Valentin Tomberg 9-3-1970 Beziehung zum Anthroposophy Steiners

english version scroll down.

Here is letter in more readable format ...Dear Mr. Seiss

Here is a late-but well-considered reply to your letter of 15.1.1970 which I have read and pondered thoroughly. My main question and worry is how I could save you an expensive disappointment. Because a disappointment is unavoidable if you came to reading to meet me personally; you would not encounter the one who emerged as the author of the ‘Studiesk’ in the thirties and who represented a centrally focussed spiritual science - simply for the reason that he isn’t there. He no longer exists.

The author of the ‘Studies’ concerning the Bible and the Gospel was a man who made it his task to save Rudolf Steiner’s life work - spiritual science - from eradication and sclerosis in the thirties by bringing it back to its central focus. However the inner descendent of this same purpose today believes that there is no spiritual science and never can be. Because even a spiritual science based on its central focus can only add to the mill of death. It will unavoidably become intellectualized and ‘fossilized’. Also spiritual science never existed because the essential criteria for every science must be that it can be tested, and that it applies universally. In reality, relating to the religious element, it was liberal theology or 'theology on its or 'theology on its own initiative', and in an anthropological or psychological sense, a generalization of personal, psychological experiences.

Whilst the experiences themselves are mystical they cannot claim a status that is scientific - universally applicable or verifiable. It follows that so-called 'spiritual science' can only be psychologically convincing on the basis of a faithful endorsement by a particular group of people, objectively, however only on the basis of trust in the account of the witness, i.e. authority. No pope has ever demanded of mankind such an extent of trust as the ‘spiritual scientist’ or initiate Rudolf Steiner. The pontiffs represent tradition with hundreds of witnesses, whilst the ‘spiritual scientist’ draws on his own experiences and their interpretations and not out of tradition, and whether intentional or not demands an authority which rivals that of the Pope. Alas, like the anti-Pope. None of this is spiritual science which doesn’t mean that there isn’t and never was knowledge of the spirit.

But knowledge of the spirit is not science but inner certainty - that means it is a condition that cannot be imposed on someone else. In any case it has to forego any claim to universal validity and scrutiny. It is based on the most personal inner experience and can possibly only be shared with very close companions who have been joined through destiny.

This is the spiritual change that has happened to the Valentin Tomberg of the Thirties. He no longer has a relationship to spiritual science, which he believes to be abstract.

Also the physical change since then has been enormous He celebrated his 70th birthday nearly a week ago, and recently underwent a major operation from which he has barely recovered. He finds socializing and communication with people rather difficult. Today he can only bear the life of a recluse, e.g. he spent his 70th birthday with a party of seven visitors, the consequence of which was a painful, sleepless night and a few days of depression!

You see, dear Mr Seiss you will not encounter the Valentin Tomberg of the thirties. The distance which separates me from him today is as big as two incarnations. Really I should now have a different name; but for civil reasons that is not possible. Nothing lies further from me today or would be more tiring than to see the ashes of the Anthroposophical past raised up … Shield me from discussions about the ‘Studies’, methods of work and similar things, which are now totally alien to me.

Today my life is prayer and contemplation and that - and only that - is what I live for; not study.

In the sincere hope that you will understand.

Yours faithfully,

Valentin Tomberg

An example of the ego of Tomberg:

exempel of the ego from Tomberg: Alexander Kieding An anecdote that my old friend Robert Powell told me is that when VT and Ernst Lehrs took some overnight ferry to (or was it from) England to Holland (must have been in the latter part od the 1930's), Lehrs complained in a friendly way next morning as they sat down for breakfast that his cabin had been next to the engine and had bothered him all night with its noise. ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................Tomberg responded in an equally friendly way that if ones soul is Christ-filled, there is no noise that can be bothersome. Lehrs was offended...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Now, I seriously do not believe that Tomberg was being arrogant och condescending there. He was simply being Russian. And a tad insensitive, or perhaps a tad too assuming. So, it was more his lack of an ordinary, Western "ego" that was the problem in this instance.

Not saying that he didn't have one, of course.

What I'm saying is more that no matter your ego status, if your ego differs too much in density or magnitude from your social surroundings, you will have to translate. The problem is whatever is lost in translation. Not ego as such. That is a Buddhist idea. (from the Tomberg facebooksite)

https://www.facebook.com/groups/1662427314039488/

YYY terug naar inhoudsopgave