The Rudolf Steiner Archive

17. Haeckel, the Mysteries of the Universe, and Theosophy

Article in the “Züricher Post”, November 24, 1905

[ 1 ] Theosophy and the “Mysteries of the World.” We have been asked to include the following lines:

[ 2 ] Th. S. On the evening of November 13, before a large audience of approximately 250 “souls,” Dr. phil. Rud. Steiner from Berlin spoke in the Assize Courtroom about theosophy and E. Haeckel’s *The Riddles of the World*. The worldview known as “Theosophy” (divine wisdom), the speaker explained, emerged about thirty years ago. It is a spiritual movement that encompasses and unites religion, science, philosophy, and ethics, and answers questions regarding the origin, nature, purpose, and destiny of humankind. The mysteries of the world can be solved; but only Theosophy is capable of solving them—and in a way that satisfies all people, learned and unlearned alike. It is Theosophy that creates peace among the various worldviews, sciences, and religions, all of which contain a grain of truth. Above all, however, this means that Theosophy does not contradict the achievements of the natural sciences.

[ 3 ] The speaker now turns specifically to Haeckel’s work *The Riddles of the Universe*, whose widespread circulation speaks to humanity’s great interest in the most important questions. Many theosophists speak out very sharply against Haeckel. I, the speaker continues, do not wish to do so. Rather, I wish to contribute to an understanding of Haeckel’s worldview. Haeckel’s significance lies in the continuation of Darwinism, in the expansion of the evidence that all living beings are based on a unified organization and that humans, too, are a link in the one great chain of the animal kingdom. But all of this had already been recognized long before Darwin—by Goethe, for example. His thoughts, however, moved in spheres too lofty to be accessible and comprehensible to all people. The most significant achievement of Darwin and his followers, therefore, consists primarily in the fact that they brought the ideas of the unified interconnection of all organisms (including humans) down to a level accessible to all of humanity, proved them to be true there, and thus made them comprehensible to the mind. In this respect, Haeckel’s “Mysteries of the World” is an astonishingly great achievement.

[ 4 ] But great people also have great flaws. From a theosophical standpoint, there is no valid objection to Darwin’s theory of the origin of species. However, one must distinguish

[ 5 ] between Darwin’s Darwinism and Haeckel’s Darwinism; for Darwin, in his writings, speaks of the “Creator” and of the “Omniscient and Almighty One who foresees everything.” However, early Darwinism emerged during a materialistic era and was therefore given a thoroughly materialistic interpretation and exegesis by its successors and developers. And it is only this interpretation and exegesis that Theosophy opposes.

[ 6 ] The sensory and visible world is underpinned by a supernatural and invisible one. Had Darwinism emerged not in a materialistic age but in a spiritualist-idealistic one, it would undoubtedly have been interpreted and explained in spiritualist-idealistic terms. But in an age when even the smallest living organism—the cell—can be seen by the naked eye, the materialistic worldview—and specifically materialistic biology—is understandable. “Ways of thinking,” whether religious, idealistic, materialistic, or otherwise, play a major role. However, thinking in purely materialistic terms is a mistake; for there are sensations (such as the sensation of the color red, the scent of a rose, or the sound of an organ) that cannot be conceived of or explained in materialistic terms. They are certainly based on material impulses, but these are not the deepest, ultimate cause. Materialism cannot solve the mysteries of the world; Du Bois-Reymond, for example, also acknowledged this in his famous “Ignorabimus” speech. Haeckel’s mistake, then, lies in the fact that he carried his materialistic habits of thought into Darwinism, and that he also seeks to explain psychological and spiritual processes in material terms. However, Theosophy does not seek to criticize Haeckel’s explanations of the physical or sensory realm, but rather to acknowledge them.

[ 7 ] Steiner now turns specifically to theosophy, which recognizes two entities in human beings—a soul or spiritual entity and a physical or material entity—and asserts that, for example, in a sleeping person, these two entities are separate. The fact that the soul or spirit does not manifest itself or perceive anything during deep sleep is due solely to the fact that it lacks the organs to do so. Therefore, it is the task of every human being to recognize this and to resolve to provide the soul, through certain means, with supersensible organs corresponding to the sensory ones. The moment when this occurs is what the theosophist calls “rebirth.” Through the continued application of these means (which, however, were not named), the soul or spirit develops into the organized supersensible, true, or divine human being, for whom the dream world is also a reality and who can see spirits with the “inner eye” just as clearly as the sensory human being sees bodies with his outer eye. The body is transitory; the spirit or soul is eternal, an indestructible unity. Therefore, Theosophy is also monism in the highest sense.

[ 8 ] Will the new “Theosophical Society of Zurich” founded here flourish and turn us all into theosophists? The author of these lines does not believe so. He considers it a mistake to regard what we call “spirit”—as distinct from the body—as something non-physical or non-natural, and finds it curious that it should require organs. Nor is the theosophical identification of the concepts of “soul” and “spirit” likely to fall on fertile ground. The current state of science does indeed allow for certain distinctions, but no longer draws sharp boundaries between what we call the mental, the emotional, and the physical. Certainly, Theosophy has its merits in that it opposes crude materialism and seeks to give the spiritual side of humanity its due. But theosophy’s denigration of the physical aspect of human beings—which, after all, also springs from the “almighty and omniscient Creator,” to use Darwin’s words, as his material and spiritual product—cannot stand up to the judgment of true science, such as the natural sciences.