The Rudolf Steiner Archive

13. The Bible and Wisdom

[ 1 ] Yesterday we attempted to bring to the forefront the meaning through which what we call spiritual science seeks to draw closer to the religious texts. Today we will attempt, at least through a few examples, to delve more deeply into the religious text that is surely still closest to contemporary human culture: the Bible. From the standpoint of spiritual science, the easiest way to approach the Bible is to begin with the New Testament, specifically the Gospels. Since we discussed yesterday how we should understand so-called “criticism”—the critical spirit—and how we can approach the composition of the various individual parts of the New Testament and the collection of writings in the Old Testament from the standpoint of spiritual science, let us focus today more on the positive aspects, taking what was said yesterday as a given and shedding light on this matter from the perspective of spiritual science without any preconceptions.

[ 2 ] You know that when a person approaches the four Gospels out of the needs of a heart that believes in Christ, they may initially encounter peculiar contradictions arising from the four Gospels—namely, those of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Even those who approach these books today with the deepest faith still lack a true understanding of the relationship believers had with the Bible in ancient, far more religious times—and of what the word “Bible,” or the expression “the Word of God,” actually meant to the believers of old. We need only recall the word “inspiration” and the fact that, for centuries, the faithful held fast to the belief that those who wrote down the religious texts were inspired—that they wrote under the direct influence of the divine Spirit Himself. And just as firmly as they held the belief that only truth could emanate from this divine Spirit, so every word contained in the Bible appeared to them as sacred. To them, the Bible was the expression of the mighty mysteries of the universe that pressed upon the human soul. How could a person who imagined that the ancient men of God were individuals who stood directly under the inspiration of the divine Spirit have believed that they had written—or indeed could have written—anything that was subject to criticism? Then there could not have been an immediate attachment to every single word in the hearts of these believers.

[ 3 ] It is difficult for people today to put themselves in that frame of mind. They read the first Gospel and then the third. They are presented with two genealogies of Jesus of Nazareth—one in the Gospel according to Matthew and the other in the Gospel according to Luke. They follow the names and find that they do not match, that as early as the third generation from Joseph onward a different name appears, that where Matthew lists Solomon, Luke lists Nathan, and so on—that a whole series of names differ in the genealogies—and they ask themselves: How is it possible that what has served as a source of truth for people throughout the centuries could contain such contradictions? — Essentially, we see in a single consideration of this kind the seed of all the doubts that have arisen among people—and among critics—regarding the unity of Scripture and, ultimately, its inspiration. Based on such considerations—which have been carried out in a complex manner down to the finest detail—the books of the New Testament have been dissected; it has been determined what is more or less authentic; it has been found that the first Gospel differs from the fourth, from which it necessarily followed that the fourth Gospel must be something entirely different from a historical document. How could anyone with an open mind simply dismiss these contradictions? It is only natural that modern people, when they see such things, must apply a critical eye.

[ 4 ] But now we ask ourselves: How is it possible that, over the course of centuries and millennia, people—who were certainly not exactly stupid—have held these books in their hands and yet have not also arrived at a critical assessment, at a recognition of these contradictions? With regard to the vast majority of believers, one might perhaps argue that, until very recently, the Bible was in the hands of only a few; before the invention of the printing press, believers had almost no access to it. One might say that the vast majority could not possibly have been misled by something that was never even presented to them by their leaders. But are we to imagine that those who did have access to the Bible would not have seen what modern criticism points out?

[ 5 ] Some historians object that it was only gradually, through the authority of the Church, that the prestige of these books became established; only little by little did what is called the awe-inspiring nature of this biblical history take shape. The content of the Bible cannot even stand up to a proper historical examination. If we go back to the early Christian centuries and examine the facts, we come to the conclusion that the Council of Nicaea determined which are the true Gospels and that it was decreed by an act of authority: “These are the Holy Scriptures.”

[ 6 ] This cannot stand up to an unbiased historical examination. We are introduced to figures who lived in the early days of Christianity. We then find in their accounts that, for example, in the year 160 CE, a so-called “Gospel harmony” was created—that is, a compilation of the various Gospels intended to present a unified picture. This was done even more frequently later on, and if we carefully examine the Gospels of the second century, we can see that what we now know as the content of the New Testament was also incorporated into them. We can go back even further, to the early Church Fathers. If we examine these writings critically, we see how they speak of the Bible with immense reverence—a reverence that suggests they believed the Bible was inspired by a higher spiritual power. We can go back as far as Origen and observe how he, too, speaks of the biblical books in the same manner and with the same reverence. And when we consider individual words—even those conveyed by Matthew, of whom it is not without reason said that he was a disciple of the Apostle John—we find that something speaks from his soul that we can connect, in the same sense, to what later became the attitude of believers, even the most learned among them, toward the Gospels.

[ 7 ] Of course, anyone who considers such matters must be able to free themselves—even thoroughly—from certain prejudices. Just as later generations have viewed what is called Christianity, so too did those who lived as scholars in the first centuries not view it in that way. And if today someone, speaking from some orthodox standpoint, approaches a person who does not interpret the Bible exactly as he does, and tells him that he is an unbeliever, that he must not call himself a Christian, that they are violating the true word of the Bible—then we may well remind them of those ancient believers, whom even those who interpret the Bible arbitrarily dare not doubt. I would like to draw on a statement by the Church Father Augustine. It goes as follows: “What is called the Christian religion today is ancient. It is the ancient true religion, and what the ancient true religion is, that is now called the Christian religion.”

[ 8 ] Consider such a word and then compare it to what a scholar of the humanities who interprets the Bible, in particular, very often experiences. Isn’t it often downright tragic how hostile reactions are provoked, how the spiritual scientist encounters bitter opposition from acquaintances, friends, and relatives, who say to him: “There you go again with your spiritual science phrases—where does that leave the Bible?” Such a statement is rooted in a profound ignorance of the true Bible; moreover, it reveals a great pretension—the claim to be infallible in one’s interpretation of the Bible. If only such believers would be willing to clearly understand what it means to approach the spiritual-scientific interpretation of the Bible in this way. It means nothing other than: “What I find in the Bible is absolutely correct.”

[ 9 ] It is not the case that the spiritual-scientific perspective takes a less positive view of the Bible; rather, it seeks to rediscover the true meaning and the true facts contained within the Bible. For the spiritual-scientific worldview, what is at stake with regard to religious texts is correct understanding. Therefore, anyone who, out of convenience, holds some other view—one that just happens to be there and to which they have become accustomed—should not actually oppose the spiritual-scientific perspective. For in many cases, there is a spirit of opposition in the souls of those who oppose a true interpretation of the Bible, leading them to say: “You are denying the Bible; you are making yourselves and your families unhappy.” — In many cases, there is nothing behind this but the thought: “I do not want to learn; I know what I know.”

[ 10 ] If we compare such a statement with the Sermon on the Mount and understand it correctly, then—even if we call ourselves Christians—we will no longer be allowed to take such a position. Let us quote here only the first sentence of the Sermon on the Mount. As those who visit here frequently know, this has happened many times before. Accurately rendered into German, it reads: “Blessed are those who are beggars in spirit, for they will find within themselves the kingdoms of heaven.” There is no more beautiful way to express what is called a spiritual-scientific attitude than the Sermon on the Mount does with these words.

[ 11 ] What does a “humanistic mindset” mean? It means nothing other than bringing to fruition that which lies within us—the deepest core of our own being, the spiritual nature that lives within us. Just as that which constitutes our body is drawn from the substances of the surrounding world, so too is that which exists within us drawn from the spirit that lives around us and has lived at all times. And just as it is true that our body is but a drop in the ocean of material reality, so it is true that our soul, our spirit, is but a drop in the ocean of the all-encompassing World Spirit. But just as the drop taken from the sea is, in substance, the same as the water of the entire sea, so too is that which lives in the deepest soul of man substantially one with the essence of the Divine. Because God lives within man, man can recognize God; because man is spiritual, man can, if he so desires, penetrate the spiritual world around him. But there is a second requirement if a person truly wishes to enter these spiritual worlds, and this second requirement is summed up in a simple phrase: Never stand still! One must not merely believe in development; one must live it. What does it mean to live a development? Nothing other than to carry within oneself the awareness that human beings have developed from an imperfect state to their present one, and that they can continue to develop into the future at any time. First of all, we do not think of the fact that the human being’s outward form changes in the course of this development, but rather that the human soul can ascend from one stage to the next; that there is an upward progression of this soul, and that it is possible to become more perfect day by day. Today we learn something; our soul forces are capable of understanding this or that; our will is capable of doing this or that. If we stop at what we understand today, at what our will is capable of doing today, then we do not develop. But if we carry within us the awareness that, in addition to the powers that have already developed within us, other powers also lie dormant—just as the plant seed that has developed into a plant carries other plant seeds dormant within itself— then we will come to realize more and more each day that through a higher unfolding of the will from within our soul, we can bring forth our spiritual eyes and ears, and see that things can get better with each passing day. We must not understand this in a trivial sense, but rather in the sense that this development in the spiritual-soul realm has universal significance.

[ 12 ] Even if we observe animal forms in the material world physically evolving into a human form, this does not justify the assumption that humans evolved from animals, even though natural science has established that, with regard to the physical form of humans, there is a greater similarity between the least developed humans and the most highly developed apes than between the lower apes and the highest ape species. It is from this relationship that natural science derives the kinship between humans and apes. In 1859, the great naturalist Huxley expressed this as a form of heresy. Much of what you read in Haeckel’s writings was written under the direct emotional impression of this statement. Those who believe in spiritual development say to themselves: “Well then, granted that in terms of external form and physicality, humans are closer to the most highly developed apes than the latter are to the lowest members of their own species; but it is equally true that those who have attained a certain level of spirituality are farther removed from those at lower stages of humanity than the lowest human is from the most highly developed animal.”

[ 13 ] If we follow the thread of development into the higher realms, we see it continuing into the spiritual realms, and in the spiritual realm we see the development described by spiritual science as something just as real as material development is to the physical eyes. Theosophy has existed throughout the ages. As early as . . . it is said that the ancient Indian Atma Vidya is the same thing, but that it has been referred to by a wide variety of names at different times. Modern natural science acknowledges an evolution from lower animal forms up to the human being. In contrast, theosophy has always maintained: we also acknowledge such an evolution; we stand firmly on the ground of such evolution; we acknowledge that there is a vast difference between the perfect form of the human being and a lower animal that lives in the sea mud and is barely visible to the eye armed with a microscope. Through how many intermediate stages must the human being pass as he advances from the imperfect to the perfect! The spiritual scientist regards the evolution of the soul and the spirit as equally real and tangible. He perceives equally great differences between those individuals who have become initiates—who, to a higher degree, utilize the qualities inherent in every human soul for divine vision—and those who have barely developed the first stirrings of soul activity. The difference in development from the most imperfect of the lowest soul levels to the perfect initiate is greater than that between the smallest living being and the most perfect human body. Anyone who knows that there are initiates who can look deeply into the development of material things knows that spiritual development also exists.

[ 14 ] Anyone who knows this also knows that their state of mind can be nothing other than this: I look up to the divine ideals, the seeds of which I carry within my soul; I know that in the future, something will have developed that today still slumbers within me, its potential only faintly present. But I also know that I must use all my strength to reach these heights. One who views the spiritual world in this way then sees himself as a beggar in spirit. And he is “blessed”—that is, he feels blissful. And in the Sermon on the Mount, in the spiritual-scientific sense, we have such a wonderful saying that goes: “Blessed are those who are beggars in spirit, for they will find within themselves the kingdoms of heaven.”—No one familiar with the language of ancient times would imagine that those who speak of heaven meant a heaven in the unknown hereafter. People imagined that wherever one is, heaven is there as well. Where we are now, there is heaven; there is the spiritual world. Just as a blind person, after undergoing surgery, sees the space that he could previously only feel with his hands filled with colors, so too does the one whose spiritual sense is opened see a new world around him. He sees whatever is around him in a new form—the form in which he must see if he is to evolve toward a higher humanity. He need not believe that heaven is elsewhere, in another place, or at another time. The words of Christ apply to him: “The Kingdom of Heaven is within you.”

[ 15 ] The Kingdom of Heaven is where we are; it permeates all physical things. Just as water permeates ice, so too does that which has condensed from this Spirit into the physical, material world float, as it were, in the ocean of the divine Spirit. Everything physical is condensed, transformed spirit. Behind everything physical lies the spiritual. Here we are already led to what, from the perspective of spiritual science, is the relationship of the human being to evolution. Just as there are perfect and imperfect beings in the animal world, so too, in relation to the spiritual, there exist the most diverse individualities: some advanced, others lagging behind; some looking into realms where modern science still shines its light, others looking into the deepest depths of human knowledge—from the savage to the human being developed to divinity, who is capable of perceiving the spiritual all around them in the outer world. All these intermediate stages not only believed in, but also knew those who were initiates. And when people spoke of initiates, they spoke of them as those who know more than the humanity surrounding them. People have always spoken of such initiates, and now let us clarify in what sense people have spoken of those initiated into the spiritual worlds.

[ 16 ] As has often been discussed here, when we go back to ancient times, we find that even everyday consciousness was different from what it is today—that a more clairvoyant consciousness existed. It is not called “clairvoyant” because it is somehow clearer than waking consciousness, but because it sees, as it were, right through objects and into the soul; yet it is a dull, twilight-like consciousness, remnants of which have been preserved in human beings’ nocturnal dream consciousness. From this, humanity’s present-day, broad-daylight consciousness has developed. When we look back to those ancient times, when the vast majority of people lived in this clairvoyant consciousness, we find that even then there were initiates. How, then, did those ancient initiates differ from those around them who were still in a more twilight-like state of consciousness? They differ in that they already knew something of the consciousness that humanity was to attain and possesses today; in that they were able to foresee something of the future and to look into the world in the way that all of humanity has come to do in later times. It was the kind of perception that takes place through the eyes and ears of the body—through those organs with which human beings make sensory observations and grasp things intellectually. Just as this is generally the case with people today, so it was already the case with individual initiates of antiquity. That is precisely why they were initiates. The initiate anticipates something of the future. Likewise, the initiate of our day carries within himself something of the heightened clairvoyance, of the heightened vision that humanity will possess in the future. He knows something to say about what present-day humanity will possess in the future.

[ 17 ] Thus the elders, who understood something of these matters, looked up to the Initiate. They said to themselves: Just as he sees things, so will people see things in the future. Let us look at him; he is the living ideal; he is the one who, through his form, reveals to us what we will become. — In this sense, he was a prophet to them, and if he stood even higher, a Messiah. And so they said to themselves that the course of history would be such that it would lead the great multitude of people to what he had attained. They called such a one a “Firstborn.” But the one who was to be initiated in this way had to pass through various stages. Through the various stages, all the way up to the highest levels of initiation, there are the most diverse degrees of knowledge and will. One can progress through many stages. Just as a plant passes through various stages in its development—from root to leaf, flower, and fruit—so does the human being ascend from insight to insight until he himself becomes an initiate. This progress occurs through training, and this training can be acquired. Anyone who denies that such training exists—through which one can attain a higher mode of perception, the opening of the eyes and ears of the spirit—simply does not know; they have not yet received any knowledge of such training. This is the task of spiritual science: to tell humanity that such training for upward development exists. In my journal Luzifer-Gnosis, you can read that it is now possible to speak in a much deeper way about the principle of initiation and spiritual culture. There are a multitude of reasons for this. But I would like to cite one reason in particular. This is precisely what is so tragic, so oppressive, and so soul-tormenting for modern humanity: that they can no longer believe in the ancient texts, that these can no longer be embodiments of the Word of God for them, because the development of intellect and reason has advanced so far that they can no longer make use of the old message. Yet they need a new message, and spiritual science seeks to bring this to them. We have, as it were, glimpsed into the future, and even today, those who are developing into initiates can see the future development of humanity. But they must develop according to specific methods. Just as the methods by which one discovers astronomical truths are quite specific, so too are the methods by which one ascends into the higher spiritual realms. No one should tell themselves that they should ascend into the higher realms on their own. That is like wanting to study mathematics on one’s own and accept nothing on the basis of authority. But one needs a guide and leader who shows one the way. There is no other authority in this field. Therefore, it is mere rhetoric when the principle of faithful devotion and confession is applied to spiritual science. It is a misunderstanding to speak of authority and faith in the context of spiritual science.

[ 18 ] Now, throughout the various millennia, there have always been books—not really books, but rather an oral tradition, if we go back to ancient times—and this oral tradition encompassed the rules for how one is initiated. If we want to get an idea of what such a tradition was like, what such instructions were like—which showed what a person must do when they begin to spiritualize themselves, all the way up to the highest levels of initiation—we need only remember that those who acted as guides and leaders were not permitted to put anything in writing. Even today, these rules may not be written down, but must be transmitted orally only to those who are worthy of them. There was a canon of initiation. It contained the rules governing the birth of the spiritual human being; it laid out the rules that a person must fulfill in order to attain the higher goals. Those who devoted themselves to spiritual striving had to be guided from one stage of practice and way of life to the next, higher one. Once you have reached the higher stage, the initiate comes and reveals the higher mysteries to you.

[ 19 ] Just one more word about the way such an initiation code was handled. This is no longer as common today as it was in ancient times. The initiation processes are also moving forward. In ancient times, the student was brought into a kind of ecstasy. The word had a different meaning back then than it does today; it did not mean being out of one’s mind, but rather becoming aware in higher states of consciousness, and the spiritual guide had led the student to that state. It was prescribed how long one had to be kept in such a state of consciousness; it was three and a half days. Today, consciousness is no longer dampened in this way. Back then, however, the person in question was in a state of ecstasy and rapture; he was unaware of what was happening around him in the sensory world; in the realm of the sensory world, the initiate was like one who is asleep. He was thus led into a state of consciousness in which the external sensory world faded away. But what he experienced differed considerably from what people today experience when, as they fall asleep, the external sensory objects around them disappear. The external sensory objects disappeared, but the person lived in a world of the spirit; light surrounded him. What is called astral light dawned upon him: a light that is different from physical light, which appears to us as a sea of spiritual substance in which spiritual beings are embedded and from which they develop. And when he ascended even higher, he heard resounding from this world what was called the “harmony of the spheres” in the ancient Pythagorean schools. What the intellect recognizes in concepts as a law of the world, the one who finds himself at such a level perceives as a kind of sound, as spiritual music. The spiritual forces express themselves in harmony and rhythm. However, this is not to be confused with external music. The spiritual world, the world of the heavens, resounds and rings out for the astral light. The initiate was introduced into this world. There he came to know the stages of human divinity, which humanity will only ascend in distant times. All of this became truth for him; he experienced it over the course of three and a half days.

[ 20 ] Countless people have lived in the world—and still live—who know that what seems grotesque to people today is just as much a world of reality as the one that the outer ear and the outer eye can perceive. When the person in question was then led back into the world of the senses after three and a half days, when he reentered this world enriched with the knowledge of spiritual life, when he was prepared to be a witness to the spiritual world—then there was always just one single, identical phrase that all initiates uttered upon reentering the sensory world: “O my God, how wonderfully you have made me!” This was the feeling into which the soul breathed itself after the initiation, upon re-entering the ordinary sensory world. All of this lived in the minds of those who were to conduct the initiation. Later, as writing gradually became more common, some things were also written down. But there was a typical description of the life of an initiate. It went something like this: The one who is to be initiated and admitted into the places of initiation must organize his life in such and such a way, and he must undergo the experience that ultimately culminated in the words: “O my God, how wonderfully you have made me.”

[ 21 ] If you can picture in your mind the life that an initiate must go through—just as you can imagine the life of a person who wants to conduct experiments in a chemistry lab—then you would get a typical picture of the person who is evolving to a higher level. Then you would gain a typical picture of the one who is to be raised up. Such books on initiation have existed, or at least they have lived on in the minds of those who have guided the initiation. If we understand that such books have existed, then we will no longer be surprised to find the most diverse initiates of various peoples described in similar ways. Therein lies a great secret; therein rests a wondrous mystery. The peoples have always looked up to their initiates, insofar as they knew of them. What they recounted about them was not what today’s biographers recount about great men. What they recounted was the spiritual life journey that the initiate experienced. Thus we will understand why—when we trace the life courses of Hermes, Buddha, Zarathustra, Moses, and Christ—we arrive at a similar picture of life in these figures. And why? Because they had to live this life if they were to become initiates. Simply put, the picture of the initiate’s life stands before us in the lives of Hermes, Zarathustra, and so on.

[ 22 ] In the external structure of the biographies, we can see the image of the initiate everywhere, and from this we can answer the question: Who were the people who wrote the Gospels? You will find a spiritual-scientific answer to this question in my book Christianity as a Mystical Fact. What I can only briefly hint at here is explained in detail there, thereby also pointing to the spiritual credibility of the Gospels. It is demonstrated that what is written in the Gospels is taken from ancient books of initiation. Of course, the books that initiates wrote about these matters differed in minor details. But in essence, the content always amounted to the same thing. We must simply realize that those who wrote the Gospels had nothing other than such ancient initiation texts. If we then look at what is actually written there, we can discern different forms of initiation in the various Gospels. And why do they differ? Because their authors knew initiation from different perspectives. We will understand this when we consider the relationship of the men who composed the Gospels to Christ Jesus. We gain the best understanding when we recall the beautiful words with which the Apocalypse begins. The one who dictated the writing of John is called: the First and the Last, the Alpha and the Omega. This refers to nothing other than that which—even though the times and forms of the world change from generation to generation, from race to race, from planet to planet—always remains present as a unified, spiritual entity. When we designate this ever-present being as the Divine and realize that we possess a spark of it within us, we feel a kinship with this Alpha and Omega; indeed, we perceive it as the ultimate ideal toward which the evolving world continually ascends. Thus has this Eternal One been revealed to us throughout all ages, this enduring presence amidst all change.

[ 23 ] Now we must recall a usage of language that has completely vanished from our consciousness. I would like to illustrate what this is about in a few words. Today, the name we give a person is more or less irrelevant. We don’t feel any real connection between a person and their name. The further back in time we go, the more meaningful and essential the name becomes; people attached great importance to certain rules governing how a person received a name. I need only remind you that it was not very long ago that the custom still existed of looking in the calendar and giving the newborn child the name that appeared in the calendar on the day of its birth. It was believed that the child felt compelled to be born on the day that bore that name. The person who underwent the initiation I have described received a new name—the initiation name—and this name denoted his inner being, denoted what he signifies in the world, that which the guide recognized him to be. This name was linked to his essence and expressed that which pertains solely to the inner being.

[ 24 ] Now, remember that the Bible, in the New Testament, contains a wide variety of sayings attributed to Jesus. Only those who approach these writings from the perspective of an initiate—and who also understand something about the significance of names—can gain a deeper insight into them. For example, when one wished to describe and express someone spiritually—indicating that they were still at a lower level—one used an expression derived from the qualities of the astral body; if they were at a higher level, one used expressions derived from the qualities of the etheric body. If one wished to express the typical, one used expressions derived from the qualities of the physical body. Thus, the ancient names had a connection to human beings and truly expressed their essence. Let us now recall how often words of Jesus appear in the Gospels in which he describes himself as something specific—you can find such examples particularly in the Gospel of John. In many cases, we can trace them back to a single word—the little word “I.” Recall what I have already explained on several occasions in these lectures:

[ 25 ] A distinction is made between four aspects of the human being: the physical body, the etheric body, the astral body, and the “I.” This “I” grows ever larger; it is such that it evolves toward initiation; it is imperfect in the less-developed human being, but mighty and perfect in the initiate. Now, when Christ in the Gospel of John frequently indicates that he is identical with the “I Am,” when he describes himself as the one who is one with the deepest essence of the human being in the statement “I and the Father are one”—if you take this into account, you will now be able to understand it from the perspective of this naming, because it encompasses the Eternal—not because he was an ordinary human being and used this “I” to refer to ordinary people, but because he was something that transcended the ordinary human being, because he was Christ, the Alpha and the Omega. Thus, those who lived in that time saw in him a divine being who wore a physical body—a being for whom the physical body is just as indifferent and the spiritual just as important as the physical body is of the utmost significance and the spiritual of no importance to the physical human being. What stood out most about this man was his name, and if we reflect on this further, we come to understand something else—from there you will find your way into many a mystery of the Bible—we understand what it means when Moses stood before Jehovah and Jehovah wanted to make him a messenger for the people, and Moses replied: “What shall I tell them—who sent me?” - And we hear the meaningful words: “Say, ‘I Am’ has sent you.”—To which essence is Jehovah himself pointing here? To that which essentially lies in the deepest inner core of every human being. When we reach the fourth member of the human being, we see that the “I” is a name we must give ourselves. The Divine must speak for itself—the Divine that begins to speak at a single point, that lives within the human being as a small, insignificant seed and can be developed into infinite greatness. This is what is meant, what gave Moses his mission and said: “Tell them, ‘I Am’ has sent you.” That which lies like a divine seed in every human soul, that which is enveloped in the physical, etheric, and astral bodies like a point to which we say “I Am,” that which still grows insignificantly above them and which still lives insignificantly within us—we shall not describe this as the least significant part of our being, but as the most important. It is the essential that lives within the human being and that seeks to send Moses, saying, “I am the I Am.”

[ 26 ] So you can see what profound meaning lies behind such naming, and whenever reference was made to this “I Am,” reference was also always made at the same time to that point in human development which I have already mentioned in these lectures and which is also alluded to in the Bible—namely, the point at which the physical human being is endowed with a soul. I have often explained how what is today the physical human being evolved from lower stages, and how, by being endowed with a soul that descended from the Divine, it was able to develop further. What descended from the bosom of the Divine sank into the physical body and further developed the physical body. This moment is also alluded to in the Bible. It teaches about it in just a few words. Before that moment—which in reality spanned long periods of time—the human body lacked what was needed to bring the “I” to full development, and it lacked what the physical human being still needs today. At that time, human ancestors did not yet breathe through lungs; at that time, human beings developed their lungs from a swim-bladder-like organ. It was only then that they learned pulmonary respiration, and it was only from this process onward that the human body became animated. If you condense this process into a single sentence, you have the biblical phrase: “And God breathed into the man the breath of life, and he became a living soul.” It was through learning to breathe as a physical being that humanity became capable of receiving the soul. If we return to the meaning of the name Jehovah, we find that Jehovah means “to blow,” that the air blows forth. The word Yahweh expresses nothing other than the blowing breath with which the I-spirit enters into human beings. Thus, this name depicts how the blowing breath expresses its essence in the statement: “I am the I-am,” who pours a part of his essence into human beings. A true cosmic process is revealed to us here. Thus, that which is eternal and lives within human nature becomes a true reality for us. Whether we consider people of today or people from thousands of years ago, the “I”-being has existed since time immemorial. Imagine the I-being in its highest revelation, where everything external is insignificant; imagine that a human being recognizes the innermost essence as so great and mighty—then you have the conception that the ancient followers of Christ held of Christ. What existed in the earliest times only as a spark lived in its highest glory in Jesus of Nazareth. He was—because he was the highest Divine—the highest initiate; hence the words: “Before Abraham was, I am.” In physical form, He is that which existed before Abraham, that which existed before Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; He is that which stands as the greatest ideal of humanity before those who wish to develop themselves, before those who follow the words of the Sermon on the Mount: “Blessed are those who are poor in spirit, for they shall find within themselves the kingdoms of heaven.” If we take this saying at face value, then you have the conception that the followers of Christ held at that time. What kind of biography could they provide of this supreme incarnate God? Where was a biography worthy of him? That was the biography given in the Initiation Canon—the canon that contained the rules according to which the initiate was to be initiated. As you can see, it was like this: If you wish to be initiated, then you must go through this and that from one level of life to the next, up to the highest level, which is indicated by the words: “My God, my God, how you have glorified me!” . . .

[ 27 ] [The postscript ends here.]