The Fundamental Social Demand of Our Times
GA 186
21 December 1918, Dornach
V. Understand One-Another
My dear friends,
Once again there comes to life in our hearts the verse that has resounded through the centuries, of the Divine Mysteries manifesting in the Heights and of the peace on Earth for men of good-will. And at this moment I imagine, especially in our time, the question will arise within our hearts: What then does mankind need, over the whole Earth's round, for the prospering of earthly evolution and of that peace of which the Gospel tells? Well, my dear friends, we have been speaking for weeks past of what is needful to mankind all the Earth over, especially in this our time—questionable as it is and so fraught with questions. And if we would gather up into a single sentence what has been passing through our souls in recent weeks—then we may say: It is necessary for men to strive ever more and more for a full mutual understanding.
This quest of a true mutual understanding among men coincides with what we explained yesterday as to the fundamental impulse underlying what we here call Anthroposophical Spiritual Science. Anthroposophical Spiritual Science strives for an insight into those things which can only be seen by spiritual vision in the world and in the evolution of the world. What is it that shall come to birth in human souls through this cosmic understanding? It is the true—not the apparent and illusory, but the true content of the social demands of the present time, and it consists in calling forth mutual understanding among men. We must strive for this understanding of humanity over the whole Earth—strive for it on the one hand with sincerity and on the other hand with strength. And this can only be done today with an active spiritual life, I mean a spiritual life which does not merely wish to devote itself to the world passively, but seeks to be inwardly active, partaking in the inner impulses of all existence and so arriving at an understanding of the world and man. Yesterday I told you, we are living in an age when new revelations of the Spirit are penetrating through the veil of outward phenomena. We cannot take this truth too earnestly. For he alone who takes it in full earnest will prove equal to the task which our age requires, of every single human being who claims to be awake in life.
If you will think back over many things which we have considered in the last few weeks, you will realize that this understanding of man over the whole Earth cannot be attained so easily as many people think. We have tried to throw light on the peculiarities of the groupings of peoples in the Western and Eastern regions of the Earth and in the Middle. Without letting sympathies or antipathies come into play in the very least, we have tried to understand what are the deepest characteristics of the peoples of the West, the Middle and the East respectively. Why did we do so? To take an example, we pointed out that our age is characterized especially by the development of intellectuality, and that in the Western—especially the English-speaking—peoples, this intellectuality comes to expression in such a way that it acts, as it were, instinctively. Whereas in the Middle peoples, intellect does not work instinctively—in fact, to begin with, it is not innate in them at all; they must acquire it by education. This, we showed, is a very significant difference between the peoples of the West and of the Middle. Thereafter we pointed to the peoples of the East and we said: There, the evolution of intellect comes to expression in such a way that, to begin with, the Eastern peoples actually recoil from it. They are loath to awaken this intellectuality to life within them; they want to preserve it for the knowledge of the Spirit-Self in the future. We pointed to other differentiations also, over the earth. Today let us ask ourselves: Why do we indicate these differentiations? Why do we seek from our point of view to characterize the different groups of people over the Earth? We do so, my dear friends, because in future the mere “Love one-another” will no longer suffice. In future, men will only attain mutual understanding as to their several tasks over the whole Earth if they know what is working in one or in another territory of the Earth. They must be able to look consciously at the several characteristics of the different groups of people. Once we can rise to the inner feeling, which is indeed essential to such understanding, this understanding will indeed be brought about. The feeling to which I refer, my dear friends, is this; the moment we begin to characterize human beings all the Earth over in this way, we must rid ourselves of the impulse to judge and value in the way we judge and value an individual human being as to his moral qualities. In seeking to characterize the nations it simply will not do to judge of their worth as we do in the case of a single human being. It is the very essence of the evolution of the individual human beings on Earth, that man develops the moral qualities as an individual being. Morality can only be evolved by the individual, not by groups of human beings. It would be the worst of illusions if we continued to believe that groups of human beings—or, as one likes to call them nowadays, nations—can enter into a like relationship to one another as man to man. One who can understand concretely what groups of human beings (nations, too, therefore) are in reality, will see the nations guided, as you know from our lecture cycle on the Folk Souls, by those Beings of the Hierarchies whom we call Archangels. He will never ascribe to the mutual relationship of nations that which he must see in the relation of one human being to another. What the nations are, they are in face of the Divine Beings. Here there arises a very different valuation from that which obtains as between man and man. It is for this very reason that man becomes an individual in the course of his evolution. He wrests himself free from the mere folk or nation, so that he may enter fully into what we call the moral order of the world. This moral order of the world is a concern of the individual man.
Such things must be understood by real spiritual knowledge. The true progress of Christianity itself in our time consists in this. I said the other day: We are living in a time when the Spirits of Personality rise in a sense to creative activity. They become Creators. This is exceedingly important, for inasmuch as they become Creator-Spirits there penetrates through the veil of phenomena what we described yesterday as a new revelation. The Spirits of Personality, therefore, are taking on the character of Creators. They become different in a sense from what they were before. They in their being take on a character like that which certain other Spirits (the Spirits of Form) possessed, for earthly evolution, since Lemurian times. This means that in a certain sense man will henceforth confront an altogether changed world-picture. We must become conscious of this, for this is the great thing in our time. Man is beginning to confront an altogether changed world picture, one that comes forth—to use a Goethean expression—out of the gray depths of the Spirit. If we look back with Spiritual Science into the historic evolution of mankind—we may look back into pre-Christian times—the farther we go back, the more we find that men possessed in an old instinctive way an extensive cosmic knowledge, which inspires us with all the greater reverence the more we learn to know it. For the seer it becomes a fact that at the outset of earthly evolution an immense Wisdom was poured out as it were over the earthly life of man. In course of time this Wisdom gradually filtered away. And strange as it may sound, my dear friends, yet it is true, it had reached a kind of zero level at the time when the Mystery of Golgotha came with a blessing to mankind. During that time all that humanity had known in former ages fell into a kind of chaos in the consciousness of man. Those who have understanding of these matters express themselves with perfect agreement on this fact. During that time, they say, the evolution into which man is woven had reached once more the point of utter ignorance. Yet into this gray ignorance which overlay mankind there fell the greatest earthly revelation—the Mystery of Golgotha—the starting point of new knowledge, new revelations for humanity.
Nevertheless, through many centuries, as concerns man himself, the dark gray ignorance persisted in a sense. It does enlighten us, my dear friends, in the deepest sense, if, looking back on the last two thousand years, we ask ourselves with understanding: What, after all, did men produce out of themselves during these last two thousand years? All they possessed by way of Wisdom (independent of the Mystery of Golgotha) was old tradition—inheritance from old traditions. Let us understand one another aright. Needless to say, I will not say humanity has had no Wisdom at all during the last two thousand years, nor will I cast aspersions on the Wisdom which they had. The point is this: The Wisdom that was present in the old pre-Christian times—whose relics are still observable in the last centuries before the Mystery of Golgotha—this Wisdom was seen, albeit instinctively, seen in the Spirit of the olden times. Now however they had lost the power of relating themselves, with independent spiritual vision, to the content of the cosmic Wisdom. What had existed in olden times was preserved, as it were, in a historic memory. Even the Mystery of Golgotha, as I said yesterday, was clothed in the old Wisdom, expressed in the conceptions of the old-remembered Wisdom.
All this went on through many centuries. An advance-guard—albeit only an advance guard—for a renewed penetration of man into Cosmic Wisdom emerged in the mode of thought of modern Natural Science. True, to begin with it emerges in an apparently godless form; yet it is so. It is something which man seeks to acquire by his own activity of soul. Have I not often emphasized that for the future men must learn to regard the spiritual world anthroposophically, even [as], since Copernicus, they have regarded the purely mechanical, external order of Nature? To learn to behold the Divine just as men learned to behold the outer mechanical aspect of the universe since Copernicus, Galileo and Giordano Bruno—this is the task that must permeate us if we would come to a true understanding of our time.
Of course there are many things against this true understanding of our time. Towards such understanding, as you know, such things are necessary as are said for instance in my book on Knowledge of the Higher Worlds and Its Attainment where we have shown what ways the soul must take to penetrate into the spiritual world even as Copernicus, Galileo and Giordano Bruno sought to penetrate the outward mechanical order of Nature. Those who have no deeper understanding for human aspirations may well be astonished that the most vigorous opposition arises out of the spirit of the old religious faiths (if we may call them so) against this endeavor to show what ways the human soul must take to find the spiritual world. It is especially so when the old spirit appears in the form of Jesuitism.
Among the many stupid accusations which have appeared in three articles in the Stimmen der Zeit this year, the following also occurs: “The Church,” they say, “forbids this treatment of the human soul to find the paths into the spiritual world.” My dear friends, for many a modern believer in authority this may sound like something new; but they fail to remember that the very same Church also forbade the researches of Copernicus and Galileo! The Church dealt with external scientific research in exactly the same way. We need not therefore wonder if it metes out the same treatment to the inner researches of spiritual science. It is only remaining true to its old habits. Even as the Catholic Church rebelled until 1827 against the Copernican doctrine, so it rebels against the conscious penetration into the spiritual world. This penetration into the spiritual worlds is no mere talking in abstractions; it is something real and concrete. It means that we transcend in fact once more the state of dark, gray ignorance and penetrate with knowledge into the underlying spiritual content of the world. Was it not also part of this gray ignorance that man looked out upon the world and saw the nations—the groups of human beings—and spoke of them as of a formless chaos. They spoke of the peoples of the West, of the Middle and of the East, but they did not distinguish nor characterize them. At best they knew that the leaders of the nations were Archangeloi, but they did not strive really to know the specific characters of the several nations—of the Archangeloi themselves. This belongs to the new revelation:—we must now observe and understand how the several Archangeloi are working over the face of the Earth. And this will be a real enrichment of man's consciousness all the Earth over. Through the very inability to rise from the dead level of gray ignorance to real differentiation, the gulf has been brought about which I described yesterday, between the subject of the Sunday sermons and what is regarded as the business of everyday life in the outer world. Within the sphere of the religious faiths they talk about the Divine World and its relation to mankind, but all this talking proves too feeble to penetrate the life and business of men on Earth. It can say no more to them than “Love one another,” which is about as sensible as if I were to say to the stove: Warm the room, that is your duty as a stove. Such teaching has not power really to take hold of the hearts of man. They cannot unite their knowledge of everyday affairs with what is brought down to them in this way as abstract precepts, customs, dogmas about the spiritual world. This gulf is there, my dear friends, and the religious faiths would only like to hold it fast.
The strangest flowers spring from the presence of this gulf and from the conscious desire to maintain it. The Jesuits, for instance, object to anthroposophical Spiritual Science because it looks for something in the human being which is capable of inner evolution so as to lead man to the Divine. To do so, they say, is heretical, for the Church teaches us and forbids us to say anything different from this—that God in His Being has nothing to do with the world, nay more, that in substantial identity He has nothing to do with the soul of man. He who declares that the soul of man bears something of the Divine Being within it in any respect whatever, is for the Catholic Church—as conceived by the Jesuits—a heretic.
Into such statements is instilled the inmost tendency of that Church, which is not to let the human beings reach to the Divine but to shut them off from it. Dogma itself assumes a form such as to prevent man from reaching the Divine. No wonder, therefore, since they have not been permitted to reach to the Divine, if in the fifth Post-Atlantean age (which had to bring the Spiritual Soul, once and for all) World-knowledge has become not a Divine but a pure Ahrimanic knowledge. For that which is recognized as Natural Science today is a purely Ahrimanic achievement. We have often characterized it thus. Strange, that the Catholic Church should prefer the Ahrimanic Natural Science to the anthroposophical; for the Ahrimanic Natural Science is no longer considered heretical today, while the anthroposophical Natural Science is anathematized.
A truly enlightened man of today needs to be clear about these things. He must recognize that the same thing must now need to be undertaken on the path of the Spirit as has hitherto been undertaken on the path of Nature. Only so can the path of Nature be saved from its aberration into a purely Ahrimanic realm. It has already suffered this aberration, because in fact the path of the Spirit could only be added to it at a later stage. But from now onwards and for the future of mankind, the path of the Spirit must be added to it, so that Natural Science may be lifted again to its Divine Spiritual height; so that the life in which we live between birth and death be reunited with the life of which the science of the Spirit has to tell, namely that life in which we live in the time between death and a new birth. Yet this will only happen in our time if we have the will really to understand this life all the Earth over, to understand it as it works in man himself.
Moreover we can only understand the single human being if we understand the character of human groupings. Only so shall we be enabled to see into the true reality.
Not long ago I drew your attention to a strange fact which may well surprise many people. I will repeat it briefly. You know that here in Switzerland there lived a worthy philosopher, Avenarius, who undoubtedly regarded himself as a good, law-abiding bourgeois citizen; who did not think himself in the remotest degree a revolutionary. He founded a school of thought written in so difficult a language that very few people can read it. Moreover, writing a rather more popular language, but in a similar sense, there lived a philosopher in Vienna and in Prague—Ernst Mach, who equally regarded himself as a good law-abiding citizen. Truly, neither of them has a vein of revolution in them. Yet the fact is, these two philosophers have become the official philosophers of the Bolsheviks. The Bolsheviks have adopted them as their State Philosophers—so we may put it, if we do not misunderstand the expression. True, Avenarius and Mach would turn in their graves if they were to discover that they are now looked up to by the Bolsheviks as their State Philosophers. As I said on the former occasion, we only do not understand such a phenomenon because we confine ourselves to abstract logic instead of holding fast to the logic of realities, the logic of facts, the logic of things seen. Though you may think that this lies far afield from your point of view, I will nevertheless refer to it again from another aspect. In particular, I will mention one point in the philosophy of Avenarius which may help us to answer the interesting questions: How could it be that Avenarius and Mach became the State Philosophers of the Bolsheviks? The very fact is after all significant enough of the utter confusion of our time.
Avenarius, you see, raises various questions. If we spoke in his technical language—of “introjections” and the like, of all the purely epistemological concepts he evolved—we should be speaking a pretty unintelligible language for most people. Yet in this unintelligible language he raises a question which is after all very interesting from the point of view of Spiritual Science. Avenarius asks: If a man were all alone in the world, would he still speak of the distinction between that which is in his own soul and that which is outside in the world? Would he still distinguish the subjective and the objective? Richard Avenarius is clever enough to declare: We are only tempted to speak of the difference between “subjective” and “objective” through the fact that we are not alone in the world. When we stand face to face with another man, we assume that that which we carry in our brains—of a table or of any other object—is in him too. By projecting into his brain the same picture which we carry in ourselves, the whole thing acquires a picture-like character, and this leads us to distinguish the things in our soul from the things outside—the things that we confront. Avenarius opines that if there were not other people outside us in the world we should not speak of the differences between that which is in our own soul and that which is outside us. We should regard ourselves as one with the things, merged with the things of the world. We should not distinguish ourselves from the world.
We may truly say, my dear friends, from a certain point of view Avenarius is right in his assertion, but from another point of view appallingly mistaken. It is indeed of some importance that in the course of our earliest childhood (though in our conscious memory we know nothing of that time) we came into touch with human beings. Our whole ideation—our whole way of thinking—was influenced by this. It is quite true, things would be very different if we had not come into touch with others; but they would not be as Avenarius supposes. He who can apprehend the underlying facts by spiritual vision arrives at the real truth. Our whole world-picture would indeed be different if at the time in life when we cannot yet think consciously we did not meet with other human beings. But this is the curious thing, my dear friends. The different world-picture which we then should have would contain the spiritual Beings who underlie the world. It would not be as Avenarius supposes. Incidentally, what a dreadful abstraction! We should not fail to distinguish ourselves from the world if we were alone in the world and there were no other human beings. Behind the minerals and plants (for there would have to be no animals, they too would disturb the world-picture by their presence) we should perceive the Divine-Spiritual World. In other words, my dear friends, our living-together with other men is the reason why, in the ordinary way of life, we do not perceive the spiritual world behind the plants and minerals. Our fellow-men place themselves before this spiritual world and hide it from us. Think what this means! At the cost of not perceiving the Divine world of the Hierarchies, we acquire all that comes to us through our living together with other men on the physical Earth. Our fellow-men place themselves before the world of the Gods and hide it from us, as it were. Naturally, Avenarius was unaware of this, hence he carried the question in an entirely wrong direction. He imagined that if no human being were there we should see ourselves unseparated from the world—should not distinguish ourselves from the world. The truth is we should distinguish ourselves—not indeed from other men or from plants and minerals—but from the Gods whom we should then have all round us. That is the truth.
If you consider this you will realize what is very important to realize in our time. Strange to say, it is in many respects our destiny today! Precisely the most penetrating spirits of our time will often touch on the most vital questions—yet always so as to lead them in the most wrong direction, so as to lead away from the perception of the Spirit. It would indeed be difficult to lead away from the perception of the Spirit more radically than Avenarius does. His philosophy is extremely sharp-witted—written with all the refinement of professorial language—and it is therefore well-adapted to lead men away from the Spirit in a state of sleep. And when men are led asleep away from the Spirit they regard this leading away from the Spirit as a necessity—a kind of mathematical necessity. So long as they do not observe that they are being led away from the Spirit, they take it all as scientifically proven. That is the one thing, my dear friends.
Here we have a philosopher (and much the same could be said of Mach) the inmost nerve of whose thought is to found a system which shall lead man radically away from the Spirit. In Bolshevism, my dear friends, the intention is to found a social order to the exclusion of all things spiritual—to group mankind in their social life so that the Spiritual plays no part in it at all. That is the real inner connection of the two, and it makes itself connection of the two, and it makes itself felt in the logic of facts. Not for a mere external reason but by a deep inner kinship, Avenarius and Mach became the State Philosophers of the Bolsheviks.
You see, it is quite possible—with judgments that are prevalent today—to stand more or less fixedly before these things in blank astonishment. How do the Bolsheviks come to have Avenarius and Mach as State Philosophers? For us however it is possible even now to see the real inner connections. Only to do so, we must look for the underlying spiritual facts, as we have done in this instance, where we perceive how it would be in reality if man [were] alone on the physical Earth without any other men. There are many facts and phenomena entering into our life today—especially in the mutual relationships of men—which paralyze men's minds to contemplate, because they can gain no understanding of them without Spiritual Science. I have just given an instance from the spiritual life; quite everyday facts, however, might also be mentioned in this way.
Do not imagine that it was so in all ages. Such phenomena also existed in ancient times, but they were instinctively intelligible to men—intelligible by the old instinctive clairvoyance. Then, through the long gray period of ignorance, such phenomena were absent from the mutual intercourse of men. Now they are making their appearance once more. Not that the souls of men are evolving; the world is evolving. The world itself is changing, and it reveals its change to begin with in the mutual intercourse of men. In the next epoch it will also reveal the change in the relation of man to the other kingdoms of Nature. Life will remain unintelligible to men, in the present and in the immediate future, so long as they are unwilling to consider it through Spiritual Science. Illusion after illusion will take hold of the soul, if man will not have recourse to the spiritual-scientific concepts. There are some here present to whom at the outbreak of the present War-catastrophe I repeated one thing again and again. It is quite possible, I said, to write of the so-called world-historic facts of the last few centuries according to the records in the archives—by looking up the records and writing histories in the style of Ranks of the rest. But of the outbreak of this War-catastrophe it is impossible to write so. However much they delve into the archives, if they do not observe what was the mood of soul of those who were concerned in the outbreak of this War, and how this mood of soul gave entry for the Ahrimanic powers into the Earth's affairs, and how thereby the causes of this War-catastrophe came from an Ahrimanic side—if, in a word, they are willing to observe the starting-point of this catastrophe with Spiritual Science, it will remain forever dark. This War-catastrophe, my dear friends, is a real challenge to mankind, to learn from it. Much can be learned from what happened during the last four or five years as a consequence of the preceding events. Above all things, we should learn to put certain questions, not so one-sidedly as heretofore, but in keeping with the real needs of the time.
As I have often said, we have no reason to comfort ourselves too lightly about the misfortunes of our time, still less to shut our eyes to them. But we have also no reason to be pessimistic. Only consider the following. We can say to ourselves: immense and terrible events have taken place in the last four or five years over the Earth. And yet, what is the essential thing in all these terrors? It is what human souls have experienced through them. That is the essential thing—what human souls have experienced through these events, with respect to their soul's evolution, needless to say throughout all Earth-existence. Seen in this light, a question fraught with deep significance emerges. The question is strange and paradoxical, but so only because it is fraught with such deep meaning, unaccustomed to our everyday thought. Could we really desire that mankind should have lived on without any such catastrophe, in the way they had grown accustomed to live until the year 1914? Can we really say that that would have been desirable? In putting this question I may be permitted once again to point to what I said before the outbreak of this War, in my lecture cycle at Vienna (April 1914, Cycle XXXII). I said: If we really see what is living in the world of man today, the mutual relationship of men, their social life, appears to us like a social carcinoma—a cancerous growth—eating its way through mankind. Men had only shut their eyes to this carcinoma of the social commonweal. They were unwilling to look the real facts in the face. No one who sees things at their deepest could say that it would have been good for mankind to go on in that way. For on the lines which I have indicated they would have gone more and more downhill, farther and farther from the Spirit. And as to those to whom we look with souls full of pain—the millions who have been swept away from the physical plane by this dread catastrophe and who are now living on as souls—they it is who ponder most of all how different now their situation is, inasmuch as they are spending the rest of their life in the spiritual world; how different it would have been if their Karma had still kept them on the physical Earth.
Sub specie aeterni—from the aspect of eternity—things after all appear quite different, and this must not be left unsaid. Only on the other hand we must not take these things lightly or superficially. True as it is, it is infinitely sad that this catastrophe has taken place, yet it is no less true, my dear friends; by this very catastrophe man has been preserved from an appalling downfall into materialism and utilitarianism. And though it does not yet show itself today, yet it will show itself—above all in the Middle Countries and the East, where, in place of an order that had been imbued with materialism, a state of chaos is now developing. Truly we cannot refer to this chaos without an undertone of pain and suffering. I mean the social chaos which has overcome the Middle and Eastern countries, and that shows outwardly little prospect of transforming into any kind of harmony. And yet there is another aspect. Wherever this chaos exists, the world in the near future will give men very, very little through the purely physical plane. The blessings of the physical plane will truly not be great in the Middle and the Eastern countries. Of all that can be given to man so that he feels his life sustained by external powers—of this there will be precious little. Man will have to take hold of himself in his own soul in order to stand fast, and in the very act of doing so he will be able to set forth along the path into the spiritual world. He will resolve to go towards the Spirit, whence alone the salvation of the future can come. This, my dear friends, will be the essential thing for the future. Our outer bodily existence will, as it were, be slipping away from us. The outer bodily nature, as I said yesterday, will no longer be so sound and healthy as in times past; it has more death in it than it had in bygone ages. The content of the World-riddle is not to be found with that with which our bodily nature is connected; no, we must rise into the spiritual world to find the necessary impulse, and also the impulse which we need for the social order. This insight will arise when men are able to find as little as possible in the physical world. For the physical world itself will only be able to assume a form of harmony when it seeks for this form out of the spiritual life.
The Bible, my dear friends, in its first pages, does not tell us that is was Lucifer or Ahriman who drove man out of Paradise; it was the Jahve—God Himself who did so. And as we know, this very expulsion from paradise signifies man's becoming free—the conscious experience of freedom by mankind. The possibility, the seed of freedom, was given by the expulsion from Paradise. Is it then contrary to the Biblical wisdom if we say: Once more, it was Divine Wisdom which drove men out of the present age that was leading them down into materialism and utilitarianism, thus planting seeds, which, spiritually taken hold of, can really help the world. It sounds to us out of the painful depths of the last four-and-a-half years: “Spiritual life is wishing to reveal itself through the veil of the outward phenomena; men shall learn through misfortune to turn their eyes to these revelations of the Spirit, and it will be for their salvation.”
This too is a language which will seem paradoxical to many a modern man and yet, it is the language which Christ Himself is guiding us to speak. Today it lies inherent in the very progress of Christianity to grasp the Christian truths in a new way. This can only be done if they are taken hold of spiritually. The Mystery of Golgotha, my dear friends, is a spiritual event which has entered into the evolution of the Earth. It can only be fully understood by a spiritual way of knowledge. As in the last resort it was through misfortune that mankind found the Christ, we too shall have to seek through our misfortune for the Christ through the new way of comprehension.
I admit, my dear friends, this is no ordinary comfort. Yet if we are ready to put all trivialities aside in the deeper sense of the word it is after all no little comfort, nay perhaps, it is the only comfort in our time, worthy of the dignity of man. It is not the kind of comfort which says to man: Only wait, and without your cooperation all the divine things will be vouchsafed to you! Rather does it say: Make use of your own forces, and you will find that the God is speaking and abounding in your souls. Then, through this God, you will also find the God in the great Universe, and—which is the most important—you yourselves will be able to work in communion with Him. We must depart from the mere passive attitude to super-sensible knowledge. Man must bestir himself within to find himself, and as he does so, recognize himself as part of the World-Order. Let the religious faiths rebel, which want to make things nice and comfortable for lulling a man's spirit to sleep in clouds of incense (I speak figuratively) so that he may then find his way to the Divine passively and without active cooperation on his part. Let them rebel however much against the call that now springs forth out of the spiritual worlds!—“Man shall now look for his true worth in inner spiritual activity—in the active inner development of spiritual life!”
This, my dear friends, must be; and it must be so especially if we are to reckon with the social demands of our time. I have said so already in these weeks. We are living—at any rate, a great part of our educated humanity are living—from the achievements of Greek culture; but we do not always remember how these achievements, by which we live, were created. Greek civilization was unfolded on a basis of slavery. A great proportion of mankind had to live as slaves in order to bring about at all what we now feel as the blessings of Greek culture. Let us face the fact fully and clearly. All that Greek Art, Greek learning signifies—all this and many other things arose on the foundation of slavery. Then, my dear friends, we shall ask ourselves with renewed intensity: What is it that has brought about the inner change? We today no longer think as did the great philosophers, Plato and Aristotle, who took slavery as an absolute matter of course. At that time it went without saying, even for the wisest of men, that nine-tenths of mankind must live as slaves. For us today it no longer goes without saying. On the contrary, we regard it as an offence against the dignity of man that anyone should think so. What was it then that brought it about for Western humanity—this radical change in men's way of thought? It was Christianity which freed men from slavery and led them to recognize, at least in principle, that all men are equal before God, as to their soul. For this was the principle which uprooted slavery out of the social order of mankind. But as we know—for we must refer to it again and again from many points of view—one thing has been left behind until our day. It is that of which I told you that it is the salient point in the consciousness of the modern working man. One thing has been left behind, namely the possibility—in our social order—for a part of the human being to be bought as a commodity and sold by himself as a commodity. Moreover it is a part of man that takes its course in his very body. The salient point of the social question—the perpetual irritant, the thing that continually incites—is the fact that human labor-power can be paid for. This too creates at the very foundations of all our social order the character of Egoism. For egoism cannot but prevail in the social (I say once more, in the social order—please understand me aright) if to obtain what he requires for his own needs a man must get his labor paid for. He is obliged to earn for himself.
This is the next and necessary stage—after the overcoming of slavery—it must be made impossible for any man's labor to be a commodity. This is the true salient point of the social question, and it is this which the new Christianity will solve. In recent lectures I have told you something of the solving of the social question. For that three-folding of the social order, of which I told you there, sets free the commodity from the labor-power of man. In future, men will only buy and sell commodities—outer objects, things separate from man himself—which (as I wrote already in my essay on Theosophy and the Social Question which appeared in 1905) one man will work for another from motives of brotherly love.
It may be a long way to go to attain this end. Yet this and this alone will solve the social question. Whoever will not believe today that this must come about in the world-order is like a man who would have said, at the time of the origin of Christianity: “Slaves there must always be.” Even as he would have been wrong at that time, so likewise today the man is wrong who says: “Labor must always be paid for.” At that time it seems unimaginable that a certain number of men should not be slaves. Not even Plato or Aristotle could conceive it. Today the cleverest of men cannot conceive a social order wherein Labor would have quite another value—quite another meaning than of being paid for. Needless to say, even then the product will proceed from the labor, but the product alone will be able to be bought and sold. Socially, this very fact will be the salvation of men.
To realize these things it is indeed necessary to have the knowledge of spiritual vision, the logic of things seen. Without it humanity will not go forward. The logic of spiritual vision is the fuel to create what must arise among mankind in future, namely that human love which springs from the understanding between man and man. Strange as it sounds, my dear friends, today, when all manner of atavistic remnants are still there in men in one way or another—today everything is still regarded with sympathies and antipathies. So it is, for instance, when we explain such distinctions as I here did a little while ago. I said that of the three members of human nature the Western peoples are called especially to develop the abdominal nature, the Middle peoples the heart-nature and the Eastern peoples the head nature. Nowadays, such things are nearly always treated as judgments of relative value, in one way or another. At least, somewhere inside him every man still has a little pigeon-hole where he does so. Such valuation must absolutely cease, for this very vision of the differentiations of mankind over the whole Earth's sphere will become the basis of sympathetic, understanding love. From understanding, not from ignorance, true human love—reaching over the whole Earth—will spring, during this age of the Spiritual Soul. Then will men know, over the whole Earth, how to find themselves in Christ. Christ is no concern of one nation or another. He concerns all mankind; but to recognize this, many an illusion must first give way.
Men must be able to raise themselves, to look without illusions into the true nature of things. Today, in many spheres of life, they are unwilling to do so. And yet, I know I am speaking in the spirit of the true Christmas peace in placing the following paradox before you. My dear friends, you know well that I am not speaking of the individual human beings but of the nations as a whole when I refer to these differentiations. It is so easy to misunderstand these things unless one has good will. As I have pointed out so often, the single human individuality who grows out of the nation is not intended; only nations as such. I beg you to bear this in mind when I now say the following:—
You see, my dear friends, let us consider the one or other of the judgments which have been passed during the last four years on the countries, or States, of the Middle of Europe. I can thoroughly understand such feelings. I do not want to say anything in the least against those who are filled with enthusiasm for the Entente. Far be it from me—everyone has his opinion, and that is justified from a certain point of view. But, my dear friends, suppose we now look away from the opinion which prevailed in the past few years and consider its prolongation in the present time. Then after all, perhaps we may find something rather hard for understanding. For we may ask ourselves: Is it necessary for the judgments which were passed, while the potentates of the middle countries held the reins of power, to be continued now? Nay is it necessary to do all that one can—and by the most refined of methods—so as to be able to prolong these judgments? Is it necessary? Is it equally explicable? Superficially considered, it is certainly not so easy to explain as many such things were before. More deeply considered however, it is still explicable, my dear friends. More deeply considered we can understand it—albeit not out of the character of the individuals (for the individuals themselves in Western countries will want to bring about a healing of these matters). Those, however, whose judgments merely spring from their respective nationalities, or rather, national prejudices—they have in their subconsciousness something which we may characterize as follows:—
Some weeks ago I explained that in our conception of the world and notably our way of thinking at the present time much that belongs to the Old Testament is still alive, while the essential nerve of Christianity has only entered to a slight extent as yet. Now it is characteristic of Jahve-worship that it concerns all those things to which we do not bring ourselves up between our birth and death, but which are given to us as an inheritance—i.e., the things which lie inherent in our blood, which in the normal course only have influence on us while we sleep, while we ourselves are outside the body. This Jahve-conception still lives and throbs in our time to a very large extent, and it can only rise into the Christ-conception if we turn in this intellectualistic age with all our power to the conquest of the spiritual world, not through birth, not through what is inspired into us with our birth, but through our own self-education in this life. Now by nature the West is not predestined to pass from the service of Jahve to that of Christ. Such predestination only begins in the Middle of Europe and goes towards the East. This applies once more, needless to say, not to the individual but to the nation. Hence, my dear friends, the characteristic form of Wilsonian thought, steeped as it is entirely in Old Testament conceptions. However much it may deny the fact, the form of thought stands out as though it would fain exterminate what is trying spiritually to emerge in the Middle Countries and in the East. Hence it is outwardly so hard to understand. Under all manner of pretexts, these people still prolong the same hostile spirit, though they have swept away what they professed they wanted to sweep away, and only the peoples themselves are left, against whom—so they assured us—they had no ill intentions. They do so because in reality they are resisting what has arisen in spiritual evolution in the Middle Countries and in the East during the last few centuries, which, nonetheless, is necessary to mankind. Subconsciously, they want to expunge it. They do not want to enter into these things.
We are now living in a most important crisis of the world. I have often heard people ask; how is it that the men of the West especially the English and the French—have such a dreadful hatred of the Germans? There is a very simple answer, my dear friends, and yet it is an exhaustive answer. Man always sees himself differently (especially himself as member of a nationality) than he sees his fellow men. I can assure you, my dear friends, such thoughts as Mach had when he got into the bus or walked along the street are very often there in the subconscious lives of men. You know how Mach himself relates the story. Once, very tired, he got into a bus and did not notice that there was a mirror on the side opposite the door. Someone else, he thought, got in at the same time from the other side, and he said to himself: What a horrid old schoolmaster that is! He knew himself very little in his outward person and when he saw himself he did not like it at all.
Now, my dear friends, observe the spiritual history of Middle Europe—not in its more intimate features but as a whole. Down to Lessing, far down into the last third of the 18th century, the Germans took pains to be like the French. You could see it in everything. From a certain moment onward (approximately in the 12th century) till far beyond the middle of the 18th century, the Germans endeavored to be like the French—to behave in such a way that they also might become Frenchmen. What the French could not see in themselves—or, if they saw it, were inclined to rate it highly—all this they hated with a dreadful hatred when they saw it in the imitation. Unconsciously, man does indeed practice a strange form of self-knowledge. At bottom, in their deepest being, the Germans were never hated by the French. The French only hated themselves when they saw their mirrored image in the German soul.
Since then a very remarkable English influence has arisen, the extent of which is by no means adequately realized. The English naturally see themselves just as little as Mach did; but they notice themselves well enough when they see themselves in this mirrored image which has entered so strongly into the German soul since the 18th century. It is the Englishman whom they now judge in the German. There is the simple psychological solution, my dear friends. If the world-crisis had not arisen, this state of affairs would have gone on for a long time, and we should have a great mixture, as it were a broth, out of which single individualities would nevertheless have arisen, possessing the intimate qualities of the true German. Now, however, out of the world-crisis, chaos and misfortune will cause to arise what must arise: that which was always present, though under the power of the West it was unable to unfold. These are the real facts. There is no ground for pessimism, even in Middle Europe. We must only dive to the deeper foundations which underlie the process of evolution.
My dear friends, what the Entente Powers are doing today may appear thus, or thus. It matters very little how it appears, for at the bottom of their hearts they are wanting what is quite impossible. They are wanting to prevent the rise of something which absolutely must unfold in the Middle of Europe and in the East, for it is connected with the spiritual progress of mankind; it cannot be prevented. But it must also call forth this, my dear friends:—If man is to take the future of the Earth in earnest he must truly have faith in the Spirit; only out of the power of the Spirit will there come what must come, even for the solving of the burning social needs of our time. In the machine age it was necessary for these 50 million invisible human beings—that is to say, human beings visible as machines—to arise, so that men might gradually learn to feel that they must not be paid like machines are paid. And it was also necessary for this appalling catastrophe to arise, wherein the machine age has celebrated its greatest triumphs. Out of this catastrophe man will begin to unfold his real strength, and as he does so, he will gain a certain power once more to unite himself with the Divine and Spiritual. If we may now compare what many people have rightly called the most appalling event in the Earth's history with the beginning of Earth-evolution we may say: just as it was no mere misfortune for men to be driven out of Paradise, so too it is no mere misfortune that such a catastrophe has overtaken mankind.
In the end, my dear friends, the most valuable truths are paradoxes today, as I have often pointed out, we may well say: Men were so infamous as to nail to the Cross the greatest Being Who ever appeared on the Earth—Jesus Christ. They killed Him. We may well say that it was infamous of them. And yet this Death, my dear friends, is the very content of Christianity; for through this Death there took place what we call the Mystery of Golgotha. Without it there would be no Christianity. This Death is the good fortune of men; this Death is the abounding strength of earthly man. So paradoxical are things in their reality. For on the one hand we may say: how infamous it was of men to nail Christ to the Cross; and yet, with this Death—this nailing to the Cross—the greatest event on Earth is brought about. A misfortune is not always merely a misfortune; often it is the starting-point for the achievement of human greatness and of human strength.
Zwölfter Vortrag
Wenn in unseren Herzen der seit Jahrhunderten tönende Spruch wieder lebendig wird von den sich offenbarenden göttlichen Geheimnissen in den Höhen und dem Frieden auf Erden für die Menschen des guten Willens, dann wird insbesondere wohl in unserer Zeit die Frage sich in eben dieses Herz hineindrängen: Was ist im Sinne der Erdenentwickelung diesem Menschen über das ganze Erdenrund hin eigentlich nötig im Sinne desjenigen Friedens, der vom Evangelium gemeint ist? Wir sprechen ja eigentlich wochenlang schon von dem, was den Menschen über das ganze Erdenrund nötig ist, insbesondere in unserer so fragwürdigen und fragevollen Gegenwart. Und wenn wir zusammendrängen wollen in einen einzigen Satz manches von dem, was wir in den letzten Zeiten haben durch unsere Seele ziehen lassen, so können wir sagen: Notwendig ist den Menschen, immer mehr und mehr volles gegenseitiges Verständnis anzustreben.
Nun fällt ja zusammen das Suchen nach wahrem gegenseitigem Menschenverständnis mit dem, was gestern auseinandergesetzt worden ist als der Grundimpuls dessen, was hier anthroposophisch orientierte Geisteswissenschaft genannt wird. Diese anthroposophisch orientierte Geisteswissenschaft strebt nach Einsicht in dasjenige, was innerhalb der Welt und ihrer Entwickelung nicht geschaut werden kann. Aber wenn man hinblickt auf das, was in den Menschenseelen werden soll durch solches Weltverständnis, so ist es eben nicht der scheinbare, nicht der illusionäre, sondern der wahre Inhalt der gegenwärtigen sozialen Forderung, der darin besteht, gegenseitiges, wirkliches Verstehen unter den Menschen hervorzurufen. Dieses Verständnis der Menschen über das Erdenrund hin muß man wirklich ehrlich auf der einen Seite und kraftvoll auf der anderen Seite anstreben. Das läßt sich heute nur im Sinne eines aktiven Geisteslebens tun, eines Geisteslebens, das nicht bloß sich passiv der Welt hingeben will, sondern das sich innerlich betätigen will, um im Anteilnehmen an den Impulsen des Daseins zum wirklichen Verständnis der Welt und des Menschen zu kommen. Gestern habe ich davon gesprochen, daß wir in einem Zeitalter leben, in dem neue geistige Offenbarungen durch die Schleier der äußeren Erscheinungen hindurchdringen. Man kann diese Wahrheit nicht ernst genug nehmen. Denn nur derjenige, der sie voll ernst nimmt, wird sich den Anforderungen gewachsen zeigen können, die unsere Zeit im Grunde an jeden einzelnen Menschen stellt, der wach sein will im Leben.
Nun werden Sie, wenn Sie die Gedanken zurückschweifen lassen auf manche Betrachtungen, die wir jetzt durch Wochen angestellt haben, finden, daß dieses Menschenverständnis nicht so einfach über die Erde hin erlangt werden kann, wie manche glauben. Wir haben uns bemüht, Licht zu verbreiten über die Eigentümlichkeiten der Völkergruppierungen im westlichen, im östlichen Gebiete der Erde und in der Mitte. Wir haben gewissermaßen, ohne im geringsten irgendwelche Sympathie und Antipathie mitsprechen zu lassen, versucht zu verstehen, was das tiefste Eigentümliche ist im Volkstum des Westens, im Volkstum der Mitte, im Volkstum des Ostens. Warum haben wir das getan? Wir haben darauf hingewiesen, daß unsere Zeit das Zeitalter der besonderen Entwickelung der Intellektualität ist, daß diese Intellektualität bei den westlichen Völkern, namentlich bei den englisch sprechenden Völkern so zum Ausdrucke kommt, daß das Ausleben des Intellektes wie instinktiv wirkt, als ein Instinkt, und daß bei den mittleren Völkern dieser Intellekt nicht instinktiv wirkt, überhaupt zunächst nicht angeboten ist, sondern erworben werden muß durch Erziehung. Wir haben darauf hin-. gewiesen, daß dies ein bedeutungsvoller Unterschied ist zwischen den Völkern des Westens und den Völkern der Mitte. Wir haben dann auf die Völker des Ostens hingewiesen und haben gesagt: Da kommt die Entwickelung des Intellektes so zum Ausdruck, daß eigentlich die Völker des Ostens sich zunächst sträuben, diese Intellektualität in sich zum Leben zu erwecken, weil sie sie aufbewahren wollen für die Erkenntnis des Geistselbstes in der Zukunft.
Wir haben noch andere Differenzierungen angegeben über das Erdenrund hin, und wir fragen uns heute: Warum führen wir diese Differenzierung an? Warum versuchen wir, zu charakterisieren von den Gesichtspunkten aus, die hier geltend gemacht werden, die verschiedenen Völkergruppen über die Erde hin? - Deshalb versuchen wir das, weil es in der Zukunft nicht mehr gehen wird mit dem bloßen: «Liebet einander», sondern weil in der Zukunft die Menschen sich über die Erde hin nur in ihren Aufgaben verständigen werden, wenn sie wissen, was auf dem einen oder andern Territorium der Erde wirkt, wenn man gewissermaßen bewußt hinschauen kann auf die Eigentümlichkeiten, die bei den verschiedenen Völkergruppierungen vorhanden sind. Wenn man sich aufschwingen kann dabei zu jener Empfindung, die allerdings gegenüber solchem Verständnisse notwendig ist, dann wird dieses Verständnis auch herbeigeführt werden. Die Empfindung, die notwendig ist, ist diese, daß, wenn man überhaupt anfängt, in solcher Weise die Menschen über die Erde hin zu charakterisieren, aufhören muß der Impuls, so zu werten, wie man den einzelnen Menschen hinsichtlich seiner moralischen Qualitäten wertet. Das geht nicht, daß, wenn man Völker charakterisieren will, man so wertet, wie man den einzelnen Menschen wertet. Das ist gerade das Wesentliche der individuellen Menschenentwickelung auf der Erde, daß der Mensch als individuelles Wesen, so wie er da ist, das Moralische entwickelt. Das Moralische kann nur der einzelne Mensch entwickeln, das Moralische können nicht Menschengruppen entwickeln. Es würde die schlimmste Illusion sein, wenn man weiterhin glauben würde, daß Menschengruppen, oder — wie man heute beliebt zu sagen — Völker, in dasselbe Verhältnis zueinander treten können, wie es Mensch zu Mensch tun kann. Wer konkret zu verstehen vermag, was Menschengruppen, also auch Völker, sind, der sieht die Völker — wir wissen es aus dem Zyklus über die Völkerseelen -, geführt von jenen Wesenheiten in der Ordnung der Hierarchien, die wir als Archangeloi, als Erzengel bezeichnen. Aber er wird dem gegenseitigen Verhältnis der Völker niemals dasselbe zuschreiben können, was er sehen muß im Verhältnis des einzelnen Menschen mit dem einzelnen Menschen. Dasjenige, was die Völker sind, sind sie vor den göttlichen Wesenheiten. Da muß eine andere Bewertung eintreten als wie sie von Mensch zu Mensch besteht. Deshalb wird der Mensch gerade individueller Mensch im Laufe seiner Entwickelung, deshalb ringt er sich los aus dem bloßen Volkstum, damit er voll eintreten kann in das, was man die moralische Weltordnung nennt. Und diese moralische Weltordnung ist eine individuelle menschliche Angelegenheit.
Solche Dinge müssen durch eine wirkliche Erkenntnis verstanden werden. Der richtige Fortschritt des Christentums selber besteht in unserer Zeit darinnen, daß solche Dinge verstanden werden. Ich habe gesagt, wir leben in einer Zeit, in welcher gewissermaßen die Geister der Persönlichkeit aufsteigen zu schöpferischer Tätigkeit, daß sie Schöpfer werden. Das ist außerordentlich wichtig, denn indem sie Schöpfer werden, dringt durch den Schleier der Erscheinungen etwas herein, was gestern bezeichnet worden ist als eine neue Offenbarung. Also die Geister der Persönlichkeit nehmen einen schöpferischen Charakter an, werden gewissermaßen etwas anderes, als sie vorher gewesen sind, werden ähnlich in ihrer Wesenheit dem Charakter, den solche Geister wie die Geister der Form seit der lemurischen Zeit für unsere Erdenentwickelung gehabt haben. Damit tritt der Mensch gewissermaßen vor ein ganz verändertes Weltbild. Dessen muß man sich bewußt werden; denn das ist das Bedeutungsvolle in unserer Zeit, daß der Mensch vor ein ganz verändertes Weltbild tritt. Sehen Sie, dieses Weltbild kommt gewissermaßen, um diesen Goetheschen Ausdruck zu gebrauchen, aus «grauer Geistestiefe» heraus. Wenn man geisteswissenschaftlich zurückblickt auf die geschichtliche Entwickelung der Menschheit, dann kann man zurückschauen in vorchristliche Zeiten, vielleicht in weit zurückgelegene vorchristliche Zeiten, und man wird finden, daß in alter, instinktiver Art, gerade je weiter man zurückgeht, desto mehr die Menschen ein ausgebreitetes Weltwissen hatten. Dieses ausgebreitete Weltwissen flößt immer mehr und mehr Ehrfurcht ein, je besser man es kennenlernt. Und es wird zuletzt für den Erkenner eine Tatsache, daß im Ausgange der Erdenentwickelung eine große Summe von Weisheit gewissermaßen über das Erdenleben des Menschen ausgegossen worden ist, die dann allmählich versickerte. Und es ist nicht anders, so sonderbar die Dinge klingen, als daß ein gewisser Tiefstand eingetreten war mit Bezug auf dieses Wissen zu jener Zeit, in der das Mysterium von Golgatha die Menschheit zugleich beglückte. Alles das, was die Menschen früher gewußt haben, lief gewissermaßen in dieser Zeit in ein Chaos des menschlichen Bewußtseins ein. Und diejenigen, die von solchen Dingen etwas verstehen, drücken sich über diese Tatsache einhellig dahin aus, daß sie sagen: Die Entwickelung, in die der Mensch eingeflochten ist, hatte zu jener Zeit wiederum einmal den Punkt der Unwissenheit erlangt. - Aber in diese graue Unwissenheit, die über die Menschheit sich ausbreitete, die da lebte höchstens in den Überlieferungen aus alten Zeiten, da fiel hinein die größte Erdenoffenbarung, das Mysterium von Golgatha, der Ausgangspunkt neuen Wissens, der Ausgangspunkt neuer Offenbarungen für die Menschheit. Dann blieb die graue Unwissenheit durch die Jahrhunderte, insofern es auf den Menschen selbst ankam, in gewissem Sinne bestehen.
Es klärt tatsächlich in tiefstem Sinne auf, wenn man den Blick wirft auf die letzten zwei Jahrtausende und sich verständig fragen kann: Was haben in diesen letzten zwei Jahrtausenden die Menschen schließlich aus sich selbst hervorgebracht? — Alles, was sie an Weisheit, an vom Mysterium von Golgatha unabhängiger Weisheit gehabt haben, das waren alte Traditionen, das war Erbgut. Verstehen wir uns recht: Ich will selbstverständlich nicht behaupten, daß die Menschheit in den letzten zwei Jahrtausenden gar keine Weisheit gehabt habe, und ich will die Weisheit, die sie gehabt hat, nicht entwerten. Aber was ins Auge gefaßt werden muß, ist dieses: die Weisheit, die in alten vorchristlichen Zeiten vorhanden war und deren Reste eben zu bemerken sind in den letzten Jahrhunderten vor dem Mysterium von Golgatha, die wurde — wenn auch instinktiv - in alten Zeiten geschaut von den Menschen. Sich selbständig schauend in Verhältnis zu setzen zu dem Inhalte der Weltenweisheit, das war verlorengegangen. Gewissermaßen wie in einem geschichtlichen Gedächtnis, in einer geschichtlichen Erinnerung war das aufbewahrt geblieben, was in diesen alten Zeiten vorhanden war. Und selbst das Mysterium von Golgatha hat man, wie ich gestern sagte, in die alte Weisheit eingekleidet, hat man ausgedrückt durch Vorstellungen der alten Weisheit, der Erinnerungsweisheit. Das dauert Jahrhunderte hindurch. Ein Vorbote für neues Eindringen der Menschen in Weltenweisheit, wenn auch nur ein Vorbote, und wenn auch zunächst auf eine, ich möchte sagen, gottabgewandte Art, trat erst auf mit der neueren naturwissenschaftlichen Denkweise. Da ist wiederum etwas, was der Mensch durch die eigene Aktivität seiner Seele erarbeiten will. Es handelt sich ja, wie ich so oft betont habe, darum, die geistige Welt in der Zukunft anthroposophisch auf gleiche Weise anzuschauen, wie man die rein mechanische äußere Naturordnung seit Kopernikus anschaute. Das Göttliche so anschauen lernen, wie man das äußere Mechanisch-Weltliche anschauen lernte seit Kopernikus, Galilei und Giordano Bruno, dies ist wiederum ein Gesichtspunkt, der einen durchdringen muß, wenn man zum rechten Verständnis unserer Zeit kommen will.
Diesem rechten Verständnis unserer Zeit steht natürlich sehr vieles entgegen. Es ist notwendig, wie Sie wissen, daß zu diesem Verständnisse jetzt solche Dinge gesagt werden, wie sie zum Beispiel gesagt werden in meiner Schrift «Wie erlangt man Erkenntnisse der höheren Welten?»: daß gewissermaßen den Menschen gezeigt werde, welche Wege die Seele zu nehmen habe, um in die geistige Welt so einzudringen, wie Kopernikus, Galilei, Giordano Bruno versuchten, in die äußerlich-mechanische Naturordnung einzudringen. Manche, die nicht tieferes Verständnis haben für die Aspirationen verschiedener Menschen, könnten sich leicht wundern, daß gerade gegen dieses Bestreben, zu zeigen, welche Wege die Menschenseele in die geistige Welt hinein nehmen soll, sich stramm erhebt alter Bekenntnisgeist, wenn man es so nennen will, insbesondere in der Form des Jesuitismus.
Unter den mancherlei stumpfen Anschuldigungen, die in den «Stimmen der Zeit» im Verlaufe dieses Jahres in drei Artikeln erschienen sind, ist ja auch die, daß die Kirche ein solches Bearbeiten der menschlichen Seele, um Wege in die geistige Welt zu finden, verbiete. Das klingt heute für manchen Gläubigen, für manchen auf Autorität hin Gläubigen so, als ob es etwas Besonderes wäre. Aber nur deshalb klingt es so, weil man nicht bedenkt: Hat denn dieselbe Kirche nicht auch das Forschen des Kopernikus, das Forschen des Galilei verboten? Die Kirche hat es ja geradeso gemacht mit dem äußeren Forschen, so daß es einen nicht zu verwundern braucht, daß sie es auch mit dem inneren Forschen auf dem Geistesgebiet so macht. Sie bewahrt ja nur ihre alten Gewohnheiten. Wie sie sich gesträubt hat als katholische Kirche bis zum Jahre 1827 gegen die kopernikanische Lehre, so sträubt sie sich gegen das Eindringen in die geistige Welt. Dieses Eindringen in die geistigen Welten ist aber nicht ein Herumreden in Abstraktionen, sondern etwas sehr, sehr Konkretes. Es ist das Wiederhinauskommen über die graue Unwissenheit und das wissende Eindringen in den Geistinhalt, der der Welt zugrunde liegt. Zu jener grauen Unwissenheit gehört es ja auch, daß man den Blick über die Erde hinschweifen ließ, Völker sah, Menschengruppierungen sah, und von diesen Menschengruppierungen sprach wie von einem Chaos. Man sprach von den Völkern des Westens, von den Völkern der Mitte, von den Völkern des Ostens, aber man unterschied nicht, man charakterisierte nicht. Man wußte höchstens, daß die Führer der einzelnen Völker Archangeloi sind. Man strebte nicht danach, den Charakter der einzelnen Völker, der Archangeloi, wirklich kennenzulernen. Das gehört zu den neuen Offenbarungen, daß wir nun wirklich darauf hinschauen, wie die einzelnen Archangeloi wirken über die Erde hin. Das ist eine tatsächliche, wirkliche Bereicherung des menschlichen Bewußtseins über die Erde hin. Indem man sich aus der grauen Unwissenheit heraus nicht aufzuschwingen vermochte zu solcher wirklichen Differenzierung, hat man eben jenen Abgrund erzeugt, der da besteht zwischen dem, was ich gestern als den Gegenstand der Sonntagnachmittagspredigten charakterisierte, und dem, was der Mensch als die Angelegenheiten des äußeren Weltlebens betrachtet. Ich sprach davon, wie auf dem Gebiete der religiösen Bekenntnisse über die göttliche Welt und ihre Beziehung zu den Menschen gesprochen wird, wie sich das aber zu schwach erweist, um das Treiben der Menschen auf Erden wirklich zu verstehen, um mehr den Menschen zu sagen, als: «Liebet einander!» — was ebensoviel Bedeutung hat, als wenn ich dem Ofen sage: Heize das Zimmer, es ist deine Ofenpflicht! — Aber eine solche Lehre hat nicht die Kraft, wirklich die Herzen der Menschen zu ergreifen, wenn diese Menschen sonst auf der Erde herumwimmeln müssen in den täglichen Angelegenheiten und nicht die Kenntnisse der täglichen Angelegenheiten mit demjenigen verbinden können, was heruntergeholt wird als die abstrakten Sätze und Gewohnheiten und Dogmen über die geistige Welt. Diese Kluft herrscht, und an dieser Kluft wollen die Bekenntnisse festhalten.
Sehen Sie, es kommen merkwürdige Blüten zustande durch das Vorhandensein und das Festhaltenwollen an dieser Kluft. So wird zum Beispiel auch von jesuitischer Seite gegen die anthroposophisch orientierte Geisteswissenschaft eingewendet, daß sie das Bestreben zeige, im Menschen etwas aufzusuchen, was entwickelt werden kann, damit es den Menschen zum Göttlichen hinführe. Das aber sei ketzerisch, denn die Kirche lehre — und sie verbiete, etwas anderes zu behaupten -, daß Gott in seiner Wesenheit nichts zu tun habe mit der Welt, auch nichts zu tun habe, in substantieller Identität, mit der Seele des Menschen. - Wer behauptet, daß die Seele des Menschen in irgendeiner Beziehung etwas von «göttlicher Wesenheit» in sich trage, ist vor der Katholischen Kirche in jesuitischer Auffassung ein Ketzer.
In solche Behauptungen schleicht sich hinein das innerste Bestreben dieser Kirche, die Menschen nicht hingelangen zu lassen zu dem Göttlichen, die Menschen abzusperren vom Göttlichen. Das Dogma nimmt schon eine solche Form an, welche bewirkt, daß die Menschen zum Göttlichen nicht hingelangen sollen. Es ist daher kein Wunder, daß, weil man die Menschen nicht hat zum Göttlichen gelangen lassen im fünften nachatlantischen Zeitraum, der nun einmal die Bewußtseinsseele bringen mußte, das Wissen von den Weltendingen nicht ein göttliches, sondern ein rein ahrimanisches geworden ist. Denn, was wir heute als Naturwissenschaft anerkennen, ist eine rein ahrimanische Leistung — das haben wir ja öfter charakterisiert. Merkwürdig ist nur, daß der Katholischen Kirche die ahrimanische Naturwissenschaft lieber ist als die anthroposophisch orientierte Naturwissenschaft; denn die ahrimanische Naturwissenschaft gilt heute nicht mehr als ketzerisch, sondern als anerkannt, und die anthroposophisch orientierte Naturwissenschaft wird als ketzerisch verschrien.
Diesen Dingen gegenüber muß aber gerade bei dem wirklich aufgeklärten Menschen Klarheit herrschen. Er muß einsehen, daß auf dem Geistesweg dasselbe unternommen werden muß, was auf dem Naturwege unternommen worden ist; denn nur dadurch kann auch der Naturweg davor bewahrt werden, in das rein Ahrimanische abzuirren. Er ist abgeirrt, weil der Geistesweg eben erst später dazukommen kann. Aber er muß von jetzt ab gegen die Zukunft der Menschheit hin dazukommen, damit die Naturwissenschaft wieder heraufgehoben werde in ihre göttlich-geistige Höhe, und damit wieder vereinigt werden kann das Leben, in dem wir stehen zwischen Geburt und Tod, mit demjenigen Leben, von dem die Wissenschaft des Geistigen Kunde geben soll, und in dem wir in der Zeit zwischen dem Tod und einer neuen Geburt stehen. Das kann aber für unsere Zeit nur geschehen, wenn wir den Willen haben, dieses Leben über die Erde hin wirklich zu verstehen, es so zu verstehen, wie es im Menschen wirkt. Wir werden auch den einzelnen individuellen Menschen nur verstehen, wenn wir den Charakter der Menschengruppierungen verstehen, und wir werden nur auf diese Art in die wahre Wirklichkeit hineinschauen können.
Ich habe Sie vor nicht langer Zeit auf eine merkwürdige Erscheinung hingewiesen, die manchen überraschen kann. Ich will es nur kurz wiederholen. Sie wissen, in der Schweiz hat ein braver Philosoph gewirkt, Avenarius, der ganz gewiß sich selber als einen recht guten, braven, bürgerlichen Staatsangehörigen angesehen, der sich nicht im entferntesten für irgendeinen Revolutionär gehalten hat. Der hat Lehren begründet, die in einer so schweren Sprache geschrieben sind, daß sie nur wenige lesen. In einer etwas populäreren Sprache, aber so ähnlich, hat ein Philosoph in Wien, in Prag gewirkt, Ernst Mach, der sich ebenso angesehen hat als einen braven Staatsbürger. Diese zwei Leute hatten wahrhaftig keine revolutionäre Ader. Und die merkwürdige Erscheinung tritt uns entgegen — ich habe Sie darauf aufmerksam gemacht -, daß diese beiden ‚Philosophen die offiziellen Philosophen des Bolschewismus geworden sind, daß die Bolschewisten diese Philosophen als ihre -— man könnte sagen, wenn der Ausdruck richtig verstanden wird — Staatsphilosophen anschauen. Nach einem gewissen Ausdruck, den die Welt gerne braucht, könnte man sagen, daß sich die beiden Philosophen, Avenarius und Mach, im Grabe umdrehen würden, wenn sie erfahren würden, daß sie nun von den Bolschewisten als Staatsphilosophen anerkannt werden. Ich habe Ihnen gesagt: Man versteht diese Erscheinung nur deshalb nicht, weil man sich nur an die abstrakte Logik hält, nicht an die Wirklichkeits-, nicht an die Tatsachenlogik, nicht an die Logik des Geschauten. Aber ich will, trotzdem Ihnen scheinbar diese Sache ferner liegen könnte, doch auf diese Sache noch einmal von einem anderen Gesichtspunkte hinweisen, will insbesondere einen der Punkte der Philosophie des Avenarius hervorheben, der uns geleiten kann bei der Beantwortung dieser wichtigen Frage: Wie kommen Avenarius und Mach dazu, bolschewistische Staatsphilosophen zu werden? Denn die Tatsache ist immerhin sehr bezeichnend für die Verwirrung in der Gegenwart. |
Sehen Sie, Avenarius wirft verschiedene Fragen auf, und wenn man in seiner Sprache spricht von den Introjektionen und so weiter, von diesen rein erkenntnistheoretischen Begriffen, die er entwickelt hat, so redet man ja für weite Kreise eine ziemlich unverständliche Sprache. Aber in dieser unverständlichen Sprache wirft er eine gewisse Frage auf, die doch gerade vom geisteswissenschaftlichen Standpunkt aus schr interessant ist. Avenarius wirft nämlich die Frage auf: Würde ein Mensch, der allein in der Welt wäre, auch von den Unterschieden sprechen zwischen dem, was in seiner Seele ist, und was außen in der Welt ist, von den Unterschieden zwischen dem Subjektiven und dem Objektiven? — Richard Avenarius ist scharfsinnig genug, daß er sagt: Wir werden nur dadurch verführt dazu, von den Unterschieden zwischen Subjektivem und Objektivem zu sprechen, daß wir, wenn wir einem anderen Menschen gegenüberstehen - also wenn wir nicht alleinstehen in der Welt -, annehmen, daß das, was wir in unseren Gehirnen tragen zum Beispiel von einem Tisch oder von etwas anderem, auch in ihm ist. Dadurch, auf diesem Umwege, daß wir das hineinprojizieren in sein Gehitn, dasselbe Bild, das wir auch in uns tragen, und dadurch die ganze Sache Bildcharakter annimmt, dadurch unterscheiden wir die Dinge in unserer Seele von den Dingen draußen, denen wir gegenüberstehen, von den Gegenständen. Avenarius meint, wenn nicht andere Leute außer uns noch draußen in der Welt wären, würden wir nicht sprechen von den Unterschieden der Dinge in unserer Seele und den Dingen draußen, sondern wir würden uns als eine Einheit anschauen, wir würden uns als Zusammenfluß mit den Dingen anschauen, würden uns nicht unterscheiden von der Welt.
Man kann sagen: Avenarius hat von einem gewissen Gesichtspunkte aus mit dieser Behauptung recht, und von einem anderen Gesichtspunkte aus furchtbar unrecht. Recht hat er insofern, als es allerdings etwas bedeutet, daß wir - wenn wir auch in unserer Erinnerung gewöhnlich von diesem Zeitpunkt nichts wissen - im Verlauf der allerersten Kindheit mit Menschen in Berührung kommen; das hat schon eine gewisse Bedeutung. Unser ganzes Vorstellen wird dadurch beeinflußt. Es wäre anders, wenn wir nicht in Berührung mit anderen Menschen kämen, aber es wäre nicht so, wie Avenarius meint. Wer durch geistiges Schauen wirklich darauf kommen kann, welcher Tatbestand da eigentlich zugrunde liegt, kommt nämlich in diesem Punkt auf die Wahrheit. Wir würden allerdings ein anderes Weltbild haben, wenn wir nicht auf unserem Lebenswege in der Zeit, in der wir noch gar nicht bewußt denken können, anderen Menschen begegneten. Aber es liegt die kuriose Tatsache vor: In diesem anderen Weltbilde wären die Geister drinnen, die der Welt zugrunde liegen. Also nicht in Avenariusschem Sinne würden wir uns von der Welt nicht unterscheiden, wenn wir allein auf der Welt wären und keine anderen Menschen da wären. Wenn wir allein auf der Welt wären bedenken Sie diese furchtbare Abstraktion -—, würden wir uns allerdings nicht von den Mineralien und Pflanzen unterscheiden, aber wir würden hinter Mineralien und Pflanzen die göttlich-geistige Welt wahrnehmen. Tiere dürften allerdings auch nicht da sein, sie würden das Weltbild auch beeinträchtigen. Aus dieser Tatsache ergibt sich aber, daß das Zusammensein mit Menschen der Grund ist, warum wir in naiver Weise nicht die geistige Welt, die hinter Pflanzen und Mineralien ist, wahrnehmen. Die Menschen stellen sich uns vor diese Welt. Denken Sie: um den Preis, die hierarchische Götterwelt nicht wahrzunehmen, erobern wir uns dasjenige, was uns durch unser Zusammenleben mit anderen Menschen auf der physischen Erde wird! Die Menschen stellen sich gewissermaßen verdeckend vor die Götterwelt hin. Das hat natürlich Avenarius nicht gewußt, daher hat er die Frage auf ein ganz falsches Geleise geführt. Er hat geglaubt, wenn keine Menschen da wären, dann würden wir uns ungeschieden von der Welt sehen, dann würden wir uns nicht unterscheiden von der Welt. Aber die Wahrheit ist: Wir würden uns zwar nicht von anderen Menschen und von Pflanzen und Mineralien unterscheiden, aber wir würden uns von den Göttern unterscheiden, die wir dann in unserem Umkreis hätten; das ist die Wahrheit! |
Wenn Sie dies bedenken, dann können Sie sich etwas sagen, was sehr wichtig ist, in unserer Zeit sich zu sagen: Es ist merkwürdig, daß unsere Zeit in vieler Beziehung das Schicksal hat, in ihren scharfsinnigsten Geistern an die wichtigsten Fragen anzutippen, zu rühren an die wichtigsten Fragen, und die Dinge auf die falschesten Geleise zu führen und immer sie so zu führen, daß sie wegführen von der Auffassung des Geistigen. Radikaler nämlich als Avenarius kann man nicht von der Auffassung des Geistigen wegführen. Denn seine Philosophie ist scharfsinnig, ist mit der ganzen Raffiniertheit der Professorensprache geschrieben, und sie ist daher geeignet, die Menschen möglichst schlafend vom Geiste hinwegzuführen. Wenn aber die Menschen schlafend vom Geiste hinweggeführt werden, dann halten sie dieses Hinwegführen vom Geiste für eine Notwendigkeit, für etwas wie die mathematische Notwendigkeit; wenn sie es nur nicht merken, daß sie vom Geiste weggeführt werden, dann nehmen sie das als ein wissenschaftlich Bewiesenes an. Das auf der einen Seite.
Sie sehen da einen Philosophen - und für Mach ließe sich ein Ähnliches sagen -, dessen innerster Nerv seines ganzen Denkens darin besteht, eine Wissenschaft zu begründen, die den Menschen radikal wegführt vom Geiste. Im Bolschewismus soll eine soziale Ordnung begründet werden mit Ausschluß alles Geistigen, soll gerade die Menschheit so sozial gruppiert werden, daß das Geistige dabei keine Rolle spielt. Sehen Sie, das ist der wirklich innere Zusammenhang. Der macht sich in der Tatsachenlogik geltend. Nicht aus einem bloß äußerlichen Grund, sondern aus höchst innerlicher Wesensverwandtheit wurden Avenarius und Mach die Staatsphilosophen der Bolschewisten.
Sie sehen daraus, daß man schon mit dem gewöhnlichen, heute gebräuchlichen Urteil vor solchen Dingen eigentlich ziemlich starr steht. Man kann sich nur wundern: Wie kommen die Bolschewisten dazu, Avenarius und Mach zu ihren Staatsphilosophen zu machen? Aber möglich ist es, die Zusammenhänge heute einzusehen. Da muß man aber auf die geistigen Grundlagen gehen. Das haben wit mit dieser Tatsache jetzt getan. Da muß man hinweisen können darauf: Wie ist das in Wirklichkeit, wenn der Mensch alleinstehend auf unserer physischen Erde, ohne andere Menschen, wäre? Es gibt einfach heute Erscheinungen, und insbesondere im gegenseitigen Verhältnis der Menschen zueinander - ich habe gerade eine geistige Angelegenheit erwähnt, aber es könnten auch alltägliche erwähnt werden -, die sich in das Menschenleben hineinstellen, und die den Menschen starr machen, weil sie ihn zu keinem Verständnisse kommen lassen, wenn er sie nicht geisteswissenschaftlich betrachtet.
Glauben Sie nicht, daß das zu allen Zeiten so war. In alten Zeiten waren solche Erscheinungen auch da, aber sie waren den Menschen instinktiv begreiflich aus dem alten instinktiven Hellsehen heraus. Im Verkehr der Menschen untereinander waren durch die graue Zeit der Unwissenheit solche Erscheinungen dann nicht vorhanden. Jetzt treten sie wieder auf. Nicht etwa, daß bloß die Seelen der Menschen sich entwickeln, die Welt entwickelt sich, die Welt ändert sich und zeigt ihre Veränderung zunächst im Verkehr der Menschen untereinander; im nächsten Zeitraum wird sie es auch zeigen im Verhältnis des Menschen zu den anderen Naturreichen. Unverständlich muß in der Gegenwart und in die nächste Zukunft hinein das Leben den Menschen bleiben, wenn sie dieses Leben nicht geisteswissenschaftlich betrachten wollen. Illusion über Illusion wird die Menschenseele packen, wenn man zu diesen geisteswissenschaftlichen Begriffen nicht seine Zuflucht wird nehmen wollen. Es sind hier manche, denen habe ich bei dem Ausbruch der gegenwärtigen kriegerischen Katastrophe immer wieder eines gesagt: Über die sogenannten welthistorischen Erscheinungen der letzten Jahrhunderte kann man schreiben nach den Urkunden der Archive, indem man einfach diese Urkunden aufstöbert und Rankesche oder ähnliche Geschichtsschreibung treibt. Über den Ausbruch dieser kriegerischen Katastrophe kann man so nicht schreiben. Denn wenn die Menschen auch alles mögliche aus den Archiven ausgraben werden: Wenn sie nicht aufmerksam darauf werden, wie die Seelenverfassung gerade derjenigen Menschen war, die am Ausgang dieses Krieges beteiligt waren, und wie diese Seelenverfassung die ahrimanischen Mächte hereingelassen hat in das Erdengetriebe, und wie dadurch von ahrimanischer Seite her die Ursachen zu dieser kriegerischen Katastrophe gekommen sind — wenn man nicht geisteswissenschaftlich wird studieren wollen den Ausgangspunkt dieser kriegerischen Katastrophe, dann wird dieser Ausgangspunkt immer dunkel bleiben. Das ist es, was schon in dieser kriegerischen Katastrophe liegt, wie, ich möchte sagen, eine Aufforderung an die Menschen, von ihr zu lernen. Viel kann gelernt werden an dem, was in den letzten vier bis fünf Jahren geschehen ist als Folge dessen, was früher da war. Vor allen Dingen wird sich lernen lassen, manche Fragen nicht mehr so einseitig wie früher, sondern den Forderungen der Zeit angemessen zu stellen.
Ich habe oftmals gesagt: Es ist kein Grund vorhanden, sich in leichter Weise über das Unglück der Zeit zu trösten oder etwa gar die Augen davor zu schließen. Es ist aber auch kein Grund zum Pessimismus vorhanden. Man braucht nur folgendes zu bedenken: Ungeheuer Schreckliches hat sich abgespielt im Laufe der letzten viereinhalb Jahre über die Erde hin; aber was ist das Wesentliche in diesem Schrecklichen? — Das, was Menschenseelen in dieser Zeit er. fahren haben, das ist das Wesentliche, in ihr erfahren haben natürlich mit Bezug auf die Entwickelung dieser Menschenseelen in der ganzen Erdenentwickelung. Da aber taucht dann eine sehr bedeutungsvolle, eine inhaltschwere Frage auf. Diese Frage ist paradox, aber nur deshalb, weil sie eben inhaltschwer und dem gewöhnlichen Denken ungewohnt ist, die Frage: Kann man denn eigentlich wünschen, daß die Menschheit ohne eine solche Katastrophe einfach so hätte fortleben sollen, wie sie sich gewöhnt hatte, bis zum Jahre 1914 zu leben? Kann man das eigentlich so ohne weiteres wünschen? - Ich darf bei der Aufwerfung einer solchen Frage immer wieder auf das hinweisen, was ich vor dem Ausbruch dieser kriegerischen Katastrophe in meinem Zyklus in Wien gesagt habe: daß, wenn man überschaut, was in der Menschenwelt lebt, sich das Verhältnis der Menschen untereinander, das soziale Leben wie ein soziales Karzinom ausnimmt, wie ein durch die Menschheit schleichendes Krebsgeschwür. Die Menschen haben allerdings die Augen zugemacht vor diesem Karzinom der sozialen Gemeinschaft. Sie wollten nicht hinschauen auf die tatsächlichen Verhältnisse. Aber niemand kann, wenn er die Dinge im Tiefsten schaut, sagen, daß es gut für die Menschheit gewesen wäre, wenn sie so fortgefahren wäre. Sie wäre auf dem Wege, den ich angedeutet habe, hinweg vom Geiste immer weiter talab gekommen. Und diejenigen, zu denen wir mit so schmerzvoller Seele hinschauen, die Millionen, die von diesem physischen Plane hinweggefegt worden sind durch diese fürchterliche Katastrophe, die jetzt als Seelen leben, sie sind es, die am allermeisten bedenken, wie ihre Lage anders ist, jetzt, da sie den Rest ihres Lebens in der geistigen Welt durchmachen, und wie diese Lage anders wäre, wenn ihr Karma sie weiter auf der physischen Erde erhalten hätte.
Sub specie aeterni, unter dem Gesichtswinkel der Ewigkeit nehmen sich die Dinge doch anders aus. So etwas muß ausgesprochen werden. Die Dinge dürfen nur nicht leichtfertig und leichtgeschürzt genommen werden. Ebenso, wie es wahr ist, daß es unendlich traurig ist, daß diese Katastrophe hereingebrochen ist, ebenso wahr ist es, daß durch diese Katastrophe die Menschheit bewahrt worden ist vor einem furchtbaren Versinken in Materialismus und Utilitarismus. Wenn sich auch das heute noch nicht zeigt, aber es wird sich zeigen, es wird sich vor allen Dingen zeigen in den Mittelländern und im Osten, wo sich statt einer Ordnung, die den Materialismus in sich aufgenommen hatte, ein Chaos entwickelt. Man kann gewiß nicht ohne den Unterton des Leidens sprechen über dieses Chaos, das über die Mittelländer und über die Länder des Ostens hereingebrochen ist, und das in äußerer Beziehung wenig Aussicht bietet, sich bald irgendwie in eine Harmonie umzugestalten. Aber ein anderes liegt vor. Da, wo dieses Chaos sich ausbreitet, da wird eine Welt sein, die durch den äußeren physischen Plan den Menschen in der nächsten Zukunft möglichst wenig geben wird. Die Segnungen des physischen Planes werden nicht groß sein in den Mittelländern und in den Ostländern. Alles das, was dem Menschen werden kann dadurch, daß er sein Dasein trägt durch äußere Gewalten, das wird nicht viel sein. Der Mensch wird sich im Innern seiner Seele fassen müssen, um festzustehen. Und bei diesem Sichfassen im Innern, um festzustehen, wird er den Ansatz machen können zum Wege in die geistige Welt hinein. Er wird den Entschluß fassen können, zum Geiste hinzugehen, von dem allein das Heil der Zukunft kommen kann. Denn das ist das Wesentliche für die Zukunft, daß uns gewissermaßen unser äußeres Leibliches entgleitet, daß unser äußeres Leibliches — ich führte es gestern aus — nicht mehr so gesund ist, als es in vergangenen Zeiten war, daß es mehr 'Tod in sich hat, als es in vergangenen Zeiten hatte. Und der Impuls für die Einsicht, daß nicht mit dem, womit unser Leibliches verbunden ist, des Weltenrätsels Inhalt gefunden werden kann, sondern daß hinaufgestiegen werden muß in geistige Welten, der Impuls dazu, auch die soziale Ordnung aus geistigen Welten zu holen, er wird sich ergeben, wenn man möglichst wenig in der physischen Welt finden kann. Diese physische Welt wird eine Gestaltung der Harmonie nur annehmen können, wenn sie diese Gestaltung aus dem geistigen Leben heraus sucht. Die Bibel erzählt auf ihren ersten Seiten nicht, daß es Ahriman oder Luzifer waren, die die Menschen aus dem Paradiese vertrieben haben, sondern daß es der Jahve-Gott selber war, der die Menschen aus dem Paradiese vertrieben hat. Aber wir wissen auch, daß diese Vertreibung aus dem Paradiese das Freiwerden des Menschen, das Erleben der Freiheit für die Menschen bedeutet, indem die Möglichkeit, der Keim zur Freiheit dadurch gelegt wurde. Müßte es denn durchaus wider diese biblische Weisheit sein, wenn gesagt würde: Auch göttliche Weisheit war es, die die Menschen herausgetrieben hat aus der in Materialismus und Utilitarismus hineinführenden Gegenwart zu Keimen, deren geistige Erfassung der Welt nützen sollen? Und aus den schmerzlichen Untergründen der letzten viereinhalb . Jahre tönt es gleichsam herauf: Geistiges will sich offenbaren durch die Schleier der äußeren Erscheinungen; Menschen sollen lernen durch das Unglück, auf diese geistigen Offenbarungen hinzuschauen, und es wird zu ihrem Heile sein.
Auch das ist eine Sprache, die paradox klingt für manche Menschen der Gegenwart; aber es ist die Sprache, die der Christus in unseren Zeiten uns anleitet zu sprechen. Denn im Fortschritt des Christentums muß es gelegen sein, die christlichen Wahrheiten in einer neuen Weise zu fassen. Das kann nur geschehen, wenn sie geistig gefaßt werden. Das Mysterium von Golgatha ist ein geistiges Ereignis, das in die Erdenentwickelung eingegriffen hat. Vollständig verstanden werden kann es nur mit geistiger Erkenntnisweise. Und so werden wir, wie die Menschheit im Grunde durch Unglück den Christus gefunden hat, durch Unglück auch den Christus in der neuen Auffassungsweise und Gestalt zu suchen haben.
Gewiß ist das, was so gesprochen wird, nicht ein Alltagstrost. Aber wenn man von aller Trivialität sich fernhalten will, so ist es im tieferen Sinne des Wortes vielleicht doch etwas Trost, vielleicht der einzige, der der Menschenwürde heute in unserer Zeit angemessen ist. Es ist allerdings ein Trost, der die Menschen nicht hinweist darauf: Wartet, und es wird euch ohne euer Zutun alles Göttliche beschieden werden, sondern ein Trost, der die Menschen darauf hinweist: Wendet an eure Kräfte, und ihr werdet finden, daß in euren Seelen der Gott spricht und kraftet, und daß ihr durch den in euren Seelen sprechenden und kraftenden Gott auch den Gott in der Welt finden werdet, und mit dem Gotte, was die Hauptsache ist, in der Welt in Gemeinsamkeit werdet wirken können! - Von dem bloß passiven Verhalten zu den übersinnlichen Einsichten muß abgegangen werden. Der Mensch muß sich aufraffen, um sich innerlich zu finden, und mit diesem innerlichen Finden sich als ein Glied in der Weltenordnung erkennen. Da mögen sich dann diejenigen Bekenntnisse, die es dem Menschen bequem machen sollen, indem sie — ich meine das bildlich - zuerst seinen Geist einlullen in Weihrauch, damit er dann passiv, ohne sein Zutun, den Weg zum Göttlichen finde, aufbäumen. Diese Bekenntnisse, die sich so an die Bequemlichkeit des Menschen wenden, sie werden sich immer aufbäumen gegen die Forderung, die jetzt herausspringt aus den geistigen Welten, daß der Mensch seinen Wert suche in innerer Aktivität, in innerer Tätigkeit, im wirksamen inneren Entwickeln des geistigen Lebens!
Das muß sein, insbesondere wenn dem Rechnung getragen werden soll, was in mancherlei Maskierung und Vermummung auftritt: der sozialen Forderung unserer Zeit. Ich habe schon in diesen Wochen darauf hingewiesen: Wir leben, wenigstens ein großer Teil unserer gebildeten Menschen, von den Errungenschaften der griechischen Kultur. Wir bedenken nur nicht immer, daß dasjenige, in dem wir so leben, dadurch geschaffen worden ist, daß diese griechische Kultur sich auf der Grundlage der Sklaverei entwickelt hat, daß ein großer Teil der Menschen als Sklaven leben mußte, damit das, was wir heute als die Segnungen der griechischen Kultur empfinden, überhaupt vorhanden sei. Wenn man sich aber so recht klarmacht, daß alles das, was griechische Kunst, was die schöne Erinnerung an griechisches Leben, was griechische Wissenschaft bedeutet, und manches andere noch auf dem Grunde der Sklaverei entstanden ist, dann fragt man sich mit einer anderen Intensität: Was hat es denn bewirkt, daß wir nicht mehr so denken wie die großen Philosophen Plato und Aristoteles gedacht haben: daß die Sklaverei etwas ganz Selbstverständliches ist? Damals war es selbstverständlich für die weisesten der Menschen, daß neun Zehntel der Menschheit als Sklaven leben mußten. Das ist für uns heute nicht mehr selbstverständlich, sondern wir betrachten es als eine Verletzung der Menschenwürde, wenn jemand so denkt. Was hat es innerhalb der abendländischen Menschheit bewirkt, daß so das Vorstellungsvermögen der Menschen umgeartet worden ist? — Das Christentum! Das Christentum hat die Menschen entsklavt, das Christentum hat sie dazu geführt, wenigstens im Prinzip den Satz anzuerkennen: Die Menschen sind in bezug auf ihre Seele gleich vor Gott. Das aber hat auch die Sklaverei ausgeschlossen aus der sozialen Ordnung der Menschen. Aber wir wissen: Es hat eines gelassen, auf das wir von den verschiedensten Gesichtspunkten immer wieder hinweisen müssen, es hat bis in unsere Zeit herein die Auffassung gelassen, von der ich Ihnen gesagt habe, daß sie gerade das Punctum saliens ist in dem Bewußtsein des Proletariers: daß in unserer sozialen Ordnung ein Teil des Menschen, und noch dazu ein im Leib sich Abspielendes vom Menschen als Ware gekauft und von ihm selbst verkauft werden kann. Das ist ja das Aufreibende und Aufregende. Das ist eigentlich das Punctum saliens der sozialen Frage, daß Arbeitskraft bezahlt werden kann. Es ist auch das, was auf dem Grunde unserer ganzen sozialen Gemeinschaft läßt den Charakter des Egoismus; denn Egoismus muß herrschen in der sozialen Ordnung, wenn der Mensch für das, was er für sich braucht, sich seine Arbeit bezahlen lassen muß. Er muß erwerben für sich. Was als nächste Etappe nach der Überwindung der Sklaverei überwunden werden muß, das ist, daß eines Menschen Arbeit Ware sein kann! Das ist das wirkliche Punctum saliens der sozialen Frage, die das neue Christentum lösen wird. Und ich habe Ihnen einiges vorgetragen von den Lösungen der sozialen Frage, denn jene Dreigliederung der sozialen Ordnung, von der ich Ihnen gesprochen habe, die löst die Ware von der Arbeitskraft ab, so daß die Menschen in der Zukunft nur Ware, nur äußeres Erzeugnis, nur vom Menschen Abgesondertes kaufen und verkaufen werden, daß aber der Mensch, wie ich es schon dargestellt habe in dem Aufsatz « Theosophie und soziale Frage», der 1905 erschienen ist, aus Bruderliebe für den anderen Menschen arbeiten wird.
Es mag ein weiter Weg sein, um das zu erreichen, doch nichts wird die soziale Frage lösen als einzig und allein dieses. Und wer heute nicht daran glaubt, daß es nur so kommen müsse in der Weltenordnung, der gleicht dem, der zur Zeit des entstehenden Christentums gesagt hätte: Sklaven muß es immer geben. So, wie ein solcher dazumal unrecht gehabt hätte, so hat heute derjenige unrecht, der da sagt: Arbeit muß immer bezahlt werden. Damals konnte man sich nicht denken, daß nicht eine Anzahl von Menschen Sklaven sein müssen, nicht Plato, nicht Aristoteles konnten es sich denken. Heute können sich die gescheitesten Menschen nicht denken, daß man eine soziale Struktur haben kann, in der die Arbeit noch ganz andere Geltung hat, als wenn sie «bezahlt» wird. Natürlich wird auch dann aus Arbeit ein Produkt hervorgehen, aber das Produkt wird das einzig und allein zu Kaufende und zu Verkaufende sein. Das wird sozial die Menschen erlösen.
Um diese Dinge einzusehen, dazu gehört schon Anschauungserkenntnis, Anschauungslogik. Aber ohne diese Anschauungslogik kommt die Menschheit nicht vorwärts, denn sie ist das Heizmaterial für das, was in der Zukunft kommen muß unter die Menschen: die aus dem Verständnis von Mensch zu Mensch entstehende Menschenliebe. Und so sonderbar es klingt, heute, wo allerlei atavistische Reste nach der einen oder nach der anderen Seite in den Menschen vorhanden sind, heute wird alles noch mit Sympathie und Antipathie angesehen. Wenn zum Beispiel so etwas auseinandergehalten wird, wie ich es vor einiger Zeit hier getan habe, wo ich sagte: Von den drei Gliedern der Menschennatur sind die westlichen Völker berufen, gerade die Unterleibsnatur besonders auszubilden, die mittleren Völker die Herznatur, die östlichen Völker die Kopfnatur, dann werden solche Sachen heute noch vielfach «bewertet»; wenigstens irgendwo in seinem Innern hat der Mensch immer noch so ein kleines Kästchen, wo er die Sachen bewertet. Diese Bewertung muß aufhören; denn gerade dieses Anschauen der Differenzierung über das Erdenrund hin wird die verständnisvolle Liebe begründen. Aus dem Verständnis, nicht aus dem Unverstand wird im Zeitalter der Bewußtseinsseele die wirkliche, über die ganze Erde hin gehende Menschenliebe hervorkommen. Dann wird man verstehen, sich in dem Christus über die ganze Erde hin zu finden. Der Christus ist keine Angelegenheit eines oder des anderen Volkes; der Christus ist eine Angelegenheit der ganzen Menschheit. Aber um ihn als Angelegenheit der ganzen Menschheit zu erkennen, muß manche Illusion schwinden, müssen die Menschen wirklich aufsteigen können dazu, ohne Illusion in die wahre Wesenheit der Dinge hineinzuschauen. Das wollen heute die Menschen auf den verschiedensten Gebieten nicht. Ich weiß aber, daß ich nur eine Weihnachtsfriedenssache ausspreche, wenn ich das folgende Paradoxon vor Sie hinstelle. Sie wissen, ich rede nicht von den einzelnen Menschen, sondern von Volkstümern, wenn ich von diesen Differenzierungen rede. Man kann diese Dinge leicht mißverstehen, wenn man nicht guten Willens ist. Aber ich mache ja so oftmals darauf aufmerksam, daß nicht gemeint ist die einzelne Menschenindividualität, die herauswächst aus dem Volkstum, sondern daß eben die Volkstümer gemeint sind. Das bitte ich zu berücksichtigen, wenn ich das Folgende sage.
Betrachten wir einmal das eine oder das andere von den Urteilen, die in den letzten vier Jahren gefällt worden sind über die Reiche oder die Staaten der europäischen Mitte. Ich will, weil ich solche Stimmungen vollständig verstehen kann, nicht im geringsten irgend etwas sagen gegen die Entente-begeisterten Menschen. Das liegt mir ganz fern. Jeder hat seine Meinung, sie ist von einem gewissen Gesichtspunkt aus berechtigt. Aber man kann nun den Blick wegwenden von dieser Meinung, die in den verflossenen Jahren vorhanden war, und kann die Fortsetzung dieser Meinung in der Gegenwart ins Auge fassen. Da wird man vielleicht doch manches recht unverständlich finden können. Man wird sich fragen können: Ist es denn notwendig, daß dieselben Urteile, die man gefällt hat, solange die Machthaber der Mittelstaaten vorhanden waren und noch die Macht hatten, daß die sich nun fortsetzen? Ja, daß man in raffinierter Weise alles tut, um diese Ansichten fortsetzen zu können? Ist es denn notwendig? Ist das ebenso erklärlich? Es ist gewiß von obenhin angesehen nicht so erklärlich, wie manches früher erklärlich war. Aber tiefer angesehen ist es doch erklärlich. Tiefer angesehen ist es erklärlich, nicht aus dem einzelnen Menschen heraus - die einzelnen Menschen werden in den Westländern auch die Gesundung dieser Verhältnisse herbeiführen -, aber diejenigen Menschen, die bloß aus den Volkstümern heraus urteilen oder aus Vorurteilen für diese Volkstümer urteilen, diese Menschen, die haben in ihrem Unterbewußten etwas, das in der folgenden Art charakterisiert werden kann.
Ich habe vor einigen Wochen hier ausgeführt, daß in unserer Weltanschauung, namentlich in unserer Vorstellungsart in der Gegenwart noch vieles Alttestamentliche lebt, daß der eigentliche Nerv des Christentums doch noch wenig eingezogen ist. Das Eigentümliche des Jahve-Dienstes besteht ja darin, daß er alles dasjenige betrifft, was wir nicht zwischen Geburt und Tod uns anerziehen, sondern was wir ererbt mitbekommen, was in unserem Blute liegt, und was sonst nur Einfluß hat, während wir schlafen, wenn wir aus unserem Leibe heraußen sind. Diese Jahve-Anschauung pulsiert noch vielfach in unserer Zeit. Sie kann zur Christus-Anschauung nur dann sich erheben, wenn man hinblickt mit aller Kraft auf die Erwerbung der geistigen Welt im intellektualistischen Zeitalter, nicht durch Geburt oder durch dasjenige, was uns mit der Geburt eingegeben ist, sondern was uns anerzogen wird. Durch die Natur selber ist nicht der Westen prädestiniert, vom Jahve-Dienst überzugehen zum Christus-Dienst, sondern es beginnt die Prädestination erst in der Mitte von Europa und geht nach dem Osten hin; das gilt selbstverständlich für das Volkstum, nicht für den einzelnen Menschen. Daher jene eigentümliche, noch ganz im alttestamentlichen Vorstellen ruhende Art des Wilsonistischen Denkens, das eigentlich so auftritt, daß es, wenn es das auch in Abrede stellt, ausrotten will das, was in den Mittelländern und im Osten geistig emporkommen will. Deshalb ist es so unerklärlich in der Gegenwart, nachdem man ja hinweggeschafft hat, was man vorgab, hinwegschaflen zu wollen, nachdem nunmehr übriggeblieben sind die Völker, denen man, wie man versichert hat, nichts Arges antun will, daß man dieselbe Gesinnung unter allerlei Vorwänden fortsetzt. Man setzt es fort, weil man sich eigentlich wehrt gegen das, was in den Mittelländern und im Osten im Laufe der letzten Jahrhunderte als der Menschheit doch notwendig in geistiger Entwickelung aufgetreten ist. Man möchte unterbewußt das auslöschen. Man möchte sich nicht einlassen auf diese Dinge.
Nun leben wir in einer sehr bedeutsamen Weltenkrisis. Ich habe oft fragen gehört: Wie kommt es denn eigentlich, daß die Menschen des Westens, namentlich Engländer und Franzosen, die Deutschen so furchtbar hassen? - Es gibt eine sehr einfache Antwort darauf, sie ist aber wirklich erschöpfend und sie besteht darin, daß der Mensch sich selber immer anders anschaut, namentlich auch als Volksangehöriger, als er den andern anschaut. Und ich kann Ihnen die Versicherung geben, solche Gedanken, wie Mach sie gehabt hat, als er in den Omnibus eingestiegen ist, oder als er auf der Straße gegangen ist, die liegen in dem Unterbewußten der Menschen sehr häufig. Sie wissen, Mach erzählt selbst: Er stieg einmal sehr ermüdet in einen Omnibus und bemerkte nicht, daß da ein Spiegel war an der Wand, die der Eingangstüre gegenüber war. Da setzte sich von der anderen Seite ein anderer herein. Da dachte er: Was ist denn das für ein gräßlicher Schulmeister, der da einsteigt vis-a-vis? — Er war nämlich sich selber fremd, er kannte sich als Person so wenig; aber als er sich sah, war er sich gar nicht sympathisch.
Nun sehen Sie sich die Geistesgeschichte Mitteleuropas an, nicht in den intimeren Zügen, aber sehen Sie sie sich an im großen und ganzen. Bis zu Lessing, also bis weit in das letzte Drittel des achtzehnten Jahrhunderts hinein haben die Deutschen sich bemüht, so zu sein wie die Franzosen. Sie sehen es ja aus allem. Von einem gewissen Zeitpunkt an, der liegt ungefähr im zwölften Jahrhundert, bis in die Zeit weit über die Hälfte des achtzehnten Jahrhunderts haben die Deutschen sich bemüht, so zu sein wie die Franzosen, es so zu machen, daß sie auch Franzosen würden. Was die Franzosen dann an sich nicht sahen, oder wenn sie es sahen, doch eher schätzten, das haßten sie furchtbar, wenn sie es in der Nachahmung sahen. Der Mensch übt nämlich unbewußt eine merkwürdige Selbsterkenntnis. Die Deutschen wurden im Grunde genommen in ihrem tiefsten Wesen von den Franzosen nie gehaßt, sondern die Franzosen haßten sich selber, indem sie ihr Abbild, ihr Spiegelbild aus der deutschen Seele heraus ansahen. Seit jener Zeit hat begonnen ein merkwürdiger, heute noch gar nicht genug gewürdigter englischer Einfluß. Die Engländer sehen sich selber natürlich ebensowenig, wie Mach sich gesehen hat, aber sie bemerken sich, wenn sie sich nun in jenem Spiegelbilde schauen, das in merkwürdiger Weise seit dem achtzehnten Jahrhundert in die deutsche Seele eingezogen ist. Sie beurteilen den Engländer im Deutschen. Das ist die einfache psychologische Lösung. Wäre diese Weltenkrisis nicht gekommen, so würde noch lange Zeit dieser Zustand gedauert haben, es wäre eigentlich ein großer Brei da, aus dem die einzelnen Individualitäten dann herauskämen, die allerdings die Intimitäten des deutschen Wesens haben würden. Aber das Unglück, das Chaos, wird aus der Weltenkrise heraus gerade das erstehen lassen, was erstehen soll, was immer da war, was nur unter der Macht des Westens sich nicht entfalten konnte. So liegen die wirklichen Tatsachen. Es ist kein Grund zum Pessimismus, auch in Mitteleuropa nicht. Aber man muß dann zu den tieferen Gründen hinuntersteigen, die dem Werden zugrunde liegen.
Dasjenige, was die Ententemächte jetzt ausführen, das mag so oder so aussehen. Darauf kommt furchtbar wenig an, denn im Grunde ihres Herzens wollen sie etwas Unmögliches. Sie wollen verhindern, daß etwas heraufkommt, was sich in der Mitte Europas und im Osten entwickeln muß. Das aber hängt zusammen mit dem geistigen Fortschritt der Menschen. Der ist nicht zu verhindern. Aber es ruft das andere hervor, daß der Mensch, wenn er es mit der Erdenzukunft ernst meint, an den Geist eben glauben muß. Nur aus dem Geiste, aus der Kraft des Geistes wird dasjenige kommen, was kommen muß, auch zur Lösung der so brennenden sozialen Forderung. Es war notwendig, daß im Maschinenzeitalter fünf mal hundert Millionen unsichtbare Menschen, das heißt, als Maschinen sichtbare Menschen, entstanden sind, damit allmählich die Menschen fühlen lernen: Sie dürfen nicht so bezahlt werden, wie die Maschinen bezahlt werden. Und es war notwendig, daß diese furchtbare Katastrophe, in der das Maschinenzeitalter seine größten 'Triumphe gefeiert hat, heraufgekommen ist. Aber aus dieser Katastrophe wird aufstehen Kraftentfaltung der Menschen. Und aus dieser Kraftentfaltung wird der Mensch auch eine gewisse Möglichkeit schöpfen, sich wiederum recht mit dem Göttlichen, mit dem Geistigen zu verbinden. Ebensowenig, wie es für den Menschen ein bloßes Unglück war — um jetzt den Ausgangspunkt der Erdenentwickelung mit dem zu vergleichen, was ja viele Menschen mit Recht das furchtbarste Ereignis in der Weltgeschichte nennen -, daß die Menschen aus dem Paradiese vertrieben worden sind, so ist es nicht ein bloßes Unglück, daß eine solche Katastrophe die Menschen betroffen hat. Die wertvollsten Wahrheiten sind schließlich im Grunde genommen paradox. Man kann heute ja ich habe öfter auf diese Sache aufmerksam gemacht — sagen: Die Menschen waren so schändlich, das wertvollste Wesen, das auf der Erde erschienen ist, den Christus Jesus, ans Kreuz zu schlagen. Sie haben ihn getötet. Man kann sagen: Es war «schändlich» von den Menschen. Aber dieser Tod, der ist ja der Inhalt des Christentums. Durch diesen Tod ist ja das geschehen, was wir das Mysterium von Golgatha nennen. Ohne diesen Tod gäbe es kein Christentum. Dieser Tod ist das Glück der Menschen, dieser Tod ist die Kraft des Erdenmenschen. So paradox sind die Dinge der Wirklichkeit. Man kann auf der einen Seite sagen: Es war schändlich, daß die Menschen den Christus ans Kreuz geschlagen haben - und dennoch ist mit diesem Tode, mit diesem Ans-Kreuz-Schlagen, das größte Erdenereignis eingetroffen. Ein Unglück ist nicht immer bloß ein Unglück. Ein Unglück ist oftmals der Ausgangspunkt für das Erringen menschlicher Größe und menschlicher Stärke.
Twelfth Lecture
When the saying that has resounded in our hearts for centuries comes alive again, speaking of the divine mysteries revealed in the heavens and of peace on earth for people of good will, then the question will surely arise in our hearts, especially in our time: What is actually necessary for these people throughout the world in terms of the evolution of the earth and in terms of the peace meant by the Gospel? We have been talking for weeks about what is necessary for people all over the world, especially in our present time, which is so full of questions and doubts. And if we want to condense into a single sentence some of what has been passing through our souls in recent times, we can say: What is necessary for people is to strive more and more for complete mutual understanding.
Now, the search for true mutual understanding between human beings coincides with what was discussed yesterday as the fundamental impulse of what is called anthroposophically oriented spiritual science. This anthroposophically oriented spiritual science strives for insight into that which cannot be seen within the world and its development. But when we look at what is to become in human souls through such an understanding of the world, it is not the apparent, illusory content of the present social demand, but its true content, which consists in bringing about mutual, genuine understanding among human beings. This understanding of human beings across the globe must be sought with genuine honesty on the one hand and with vigor on the other. Today, this can only be done in the sense of an active spiritual life, a spiritual life that does not merely want to surrender itself passively to the world, but wants to be active inwardly in order to come to a real understanding of the world and of human beings by participating in the impulses of existence. Yesterday I spoke of the fact that we live in an age in which new spiritual revelations are penetrating through the veil of outer appearances. This truth cannot be taken seriously enough. For only those who take it fully seriously will be able to meet the demands that our time basically places on every individual who wants to be awake in life.
Now, if you let your thoughts wander back to some of the observations we have made over the past few weeks, you will find that this understanding of human beings cannot be attained on earth as easily as some believe. We have endeavored to shed light on the peculiarities of the ethnic groups in the western, eastern, and central regions of the earth. We have, so to speak, without allowing any sympathy or antipathy to influence us in the slightest, tried to understand what is most peculiar to the folklore of the West, the folklore of the middle, and the folklore of the East. Why have we done this? We have pointed out that our time is an age of special development of intellectuality, that this intellectuality finds expression among the Western peoples, especially among the English-speaking peoples, in such a way that the living out of the intellect seems instinctive, an instinct, and that among the Middle Eastern peoples this intellect does not appear instinctive, is not even present at first, but must be acquired through education. We pointed out that this is a significant difference between the peoples of the West and the peoples of the Middle East. We then pointed to the peoples of the East and said: There, the development of the intellect is expressed in such a way that the peoples of the East initially resist awakening this intellectuality within themselves because they want to preserve it for the recognition of the spirit itself in the future.
We have pointed out other differences across the globe, and today we ask ourselves: Why do we make these distinctions? Why do we try to characterize the different peoples of the earth from the points of view that have been put forward here? We are trying to do this because in the future it will no longer be enough to simply say, “Love one another,” but because in the future people will only be able to communicate with one another across the Earth in their tasks if they know what is at work in one territory or another, if they can consciously look at the peculiarities that exist in the various ethnic groups. If we can raise ourselves to the level of feeling that is necessary for such understanding, then this understanding will also be brought about. The feeling that is necessary is this: when we begin to characterize people across the earth in this way, we must stop judging them according to their moral qualities. It is not possible to characterize peoples by judging them in the same way as one judges individual human beings. It is precisely the essence of individual human development on earth that human beings, as individual beings, develop morality as they are. Morality can only be developed by individual human beings; it cannot be developed by groups of human beings. It would be the worst illusion to continue to believe that groups of people, or — as people like to say today — nations, can enter into the same relationship with one another as individuals can. Those who can understand concretely what groups of human beings, including peoples, are, see peoples — as we know from the cycle on the souls of peoples — guided by those beings in the order of hierarchies whom we call Archangeloi, or archangels. But they will never be able to attribute to the mutual relationship between peoples the same thing that they must see in the relationship between individual human beings. What peoples are, they are before the divine beings. A different assessment must be made than that which exists between human beings. That is why human beings become more individual in the course of their development, why they struggle to free themselves from mere ethnicity so that they can fully enter into what is called the moral world order. And this moral world order is an individual human matter.
Such things must be understood through real knowledge. The true progress of Christianity itself in our time consists in understanding such things. I have said that we live in a time in which, in a sense, the spirits of personality are rising to creative activity, becoming creators. This is extremely important, for as they become creators, something penetrates through the veil of appearances that was described yesterday as a new revelation. Thus, the spirits of personality take on a creative character, become, in a sense, something other than what they were before, becoming similar in their essence to the character that spirits such as the spirits of form have had for our Earth's development since the Lemurian epoch. Thus, human beings are confronted with a completely changed worldview. We must be aware of this, for it is significant in our time that human beings are confronted with a completely changed worldview. You see, this worldview comes, to use Goethe's expression, out of the “gray depths of the spirit.” If we look back at the historical development of humanity from a spiritual scientific perspective, we can look back to pre-Christian times, perhaps to times far back in pre-Christian history, and we will find that in an ancient, instinctive way, the further back we go, the more extensive the knowledge of the world was. This extensive knowledge of the world inspires more and more awe the better one gets to know it. And it finally becomes a fact for the knower that at the end of the Earth's development, a great sum of wisdom was poured out, as it were, over human life on Earth, which then gradually seeped away. And strange as it may sound, it is no other way than that a certain low point had been reached with regard to this knowledge at the time when the mystery of Golgotha simultaneously brought happiness to humanity. Everything that people had known earlier flowed, as it were, into a chaos of human consciousness during this time. And those who understand such things express this fact unanimously by saying: The development in which human beings are involved had once again reached the point of ignorance at that time. But into this gray ignorance that spread over humanity, which lived at most in the traditions of ancient times, there fell the greatest revelation on earth, the mystery of Golgotha, the starting point of new knowledge, the starting point of new revelations for humanity. Then the gray ignorance remained throughout the centuries, insofar as it depended on human beings themselves, in a certain sense.
It is indeed deeply enlightening to look back on the last two millennia and ask ourselves: What have human beings ultimately brought forth from themselves in these last two millennia? Everything they had in the way of wisdom, wisdom independent of the mystery of Golgotha, was ancient tradition, it was inherited. Let us understand each other correctly: I do not mean to say that humanity had no wisdom at all in the last two millennia, and I do not wish to devalue the wisdom it did have. But what must be taken into account is this: the wisdom that existed in ancient pre-Christian times, the remnants of which can be seen in the last centuries before the Mystery of Golgotha, was — albeit instinctively — seen by people in ancient times. The ability to see oneself independently in relation to the content of world wisdom had been lost. In a sense, what existed in those ancient times was preserved in a historical memory, in a historical remembrance. And even the mystery of Golgotha, as I said yesterday, was clothed in ancient wisdom, expressed through ideas from ancient wisdom, from the wisdom of remembrance. This lasted for centuries. A harbinger of a new penetration of world wisdom by human beings, even if only a harbinger, and even if initially in a way that I would call God-averse, only appeared with the newer scientific way of thinking. Here again is something that human beings want to work out through the activity of their own souls. As I have so often emphasized, it is a matter of viewing the spiritual world in the future in the same way as the purely mechanical external order of nature has been viewed since Copernicus. Learning to view the divine in the same way that we have learned to view the external, mechanical, worldly realm since Copernicus, Galileo, and Giordano Bruno is another point of view that must permeate our thinking if we want to arrive at a true understanding of our time.
Of course, there are many obstacles to this true understanding of our time. As you know, it is necessary that things be said now to bring about this understanding, such as those said in my book How to Know Higher Worlds: that people be shown, as it were, the paths the soul must take in order to penetrate the spiritual world, just as Copernicus, Galileo, and Giordano Bruno attempted to penetrate the external, mechanical order of nature. Some who do not have a deeper understanding of the aspirations of different people might easily be surprised that it is precisely this endeavor to show the paths that the human soul must take to enter the spiritual world that is strongly opposed by the old spirit of confession, if one may call it that, especially in the form of Jesuitism.
Among the various blunt accusations that have appeared in three articles in the “Stimmen der Zeit” (Voices of the Times) over the course of this year is the claim that the Church forbids such manipulation of the human soul in order to find paths to the spiritual world. To many believers today, to many who believe out of authority, this sounds as if it were something special. But it only sounds that way because people do not consider that the same Church also forbade the research of Copernicus and Galileo. The Church did exactly the same with external research, so it is not surprising that it does the same with internal research in the spiritual realm. It is merely preserving its old habits. Just as the Catholic Church resisted the Copernican doctrine until 1827, so it resists penetration into the spiritual world. But this penetration into the spiritual worlds is not talking in abstractions, but something very, very concrete. It is the emergence from gray ignorance and the knowing penetration into the spiritual content that underlies the world. Part of this gray ignorance is that people let their gaze wander over the earth, saw peoples, saw groups of people, and spoke of these groups of people as if they were chaos. They spoke of the peoples of the West, of the peoples of the Middle, of the peoples of the East, but they did not distinguish between them, they did not characterize them. At most, one knew that the leaders of the individual peoples were Archangeloi. One did not strive to really get to know the character of the individual peoples, the Archangeloi. It is one of the new revelations that we now really look at how the individual Archangeloi work throughout the earth. This is an actual, real enrichment of human consciousness throughout the earth. By being unable to rise out of gray ignorance to such real differentiation, we have created the very abyss that exists between what I characterized yesterday as the subject of Sunday afternoon sermons and what human beings regard as the affairs of outer world life. I spoke of how people talk about the divine world and its relationship to human beings in the realm of religious creeds, but how this proves too weak to really understand human activity on earth, to say more to human beings than, “Love one another!” — which has as much meaning as if I say to the stove, “Heat the room, it is your duty as a stove!” But such a teaching does not have the power to truly touch people's hearts when these people otherwise have to flounder around on earth in their daily affairs and cannot connect their knowledge of daily affairs with what is brought down to them as abstract propositions, habits, and dogmas about the spiritual world. This gap exists, and it is this gap that the creeds want to hold on to.
You see, strange things come about through the existence of this divide and the desire to hold on to it. For example, Jesuits object to anthroposophically oriented spiritual science on the grounds that it seeks to find something in human beings that can be developed in order to lead them to the divine. But this is heretical, because the Church teaches — and forbids anyone to claim otherwise — that God in His essence has nothing to do with the world, nor does He have anything to do, in substantial identity, with the soul of man. Anyone who asserts that the human soul bears in any way something of the “divine essence” within itself is, in the Jesuit view, a heretic before the Catholic Church.
Such assertions are imbued with the innermost desire of this Church to prevent people from reaching the divine, to shut people off from the divine. The dogma already takes on a form that prevents people from reaching the divine. It is therefore no wonder that, because people were not allowed to attain the divine in the fifth post-Atlantean period, which was supposed to bring about the consciousness soul, knowledge of worldly things has become not divine but purely Ahrimanic. For what we recognize today as natural science is a purely Ahrimanic achievement — we have characterized this frequently. It is only strange that the Catholic Church prefers Ahrimanic natural science to anthroposophically oriented natural science, for Ahrimanic natural science is no longer considered heretical today, but rather accepted, while anthroposophically oriented natural science is denounced as heretical.
But it is precisely the truly enlightened person who must have clarity about these things. They must realize that the same thing must be done on the spiritual path that has been done on the natural path, for only in this way can the natural path be preserved from straying into pure Ahrimanic influence. It has strayed because the spiritual path can only come into play later. But from now on, it must come into play for the future of humanity, so that natural science may be raised again to its divine-spiritual height, and so that the life in which we stand between birth and death may be reunited with the life of which the science of the spiritual is to give knowledge, and in which we stand in the time between death and a new birth. But this can only happen in our time if we have the will to truly understand this life on earth, to understand it as it works in human beings. We will also only understand the individual human being if we understand the character of human groups, and only in this way will we be able to look into true reality.
Not long ago, I pointed out to you a strange phenomenon that may surprise some people. I will just repeat it briefly. As you know, there was a respectable philosopher in Switzerland named Avenarius, who certainly considered himself a good, respectable, bourgeois citizen who did not consider himself in the least a revolutionary. He founded doctrines that are written in such difficult language that only a few people can read them. In a somewhat more popular language, but very similar, a philosopher named Ernst Mach worked in Vienna and Prague, who also considered himself a respectable citizen. These two men truly had no revolutionary streak. And we are confronted with the strange phenomenon—I have already pointed this out to you—that these two philosophers have become the official philosophers of Bolshevism, that the Bolsheviks regard these philosophers as their—one could say, if the expression is correctly understood—state philosophers. According to a certain expression that the world likes to use, one could say that the two philosophers, Avenarius and Mach, would turn in their graves if they knew that they are now recognized by the Bolsheviks as state philosophers. I have told you: this phenomenon can only be understood if one adheres to abstract logic, not to the logic of reality, not to the logic of facts, not to the logic of what is seen. But even though this matter may seem remote to you, I would like to point it out once again from a different perspective, emphasizing in particular one of the points of Avenarius' philosophy that can guide us in answering this important question: How did Avenarius and Mach come to be Bolshevik state philosophers? For the fact is, after all, very indicative of the confusion that prevails at present.
You see, Avenarius raises various questions, and when one speaks in his language of introjections and so on, of these purely epistemological concepts that he has developed, one is speaking in a language that is quite incomprehensible to the general public. But in this incomprehensible language, he raises a certain question that is particularly interesting from the point of view of the humanities. Avenarius raises the question: Would a person who were alone in the world also speak of the differences between what is in his soul and what is outside in the world, of the differences between the subjective and the objective? Richard Avenarius is astute enough to say that we are only tempted to speak of the differences between the subjective and the objective because, when we are faced with another human being—that is, when we are not alone in the world—we assume that what we carry in our brains, for example, about a table or something else, is also in him. Through this detour, by projecting into his mind the same image that we carry within ourselves, and thereby giving the whole thing the character of an image, we distinguish the things in our soul from the things outside us, from the objects we encounter. Avenarius believes that if there were no other people outside of us in the world, we would not speak of the differences between things in our souls and things outside, but we would see ourselves as a unity, we would see ourselves as merging with things, we would not distinguish ourselves from the world.
One could say that Avenarius is right in this assertion from a certain point of view, and terribly wrong from another. He is right insofar as it does indeed mean something that we come into contact with people in the course of our earliest childhood, even if we are usually unaware of this in our memory; this has a certain significance. Our entire imagination is influenced by this. It would be different if we did not come into contact with other people, but it would not be as Avenarius thinks. Anyone who can truly discern through spiritual insight what is actually underlying this fact will arrive at the truth on this point. We would certainly have a different worldview if we did not encounter other people on our path through life at a time when we were not yet capable of conscious thought. But there is a curious fact: in this other worldview, the spirits that underlie the world would be inside it. So, not in Avenarius' sense, we would not differ from the world if we were alone in the world and there were no other people. If we were alone in the world—consider this terrible abstraction—we would not differ from minerals and plants, but we would perceive the divine-spiritual world behind minerals and plants. Animals would not be there either, as they would also interfere with our worldview. This fact shows that being together with other people is the reason why we naively do not perceive the spiritual world behind plants and minerals. People place themselves in front of this world. Think about it: at the price of not perceiving the hierarchical world of gods, we conquer what we gain through our coexistence with other people on the physical earth! Humans place themselves, as it were, in front of the world of gods to conceal it. Of course, Avenarius did not know this, which is why he led the question down the wrong path. He believed that if there were no humans, we would see ourselves as undivided from the world, and we would not differ from the world. But the truth is: we would not differ from other people, plants, and minerals, but we would differ from the gods we would then have around us; that is the truth! |
If you consider this, you can tell yourself something that is very important to say in our time: It is strange that our age, in many respects, has the fate of touching upon the most important questions in its most astute minds, of stirring up the most important questions, and of leading things onto the most wrong tracks, always leading them away from the conception of the spiritual. For one cannot lead away from the conception of the spiritual more radically than Avenarius does. For his philosophy is astute, written with all the sophistication of professorial language, and is therefore well suited to lead people away from the spirit in the most sleepwalking manner possible. But when people are led away from the spirit while they are asleep, they consider this leading away from the spirit to be a necessity, something like a mathematical necessity; if they do not realize that they are being led away from the spirit, they accept it as scientifically proven. That is on the one hand.
You see a philosopher—and the same could be said of Mach—whose innermost nerve of all his thinking consists in founding a science that leads people radically away from the spirit. In Bolshevism, a social order is to be established with the exclusion of everything spiritual; humanity is to be socially grouped in such a way that the spiritual plays no role. You see, that is the real inner connection. It asserts itself in the logic of facts. It was not for a merely external reason, but because of a profound inner affinity that Avenarius and Mach became the state philosophers of the Bolsheviks.
You can see from this that even with the ordinary judgment commonly used today, one is actually quite stuck when faced with such things. One can only wonder: How did the Bolsheviks come to make Avenarius and Mach their state philosophers? But it is possible to see the connections today. To do so, however, one must go to the spiritual foundations. We have now done that with this fact. One must be able to point out: What is it really like when man is alone on our physical earth, without other people? There are simply phenomena today, especially in the mutual relationships between people—I have just mentioned a spiritual matter, but everyday ones could also be mentioned—that intrude into human life and make people rigid because they prevent them from understanding if they do not view them from a spiritual scientific perspective.
Do not think that this has always been the case. In ancient times, such phenomena also existed, but they were instinctively comprehensible to people because of their ancient instinctive clairvoyance. During the dark ages of ignorance, such phenomena did not exist in human interaction. Now they are reappearing. It is not merely that human souls are developing; the world is developing, the world is changing, and this change is first apparent in human interaction; in the next period it will also be apparent in the relationship between humans and the other natural kingdoms. Life must remain incomprehensible to people in the present and in the near future if they do not want to view it from a spiritual scientific perspective. Illusion upon illusion will seize the human soul if we do not take refuge in these spiritual scientific concepts. There are some here to whom I have said repeatedly since the outbreak of the present war catastrophe: One can write about the so-called world-historical events of the last centuries by referring to the documents in the archives, simply digging up these documents and engaging in Rankean or similar historiography. But one cannot write about the outbreak of this warlike catastrophe in this way. For even if people dig up everything possible from the archives, if they do not pay attention to the state of mind of those who were involved in the outcome of this war, and how this state of mind allowed the Ahrimanic forces to enter the earth's machinery, and how the causes of this warlike catastrophe came about from the Ahrimanic side — if one does not want to study the starting point of this warlike catastrophe from a spiritual scientific perspective, then this starting point will always remain obscure. This is what lies in this war catastrophe, as I would say, a call to people to learn from it. Much can be learned from what has happened in the last four to five years as a consequence of what came before. Above all, we will learn to ask certain questions no longer in such a one-sided way as before, but in a way that is appropriate to the demands of the times.
I have often said: There is no reason to take comfort in the misfortunes of the times or even to close our eyes to them. But there is also no reason for pessimism. One need only consider the following: Terrible things have happened on Earth over the last four and a half years; but what is the essence of these terrible things? — What human souls have experienced during this time is the essence, experienced, of course, in relation to the development of these human souls throughout the entire evolution of the Earth. But then a very significant, profound question arises. This question is paradoxical, but only because it is profound and unfamiliar to ordinary thinking. The question is: Can one actually wish that humanity, without such a catastrophe, should have simply continued to live as it had become accustomed to living until 1914? Can one really wish that without further ado? When raising such a question, I must repeatedly refer to what I said in my cycle in Vienna before the outbreak of this warlike catastrophe: that when one surveys what lives in the human world, the relationship between people, social life, appears like a social carcinoma, like a cancerous tumor creeping through humanity. However, people have closed their eyes to this carcinoma of the social community. They did not want to look at the actual conditions. But no one who looks at things in their deepest essence can say that it would have been good for humanity to continue in this way. It would have continued on the path I have indicated, moving further and further away from the spirit. And those whom we look upon with such a sorrowful soul, the millions who have been swept away from this physical plane by this terrible catastrophe, who now live as souls, they are the ones who are most aware of how different their situation is now that they are spending the rest of their lives in the spiritual world, and how different this situation would have been if their karma had kept them on the physical earth.
Sub specie aeterni, from the perspective of eternity, things appear differently. This must be said. Things must not be taken lightly or frivolously. Just as it is true that it is infinitely sad that this catastrophe has befallen us, it is equally true that this catastrophe has saved humanity from a terrible descent into materialism and utilitarianism. Even if this is not yet apparent today, it will become apparent, above all in the Middle Lands and in the East, where chaos is developing in place of an order that had absorbed materialism. One certainly cannot speak without an undertone of suffering about this chaos that has befallen the Middle Lands and the countries of the East, and which, in external terms, offers little prospect of transforming itself into harmony in the near future. But there is something else. Where this chaos spreads, there will be a world that will give people as little as possible in the near future through the outer physical plane. The blessings of the physical plane will not be great in the Middle Lands and in the Eastern countries. All that can become of people through carrying their existence through outer forces will not be much. Human beings will have to find themselves within their own souls in order to stand firm. And in finding themselves within themselves in order to stand firm, they will be able to take the first steps on the path into the spiritual world. They will be able to make the decision to go to the spirit, from which alone the salvation of the future can come. For this is essential for the future: that our outer physical body slips away from us, so to speak, that our outer physical body — as I explained yesterday — is no longer as healthy as it was in past times, that it has more death in it than it had in past times. And the impulse for the insight that the content of the world mystery cannot be found in what is connected with our physical body, but that we must ascend into spiritual worlds, the impulse to also derive the social order from spiritual worlds, will arise when we can find as little as possible in the physical world. This physical world will only be able to take on a form of harmony if it seeks this form in spiritual life. The Bible does not tell us in its first pages that it was Ahriman or Lucifer who drove humans out of paradise, but that it was Yahweh himself who drove humans out of paradise. But we also know that this expulsion from Paradise meant the liberation of human beings, the experience of freedom for human beings, because it laid the seed for freedom. Would it really be contrary to this biblical wisdom to say that it was also divine wisdom that drove people out of the present, which leads to materialism and utilitarianism, to become seeds whose spiritual understanding will benefit the world? And from the painful foundations of the last four and a half . It sounds as if it is coming from afar: Spirituality wants to reveal itself through the veil of external appearances; people should learn through misfortune to look toward these spiritual revelations, and it will be for their salvation.
This, too, is a language that sounds paradoxical to some people today, but it is the language that Christ instructs us to speak in our times. For it must be inherent in the progress of Christianity to grasp Christian truths in a new way. This can only happen if they are grasped spiritually. The mystery of Golgotha is a spiritual event that has intervened in the evolution of the earth. It can only be fully understood through spiritual knowledge. And so, just as humanity found Christ through misfortune, we must also seek Christ in a new understanding and form through misfortune.
Certainly, what is said here is not everyday consolation. But if one wants to keep away from all triviality, then in the deeper sense of the word it is perhaps something comforting, perhaps the only comfort appropriate to human dignity in our time. It is, however, a comfort that does not tell people: Wait, and everything divine will be granted to you without your doing anything, but a comfort that tells people: Use your powers, and you will find that God speaks and works in your souls, and that through the God who speaks and works in your souls, you will also find God in the world, and, what is most important, you will be able to work together with God in the world! We must move away from a merely passive attitude toward supernatural insights. Man must pull himself together in order to find himself inwardly, and with this inner finding recognize himself as a member of the world order. Then those confessions that are intended to make life comfortable for man by first lulling his spirit in incense, so that he then passively, without any effort on his part, finds the way to the divine, will rear up. These creeds, which appeal so much to human comfort, will always rebel against the demand now emerging from the spiritual worlds that human beings seek their value in inner activity, in inner work, in the effective inner development of spiritual life!
This must be so, especially if we are to take into account what appears in various guises and disguises: the social demands of our time. I have already pointed this out in recent weeks: we live, at least a large part of our educated people, from the achievements of Greek culture. We just don't always think about how what we live in was created because Greek culture developed on the basis of slavery, and that a big part of humanity had to live as slaves so that what we now see as the blessings of Greek culture could even exist. But when one realizes that everything that Greek art, the beautiful memory of Greek life, Greek science, and many other things mean, arose from slavery, then one asks oneself with greater intensity: What has caused us to no longer think as the great philosophers Plato and Aristotle thought, that slavery is something completely natural? At that time, it was self-evident to even the wisest of men that nine-tenths of humanity had to live as slaves. Today, this is no longer self-evident to us; rather, we consider it a violation of human dignity when someone thinks this way. What has caused such a change in the imagination of Western humanity? Christianity! Christianity has freed people from slavery; Christianity has led them to recognize, at least in principle, that all people are equal before God in terms of their souls. But this has also excluded slavery from the social order of human beings. However, we know that It has left one thing behind, which we must repeatedly point out from various points of view; it has left behind, right up to our time, the view which I have told you is precisely the punctum saliens in the consciousness of the proletarian: that in our social order, a part of man, and moreover a part that is physical, can be bought and sold by man himself as a commodity. That is what is so exhausting and exciting. That is actually the salient point of the social question, that labor power can be paid for. It is also what gives the whole of our social community its fundamentally selfish character; for selfishness must prevail in the social order if people have to pay for their work in order to obtain what they need for themselves. He must earn for himself. What must be overcome as the next stage after the overcoming of slavery is that a person's labor can be a commodity! That is the real crux of the social question, which the new Christianity will solve. And I have presented to you some of the solutions to the social question, for the threefold division of the social order of which I have spoken to you separates the commodity from the labor power, so that in the future people will buy and sell only commodities, only external products, only things separated from human beings, but that human beings, as I have already explained in the essay ” Theosophy and the Social Question,” which was published in 1905, will work out of brotherly love for their fellow human beings.
It may be a long way to go to achieve this, but nothing will solve the social question except this alone. And anyone who does not believe today that this is the only way the world order can be, is like someone who would have said at the time of the emergence of Christianity: There must always be slaves. Just as such a person would have been wrong then, so is anyone who says today: Work must always be paid for. At that time, no one could imagine that a number of people did not have to be slaves; not Plato, not Aristotle could imagine it. Today, even the most intelligent people cannot imagine that there can be a social structure in which work has a completely different value than when it is “paid.” Of course, work will still produce a product, but the product will be the only thing that can be bought and sold. This will redeem people socially.
To understand these things, one needs intuitive knowledge, intuitive logic. But without this intuitive logic, humanity cannot progress, for it is the fuel for what must come among people in the future: the love of humanity that arises from understanding between people. And as strange as it may sound today, when all kinds of atavistic remnants exist in people on one side or the other, today everything is still viewed with sympathy and antipathy. For example, when a distinction is made, as I did here some time ago, when I said: Of the three members of human nature, the Western peoples are called upon to develop the lower nature in particular, the middle peoples the heart nature, and the Eastern peoples the head nature, then such things are still widely “evaluated” today; at least somewhere deep inside, people still have a little box where they evaluate things. This evaluation must cease, for it is precisely this view of differentiation across the globe that will establish understanding love. In the age of the consciousness soul, true love for all humanity, extending across the entire earth, will emerge from understanding, not from ignorance. Then people will understand how to find themselves in Christ across the entire earth. Christ is not a matter for one people or another; Christ is a matter for the whole of humanity. But in order to recognize him as a matter for the whole of humanity, certain illusions must disappear, and people must be able to rise up and look into the true nature of things without illusion. Today, people in many different areas do not want this. But I know that I am only expressing a Christmas message of peace when I present the following paradox to you. You know that I am not talking about individual human beings, but about peoples, when I speak of these differences. It is easy to misunderstand these things if one is not of good will. But I often point out that I am not referring to the individual human personality that emerges from the ethnic group, but rather to the ethnic groups themselves. Please bear this in mind when I say the following.
Let us consider one or two of the judgments that have been made in the last four years about the empires or states of central Europe. Because I can fully understand such sentiments, I do not wish to say anything against those who are enthusiastic about the Entente. That is far from my mind. Everyone has their opinion, and from a certain point of view it is justified. But one can now turn one's gaze away from this opinion, which was prevalent in years past, and consider the continuation of this opinion in the present. There, one may find some things quite incomprehensible. One may ask oneself: Is it really necessary that the same judgments that were made while the rulers of the middle states were still in power and still had power should now continue? Yes, that everything is being done in a sophisticated manner to perpetuate these views? Is that necessary? Is that equally explainable? At first glance, it is certainly not as explainable as many things were in the past. But on closer inspection, it is explainable. On deeper reflection, it is explainable, not from the individual human being—individual human beings in Western countries will also bring about the healing of these conditions—but from those human beings who judge solely on the basis of their national character or on the basis of prejudices in favor of this national character. These human beings have something in their subconscious that can be characterized in the following way.
A few weeks ago, I explained here that in our worldview, especially in our present way of thinking, much of the Old Testament still lives on, that the true spirit of Christianity has not yet been fully absorbed. The peculiarity of Yahweh worship is that it concerns everything that we do not acquire between birth and death, but rather what we inherit, what lies in our blood, and what otherwise only influences us while we sleep, when we are outside our bodies. This Yahweh view still pulsates in many ways in our time. It can only rise to the Christ view if we look with all our strength at the acquisition of the spiritual world in the intellectual age, not through birth or through what is instilled in us at birth, but through what is taught to us. Nature itself does not predestine the West to pass from the service of Yahweh to the service of Christ; rather, predestination begins in the middle of Europe and moves eastward; this applies, of course, to the people, not to the individual. Hence that peculiar type of Wilsonian thinking, still entirely rooted in Old Testament ideas, which actually manifests itself in such a way that, even though it denies it, it wants to eradicate what is striving to emerge spiritually in the Middle Lands and in the East. That is why it is so inexplicable in the present day, after one has done away with what one claimed to want to do away with, after all that remains are the peoples whom, as one has assured, one does not want to harm, that one continues with the same attitude under all sorts of pretexts. It is being continued because one is actually resisting what has emerged in the Middle Lands and in the East over the last few centuries as necessary for the spiritual development of humanity. One wants to subconsciously eradicate this. One does not want to get involved in these things.
Now we are living in a very significant world crisis. I have often heard people ask: How is it that the people of the West, especially the English and French, hate the Germans so terribly? There is a very simple answer to this question, but it is truly exhaustive, and it consists in the fact that people always see themselves differently, especially as members of a nation, than they see others. And I can assure you that thoughts such as those Mach had when he got on the bus or when he was walking down the street are very common in people's subconscious. You know, Mach himself recounts that he once got on a bus very tired and did not notice that there was a mirror on the wall opposite the entrance door. Then someone else sat down on the other side. He thought: What kind of horrible schoolmaster is that getting in opposite me? — He was a stranger to himself, he knew so little about himself as a person; but when he saw himself, he did not like what he saw at all.
Now look at the intellectual history of Central Europe, not in its more intimate details, but look at it as a whole. Until Lessing, that is, until well into the last third of the eighteenth century, the Germans tried to be like the French. You can see it in everything. From a certain point in time, roughly in the twelfth century, until well into the second half of the eighteenth century, the Germans tried to be like the French, to do things in such a way that they too would become French. What the French did not see in themselves, or if they did see it, tended to appreciate it, they hated terribly when they saw it in their imitations. For human beings unconsciously practice a strange form of self-knowledge. The Germans were never hated by the French in their deepest essence, but the French hated themselves when they saw their image, their reflection, in the German soul. Since that time, a strange English influence has begun, one that is still not sufficiently appreciated today. The English, of course, see themselves just as little as Mach saw himself, but they notice themselves when they look at themselves in that mirror image that has strangely entered the German soul since the eighteenth century. They judge the English in the Germans. That is the simple psychological solution. Had this world crisis not come, this state of affairs would have lasted for a long time; there would actually be a great mash from which individual personalities would emerge, but they would have the intimate characteristics of the German nature. But the misfortune, the chaos, will bring forth from the world crisis precisely what is supposed to come into being, what has always been there but could not unfold under the power of the West. Such are the real facts. There is no reason for pessimism, not even in Central Europe. But one must then descend to the deeper reasons that underlie this development.
What the Entente powers are doing now may look one way or another. It matters very little, because deep down they want something impossible. They want to prevent something from emerging that must develop in the middle of Europe and in the East. But this is connected with the spiritual progress of human beings. That cannot be prevented. But it brings about the opposite, namely that if human beings are serious about the future of the earth, they must believe in the spirit. Only from the spirit, from the power of the spirit, will that which must come come, including the solution to such burning social demands. It was necessary that in the machine age, five hundred million invisible people, that is, people visible as machines, came into being so that people would gradually learn to feel that they should not be paid as machines are paid. And it was necessary that this terrible catastrophe, in which the machine age celebrated its greatest triumphs, should come about. But out of this catastrophe will arise the unfolding of human power. And out of this unfolding of power, human beings will also draw a certain possibility of reconnecting themselves with the divine, with the spiritual. Just as it was not merely a misfortune for human beings — to compare the starting point of Earth's development with what many people rightly call the most terrible event in world history — that human beings were driven out of paradise, so it is not merely a misfortune that such a catastrophe has befallen human beings. The most valuable truths are, after all, fundamentally paradoxical. Today, one can say—and I have often pointed this out—that human beings were so shameful as to crucify the most valuable being that ever appeared on earth, Jesus Christ. They killed him. One can say that it was “shameful” of human beings. But this death is the essence of Christianity. Through this death, what we call the mystery of Golgotha came to pass. Without this death, there would be no Christianity. This death is the good fortune of humanity; this death is the strength of earthly human beings. Such is the paradox of reality. On the one hand, one can say that it was shameful that people crucified Christ—and yet with this death, with this crucifixion, the greatest event on earth took place. Misfortune is not always just misfortune. Misfortune is often the starting point for the attainment of human greatness and human strength.