Anthroposophical Life Gifts
GA 181
16 April 1918, Berlin
V. Thoughts on Life and Death
In the public lecture given yesterday, “The Human Kingdom and the Animal Kingdom,” I alluded among many other things to an idea which one may have concerning the life of the soul and which of course is in no sense hypothetical, but one which directly corresponds to the reality of the soul-life. I call your attention to the fact that what forms the beginning and end of life in the animal world, and in a sense only comprises two moments—the entrance into physical life and the leaving it, conception and death—stands in such a relation to the animal life that one might say: animal life might be represented as a ladder, at the beginning of which there is conception, and at the end, death. I called your attention to the fact that these two experiences really run through the whole soul-life of the human being; at every moment the soul-life of man gathers into a whole that which is experienced in the animal kingdom, whilst the Group-Soul—which really never quite descends onto the physical plane—is establishing a reciprocal relation with the physical being through conception. And something like a touch of Ego-consciousness appears in the animal at the single moment of death. I called your attention yesterday to the fact that one who is able to observe the death of animals can gain an idea of how in reality the Ego-consciousness, which runs through the whole life of man, is only present in the animal at the moment of passing out of life. But the important thing is this: that the two moments, which in animal life are really only “two moments,” are gathered together into one, in a synthesis as it were, and go through human life in such a way that the human head, the peculiar kind of organization which I have described, can develop a continuous becoming-pregnant and dying, gently reminding one of the fact that this human soul-life continuously proceeds from the interweaving of conception and death. Such is the life of the human soul, and this gives rise to the justifiable thought of human immortality.
In addition I said: Every time that we have a thought, the thought is born of the will; and every time we will, the thought fades into the will. I said that Schopenhauer represented this in a very one-sided manner, for he represented the will alone as something real. He did not see that “will” is only one side of the matter, that in a certain sense it is simply dying thought, whereas the thought is the will being brought to birth. To describe as Schopenhauer does is like describing a human life only from the thirthy-fifth year to the end, whereas every man who reaches the age of 35 must have attained some other age before this, for the time from birth up to the 35th year must also be taken into account. Schopenhauer only depicts the will, he considers thought or the idea as an illusion. That however is only the other side of the question: the thought of the will which strives to be born; whereas the thought is the expiring will. And through the fact that in our soul-life we have a continual interweaving of thought and will, we thus have birth, which refers back to conception (for perception is conception)—and death.
This idea is one for which nothing further is necessary—even if we wish to establish it anatomically and physiologically—but present-day science and the will, the good-will, really to observe the phenomenon of the soul. Anyone who does not take the experiences made with the human brain in the manner of official science today, but really tests free from prejudice, what physiology and biology have to say of it will find what I have just said borne out scientifically. If instead of all the hocus-pocus carried on today at the universities for the purpose of investigating all sorts of things in the psychological-physiological laboratories (for anatomists have no thoughts but, instead of thinking, sit down before their instruments in order to maltreat the soul life of the person to be studied and then to “investigate”), if people would not put up with this, a real observation of the soul-life would be possible and it would be possible also to gain an idea of the continuous coming to birth and dying which goes on in the human soul-life itself, that metamorphosis which is only an intensification of Goethe's theory of metamorphosis. But the science of today has not yet even come to the point of understanding Goethe's metamorphosis after the lapse of a hundred years, let alone really carrying such a thought, once given to mankind, further.
Such thoughts as I try to sketch for you in the last lecture are nothing more nor less than Goethe's teaching on metamorphosis carried further. These things can all be established without any sort of clairvoyant consciousness. Real science and psycho-observation are alone necessary. If a number of students were brought to understand such things, instead of the many absurdities to which official science leads, the time would not then be far off when Spiritual Science would be impressed on the culture of mankind. For it is just such thoughts, which could be scientifically established today, and which need nothing else to make them fertile for the soul-life but the good-will to observe and to think—such ideas, such concepts might form the bridge from the outer materialistic science to Spiritual Science; which is not kept from spreading lest it would not be understood by those who have no clairvoyance, but because such a thing as this, which comes fresh into existence, cannot spread at all on account of the aggressiveness of the present-day scientific mind. It is my firm conviction that it will do no harm if these things are sometimes really called by their true names and described as they really are. We may say that the effect of a thought on the human soul-life is more important than the spreading of it abroad as a thought. It is much less important what sort of thoughts we have, than which forces we must use in order to grasp this or some other thought. The constitution of the human soul must be quite different, according to whether one grasps some entirely dead thought of the so-called science of to-day, or a living thought of Spiritual Science. In the case of the latter the whole inner nature of man is brought into play; he is inwardly quick and placed in the Cosmos; on the other hand through what present-day science produces, especially when carried beyond its own narrowest limits, he is pushed out spiritually from any connection with the Cosmos.
We must understand that. It is that which must really be introduced to mankind, through Spiritual Science. For just in those things that begin to be important for our immediate life, for example, education, instruction and everything connected with that, it is of immeasurable importance that the living ideas, which really leads straight into life, should penetrate human souls. It will become clear to the soul when it tries to view things in this manner, what are the tasks and what the essential point in the understanding of Spiritual Science for the whole spiritual culture of our time. That ought really to be grasped in its full significance. Then only would people see how unnecessary it is to look with unprejudiced eyes upon the almost entirely disjointed thinking which sometimes lies at the bottom of the present-day practice of life. The symptoms of this disjointed thinking are by no means so easy to grasp.
I drew your attention to one thing yesterday. In our manner of life it is necessary that nothing of what we might call sluggishness or idleness of thought should be developed. For just imagine if an inactivity of thought were to be developed amongst us! I have recently sung the praises everywhere of Oskar Hertwig's book “The Growth of Organisms.” I have called it the “best book of recent times” as regards his scientific achievements. I spoke without restraint, for a man who stands at the height of the scientific methods of his time has undertaken to disentangle the theories of Darwin and relegate them to their own boundaries! One could agree with him from beginning to end. Now comes his latest book, “In Defense of the Technical, Social and Political Darwinism.” As I have already said, one might really speak scathingly against the limitations of this book. For once, the natural-scientific investigator forsakes his narrow sphere—and talks real nonsense! I gave an example and mentioned that the good man says the following about the methods of natural science: “In the last resort all natural science should be constructed on the pattern of astronomy.” Of course this is not even original! Du Bois Reymond already said this in the year 1876, in speaking of the structure of the atomic world. We are to observe the realities round about us; then the astronomical theory, which is as far removed as possible from man, is set up as a pattern! Logically this is of no more value than if one were to explain the inner life to a family living in poverty somewhere in the country, by telling them: You need not consider how your own father and mother, son and daughter behave, but study the family life of a count's household; from that you can deduce how family rules and regulations should be constituted! Today such things are taken very superficially, and not even noticed; with us not only should there be no belief in authority but also no bed of idleness. We must understand that because an opinion is once formed about a person, one cannot thereafter rely on everything which might come from the same person. Herein is the question, and that must really be carried out practically, even down to the details of our conduct. Therefore no one should wonder if the one activity in Oskar Hertwig is praised to the skies and another found fault with; that must happen; we must accustom ourselves to look at life without prejudice. For he who does not practice this does not practice this does not notice on the one hand the direct realities of life, and on the other hand where he may find the entrance to the spiritual world. I should like to give a little example of this. I do not know how many people have noticed this, that is, have noticed it so as to draw forth the practical application of it to life
Some time ago there appeared in the “Berliner Tageblatt” an article by Fritz Mauthner in which he indulged in the most incredibly trivial, really dreadfully trivial strictures on a man who had written a book referring among other things to Goethe's horoscope. The critical language, Fritz Mauthner, wrote long columns in an uncommonly complacent manner, and tried to show what wrong the author is committing against the present age by writing about Goethe's horoscope and things like that, especially in a book which appeared in such a popular collection as “From Nature and the World of Spirit.” As regards this article of Fritz Mauthner's, one felt that really there was a little too much frivolity in it; but apart from that, the compiler of this book in the “From Nature and the World of Spirit” collection, is really a fairly average scholar of the present-day, and it did not seem that there was anything about which one was compelled to feel especially excited. Really one did not see why Fritz Mauthner should excite himself. One could understand it even less, considering that the compiler of this little book laughs at all those taken things treated therein seriously, and Fritz Mauthner only abuses this man because he speaks of the “horoscope.” Now he who compiled this little book justified himself and explained in the “Berliner Tageblatt” that it had not in the least that his intention to speak in favor of astrology. Thus the author really fulfilled all the conditions that even Fritz Mauthner, in his position, could demand. The two are thoroughly at one; but Fritz Mauthner attacked the man because he considered it extremely dangerous socially but a book of this kind should appear in such a collection. And the “Berliner Tageblatt” the remark that he could not but think that Fritz Mauthner had not understood the matter, for it was quite in agreement with what Mauthner himself had written. This is a particularly striking example of that degree of spiritual feeble-mindedness which really lies at the bottom of all these things. If on the other hand we bear in mind how greatly life is stimulated by what is expressed by such inferior mental activity, we are struck by the thoughts characteristic of the present-based spiritual culture. And we must really take note of these thoughts. That is a necessity, if we wish to gain understanding of the tasks which may really fall to Spiritual Science. What we must above all be aware of is that such things as deceit, lies are real powers, and we cannot imagine a worse deceit than when such a thing as this happens: one man writes a book on astrology, and another assails him because he does not wish anyone at all to write about such subjects. The first man then justifies itself by saying: “Come, I was only joking.” If he had said before hand, “I am only joking when I am talking about Goethe's horoscope,” Mauthner would have been satisfied.
These things are absolutely serious and are connected with the most serious tendencies of the present day, above all with that which we must also perceive, that Spiritual Science must of necessity find it difficult in our present time to work its way through and to attain something of what it is really incumbent on it to attain. It really demands strong and courageous thinking. The field for this has been in many ways prepared, and to understand how this has been done leads us to see that not alone were earthly, human beings active in this work, but that for centuries the great Ahrimanic forces of mankind have been at work. Besides all the things undertaken by the Ahrimanic beings in order to bring mankind into such confusion, out of which the way has again to be found, must be added the fact that men have been rendered incapable of perceiving that everything material is rooted in the spiritual and that everything spiritual desires to reveal itself materially. The world has been torn in pieces, its continuity destroyed. Above all, if we look at the outer history of the continuous Christian impulse—not of Christianity—we find Ahrimanic powers working through humanity, and particularly in the Christian development. One thing among others should be specially observed: the tearing asunder of what on the one hand is Sun and Sun-force, from what on the other is Christ and Christ-force. If the connection between these forces is not again recognized, the world will not easily be linked to the spiritual. One of the principal tasks of Spiritual Science is that we must rediscover, in another way—in a way which entails the spiritualization of mankind through the Christ-Mystery—the great Sun-mystery, which throughout the ages before the Mystery of Golgotha was not then the Christ-Mystery but which afterwards became the Christ-Mystery. Julian, the recreant, the apostate, only knew the Sun-Mystery in the old form; he did not yet understand that it was the Christ-Mystery. That was his tragic fate; he was overtaken by the world-historic delusion of seeking to communicate to humanity the secret of the spiritual power of the Sun. This led to his being murdered on his march through Persia.
In the 19th century we have to record another spiritual undertaking which was directed by Ahrimanic powers to prevent mankind from knowing that of which I am now speaking: the Sun-Mystery in its connection with the other Mysteries. We must look at these things thoroughly in the face. What I am about to say would, if I were to mention it in any scientific society or the like, instead of to persons prepared for it, of course be counted as madness. But we need not consider that. The point is that the truth must be spoken; for the decision as to whether we or others are deluded must not come into the question. In the 19th century a concept was first fundamentally established which now dominates the whole of science and which, if it still continues to do so to an increasing extent, will never allow healthy concepts about the spiritual life to find a place. To the ideas disseminated concerning the basic principles of physics and chemistry belongs the fundamental concept of the “conservation of force,” of the “conservation of energy,” as accepted today. Wherever you investigate today you will hear it said that forces are simply converted. (The examples quoted are of course justified in every respect.) When I stretch out my hand over the table I use pressure, but force expended is not consumed thereby; it is transmuted into warmth. Thus are all forces transmuted. A transmutation of force, of energy, takes place. “Conservation of substance and force” is indeed a favorite expression, used more particularly by all scientific thoughts today. It is considered an axiom that nothing originates nor passes away as regards matter, energy, and force. If this is kept within its proper limits nothing can be said against it; but the science does not keep it within its limits but reduced it to a dogma, a scientific dogma.
Just in the 19th century a remarkable Ahrimanic practice of coarsening the concepts has come about. A wonderful and extremely brilliant essay on the “Conservation of energy” has appeared by Julius Robert Mayer. This essay, which appeared in the year 1844, was rejected at that time by most of the cultured thinkers in Germany; it was considered amateurish. Julius Robert Mayer was indeed later confined in an asylum. Today we know that he made a fundamental scientific discovery. But it had no effect, and we can easily prove that those who mention him in connection with this scientific law have not themselves read his work. There is a History of Philosophy by Überweg, in which Mayer is also mentioned; he is spoken of in a few lines only. But he who reads those few lines is at once aware that this classical writer of the History of Philosophy, which all students must plow through, has entirely misunderstood him. The subject has not entered men's souls in the fine intellectual manner in which it was treated by Mayer, but in a much coarser manner. That principally comes about because, not the thoughts of Julius Robert Mayer himself, but those of the English brewer Joule and of the physicist Helmholtz, ignoring completely the thoughts of Julius Robert Mayer, have permeated science. It is not always considered necessary nowadays to look these things in the face. These relationships ought, however, to be pointed out in our higher teaching institutions. People really ought to learn why Darwinism found such quick circulation. For, believe me, if Darwin's book “The Origin of Species and Natural Selection” had simply appeared as a book given to the public, it would not have gained popularity in all circles, and these opinions would have vanished in the clouds. No, the thought which is at the base of Darwinism was already prepared beforehand. In 1844, a long time before Darwin, a book of gleanings was compiled, which mentions in the most trivial manner all the things which Lemarck and others have said. It was a purely book-selling speculative enterprise inaugurated by Robert Chambers in Edinburgh, knowing that the instincts of the 19th century could be relied upon to push such a thing through. Into this pregnant atmosphere, Darwin threw his ideas. All he did was to connect and combine the theory of selection with the ideas of Lamarck, for these things have been known to English practitioners for a long time. A book had previously appeared, “Ship-building and Tree-culture” by Patrick Matthew, in which the theory of selection is openly pronounced. The ways along which these things penetrated the culture of the 19th century had to be disclosed some time. History, as it is presented, is a myth; and in most spheres is a great deception. We must really look at what actually happened. For it makes a difference whether a young man learns that he has to deal with a scientific reality, or merely with the thoughts of an English brewer, Joule; whether something was really established by the scientific observations of the 19th century, or whether he had to deal with an enterprise of the Edinburgh publisher and bookseller, Robert Chambers. The truth is then discovered aright. Mankind must above all take its stand on truth.
This concept of the absolute—not relative—imperishability of matter and force prevents men—and what I am saying might be established physiologically today, it is only the dogma of the “Conservation of Energy” which keeps men back from seeing it—this concept prevents them from recognizing where substance really does disappear into nothingness and new substance begins. And this unique place in the world—there are many such—is the human body. Substance is not merely passed through the human body, but during the process experienced in the soul in the synthesis of conception and dying, it happens physically that a certain substance which is taken by us in fact disappears, that forces pass away and are generated anew. The things which come into consideration in this connection are really older than one thinks; but no value is placed on these observations. If we carefully study the circulation of the blood inside the eye with the instruments which are perfect enough today to enable us to see such things externally, we shall be able to corroborate what I have just said, externally and physically. For it will be proved that the blood goes to the periphery of an organ, disappears into it, and is again generated out of it, in order to flow back again; so that we are not concerned with a “circulation of the blood,” but with an arising and passing away. These things exist, but the dogmatic concepts of present-day science prevents one from recognizing the cause underlying them, and the men of today are thus prevented from observing in their true reality certain processes and happenings which are absolutely real.
What does it mean to present-day science when men die, purely as physical beings? No notice is taken of this by science. On the other hand sciences is constantly studying the dead because it cannot get at the living, but it takes no notice of the fact of dying. An example of this was given to me only yesterday. In the year 1889 Hammerling was temporarily entombed in Graz. Later on he was transferred to another vault. The gentleman who made the discovery told me only yesterday that during the transference of the body from the temporary vault, the skull disappeared. He investigated the matter and found out that in the University-Museum a plaster cast had been taken of the skull. The skull, wrapped in newspaper, had been left somewhere and was only restored to the rest of the body in its grave because the matter was then discovered. Thus we concern ourselves with the death, but not with the fact of death. Yet this fact of death likewise leads to the perception of important things. I have already pointed to the fact, in one of my last lectures that this human dust takes quite a particular course. I pointed out that it really tries to take an upward path. The dust that comes from human beings, unlike other dust, would be disbursed into the whole Cosmos—no matter whether the corpse is cremated or decays—were it not taken possession of by the power of the Sun, by the forces which are the Sun. In fact that force, which shines from the surface of a brilliant stone, or which we see in the colors of the plants, is only one of the Sun forces, it is that force which Julian the Apostate called the ‘visible sun.’ We also have the ‘invisible Sun’ which lies at the back of the visible one, as does the soul behind the outer physical human body. This force, which of course does not come down with streams of physical ether but only lives again in it, animates the human dust in quite a special way; quite distinct from the way it animates anything else, either mineral, vegetable or animal dust. A continuous interaction takes place after death between what remains of the purely external, physical man and the forces which streamed down from the Sun—they encounter each other. The forces which streamed down to act upon the human dust are indeed those forces which the dead man, now become a soul-and-spirit individuality, himself discovers after death. Whereas we, when we are incarnated in the physical body, see the physical Sun, the dead man, when he has passed through the gate of death, discovers the Sun first as the Cosmic Being Who animates human dust on the Earth below. This is one discovery among the many others which the dead man makes after death. He learns of the interweaving of the Sun-force, the spiritual Sun-force, and the human dust. When he learns to know this web composed of human dust and Sun-force, he first really becomes acquainted with the secret of reincarnation; seen from the other side, the next incarnation is being prepared and woven out of the Cosmos. Besides this he learns to know from the other side certain facts upon which the secret of reincarnation depends, and of which we will also speak in the near future.
This enables us to grasp the concept of how very different the ideas of the inner life of the human soul are when the soul has passed through the gate of death, as compared with the experiences which it has here. After death these are quite different in the whole configuration of the soul. Just as here on Earth we alternate between sleeping and waking, so does the dead man alternate between different states of consciousness. I have already called your attention to this in these lectures, but I will once more characterize it briefly from another point of view.
Among other things we live here in the inner thoughts of our soul. The dead man enters a world of reality. This reality consists of what to us are merely thoughts. Whereas in physical life we perceive the external, mineral, vegetable and animal worlds, and have our physical world besides, that of which we only experience the shadowy reflection in our thoughts is immediately present to the dead man when he has passed through the gate of death. The world he then enters really bears the same relation to the physical world as do objects to their shadows here. In our thoughts we have only the shadow of what the dead experience; but they experience it differently from the way we experience our thoughts. They learn something more concerning thoughts from what man on earth does, at least in our present-day epoch. For we usually dream in respects to our thoughts. But the dead man experiences that while he thinks, he lives in his thoughts as in realities; he grows, he expands, he flourishes; but to the extent to which she ceases to think and no longer lives in thought, he declines, becomes thinner and sparer. Even coming into being and passing away are, after death, connected with living in thought and living outside thought. If it were the case here that men who did not wish to thank became thinner, a remarkable world might be seen. But we only experience the ineffectual shadows of thought, which have no real results. The dead man experiences thoughts as realities; which neither nourish nor devour him in his existence as soul and spirit. The time in which the thoughts either nourish or devour him is at the same time that in which he develops his super-sensible life of perception. He sees how thoughts stream into him and pass out again. It is not such a perception as we have in our ordinary consciousness, where we have only finished perceptions; but a passing stream of thought life, which always connects itself with his own being. No matter how many things a human being on earth can see, yet, when he has seen everything, he is still exactly the same as before: except that afterwards he generally knows something of what he was before, but at least his organization has not altered to any considerable extent. With the dead man it is different; he sees himself in continuous interchange with that which he perceives. That is one of his conditions; the perception of the flowing-in and the continuous flowing-out of a living stream of thought. The other is that this ceases, and a quiet recollection of what has flowed through him comes about; an intense and far-reaching memory, not our abstract memory, but one connected with the whole of the Universe. These two conditions alternate. For that reason the dead are really only receptive to thoughts such as those brought to them from Spiritual Science, or from a spiritual point of view. The thought-organization usually possessed by men of today does not really reach the dead; and the kind of thought which does penetrate to the dead is not much appreciated by the men of today. They like thoughts which they can gather in some way from the outer world. But thoughts which we can only have by working upon them inwardly, which inwardly and spiritually have already a trace of that which thoughts have after death—this mobility and life is not liked by men. It is far too difficult for the men of today. Therefore they are nicely seated in their laboratory, and are able to have a microscope and to study the cells under the microscope, they can make the necessary incision with a knife; they can study the incision and are able to work out other observations in some way or other. They can then write remarkable books such as Oskar Hertwig's “Birth of Organisms.” But the moment they begin to think, they can write senseless books such as those of the present Oskar Hertwig. The only difference is that for such a book as his second one, even “thought corpses” would not have been necessary. For natural-scientific books, thought corpses are necessary; but for books like the second one, living thoughts would have been necessary, and these he has not got! It is necessary really to love such thoughts and to be able to live them. The moment a man left behind on Earth wishes to build a bridge to the friend who has passed through the gate of death, with whom he is linked by karma, he needs at least a disposition of mind which inclines towards life of thought. If we have this disposition of mind our thoughts are really quite a considerable addition to the life of our dead friends, and make a great difference to the existence of those stand between death and rebirth. But if a vague feeling lives in men's souls about everything which the dead consider should be different on the Earth from what it is, the living have but little satisfaction in this thought. Such vague feelings exist; men fear that the opinion of the dead might prevail over much that men think, feel and do in physical life. They are not conscious of this fear; but it holds them chained to materialism. For the unconscious, though we may not be aware of it, is still active. With the courage of the thinker we must not only put soul into the conscious life of idea, but also into the profoundest depth of the human being. This must be said again and again, if Spiritual Science is to be taken in full earnest. The question is not that we should accept some sentence or other which someone or other finds interesting or important for himself, but that just as an organism moulds itself together out of many units, so all the units should form together in man a whole attitude of soul, which for our time can only be characterized from the most varied points of view, as I have attempted to do. It is absolutely necessary that there should be some people at the present day who know how to take Spiritual Science seriously from this point of view, realizing that it gives to our time and active, living thought-life; so that one person does not fall out with another when they are both really quite in agreement; that there is therefore no reason for us to adopt the tendency of crying out when someone says something about the horoscope. That is not looking at the matter properly.
An age in which such an attitude of soul prevails brings forth much more besides from its depths. Unfortunately one can only allude to this briefly; but the possibility had to be created of really looking that in the face which arises out of the necessities of our time, and which is expressing itself sufficiently in such a catastrophic manner. Some people are indeed beginning today to have serious thoughts. But one sees how difficult it is for people to free themselves from the unreal situation towards the world and mankind in which the souls of today are enmeshed. How frequent the question arises which I have referred to briefly today and which I will go into further in the near future, the question: What is the position occupied by Christianity during the past centuries and thousands of years, seeing that although it has been working for hundreds of years, yet the present-day conditions are possible? This question has been touched upon at different points. It can be seen that the materials necessary to answer it are not yet to be found among what mankind calls today the scientific or religious or any other kind of studies. Spiritual Science alone will be able to produce these materials. For it is indeed an earnest question: How is the present-day man to regard Christianity?—considering that it has indeed worked for a long time in the past and yet has allowed such conditions to come about today. Those men are certainly peculiar who demand that Christianity should go back again to some of the forms existing before these conditions, who does have no feeling for the fact that if we go back to the same thing, the same must again come out of it. These people will certainly not very easily admit that something new of a penetrating and intense nature must strike into spiritual life. More as to this in our next lecture.
Zwölfter Vortrag
Ich habe gestern in dem öffentlichen Vortrag «Menschenwelt und Tierwelt» unter mancherlei anderem auf eine Vorstellung hingewiesen, die man bekommen kann über das menschliche Seelenleben, auf eine Vorstellung, die selbstverständlich keine irgendwie hypothetische ist, sondern eine solche, die unmittelbar der Wirklichkeit des Seelenlebens selbst entspricht. Ich habe darauf aufmerksam gemacht, was in der tierischen Welt Anfang und Ende des Lebens bildet, was gewissermaßen zwei Augenblicke nur umfaßt: das Hereintreten ins physische Leben und das Herausgehen aus demselben, Empfängnis und Tod; sie stehen so zum tierischen Leben, daß man sagen könnte: Das tierische Leben stellt sich als eine Leiter dar, am Anfang die Empfängnis, am Ende der Tod. Ich habe darauf aufmerksam gemacht, daß diese beiden Erlebnisse durch das ganze Seelenleben des Menschen wirklich durchgehen, daß das Seelenleben des Menschen in jedem Augenblicke in ein Ganzes das zusammenfaßt, was im Tierischen erlebt wird, wenn die niemals eigentlich ganz auf den physischen Plan kommende Gattungsseele durch die Empfängnis ein Wechselverhältnis herstellt zu dem physischen Wesen. Und etwas wie ein Anflug eines Ich-Bewußtseins tritt in dem einzigen Augenblick des Sterbens beim Tier auf. Ich habe gestern darauf aufmerksam gemacht, daß der, welcher tierisches Sterben zu beobachten in der Lage ist, schon eine Vorstellung davon bekommen kann, wie im Grunde genommen das, was beim Menschen durch das ganze Leben läuft, das Ich-Bewußtsein, für das Tier nur in diesem Moment des Herausgehens aus dem Leben vorhanden ist. Aber das Wichtige ist eben dies: daß die zwei Augenblicke, die wirklich nur zwei Augenblicke im tierischen Leben sind, in eins zusammengefaßt sind wie in einer Synthese und durch das menschliche Leben so durchgehen, daß das menschliche Haupt, die eigentümliche Art der Organisation, wie ich es auseinandersetzte, eben ein fortwährendes Empfangenwerden und Sterben entwickeln kann, leise anklingend daran — aber so ist das menschliche Seelenleben, und dadurch entsteht der berechtigte Gedanke der menschlichen Unsterblichkeit -, daß dieses menschliche Seelenleben fortwährend verläuft aus dem Ineinander-Verwobensein von Konzeption oder Empfängnis und Tod.
Ich fügte dann noch hinzu: Jedesmal wenn wir einen Gedanken haben, wird der Gedanke herausgeboren aus dem Willen, und jedesmal wenn wir wollen, erstirbt: der Gedanke in den Willen hinein. Schopenhauer, sagte ich, habe sehr einseitig die Sache dargestellt, indem er nur den Willen als etwas Reales hingestellt hat. Er hat nicht eingesehen, daß «Wille» nur die eine Seite der Sache ist, gewissermaßen nur der sterbende Gedanke, während der «Gedanke» der geborenwerdende Wille ist. Wer so schildert wie Schopenhauer, der gleicht einem Menschen, der vom menschlichen Leben nur die Zeit etwa vom fünfunddreißigsten Jahre an bis zum Ende schildert. Aber jeder Mensch, der fünfunddreißig Jahre alt war, muß vorher noch etwas anders alt gewesen sein. Es gibt auch noch etwas für die Zeit von der Geburt bis zum fünfunddreißigsten Jahr. Schopenhauer schildert nur den Willen; und den Gedanken, beziehungsweise die Vorstellung betrachtet er wie einen Schein. Aber das ist nur die andere Form der Sache; der Gedanke vom Willen, der geboren werden will, während der Gedanke der sterbende Wille ist. Und indem wir in unserem Seelenleben fortwährend ineinander verwoben haben Gedanken und Willen, haben wir ebenso Geburt, die auf die Empfängnis zurückführt - denn die Wahrnehmung ist Empfängnis -, und Sterben.
Diese Vorstellung ist eine solche, zu der man, auch wenn man sie anatomisch, physiologisch begründen will, nichts anderes braucht als die gegenwärtige Wissenschaft und den Willen, den guten Willen, seelische Erscheinungen wirklich zu beobachten. Wer die Erfahrungen, die man mit dem menschlichen Gehirn macht, nicht so darlegt, wie das gegenwärtig von seiten der offiziellen Wissenschaft geschieht, sondern wer vorurteilslos das, was Physiologie und Biologie des menschlichen Gehirns ergeben, wirklich prüft, der findet, daß das, was ich eben gesagt habe, gut wissenschaftlich fundiert ist. Und wenn sich die Menschen all die Firlefanzereien, die heute an den Universitäten getrieben werden, um in den psychologisch-physiologischen Laboratorien allerlei Zeug zu untersuchen, weil die Anatomen keine Gedanken haben, sondern sich statt dessen an die Apparate setzen, um das Seelenleben der Studierenden erst zu malträtieren und dann zu erforschen, wenn sich die Menschen dies nicht gefallen ließen, dann würde man auch wirklich zum Beobachten des Seelenlebens kommen können und würde dann auch einen Begriff bekommen von dem fortwährenden Geborenwerden und Sterben im menschlichen Seelenleben selbst, von jener Metamorphose, die nur eine Steigerung der Goetheschen Metamorphose ist. Aber die gegenwärtige Wissenschaft hat es heute, nach hundert Jahren, noch nicht einmal dahin gebracht, dieGoethesche Metamorphose zu verstehen, geschweige einen solchen Gedanken, der einmal der Menschheit übergeben worden ist, wirklich weiterzubringen.
Solche Gedanken, wie ich sie gestern versuchte zu skizzieren, sind nichts anderes als die weitergebildete Goethesche Metamorphosenlehre. Das alles sind Dinge, die festgestellt werden können, ohne daß irgendein hellsichtiges Bewußtsein dafür eintritt. Dazu gehört nur wirkliche Wissenschaft und Seelenbeobachtung. Würde man dagegen, statt zu all den vielfachen Torheiten, zu denen offizielle Wissenschaft die Leute führt, eine Anzahl von Studenten und Studentinnen dazu bringen, eine solche Sache zu begreifen, dann würde der Weg nicht mehr weit sein, um Geisteswissenschaft wirklich der Kultur der Menschheit einzuprägen. Denn gerade solche Gedanken, die wissenschaftlich heute festgestellt werden können, zu deren Fruchtbarmachung für das Seelenleben nichts anderes gehört als der gute Wille, wirklich zu beobachten, und Gedanken zu haben - solche Begriffe, solche Vorstellungen könnten die Brücke bilden von der äußeren sinnlichen Wissenschaft zu der Geisteswissenschaft, die nicht aus dem Grunde sich nicht verbreitet, weil sie nicht verständlich wäre für jene Menschen, die kein Hellsehen haben, sondern weil durch die Brutalität der gegenwärtigen wissenschaftlichen Gesinnung sich so etwas, das neu ins Dasein tritt, überhaupt nicht verbreiten kann. Es schadet nichts — das ist meine Überzeugung -, wenn manchmal diese Dinge auch wirklich bei ihrem wahren Namen genannt und so charakterisiert werden, wie sie eigentlich sind. Man kann schon sagen: Wichtiger noch, als daß ein solcher Gedanke sich als Gedanke verbreitet, ist die Wirkung eines Gedankens auf das menschliche Seelenleben. Es kommt nämlich viel weniger darauf an, was wir für Gedanken haben, als welche Kräfte wir anwenden müssen, um den einen oder andern Gedanken zu fassen. Die menschliche Seelenverfassung muß eine ganz andere sein, ob man irgendeinen völlig toten Gedanken der heutigen sogenannten Wissenschaft, oder ob man einen lebendigen Gedanken der Geisteswissenschaft faßt. Das eine Mal, beim lebendigen Gedanken der Geisteswissenschaft, wird der ganze Mensch innerlich in Anspruch genommen, wird innerlich belebt und hineingestellt in den Kosmos; bei dem dagegen, was vielfach die heutige Wissenschaft produziert, besonders wenn sie über ihr engstes Gebiet hinausgeht, wird der Mensch seelisch hinausgeschoben aus dem kosmischen Zusammenhang.
Das muß man einsehen. Das ist aber auch das, was wirklich durch die Geisteswissenschaft der Menschheit zugeführt werden muß. Denn gerade da, wo die Dinge für das unmittelbare Leben anfangen wichtig zu werden, zum Beispiel in der Erziehung, im Unterricht und in allem, was damit zusammenhängt, ist es von grenzenloser Bedeutung, daß lebendige, ins Leben unmittelbar eingreifende Begriffe die menschlichen Seelen umfassen können. Dann wird sich für die Seele selbst, welche die Dinge so anzuschauen vermag, ergeben, was die Aufgaben, was das Wesentliche ist im Eingreifen der Geisteswissenschaft für die ganze Geisteskultur unserer Zeit. Das müßte in seiner ganzen Bedeutung eigentlich einmal eingesehen werden. Dann würde man erst sehen, wie notwendig wir es haben, auf das fast ganz verrenkte Denken, welches der gegenwärtigen Lebenspraxis zuweilen zugrunde liegt, mit unbefangenen Augen hinzuschauen. Die Symptome dieses verrenkten Denkens werden gar nicht so leicht gefaßt.
Ich habe gestern auf eines aufmerksam gemacht. Es ist ja auch bei uns, in unserer Praxis, schon notwendig, daß gar nichts von dem entfaltet werde, was man nennen könnte: Lässigkeit des Denkens, Trägheit des Denkens. Denn denken Sie einmal, wenn Lässigkeit des Denkens bei uns entwickelt würde! Ich habe in den letzten Zeiten überall, wo ich nur vortragen konnte, nach allen Richtungen hin das Lob des Buches von Oscar Hertwig gesungen: «Das Werden der Organismen.» Ich habe es das beste Buch der letzten Zeiten in bezug auf wissenschaftliche Leistungen genannt. Ich bin nicht zurückhaltend gewesen, weil es einmal von einem Menschen, der auf der Höhe der wissenschaftlichen Methoden seiner Zeit steht, unternommen worden ist, den Darwinismus aufzudröseln, in seine Grenzen zurückzuweisen. Bis auf die letzten Seiten konnte man mit ihm gehen. Jetzt ist das letzte Buch von Oscar Hertwig erschienen: «Zur Abwehr des ethischen, des sozialen, des politischen Darwinismus.» Und wie ich schon angedeutet habe, möchte man gegen die Impotenz, gegen das Bornierte, Beschränkte, Triviale, Unsinnige dieses Buches wirklich Worte finden, die möglichst scharf sind. Da verläßt einmal der naturwissenschaftliche Forscher das engste Gebiet — und redet ganz gehöriges Blech, aber ausgewalztes Blech! Und ich habe ein Beispiel angeführt, habe erwähnt, daß der gute Mann über die naturwissenschaftlichen Methoden das Folgende sagt: Endlich mußte alle Naturwissenschaft nach dem Muster der Astronomie gebaut werden. — Natürlich ist auch das nicht original; Da Bois-Reymond hatte es schon im Jahre 1872 gesagt, als er über den Bau der Atomenwelt sprach. Aber bedenken Sie, man sollte die Tatsachen um uns herum beobachten; dann aber wird als Muster die astronomische Theorie aufgestellt, welcher der Mensch so fern wie möglich steht! Logisch ist das nicht mehr wert, als wenn man einer Familie, die irgendwo draußen auf dem Lande in Armut schwimmt, das innere Leben dieser Familie dadurch begreiflich machen will, daß man ihr sagt: Du darfst nicht begreifen, wie sich in deiner Familie Vater und Mutter, Sohn und Tochter verhalten, sondern wie es in einem Grafenhause ist; daraus kannst du entnehmen, wie sich die Familiengesetze gestalten sollen! - Über solche Sachen wird aber heute hinweggelesen, das wird gar nicht beachtet. Bei uns aber ist es nötig, daß derlei Dinge beachtet werden. Bei uns darf es nicht nur keinen Autoritätsglauben, sondern auch kein Faulbett geben. Wir sind uns klar, daß, wenn einmal ein Urteil über einen Menschen gefällt ist, man sich nicht darnach auf alles verlassen kann, was sonst von demselben Menschen kommen könnte. Hier handelt es sich um anderes, und das soll wirklich auch bis in die Einzelheiten des Gebarens praktisch durchgeführt werden. Deshalb darf sich niemand wundern, wenn die eine Tätigkeit Oscar Hertwigs das eine Mal bis in den Himmel hinaufgehoben wird, und das nächste Mal etwa bis in die Hölle versenkt wird; denn das muß geschehen; aber man muß sich üben, das Leben vorurteilslos anzuschauen. Denn wer sich darin nicht übt, der bemerkt auf der einen Seite gar nicht, wie die unmittelbaren Tatsachen des Lebens sind, und auf der andern Seite nicht, wo er den Eingang zur geistigen Welt nur finden kann. Ich möchte ein kleines Beispiel dafür anführen. Ich weiß nicht, wie viele Leute die Sache bemerkt haben, aber so bemerkt haben, daß man wirklich die Nutzanwendung daraus im Leben zieht.
Da ist vor einiger Zeit im «Berliner Tageblatt» ein Artikel von Fritz Mauthner erschienen, worin sich dieser in den unglaublichsten trivialen, aber wirklich schon furchtbar trivialen Widerlegungen eines Mannes erging, der ein Buch geschrieben hat, in dem er neben anderem auch über Goethes Horoskop gesprochen hat. Ungemein selbstgefällig schrieb der Kritiker der Sprache, Fritz Mauthner, lange Spalten, versuchte zu zeigen, was dieser Mann an der Gegenwart für ein Unrecht dadurch begeht, daß er in einem Buche, das noch dazu in einer so populären Sammlung wie «Aus Natur und Geisteswelt» erschien, über das Goethesche Horoskop schreibt und dergleichen. Man bekam gegenüber diesem Artikel Fritz Mauthners das Gefühl: Es ist nun doch wirklich der Trivialität ein wenig zu viel. Aber davon abgesehen, der Verfasser dieses Buches in der Sammlung « Aus Natur und Geisteswelt» ist eigentlich ein ziemlicher Durchschnittsgelehrter der heutigen Zeit, und man konnte nicht recht begreifen, daß etwas vorliegen sollte, worüber man sich besonders aufregen müßte. Denn eigentlich wußte man gar nicht, warum Fritz Mauthner sich irgendwie aufregte. Man konnte es um so weniger begreifen, als der Verfasser dieses Büchelchens sich über alle die Leute lustig macht, die jene dort behandelten Dinge ernst nehmen, und Fritz Mauthner wendet sich gegen diesen Mann eigentlich nur aus dem Grunde, weil er über das Horoskop spricht. Nun hat derselbe Mann, der dieses Büchelchen verfaßt hat, sich im «Berliner Tageblatt» gerechtfertigt und klargelegt, daß ihm gar nicht eingefallen sei, für die Astrologie einzuspringen. Also der Mann hatte eigentlich alles erfüllt, was auch Fritz Mauthner nach seiner Funktion verlangen konnte. Die beiden sind ganz und gar einig, aber Fritz Mauthner ist dennoch über den Mann hergefallen, indem er es als etwas sozial höchst Gefährliches beträchtete, daß ein derartiges Buch in einer solchen Sammlung erschien. Und das «Berliner Tageblatt» macht dazu die Bemerkung, daß . es eigentlich nicht finden könne, daß Fritz Mauthner die Sache nicht richtig verstanden habe; es sei im Gegenteil ganz einverstanden mit dem, was Mauthner geschrieben hat.
Das ist nur ein besonders eklatantes Beispiel für jenen Grad geistigen Schwachsinns, der auf dem Grunde eigentlich aller dieser Dinge schon ruht. Wenn man auf der andern Seite ins Auge faßt, wie sehr das Leben eigentlich verquickt ist mit dem, was in solcher Journalisten-, in solcher inferioren Geistestätigkeit zum Ausdruck kommt, dann kommt man schon auf die Gedanken, welche die gegenwärtige geistige Kultur charakterisieren. Und dieseGedanken muß man eigentlich haben. Das gehört notwendigerweise dazu, wenn man Verständnis gewinnen will für die Aufgaben, welche die geisteswissenschaftliche Richtung eigentlich haben kann. Was man vor allem wissen muß, das ist, daß solche Dinge, wie Verlogenheit, Lüge, reale Mächte sind, und man kann sich nichts ärger Verlogenes vorstellen, als wenn so etwas geschieht: Der eine schreibt ein Buch über Astrologie, der andere fällt über ihn her, weil er nicht will, daß überhaupt jemand darüber schreibt, und der erste rechtfertigt sich nun, indem er sagt: Du, ich mache damit aber nur einen Spaß. — Hätte er vorher gesagt: Ich mache damit nur einen Spaß, daß ich hier auch noch das Horoskop Goethes erzähle -, dann würde Mauthner befriedigt gewesen sein.
Die Dinge sind durchaus ernst und hängen mit den ernstesten Strömungen der Gegenwart zusammen, vor allem mit dem, was man auch durchschauen muß: daß es die Geisteswissenschaft notwendig in unserer Gegenwart schwierig haben muß, um durchzudringen, um irgendwie etwas von dem zu erreichen, was ihr zu erreichen eigentlich obliegt. Sie fordert wirklich ein starkes und mutiges Denken, und neben all ihrem Inhalt ist dies notwendig, daß man sich eben etwas vertraut macht mit dem Gedanken, daß die Geisteswissenschaft ein starkes und mutiges Denken fordert. Diesem starken und mutigen Denken ist vielfach der Boden abgegraben worden. Wie ihm der Boden abgegraben worden ist, das allerdings führt wieder dazu, etwas einzusehen: daß bei diesem Abgraben des Bodens nicht allein bloß irdische, menschliche Wesenheiten tätig waren, sondern daß seit Jahrhunderten die großen ahrimanischen Mächte der Menschheit dabei am Werke sind. Zu all den Dingen, die von den ahrimanischen Wesenheiten unternommen worden sind, um die Menschheit in ein solches Wirrsal hineinzubringen, aus dem heraus das Licht wieder gefunden werden muß, zählt vor allem auch das, daß man die Menschen dazu gebracht hat, nicht mehr einzusehen, daß alles Materielle im Geistigen wurzelt, und daß alles Geistige sich materiell offenbaren will. Man hat die Welt zerrissen, das Zusammengehörige auseinandergebracht. Vor allen Dingen, wenn man das äußere Historische der fortlaufenden christlichen Strömung - nicht des Christentums - ins Auge faßt, da findet man ahrimanische Mächte, die durch die Menschheit wirken, in dieser christlichen Entwickelung gar sehr am Werke. Eines schon unter vielem andern sollte 'man beachten: das Auseinanderreißen desjenigen, was Sonne und Sonnenkraft einerseits, und was Christus und Christus-Kraft andererseits ist. Wenn nicht der Zusammenhang zwischen Sonne und Sonnenkraft und Christus und Christus-Kraft wieder erkannt wird, dann wird die Welt nicht immer leicht an das Geistige angeknüpft werden können. Darin liegt aber gerade eine der Hauptaufgaben geistiger Wissenschaft, daß man in einer andern Weise - in der Weise, wie es dem Durchgeistigtsein der Menschheit mit dem Christus-Mysterium entspricht - wiederum das große Sonnengeheimnis auffinden kann, das durch die Zeiten vor dem Mysterium von Golgatha noch nicht das Christus-Geheimnis sein konnte, das nachdem aber zugleich das Christus-Geheimnis geworden ist. Julian der Abtrünnige, der Apostat, kannte das Sonnenmysterium nur noch in der alten Form, er verstand noch nicht, daß es das Christus-Mysterium war. Das ist sein tragisches Geschick, das tragische Geschick, daß er von dem welthistorischen Wahn befallen war, der Menschheit das Geheimnis von der geistigen Kraft der Sonne mitzuteilen. Das führte dann auch dazu, daß er auf seinem persischen Zuge ermordet worden ist.
Wir haben aber im 19. Jahrhundert noch eine geistige Unternehmung zu verzeichnen, die von ahrimanischen Mächten aufgerichtet worden ist, um das, was ich jetzt sage: das Sonnenmysterium in Verbindung mit andern Mysterien -, die Menschheit nicht wissen zu lassen. Auch diesen Dingen muß man gehörig ins Auge schauen. Ich erwähne jetzt etwas, was man, wenn ich es nicht vor vorbereiteten Menschen, sondern in irgendeinem wissenschaftlichen Verein oder dergleichen erwähnen würde, selbstverständlich für Wahnsinn halten würde. Aber darauf kommt es nicht an. Es handelt sich darum, die Wahrheit zu sagen; denn die Entscheidung darüber, ob man selbst oder die andern wahnsinnig sind, ist ja eine Frage, die dabei nicht zum Austrag gebracht werden muß. — Im 19. Jahrhundert ist im wesentlichen erst eine Vorstellung entstanden, welche heute die ganze Wissenschaft beherrscht, und die, wenn sie im stärkern Grade noch als gegenwärtig schon herrschen wird, niemals gesunde Vorstellungen über das geistige Leben wird Platz greifen lassen. Zu den Vorstellungen, die heute über die Grundprinzipien von Physik und Chemie verbreitet sind, gehört die Grundvorstellung von der Erhaltung der Kraft, von der Erhaltung der Energie, wie sie heute vertreten wird. Sie können heute überall nachforschen und werden hören, daß gesagt wird, Kräfte verwandeln sich nur. Die vorgebrachten Beispiele sind natürlich im einzelnen überall berechtigt. Wenn ich mit der Hand über den Tisch streiche, wende ich Druck auf, aber die aufgewendete Kraft ist dadurch nicht verbraucht, der Druck verwandelt sich in Wärme. So verwandeln sich alle Kräfte. Eine Umwandelung der Kraft, der Energie findet statt. «Erhaltung des Stoffes und der Kraft» ist ja ein Schlagwort, das im eminentesten Sinne alles, was heute wissenschaftlich denkt, ergriffen hat. Daß nichts entsteht und vergeht in bezug auf das Stoffliche und in bezug auf die Energien, die Kräfte, das gilt als ein Axiom. Führt man es in seinen Grenzen an, so kann man gar nichts dagegen haben. Aber man führt es ja in den Wissenschaften nicht innerhalb der Grenzen an, sondern so, daß man es zu einem Dogma, zu einem wissenschaftlichen Dogma macht.
Es hat sich ja gerade im 19. Jahrhundert eine merkwürdige ahrimanische Praxis der Vergröberung der Vorstellungen herausgebildet. Da ist eine wunderbar glänzend schöne Abhandlung von Julius Robert Mayer über die Erhaltung der Energie erschienen. Diese Abhandlung, die im Jahre 1842 erschienen ist, wurde damals von den meisten tonangebenden Geistern Deutschlands zurückgewiesen; sie galt als dilettantisch. Julius Robert Mayer ist später sogar ins Irrenhaus gesperrt worden. Heute weiß man, daß er eine grundlegende wissenschaftliche Entdeckung gemacht hat. Aber das hat nicht gewirkt. Denn man kann leicht nachweisen, daß die, welche ihn bei diesem wissenschaftlichen Gesetz erwähnen, ihn selbst nicht gelesen haben. Es gibt eine Geschichte der Philosophie von Ueberweg, worin Mayer auch erwähnt wird; in ein paar Zeilen wird darin von ihm gesprochen. Wer sich aber diese paar Zeilen durchliest, der weiß sofort: Dieser klassische Geschichtsschreiber der Philosophie, den alle Studenten durchochsen müssen, hat nichts von ihm gelesen; sonst könnte er nicht einen solchen Stiefel geschrieben haben wie das, was die Studenten zu ochsen haben. Aber es ist ja die Sache auch nicht in der feingeistigen Art, wie sie bei Mayer behandelt wird, in die Menschenseelen übergegangen, sondern in einer viel gröberen Weise. Und das kommt vor allem daher, weil nicht die Gedanken von Julius Robert Mayer, sondern die des englischen Bierbrauers Joule und des Physikers Helmholtz unter völligem Verlassen der Gedanken Julius Robert Mayers in die Wissenschaft übergegangen sind. Aber man findet es heute nicht nötig, diese Dinge ins Auge zu fassen. Diese Verhältnisse müßte man an unseren höheren Unterrichtsanstalten auch kennenlernen. Man müßte doch auch erfahren, weshalb der Darwinismus eine so rasche Ausbreitung gefunden hat. Denn glauben Sie mir, wenn Darwins Buch «Über die Entstehung der Arten durch natürliche Zuchtwahl» einfach so erschienen wäre, als ein Buch ins Publikum geworfen, es hätte nicht so alle populären Kreise ergriffen, und wären diese Ansichten auf den Wolken herangetragen worden. Nein, was dem Darwinismus eigentlich zugrunde liegt, dem war schon vorgearbeitet. Es ist nämlich 1844, also lange Zeit vor Darwin, ein zusammengestoppeltes Buch herausgekommen, das in der trivialsten Weise alle die Dinge nennt, welche ZLamarck und andere gesagt haben. Es war ein rein buchhändlerisch spekulatives Unternehmen, das Robert Chambers in Edinburgh hat erscheinen lassen, weil man wußte, man kann auf die Instinkte des 19. Jahrhunderts rechnen und dringt mit so etwas durch. Und in diese so geschwängerte Atmosphäre hat Darwin seine Sachen hineingeworfen. Er hat nur die Dinge von Lamarck mit der Selektionstheorie durchsetzt; denn den englischen Praktikern waren diese Sachen schon längst bekannt. Denn vorher war ein Buch erschienen: «Schiffsbauholz und Baumcultur» von Patrick Matthew, darin ist die Selektionstheorie offen ausgesprochen. — Die Wege, auf denen diese Dinge in die Kultur des 19. Jahrhunderts hineingegangen sind, müßten einmal aufgedeckt werden. Geschichte, so wie sie dargestellt wird, ist ein Mythos, eine große Verlogenheit auf den meisten Gebieten. Es handelt sich darum, daß man wirklich ins Auge faßt, was tatsächlich geschehen ist. Denn es ist etwas anderes, ob der junge Mensch weiß, daß man es mit einer wissenschaftlichen Tatsache zu tun hat, oder ob es sich um die Gedanken des englischen Bierbrauers Joule handelt. Es ist etwas anderes für ihn, zu wissen, ob etwas durch alle wissenschaftlichen Betrachtungen des 19. Jahrhunderts festgestellt wurde, oder ob man es mit einem Unternehmen des Edinburgher Verlagsbuchhändlers Robert Chambers zu tun hat. Das führt in der richtigen Weise in die Wahrheit hinein. Auf Wahrheit vor allem muß sich die Menschheit einstellen.
Diese Vorstellung von der absoluten, nicht relativen, Unvergänglichkeit des Stoffes und der Kraft verhindert - man könnte es heute physiologisch feststellen, und nur das Dogma von der Erhaltung der Energie hindert die Menschen daran —, daß der Ort erkannt werde, wo wirklich Stoff ins Nichts verschwindet und neuer Stoff beginnt. Und dieser einzige Ort in der Welt - es sind viele Orte — ist der menschliche Organismus. Durch den menschlichen Organismus geht der Stoff nicht bloß durch, sondern während des Prozesses, der sich seelisch erlebt in der Synthesis von Konzipiertwerden und Sterben, spielt sich körperlich das ab, daß gewisser Stoff, der von uns aufgenommen wird, tatsächlich verschwindet, daß Kräfte vergehen und neu erzeugt werden. Diejenigen Dinge, die dabei in Betracht kommen, sind eigentlich älter beobachtet, als man meint. Aber auf diese Beobachtungen wird kein Wert gelegt. Man studiere nur einmal sorgfältig die Blutzirkulation im Inneren des Auges: Mit den Instrumenten, die heute schon vollkommen genug sind, um auch äußerlich so etwas sehen zu können, wird man an der Blutzirkulation rein äußerlich, physikalisch, nachweisen können, was ich eben ausgesprochen habe. Denn man wird zeigen können, daß Blut nach einem Organ peripherisch hingeht, in das Organ hinein verschwindet und aus ihm wiederum erzeugt wird, um zurückzufließen, so daß man es nicht mit einem Blutkreislauf zu tun hat, sondern mit einem Entstehen und Vergehen. Diese Dinge gibt es, doch die dogmatischen Vorstellungen der heutigen Wissenschaft hindern das, worauf es in bezug auf sie ankommt. Deshalb werden die Menschen heute auch gehindert, gewisse Prozesse und Vorgänge, die einfach real sind, in ihrer Realität zu betrachten.
Was ist es für die heutige Wissenschaft, wenn Menschen sterben, rein als physische Wesen sterben? Man nimmt davon in der Wissenschaft keine Notiz. Sonst beschäftigt man sich ja genügend mit den Toten, weil man an die Lebenden nicht herankommen kann, aber man nimmt in der Wissenschaft nicht von der Tatsache des Sterbens Notiz. Daß man sich sonst mit den Toten beschäftigt, dafür wurde mir erst gestern ein Beispiel erzählt. Im Jahre 1889 wurde Hamerling in Graz provisorisch beigesetzt. Später sollte er in eine andere Gruft überführt werden. Während der Überführung - der Herr, der die Sache aufdeckte, hat es mir erst gestern erzählt - von der provisorischen Gruft in die spätere, verschwand der Schädel. Der Schädel war nicht da. Der betreffende Herr ist der Sache nachgegangen, und da hat sich denn herausgestellt, daß im Universitätsmuseum ein Gipsabguß von dem Schädel genommen worden war. Der Schädel hat, eingepackt in Zeitungspapier, an einer Stelle dort gestanden, und nur dadurch ist er wieder in sein Grab zum übrigen Organismus gekommen, daß damals die Sache aufgedeckt worden ist. -— Man beschäftigt sich also schon mit den Toten, aber nicht mit der Tatsache des Todes. Denn diese Tatsache des Todes führt ebenfalls dazu, Wichtigstes einzusehen. Der Menschenstaub nämlich - ich habe schon in einer der letzten Betrachtungen darauf hingewiesen — macht ganz besondere Wege durch. Ich habe darauf hingewiesen, daß er eigentlich den Weg nach oben anzutreten versucht. Es würde tatsächlich der Staub, der vom Menschen kommt, anders als anderer Staub, in den ganzen Kosmos hinein zerstäuben, ganz gleichgültig, ob der Leichnam verbrannt wird oder verwest, wenn er nicht ergriffen würde von der Sonnenkraft, von der Kraft, die in der Sonne ist. In der Tat, diejenige Kraft, die uns an der Oberfläche des glitzernden Steines erglänzt, oder wenn wir die Pflanzenfarben sehen, das ist nur eine Kraft der Sonne, das ist diejenige Kraft, die Julian, der Apostat, die sichtbare Sonne genannt hat. Dann haben wir die unsichtbare Sonne, welche der sichtbaren zugrunde liegt, wie die Seele dem äußeren physischen Menschenorganismus. Diese Kraft, die natürlich nicht mit den physischen Ätherstrahlen herunterkommt, sondern die darin erst wieder lebt, diese Kraft belebt in einer ganz besonderen Weise den Menschenstaub, so wie sie sonst nichts, nicht den mineralischen, nicht den pflanzlichen und nicht den tierischen Staub belebt. Eine fortwährende Wechselwirkung findet statt post mortem zwischen dem, was rein äußerlich, leiblich, vom Menschen übrigbleibt, und den Kräften, die von der Sonne herunterstrahlen. Beides begegnet sich. Die Kräfte, die da herunterströmen, um den Menschenstaub zu bewegen, sind allerdings diejenigen Kräfte, die der Tote selber - jetzt als geistig-seelische Individualität — nach dem Tode entdeckt. Während wir, indem wir in den physischen Leib hinein inkarniert sind, die physische Sonne sehen, entdeckt der Tote, wenn er durch die Pforte des Todes gegangen ist, die Sonne zuerst als das Weltenwesen, welches da unten auf der Erde Menschenstaub belebt. Das ist eine Entdeckung, die der Tote unter den allgemeinen Entdeckungen, die er nach dem Tode macht, auch macht. Er lernt kennen das Ineinander-Verwobenwerden von Sonnenkraft, von seelischer Sonnenkraft mit Menschenstaub. Und indem er dieses Gewebe kennenlernt zwischen Menschenstaub und Sonnenktaft, lernt er erstens überhaupt das Geheimnis der Wiederverkörperung kennen, von der andern Seite gesehen, vorbereitend die nächste Inkarnation, aus dem Kosmos heraus webend die nächste Inkarnation. Und außerdem lernt er von der andern Seite gewisse Tatsachen erkennen, auf denen das Geheimnis der Wiederverkörperung beruht, wovon wir in > der nächsten Zeit auch sprechen werden.
Dies führt uns nun wieder dahin, einen Begriff zu erhalten, wie ganz anders die Vorstellungen des inneren Lebens der Menschenseele sind, wenn die Seele durch die Pforte des Todes gegangen ist, gegenüber den Erlebnissen, welche die Seele hier hat. Diese Erlebnisse nach dem Tode sind schon in der ganzen Konfiguration der Seele anders. So wie wir hier zwischen Schlafen und Wachen abwechseln, so wechselt der Tote auch zwischen Bewußtseinszuständen ab. Ich habe hier in diesen Vorträgen schon darauf aufmerksam gemacht, will es aber von einem andern Gesichtspunkte aus noch einmal kurz charakterisieren.
Wir leben hier, neben anderem, in Gedanken, innerlich seelisch. Der Tote tritt in eine Realität ein. Was für uns bloß Gedanken sind, ist diese Realität. Während wir im physischen Leben die äußerliche mineralische, pflanzliche, tierische Welt wahrnehmen und dazu unsere eigene physische Welt haben, ist das, wovon wir nur den Schatten erleben im Gedanken, für den Toten gleich da, wenn er durch die Pforte des Todes geschritten ist. Und diese Welt, in die er da eintritt, verhält sich zur physischen wirklich so, wie hier die Gegenstände zu den Schatten. Wir haben im Gedanken nur die Schatten dessen, was der Tote erlebt. Aber der Tote erlebt das anders, als wir Gedanken erleben. Er erfährt über die Gedanken etwas anderes, als der Mensch hier, wenigstens in unserem heutigen Zeitalter. Für gewöhnlich träumt der Mensch in bezug auf die Gedanken. Der Tote aber erfährt: Indem er denkt, also in Gedanken als in Realitäten lebt, wird er, wächst er, gedeiht er; in demselben Maße, als er die Gedanken verläßt, nicht in ihnen lebt, entwird er, wird magerer, spärlicher. Entstehen und Vergehen selber hängt post mortem zusammen mit In-Gedanken-Leben und Außer-den-Gedanken-Leben. Wenn es hier so wäre, daß die Menschen magerer würden, die nicht denken wollen, so könnte sich eine merkwürdige Welt zeigen. Aber wir erleben eben nur die unwirksamen Schatten der Gedanken, die keine realen Wirkungen haben. Der Tote erlebt die Gedanken als Wirklichkeiten; sie nähren ihn, oder zehren ihn ab in seinem seelisch-geistigen Dasein. Und diese Zeit, in der die Gedanken ihn nähren oder abzehren, ist zugleich die Zeit, in welcher er sein übersinnliches Wahrnehmungsleben entwickelt. Er sieht, wie die Gedanken in ihn einströmen, und wie sie wieder weggehen. Es ist nicht ein solches Wahrnehmen, wie sonst in unserem gewöhnlichen Bewußtsein, wo wir nur die fertigen Wahrnehmungen haben, sondern es ist ein durchgehender Strom des Gedankenlebens, der sich immer mit dem eigenen Wesen verbindet. Wenn der physische Mensch auf der Erde noch so viele Dinge sieht, so ist er doch hinterher, wenn er alles gesehen hat, genau ebenso beschaffen, nur daß er nachher meistens etwas davon weiß, was er vorher gewesen ist, aber es hat an seiner Organisation wenigstens nicht erheblich viel geändert. Beim Toten ist das anders; er sieht sich selber in fortwährender Veränderung mit dem, was er wahrnimmt. Das ist der eine Zustand: dieses Wahrnehmen des Hereinfließens und des Fortfließens eines lebendigen Gedankenstromes. Der andere Zustand ist, daß dies aufhört, und daß ein ruhiges Sich-zum-Bewußtsein-Bringen dessen besteht, was so durch ihn durchgeflossen ist: eine intensivere Erinnerung, eine Erinnerung, die nicht unsere abstrakte Erinnerung ist, sondern die wieder mit dem ganzen Werden zusammenhängt. Diese beiden Zustände wechseln ab. Deshalb sind die Toten auch eigentlich nur empfänglich für solche Gedanken, die aus der geisteswissenschaftlichen oder aus der spirituellen Gesinnung heraus zu ihnen hingetragen werden. Das Gedankenwesen, das die heutigen Menschen gewöhnlich haben, dringt eigentlich kaum zu den Toten, und das Gedankenwesen, das zu den Toten dringt, lieben die heutigen Menschen nicht sehr. Die heutigen Menschen lieben solche Gedanken, die sie irgendwie aus der Außenwelt hernehmen können. Gedanken aber, die man nur dadurch hat, daß man sie innerlich erarbeiten muß, die also innerlich seelisch schon eine Spur von dem haben, was die Gedanken nach dem Tode haben, diese Beweglichkeit, dieses Leben liebt man nicht. Das ist dem heutigen Menschen viel zu schwer. Deshalb können die Menschen auch, wenn sie hübsch im Laboratorium sitzen, das Mikroskop haben und unter dem Mikroskop die Zellen, können mit dem Messer den entsprechenden Schnitt machen, den Schnitt beobachten oder in irgendeiner Weise andere Beobachtungen verarbeiten. Dann können sie so ausgezeichnete Bücher schreiben wie Oscar Hertwig: «Das Werden der Organismen.» In dem Augenblick aber, wo sie anfangen zu denken, können sie so unsinnige Bücher schreiben, wie der jetzige Oscar Hertwig. Der Unterschied ist nur der, daß für ein Buch wie sein zweites, nicht Gedankenleichname notwendig gewesen wären. Für die naturwissenschaftlichen Bücher sind nur Gedankenleichname notwendig; für Bücher von der Art des zweiten wären lebendige Gedanken notwendig gewesen. Die hat er nicht! Das ist aber nötig, solche Gedanken wirklich zu lieben, in ihnen leben zu können. Denn in dem Augenblick, wo man als hier Zurückgebliebener wirklich eine Brücke schlagen will zu dem, der durch die Pforte des Todes gegangen ist, und mit dem man karmisch verbunden war, in diesem Augenblick braucht man wenigstens eine Gesinnung, die zum Leben in Gedanken hinneigt. Hat man diese Gesinnung, so sind die Gedanken der Zurückgebliebenen für den Toten wirklich eine ganz besondere Zugabe zum Leben und ändern viel, unendlich viel an dem Dasein derjenigen Menschen, die zwischen Tod und neuer Geburt stehen. Aber, wenn allerdings in den Menschenseelen ein unbestimmtes Gefühl von allem leben würde, wovon die Toten die Meinung haben, es sollte auf der Erde anders sein, als es ist, dann würden die Lebenden an diesem Gedanken wenig Beseligung haben. Ein solches unbestimmtes Gefühl ist vorhanden. Die Menschen fürchten, es könnte die Meinung der Toten über manches herauskommen, was die Menschen im physischen Leben denken und empfinden, tun und meinen. Nur wird diese Furcht nicht bewußt, aber sie hält die Menschen im Materialismus befangen. Denn das Unbewußte, wenn es auch nicht bewußt wird, ist doch wirksam. Man muß mit dem Denkermut nicht nur das durchseelen, was bewußtes Vorstellungsleben ist, sondern auch die tiefsten Tiefen des menschlichen Wesens. Das muß immer wieder und wieder gesagt werden, wenn Geisteswissenschaft in vollem Ernst aufgefaßt werden soll. Denn nicht darauf kommt es an, daß man den einen oder andern Satz auffaßt, das eine oder andere interessant oder für sich wichtig findet, sondern darauf, daß alle die Einzelheiten, so wie ein Organismus sich aus vielen Einzelheiten zusammenfügt, für den Menschen sich zusammenbilden zu einer Gesamtverfassung der Seele, die man für unsere Zeit doch nur immer so charakterisieren kann, wie ich es von den verschiedensten Gesichtspunkten aus versucht habe. Es ist durchaus notwendig, daß sich einige Menschen in unserer Gegenwart finden, welche die Geisteswissenschaft von diesem Gesichtspunkte aus ernst zu nehmen wissen: daß sie unserer Zeit ein bewegliches, lebendiges Gedankenleben gibt, daß nicht einer über den andern herfällt, obwohl sie ganz einverstanden sind, also auch gar kein Grund vorhanden ist, zu bellen, wenn jemand etwas vom Horoskop sagt. Man schaut dann die Sache gar nicht ordentlich an.
Eine Zeit, in der solche Seelenverfassung herrscht, erzeugt noch vieles andere auf ihrem Grund. Leider kann man nur leise darauf hindeuten, aber es müßte auch die Möglichkeit geschaffen werden, das, was auf dem Grunde der Zeit ruht und was genug in so katastrophaler Weise zum Ausdruck kommt, wirklich ins Auge zu fassen. Einige Menschen beginnen ja heute, ernsthaftige Gedanken zu haben. Aber man sieht, wie schwer es für die Menschen ist, über die unwahrhaftige Stellung zur Welt und zur Menschheit, von der heute die Seelen befangen sind, hinauszukommen. An wie vielen Punkten tritt denn diese Frage zutage, die ich heute leise berührt habe, und die ich in der nächsten Zeit weiter ausführen werde, die Frage: Welche Stellung hat denn überhaupt das Christentum im Laufe der Jahrhunderte und Jahrtausende gehabt, daß es nun Jahrhunderte, Jahrtausende bald gewirkt hat und dennoch die heutigen Zustände hat möglich werden lassen? — Die Frage wurde an verschiedenen Punkten gestellt. Aber man sieht, die Materialien zu ihrer Beantwortung sind noch nicht unter dem, was heute die Menschheit wissenschaftliche oder religiöse oder sonstwie geartete Betrachtungen nennt. Diese Materialien wird erst die Geisteswissenschaft herbeibringen können. Denn eine ernste Frage ist es doch: Wie soll sich der Mensch in der Gegenwart zum Christentum stellen, da dieses Christentum doch eine lange Zeit in den Jahrhunderten gewirkt hat, aber diese Zustände heute dennoch hat zulassen können? Am kuriosesten sind jedenfalls diejenigen Menschen, die da verlangen, daß zu irgendwelchen, vor diesen Zuständen bestandenen Formen des Christentums wieder zurückgegangen werden soll, die also gar keine Empfindung dafür haben, daß, wenn man zu demselben zurückgeht, aus demselben wieder dasselbe herauskommen muß. Diese Menschen werden gewiß nicht leicht einsehen, daß ein durchgreifendes und intensives Neues in unser Geistesleben eintreten muß. Davon das nächste Mal weiter.
Twelfth Lecture
Yesterday, in my public lecture “The Human World and the Animal World,” I referred, among other things, to an idea that can be formed about the human soul life, an idea that is of course not hypothetical in any way, but one that corresponds directly to the reality of the soul life itself. I drew attention to what constitutes the beginning and end of life in the animal world, which in a sense comprises only two moments: entering physical life and leaving it, conception and death; they stand in such a relationship to animal life that one could say: Animal life presents itself as a ladder, with conception at the beginning and death at the end. I have pointed out that these two experiences really run through the entire soul life of the human being, that the soul life of the human being at every moment summarizes into a whole what is experienced in the animal, when the generic soul, which never actually comes entirely onto the physical plane, establishes an interrelationship with the physical being through conception. And something like a hint of ego-consciousness appears in the single moment of death in animals. Yesterday I pointed out that anyone who is able to observe animal death can already gain an idea of how, in essence, what runs through the whole life of the human being, the ego-consciousness, is present for the animal only in this moment of passing out of life. But the important thing is precisely this: that the two moments, which are really only two moments in animal life, are combined into one, as in a synthesis, and pass through human life in such a way that the human head, the peculiar nature of its organization, as I have explained, can develop a continuous becoming and dying, quietly echoing this — but such is the human soul life, and this gives rise to the justified idea of human immortality — that this human soul life proceeds continuously from the interweaving of conception or conception and death.
I then added: Every time we have a thought, the thought is born out of the will, and every time we will, the thought dies into the will. Schopenhauer, I said, had presented the matter very one-sidedly by presenting only the will as something real. He did not realize that “will” is only one side of the matter, in a sense only the dying thought, while the “thought” is the will being born. Anyone who describes things as Schopenhauer does is like a person who describes human life only from the age of thirty-five or so until the end. But every person who has reached the age of thirty-five must have been something else before that. There is also something else for the period from birth to the age of thirty-five. Schopenhauer describes only the will; and he regards the thought, or rather the idea, as an illusion. But that is only the other form of the matter; the thought of the will that wants to be born, while the thought is the dying will. And in that we have continually interwoven thought and will in our soul life, we likewise have birth, which goes back to conception—for perception is conception—and dying.
This idea is one that, even if one wants to justify it anatomically or physiologically, requires nothing more than current science and the will, the good will, to truly observe mental phenomena. Anyone who does not present the experiences gained with the human brain in the way that is currently done by official science, but who really examines the findings of physiology and biology of the human brain without prejudice, will find that what I have just said is well founded scientifically. And if people would stop all the nonsense that is going on in universities today, investigating all kinds of things in psychological and physiological laboratories because anatomists have no ideas and instead sit down at their apparatus to first maltreat and then research the soul life of students, if people did not put up with this, then we would really be able to observe the life of the soul and would then also gain an understanding of the continuous birth and death in the human soul itself, of that metamorphosis which is only an intensification of Goethe's metamorphosis. But today, after a hundred years, contemporary science has not even managed to understand Goethe's metamorphosis, let alone really advance such an idea that was once handed down to humanity.
Such ideas, as I attempted to sketch yesterday, are nothing other than the further developed Goethean doctrine of metamorphosis. These are all things that can be established without any clairvoyant awareness of them. All that is needed is real science and observation of the soul. If, instead of all the many follies to which official science leads people, a number of students were encouraged to understand such things, then the path would not be far off to truly impress spiritual science upon the culture of humanity. For it is precisely such thoughts, which can be scientifically established today and which require nothing more than good will to bear fruit in the soul life, to observe truly, and to have thoughts — such concepts, such ideas could form a bridge from external sensory science to spiritual science, which does not spread because it is not understandable to those people who do not have clairvoyance, but because the brutality of the present scientific attitude prevents something new coming into existence from spreading at all. It does no harm, I am convinced, if these things are sometimes called by their true names and characterized as they really are. One can say that even more important than the spread of such a thought as a thought is the effect of a thought on the human soul. For it matters much less what thoughts we have than what forces we must apply to grasp one thought or another. The human soul must be in a completely different state of mind when it grasps a completely dead thought of today's so-called science than when it grasps a living thought of spiritual science. In the case of the living thought of spiritual science, the whole human being is inwardly engaged, inwardly enlivened, and placed within the cosmos; in contrast, in what modern science often produces, especially when it goes beyond its narrowest field, the human being is pushed out of the cosmic context.
This must be understood. But this is also what spiritual science must truly bring to humanity. For it is precisely where things begin to become important for immediate life, for example in education, in teaching, and in everything connected with it, that it is of boundless importance that living concepts that intervene directly in life can encompass the human soul. Then it will become clear to the soul itself, which is able to see things in this way, what the tasks are, what is essential in the intervention of spiritual science for the entire spiritual culture of our time. This should really be understood in all its significance. Only then would we see how necessary it is to look with unbiased eyes at the almost completely distorted thinking that sometimes underlies contemporary life. The symptoms of this distorted thinking are not so easy to grasp.
I drew attention to one of them yesterday. It is also necessary in our practice that nothing of what could be called laxity of thinking or sluggishness of thinking be allowed to develop. Just think what would happen if laxity of thinking were to develop among us! Recently, wherever I have been able to give lectures, I have praised Oscar Hertwig's book Das Werden der Organismen (The Becoming of Organisms) in every possible way. I have called it the best book of recent times in terms of scientific achievement. I have not been reticent, because it was undertaken by a man who stands at the height of the scientific methods of his time to unravel Darwinism and reject it within its limits. One could agree with him right up to the last pages. Now Oscar Hertwig's latest book has been published: “Zur Abwehr des ethischen, des sozialen, des politischen Darwinismus” (Against Ethical, Social, and Political Darwinism). And as I have already indicated, one would really like to find words that are as sharp as possible to counter the impotence, narrow-mindedness, limitations, triviality, and nonsense of this book. Here, for once, a scientific researcher leaves his narrow field and talks utter nonsense, but nonsense that has been trotted out over and over again! I have given an example, mentioning that this good man says the following about scientific methods: Ultimately, all natural science had to be constructed according to the model of astronomy. Of course, this is not original either; Da Bois-Reymond had already said it in 1872 when he spoke about the structure of the atomic world. But consider this: one should observe the facts around us; but then the astronomical theory, which is as far removed from man as possible, is set up as a model! Logically, this is no more valuable than trying to explain the inner life of a family living in poverty somewhere out in the countryside by telling them: You must not understand how your father and mother, son and daughter behave in your family, but how it is in a count's house; from this you can deduce how family laws should be structured! But today such things are overlooked, they are not even noticed. With us, however, it is necessary that such things be noticed. With us, there must be no belief in authority, nor must there be any laziness. We are clear that once a judgment has been made about a person, one cannot rely on anything else that might come from that person. This is a different matter, and it must be put into practice down to the smallest details of behavior. Therefore, no one should be surprised if one of Oscar Hertwig's actions is praised to the skies one moment and condemned to hell the next; for that must happen; but one must practice looking at life without prejudice. For those who do not practice this will not notice, on the one hand, what the immediate facts of life are, and on the other hand, where they can find the entrance to the spiritual world. I would like to give a small example of this. I do not know how many people have noticed this, but they have noticed it in such a way that one can really draw practical benefit from it in life.
Some time ago, an article by Fritz Mauthner appeared in the Berliner Tageblatt in which he indulged in the most incredible trivial, but truly terribly trivial refutations of a man who had written a book in which he discussed, among other things, Goethe's horoscope. The language critic Fritz Mauthner wrote long columns in an extremely self-satisfied manner, trying to show what an injustice this man was doing to the present day by writing about Goethe's horoscope and the like in a book that appeared in such a popular collection as Aus Natur und Geisteswelt (From Nature and the World of the Mind). Fritz Mauthner's article gave one the feeling that this was really a bit too much triviality. But apart from that, the author of this book in the collection “Aus Natur und Geisteswelt” is actually a fairly average scholar of today, and it was difficult to understand what there was to get particularly upset about. For one did not really know why Fritz Mauthner was so upset. It was all the more incomprehensible since the author of this little book makes fun of all the people who take the things discussed there seriously, and Fritz Mauthner turns against this man only because he talks about horoscopes. Now the same man who wrote this little book has justified himself in the Berliner Tageblatt and made it clear that it never occurred to him to defend astrology. So the man had actually fulfilled everything that Fritz Mauthner could have demanded of him in his position. The two are in complete agreement, but Fritz Mauthner nevertheless attacked the man, considering it socially highly dangerous for such a book to appear in such a collection. And the Berliner Tageblatt commented that it could not really find that Fritz Mauthner had misunderstood the matter; on the contrary, it agreed entirely with what Mauthner had written.
This is just one particularly striking example of the degree of intellectual weakness that actually underlies all these things. On the other hand, when one considers how much life is actually intertwined with what is expressed in such journalistic, inferior intellectual activity, one begins to understand what characterizes the current intellectual culture. And one must actually have these thoughts. This is necessary if one wants to gain an understanding of the tasks that the spiritual scientific direction can actually have. What one must know above all is that such things as dishonesty and lies are real powers, and one cannot imagine anything more dishonest than when something like this happens: One person writes a book about astrology, another attacks him because he does not want anyone to write about it at all, and the first justifies himself by saying, “Hey, I'm just having fun with it.” If he had said beforehand, “I'm just having fun telling Goethe's horoscope here,” then Mauthner would have been satisfied.
The issues are quite serious and are connected with the most serious currents of the present, above all with what must be recognized: that spiritual science necessarily has a difficult time in our present age in order to penetrate and somehow achieve what it is actually supposed to achieve. It really requires strong and courageous thinking, and in addition to all its content, it is necessary to familiarize oneself with the idea that spiritual science requires strong and courageous thinking. The ground for this strong and courageous thinking has been undermined in many ways. How the ground has been undermined, however, leads us to realize something else: that it was not only earthly, human beings who were active in undermining the ground, but that the great Ahrimanic forces have been at work for centuries. Among all the things that the Ahrimanic beings have done to bring humanity into such a state of confusion, from which the light must be found again, one of the most important is that they have led people to no longer recognize that everything material has its roots in the spiritual, and that everything spiritual wants to reveal itself materially. The world has been torn apart, and things that belong together have been separated. Above all, when we consider the external history of the ongoing Christian stream—not Christianity itself—we find Ahrimanic forces at work in this Christian development. Among many other things, one thing in particular should be noted: the tearing apart of what is the sun and solar power on the one hand, and what is Christ and Christ power on the other. Unless the connection between the sun and solar power and Christ and Christ power is recognized again, it will not always be easy to connect the world with the spiritual. But this is precisely one of the main tasks of spiritual science: to rediscover in a different way—in a way that corresponds to the spiritualization of humanity through the Christ Mystery—the great mystery of the sun, which could not yet be the Christ Mystery before the Mystery of Golgotha, but which subsequently became the Christ Mystery. Julian the Apostate knew the mystery of the sun only in its old form; he did not yet understand that it was the Christ Mystery. That is his tragic fate, the tragic fate of being seized by the world-historical delusion of communicating to humanity the secret of the spiritual power of the sun. This led to his murder during his Persian campaign.
However, in the 19th century, we have another spiritual undertaking to record, which was set up by Ahrimanic forces in order to prevent humanity from knowing what I am now saying: the mystery of the sun in connection with other mysteries. We must also look these things properly in the eye. I will now mention something which, if I were to mention it not to a prepared audience but in some scientific society or the like, would naturally be considered madness. But that is not important. It is a matter of telling the truth, for the decision as to whether one's own self or others are mad is a question that does not need to be settled here. In the 19th century, an idea essentially emerged that now dominates all of science and that, if it becomes even more dominant than it already is, will never allow healthy ideas about spiritual life to take hold. Among the ideas that are widespread today about the basic principles of physics and chemistry is the fundamental idea of the conservation of force, of the conservation of energy, as it is held today. You can investigate everywhere today and you will hear it said that forces are only transformed. The examples given are, of course, justified in detail everywhere. When I stroke the table with my hand, I exert pressure, but the force expended is not consumed; the pressure is transformed into heat. All forces are transformed in this way. A transformation of force, of energy, takes place. “Conservation of matter and force” is a catchphrase that has taken hold of everything that is scientifically thought today in the most eminent sense. That nothing comes into being and passes away in relation to matter and in relation to energies, forces, is considered an axiom. If one applies this within its limits, one cannot object to it at all. But in science it is not applied within its limits, but in such a way that it becomes a dogma, a scientific dogma.
It was precisely in the 19th century that a strange Ahrimanic practice of coarsening ideas developed. A wonderfully brilliant treatise by Julius Robert Mayer on the conservation of energy appeared. This treatise, which was published in 1842, was rejected by most of the leading minds in Germany at the time; it was considered amateurish. Julius Robert Mayer was later even locked up in a madhouse. Today we know that he made a fundamental scientific discovery. But that had no effect. For it is easy to prove that those who mention him in connection with this scientific law have not read him themselves. There is a history of philosophy by Ueberweg in which Mayer is also mentioned; a few lines are devoted to him. But anyone who reads these few lines immediately knows that this classic historian of philosophy, whom all students have to plow through, has read nothing by him; otherwise he could not have written such nonsense as what the students have to plow through. But the matter has not passed into the human soul in the refined way in which Mayer treats it, but in a much cruder manner. And this is mainly because it is not the ideas of Julius Robert Mayer that have passed into science, but those of the English beer brewer Joule and the physicist Helmholtz, completely abandoning the ideas of Julius Robert Mayer. But today, people do not consider it necessary to consider these things. These circumstances should also be taught in our higher educational institutions. People should also learn why Darwinism spread so rapidly. For believe me, if Darwin's book “On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection” had simply appeared as a book thrown into the public, it would not have taken hold of all popular circles, and these views would have been carried on clouds. No, what actually underlies Darwinism had already been prepared. In 1844, long before Darwin, a cobbled-together book was published that described in the most trivial way all the things that Lamarck and others had said. It was a purely speculative undertaking by a bookseller, published by Robert Chambers in Edinburgh, because they knew they could count on the instincts of the 19th century and get away with something like that. And it was into this atmosphere that Darwin threw his ideas. He simply interspersed Lamarck's ideas with the theory of selection, because English practitioners had long been familiar with these ideas. A book had been published earlier: “Shipbuilding and Tree Culture” by Patrick Matthew, in which the theory of selection is openly expressed. The ways in which these ideas entered 19th-century culture would have to be uncovered at some point. History, as it is presented, is a myth, a great deception in most areas. It is important to really look at what actually happened. For it is one thing for a young person to know that they are dealing with a scientific fact, and quite another to know that it is the idea of the English brewer Joule. It is one thing for them to know that something has been established by all the scientific observations of the 19th century, and quite another to know that it is the work of the Edinburgh publisher Robert Chambers. This leads in the right way to the truth. Humanity must above all adjust itself to the truth.
This idea of the absolute, not relative, immortality of matter and energy prevents us from recognizing the place where matter really disappears into nothingness and new matter begins. Today we could prove this physiologically, but only the dogma of the conservation of energy prevents us from doing so. And this one place in the world — there are many places — is the human organism. Matter does not merely pass through the human organism; during the process that is experienced spiritually in the synthesis of conception and death, something happens physically: certain matter that we take in actually disappears, forces pass away and are newly generated. The things that come into consideration here have actually been observed for longer than one might think. But no value is placed on these observations. One need only study carefully the circulation of blood inside the eye: with the instruments that are already sufficiently advanced today to be able to see something like this externally, it will be possible to prove purely externally, physically, what I have just said. For it will be possible to show that blood flows peripherally to an organ, disappears into it, and is produced again from it in order to flow back, so that one is not dealing with a blood circulation, but with a process of arising and passing away. These things exist, but the dogmatic ideas of modern science prevent us from seeing what is important about them. That is why people today are prevented from seeing certain processes and events that are simply real in their reality.
What does it mean for modern science when people die, die purely as physical beings? Science takes no notice of this. Otherwise, people are sufficiently preoccupied with the dead because they cannot get hold of the living, but science takes no notice of the fact of dying. I was told just yesterday of an example of how people are otherwise preoccupied with the dead. In 1889, Hamerling was provisionally buried in Graz. Later, he was to be transferred to another crypt. During the transfer from the provisional crypt to the later one, the skull disappeared. The skull was not there. The gentleman in question investigated the matter, and it turned out that a plaster cast of the skull had been taken to the university museum. The skull, wrapped in newspaper, had been left there, and it was only because the matter was uncovered at that time that it was returned to its grave with the rest of the body. So people are concerned with the dead, but not with the fact of death. For this fact of death also leads us to understand something very important. Human dust, as I have already pointed out in one of my recent reflections, takes a very special path. I have pointed out that it actually tries to ascend. In fact, the dust that comes from human beings would, unlike other dust, scatter throughout the entire cosmos, regardless of whether the corpse is burned or decomposes, if it were not seized by the power of the sun, by the power that is in the sun. In fact, the force that shines on us from the surface of a glittering stone, or when we see the colors of plants, is only a force of the sun, the force that Julian the Apostate called the visible sun. Then we have the invisible sun, which underlies the visible one, like the soul underlies the external physical human organism. This force, which of course does not come down with the physical ether rays, but only lives again in them, animates human dust in a very special way, just as it animates nothing else, neither mineral, plant, nor animal dust. A continuous interaction takes place post mortem between what remains of the human being in a purely external, physical sense and the forces that radiate down from the sun. The two meet. The forces that flow down to move the human dust are, however, the same forces that the dead person himself—now as a spiritual-soul individuality—discovers after death. While we, incarnated in the physical body, see the physical sun, the dead, when they have passed through the gate of death, first discover the sun as the world being that animates human dust down below on earth. This is one of the general discoveries that the dead make after death. They learn about the interweaving of solar power, of soul solar power, with human dust. And by learning about this interweaving between human dust and solar power, they first learn about the mystery of reincarnation, seen from the other side, preparing the next incarnation, weaving the next incarnation out of the cosmos. And in addition, he learns to recognize certain facts from the other side on which the mystery of reincarnation is based, which we will also discuss in the next section.
This now leads us back to an understanding of how completely different the inner life of the human soul is after passing through the gate of death, compared to the experiences the soul has here. These experiences after death are already different in the entire configuration of the soul. Just as we alternate between sleeping and waking here, so the dead alternate between states of consciousness. I have already pointed this out in these lectures, but I would like to characterize it briefly from another point of view.
We live here, among other things, in thoughts, inwardly, spiritually. The dead enter a reality. What are merely thoughts for us is this reality. While in physical life we perceive the external mineral, plant, and animal world and have our own physical world, what we experience only as shadows in our thoughts is immediately present for the dead when they pass through the gate of death. And this world into which he enters really relates to the physical world in the same way as objects here relate to shadows. In our thoughts, we have only the shadows of what the dead person experiences. But the dead person experiences this differently than we experience thoughts. He experiences something different through thoughts than human beings here, at least in our present age. Usually, human beings dream in relation to their thoughts. The dead, however, experience that by thinking, that is, by living in thoughts as in realities, they become, they grow, they flourish; to the same extent that they leave their thoughts, do not live in them, they cease to be, they become leaner, sparser. Coming into being and passing away themselves are connected post mortem with living in thoughts and living outside of thoughts. If it were the case here that people who do not want to think become leaner, a strange world could emerge. But we experience only the ineffective shadows of thoughts, which have no real effects. The dead experience thoughts as realities; they nourish them or consume them in their spiritual existence. And this time, in which thoughts nourish or consume them, is also the time in which they develop their supersensible perception. They see how thoughts flow into them and how they flow away again. It is not a perception like that in our ordinary consciousness, where we only have finished perceptions, but rather a continuous stream of thought life that is always connected with one's own being. Even though the physical human being on earth sees so many things, when he has seen everything, he is still exactly the same, except that afterwards he usually knows something of what he was before, but at least there has been no significant change in his organization. With the dead, it is different; they see themselves in constant change with what they perceive. That is one state: this perception of the inflow and outflow of a living stream of thoughts. The other state is that this ceases and that there is a calm bringing to consciousness of what has flowed through him: a more intense memory, a memory that is not our abstract memory, but one that is again connected with the whole process of becoming. These two states alternate. That is why the dead are actually only receptive to thoughts that are carried to them from a spiritual or spiritualistic mindset. The thoughts that people today usually have hardly penetrate to the dead, and the thoughts that do penetrate to the dead are not very loved by people today. People today love thoughts that they can somehow take from the outside world. But thoughts that one has only by working them out inwardly, which therefore already have within them a trace of what thoughts have after death, this mobility, this life, are not loved. This is far too difficult for people today. That is why people can sit nicely in a laboratory with a microscope and observe cells under the microscope, make the appropriate cuts with a knife, observe the cuts, or process other observations in some way. Then they can write such excellent books as Oscar Hertwig's “The Becoming of Organisms.” But the moment they start thinking, they can write such nonsensical books as the current Oscar Hertwig. The only difference is that for a book like his second one, thought corpses would not have been necessary. For scientific books, only thought corpses are necessary; for books of the second kind, living thoughts would have been necessary. He does not have them! But it is necessary to truly love such thoughts, to be able to live in them. For at the moment when one, as someone left behind here, really wants to build a bridge to someone who has passed through the gates of death and with whom one was karmically connected, at that moment one needs at least an attitude that inclines toward life in thought. If one has this attitude, the thoughts of those left behind are truly a very special addition to the life of the dead and change much, infinitely much, in the existence of those who stand between death and new birth. But if there were an indefinite feeling in human souls about everything that the dead think should be different on earth than it is, then the living would derive little comfort from this thought. Such an indefinite feeling does exist. People fear that the opinions of the dead about many things that people think, feel, do, and believe in physical life might come out. Only this fear is not conscious, but it keeps people trapped in materialism. For the unconscious, even if it does not become conscious, is still effective. One must not only imbue conscious imagination with the courage of thought, but also the deepest depths of the human being. This must be said again and again if spiritual science is to be taken seriously. For it is not important that one understands one sentence or another, finds one thing or another interesting or important in itself, but that all the details, just as an organism is composed of many details, come together for the human being to form a total constitution of the soul, which can only ever be characterized for our time as I have attempted to do from the most diverse points of view. It is absolutely necessary that there be some people in our time who know how to take spiritual science seriously from this point of view: that it gives our time a flexible, living thought life, that no one attacks another, even though they are in complete agreement, so that there is no reason to bark when someone says something about horoscopes. Then one does not look at the matter properly.
A time in which such a state of mind prevails produces many other things in its wake. Unfortunately, one can only hint at this, but the possibility must also be created to really grasp what lies at the root of the times and what is expressed in such a catastrophic way. Some people are beginning to have serious thoughts today. But we can see how difficult it is for people to overcome the untruthful attitude toward the world and toward humanity that is so prevalent in souls today. In how many ways does this question, which I have touched upon briefly today and which I will elaborate on in the near future, come to light? The question is: What position has Christianity actually held over the centuries and millennia, that it has been effective for centuries, millennia, and yet has allowed the conditions of today to come about? This question has been asked in various contexts. But we can see that the materials needed to answer it are not yet available in what humanity today calls scientific or religious or other kinds of considerations. Only spiritual science will be able to provide these materials. For it is indeed a serious question: How should people today relate to Christianity, given that Christianity has had such a long influence over the centuries, yet has nevertheless allowed the present conditions to arise? In any case, the most curious people are those who demand a return to some form of Christianity that existed before these conditions arose, who therefore have no sense that if one returns to the same, the same must come out of it again. These people will certainly not easily understand that something thoroughly new and intensive must enter our spiritual life. More on this next time.