constitution
fuse together. It is a deeply incarnational spirituality. Development
consists precisely in permeating life processes, and
eventually the physical body as well, with a consciousness of eternal
presence — not in escaping from this life or this world, but in
more wholly entering it. Though in sleep and at death the
“ego” (or spiritual self) and the “astral”
(or soul) are said by Steiner to disengage from physical and life
processes in order to receive nourishment from higher worlds, in
initiation the ego and astral can be thought of as joining more
intensively with these processes:
Let us consider first what the
situation is when the astral body and ego approach the etheric body.
In clairvoyance one can bring this condition about fairly easily, by
strengthening one's thinking — strengthening it by very
thorough, energetic meditation. Then it is easy to come to this
condition; it is the beginning of initiation. One slips down into
one's etheric body but is not yet able to take hold of the physical
body; one remains in the etheric body. In this condition, it is
possible to think very, very well. ... Thinking becomes wider. One
knows clearly: now I am in the etheric world. Thus when one is in
one's etheric body, one is truly in the world ether. One has the
clear experience: I am in the spiritual world out of which the sense
world comes (Lecture Eight).
To enter more wholly
into one's body and bodies, to imbue the present world with the full
grace of our possible creativity — this is, for Steiner, the
ultimate path of both healing and initiation. Along the way, he will
throw out further hints in these lectures about the nature of human
breathing as a process of bringing in spiritual forces rather than
oxygen alone, and about the esoteric nature of sense perception (for
a much fuller elaboration of this theme, see Georg Kühlewind's
Belehrung der Sinne). It is
a profoundly Thomistic view in that Thomas Aquinas embraced the
physical as divine creation, to be known intimately, rather than as
something fallen, to be rejected.
The processes that we
are accustomed to think of as physical, as
merely chemical and physical and
biological, can be understood both in the human and in nature as
fundamentally meaningful rather than senseless and material. Applying
this view radically to the giving of medicines, in Lecture Nine,
Steiner can assert, “You can see that one must recognize the
spirit in nature, the spirit that is in the mineral and plant
kingdoms of the world. It is the spirit, not the substance, that one
must know, because in reality one heals the human being through the
spirit that is in the mineral and in the plant.” In this,
Steiner is taking up a theme that the seventeenth-century pastor
Angelus Silesius put in a verse (based on John 6:32-35) that has been
adapted as a mealtime grace but can also serve as a closing epigraph
here:
The bread does not nourish me.
What feeds me in the bread
Is God's eternal Word,
Is spirit and is life.
MICHAEL LIPSON, PH.D., is a clinical psychologist in independent
practice in Great Barrington, Massachusetts. He is the translator of
Rudolf Steiner's
Intuitive Thinking as a Spiritual Path
and of Georg Kühlewind's
From Normal to Healthy, both published
by Anthroposophic Press. Dr. Lipson's work combines the insights of
Rudolf Steiner with those of Zen Buddhism. He teaches meditation
widely, and writes on issues of consciousness, human development, and
meditative practice.
|