Ancient Myths, Their Meaning and Connection with Evolution
GA 180
12 January 1918, Dornach
Lecture VI
The matters which we are now discussing are connected with a fact that sounds strange at first hearing but which corresponds to a deep and significant truth—namely, man wanders over the earth but has in reality no true understanding of himself. One could say that this statement applies particularly to our own time. We know that once in ancient Greece the great and significant inscription ‘Know thyself’ stood on Apollo's temple as a challenge to those who sought for spiritual things. Nor was this inscription on the Delphic temple ‘Know thyself’ merely a phrase at that time, as we know from our various studies. For even in this Grecian age it was still possible to bring about a deeper knowledge of man than is possible at the present time. This present time, however, is also a challenge to us to strive again for a real knowledge of man, for a knowledge of what man on the earth actually is.
Now it seems as if the things that must be said in connection with this question are difficult to understand. In reality they are not, in spite of the fact that they sound as if they were difficult. They are only so for the present day because people are not accustomed to let their thinking and feeling flow into such currents as are necessary for a right understanding of something of this nature. The point is, that what we call understanding at the present day is actually the result of our always seeking to understand through abstract concepts. But one cannot understand everything through abstract concepts. Above all one cannot understand the human being through abstract concepts; one requires something different for the understanding of man. One must put oneself in the position of taking man as he wanders about over the earth, as a picture, as a picture which expresses something, which discloses something, which wants to reveal something to us. One must revive the consciousness that the human being is a riddle that wants to be solved. We shall not, however, solve the riddle of man if we are content to continue to be so indolent, so theoretic in our thinking as we now prefer. For you see, the human being is—this we have stressed again and again—a complicated being. Man is more, vastly more than the physical form that wanders about before our eyes as man—far, far more is man. But this physical structure that wanders round before our eyes as man, and all that belongs to it, is none the less an expression for the whole comprehensive being of man. And one can say: Not only can one recognize in the human form, in the physical man that goes about among us, what man is between birth and death here in the physical word, but, if one only will, one can also recognize in the human being what he is as immortal, as eternal being of soul. One must only develop a feeling that this human form is a complexity. Our modern science, which is made popular and so can reach everyone, is not fitted to call forth a feeling of what a miraculous structure this human being actually is, who wanders about on earth. One must regard man quite differently.
You have assuredly all seen a human skeleton—remember then that the human skeleton is actually twofold, if one disregards everything else. One could speak much more exactly, but if one disregards all the rest, the skeleton is a duality. You can easily lift up the skull from the skeleton; it is really only set upon it, and then the rest of the human being remains skull-less. The skull is very easily lifted off. The rest of the man without the skull is still a very complicated being, but we will now grasp it as a unit and leave aside its complexity. But we will first consider the duality which we see when we look at a human being, as, let us say, head-man, and for the rest trunk-man. And so too is the complete flesh and blood man a duality, though it is there less clearly shown.
Now in spiritual science we need not be so fond of comparisons as to treat them as absolute, develop them metaphysically—that we will not do. But by employing comparisons we wish to make various things clear. And so it is very natural, since it actually corresponds to what we see, to say: man in respect of his head is above all ruled by the spherical form. If one desires to express in a diagram what the human head is, we can say: man is ruled by the spherical form (see diagram).
If we wish to have a diagrammatic picture for the rest of man, we should naturally have to pay attention to the complications, only we will not do that today. You will, however, easily see that disregarding certain complications, just as schematically one can picture the human head as a sphere, so one can picture the rest of man in such a form as this (see diagram: moon form), only, of course, the two circles must be placed in varied positions according to the corpulence of each individual.

But we can, as it were, really conceive of man so—as spherical form and as moon-form. This has a deep inner justification; however we will not discuss this, but only think of the fact that the human being falls into these two members.
Now, man's head is in the first place a true apparatus for spiritual activity, for all that man can produce by way of human thoughts, human feelings. The head, the apparatus ... but, if we were committed to the thoughts, the feelings, that the head as apparatus can supply, we should never be in the position of really understanding the being of man. If we were committed to use the head alone as an instrument of our spiritual life, we should never be in the position of really saying ‘I’ to ourselves. For what is this head? This head is in truth, as it meets us in its globular form, an image of the whole cosmos, as the cosmos appears to you with all its stars, fixed stars, planets and comets; even meteors—irregularities, as we know—make their appearance in many heads. The human head is an image of the macrocosm, an image of the whole world. And only the prejudice of our time—I have indicated this in another connection—knows nothing of the fact that the whole world has a share in the coming about of a human head. But now, if through heredity, through birth, this human head is transposed to the earth, it can be no apparatus for comprehending the being of man himself. We have been given in our head an apparatus, as it were, which is like an extract of the whole world, but which is not competent to comprehend man. Why? Well, by reason of the fact that man is more than all that we can see and can think through our head. Many people say nowadays ‘there are limits to human knowledge, one cannot get beyond these limits!’ But this is only because they merely reckon with the wisdom of the head, and the wisdom of the head, it is true, does not get beyond certain limits. This wisdom of the head, my dear friends, has also made what a few days ago we described as the Greek Gods. The Greek Gods have proceeded from the wisdom of the head. They are the upper Gods; they are therefore only Gods for all that the head of man can encompass with its wisdom.
Now I have often brought to your attention that besides this external mythology the Greeks had their Mysteries. The Greeks revered in the Mysteries other Gods as well as the celestial Gods, namely, the Chthonic Gods. And of one who was initiated in the Mysteries one could say with truth: he learns to know the upper and the lower Gods, the Upper and the Lower Gods. The upper Gods were those of the Zeus-circle; but they only have rulership over what is spread out before the senses, and what the intellect can understand. The human being is more than this. Man is rooted with his being in the kingdom of the lower Gods, in the kingdom of the Chthonic Gods.
But it is no good, my dear friends, if one only looks at the part of man which I have drawn here in the sketch. If one is to turn one's mind to the rooting of man in the kingdom of the lower Gods then one must complete this drawing and make it so: one must also, as it were, include the unillumined moon. (See drawing below.) In other words, one must regard the head of man differently from the rest of the organism. With the rest of the organism one must far more have in mind what is spiritual, what is super-sensible and invisible. The head of man as it confronts us is externally complete. All that is spiritual has formed for itself an image in the head. In the rest of man that is not the case; the remaining part is only a fragment as physical man, and it is not enough for the rest of man if one takes this bodily fragment which wanders visibly about on earth.
Now this already shows us that we must accept man as complicated. But, does what I have just said ever come before us in life? What I have just said seems to be abstract, it seems paradoxical and hard to understand, but yet the question

must arise: does it ever come before us in life? That is the important thing: it appears in life quite clearly. The head is the instrument of our wisdom; it is so strongly the instrument of our wisdom, that our immediate wisdom is connected with its development. But even external anatomical physiological observation—look how a head develops, how a man grows up—shows that the head goes through a quite different development from the rest of the organism. The head develops quickly, the remaining organism slowly. The head in a child is relatively already quite finished, it develops very little further. The rest of the organism is still little perfected and goes slowly through its stages. This is connected with the fact that in life as well we are really a duplex being. Not only does our skeleton show the head and the remaining organism, but life itself shows this twofold nature: our head develops quickly, the rest of our organism slowly. At our present time the head develops practically up to our twenty-eighth or twenty-seventh year, the rest of the organism needs the whole of life up to death to do this. One can in fact only experience in a whole lifetime what the head acquires in a relatively short time. This is connected with many mysteries.
The spiritual investigator has a special knowledge of these things if he is able to observe a fatal accident... again it sounds strange but it expresses the full truth, in a fatal accident. Imagine that a person is struck down, dies by an accident. Let us suppose that a man is struck dead in his thirtieth year. To outer physical observation such a sudden death is a kind of accident: but from a spiritual science outlook it is simply absurd to regard such an affair as accidental. For in the moment when from outside, from any external cause, a man suddenly meets with death, an immense amount rapidly takes place. Think to yourselves: this same man who has been killed at the age of thirty would have become in the ordinary course of things perhaps seventy, eighty, ninety years old. If he had still lived from thirty to ninety years he would slowly have gone through, one after another, many life experiences. What he would thus have experienced during sixty years of life, he now goes through rapidly, it might even be in half-a-minute, if he is killed at the age of thirty. When it is a matter of the spiritual world, time relationships are different from what they seem to us here on the physical plane. A sudden death caused by external circumstances—one must treat the matter quite exactly—can cause the experience, I say the experience, the life-wisdom of the whole life that might still have been lived, to be passed through under certain circumstances very rapidly.
One is in this way enabled to see how a man assimilates life-wisdom, life-experience all his life through. And one can study through it the relation between what the head can provide with its short development, and what the rest of the human being can furnish with its long development in the social life. It is really true that during his young days a man takes in certain ideas and concepts that he learns; but he then only learns them. They are then head-knowledge. The rest of life that runs more slowly, is destined to transform the head-knowledge gradually into heart-knowledge—I now call the other man not the head-man, I call him the heart-man—to transform head-knowledge into heart-knowledge, knowledge in which the whole man shares, not only the head.
We need much longer to transform head-knowledge into heart-knowledge than to assimilate the head-knowledge. Even if the head-knowledge is an especially clever knowledge, one needs today the time into the twenties, is it not so? then one is a quite clever person, academically quite clever. But in order to unite this knowledge fully with the whole man, one must keep flexible one's whole life through. And one needs just as much longer to change head-knowledge into heart-knowledge as one lives longer than to the twenty-seventh or twenty-sixth year. In so far is the human being also of a twofold nature. One quickly acquires the head-knowledge and can then in the course of life change it into heart-knowledge.
It is not quite easy to know what this actually signifies. And, perhaps I may venture to instance an experience of the spiritual investigator through which something may be more easily known concerning these things than through other results of spiritual research. If one makes oneself acquainted with the speech which the human souls speak who have gone through the gate of death, who live in the spiritual world after death, one understands to some degree the speech of the dead, the so-called dead, one can then make the experience that the dead express themselves in a very special way upon many things connected with human life. The dead have a speech today that we who are living cannot yet quite understand. The comprehensions of the dead and the living lie somewhat far apart from one another today. The dead have a thorough consciousness of how man develops quickly as headman and slowly as heart-man. And if the dead wish to express what really happens when the quickly gained head-knowledge lives itself into the slower course of the heart-knowledge, they say there wisdom-knowledge is transformed through what ascends from man as heart-warmth or love. Wisdom is fructified in man by love. So say the dead.1See also ‘The Inner Nature of Man and Life between Death and Rebirth’.
And that is in fact a profound and significant law of life. One can acquire head-knowledge rapidly, one can know a tremendous amount precisely in our age, for natural science—not the natural-scientist—natural science has made very great advances in our time and has a rich content. But this content has remained head-knowledge, it has not been transformed into heart-knowledge because people—I pointed this out yesterday—no longer pay attention to what approaches in life after the twenty-seventh year, because people do not understand how to become old—or I could say, to remain young in growing old. Because men do not keep the inner livingness their heart grows cold; the heart warmth does not stream up to the head; love, which comes from the rest of the organism, does not fructify the head. The head-knowledge remains cold theory. There is no necessity for it to remain cold theory, all head-knowledge can be transformed into heart-knowledge. And that is precisely the task of the future; that head-knowledge shall gradually be transformed into heart-knowledge. A real miracle will happen if head-knowledge is transformed into heart-knowledge! One is completely right if one vigorously declaims today against the materialistic natural science, or, really, natural-philosophy—one is completely right, but all the same, something else is true. If this natural science which has remained mere head-knowledge in Haeckel, Spencer, Huxley, etc. and is therefore materialism, became heart-knowledge, if it were absorbed by the whole man, if humanity were to understand how to become old, or younger in old age as I showed yesterday, this science of today would become really spiritual, the true pursuit for the spirit and its existence. There is no better foundation than the natural science of the present day, if it is transformed into what can flow to the head from the rest of man's organism, that is to say from the spiritual part of the organism. The miracle will be accomplished when men also learn to feel the rejuvenation of their etheric body so that the materialistic natural science of today will become spirituality. It will the sooner become spirituality the greater the number of people who reproach it with its present materialism, its materialistic folly.
But together with this will be linked a complete transforming which can be felt by one who has but a slight feeling for what is taking place at the present time: linked with it will be a complete transforming of the nature of education and instruction. Who could deny, if he has an open eye for the social, moral, historical conditions of the present, who could deny that mankind as a whole is not in a position—though it sounds grotesque—to give children an adequate education, especially an adequate instruction? We can, to be sure, make children officials, industrialists, we can even make them pastors, etc. etc., but we are but little in a position to make children today into complete human beings, into all-round developed men. For it is a deep demand of the time that if man is to be a complete all-round developed organism of soul and spirit, he must be in the position to transform all his life through what he took in quickly, rapidly as a child. The whole life through must the human being remain fresh in order to transform what he has absorbed.
For what do we really do today in later life? (These things are not looked on unprejudicedly [?] enough). We have learnt a certain amount in youth, the one more, the other less; we are proud, are we not, that we have no more illiterates in Western Europe? One learns much, another less, but all have learnt something in youth. And what do we do in later life with what we learnt, no matter whether it was much or little? It is all of such a nature that one only remembers what one has learnt, it is present in man in such a way that one can remember it. But what do men work on there? It is not conveyed to the human soul so as to work in the soul, so that heart-contents may arise from head-knowledge. It is in no way fitted for that. Much water must still flow down the Rhine, if what we can give to youth today—(let us observe it only in one field, but it is applicable in all fields) is to be something that is fitted really to be transformed into heart-knowledge. What must that be? We have in fact today no possibility at all of giving our children anything that could really become heart-knowledge. For that we lack two conditions, and only Spiritual Science rightly understood can bring about these two conditions.
Two conditions are lacking for really giving to children today something that refreshes life, something which throughout life can be a source of joy in life and a supporting of life. Two things are lacking. The one is that, from all the current ideas that we have today, that modern culture can give us, man can gain no conception of how he stands in relation to the universe. Just think of all that is conveyed to one in school. It is imparted even to the smallest children—at least, what they are told is put into such words as contain what I am now expressing to you. Reflect that the human being grows up today under these ideas: there is the earth, it swings with such and such a velocity through universal space, and beyond the earth there are the sun, planets, fixed stars. And then what is said of the sun, the planets, the fixed stars, is at most a kind of cosmic physics—it is no more—cosmic mechanics, cosmic physics. What the astronomer says today, what our general culture today says about the structure of the universe, has that anything to do with this human being who walks about here below upon the earth? Most certainly not! Is it not true that for the natural scientific idea of the world, man goes about as a somewhat more highly developed animal; he is born, dies, is buried, another comes, is born, dies, is buried, etc. etc. and so it goes from generation to generation. Out in the great cosmic space events take place which are calculated purely mathematically as in a great world machine. But for the modern clever men what has all that takes place out there in the universe to do with the fact that here on earth this somewhat more highly evolved animal is born and dies? Priests, pastors, know no other wisdom to put in place of this comfortless wisdom. And since they do not know that, they say that they do not occupy themselves in any way with science, but that faith must have an entirely different origin.
Well, we need not enlarge on this. But they are two utterly different things that are spoken of by atheistic science and by the so-called religious faith of this or that Confession at Church, feebly upholding the theistic element. It was essential that for a certain time in humanity's evolution the present world conception should take the place of the earlier ideas. We need not go back very far—only people don't think of it today—and men were then still aware that they did not wander on the earth as higher animals who were just born and buried. Rather did they bring themselves into connection with the star-world, with the whole universe, and knew in their own way, in a different way from that in which it must be striven for now, of the connection with the universe. But one must therefore also conceive of the universe differently.
You see, such a world conception as is imparted even to children today would be unthinkable in the twelfth, thirteenth centuries; they could not in the least imagine having such an opinion of the world of the stars. They looked up to the stars, to the planets as we do today, but they did not merely calculate, as the modern mathematical astronomer does, the orbits of the planets, and believe that up there is a globe which passes through world space—the science of the Middle Ages saw in each globe the body of a spiritual being. It would have been simply a piece of folly to represent a planet as a mere material globe. Read about it in Thomas Aquinas.2Compare ‘The Philosophy of Thomas Aquinas’. You will find everywhere that in each planet he sees an Angelic Intelligence. And so in the other stars. Such a universe as modern astronomy fabricates was not imagined. But for a certain length of time, in order to progress, one must drive the soul, as it were, out of the universe, in order to conceive the skeleton, the pure machinery of the universe. The Copernicus, the Galileo, the Kepler world conceptions had to come. But only the foolish see them as something valid for all time. They are a beginning, but a beginning that must evolve further.
Many things are known already to Spiritual Science which official astronomy does not yet know. But it is important that just these things which Spiritual Science knows and official astronomy does not yet know, should pass over into the general consciousness of humanity. And although these concepts may seem difficult today they will become something that one can impart to the children, they will be an important possession for the children, to keep the soul full of life. We still have to speak of these things, however, in difficult concepts. For as long as Spiritual Science is received, as it is at present by the external world, it has no opportunity of pouring things into such concepts and such pictures as are needed if they are to become the subject of children's education.
There is something, for instance, of which modern astronomy knows nothing. It knows nothing of the fact that the earth speeding through the universe, speeds too fast. She rushes too fast, the earth! And since she rushes too fast, since the earth moves quickly, we also have our head-development quicker than we should have if the earth were to move as slowly as to correspond with our whole life's duration. The rapidity of our head-development simply depends on the fact that the earth races too quickly through universal space. Our head takes part in this speed of the earth, the rest of our organism takes no part in it, the rest of our organism withdraws itself from cosmic events. Our head which, as a sphere, is an image of the heavens, must also participate in what the earth performs in celestial space. Our remaining organism which is not formed on the model of the whole universe, does not participate, it makes its development more slowly. Were our whole organism to participate today in the speed of the earth, were it to develop in correspondence to the speed of the earth, then none of us could ever be older than twenty-seven years. Twenty-seven years would be the average life of man. For in fact our head is finished when we are twenty-seven years old; if it depended on the head, man would die at the age of twenty-seven. Only because the rest of man is planned for a longer life time, and continually sends its forces to the head after the twenty-seventh year, do we live as long as we do. It is the spiritual part of the remaining organism which sends its forces to the head. It is the heart portion that exchanges its forces with the head.
If humanity knows some day that it has a twofold nature, a head-nature and a heart-nature, then it will know too that the head obeys quite other cosmic laws than the rest of the organism. Then the human being takes his place again within the whole macrocosm, then man can do no other than form concepts that lead him to say ‘I do not stand here upon earth as merely a higher animal, to be born and to die, but I am a being formed from out the whole universe. My head is built up for me out of the whole universe, the earth has attached to me the rest of my organization, and this does not follow the movements of the cosmos as my head does.’ Thus, when we do not look at man abstractly, as modern science does, but regard him as picture in his duality, as head-man and heart-man in connection with the universe, then the human being is placed again into the cosmos. And I know, my dear friends, and others who can judge such things know it also: if man can make heart-warm concepts of the fact that when one looks at the human head it is seen to be an image of the whole star-strewn space of the world with its wonders, then there will enter the human soul all the pictures of the connection of man with the wide, wide universe. And these pictures become forms of narrative which we have not yet got, and which will bring to expression, not abstractly, but linked with feeling, what we can pour into the hearts of the youngest children. Then these hearts of young children will feel: here upon earth I stand as human being, but as man I am the expression of the whole star-strewn universal space: the whole world expresses itself in me. It will be possible to train the human being to feel himself a member of the whole cosmos. That is the one condition.
The other condition is the following: when we are able to arrange the whole of education and instruction so that man knows that he is an image of the universe in his head, and in the remaining organism is withdrawn from the universe, that with his remaining organism he must so work upon what falls down like a rain of the soul—the whole universe—that it becomes independent in man here upon earth, then this will be a particular inner experience. Think of this two-fold human being, whom I will now draw in this curious fashion.
When he comes to know that from the whole universe there flow unconsciously into his head, stimulating its forces, the secrets of the stars, but that all this must be worked upon his whole life through by the rest of his organism, so that he may conserve it on earth, carry it through death back again into the spiritual world—when this becomes a living experience, then man will know his twofold nature, he will know himself as head-man and heart-man. For what I am now saying means that man will learn to solve his own riddle, to say to himself: inasmuch as I become more and more heart-man, inasmuch as I remain young, I view in later years through what my heart gives me, that which in childhood and youth I learnt through my head. The heart gazes

up to the head and will see there an image of the whole starry heavens. The head however will look to the heart and will find there the mysteries of the human riddle, will learn to fathom in the heart the actual being of man. The human being will feel as regards his education: To be sure, I can learn all sorts of things with my head. But as I go on living, as I live on towards death that is to bear me into the spiritual world, what I learn through the head is fructified in the future through the love ascending from the rest of the organism and becomes something quite different. There is something in me as man that is only to be found in me as man; I have to await something. Very much lies in these words and it means very much when man is so educated that he says: I have something to await. I shall be thirty, forty, fifty, sixty years old, and as I grow older from decade to decade, there comes towards me through growing older something of the mystery of man. I have something to await from the fact that I live on.
Imagine if that were not mere theory, if it were life-wisdom, social life-wisdom. Then the child is educated in such a way that he knows ‘I can learn something; but he who teaches me possesses something that I cannot learn; I must first be as old as he before I can find it in myself. If he relates it to me, he gives me something which must be a sacred mystery for me, since I can hear it from his mouth, but cannot find it in myself.’ Just think what a relationship is created again between children and their elders, which is entirely lost in our age—if man knows that age offers something that is to be awaited. If I am not yet forty years old, that sum of mysteries cannot lie in me that can lie in one who is already forty years old. And if he imparts it to me, I receive it just as information, I cannot know it through myself. What a bond of human fellowship would be formed, if in this way a new earnestness, a new profundity came into life!
This earnestness, this depth, is precisely what is lacking to our life, what our life does not possess. Our present life only values head-knowledge. But true social life will in this way die out, approach dissolution, for here on earth men wander about who have no idea what they are, who really only take seriously what there is up to the age of twenty-seven, and then employ the remainder of life in carrying about the corpse in them, but not in transforming the whole man into something which can still carry youthfulness through death.
Because people do not understand this, my dear friends, because an age has come that could not understand this, everything that refers to spiritual things remains so unsatisfying, as I had to say yesterday concerning Friedrich Schlegel. He was a gifted man, he had understood much, but he did not know that a new revelation of the spirit was necessary, he thought that one could simply take the old Christianity. In many respects he could even express right ideas with ringing words—I will read you a passage from the last lecture by Friedrich Schlegel in the year 1828. He sought to prove, as he said, ‘that in the course of world-history a divine guiding hand and disposition is to be recognized, that not merely earthly visible forces are co-operating in this evolution, or opposing and hindering it, but that the conflict is in part directed under divine assistance against invisible powers. I hope to have established a conviction of this, even I though it is not proved mathematically, which would here be neither proper nor applicable, and that it will nevertheless remain active and vigorous.’
He had a presentiment, but not a living consciousness that man, by living through history, has to become familiar in history with divine forces, and together with these divine forces fights against opposing spiritual powers—he says expressly, ‘opposing spiritual powers’. For in certain respects people flee from the real science of the spirit. Since the third century of our era, when in the West the prejudice as it was called, arose against the persuasion of the false gnosis (so they called it: the persuasion of the false gnosis!) people have gradually begun to turn aside from all that can be known of the spiritual worlds. And so it came about that even religious impulses prepared materialism, and that these religious impulses could not prevent the fact that we have really nothing to give to youth. Our science does not serve the young; in later life one can only remember it, it cannot become heart-wisdom.
In the religious field it is just the same. Man has finally come, one might say, to two extremes. He seems to have forgotten how to conceive of the super-sensible Christ and desires to know nothing of that cosmic power of which spiritual science must speak again as the power of Christ-Jesus. On the other hand there is the quite delightful, really lovely and charming picture which developed in the course of the Middle Ages and modern times through poets and musicians—a charming poetic picture which has developed round the Infant-Jesus. But pictures and ideas related to the dear Jesus-Babe cannot satisfy a man religiously his whole life through! It is in fact characteristic that a really paradoxical love for the sweet little Jesus is expressed in countless songs and so on. There is nothing to be objected to in this, but it cannot remain the only thing.
That is the one aspect, where man, in order to have at least something, has clung to the smallest, since he cannot raise himself to the great. But it cannot fill up life. And on the other hand the ‘bon Dieu citoyen’, as at Christmas we learnt to know him in Heinrich Heine's words, the ‘bon citoyen’ Jesus, who is divested of all divinity, the God of the liberal pastors and liberal priests. Now do you believe that he can really grip life? Do you believe in particular that he can take youth captive? He is from the outset a dead theology-product, not even a theology-product, but a theology-history-product. In this sphere, however, mankind is far removed from directing its gaze to what is spiritual power in history.
Why is this so? Simply because for a time mankind must go through a stage of gazing into the world purely from a materialistic standpoint. The time has also come when modern natural science which is so fitted for spirituality must be transformed into heart-knowledge. Our natural science is either execrable, if it remains as it is, or it is something quite extraordinarily grand, if it changes into heart-knowledge. For then it becomes spiritual science. The older science which is involved in all sorts of traditions had already transformed head-science into heart-science; the modern age has had no gift for transforming into heart-science the science it has acquired up to the present, and so it has come about that head-science, especially in the social field, has performed the only real work, and has thus brought about the most one-sided product it is possible to have.
You see, man's head can know nothing at all of the being of man. Hence when man's head ponders over the being of man and his connection with the social life, it has to bring something quite foreign into the social common life. And that is the modern socialism, expressed as social-democratic theory. There is nothing that is such pure head-knowledge as the Marxist social-democracy. This is only because the rest of mankind has shirked any concern in world problems, and in the Marxist circles they have only occupied themselves with social theories. The others have only—no, I will be polite—let themselves be prompted by professorial-thoughts, which are purely traditional. But head-wisdom has become social theory. That is to say, people have tried to establish a social theory with an instrument which is least of all capable of knowing anything about the human being. This is a fundamental error of present-day mankind, which can only be fully disclosed when people know about head-knowledge and heart-knowledge. The head will never be able to refute socialism, Marxist socialism, because in our times the head's task is to think out and devise. It will only be refuted through Spiritual Science, since Spiritual Science is head wisdom transformed through the heart.
It is extraordinarily important that one should realize these things. You see why even such a man as Schlegel suggested unsuitable means—since he was willing to accept the old, although he realized that man must re-acquire vision for the invisible that goes about amongst us. But our age is a challenge to direct the gaze to what is thus invisible. Invisible powers were always at hand as Schlegel divined: unseen powers have taken part in working upon what is being accomplished in mankind. Humanity, however, must evolve. Up to a certain degree it did not matter so much if people in the last few centuries gave no thought to the super-sensible, invisible forces, for instance, in social life. That will not do in the future. In the future, in face of the real conditions, that won't do! I could quote many examples to show this; I will bring forward one.
In the course of the last decade and a half I have spoken of this from other points of view. Anyone who observes the social state of Europe, as it has developed since the 8th, 9th centuries, knows that many different things have worked into the structure of European life, into this complicated European life. In the West it has retained the Athanasian Christianity, it has thrust back eastwards (as I said here a few weeks ago) an older Christianity, originally linked with Asiatic traditions, the Russian Christianity, the Orthodox Christianity. It has developed in the West the various European members of this European social totality—inasmuch as it has gradually created a member out of the preserved Roman element with the newly revived German and Slav elements in Europe—altogether a complicated organism. One could find one's way about in it up to now, if one disregarded what lives there unseen; for the configuration of Europe has much force in its structure. But an essential and important force in this structure is, among others, the relation in which France has stood to the rest of Europe. I do not now mean merely the political relation, I mean the whole relation of France to the rest of Europe, and by this I mean all that any European could feel in the course of centuries, since the 8th, 9th centuries, with regard to anyone belonging to the French nation. There is this peculiarity, my dear friends, that, so far as the relation of the rest of Europe to France is concerned, it comes to expression in feelings of sympathy and antipathy. We have to do with sympathy and antipathy, and hence purely with a phenomenon of the physical plane. One can understand the human relationship coming into play between France and the rest of Europe if one studies what hearts, what human souls live out on the physical plane. What has developed for France, at any rate outside France, is to be understood through physical plane conditions. Hence it did no harm—there were similar relationships in Europe in the last centuries—it did no harm if people neglected to see the super-sensible powers playing into things, since the sympathies and antipathies were caused by relations of the physical plane.
Much of what has thus played its part for centuries will become different. We are standing before mighty revolutions, even in regard to innermost relations that are coming over the European social structure. One need not believe it to have been lightly spoken if I have once again stressed the fact that things are to be taken more earnestly than men nowadays are inclined to take them. We are standing before mighty revolutions—and it will be necessary in the future for men to turn their eyes—the eyes of the mind—to spiritual relationships; for it will no longer be possible merely from physical plane relations to understand what is going on. It can only be understood if one can take spiritual relations into consideration.
What took place in March—the fall of the Czar—has a metaphysical character. One can only understand it if one has in mind its metaphysical character. Why then was there a Czar at all? The question can be grasped in a higher sense than in the external trivial-historical sense. Why was there a Czar at all? If one disregards individual pacifist cranks who have seen something serious in the tomfoolery of the Czar's Peace-Manifesto, then one must say: even those who from all sorts of reasons have ranged themselves with the Russian realm have not loved Czardom. And in those who loved it, the love was certainly not very genuine. But why was there a Czardom? There was a Czardom—my dear friends, I will now express it paradoxically, somewhat extremely:—so that Europe had something to hate. It was necessary to provoke those forces of hatred. There was a Czardom, and the Czardom behaved as it did, so that Europe had something to hate. Europe needed this hate as a sort of fresh impetus to something else. The Czar must be there in order in the first place to serve as the point on which the hatred concentrated; for a wave of hatred was prepared, as may now even be seen externally. What is now taking place will be transformed into powerful feelings of hatred. It will no longer be possible to understand these, as the sympathy and antipathy of former times were to be understood—from the aspect of the physical plane. For, my dear friends, not mere human beings will hate. Central and Eastern Europe will be hated, not by men, but by certain demons which will dwell in men. The time will certainly come when Eastern Europe will perhaps be hated even more than Central Europe.
These things must be understood and they must not be taken lightly. They can only be understood if men lift themselves to seek a connection with the spiritual world. For what has already been to some extent divined by such spirits as Friedrich Schlegel, will certainly come to pass, though they have not seen the foundations and the roots. Things must be grasped without prejudice in the eye of the soul, so that man can look back over the last centuries and what they have brought ... and then they will be able to co-operate in what must be founded.
Among the fine passages that occur from time to time in Schlegel's addresses there is this: ‘In the evolution of mankind all depends on the inner being of the soul and on the sincerity in the soul, and harmful above all is every kind of political idolatry.’ That is a fine passage of Friedrich Schlegel's. This political idolatry, how it has laid hold of our time! How it rules our time! And the political idolatry has created a fine symptom for itself, by which one is able to recognize what is there.
But one must look through circumstances! Yes, my dear friends, one must perceive what is living in our times. We have no possibility today, if we do not deepen knowledge through the heart, of giving children what they need in order to keep young and fitted for life all their life through. We have not yet this possibility3The first of over eighty Waldorf Schools was not founded until 1919.—and we understand that as soon as we look at the true nature of the head-man and heart-man. It must be established, it must come. If we want to put things in a few words we can say: Schoolmastering is utterly and entirely unable to fulfil its mission today. What ranks as Schoolmastering is completely foreign to the true being of man. But the world threatens to be ruled by a schoolmaster,4Woodrow Wilson. revered through political idolatry. Schoolmastering, the least of all fitted for guiding men in the modern epoch, is supposed to be high politics.
At least some few people ought to realize these things. For they are things which are profoundly connected with the deep knowledge which man can only gain if he seeks a little to penetrate the secrets of humanity. The world today can neither be grasped nor in any way governed through desires and instincts, through Chauvinism and nationalism, but solely through the good will which tries to penetrate into true reality.
Dreizehnter Vortrag
Die Dinge, die wir jetzt besprechen, hängen zusammen mit einer Tatsache, die paradox klingt, wenn man sie so einfach hinspricht, die aber doch einer bedeutsamen, tiefen Wahrheit entspricht: Der Mensch wandelt auf der Erde herum, aber der Mensch versteht sich selbst eigentlich sehr schlecht. Nun gilt dieser Ausspruch, man könnte sagen, in unmittelbarer Anwendung am meisten gerade für unser Zeitalter. Wir wissen ja, daß die große, bedeutsame Aufschrift des Apollotempels, «Erkenne dich selbst», wie eine Aufforderung an die geistige Zusammenhänge suchenden Menschen einstmals im alten Griechenlande war. Und diese Aufschrift auf dem delphischen Tempel, «Erkenne dich selbst», ist ja — das geht aus unseren verschiedensten Betrachtungen hervor - in jener Zeit nicht etwa nur eine Phrase gewesen, sondern es war schon möglich auch noch in dieser Griechenzeit, eine tiefere Erkenntnis des Menschen herbeizuführen, als das in der Gegenwart der Fall ist. Aber diese Gegenwart ist auch eine Aufforderung an uns, nach wirklicher Menschenerkenntnis wieder zu streben, nach der Erkenntnis dessen, was der Mensch eigentlich auf der Erde ist.
Nun scheint es, als ob die Dinge, die man im Zusammenhange mit dieser Frage sagen muß, schwer verständlich wären. Sie sind es in Wirklichkeit nicht, trotzdem sie sich so anhören, wie wenn sie schwer verständlich wären. Sie sind es nur deshalb für die Gegenwart, weil man nicht gewöhnt ist, sein Denken, sein Empfinden in solche Strömungen zu leiten, wie sie notwendig sind, damit man so etwas richtig versteht. Es handelt sich darum, daß alles dasjenige, was wir in der Gegenwart Verstehen nennen, eigentlich darauf hinauskommt, daß wir immer durch abstrakte Begriffe zu verstehen suchen. Man kann aber nicht alles durch abstrakte Begriffe verstehen. Vor allen Dingen kann man nicht den Menschen durch abstrakte Begriffe verstehen. Man braucht etwas anderes zum Verständnisse des Menschen als abstrakte Begriffe. Man muß sich in die Lage versetzen, den Menschen so, wie er auf der Erde herumwandelt, gewissermaßen als ein Bild zu nehmen, als ein Bild, welches etwas ausspricht, welches etwas verrät, welches uns etwas offenbaren will. Man muß wieder auffrischen das Bewußtsein, daß der Mensch ein Rätsel ist, das gelöst werden will. Man wird aber das Menschenrätsel nicht lösen, wenn man wird fortfahren wollen, so bequem zu sein im Denken, so theoretisch zu sein im Denken, wie man es jetzt liebt. Denn der Mensch ist, das haben wir ja immer wieder und wiederum betonen müssen, ein kompliziertes Wesen. Der Mensch ist mehr, reichlich mehr als das physische Gebilde, das vor unseren Augen als Mensch herumwandelt; reichlich mehr ist der Mensch. Aber dieses physische Gebilde, das vor unseren Augen als Mensch herumwandelt, und alles, was zu diesem physischen Gebilde gehört, das ist doch ein Ausdruck für die ganze umfassende Wesenheit des Menschen. Und man kann sagen: Nicht nur dasjenige kann man erkennen an der menschlichen Gestalt, an dem physischen Menschen, der unter uns herumwandelt, nicht nur das kann man in ihm erkennen, was der Mensch ist zwischen seiner Geburt und seinem Tode hier in der physischen Welt, sondern auch das kann man, wenn man nur will, am Menschen erkennen, was er ist als unsterbliche, als ewige Seelenwesenheit. - Man muß nur ein Gefühl dafür entwickeln, daß diese menschliche Gestalt etwas Kompliziertes ist. Unsere Wissenschaft, die ja heute populär gemacht wird und so zu allen Menschen kommt, ist nicht geeignet, ein Gefühl davon hervorzurufen, was für ein Wunderbau dieser Mensch eigentlich ist, der auf der Erde herumwandelt. Man muß den Menschen ganz anders ansehen.
Erinnern Sie sich einmal - Sie haben gewiß schon alle ein menschliches Skelett gesehen -, erinnern Sie sich nur, daß ein solches menschliches Skelett eigentlich zweifach ist, wenn man von allem übrigen absieht. Man kann viel genauer darüber sprechen, aber wenn man von allem übrigen absieht, so ist dieses Skelett eine Zweiheit. Sie können ja sehr leicht vom Skelett den Schädel abheben, der eigentlich nur daraufgesetzt ist, dann bleibt der übrige Mensch schädellos übrig. Der Schädel läßt sich sehr leicht abheben. Dieser übrige Mensch außer dem Schädel ist noch immer ein recht kompliziertes Wesen; allein wir wollen ihn jetzt als eine Einheit auffassen, wir wollen von seiner Komplikation absehen. Aber diese Zweiheit wollen wir zunächst ins Auge fassen, die uns eben vor Augen tritt, wenn wir den Menschen betrachten, sagen wir als Kopfmenschen und als übrigen Menschen, als Rumpfmenschen. So ist er ja auch nicht nur im Skelett, so ist er, obwohl das weniger deutlich hervortritt, auch als ganzer fleischlicher Mensch eine Zweiheit.
Nun brauchen wir auf geisteswissenschaftlichem Boden Vergleiche nicht zu lieben in der Form, daß wir sie etwa verabsolutieren, metaphysisch ausbauen. Das wollen wir nicht, aber verdeutlichen wollen wir uns allerlei Dinge, indem wir Vergleiche gebrauchen. Und da ist es naheliegend, weil es wirklich der Anschauung entspricht, sich zu sagen, der Mensch ist in bezug auf seinen Kopf hauptsächlich durch die Kugelform beherrscht. Will man irgendwie schematisch das ausdrücken, was das menschliche Haupt, der menschliche Kopf ist, so können wir sagen, der Mensch ist durch die Kugelform beherrscht.

Wollten wir für den übrigen Menschen ein schematisches Bild haben, so würden wir natürlich die Komplikationen ins Auge fassen müssen, allein das wollen wir heute nicht tun. Sie werden aber leicht einsehen: von gewissen Kompliziertheiten abgesehen, ebenso wie man schematisch den menschlichen Kopf als eine Kugelform auffassen kann, so kann man den übrigen Menschen als eine solche Form auffassen (siehe Zeichnung: Mondform), wobei nur selbstverständlich in der Stellung dieser zwei Kreise je nach der Korpulenz der einzelnen unterschieden werden muß.
Aber so können wir schon den Menschen auffassen gewissermaßen als Kugelform und als Mondenform. Das hat eine tief-innerliche Berechtigung; über diese wollen wir aber heute nicht sprechen, sondern wir wollen nur eingedenk des Umstandes sein, daß der Mensch in diese zwei Glieder zerfällt.
Nun ist das Haupt des Menschen ein wirklicher Apparat zunächst für die geistige Betätigung. Für alles dasjenige, was der Mensch aufbringen kann an menschlichen Gedanken, menschlichen Empfindungen ist das Haupt, der Kopf der Apparat. Aber wenn wir angewiesen wären auf dasjenige, was der Kopf als Apparat leisten kann im Denken, Empfinden, würden wir niemals imstande sein, das Wesen des Menschen wirklich zu verstehen. Wenn wir überhaupt angewiesen wären, nur den Kopf als Werkzeug unseres Geisteslebens zu benützen, würden wir niemals imstande sein, zu uns wirklich Ich zu sagen. Denn, was ist dieser Kopf? Dieser Kopf ist in Wahrheit, so wie er uns in seiner Kugelform entgegentritt, ein Abbild des ganzen Kosmos, wie Ihnen der Kosmos zunächst erscheint mit all seinen Sternen, Fixsternen, Planeten und Kometen, sogar Meteorsteinen — die Unregelmäßigkeiten spuken ja in manchen Köpfen. Der menschliche Kopf ist ein Abbild des Makrokosmos, ist ein Abbild der ganzen Welt. Und nur das Vorurteil unserer Zeit - ich habe das schon in anderem Zusammenhang angedeutet — weiß nichts davon, daß die ganze Welt daran beteiligt ist, daß ein menschliches Haupt zustande kommt.
Aber wenn dieses menschliche Haupt nun durch die Vererbung, durch die Geburt auf die Erde versetzt ist, so kann dieses menschliche Haupt kein Apparat sein, um die Wesenheit des Menschen selbst zu begreifen. Uns wird gewissermaßen in unserem Haupte ein Apparat gegeben, der wie ein Extrakt der ganzen Welt ist, der aber nicht imstande ist, den Menschen zu begreifen. Warum? Ja, aus dem Grunde, weil der Mensch mehr ist als alles dasjenige, was wir sehen, denken können durch unsern Kopf. Heute sagen viele Leute, das menschliche Erkennen hätte Grenzen, man könne nicht weiter über diese Grenzen hinauskommen. Das rührt aber nur davon her, weil diese Menschen bloß die Weisheit des Kopfes gelten lassen wollen, und die Weisheit des Kopfes geht allerdings nicht über gewisse Grenzen hinaus. Diese Weisheit des Kopfes hat aber auch gemacht dasjenige, was wir vor einigen Tagen beschrieben haben als die griechischen Götter. Die griechischen Götter sind aus der Weisheit des Kopfes hervorgegangen. Sie sind die oberen Götter; sie sind daher nur Götter für alles dasjenige, was der Kopf des Menschen mit seiner Weisheit umspannen kann.
Nun habe ich Sie öfter darauf aufmerksam gemacht: die Griechen hatten außer dieser äußeren Götterlehre ihre Mysterien. In den Mysterien verehrten die Griechen außer den himmlischen Göttern noch andere Götter, die chthonischen Götter. Und von demjenigen, der in die Mysterien eingeweiht wurde, sagte man mit Recht: Er lernt kennen die oberen und die unteren Götter. - Die oberen Götter, das waren diejenigen des Zeuskreises; aber sie haben nur Herrschaft über dasjenige, was vor den Sinnen ausgebreitet ist und was der Verstand begreifen kann. Der Mensch ist mehr als dieses. Der Mensch wurzelt mit seiner Wesenheit im Reiche der unteren Götter, im Reiche der chthonischen Götter.
Aber man kommt nicht zurecht, wenn man nur dasjenige vom Menschen ins Auge faßt, was ich schematisch hier aufgezeichnet habe. Wenn man das Wurzeln des Menschen im Bereiche der unteren Götter ins Auge fassen will, dann muß man schon diese Zeichnung vervollständigen und muß sie so machen: Man muß auch gewissermaßen den nicht belichteten Mond einbeziehen (siehe Zeichnung S. 234). Man muß, mit andern Worten, den Kopf des Menschen anders betrachten als den übrigen Organismus. Beim übrigen Organismus muß man viel mehr ins Auge fassen dasjenige, was geistig ist, was übersinnlich, was unsichtbar ist. Der Kopf des Menschen ist äußerlich, so wie er uns entgegentritt, gewissermaßen eine Vollkommenheit. Alles, was geistig ist, hat sich ein Abbild geschaffen im Kopfe. Im übrigen Menschen ist das nicht der Fall. Der übrige Mensch ist nur ein Fragment als physischer Mensch, und man kommt nicht zurecht mit dem übrigen Menschen, wenn man dieses fleischliche Fragment nimmt, das sichtbarlich auf der Erde herumwandelt.
<
Nun, das zeigt uns schon, daß wir den Menschen kompliziert nehmen müssen. Aber tritt das irgendwie im l.eben hervor, was ich jetzt gesagt habe? Es scheint abstrakt zu sein, was ich jetzt gesagt habe, es scheint paradox und schwer verständlich zu sein, aber die Frage muß doch auftauchen: Tritt es im leben irgendwie hervor? Das ist das Wichtige: es tritt im l.eben nämlich ganz klar hervor. Der Kopf ist der Apparat unserer Weisheit; er ist der Apparat unserer Weisheit so stark, daß mit seiner Entwickelung unsere zunächstige Weisheit zusammenhängt. Aber selbst die äußere anatomisch-physiologische Betrachtung zeigt - sehen Sie sich an, wie ein Haupt sich entwickelt, wie ein Mensch aufwächst -, daß der Kopf eine ganz andere Entwickelung durchmacht als der übrige Organismus. Der Kopf entwickelt sich rasch, der übrige Organismus langsam. Verhältnismäßig ist der Kopf schon ganz ausgebildet beim Kinde, entwickelt sich viel weniger weiter. Der übrige Organismus ist noch wenig ausgebildet, macht langsam seine Stadien durch. Das hängt zusammen damit, daß wir in der Tat ein Doppelmensch auch im Leben sind. Nicht nur unser Skelett zeigt den Kopf und den übrigen Menschen, sondern unser Leben zeigt selbst diese Zwienatur unseres Wesens: unser Kopf entwickelt sich schnell, unser übriger Organismus entwickelt sich langsam. Unser Kopf macht in unserer Zeit ungefähr schon bis zu unserem achtundzwanzigsten oder siebenundzwanzigsten Jahre seine Entwickelung durch, der übrige Organismus braucht dazu das ganze Leben bis zum Tode. Erleben nämlich kann man dasjenige, was der Kopf verhältnismäßig in kurzer Zeit sich aneignet, nur im ganzen Leben. Es hängt das mit vielen Geheimnissen zusammen.
Der Geistesforscher erkennt diese Dinge insbesondere dann, wenn er einmal den Blick richtet auf einen Unglücksfall. Es klingt wiederum paradox, aber es entspricht der völligen Wahrheit. Denken Sie sich einmal, ein Mensch wird erschlagen, er geht durch einen Unglücksfall zugrunde. Nehmen wir an, ein Mensch wird in seinem dreiBigsten Jahre erschlagen. Für die äußere physische Betrachtung ist solch ein plötzlicher Tod eine Art Zufall; aber es ist vor der geisteswissenschaftlichen Betrachtung einfach lächerlich, eine solche Sache als Zufall zu betrachten. Denn in dem Momente, wo durch eine äußere Veranlassung, von außen her, ein Mensch plötzlich in den Tod kommt, geht rasch ungeheuer viel mit ihm vor sich. Denken Sie sich, im gewöhnlichen Zusammenhange der Dinge wäre dieser selbe Mensch, der mit dreißig Jahren erschlagen worden ist, vielleicht siebzig, achtzig, neunzig Jahre alt geworden. Da hätte er dadurch, daß er vom dreißigsten bis neunzigsten Jahre noch gelebt hätte, langsam hintereinander mancherlei im I.eben zugenommen an Lebenserfahrung. Das, was er so in sechzig Jahren durchgemacht hätte an Lebenserfahrung, macht er, wenn er im dreißigsten Jahre erschlagen wird, kurz, vielleicht in einer halben Minute könnte es sein, durch. Die Zeitverhältnisse sind, wenn die geistige Welt in Betracht kommt, eben andere als sie uns hier im physischen Plan erscheinen. Ein rascher Tod, der durch äußere Verhältnisse herbeigeführt wird - man muß die Sache ganz genau nehmen -, kann unter Umständen rasch die Erfahrung, die Erfahrung sage ich, die Lebensweisheit des ganzen Lebens durchmachen lassen, das noch hätte kommen können.
Daran kann man studieren, wie das ist, was der Mensch sein Leben hindurch an Lebensweisheit, an Lebenserfahrung sich aneignet. Und man kann daran studieren, wie sich verhält dasjenige, was der Kopf leisten kann mit seiner kurzen Entwickelung, gegenüber dem, was der übrige Mensch leisten kann mit seiner langen Entwickelung im sozialen Leben. Es ist wirklich so, daß der Mensch während seiner Jugendzeit gewisse Begriffe, gewisse Vorstellungen aufnimmt, die er lernt; aber er lernt sie eben da nur. Sie sind dann Kopfwissen. Das übrige Leben, das langsamer verläuft, ist dazu bestimmt, das Kopfwissen umzuwandeln allmählich in Herzwissen - ich nenne jetzt den andern Menschen nicht den Kopfmenschen, ich nenne ihn den Herzensmenschen -, umzuwandeln das Kopfwissen in Herzenswissen, in Wissen, an dem der ganze Mensch beteiligt ist, nicht nur der Kopf.
Um das Kopfwissen in Herzenswissen umzuwandeln, brauchen wir viel länger, als um uns das Kopfwissen anzueignen. Um uns das Kopfwissen anzueignen - wenn es schon ein ganz besonders gescheites Wissen ist, braucht man heute die Zeit bis in die Zwanzigerjahre hinein. Nicht wahr, dann wird man ein ganz gescheiter Mensch, akademisch ganz gescheiter Mensch, aber um dieses Wissen wirklich mit dem ganzen Menschen zu vereinigen, muß man beweglich bleiben sein Leben hindurch. Und man braucht, um das Kopfwissen in Herzenswissen umzuwandeln, eben um so viel länger, als man länger lebt als bis zum siebenundzwanzigsten oder sechsundzwanzigsten Jahre. Insofern ist man auch als Mensch eine Zwienatur. Man eignet sich rasch das Kopfwissen an und kann es dann umwandeln im Laufe des Lebens in Herzenswissen.
Zu wissen, was das eigentlich bedeutet, ist nicht ganz leicht. Und ich darf, wir sind ja unter uns, für diese Sache vielleicht eine Erfahrung des Geistesforschers anführen, durch die leichter über diese Dinge etwas gewußt werden kann als durch andere geistesforscherische Arbeiten. Man kann, wenn man sich bekannt macht mit der Sprache, welche die Menschenseelen sprechen, die durch den Tod hindurchgegangen sind, die in der geistigen Welt leben nach dem Tode, man kann, wenn man die Sprache der Toten, der sogenannten Toten einigermaßen versteht, dann die Erfahrung machen, daß die Toten sich über manche Dinge, die im Zusammenhange mit dem Menschenleben stehen, in ganz besonderer Weise ausdrücken. Die Toten haben heute schon eine Sprache, die wir Lebenden noch nicht ganz gut verstehen können. Es gehen die Verständnisse der Toten und der Lebenden heute ziemlich weit auseinander. Der Tote hat durchaus ein Bewußtsein davon, daß der Mensch sich als Kopfmensch rasch entwickelt, als Herzensmensch langsam entwickelt. Und der Tote sagt, wenn er ausdrücken will, was da eigentlich geschieht, wenn sich allmählich das rasch erworbene Kopfwissen in das langsamer verlaufende Herzenswissen einlebt: Das bloße Weisheitswissen wird umgewandelt durch die aus dem Menschen aufsteigende Herzenswärme oder Liebe. Weisheit wird im Menschen von der Liebe befruchtet. — So sagt der Tote.
Und das ist in der Tat ein tiefes, bedeutsames Lebensgesetz. Man kann das Kopfwissen rasch erwerben, man kann ungeheuer viel wissen gerade in unserer Zeit, denn die Naturwissenschaft - nicht die Naturwissenschafter, aber die Naturwissenschaft - ist in unserer Zeit recht schr fortgeschritten und hat reichen Inhalt. Aber dieser Inhalt ist so, daß er nicht umgewandelt ist in Herzenswissen, daß das Kopfwissen überall geblieben ist; weil die Menschen - ich habe schon gestern darauf aufmerksam gemacht — das andere, was dann anrückt im Leben nach dem siebenundzwanzigsten Jahre, nicht mehr beachten, weil die Menschen nicht verstehen, alt zu werden, beziehungsweise könnte ich auch sagen: jung zu bleiben, indem sie alt werden.
Weil die Menschen die innerliche Lebendigkeit sich nicht erhalten, da erkaltet ihr Herz; es strömt die Herzenswärme nicht nach dem Kopfe hinauf, es befruchtet die Liebe, die aus dem übrigen Organismus kommt, den Kopf nicht. Das Kopfwissen bleibt kalte Theorie. Aber es braucht nicht kalte Theorie zu bleiben, es kann alles Kopfwissen umgewandelt werden in Herzenswissen. Und das ist gerade die Aufgabe der Zukunft, daß das Kopfwissen allmählich in Herzenswissen umgewandelt wird. Da wird ein wirkliches Wunder geschehen, wenn das Kopfwissen in Herzenswissen umgewandelt wird.
Man hat vollständig Recht, wenn man heute nach allen Noten die materialistische Naturwissenschaft oder namentlich die materialistische Naturphilosophie abkanzelt. Man hat vollständig Recht, aber trotzdem ist noch etwas anderes wahr: diese Naturwissenschaft, die in Haeckel, in Spencer, in Huxley und so weiter bloßes Kopfwissen geblieben ist und daher Materialismus ist, die wird, wenn sie Herzenswissenschaft werden wird, wenn sie aufgenommen werden wird vom ganzen Menschen, wenn die Menschheit verstehen wird, älter zu werden oder jünger zu werden im Ältersein, wie ich das gestern gemeint habe, dann wird diese, gerade diese Wissenschaft der Gegenwart der reinste Spiritualismus werden, die reinste Bekräftigung für den Geist und sein Dasein werden. Es gibt keine bessere Grundlage als die Naturwissenschaft der Gegenwart, wenn sie sich umwandelt in dasjenige, was dem Kopf des Menschen zufließen kann aus dem übrigen Organismus, aber jetzt aus dem geistigen Teil des übrigen Organismus. Das Wunder wird sich vollziehen, indem die Menschen lernen werden, die Verjüngung ihres Ätherleibes auch zu fühlen, so daß die materialistische Naturwissenschaft der Gegenwart Spiritualismus werden wird. Sie wird um so eher Spiritualismus werden, je mehr Leute sich finden werden, ihr ihren gegenwärtigen Materialismus, ihre materialistische Torheit vorzuhalten.
Damit wird aber eine vollständige Umwandlung verknüpft sein, die derjenige, der nur einigermaßen Empfindung für das hat, was in der Gegenwart vorgeht, empfinden kann: damit wird verknüpft sein eine vollständige Umwandlung des Erziehungs- und Unterrichtswesens. Wer könnte sich verhehlen, wenn er ein offenes Auge hat für die sozialen, sittlichen, geschichtlichen Verhältnisse der Gegenwart, wer könnte sich verhehlen, daß wir heute gar nicht in der Lage sind als ganze Menschheit - nun, wenn man es grotesk ausdrücken will -, den Kindern eine angemessene Erziehung, insbesondere einen angemessenen Unterricht zu geben. Gewiß, wir können die Kinder zu Beamten, wir können sie zu Industriellen machen, wir können sie sogar zu Pastoren und so weiter machen, aber wir sind wenig in der Lage, die Kinder heute zu vollständigen Menschen, zu allseitig entwickelten Menschen zu machen. Denn es ist eine tiefe Forderung der Zeit: Wenn der Mensch ein vollständiger, ein allseitig entwickelter geistig-seelischer Organismus sein soll, dann muß er in die Lage kommen, dasjenige, was er als Kind aufnimmt, schnell, rasch aufnimmt, das umzuwandeln sein ganzes Leben hindurch. Das ganze Leben hindurch muß der Mensch frisch bleiben, um umzuwandeln dasjenige, was er aufgenommen hat.
Was tun wir denn heute - man sieht diese Dinge nur nicht unbefangen genug an -, was tun wir denn heute eigentlich im späteren Leben? Wir haben in der Jugend etwas gelernt, der eine viel, der andere weniger. Nicht wahr, man ist ja stolz darauf, daß man keine Analphabeten mehr hat in Westeuropa. Einer lernt viel, der andere weniger, aber alle lernen etwas in der Jugend. Und was tut man im späteren Leben mit dem, was man gelernt hat, gleichgültig, ob man viel oder wenig gelernt hat? Es ist ja alles so veranlagt, daß man sich nur erinnert an das, was man gelernt hat; es ist so im Menschen vorhanden, daß man sich erinnert daran. Was arbeiten denn die Menschen da? Es ist nicht so der Menschenseele beigebracht, daß es in der Menschenseele arbeitet, daß aus Kopfinhalt Herzensinhalt wird. Dazu ist es gar nicht veranlagt. Da muß auch noch manches Wasser den Rhein hinunterfließen, wenn das, was wir heute der Jugend geben können - betrachten wir es nur auf einem Felde, aber es ist auf alle Felder anwendbar -, etwas werden soll, was geeignet ist, wirklich in Herzenswissen umgewandelt zu werden. Was muß das sein? Wir haben ja heute gar keine Möglichkeit, unsern Kindern etwas zu geben, was wirklich Herzenswissen werden könnte. Dazu fehlen zwei Bedingungen. Diese zwei Bedingungen kann nur die wirklich richtig verstandene Geisteswissenschaft herbeiführen.
Zwei Bedingungen fehlen, um heute den Kindern wirklich etwas Lebenerfrischendes zu geben, etwas zu geben, was das ganze Dasein hindurch ein Quell von Lebensfreude und Lebensgetragenheit sein kann. Zwei Dinge fehlen. Das eine ist, daß der Mensch heute nach allen gangbaren Begriffen, die wir haben, die die heutige Bildung dem Menschen anweisen kann, keine Vorstellung gewinnen kann über seine Stellung zum Weltenall. Bedenken Sie nur einmal alles dasjenige, was einem in der Schule überliefert wird. Den kleinsten Kindern wird ja das heute schon überliefert, wenigstens wird das, was ihnen gesagt wird, in solchen Worten gesagt, daß das drinnen liegt, was wir nun aussprechen wollen. Bedenken Sie, daß der Mensch heute heranwächst unter den Vorstellungen: Da ist die Erde; sie schwebt mit so und so viel Geschwindigkeit durch den Weltenraum, und außer der Erde die Sonne und Planeten, Fixsterne. Und was nun von der Sonne, den Planeten, den Fixsternen gesagt wird, das ist höchstens eine Art Weltenphysik, mehr ist es nicht, Weltenmechanik, Weltenphysik.
Dasjenige, was da der Astronom heute sagt, was unsere Bildung überhaupt heute sagt über das Weltengebäude, hat das etwas zu tun mit diesem Menschen, der hier auf der Erde unten heramwandelt? Doch gewiß nicht! Nicht wahr, für die naturwissenschaftliche Weltanschauung geht der Mensch als ein etwas höher entwickeltes Tier herum, wird geboren, stirbt, wird begraben, ein anderer kommt, wird geboren, stirbt, wird begraben und so weiter. So geht es von Generation zu Generation. Draußen im großen Weltenraume spielen sich die Ereignisse ab, die rein mathematisch berechnet werden wie in einer großen Weltenmaschinerie. Aber was hat das alles zu tun für den heutigen gescheiten Menschen, was sich da draußen in der großen Welt abspielt, mit dem, daß hier auf der Erde dieses etwas höher entwickelte Tier geboren wird und stirbt? Priester, Pastoren wissen keine andere Weisheit an die Stelle dieser trostlosen Weisheit zu setzen. Und weil sie das nicht wissen, so sagen sie, sie befassen sich überhaupt nicht mit dieser Wissenschaft, sondern der Glaube muß einen ganz andern Ursprung haben.
Na ja, das brauchen wir nicht weiter auszuführen. Aber es sind einmal zwei recht verschiedene Dinge: das, wovon die atheistische Wissenschaft redet, und die notdürftig das theistische Element aufrechterhaltende sogenannte Gläubigkeit dieser oder jener Bekenntniskirche. Es war notwendig, daß gegenüber der früheren Anschauung über das Weltenall die jetzige eine Zeitlang in der Menschheitsentwickelung Platz gegriffen hat. Wir brauchen nicht weit zurückzugehen - man denkt heute nur nicht daran -, da hatten die Menschen noch ein Bewußtsein, daß sie nicht bloß als höhere Tiere hier unten herumwandeln auf der Erde, geboren werden und begraben werden, sondern sie brachten sich in Zusammenhang mit der Sternenwelt, in Zusammenhang mit dem ganzen Weltenall, wußten in ihrer Art, in anderer Art, als das jetzt angestrebt werden muß, aber wußten in ihrer Art von dem Zusammenhang mit dem Weltenall. Da mußte man aber das Weltenall auch anders vorstellen.
Eine solche Weltanschauung, wie sie heute schon den Kindern beigebracht wird, war im 12., 13. Jahrhundert undenkbar; man konnte gar nicht daran denken, solch eine Anschauung von der Sternenwelt irgendwie zu haben. Man blickte hinauf zu den Sternen, man blickte auf, wie heute zu den Planeten, aber man rechnete nicht nur, wie heute der mathematische Astronom das tut, die Planetenbahnen aus und hatte die Vorstellung: Da oben ist eine Kugel, die da durch den Weltenraum geht -, sondern die mittelalterliche Wissenschaft sah in jeder Kugel den Leib eines geistigen Wesens. Es wäre ein einfacher Unsinn gewesen, sich eine bloße materielle Kugel vorzustellen unter einem Planeten. Lesen Sie nach bei Thomas von Aquino. Sie werden überall finden, daß er in jedem Planeten die englische Intelligenz sieht nicht engländische, die engelische Intelligenz. Und so in den übrigen Sternen. Ein Weltenall, wie es die heutige Astronomie fabriziert, stellte man sich nicht vor. Man mußte aber, um fortzuschreiten, eine Zeitlang, ich möchte sagen, die Seele aus dem Weltenall heraustreiben, um das Skelett, die reine Maschinerie des Weltenalls, vorzustellen. Die Kopernikanische, die Galileische, die Keplersche Weltanschauung mußte kommen. Aber nur Toren sehen sie als etwas letztlich Gültiges an. Sie sind ein Anfang, aber ein Anfang, der sich weiter entwickeln muß.
Manche Dinge weiß heute schon die Geisteswissenschaft, die die äußere Astronomie noch nicht weiß. Aber wichtig ist, daß gerade diese Dinge, welche die Geisteswissenschaft weiß, die äußere Astronomie noch nicht weiß, übergehen in das allgemeine Menschheitsbewußtsein. Und wenn sie auch heute noch schwierig erscheinen, diese Begriffe, sie werden so werden, daß man sie den Kindern schon beibringen kann; sie werden gerade für die Kinder ein wichtiges Gut sein, um die Seele lebendig zu erhalten. Wir müssen allerdings diese Dinge noch in schwierigen Begriffen besprechen. Denn so lange die Geisteswissenschaft so genommen wird von der äußeren Welt, wie sie jetzt genommen wird, hat sie keine Gelegenheit, die Dinge in solche Begriffe, in solche Vorstellungen zu gießen, wie sie gebraucht werden, wenn sie Gegenstand der Kindererziehung werden sollen.
Von etwas zum Beispiel weiß die heutige Astronomie nichts: sie weiß nichts davon, daß die Erde, indem sie durch das Weltenall rast, zu schnell rast. Sie rast zu schnell, die Erde. Und weil sie zu schnell rast, weil die Erde schnell sich bewegt, können wir auch unsere Kopfentwickelung schneller haben, als wir sie hätten, wenn die Erde sich so langsam bewegen würde, daß sie dem entsprechen würde, was unserer ganzen Lebensdauer entspricht. Die Schnelligkeit unserer Kopfentwickelung hängt einfach damit zusammen, daß die Erde zu schnell durch den Weltenraum rast. Unser Kopf macht mit diese Schnelligkeit der Erde, unser übriger Organismus macht sie nicht mit; unser übriger Organismus entzieht sich den kosmischen Ereignissen. Unser Kopf, welcher als eine Kugel nachgebildet ist dem Himmelsbau, der muß auch mitmachen dasjenige, was die Erde mitmacht im Himmelsraume.
Unser übriger Organismus, der nicht nachgebildet ist dem ganzen Weltenbau, macht das nicht mit, der macht seine Entwickelung langsamer. Würde unser ganzer Organismus die Schnelligkeit der Erde heute mitmachen, würde er sich so entwickeln, daß es der Schnelligkeit der Erde entsprechen würde, so würden wir alle niemals älter werden können als siebenundzwanzig Jahre. Da würden siebenundzwanzig Jahre so im Durchschnitt das Lebensalter der Menschen sein. Denn in der Tat: unser Haupt, unser Kopf, ist mit siebenundzwanzig Jahren fertig; wenn es auf ihn ankäme, könnte der Mensch mit siebenundzwanzig Jahren sterben. Nur dadurch, daß der übrige Mensch für eine längere Lebensdauer angelegt ist und dem Kopfe nach dem siebenundzwanzigsten Jahre fortwährend seine Kräfte zuführt, leben wir, so lang wir eben leben. Das ist der geistige Teil des übrigen Menschen, der dem Kopfe seine Kräfte zuführt. Es ist der Herzensteil, der mit dem Kopf seine Kräfte tauscht.
Wird die Menschheit einmal erkennen, daß sie eine Zwienatur hat, eine Kopfnatur und Herzensnatur, dann wird sie auch erkennen, daß der Kopf ganz andern Weltengesetzen gehorcht als der übrige Organismus. Dann steht der Mensch wiederum drinnen im ganzen Makrokosmos; dann kann der Mensch gar nicht anders, als sich Vorstellungen bilden, die so gehen, daß er sich sagt: Ich stehe nicht bloß als ein höheres Tier hier auf der Erde, werde geboren und sterbe, sondern ich bin ein Wesen, das aus dem ganzen Weltenall heraus gebaut ist. Mein Haupt, das mir aufgebaut ist, ist aus dem ganzen Weltenall heraus; die Erde hat mir den übrigen Organismus angegliedert, der die Bewegungen des Weltenalls in dieser Weise zunächst nicht mitmacht, wie sie der Kopf in anderer Weise mitmacht.
So, wenn man den Menschen nicht abstrakt betrachtet, wie es die gegenwärtige Wissenschaft macht, sondern wenn man ihn als Bild in seiner Zweiheit betrachtet: als Kopfmenschen und Herzensmenschen im Zusammenhange mit dem Weltenall, da stellt sich der Mensch wiederum in das Weltenall hinein. Und ich weiß, und andere, die so etwas beurteilen können, wissen es auch: Wird man sich herzenswarme Vorstellungen machen können darüber, daß, wenn man hinschaut auf das menschliche Haupt, man in dem menschlichen Haupte ein Abbild des ganzen sternbesäten Weltenraumes mit seinen Wundern sieht, dann werden in die menschliche Seele hereinkommen alle Bilder über den Zusammenhang des Menschen mit dem weiten, weiten Weltenall. Und diese Bilder werden zu Erzählungsformen, die wir heute noch nicht haben; und diese Erzählungsformen werden nicht abstrakt, aber empfindungsgemäß zum Ausdruck bringen dasjenige, was wir in die Herzen der jüngsten Kinder gießen können, so daß diese Herzen der jüngsten Kinder empfinden: Hier auf der Erde stehe ich als Mensch, aber als Mensch bin ich ein Ausdruck des ganzen sternbesäten Weltenraumes; in mir spricht sich aus die ganze Welt. Empfindungsgemäß wird der Mensch erzogen werden können zu einem Mitgliede des ganzen Kosmos. Das ist die eine Bedingung.
Die andere Bedingung ist die folgende. Wenn wir die ganze Erziehung, wenn wir alles Unterrichtsgemäße so imstande sind zu veranlagen, daß der Mensch gewahr wird: in seinem Haupte ist er ein Abbild des Weltenalls, mit seinem übrigen Organismus entzieht er sich diesem Weltenall; er hat mit seinem übrigen Organismus dasjenige, was wie ein Seelenregen herabträufelt, das ganze Weltenall zu verarbeiten, so daß es selbständig wird hier auf der Erde im Menschen -, dann wird dieses ein besonderes inneres Erlebnis sein. Denken Sie sich diesen zwiefachen Menschen, den ich jetzt in dieser kuriosen Form zeichnen will. Wenn er wissen wird: Da kommt aus dem ganzen Weltenall in sein Haupt unbewußt dasjenige, was die Geheimnisse aller Sterne sind; dies aber, indem es die Kräfte seines Hauptes anregt, hat er sein ganzes Leben hindurch zu verarbeiten mit seinem übrigen Organismus, damit er es hier auf Erden konserviere, es durch den Tod trage und in die geistige Welt wieder zurücktrage — wenn dies eine lebendige Empfindung wird, dann wird sich der Mensch wissen als eine Zwienatur, er wird sich wissen als Kopf- und Herzensmensch. Denn verbunden ist das, was ich jetzt sage, damit, daß der Mensch lernen wird, sich selber zu enträtseln, sich zu sagen: Indem ich Herzensmensch werde immer mehr und mehr, indem ich jung bleibe, sehe ich, wenn ich altere, durch das, was mein Herz mir gibt, dasjenige an, was ich als Kind in der Jugend gelernt habe durch den Kopf. Das Herz blickt zum Kopfe auf, und das Herz wird im Kopfe sehen ein Abbild des ganzen Sternenhimmels. Der Kopf aber wird zum Herzen blicken, und wird im Herzen die Geheimnisse des Menschenrätsels finden, wird lernen, das eigentliche Wesen des Menschen im Herzen zu ergründen.

Der Mensch wird sich so erzogen fühlen, daß er sich sagen wird: Gewiß, ich kann mit meinem Kopfe mancherlei lernen. Aber indem ich lebe, indem ich dem Tode entgegenlebe, der mich in die geistige Welt hineintragen soll, wird dasjenige, was ich mit dem Kopfe erlerne, dereinst von der aus dem übrigen Organismus aufsteigenden Liebe befruchtet, wird etwas ganz anderes. Es gibt etwas in mir als Menschen, das es nur in mir als Menschen gibt; ich habe etwas zu erwarten. - In diesen Worten liegt viel, und viel bedeutet es, wenn der Mensch so erzogen wird, daß er sagt: Ich habe etwas zu erwarten. Ich werde dreißig, vierzig, fünfzig, sechzig Jahre alt werden, und indem ich von Jahrzehnt zu Jahrzehnt älter werde, kommt durch das Älterwerden etwas vom Geheimnis des Menschen mir entgegen. Ich habe etwas zu erwarten von dem, daß ich lebe.
Denken Sie sich, wenn das nicht bloße Theorie ist, wenn das TLebensweisheit ist, soziale Lebensweisheit, dann wird das Kind so erzogen, daß es weiß: Ich kann etwas lernen; aber derjenige, der mich erzieht, der hat etwas in sich, was ich nicht lernen kann, wozu ich erst so alt werden muß wie er, damit ich es in mir selber finden kann. Wenn er es mir erzählt, dann gibt er mir etwas, was ein heiliges Geheimnis für mich sein muß, weil ich es aus seinem Munde hören, in mir aber nicht finden kann. - Denken Sie sich, was daraus wiederum für ein Verhältnis zwischen den Kindern und den Alten geschaffen wird, das in unserer Zeit vollständig verwischt ist, wenn der Mensch wissen wird: Die Lebensalter bieten etwas, was zu erwarten ist. In mir kann, wenn ich noch nicht vierzig Jahre alt bin, nicht jene Summe von Geheimnissen sitzen, welche sitzen können in demjenigen, der schon vierzig Jahre alt geworden ist. Und teilt er es mir mit, so bekomme ich es eben als Mitteilung, ich kann es nicht durch mich selber wissen. - Welches Band menschlicher Gemeinschaft wird dadurch geknüpft, daß in dieser Weise ein neuer Ernst, eine neue Tiefe in das Leben hineinkommt!
Dieser Ernst, diese Tiefe ist es gerade, die unserem Leben fehlt, die unser Leben nicht hat, weil unser Leben nur Kopfwissen vorläufig achtet. Dadurch aber wird das wirkliche Soziale sterben, der Auflösung entgegengehen; denn hier auf der Erde wandeln Menschen dann herum, die gar nicht wissen, was sie sind, die eigentlich nur dasjenige ernst nehmen, was bis zum siebenundzwanzigsten Jahre ist, und das übrige Leben dazu benützen, um den Kadaver in sich zu tragen für den Rest, aber nicht umzuwandeln den ganzen Menschen in etwas, was die Jugend noch durch den Tod tragen kann.
Weil man dies nicht versteht, weil ein Zeitalter gekommen ist, das dies nicht verstehen konnte, deshalb blieben alle die Dinge, die sich auf Geistiges bezogen, so unbefriedigende Dinge, wie ich es gestern sagen mußte von Friedrich Schlegel. Er war ein genialer Kopf, er hat vieles verstanden, aber er wußte nicht, daß eine neue Geistoffenbarung notwendig ist. Er glaubte einfach, das alte Christentum nehmen zu können. Mit Worten, mit wörtlichem Schallklang konnte er sogar in vieler Beziehung das Richtige aussprechen. Denken Sie nur einmal, eine Stelle aus dem letzten Vortrage von Friedrich Schlegel vom Jahre 1828 will ich Ihnen doch mitteilen. Er versuchte zu beweisen, so sagt er, «daß in dem Gange derselben» - nämlich der Weltgeschichte -«eine göttlich führende Hand und Fügung zu erkennen ist, daß nicht bloß irdisch sichtbare Kräfte in dieser Entwickelung und in dem sie hemmenden Gegensatze mitwirkend sind, sondern daß der Kampf zum Teil auch unter dem göttlichen Beistande gegen unsichtbare Mächte gerichtet ist; davon hoffe ich die Überzeugung, wenn auch nicht mathematisch erwiesen, was hier gar nicht angemessen, noch anwendbar wäre, doch bleibend erweckt und lebendig begründet zu haben».
Daß der Mensch also, indem er die Geschichte durchlebt, sich hereinzuleben hat in die Geschichte göttlicher Kräfte und mit diesen göttlichen Kräften zusammen gegen widerstrebende geistige Mächte—er sagt ausdrücklich: widerstrebende geistige Mächte — kämpft, davon hatte er eine Ahnung, aber es fehlte jedes lebendige Bewußtsein. Denn die wirkliche Wissenschaft vom Geiste, die flieht man ja in gewisser Beziehung. Seit dem 3. Jahrhundert unserer Zeitrechnung, als im Abendlande entstanden ist das Vorurteil, wie man es nannte, gegen die Einrede der falschen Gnosis — so nannte man es: die Einrede der falschen Gnosis -, da kam man allmählich dazu, abzulehnen alles dasjenige, was der Mensch wissen kann über die geistigen Welten. Und so ist es denn gekommen, daß auch die religiösen Impulse den Materialismus zubereitet haben, daß diese religiösen Impulse nicht verhindern konnten, daß wir eigentlich heute nichts haben, was wir der Jugend wirklich geben können. Unsere Wissenschaft dient nicht der Jugend, denn man kann sich im späteren Alter nur an sie erinnern, sie kann nicht Herzensweisheit werden.
Selbst auf religiösem Gebiete ist es so. Schließlich ist ja die Menschheit nur, ich möchte sagen, zu zwei Extremen gekommen. Den übersinnlichen Christus zu fassen hat ja die Menschheit ziemlich verlernt. Sie will nichts wissen von jener kosmischen Macht, von der die Geisteswissenschaft wieder sprechen muß als der Macht des Christus Jesus. Auf der einen Seite ist ja eine ganz liebliche, wirklich liebliche Vorstellung all dasjenige, was sich im Laufe des Mittelalters und der neueren Zeit durch Dichter, durch Musiker entwickelt hat, eine liebliche poetische Vorstellung, was sich in Anlehnung an das Jesuskind entwickelt hat; aber, religiös ausfüllen kann es doch nicht den Menschen sein ganzes Leben hindurch, was sich an Vorstellungen anknüpft an das liebe Jesulein! Es ist ja schon charakteristisch, daß eine geradezu paradoxe Liebe in unzähligen Liedern und dergleichen für das liebe Jesulein sich ausdrückt. Dagegen ist gar nichts einzuwenden, aber es kann nicht das einzige bleiben.
Das ist das eine, wo sich der Mensch, weil er sich zu dem Großen nicht erheben kann, an das Kleinste gemacht hat, um wenigstens etwas zu haben. Aber ausfüllen kann es das Leben nicht. Und auf der andern Seite der «bon dieu citoyen», wie wir ihn zu Weihnachten mit den Worten Heinrich Heines kennengelernt haben, der gute Bürgergott Jesus, der aller Göttlichkeit entkleidet ist, der Gott der liberalen Pastoren und liberalen Priester. Glauben Sie, daß er nun wirklich das Leben ergreifen kann? Glauben Sie insbesondere, daß er die Jugend gefangennehmen kann? Er ist vom Anfange an ein totes Theologieprodukt, nicht einmal ein Theologieprodukt, sondern ein Theologiegeschichteprodukt. Aber die Menschheit ist auch auf diesem Gebiete weit davon entfernt, die Blicke hinzurichten auf dasjenige, was geistige Macht in der Geschichte ist.
Warum ist das so? Weil eben eine Zeitlang die Menschheit das schon durchmachen mußte, rein materiell in die Welt zu blicken. Es ist auch die Zeit herangekommen, wo die Umwandlung gerade des zur Spiritualität tauglichen Naturwissens der Gegenwart in Herzenswissen sich vollziehen muß. Unsere Naturwissenschaft ist entweder spottschlecht, wenn sie so bleibt, wie sie ist, oder sie ist etwas ganz außerordentlich Großartiges, wenn sie sich umwandelt in Herzensweisheit. Denn dann wird sie Geisteswissenschaft. Die alte, ältere Wissenschaft, die in mancherlei Traditionen befangen ist, hatte schon die Kopfwissenschaft in Herzenswissenschaft umgewandelt. Die neuere Zeit hat keine Begabung gehabt, das, was sie als Wissenschaft neu gewonnen hat bis jetzt, in Herzenswissenschaft umzuwandeln. Und so ist es denn gekommen, daß insbesondere auf sozialem Gebiete die Kopfwissenschaft die einzige wirkliche Arbeit geleistet hat und daher das einseitigste Produkt zustande gebracht hat, das es geben kann.
Der Kopf des Menschen kann vom Menschenwesen überhaupt nichts wissen. Wenn der Kopf des Menschen daher über das Menschenwesen, wie es sich im sozialen Zusammenhange auslebt, nachdenkt, so muß der Kopf etwas ganz Fremdes in dem sozialen Zusammenleben zustande bringen, und das ist der moderne Sozialismus, wie er sich als sozialdemokratische Theorie ausdrückt. Es gibt nichts, was so rein Kopfwissen ist, wie die marxistische Sozialdemokratie, nur weil die übrige Menschheit versäumt hat, sich überhaupt mit Weltproblemen zu beschäftigen, und man in diesen Kreisen sich allein mit sozialen Theorien beschäftigt hat. Die übrigen haben nur - na, ich will höflich sein — die Professorengedanken sich vorsagen lassen, die nur traditionell sind. Aber die Kopfweisheit, das ist Sozialtheorie geworden. Das heißt, mit einem Instrumente hat man versucht, eine soziale Theorie zu begründen, das gerade am allerwenigsten geeignet ist, über die Menschenwesenheit etwas zu wissen. Das ist ein Fundamentalirrtum der gegenwärtigen Menschheit, der nur ganz aufgedeckt werden kann, wenn man wissen wird, wie es mit dem Kopf- und Herzenswissen ist. Niemals wird der Kopf widerlegen können den Sozialismus, marxistischen Sozialismus, weil der Kopf hinausdenken muß in unserem Zeitalter. Widerlegen können wird ihn nur die Geisteswissenschaft, weil die Geisteswissenschaft durch das Herz umgewandelte Kopfweisheit ist.
Das ist außerordentlich wichtig, daß man diese Dinge ins Auge faßt. Sie sehen, warum untaugliche Mittel vorhanden waren selbst bei einem solchen Menschen wie Schlegel, weil er Altes nehmen wollte, trotzdem er einsah: der Mensch muß wiederum sich einen Blick aneignen für das Unsichtbare, das unter uns herumgeht. Aber unsere Zeit ist eine Aufforderung, den Blick hinzurichten auf dieses Unsichtbare. Unsichtbare Mächte waren immer da, so wie Schlegel das ahnt; unsichtbare Mächte haben mitgearbeitet und mitgewirkt an dem, was in der Menschheit sich vollzieht. Die Menschheit aber muß sich entwickeln. Das ging bis zu einem gewissen Grade, daß in den letzten Jahrhunderten die Menschen keine Rücksicht genommen haben auf die übersinnlichen, unsichtbaren Kräfte zum Beispiel im sozialen Leben. In Zukunft wird das nicht gehen. In der Zukunft wird das gegenüber den realen Verhältnissen nicht gehen. Viele Beispiele könnte ich dafür anführen; eines will ich anführen.
Ich habe von andern Gesichtspunkten aus im Laufe der letzten anderthalb Jahrzehnte darüber gesprochen. Wer das soziale Verhältnis in Europa betrachtet, wie es sich herausgebildet hat seit dem 8., 9. Jahrhundert, der weiß, daß verschiedenes in die Struktur des europäischen Lebens hineingearbeitet hat, in dieses komplizierte europäische I,eben, das im Westen sich behalten hat das athanasianische Christentum, das zurückgeschoben hat, wie ich das vor Wochen hier gesagt habe, nach dem Osten ein älteres Christentum, das urverwandt ist mit asiatischen Traditionen: das russische Christentum, das orthodoxe Christentum; das im Westen ausgebildet hat — indem es allmählich einen Gliedkörper geschaffen hat aus dem konservierten Romanentum mit dem neu auflebenden Germanentum und Slawentum in Europa - die verschiedenen europäischen Glieder dieses europäischen sozialen Ganzen, einen komplizierten Organismus. Man konnte sich bis jetzt in ihm bewegen, indem man dasjenige, was unsichtbar in ihm lebte, unberücksichtigt ließ; denn die Konfiguration Europas, sie hat viel Kraft in ihrer Struktur. Aber eine wichtige, wesentliche Kraft in dieser Struktur ist unter anderem das Verhältnis, in dem Frankreich zum übrigen Europa gestanden hat. Ich meine jetzt nicht bloß das politische Verhältnis, ich meine das ganze Verhältnis von Frankreich zum übrigen Europa und verstehe darunter alles dasjenige, was irgendein Europäer irgendeinem, der sich zum französischen Wesen rechnet, gegenüber fühlen konnte im Laufe der Jahrhunderte, seit dem 8., 9. Jahrhundert. Es besteht das Eigentümliche, daß, soweit das Verhältnis des übrigen Europa zu Frankreich in Betracht kommt, das Verhältnis des übrigen Europa zu Frankreich in Sympathie- und Antipathiegefühlen sich ausdrückt. Wir haben es zu tun mit Sympathie und Antipathie. Aber so ist es mit einem reinen Phänomen des physischen Planes. Man kann verstehen, was in Europa hereingespielt hat zwischen Frankreich und dem übrigen Europa in bezug auf Menschenverhältnisse, wenn man studiert, was Herzen, was Menschenseelen ausleben auf dem physischen Plan. Was jedenfalls außerhalb Frankreichs sich für Frankreich entwickelt hat, ist zu verstehen nach Verhältnissen des physischen Planes. Daher hat es nichts geschadet - andere Verhältnisse in Europa waren in den letzten Jahrhunderten ähnlich -, wenn man versäumt hat zu schen, was an übersinnlichen Mächten in die Dinge hineingespielt hat, weil die Sympathien und Antipathien nach den Verhältnissen des physischen Planes eingestellt waren.
Vieles von dem, was durch Jahrhunderte so gespielt hat, wird anders werden. Wir stehen vor mächtigen Umwälzungen, auch in bezug auf die innersten Verhältnisse, die über die europäische soziale Struktur hingehen. Man darf nicht glauben, daß es leichten Herzens hingesprochen war, wenn ich jetzt wiederholt darauf aufmerksam gemacht habe, daß die Dinge wichtiger zu nehmen sind, als man heute geneigt ist, es zu tun. Wir stehen vor mächtigen Umwälzungen, und notwendig wird es sein, daß in der Zukunft die Menschen ihr Auge, ihr Seelenauge richten auf geistige Verhältnisse; denn man wird nach bloßen Verhältnissen des physischen Planes nicht mehr verstehen können, was sich abspielt. Man wird es nur verstehen können, wenn man geistige Verhältnisse wird in Betracht ziehen können. Was sich im März abgespielt hat — der Sturz des Zarentums -, das hat einen metaphysischen Charakter. Man kann es nur verstehen, wenn man den metaphysischen Charakter ins Auge faßt.
Wir sind unter uns, solche Dinge können unbefangen besprochen werden. Warum gab es denn überhaupt ein Zarentum? Die Frage kann in einem höheren Sinne aufgefaßt werden als im äußeren trivial-historischen Sinne. Warum gab es denn überhaupt ein Zarentum? Wenn man absieht von einzelnen pazifistischen Querköpfen, die in den Firlefanzereien des zaristischen Friedensmanifestes etwas Ernsthaftes gesehen haben, dann muß man sagen: Selbst diejenigen, welche aus allerlei Gründen mit dem russischen Reiche sich [gut] gestellt haben -, das Zarentum haben sie nicht geliebt! Und diejenigen, die es geliebt haben, bei denen war die Liebe sicherlich nicht sehr echt. Warum gab es denn überhaupt ein Zarentum? Es gab ein Zarentum - ich will es jetzt paradox ausdrücken, etwas extrem -, damit Europa etwas zu hassen hatte. Diese Kräfte des Hasses waren notwendig aufzubringen. Es gab ein Zarentum, und das Zarentum benahm sich so, wie es sich benahm, damit Europa etwas zu hassen hatte. Diesen Haß brauchte Europa als den Vorspann zu etwas anderem. Der Zar mußte dasein, um zunächst den Punkt abzugeben, auf den sich der Haß konzentrierte; denn eine Welle des Hasses bereitete sich vor, die nach diesen Tagen auch schon äußerlich beurteilt werden kann. Dasjenige, was sich jetzt abspielt, wird sich in mächtige Hassesgefühle umwandeln, die nicht mehr zu verstehen sein werden, wie die Sympathie und Antipathie von früher, wie ich auseinandergesetzt habe, nach dem physischen Plane zu verstehen sind. Denn es werden nicht bloß Menschen hassen. Mittel- und Osteuropa wird gehaßt werden, nicht von Menschen, sondern von gewissen Dämonen, die in Menschen wohnen werden. Die Zeit, wo Osteuropa vielleicht noch mehr gehaßt wird als Mitteleuropa, die wird schon kommen.
Diese Dinge müssen verstanden werden, diese Dinge dürfen nicht leicht genommen werden. Sie können nur verstanden werden, wenn die Menschen sich dazu aufschwingen, Zusammenhang zu suchen mit der geistigen Welt. Denn das muß doch kommen, was solche Geister wie Friedrich Schlegel schon ein wenig geahnt haben, aber wofür sie die Grundlagen und die Wurzeln eben nicht gesehen haben. Das muß kommen, daß die Dinge unbefangen ins Seelenauge gefaßt werden, damit der Mensch zurückschauen kann auf die letzten Jahrhunderte, auf das, was sie gebracht haben - und dann wird er mitarbeiten können an dem, was begründet werden muß.
Unter den schönen Sätzen, die sich zuweilen in den Schlegelschen Vorlesungen finden, ist auch der, daß es in der Entwickelung der Menschheit ankommt auf das Innere der Seele und auf die Wahrhaftigkeit im Innern der Seele, und daß schädlich ist vor allem jede politische Abgötterei. Das ist ein schöner Satz von Friedrich Schlegel. Diese politische Abgötterei, wie hat sie unsere Zeit erfaßt! Wie beherrscht sie unsere Zeit! Und die politische Abgötterei hat sich selber ein schönes Symptom geschaffen, an dem man erkennen konnte, was da ist.
Aber man muß Zusammenhänge durchschauen. Man muß es empfinden, was in unserer Zeit lebt. Wir haben nicht die Möglichkeit — wir verstehen es, sobald wir hinblicken auf das wahre Wesen des Kopf- und Herzensmenschen -, wir haben heute nicht die Möglichkeit, wenn wir das Wissen nicht herzlich vertiefen, den Kindern dasjenige zu geben, was sie brauchen, um das Leben lebensfähig jung hindurchzuerhalten. Wir haben diese Möglichkeit noch nicht. Das muß begründet werden, das muß kommen. Wir können sagen, wenn wir die Dinge in ein paar Worte zusammenfassen wollen: ganz und gar nicht kann die Schulmeisterei ihre Aufgabe heute erfüllen. Was Schulmeisterei ist, das ist weltenfremd dem wahren Wesen des Menschen. Die Welt aber droht beherrscht zu werden von einem politisch abgöttisch verehrten Schulmeister. Die Schulmeisterei, das Ungeeignetste zur Menschenlenkung in dem heutigen Zeitabschnitte, soll große Politik werden.
Diese Dinge sollten wenigstens einige Menschen einsehen, denn das sind Dinge, die tief zusammenhängen mit den tiefen Erkenntnissen, die man sich allein erwerben kann, wenn man ein wenig hineinzudringen versucht in die Geheimnisse der Menschheit. Mit Trieben und Instinkten, mit Chauvinismen und Nationalismen läßt sich heute die Welt weder begreifen noch irgendwie regieren - allein mit dem guten Willen, der eindringen will in die wahre Wirklichkeit. Davon wollen wir dann morgen weitersprechen.
Thirteenth Lecture
The things we are now discussing are connected with a fact that sounds paradoxical when stated so simply, but which nevertheless corresponds to a significant, profound truth: Human beings walk around on earth, but they actually understand themselves very poorly. Now, this statement applies most directly to our age. We know that the great, significant inscription on the Temple of Apollo, “Know thyself,” was once an exhortation to people in ancient Greece who were searching for spiritual connections. And this inscription on the Delphic temple, “Know thyself,” was not just a phrase at that time, as we can see from our various observations, but even in those days of the Greeks it was possible to attain a deeper understanding of human beings than is the case today. But the present is also a challenge to us to strive once more for a true understanding of human beings, for an understanding of what human beings actually are on earth.
Now it seems as if the things that must be said in connection with this question are difficult to understand. In reality, they are not, even though they sound as if they were difficult to understand. They are only difficult for the present because we are not accustomed to directing our thinking and feeling into the currents that are necessary for understanding such things correctly. The point is that everything we call understanding in the present actually boils down to our always seeking to understand through abstract concepts. But you cannot understand everything through abstract concepts. Above all, you cannot understand human beings through abstract concepts. You need something else to understand human beings than abstract concepts. You have to put yourself in the position of taking human beings as they walk around on earth, as it were, as an image, as an image that expresses something, that reveals something, that wants to reveal something to us. We must refresh our awareness that human beings are a mystery that needs to be solved. But we will not solve the mystery of human beings if we continue to be so comfortable in our thinking, so theoretical in our thinking, as we are now. For human beings are, as we have had to emphasize again and again, complicated beings. Human beings are more, much more than the physical structure that walks around before our eyes as a human being; human beings are much more than that. But this physical structure that walks around before our eyes as a human being, and everything that belongs to this physical structure, is nevertheless an expression of the whole comprehensive essence of the human being. And one can say: it is not only this that can be recognized in the human form, in the physical human being who walks among us, it is not only this that can be recognized in him, what the human being is between his birth and his death here in the physical world, but also, if one only wants to, one can recognize in the human being what he is as an immortal, eternal soul being. One only has to develop a feeling that this human form is something complex. Our science, which is popularized today and thus reaches all people, is not suited to evoking a feeling of what a miraculous structure this human being is who walks around on earth. One must look at human beings in a completely different way.
Remember—you have all certainly seen a human skeleton—remember that such a human skeleton is actually twofold, if you disregard everything else. One can speak about this much more precisely, but if you disregard everything else, this skeleton is a duality. You can very easily remove the skull from the skeleton, which is actually only placed on top of it, and then the rest of the human being remains intact. The skull can be removed very easily. This rest of the human being, apart from the skull, is still a very complicated being; but we want to consider it as a unity now, we want to disregard its complexity. But let us first consider this duality that presents itself to us when we look at the human being, let us say as a head person and as the rest of the human being, as a torso person. For he is not only a skeleton, but, although this is less obvious, he is also a duality as a whole fleshly human being.
Now, in the field of spiritual science, we do not need to love comparisons in the sense of absolutizing them or developing them metaphysically. We do not want to do that, but we do want to clarify all kinds of things by using comparisons. And here it is obvious, because it really corresponds to our perception, to say that the human being is mainly dominated by the spherical form in relation to his head. If we want to express schematically what the human head is, we can say that humans are dominated by the spherical shape.

If we wanted to have a schematic picture of the rest of the human being, we would of course have to take the complications into account, but we do not want to do that today. However, you will easily see that, apart from certain complications, just as the human head can be schematically conceived as a spherical shape, so the rest of the human being can be conceived as such a shape (see drawing: moon shape), whereby, of course, the position of these two circles must be differentiated according to the corpulence of the individual.
But in this way we can already conceive of the human being as a sphere and as a moon shape. This has a deep inner justification, but we will not discuss that today. We will simply bear in mind the fact that the human being is divided into these two parts.
Now, the human head is primarily a real apparatus for mental activity. The head is the apparatus for everything that human beings can bring forth in the way of human thoughts and human feelings. But if we were dependent on what the head as an apparatus can achieve in thinking and feeling, we would never be able to truly understand the essence of the human being. If we were dependent solely on the head as the tool of our mental life, we would never be able to truly say “I” to ourselves. For what is this head? In truth, as it appears to us in its spherical form, this head is a reflection of the entire cosmos, as the cosmos first appears to you with all its stars, fixed stars, planets, and comets, even meteorites — the irregularities that haunt some minds. The human head is an image of the macrocosm, an image of the entire world. And only the prejudice of our time—I have already hinted at this in another context—knows nothing of the fact that the entire world is involved in the creation of a human head.
But when this human head is transferred to Earth through heredity, through birth, this human head cannot be an apparatus for comprehending the essence of the human being itself. We are, in a sense, given an apparatus in our head that is like an extract of the whole world, but which is incapable of comprehending the human being. Why? Because human beings are more than everything we can see and think with our heads. Today, many people say that human knowledge has limits and that we cannot go beyond these limits. But this is only because these people want to accept only the wisdom of the head, and the wisdom of the head does indeed have certain limits. This wisdom of the head also created what we described a few days ago as the Greek gods. The Greek gods arose from the wisdom of the head. They are the higher gods; they are therefore only gods for everything that the human head can comprehend with its wisdom.
Now, I have often pointed out to you that, in addition to this external doctrine of the gods, the Greeks had their mysteries. In the mysteries, the Greeks worshipped other gods besides the heavenly gods, the chthonic gods. And of those who were initiated into the mysteries, it was rightly said that they came to know the higher and lower gods. The upper gods were those of the circle of Zeus; but they only have dominion over what is spread out before the senses and what the mind can comprehend. Man is more than this. Man is rooted with his essence in the realm of the lower gods, in the realm of the chthonic gods.
But one cannot get by if one only considers what I have schematically outlined here. If one wants to understand the roots of man in the realm of the lower gods, then one must complete this outline and make it as follows: One must also include, in a sense, the unilluminated moon (see drawing on p. 234). In other words, one must view the human head differently than the rest of the organism. With the rest of the organism, one must consider much more that which is spiritual, supersensible, invisible. The human head, as it appears to us externally, is, in a sense, a perfection. Everything that is spiritual has created an image of itself in the head. This is not the case with the rest of the human being. The rest of the human being is only a fragment as a physical human being, and one cannot come to terms with the rest of the human being if one takes this fleshly fragment that visibly walks around on earth.

Well, this already shows us that we must take human beings as complex beings. But does what I have just said emerge in any way in life? What I have just said seems abstract, it seems paradoxical and difficult to understand, but the question must nevertheless arise: Does it emerge in any way in life? That is the important thing: it emerges quite clearly in life. The head is the apparatus of our wisdom; it is the apparatus of our wisdom so strongly that our initial wisdom is connected with its development. But even external anatomical and physiological observation shows—look at how a head develops, how a human being grows up—that the head undergoes a completely different development than the rest of the organism. The head develops rapidly, the rest of the organism slowly. Relatively speaking, the head is already fully formed in children and develops much less further. The rest of the organism is still poorly developed and slowly goes through its stages. This is connected with the fact that we are indeed double beings in life. Not only does our skeleton show the head and the rest of the human being, but our life itself shows this dual nature of our being: our head develops quickly, the rest of our organism develops slowly. In our time, our head completes its development by the age of twenty-eight or twenty-seven, while the rest of the organism needs the whole of life until death to do so. For what the head acquires in a relatively short time can only be experienced in the whole of life. This is connected with many mysteries.
The spiritual researcher recognizes these things especially when he turns his gaze to an accident. It sounds paradoxical again, but it corresponds to the complete truth. Imagine that a person is killed, that he perishes in an accident. Let us assume that a person is killed in his thirteenth year. From an external, physical point of view, such a sudden death is a kind of accident; but from a spiritual scientific point of view, it is simply ridiculous to regard such a thing as an accident. For at the moment when, through an external cause, a person suddenly dies, an enormous amount happens to him. Imagine that, in the normal course of events, this same person who was killed at the age of thirty might have lived to be seventy, eighty, or ninety years old. By living from the age of thirty to ninety, he would have slowly gained a great deal of life experience. What he would have gone through in sixty years of life experience, he goes through in perhaps half a minute when he is killed at the age of thirty. When the spiritual world is taken into consideration, the time relationships are different from what they appear to us here on the physical plane. A quick death brought about by external circumstances—one must take the matter very seriously—can, under certain circumstances, quickly impart the experience, and I say experience, the wisdom of a whole life that could have been lived.
From this we can study how it is that human beings acquire wisdom and experience throughout their lives. And one can study how what the head can achieve with its short development compares to what the rest of the human being can achieve with its long development in social life. It is really true that during their youth, human beings absorb certain concepts, certain ideas that they learn; but they learn them only there. They are then head knowledge. The rest of life, which proceeds more slowly, is destined to gradually transform intellectual knowledge into heart knowledge — I am not now referring to other people as intellectual beings, but as heart beings — to transform intellectual knowledge into heart knowledge, into knowledge in which the whole human being participates, not just the head.
It takes us much longer to transform head knowledge into heart knowledge than it does to acquire head knowledge. To acquire head knowledge—if it is particularly clever knowledge—you need time until well into your twenties. Isn't that true? Then you become a very intelligent person, academically very intelligent, but in order to truly unite this knowledge with your whole being, you have to remain flexible throughout your life. And in order to transform head knowledge into heart knowledge, you need just as much time as you live beyond the age of twenty-seven or twenty-six. In this sense, we are also dual beings as human beings. We quickly acquire knowledge in our heads and can then transform it into knowledge in our hearts over the course of our lives.
It is not easy to know what this actually means. And since we are among ourselves, I may perhaps cite an experience of a spiritual researcher which makes it easier to understand these things than other spiritual research work. If you familiarize yourself with the language spoken by human souls who have passed through death and live in the spiritual world after death, if you understand the language of the dead, the so-called dead, to some extent, then you can experience that the dead express themselves in a very special way about many things that are connected with human life. The dead already have a language that we living people cannot yet understand very well. Today, the understanding of the dead and the living diverges considerably. The dead are well aware that human beings develop quickly as head beings and slowly as heart beings. And the dead say, when they want to express what actually happens when the quickly acquired knowledge of the head gradually settles into the slower knowledge of the heart: mere intellectual knowledge is transformed by the warmth of the heart or love that rises from within the human being. Wisdom is fertilized by love in the human being. — So say the dead.
And that is indeed a profound and significant law of life. One can acquire intellectual knowledge quickly; one can know an enormous amount, especially in our time, because natural science — not natural scientists, but natural science — is quite advanced in our time and has rich content. But this content is such that it has not been transformed into knowledge of the heart, that the knowledge of the head has remained everywhere; because people—as I pointed out yesterday—no longer pay attention to the other thing that comes in life after the age of twenty-seven, because people do not understand how to grow old, or I could also say: how to remain young while growing old.
Because people do not maintain their inner vitality, their hearts grow cold; the warmth of the heart does not flow up to the head, it does not fertilize the love that comes from the rest of the organism, it does not fertilize the head. Intellectual knowledge remains cold theory. But it does not have to remain cold theory; all intellectual knowledge can be transformed into heart knowledge. And that is precisely the task of the future, that head knowledge be gradually transformed into heart knowledge. A real miracle will happen when head knowledge is transformed into heart knowledge.
One is completely right today to criticize materialistic natural science, or materialistic natural philosophy in particular, in every respect. One is completely right, but nevertheless something else is also true: this natural science, which in Haeckel, Spencer, Huxley, and so on has remained mere intellectual knowledge and is therefore materialism, will, when it becomes heart science, when it is taken up by the whole human being, when humanity understands how to grow older or younger in old age, as I meant yesterday, then this, precisely this science of the present, will become the purest spiritualism, the purest affirmation of the spirit and its existence. There is no better foundation than the natural science of the present, when it transforms itself into that which can flow into the human mind from the rest of the organism, but now from the spiritual part of the rest of the organism. The miracle will take place when people learn to feel the rejuvenation of their etheric body, so that the materialistic natural science of the present will become spiritualism. It will become spiritualism all the more quickly the more people there are who reproach it for its present materialism, its materialistic folly.
This will be accompanied by a complete transformation that anyone who has even the slightest sensitivity to what is happening at present can sense: it will be accompanied by a complete transformation of the education and teaching system. Who could deny, if they have an open eye for the social, moral, and historical conditions of the present, who could deny that we today are not at all in a position as a whole humanity—well, if one wants to put it grotesquely—to give children an adequate education, especially adequate instruction? Certainly, we can make children into civil servants, we can make them into industrialists, we can even make them into pastors and so on, but we are hardly in a position to make children today into complete human beings, into people who are developed in all respects. For it is a profound demand of the times: if human beings are to be complete, all-roundly developed spiritual and emotional organisms, then they must be enabled to take in quickly and rapidly what they absorb as children and transform it throughout their entire lives. Throughout their entire lives, human beings must remain fresh in order to transform what they have absorbed.
What are we doing today—we just don't look at these things impartially enough—what are we actually doing today in later life? We learned something in our youth, some more, some less. Isn't it true that we are proud that there are no longer any illiterate people in Western Europe? Some learn a lot, others less, but everyone learns something in their youth. And what do we do in later life with what we have learned, regardless of whether we have learned a lot or a little? Everything is so predisposed that one only remembers what one has learned; it is inherent in human nature to remember. What do people do for work? It is not taught to the human soul that it works within the human soul, that the contents of the head become the contents of the heart. It is not predisposed to do so. Much water must flow down the Rhine before what we can give to young people today — let us consider it only in one field, but it is applicable to all fields — can become something suitable for being truly transformed into heart knowledge. What must this be? Today we have no way of giving our children anything that could truly become heart knowledge. Two conditions are missing. Only a truly correctly understood spiritual science can bring about these two conditions.
Two conditions are missing in order to give children today something truly life-giving, something that can be a source of joy and vitality throughout their entire existence. Two things are missing. One is that, according to all the concepts we have today, according to what modern education can teach people, human beings cannot gain any idea of their place in the universe. Just think about everything that is taught in school. Even the smallest children are taught this today, or at least what they are told is expressed in words that contain what we now want to say. Consider that human beings today grow up with the following ideas: there is the Earth, it floats through space at such and such a speed, and apart from the Earth there is the Sun and the planets, the fixed stars. And what is said about the sun, the planets, and the fixed stars is at most a kind of world physics, nothing more, world mechanics, world physics.
Does what astronomers say today, what our education today says about the structure of the world, have anything to do with the human beings who walk here on Earth? Certainly not! For the scientific worldview, human beings are simply higher-developed animals that are born, die, are buried, and then another comes along, is born, dies, is buried, and so on. This continues from generation to generation. Out there in the vast universe, events take place that are calculated purely mathematically, as in a huge world machine. But what does all this have to do with today's intelligent human beings, what is happening out there in the big world, with the fact that here on earth this somewhat higher developed animal is born and dies? Priests and pastors know of no other wisdom to replace this bleak wisdom. And because they do not know, they say that they do not concern themselves with this science at all, but that faith must have a completely different origin.
Well, we need not go into that further. But there are two quite different things: what atheistic science talks about and the so-called faith of this or that confessional church, which barely maintains the theistic element. It was necessary that the present view of the universe should take hold for a time in human evolution, in contrast to the earlier view. We don't need to go back very far—people just don't think about it today—when humans still had an awareness that they were not merely higher animals wandering around here on Earth, being born and buried, but that they were connected to the world of the stars, to the entire universe, and knew in their own way, in a different way than we must strive for now, but they knew in their own way about the connection with the universe. But then one had to imagine the universe differently.
Such a worldview as is already taught to children today was unthinkable in the 12th and 13th centuries; one could not even imagine having such a view of the starry world. People looked up at the stars, they looked up as we do today at the planets, but they did not just calculate the planetary orbits as mathematical astronomers do today and imagine that there was a sphere up there moving through space. Instead, medieval science saw in each sphere the body of a spiritual being. It would have been utter nonsense to imagine a mere material sphere beneath a planet. Read Thomas Aquinas. You will find everywhere that he sees in every planet the English intelligence, not English intelligence, but angelic intelligence. And so it is with the other stars. A universe such as that fabricated by modern astronomy was not imagined. But in order to progress, it was necessary for a time, I would say, to drive the soul out of the universe in order to imagine the skeleton, the pure machinery of the universe. The Copernican, Galilean, and Keplerian worldviews had to come. But only fools regard them as ultimately valid. They are a beginning, but a beginning that must develop further.
Some things are already known today by spiritual science that external astronomy does not yet know. But it is important that precisely these things, which spiritual science knows but external astronomy does not yet know, pass into the general consciousness of humanity. And even if these concepts still seem difficult today, they will become such that they can be taught to children; they will be an important asset for children in particular in keeping their souls alive. We must, however, still discuss these things in difficult terms. For as long as spiritual science is taken as it is now by the outer world, it has no opportunity to cast things into the concepts and ideas that are needed if they are to become the subject of children's education.
For example, modern astronomy knows nothing about the fact that the earth is racing too fast as it hurtles through the universe. The earth races too fast. And because it races too fast, because the earth moves quickly, we can also develop our heads more quickly than we would if the earth moved so slowly that it corresponded to our entire lifespan. The speed of our head development is simply related to the fact that the earth races too fast through space. Our head keeps up with this speed of the Earth, but the rest of our organism does not; the rest of our organism withdraws from cosmic events. Our head, which is modeled after the celestial structure as a sphere, must also participate in what the Earth participates in in the celestial space.
The rest of our organism, which is not modeled after the entire structure of the universe, does not keep up; it develops more slowly. If our entire organism were to keep up with the speed of the earth today, if it were to develop in such a way that it corresponded to the speed of the earth, we would never be able to live longer than twenty-seven years. Then twenty-seven years would be the average age of human beings. For in fact, our head is fully developed at the age of twenty-seven; if it depended on the head, human beings could die at the age of twenty-seven. It is only because the rest of the human being is designed for a longer life and continues to supply the head with energy after the age of twenty-seven that we live as long as we do. This is the spiritual part of the rest of the human being that supplies the head with energy. It is the heart that exchanges its energy with the head.
Once humanity recognizes that it has a dual nature, a head nature and a heart nature, it will also recognize that the head obeys completely different laws of the world than the rest of the organism. Then the human being stands once again within the whole macrocosm; then the human being cannot help but form ideas that lead him to say: I am not merely a higher animal here on earth, born and destined to die, but I am a being built out of the whole universe. My head, which is built up within me, comes from the entire universe; the earth has attached the rest of my organism to me, which does not initially participate in the movements of the universe in the same way that the head does in a different way.
So, if you don't look at people in an abstract way, like modern science does, but if you see them as an image in their duality: as head people and heart people connected to the universe, then people put themselves back into the universe. And I know, and others who are able to judge such things also know, that if we can form heartfelt ideas about the fact that when we look at the human head, we see in it a reflection of the entire star-studded universe with all its wonders, then all the images of the connection between the human being and the vast, vast universe will enter the human soul. And these images will become forms of narrative that we do not yet have today; and these forms of narrative will not be abstract, but will express in a way that can be felt what we can pour into the hearts of the youngest children, so that these hearts of the youngest children will feel: Here on Earth I stand as a human being, but as a human being I am an expression of the entire star-studded universe; the whole world speaks through me. Through feeling, human beings will be able to be educated to become members of the whole cosmos. That is one condition.
The other condition is this. If we are able to organize all education, all teaching, in such a way that human beings become aware that in his head he is a reflection of the universe, with the rest of his organism he withdraws from this universe; with the rest of his organism he has that which trickles down like a shower of souls, to process the whole universe so that it becomes independent here on earth in man—then this will be a special inner experience. Imagine this twofold human being, whom I now want to describe in this curious form. When he realizes that what are the secrets of all the stars come unconsciously into his head from the whole universe, but that he has to process this throughout his whole life with the rest of his organism by stimulating the forces of his head, so that he may preserve it here on earth, carry it through death, and carry it back into the spiritual world — when this becomes a living sensation, then human beings will know themselves as a dual nature, they will know themselves as head and heart beings. For what I am saying now is connected with the fact that human beings will learn to unravel themselves, to say to themselves: As I become more and more a person of the heart, as I remain young, I see, as I grow older, through what my heart gives me, what I learned as a child in my youth through my head. The heart looks up to the head, and the heart will see in the head an image of the entire starry sky. But the head will look to the heart and will find in the heart the secrets of the human riddle; it will learn to fathom the true nature of man in the heart.

Man will feel so educated that he will say to himself: Certainly, I can learn many things with my head. But as I live, as I live toward death, which will carry me into the spiritual world, what I learn with my head will one day be fertilized by the love rising from the rest of my organism and become something completely different. There is something in me as a human being that exists only in me as a human being; I have something to look forward to. There is a lot in these words, and it means a lot when a person is brought up to say: I have something to look forward to. I will live to be thirty, forty, fifty, sixty years old, and as I grow older from decade to decade, something of the mystery of human beings will come to me through the process of growing older. I have something to look forward to from the fact that I am alive.
Imagine, if this is not mere theory, if this is wisdom about life, social wisdom, then the child is brought up to know: I can learn something; but the person who is bringing me up has something in him that I cannot learn, that I must first become as old as he is before I can find it in myself. When he tells me, he is giving me something that must be a sacred secret to me, because I hear it from his mouth but cannot find it within myself. Think what kind of relationship this creates between children and the elderly, a relationship that has been completely blurred in our time, when people know that the stages of life offer something to look forward to. I am not yet forty years old, so I cannot possess the sum of secrets that can be found in someone who has already reached that age. And if he shares it with me, I receive it as a communication; I cannot know it through myself. What bond of human community is formed when a new seriousness, a new depth enters life in this way!
It is precisely this seriousness, this depth that is lacking in our lives, that our lives do not have, because our lives only value intellectual knowledge for the time being. But this will cause the real social to die, to move toward dissolution; for then there will be people walking around here on earth who do not know what they are, who actually take seriously only what is up to the age of twenty-seven, and use the rest of their lives to carry the carcass within themselves for the rest, but not to transform the whole human being into something that youth can still carry through death.
Because people do not understand this, because an age has come that could not understand this, all things related to the spiritual remained so unsatisfactory, as I had to say yesterday about Friedrich Schlegel. He was a brilliant mind, he understood many things, but he did not know that a new revelation of the spirit was necessary. He simply believed that he could take the old Christianity. With words, with the literal sound of words, he was even able to express what was right in many respects. Just think, I would like to share with you a passage from Friedrich Schlegel's last lecture in 1828. He tried to prove, he says, “that in the course of the same” — namely, world history — “a divine guiding hand and providence can be recognized, that it is not merely earthly, visible forces that are at work in this development and in the opposing forces that hinder it, but that the struggle is also partly directed, with divine assistance, against invisible powers; of this I hope to have convinced you, if not mathematically, which would be neither appropriate nor applicable here, but at least in a lasting and living way.”
That man, in living through history, has to live himself into the history of divine forces and, together with these divine forces, fight against opposing spiritual powers—he expressly says: opposing spiritual powers—he had an inkling of this, but it lacked any living consciousness. For the real science of the spirit is something that is shunned in a certain sense. Since the third century of our era, when the prejudice arose in the West against what was called the objection of false Gnosticism — that is what it was called: the objection of false Gnosticism — people gradually came to reject everything that human beings can know about the spiritual worlds. And so it has come about that even religious impulses have prepared the way for materialism, that these religious impulses have been unable to prevent us from having nothing today that we can really give to the young. Our science does not serve the young, for one can only remember it in later life; it cannot become wisdom of the heart.
This is also true in the religious sphere. Ultimately, humanity has, I would say, come to two extremes. Humanity has largely forgotten how to grasp the supersensible Christ. It wants to know nothing of that cosmic power of which spiritual science must speak again as the power of Christ Jesus. On the one hand, there is a very lovely, truly lovely idea of everything that developed during the Middle Ages and in more recent times through poets and musicians, a lovely poetic idea that developed in reference to the baby Jesus; but what is linked to ideas about the dear little Jesus cannot fill a person's entire life in a religious sense! It is characteristic that an almost paradoxical love for the dear little Jesus is expressed in countless songs and the like. There is nothing wrong with that, but it cannot remain the only thing.
This is one thing where human beings, because they cannot rise to greatness, have attached themselves to the smallest things in order to have at least something. But it cannot fill life. And on the other side is the “bon dieu citoyen,” as we learned at Christmas in the words of Heinrich Heine, the good citizen God Jesus, stripped of all divinity, the God of liberal pastors and liberal priests. Do you believe that he can really take hold of life? Do you believe, in particular, that he can capture the youth? From the beginning, he is a dead product of theology, not even a product of theology, but a product of theological history. But humanity is also far from directing its gaze in this area toward what spiritual power is in history.
Why is this so? Because for a time, humanity had to go through a period of looking at the world in purely material terms. The time has now come when the natural sciences of the present, which are capable of spirituality, must be transformed into knowledge of the heart. Our natural science is either utterly worthless if it remains as it is, or it is something extraordinarily great if it transforms itself into wisdom of the heart. For then it becomes spiritual science. The old, older science, which is caught up in various traditions, had already transformed head science into heart science. The newer era has not had the talent to transform what it has newly gained as science into heart science. And so it has come about that, especially in the social sphere, head science has done the only real work and has therefore produced the most one-sided product that can exist.
The human mind cannot know anything about human nature. When the human mind reflects on human nature as it is lived out in social relationships, it must therefore produce something completely foreign to social coexistence, and that is modern socialism as expressed in social democratic theory. There is nothing that is as purely intellectual as Marxist social democracy, simply because the rest of humanity has failed to concern itself with world problems at all, and because these circles have concerned themselves solely with social theories. The rest have merely—well, I want to be polite—allowed themselves to be fed the traditional ideas of professors. But this intellectual wisdom has become social theory. In other words, an instrument has been used to try to establish a social theory that is the least suitable for knowing anything about human nature. This is a fundamental error of contemporary humanity, which can only be fully exposed when we know the difference between intellectual knowledge and heart knowledge. The head will never be able to refute socialism, Marxist socialism, because the head must think beyond itself in our age. Only the spiritual science can refute it, because spiritual science is head knowledge transformed by the heart.
It is extremely important to take these things into account. You can see why even someone like Schlegel had unsuitable means at his disposal, because he wanted to take the old, even though he realized that human beings must once again acquire a view of the invisible that surrounds us. But our time is a call to turn our gaze to this invisible. Invisible forces have always been there, as Schlegel suspects; invisible forces have worked and contributed to what is happening in humanity. But humanity must develop. This went so far that in recent centuries people have not taken into account the supernatural, invisible forces, for example in social life. In the future, this will not be possible. In the future, this will not be possible in view of the real circumstances. I could cite many examples of this; I will mention one.
I have spoken about this from other points of view over the last decade and a half. Anyone who looks at social relations in Europe as they have developed since the 8th and 9th centuries knows that various factors have worked their way into the structure of European life, into this complicated European I, which has preserved Athanasian Christianity in the West, pushing back, as I said here weeks ago, an older form of Christianity to the East, which is closely related to Asian traditions: Russian Christianity, Orthodox Christianity; which in the West has developed — by gradually creating a body of members from the preserved Roman culture with the newly revived Germanic and Slavic cultures in Europe — the various European members of this European social whole, a complex organism. Until now, it has been possible to move within it by ignoring what lived invisibly within it, for the configuration of Europe has great strength in its structure. But one important, essential force in this structure is, among other things, the relationship that France has had with the rest of Europe. I do not mean merely the political relationship, I mean the whole relationship between France and the rest of Europe, and by that I mean everything that any European could feel towards anyone who considered himself French throughout the centuries since the 8th or 9th century. There is something peculiar about the fact that, as far as the relationship of the rest of Europe to France is concerned, the relationship of the rest of Europe to France is expressed in feelings of sympathy and antipathy. We are dealing with sympathy and antipathy. But this is a purely physical phenomenon. One can understand what has happened in Europe between France and the rest of Europe in terms of human relationships if one studies what hearts and human souls experience on the physical plane. What has developed outside France for France can be understood in terms of the physical plane. Therefore, it did no harm — other conditions in Europe were similar in recent centuries — if one failed to recognize the supersensible forces at work in things, because sympathies and antipathies were determined by conditions on the physical plane.
Much of what has been happening for centuries will change. We are facing powerful upheavals, including in relation to the innermost conditions that transcend the European social structure. It should not be taken lightly when I repeatedly point out that things must be taken more seriously than people are inclined to do today. We are facing powerful upheavals, and it will be necessary for people in the future to turn their eyes, the eyes of their souls, to spiritual conditions; for it will no longer be possible to understand what is happening by looking only at conditions on the physical plane. It will only be possible to understand if spiritual conditions are taken into consideration. What happened in March—the fall of the tsarist regime—has a metaphysical character. It can only be understood if one takes its metaphysical character into account.
We are among ourselves; such things can be discussed impartially. Why was there a tsarist regime in the first place? The question can be understood in a higher sense than in the trivial historical sense. Why did the tsarist regime exist at all? If we disregard individual pacifist mavericks who saw something serious in the frippery of the tsarist peace manifesto, then we must say: even those who, for all sorts of reasons, were well disposed toward the Russian Empire did not love the tsarist regime! And those who loved it, their love was certainly not very genuine. Why did the tsarist regime exist at all? The tsarist regime existed – I will now express this paradoxically, somewhat extremely – so that Europe had something to hate. These forces of hatred had to be mobilized. There was a tsarist regime, and the tsarist regime behaved as it did so that Europe would have something to hate. Europe needed this hatred as a prelude to something else. The tsar had to exist in order to initially provide a focus for the hatred, because a wave of hatred was brewing that can already be seen externally after these days. What is happening now will turn into powerful feelings of hatred that will no longer be understandable in the same way as the sympathy and antipathy of the past, as I have explained, according to the physical plane. For it will not be merely human beings who hate. Central and Eastern Europe will be hated, not by human beings, but by certain demons who will dwell in human beings. The time when Eastern Europe will perhaps be hated even more than Central Europe is already coming.
These things must be understood; these things must not be taken lightly. They can only be understood if people make an effort to seek connections with the spiritual world. For what spirits such as Friedrich Schlegel already sensed to some extent, but for which they did not see the foundations and roots, must come to pass. It must come that things are grasped impartially in the eye of the soul, so that people can look back on the last centuries, on what they have brought – and then they will be able to work on what needs to be established.
Among the beautiful sentences that are sometimes found in Schlegel's lectures is the one that says that what matters in the development of humanity is the inner soul and the truthfulness within the soul, and that all political idolatry is harmful above all else. That is a beautiful sentence by Friedrich Schlegel. How this political idolatry has gripped our time! How it dominates our time! And political idolatry has created a beautiful symptom for itself, by which one can recognize what is there.
But one must see through the connections. One must feel what is alive in our time. We do not have the opportunity—we understand this as soon as we look at the true nature of the head and heart of human beings—we do not have the opportunity today, unless we deepen our knowledge from the heart, to give children what they need to maintain a viable life as young people. We do not yet have this opportunity. It must be established; it must come. We can say, if we want to summarize things in a few words: schoolmasterliness cannot fulfill its task today at all. Schoolmasterliness is alien to the true nature of human beings. But the world is in danger of being ruled by a politically idolized schoolmaster. Schoolmastering, the most unsuitable means of guiding people in the present age, is to become high politics.
At least some people should realize these things, for they are deeply connected with the profound insights that can only be gained by trying to penetrate a little into the mysteries of humanity. With drives and instincts, with chauvinism and nationalism, the world today can neither be understood nor governed in any way—only with the good will that wants to penetrate true reality. We will talk more about this tomorrow.