Donate books to help fund our work. Learn more→

The Rudolf Steiner Archive

a project of Steiner Online Library, a public charity

Karma of Untruthfulness I
GA 173c

30 January 1917, Dornach

Lecture XXV

Today it seems appropriate to mention certain thoughts on the meaning and nature of our spiritual Movement—anthroposophical spiritual science, as we call it. To do so will necessitate references to some events which have occurred over a period of time and which have contributed to the preparation and unfolding of this Movement. If, in the course of these remarks, one or another of them should seem somewhat more personal—it would, at any rate, only seem to be so—this will not be for personal reasons but because what is more personal can be a starting point for something more objective. The need for a spiritual movement which makes known to people the deeper sources of existence, especially human existence, can be easily recognized by the way in which today's civilization has developed along lines which are becoming increasingly absurd. No one, after serious thought, will describe today's events as anything other than an absurd exaggeration of what has been living in more recent evolution.

From what you have come to know in spiritual science, you will have gained the feeling that everything, even what is apparently only external, has its foundation in the thoughts of human beings. Deeds which are done, events which take place in material life—all these are the consequence of what human beings think and imagine. And the view of the external world, which is gaining ground among human beings today, gives us an indication of some very inadequate thought forces. I have already put into words the fact that events have grown beyond human beings, have got out of hand, because their thinking has become attenuated and is no longer strong enough to govern reality. Concepts such as that of maya, the external semblance which governs the things of the physical plane, ought to be taken far more seriously by those familiar with them than they, in fact, often are. They ought to be profoundly imprinted on current consciousness as a whole. This alone might lead to the healing of the damage which—with a certain amount of justification—has come upon mankind. Those who strive to understand the functioning of man's deeds—that is, the way the reflections of man's thoughts function—will recognize the inner need for a comprehension of the human soul which can be brought about by stronger, more realistic thoughts.

In fact, our whole Movement is founded on the task of giving human souls thoughts more appropriate to reality, thoughts more immersed in reality, than are the abstract concept patterns of today. It cannot be pointed out often enough how very much mankind today is in love with the abstract, having no desire to realize that shadowy concepts cannot, in reality, make any impact on the fabric of existence. This has been most clearly expressed in the fourteen-, fifteen-year history of our Anthroposophical Movement. Now it is becoming all the more important for our friends to take into themselves what specifically belongs to this Anthroposophical Movement. You know how often people stressed that they would so much like to give the beautiful word ‘theosophy’ the honour it deserves, and how much they resisted having to give it up as the key word of the Movement. But you also know the situation which made this necessary.

It is good to be thoroughly aware in one's soul about this. You know—indeed, many of you shared—the goodwill with which we linked our work with that of the Theosophical Movement in the way it had been founded by Blavatsky, and how this then continued with Besant's and Sinnett's efforts, and so on. It is indeed not unnecessary for our members, in face of all the ill-meant misrepresentations heaped upon us from outside, to persist in pointing out that our Anthroposophical Movement had an independent starting-point and that what now exists has grown out of the seeds of those lectures I gave in Berlin which were later published in the book on the mysticism of the Middle Ages. We must stress ever and again that in connection with this book it was the Theosophical Movement who approached us, not vice versa. This Theosophical Movement, in whose wake it was our destiny to ride during those early years, was not without its connections to other occult streams of the nineteenth century, and in lectures given here I have pointed to these connections. But we should look at what is characteristic for that Movement.

If I were asked to point factually to one rather characteristic feature, I would choose one I have mentioned a number of times, which is connected with the period when I was writing in the journal Lucifer-Gnosis what was later given the title Cosmic Memory. A representative of the Theosophical Society, who read this, asked me by what method these things were garnered from the spiritual world. Further conversation made it obvious that he wanted to know what more-or-less mediumistic methods were used for this. Members of those circles find it impossible to imagine any method other than that of people with mediumistic gifts, who lower their consciousness and write down what comes from the subconscious.

What underlies this attitude? Even though he is a very competent and exceptionally cultured representative of the Theosophical Movement, the man who spoke to me on this was incapable of imagining that it is possible to investigate such things in full consciousness. Many members of that Movement had the same problem because they shared something which is present to the highest degree in today's spiritual life, namely, a certain mistrust in the individual's capacity for knowledge. People do not trust the inherent capacity for knowledge, they do not believe that the individual can have the strength to penetrate truly to the essential core of things. They consider that the human capacity for knowledge is limited; they find that intellectual understanding gets in the way if one wants to penetrate to the core of things and that it is therefore better to damp it down and push forward to the core of things without bringing it into play. This is indeed what mediums do; for them, to mistrust human understanding is a basic impulse. They endeavour, purely experimentally, to let the spirit speak while excluding active understanding.

It can be said that this mood was particularly prevalent in the Theosophical Movement as it existed at the beginning of the century. It could be felt when one tried to penetrate certain things, certain opinions and views, which had come to live in the Theosophical Movement. You know that in the nineties of the nineteenth century and subsequently in the twentieth century, Mrs Besant played an important part in the Theosophical Movement. Her opinion counted. Her lectures formed the centrepiece of theosophical work both in London and in India. And yet it was strange to hear what people around Mrs Besant said about her. I noticed this strongly as early as 1902. In many ways, especially among the scholarly men around her, she was regarded as a quite unacademic woman. Yet, while on the one hand people stressed how unacademic she was, on the other hand they regarded the partly mediumistic method she was famous for, untrammelled as it was by scientific ideas, as a channel for achieving knowledge. I could say that these people did not themselves have the courage to aim for knowledge. Neither had they any confidence in Mrs Besant's waking consciousness. But because she had not been made fully awake as a result of any scientific training, they saw her to some extent as a means by which knowledge from the spiritual world could be brought into the physical world. This attitude was extraordinarily prevalent among those immediately surrounding her. People spoke about her at the beginning of the twentieth century as if she were some kind of modern sibyl. Those closest to her formed derogatory opinions about her academic aptitude and maintained that she had no critical ability to judge her inner experiences. This was certainly the mood around her, though it was carefully hidden—I will not say kept secret—from the wider circle of theosophical leaders.

In addition to what came to light in a sibylline way through Mrs Besant, and through Blavatsky's The Secret Doctrine, the Theosophical Movement at the end of the nineteenth century also had Sinnett's book or, rather, books. The manner in which people spoke about these in private was, equally, hardly an appeal to man's own power of knowledge. Much was made in private about the fact that in what Sinnett had published there was nothing which he had contributed out of his own experience. The value of a book such as his Esoteric Buddhism was seen to lie particularly in the fact that the whole of the content had come to him in the form of ‘magical letters’, precipitated—no one knew whence—into the physical plane—one could almost say, thrown down to the physical plane—which he then worked into the book Esoteric Buddhism.

All these things led to a mood among the wider circles of the theosophical leaders which was sentimental and devotional in the highest degree. They looked up, in a way, to a wisdom which had fallen from heaven, and—humanly, quite understandable—this devotion was transferred to individual personalities. However, this became the incentive for a high level of insincerity which was easy to discern in a number of phenomena.

Thus, for instance, even in 1902 I heard in the more private gatherings in London that Sinnett was, in fact, an inferior spirit. One of the leading personalities said to me at that time: Sinnett could be compared with a journalist—say, of the Frankfurter Zeitung—who has been dispatched to India; he is a journalistic spirit who simply had the good fortune to receive the ‘Master's letters’ and make use of them in his book in a journalistic way which is in keeping with modern mankind!

You know, though, that all this is only one aspect of a wide spectrum of literature. For in the final decades of the nineteenth century and the first decades of the twentieth, there appeared—if not a Biblical deluge, then certainly a flood of—written material which was intended to lead mankind in one way or another to the spiritual world. Some of this material harked back directly to ancient traditions which have been preserved by all kinds of secret brotherhoods. It is most interesting to follow the development of this tradition.

I have often pointed out how, in the second half of the eighteenth century, old traditions could be found in the circle led by Saint-Martin, the philosophe inconnu. In Saint-Martin's writings, especially Des erreurs et de la vérité, there is a very great deal of what came from ancient traditions, clothed in a more recent form. If we follow these traditions further back, we do indeed come to ideas which can conquer concrete situations, which can influence reality. By the time they had come down to Saint-Martin, these concepts had already become exceedingly shadowy, but they were nevertheless shadows of concepts which had once been very much alive; ancient traditions were living one last time in a shadowy form. So in Saint-Martin's work we find the healthiest concepts clothed in a form which is a final glimmer. It is particularly interesting to see how Saint-Martin fights against the concept of matter, which had already come to the fore. What did this concept of matter gradually become? It became a view in which the world is seen as a fog made up of atoms moving about and bumping into one another and forming configurations which are at the root of all things taking shape around us. In theory materialism reached its zenith at the point when the existence of everything except the atom was denied. Saint-Martin still maintained the view that the whole science of atoms, and indeed the whole belief that matter was something real, was nonsense; which indeed it is. If we delve into all that is around us, chemically, physically, we come in the final analysis not to atoms, not to anything material, but to spiritual beings. The concept of matter is an aid; but it corresponds to nothing that is real. Wherever—to use a phrase coined by du Bois-Reymond—‘matter floats about in space like a ghost’: there may be found the spirit. The only way to speak of an atom is to speak of a little thrust of spirit, albeit ahrimanic spirit. It was a healthy idea of Saint-Martin to do battle against the concept of matter.

Another immensely healthy idea of Saint-Martin was the living way in which he pointed to the fact that all separate, concrete human languages are founded on a single universal language. This was easier to do in his day than it is now, because in his time there was still a more living relationship to the Hebrew language which, among all modern languages, is the one closest to the archetypal universal language. It was still possible to feel at that time the way in which spirit flowed through the Hebrew language, giving the very words something genuinely ideal and spiritual. So we find in Saint-Martin's work an indication, concrete and spiritual, of the meaning of the word ‘the Hebrew’. In the whole way he conceived of this we find a living consciousness of a relationship of the human being with the spiritual world. This word ‘the Hebrew’ is connected with ‘to journey’. A Hebrew is one who makes a journey through life, one who gathers experiences as on a journey. Standing in the world in a living way—this is the foundation of this word and of all other words in the Hebrew language if they are sensed in their reality.

However, in his own time Saint-Martin was no longer able to find ideas which could point more precisely, more strongly, to what belonged to the archetypal language. These will have to be rediscovered by spiritual science. But he had before his soul a profound notion of what the archetypal language had been. Because of this his concept of the unity of the human race was more concrete and less abstract than that which the nineteenth century made for itself. This concrete concept of the unity of the human race made it possible for him, at least within his own circle, to bring fully to life certain spiritual truths, for instance, the truth that the human being, if only he so desires, really can enter into a relationship with spiritual beings of higher hierarchies. It is one of his cardinal principles, which states that every human being is capable of entering into a relationship with spiritual beings of higher hierarchies. Because of this there still lived in him something of that ancient, genuine mystic mood which knew that knowledge, if it is to be true knowledge, cannot be absorbed in a conceptual form only, but must be absorbed in a particular mood of soul—that is after a certain preparation of the soul. Then it becomes part of the soul's spiritual life.

Hand in hand with this, however, went a certain sum of expectations, of evolutionary expectations directed to those human souls who desired to claim a right to participate in some way in evolution. From this point of view it is most interesting to see how Saint-Martin makes the transition from what he has won through knowledge, through science—which is spiritual in his case—to politics, how he arrives at political concepts. For here he states a precise requirement, saying that every ruler ought to be a kind of Melchizedek, a kind of priest-king.

Just imagine if this requirement, put forward in a relatively small circle before the outbreak of the French Revolution, had been a dawn instead of a dusk; just imagine if this idea—that those whose concepts and forces were to influence human destiny must fundamentally have the characteristics of a Melchizedek—had been absorbed, even partially, into the consciousness of the time, how much would have been different in the nineteenth century! For the nineteenth century was, in truth, as distant as it could possibly be from this concept. The demand that politicians should first undertake to study at the school of Melchizedek would, of course, have been dismissed with a shrug.

Saint-Martin has to be pointed out because he bears within him something which is a last glimmer of the wisdom that has come down from ancient times. It has had to die away because mankind in the future must ascend to spirituat life in a new way. Mankind must ascend in a new way because a merely traditional continuation of old ideas never has been in keeping with the germinating forces of the human soul. These underdeveloped forces of the human soul will tend, during the course of the twentieth century, in a considerable number of individuals—this has been said often enough—to lead to true insight into etheric processes. The first third of the twentieth century can be seen as a critical period during which a goodly number of human beings ought to be made aware of the fact that events must be observed in the etheric world which lives all around us, just as much as does the air. We have pointed emphatically to one particular event which must be seen in the etheric world if mankind is not to fall into decadence, and that is the appearance of the Etheric Christ. This is a necessity. Mankind must definitely prepare not to let wither those forces which are already sprouting.

These forces must not be allowed to wither for, if they did, what would happen? In the forties and fifties of the twentieth century the human soul would assume exceedingly odd characteristics in the widest circles. Concepts would arise in the human soul which would have an oppressive effect. If materialism were the only thing to continue, concepts which exist in the human soul would arise, but they would rise up out of the unconscious in a way which people would not understand. A waking nightmare, a kind of general state of neurasthenia, would afflict a huge number of people. They would find themselves having to think things without understanding why they were thinking them.

The only antidote to this is to plant, in human souls, concepts which stem from spiritual science. Without these, the forces of insight into those concepts which will rise up, into those ideas which will make their appearance, will be paralysed. Then, not the Christ alone, but also other phenomena in the etheric world, which human beings ought to see, will withdraw from man, will go past unnoticed. Not only will this be a great loss, but human beings will also have to develop pathological substitute forces for those which ought to have developed in a healthy way.

It was out of an instinctive need in wide circles of mankind that the endeavours arose which expressed themselves in that flood of literature and written material mentioned earlier. Now, because of a peculiar phenomenon, the Anthroposophical Movement of Central Europe was in a peculiar position relative to the Theosophical Movement—particularly to the Theosophical Society—as well as to that other flood of written material about spiritual matters. Because of the evolutionary situation in the nineteenth century and at the beginning of the twentieth century, it was possible for a great number of people to find spiritual nourishment in all this literature; and it was also possible for a great number of people to be utterly astounded by what came to light through Sinnett and Blavatsky. However, all this was not quite in harmony with Central European consciousness. Those who are familiar with Central European literature are in no doubt that it is not necessarily possible to live in the element of this Central European literature while at the same time taking up the attitude of so many others to that flood. This is because Central European literature encompasses immeasurably much of what the seeker for the spirit longs for—only it is hidden behind the peculiar language which so many people would rather have nothing to do with.

We have often spoken about one of those spirits who prove that spiritual life works and weaves in artistic literature, in belletristic literature: Novalis. For more prosaic moods we might equally well have mentioned Friedrich Schlegel, who wrote about the wisdom of ancient India in a way which did not merely reproduce that wisdom but brought it to a fresh birth out of the western cultural spirit. There is much we could have pointed to that has nothing to do with that flood of written material, but which I have sketched historically in my book Vom Menschenrätsel. People like Steffens, like Schubert, like Troxler, wrote about all these things far more precisely and at a much more modern level than anything found in that flood of literature which welled up during the last decades of the nineteenth century and the beginning of the twentieth century. You have to admit that, compared with the profundity of Goethe, Schlegel, Schelling, those things which are held to be so marvellously wise are nothing more than trivia, utter trivia. Someone who has absorbed the spirit of Goethe can regard even a work like such as Light on the Path as no more than commonplace. This ought not to be forgotten. To those who have absorbed the inspiration of Novalis or Friedrich Schlegel, or enjoyed Schelling's Bruno, all this theosophical literature can seem no more than vulgar and ordinary. Hence the peculiar phenomenon that there were many people who had the earnest, honest desire to reach a spiritual life but who, because of their mental make-up were, in the end, to some degree satisfied with the superficial literature described.

On the other hand, the nineteenth century had developed in such a way that those who were scientifically educated had become—for reasons I have often discussed—materialistic thinkers about whom nothing could be done. However, in order to work one's way competently through what came to light at the turn of the eighteenth to the nineteenth century through Schelling, Schlegel, Fichte, one does need at least some scientific concepts. There is no way of proceeding without them. The consequence was this peculiar phenomenon: It was not possible to bring about a situation—which would have been desirable—in which a number of scientifically educated people, however small, could have worked out their scientific concepts in such a way that they could have made a bridge to spiritual science. No such people were to be found. This is a difficulty that still exists and of which we must be very much aware.

Supposing we were to approach those who have undergone a scientific education, with the intention of introducing them to Anthroposophy: lawyers, doctors, philologists—not to mention theologians—when they have finished their academic education and reached a certain stage in life at which it is necessary for them, in accordance with life's demands, to make use of what they have absorbed, not to say, have learnt. They then no longer have either the inclination or the mobility to extricate themselves from their concepts and to seek for others. That is why scientifically-educated people are the most inclined to reject Anthroposophy, although it would only be a small step for a modern scientist to build a bridge. But he does not want to do so. It confuses him. What does he need it for? He has learnt what life demands of him and, so he believes, he does not want things which only serve to confuse him and undermine his confidence. It is going to take some considerable time before these people who have gone through the education of their day start to build bridges in any great numbers. We shall have to be patient. It will not come about easily, especially in certain fields. And when the building of bridges is seriously tackled in a particular field, great obstacles and hindrances will be encountered. It will be necessary above all to build bridges in the fields encompassed by the various faculties, with the exception of theology.

In the field of law the concepts being worked out are becoming more and more stereotyped and quite unsuitable for the regulation of real life. But they do regulate it because life on the physical plane is maya; if it were not maya, they would be incapable of regulating it. As it is, their application is bringing more and more confusion into the world. The application of today's jurisprudence, especially in civil law, does nothing but bring confusion into the situation. But this is not clearly seen. Indeed, how should it be seen? No one follows up the consequences of applying stereotyped concepts to reality. People study law, they become solicitors or judges, they absorb the concepts and apply them. What happens as a consequence of their application is of no interest. Or life is seen as it is—despite the existence of the law, which is a very difficult subject to study for many reasons, not least because law students tend to waste the first few terms—life is seen as it is; we see that everything is in a muddle and do no more than complain.

In the field of medicine the situation is more serious. If medicine continues to develop in the wake of materialism as it has been doing since the second third of the nineteenth century, it will eventually reach an utterly nonsensical situation, for it will end up in absurd medical specializations. The situation is more serious here because this tendency was, in fact, necessary and a good thing. But now it is time for it to be overcome. The materialistic tendency in medicine meant that surgery has reached a high degree of specialization, which was only possible because of this one-sided tendency. But medicine as such has suffered as a result. So now it needs to turn around completely and look towards a real spirituality—but the resistance to this is enormous.

Education is the field which, more than any other, needs to be permeated with spirituality, as we have said often enough. Bridges need to be built everywhere.

In technology—although it may appear to be furthest away from the spirit—it is above all necessary that bridges should be built to the life of the spirit, out of direct practical life. The fifth post-Atlantean period is the one which is concerned with the development of the material world, and if the human being is not to degenerate totally into a mere accomplice of machines—which would make him into nothing more than an animal—then a path must be found which leads from these very machines to the life of the spirit. The priority for those working practically with machines is that they take spiritual impulses into their own soul. This will come about the moment students of technology are taught to think just a little more than is the case at present; the moment they are taught to think in such a way that they see the connections between the different things they learn. As yet they are unable to do this. They attend lectures on mathematics, on descriptive geometry, even on topology sometimes; on pure mechanics, analytical mechanics, industrial mechanics, and also all the various more practical subjects. But it does not even occur to them to look for a connection between all these different things. As soon as people are obliged to apply their own common sense to things, they will be forced—simply on account of the stage of development these various subjects have reached—to push forward into the nature of these things and then on into the spiritual realm. From machines, in particular, a path will truly have to be found into the spiritual world.

I am saying all this in order to point out what difficulties today face the spiritual-scientific Movement, because so far there are no individuals to be found who might be capable of generating an atmosphere of taking things seriously. This Movement suffers most of all from a lack of being taken seriously. It is remarkable how this comes to the fore in all kinds of details. Much of what we have published would have been taken seriously, would have been seen in quite a different light, if it had not been made known that it stemmed from someone belonging to the Theosophical Movement. Simply because the person concerned was in the Theosophical Movement, his work was stamped as something not to be taken seriously. It is most important to realize this, and it is just these trifling details which make it plain. Not out of any foolish vanity but just so that you know what I mean, let me give you an example of one of these trifles which I came across only the other day.

In my book Vom Menschenrätsel I wrote about Karl Christian Planck as one of those spirits who, out of certain inner foundations, worked towards the spiritual realm, even though only in an abstract way. I have not only written about him in this book, but also—over the past few winters—spoken about him in some detail in a number of cities, showing how he went unrecognized, or was misunderstood, and referring especially to ane particular circumstance. This was the fact that, in the eighties, seventies, sixties, fifties, this man had ideas and thoughts in connection with industrial and social life which ought to have been put into practice. If only there had been someone at that time with the capacity of employing in social life the great ideas this man had, ideas truly compatible with reality, then—and I am not exaggerating—mankind would probably not now be suffering all that is going on today which, for the greater part, is a consequence of the totally wrong social structure in which we are living.

I have told you that it is a real duty not to let human beings come to a pass such as that reached by Karl Christian Planck, who finally came to be utterly devoid of any love for the world of external physical reality. He was a Swabian living in Stuttgart. He was refused a place in the philosophy department of Tübingen University, where he would have had the opportunity to put forward some of his ideas. I entirely intentionally mentioned the fact that, when he wrote the foreword to his book Testament of a German, he felt moved to say, ‘Not even my bones shall rest in the soil of my ungrateful fatherland’. Hard words. Words such as people today can be driven to utter when faced with the stupidity of their fellow human beings, who refuse to see the point about what is really compatible with reality. In Stuttgart I purposely quoted these words about his bones, for Stuttgart is Planck's fatherland in the narrower sense. There was little reaction, despite the fact that events had already reached a stage when there would have been every reason to understand the things he had said.

Now, however, a year-and-a-half later, the following notice may be found in the Swabian newspapers:

‘Karl Christian Planck. More than one far-seeing spirit foretold the present World War. But none anticipated its scale nor understood its causes and effects as clearly as did our Swabian countryman Planck.’

I said in my lecture that Karl Christian Planck had foreseen the present World War, and that he even expressly stated that Italy would not be on the side of the Central Powers, even though he was speaking at the time when the alliance had not yet been concluded, but was only in the making.

‘To him this war seemed to be the unavoidable goal toward which political and economic developments had been inexorably moving for the last fifty years.’

This is indeed the case!

‘Just as he revealed the damage being done in his day, so he also pointed the way which can lead us to other situations.’

This is the important point. But nobody listened!

‘By him we are told the deeper reasons underlying war profiteering and other black marks which mar so many good and pleasing aspects of the life of the nation today. He knows where the deeper, more inward forces of the nation lie and can tell us how to release them so that the moral and social renewal longed for by the best amongst us can come about. Despite all the painful disappointments meted out to him by his contemporaries, he continued to believe in these forces and their triumphant emergence.’

Nevertheless, he was driven to utter the words I have quoted!

‘The news will therefore be widely welcomed that the philosopher's daughter is about to give an introduction to Planck's social and political thinking in a number of public lectures.’

It is interesting that a year-and-a-half later his daughter should be putting in an appearance. This notice appeared in a Stuttgart newspaper. But a year-and-a-half ago, when I drew attention as plainly as possible in Stuttgart to the the philosopher Karl Christian Planck, no one took the slightest notice, and no one felt moved to make known what I had said. Now his daughter puts in an appearance. Her father died in 1880, and presumably she had been born by then. Yet she has waited all this time before standing up for him by giving public lectures.

This example could be multiplied not tenfold, but a hundredfold. It shows once again how difficult it is to bring together the all-embracing aspect of spiritual science with everyday practical details, despite the fact that it is absolutely essential that this should be done. Only through the all-embracing nature of spiritual science—this must be understood—can healing come about for what lives in the culture of today.

That is why it has been essential to keep steering what we call anthroposophical spiritual science, in whatever way possible, along the more serious channels which have been increasingly deserted by the Theosophical Movement. The spirit that was even known to the ancient Greek philosophers had to be allowed to come through, although this has led to the opinion that what is written in consequence is difficult to read. It has often not been easy. Especially within the Movement it met with the greatest difficulties. And one of the greatest difficulties has been the fact that it really has taken well over a decade to overcome one fundamental abstraction. Laborious and patient work has been necessary to overcome this fundamental abstraction which has been one of the most damaging things for our Movement. This basic abstraction consisted simply in the insistence on clinging to the word ‘theosophy’, regardless of whether whatever was said to be ‘theosophical’ referred to something filled with the spirituality of modern life, or to no more than some rubbish published by Rohm or anyone else. Anything ‘theosophical’ had equal justification, for this prompted ‘theosophical tolerance’.

Only very gradually has it been possible to work against these things. They could not be pointed out directly at the beginning, because that would have seemed arrogant. Only gradually has it been possible to awaken a feeling for the fact that differences do exist, and that tolerance used in this connection is nothing more than an expression of a total lack of character on which to base judgements. What matters now is to work towards knowledge of a kind which can cope with reality, which can tackle the demands of reality. Only a spiritual science that works with the concepts of our time can tackle the demands of reality. Not living in comfortable theosophical ideas but wrestling for spiritual reality—this must be the direction of our endeavour.

Some people still have no idea what is meant by wrestling for reality, for they are fighting shy of understanding clearly how threadbare are the concepts with which they work today. Let me give you a small example, from a seemingly unrelated subject, of what it means to wrestle for reality in concepts. I shall be brief, so please be patient while I explain something that might seem rather far-fetched.

There were always isolated individuals in the nineteenth century who were prepared to take up the question of reality. For reality was then supposed to burst in on mankind with entirely fresh ideas about life, not only the unimportant aspects but especially the basic practical aspects of life. Thus at a certain point in the nineteenth century Euclid's postulate of parallels was challenged. When are two lines parallel? Who could have failed to agree that two lines are parallel if they never meet, however long they are! For that is the definition: That two straight lines are parallel if they never meet, whatever the distance to which they are extended. In the nineteenth century there were individuals who devoted their whole life to achieving clarity about this concept, for it does not stand up to exact thinking. In order to show you what it means to wrestle for concepts, let me read you a letter written by Wolfgang Bolyai. The mathematician Gauss had begun to realize that the definition of two straight lines being parallel if they meet at infinity, or not at all, was no more than empty words and meant nothing. The older Bolyai, the father, was a friend and pupil of Gauss, who also stimulated the younger Bolyai, the son. And the father wrote to the son:

‘Do not look for the parallels in that direction. I have trodden that path to its end; I have traversed bottomless night in which every light, every joy of my life has been extinguished. By God I implore you to leave the postulate of the parallels alone! Shun it as you would a dissolute association, for it can rob you of all your leisure, your health, your peace of mind and every pleasure in life. It will never grow light on earth and the unfortunate human race will never gain anything perfectly pure, not even geometry itself. In my soul there is a deep and eternal wound. May God save you from being eaten away by another such. It robs me of my delight in geometry, and indeed of life on earth. I had resolved to sacrifice myself for the truth. I would have been prepared for martyrdom if only I could have handed geometry back to mankind purified of this blemish. I have accomplished awful, gigantic works, have achieved far more than ever before, but never found total satisfaction. Si paullum a summo discessit, vergit ad imum. When I saw that the foundation of this night cannot be reached from the earth I returned, comfortless, sorrowing for my self and the human race. Learn from my example. Desiring to know the parallels, I have remained without knowledge. And they have robbed me of all the flowers of my life and time. They have become the root of all my subsequent failures, and much rain has fallen on them from our lowering domestic clouds. If I could have discovered the parallels I would have become an angel, even if none had ever known of my discovery.

... Do not attempt it ... It is a labyrinth that forever blocks your path. If you enter you will grow poor, like a treasure hunter, and your ignorance will not cease. Should you arrive at whatever absurd discovery, it will be for naught, untenable as an axiom ...

... The pillars of Hercules are situated in this region. Go not a step further, or you will be lost.’

Nevertheless, the younger Bolyai did go further, even more so than his father, and devoted his whole life to the search for a concrete concept in a field where such a concept seemed to exist, but which was, however, empty words. He wanted to discover whether there really was such a thing as two straight lines which did not meet, even in infinity. No one has ever paced out this infinite distance, for that would take an infinite time, but this time has not yet run its course. It is nothing more than words. Such empty words, such conceptual shadows, are to be found behind all kinds of concepts. I simply wanted to point out to you how even the most thorough spirits of the nineteenth century suffered because of the abstractness of these concepts! It is interesting to see that while children are taught in every school that parallel lines are those which never meet, however long they are, there have been individual spirits for whom working with such concepts became a hell, because they were seeking to push through to a real concept instead of a stereotyped concept.

Wrestling with reality—this is what matters, yet this is the very thing our contemporaries shun, more or less, because they ‘realize’, or imagine they realize, that they have ‘high ideals’! It is not ideals that matter, but impulses which work with reality. Imagine someone were to make a beautiful statement such as: At long last a time must come when those who are most capable are accorded the consideration due to them. What a lovely programme! Whole societies could be established in accordance with this programme. Even political sciences could be founded on this basis. But it is not the statement that counts. What counts is the degree to which it is permeated by reality. For what is the use—however valid the statement, and however many societies choose it for the prime point in their programmes—if those in power happen to see only their nephews as being the most capable? It is not a matter of establishing the validity of the statement that the most capable should be given their due. The important thing is to have the capacity to find those who are the most capable, whether they are one's nephews or not! We must learn to understand that abstract concepts always fall through the cracks of life, and that they never mean anything, and that all our time is wasted on all these beautiful concepts. I have no objection to their beauty, but what matters is our grasp and knowledge of reality.

Suppose the lion were to found a social order for the animals, dividing up the kingdom of the earth in a just way. What would he do? I do not believe it would occur to him to push for a situation in which the small animals of the desert, usually eaten by the lion, would have the possibility of not being eaten by the lion! He would consider it his lion's right to eat the small animals he meets in the desert. It is conceivable, though, that for the ocean he would find it just and proper to forbid the sharks to eat the little fishes. This might very well happen. The lion might establish a tremendously just social order in the oceans, at the North Pole or wherever else he himself is not at home, giving all the animals their freedom. But whether he would be pleased to establish such an order in his own region is a question indeed. He knows very well what justice is in the social order, and he will put it into practice efficiently in the kingdom of the sharks.

Let us now turn from lions to Hungaricus. I told you two days ago about his small pamphlet Conditions de Paix de l'Allemagne. This pamphlet swims entirely with the stream of that map of Europe which was first mentioned in the famous note from the Entente to Wilson about the partition of Austria. We have spoken about it. With the exception of Switzerland, Hungaricus is quite satisfied with this map. He begins by talking very wisely—just as most people today talk very wisely—about the rights of nations, even the rights of small nations, and about the right of the state to be coincident with the power of the nation, and so on. This is all very nice, in the same way that the statement, about the most capable being given his due, is nice. As long as the concepts remain shadowy we can, if we are idealists, be delighted when we read Hungaricus. For the Swiss, the pamphlet is even nicer than the map, for rather than wiping Switzerland off the map, Hungaricus adds the Vorarlberg and the Tyrol. So I recommend the Swiss to read the pamphlet rather than look at the map. But now Hungaricus proceeds to divide up the rest of the world. In his own way he accords to every nation, even the smallest, the absolute right to develop freely—as long as he considers he is not causing offence to the Entente. He trims his words a little, of course, saying ‘independence’ when referring to Bohemia, and obviously ‘autonomy’ with regard to Ireland. Well, this is the done thing, is it not! It is quite acceptable to dress things up a little. He divides up the world of Europe quite nicely, so that apart from the things I have mentioned—which are to avoid causing offence—he really endeavours to apportion the smallest nations to those states to which the representatives of the Entente believe they belong. It is not so much a question of whether these small territories are really inhabited by those nationalities, but of whether the Entente actually believes this to be the case. He makes every effort to divide up the world nicely, with the exception of the desert—oh, pardon me—with the exception of Hungary, which is where he practises his lion's right! Perfect freedom is laid down for the kingdom of the sharks. But the Magyar nation is his nation, and this is to comprise not only what it comprises today—though without it only a minority of the population would be Magyar, the majority being others—but other territories as well. Here he well and truly acts the part of the lion.

Here we see how concepts are formulated nowadays and how people think nowadays. It gives us an opportunity to study how urgent it is to find the transition to a thinking which is permeated with reality. For this, concepts such as those I have been giving you are necessary. I want to show you—indeed, I must show you—how spiritual thinking leads to ideas which are compatible with reality. One must always combine the correct thought with the object; then one can recognize whether that object corresponds to reality or not.

Take Wilson's note to the Senate. As a sample it could even have certain effects in some respects. But this is not what matters. What matters is that it contains ‘shadowy concepts’. If it nevertheless has an effect, this is due to the vexatious nature of our time which can be influenced by vexatious means. Look at this matter objectively and try to form a concept against which you can measure the reality, the real content with which this shadowy concept could be linked. You need only ask one question: Could this note not just as well have been written in 1913? The idealistic nothings it contains could just as easily have been expressed in 1913! You see, a thinking which believes in the absolute is not based on reality. It is unrealistic to think that something ‘absolute’ will result every time. The present age has no talent for seeing through the lack of reality in thinking because it is always out for what is ‘right’ rather than for what is in keeping with reality.

That is why in my book Vom Menschenrätsel I emphasized so heavily the importance not only of what is logical but also of what is in keeping with reality. A single decision that took account of the facts as they are at this precise moment would be worth more than all the empty phrases put together. Historical documents are perhaps the best means of showing that what I am saying has to do with reality, for as time has gone on the only people to come to the surface are those who want to rule the world with abstractions, and this is what has led to the plight of the world today. Proper thinking, which takes account of things as they are, will discover the realities wherever they are. Indeed, they are so close at hand! Take the real concept which I introduced from another point of view the other day: Out of what later became Italy in the South there arose the priestly cultic element which created as its opposition the Protestantism of Central Europe; from the West was formed the diplomatic, political element which also created an opposition for itself; and from the North-west was formed the mercantile element which again created for itself an opposition; and in Central Europe an opposition coming out of the general, human element will of necessity arise. Let us look once more at the way these things stream outwards. (See diagram.)

Even for the fourth post-Atlantean period—proceeding on from the old fourfold classification in which one spoke of castes—we can begin to describe this structure in a somewhat different way: Plato spoke of ‘guardian-rulers’; this is the realm for which Rome—priestly, papal Rome—seized the monopoly, achieving a situation in which she alone was allowed to establish doctrinal truths. She was to be the only source of all doctrine, even the highest.

In a different realm, the political, diplomatic element is nothing other than Plato's ‘guardian-auxiliaries’. I have shown you that, regardless of what people call Prussian militarism, the real military element was formed with France as its starting point, after the first foundations had been laid in Switzerland. That is where the military element began, but of course it created an opposition for itself by withholding from others what it considered to be its own prerogative. It wants to dominate the world in a soldierly way, so that when something soldierly comes to meet it from elsewhere it finds this quite unjustified, just as Rome finds it unjustified if something comes towards her which is to do with the great truths of the universe.

And here, instead of mercantilism, we might just as well write ‘the industrial and agricultural class’. Think on this, meditate on it, and you will come to understand that this third factor corresponds to the provision of material needs. So what is being withheld? Foodstuffs, of course!

If you apply Plato's concepts appropriately, in accordance with reality, then you will find reality everywhere, for with these concepts you will be able fully to enter into reality. Starting from the concept, you must find the way to reality, and the concept will be able to plunge down into the most concrete parts of reality. Shadowy concepts, on the other hand, never find reality, but they do lend themselves exceptionally well to idealistic chatter. With real concepts, though, you can work you way through to an understanding of reality in every detail. Here lies the task of spiritual science. Spiritual science leads to concepts through which you can really discover life, which of course is created by the spirit, and through which you will be able to join in a constructive way at working on the formation of this life.

One concept, in particular, requires realistic thinking, owing to the terrible destiny at present weighing down on mankind, for the corresponding unreal concept is especially persistent in this connection. Those who speak in the most unrealistic way of all, these days, are the clergymen. What they express about Christianity or the awareness of God, apropos of the war, is enough to send anyone up the wall, as they say. They distort things so frightfully. Of course things in other connections are distorted too, but in this realm the degree of absurdity is even greater.

Look at the sermons or tracts at present stemming from that source; apply your good common sense to them. Of course it is understandable that they should ask: Does mankind have to be subjected to this terrible, painful destiny? Could not the divine forces of God intervene on behalf of mankind to bring about salvation? The justification for speaking in this way does indeed seem absolute. But there is no real concept behind it. It does not apply to the reality of the situation. Let me use a comparison to show you what I mean.

Human beings have a certain physical constitution. They take in food which is of a kind which enables them to go on living. If they were to refuse food, they would grow thin, become ill, and finally starve to death. Now is it natural to complain that if human beings refuse to eat it is a weakness or malevolence on the part of God to let them starve? Indeed it is not a weakness on the part of God. He created the food; human beings only need to eat it. The wisdom of God is revealed in the way the food maintains the human beings. If they refuse to eat it, they cannot turn round and accuse God of letting them starve.

Now apply this to what I was saying. Mankind must regard spiritual life as a food. It is given by the gods, but it has to be taken in by man. To say that the gods ought to intervene directly is tantamount to saying that if I refuse to eat God ought to satisfy my hunger in some other way. The wisdom-filled order of the universe ensures that what is needed for salvation is always available, but it is up to human beings to make a relationship with it. So the spiritual life necessary for the twentieth century will not enter human beings of itself. They must strive for it and take it into themselves. If they fail to take it in, times will grow more and more dismal. What takes place on the surface is only maya. What is happening inwardly, is that an older age is wrestling with a new one. The general, human element is rising up everywhere in opposition to the specialized elements. It is maya to believe that nation is fighting against nation—and I have spoken about this maya in other connections too. The battle of nation with nation only comes about because things group themselves in certain ways but, in reality, the inward forces opposing one another are something quite different. The opposition is between the old and the new. The laws now fighting to come into play are quite different from those which have traditionally ruled over the world.

And again it was maya—that is, something appearing under a false guise—to say that those other laws were rising up on behalf of socialism. Socialism is not something connected with truth; above all it is not connected with spiritual life, for what it wants is to connect itself with materialism. What really wants to wrestle its way into existence is the many-sided, harmonious element of mankind, in opposition to the one-sided priestly, political or mercantile elements. This battle will rage for a long time, but it can be conducted in all kinds of different ways. If a healthy way of leading life, such as that described by Planck in the nineteenth century, had been adopted, then the bloody conduct of the first third of the twentieth century would, at least, have been ameliorated. Idealisms do not lead to amelioration, but realistic thinking does, and realistic thinking also always means spiritual thinking.

Equally, we can say that whatever has to happen will happen. Whatever it is that is wrestling its way out, must needs go through all these experiences in order to reach a stage at which spirituality can be united with the soul, so that man can grow up spiritually. Today's tragic destiny of mankind is that in striving upwards today, human beings are endeavouring to do so not under the sign of spirituality but under the sign of materialism. This in the first instance is what brought them into conflict with those brotherhoods who want to develop the impulses of the mercantile element, commerce and industry, in a materialistic way on a grand scale. This is today's main conflict. All other things are side issues, often terrible side issues. This shows us how terrible maya can be. But it is possible to strive for things in different ways. If others had been in power instead of the agents of those brotherhoods, then we would, today, be busy with peace negotiations, and the Christmas call for peace would not have been shouted down!

It is going to be immensely difficult to find clear and realistic concepts and ideas in respect of certain things; but we must all seek to find them in our own areas. Those who enter a little into the meaning of spiritual science, and compare this spiritual science with other things making an appearance just now, will see that this spiritual science is the only path that can lead to concepts which are filled with reality.


I wanted to say this very seriously to you at this time. Despite the fact that the task of spiritual science can only be comprehended out of the spirit itself, out of knowledge, and not out of what we have been discussing today, I wanted to show you the significance, the essential nature, of spiritual science for the present time. I wanted to show you how urgent it is for everything possible to be done to make spiritual science more widely known. It is so necessary in these difficult times for us to take spiritual science not only into our heads but really into our warm hearts. Only if we take it into the warmth of our hearts will we be capable of generating the strength needed by the present time.

None of us should allow ourselves to think that we are perhaps not in a suitable position, or not strong enough, to do what it is essential for us to do. Karma is sure to give every one of us, whatever our position, the opportunity to put the right questions to destiny at the right moment. Even if this right moment is neither today nor tomorrow, it is sure to come eventually. So once we have understood the impulses of this spiritual Movement we must stand firmly and steadfastly behind them. Today it is particularly necessary to set ourselves the aim of firmness and steadfastness. For either something important must come from one side or another—although this cannot be counted upon—in the very near future, or all conditions of life will become increasingly difficult. It would be utterly thoughtless to refuse to be clear about this. For two-and-a-half years it has been possible for what we now call war to carry on, while conditions remained as bearable as they now are. But this cannot go on for another year. Movements such as ours will be put te a severe test. There will be no question of asking when we shall next meet, or why do we not meet, or why this or that is not being published. No, indeed. It will be a question of bearing in our hearts, even through long periods of danger, a steadfast sense of belonging.

I wanted to say this to you today because it could be possible in the not too distant future that there will be no means of transport which will enable us to come together again; I am not speaking only of travel permits but of actual means of transport. In the long run, it will not be possible to keep the things going which constitute our modern civilization, if something breaks in on this civilization which, although it has arisen out of it, is nevertheless in absolute opposition to it. This is how absurd the situation is: Life itself is bringing forth things which are absolutely opposed to it.

So we must accept that difficult times may be in store for our Movement too. But we shall not be led astray if we have taken into ourselves the inner steadfastness, clarity and right feeling for the importance and nature of our Movement, and if in these serious times we can see beyond our petty differences. This, our Movement ought to be able to achieve; we ought to be able to look beyond our petty differences to the greater affairs of mankind, which are now at stake. The greatest of these is to reach an understanding of what it means to base thinking on reality. Wherever we look we are confronted with the impossibility of finding a thinking which accords with reality. We shall have to enter heart and soul into this search in order not to be led astray by all kinds of egoistic distractions.

This is what I wanted to say to you as my farewell today, since we are about to take leave of one another for some time. Make yourselves so strong—even if it should turn out to be unnecessary—that, even in loneliness of soul, your hearts will carry the pulse of spiritual science with which we are here concerned. Even the thought that we shall be steadfast will help a very great deal; for thoughts are realities. Many potential difficulties can still be swept away if we maintain an honest, serious quest in the direction we have here discussed so often.

Now that we have to depart for a while we shall not allow ourselves to flag, but shall make sure that we return if it is possible. But even if it should take a long time as a result of circumstances outside our control, we shall never lose the thought from our hearts and souls that this is the place—where our Movement has even brought forth a visible building—where the most intense requirement exists to bear this Movement so positively, so concretely, so energetically, that together we can carry it through, come what may. So wherever we are, let us stand together in thought, faithfully, energetically, cordially, and let us hear one another, even though this will not be possible with our physical ears. But we shall only hear one another if we listen with strong thoughts and without sentimentality, for the times are now unsuitable for sentimentality.

In this sense, I say farewell to you. My words are also a greeting, for in the days to come we shall meet again, though more in the spirit than on the physical plane. Let us hope that the latter, too, will be possible once more in the not too distant future.

Fünfundzwanzigster Vortrag

Es scheint mir richtig zu sein, heute einiges an Gedanken vorzubringen über die Bedeutung und das Wesen unserer geistigen Bewegung, der anthroposophisch orientierten Geisteswissenschaft, wie wir sagen. Nun wird es notwendig sein, anzuknüpfen an die eine oder die andere Erscheinung, die im Laufe der Zeit aufgetreten ist, in welcher sich diese Bewegung teils vorbereitet, teils entfaltet hat. Wenn dabei — was ja auch nur scheinbar sein soll — die eine oder die andere Bemerkung persönlicher Art fällt, so geschieht das nicht aus persönlichen Gründen, sondern darum, weil ja das Persönliche der Haltepunkt gleichsam sein soll für das, was sich objektiv ausspricht. Daß in einer geistigen Bewegung, welche gewissermaßen die Menschheit tiefer mit den Quellen des Seins, namentlich des menschlichen Seins selber bekanntmacht, eine gewisse Notwendigkeit liegt, dürfte ja einfach daraus für jeden ersichtlich sein, daß die Kultur der Gegenwart, wie sie sich entwickelt hat, in einer gewissen Weise sich eigentlich ad absurdum geführt hat. Denn es wird ja doch bei tieferem Nachdenken niemandem beifallen können, die Ereignisse, wie sie sich heute abspielen, als etwas anderes zu bezeichnen denn als eine Art Ad-absurdum-Führen desjenigen, was an Impulsen in der neueren Entwickelung gelebt hat.

Nun werden Sie aus dem, was Ihnen bekanntgeworden ist in der Geisteswissenschaft, wohl erfühlt haben, wie alles dasjenige, was sich auch scheinbar noch so äußerlich abspielt, zuletzt auf den Vorstellungen, auf den Gedanken der Menschen beruht. Was an Taten geschieht, was sich im materiellen Leben abwickelt, es ist ja durchaus, man kann sagen, ein Ergebnis desjenigen, was die Menschen vorstellen. Und die Anschauung der äußeren Welt, wie sie sich innerhalb der Menschheit heute gestaltet, gibt wohl ein Bild, das auf unzulängliche Gedankenkräfte ganz stark hinweist. Ich habe schon einmal das Wort gebraucht: Die Ereignisse sind eigentlich den Menschen über den Kopf gewachsen, weil das Denken dünn geworden ist und nicht mehr ausreicht, in die Wirklichkeit einzugreifen. Worte, wie das von der Maja, von dem äußeren Scheine, dem die Dinge auf dem physischen Plane unterliegen, die müßten viel ernster genommen werden von denjenigen, die sie schon kennen, als sie oftmals genommen werden. Und sie müßten sich tief, tief einprägen in das gesamte Zeitbewußtsein. Darinnen kann allein die Heilung von den Schäden liegen, die mit einer gewissen Notwendigkeit über die Menschen heraufgezogen sind. Wer versucht, verständig in das Triebwerk der Taten, also in das Triebwerk der Abbilder der Gedanken heute hineinzublicken, der wird schon die Notwendigkeit, die innere Notwendigkeit eines Erfassens der menschlichen Seele durch kräftigere, wirklichkeitsfreundlichere Gedanken erkennen.

Nun, im Grunde liegt unserer ganzen Bewegung dies zugrunde, den Menschenseelen wirklichkeitsfreundlichere Gedanken zu geben, von Wirklichkeit mehr durchtränkte Gedanken, als die abstrakten Begriffsschablonen der Gegenwart sind. Aber man kann nicht oft genug hinweisen darauf, wie sehr die Menschheit heute das Abstrakte liebt und gar kein Bewußtsein entwickeln will, daß das begreiflich Schattenhafte nicht wirklich in das Gewebe des Seins eingreifen kann. Das drückte sich ja insbesondere in der vierzehn-, fünfzehnjährigen Geschichte unserer anthroposophischen Bewegung aus. Es wird immer mehr notwendig sein, daß sich unsere Freunde durchdringen mit dem Spezifischen, was gerade diese anthroposophische Bewegung hatte. Sie wissen ja, wie oft betont worden ist, daß man es gern gehabt hätte, das schöne Wort «Theosophie» vollständig zu Ehren zu bringen, daß man sich lange gewehrt hat, dieses Wort als Kennwort der Bewegung aufzugeben. Aber Sie kennen ja auch alle die Verhältnisse, durch die dieses notwendig geworden ist. Und es ist schon gut, die Sache sich möglichst genau vor die Seele zu führen. Sie wissen ja, daß mit allem guten Willen — denn dieser gute Wille war ja in vielen von Ihnen selbst verankert - angeknüpft worden ist an die sogenannte ’Theosophische Bewegung, wie sie begründet worden ist durch die Blavatsky, wie sie dann ihre Fortsetzung gefunden hat in den Sinnettschen, Besantschen Bestrebungen und so weiter. Es ist wirklich nicht unnötig, daß gerade den vielen böswilligen Entstellungen gegenüber, die von auswärts kommen, unsere Mitglieder immer wieder betonen, daß die anthroposophisch gewordene Bewegung von einem selbständigen Zentrum ausgegangen ist, daß zunächst das, was wir jetzt haben, wirklich seine Keime hatte in den Vorträgen, die von mir in Berlin gehalten worden sind und die dann in der Schrift über die Mystik des Mittelalters niedergelegt sind. Und es muß immer wieder betont werden, daß durch diese Schrift die damals bestehende theosophische Bewegung sich uns, nicht wir ihr, genähert hat. Diese theosophische Bewegung nun, in deren Fahrwasser man die ersten Jahre zu sein hatte, sie steht ja, stand ja nicht ohne Zusammenhang mit andern okkulten Bestrebungen des 19. Jahrhunderts, und ich habe ja in Vorträgen, die hier gehalten worden sind, auf diesen Zusammenhang hingewiesen. Aber man muß auf das Charakteristische dieser Bewegung selbst sehen.

Wenn ich ein recht charakteristisches Merkmal, ich möchte sagen tatsachengemäß, hervorheben soll, so muß es dasjenige sein, auf das ich oftmals oder wenigstens öfters angespielt habe, als ich in der Zeitschrift «Lucifer-Gnosis» zunächst dasjenige veröffentlichte, was dann den Titel bekommen hat «Aus der Akasha-Chronik». Einer der Vertreter der Theosophischen Gesellschaft, der dieses las, fragte, auf welchem Wege die Dinge eigentlich aus der geistigen Welt herausgeholt werden. Und aus dem weiteren Gespräche mit ihm war es sehr ersichtlich, daß es sich darum handelte, zu erfahren, auf welchem mehr oder weniger medialen Wege diese Dinge gewonnen werden. Man konnte sich dort gar nicht denken, daß durch andere Mittel als dadurch, daß irgendein Mensch von medialer Veranlagung, der sein Bewußtsein herabgestimmt erhält und dann etwas aus der Unterbewußtheit heraus vorbringt, was dann aufgezeichnet wird, daß anders als auf diesem Wege diese Dinge zustande kommen. Was liegt denn da eigentlich zugrunde? Dem Manne, der so sprach, lag es völlig fern, sich vorzustellen, daß diese Dinge untersucht werden können bei völliger Aufrechterhaltung des wachen Bewußtseins, trotzdem er ein sehr geschulter und außerordentlich gebildeter Vertreter der theosophischen Bewegung ist. Es lag das vielen Mitgliedern dieser Bewegung aus dem Grunde fern, weil eben diesen vielen etwas eigen ist, was im modernen Geistesleben überhaupt im höchsten Maße vorhanden ist: ein gewisses Mißtrauen in die Eigenkraft des menschlichen Erkenntnisvermögens. Man traut dem menschlichen Erkenntnisvermögen nicht zu, daß es die Kraft in sich aufbringen könne, in das Innere der Dinge wirklich einzudringen. Man findet, das menschliche Erkenntnisvermögen sei doch begrenzt, eigentlich störe der Verstand nur - so findet man -—, wenn man mit ihm in das Wesen der Dinge eindringen will; daher muß man ihn abdämpfen. Man müsse, ohne daß der menschliche Verstand dabei tätig ist, in das Wesen der Dinge eindringen. — Beim Medium ist das ja der Fall, da wird das Mißtrauen in den menschlichen Verstand zu einem maßgebenden Impuls gemacht. Da wird wirklich mit Ausschluß der verständigen Erkenntnistätigkeit rein experimentell versucht, den Geist sprechen zu lassen.

Man kann sagen, daß in einer gewissen Art diese Stimmung die theosophische Bewegung, wie sie auch noch im Anfange unseres Jahrhunderts war, gar sehr durchsetzt hatte; diese Stimmung war da vielfach zu Hause. Und man konnte diese Stimmung empfinden, wenn man mit Einsicht gewisse Dinge verfolgte, die sich als Meinungen, als Anschauungen, als Ansichten in der theosophischen Bewegung abgesetzt hatten. Sie wissen ja, daß in den neunziger Jahren des 19. Jahrhunderts und dann im 20. Jahrhundert Mrs. Besant eine große Rolle spielte in der theosophischen Bewegung. Auf dasjenige, was sie zu sagen hatte, hörte man. Ihre Vorträge standen im Mittelpunkte des theosophischen Wirkens in London und auch in Indien. Dennoch war es merkwürdig, die Persönlichkeiten aus der Umgebung von Mrs. Besant über Mrs. Besant sprechen zu hören. 1902 trat mir das schon sehr bedeutsam entgegen. Mrs. Besant galt in vieler Beziehung, namentlich den gelehrten Männern ihrer Umgebung, als eine durchaus ungelehrte Frau; aber während man auf der einen Seite das stark betonte, daß man es mit einer ungelehrten Frau zu tun hat, sah man doch auf der andern Seite in der, ich möchte sagen, nicht durch wissenschaftliche Vorstellungen getrübten, halb medialen Art des Wirkens, die man bei ihr rühmte, ein Hilfsmittel, zu Erkenntnissen zu kommen. Ich möchte sagen, die Leute trauten sich nicht zu, selbst zu Erkenntnissen zu kommen. Sie trauten natürlich auch dem wachen Bewußtsein von Mrs. Besant nicht zu, zu Erkenntnissen zu kommen. Aber weil sie nicht zur völligen Wachheit gekommen war durch eine wissenschaftliche Durchbildung, so betrachtete man sie gewissermaßen als ein Mittel, durch welches Kundgebungen aus der geistigen Welt ins Physische hereinkommen können. Das war doch bei der nächsten Umgebung außerordentlich ausgebildet. Und man kann schon sagen: Die Art, wie gesprochen wurde, die machte den Eindruck, als ob man Mrs. Besant am Anfang des 20. Jahrhunderts ansah wie eine Art moderner Sibylle. Man konnte nach dieser Richtung gerade bei der nächsten Umgebung abfällige Urteile über die wissenschaftliche Begabung von Mrs. Besant hören, man konnte hören, wie man ihr gar keine Kritik über ihre inneren Erlebnisse zutraute. Das war durchaus die Stimmung, die ja natürlich sorgfältig verborgengehalten wurde - ich will nicht sagen, geheimgehalten wurde — vor dem größeren Kreise der theosophischen Leiter.

Außer diesem, was da durch das Sibyllenhafte von Mrs. Besant zutage trat, war ja Ende des 19. Jahrhunderts neben der «Geheimlehre» der Blavatsky insbesondere eine Art Bibel der theosophischen Bewegung das Buch von Sinnett, vielleicht besser gesagt die Bücher von Sinnett. Nun, wie man erst über die Bücher von Sinnett reden hörte im engeren Kreise, das war ebensowenig etwas, was man nennen könnte einen Appell an die eigene Erkenntniskraft des Menschen. Denn man legte einen großen Wert darauf im engsten Kreise, daß Sinnett ja nicht zu dem, was er veröffentlicht hat, irgend etwas aus seinen eigenen Erfahrungen hinzugebracht hat. Man sah den Wert eines solchen Buches wie des «Esoterischen Buddhismus» von Sinnett gerade darinnen, daß der Inhalt ganz und gar zustande gekommen ist durch «magische Briefe», durch Briefe, welche präzipitiert waren, die also von unbekannt woher in den physischen Plan hereingeschickt worden waren, man kann sagen, geworfen worden waren, und deren Inhalt dann einfach zu diesem Buche «Esoterischer Buddhismus» verarbeitet wurde.

Durch alle diese Dinge war zwar in den weiteren Kreisen der theosophischen Leiter eine Stimmung vorhanden, die sentimental-anbetend im höchsten Grade war. Man sah gewissermaßen zu einer Weisheit hinauf, die vom Himmel gefallen war, und übertrug, wie das ja menschlich begreiflich ist, die Verehrung auf Persönlichkeiten. Aber es lag darinnen der Antrieb zu einer starken Unaufrichtigkeit, die in den einzelnen Erscheinungen sehr gut verfolgt werden konnte.

So konnte ich zum Beispiel schon 1902 hören, wie in den engsten Kreisen in London davon gesprochen wurde, daß Sinnett eigentlich ein untergeordneter Geist sei. Es sagte mir dazumal eine der führenden Persönlichkeiten: Ja, der Sinnett, man kann ihn vergleichen mit einem Journalisten etwa der «Frankfurter Zeitung», nach Indien versetzt, ein journalistischer Geist, der einfach das Glück gehabt hat, die Meisterbriefe zu empfangen und sie journalistisch in einer Weise, wie es für die Menschheit der neueren Zeit ansprechend ist, in dem Buche «Esoterischer Buddhismus» zu verwerten! — Sie wissen aber auch, daß all dieses doch in einer breiten Literatur drinnen stand, in einem breiten Schrifttum. Denn es ist ja wirklich, ich will nicht sagen eine Sündf£lut, aber eine Flut von Schriften erschienen in den letzten Jahrzehnten des 19. Jahrhunderts und in den ersten Jahrzehnten des 20. Jahrhunderts, welche bestimmt waren, irgendwie die Menschen hinzuführen zur spirituellen Welt. Unter diesen Schriften waren solche, die in unmittelbarer Anknüpfung standen an alte Traditionen, wie sie sich bewahrt haben in den verschiedensten okkulten Brüderschaften. Es ist im Grunde genommen interessant, die Entwickelung dieser Traditionen zu verfolgen.

Ich habe öfter schon darauf hingewiesen, wie in der zweiten Hälfte des 18. Jahrhunderts in dem Kreise, dessen Führer Saint-Martin, der «Unbekannte Philosoph» war, sich in entsprechender Weise alte Traditionen ausgelebt haben. Und wenn man die Schriften, namentlich «Wahrheit und Irrtümer» von Saint-Martin heute sich vornimmt, so findet man darinnen doch sehr, sehr viel von einer letzten Gestalt, die alte okkulte Traditionen angenommen haben. Verfolgt man diese Traditionen weiter zurück, dann gelangt man durchaus noch zu Vorstellungen, welche das Konkrete beherrschen, welche eingreifen in die Wirklichkeiten. Bei Saint-Martin sind die Begriffe schon sehr schattenhaft geworden, aber es sind doch die Schatten von Begriffen, die einstmals voll lebendig waren, es lebten eben zum letzten Mal in schattenhafter Weise alte Traditionen auf. Und so findet man bei Saint-Martin die gesündesten Begriffe, aber in einer Form, die ein letztes Aufflackern ist. Da ist es ja insbesondere interessant, zu sehen, wie Saint-Martin kämpft gegen den damals schon aufgekommenen Begriff der Materie. Wozu ist denn dieser Begriff der Materie nach und nach geworden? Dazu ist er geworden, daß man die ganze Welt ansieht als einen Nebel von Atomen, die in irgendeiner Weise sich bewegen und stoßen, und die durch ihre Konfiguration all das hervorrufen, was als Welt um den Menschen herum sich ausbildet. Theoretisch hat ja der eigentliche Materialismus seinen Höhepunkt dadurch erfahren, daß man dann alles übrige geleugnet hat außer dieser Atomwelt. Saint-Martin stand noch auf dem Standpunkt, daß die ganze Atomistik, überhaupt der Glaube, daß Materie etwas Wirkliches sei, ein Unsinn ist, wie es ja auch tatsächlich der Fall ist. Wenn man den Dingen zu Leibe geht, die uns umgeben chemisch, physisch, so kommt man zuletzt nicht auf Atome, nicht auf Materielles, sondern auf geistige Wesenkeiten. Der Begriff der Materie ist ein Hilfsbegriff; er entspricht nichts Wirklichem. Denn da, wo, um diesen Ausdruck Da Bois-Reymonds zu gebrauchen, «Materie im Raume spukt», da ist wirklich Geist vorhanden, und wenn man von einem Atom reden will, so könnte man höchstens so von dem Atom reden, daß es ein kleiner Stoß des Geistes ist, allerdings Ahrimans. Das war ein gesunder Begriff von Saint-Martin, sein Bekämpfen des Begriffes der Materie.

Ebenso war ein ungeheuer gesunder Begriff bei Saint-Martin, daß er noch hinwies in lebendiger Art auf die Tatsache, daß menschlichen, konkreten, einzelnen Sprachen eine Universalsprache zugrunde liegt. Und das konnte man in der damaligen Zeit aus dem Grunde besser als später, weil man derjenigen Sprache, welche unter den gegenwärtigen am ehesten nahesteht der ursprünglichen Universalsprache, der hebräischen Sprache, noch lebendiger gegenüberstand, weil man noch in den Worten der hebräischen Sprache etwas vom Fließen des Geistes und dadurch in den Worten selber etwas Geistig-Ideelles, etwas wirklich Geistiges verspüren konnte. Bei Saint-Martin finden Sie daher noch den konkret-spirituellen Hinweis auf das, was das Wort «Hebräer» selber bedeutet. Und in der ganzen Art und Weise, wie er das auffaßt, sieht man, wie noch das lebendige Bewußtsein vorhanden war von einer Beziehung des Menschen zur geistigen Welt. Denn das Wort «Hebräer» hängt zusammen mit «reisen»: wer ein Hebräer ist, ist derjenige, der eine Lebensreise macht, der auf einer Reise erfährt, erlebt. Dieses lebendige Drinnenstehen in der Welt liegt in diesem Wort, liegt aber allen andern Worten der hebräischen Sprache zugrunde, wenn sie real erfühlt werden.

Nun konnte jaSaint-Martin zu seiner Zeit nicht mehr Vorstellungen finden — diese müssen erst wiederum durch Geisteswissenschaft gewonnen werden -, welche präziser, stärker auf das Ursprachliche hinweisen. Aber als eine Ahnung stand die Ursprache vor seiner Seele. Damit aber hatte er nicht einen so abstrakten Begriff von der Einheitlichkeit des Menschengeschlechtes, wie ihn dann das 19. Jahrhundert ausbildete, sondern er hatte einen konkreten Begriff davon. Dieser konkrete Begriff von der Einheitlichkeit des Menschengeschlechtes führte ihn aber auch dahin, gewisse geistige Wahrheiten wenigstens in seinem Kreise noch voll lebendig zu machen, zum Beispiel die Wahrheit, daß der Mensch, wenn er nur will, wirklich mit geistigen Wesen höherer Hierarchien in Beziehungen treten kann. Das ist ein Kardinalsatz bei Saint-Martin, daß jeder Mensch mit geistigen Wesenheiten höherer Hierarchien in Beziehungen treten kann. Aber dadurch lebte in ihm gewissermaßen etwas noch von jener alten, echten mystischen Stimmung, welche wußte, daß das Wissen nicht bloß in Begriffen aufgenommen werden kann, wenn es wirkliches Wissen sein soll, sondern in einer gewissen Seelenverfassung aufgenommen werden muß, das heißt nach einer gewissen Vorbereitung der Seele. Dann wird es zum spirituellen Leben der Seele. Damit aber war verknüpft eine gewisse Summe von Forderungen, von Evolutionsforderungen an die menschlichen Seelen, die überhaupt Anspruch machen wollten, an der Evolution irgendwie teilzunehmen. Und von diesem Gesichtspunkte aus ist es so interessant, wenn dann Saint-Martin überleitet dasjenige, was er aus dem Erkennen, aus der Wissenschaft heraus — die aber spirituell bei ihm ist — gewinnt, zur Politik, wenn er also zu den politischen Begriffen kommt. Denn da hat er ja die präzise Forderung: Jeder Regierende müsse eine Art Melchisedek sein, eine Art Priesterregent.

Und denken Sie sich, wenn diese Forderung, die geltend gemacht worden ist in verhältnsmäßig kleinem Kreise, bevor die Französische Revolution hereinbrach, wenn diese Forderung nicht Abendröte, sondern Morgenröte geworden wäre, wenn etwas davon ins Zeitbewußtsein übergegangen wäre von dem melchisedekartigen Grundcharakter derjenigen, die mit ihren Vorstellungen und Kräften einzugreifen haben in die menschlichen Geschicke, was alles anders hätte werden müssen im 19. Jahrhundert, als es geworden ist! Denn das 19. Jahrhundert stand wahrhaftig dann so fern als möglich dieser Auffassung, die eben charakterisiert worden ist. Man hätte ja die Anforderung, daß Politiker durch die Schule Melchisedeks durchzugehen haben, selbstverständlich nur mit einem Lächeln abgefertigt.

Man muß auf Saint-Martin hinweisen, weil in ihm etwas vorliegt wie eben ein letztes Abglimmen der Weisheiten, die sich heraufentwickelt haben aus dem fernen Altertum. Das mußte ja auch abglimmen, denn die Menschheit der Zukunft muß auf andere Art zu dem spirituellen Leben aufsteigen. Sie muß auf andere Art aufsteigen, weil niemals das bloße Bewahren, das bloße traditionelle Fortpflanzen der alten Vorstellungen den keimenden Kräften der menschlichen Seele entsprochen hätte. Diese noch unentwickelten Kräfte der menschlichen Seele, sie tendieren ja darauf hin, daß im Laufe des 20. Jahrhunderts noch bei einer größeren Anzahl von Menschen — das ist oft betont worden — wirklich ein Hineinsehen in die ätherischen Vorgänge stattfindet. Und man kann den Ablauf des ersten Drittels des 20. Jahrhunderts geradezu als die kritische Zeit bezeichnen, wo eine größere Anzahl von Menschen aufmerksam darauf werden müssen, wie im Äther, der ebenso wie die Luft in unserer Umgebung lebt, die Ereignisse geschaut werden müssen. Wir haben ja insbesondere scharf auf ein Ereignis hingewiesen, das im Äther zu schauen sein muß, wenn die Menschheit nicht in die Dekadenz verfallen will: wir haben auf das Schauen des ätherischen Christus hingewiesen. Diese Notwendigkeit muß eintreten. Und die Menschheit muß sich darauf vorbereiten, diese Kräfte, die schon keimen, wirklich nicht abdorren zu lassen. Die Kräfte dürfen nicht abdorren, denn setzen wir einmal den Fall, die Kräfte sollten abdorren, was würde denn dann geschehen? Dann würde in den vierziger, fünfziger Jahren des 20. Jahrhunderts das menschliche Gemüt in weitesten Kreisen ganz absonderliche Formen annehmen. Es würden im Gemüte Begriffe aufsteigen, die wie beklemmend wirken würden. Würde nur der Materialismus sich fortpflanzen, so würden solche Begriffe aufsteigen, die zwar da wären im menschlichen Gemüte, die aber durchaus aus dem Unterbewußtsein neraufsteigen, und bei denen man den Grund nicht kennt, warum man sie eigentlich hat. Ein Alpdrücken während des Wachens würde als eine allgemeine neurasthenische Erscheinung bei einer großen Anzahl von Menschen auftreten. Die Menschen würden sich sagen: Ja, da muß ich das denken, aber ich weiß nicht warum; da muß ich jenes denken, ich weiß nicht warum.

Dem kann nur entgegengearbeitet werden dadurch, daß in den menschlichen Gemütern Begriffe eingepflanzt werden, die aus der geistigen Wissenschaft kommen. Sonst werden die Kräfte der Einsicht in die Begriffe, die aufsteigen, in die Ideen, die kommen, erlahmen. Und nicht nur der Christus, sondern auch andere Erscheinungen des ätherischen Geschehens, die der Mensch sehen müßte, werden sich dem Menschen entziehen, werden an ihm vorbeigehen. Er wird aber nicht nur einen Verlust dadurch haben, sondern er wird die Kräfte entwikkeln müssen, welche krankhafte Ersatzkräfte für diejenigen sind, die sich als gesunde entwickeln sollten.

Aus einem instinktiven Bedürfnis weiterer Menschheitskreise ging das Bestreben hervor, das sich eben dann ausdrückte in der Flut von Literatur und Schrifttum, von der ich gesprochen habe. Nun, sehen Sie, sowohl demjenigen, was in der eigentlichen theosophischen Bewegung, namentlich in der Theosophical Society zutage trat, wie auch der andern Flut von allerlei zum Spirituellen hinarbeitenden Schriften, stand man mit der mitteleuropäischen anthroposophischen Bewegung eigentümlich gegenüber, weil eine eigentümliche Erscheinung vorlag. Es war möglich durch die Evolutionsbedingungen des 19. und beginnenden 20. Jahrhunderts, daß eine große Anzahl von Menschen geistige Nahrung fand in der Literatur, die also zutage trat, es war möglich, daß eine große Anzahl von Menschen auch furchtbar anstaunte dasjenige, was durch Sinnett und die Blavatsky zutage getreten ist. Aber mit dem mitteleuropäischen Bewußtsein stimmte das nicht ganz gut zusammen. Denn für denjenigen, der die mitteleuropäische Literatur kennt, gibt es gar keinen Zweifel, daß man zum Beispiel nicht ohne weiteres im Fahrwasser dieser mitteleuropäischen Literatur stehen und sich ganz gleich wie viele andere zu dem verhalten kann, was da als eine Flut heraufkam, einfach, weil die mitteleuropäische Literatur unendlich vieles in sich hat — nur durch eine eigentümliche Sprache, auf die sich viele Menschen nicht einlassen wollen, verborgen -, was die spirituell Suchenden haben wollen.

Wir haben ja öfters von einem der Geister gesprochen, die so recht ein Beweis sein können, wie einfach in der künstlerischen Literatur, in der schöngeistigen Literatur das spirituelle Leben waltet und webt: Novalis. Wir hätten ebensogut, wenn wir für prosaischere Stimmungen hätten sorgen wollen, Friedrich Schlegel anführen können, der über die Weisheit der Inder so geschrieben hat, wie eben jemand schreibt, der nicht nur die Weisheit der Inder wiedergibt, sondern der sie aus dem westlichen Geiste heraus wiedergebiert. Wir hätten auf vieles verweisen können, was mit der Flut, von der ich gesprochen habe, nichts zu tun hat und was dann, ich möchte sagen, historisch im Abrisse von mir charakterisiert worden ist in meinem Buche «Vom Menschenrätsel». Bei Leuten wie Steffens, wie Schubert, wie Troxler findet man ja alles vielfach präziser, viel mehr auf moderner Höhe stehend vor als in der Flut von Literatur, die da plötzlich in den letzten Jahrzehnten des 19. und im Beginne des 20. Jahrhunderts hereingebrochen ist. Man muß sagen, gegenüber der Tiefe, die in Goethe, Schlegel, Schelling liegt, sind wahrhaftig die Dinge, die angestaunt wurden als hohe Weisheit, trivial, richtig trivial. Denn schließlich gilt es ja doch, daß für jemanden, der den Geist Goethes in sich aufgenommen hat, selbst so etwas wie «Licht auf den Weg» etwas Triviales ist. Ich meine, dieses soll man nicht vergessen. Wer den hohen Schwung von Novalis oder Friedrich Schlegel aufgenommen hat, oder sich erfreut hat an Schellings «Bruno», für den gilt diese ganze theosophische Literatur, wie sie aufgetreten ist, dennoch nur als etwas Vulgär-Triviales. Daher stand man vor der eigentümlichen Erscheinung, daß viele Menschen da waren, welche den ernsten, aufrichtigen Willen hatten, zum spirituellen Leben hinzukommen, die aber schließlich durch ihre geistige Artung eine gewisse Befriedigung finden konnten gerade an der charakterisierten TrivialLiteratur.

Und auf der andern Seite hatte die Entwickelung des 19. Jahrhunderts allmählich den Charakter angenommen, daß die wissenschaftlich gebildeten Leute aus Gründen, die ich oft erörtert habe, materialistische Denker geworden waren, mit denen nichts anzufangen war. Will man aber so recht feststehend das verarbeiten, was um die Wende des 18. zum 19. Jahrhundert durch Schelling, Schlegel, Fichte und andere zutage getreten ist, dann braucht man schon wenigstens einige wissenschaftliche Begriffe. Man kann ohne die nicht auskommen. Daher stand man vor einer sehr eigentümlichen Erscheinung. Es war nicht möglich, zur rechten Zeit etwas herbeizuführen, was hätte wünschenswert erscheinen können, nämlich, daß eine Anzahl, wenn auch eine kleine Anzahl von wissenschaftlich gebildeten Persönlichkeiten in die Lage gekommen wäre, ihre wissenschaftlichen Begriffe so auszubilden, daß sie den Anschluß gefunden hätten an die spirituelle Wissenschaft. Diese Leute waren überhaupt gar nicht zu finden, die waren gar nicht da. Das ist ja überhaupt eine Schwierigkeit, die vorliegt, und diese Schwierigkeit muß man sich klar vor Augen führen.

Nehmen Sie an, man wende sich mit der Anthroposophie an die durch die heutige wissenschaftliche Bildung Gegangenen. Nun, wenn die Leute durch die wissenschaftliche Bildung gegangen sind, Juristen, Mediziner, Philologen geworden sind — von den Theologen gar nicht zu reden -, dann sind sie bei einem bestimmten Lebensalter angekommen, das es notwendig macht, dasjenige, was sie, ich will nicht sagen gelernt haben, aber was sie aufgenommen haben, nun auch wirklich im Leben zu verwerten, so wie das Leben es verlangt. Dann haben sie nicht mehr die Neigung und nicht mehr die Elastizität, aus ihren Begriffen sich herauszuarbeiten nach irgend etwas anderem hin. Und daher, gerade wenn man sich an wissenschaftlich gebildete Menschen wendet mit der Anthroposophie, wird man am allermeisten zurückgestoßen, trotzdem es nur ein weniges bedürfte für den heutigen Wissenschafter, die Brücke zu schlagen. Aber er will diese Brücke nicht schlagen. Es beirrt ihn, Wozu braucht er das? Er hat das gelernt, was das Leben von ihm fordert, und etwas anderes will er nicht haben, weil es ihn beirrt, weil es ihn unsicher macht, wie er glaubt. Und deshalb wird es schon noch einige Zeit dauern, bis Männer, die die Bildung ihrer Zeit - so wie man das definiert - in sich aufgenommen haben, die Brücke schlagen, wenigstens eine größere Anzahl von Männern. Da muß man durchaus Geduld haben. Das wird sich nicht so leicht machen lassen, insbesondere auf gewissen Gebieten nicht. Bevor aber auf gewissen Gebieten ernsthaftig in Angriff genommen wird dieses Brückenschlagen, werden immer große Hindernisse und Hemmungen eintreten. Vor allen Dingen wird es notwendig sein, auf den Gebieten, die heute den Umkreis der verschiedenen Fakultäten darstellen, mit Ausnahme der Theologie, diese Brücke zu schlagen.

Die Jurisprudenz arbeitet sich immer mehr und mehr hinaus zu bloßen Begriffsschablonen, die ganz und gar ungeeignet sind, das Leben zu beherrschen. Sie beherrschen trotzdem das Leben, weil das Leben auf dem physischen Plane Maja ist — wäre es nicht Maja, so könnten sie es nicht beherrschen -, aber indem sie angewendet werden, bringen sie die Welt immer mehr und mehr durcheinander. Es ist eigentlich die Anwendung der gegenwärtigen Jurisprudenz, namentlich im Zivilrecht, ein bloßes Durcheinanderbringen der Verhältnisse. Man sieht das nur nicht klar. Wie sollte man es auch sehen? Man verfolgt ja nicht dasjenige, was entsteht aus der Anwendung der juristischen Schablonenbegriffe auf die Wirklichkeit, sondern man studiert Jurisprudenz, das heißt, man wird Advokat oder Richter, man nimmt die Begriffe auf und wendet sie an. Was aus der Anwendung wird, das kümmert einen nicht weiter. Oder aber man sieht, wie das Leben ist, trotzdem es eine Jurisprudenz gibt, die sehr schwer zu lernen ist, nicht nur aus dem Grunde schwer zu lernen ist, weil gerade die Juristen gewöhnlich die ersten Semester verbummeln, sondern auch aus andern Gründen schwer zu lernen ist. Man sieht dieses Leben, und sieht, daß es verworren wird und schimpft höchstens.

In der Medizin, da liegt die Sache ja ernster. Die Medizin wird sich wirklich, wenn sie sich so weiterentwickelt im materialistischen Fahrwasser, wie sie seit dem zweiten Drittel des 19. Jahrhunderts sich anläßt, völlig ad absurdum führen; sie wird schließlich in absoluten medizinischen Spezialismus auslaufen. Aber da liegen die Dinge doch insofern ernster, als es notwendig war, daß diese Strömung heraufkam, denn diese Strömung hat ihr Gutes gehabt, nur muß sie jetzt wiederum überwunden werden. Die materialistische Richtung der Medizin hat die Chirurgie bis zu einer gewissen Höhe gebracht, und nur durch die Einseitigkeit der Medizin konnte die Chirurgie jene Vollkommenheit erlangen, die sie erlangt hat. Aber die eigentliche Medizin hat darunter gelitten und muß nun durch einen Umschwung gerade zu einer Vergeistigung getrieben werden, wogegen man sich heute ungeheuer stark wehrt. - Am meisten hat spirituelle Durchsetzung alles dasjenige nötig, was mit der Pädagogik zusammenhängt. Nun, darüber haben wir ja mehrfach geredet. Da muß überall die Brücke geschlagen werden.

Vor allem, trotzdem es scheinbar am fernsten liegt, ist es aber vonnöten, daß gerade von der Technik, von der unmittelbaren Lebenspraxis die Brücke geschlagen wird zum spirituellen Leben. Denn der fünfte nachatlantische Zeitraum hat es zu tun mit der Entwickelung der materiellen Welt, und wenn der Mensch nicht vollständig degenerieren soil, das heißt, zum bloßen Handlanger der Maschine werden soll, wodurch er nichts weiter wird als ein Tier, so muß gerade der Weg von der Maschine zum spirituellen Leben gefunden werden. Für den technischen Praktiker ist es vor allen Dingen zuerst notwendig, daß er spirituelle Impulse in sein Seelenleben aufnimmt. Dies wird in dem Momente geschehen, wenn ein klein wenig mehr, als es jetzt der Fall ist, die technischen Studenten zum Denken angehalten werden, so daß sie die einzelnen Dinge, die ihnen beigebracht werden, miteinander verbinden. Das tun sie heute noch nicht. Sie hören Mathematik, sie hören Darstellende Geometrie, sie hören auch Geometrie der Lage zuweilen; sie hören reine Mechanik, analytische Mechanik, technische Mechanik, ‚sie hören dann die verschiedenen einzelnen, mehr in die Praxis hineingehenden Zweige, aber eine eigentliche Verbindung zwischen den einzelnen Dingen wird überhaupt gar nicht gesucht. In dem Augenblicke, wo die Leute, ich möchte sagen, dazu getrieben werden, so recht den gesunden Menschenverstand auf die Dinge anzuwenden, da werden sie — einfach durch das Entwickelungsstadium, in dem diese einzelnen Zweige stehen, von denen ich gesprochen habe — dazu getrieben werden, in das Wesen der Dinge und dann in das Spirituelle einzudringen. Wirklich, gerade von der Maschine aus wird man den Weg finden müssen in die spirituelle Welt hinein.

Nun, das alles sage ich, um die Schwierigkeit anzudeuten, welche die geisteswissenschaftliche Bewegung heute hat, weil sie gewissermaßen noch nicht diejenigen finden kann, welche geeignet wären, die Aura des Ernstgenommenwerdens zu erzeugen. Darunter leidet ja diese Bewegung am allermeisten, daß sie nicht ernst genommen wird. Und es ist merkwürdig, wie in allen Einzelheiten das zutage tritt. Hätte man manches erscheinen lassen, was erschienen ist, ohne daß die Leute gewußt hätten: Das ist von jemandem geschrieben, der in der theosophischen Bewegung steht —, so wäre es ernst genommen worden, wäre es ganz anders aufgefaßt worden. Aber einfach weil der Betreffende in der theosophischen Bewegung stand, war die Sache mit einer Marke versehen, die bewirkte, daß man sie nicht ernst nahm. Es ist sehr wichtig, dies ins Auge zu fassen. An Kleinigkeiten kann einem das entgegentreten, an richtigen Kleinigkeiten. Ich will zum Beispiel eine Kleinigkeit erwähnen, weil sie mir gerade in den letzten Tagen entgegengetreten ist, wirklich nicht aus einer albernen Eitelkeit heraus, sondern einfach, um Sie aufmerksam zu machen, wie die Dinge liegen.

Ich habe in meinem Buche «Vom Menschenrätsel» als einem derjenigen Geister, die aus gewissen Grundlagen heraus zum Spirituellen hingearbeitet haben, wenn auch noch in einer abstrakten Form, den Karl Christian Planck behandelt. Ich habe über Karl Christian Planck nicht nur in diesem Buche geschrieben, sondern in einer ganzen Anzahl von Städten in den letzten Wintern ziemlich ausführlich über Karl Christian Planck gesprochen, auch hingewiesen darauf, wie er verkannt worden ist, wie er mißverstanden worden ist, hingewiesen vor allen Dingen auf einen Umstand. Auf den Umstand habe ich scharf hingewiesen, daß dieser Mann in den achtziger, siebziger, sechziger, fünfziger Jahren in bezug auf die Zusammenhänge des industriellen und sozialen Lebens Dinge gedacht hat, die notwendig waren durchzuführen. Wenn dazumal irgend jemand sich gefunden hätte, der mit Verständnis dasjenige in die Praxis des sozialen Lebens umgesetzt hätte, was der Mann Großes an Ideen, an wirklichkeitsfreundlichen Ideen geleistet hat, dann - ich sage nicht zuviel — wären wahrscheinlich diese Leiden, die jetzt die Menschheit trägt, nicht über die Menschheit gekommen, die ja doch zum großen Teile damit zusammenhängen, daß die Menschheit in einer ganz falschen sozialen Struktur drinnenlebt. Ich habe darauf hingewiesen, wie es eine Pflicht ist, die Menschen nicht dahin kommen zu lassen, wo Karl Christian Planck hingekommen ist, der zuletzt ganz und gar entfremdet war aller Liebe zur Welt der äußeren physischen Wirklichkeit. Planck war Schwabe und hat in Stuttgart gelebt, ist in Tübingen zurückgewiesen worden von der Philosophie-Dozentur, die ihm die Möglichkeit geboten hätte, ein wenig zu wirken, und ich habe mit voller Absicht darauf hingewiesen, daß der Mann schließlich in seinem «Testament eines Deutschen» dazu gekommen ist, in der Vorrede zu sagen: «Nicht einmal meine Gebeine sollen in dem undankbaren Vaterlande liegen.» Es war das ein scharfes Wort. Es ist eben ein Wort, zu dem Leute in der Gegenwart kommen können gegenüber dem Stumpfsinn der Menschen, die gerade das nicht einsehen wollen, was wirklichkeitsfreundlich ist. Ich habe es absichtlich in Stuttgart zitiert, dieses Wort von den Gebeinen, denn das ist ja das engere Vaterland Plancks gewesen. Es war im wesentlichen damals auch nicht viel Reaktion da, trotzdem schon die Ereignisse da waren, die zeigten, wie sehr man Grund gehabt hätte, die Dinge zu verstehen.

Jetzt dagegen, nach etwa anderthalb Jahren, geht folgende Notiz durch die schwäbischen Zeitungen:

«Karl Christian Planck. Nicht etwa nur ein Einzelner, sondern mancher weitblickende Geist hat den gegenwärtigen Weltkrieg vorausgesehen. Aber keiner hat seinen vollen Umfang so sicher geahnt und zugleich seine Ursachen und Wirkungen so scharf erfaßt wie unser schwäbischer Landsmann Planck.»

Ich habe dazumal gesagt: So genau hat Karl Christian Planck diesen Weltkrieg vorausgesehen, daß er sogar ausdrücklich darauf hingewiesen hat, daß Italien nicht auf der Seite der Mittelmächte stehen wird, trotzdem damals das Bündnis noch nicht geschlossen war, sondern man erst hinsteuerte darauf, als er den Ausspruch getan hatte.

«Ihm erschien dieser Krieg als das unvermeidliche Ziel, dem die politische und wirtschaftliche Entwickelung des letzten halben Jahrhunderts zusteuern mußte.»

Das ist wirklich so!

«Wie er aber die Schäden seiner Zeit aufgedeckt, so hat er zugleich den Weg gewiesen, der uns zu anderen Zuständen führen kann.»

Das ist das Wichtige! Nur hat keiner gehört!

«Bei ihm erfahren wir den tieferen Grund des Kriegswuchers und anderer schwarzer Flecken, die neben so vielem Schönen und Erfreulichen in dem Bilde des heutigen Volkslebens sich zeigen. Er kennt aber auch die tieferen inneren Kräfte des Volkslebens und weiß, wie sie freigemacht werden können, um die sittliche und rechtliche Erneuerung zu schaffen, nach der unsere Besten sich sehnen. Trotz aller schmerzlichen Enttäuschung, die seine Zeitgenossen ihm bereiteten, hat er an diese Kräfte und ihr siegreiches Hervorbrechen geglaubt.»

Nur ist er bis zu einem solchen Ausspruch gekommen, wie ich ihn zitiert habe!

«Es wird daher in weiteren Kreisen dankbar begrüßt werden, daß die Tochter des Philosophen nächstens in mehreren öffentlichen Vorträgen eine Einführung in die sozial-politischen Gedanken Plancks bieten will.»

Es ist interessant, daß nunmehr die Tochter des Philosophen auftritt nach anderthalb Jahren. Diese Notiz ist in einer Stuttgarter Zeitung erschienen. Dazumal, als von meiner Seite auf den Philosophen Karl Christian Planck in Stuttgart möglichst deutlich hingewiesen worden ist, hat überhaupt niemand Notiz genommen, hat sich auch niemand gedrängt gefühlt, das irgendwie bekanntzumachen. Anderthalb Jahre danach tritt die Tochter auf, die vermutlich bei dem Tode ihres Vaters, der 1880 erfolgt ist, auch schon gelebt hat, die also bis jetzt gewartet hat, um in öffentlichen Vorträgen für ihn einzutreten.

Das ist ein Beispiel, das man nicht verzehn-, sondern verhundertfachen kann, und aus dem immer wieder gezeigt wird, wie es schwierig ist, zugleich das Umfassende der Geisteswissenschaft und das einzelne Praktisch-Konkrete zur Geltung zu bringen, trotzdem natürlich eine absolute Notwendigkeit dafür vorliegt. Denn nur durch das Umfassende der Geisteswissenschaft — das muß verstanden werden - ist eine Heilung möglich für dasjenige, was in der Kultur unserer Zeit lebt.

Und so war es notwendig, das,was wir anthroposophisch orientierte Geisteswissenschaft nennen, doch in irgendeiner Weise in dem ernsten Fahrwasser zu halten, von dem die theosophische Bewegung immer mehr und mehr abgegangen ist. Es mußte der Geist, der erfaßt worden ist in der griechischen Philosophenzeit, schon die Dinge durchdringen, wenn auch dadurch die Meinung entstand, die Schriften seien schwer zu lesen. Und das war zuweilen nicht leicht. Denn gerade innerhalb der Bewegung stieß das auf größte Schwierigkeiten. Und eine der allergrößten Schwierigkeiten war die, daß es wirklich reichlich mehr als ein Jahrzehnt gebraucht hat, über eine Grundabstraktion hinwegzukommen. Man mußte langsam und geduldig arbeiten, um über eine Grundabstraktion hinwegzukommen, die zu dem Allerschädlichsten gehörte in unserer Bewegung. Diese Grundabstraktion bestand einfach darinnen, daß man an dem Worte «Theosophie» festhielt, ganz gleichgültig, wenn etwas «theosophisch» sich nannte, ob es nun wirklich durchdrungen war von der Geistigkeit des modernen Lebens oder ob es Rohmsches oder sonstiges Zeug war. Wenn es «theosophisch» genannt wurde, dann war es gleichberechtigt, denn das forderte die «theosophische Toleranz». Nur ganz langsam und allmählich war es möglich, gegen diese Dinge aufzukommen, denn ganz sagen konnte man das ja nicht gleich von Anfang, sonst wäre es ja als Anmaßung erschienen, und ein Gefühl davon hervorzurufen, daß doch ein Unterschied besteht zwischen den Dingen, und daß Toleranz, in diesem Sinne gebraucht, nichts anderes ausdrückt als die absoluteste Charakterlosigkeit im Urteilen. Das, worauf es eben ankommt, ist gerade das Hinarbeiten auf ein solches Wissen, auf eine solche Erkenntnis, die der Wirklichkeit gewachsen ist, die es aufnehmen kann mit den Forderungen der Wirklichkeit. Es mit den Forderungen der Wirklichkeit aufnehmen kann nur eine Geisteswissenschaft, welche mit den Begriffen unserer Zeit arbeitet. Und nicht nur das Leben in angenehmen theosophischen Vorstellungen, sondern das Ringen nach geistiger Wirklichkeit, das ist es, worauf hingestrebt werden muß.

Manche Menschen haben heute gar keinen Begriff, was es eigentlich heißt, nach der Wirklichkeit hin sich durchzuringen, weil man noch nicht volle Klarheit sich erringen will von der Abgebrauchtheit der Begriffe, mit denen heute gearbeitet wird. Nur eine kleine Probe aus einem scheinbar entlegenen Gebiete, von einem Ringen nach Wirklichkeit in Vorstellungen, lassen Sie mich vorbringen. Dulden Sie es, daß ich dies etwas Abgezogenere vorbringe, es soll ja nur kurz gemacht werden.

Einzelne waren ja im 19. Jahrhundert immer da, welche esaufgenommen haben mit der Wirklichkeit, wie sie hereinbrechen sollte in ganz neuen Lebensvorstellungen, Lebensvorstellungen nicht nur im trivialen Sinne, sondern Lebensvorstellungen, wie man sie braucht gerade im praktischen Leben. So war in einer bestimmten Zeit im 19. Jahrhundert der Parallelbegriff brüchig geworden, der seit dem alten Euklid gegolten hat. Wann sind zwei Linien parallel? Nun, wer wäre sich denn nicht klar darüber, daß zwei Linien parallel dann sind, wenn sie noch so weit verlängert, sich nicht schneiden! Das ist ja auch die Definition: Zwei Gerade sind dann parallel, wenn sie, noch so weit verlängert, sich nicht schneiden. Es hat Leute im 19. Jahrhundert gegeben, die ihr ganzes Leben darauf verwendet haben, über diesen Begriff zur Klarheit zu kommen, weil er vor einem genauen Denken doch nicht standhält. Und ich will Ihnen einen Brief vorlesen, den einer der beiden Bolyai, Wolfgang Bolyai, geschrieben hat, um Ihnen zu zeigen, was Ringen in Vorstellungen heißt. Der Mathematiker Gauf hat ja begonnen, nachzudenken darüber, daß die Definition: Zwei Gerade sind parallel, wenn sie sich in unendlicher Entfernung oder gar nicht schneiden - eigentlich gar nichts sagt, bloß eine Rederei ist. Und der ältere Bolyai, der Vater, war Freund und Schüler von Gauß, aber er hat auch seinen Sohn, den jüngeren Bolyai angeregt. Und der Vater schrieb an den Sohn:

«Du darfst die Parallelen auf jenem Wege nicht versuchen; ich kenne diesen Weg bis an sein Ende — auch ich habe diese bodenlose Nacht durchmessen, jedes Licht, jede Freude meines Lebens sind in ihr ausgelöscht worden - ich beschwöre Dich bei Gott! laß die Lehre von den Parallelen in Frieden - Du sollst davor denselben Abscheu haben, wie vor einem liederlichen Umgang, sie kann Dich um all’ Deine Muße, um die Gesundheit, um Deine Ruhe und um Dein ganzes Lebensglück bringen. — Diese grundlose Finsternis würde vielleicht tausend Newtonische Riesentürme verschlingen, es wird nie auf Erden hell werden, und das armselige Menschengeschlecht wird nie etwas vollkommen Reines haben, selbst die Geometrie nicht; es ist in meiner Seele eine tiefe und ewige Wunde; behüt’ Dich Gott, daß diese sich (bei Dir) je so tief hineinnagen möchte. Diese raubt einem die Lust zur Geometrie, zum irdischen Leben; ich hatte mir vorgenommen, mich für die Wahrheit aufzuopfern; ich wäre bereit gewesen zum Märtyrer zu werden, damit ich nur die Geometrie von diesem Makel gereinigt dem menschlichen Geschlecht übergeben könnte. Schauderhafte, riesige Arbeiten habe ich vollbracht, habe bei weitem Besseres geleistet als bisher (geleistet wurde), aber keine vollkommene Befriedigung habe ich je gefunden; hier aber gilt es: si paullum a summo discessit, vergit ad imum. — Ich bin zurückgekehrt, als ich durchschaut habe, daß man den Boden dieser Nacht von der Erde aus nicht erreichen kann, ohne Trost, mich selbst und das ganze Geschlecht bedauernd. Lerne an meinem Beispiel; indem ich die Parallelen kennen wollte, blieb ich unwissend, diese haben mir all’ die Blumen meines Lebens und meiner Zeit weggenommen. Hier steckt sogar die Wurzel aller meiner späteren Fehler, und es hat darauf aus den häuslichen Gewölken geregnet. - Wenn ich die Parallelen hätte entdecken können, so wäre ich ein Engel geworden, wenn es auch niemand gewußt hätte, daß ich sie gefunden habe.

... Versuche es nicht, Du wirst es nie zeigen, daß je mit den unaufhörlichen Einbiegungen desselben Maßes die untere Gerade geschnitten werde, es steckt in dieser materia ein ewig in sich zurückdrehender circulus — ein Labyrinth, das einen immer hineinlockt — wer sich hineinbegibt, verarmt, wie ein Schatzgräber, und bleibt unwissend. Solltest Du auf was immer für ein absurdum geraten, alles ist umsonst, Du kannst es nicht als ein Axiom hinstellen; ....

... Die Säulen des Herkules stehen in diesen Gegenden, gehe nicht um einen einzigen Schritt weiter, sonst bist Du verloren.»

Dennoch ist auch der jüngere Bolyai weitergegangen auf diesem Weg und hat sein ganzes Leben noch mehr als der Vater darauf verwendet, um auf einem Gebiete, wo man einen ganz realen Begriff zu haben scheint, der aber doch nur eine Rederei ist, zu einem konkreten Begriff zu kommen, Er wollte herausfinden, ob es denn wirklich so etwas gibt wie zwei Geraden, die sich auch in unendlicher Entfernung nicht schneiden; denn nachgelaufen ist ja noch niemand dieser unendlichen Entfernung, weil das eine unendliche Zeit erfordert, und die ist ja noch nicht abgelaufen. Es ist ja eine bloße Rederei. In den weitesten Begriffsverzweigungen stecken diese bloßen Redereien, stecken die bloßen Begriffsschatten. Ich wollte Sie nur auf etwas aufmerksam machen, was abgezogen wird, damit Sie sehen, wie gründlichere Geister des 19. Jahrhunderts an der Abstraktheit der Begriffe gelitten haben! Es ist interessant zu sehen, daß, während in allen Schulen gelehrt wird: Parallele Linien sind diejenigen, die sich nicht schneiden, wenn man sie noch so lange verlängert -, es einzelne Geister gegeben hat, denen das Arbeiten in dieser Vorstellung zur Hölle geworden ist, weil sie versuchten, durchzudringen zu einem wirklichen Begriff, nicht zu einer Begriffsschablone.

Ja, das Ringen mit der Wirklichkeit, das ist es, worauf es ankommt, was die Leute in unserer Zeit doch mehr oder weniger fliehen, nicht wollen, weil sie ja «einsehen», wenigstens einzusehen glauben, daß sie «hohe Ideale» haben! Ja, auf die Ideale kommt es nicht an, sondern auf die Impulse, die mit der Wirklichkeit arbeiten. Denken Sie sich, es stelle sich einer hin und sagt das schöne Wort: Es muß nun endlich eine Zeit kommen, in welcher der Tüchtigste seine gebührende Berücksichtigung im Leben findet. — Das ist ein sehr schönes Programm! Man kann sogar Gesellschaften begründen mit dem Programm, die Gesellschaft so zu reformieren, daß der Tüchtigste zu seinem gebührenden Platz kommt; man könnte sogar Staatswissenschaften auf diesem Satz begründen. Aber auf den Satz kommt es nicht an, sondern auf das Wirklichkeitsdurchtränktsein. Denn, was nützt es denn, wenn dieser Satz noch so sehr gilt, wenn er von noch so vielen Gesellschaften als erster Programmpunkt selbst vertreten würde, aber die Menschen, die die Macht dazu haben, als den Tüchtigsten eben doch ihren Neffen ansehen! Es kommt ja nicht darauf an, den abstrakten Satz geltend zu machen, daß der Tüchtigste an den richtigen Platz gestellt werde, sondern daß man die Fähigkeit hat, den Tüchtigsten wirklich zu finden, nicht den Neffen zu finden! Man muß verstehen, wie abstrakte Begriffe überall in den Klunsen des Lebens, das heißt in den Spalten des Lebens durchfallen, wie sie nirgends etwas bedeuten, und wie unsere ganze Zeit angefüllt ist von lauter schönen Begriffen, gegen die ja auch nichts eingewendet werden soll in ihrer Begriffsschönheit; aber auf Wirklichkeitserfassung, auf Wirklichkeitserkenntnis kommt es an.

Stellen wir uns einmal vor, der Löwe wollte eine Weltenordnung für die Tiere begründen, wollte das Reich der Erde so einteilen, daß es gerecht ist. Was wird der Löwe tun? Ich glaube nicht, daß es dem Löwen einfallen wird, darauf zu drängen, daß in der Wüste die kleinen Tiere, die der Löwe sonst frißt, die Möglichkeit haben, nicht vom Löwen gefressen zu werden! Ich glaube es nicht, sondern er wird es als sein Löwenrecht betrachten, die kleinen Tiere eben zu fressen, die ihm begegnen. Dagegen könnte es dem Löwen schon einfallen, für das Meer zum Beispiel als eine gerechte Maßregel aufzustellen, daß die Haifische keine kleinen Fische fressen. Das könnte schon passieren, und es könnte sogar passieren, daß der Löwe eine furchtbar gute Tierordnung aufstellte, so daß im Meere und auf dem Nordpol und sonst, wo gerade der Löwe nicht zu Hause ist, es allen Tieren freiheitsgemäß außerordentlich gut geht. Aber ob es ihm gefallen würde, im Löwengebiete genau dieselbe Ordnung einzuführen, das frägt sich sehr. Der Löwe weiß nämlich ganz gut, was eine gerechte Weltenordnung ist, und er wird sie bei den Haifischen sehr gut anwenden.

Nun, sprechen wir nicht vom Löwen, sondern sprechen wir vom Hungaricus. Ich habe Ihnen neulich gesagt, daß eine kleine Broschüre erschienen ist: «Conditions de Paix de l’Allemagne.» Diese Broschüre segelt nun ganz im Fahrwasser jener europäischen Landkarte, welche schon ihre erste Ankündigung in der berühmten Note der Entente an Wilson gefunden hat für die Zerstückelung Österreichs. Wir haben ja davon gesprochen. Hungaricus ist im Grunde genommen, mit Ausnahme der Schweiz, mit dieser Karte ganz einverstanden. Er redet zuerst sehr weise — wie ja jetzt die meisten Menschen weise reden — über das Recht der Nationen, auch über das Recht der kleinen Nationen, über das Recht, daß der Staat zusammenfallen muß mit der Kraft der Nation und so weiter. Das alles ist selbstverständlich sehr schön, so wie der Satz, daß der Tüchtigste auf seinen rechten Platz kommen muß, auch sehr schön ist. Solange man bei diesen Begriffsschatten bleibt, kann man sich ja die Finger ablecken, wenn man abstrakter Idealist ist und den Hungaricus liest. Für Schweizer ist ja der Hungaricus angenehmer zu lesen als die Karte, die ich vorgeführt habe, aus dem Grunde, weil der Hungariicus die Schweiz nicht auslöscht, sondern sie sogar vergrößert; er schreibt ihr nämlich Vorarlberg zu und Tirol. Deshalb rate ich gerade den Schweizern, den Hungaricus zu lesen, statt sich an jene Karte zu halten. Aber nun teilt er auch die Welt ein. Man kann sagen, er läßt allen, allen Völkern, selbst den kleinsten, in seiner Art absolutestes Recht freier Entwickelung -, wenn er nicht glaubt, daß er mit irgend etwas bei der Entente Anstoß erregt. Da verbrämt er das Wort so ein bißchen: bei Böhmen sagt er Selbständigkeit, bei Irland sagt er selbstverständlich Autonomie. Nun ja, das tut man so, nicht wahr! Frisieren kann man ja die Sache. Und so wird die Welt zurechtgeschnitten, die Welt Europas recht hübsch aufgeteilt, so daß mit Ausnahme eben der Dinge, auf die ich gerade hingewiesen habe — damit nicht Anstoß erregt werde -, wirklich versucht worden ist, die kleinsten Nationalitäten denjenigen Staaten zuzuteilen, von welchen die Vertreter der Entente glauben, daß die betreffenden Nationalitäten dieser kleinen Gebiete dort daheim sind. Es kommt ja dann sogar weniger darauf an, ob diese kleinen Gebiete wirklich diese Nationalitäten haben, sondern es kommt eben darauf an, daß man auf jener Seite glaubt, daß sie diesen Nationalitäten angehören. Also er bemüht sich recht schön, die Welt einzuteilen: die Welt, die außerhalb der Wüste — ah pardon -, außerhalb Ungarns liegt, denn in Ungarn übt er sein Löwenrecht! Für die Haifische, da gründet er die vollständige Freiheit! Aber die magyarische Nation ist seine Nation, und die muß umfassen nicht nur das, was sie heute schon umfaßt — obwohl sie ohnedies nur eine Minorität Magyaren umfaßt, und die Majorität eine andere Bevölkerung ist -, sondern das muß noch größer werden. Also da ist er ganz und gar der Löwe.

Da sieht man, wie heute Begriffe gemacht werden, wie heute gedacht wird. Man muß daran schon studieren, wie notwendig es ist, den Übergang zu wirklichkeitsdurchtränktem Denken zu finden. Dazu sind solche Begriffe notwendig, wie ich sie Ihnen hier vorführe. Und ich will einmal auch zeigen und muß zeigen, wie spirituelles Denken eben zu wirklichkeitsgemäßen Ideen führt. Es kommt überall darauf an, den richtigen Gedanken zu verbinden mit einer Sache; dann erkennt man, ob die Sache der Wirklichkeit entspricht oder nicht.

Nehmen Sie zum Beispiel die jetzige Wilson-Note an den Senat. Was das Musterbeispiel ist, kann ja sogar in gewisser Beziehung wirksam sein; aber darauf kommt es nicht an, sondern darauf kommt es an, daß sie «Begriffsschatten» enthält. Wenn sie wirksam ist, so ist es durch die Vertracktheit der Zeit, auf die gerade das Vertrackte einigen Einfluß haben kann. Nehmen Sie die Sache ganz objektiv, versuchen Sie sich aber einmal einen Begriff zu bilden, an dem Sie die Wirklichkeit, den Wirklichkeitsgehalt, der mit diesen Begriffsschatten etwa verbunden werden könnte, messen können. Sie brauchen sich nur eine einzige Frage zu stellen: Hätte denn nicht dieselbe Note auch im Jahre 1913 geschrieben werden können? Diese Idealismen, die dadrinnen stehen, hätten alle im Jahre 1913 ganz genau so, wie sie heute da stehen, geschrieben werden können! Sehen Sie, das ist ein unwirklichkeitsgemäßes Denken, das da glaubt an Absolutheit. Daß jederzeit «absolut» das herauskommt, ist unwirklichkeitsgemäßes Denken. Und dafür besteht in der Gegenwart so wenig Talent, dieses unwirklichkeitsgemäße Denken einzusehen, weil man nur auf das «Richtige» geht, während es auf das Wirklichkeitsgemäße eben auch ankommt.

Deshalb habe ich in meinem Buche «Vom Menschenrätsel» so stark hervorgehoben, daß nicht nur das Logische in Betracht kommt, sondern das Wirklichkeitsgemäße. Nur ein Entschluß, der mit einer Tatsache der Gegenwart, der unmittelbaren Gegenwart rechnet, wäre mehr wert als die ganze Phraseologie. Gerade vielleicht an historischen Dokumenten kann man einsehen, daß dasjenige, was hier geredet wird, schon mit den Realitäten zusammenhängt, denn nach und nach sind jene Menschen an die Oberfläche gebracht worden, die nurmehr die Welt regieren wollen mit Abstraktionen, und das hat zu dem heutigen Zustande geführt, während ein wirkliches Denken, das auf die Dinge eingeht, überall auch Wirklichkeiten findet. Sie liegen, ich möchte sagen, so nahe, diese Wirklichkeiten! Nun denken Sie doch nur einmal: Nehmen Sie diesen realen Begriff, diesen Wirklichkeitsbegriff, den ich schon von einem andern Gesichtspunkte aus angeführt habe in den letzten Tagen, als ich Ihnen zeigte, wie von Süden herauf, das dann zu Italien geworden ist, das Priesterliche, Kultusmäßige dringt, das sich die Opposition geschaffen hat in dem mitteleuropäischen Protestantentum, wie vom Westen das Diplomatisch-Politische sich gebildet hat, das sich wieder die Opposition geschaffen hat, wie vom Nordwesten sich das Merkantilistische bildet, das sich wieder die Opposition geschaffen hat, und wie in Mitteleuropa eine Opposition aus dem Allgemein-Menschlichen heraus notwendig bestehen muß. Stellen wir noch einmal diese Ausstrahlung vor uns hin.

AltName

Schon im vierten nachatlantischen Zeitraum hat man angefangen — im Fortschritt gegenüber der alten Viergliedrigkeit, wo man von Kasten gesprochen hat -, diese Gliederung der Menschen etwas anders zu bezeichnen. Plato hat gesprochen vom «Lehrstand»; der Lehrstand ist derjenige, für den Rom, das priesterliche, das päpstliche Rom das Monopol genommen hat. Der Lehrstand hat es dahin gebracht, einzig und allein für sich die dogmatische Fixierung der Wahrheit aufzustellen und niemandem zu gestatten, von sich aus Wahrheiten aufzustellen. Es sollte nur von hier aus die Versorgung mit der Lehre, mit der Lehre sogar in den höchsten Dingen, ausgehen.

Das Politisch-Diplomatische ist auf einem andern Gebiete nichts anderes als der Platonsche Wehrstand. Ich habe es Ihnen ja ausgeführt, wie trotz des sogenannten preußischen Militarismus der Wehrstand gerade von Frankreich aus sich gebildet hat, nachdem seine Grundlage sogar in der Schweiz geschaffen worden ist. Der Wehrstand geht von da aus, schafft sich natürlich dadurch seine Opposition, daß er vorenthalten möchte den anderen dasjenige, was er für sich in Anspruch nimmt. Er will allein soldatenmäßig die Welt beherrschen, und wenn ihm von woanders her Soldatenhaftes entgegentritt, so findet er es unberechtigt, geradeso wie Rom es unberechtigt findet, wenn ihm von anderer Seite her irgend etwas über die Wahrheiten in der Welt entgegentritt. Und hier könnten wir ebensogut statt des Merkantilistischen schreiben den «Nährstand». Was wirklich im tiefsten Inneren — denken Sie nur darüber nach, meditieren Sie nur — diesem dritten Faktor entspricht, das ist der Nährstand. Was wird denn da vorenthalten? Selbstverständlich die Nahrungsmittel!

Und wenn Sie die platonischen Begriffe richtig anwenden, wirklichkeitsgemäß anwenden, dann finden Sie überall die Wirklichkeit. Dann sind nämlich Ihre Begriffe so geartet, daß Sie mit den Begriffen in die Wirklichkeit untertauchen. Sie müssen vom Begriffe aus den Weg hineinfinden in die Wirklichkeit, und bis in das Konkreteste der Wirklichkeit wird der Begriff sich hineinfinden. Die Begriffsschatten finden nirgends die Wirklichkeit, aber mit Begriffsschatten läßt sich sehr schön herumplaudern, auch herumidealisieren, während Sie, wenn Sie mit wirklichen Begriffen arbeiten, bis in solche Einzelheiten hinein die Dinge verstehen werden.

Und hier sehen Sie die Aufgabe der Geisteswissenschaft: Sie führt zu solchen Begriffen, durch die Sie das Leben, das ja nur eine Schöpfung des Geistes ist, wirklich auffinden können, durch die Sie aber auch sich hindurchringen werden, um am Leben in einer realen Weise mitzuarbeiten.

In bezug auf einen Begriff ist es besonders heute, wo die Menschheit vom Schicksal so furchtbar niedergedrückt ist, notwendig, realistisch, wirklichkeitsgemäß zu denken; denn der unwirkliche Begriff liegt auf diesem Gebiete ganz besonders nahe. Am unwirklichsten reden ja heute die Pastoren, wenn sie irgendwo auf irgendeinem Gebiete reden. Die reden natürlich auch am unwirklichsten über diesen Krieg, denn wenn sie schildern, wie in diesem Kriege das Christentum oder das Gottesbewußtsein sich ausdrückt — ja, das ist, nicht wahr, zum An-die-Wände-Heraufkriechen, wie man sagt. Da wird etwas Furchtbares daraus. Es wird ja aus andern Dingen oft auch etwas Furchtbares von dieser Seite her, aber es zeigt sich gerade auf diesem Gebiete das Absurde.

Nehmen Sie nur einmal Schriften über den Krieg in die Hand, die jetzt gerade von dieser Seite her als Predigten oder dergleichen erscheinen, und sehen Sie sie einmal an mit gesundem Menschenverstande. Es ist ja natürlich auch naheliegend, daß das gesagt wird: Ja, muß denn die Menschheit dem schweren, schmerzlichen Geschicke ausgesetzt sein? Können nicht zum Heile der Menschheit die göttlich-geistigen Kräfte unmittelbar eingreifen, um das Heil herbeizuführen? Und hier muß gesagt werden: Mit einem hohen Scheine des Rechtes spricht man so, aber es ist kein wirklichkeitsgemäßer Begriff da, weil man nicht dasjenige trifft, was von diesem Gesichtspunkte aus in der Wirklichkeit begründet ist. —- Ich will Ihnen das, worauf es ankommt, durch einen Vergleich klarmachen.

Der Mensch ist in einer gewissen Weise organisiert. Er nimmt Nahrungsmittel auf; die Nahrungsmittel sind so organisiert oder gestaltet, daß er sein Leben fortfristen kann. Denken Sie sich, wenn er sich weigerte, Nahrung aufzunehmen, er würde mager, krank, verhungert zuletzt. Ist es nun natürlich zu sagen, es sei eine Schwäche oder etwas Böses von der Gottheit, den Menschen verhungern zu lassen, wenn er durchaus nicht essen will? Das ist keine Schwäche der Gottheit. Die Gottheit hat die Nahrungsmittel geschaffen, der Mensch braucht nur zu essen. Die Weisheit des Gottes zeigt sich darin, daß die Nahrungsmittel den Menschen unterhalten; wenn er sich weigert, sie zu sich zu nehmen, so kann er den Gott nicht anklagen, daß er ihn verhungern läßt.

Nun, übertragen Sie per Analogie dieses auf das andere: Die Menschheit muß das geistige Leben wie ein Nahrungsmittel betrachten. Es ist von den Göttern her da, aber es muß zu sich genommen werden. Und zu sagen: Die Götter müssen unmittelbar eingreifen -, das bedeutet nichts anderes, als zu sagen: Wenn ich nicht essen will, soll mich der Herrgott auf eine andere Weise satt machen. — Es ist durch die weisheitsvolle Weltenordnung immer dasjenige da, was zum Heile führen kann, aber es muß der Mensch sich in ein Verhältnis dazu setzen. Daher wird auch das für das 20. Jahrhundert notwendige spirituelle Leben nicht von selbst kommen, sondern die Menschen müssen es sich erringen, sie müssen es aufnehmen. Wenn sie es nicht aufnehmen, so werden immer trübere und trübere Zeiten kommen. Und dasjenige, was äußerlich geschieht, wird nur Maja sein, denn der innere Zusammenhang ist doch der, daß gegenwärtig eine alte Zeit mit einer neuen ringt. Gegenwärtig ringt sich überallempor das Allgemein-Menschliche gegenüber dem Einzelständlichen. Und wenn man heute glaubt, daß Nationen miteinander kämpfen, so ist das Maja - ich habe ja auch schon von andern Gesichtspunkten auf diese Maja hingewiesen -, das ist nur, weil sich die Dinge in der einen oder in der andern Weise gruppieren, was nicht genau dem inneren Gang entspricht: in Wahrheit liegen ganz andere Gegensätze vor. Es liegt der Gegensatz von Altem und Neuem vor. Es ringen sich ganz andere Gesetze empor, als diejenigen sind, die traditionell über die Welt geherrscht haben.

Und wiederum war es Maja — das heißt etwas, was in einer falschen Gestalt auftritt -, wie sich diese andern Gesetze für Sozialistisches emporgerungen haben. Der Sozialismus ist nicht dasjenige, was mit der Wahrheit verbunden ist, vor allen Dingen ist er nicht mit dem Spirituellen verbunden, sondern er ist etwas, was sich gerade mit dem Materialismus verbinden will. Was sich eigentlich durchringen will, das ist die allseitig harmonische Menschlichkeit gegenüber den Einseitigkeiten von Lehr-, Wehr- und Nährstand. Der Kampf wird allerdings lange dauern, aber er kann ja auf verschiedenste Weise geführt werden. Hätte man im Planckschen Sinne im 19. Jahrhundert einer gesunden Lebenspraxis sich zugewendet, so wäre die blutige Praxis des ersten Drittels des 20. Jahrhunderts zum mindesten gemildert worden. Mit Idealismen kann man die Dinge nicht mildern, sondern dadurch, daß man realistisch denkt, und realistisch denken bedeutet immer auch, spirituell denken.

Ebenso kann man sagen: Dasjenige, was geschehen muß, das muß schon geschehen. Dasjenige, was sich emporringt, muß alles das durchmachen, um es dahin zu bringen, Spiritualität mit der Seele zu vereinen, im Spirituellen aufzuwachsen. Das tragische Schicksal der Menschheit besteht darinnen, daß die sich emporringenden Menschen nicht im Zeichen des Spirituellen, sondern im Zeichen des Materiellen sich emporringen wollen. Das brachte sie zunächst in Konflikt mit denjenigen Brüderschaften, welche im Großen die Impulse des merkantilistischen Wesens, des industriell-kommerziellen Wesens materialistisch entwickeln wollen. Denn das ist der Hauptzusammenstoß der Gegenwart; das andere ist nur Begleiterscheinung, oftmals furchtbare Begleiterscheinung. Gerade da sieht man in eine furchtbare Maja hinein. Aber es ist schon möglich, daß die Dinge auf verschiedene Art angestrebt werden. So wäre es nötig gewesen, daß statt der Agenten der Brüderschaften, von denen ich gesprochen habe, herrschend gewesen wären andere Menschen. Denn dann würden wir heute in Friedensverhandlungen drinnenstecken, dann würde nicht bebrüllt worden sein der Weihnachtsruf um Frieden!

Nun, es wird ja außerordentlich schwer sein, in bezug auf gewisse Dinge klare und wirklichkeitstragende Begriffe und Ideen zu finden; aber jeder muß sie auf seinem Gebiete versuchen zu finden. Und wer ein wenig in den Sinn der Geisteswissenschaft eindringt und vergleicht diesen Sinn der Geisteswissenschaft mit anderem, was in der Gegenwart auftritt, der wird schon sehen, wie diese Geisteswissenschaft der einzige Weg ist, zu wirklichkeitserfüllten Begriffen zu kommen.

Dies wollte ich als ein ernstes Wort in dieser Zeit noch an Sie richten, gewissermaßen zeigen — trotzdem die Aufgabe der Geisteswissenschaft nur aus dem Geiste selbst heraus aufgefaßt werden kann, nicht in Rücksicht darauf, was heute erörtert worden ist, sondern nur aus der Erkenntnis, aus dem Geiste selbst —, welches die Bedeutung, das Wesen der Geisteswissenschaft für die Gegenwart aber ist, und wie vonnöten es wäre, daß alles dasjenige, was nun geschehen kann zum Bekanntmachen der Geisteswissenschaft, wirklich geschähe. Es ist schon notwendig, daß in dieser schweren Zeit wir Geisteswissenschaft nicht nur aufnehmen in unsere Köpfe, sondern daß wir sie wirklich in warme Herzen aufnehmen. Denn nur, wenn wir sie in unsere Herzenswärme aufnehmen, werden wir in der Lage sein, Kraft zu entwickeln, welche die Gegenwart braucht. Und dann darf keiner an sich so denken, als ob er an seinem Orte nicht geeignet wäre oder nicht kraftvoll genug wäre, dasjenige zu tun, worauf es ankommt. Ein jeder wird durch sein Karma an seinem Orte schon die Möglichkeit finden, zur rechten Zeit an das Schicksal die entsprechenden Fragen zu stellen. Wenn diese rechte Zeit vielleicht auch noch nicht heute oder morgen ist, kommen wird sie in irgendeiner Weise. Darum kommt es darauf an, fest und sicher in den Impulsen dieser geistigen Bewegung drinnenzustehen, wenn man sie einmal verstanden hat. Insbesondere heute ist es notwendig, diese Festigkeit und Sicherheit sich als Ziel zu setzen. Denn entweder muß Bedeutungsvolles von irgendeiner Seite — was ja sein könnte, worauf aber nicht gerechnet werden darf — in der nächsten Zeit geschehen, oder alle Lebensverhältnisse gehen großen Schwierigkeiten entgegen. Und es wäre nur eine Gedankenlosigkeit, wenn man sich das nicht klarmachen wollte. Zweieinhalb Jahre konnte dasjenige, was man jetzt Krieg nannte, dauern, und die Verhältnisse blieben so erträglich, wie sie bis jetzt sind; nun aber geht es nicht noch ein weiteres Jahr. Und da werden schon auch solche Bewegungen wie die unsere die Probe durchzumachen haben. Da wird man nicht sagen können: Wann kommen wir wiederum zusammen? — oder: Warum kommen wir nicht zusammen? — oder: Warum erscheint dieses oder jenes nicht? —, sondern man wird in seinem Herzen tragen müssen, selbst über gefährdete Zeitperioden hindurch, das sichere Gefühl der Zugehörigkeit.

Gerade jetzt wollte ich solch ein Wort an Sie richten, weil es ja immerhin möglich ist, daß in gar nicht zu ferner Zeit nicht einmal eine Verkehrsmöglichkeit besteht, damit wir wieder zusammenkommen; ich meine nicht nur eine Erlaubnismöglichkeit, sondern eine Verkehrsmöglichkeit. Denn es können die Dinge nicht aufrechterhalten werden auf die Dauer, welche das ganze moderne Kulturleben ausmachen, wenn etwas hereinbricht in dieses moderne Kulturleben, das zwar aus ihm hervorgegangen ist, aber ihm im eminentesten Sinne widerspricht. Dadurch besteht aber gerade das Absurde, daß Dinge hervorgebracht werden aus dem Leben selber, die dann ihm selber widersprechen. So müssen wir darauf gefaßt sein, daß auch für unsere Bewegung schwere Zeiten kommen können. Aber sie werden uns nicht beirren, wenn wir die innere Sicherheit, Klarheit und das rechte Gefühl von der Bedeutung und dem Wesen der Bewegung in uns aufgenommen haben, wenn wir hinwegsehen können in so ernster Zeit über das Einzelpersönliche. Das gerade soll unsere Bewegung leisten: uns über das einzelne Persönliche auch schon im Blicke hinwegzuheben, unseren Blick zu richten auf die großen Angelegenheiten der Menschheit, die auf dem Spiele stehen. Und die größte ist doch diese: Verständnis zu bekommen für wirklichkeitsgemäßes Denken. — Auf Schritt und Tritt, überall findet man die Unmöglichkeit, wirklichkeitsgemäßes Denken zu finden. Man muß mit seinem Herzen bei einer solchen Sache dabei sein, dann wird man im einzelnen nicht durch allerlei Egoismus abirren können.

Das ist es, was ich Ihnen wie eine Art Lebewohl heute, wo wir für einige Zeit Abschied nehmen müssen, zurufen möchte. Machen Sie sich so stark — auch für den Fall, daß es nicht notwendig sein sollte -, daß Ihr Herz durchtragen kann selbst in Seeleneinsamkeit dasjenige, was in der Geisteswissenschaft pulsiert, und womit wir uns ja doch hier befassen wollen. Schon der Gedanke, daß wir sicher sein wollen, wird vieles, vieles helfen; denn Gedanken sind Wirklichkeiten. Manches Schwierige, das in Aussicht steht, kann noch dadurch hinweggeräumt werden, daß wir aufrichtiges, ernstes Suchen in der Richtung haben, die jetzt öfter hier besprochen worden ist.

An uns, die jetzt für eine Weile von hier fern sein müssen, wird es nicht liegen; wir werden schon Sorge tragen, wenn es sein kann, wieder zu kommen. Aber selbst, wenn es längere Zeit dauern sollte und an anderem liegen sollte, dann wollen wir hier doch den Gedanken niemals aus unserem Herzen, aus unserer Seele schwinden lassen, daß gerade an dieser Stätte, wo es unsere Bewegung bis zum sichtbaren Bau gebracht hat, die allerintensivste Anforderung besteht, diese Bewegung so positiv, so konkret, so energisch zu fassen, daß wir sie wirklich gemeinsam durchtragen, was auch kommen mag. Daher, wo wir auch sein werden, wollen wir in Gedanken treu, energisch und herzlich zusammenstehen und uns hören, auch wenn dies nicht mit physischen Ohren geschehen kann. Aber wir werden uns nur recht hören, wenn wir in starken Gedanken dieses Hören suchen, und nicht in Sentimentalitäten. Für Sentimentalitäten ist unsere Zeit wenig geeignet.

In diesem Sinne sage ich Ihnen dieses Abschiedswort, das für viele ein Begrüßungswort ist für ein nunmehr sich anschließendes Zusammenleben mehr im Geiste, als es hier sein konnte auf dem physischen Plan. Hoffentlich kann auch das letztere in nicht ferner Zeit wieder einmal da sein.

Twenty-fifth Lecture

It seems right to me today to offer some thoughts on the meaning and nature of our spiritual movement, which we call anthroposophical spiritual science. It will now be necessary to take up one or another aspect that has arisen in the course of time in which this movement has partly prepared itself and partly unfolded. If, in doing so, one or other remark of a personal nature is made — which is only to be understood as apparent — this is not for personal reasons, but because the personal aspect is, as it were, the point of reference for what is being expressed objectively. That there is a certain necessity in a spiritual movement which, in a sense, makes humanity more deeply acquainted with the sources of being, especially of human being itself, should be obvious to everyone from the fact that contemporary culture, as it has developed, has in a certain sense actually led itself ad absurdum. For upon deeper reflection, no one can approve of describing the events taking place today as anything other than a kind of reduction ad absurdum of the impulses that have been alive in recent developments.

Now, from what you have learned in spiritual science, you will have sensed how everything that appears to be happening externally is ultimately based on people's ideas and thoughts. What happens in terms of deeds, what unfolds in material life, is, one might say, entirely the result of what people imagine. And the view of the external world as it is formed within humanity today presents a picture that strongly indicates inadequate powers of thought. I have already used the expression: events are actually beyond people's comprehension because thinking has become thin and is no longer sufficient to intervene in reality. Words such as those spoken by Maja, about the outer appearance to which things on the physical plane are subject, should be taken much more seriously by those who already know them than they often are. And they should be deeply, deeply engraved in the entire consciousness of the times. Only therein can the healing of the damage that has befallen humanity with a certain necessity lie. Anyone who tries to look intelligently into the driving force behind actions, that is, into the driving force behind the images of thoughts today, will already recognize the necessity, the inner necessity, of grasping the human soul through more powerful, more reality-friendly thoughts.

Now, this is basically the foundation of our entire movement: to give human souls thoughts that are more realistic, thoughts that are more imbued with reality than the abstract conceptual templates of the present. But one cannot emphasize enough how much humanity today loves the abstract and does not want to develop any awareness that the comprehensible shadow cannot really intervene in the fabric of being. This was particularly evident in the fourteen or fifteen-year history of our anthroposophical movement. It will become increasingly necessary for our friends to imbue themselves with the specific nature of this anthroposophical movement. You know how often it has been emphasized that we would have liked to do full justice to the beautiful word “theosophy” and that we have long resisted abandoning this word as the movement's watchword. But you are all familiar with the circumstances that made this necessary. And it is good to keep the matter as clear as possible in our minds. You know that, with all good will — for this good will was anchored in many of you — a connection was made with the so-called Theosophical Movement as founded by Blavatsky and continued in the efforts of Sinnett, Besant, and so on. It is really not unnecessary that, especially in the face of the many malicious distortions coming from outside, our members repeatedly emphasize that the movement that became anthroposophical originated from an independent center, that what we now have really had its seeds in the lectures I gave in Berlin, which were then recorded in the book on the mysticism of the Middle Ages. And it must be emphasized again and again that through this book, the theosophical movement that existed at that time drew closer to us, not we to it. This theosophical movement, in whose wake we found ourselves in the early years, was not without connection to other occult endeavors of the 19th century, and I have pointed out this connection in lectures given here. But one must look at the characteristic features of this movement itself.

If I am to highlight a truly characteristic feature, I would say factual, it must be the one I often, or at least frequently, alluded to when I first published in the magazine Lucifer-Gnosis what later became entitled “From the Akashic Records.” One of the representatives of the Theosophical Society who read this asked how things were actually brought out of the spiritual world. And from further conversation with him, it was very clear that he wanted to know by what more or less mediumistic means these things were obtained. It was impossible to imagine that these things could come about in any other way than through a person with mediumistic abilities who lowers their consciousness and then brings forth something from the subconscious, which is then recorded. What is actually behind this? It was completely beyond the imagination of the man who spoke in this way that these things could be investigated while maintaining full consciousness, even though he was a highly trained and exceptionally educated representative of the theosophical movement. This was far from the minds of many members of this movement because many of them have something that is very common in modern intellectual life: a certain distrust of the power of human cognition. They do not believe that human cognition has the power to truly penetrate the inner nature of things. They believe that human cognitive faculties are limited and that the intellect actually only gets in the way when one wants to penetrate into the essence of things; therefore, it must be suppressed. One must penetrate into the essence of things without the human intellect being active. This is indeed the case with the medium, where mistrust in the human intellect is made into a decisive impulse. There, with the exclusion of all rational cognitive activity, a purely experimental attempt is made to let the spirit speak.

One can say that, in a certain way, this mood had permeated the theosophical movement, as it still was at the beginning of our century; this mood was very much at home there. And one could sense this mood when one followed with insight certain things that had become established as opinions, views, and perspectives in the theosophical movement. You know that in the 1890s and then in the 20th century, Mrs. Besant played a major role in the theosophical movement. People listened to what she had to say. Her lectures were at the center of theosophical activity in London and also in India. Nevertheless, it was strange to hear the personalities from Mrs. Besant's circle speak about Mrs. Besant. In 1902, this struck me as very significant. Mrs. Besant was considered in many respects, especially by the learned men in her circle, to be a thoroughly uneducated woman; but while on the one hand it was strongly emphasized that she was an uneducated woman, on the other hand, they saw in her, I would say, unclouded by scientific ideas, semi-mediumistic way of working, which they praised, a means of gaining knowledge. I would say that people did not trust themselves to gain knowledge. Nor, of course, did they trust Mrs. Besant's alert consciousness to gain knowledge. But because she had not attained complete alertness through scientific training, she was regarded, in a sense, as a means through which manifestations from the spiritual world could enter the physical world. This was extremely pronounced in her immediate surroundings. And one can already say that the way people spoke gave the impression that Mrs. Besant was regarded at the beginning of the 20th century as a kind of modern Sibyl. In this vein, one could hear disparaging remarks about Mrs. Besant's scientific abilities, especially in her immediate circle, and one could hear how people did not credit her with any ability to critically assess her inner experiences. That was definitely the mood, which was of course carefully concealed — I don't want to say kept secret — from the wider circle of theosophical leaders.

Apart from what came to light through Mrs. Besant's Sibylline nature, at the end of the 19th century, alongside Blavatsky's “Secret Doctrine,” there was a kind of Bible of the theosophical movement, namely Sinnett's book, or rather Sinnett's books. Now, when people first started talking about Sinnett's books in close circles, it was not something that could be called an appeal to people's own powers of insight. For it was considered very important in the innermost circles that Sinnett had not added anything from his own experiences to what he had published. The value of a book such as Esoteric Buddhism by Sinnett precisely in the fact that its content had come about entirely through “magical letters,” through letters that had been precipitated, that is, sent from an unknown source into the physical plane, one might say thrown in, and whose content was then simply processed into this book Esoteric Buddhism.

All these things created a mood among the wider circles of theosophical leaders that was sentimental and worshipful in the highest degree. People looked up, as it were, to a wisdom that had fallen from heaven and, as is humanly understandable, transferred their veneration to personalities. But this contained the impetus for a strong insincerity, which could be traced very clearly in individual manifestations.

For example, as early as 1902, I heard talk in the closest circles in London that Sinnett was actually a subordinate spirit. One of the leading personalities told me at the time: Yes, Sinnett can be compared to a journalist from the Frankfurter Zeitung, transferred to India, a journalistic spirit who simply had the good fortune to receive the master's letters and to use them in a journalistic way that appeals to the people of modern times in the book Esoteric Buddhism! — But you also know that all this was already contained in a wide range of literature, in a broad body of writings. For it is true that, I will not say a deluge, but a flood of writings appeared in the last decades of the 19th century and in the first decades of the 20th century, which were intended to lead people in some way to the spiritual world. Among these writings were some that were directly linked to ancient traditions as preserved in various occult brotherhoods. It is interesting, in fact, to trace the development of these traditions.

I have often pointed out how, in the second half of the 18th century, old traditions were revived in a corresponding manner in the circle led by Saint-Martin, the “Unknown Philosopher.” And if one takes up the writings of Saint-Martin today, especially “Truth and Errors,” one finds in them very, very much of a final form that old occult traditions have taken on. If one traces these traditions further back, one arrives at ideas that dominate the concrete, that intervene in reality. In Saint-Martin, the concepts have already become very shadowy, but they are still the shadows of concepts that were once fully alive; old traditions were revived for the last time in a shadowy form. And so, in Saint-Martin, one finds the healthiest concepts, but in a form that is a last flickering. It is particularly interesting to see how Saint-Martin fights against the concept of matter, which had already emerged at that time. What has this concept of matter gradually become? It has become a way of viewing the whole world as a mist of atoms that move and collide in some way and, through their configuration, bring about everything that forms the world around us. Theoretically, materialism reached its peak when everything else was denied except this atomic world. Saint-Martin still held the view that the whole atomistic theory, indeed the belief that matter is something real, is nonsense, as is actually the case. When one gets to grips with the things that surround us chemically and physically, one ultimately does not arrive at atoms, at material things, but at spiritual essences. The concept of matter is an auxiliary concept; it corresponds to nothing real. For where, to use Da Bois-Reymond's expression, “matter haunts space,” there is really spirit present, and if one wants to speak of an atom, one could at most speak of the atom as a small impulse of the spirit, albeit Ahriman's. This was a healthy concept of Saint-Martin, his rejection of the concept of matter.

It was also an enormously healthy concept of Saint-Martin that he pointed out in a lively way the fact that human, concrete, individual languages are based on a universal language. And this could be better understood at that time than later, because people were still more familiar with the language that is closest to the original universal language, the Hebrew language, because they could still sense something of the flow of the spirit in the words of the Hebrew language and thus something spiritual and ideal, something truly spiritual, in the words themselves. In Saint-Martin, therefore, you still find concrete spiritual references to what the word “Hebrew” itself means. And in the whole way he understands this, you can see how the living awareness of a relationship between human beings and the spiritual world was still present. For the word “Hebrew” is related to “travel”: a Hebrew is someone who is on a journey through life, who experiences and learns on a journey. This living presence in the world is contained in this word, but it also underlies all other words in the Hebrew language when they are truly felt.

Now, Saint-Martin could no longer find any ideas in his time — these must first be gained through spiritual science — that point more precisely and strongly to the original language. But the original language stood before his soul as an intuition. With this, however, he did not have such an abstract concept of the unity of the human race as was then developed in the 19th century, but rather a concrete concept of it. This concrete concept of the unity of the human race also led him to make certain spiritual truths fully alive, at least in his circle, for example, the truth that human beings, if they so desire, can truly enter into relationships with spiritual beings of higher hierarchies. It is a cardinal tenet of Saint-Martin that every human being can enter into relationships with spiritual beings of higher hierarchies. But through this, something of that old, genuine mystical mood still lived in him, which knew that knowledge cannot be absorbed merely in concepts if it is to be real knowledge, but must be absorbed in a certain state of mind, that is, after a certain preparation of the soul. Then it becomes the spiritual life of the soul. But this was linked to a certain set of demands, evolutionary demands on human souls that wanted to claim some kind of participation in evolution. And from this point of view, it is so interesting when Saint-Martin then moves on to what he gains from his knowledge, from science — which is spiritual for him — to politics, when he comes to political concepts. For there he has the precise demand: every ruler must be a kind of Melchizedek, a kind of priest-regent.

And just imagine, if this demand, which was made in a relatively small circle before the French Revolution broke out, if this demand had not become a twilight but a dawn, if something of it had passed into the consciousness of the time about the Melchizedek-like fundamental character of those who have to intervene in human destiny with their ideas and powers, how different everything would have been in the 19th century from what it actually was! For the 19th century was truly as far removed as possible from the view that has just been characterized. The demand that politicians should be required to pass through the school of Melchizedek would, of course, have been dismissed with a smile.

One must point to Saint-Martin, because in him there is something like a last glimmer of the wisdom that has developed from distant antiquity. This had to fade away, because the humanity of the future must ascend to spiritual life in a different way. It must ascend in a different way, because the mere preservation, the mere traditional propagation of old ideas would never have corresponded to the germinating forces of the human soul. These still undeveloped forces of the human soul tend toward a situation in which, in the course of the 20th century, a larger number of people—as has often been emphasized—will truly gain insight into the etheric processes. And one can describe the first third of the 20th century as a critical period in which a large number of people must become aware of how events must be viewed in the ether, which, like the air, lives in our environment. We have pointed out in particular an event that must be seen in the ether if humanity does not want to fall into decadence: we have pointed to the vision of the etheric Christ. This necessity must come about. And humanity must prepare itself not to allow these forces, which are already germinating, to wither away. These forces must not be allowed to wither away, for if we imagine that they were to wither away, what would happen then? Then, in the 1940s and 1950s, the human mind would take on very strange forms in the widest circles. Concepts would arise in the mind that would have an oppressive effect. If only materialism were to propagate, such concepts would arise which would indeed be present in the human mind, but which would rise up from the subconscious, and for which one would not know the reason why one actually has them. A feeling of oppression during waking hours would occur as a general neurasthenic phenomenon in a large number of people. People would say to themselves: Yes, I have to think that, but I don't know why; I have to think that, I don't know why.

This can only be counteracted by implanting concepts in the human mind that come from spiritual science. Otherwise, the powers of insight into the concepts that arise, into the ideas that come, will weaken. And not only Christ, but also other manifestations of etheric events that human beings should be able to see will elude them, will pass them by. But they will not only suffer a loss as a result, they will also have to develop forces that are pathological substitutes for those that should develop as healthy ones.

An instinctive need among wider circles of humanity gave rise to the endeavor that then found expression in the flood of literature and writings I have spoken of. Now, you see, both what came to light in the actual theosophical movement, namely in the Theosophical Society, and the other flood of all kinds of writings working toward the spiritual, were viewed with peculiarity by the Central European anthroposophical movement because there was a peculiar phenomenon. Due to the evolutionary conditions of the 19th and early 20th centuries, it was possible for a large number of people to find spiritual nourishment in the literature that came to light. It was also possible for a large number of people to be terribly astonished by what Sinnett and Blavatsky brought to light. But this did not fit in very well with the Central European consciousness. For those who are familiar with Central European literature, there is no doubt that it is not possible to simply follow in the wake of this Central European literature and behave like so many others in response to what came flooding in, simply because Central European literature has so much to offer — hidden only by a peculiar language that many people do not want to engage with, hidden — which those seeking spirituality want to have.

We have often spoken of one of the spirits who can really prove how easily spiritual life reigns and weaves in artistic literature, in aesthetic literature: Novalis. If we had wanted to create a more prosaic mood, we could just as well have cited Friedrich Schlegel, who wrote about the wisdom of the Indians in the way someone writes who not only reproduces the wisdom of the Indians, but also recreates it from the Western spirit. We could have referred to many things that have nothing to do with the flood I have spoken of and which, I would say, have been characterized historically in my book Vom Menschenrätsel (The Riddle of Man). In people like Steffens, Schubert, and Troxler, one finds everything much more precise, much more in line with modern standards than in the flood of literature that suddenly broke forth in the last decades of the 19th century and at the beginning of the 20th century. It must be said that, compared to the depth found in Goethe, Schlegel, and Schelling, the things that were marveled at as high wisdom are truly trivial, truly trivial. For ultimately, it is true that for someone who has absorbed Goethe's spirit, even something like “light on the path” is trivial. I think this should not be forgotten. For those who have absorbed the high spirit of Novalis or Friedrich Schlegel, or who have enjoyed Schelling's “Bruno,” all this theosophical literature, as it has appeared, is nevertheless only something vulgar and trivial. Hence, we were faced with the peculiar phenomenon that there were many people who had a serious, sincere desire to attain a spiritual life, but who, due to their spiritual nature, were ultimately able to find a certain satisfaction precisely in the trivial literature I have described.

On the other hand, the development of the 19th century had gradually taken on the character that scientifically educated people, for reasons I have often discussed, had become materialistic thinkers with whom nothing could be done. But if one wants to process in a truly definitive way what came to light at the turn of the 18th to the 19th century through Schelling, Schlegel, Fichte, and others, then one needs at least a few scientific concepts. One cannot do without them. Therefore, we were faced with a very peculiar phenomenon. It was not possible to bring about at the right time what might have been desirable, namely that a number, even if only a small number, of scientifically educated personalities would have been able to develop their scientific concepts in such a way that they would have found a connection to spiritual science. These people were nowhere to be found; they simply did not exist. This is a fundamental difficulty that must be clearly understood.

Suppose one approaches anthroposophy with people who have undergone modern scientific education. Now, if people have gone through scientific education and become lawyers, doctors, philologists — not to mention theologians — then they have reached a certain age in life when it becomes necessary to actually apply in life what they have, I don't want to say learned, but what they have absorbed, in the way that life demands. Then they no longer have the inclination or the flexibility to work their way out of their concepts toward something else. And that is why, precisely when one approaches scientifically educated people with anthroposophy, one is most often rejected, even though it would take very little for today's scientists to build a bridge. But they do not want to build this bridge. It confuses them. Why do they need it? They have learned what life demands of them, and they do not want anything else because it confuses them, because it makes them uncertain about their beliefs. And that is why it will take some time before men who have absorbed the education of their time—as it is defined—build the bridge, at least a larger number of men. We must be patient. It will not be easy, especially in certain areas. But before this bridge-building can be seriously tackled in certain areas, there will always be major obstacles and inhibitions. Above all, it will be necessary to build this bridge in the areas that today constitute the various faculties, with the exception of theology.

Jurisprudence is increasingly reducing itself to mere conceptual templates that are completely unsuitable for governing life. Nevertheless, they govern life because life on the physical plane is Maya—if it were not Maya, they could not govern it—but by being applied, they bring the world more and more into confusion. It is actually the application of current jurisprudence, particularly in civil law, that is merely confusing the situation. People just don't see it clearly. How could they? They don't pursue what arises from the application of legal templates to reality; instead, they study jurisprudence, which means they become lawyers or judges, they adopt the concepts and apply them. What comes of the application is of no concern. Or one sees how life is, despite the existence of jurisprudence, which is very difficult to learn, not only because lawyers usually waste their first semesters, but also for other reasons. One sees this life and sees that it is becoming confused, and at most one complains.

In medicine, the situation is more serious. If medicine continues to develop in the materialistic direction it has been taking since the second third of the 19th century, it will completely reduce itself to absurdity; it will ultimately degenerate into absolute medical specialization. But the situation is more serious insofar as it was necessary for this trend to arise, because this trend has had its good points, but now it must be overcome. The materialistic direction of medicine has brought surgery to a certain level, and it was only through the one-sidedness of medicine that surgery was able to achieve the perfection it has attained. But real medicine has suffered as a result and must now be driven by a reversal toward a spiritualization, which is being resisted enormously today. Spiritual implementation is most necessary in everything related to education. Well, we have talked about that many times. Bridges must be built everywhere.

Above all, even though it seems most remote, it is necessary that bridges be built to spiritual life precisely from technology, from immediate practical life. For the fifth post-Atlantean period has to do with the development of the material world, and if human beings are not to degenerate completely, that is, become mere servants of the machine, whereby they become nothing more than animals, then the path from the machine to spiritual life must be found. For the technical practitioner, it is first and foremost necessary that he take spiritual impulses into his soul life. This will happen at the moment when technical students are encouraged to think a little more than is currently the case, so that they connect the individual things they are taught with one another. They do not do this today. They study mathematics, they study descriptive geometry, they also study geometry of position at times; they study pure mechanics, analytical mechanics, technical mechanics, they then study the various individual branches that are more practical, but no real connection between the individual things is sought at all. At the moment when people are, I would say, driven to apply common sense to things, they are driven — simply by the stage of development of the individual branches I have mentioned — to penetrate into the essence of things and then into the spiritual. Indeed, it is precisely from the machine that we will have to find our way into the spiritual world.

Now, I say all this to indicate the difficulty that the spiritual scientific movement faces today, because it has not yet been able to find those who are capable of creating an aura of being taken seriously. This movement suffers most of all from not being taken seriously. And it is remarkable how this comes to light in every detail. If some of the things that have been published had appeared without people knowing that they were written by someone involved in the theosophical movement, they would have been taken seriously and understood quite differently. But simply because the person concerned was involved in the theosophical movement, the matter was branded in such a way that it was not taken seriously. It is very important to bear this in mind. One can be confronted with trivialities, with real trivialities. I would like to mention one triviality, for example, because it has come to my attention in the last few days, not out of silly vanity, but simply to make you aware of how things stand.

In my book “Vom Menschenrätsel” (The Riddle of Man), I discuss Karl Christian Planck as one of those minds who, based on certain principles, worked toward the spiritual, albeit still in an abstract form. I have not only written about Karl Christian Planck in this book, but have also spoken about him at length in a number of cities over the past few winters, pointing out how he has been misjudged and misunderstood, and above all drawing attention to one circumstance. I have pointed out sharply that in the 1880s, 1870s, 1860s, and 1850s, this man thought things that were necessary to carry out in relation to the connections between industrial and social life. If someone back then had been able to put into practice the great ideas, the realistic ideas that this man had, then—and I'm not exaggerating—the suffering that humanity is now going through probably wouldn't have happened. This suffering is largely due to the fact that humanity is living in a completely wrong social structure. I have pointed out that it is our duty not to let people end up where Karl Christian Planck ended up, who in the end was completely alienated from all love for the world of external physical reality. Planck was a Swabian and lived in Stuttgart. He was rejected by the philosophy faculty in Tübingen, which would have given him the opportunity to have some influence, and I pointed out quite deliberately that the man finally came to say in the preface to his “Testament of a German”: “Not even my bones shall lie in my ungrateful fatherland.” Those were harsh words. They are words that people today can use in response to the dull-wittedness of those who refuse to see what is real. I deliberately quoted this passage about bones in Stuttgart, because that was Planck's immediate homeland. Essentially, there was not much reaction at the time, even though events were already taking place that showed how much reason there was to understand the situation.

Now, however, after about a year and a half, the following note is appearing in the Swabian newspapers:

“Karl Christian Planck. It was not just one individual, but many far-sighted minds who foresaw the current world war. But no one anticipated its full extent with such certainty and at the same time grasped its causes and effects as sharply as our Swabian compatriot Planck.”

I said at the time: Karl Christian Planck foresaw this world war so accurately that he even pointed out explicitly that Italy would not side with the Central Powers, even though the alliance had not yet been formed at the time, but was only being worked towards when he made his statement.

“This war appeared to him to be the inevitable goal toward which the political and economic developments of the last half-century must lead.”

That is really so!

“But just as he exposed the evils of his time, he also pointed the way that can lead us to a different state of affairs.”

That is the important thing! Only no one listened!

"From him we learn the deeper causes of war profiteering and other dark spots that appear alongside so many beautiful and joyful things in the picture of today's popular life. But he also knows the deeper inner forces of popular life and knows how they can be liberated to bring about the moral and legal renewal for which our best people long. Despite all the painful disappointments his contemporaries caused him, he believed in these forces and their victorious emergence."

Only he came to such a statement as I have quoted!

“It will therefore be gratefully welcomed in wider circles that the philosopher's daughter intends to give several public lectures introducing Planck's socio-political ideas.”

It is interesting that the philosopher's daughter is now appearing after a year and a half. This note appeared in a Stuttgart newspaper. At the time when I pointed out the philosopher Karl Christian Planck in Stuttgart as clearly as possible, no one took any notice, nor did anyone feel compelled to make it known in any way. A year and a half later, his daughter appears, who was presumably already alive when her father died in 1880, and who has therefore waited until now to speak up for him in public lectures.

This is an example that can be multiplied not tenfold but a hundredfold, and which shows time and again how difficult it is to bring to bear both the comprehensiveness of spiritual science and the individual practical and concrete aspects, even though there is of course an absolute necessity for doing so. For only through the comprehensiveness of spiritual science — this must be understood — is healing possible for what lives in the culture of our time.

And so it was necessary to keep what we call anthroposophically oriented spiritual science in some way on the serious path from which the theosophical movement had increasingly strayed. The spirit that had been grasped in the Greek philosophical period had to permeate things, even if this led to the opinion that the writings were difficult to read. And that was not always easy. For it encountered great difficulties within the movement itself. And one of the greatest difficulties was that it took more than a decade to overcome a fundamental abstraction. It was necessary to work slowly and patiently to overcome a fundamental abstraction that was among the most harmful things in our movement. This basic abstraction simply consisted in clinging to the word “theosophy,” regardless of whether something that called itself “theosophical” was really imbued with the spirituality of modern life or whether it was Rohm's or some other kind of stuff. If it was called “theosophical,” then it was equal, because that was what “theosophical tolerance” demanded. Only very slowly and gradually was it possible to oppose these things, because one could not say so outright from the beginning, otherwise it would have appeared presumptuous and would have given rise to the feeling that there is indeed a difference between things and that tolerance, used in this sense, expresses nothing other than the most absolute lack of character in judgment. What is important is precisely to work toward such knowledge, toward such insight that is equal to reality, that can take on the demands of reality. Only a spiritual science that works with the concepts of our time can take on the demands of reality. And it is not just living in pleasant theosophical ideas, but striving for spiritual reality that is what we must aim for.

Some people today have no idea what it actually means to strive for reality, because they do not yet want to gain full clarity about the obsolescence of the concepts with which we work today. Let me give you just a small sample from a seemingly remote area, from a struggle for reality in ideas. Please allow me to present this somewhat abstract example; it will only be brief.

In the 19th century, there were always individuals who took up the challenge of reality as it was about to break into entirely new conceptions of life, not only in the trivial sense, but in the sense of conceptions of life that are needed in practical life. Thus, at a certain time in the 19th century, the parallel concept, which had been valid since the time of Euclid, had become fragile. When are two lines parallel? Well, who would not be clear that two lines are parallel if they are extended so far that they do not intersect! That is also the definition: Two straight lines are parallel if they are extended so far that they do not intersect. There were people in the 19th century who devoted their entire lives to clarifying this concept because it did not stand up to precise thinking. And I would like to read you a letter written by one of the two Bolyais, Wolfgang Bolyai, to show you what it means to wrestle with ideas. The mathematician Gauf began to think about the fact that the definition “Two lines are parallel if they intersect at an infinite distance or not at all” actually says nothing at all, that it is just empty talk. The elder Bolyai, the father, was a friend and student of Gauss, but he also encouraged his son, the younger Bolyai. And the father wrote to his son:

"You must not try the parallels in that way; I know that way to its end — I too have traversed that bottomless night, every light, every joy of my life has been extinguished in it — I implore you by God! Leave the doctrine of parallels in peace—you should have the same abhorrence for it as for dissolute company; it can rob you of all your leisure, your health, your peace, and all your happiness in life. This groundless darkness would perhaps swallow up a thousand giant towers of Newton, it would never become light on earth, and the poor human race would never have anything completely pure, not even geometry; it is a deep and eternal wound in my soul; may God protect you from ever allowing it to eat so deeply into you. This robs one of the desire for geometry, for earthly life; I had resolved to sacrifice myself for the truth; I would have been willing to become a martyr, if only I could have handed geometry over to the human race cleansed of this blemish. I have accomplished tremendous, terrifying works, far better than anything that had been done before, but I have never found complete satisfaction; here, however, the saying applies: si paullum a summo discessit, vergit ad imum. I returned when I realized that the bottom of this night cannot be reached from the earth, without consolation, regretting myself and the whole human race. Learn from my example; in wanting to know the parallels, I remained ignorant, and they took away all the flowers of my life and my time. Herein lies the root of all my later mistakes, and it rained down on me from the clouds of my home. If I had been able to discover the parallels, I would have become an angel, even if no one had known that I had found them.

... Don't try it, you will never prove that the lower straight line can be cut with the incessant bends of the same measure; there is an eternally receding circle in this matter — a labyrinth that always lures you in — whoever enters it becomes impoverished, like a treasure hunter, and remains ignorant. Should you come across any absurdity, everything is in vain, you cannot present it as an axiom; ....

... The pillars of Hercules stand in these regions, do not go a single step further, or you are lost."

Nevertheless, the younger Bolyai continued along this path and devoted his entire life even more than his father to arriving at a concrete concept in a field where one seems to have a very real concept, but which is really just empty talk. He wanted to find out whether there really is such a thing as two straight lines that do not intersect even at infinite distances; for no one has ever traveled this infinite distance, because it would require infinite time, and that has not yet elapsed. It is mere rhetoric. These mere rhetorical devices, these mere shadows of concepts, are found in the broadest branches of concepts. I just wanted to draw your attention to something that is being deducted, so that you can see how thoroughly the minds of the 19th century suffered from the abstract nature of concepts! It is interesting to see that while all schools teach that parallel lines are those that do not intersect, no matter how long they are extended, there have been individuals for whom working with this idea has become hell because they tried to penetrate to a real concept, not a conceptual template.

Yes, the struggle with reality is what matters, what people in our time more or less flee from, do not want, because they “understand,” or at least believe they understand, that they have “high ideals”! Yes, it is not ideals that matter, but the impulses that work with reality. Imagine someone standing up and saying these fine words: “The time must finally come when the most capable find their rightful place in life.” That is a very fine program! One could even found societies with the program of reforming society so that the most capable come to their rightful place; one could even base political science on this sentence. But it is not the statement that matters, but its being steeped in reality. For what good is it if this statement is still valid, if it is advocated by so many societies as their first programmatic point, but the people who have the power to do so still consider their nephews to be the most capable! It is not a matter of asserting the abstract principle that the most capable should be placed in the right position, but of having the ability to actually find the most capable, not the nephew! One must understand how abstract concepts fall through the cracks of life, that is, in the crevices of life, how they mean nothing anywhere, and how our entire time is filled with beautiful concepts, against which nothing can be said in terms of their conceptual beauty; but what matters is the grasp of reality, the knowledge of reality.

Let us imagine that the lion wanted to establish a world order for the animals, wanted to divide the kingdom of the earth in such a way that it was just. What would the lion do? I do not believe that it would occur to the lion to insist that in the desert the small animals that the lion otherwise eats should have the opportunity not to be eaten by the lion! I don't think so. Instead, he would consider it his lion's right to eat the small animals he encounters. On the other hand, it might occur to the lion to establish a just rule for the sea, for example, that sharks should not eat small fish. That could happen, and it could even happen that the lion established a terribly good animal order, so that in the sea and at the North Pole and elsewhere where the lion is not at home, all animals would live extraordinarily well in accordance with their freedom. But whether he would like to introduce exactly the same order in the lion's territory is highly questionable. The lion knows very well what a just world order is, and he will apply it very well to the sharks.

Well, let's not talk about the lion, let's talk about Hungaricus. I told you recently that a small brochure has been published: “Conditions de Paix de l'Allemagne.” This brochure is now sailing in the wake of that European map, which already found its first announcement in the famous note from the Entente to Wilson for the dismemberment of Austria. We have already spoken about this. Hungaricus is, with the exception of Switzerland, in complete agreement with this map. He first speaks very wisely—as most people speak wisely these days—about the right of nations, including the right of small nations, about the right of the state to coincide with the power of the nation, and so on. All of that is very nice, of course, just as the statement that the most capable must come into their rightful place is also very nice. As long as one remains within the realm of these vague concepts, one can lick one's fingers if one is an abstract idealist and reads Hungaricus. For Swiss people, Hungaricus is more pleasant to read than the map I showed you, because Hungaricus does not wipe Switzerland off the map, but actually enlarges it; he attributes Vorarlberg and Tyrol to Switzerland. That is why I advise Swiss people in particular to read Hungaricus instead of sticking to that map. But now he also divides the world. One could say that he grants all peoples, even the smallest, the absolute right to free development in his own way—if he does not believe that he will offend the Entente in any way. He embellishes the words a little: in the case of Bohemia, he says independence, in the case of Ireland, he naturally says autonomy. Well, that's how it's done, isn't it! One can embellish the matter. And so the world is cut to size, the world of Europe is divided up quite nicely, so that with the exception of the things I have just pointed out — so as not to cause offense — a real attempt has been made to assign the smallest nationalities to those states where the representatives of the Entente believe that the nationalities in question are at home. It matters less whether these small areas really have these nationalities than whether people on that side believe that they belong to these nationalities. So he is trying very hard to divide up the world: the world outside the desert — ah, pardon me — outside Hungary, because in Hungary he exercises his right of the lion! For the sharks, he establishes complete freedom! But the Magyar nation is his nation, and it must encompass not only what it already encompasses today — even though it only encompasses a minority of Magyars, and the majority is a different population — but it must become even larger. So there he is, completely the lion.

This shows how concepts are formed today, how people think today. One must study this to understand how necessary it is to find a transition to thinking that is steeped in reality. To do this, concepts such as those I am presenting to you here are necessary. And I want to show, and must show, how spiritual thinking leads to ideas that are in line with reality. Everywhere it is important to connect the right thought with a thing; then one recognizes whether the thing corresponds to reality or not.

Take, for example, the current Wilson note to the Senate. The model example may even be effective in a certain respect, but that is not what matters. What matters is that it contains “conceptual shadows.” If it is effective, it is because of the complexity of the times, on which the complexities themselves can have some influence. Take the matter quite objectively, but try to form a concept by which you can measure the reality, the real content that could be associated with these conceptual shadows. You need only ask yourself one question: Could the same note not have been written in 1913? All the idealisms contained therein could have been written in 1913 exactly as they are written today! You see, this is unrealistic thinking that believes in absolutes. To believe that something will always turn out “absolutely” is unrealistic thinking. And there is so little talent in the present day for recognizing this unrealistic thinking, because people only go for what is “right,” while what is realistic is just as important.

That is why I emphasized so strongly in my book “The Riddle of Man” that it is not only the logical that is to be considered, but also the realistic. Only a decision that takes into account a fact of the present, of the immediate present, would be worth more than all the phraseology. Perhaps historical documents in particular show that what is being said here is already connected with reality, because little by little those people have come to the surface who want to rule the world with abstractions, and this has led to the present state of affairs, while real thinking, which responds to things, finds reality everywhere. These realities are, I would say, so close at hand! Just think about it: take this real concept, this concept of reality, which I have already mentioned from another point of view in recent days, when I showed you how, from the south, what then became Italy, the priestly, cultic element penetrated, which created its opposition in Central European Protestantism, how the diplomatic-political emerged from the West, which in turn created its opposition, how the mercantile emerged from the northwest, which in turn created its opposition, and how in Central Europe an opposition must necessarily exist out of the general human condition. Let us once again imagine this radiation before us.

AltName

Already in the fourth post-Atlantean period, progress had been made in relation to the old fourfold division, where one spoke of castes, and this division of humanity began to be described somewhat differently. Plato spoke of the “teaching class”; the teaching class is that for which Rome, the priestly, papal Rome, had taken the monopoly. The teaching class has brought it about that it alone has established the dogmatic fixation of truth and does not allow anyone else to establish truths on their own. Only from here should the supply of doctrine, even in the highest matters, emanate.

In another sphere, the political-diplomatic is nothing other than Plato's military class. I have already explained to you how, despite so-called Prussian militarism, the military class developed in France, even though its foundations had been laid in Switzerland. The military class arises from this and naturally creates its own opposition by wanting to withhold from others what it claims for itself. It wants to rule the world alone in a soldierly manner, and when it encounters soldierly behavior from elsewhere, it considers it unjustified, just as Rome considers it unjustified when something from another quarter contradicts its truths about the world. And here we could just as well write “subsistence” instead of “mercantilism.” What really corresponds to this third factor in the deepest inner core — just think about it, meditate on it — is the nourishing class. What is being withheld here? Food, of course!

And if you apply the Platonic concepts correctly, in accordance with reality, then you will find reality everywhere. For then your concepts are such that you can immerse yourself in reality with them. You must find your way into reality from the concept, and the concept will find its way into the most concrete aspects of reality. The shadows of concepts never find reality, but with the shadows of concepts you can chat away very nicely, even idealize, whereas if you work with real concepts, you will understand things down to the smallest details.

And here you see the task of spiritual science: it leads to concepts through which you can truly discover life, which is only a creation of the spirit, but through which you will also struggle your way through in order to participate in life in a real way.

With regard to a concept, it is particularly necessary today, when humanity is so terribly oppressed by fate, to think realistically and in accordance with reality; for unreal concepts are particularly prevalent in this area. Today, pastors speak most unrealistically when they speak anywhere on any subject. Of course, they also speak most unrealistically about this war, because when they describe how Christianity or the consciousness of God is expressed in this war — well, that is, isn't it, enough to make you crawl up the walls, as they say. It turns into something terrible. Other things often turn into something terrible from this side, but it is precisely in this area that the absurdity becomes apparent.

Just pick up some writings about the war that are currently appearing from this side as sermons or the like, and look at them with common sense. It is, of course, obvious that people would say: Yes, must humanity be exposed to such a difficult and painful fate? Can't the divine spiritual forces intervene directly for the good of humanity to bring about salvation? And here it must be said: one speaks like this with a high appearance of right, but there is no concept that corresponds to reality, because one does not grasp what is actually grounded in reality from this point of view. — I will clarify what is important here by means of a comparison.

Human beings are organized in a certain way. He takes in food; food is organized or structured in such a way that he can continue his life. Imagine if he refused to eat, he would become emaciated, sick, and eventually starve to death. Is it natural to say that it is a weakness or something evil on the part of the deity to let a person starve to death if he absolutely refuses to eat? This is not a weakness of the deity. The deity has created food; man only needs to eat. The wisdom of God is evident in the fact that food sustains man; if he refuses to eat it, he cannot accuse God of letting him starve.

Now, apply this by analogy to the other: humanity must regard spiritual life as food. It is there from the gods, but it must be taken in. And to say, “The gods must intervene directly,” means nothing other than to say, “If I do not want to eat, the Lord God should satisfy me in some other way.” Through the wise order of the world, that which can lead to salvation is always there, but man must relate himself to it. Therefore, the spiritual life necessary for the 20th century will not come about by itself, but people must achieve it, they must take it up. If they do not take it up, increasingly gloomy times will come. And what happens outwardly will only be Maya, for the inner connection is that an old time is currently struggling with a new one. At present, the universal human is struggling everywhere against the individual. And if people today believe that nations are fighting each other, this is Maya — I have already pointed out other aspects of this Maya — it is only because things are grouping themselves in one way or another that does not correspond exactly to the inner process: in truth, there are completely different opposites at work. There is a contrast between the old and the new. Laws are emerging that are completely different from those that have traditionally ruled the world.

And again, it was Maya—that is, something that appears in a false form—that caused these other laws to emerge for socialism. Socialism is not connected with truth; above all, it is not connected with the spiritual, but is something that wants to connect itself with materialism. What actually wants to prevail is all-round harmonious humanity in opposition to the one-sidedness of the teaching, military, and farming classes. The struggle will certainly be long, but it can be waged in many different ways. If, in the 19th century, people had turned to a healthy way of life in the sense of Planck, the bloody practices of the first third of the 20th century would at least have been mitigated. Things cannot be mitigated with idealism, but by thinking realistically, and thinking realistically always means thinking spiritually.

Similarly, one can say: What must happen must happen. That which rises up must go through all of this in order to unite spirituality with the soul and grow up in the spiritual realm. The tragic fate of humanity consists in the fact that those who strive upward want to do so not under the sign of the spiritual, but under the sign of the material. This initially brought them into conflict with those brotherhoods which, on a large scale, want to develop the impulses of the mercantile nature, of the industrial-commercial nature, in a materialistic way. For that is the main conflict of the present; the other is only a side effect, often a terrible side effect. It is precisely there that one sees a terrible Maja. But it is already possible that things are being pursued in different ways. It would have been necessary for other people to have been in power instead of the agents of the brotherhoods I have spoken of. For then we would be engaged in peace negotiations today, and the Christmas call for peace would not have been shouted down!

Now, it will be extremely difficult to find clear and realistic concepts and ideas in relation to certain things; but everyone must try to find them in their own field. And anyone who penetrates a little into the meaning of spiritual science and compares this meaning of spiritual science with other things that are happening in the present will see how this spiritual science is the only way to arrive at concepts that are true to reality.

I wanted to address this to you as a serious word in these times, show you, so to speak — even though the task of spiritual science can only be understood from the spirit itself, not in consideration of what has been discussed today, but only from knowledge, from the spirit itself — what the significance and essence of spiritual science is for the present, and how necessary it would be for everything that can now be done to make spiritual science known to actually happen. It is already necessary in these difficult times that we not only take spiritual science into our heads, but that we truly take it into our warm hearts. For only when we take it into the warmth of our hearts will we be able to develop the strength that the present needs. And then no one should think of themselves as unsuitable or not strong enough to do what is necessary in their own place. Through their karma, everyone will find the opportunity in their own place to ask the right questions of fate at the right time. Even if that right time is not today or tomorrow, it will come in some way. That is why it is important to stand firm and secure in the impulses of this spiritual movement once you have understood them. Today in particular, it is necessary to set this firmness and certainty as a goal. For either something significant must happen from some quarter—which could be, but cannot be counted on—in the near future, or all conditions of life will face great difficulties. And it would be thoughtless not to realize this. What we now call war could last two and a half years, and conditions remained as bearable as they are now; but now it cannot go on for another year. And movements such as ours will also have to undergo the test. It will not be possible to say: When will we come together again? — or: Why are we not coming together? — or: Why is this or that not happening? Instead, we will have to carry in our hearts, even through dangerous times, the secure feeling of belonging.

I wanted to say this to you now because it is possible that in the not too distant future there will be no means of transportation for us to come together again; I do not mean just permission, but the actual means of transportation. For the things that constitute modern cultural life cannot be maintained in the long run if something breaks into this modern cultural life that has emerged from it but contradicts it in the most eminent sense. But this is precisely the absurdity of things being produced by life itself that then contradict life itself. So we must be prepared for the fact that difficult times may also come for our movement. But they will not deter us if we have absorbed the inner security, clarity, and right feeling for the meaning and essence of the movement, if we can look beyond the individual in such serious times. This is precisely what our movement must achieve: to lift us above the individual, to direct our gaze to the great issues of humanity that are at stake. And the greatest of these is this: to gain an understanding of realistic thinking. — At every turn, everywhere, one finds the impossibility of realistic thinking. One must be wholeheartedly committed to such a cause, then one will not be led astray by all kinds of egoism.

That is what I would like to say to you today, as a kind of farewell, now that we must part for a while. Make yourselves strong — even if it should not be necessary — so that your hearts can carry through, even in spiritual loneliness, that which pulsates in spiritual science and with which we want to concern ourselves here. The very thought that we want to be sure will help a great deal, for thoughts are realities. Many of the difficulties that lie ahead can be overcome by our sincere and serious search in the direction that has been discussed here so often.

It will not be up to us who must now be away from here for a while; we will take care to return if possible. But even if it should take a long time and be due to other circumstances, we will never let the thought fade from our hearts and souls that it is precisely in this place, where our movement has brought us to the point of visible construction, that the most intense demand exists to grasp this movement so positively, so concretely, so energetically that we really carry it through together, whatever may come. Therefore, wherever we may be, let us stand together in our thoughts, loyal, energetic, and cordial, and listen to one another, even if this cannot be done with our physical ears. But we will only hear each other properly if we seek to hear with strong thoughts and not with sentimentality. Our time is not well suited to sentimentality.

With this in mind, I bid you farewell, which for many is a welcome to a life together that will now continue more in spirit than it could here on the physical plane. Hopefully, the latter will also be possible again in the not too distant future.