Donate books to help fund our work. Learn more→

The Rudolf Steiner Archive

a project of Steiner Online Library, a public charity

A Sound Outlook for To-day and a Genuine Hope for the Future
GA 181

16 July 1918, Berlin

IV. History and Repeated Earth-Lives

I want to continue the observations I have begun concerning the progress of the human soul through its various earth lives, and to continue them in such a way as to make the experiences referred to useful as regards our judgment of the immediate present. To-day I would like to dwell more on the external side of things, and in the next lecture more on the inner side.

We have traced the path of the human soul in its repeated earth-lives through the three epochs most vitally concerning us—the Egypto-Chaldean, the Graeco-Latin, and our own, during which the human soul—looked upon as a self, as an individuality—experiences sonething different in each incarnation. Now we need only call up before our minds what will happen to those souls who go through earthly incarnation in our own time, to return after a more or less normal period, as will happen with most people, though not with everyone. It has often been pointed out, and last time it was repeated, that souls incarnated at thn present time will come back knowing with certainty, in some form or other—and (this I described more closely last time) through their own inward exerience—the fact of repeated earth-lives. This momentous step will be accomplished in the next age; souls will advance from their present ignorance to knowledge of reincarnation; but something else needs emphasis.

Remember that I laid stress on an important epoch which began with the seventh or eighth century before the Mstery of Golotha. In the earlier centuries of this epoch many souls were able, in the old clairvoyant fashion, to look back on their earlier earth-lives; but because they looked into a time when the sentient soul was specially developed, what they saw was the connection of human beings with the outer world. They gained a clear picture of man's proceedings in the outer world, and what happened to him there. To be sure, this will not be so in the next epoch to ours, when the retrospect will be more directed towards aspects of the soul. It will be less concerned with actions and experiences in space, less like a realistic picture, and more of a looking back into the life of the soul.

I mention this again so that you may see what very, very different experiences souls have in their successive earth lives. And of course the question must press upon each one of you—how has the outside world come to believe that during the course of history, human beings have not greatly changed? Taking the current presentations of history (some of which, but not all, are well-intentioned), we find over and over again that each goes back to a certain point of time, to which the historical accounts and documents extend, but they take for granted that the structure of the human soul has been the same all along. They grant a certain development, but they do not think of it in nearly as radical a way as we must do, in the light of the conclusions of spiritual science. The question forces itself on every one of us:—How is it that there is no proper awareness of “the metamorphosis of the human soul”?

If now we consider historical events from the point of view of spiritual science, we see that for a long time man has really been held back from knowledge of himself, rather than led towards it. To discover how the human soul changes from one incarnation to another is possible only when self- knowledge, real self-knowledge, takes root; but this has been driven back through events which we still have to appraise. Significant examples of this forcing-back process could be found in recent history. A certain fraternity, known to you all, that of the Freemasons, believes—honestly in the case of many of the brethren—that they can lead members of their circle to self-knowledge. They have various symbols of which it is evident, when they are approached with spiritual scientific knowledge, that they are profound, fraught with meaning; all really designed to lead to self-knowledge; but they do not do so. If one reads the official records of Freemasonry, it is remarkable to find the “enlightened” supposing that to understand their craft it is necessary to go back only to the eighteenth or seventeenth century. Yet what is contained in their symbols has been entirely concealed since the seventeenth century, changed into something to be looked at and shared—but which it is not felt necessary to understand. To approach these Masonic symbols with a capacity for understanding them would provide a path to self-knowledge, for they are all designed to that end. The real development of Freemasonry, however, has taken another path,—that of concealing self-knowledge, and by admitting only an outward explanation of the symbolism, to make self-knowledge impossible. Hence we can really say, from the standpoint of truth, that the development of modern Freemasonry is fundamentally that of a fraternity for making incomprehensible the symbols to be found within it. It is as though the unconscious purpose was precisely to make the symbols incomprehensible, for the very time over which the new Freemasonry has extended, (as regards the “enlightened”, not the mystical side), coincides with the greatest dread of self-knowledge in men's minds. There is much talk about it; man must seek “the divine within him”, “his higher self”, etc.; but that is all mere talk. It all tends to block up, not to open, the way to real self-knowledge; and we must ask: Whence comes this aversion, this terror? We will consider this from its outer side to-day.

It is apparent in a very remarkable way, not only in the limited realm of Freemasonry, but over the whole range of modern culture. We see how modern culture—notably in the spreading of Christianity—really takes the line of concealing and suppressing self-knowledge; a line of extraordinary interest and significance. Few people to-day take the trouble to compare the best available accounts of widely separated centuries, and fewer still reflect on the real character of what is described.

You can make an experiment, not very revealing but interesting all the same, by taking such a work as “The Life of Michelangelo” by Herman Grimm, which deals in fact mainly with Michael Angelo's period, the environment from which he emerged. Try to realise what the world would be like if one lived in the time which Grimm describes, and try to compare it with the world of to-day. The difference is tremendous! Yet that will not mean much, for the centuries in question are not very far apart. Something else emerges if one gives real thought to studying the epoch—including its preparatory stages and its after-effects—in which the great transition to modern times was accomplished. Looking back at the three great epochs which Spiritual Science shows us in our Present earth-cycle, we find that the third ends about the seventh or eighth century B.C., and the fourth with the beginning of the fifteenth century A.D. At this point there lies, not far behind us, an important, significant transition in the soul-life of civilised humanity. Usually it is hardly touched upon in history—and why? There, too, is the dread of self-knowledge, and also of knowledge of the human soul. An interesting example of the time antecedent to the change can be found in accounts of a personality such as St. Bernard Of Clairvaux. St. Bernard, perhaps the most outstanding personality of the twelfth century, and indeed of the age with which the fourth Post-Atlantean epoch of civilisation came to an end, manifested a structure of soul which after the fifteenth century was no longer possible in Europe. Nowadays it is very hard to describe this, because the preconditions for forming the right conceptions are altogether lacking; but I advise you to read accounts of the life of St. Bernard so as to see the impression he made on other people. Reading these accounts, one says to oneself: By the side of these, what are the Gospel stories of Miracles? The few sick folk healed by Christ Jesus himself—according to the Gospels—are a trifle compared with the astonishing wonder-working activities of St. Bernard! The number of people of whom it is said that he made the blind to see and lame to walk, is beyond all comparison with the number of similar cases reported in the Gospels. The accounts of the impression made by his preaching gives one the feeling that what he said acted as a widespread, intensely active spiritual aura. In the words of this man there lived a reality of which we can have no conception at the present day. If one tried to describe all the effects produced by his personality, people would simply not believe it for there is no possibility nowadays of giving an adequate idea of how he was then regarded. To penetrate to the inner structure of his soul, is, as I have said, difficult to-day, because, even in our own circle, the conditions for it are wanting. However, I might hint at one thing:—

In this personality there was an amazing devotion to the spiritual world, an absolute absorption in it. If anyone to-day undertakes something and it fails, he naturally begins to doubt whether he was right to embark on it. A personality such as St. Bernard was never doubtful, because he had always taken counsel with his God in the spiritual worlds before he undertook or advised anything. Through all the failures he experienced in the Crusades, when everything he had advised went wrong, he never doubted for a moment that his thoughts were absolutely correct, and that the discrepancy between what really happened in the outer world and what he had conceived under the influence of the spiritual world would in some way be cleared up and accounted for.

In choosing out such a personality, one is speaking of a single, outstanding figure; but what I have been saying is not restricted to him. It is the signature of the whole age—in no way confined to him. It is the signature of the epoch which began in Europe about the third or fourth century A.D., and lasted until the thirteenth, fourteenth or fifteenth. Of course within this age something further was being prepared, but this came to expression, as a deep influence, stamping itself on its time, only after the fourteenth or fifteenth century. The third to the fifteenth centuries was the time of an even more concentrated power of Faith, the age in which the events of the time came to pass under its impress.

In this connection I must beg you to recollect what I always request in these lectures—it is particularly important in passages such as these. I choose my words in such a way that other words cannot be substituted for them. If these carefully chosen words are replaced by others, from that moment your description is no longer historically accurate. I said, “It was the age when the power of Faith-was established”: If that be changed into “It was the age when Piety was established”, that would represent something entirely untrue, not my meaning at all. It was the Power of Faith I referred to in describing Bernard. He was also without doubt a pious nan, but that may belong to a man's personal character. What in those days worked and lived in outer events was the influence of Faith. The power of Faith is indeed to be found in every age, but it is not always decisive in the making of history. Our present age will be superseded by one in which Faith will again play a significant though sporadic part, but it has not yet come to that. Superstitious belief in medicine for instance, take grotesque forms in the future, and Faith will have a great part to play in that, but things have not yet gone so far. In humanity to-day, a hazy somnolence as regards historical events plays the chief part. Now we can put the question: How did it happen that this power of Faith became such an important historical impulse in Europe—the very impulse which significantly ushered in what arose in the fifteenth century as the fifth post-Atlantean epoch, in which we are now living?

First of all it was something apparently quite external which laid the foundation for the advent of the power of Faith: I mean, the circunstances which brought about the fall of the Roman Empire. The dominant historical-impulses from the third or fourth century up to the fifteenth, took the place of the impulses of the Roman Empire. Of course there were very many impulses which contributed to the fall of the Empire but one very substantial one was that during the course of Roman history money gradually flowed away towards the East. With the extension of the Roman Empire the Legions had to be moved further and further to the borders of the huge Empire; the men's wages had to be paid in money—not in kind, as was possible while the Empire was smaller. Therefore, with the extending Empire, money-wealth was gradually diverted to the East; and an essential characteristic of Europe from the early part of the third and fourth centuries onward, was its shortage of money—of coinage, that is. Many other things are, involved in this, and it is important to look at them with a sound eye for reality, not with mystical enthusiasm.

The art of making gold, alchemy, was partly conditioned in Europe by the outflow of gold to the East; men believed that if gold could be made, crated, they could once again be rich. A frequent reason for alchemy, as it was cultivated in the first centuries of the Middle Ages, was the shortage of coinage due to the extension of the Roman Empire. Linked up with this was the eruption into the impoverished Roman Empire, at that period, of the peoples from the north. With their pagan ideas, pagan culture and pagan experiences, they understood little of the Roman social structure, which had gradually become more and more powerful under the influence of money. The Romans had found things very uncomfortable after the diversion of money to the East, but these conditions suited the invading German races very well.

The spread of Christianity coincided with this condition of the Roman Empire. It is a fact, though one no longer recognised, that a profound spiritual perception lived in the spreading waves of Christianity throughout those early times. There is an incurable fear to-day, especially in theological circles, of the sc-called “Gnosis”. Many a time on asking why people in such circles dislike, and even fear, Spiritual Science, one receives the answer that “it lead to a revival of the Gnosis”; that is quite a sufficient reason for rejection! the Gnosis (though of course in our age it would have to make its appearance in a different guise from what it was in the early centuries of Christianity) is nothing else than a positive knowledge of the spiritual world, the human capacity to attain to vision of spiritual realms, as sight in the physical world is gained by the senses. One can meet people to-day who make fun of the disputes there used to be as to whether the Spirit proceeds from the Father or from the Son, or is connected in some other way with the Father and the Son. Nowadays people unite no conceptions with these ideas, but they did in those times. Anyone who writes the history of the first Christian centuries out of true knowledce, will see that in these origins of dogmas the spirit was active, although men can no longer find it now. A deeply significant spiritual outlook was carried on the advancing waves of Christianity, and it lasted on into the ninth century. A study of the details of this spreading Christianity shows that the later opinion, according to which the religious outlook should be concerned only with the strengthening of faith and should meddle as little as possible with tie particulars of the spiritual world, arose from a certain way, a right way, of regarding the nations from whom the new Europe was to arise. They were pagan peoples—peoples moreover, who had not come far in connected thinking or in the forming of ideas which lead into the spiritual world; they were strong, forceful, primitively sound men, but not exactly men of a disposition to form very defined conceptions of anything spiritual.

So, in order that Christianity might spread, it was made suitable for these peoples. Because they were not great thinkers, more was made of the “heart”, of the power of faith. So we find that in the tenth century all spiritual vision had more or less disappeared from Christianity; everything was centred in faith—and what was then regarded as faith, what was meant by the term, had gradually become the soul-content of man. Souls then lived in a different atmosphere from that of to-day. One needs to realise what was then experienced through legends. I will relate one simple legend, a thoughtful one, which in those days was known everywhere. It runs thus:

Saint Bernard occasionally rode on an ass. He had a monk with him. This monk suffered from what we call epilepsy. He was constantly falling. St. Bernard saw this when the monk accompanied him to lead his ass; so he besought his God that in future the monk might never have an attack of epilepsy without knowing of it beforehand. The legend goes on to say that the monk lived for twenty years, but every time he had an attack, he knew it was coming so he could stay in bed, and not bruise his limbs by falling.

This is a simple, unpretentious tale, but it worked deeply and was told everywhere. Men felt strong in soul in experiencing the supporting power of true faith, and they lived in the aura of such an experience.

Now it would not have been possible for this power of faith to establish itself in this way if Europe had not been to some extent isolated during the centuries I have described. Money had flowed Eastwards; and for this reason, trade had gradually ceased. Europe was for a time limited to agriculture. The fact that a third of the soil of Europe should have passed over in the course of these centuries to the upholders of the power of faith—that is, into the possession of the Church—is highly symptomatic. It is as though the whole content of the fourth post-Atlantean period (interrupted only by the Roman element) had been condensed into this power of Faith. But in the course of this strengthening of faith one thing was lost—progress in a genuine Christ-consciousness. We must not forget that Christ was known in the highest sense during the first Christian centuries by those who knew how the Christ-Figure, the Christ-Being, stood in relation to all the forces of the Spiritual world. For those who were first affected by the Christ-Figure, the ground of their emotion was that they gazed up into a spiritual world, and in a sense perceived as it were the approach of the Christ-Figure to the Earth through the aeons, and could connect the Event of Golgotha with all that happened in the Cosmos. This was the grasp of the Event of Golgotha which led those who first interpreted it to explain what had happened on earth as the outcome of event in the worlds of great cosmic happenings.

I know very well that this is otherwise represented now, but when it is said, “We must go back to the plain, simple conceptions of Christ Jesus prevailing in the early centuries”, that is to speak accords to personal fancies, from a wish to conceal the greatness of the Christ-idea and the profound insight of those early centuries into the Mystery of Golgotha. That is why the favourite idea was brought out: everything was made simple, designed to show that Christ Jesus was no more than “the simple man of Nazareth”. It is less surprising to find this view among young people. Older people, at any rate, ought to know that in these matters a significant change has taken place in our time. I have often heard that it is said “These things as presented in Spiritual science we simply cannot understand; they are so very difficult! If only there were not these hindrances!” Thirty years ago the simple country people would have understood such subjects well, but in course-of the last few decades a great change has come about. Older people may still know something of how certain writings, such as those of Böhme and Eckartshausen, which most strenuously endeavoured to open a way into the concrete realities of the spiritual world, were then accepted by the souls of simple peasants. Our spiritual life, unfortunately, has become superficial, under the influence of the bourgeois mind and the increasing repetition of its favourite idea—that truth must be “simple”, meaning that truth must be easy for everyone to grasp in a comfortable way without much reflection. Certainly, there are not many traces left nowadays—even in simple minds—of the fact that in the early centuries of Christianity it was possible to bring lofty spiritual truths before quite simple people when Christ Jesus was spoken of. this implies that what occurred in the subsequent centuries was, in a sense, directed primarily to concealing the knowledge of Christ from Man, to keeping, it at a distance from him.

In these matters we must not look at what we imagine, but at the reality. One of the deepest demands of our age is that we should learn to face reality. Here is an example. I once gave a lecture in Colmar on the subject of “Christianity and Wisdom”; two Catholic ecclesiastics were present. Naturally, they had never heard anything like it before, and on that account they came to me after the lecture, for what I had said did not seem to them so very wicked. It might have seemed so only if some of their superiors had previously spoken about it, and then they would probably have heard nonsense. They only made one objection. They said: “What you say is all very well; it is excellent to talk in this way about the spiritual world, but people understand none of it. We talk in such a way that people can understand it.” I said: “You know, reverend sirs, that neither you nor I ought to lay down the law as to how we should speak to people. Our favourite theories are of no consequence; for of course, according to them, the way in which you speak will please you and the way in which I speak will please me, but that is not the point. What matters is the duty laid upon us by the time we live in:—- not to answer such questions as you have just raised according to our favourite theories, but to let reality itself give the answer. And this is not far to seek. I ask you, since you believe that you speak to everybody, does everybody go to church to hear you?" As truthful men they could only answer: “Many stay away.” Then I could say: “That is the answer of reality! I speak for those who remain outside, who have also the right to find the way to Christ Jesus.” Let the question be asked of reality, of the age, not of man's own self, because the answer one can get from oneself is clearly known to one It seems very simple; but to learn to grasp the obligation laid on us by our age is not a simple matter. Only after deep counsel with himself can a man recognise what really lies behind this.

Mankind's real need to-day is just this: to become objective, to learn to live with the facts of the world. If we understand how to grasp the impulse which is meant by this, we shall come to terms with the truth that gradually, under the influence of the course of events through the centuries, the higher knowledge, the upward gaze into the connection between the Mystery of Golgotha and cosmic events, has been quite lost in Europe. Christ has been put at a distance—from the European soul; He has been reduced to what men were willing to grasp and imagine. The important thing, however, is that men should grasp reality, not merely what they would like to grasp. We often hear it said: “Man should seek his God and he will find Him within. He must unite himself with his inner divine self, then he will find Him”. People are particularly shocked when Spiritual Science is impelled to declare: “If we rise into the spirit from the world in which we live, we find the “Hierarchies”, a richly-membered hierarchical spiritual world, even as here below we find a richly-membered physical world. It is certainly easier and more comfortable to say, “Let each draw near directly to the one Christ: everyone can find Him.” But it does not matter what men imagine; the point is that they should recognise what is really to be found in the spiritual. What do those find who so often say, “I have found an inner connection with my God?” What they call “God,” when they speak like this is in fact often the nearest Spiritual Being belonging to the hierarchy of the Angels, the Guardian Angel, who is thus revered as the “highest being.” To say we “believe” we have found God, means nothin; what is necessary is to understand the reality of this inner experience. When anyone believes himself to be permeated inwardly by a divine being, he is generally permeated only by a member of the Hierarchy of Angels, or else by his own Ego, as it was between the last death and the present birth, as it lived in the spiritual world before uniting with his physical body.

Is it not interesting, that there is one word of which the origin is unknown? Search dictionaries, and you will discover fine explanations of all sorts of words. Yet for this one word the most learned dictionary-makers can find no origin; they do not know what it means even philologically—and this is the word, “God.” It is the word whose meaning is unknown. Very significant and very suggestive! For what people are often really talking about, when they speak so constantly about their “God,” is their own Angel, or simply their own Ego in the time between the last death and present birth. What is thus actually experienced—(I am thinking only of genuine, honest experiences)—is real enough. The point is not to succumb to the illusion that people are praying to “one God.” People have only one word for the experience of their Angel, or indeed for their own ego, whether embodied or not.

It is not uncommon for someone to have a vague foreboding that through Spiritual Science he will get behind the veil of what is constantly referred to as an “experience of God,” and this hinders the spread of Spiritual Science, for Spiritual Science is inherently inclined to reveal the truth behind the immensely significant fact to which I have just referred. The whole historical trend from the third to the tenth—indeed to the fifteenth—century, tends more to the concealment of the mysteries of Christ Jesus than to their becoming manifest. This is not a criticism, but simply a characteristisation; and if people are not in a position to take it in objectively, they will never understand the powers ruling the age that begins with the fifteenth century, the age of the “Consciousness-Soul.” This age, I might say, “thunders in,” and everything in the spiritual world tends to bring out the Consciousness Soul, with its two poles, the material and the spiritual. It is from this point of view that the course of historical development must be scrutinised. Let us picture, for example, how the frame of mind which appears at a higher stage in St Bernard, as the fruit of a strengthened, consolidated faith, produced the European tendency to put Jerusalem in the place of Rome, to found an anti-Roman Christianity with its centre in Jerusalem. For this impulse lay at the root of the Crusades. Godfrey de Bouillon was no emissary of the Roman Pope; on the contrary, he seized on the Crusades in order to build in Jerusalem a bulwark against Rome, to make Christianity independent of Rome. It was an idea which held sway for several centuries. Henry the Second, the Saintly, gave it out in the form of “a Church Catholic but not Roman”.

We see how the faith of Europe sends its aura into the regions where the Romans had sent their gold! In the East the Crusaders came into contact with money and its results; with Roman gold on the one hand, with Oriental Gnosis on the other. This aura under which the Crusades arose must be taken into consideration. It is entirely the aura of European faith—that is the one tone, the one colouring the picture. Let us set against this colouring—if it were to be painted, it would have to be in this one colour—another picture of the dawn of the Consciousness Soul. How should this be represented?

Consider Dandolo, Doge of Venice (1120–1205), formerly in Constantinople and blinded there by the Turks, who was the incarnation of the Ahriman-spirit, and, in spite of his blindness, was the ruler Venice—that Venice which imported the Ahrimanic element into the spirit, as I have described. It was a moment of great significance in the history of the world when this Doge conquered Constantinople, and led over the original spirit of the Crusades into the later ones. How did it happen? In this way.

The Crusaders originally went to the East in quest of the holy places and relics, wishing to bring them under the mantle of their faith. That was their aim they wanted to bring the relics back reverently to Europe. They wished to establish a real link between their faith and the events of he Mystery of Golgotha. When Venice intervened, what became of the relics? They were all collected, but in reality everything was made a business transaction! Under the influence of Venice, the relics were gradually treated as stocks and shares; they rose and rose in value. The capitalist aura spread through Dandolo, the incarnation of the Ahriman-spirit!

We ask ourselves—how did Venice succeed in reversing the earlier trend of events? Venice led trade back from the East to Europe; she rekindled commercial life, which had been impossible before. The question must arise: How could Venice become so powerful in the realm of commerce, while Europe was fundamentally so poor?

Commerce was carried on by barter. During the first part of the period of which I have been speaking, Europe was cut off from the East, to which, to begin with, she had given her coinage. In the absence of money, barter was substituted. Over and over again the historical fact of the way in which Venice came into this field must be insisted upon. We can prove that Venice drove a great bargain for the possession of Alexandria and Damieta, in order to barter her goods for the Oriental wares she coveted. What was it that Venice sold? One thing can easily be proved by documentary evidence, and many others could be added to it: investigation in this direction could be carried far. The Venetian wares were men! Thousands of men! The new trade with the East was begun with human beings—men were sold to the East; and anyone who follows up what became of them arrives at a remarkable result, of which outer history as yet knows but little. From these bartered men sprang the strongest of the warriors with whom the great military expeditions from Asia into Europe were successfully undertaken. The choicest troops of the Asiatic tribes which later fell upon Europe consisted of the descendants of the men sold into slavery to the East by Venice and other Italian States.

It is really necessary to look behind the scenes of world-history, and not to cling to the legends so often retailed to mankind as the “history of the world.” These legends must ultimately suffer the fate of being dismissed as school-girl tales, even though written by Ranke. The times we live in are much too serious for us to refrain from emphasizing what must be learnt; and the most important thing gained from these maters will be the acquirement of a judnment which will awaken man's consciousness—so that he will no longer remain asleep to current tendencies. A monstrous thing happens in our present time, but men do not, and will not, see it; they prefer to look at everything in a disguised and confused way. If here or there a note is struck, sounding from the depths of human development, it is repulsed with phrases drawn from superficial journalism or newspaper articles, which are as far as possible from profitable truth.

To-day I wished to draw your attention from an external point of view, to something belonging to the period in which, during the fifteenth century, the transition was accomplished from the Mind-Soul to the Consciousness-Soul It is most desirable that such ideas should sink into men's souls; they are needed—needed in all domains of life. People talk a great deal nowadays about the ways in which the structure of the community will develop in the future. This very morning I read an article by a man who esteems himself exceptionally clever, who believes he has really grasped the truths of political economy from their foundations. The profound fact he gives out in his argument is that the community, the communal life, must be comprehended as an “organism.” Something really significant is supposed to have been advanced when it is said that the life of the community must be looked upon as an organism, not as a machine. Thus is the most dreadful Wilsonism rife amongst us! I have often said that the very essence of “Wilsonism” is its inability to conceive of the life of the community except as an “organism.” Men must eventually learn to employ higher concepts than this, in contemplating the social structure. It can never be understood as an “organism:” it is an affair of the soul, of the spirit. The Spirit works in every human social community. Our age has become poverty-stricken in conceptions. We can found no social policy unless we steep our minds in spiritual knowledge for only there can we find the “meta-organism!” which transcends the mere “organism.”

Everywhere we find unwillingness to penetrate directly into the spirit; but it must be done, or incalculable effects will follow. On this subject, if you remember, I pointed out how, in the seventeenth century, Johann Valentine Andreae wrote the story of the “Chemical Marriage” of Christian Rosenkreuz, which contains much that springs from impulses connected with the transition in the fifteenth century. The story is told as having occurred in that century.

It is very interesting to notice that Johann Valentine Andreae wrote it as a youth of seventeen, when he was still unripe in external intelligence, and repudiated it in his later yenrs. Andreae, the pious theologian of later years, wrote everything possible in opposition to it. The interesting fact is that Andreae's life shows no glimmer of understanding the meaning of what he wrote in the “Chemical Marriage”. The Spiritual worlds desired to reveal to mankind something connected with the entire experience of that age.

Recently I visited, a castle in Central Europe, where there is a chapel in which the ideas of the transition-period of the new age are symbolised. Primitive paintings adorn the well of the staircase, and what do they represent? The “Chemical Marriage” of Christian Rosenkeuz! The way leads through the Chemical Marriage to a Chapel of the Grail. Then began the Thirty Years' War, after which the “Chemical Marriage” was written down, but its meaning was lost in the waves of conflict.

The lesson to be learnt from this is that the same thing never happens twice. The spiritual development which has been required of humanity since the fifteenth century must make its appearance little by little. In the next lecture we will speak of this from a deeper aspect.

Achtzehnter Vortrag

Die Betrachtungen, die ich über den Gang der Menschenseele durch ihre verschiedenen Erdenleben für unseren Menschheitszyklus begonnen habe, möchte ich fortsetzen, so fortsetzen, daß die heranzuziehenden Erlebnisse uns nützen können bei der Beurteilung der Ereignisse unserer unmittelbaren Gegenwart. Zu diesem Ziele möchte ich heute eine gleichsam mehr auf das Äußere, heute über acht Tage eine mehr auf das Innere gehende Beobachtung vor Ihnen entwickeln.

Wir haben ausgeführt, wie die Menschenseele bei ihrem Durchgang durch die aufeinanderfolgenden Erdenleben, wenn wir auf die uns zunächst interessierenden drei Zeiträume blicken: die ägyptisch-chaldäische Zeit, die griechisch-lateinische Zeit und unsere Zeit, während welcher ja die Menschenseele durch verschiedene Inkarnationen durchgegangen ist, wie diese Menschenseele - als Seele, als Selbst betrachtet — jedesmal eigentlich etwas Neues, etwas anderes erlebt als in einer vorhergehenden Inkarnation. Wir brauchen uns nur noch einmal vor die Seele zu rufen, wie es mit den Seelen sein wird, die jetzt, in unserer Zeit, durch die Erdeninkarnation durchgehen und die dann nach einer verhältnismäßig normalen Zeit wiederkommen, wie sie zwar nicht alle Leute absolvieren, aber doch sehr viele.

Wir haben schon öfter darauf aufmerksam gemacht und haben es das letzte Mal wiederholt, daß die Seelen, die durch die jetzige Erdeninkarnation durchgehen, im wesentlichen so wiederkommen werden, daß sie in irgendeiner Form — und die genauere Form habe ich das letzte Mal entwickelt — durch eigenes inneres Erleben ganz sicher wissen können: Es gibt wiederholte Erdenleben. Dieses Wichtige wird sich im nächsten Zeitalter vollziehen, daß die Seelen übergehen werden von der jetzigen Ungewißheit über die wiederholten Erdenleben zu einem Wissen von ihnen. Wie gesagt, das Genauere haben wir das letzte Mal ins Auge gefaßt. Aber noch etwas möchte ich betonen. |

Ich habe Sie darauf aufmerksam gemacht, daß ein wichtiger Zeitabschnitt der ist, welcher etwa mit dem 7. oder 8. Jahrhundert vor dem Mysterium von Golgatha beginnt. In den ersten Jahrhunderten dieses Zeitraumes haben durch die alten Hellsehergewohnheiten verhältnismäßig viele Seelen noch in ihre früheren Erdenleben zurückblicken können. Aber weil sie so zurückgeblickt haben, daß in dem damaligen Erdenleben die Empfindungsseele besonders ausgebildet war, haben die Seelen, indem sie zurückblickten, gesehen das Verhalten des Menschen in der äußeren Welt. Sie haben gewissermaßen ein anschauliches Bild davon bekommen, wie der Mensch in der äußeren Welt herumgegangen ist, was ihm in der äußeren Welt passiert ist. Dies allerdings werden die Seelen in der nächsten Zeit, von uns ab gerechnet, nicht haben können. Da wird der Rückblick mehr auf das Seelische gerichtet sein. Man wird weniger einen Einblick darin haben können, wie der Mensch im Raume herumgeht, was ihm im Raume geschieht und so weiter; man wird weniger einen bildhaft realen Inhalt im sinnlichen Sinne haben, sondern man wird mehr ein Zurückblicken auf ein Seelisches haben.

Ich erwähne das noch einmal aus dem Grunde, weil Sie daraus sehen können, daß die Seelen in den aufeinanderfolgenden Erdenleben sehr, sehr verschieden erleben. Und da muß jedem eine Frage sich vor die Seele drängen, die Frage: Wie kommt es, daß die äußere Welt eigentlich die Meinung hat, wenn man so in frühere geschichtliche Zeiträume zurückblickt, so hat sich in bezug auf den Menschen eigentlich nichts so besonders geändert. - Nehmen wir die landläufigen Geschichtsdarstellungen — es sind ja auch einige von ihnen, nicht alle, gut gemeint —: Sie werden immer wieder und wieder finden, daß eigentlich zurückgegangen wird bis zu einem gewissen Zeitpunkt, bis zu dem die historischen Nachrichten und Dokumente gehen. Aber die Struktur der Menschenseele denkt man sich für alle diese Zeiten eigentlich gleich. Man denkt sich eine gewisse Entwickelung, aber die ist nicht so radikal gedacht, als sie gedacht werden muß im Sinne der Darstellung, die wir auf Grund der geisteswissenschaftlichen Ergebnisse machen können. Woher kommt das, daß man eigentlich kein rechtes Bewußtsein hat von der Umwandelung der Menschenseele? Diese Frage wird sich einem vor die Seele drängen.

Wenn man, aber jetzt mit geisteswissenschaftlichem Blick, die geschichtlichen Ereignisse betrachtet, so ist in der Tat, man möchte sagen, alles seit längerer Zeit so geschehen, daß im Grunde genommen der Mensch von der Selbsterkenntnis seiner Seele eher abgehalten worden ist, als daß er zu ihr hingeführt worden wäre. Wie die Menschenseele von Inkarnation zu Inkarnation sich verändert, man kann es eigentlich nur wirklich durchschauen, wenn Selbsterkenntnis, wirkliche Selbsterkenntnis Platz greift. Aber diese Selbsterkenntnis ist eigentlich durch die Ereignisse, die wir eben jetzt zu würdigen haben, gar sehr zurückgedrängt worden. Wir könnten signifikante Beispiele dafür aufzeigen, wie Selbsterkenntnis gerade in der neueren Geschichte der Menschheit zurückgedrängt worden ist. Eine gewisse Brüderschaft, die Sie alle kennen, die sich die Freimaurerbrüderschaft nennt, glaubt - und manche ihrer Mitbrüder wiederum gutmeinend - ganz gewiß, zur Selbsterkenntnis innerhalb ihrer Reihen die Menschen anzuhalten. Diese Brüderschaft hat verschiedene Symbole, denen man es ansieht, sobald man nur mit geisteswissenschaftlicher Erkenntnis an sie herantritt, daß sie tiefsinnige, bedeutsame Symbole sind, die eigentlich alle schon geeignet wären, zur menschlichen Selbsterkenntnis zu führen. Aber sie tun es nicht. Es ist sehr merkwürdig: Wenn man die offiziellen Geschichten, die aus freimaurerischen Kreisen, aus dem Freimaurertum hervorgegangen sind, liest, so wird von den Aufgeklärteren gemeint, daß man etwa nur bis ins 18., 17. Jahrhundert zurückzugehen habe, um das neuere Freimaurertum kennenzulernen. Aber was in den Symbolen der Freimaurerei liegt, das ist vom 17. Jahrhundert ab geradezu verhüllt worden, ist geradezu in etwas verwandelt worden, das man anschaut, das man mitmacht und demgegenüber man immer weniger Bedürfnis hat, es zu verstehen. Würde man sich dieser freimaurerischen Symbolik nähern mit Begabung für das Verständnis derselben, so würde dies schon einen Weg zur Selbsterkenntnis des Menschen geben. Denn alle diese Symbole sind dazu veranlagt. Aber die wirkliche Entwickelung des Freimaurertums hat einen andern Weg genommen: die Selbsterkenntnis zu verdecken, sie dadurch unmöglich zu machen, daß man sich bloß äußerlich auf die Symbolik einläßt. Und so könnte man eigentlich, vom Standpunkte der Wahrheit angesehen, sagen: Die Entwickelung des neueren Freimaurertums ist im Grunde genommen die Entwickelung einer Gemeinschaft zur Unverständlichmachung derjenigen Symbole, welche innerhalb dieser Gemeinschaft leben. - Es ist, wie wenn geradezu das Programm, unbewußt, herrschte, die Symbole unverständlich zu machen, weil gerade in dieser Zeit, über die man — bei den aufgeklärten, nicht bei den mystischen Freimaurern — die neuere Freimaurerei sich erstrecken läßt, die Angst vor der Selbsterkenntnis die Menschen im höchsten Maße ergriffen hat. Man redet viel von Selbsterkenntnis; man redet viel davon, daß der Mensch sein göttliches Selbst, sein höheres Selbst und so weiter suchen müsse. Aber das alles ist ja Gerede. Das alles ist eigentlich auch mehr dazu da, um den wirklichen Weg zur Selbsterkenntnis zu verrammeln, nicht ihn zu ebnen. Und wir müssen uns fragen: Woher kommt diese Abneigung, diese Angst vor einer ge‚wissen Selbsterkenntnis? Und da möchte ich heute zunächst einmal die Sache etwas äußerlicher betrachten.

Wir sehen ja, daß es nicht bloß auf diesem einen Gebiete so ist, auf dem Gebiete der Freimaurerei, sondern wir sehen dieses auch in der ganzen Breite der neueren Kultur in einer ganz merkwürdigen Weise vorhanden. Wir sehen, wie diese neuere Kultur — namentlich in der Ausbreitung des Christentums - eigentlich den Weg des Verdeckens, des Vertuschens der Selbsterkenntnis geht. Und das ist ein außerordentlich interessanter, ein außerordentlich bedeutungsvoller Weg. Wenige Menschen nehmen sich heute die Mühe, einmal bessere Schilderungen, die aus weiter auseinanderliegenden Jahrhunderten genommen sind, wirklich zu vergleichen, und noch weniger Menschen denken darüber nach, wie eigentlich die Dinge sich verhalten, die da vor ihre Seele treten. Es ist ja ein noch nicht vielsagendes, aber immerhin nicht uninteressantes seelisches Experiment, das Sie machen können, wenn. Sie eine solche Schrift nehmen wie «Das Leben Michelangelos» von Flerman Grimm. Es ist eine Schrift eigentlich mehr über das Zeitalter des Michelangelo, eine Schrift, die über die Zeit handelt, aus der er herausgewachsen ist. Versuchen Sie aber auf Grundlage dieser Schrift sich vorzustellen, wie die Welt um Sie herum sein würde, wenn Sie spazieren gingen in der Welt, welche Herman Grimm als diejenige Michelangelos schildert; und versuchen Sie, diese Welt zu vergleichen mit derjenigen, die Sie jetzt erleben: Der Unterschied ist ein ganz ungeheurer! Aber das will noch nicht viel besagen, denn die Jahrhunderte, auf die wir da den Blick richten, liegen nicht sehr weit auseinander. Etwas anderes aber kommt schon heraus, wenn man wirklich nun sinnig den Blick richtet auf das Zeitalter mit seinen Vorbereitungen und seinen Nachwirkungen, wo sich der große Umschwung in der neueren Zeit vollzogen hat. Wenn wir auf die drei großen Zeiträume zurückblicken, die sich uns aus der Geisteswissenschaft heraus zunächst für unseren jetzigen Erdenzyklus darstellen, so schließt der dritte Zeitraum etwa mit dem 7. oder 8. vorchristlichen Jahrhundert, und der vierte Zeitabschnitt schließt mit dem Beginn des 15. Jahrhunderts unserer Zeitrechnung. Da, mit dem Beginn des 15. Jahrhunderts, ist ein uns nicht sehr weit abliegender, wichtiger, bedeutungsvoller Umschwung im Seelenleben der Kulturmenschheit doch schon vorhanden. Man stellt ihn nur gewöhnlich geschichtlich kaum dar. Man fragt sich: Warum stellt man ihn nicht dar? Es ist eben im Grunde genommen auch darin die Angst vor einer Selbsterkenntnis und auch vor einer Erkenntnis des menschlichen Seelenlebens vorhanden. Sie würden zum Beispiel Interessantes erleben, wenn Sie Beschreibungen lesen würden über eine solche Persönlichkeit wie die des heiligen Bernhard von Clairvaux. Bernhard, die vielleicht bedeutsamste Persönlichkeit des 12. Jahrhunderts etwa, die bedeutsamste Persönlichkeit desjenigen Zeitalters, mit dem der vierte nachatlantische Kulturzeitraum seinem Ende zugeht, diese Persönlichkeit weist eine Seelenstruktur auf, wie sie später, nach dem 15. Jahrhundert, in Europa überhaupt nicht mehr möglich ist. Wie es in der Seele eines solchen Menschen ausgesehen hat, das ist sogar für die heutigen Menschen außerordentlich schwierig zu schildern, weil eigentlich alle Vorbedingungen dazu fehlen, um zu Vorstellungen zu kommen, wie es in einer solchen Seele ausgesehen hat. Aber ich rate Ihnen an, Lebensbeschreibungen des heiligen Bernhard zu lesen aus dem Grunde, weil Sie daraus ersehen können, was die andern Menschen für Eindrücke am Seelenleben des heiligen Bernhard gehabt haben. Wenn man diese Lebensbeschreibungen liest, sagt man sich: Was sind dagegen eigentlich die Wunderberichte der Evangelien? Die paar Kranken, nach den Evangelien gesprochen, die der Christus . Jesus selbst - immer nach den Evangelien gesprochen — geheilt hat, das ist eine Kleinigkeit gegen die ungeheuer breite Schilderung der Wundertätigkeit des heiligen Bernhard, fast zwölf Jahrhunderte darnach! Die Zahl derjenigen Menschen, von denen gesagt wird, daß er sie als Blinde sehend, als Lahme gehend gemacht hat, sie läßt sich gar nicht vergleichen mit den Zahlen, die man herausbekommt, wenn man die ähnlichen Berichte der Evangelien nachrechnet. Die Beschreibung der Eindrücke der Predigten des heiligen Bernhard ist eine solche, daß man fühlt: Wenn er irgendwo gesprochen hat, dann war das, was er gesprochen hat, wie die Ausbreitung einer weithin intensiv wirkenden geistigen Aura. Eine Realität lebte in den Worten dieses Mannes, von der man sich jetzt keine Vorstellung mehr macht. Wollte man alles schildern, was für den Eindruck bezeichnend ist, den diese Persönlichkeit auch dazumal noch gemacht hat, so würde man natürlich heute auf ungläubige Menschen stoßen müssen, weil gar keine Möglichkeit vorhanden ist, um aus dem, was heute geschieht, sich Vorstellungen über die Anschauung zu machen, die man damals von einer solchen Persönlichkeit gehabt hat, wie es der heilige Bernhard war. Nun, auf die innere Struktur seiner Seele einzugehen, das ist, wie gesagt, heute aus dem Grunde schwierig, weil - auch in diesem Kreise - die Vorbedingungen dazu fehlen. Aber auf eines darf ich doch hinweisen.

In dieser Persönlichkeit lebte eine ungeheure Hingabe an die geistige Welt, ein absolutes Aufgehen in der geistigen Welt. Heute erscheint es den Menschen ganz selbstverständlich, daß, wenn man sich irgend etwas vornimmt, es dann ausführen will- und es geht nicht, so wird einem zweifelhaft, ob das Vorgenommene richtig war. Eine solche Persönlichkeit, wie der heilige Bernhard, wird nie zweifelhaft; denn das, was er irgendwie sich vorgenommen oder andern geraten hat, das hat er immer zuvor mit seinem Gotte in den geistigen Welten beraten. Und selbst bei solchen Fehlschlägen wie die, welche er bei den Kreuzzügen erlebt hat, wo alles, was er geraten hat, fehlgeschlagen ist, wird er keinen Augenblick irre, daß doch seine Gedanken absolut richtig waren, und daß die Diskrepanz zwischen dem, was in der Wirklichkeit der äußeren Sinneswelt geschehen ist, und dem, was er gedacht hat unter dem Einfluß der geistigen Welt, sich schon auf eine, irgendeine Weise rechtfertigen lassen wird, sich schon aufklären wird. Aber indem man eine solche Persönlichkeit herausgreift, sagt man eigentlich über einen einzelnen - allerdings Hervorragenden - dies, was da gesagt werden kann. Aber es ist das keineswegs etwas, was auf den einzelnen beschränkt ist, es ist die Signatur des ganzen Zeitalters. Es ist die Signatur des Zeitalters in Europa, wie es etwa im 3., 4. nachchristlichen Jahrhundert beginnt und bis zum 13., 14., 15. Jahrhundert andauert. Natürlich bereitet sich innerhalb dieses Zeitalters auch etwas anderes vor. Aber was sich als anderes vorbereitet, das kommt doch als die Zeit tief beeinflussend, der Zeit das Gepräge aufdrückend, erst nach dem 14., 15. Jahrhundert zum Ausdruck. Es ist die Zeit vom 3. bis 15. Jahrhundert diejenige der sich immer weiter und weiter konsolidierenden Glaubenskraft, die Zeit, in der unter dem Eindruck dieser Glaubenskraft eben die Ereignisse der Zeit unternommen werden, — Bitte, auch gerade, indem ich dieses Kapitel bespreche, auf etwas Rücksicht zu nehmen, das ich eigentlich bei diesen Vorträgen immer fordere, aber das an solchen Stellen ganz besonders wichtig ist: Ich wähle die Worte so, daß sie nicht durch andere ersetzt werden können. In dem Augenblick, wo man die wohlgewählten Worte durch andere ersetzen wollte, schildert man nicht mehr geschichtlich richtig. Wer also das, was ich eben gesagt habe: Es war das Zeitalter der sich konsolidierenden Glaubenskraft -, ersetzen würde durch den Satz: Es war das Zeitalter der sich konsolidierenden Frömmigkeit -, der würde etwas ganz Falsches darstellen. Das meine ich durchaus nicht. Glaubenskraft war es, wie ich es bei Bernhard charakterisiert habe. Bernhard ist gewiß auch ein frommer Mann. Aber fromm kann man auch sein als persönlicher Charakter. Was aber damals in den Ereignissen gewirkt und gelebt hat in den Jahrhunderten, von denen ich gesprochen habe, das steht unter dem Einflusse der Glaubenskraft. Glaubenskraft ist ja in jedem Zeitalter vorhanden. Aber nicht für das Historische ist in jedem Zeitalter die Glaubenskraft maßgebend. Es wird auch unser jetziges Zeitalter wiederum von einem solchen ‚abgelöst werden, in dem die Glaubenskraft wieder, vorübergehend, sporadisch, eine bedeutende Rolle spielen wird. In der Gegenwart aber ist das noch nicht der Fall. Es wird zum Beispiel der Aberglaube in die materialistische Medizin in der Zukunft groteske Formen annehmen. Die Glaubenskraft wird da schon eine große Rolle noch spielen, aber gegenwärtig ist es noch nicht so weit. Gegenwärtig ist es mehr ein Dämmern, ein Schlafen der Menschheit, was für die historischen Ereignisse eine ganz bedeutsame, eine große Rolle spielt. Nun kann man die Frage aufwerfen: Wie kommt es eigentlich, daß diese Glaubenskraft in Europa ein so bedeutsamer geschichtlicher Impuls wird, der Impuls, der eigentlich am bedeutsamsten dasjenige einleitet, was dann im 15. Jahrhundert heraufkommt als der fünfte nachatlantische Kulturzeitraum, in dem wir jetzt leben?

Zunächst ist es etwas scheinbar recht Äußerliches, was die Grund‚lage geliefert hat für das Heraufkommen der Glaubenskraft, das ist das, was im wesentlichen bedingt hat den Untergang des Römischen Reiches. Was vom 3.,4. nachchristlichen Jahrhundert bis zum 15. Jahrhundert herrschende geschichtliche Impulse sind, setzt sich an die Stelle desjenigen, was die Impulse des Römischen Reiches waren. Es gibt natürlich eine ganze Anzahl von Impulsen, die den Untergang des Römischen Reiches herbeigeführt haben, aber ein ganz wesentlicher ist der, daß durch den Gang der römischen Geschichte allmählich das Geld abgeflossen war nach dem Orient. Mit der Ausbreitung des Römischen Reiches mußten die Legionen immer mehr und mehr an den Rand des großen Reiches geschoben werden; man mußte den Sold den Leuten immer mehr und mehr in Geld auszahlen, nicht in Naturalien, wie es möglich war, solange das Römische Reich enger war. Dadurch aber hat sich mit dem sich ausbreitenden Reiche der Geldreichtum nach und nach wirklich nach dem Orient verschoben, und ein wesentliches Kennzeichen Europas in den Jahrhunderten, namentlich in der ersten Zeit dieser Jahrhunderte, vom 3., 4. an, ist seine Geldarmut, namentlich seine Armut an Metallgeld. Damit hängen manche andere Dinge zusammen, und es ist wichtig, daß man sich über diese Dinge nicht in mystische Schwärmereien ergeht, sondern daß man sich den gesunden Blick für die Wirklichkeit schon bewahrt. Die «Goldmacherkunst», die Alchimie, ist zum Teil in Europa dadurch bedingt, daß das Gold nach dem Orient abgeflossen war, und man dachte, man könnte es machen, könnte es schaffen, man könnte sich wieder reich machen. Hinter der Alchimie, wie sie sich in den ersten Jahrhunderten des Mittelalters herausbildet, steckt vielfach als Grund die Verarmung an Geld, die durch die Ausbreitung des Römischen Reiches gekommen ist. - Damit hängt wieder zusammen, daß in diesen Jahrhunderten in das verarmte Römische Reich die Völkerschaften hereinrückten, die vom Norden kamen, die heidnische Anschauungen, heidnische Kultur, heidnische Empfindungen hatten, die wenig verstanden von jener sozialen Struktur, die im Römischen Reich allmählich immer mächtiger geworden war gerade unter dem Einfluß des Geldes. Die Römer haben das als recht unbehaglich empfunden, nachdem ihnen das Geld nach dem Orient abgeflossen war. Die nachrückenden germanischen Völker haben sich dabei recht wohl befunden.

In diese Stimmung des Römischen Reiches hinein fällt die Ausbreitung des Christentums. Man stellt es heute nicht mehr dar, aber es ist so, daß auf den Wellen des sich ausbreitenden Christentums in den ersten Zeiten durchaus eine tiefsinnige Geistesanschauung lebte. Es ist ja heute geradezu eine heillose Angst, besonders in theologischen Kreisen, vor der sogenannten Gnosis vorhanden. Vielfach, wenn man frägt, warum denn die Menschen unsere Geisteswissenschaft, namentlich in theologischen Kreisen, nicht mögen, sie sogar fürchten, so bekommt man vielfach die Antwort, diese Geisteswissenschaft könnte zu einer Erneuerung der Gnosis führen. Und das ist schon ein Grund, die Sache abzulehnen. Gnosis ist ja nichts anderes — natürlich muß sie in unserem heutigen Zeitalter anders auftreten, als sie in den ersten Jahrhunderten des Christentums aufgetreten ist — als ein positives Wissen über die geistige Welt, die Fähigkeit des Menschen, Einblicke in die geistigen Welten zu gewinnen, so wie man durch die Sinne Einblicke gewinnt in die physischen Welten. Man kann heute Leuten begegnen, die sich lustig machen über die Streitigkeiten, die es einmal darüber gegeben hat, ob der Geist vom Vater oder vom Sohne ausgeht oder irgendwie anders zusammenhängt mit Vater und Sohn. Mit solchen Begriffen verbinden die Leute heute gar keine Vorstellung mehr. Dazumal hatte man schon Vorstellungen damit verknüpft. Wer mit wirklicher Kenntnis die Geschichte der ersten christlichen Jahrhunderte schreiben würde, der würde sehen, daß in dieser Dogmenentstehung schon Geist steckt, nur findet man ihn heute nicht mehr. Es war auf den Wellen des sich ausbreitenden Christentums schon eine tief bedeutsame Geistesanschauung vorhanden, und man kann verfolgen, wie diese Geistesanschauung in dem sich ausbreitenden Christentum bis ins 9. Jahrhundert hineinragt. Studiert man in den Einzelheiten dieses sich ausbreitende Christentum, so findet man, daß die spätere Ansicht, wonach die religiöse Anschauung sich darauf beschränken solle, von Glaubenskraft sich zu durchdringen und möglichst wenig auf Einzelheiten der geistigen Welt sich einzulassen, dadurch entstanden ist, daß man mit einem gewissen richtigen Blick die Völkerschaften angeschaut hat, aus denen sich das neue Europa herausbilden sollte. Es waren heidnische Völkerschaften, Völkerschaften aber auch, die im Denken, in der Verbindung und in der Ausbildung von Begriffen, die in die geistige Welt hineinführen, es nicht sehr weit gebracht haben;.es waren starke, kräftige, elementarisch gesunde Menschen, aber nicht gerade Menschen, deren geistige Veranlagung dahin ging, sich sehr konkrete Vorstellungen über irgend etwas Geistiges zu machen.

So hat man denn, um das Christentum zur Ausbreitung zu bringen, sich diesen Völkerschaften angepaßt. Man wandte sich mehr, weil diese Leute weniger denken konnten, an das Gemüt, wie man sagt, an die Glaubenskraft. So sieht man, wie im 10. Jahrhundert eigentlich schon alles Geistesschauerische aus dem Christentum mehr oder weniger verschwunden ist, aber alles hat sich zusammengedrängt in die Glaubenskraft. Und das, was man anschaute in der Glaubenskraft, was man neben sich zu haben meinte in der Glaubenskraft, das war Seeleninhalt für die Menschen allmählich geworden. Die Seelen lebten schon anders, als sie jetzt leben. Man muß sich vorstellen, was eine solche Seele damals bei einer Legende erlebte. Ich will nur eine einfache Legende erzählen, die aber überall damals verbreitet wurde, die sinnig ist. Sie lautet so: Der heilige Bernhard ritt einmal auf einem Esel. Er hatte einen Mönch bei sich. Dieser Mönch litt, wie man heute sagen würde, an Epilepsie. Er fiel immer um. Das sah gerade der heilige Bernhard, als dieser Mönch ihn begleitete und ihm den Esel führte. Da wandte er sich an seinen Gott, daß dieser Mönch fortan niemals den epileptischen Anfall erhalten solle, ohne daß er es vorher wisse. Und die Legende erzählt weiter, der Mönch lebte noch zwanzig Jahre, und jedesmal, wenn er wieder einen Anfall bekam, wußte er es vorher; er konnte sich ins Bett legen und zerschlug sich nicht die Glieder, wenn er wieder umfallen wollte.

Es ist eine einfache, harmlose Sache, aber eine Sache, die tief wirkte, die damals überall erzählt wurde. Denn man fühlte seine Seele stark, wenn man die Tragkraft der Glaubenswirklichkeit empfinden konnte, und die Menschen lebten in der Aura dieser Empfindung.

Nun wäre es nicht möglich gewesen, daß die Glaubenskraft sich so konsolidieren konnte, wenn Europa nicht gewissermaßen durch die Jahrhunderte, die ich angeführt habe, sich isoliert hätte. Das Geld war nach dem Orient abgeflossen; damit hatte der Handel allmählich aufgehört. Europa war eine Zeitlang im wesentlichen beschränkt auf seinen Ackerbau. Aber das ist ein geradezu tief bedeutsames Symptom für die Entwickelung Europas in diesen Jahrhunderten, daß ein Drittel des europäischen Bodens an diejenigen übergeht, die die Träger dieser Glaubenskraft sind: In den kirchlichen Besitz geht ein Drittel des Bodens in dieser Zeit über. Es ist, wie wenn das, was gelebt hat, nur durch das römische Element unterbrochen, im ganzen vierten nachatlantischen Zeitraum sich in diese Glaubenskraft zusammengedrängt hätte. Aber eines ging verloren gerade unter dieser Erstarkung der Glaubenskraft, verloren ging der Fortschritt im eigentlichen Christus-Bewußtsein. Man darf nicht vergessen, daß im höchsten Stile von Christus gewußt worden ist in der Zeit der ersten christlichen Jahrhunderte bei denen, welche die Christus-Gestalt, die ChristusWesenheit hineinstellen konnten in den ganzen Zusammenhang der Kräfte der geistigen Welt. Für diejenigen, die zuerst ergriffen waren von der Christus-Gestalt, war der Grund ihres Ergriffenseins ja der, daß sie hinaufschauten in die geistige Welt und gewissermaßen die Annäherung der Christus-Gestalt durch die geistigen Welten durch Äonen hindurch zur Erde her erblickten, und diese ganzen Ereignisse von Golgatha anschließen konnten an alles Geschehen im Kosmos. Das war das Ergreifende des Ereignisses von Golgatha, daß die, die es zuerst auslegten, es sich so zurechtlegten, daß das, was auf der Erde geschah, das Herabfließen eines Ereignisses aus den Welten des großen kosmischen Geschehens war.

Daß man das heute anders darstellt, das weiß ich sehr wohl. Aber wenn man sagt, man müsse zurückgehen auf die schlichten, einfachen Vorstellungen, die man in den ersten Jahrhunderten von dem Christus Jesus hatte, so redet man eben nur von seinen eigenen Liebhabereien, weil man verdecken will die Größe der Christus-Idee und den tiefen Einblick, den die ersten Jahrhunderte in das Mysterium von Golgatha hatten. Deshalb brachte man die Lieblingsidee auf: Alles war schlicht, alles war so, daß der Christus Jesus womöglich nichts weiter war als, wie mancher heute sagt, «der schlichte Mann aus Nazareth». Man wundert sich bei solchen Dingen vielleicht weniger, wenn man diese Anschauung bei jüngeren Leuten findet. Ältere Leute müßten allerdings wissen, daß wir selbst in unserer Zeit mit Bezug auf diese Dinge einen bedeutungsvollen Umschwung erlebt haben. Ich habe es oft gehört, daß gesagt wird: Solche Dinge, wie sie in der Geisteswissenschaft dargestellt werden, kann man ja nicht verstehen; die sind sehr schwer verständlich. — Ja, wenn es keine Hindernisse, keine äußeren Hindernisse gäbe! Vor noch dreißig Jahren würden gerade die schlichten Leute auf dem Lande draußen diese Dinge voll verstanden haben. Im Laufe der letzten Jahrzehnte aber ist es anders geworden. Die älteren Leute könnten noch etwas davon wissen, wie Schriften, wie zum Beispiel die des Jakob Böhme oder des Eckartshausen, Schriften, die sehr, sehr versuchen, in die Konktretheit der geistigen Welt einzuführen, gerade von einfachen Bauerngemütern vor Jahrzehnten noch aufgenommen worden sind. Oberflächlich ist unser Geistesleben lediglich durch das Bourgeoistum geworden. Das hat seine Lieblingsidee immer mehr und mehr zum Ausdruck gebracht, daß das Wahre, wie man sagt, «einfach» sein müsse, wobei man nichts anderes meint, als, es müsse auf bequeme Weise, ohne viel Nachdenken, von jedem erfaßt werden können. Heute sind allerdings nicht mehr viel Belege, auch in den schlichten Gemütern nicht, dafür zu finden, daß in den ersten Jahrhunderten des Christentums schon geredet werden konnte, gerade diesen schlichten Gemütern gegenüber, von hohen geistigen Dingen, wenn man von dem Christus Jesus sprach. Das heißt aber: Was dann in den folgenden Jahrhunderten geschehen ist, das ist eigentlich geschehen, um gewissermaßen zunächst auch die Christus-Erkenntnis für die Menschheit wiederum etwas zu verdecken, die Christus-Erkenntnis nicht sehr nahe an die Menschen herankommen zu lassen.

In diesen Dingen hat man nötig, die Wirklichkeit anzuschauen, nicht das, was man sich einbildet. Es gehört zu den tiefsten Anforderungen unseres Zeitalters, daß man wiederum lerne, die Wirklichkeiten anzuschauen. Ich muß dabei immer an ein Beispiel erinnern, weil es recht anschaulich ist. Ich habe einmal in Kolmar einen Vortrag gehalten über Christentum und Weisheit. Bei diesem Vortrage waren auch zwei katholische Geistliche anwesend. Die hatten natürlich nie von so etwas gehört, selbstverständlich; aber weil sie jedenfalls noch nichts darüber gehört hatten - das wirkte ja dazu mit -, kamen sie nach dem Vortrage an mich heran, denn das, was ich gesagt hatte, kam ihnen gar nicht so schlimm vor. Es wäre ihnen wahrscheinlich nur schlimm vorgekommen, wenn sie schon etwas von ihren entsprechenden Oberen gehört hätten, und dann hätten sie wahrscheinlich eben Unsinn gehört. Nur das eine wendeten sie ein. Sie sagten: Was Sie da sagen, ist ja alles schön; so über die geistige Welt zu reden, ist schön. Aber das versteht ja die Menschheit gar nicht. Wir reden so, wie es die Menschheit verstehen kann. — Ich sagte: Wissen Sie, Hochwürden, wie man zur Menschheit zu sprechen hat, das dürfen nicht Sie und nicht ich nach unseren Lieblingsmaximen auslegen. Auf diese Lieblingsmaximen kommt es nicht an; denn selbstverständlich, wenn wir nach unseren Lieblingsmaximen urteilen wollten, so würde Ihnen die Art gefallen, wie Sie reden, und mir würde die Art gefallen, wie ich rede. Aber darauf kommt es nicht an. Sondern es kommt darauf an, wozu uns unser Zeitalter verpflichtet: ja nicht solche Fragen, wie Sie sie eben aufwerfen, nach unseren Lieblingsmaximen zu beantworten, sondern sie uns von der Wirklichkeit beantworten zu lassen. Und da gibt es eine naheliegende Antwort. Ich frage Sie: Gehen heute alle Leute zu Ihnen in die Kirche, da Sie glauben, Sie sprechen zu allen Leuten? Da könnten Sie wahrheitsgetreu nur sagen: Es bleiben auch manche draußen. Darauf könnte ich sagen: Das ist die Antwort der Wirklichkeit! Für die, welche bei Ihnen draußen bleiben, spreche ich, und die haben auch ein Recht, den Weg zum Christus Jesus zu finden. - Man frage nicht sich, sondern man frage die Realität, man frage das Zeitalter. Denn was man durch sich selbst als Antwort bekommen kann, das weiß man ja. Es scheint so sehr einfach zu sein; aber lernen, die Verpflichtung zu fassen, die einem das Zeitalter gibt, das ist nicht so einfach. Und nur, wenn man mit sich recht sehr zu Rate geht, wird man erkennen, was eigentlich hinter dem liegt, was ich jetzt eben gesagt habe.

Was der Menschheit heute nottut, das ist eben grade: objektiv werden, mit der Umgebung leben lernen. Wenn wir verstehen, den Impuls zu fassen, der hier gemeint ist, dann werden wir uns auch mit der Wahrheit abfinden können, wie allmählich unter dem Einfluß der Zeitereignisse in den Jahrhunderten, von denen ich gesprochen habe, die höhere Erkenntnis, das Hinaufblicken zu dem geistigen Zusammenhang zwischen dem Mysterium von Golgatha und dem kosmischen Geschehen allmählich in Europa dahingeschwunden ist. Der Christus ist den europäischen Gemütern ferngerückt worden; er hat sich zusammengezogen auf dasjenige, was man fassen wollte, was man sich vorstellen wollte. Aber es kommt darauf an, daß man die Wirklichkeit faßt, nicht das, was man fassen will. Heute hört man sehr häufig, der Mensch soll seinen Gott suchen, im Inneren werde er diesen Gott finden; er soll sich in seinem Inneren mit seinem göttlichen Selbst vereinigen, dann wird er den Gott finden. Insbesondere nehmen die Leute daran Anstoß, daß die Geisteswissenschaft betonen muß: Wenn wir aus der Welt, in der wir leben, hinauskommen in den Geist, dann finden wir Hierarchien, dann finden wir, wie wir hier eine reich gegliederte physische Welt finden, dort ebenso eine reich gegliederte, abgestufte geistige Welt. Aber dann ist es den Leuten einfacher und bequemer zu sagen: Man wende sich direkt, unmittelbar an den einigen Christus; den findet jeder einzelne Mensch. Es kommt nicht darauf an, daß man es sich einbildet, sondern es kommt darauf an, daß man erkennt, was man im Geistigen wirklich findet. Was finden diejenigen Menschen, die heute oftmals davon sprechen: Ich habe ein innerliches Verhältnis zu meinem Gott gefunden? - Das nämlich, was da Gott genannt wird, ist oftmals nichts anderes als das allernächste geistige Wesen aus der Hierarchie der Angeloi, der unmittelbar schützende Engel, der als das höchste Wesen verehrt wird. Daß wir glauben, wir haben den Gott, darauf kommt es ja nicht an, sondern daß wir die Realität dieses inneren Erlebnisses verstehen, das der Mensch hat. Wenn mancher glaubt, er ist innerlich durchsetzt von einem Göttlichen, so ist er meistens nur durchsetzt von einem Wesen aus der Hierarchie der Angeloi, oder aber er ist durchsetzt von seinem eigenen Ich, wie es war zwischen dem letzten Tode und dieser Geburt, wie es in der geistigen Welt gelebt hat, bevor es sich mit diesem physischen Leib vereinigte. Ist es denn nicht interessant, daß es ein Wort gibt, dessen Ursprung man nicht kennt? Wenn Sie die Wörterbücher aufschlagen, so finden Sie mancherlei recht Schönes über mancherlei Wörter. Doch ein Wort gibt es — die gelehrtesten philologischen Wörterbuchschreiber können seinen Ursprung nicht finden, sie wissen nicht, was damit gemeint ist, auch philologisch nicht: das ist das Wort Gott! Lesen Sie nach im Deutschen Wörterbuch. Es ist das Wort, dessen Bedeutung man nicht kennt. Sehr bedeutsam, sehr bezeichnend! Denn das, wovon man in Wirklichkeit redet, wenn man heute vielfach von seinem Gott spricht, das ist der einzelne Engel oder gar das eigene Selbst in der Zeit zwischen dem letzten Tode und der jetzigen Geburt. Was man da wirklich erlebt - ich denke jetzt nur an wirklich auftichtige, ehrliche Selbsterleber -, das ist Wirklichkeit. Darauf kommt es an und nicht darauf, daß man sich selbst der Täuschung hingibt: Die Leute beten einen einheitlichen Gott an. Sie haben nur ein Wort für das Erlebnis ihres Engels oder gar für das eigene Selbst, wenn es noch nicht verkörpert ist oder schon verkörpert ist, gewissermaßen.

Daß man dies ahnt, daß man ahnt: Durch Geisteswissenschaft muß dahintergekommen werden, was sehr häufig mit dem sogenannten Gotteserlebnis der Menschen gemeint ist, das bewirkt, daß man diese Geisteswissenschaft so wenig gern sich ausbreiten sieht; denn sie ist geeignet, hinter diese ungeheuer bedeutungsvolle Tatsache zu kommen, die ich eben hervorgehoben habe. Die ganze geschichtliche Entwickelung vom 3. bis zum 10., ja noch bis zum 15. Jahrhundert geht dahin, die Mysterien des Christus Jesus eigentlich mehr zu verdecken, mehr zu kaschieren, als sie offenbar werden zu lassen. Dies, was ich sage, ist nicht eine Kritik, sondern eine bloße Charakteristik. Denn ; wenn man nicht imstande ist, diese Charakteristik objektiv hinzunehmen, so wird man nie verstehen, unter welchen Gewalten das Zeitalter heraufkommt, das mit dem 15. Jahrhundert beginnt, das Zeitalter der eigentlichen Bewußtseinsseele. Ich möchte sagen, dieses Zeitalter donnert herein, und alles in der geistigen Welt tendiert so, daß diese Bewußtseinsseele mit ihren zwei Polen, mit ihrem materialistischen und ihrem spirituellen Pol, herauskommen muß. Aber von diesem Gesichtspunkte aus muß man erst das geschichtliche Werden ansehen. Bilder muß man sich vor die Seele hinstellen, wie etwa dieses: Aus solchen Stimmungen wie diese, die uns auf einer höchsten Stufe in dem heiligen Bernhard erscheint, geht aus verstärkter, konsolidierter Glaubenskraft die europäische Tendenz hervor, Jerusalem an die Stelle von Rom zu setzen, das Christentum mit dem Mittelpunkte in Jerusalem als antirömisches Christentum zu begründen. — Denn das liegt eigentlich den Kreuzzügen zugrunde. Gottfried von Bouillon ist nicht ein Sendling der römischen Päpste, sondern er ist derjenige, der die Kreuzzüge aufgreift, um ein Bollwerk in Jerusalem gegen Rom zu errichten, um das Christentum unabhängig zu machen von Rom. Es war eine Idee, die im Grunde viele Jahrhunderte beherrschte. ‚Heinrich I., der Heilige, hat sie dann in die Form geprägt einer Ecclesia catholica non romana.

Wir sehen, wie die europäische Glaubenskraft in diejenigen Gefilde hinein ihre Aura sendet, in welche die Römer ihr Gold gesandt haben! Mit dem Golde und seinen Folgen im Orient stoßen die Kreuzfahrer zusammen, mit dem römischen Golde auf der einen Seite, mit der orientalischen Gnosis auf der andern Seite. Diese Aura muß man in Betracht ziehen, unter der die Kreuzzüge entstanden sind. Sie ist ganz die Aura der europäischen Glaubenskraft. Das ist der eine Ton, der eine Farbenton des Bildes. Doch stellen wir hinein in diesen Farbenton - man könnte es, wenn man es malen wollte, nur als einen Farbenton malen -, stellen wir hinein ein anderes Bild des aufgehenden Zeitalters der Bewußtseinsseele. Wie müßte man es etwa hineinstellen?

So, daß man den im Jahre 1108 geborenen Dandolo von Venedig, den Dogen, hinstellt, jenen Dogen, der in Konstantinopel war, dort von den Byzantinern geblendet worden ist, der aber die Inkarnation des ahrimanischen Geistes war, und der, trotzdem er nicht sehen konnte, Herr von Venedig war, jenes Venedig, das den ahrimanischen Geist in den Geist hineingestellt hat, den ich jetzt eben gekennzeichnet habe. Das ist ein bedeutungsvoller Augenblick der Weltgeschichte, als dieser Doge Dandolo Konstantinopel eroberte, und als er den ursprünglichen Geist der Kreuzzüge überführte in den späteren Geist der Kreuzzüge. Wie war das?

So war es, daß zuerst die Kreuzfahrer nach dem Orient zogen, um dort zu finden, was an Heiligtümern, an Reliquien zurückgeblieben war, auf daß sich die Glaubenskraft daranknüpfen könnte. Das haben sie gesucht, das haben sie in ihrer Ehrerbietung nach Europa bringen wollen. Ein reales Band haben sie herstellen wollen zwischen ihrer Glaubenskraft und den tatsächlichen Ereignissen des Mysteriums von Golgatha. Als Venedig eingegriffen hat — was wurden da die Reliquien? Alles wurde gesammelt, aber alles wurde zur Grundlage von Kapitalbildung gemacht! Die Reliquien wurden unter dem Einflusse von Venedig nach und nach behandelt wie Börsenpapiere; sie stiegen und stiegen. Die kapitalistische Ära breitete sich aus: Dandolo, die Inkarnation des ahrimanischen Geistes!

Wir fragen uns: Wie ist es Venedig gelungen, das, was war, wiederum rückgängig zu machen? Es hat den Handel wiederum vom Orient nach Europa geleitet; es hat gewissermaßen das, was früher nicht sein konnte — das kommerzielle Leben — wiederum entfacht. Eine Frage muß entstehen: Wie konnte Venedig so mächtig werden gerade auf dem Handelsgebiete, da doch Europa im Grunde genommen verarmt war?

Der Handel war ein Tausch. Im Grunde genommen war namentlich während der ersten Zeit jenes Zeitraumes, von dem ich heute _ gesprochen habe, Europa vom Orient, dem es zuerst sein Metallgeld gegeben hatte, abgeschlossen. Das hatte man nicht, das tauschte man. Es müßte immer wieder und wieder betont werden, was eine historische Tatsache ist, wie Venedig auf diesem Gebiete vorangegangen ist. Wir können einen großen Verkauf nachweisen, den Venedig nach Alexandrien und Damiette besorgt hat, um die orientalischen Waren dafür wieder einzutauschen. Was wurde denn von Venedig aus verkauft? Das eine kann leicht dokumentarisch nachgewiesen werden, vieles andere könnte damit verbunden werden; dann würde man, nach dieser Richtung forschend, schon weiter kommen. Das, was verkauft wurde, waren tausend Menschen! Mit Menschen hat man den neuen Handel nach dem Orient begonnen. Menschen wurden nach dem Orient verkauft. Und wer dem nachgeht, was aus diesen Menschen im Orient geworden ist, der kommt zu einem merkwürdigen Resultat, auf das allerdings die äußere Geschichte noch wenig weist: daß von diesen verkauften Menschen die wichtigsten derjenigen Krieger abstammten, mit denen dann von Asien aus die großen Heereszüge nach Europa erfolgreich unternommen worden sind. Die Kerntruppen der asiatischen Völkerschaften, die später in Europa einfielen, bestanden aus den Nachkommen der von Venedig und andern italienischen Städten nach dem Oriente verkauften Menschen.

Es ist schon notwendig, daß man etwas hinter die Kulissen der Weltgeschichte sieht, daß man sich nicht an jene Legende hält, die so oft als Weltgeschichte den Menschen vorgemacht wird. Diese Legende muß endlich dem Schicksal verfallen, daß man sagt: Sie ist eine Pensionsmädelgeschichte, selbst wenn sie Ranke geschrieben hat. Unsere Zeit ist viel zu ernst, als daß nicht betont werden muß, daß gelernt werden muß. Und das Wichtigste wird sein, was man aus diesen Dingen gewinnt: daß man sich ein Urteil aneignen wird, um die Gegenwart nicht mit schlafendem Bewußtsein, sondern mit wachendem Bewußtsein zu verfolgen. Ein Ungeheures geschieht in der Gegenwart, aber die Menschen sehen es nicht und wollen es nicht sehen, wollen alle Dinge nur verstellt und verworren sehen. Schlägt man nur da oder dort einen Ton an, der aus den Tiefen des Menschenwerdens heraus ist, so wird man zurückgewiesen mit den Phrasen, die heute an der Oberfläche der Journal- oder Zeitungslektüre gewonnen werden, und die so weit wie nur möglich von der Wahrheit, von der fruchtbaren Wahrheit entfernt sind.

Ich mußte Sie heute in äußerlicher Weise auf etwas aufmerksam machen, was mit jenem Zeitalter zusammenhängt, in dem sich im 15. Jahrhundert der Umschwung vollzogen hat von der Gemütsseele in die Bewußtseinsseele hinein. Denn man möchte es so gerne haben, daß solche Dinge sich in die Gemüter der Menschen hineinsenken. Man braucht es heute, braucht es auf allen Gebieten. Die Menschen reden heute viel von der Art, wie sich die soziale, die gesellschaftliche Struktur in der Zukunft entwickeln soll. Ich las heute morgen wiederum einmal einen Satz von einem Menschen, der sich ungeheuer gescheit dünkt, der zum mindesten glaubt, die volkswirtschaftliche Wahrheit in ihren Fundamenten erfaßt zu haben. Und siehe da, das Tiefsinnige, was er inmitten seines Aufsatzes sagt, ist, daß man die Gesellschaft, das gesellschaftliche Zusammenleben der Menschen als Organismus erfassen soll. Es glauben die Menschen schon etwas Bedeutsames zu haben, wenn sie sagen, man solle das gesellschaftliche Zusammenleben nicht als einen Mechanismus, sondern als einen Organismus erfassen. Das ist der schlimmste Wilsonianismus mitten unter uns! Ich habe schon öfter gesagt, daß gerade das Wesen des Wilsonianismus darin besteht, daß er keine andern Begriffe für das gesellschaftliche Zusammenleben aufbringen kann als den des Organismus. Darauf kommt es aber an, daß man begreifen lernt, daß die Menschen: zu höheren Begriffen noch kommen müssen, als der des Organismus ist, wenn sie die soziale Struktur begreifen wollen. Diese soziale Struktur kann niemals als Organismus begriffen werden; sie muß als Psychismus, als Pneumatismus begriffen werden, denn Geist wirkt in jedem gesellschaftlichen Zusammenleben der Menschen. Arm ist unsere Zeit an Begriffen geworden. Wir können nicht eine Volkswirtschaft begründen, ohne daß wir hineintauchen in die Geist-Erkenntnis, denn nur da finden wir den Metaorganismus; da finden wir . das, was über den bloßen Organismus hinausgeht.

So findet man überall, daß es heute den Menschen fehlt an gutem Willen, in den Geist unmittelbar einzudringen. Aber das muß geschehen. Denn unabsehbar wären die Folgen, wenn es nicht geschähe. Sie wissen, ich habe darauf hingedeutet, wie im 17. Jahrhundert - ich habe es schon im letzten Heft der Zeitschrift «Das Reich» erwähnt Johann Valentin Andreae die Geschichte der «Chymischen Hochzeit des Christian Rosenkreutz» geschrieben hat. In dieser «Chymischen Hochzeit» ist wirklich vieles von den Impulsen enthalten, die mit dem Umschwung im 15. Jahrhundert zusammenhängen. Es wird ja die Geschichte der «Chymischen Hochzeit» auch in das 15. Jahrhundert verlegt. Es ist eine sehr interessante Sache, wenn man sieht: Johann Valentin Andreae hat diese Geschichte der «Chymischen Hochzeit des Christian Rosenkreutz» hingeschrieben als siebzehnjähriger Junge. Siebzehn Jahre war er, unreif mit seiner Außenintelligenz; und später hat er sie bekämpft. Denn der pietistische Theologe Andreae, der später geschrieben hat, schreibt eigentlich alles mögliche andere, womit man das, was in der «Chymischen Hochzeit» steht, bekämpfen kann. Es ist sehr interessant: Das Leben des Andreae zeigt, daß er keine Spur von Verständnis hat für das, was er in der «Chymischen Hochzeit» hingeschrieben hat. Die geistigen Welten wollten der Menschheit eben etwas offenbaren, was allerdings mit dem ganzen Empfinden der damaligen Zeit zusammenhängt. — Ich war neulich in einem Schlosse Mitteleuropas, in dem eine Kapelle ist, worin zu finden sind symbolisiert die Gedanken gerade von dem Umschwunge dieses neuen Zeitalters. Im Treppenhause sind ziemlich primitive Malereien; aber durch das ganze Treppenhaus hindurch — was ist gemalt, wenn auch die Malereien primitiv sind? Die «Chymische Hochzeit des Christian Rosenkreutz»! Man geht durch diese «Chymische Hochzeit», indem man in eine Gralskapelle nachher kommt. — Dann trat der Dreißigjährige Krieg ein, nachdem die «Chymische Hochzeit» niedergeschrieben war, und mit den Wogen des Dreißigjährigen Krieges ging dann unter, was gemeint war. Das muß eine Lehre sein, denn dasselbe darf nicht ein zweites Mal geschehen. Was von der Menschheit seit dem 15. Jahrhundert gefordert wird: geistige Entwickelung, das muß nach und nach eintreten. Davon wollen wir das nächste Mal von einem mehr innerlichen Standpunkte sprechen.

Eighteenth Lecture

I would like to continue the reflections I began on the passage of the human soul through its various earthly lives in our human cycle, continuing in such a way that the experiences we draw upon can be of use to us in assessing the events of our immediate present. To this end, I would like to develop before you today an observation that is, as it were, more external, and in eight days' time one that is more internal.

We have explained how the human soul, in its passage through successive earthly lives, if we look at the three periods that are of interest to us at present: the Egyptian-Chaldean period, the Greek-Latin period, and our own time, during which the human soul has passed through various incarnations, how this human soul — considered as a soul, as a self — actually experiences something new, something different each time than in a previous incarnation. We need only recall what will happen to the souls who are now, in our time, passing through earthly incarnation and who will then return after a relatively normal period of time, which not all people will complete, but very many will.

We have often pointed out, and repeated last time, that the souls passing through the present incarnation on earth will essentially return in such a way that they will be able to know with certainty, through their own inner experience, that there are repeated lives on earth. This important thing will happen in the next age, when souls will transition from the current uncertainty about repeated earthly lives to a knowledge of them. As I said, we looked at the details last time. But I would like to emphasize something else. |

I have pointed out to you that an important period of time is that which begins around the 7th or 8th century before the Mystery of Golgotha. In the first centuries of this period, relatively many souls were still able to look back on their previous earthly lives through the ancient clairvoyant practices. But because they looked back in such a way that the sentient soul was particularly developed in their former earthly lives, the souls, in looking back, saw the behavior of human beings in the outer world. They gained, as it were, a vivid picture of how human beings went about in the outer world, what happened to them in the outer world. However, the souls will not be able to do this in the next period, counting from our time. Then the looking back will be directed more toward the soul. One will have less insight into how people move around in space, what happens to them in space, and so on; one will have less pictorially real content in the sensory sense, but will look back more on the soul.

I mention this again because you can see from it that souls experience very, very different things in successive earthly lives. And this must prompt a question in everyone's soul: How is it that the outer world actually believes, when one looks back on earlier periods of history, that nothing particularly special has changed in relation to human beings? Take the common historical accounts — some of them, not all, are well-intentioned —: you will find again and again that they actually go back to a certain point in time, to the point where historical records and documents begin. But the structure of the human soul is thought to have remained the same throughout all these periods. One imagines a certain development, but it is not thought of as radically as it must be in the sense of the account we can give on the basis of the findings of spiritual science. Why is it that we have no real awareness of the transformation of the human soul? This question will press itself upon our minds.

But when we look at historical events from a spiritual scientific perspective, we see that everything has in fact happened in such a way for a long time that, basically, human beings have been prevented from gaining self-knowledge of their souls rather than being led to it. How the human soul changes from incarnation to incarnation can only really be understood when self-knowledge, true self-knowledge, takes hold. But this self-knowledge has actually been greatly suppressed by the events we are now called upon to assess. We could point to significant examples of how self-knowledge has been suppressed, especially in the recent history of humanity. A certain brotherhood, which you all know, called the Masonic Brotherhood, believes—and some of its members, well-meaning, believe this too—that it is certainly promoting self-knowledge within its ranks. This brotherhood has various symbols which, as soon as one approaches them with spiritual scientific knowledge, can be seen to be profound and meaningful symbols, all of which would actually be suitable for leading to human self-knowledge. But they do not do so. It is very strange: when one reads the official histories that have emerged from Masonic circles, from Freemasonry itself, the more enlightened among them believe that one need only go back to the 18th or 17th century to learn about modern Freemasonry. But what lies in the symbols of Freemasonry has been completely veiled since the 17th century, has been transformed into something that one looks at, participates in, and feels less and less need to understand. If one were to approach this Masonic symbolism with a talent for understanding it, this would already provide a path to human self-knowledge. For all these symbols are designed for that purpose. But the real development of Freemasonry has taken a different path: to conceal self-knowledge, to make it impossible by engaging with the symbols only superficially. And so, from the standpoint of truth, one could actually say: The development of modern Freemasonry is basically the development of a community dedicated to making the symbols that live within that community incomprehensible. It is as if the program of making the symbols incomprehensible were consciously in force, because it is precisely in this period, over which modern Freemasonry extends itself—among the enlightened, not among the mystical Freemasons—that the fear of self-knowledge has seized people to the highest degree. There is much talk of self-knowledge; there is much talk of the fact that man must seek his divine self, his higher self, and so on. But all this is just talk. All this is actually more intended to bar the real path to self-knowledge than to smooth it. And we must ask ourselves: Where does this aversion, this fear of true self-knowledge come from? And here I would like to begin by looking at the matter from a somewhat external perspective.

We see that this is not only true in this one area, in the area of Freemasonry, but we also see it present in a very remarkable way throughout the whole breadth of modern culture. We see how this modern culture — especially in the spread of Christianity — actually follows the path of concealing and covering up self-knowledge. And that is an extremely interesting, an extremely significant path. Few people today take the trouble to really compare better descriptions taken from centuries far apart, and even fewer people think about how things actually are that come before their soul. It is a spiritual experiment that is not yet very meaningful, but at least not uninteresting, that you can try if you take a book such as “The Life of Michelangelo” by Flerman Grimm. It is actually more about the age of Michelangelo, a book about the time from which he emerged. But based on this book, try to imagine what the world around you would be like if you were walking in the world that Herman Grimm describes as Michelangelo's; and try to compare this world with the one you are experiencing now: the difference is enormous! But that does not mean much, because the centuries we are looking at are not very far apart. Something else emerges, however, when we really focus our attention on the age with its preparations and its aftermath, when the great upheaval of modern times took place. When we look back on the three great periods that spiritual science initially presents to us for our present earth cycle, the third period ends around the 7th or 8th century BC, and the fourth period ends with the beginning of the 15th century of our calendar. At the beginning of the 15th century, an important and significant upheaval in the soul life of cultural humanity, which is not very far removed from us, was already taking place. It is simply not usually presented in historical accounts. One wonders: Why is it not presented? Basically, it is because there is a fear of self-knowledge and also of knowledge about the human soul. You would find it interesting, for example, to read descriptions of a personality such as St. Bernard of Clairvaux. Bernard, perhaps the most significant personality of the 12th century, the most significant personality of the age with which the fourth post-Atlantean cultural period is coming to an end, this personality has a soul structure that was no longer possible in Europe after the 15th century. What it was like in the soul of such a person is extremely difficult to describe, even for people today, because we lack all the prerequisites for imagining what it was like in such a soul. But I advise you to read biographies of St. Bernard, because from them you can see what impressions other people had of St. Bernard's soul life. When one reads these biographies, one says to oneself: What are the miracle stories in the Gospels compared to this? The few sick people whom Christ Jesus himself healed, according to the Gospels, are a mere trifle compared to the enormously broad description of the miracles of St. Bernard, almost twelve centuries later! The number of people who are said to have been made sighted by him when they were blind, and able to walk when they were lame, cannot be compared with the numbers one arrives at when one calculates the similar accounts in the Gospels. The description of the impressions made by St. Bernard's sermons is such that one feels: when he spoke somewhere, what he said was like the spread of a spiritual aura with a far-reaching and intense effect. A reality lived in the words of this man that we can no longer imagine today. If one wanted to describe everything that was characteristic of the impression this personality made even back then, one would naturally encounter disbelief today, because there is no way of forming an idea, based on what happens today, of the view people had at that time of a personality such as St. Bernard. Now, as I said, it is difficult today to go into the inner structure of his soul because the prerequisites for doing so are lacking, even in this circle. But I can point out one thing.

This personality was characterized by an immense devotion to the spiritual world, an absolute immersion in the spiritual world. Today, it seems quite natural to people that when one undertakes something, one wants to carry it out—and if it does not work, one begins to doubt whether what one has undertaken was right. A personality such as St. Bernard never doubts, for whatever he has undertaken or advised others to do, he has always first discussed with his God in the spiritual worlds. And even in the face of such failures as those he experienced during the Crusades, where everything he advised failed, he never for a moment lost faith that his thoughts were absolutely right and that the discrepancy between what happened in the reality of the outer sensory world and what he thought under the influence of the spiritual world will be justified in some way, will be clarified. But by singling out such a personality, one is actually saying about an individual—albeit an outstanding one—what can be said. But this is by no means something that is limited to the individual; it is the signature of the entire age. It is the signature of the age in Europe, beginning in the 3rd and 4th centuries AD and continuing until the 13th, 14th, and 15th centuries. Of course, something else is also brewing within this era. But what is brewing as something else only comes to the fore after the 14th and 15th centuries, deeply influencing the era and leaving its mark on it. The period from the 3rd to the 15th century is one of ever-increasing consolidation of the power of faith, a time in which the events of the age are undertaken under the influence of this power of faith. Please, especially when discussing this chapter, bear in mind something that I always ask for in these lectures, but which is particularly important at such points: I choose my words so that they cannot be replaced by others. The moment one tries to replace well-chosen words with others, one is no longer describing history correctly. So anyone who would replace what I have just said, “It was the age of consolidating religious conviction,” with the sentence, “It was the age of consolidating piety,” would be presenting something completely wrong. That is not what I mean at all. It was the power of faith, as I characterized it in Bernhard. Bernhard is certainly also a pious man. But one can also be pious as a personal character. However, what was at work and lived in the events of the centuries I have spoken of is under the influence of the power of faith. The power of faith is present in every age. But faith is not decisive for history in every age. Our present age will in turn be replaced by one in which faith will once again play a significant role, temporarily and sporadically. But that is not yet the case in the present. For example, superstition in materialistic medicine will take on grotesque forms in the future. The power of belief will still play a major role there, but we are not there yet. At present, it is more of a dawning, a slumbering of humanity, which plays a very significant, a major role in historical events. Now one might ask: How is it that this power of belief became such a significant historical impulse in Europe, the impulse that actually initiated what emerged in the 15th century as the fifth post-Atlantean cultural period in which we now live?

At first glance, it seems to be something quite external that provided the basis for the emergence of the power of faith, namely, what essentially caused the downfall of the Roman Empire. The historical impulses that prevailed from the 3rd and 4th centuries AD until the 15th century replaced those of the Roman Empire. There are, of course, a number of factors that led to the downfall of the Roman Empire, but one of the most important was that, as Roman history progressed, money gradually flowed to the Orient. With the expansion of the Roman Empire, the legions had to be pushed further and further to the edges of the great empire; it became necessary to pay the soldiers more and more in money, not in kind, as had been possible when the Roman Empire was smaller. As a result, however, with the expansion of the empire, wealth gradually shifted to the Orient, and a key feature of Europe in the centuries that followed, especially in the early part of these centuries, from the 3rd and 4th centuries onwards, was its poverty in money, especially its poverty in metal money. Many other things are connected with this, and it is important not to indulge in mystical fantasies about these things, but to maintain a healthy view of reality. The “art of making gold,” alchemy, is partly due to the fact that gold had flowed to the Orient, and people thought they could make it, could create it, could make themselves rich again. Behind alchemy, as it developed in the early centuries of the Middle Ages, there was often the impoverishment caused by the spread of the Roman Empire. This is linked to the fact that during these centuries, peoples from the north invaded the impoverished Roman Empire, bringing with them pagan beliefs, pagan culture, and pagan sensibilities, and understanding little of the social structure that had gradually become increasingly powerful in the Roman Empire, particularly under the influence of money. The Romans found this quite uncomfortable after their money had flowed to the Orient. The Germanic peoples who followed felt quite at home here.

The spread of Christianity took place in this atmosphere of the Roman Empire. It is no longer recognized today, but it is true that in the early days, a profound spiritual outlook lived on the waves of spreading Christianity. Today, there is a downright hopeless fear, especially in theological circles, of so-called Gnosticism. When one asks why people do not like our spiritual science, especially in theological circles, and even fear it, one often receives the answer that this spiritual science could lead to a renewal of Gnosticism. And that is already a reason to reject it. Gnosis is nothing other than positive knowledge about the spiritual world, the ability of human beings to gain insight into the spiritual worlds, just as we gain insight into the physical worlds through the senses. Today, one encounters people who make fun of the disputes that once arose over whether the Spirit proceeds from the Father or from the Son or is somehow connected with the Father and the Son. People today no longer have any conception of such concepts. At that time, people had ideas associated with them. Anyone who writes the history of the first centuries of Christianity with real knowledge will see that there is already spirit in the emergence of these dogmas, only it is no longer to be found today. A deeply meaningful spiritual view already existed on the waves of spreading Christianity, and one can trace how this spiritual view extended into the 9th century in the spreading Christianity. If one studies the details of this spreading Christianity, one finds that the later view, according to which religious belief should be limited to being permeated by faith and involve as little as possible of the details of the spiritual world, arose from a certain correct view of the peoples from whom the new Europe was to emerge. These were pagan peoples, but they were also peoples who had not progressed very far in their thinking, in their connections, and in the formation of concepts that lead into the spiritual world. They were strong, vigorous, and elementally healthy people, but not exactly people whose spiritual disposition led them to form very concrete ideas about anything spiritual.

So, in order to spread Christianity, it adapted itself to these peoples. Because these people were less capable of thinking, it turned more to the emotions, as they say, to the power of faith. Thus, one can see how, by the 10th century, everything spiritual had more or less disappeared from Christianity, but everything had been compressed into the power of belief. And what one saw in the power of belief, what one thought one had beside oneself in the power of belief, gradually became the content of the soul for people. Souls lived differently then than they do now. One must imagine what such a soul experienced at that time when hearing a legend. I will tell just one simple legend, but it was widespread at that time and is meaningful. It goes like this: Saint Bernard was once riding on a donkey. He had a monk with him. This monk suffered, as we would say today, from epilepsy. He kept falling down. Saint Bernard saw this when the monk was accompanying him and leading his donkey. So he turned to God and asked that from then on, this monk should never have an epileptic seizure without knowing it beforehand. And the legend goes on to say that the monk lived for another twenty years, and every time he had a seizure, he knew it in advance; he could lie down in bed and did not break his limbs when he was about to fall down again.

It is a simple, harmless thing, but it had a profound effect and was told everywhere at the time. For people felt their souls grow strong when they could sense the power of faith, and they lived in the aura of this feeling.

Now, it would not have been possible for the power of faith to consolidate in this way if Europe had not isolated itself, in a sense, during the centuries I have mentioned. Money had flowed to the Orient, and trade had gradually ceased. For a time, Europe was essentially limited to agriculture. But it is a deeply significant symptom of Europe's development during these centuries that a third of European land passed into the hands of those who were the bearers of this power of faith: During this period, one third of the land passed into the possession of the Church. It is as if everything that had lived, interrupted only by the Roman element, had been compressed into this religious power during the entire fourth post-Atlantean period. But one thing was lost precisely during this strengthening of the power of faith: progress in the actual Christ consciousness was lost. We must not forget that Christ was known in the highest sense during the first Christian centuries by those who were able to place the Christ figure, the Christ being, into the whole context of the forces of the spiritual world. For those who were first moved by the Christ figure, the reason for their emotion was that they looked up into the spiritual world and, in a sense, saw the approach of the Christ figure through the spiritual worlds down to the earth through the eons, and were able to connect all these events of Golgotha with everything that had happened in the cosmos. That was the moving thing about the event of Golgotha, that those who first interpreted it arranged it in such a way that what happened on earth was the descent of an event from the worlds of the great cosmic happening.

I am well aware that this is presented differently today. But when people say that we must go back to the simple, uncomplicated ideas that people had about Christ Jesus in the first centuries, they are merely talking about their own hobby, because they want to conceal the greatness of the Christ idea and the deep insight that the first centuries had into the mystery of Golgotha. That is why people came up with their favorite idea: everything was simple, everything was such that Christ Jesus was possibly nothing more than, as some say today, “the simple man from Nazareth.” One is perhaps less surprised to find such views among younger people. Older people, however, should know that even in our time we have experienced a significant change in relation to these things. I have often heard it said that things as they are presented in spiritual science cannot be understood; they are very difficult to understand. Yes, if there were no obstacles, no external obstacles! Thirty years ago, it was precisely the simple people in the countryside who would have understood these things fully. But over the last few decades, things have changed. Older people may still know something about how writings such as those of Jakob Böhme or Eckartshausen, writings that try very, very hard to introduce the concrete nature of the spiritual world, were accepted decades ago, especially by simple peasant minds. Our spiritual life has become superficial solely through bourgeoisism. This has increasingly given expression to its favorite idea that the truth, as they say, must be “simple,” meaning nothing other than that it must be comprehensible to everyone in a convenient way, without much thought. Today, however, there is not much evidence, even in simple minds, that in the first centuries of Christianity it was possible to speak of high spiritual things, especially to these simple minds, when speaking of Christ Jesus. This means, however, that what happened in the following centuries actually happened in order, as it were, to conceal the knowledge of Christ from humanity once again, to prevent this knowledge from coming too close to people.

In these matters, it is necessary to look at reality, not at what one imagines. It is one of the deepest demands of our age that we learn once again to look at realities. I always have to recall an example of this because it is quite illustrative. I once gave a lecture in Colmar on Christianity and wisdom. Two Catholic clergymen were also present at this lecture. Of course, they had never heard of such a thing, but because they had never heard anything about it before, they came up to me after the lecture because what I had said did not seem so bad to them. It would probably only have seemed bad to them if they had already heard something from their superiors, and then they would probably have heard nonsense. They only objected to one thing. They said: What you are saying is all very well; it is nice to talk about the spiritual world in this way. But humanity does not understand that at all. We speak in a way that humanity can understand. — I said: You see, Reverend, how one should speak to humanity is not for you or me to interpret according to our favorite maxims. These favorite maxims are irrelevant; for if we were to judge according to our favorite maxims, you would naturally like the way you speak, and I would like the way I speak. But that is not the point. The point is what our age obliges us to do: not to answer questions such as those you have just raised according to our favorite maxims, but to let reality answer them for us. And there is an obvious answer. I ask you: Do all people go to your church today because you believe you speak to all people? You could only truthfully say that some people stay outside. To that I could say: That is the answer of reality! I speak for those who remain outside, and they also have a right to find their way to Christ Jesus. Do not ask yourself, but ask reality, ask the age. For what you can get as an answer from yourself, you already know. It seems so simple, but learning to accept the obligation that the age gives you is not so easy. And only if you consult with yourself very carefully will you recognize what actually lies behind what I have just said.

What humanity needs today is precisely this: to become objective, to learn to live with its environment. If we understand the impulse that is meant here, then we will also be able to come to terms with the truth that, gradually, under the influence of the events of the centuries I have spoken of, higher knowledge, the upward gaze toward the spiritual connection between the mystery of Golgotha and the cosmic events, has gradually disappeared in Europe. Christ has been distanced from European minds; he has been reduced to what people wanted to grasp, what they wanted to imagine. But what matters is to grasp reality, not what one wants to grasp. Today we very often hear that human beings should seek their God within themselves, that they will find this God within themselves; that they should unite themselves with their divine self within themselves, and then they will find God. People take particular offense at the fact that spiritual science must emphasize that when we step out of the world in which we live and enter the spirit, we find hierarchies; just as we find a richly structured physical world here, we find an equally richly structured, graded spiritual world there. But then it is easier and more convenient for people to say: Turn directly, immediately to the one Christ; every individual human being will find him. It does not matter whether one imagines it, but whether one recognizes what one really finds in the spiritual realm. What do those people find who today often say: I have found an inner relationship with my God? What is called God is often nothing more than the closest spiritual being in the hierarchy of the Angeloi, the immediate guardian angel, who is worshipped as the highest being. It does not matter that we believe we have God, but that we understand the reality of this inner experience that human beings have. When some people believe that they are imbued with something divine, they are usually only imbued with a being from the hierarchy of the angeloi, or they are imbued with their own ego, as it was between their last death and this birth, as it lived in the spiritual world before it united with this physical body. Isn't it interesting that there is a word whose origin is unknown? If you look up words in dictionaries, you will find many beautiful things about many words. But there is one word—the most learned philological lexicographers cannot find its origin, they do not know what it means, not even philologically: that is the word God! Look it up in the German dictionary. It is the word whose meaning is unknown. Very significant, very telling! For what people really mean when they speak so much about their God today is the individual angel or even their own self in the time between their last death and their present birth. What one really experiences there—I am thinking now only of truly sincere, honest self-experiencers—is reality. That is what matters, and not that one gives oneself over to deception: people worship a uniform God. They have only one word for the experience of their angel or even for their own self, if it is not yet embodied or is already embodied, in a certain sense.

That one senses this, that one senses: Through spiritual science, we must discover what is very often meant by the so-called experience of God that people have, which causes people to be so reluctant to see this spiritual science spread; for it is capable of uncovering this enormously significant fact that I have just emphasized. The entire historical development from the 3rd to the 10th, indeed even to the 15th century, tends to conceal the mysteries of Christ Jesus rather than allow them to become apparent. What I am saying is not a criticism, but merely a characteristic observation. For if one is unable to accept this characteristic observation objectively, one will never understand the forces that brought about the age that began in the 15th century, the age of the consciousness soul proper. I would say that this age is thundering in, and everything in the spiritual world is tending toward the emergence of this consciousness soul with its two poles, its materialistic and its spiritual pole. But it is from this point of view that one must first look at historical development. One must place images before one's soul, such as this: From such moods as these, which appear to us at the highest level in St. Bernard, the European tendency emerges from a strengthened, consolidated power of faith to replace Rome with Jerusalem, to establish Christianity with its center in Jerusalem as anti-Roman Christianity. For this is actually the basis of the Crusades. Godfrey of Bouillon is not an emissary of the Roman popes, but rather the one who takes up the Crusades in order to establish a bulwark in Jerusalem against Rome, to make Christianity independent of Rome. It was an idea that basically dominated for many centuries. Henry I, the Saint, then shaped it into the form of an Ecclesia catholica non romana.

We see how the power of European faith sends its aura into those realms where the Romans sent their gold! The Crusaders clash with the gold and its consequences in the Orient, with Roman gold on one side and Oriental Gnosticism on the other. One must take into account the aura under which the Crusades arose. It is entirely the aura of European religious power. That is the one tone, the one color tone of the picture. But let us place within this color tone—one could paint it, if one wanted to, only as a color tone—let us place within it another picture of the dawning age of the consciousness soul. How should one place it there?

By placing Dandolo of Venice, born in 1108, the doge who was in Constantinople, who was blinded there by the Byzantines, but who was the incarnation of the Ahrimanic spirit, and who, despite his blindness, was lord of Venice, that Venice which placed the Ahrimanic spirit into the spirit that I have just described. It was a significant moment in world history when this Doge Dandolo conquered Constantinople and transformed the original spirit of the Crusades into the later spirit of the Crusades. How did that happen?

It was thus that the Crusaders first went to the Orient to find what had been left behind there in the way of holy relics, so that the power of faith could attach itself to them. That is what they sought, and that is what they wanted to bring back to Europe in their reverence. They wanted to establish a real link between their faith and the actual events of the mystery of Golgotha. When Venice intervened, what became of the relics? Everything was collected, but everything was used as a basis for capital formation! Under the influence of Venice, the relics were gradually treated like stock market securities; they rose and rose. The capitalist era spread: Dandolo, the incarnation of the Ahrimanic spirit!

We ask ourselves: How did Venice manage to reverse what had been? It redirected trade from the Orient to Europe; it rekindled, so to speak, what could not have existed before — commercial life. A question must arise: How could Venice become so powerful in the field of trade, when Europe was basically impoverished?

Trade was a barter system. Basically, during the early period I mentioned today, Europe was cut off from the Orient, which had initially given it its metal money. People didn't have it, so they traded it. It cannot be emphasized enough what a historical fact it is that Venice was a pioneer in this area. We can prove that Venice made a large sale to Alexandria and Damietta in order to exchange it for Oriental goods. What was sold from Venice? One thing can be easily proven by documents, and many other things could be connected with it; then, by researching in this direction, we would make further progress. What was sold were a thousand people! The new trade with the Orient began with human beings. People were sold to the Orient. And anyone who investigates what became of these people in the Orient comes to a remarkable conclusion, which, however, is not yet widely known: that the most important of these sold people were descended from the warriors who then successfully undertook the great military campaigns from Asia to Europe. The core troops of the Asian peoples who later invaded Europe consisted of the descendants of those sold to the Orient by Venice and other Italian cities.

It is necessary to look behind the scenes of world history and not to cling to the legend that is so often presented to people as world history. This legend must finally be consigned to the dustbin of history, even if it was written by Ranke. Our times are far too serious for us not to emphasize that we must learn. And the most important thing will be what we gain from these things: that we will acquire the ability to judge, so that we can follow the present not with a sleeping consciousness, but with an awakened consciousness. Something monstrous is happening in the present, but people do not see it and do not want to see it; they want to see everything only distorted and confused. If one strikes a note here and there that comes from the depths of human existence, one is rejected with phrases that are found today on the surface of magazines and newspapers and that are as far removed as possible from the truth, from the fruitful truth.

Today I had to draw your attention in an external way to something connected with that age in which, in the fifteenth century, the transition took place from the soul of the mood to the soul of consciousness. For one would so much like such things to sink into the minds of people. One needs it today, one needs it in all fields. People today talk a lot about how the social structure should develop in the future. This morning I read once again a sentence by someone who considers himself extremely clever, who at least believes he has grasped the fundamental truths of economics. And lo and behold, the profound thing he says in the middle of his essay is that society, the social coexistence of human beings, should be understood as an organism. People think they have something significant to say when they say that social coexistence should be understood not as a mechanism but as an organism. This is the worst Wilsonianism in our midst! I have often said that the essence of Wilsonianism lies precisely in its inability to come up with any other concepts for social coexistence than that of the organism. But what matters is that we learn to understand that human beings must arrive at concepts higher than that of the organism if they want to understand the social structure. This social structure can never be understood as an organism; it must be understood as psychism, as pneumatism, because spirit is at work in every social coexistence of human beings. Our age has become poor in concepts. We cannot establish a national economy without delving into spiritual knowledge, for only there can we find the metaorganism; there we find that which transcends the mere organism.

Thus, we find everywhere today that people lack the good will to penetrate directly into the spirit. But this must happen. For the consequences would be incalculable if it did not happen. You know that I have pointed out how, in the 17th century — I already mentioned this in the last issue of the magazine Das Reich — Johann Valentin Andreae wrote the story of The Chymical Wedding of Christian Rosenkreutz. This “Chymical Wedding” really contains many of the impulses associated with the upheaval of the 15th century. The story of the “Chymical Wedding” is also set in the 15th century. It is very interesting to note that Johann Valentin Andreae wrote this story of the “Chymical Wedding of Christian Rosenkreutz” as a seventeen-year-old boy. He was seventeen, immature in his external intelligence, and later he fought against it. For the pietistic theologian Andreae, who wrote later, actually writes all sorts of other things with which one can fight against what is written in the “Chymical Wedding.” It is very interesting: Andreae's life shows that he had no trace of understanding for what he wrote in the “Chymical Wedding.” The spiritual worlds wanted to reveal something to humanity, something that was connected with the whole sensibility of the time. I was recently in a castle in Central Europe where there is a chapel containing symbols that represent the thoughts of this new age of change. The stairwell has some rather primitive paintings, but throughout the entire stairwell — what is painted there, even if the paintings are primitive? The “Chymical Wedding of Christian Rosenkreutz”! One passes through this “Chymical Wedding” and then enters a Grail chapel. Then the Thirty Years' War began after the “Chymical Wedding” was written down, and with the waves of the Thirty Years' War, what was meant was lost. This must be a lesson, for the same thing must not happen a second time. What has been demanded of humanity since the 15th century—spiritual development—must come about gradually. We will speak about this next time from a more inner point of view.