Seeing Double
— espying spirits and souls
"I have never agreed with my other self wholly. The truth of the matter seems to lie between us."
— Khalil Gibran, Sand and Foam, 1926
Devils and Demons
Goethe's Faust (1808) is seminal to Steiner’s spiritual science and often cited for its profound insights into the nature of good and evil and the relationship between spirituality and materialism. As a result many Anthroposophists see the Goethean Mephisto as a manifestation of the Ahrimanic Double. However, Goethe himself links Mephisto to Lucifer, not Ahriman, and portrays him as a separate discarnate entity rather than as a doppelgänger. His cold-hearted Mephisto is an envoy of the Devil, traditionally seen as the Shadow of Lucifer, and not a double or mirror image of Faust. As a shapeshifter in Germanic folklore, Mephistopheles adopts various disguises to manipulate or trick his victims.
​
Marlowe’s Doctor Faustus (1604), published two centuries earlier in England, also presents Mephistopheles as a fallen angel, not a sinister double. We can conclude that the notion of an Ahrimanic Double does not come from the legend itself — to which Goethe and Marlowe both turned for inspiration — but from interpretations brought to bear on the character by enthusiastic Anthroposophists. The same may be said about Edgar Allan Poe's William Wilson (1839), Fyodor Dostoevsky’s The Double (1846) and Robert Louis Stevenson's Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde (1886), all of which are interpreted as examples of Steiner’s Ahrimanic Double.​
​
A Second Self, an Alter Ego or the Ahrimanic Double?
The second self or alter ego needs no introduction, so we begin with a quote, albeit a longish one, to provide readers with the source and origin behind the term Ahrimanic Double:
​
​"A short time before birth we are permeated by another being; in our terminology we would call it an Ahrimanic spirit-being. This is within us just as our own soul is within us. These beings spend their life using human beings in order to be in the sphere where they want to be [and leave their host again at death]. These beings have an extraordinarily high intelligence and a significantly developed will, but no warmth of heart at all, nothing of what we call human soul warmth [Gemüt]. Thus we go through life in such a way that we have both our soul and a double of this kind, who is cleverer, very much more clever than we are, who is very intelligent, but with a Mephistophelian intelligence, an Ahrimanic intelligence...” — Rudolf Steiner, GA 178, Geographic Medicine, lecture 2, 1917​​
Numerous publications, both in print and online, are currently delving into Steiner’s predictions on the imminent appearance of Ahriman, the Prince of Darkness, seen by Anthroposophists as the principal adversary to human divinity and the evolution of spiritual consciousness. While Ahriman’s transhuman (part human, part machine) incarnation remains unconfirmed, his nefarious horde has been identified in fiction, film and fairytales. This post examines some popular examples of the so-called Ahrimanic Double.​
​
​Imps, Vampires and Werewolves
Just as Mephistopheles bargains knowledge, wealth and eternal youth in return for a man’s soul; so too Grimms’ Rumpelstiltskin (1812) offers to spin rough straw into fine gold for a woman's firstborn child. Similarly, Bram Stoker's Dracula (1897) promises his victims immortality in exchange for their blood. Hereby vampires and werewolves induce their victims to become like them — immortal creatures of the dark — and use "nature-forces" (Steiner) to achieve their devilish ends. Once again, regardless of their cultural/geographical background, shapeshifters are likened to the Ahrimanic Double.​
​
​
Underlings of the Underworlds
Wagner’s epic Ring of the Nibelung (1876) and Tolkien’s fantasy Lord of the Rings (1954 – 1955) include characters all too readily identified as the Ahrimanic Double. These are the dwarf Alberich and hobbit Gollum, both of whom are obsessed with a magic ring that either grants power to rule the world or extends life beyond its natural limits. Steiner was twenty-one and had still to publish his significant works when Wagner died, a year after the first performance of Parsifal (1882) and four decades before Steiner’s own lecture-cycle on The Incarnation of Ahriman (1919), but so far as we know, Wagner never used the term Ahrimanic Double.
Ditto that for Tolkien. As a leading figure among the Inklings (1931 – 1949), Tolkien befriended Cecil Harwood and Owen Barfield, both Anthroposophists, who shared with him Steiner’s ideas of human evolution through various ages and how benign and malign beings co-inhabit our worlds. But the extent to which they discussed Ahriman is a matter of some speculation and shouldn't be overstated. Once again, associations with the Ahrimanic Double are more a product of Anthroposophical interpretation than of the authors’ own intentions.
​Druids and Wizards
Another notable example is Archdruid Merlin. Steiner draws on several legends known to him, including an obscure medieval version in which Merlin is conceived after a devil ravishes a sleeping nun. Steiner thus attributes a dual nature to Merlin, vividly describing his contrary character, his wisdom and his wildness, his empathy and his malice. This description probably accounts for why Anthroposophists tend to have mixed feelings towards Merlin, seeing his Gandalf-like benevolence and his Mephisto-like malice.
​
However we now know that Merlin is not a name but a title — in the same way that Zarathustra or Lazarus are not ordinary names but designations for a Teacher or an Initiate — and that the name Merlin was borne by those of the Druidic class of Magi. Significantly, several Merlins are mentioned in legends from the 5th – 6th century, of which two are relevant here: Merlin Emrys (Emrys Powys) and Merlin Wyllt. The latter appears to be the one Steiner identified with Wagner. The two Merlins stand in relation to one another much like Gandalf and Saruman do in Tolkien's lore.
​
Later reworkings of the saga clearly failed to distinguish one Merlin from another, leaving a confused and contradictory image of Merlin as both Sage and Madman. It is thought that Tolkien himself may have been a Merlin, possibly contemporary with the Arthurian age, or perhaps even earlier.
​​
Diabolic Kids and Cyborgs
There are, of course, authors who have been inspired by Anthroposophical ideas. Sure. These include Nobel Laureate William Golding and Oscar Winners George and Marcia Lucas. Via Waldorf teachers and students, William and Marcia came into contact with Steiner’s ideas of the hero’s spiritual quest, à la the Grail, and the age-old struggle against the dark forces of materialism and technology. William’s connection came via the New School in London and Marcia’s through the Waldorf Institute and Mayflower Bookshop in Detroit. It is said that Lord of the Flies (1957) and the Star Wars Trilogy (1977 – 1983) were inspired by Anthroposophical ideas of the doppelgänger or double, notably in the characters of Roger and Darth Vader (see Andreas Neider, The Electronic Doppelgänger: The Mystery of the Double in the Age of the Internet, Rudolf Steiner Press, 2016).
However, without wishing to labour the point, links to the Ahrimanic Double are speculative and the influence of Anthroposophy on these movies should not be overestimated. Social media sites are littered with did-you-know claims that 'a Waldorf student, Douglas Gabriel, was the guy who actually wrote the Star Wars script in three days — and without ever earning a penny for it’. (Reddit, 2017)
​
The latest character to join this list is Boy Kavalier from Alien: Earth (2025), a sci-fi series released a few weeks ago (12 August). Tech bro Kavalier is presented as the world's youngest ever trillionaire and the founder-owner of Prodigy Corporation. He deals ruthlessly in artificial intelligence and synthetics and is the "boy genius" behind the creation of hybrids or synths (synthetic bodies infused with the minds of humans).
Curiously, Boy Kavalier's sadistic and unconscionable actions are reminiscent of Roger in Golding's Lord of the Flies. But wait, I should not be making overstated comparisons here myself. So, enough already.
Conclusion
For now, here’s my take on the matter. While many "a second self, a trusted friend” (Cicero) may share certain characteristics with that of Ahriman — such as offering immortality, power, gold or blood; or promising material wealth instead of spiritual wisdom — I believe we should be careful not to over-interpret binary relationships involving evil in terms of Steiner’s Ahriman and Lucifer. Their duality is unique to Anthroposophy, yes, but it is not a measure of all things. Our world of light-and-dark, good-and-evil, divine-and-material is far too nuanced to be reduced to the machinations of two demonic adversaries alone. Moreover, we should not impose our understanding of the Christian devil (above left) onto a mask of the African ancestors (above right) simply because they share similar characteristics.​​​
​
​To this end, similarities between Steiner’s sculpture of Ahriman (since destroyed) and the self-styled Prince of Darkness, Ozzy Osbourne (recently deceased), are not to be taken too literally. Nor does the likeness between them prove Ahriman's earthly appearance or spiritual existence. While I find such comparisons rash and troublesome, even disturbing, I am far more troubled by Anthroposophists who claim to have identified Ahriman in the likes of Karl Rove (Joel Wendt, 2012) and Barack Obama (Robert Powell, 2016). Really, the Antichrist incarnate! Even Steiner goes too far for me when he says the ailing Nietzsche was possessed by Ahriman and used him as a mouthpiece for the Antichrist:​
​
​“It was only afterwards that one became acquainted with what Nietzsche wrote in the period of his decay. There are above all the two works Anti-Christ and Ecce Homo. These two works were written by Ahriman and not by Nietzsche. It was an Ahrimanic spirit incorporated in Nietzsche. Here it was then, for the first time, that Ahriman appeared as an author upon earth. He will continue to do so...” — Rudolf Steiner, GA 237, Karmic Relationships III: Evolution of the Michael Principle Throughout the Ages, 1924​
​
I see Steiner's allusion to the Ahrimanic Double as an opposing force — not as an independent entity — a force that plays out in incarnations of individuals or groups at certain cyclical times. For me Lucifer and Ahriman are not actual incarnations; that is, they don't exist in and of themselves as flesh and blood or in technology and machines. The examples discussed above, at least from the perspective of the Daoudic paradigm, are best seen as manifestations or embodiments of our Oversouls which, as co-incarnate or discarnate entities, direct or distract us from our earthly endeavours. Nietzsche is for me no conduit of Ahriman and, certainly, no propagandist for the Antichrist.​
​
Laurence Oliver (Out of Eden, 2001, p.179) describes Nietzsche as an incarnation of the 24th and last Osirian adept, Nisseau, who also oversouled the last Zoroaster. I find this far more consistent with my understanding of the Nietzschean genius. It also sets aside Steiner's controversial view of the soul he knew to be Nietzsche and focuses on the Nietzschean oversoul, as well as the long line of philosophers that came before him, including Nietzsche's own "great teacher" Schopenhauer. The next post explores the relationship between these souls and their oversouls.
Nicolaas Vergunst
​
