The Rudolf Steiner Archive

2. What is Self-Knowledge?

[ 1 ] The day before yesterday, we discussed a topic that is occult in the truest sense of the word—we offered a glimpse into the higher worlds. Then, in yesterday’s public lecture, we examined the methods and practices through which a person can awaken the abilities and powers slumbering within their soul, so that, little by little, they may gain knowledge of these higher worlds. The topic we will address today is intrinsically connected to both of these, and it is also related in a certain way to all anthroposophical endeavors. Not only is it often said in theory that anthroposophical spiritual science is, in fact, nothing other than a comprehensive, universal self-knowledge of the human being—a self-knowledge that reveals to the individual the deepest foundation and essence of their own “I,” thereby opening up knowledge of the world— But I say that not only can you often find this statement in theosophical literature and elsewhere, but true, genuine self-knowledge is also that which must run parallel—like a concomitant phenomenon—to all genuine research in the realm of the higher worlds, and must run parallel to all development of the inner soul forces. “Know thyself,” this ancient saying of humanity, means a great deal—indeed, a very great deal—especially for the anthroposophist. Today, let us consider what can be called self-knowledge in the spiritual-scientific sense at the various stages of human development. Let us begin with the most ordinary, everyday form of self-knowledge and ascend to that self-knowledge which can be called world-knowledge in the anthroposophical sense; and in all the individual points we have to discuss, let us certainly take into account what might be called the “esoteric” aspect, the occult side.

[ 2 ] Self-knowledge is all the more important to discuss within the anthroposophical worldview because, when properly understood, it can encompass the highest goal of anthroposophical striving, but when misunderstood, it can become something extraordinarily dangerous. Misunderstood self-knowledge is precisely what, especially at the beginning of spiritual scientific endeavor, tends to lead us away from—rather than toward—the true path laid out for us in anthroposophy. Goethe, who was thoroughly well-versed in this field in many respects, once said that he already harbored a certain distrust of the term “self-knowledge,” that it signified something espoused by people who, fundamentally speaking, have strayed into a completely erroneous course through some form of false melancholy or self-numbness. And this is an entirely accurate way of putting it. In the field of spiritual science, we repeatedly have the opportunity to contemplate the complex nature of the human being when we recall what we all know: that, from an anthroposophical perspective, we divide the human being into the physical body, the etheric body, the astral body, and the actual “I-bearer.” And when we consider that, fundamentally, what we call the self is connected to all these aspects of human nature, we will readily conclude that self-knowledge is something extraordinarily complex.

[ 3 ] To begin with the simplest, most basic form of self-knowledge, let us remember that, when considering these four aspects of human nature, we must indeed distinguish —depending on the current relationship between these elements—between the waking human being and the one in dreamless sleep; that we must say that in the sleeping human being, the physical and etheric bodies are separated from the astral body and the ego-bearer, and that the latter two are outside the body. At the same time, however, we know that it is normal for the current human cycle that the human ego can become conscious of itself only when it makes use of the physical organs to make perceptions on the physical plane. Thus, in the spiritual-scientific sense, we speak of an “I-bearer” that persists through those states we call unconscious sleep. However, we must say of this “I-bearer” that it can develop the present aspect of consciousness and self-consciousness—that is, bring it into the immediate field of observation—only when it makes use of the physical organs, that is, when it re-enters the physical and etheric bodies in the morning. Here we have before us the self-consciousness that is normal for human beings today, and we must ask ourselves: What is the nature of this self-consciousness at its lowest level? — But the question is better phrased if we say: How does a person come to recognize that which dwells in their physical body from morning to evening and makes use of the physical organs; how does a person come to a recognition of the nature of the whole, or of the self? —It is easy to believe that a person must now look within, that they must, so to speak, explore themselves. This brings us to all manner of self-knowledge that are practiced and recommended. For example, a person is supposed to observe what they do, what their characteristics and faults are; they are to delve into their inner self and seek to recognize how much they are worth, how capable they are of this or that action, and the like. Here already begin the dangers of misunderstood self-knowledge, and that is why we must speak of these dangers. We always keep in mind that a person should strive to ascend into the higher worlds. We also know that this ascent is something that transforms a person into something entirely different from what they are today, and therefore it is only natural that certain obstacles arise along the way. Through false self-knowledge, the ascent becomes just as perilous as it is made possible in the first place by true self-knowledge. This kind of self-knowledge—which one might rather call a brooding over one’s everyday “I,” a focusing on one’s faults—is false and constitutes a danger that actually tends to set a person back, precisely because the comprehensive standard for judgment is lacking.

[ 4 ] When a person, through a routine assessment of their strengths and weaknesses, says, “You did that right, you did that wrong, you need to improve there”—this presupposes that they have a standard by which to measure themselves. This standard also becomes, so to speak, a measure of value for what a person will embody in the future. And in this way, a person will never truly transcend themselves—and this is precisely what the anthroposophist must always remind themselves: not to stand still, but to move beyond this point, step by step, time and again. - A saying that should be taken to heart is: Everything you undertake with regard to the development of the soul and that moves you forward on the path of life is well done; everything that keeps you stuck at a certain point is, in essence, a loss for your soul. - No self-knowledge that drives a person to be consumed by remorse or leads them to self-satisfaction can move them forward. If we wish to gain even a glimmer of insight into what really matters, we must ask ourselves: On what does the true human being usually depend? You will easily put yourself in this line of thought: What would become of my perceptions, my sensations, and my feelings if this individuality—which has, after all, passed from incarnation to incarnation and will continue to do so—had not, let us say, been born in Vienna so many years ago, but rather fifty years earlier in Moscow, for example? What kind of content would this individuality then have? What sensations, feelings, perceptions, thoughts, and ideas would then permeate this individuality and give it its distinctive underlying tone? Entirely different ones! You can most easily imagine this very precisely if you reflect on how your perceptions and sensations unfold from morning to evening, and how much of this depends on when and where you came into the world. Try to take a close look at this for yourself: strip away from the innermost depths of your soul everything that is conditioned by the when and where of your birth. Cast all these notions out of your inner life. Try to think about what remains after that, and above all, try to consider how many of these ideas—which pass through the soul from morning to night—have any validity or value at all apart from the time and place of your life between birth and death. Then you will see how important it is for the “I” to pay close attention to the extent to which it is subject to the influences of time and place. You do not learn to recognize this by brooding over your inner self, but rather by giving due consideration to the poet’s saying: “If you wish to contemplate yourself, learn to know yourself through others!”—through your surroundings. And so, in a peculiar way, we are led away from brooding over the soul and toward the realization that, in order to get to know our “I,” we must cultivate an open eye and an open mind for the unique character of the world into which we were born, with its specific time and place. The more we strive to maintain this open sensibility toward the external world—toward what surrounds us—the more we arrive, in the spiritual-scientific sense, at what we might call self-knowledge in this most basic realm.

[ 5 ] Let us, as it were, come to know the entire tonal character of our own time by looking freely; let us try to realize how the distinctive qualities of our age and the place where we live are available to us in the most manifold ways. This self-knowledge—which directs us from our own selves to our surroundings—is most peculiar. Let us get to know this outer world of ours; let us try to penetrate its spirit, to explore what has shaped us—then we will recognize our true selves as if in a mirror image. This is an objective path. Looking inward is dangerous. One should recognize the reasons why one is the way one is. These can be discovered in one’s surroundings; in doing so, we are distracted from ourselves. So here, then, is what gives us the ability to recognize ourselves, insofar as we are a “self” that makes use of the physical body to live in harmony with the world around us.

[ 6 ] Now this “I” makes use of the organ of the etheric body, the life body—that subtle organism whose nature is well known to the anthroposophical spiritual scientist, which pervades the physical body, and which is a constant fighter against the decay of the physical body. Now, when the Self immerses itself in the physical and etheric bodies in the morning, it acts in both bodies—including the etheric body—during the current human cycle. What is at stake here is not what place and time—the “when” and “where”—make of us, but something more. Attached to the etheric body is something quite different, which is, in a certain sense, even more deeply connected to our Self—something that already transcends birth and death. This brings us to what, in a certain sense, this Self brings with it—that which originates from the past and extends into the future, and which this Self already possesses when it is embodied in a physical body. Viewed from the outside—by simply observing a person superficially—it is particularly in the etheric body that what we must describe as talents, aptitudes, and special abilities of the self manifests itself; and here we are already, in a certain sense, in a more challenging realm of self-knowledge. Although this is still a relatively low stage compared to what self-knowledge entails at the higher levels of development, a person will not get very far even here if they brood over their inner self and try to clarify: What are your talents and abilities?

[ 7 ] It would take us too far afield today to derive the rationale for what I am about to say from the very nature of the human being. The worst enemies of self-knowledge lie in wait there, when a person begins to try to gain clarity about their talents and abilities through self-reflection. It is precisely there that they must shift their reflections from themselves to their surroundings, from the personal to the impersonal. We must now direct our reflections to the realm of the etheric body, to our connection with this or that race. We must ask ourselves: To which branch of humanity do you actually belong? And we should strive to explore the distinctive character of the group of humanity to which we belong—through family, race, and nation—in comparison with the universal characteristics of the entire human race. Let us therefore come to know that which runs through the line of inheritance, that which develops from great-grandfather to grandfather and so on, and what uniquely colors the self within this hereditary line—that is, what is not directly related to when and where, but rather to deeper fundamental laws of human existence—if we come to know these characteristics, then we will in turn find the proper context, and only then will we be able to see how our own self stands out against this background. But any self-absorption prior to considering this background is harmful. Thus, while anthroposophy does indeed demand of us a more uncomfortable form of self-knowledge than that which is often meant in a clichéd sense, there is simply no other way to attain true self-knowledge, because the standard is missing; because one merely broods over one’s own perspective and lacks a benchmark for comparison.

[ 8 ] Now I would like to move on to the occult facts. We all know that the human body is surrounded by an aura, embedded in this astral aura, which is visible to the clairvoyant consciousness as an oval cloud. The fact that a person is born into a specific time and place determines the extent of their aura in a certain way. A person who has a very narrow horizon—who, in essence, can and will experience only what lies within their own self, and who wishes to be guided solely by the impulses of the will that, unseen, spur them on from their surroundings; in other words, who is the product of when and where—reveals to the clairvoyant consciousness something compressed and constricted in their aura. In this case, the aura is not large and does not extend far beyond the physical body. The moment a person broadens their horizon—that is, the moment they develop an open mind and an open eye for observing their surroundings—we can actually see how the aura expands in all directions, becoming more comprehensive in relation to the boundaries of the physical body. A person thus becomes spiritually greater within by expanding their horizons in terms of their conceptual and emotional worlds. To clairvoyant consciousness, this is strikingly evident: in people who are merely an echo of their surroundings, the aura is small. But when people begin to refine their judgment and make it more independent, so that they eventually come to distinguish themselves from conventional thinking, then clairvoyant consciousness sees how the aura expands, how it grows larger, and how the person becomes more refined and comprehensive within themselves.

[ 9 ] As grotesque as it may sound to many—understanding one’s surroundings is the first step toward self-knowledge. Understanding one’s family and race is the second step. In the case of a person who, through the impulses of their emotions and will, attempts to free themselves from the context into which they have been placed—be it a people, a race, a family, and so on—clairvoyant consciousness perceives not only how the aura expands, but also how it becomes more mobile within itself, taking on vibrations, whereas before it was lifeless and immobile. Well, this already indicates that—though not directly, but in a certain way—what we call specific characteristics and abilities is connected to this hereditary line.

[ 10 ] How, then, can we rise above those very factors that determine and shape the inner structure of the self? A person has not yet achieved much by coming to know himself in this way. As far as one’s talents and abilities are concerned, generally little will have been accomplished if one merely forms an idea about ancestry and hereditary lineage; one will not be able to transcend this. Here, only spiritual scientific experience can speak. The point is that spiritual scientific experience must provide what makes a person independent of talents and abilities. This remedy does not resemble at all what it is intended to achieve, yet it is the remedy: When a person tries to cultivate a warm, heartfelt feeling for what initially interests them little—for what they find difficult to take an interest in—and especially when they broaden their interests, then they will develop their individuality out of their inherited abilities.

[ 11 ] The first step—becoming aware of one’s surroundings—will be accomplished relatively quickly; the second—this process of self-education—transforms one’s talents only slowly. Indeed, it must even be pointed out that sometimes, for the sake of this incarnation, one must forgo a complete transformation of one’s talents; yet the path is set in motion, and it is extraordinarily important that we truly strive toward this. Then the clairvoyant consciousness will very soon perceive how the aura becomes dynamic within itself, how it begins to vibrate. We will see, at least in the very beginning, a transformation of our own nature. In this gradual process of self-education, what we might call an impersonal self-knowledge then arises quite naturally.

[ 12 ] Now we come to the third important area. We now come to consider that aspect of our self which manifests itself through the astral body—the vehicle of pleasure and pain, of passions, and so on. During dreamless sleep, this astral body is separated from the physical and etheric bodies. The ordinary person has never consciously separated the astral body from the physical and etheric bodies. Clairvoyant consciousness can do this, but normal consciousness cannot. Which aspect of human nature, governed by natural laws, will now manifest its characteristic features in the astral body? It is there that what we call karma plays out within the Self—that which is the distinctive nature of the Self or individuality, which not only develops through the line of inheritance but also passes from incarnation to incarnation, and is thus connected to one’s own deeds and the soul’s own experiences throughout incarnations. What a person experiences through their bodies—that is, what plays out as a law of cause and effect of a purely spiritual nature—comes into consideration at the third stage of self-knowledge.

[ 13 ] The question now arises: Can a person do anything to gain self-knowledge in this area? In answering a question, I was able to point out how difficult it is in the current cycle of humanity to even comprehend the effect of karma. I said, for example, that it is predetermined in a person’s karma that he must take a trip at a certain time—say, in about fourteen days. But he resolves to do something in three weeks because he does not see his karma; he knows nothing about it. He then arranges everything accordingly until he receives the news that he must undertake the trip now. Now the two courses of action collide with one another. What he has done contradicts his karmic path. From this you can see that new elements are constantly being added to karma. As a result, the karmic paths intensify and become intertwined. This is to say that, in his normal development, a person can hardly fathom the path of the Self, of the “I,” insofar as this chain of karma is concerned; for unless he possesses a clairvoyant consciousness of a high degree of development, he cannot know what lies within his karma.

[ 14 ] The question now is: Can self-knowledge be attained to this extent in everyday life? Here I must immediately point out to you the means provided by spiritual scientific experience, which makes it possible, so to speak, for a person not to overlook what is karmically right and to carry out what is right at a certain moment. It is a completely mistaken view, one that is occasionally encountered, namely, that human beings are unfree because of karma. Karma does not make one unfree. Precisely by virtue of their freedom, human beings can do something at every moment that creates karma. Karma, therefore, does not preclude the possibility that the karmic line can be interwoven and linked back and forth. Can a person do anything to position themselves in a certain relationship to their karma—in such a way that they do not counteract this karma too strongly and thereby create new causes that, instead of moving them forward, only hold them back? There is one thing that works in such a way that a person moves more and more in the direction that their karmic line intends, and indeed, there is something that is constantly practiced and discussed in circles that cultivate the anthroposophical worldview. It is precisely that which arises as a disposition in the soul under the influence of a worldview such as the anthroposophical one. This is what draws a person ever more deeply into their karma. We must attune ourselves properly in the anthroposophical way; the complacent souls who speak only of how a person should delve into themselves, should seek God within themselves, will lead people little further along their path; rather, it is precisely that which leads them away from their own person—that which gives them a worldview that makes the supersensible possible—that carries them forward. Everything offered to us in anthroposophy allows us to look into supersensible events. At first, a person cannot, of course, be a clairvoyant themselves; they must accept what is told to them by clairvoyant researchers. Nor is it strictly necessary for them to be a clairvoyant, any more than one must immediately pick up a telescope or a microscope. What the researcher in this field communicates can certainly be grasped through unbiased logic. A person must, so to speak, make himself an instrument in order to be able to conduct research in the supersensible realm; yet everything can be understood without one’s having to become an instrument oneself.

[ 15 ] When the anthroposophist forms a picture of what the higher worlds are like, of what goes on behind sensory reality, this does not fail to have an effect on his entire emotional and sensory life. We must take this to heart once and for all, so that we do not succumb to the convenient excuse: it does not matter whether one learns much, but rather that one holds to this or that moral principle. — The fact is that in anthroposophical spiritual science, learning cannot be dispensed with, and anyone who says: “What do I care about that theory of higher worlds and so on? Certainly, the anthroposophical attitude is what matters; that is a self-evident condition; but just as a stove warms the room when it is heated—because fuel has been placed inside and set alight—so it is with human beings. But if you merely preach to the stove, merely say, “Dear stove, your duty is to warm the room”—it will not warm the room. If you always just preach to people that it is their duty to love and so on, little will come of it. It is of little use for us to set ourselves up as moral preachers, for all moral preaching leaves humanity just as it is. When you stoke the stove, it warms the room. If you feed it fuel, that will be the cause of the room’s warmth. If you give people the worldview that anthroposophy can offer regarding supersensible realities, then what is contained in the first principle of the Theosophical Society—universal brotherhood—will follow quite naturally. An anthroposophical attitude is necessary, but merely repeating this over and over again is of no help. It will certainly manifest itself in the form in which it is effective for the world when knowledge of the higher world—super-sensory knowledge of the world—is revealed. Just as plants turn toward the one sun, so too do all who strive for this knowledge of the world turn toward the one central sun, and all other consequences follow of their own accord. Thus is the anthroposophical attitude, as it arises from spiritual scientific knowledge.

[ 16 ] This is what enables a person to live in accordance with their karma of their own accord. The task now, therefore, is for people to begin putting the anthroposophical teachings into practice. If karma is not to remain an abstract idea but is to become effective, it is necessary to begin introducing this idea of karma into life on a trial basis—at least on a trial basis—because, given the diversity and turmoil of our everyday lives, we cannot remain in a state of constant self-observation. It is necessary to ask ourselves: What does it mean to think karmically?

[ 17 ] Let’s take a radical case as an example: Someone has slapped another person—me, for example. What does it mean to “think karmically” in such a case? I was there in a past life, and so was the other person. Perhaps back then, in that past life, I provided the cause for his current behavior—I urged him on, so to speak, and even trained him for it. I don’t want to theorize; I want to propose a hypothesis that will become a hypothesis of life. Does he strike me now, if I think this way? No, he doesn’t strike me at all. I inflict it upon myself, for I have placed him there myself; I have raised the very hand that he raised against me.

[ 18 ] From here on, only experience can provide further insight, and it reveals the following: When a person seriously attempts to grapple with the concept of karma in this way—asking such a question from time to time, with complete sincerity and dignity—he will indeed see that he benefits from it. No one can prove this to you. You must prove it to yourself by doing it. Then you will see that your inner life actually becomes quite different; you will experience entirely different feelings and impulses of will regarding life, and a completely different inner life will reveal its consequences—it will manifest itself in an entirely different way. Where you would have experienced great pain and disappointment, you will calmly accept the pain; you are balanced because you have acted and thought in this way. The result is that a remarkable calm descends upon your entire inner life—a kind of lawful comprehension of events, by no means a fatalistic one.

[ 19 ] This is also the path one must take if one wishes to gradually develop the idea of karma—and the belief in this idea—into certainty. One can argue against the idea of karma. Anyone who wants to present arguments can do so. Such a thing cannot be proven theoretically, but only through testing, and experience will reveal the outcome. When experience becomes intense, it provides the means to grasp karma initially. Then, from the way things are grouped together, one realizes that there really is something inherent in them—just as one realizes whether one is holding a figment of the imagination or the reality of a piece of iron when one touches it. Thus, experience itself must provide that synthesis of life’s facts through which we gradually integrate our arbitrariness and our inner impulses of will into our karma. This work of our lives, though complicated, is one of the best means of attaining a third stage of true self-knowledge. Through it, you gradually learn to sense what in your present life is the repercussion of your past life.

[ 20 ] This insight is not as simple as brooding over it, because it must still come from the environment. Above all, it is a matter of stepping outside oneself—even at the highest level of self-knowledge, which is knowledge of the world. Fichte said: Most people would rather consider themselves a piece of lava on the moon than an “I.”—There, one comes to know the “I” more in its punctate existence, more than just a point. One recognizes this “I” as a punctate reflection of the entire world. In this sense, self-knowledge is, if you will, knowledge of God—not in the pantheistic sense, but like a drop that is of the same substance and essence as the entire sea. And just as the drop, by virtue of this essential sameness, reveals the essence and nature of the entire sea, so too is man of the same essence as the divinity he can perceive; but it would never occur to anyone to declare the drop to be the ocean. We can recognize the substance and essence of the Divine, just as we do that of the ocean, from the drop, but no one would presume to say, “Knowledge of the drop is enough for me”; and surely everyone would say, “What matters to me is knowledge of the ocean,” and that happens when you sail across it. You therefore learn to recognize the Divine in particular when you grasp the drop of the Divine within yourself, in your innermost being; but you cannot come to know that of which what is within you is again only a drop or a spark, except by immersing yourself selflessly in the great supersensible worlds in the highest possible way. If we wish to know ourselves, we must step completely outside of ourselves and explore the supersensible worlds in the deepest possible way.

[ 21 ] For the third stage, what has been said about reincarnation and karma should suffice. For the highest self-knowledge, we must attain an understanding of the great cosmic connection of our Earth; for we are a part of our Earth, just as a finger is a part of the whole organism. The finger does not succumb to the illusion that it is an independent entity; cut it off, and it is no longer a finger. If it could walk around on your organism, then it could, like a human being, succumb to the illusion that it is an independent organism. Human beings do not consider that if you lift them a few miles above the Earth, they are no longer human beings. Human beings are a link in the Earth’s organism, and the Earth, in turn, is a link in the cosmos. We can only perceive this if we grasp the basis of the cosmic connection. All reflection on the self without a comprehensive understanding of the world—without comprehending how the “I” has needed all past events—is in vain; without this overview, we cannot arrive at any insight, not even regarding the “I”-self. We come to an understanding of the daytime “I” when we examine our surroundings in terms of when and where. We find the understanding of how the “I” expresses itself in the etheric body when we consider the line of heredity. We gain insight into how the “I” expresses itself in the astral body when we live out our karma, and the ultimate insight when we acquire knowledge of the world; for there is spread out what is condensed within the human being’s point-like “I.” Knowledge of the world is self-knowledge.

[ 22 ] If you bring to mind exactly what is described in the essays “From the Akashic Records” regarding the evolution of the Earth—which may seem entirely foreign to the soul—and how this ultimately and inevitably leads to today’s configuration, then you will gain self-knowledge through knowledge of the world! In this way, self-knowledge leads us farther and farther out of ourselves, always toward the impersonal. Just as the aura becomes brighter and more luminous through the application of karma in life, so too does it become more powerful through the true understanding of cosmic interrelationships, enabling it to generate impulses that are inherently free from within itself. Here you arrive at the solution to the question of freedom and bondage. For freedom is a product of development, and the more one attains self-knowledge, the more one attains freedom. Then, through such an exercise in self-knowledge in the sense described, one comes to grasp various aspects of the field of spiritual science in the correct sense and to empathize with the anthroposophical spiritual current. Various issues persist as “teething problems” in the anthroposophical movement that must be eliminated, especially once such things have been understood as they were intended—as instructions for self-knowledge. The impersonal nature of anthroposophical knowledge will be recognized more and more clearly. After all, it has been attained through the work of researchers who have not only transformed their souls into instruments of self-knowledge but have also developed them—as was just described today—and who have thus come to describe, in an impersonal way, what the higher worlds reveal. A fundamental principle to be grasped is the old, beautiful principle of the Greek sage: Whoever wishes to arrive at the truth must not attach importance to his own opinion. — Therefore, you will find that those who are truly experienced in the paths of spiritual science say: Yes, I cannot offer opinions; I can provide descriptions of experiences, not regulatory principles, no postulates for action, and such descriptions should flow into the theory of spiritual science as teachings. - The spiritual scientist must unlearn opinions and fixed viewpoints. He has no fixed viewpoint, because all perspectives are like images that arise from different viewpoints and are as varied as the people who view the world from the most diverse angles. From one angle comes the image of the materialistic perspective; from other angles, a spiritual, a mechanistic, or a vitalistic perspective. These are all perspectives. To not only recognize them theoretically, but to live with a worldview such that all perspectives appear as images seen from different sides—that is the inner tolerance at stake here. Opinions should not be pitted against one another. Then inner tolerance arises, and from this, the outer tolerance we need if humanity is to move toward its salvation in the future.

[ 23 ] Special emphasis must also be placed on the understanding that the ideas flowing through the anthroposophical world movement are a product of the impersonal. This will lead us to eliminate one thing from the anthroposophical movement—in the sense that it existed in earlier times and still exists today: authority in the negative sense. Do we call the microscope an authority? It is a necessity, a point of passage. In the same way, human beings must also become a point of passage, but we must rise to the impersonal, because only through human beings can what is meant to come into the world actually come. Belief in authority must be struck from the anthroposophical lexicon, and that is precisely why people who internalize this insight attain a state of impartiality, so that through the personal they enter into the impersonal course of the world.