Can opponents of vaccination invoke Rudolf Steiner and anthroposophy?
疫苗反對者可以訴諸魯道夫•施泰納和人智學的權威嗎？
Tue, 06 Apr 2021 | By NNA correspondent Wolfgang G. Voegele
撰文／NNA通訊記者Walfgang G. Voegele
中譯／陳脩平 2021/7/25
The answer would appear to be “no”. A look at his work and biography reveals a nuanced yet pragmatic approach.
答案看來是「不能」。檢視他的著作與生平可知，他對此議題採取一種微妙但務實的取向。
________________________________________
DORNACH (NNA) – Anthroposophists are currently present in the media as potential deniers of the coronavirus pandemic and anti-vaxxers. But to what extent can opponents of vaccination actually invoke Rudolf Steiner?
人智學者近來在媒體被呈現為新冠病毒疫情的潛在反對者和反疫苗者。但是疫苗的反對陣營在多大程度上可以訴求於魯道夫•施泰納（Rudolf Steiner）的權威呢？
In this question too – as with many other topics – nuances in Steiner’s work come to the fore, opening up a number of different possibilities.
在這個問題上——就像在許多其他的議題裡一樣——施泰納的工作和著作引人注目，也打開了許多不同的可能性。
On the one hand, Steiner had reservations about the mass use of vaccination, especially as compulsory vaccination, but on the other hand he also advocated that anthroposophy should recognise medical progress.
一方面，施泰納對於大規模使用疫苗持保留態度，特別是強制性的疫苗施打，但另一方面，他也倡議人智學（Anthroposophy）應該去認識醫藥方面的進步。
Anthroposophical medicine, as Steiner developed it together with the doctor Ita Wegmann, therefore always sees itself as an “extended” system of medicine which builds on the findings of conventional medicine: “It is not a matter of opposing medicine working with the recognised scientific methods of the present day. We fully recognise the principles of the latter,” it says, for example, in the introduction to the book Extending Practical Medicine written by Steiner and Wegmann in 1925.
因此，施泰納和伊塔•薇格曼（Ita Wegmann）醫師所共同發展的人智醫學（Anthroposophical medicine）立基於慣行醫學的發現，並一向自視為慣行醫學的「延伸」系統，例如，兩人在一九二五年合著的《療癒的秘密》（中譯本由宇宙織錦出版）一書的序文裡寫道：「反對以今日所公認的科學方法建立起來的醫學，這根本不是我們在意的問題。我們完全認可其眾多原則。」
Steiner thus also thought and acted accordingly in concrete situations where vaccination was involved. This is shown by his statements to doctors in 1924 on the subject as well as his behaviour during the smallpox epidemic in Berlin in 1917 during the First World War, reported by the stenographer Hedda Hummel.
在與疫苗相關的實際情況裡，施泰納也是這麼言行一致地面對。這顯現在他一九二四年對醫師的演講裡談到此主題，以及速記員荷達•胡默爾（Hedda Hummel）記錄下，他在一九一七年第一次世界大戰期間遇到柏林天花大流行時的舉措。
In 1924 Steiner was asked by practising doctors what anthroposophy had to say about vaccination. Steiner told them how, during his time as a tutor with the Specht family in Vienna, he exposed himself to the risk of contracting hemorrhagic smallpox, which had afflicted the mother of his pupils. He had relied on being resilient enough to defy infection: one could minimise the risk of infection through fearlessness, he argued to the doctors. In other words, a positive mental attitude strengthened the immune system in his view – as indeed resilience theory advocates today.
一九二四年，施泰納被一群執業醫師問到，人智學對疫苗有何看法。施泰納跟他們說，他當年在維也納的施佩特（Specht）家擔任家庭教師時，他使自己暴露在出血性天花的感染風險裡，因為那個家庭裡的母親和施泰納的學生都已染病。他當時倚賴的是足夠的抵抗力去抗拒感染：我們可以透過無畏無懼，把感染的風險降到最低。
No fanaticism拒絕盲從狂熱
However, Steiner also pointed out to the doctors that in areas where the population is definitely afraid of infection, “educational measures” in this direction were pointless. “You just have to vaccinate there. There is nothing else you can do,” Steiner emphasised. For “fanatically opposing these things is what I would not recommend at all, not for medical but for general anthroposophical reasons,” he added. It was “completely absurd” to proceed with such fanaticism in specific instances.
然而，施泰納也對醫師們指出，當某些區域的人們對感染有著明確而絕對的恐懼時，以「教育性手段」的這個方向去回應也是無益的。施泰納強調，「在那兒就是要注射疫苗。沒有什麼其他的辦法。」因為「我一點也不建議狂熱地反對這些事情，不是因為醫學的緣故，而是出於整體人智學的理由。」他如此補充。在某些情況底下，如此狂熱盲目地行事是「完全荒唐」的。
During the First World War, Steiner was confronted with the smallpox epidemic in Berlin – also in his immediate environment. As Marie Steiner reports, Steiner had made the large art room of his flat in Motzstrasse and its adjoining rooms available for a children’s nursery, and he himself lived in rooms in the back of the house during his stays in Berlin. At that time, Steiner commuted between Dornach and Berlin.
第一次世界大戰期間，施泰納在柏林遇上了天花大流行，就在他身處的周遭。瑪麗•施泰納寫下，施泰納把他在莫茨大街（Motzstrasse）上的公寓裡的一間大畫室和隔鄰的一些房間當作托兒所，當他回到柏林時，他住在屋子後面的房間裡。當時，施泰納往返於多納赫和柏林之間。
With the outbreak of smallpox in Berlin, the question now arose of how to protect children and residents. Schools and kindergartens in Berlin were already vaccinating at that time. Hedda Hummel reports on this: “Dr. Steiner ordered that the children in our nursery be vaccinated as well, and also the people who went in and out of the nursery.”
在柏林的天花疫情裡，重點在於如何保護兒童和居民。當時柏林的幼稚園與學校都已施打疫苗。荷達•胡默爾記錄下：「施泰納博士下令在我們托兒所裡的小孩還有進出托兒所的人也要打疫苗。」
Steiner himself and his wife had also had themselves vaccinated, the stenographer continues. Steiner had suffered from the side effects of the vaccination – just like all the other vaccinated people, mostly women. They often rubbed their aching arms, which had been affected by the smallpox vaccination, which Steiner also did. Thus a joke had circulated in Motzstrasse that Dr Steiner was “joining in the women’s movement”.
這位速記員繼續寫到，施泰納自己和他太太也注射疫苗了。就像所有其他接種疫苗的人一樣，施泰納也承受了疫苗的副作用，當時施打的大多是婦女。她們時常搓揉著疼痛的手臂，那是天花疫苗造成的，施泰納也是如此。因此在莫茨大街上流傳著一個笑話說施泰納博士「加入了婦女運動」。
Pragmatic approach實務取向
Against the background of these reports, we can ask ourselves where Steiner’s place would be today, at the time of the coronavirus pandemic. Certainly not with the anti-vaxxers and coronavirus deniers, for as stated above, he spoke out against a “fanatical approach”. He would look at the new vaccination technologies – mRNA and vector-based – with great interest, as they serve medical progress, but he would reject compulsory vaccination.
了解以上幾則記事之後，我們可以自問，施泰納若身處當今這個新冠病毒疫情肆虐的時代，他的立場會是如何。當然不會是反疫苗者和否認新冠疫情者，因為他曾明言拒斥「盲從狂熱的做法」。他會以極大的興趣去檢視新的疫苗科技——mRNA和病毒載體——，因為這些技術帶來醫學上的進步，但是他會拒絕強制的疫苗注射。
And as to whether he would have himself vaccinated or trust in his own resilience to COVID-19? Here, too, one can draw one’s conclusions with a look at Steiner’s biography: as a young tutor in Vienna in the 1880s, Steiner – then still under 30 years old – relied on his own resilience. In wartime Berlin, in his mid-50s, he preferred to rely on the smallpox vaccination, which also protected the children in the Waldorf nursery.
至於他是否會注射疫苗或是信任自己對COVID-19的抵抗力呢？在此，我們也可以參考施泰納的傳記去做出自己的結論：一八八０年代，年輕的施泰納還不到三十歲，在維也納當家庭教師，他倚賴自己的抵抗力。大戰期間，在柏林，他已五十歲中期，他傾向依靠天花疫苗，這也保護了華德福托兒所裡的兒童。
Thus in the current controversy about vaccination and corona measures it is basically only the pragmatists who can invoke Rudolf Steiner.
因此，在眼前這個對疫苗和新冠疫情防堵措施莫衷一是的時刻，基本上，只有務實作為者可以呼應施泰納的精神。
END/nna/vog
Item: 210406-02EN Date: 6 April 2021
Copyright 2021 Nexus News Agency. All rights reserved.
About NNA
Nexus News Agency CIC (NNA) is a not-for-profit community interest company incorporated in England and Wales.
NNA is an international news agency covering news and events from a perspective which incorporates the spirit and spiritual understanding as they relate to the development of new paradigms in every area of life – be it current affairs, politics and society, civil society, ecology, education, economics, agriculture, the arts or the sciences.
關於NNA
Nexus News Agency CIC (NNA)是一間設立於英格蘭和威爾斯的非營利社群利益公司。這是一間國際性的新聞通訊社，致力於提供整合靈性和靈性理解觀點的新聞和事件報導，並且是與發展出新的世界觀典範相關的內容，涵蓋所有生活面向——時事、政治與社會、公民社會、生態、教育、經濟、農業、藝術或各科學領域。