The Rudolf Steiner Archive

11. Occupation and Earnings

[ 1 ] Many who have heard only superficially about what is commonly called spiritual science or “theosophy” will find it somewhat surprising that, after such a wide variety of practical topics have already been discussed from this perspective, an attempt is even being made to speak about vocation and livelihood from this spiritual-scientific standpoint. For many of our contemporaries have formed the impression, based on such a more or less superficial acquaintance with the subject, that spiritual science is something far removed from all practical life, as unsuited as possible to intervening in any way in this practical, everyday life. You will not infrequently encounter a view expressed in the following words: “Oh, this spiritual science—it’s something for certain people who have had their fill of life, who have nothing practical to do, and who therefore have enough spare time to concern themselves with all sorts of convoluted, fantastical speculations, such as the ideas of spiritual science.”

[ 2 ] Now, let us not deny from the outset that, fundamentally speaking, such a criticism is indeed justified in many cases that appear, shall we say, to be theosophical—that it is often true that those who concern themselves with theosophical matters, ideas, and concepts are indeed as alien to everyday life as possible. But even among those who have to struggle and work hard in everyday life and can only bring themselves to do so with great effort, there are those who are drawn to spiritual science out of inner sympathy, out of a longing of the heart. Among these there will be many for whom this duality—the daily occupation, the daily work, the laborious routine from morning to evening, and then the immersion in the great ideas—holds something magnificent. For others, these two things will stand quite abruptly side by side; one will, so to speak, lie far, far removed from the other. But the one who sees in “Theosophy” or spiritual science not merely an idle pastime for a few dreamers and fantasists, but something capable of penetrating deeply into our entire cultural movement, renewing it, and to revitalize it from a spiritual standpoint—will also have to firmly uphold the conviction that this Theosophy or spiritual science is precisely what leads to a true, genuine understanding of reality, and also has something important and essential to say where the great questions of everyday life arise, where those matters concern people from morning to night in their hard work.

[ 3 ] Anyone who engages not superficially but deeply with what theosophy or spiritual science has to offer—who derives not only a few abstract ideas from it but also the deepest impulses of life—will very soon come to realize that, in the broadest sphere of life, it is precisely through spiritual science that a true, sound, and correct judgment can be attained. A few abstract statements, however, are not enough—least of all the principle of some abstract brotherhood of humanity. This abstract, universal brotherhood of humanity is a matter of course for every good and sincerely striving person. What falls to theosophy or spiritual science, however, is not merely to preach this general, all-encompassing brotherly love for humanity, but to establish the method and create the conditions through which true, genuine human brotherhood is possible and can also be realized. Of course, there are many in our time who say the same thing; but they lack the broader perspective.

[ 4 ] If we now consider the whole of human existence from ancient times to the present day, and compare our everyday life today with what has existed throughout history, we find—in the opinion of many people—that certain forms of life have not changed: there have always been the rich and the poor; hardship and misery on the one hand, and a comfortable life and contentment on the other, have always existed and have never been eradicated from the world by any human intellectual movement. Therefore, one cannot believe that—as many people say—an “idealistic” intellectual movement such as theosophy could have anything significant to say specifically about what our time must address in terms of profession and livelihood.

[ 5 ] However, the best way to approach today’s topic is to consider the two concepts of “vocation” and “livelihood” in a truly spiritual-scientific sense. We will then see that, above all, it is absolutely essential to cultivate deep thinking in order to gain insight into what our diverse and multifaceted lives present to us in terms of vocation and livelihood. The phrase “rich and poor” has, of course, always existed. But that alone is not enough if one wants to understand life. However, when we take a look at our surroundings and compare them with what constituted the human environment centuries ago—or even in more recent times—it becomes clear to us that the form of life has changed fundamentally, and that the causes of hardship and misery, of wretchedness and poverty today have been brought about by an entirely new way of life. It becomes clear that it is very necessary for people across the broadest possible spectrum to reflect more deeply on precisely these questions concerning the changing relationship between human beings and their work and livelihoods. Anyone who surveys this way of life, as it has gradually developed over the centuries, will have to conclude, upon mature reflection, that a certain class of people—which is of primary concern today if we are to say anything substantial on this matter— has only been created in the most recent times, and that it is precisely within this one class of people that what is revealed to us with full force and intensity through the question of vocation and livelihood in our time is gaining ever greater significance. If we delve even deeper, we will see that this issue reveals what it means when humanity, on the one hand, moves forward, yet on the other hand is unable to follow its own progress with the necessary insight and interest. What we today call the modern worker, the industrial worker, in the form in which it exists today, is in fact only a result of humanity’s development over the last few centuries.

[ 6 ] This is linked to the most admirable, the most magnificent, and the greatest advances in human development. Today we see the Earth dotted with the products of human thought, human inventions, discoveries, and the arts. Everywhere people build factories and enterprises, wherever they dig deep into the earth, wherever they search for mineral resources and metals—everywhere we see the results of human thought before us. The advances in our understanding of nature, the mastery of natural laws—everything that human thought and intellectual labor have created over the centuries—we see all of this crystallized in our industry, in the networks of all kinds that span the Earth in our modern means of transportation. All of this has shaped our lives. All that the human intellect has thus created is what first gave rise to the modern worker, commonly referred to as the proletarian worker. It is, in truth, only with him that the modern form of our plight regarding occupation and livelihood has emerged. There is hardly any segment of the population, hardly any class—whether it belongs to this or that sphere of life—that is not affected in some way by what has been created for humanity in this manner.

[ 7 ] Let us now ask ourselves: Have human thought and human interest been capable of creating a social structure that is in any sort of harmony or proportion to what human intellectual power has created in the fields of technology and industry? Let us imagine, hypothetically, what would have become of us if human beings—or if a single human individual—had been capable of using their intellectual power, which has crystallized in such a powerful and magnificent way in machines, banks, and transportation, to bring those who are part of this development into a corresponding social structure as well. We do not wish to adopt the standpoint taken by a much-cited natural scientist who claims that all the magnificent, tremendous advances of the human spirit, human science, human industry, and human transportation have contributed nothing at all to the progress of humanity’s moral development; rather, if we were to look at what people have produced in terms of morality and social mores, we would still be standing today at the most primitive stage of barbarism. — No deeper reflection will support this view; yet it is true that all the technical and scientific achievements we admire today, in both the external and internal spheres, are not matched by anything in the realm of social life or social structure. We see how the disharmony between human longing, human need, and human ideals—indeed, even the simple, natural human way of life—and what life in its reality offers to all people today manifests itself in the most diverse ways as the inadequacy of social thinking with regard to industrial activity.

[ 8 ] It would be the duty of the broadest segments of the population—across all classes and social strata—to reflect on this very issue, because these matters hold something earth-shattering significance today. Yet the vast majority of people, especially certain classes and social strata, do not feel this at all today. The Theosophical Movement, in particular, must not be one that believes it can accomplish anything here with a few abstract dogmas or a few formulas churned out by a think tank; rather, it must strive, through selfless devotion and an understanding of the true nature of humanity, to spread and cultivate healthy, profound, and thorough thinking in the world—including in this field. The essential point in this area is that people train themselves inwardly to see matters in this field in their proper light.

[ 9 ] Those who, from a supposedly practical standpoint, would today like to dismiss with a shrug such an impractical spiritual movement as theosophy, should take a closer look at life and learn from particularly characteristic signs how they should actually approach such questions. Human thinking today has, in a certain sense, become narrow because people have grown accustomed to viewing everything through materialistic frameworks. Anyone who stands on the ground of spiritual science and believes they can unravel the mysteries of existence with a few fixed concepts—that a few fixed concepts are sufficient to construct the entire structure of the world right up to the human being—is mistaken. Yes, a few concepts are sufficient for a superficial understanding; but not for an intimate, precise assessment of life. Spiritual science is inconvenient. Not, mind you, for those who stick only to what is expressed in words and then limit themselves to an abstract view of life; but for those who venture deeper into it, it is inconvenient. It has nothing to do with a few mechanical notions; rather, it compels one to acquire specific concepts for the most diverse stages of existence. In return, however, these specific concepts serve as good guides in life.

[ 10 ] When people open a book on the humanities that reveals to them the physical world, the astral world, and even higher spiritual worlds hidden within our own, and then goes on to say that human beings consist not only of what can be seen with the eyes and touched with the hands, but that one can also live in even higher realms, they say that’s too complicated, that everything is getting all tangled up. The world is simple, they say, and anyone who doesn’t present the world as simple arouses their suspicion from the very start. The world is simple; it’s convenient! — One might well say that, but it’s simply not true! These concepts are unsuitable for truly penetrating real life, for what truly surrounds us. There are many people whose concepts extend no further than the few steps they take each day. It is, of course, understandable that such people arrive at quite peculiar notions about life. Such people will, naturally, only reveal themselves when they speak or write. I could cite numerous examples of this.

[ 11 ] I would like to highlight two examples from the vast number available that may show you how quickly those who are actually called upon to judge life—or who feel called upon to do so—come to terms with it.

[ 12 ] There is a man who has written a book. That’s nothing special these days; it’s sometimes hard to find people in society who haven’t written a book yet. This man has now written a book about life. In it, he says that he has thought a great deal about the functions of money and what significance it has in our external lives. However, he first had to learn through a particular experience that money is merely a kind of means within a certain social circle, and that it actually has no real significance. He learned this while traveling in South America. He had carried a hundred dollars with him, but he still had to go terribly hungry; he couldn’t get anything for his money. And when he once came to a hut and was given something to eat there, he was told not to bother with his dollars—they were of no use there.

[ 13 ] This man has such “clear” ideas that, in order to establish this, he first has to travel to a Brazilian jungle! But let’s continue: You know that a book was written by a certain State Councilor Kolb. This book deserves every recognition. It should be acknowledged that a government councilor brought himself to work as an ordinary laborer in America—including in a bicycle factory—and to live alongside the workers through all the hardships he had never known before. So he, too, has written a book in which he says: “Now I’m learning to view life differently than I used to.” “When I used to see a person begging on the street, I would say, ‘Why isn’t that good-for-nothing working?’ Now I know!” — And he adds meaningfully: “Yes, the most beautiful and significant problems of political economists can be dealt with easily and comfortably in the ivory tower; but in real life, they look quite different.” — All credit to anyone who undertakes such a venture outside their social circles, and all credit for the courage to admit this openly and freely!

[ 14 ] But now for the other side of the coin. Let’s set the man aside for a moment and consider the fact in and of itself. What does it mean when someone who lives in Europe, who holds a position of responsibility on whose actions so much depends—the suffering, joy, happiness, and misfortune of all manner of people—goes through the world as if blindfolded? Must we not ask: How has he actually gone through the world? How has he studied it? How has he educated himself? If one simply keeps one’s eyes open and sees what he should have seen—for when one is out in the world, one must know such things—then one must ask: Have these people walked through the world blindfolded, and did they have to go all the way to America to learn that money is no good in the jungle, and to learn why the “beggar” doesn’t work when he’s begging? Must we not say that an age in which such symptoms are possible—in which thoughts are so shallow—needs thoughts regarding social structure that are just as clear and certain as those that have been admirably developed over the centuries right up to our own time with regard to machinery and industry? If theosophy or spiritual science is not understood as an abstraction, as a sermon of fine phrases, but as a proclamation of what in reality underlies our entire world, then it is precisely this that provides this genuine understanding of human nature.

[ 15 ] Let’s talk about this in more detail today. If we take a closer look at the transformations that have taken place over the centuries—and whose final repercussions still extend into our present—then we must acknowledge that the relationship between work and livelihood and human beings has changed very, very much. Of course, even today there are still many people who are familiar with the beautiful words spoken by Goethe: “Passion and love are the wings of great deeds.” Truly, passion and love are the wings of great deeds! If human progress and human happiness are to flourish, they must also be the wings of human life. Wouldn’t the artist, when expressing his innermost thoughts, always say: “I can only truly work and produce something fruitful when the joy of work inspires me.”—True, all too true! But how far removed is our life from this truth! We arrive at a sad chapter regarding work and livelihood when we ask ourselves this question.

[ 16 ] Let us compare the creative artist—who creates his works out of a desire and love for the salvation, joy, and elevation of humanity—with the workers toiling in gloomy mines, say, in Sicily. There you will find workers—and not just adult workers, but a swarm of children aged seven, eight, nine, and ten—who are being ruined in the most terrible way and who, with few exceptions, spend their lives down there. And when you recognize the impulses that drive these people to work, you will begin to understand something that is otherwise terribly difficult to grasp. There is a terrible atmosphere of hostility toward life and opposition to life when such things are experienced in the midst of those very things that are otherwise meant to evoke joy and cheerfulness in life. The person who works this way—I am not telling fairy tales, and I have expressly emphasized that I very much dislike having to describe these realities—may express his mood, which in other people is usually expressed in a beautiful, joyful song, in a song like this:

Curse the mother who gave birth to me,
Curse the priest who baptized me,
... if only I had become a s...,
then I would have ...^{1Gap in the postscript}

[ 17 ] Consider this in light of the words: “Desire and love are the wings of great deeds,” and try to see from this the necessity of striving for a worldview capable of deepening the heart to such an extent that it “must be added to our human material development, because it is something that belongs to the structure of life and is part of industry, transportation, and technology.”

[ 18 ] But we can also reflect on the rise of machines in recent centuries in terms of occupation and livelihood in other ways. You don’t have to go back very far to find the saying: “Craftsmanship is a golden opportunity.” Why? There were many people who had a deep personal connection—in their very souls—to their work and the products they created. Try to imagine the medieval towns. Try to look closely at every door lock and every key, and then try to look inside the workshops where these things were crafted. Imagine how people worked with joy and love, how the worker, so to speak, imparted a piece of his soul to the products he created.

[ 19 ] Now try to imagine, by contrast, the industrial worker, the factory worker, who performs and processes only a small part of the whole, the connection of which he cannot fully grasp. He lacks that intimate connection between the product itself and his work. This personal relationship is something extraordinarily important. It is something that these two concepts—profession and livelihood—will bring into ever clearer focus for us. There is a difference—both with regard to earnings and with regard to the worker—when a person can take a personal interest in the products, in their form, in their design, in what the product offers to the eye, as opposed to when the sole interest in the product is the earnings—that is, what one receives as wages for it. The former constitutes the vocation; this is expressed in the work that becomes the product. Earnings are expressed in what human selfishness receives as a reward for the product. Thus, we must juxtapose these two concepts, and they will soon present themselves side by side to you when you compare the craftsman of yesteryear with the modern worker. Everything is different today, down to the smallest detail—what they wear and what surrounds them. The entire tragedy inherent in these machines with regard to profession and livelihood in human life is expressed in a beautiful little poem written by a poet of our modern era who is, unfortunately, far too little known:

In the depths of the forest stands a dilapidated
smithy by the forest path,
From which the hammer’s blow no longer rings out
to the song of joyful labor,
Not far from there, soaring into the air,
A long, slender building,
Where, in the machine room,
Soot-stained hammermen reign.
With nails from the steam factory
A coffin is hammered together,
In which the impoverished nail smith
Was carried to his grave.

[ 20 ] These twelve lines capture the transformation that has taken place over the last few centuries with regard to work and livelihood. We need only consider this one line: “No longer does the sound of the hammer ring out from the smithy to the tune of a joyful work song.” It expresses this transformation. Everything related to occupation and livelihood comes to mind. Let us imagine a person whose joyful work song accompanies the strike of his hammer, and let us imagine the soul whose inner mood is that of a joyful work song; and then let us try to visualize the mood of a person who stands in the factory as a soot-covered laborer. It cannot be the task of spiritual science to preach, for example, a reaction aimed at restoring the old conditions or at preventing things that have developed as a result of human progress and that were bound to happen. We are not to criticize what had to happen. We must, however, realize that it lies within human beings and depends on them to work constructively, through their spiritual labor, for the well-being of humanity and for human progress.

[ 21 ] Now, many will say: But we see plenty of people around us who are well-equipped to reflect on social issues, to think about what should happen. — Well, there is a certain difference—and it is a very significant one—between what spiritual science has to say and the general mood of the times. This general mood of the times could be brought before the soul in general terms. Those who have studied say: “You Theosophists preach that people should become better, that they should develop love, and so on.” Well, we do not concern ourselves with such childish notions of the development of the human soul, of preparing people for a better life and for the salvation of humanity; rather, we know that it is not people, but circumstances that matter. — So say many, not just professors, but also people at the green tables of socialism. What is proclaimed there is just as arrogant as what is spread from the other “green tables.” Everywhere, the sermon goes: Improve the conditions, and then people will naturally improve. — You can hear them declaiming this—those very clever people who keep appearing again and again.

[ 22 ] I could give you many examples from everyday life. I would only have to take three steps from here to point to a spot where someone once stood and said [of theosophy], “Those are foolish ideas!” What matters is that conditions are improved. If you give people better living conditions, then they will become better all on their own.”—We hear this refrain sung over and over again, in all its variations, when it comes to today’s working and economic conditions. When something is wrong, people don’t think it’s the fault of the people themselves; instead, they say a new law must be enacted so that conditions will change. And when something isn’t right in a particular area, they say we must protect the immature masses—those who lack sound judgment—against those who seek to exploit them in this or that field. When this is said, for example, in connection with certain healing methods, one is tempted to ask: Wouldn’t it be more logical and natural to say that it is the duty of those who have insight into these matters to enlighten people, so that they may, based on their own judgment, turn to those they ought to turn to? The issue cannot be about circumstances, but solely about the development of the human soul.

[ 23 ] Deep within our conception of time lies this materialism, which has been drawn from atomistic thinking and applied to social conditions. Many people discuss such matters, but such discussions only lead to endless debates. Anyone who knows the secret of the art of debate knows that one can argue endlessly for and against the significance of human beings. However, it is not merely a matter of being able to cite endless reasons for and against, but also of sensing the weight of those reasons. One man who was called upon to pass judgment in this area—because he was a man of genius—was the Englishman Robert Owen. He was a genius not only because he wanted to make people happy, but also because he had a warm heart for social misery. He succeeded in establishing what was virtually a model colony. He achieved something wonderful there. He managed the situation so wisely that he placed those who were alcoholics and so on among the hardworking people, who could serve as role models. This yielded many positive results. That then encouraged him to found another colony. Once again, he did so with the aim of realizing certain ideals that inspired him. But after some time, developments in the colony were such that he had to acknowledge that those who were not naturally diligent and hardworking were becoming parasites on the colony. So he said to himself: “No,” and it was like a confession: “One must wait with the general institutions until people, like himself, have been raised to a certain level in theoretical terms.” Salvation and progress can come only through the transformation of the human soul, never through mere institutions.—This was said by a man who was entitled to say it, because he proceeded from a perspective inspired by a warm heart and was guided by experience. We should learn from such facts, not from abstract theories. But what constitutes inner and viable thinking in this area? Precise and viable thinking in this area shows us that all institutions—which can become oppressive and terrible for people—are created by people. Human institutions that become the cause of hardship and misery arise simply because they are first created by people. Anyone who truly wants to see things clearly should try to study the course of history, to study how people live together today, how one person is placed in life in one way and another in another. Who placed them there? Not vague social forces, but human thoughts, human feelings, and human impulses of will. We must state this once and for all: Human beings can suffer only at the hands of other human beings. All other forms of suffering are, in a social sense, actually irrelevant.

[ 24 ] It is not to be expected that the scholar of the humanities should set himself up as a critic of historical necessities. It is necessary to realize that circumstances are created by human beings and that, once they are created, misery is introduced into these circumstances solely through false ideas. It is not difficult to see that a narrow-minded way of thinking—one that has no inkling of the great, vast interconnections of the world—cannot create institutions capable of bringing happiness and salvation to humanity. The statement that one should be selfless, that one should love people, is like saying to a stove: “You are a stove; be nice and warm; it is your moral duty to heat the room.” — It won’t get warm! But if you stoke the fire, it will get warm! Preaching universal love for humanity is something one can readily proclaim to the world. But the practical application—that which enables one to intervene in the external world in such a way that salvation and blessings for humanity result from it—depends on the relationship between one person and another.

[ 25 ] A materialistic age will see in human beings only what can be grasped with the hands or perceived with the eyes. But human beings are more than that. They are spiritual, soulful, and physical beings. And everything that can bring healing and blessing to human beings can arise only from taking the entire human being into account—especially in the complex and increasingly complex circumstances of the present and the future. Spiritual science reveals to us this true nature of the human being, shows us its foundation, and thereby leads us—in a way entirely different from anything else—to an understanding of humanity and the world. What surrounds us, what we can bring forth in the world through our work and livelihood—we cannot bring it forth in any other way than through a life filled with joy in work. Imagine what a difference it makes when workers, as in the poem, can perform their work to the rhythm of a song that celebrates labor. The individual blacksmith could do this. He knew the work from its beginning to the finished product. Work cannot arise from mere livelihood; no work whatsoever arises from mere livelihood. Try to cast your gaze back to simple labor: it unfolded rhythmically, the blacksmith’s hammer struck in rhythm, and the song accompanied that rhythm. The impulses—which can be compared to joy and love—were what drove the work. The further back you go, the more you will find that livelihood and vocation are two entirely different things.

[ 26 ] What a person does as work, he does out of an impulse toward the task itself. Earning a living is something else entirely. But that is the root of our modern misery: that livelihood and profession, that wages and work, have become one and the same, have merged. This is the point to which our reflection must ultimately lead. A person who operates a small machine in a factory in the manner of today will never again be able to have the devotion to the product that characterized the craftsman of old; that is irretrievably lost. Given our complex circumstances, it will never again be possible in the future for the workplace to be filled with a song of joy in work. That song—the one associated with the product—has faded away!

[ 27 ] We ask: Is there another impulse that can serve as a substitute? When we look back over the years, during which more and more factories were built and more and more people were herded into the sites of modern misery—factories and places of work—and let all of this pass before our eyes, then we see—even though much may have changed—that people believe they can simply graft future development onto the past, when pleasure and love were still the driving forces behind work. But humanity has not been able to create a substitute that reconnects people to the product. Nor can that be restored. But something else can be done. What can take its place? How can pleasure and love once again become the driving forces, the wings for daily work? How can they be created?

[ 28 ] Yes, some might object: “Try to find the motivation for work that is dirty, unpleasant, and abhorrent!” — Such motivation does exist. Just think about what mothers do when they work out of love for their children. Think of what human beings are capable of when they do something out of love for other people. There is no need for love of the product of one’s labor; what is needed is a bond between one person and another. You cannot restore love for the product among humanity, for that was bound to primitive, simple circumstances. But what the future must bring is the great, all-encompassing understanding and love from person to person. Until every person can find the motivation for their actions from the deepest impulses—which only a spiritual world movement can provide—and until they are able to work out of love for their fellow human beings, it will not be possible to create genuine impulses for future development in the interest of humanity’s salvation.

[ 29 ] Thus, we have presented as a starting point what all esoteric science has known since time immemorial. For there is a spiritual law that states: In social life, the only thing that is beneficial for the welfare of humanity is what people do not for themselves, but for the whole of humanity. All work that people do solely for themselves must lead to disaster. This may seem like a harsh principle, but this harsh principle is the result of true knowledge.

[ 30 ] This is what theosophy, or spiritual science, has to offer humanity today: learning to understand such a statement once again. Something that is meant to encompass all people or groups of people has become a completely abstract concept in the materialistic worldview. It can no longer provide any moral impetus. Just think about how people speak of national souls or group souls. That is not something real! People must once again gain clarity about the fact that there are beings who live in spiritual worlds, and that such group souls exist and are real. We have advanced so far in our development that, precisely in our time, we have reached a point where there are views that are the exact opposite of spiritual science—views that, for example, see only formalities in everything that encompasses a group or a sense of belonging in the world. Spiritual science, however, shows that the visible, the physical, does not contain the whole essence of existence, but that underlying all that is visible is the supraphysical, the non-sensory, the supersensible—so that things such as community spirits and group spirits are no longer abstractions for us. Thus, it becomes a precise concept for us when we say: Work, no matter how highly it is valued, is not what matters. Work matters only in the context of humanity when this work is, as we say, productive work that benefits other people.

[ 31 ] Consider a simple example to illustrate this: Two people live on an island. One produces things that satisfy both their hunger and make their existence possible. The other works terribly hard, an awful lot; he spends his time throwing stones from one place to another, hurling them diligently and laboriously and quickly throwing them back again. He is terribly diligent and laborious; he can be incredibly hardworking. But his work has no meaning at all; it is completely meaningless. What matters is not that we work, but that we perform work that is beneficial to others. The work of throwing stones back and forth is beneficial only if it brings joy to the person performing it. But if he is forced by some system to accept payment for his work, then the work is meaningless in the larger context. It must be situated within a context governed by wisdom and structure. Anyone who looks into this context knows that the most important work is that which is performed independently of remuneration. Remuneration must stand on its own. How people support one another is a separate question. The impulse to work must not and cannot lie in selfishness; rather, it must arise from a consideration of the whole.

[ 32 ] What one person does is needed by others. If people desire what I produce through my work, then my work may match my abilities; it may be modest if my abilities are limited, or it may be significant if my abilities are great. But if people need this work, that is an impetus for the work that can put me in a cheerful, song-filled mood. But to achieve this, we must first have the impulse and the ability to look into people’s hearts and see that people’s hearts can become something for us. When we know how to empathize with people’s hearts, we understand the essence of humanity; then we also work in community and adopt social thinking. You will say, “No one does that: throwing stones from one place to another.” — This happens constantly in our circumstances; people just don’t see it! Their perspective is too narrow. Those who learn to think socially soon become aware of it. Imagine you were sitting somewhere and found a beautiful postcard, and then you wrote twenty postcards without having anything in particular to say. Anyone who looks more deeply at this sees not only the postcards with the pictures, but also the many mail carriers who have to go up and down stairs. How much work would be saved if the cards weren’t written!

[ 33 ] But then along comes a very clever person who says: By writing so many postcards, you end up needing more than one worker. Another person is hired, and this other person thereby earns a living. — No one stops to consider that no productive work is being done this way. This is the kind of work that produces nothing. By forcing a person to do a job and providing him with a wage for it, you are not bringing about salvation for humanity. But one must look into the structure of existence, as only an education in spiritual science can enable us to do. One must realize that it is not merely a few economists who should look into these matters. Every single person must be led to develop this social thinking, and this is what flows from spiritual scientific wisdom as a spiritual scientific attitude: that the human soul becomes open and free, that it then looks around at things in order to think them through to their conclusion, to observe and study them, so that it is no longer a matter of having to create work for the unemployed. What matters is not giving work to this or that person, but rather what kind of work is being done—namely, work that meets the needs of the whole. If we view the matter in this way, it becomes clear to us that what must serve as the impetus for our work in the future—what must be incorporated into our profession—is the sense of belonging to human groups that flows from true wisdom, that living social feeling, which must take root in every human soul. Not abstract love, not the kind of love that merely speaks of love and sees only as far as the end of its nose, but only love illuminated by insight can bring about an improvement in human relations.

[ 34 ] Therefore, spiritual science cannot be a collection of dogmas or ideas. Ideas exist for the sake of the soul. What really matters are living human beings. The more people are moved and inspired by this wisdom, the more true, real love there will be, and the more it will serve human progress and well-being. Thus we will find that because the vocation is grounded in devotion to humanity, and livelihood is grounded in concern for human sustenance—and because thinking is directed entirely in this direction—salvation will be bestowed upon humanity. The spiritual scientist will not think that this can be changed overnight through dogmas. It is clear to those who stand firmly on the ground of spiritual science that the soul can become attuned to active love, and that—because there are people who establish these insights—work can be done for the salvation of humanity. Then a person like Kolb will not first have to go to America to learn that it is easy to pass judgment on social issues from behind a desk; rather, a current in public life will open his eyes, and he will no longer have to walk through the world blindfolded. This will be the finest and most beautiful fruit of the spiritual-scientific worldview, provided it does not lead people to sentimental preaching about love of humanity and brotherhood, but rather enables them to perceive true spiritual reality with an open and free mind. In this way, humanity will increasingly fulfill Goethe’s saying: “The person who overcomes himself frees himself from the force that binds all beings.”

[ 35 ] This statement applies in a broad sense to the national, professional, and commercial spheres. It holds that only when our social structure is entirely governed by this principle—that our work is not subordinated to wages and profit, but is made independent of profit—can something fruitful be created.

[ 36 ] Of course, there are people who say that efforts are being made everywhere to relieve the subjective drive for gain of all sorts of things and transfer them to the community. Those who say this might see the civil servant as the ideal of a person in whom gain and profession are separate. What matters, however, is that every individual possesses the impulses from which the salvation described above can spring. Unity must not hover over the whole like an abstract specter, like a cloud; rather, it must live in every single soul, which always points to the spiritual heights of the universe as reflected in every human soul. Only such a worldview can succeed in realizing what is possible in terms of healing within human coexistence.

[ 37 ] This is what the great minds have felt; it was felt by a great spirit who is once again the subject of much discussion today—and some people talk about him all the more the less they understand him. This spirit has said that bliss comes to humankind through merging into real, true unity, and that all misery arises from the scattering into multiplicity and differences. Misery is greatest when people are driven so far into differentiation that no one does anything except for the sake of selfishness. Only when the individual feels that he must lay down what he can do upon the altar of humanity—when this feeling and this way of thinking permeate the individual—can it also permeate humanity to the utmost degree. It is true, as Fichte said: All bliss lies in merging with the true One, and all distress and misery lie in living in separation and distinction; for true love can only be attained when the soul is not hardened in separation and diversity, but rather when it finds rest and peace in true wholeness and in the total Spirit.