Goetheanism as an Impulse for Man's Transformation
GA 188
5 January 1919, Stuttgart
III. Clairvoyant Vision Looks at Mineral, Plant, Animal, Man
From our considerations of yesterday you will have seen how easily the whole course of human evolution can be misunderstood and how it is particularly misunderstood from many sides today to the detriment of present knowledge as well as of the present social striving of mankind. (see Z-7.) Today we will for once call up before our souls some results of Spiritual Science of such a nature that they can throw light, it may be said, from another side on what becomes so enigmatical if looked at from the points of view holding good at present. Now I have told you that man can come to terms with this present time only if he makes up his mind to find his real bearings by starting on the path to the spirit. He must decide to look for a new relation to external nature since the old means to this end no longer suffice, and also find his way to a new relation to his fellow men, the old relation no longer being suitable, so that he sees what impulses are necessary for the modern social structure of mankind. If we wish to be successful in this, we must earnestly keep before our souls the following—that as man is placed in the world today, in earthly existence between birth and death, he sees but the outer manifestation of his own essential being and enters into actual relationship with merely the outer manifestation of his fellowmen. Life takes on a different form for the different epochs of mankind's evolution, and we exert ourselves really to study these things just in their relation to men of the present time. For the present age is a very critical one for men on earth. Up to the fifteenth century, and, since things do not change in a flash, one might say on into the present time, man is still actually more or less dominated by inherited concepts and impulses of the past. This fifth post-Atlantean epoch is indeed in a certain sense rather out of the ordinary where the evolution of men is concerned. For you certainly know that taking earthly evolution as a whole it divides itself into seven great successive epochs, of which the fourth was the Atlantean epoch and the fifth, our present one, the post-Atlantean. The sixth and the seventh should then follow.
In the Atlantean period there was a kind of crisis. For up to that time the whole of the earth's existence was a recapitulation of the earlier existence of Saturn, Sun and Moon. During the Atlantean period there was a kind of crisis but it is true only the beginning of a crisis. There was merely a preparation of things that were actually to be developed in the following evolution of the earth. So that up to Atlantean times man was really only what he had been in his different forms as man on Saturn, Sun and Moon. In Atlantean times, however, he had only intimations of what he was supposed actually to become as man of the earth; then he continues on, and now we are in the fifth post-Atlantean period. In the post-Atlantean period, throughout the old Indian end old Persian development, and so on, ever more definite relations were arising. But the Greco-Latin time, the fourth post-Atlantean period, gives us again even though in another form merely a kind of repetition of what existed on another level of existence in Atlantis. It is only now in the fifth post-Atlantean period, in the time since the fifteenth century, that man stands within his whole evolution in such a way that new impulses arise—impulses which are perceptible in his very being. Previously they were not so noticeable; now they appear in his being noticeably, nevertheless there are still only intimations of their presence. The terrible, catastrophic events of our time, the consequences of which—one can already foresee—will be shattering to mankind, are the expression of how new relations are making their way into mankind's evolution. I have already indicated how from a certain aspect these new relations can be described by pointing to the way in which an on-rolling spiritual wave is clearly perceived, arising from, as it were, a surging up into evolution of the Spirits of Personality.
Now we notice it after the manner of Spiritual Science we keep in mind this particular state of soul in which modern man is found here on earth, it is markedly noticeable today, according to the outlook of Spiritual Science, how man when he perceives or is outwardly active in his willing is really surrounded only by manifestations of the being of nature, and the being of his fellow men. He is not surrounded by the real beings into whom he must, as it were, grow in the course of evolution, into whom he will have grown at a later stage of evolution. As you know, man's position in the world is such that—to describe it broadly—he perceives the surrounding world in the mineral kingdom, plant kingdom, animal kingdom and in his own human kingdom. This is what is visible around man. And in the visible human kingdom there is played out what comes from the will and what should find a certain ordering for the social structure.
Now people have reflected a great deal about man's attitude to his environment, though insufficient thought has gone into their reflections. But the result of these reflections has been worked into various theories of knowledge. We get very little, however, from these theories of knowledge. And what in schoolmaster fashion is given in these theories today to the young people, who are then supposed to speak to the world as philosophers, is really perfectly inadequate nonsense. For a true insight into what is really revealed in man's surroundings, a real insight, can only be gained when the matter is observed according to the way of Spiritual Science. You see, on one side man can look upon the mineral kingdom and the plant kingdom; on the other side he can look on the animal kingdom and the kingdom of man himself. Both—mineral kingdom and plant kingdom as well as human kingdom and animal kingdom—unveil themselves to him in such a way that if now in a theoretical sense he is honest, in this unveiling, in this revealing, he notices contradictions. He is unable to make anything of the way in which on the one hand the mineral kingdom and plant kingdom, and on the other hand the animal kingdom and human kingdom reveal themselves to him. And when people believe they can succeed in doing so this comes from a certain dullness. Because they take life too easily they are unwilling to go into all the doubts which arise from observing the kingdoms of Nature. But now, when one presses on to knowledge, when one trains oneself in the direction given in Knowledge of the Higher Worlds, then to a certain extent a change takes place in our contemplation of the mineral and plant kingdoms, as well as in our view of the connection with the animal and human kingdoms. Unconsciously men already have, to a high degree today, a feeling for this change, even if it does not enter consciousness. It remains indeed in the unconscious—just as I told you that today in the natural course of evolution man passes by the Guardian of the Threshold unconsciously. It is actually a certain fear of the truth which always unconsciously holds men back from really pressing on so that they come to this change. I am speaking in Imaginations, my dear friends, in Imaginations translated into words. In reality these things cannot be appropriately described in any other way. For when man brings to life within him what can be made living, when he applies himself to what is described in Knowledge of the Higher Worlds, looking at the mineral and plant kingdoms with this transformed power of cognition, he will always experience something like fear. But you should not have to shudder nor get gooseflesh at the description of these conditions. People avoid them because they are afraid. From this you ought to understand that of course when picturing these conditions one can indeed get gooseflesh to a certain degree, and on that account people just get frightened. When such knowledge is acquired, on looking at the mineral and plant kingdoms, one always experiences something like the smell of a corpse; there is a corpse-like smell which characterises as if in a vivid feeling what is living in the mineral and plant kingdoms. On the contrary, When with transformed cognition we look at the animal kingdom and the kingdom of man, there is always a sensation that can be described by saying: actually (you will forgive me, I know, for putting this Imagination into words) actually so long as they are in a physical body men remain—even the most advanced of them—where what in reality is hidden within them is concerned, always children, thorough children. The simple truth is that far more lies hidden in a man between birth and death than he can develop outwardly, can bring to manifestation out of himself.
Therefore, because in supersensible knowledge there is always a gradual ascent from semblance to actual reality, you see that when looking at, observing the outer world as it now is, we actually have to do with semblance alone. For the corpse-like smell of which I have spoken and, forgive me, the childishness of men, are veiled. The corpse-like smell finds, if I may say so, too dull a nose in our physical men, the etheric nose not being sufficiently developed. And the childishness of men does not allow us to confess its presence because , as men, we are too conceited to do so. Yet this is how the matter stands. My explaining what I have just been describing one points at the same time to there being far more hidden in in man than can be given practical proof. The question may now be asked: If man does not perceive the reality in minerals nor plants, if he perceives no reality in animals either—not even in his own being as man, where then is his right setting on earth? Strange as it may seem we find him placed among beings who belong neither to the mineral and plant kingdoms, nor to the animal and human kingdoms, but lie between them. He bases his being upon a kind of plant-animal, or animal-plant. were there a being here on earth neither wholly plant nor wholly animal, but having mere plant nature where their inner organisation is concerned, and having the power to go around, to move about at will like the animals—now this is what I meant were there beings who on being examined anatomically would not be found to have muscles and blood within them but whose anatomy would resemble that of the plants, with only their cells and tissue, but if these beings were able to move at will like the animals, or were there wandering round our earth animals that on dying left plantlike corpses, then man in his whole attitude of soul would really belong among these beings. Here in his earthly existence man would really be able to comprehend such beings. But again the remarkable thing is that for their part these beings could not exist on earth, these beings are only to be found in other worlds. They could not flourish in earth existence. Thus, we may say that man really lacks the faculty for knowledge—and this particularly apparent today's—which enables him to penetrate directly into the being of minerals and plants. and also of animals and men. And the beings he would directly perceive in their whole constitution are just these which could not live on the earth. This is the remarkable position of man where his relation to nature around him is concerned.
But here on earth man stands also in a strange relation to himself. Man is on the one hand a being who has conceptions. When, however, he puts this faculty for conceiving, for having ideas, into action, in the conception he loses his own identity. And he actually has his identity, that is not able to make an appearance in the conception, only when something—his will—works up out of the unconscious. If the will were not to work up and we were to have no trace of it in us, could we have andy ideas about it. The whole world would seem to us ghostly. We should have a ghostly world before us, which about describes the world of scientific concepts; this would actually constitute our world. Imagine the world looking as it is described by natural scientists or zoologists; just think of it being nothing more than what is found in books on Botany and Mineralogy. Real Botany and Mineralogy contain far more than what we find in books. But imagine you were taken into a world described in books, where there was nothing more than what is described in books; it would indeed be a world of mere apparitions, a proper world of ghosts. The world not being one of ghosts is amply due to the will having something to say. Now look! Were you able to fly—I don't mean with a machine but were you able to fly yourself, if you had no need of earth under your feet and were you able to move freely without the earth—then you would come near to perceiving the world in this ghostly fashion. Even if you could only follow the world with your eyes when awake it would appear very ghostly, not so much so as when described by the natural scientist, but all the same it would appear very ghostly. You have a feeling of the solidity of world existence only because you stand with your feet on the ground. And this pressure of your feet against the ground gives you the feeling, akin to the will, but watered-down will, that you are not in a ghostly world but in one that is solid. Were you not to have this feeling, should you only see, the world would appear to you a very ghostly place. You do not tell yourself what is going on in the subconscious; in the subconscious something is going on that makes man say (in the subconscious he does say it): Yes, the world looks very like a ghost! Were it really what is presented by my eyes I should never be able to stand firm, I should have to sink down; and as I do not sink, the world is not as presented by my eyes. This conclusion is constantly being arrived at in the unconscious. The entirely ordinary, most everyday relation to the world is as complicated as this. It is always an unconscious conclusion that to a certain extent originates with the will. Thus in mere conception we actually lack—to use an erudite expression, a pedantic expression—we lack the subject, it drops out. That we have a subject and feel ourselves bound up with the world comes from the will.
Again, when we will, when we develop the will, the object is actually lacking. The object does not come into our consciousness at all as something properly solid. If I want simply to lift this little book from the left side over to the right, and actually do it—the real object of the will does not enter consciousness at all. You can see the passage of the book, the conception which takes its ghostly way into the will, but the actual object of the will does not enter consciousness. So that man when he makes conceptions and also when he wills (this again sounds grotesque because an Imagination is being clothed in words) man as a conceiver as well as a willer is—if you will forgive me—a cripple. He conceives in a ghostly way and wills incompletely. What man is in reality, is actually neither quite within his conception nor his will; once again it is in the centre between the conception and the will. But all this goes on in ordinary life without being able to enter consciousness. In the same way as the plant-animal is unable to enter external nature, what man actually is cannot enter his consciousness. For this reason I have often spoken to you of the fact from another point of view by saying: man perceives the real ego like a hole in life's events. You see we have to be clear that holes can also be perceived. Man knows nothing of sleep, he wakes, sleeps; wakes, sleeps; wakes, sleeps. But reviewing the course of his life he is faced by empty space in his consciousness, the hole in consciousness, and he sees just as if there were a white surface before him with black holes where really nothing is to be seen. Thus he looks at the holes that, during sleep, are there in consciousness. But it is also the same with our ego in waking life. Our ego is not in reality brought into consciousness: in the consciousness there is only a hole for this ego, and perceiving this hole is the only thing that makes us aware that we really have an ego.
These things, that appear to the insensitive men of today as sophistry, must gradually become an elementary consciousness in man. For in the future man will not be able to found life on dogmatic conceptions, as has been possible for him in the past owing to the still existing remains and after effects of atavistic clairvoyance. In future we shall have to base life on grounds that are easy to detect. It will have to be part of our everyday conceptions that mineral and plant kingdoms are observed after the manner of Goethe. For Goethe only examined the phenomenon, and did not believe that in the phenomenon there was revealed anything but, at best, the basic phenomena, the archetypal phenomena and that phenomena do not reveal in laws of nature which can be put thoughts. Goethe never looked for laws of nature, for this would have seemed to him very fantastic; he wanted to pursue the phenomena because the external world shows us in the mineral and plant kingdoms nothing but perceptions, appearances. Thus man has to look at the external world to become conscious of himself. In the mineral kingdom, in the plant kingdom I really see only the outer side, and when confronted by the animal and human kingdoms I actually see only something like an embryo of the complete being. That also must be so. For you see, in the mineral and plant kingdoms in reality there exist beings who, when observed by man, reveal only a certain side of themselves because it may be said they cannot reveal themselves in any other way. For in the mineral and plant kingdoms lives something man can only fully recognise if—please understand me, thoroughly he looks back to the world from which he came on entering physical existence through birth. Could you after birth with your thought keep possession of the consciousness that stretches backward before birth, could you, that is, look upon being born as an event in your life like—shall we say—the passing from the fifteenth to the sixteenth year, and were the backward-running thread of consciousness to remain unbroken—the consciousness being quite different before birth, before conception—without more ado you would get a view of mineral and plant kingdoms quite different from the one you get on looking from the standpoint of life between birth and death. For you would then say to yourself the followings I have come from the spiritual world through birth. I have entered this physical realm. Why should I have done this? Why should I not have remained in the spiritual realm? Why have I been enticed down to earth at all? For one may speak here of enticement. Then, if you were able to remember, you might says I have been enticed to earth for the reason that suddenly in the course of my development between death and a new birth, it seemed—I came into a sphere where it seemed—as if certain beings had flown away, as if they really should be there, were missing—and were not there. To put it bluntly, in the time just before birth in the spiritual world one is dogged by the feeling that one misses certain beings which actually belong there and are not there. Everything goes to show that these beings are lacking. And if one comes down through birth, these beings are there in the minerals and in the plants, but as though banished, as if these beings were banished from the world just left, as if they could not really flourish, would half die and thus create the corpse-like smell, would become half dead in the world one has entered. Before birth we long to know certain exiles. We only know there are banished beings, but where are they? Then we go into the physical world and perceive them, but they might be said to be embalmed, mummified. For in the world we have entered it is only possible for them to be embalmed, mummified, dried up. It is perfectly right, on being confronted by the mineral world and the world of the plants, that we should have the feeling we are looking at beings exiled from the spiritual world, from the regions in which we were before having to enter physical life.
And when we look at animals and men end see their childishness, then, if we can develop the power to see more deeply into being, we remember that these animals and men, as they actually are here in the world in which we live between birth and death are never finished, never actually bring to completion the whole of their life which is conditioned by their inner being. Anyone looking at animals in the right way, anyone who can look at them with full inward and living force of knowledge, knows well that animals are not immortal, but knows too that animals experience in their group souls the whole tragedy of this not being immortal. The group souls outlast the individual life of the animal but what there is here on earth of the animals is—as I recently sale—in reality sick (see Lecture 1), and this is so on account of its deterioration through belonging to s world from which it is banished. And in his outer physical form man also is an exile in this world. He therefore remains crippled and a mere child. Man remains a child, the animal in his general being, in his physical form, is dried up. For what belongs to animal and man is found when we go through death and enter directly into the spiritual world, which then after death we observe. For actually a circle is described in the life between death and a new birth. What remains hidden here of animal kingdom and plant kingdom, what causes us to perceive that animals and men—as far as men's physical forms are concerned—are exiles from the spiritual world, banished out of the spiritual world, is first perceived by us when we pass into the spiritual world through the gate of death. There we go through an evolution and as we approach ever nearer the cosmic midnight, described in my mystery play, (see The Soul's Awakening, scene 6) we become clear that something is missing, that what is missing has run away from the spiritual world; we pursue it through birth and find it on the physical earth in the mineral and plant kingdoms. On entering this existence through birth we are never really surprised about the mineral and plant kingdoms because they are what we have been expecting. Finding animals on the physical earth, too, and men with an outer form that recalls that of the animal though it is more perfect, is astonishing to us in some measure after being born with our gift of consciousness. We begin ia understand this, however, when we know that a beginning has been made with this outer form of animal and man, which only develops in the world we enter through the gate of death.
Now it might be said: For the abstract and completely dried up religious conceptions that still persist (these conceptions were once much more full of life and really gave men something) for these abstract, dried up conceptions still remaining in our age of consciousness, all that men perceive here in the physical world, all that they should conceive as underlying the world experienced by man between death and a new birth, comes upon them too abruptly. What man experiences between death and a new birth remains on this account so problematical for men today, and can so easily be denied by the grossly material mind, because men in arriving at the age of the consciousness soul, which means the age of the intellect, lives as I have explained only in what is reflected into his consciousness. Therefore, he is also only able to live in reflected images when he goes out beyond the perceptions to where, if he stands firmly on his feet, the will plays into him in the way I have previously indicated. If no will plays in however—and in the immortal life after death no will does play in—when there is no interplay of the will and man is restricted to placing before his soul, the reflected images of his conceptions of what the world is between death and a new birth, then this world will have no certainty and will be not only ghostly but without certainty. Indeed we can go as far as to say that if men obstinately cling only to science, if they fix, their attention only upon the ghostly world given them by science, then they are quite right in denying any life at all after going through the gate of death. For what is given by science is only pictures, apparitions. And even this comes to an end when we pass the gate of death. Science is unable to contain anything of what we experience in the realm after death and before birth. For, you see, in books on mineralogy, in books on botany, in everything connected with Physiology, Geology end so forth, in any of the conceptions you can absorb about plants and minerals, you can absorb only about beings who are living in banishment here in this physical world. Again, you can also perceive in the bodies of animals and men only what has been banished here—even with all the help of your books on Zoology and Anthropology, and, if you widen the field of your thought you can really put all knowledge in the same category—you are only able to perceive what is living down here in banishment. But when you reflect that before birth you feel the lack because they really are not there of just these beings experienced here after birth, that in animals and men you then experience what does not exist down here, you will understand that into the conceptual life of science nothing at all of immortal life can enter, and that since it lives in images science in its own domain has a perfect right not to trouble itself about immortal life. It in for this reason that, since the fifteenth century, in the epoch when the conceptions of science are dominating the whole of mankind, man has on the one side the robust, crude nature actually representing for him the whole of reality, and on the other side a realm that he wishes to reach with only the weakened mirrored images of the age of the consciousness soul. This comes before him as though he were saying to himself: Now that I come to see (this happens in the subconscious, for it is there he comes to doubt immortality) when I come to see that what I think are only reflected images, then were I to believe these reflected images would still be there after my death, including the images of my self, I should be just as stupid as if I believed that there were coming towards me out of my mirror here on the wall the men who appear to approach me—that they were not simply reflected but were actually coming towards me.
It is simply characteristic of this epoch of the development of the consciousness soul that if man will not advance to a spiritual comprehension of the world, then connection with the world into which he will enter once he has passed through the gate of death will vanish from him more and more. It will also disappear from his thought life, from his conscious life, but he will not cease to long for it. And even the most hardened deniers of immortality have in the depths of their will, where longing is born, the longing to experience something of the world man enters through the gate of death, the world from which he comes on passing through the gate of birth. They have a longing. The present time is sick with this longing. And the many illnesses of the present time are the expression of this longing holding sway in man, and of man's inability to find conscious conceptions for his longing. If anything is living in the sphere of the will which we are unable to master by conception (again one has to develop very fundamental concepts to speaker these things) when man cannot overcome by his conception what is living in the sphere of his will, then he starts to rage. This is the essence of raging, or frenzy, that something is living in the realm of the will that man cannot comprehend with his capacity for conception. And if man refuses to give in and agree to recognise the existence of the spiritual world, so that through the recognition of the spiritual world he comprehends what has already taken shape in the sphere of the will, than this raging will become ever greater and greater in the world; the raging which indeed presents itself today as the next stage for men after the—not forthcoming but always hoped for—conclusion of peace. This is not anything which can be talked about in the way things ere discussed at a bowling club where, according to the usual philistine conceptions, people come to an understanding as to the possibility of getting some kind of relief or redress. No, it is something connected with the deepest reality of human evolution. Man cannot struggle against the development in him of what enters the sphere of his will. He has no power over it. He is able only to make up his mind consciously to penetrate to the sphere of the spirit so that he learns to understand what is permeating the region of his will. By this means an ordered co-operative life for men can be developed in future in place of this raging.
You see, men turning to the spiritual world which will be revealed in our time by a special wave of events, is not an affair only affecting mean subjectively; it is an objective necessity for man to turn to the spiritual world in this age of the consciousness soul. For changes have even now entered human evolution.
Up to the time in the Mystery of Golgotha took place in earthly life, up to that time, everything man needed for standing here in the world with some measure of security came just through sleep. Before the Mystery of Golgotha man slept in a different way from what he now sleeps, whatever the physiologists may say. Those prophetic natures like the Hebrew prophets to whom such sublime things were revealed in dreams, exist no longer, therefore, in the same form. For today these things are not given to men by God in sleep. This used to happen. This is just the great crossing point in evolution. And pictures of the future were not given only to the prophetic natures but in the time of the Greeks men still had their thoughts given them during sleep. On waking, man brought his thoughts back with him. The structure of the human organism was still such that man could bring back his thoughts. For quite a while this went on working, for the fact is that men actually became headless in the fifteenth century—you will forgive mel To become headless means that the head could no longer he used properly, the head could no longer bring back thoughts out of sleep.
One of the results arrived at through Spiritual Science is that we recognise our head as an instrument to have been really of much less use and much more dried up since the fifteenth century than it was before that time. But it is only now that this has become so noticeable; and it will become ever more noticeable if some means is not found to compensate, s0 that the evaporation of the head is made good again by the spiritual world. For up to the present, up to the nineteenth century, the other nature, man's breast nature has always been accustomed to what the head was still getting from sleep during the Greco-Latin period. The breast nature was inured to this, and in their headless condition men were still receiving impulses as an after effect; they were still in the habit—or I might say men still had the gesture of the thought, the shadow of the thought. But this shadow too will pass away and men will have no thoughts at all if they leave their thinking only to their head. And this is really how the matter stands; it is shown by men's reluctance to think. They have less and less will to think. On the one side they want to have thoughts dictated by nature, for what they like best is merely to make experiments and let the experiments say what they themselves should be thinking. But men prefer not to do the thinking themselves. They even have no proper faith in it, for it is their opinion that what they think out lacks true reality. It is true that there is no reality if you take the mere thoughts. We can come to see, however, that thinking, not the thoughts but the thinking, must become active. And when thinking is made active, this means the spiritual world is coming into play. Today when you really begin to think actively, you can do nothing further than let the spiritual world play a part in you. Otherwise you do not think; you think as little as the scientist thinks today who prefers to let his experiments or his investigations dictate everything to him. Or you think so little as the modern students of sociology who, because they have no will to be active, because they do not come to grips with real social impulses which can be grasped only by being active, actually work with what can be discovered in history, what is inherited from the past. Think for once how men, because they themselves no longer have impulses able to create the social structure, have come down to looking back to the time when thoughts were still formed. The matter is then seen from only a false point of view. It was Rousseau who held up to men the natural state, because he had the feeling that in his day nothing could be gained unless men became active in their pursuit of knowledge of the higher worlds. Well, and even modern socialism likes to indulge in a study of mankind's primitive state; it is something that particularly interests the socialists. They study the original conditions of mankind, their primitive conditions, they study the most savage original peoples, primitive peoples, so as to understand how men are meant to live in social co-operation. This is recognised by all who are familiar with these things. Everywhere there is a certain fear of what is making its presence so inevitably felt as the first dawning of connection with the spiritual world, a certain fear of active thinking. This is why there is difficulty in understanding my Philosophy of Spiritual Activity, for example, which makes such demands on active thinking. In it the thoughts are different from the usual thoughts of today. And people often stop short when reading this book for the simple reason that they would like to read it as any other book is read. But the other books particularly popular today—well, I think you will agree, they are read in a comfortable easy chair where one can just let thoughts go by with as little trouble as possible. Many people do any reading they go in for just like that. Don't delude yourselves into believing that these men often read newspapers in a different way (present company, of course, always excluded); it is true that emotions are mixed up with this reading, and worries too. But even the newspapers that are devoured so sensationally are also read by letting the pictures slip by. Ah, but all one has tried to put into The Philosophy of Spiritual Activity cannot be read just like that. There you have continually to give yourself a shake to prevent the thoughts sending you to sleep, my dear friends! For it was not written with the idea that you would simply sit in an easy chair; naturally you can sit, even rest your back, but then, just because you are physically at rest, you have to try with the whole of you to set the inner being of soul and spirit in motion so that the whole thinking begins to move. Otherwise you get nowhere but go to sleep. Many indeed do go to sleep and they are not always the least sincere; the insincere ones are those who read The Philosophy of Spiritual Activity just like any other book and then believe they have really followed the thoughts. They have not followed them, they have on the contrary just jumped over them as if they were the husks of words; they go on reading the words without taking in what actually follows from the words as the spark should be produced by flint and steel. But this is something that must be required of what has to take hold of the evolution of mankind in the present and the immediate future, for through it man will gradually raise himself to the spiritual world in the right way. By active thinking man's inner relations to the spiritual world will be kindled and then he will make ever greater progress. Today he can already get very far by carrying out such things as are described in Knowledge of the Higher Worlds. But there too it is sufficiently indicated how pre-eminently necessary it is to develop coherent, connected thinking where there is no broken thread—when the thread of the thought is carefully followed.
In this longing, today more or less lacking in clarity and consciousness, to push oneself upward with unconscious thinking to the sphere of the spirit—and it is possible to do this—there is mingled a desire from the past, a weary desire, to go on thinking incoherently. Just recently I have drawn your attention to how contrary it is to men's sense of comfort to have to progress step by step in conscious thinking. They would much prefer to leave things more to the unconscious, and not in thought go on to the next point and then again to make a further step. Isn't it so? You see, Spiritual Science as we understand it here and as in a sane way it reckons with the unbroken sequence of the thoughts in the way you know—well, it is not that this Spiritual Science cannot be understood if thinking is made active, but men simply want to understand Spiritual Science in a different way from how they must understand it; instead of which they would like the thread to be continually broken. When you go deeply into what Spiritual Science gives you, when you plunge into it with real energy (have patience, in the present epoch only faint indications of this can as yet exist) then, already today, by developing the power of thought, by following in thought Saturn, Sun and Moon, as described in my Occult Science, you can follow this evolution up to where man stands there in the world, and you can press on to your own life, penetrate this life of yours with the thought which is thus made vigorous. Then you come to certain conceptions which, although not as you would like them to appear but entirely in the connection, in the coherence, of the thinking, enlighten you about their being, about their nature, about what they are and their character. By bringing to life what is said about Saturn, Sun, Moon and their corresponding details, and then about the evolution of the earth, applying all this to your individual selves, you would be able to progress to your own being; only you have to go on in your thought to the perception of yourself, not letting the thoughts be broken but keeping them coherent and connected. What in this way man begins rightly today enlightens him up to the stage where he should become clear about his own personal being. In this longing, still present more or less unconsciously in men, however, something else is mingled with the broken thread of thought, something calculated! Man would like to find out something of the kind about his being; what does he do? He takes old antiquated knowledge of which, it goes without saying, the venerable nature is certainly not to be disparaged, which, however, has need of explanation when applied in a new epoch—he calculates, reckons, breaks the thread of thought at any point, calculates constellation of the stars, and after that the thread of thought can break, and quite externally without any sequence in the thought this being of man as he appears on earth is supposed to develop without any thinking.
You see, even if the Church, the Roman Catholic Church as I described it to you yesterday, denies what today is most necessary of all, this can be made good just by taking anything like the description of the inner vision of John of the Cross and living today in the sense of the evolution that conforms with Knowledge of the Higher Worlds. What is contained in this book follows on today precisely from what a man such as St. John of the Cross wills; whereas the Catholic Church denies it and wishes even today to see the old way of John of the Cross applied to modern man, as indeed it is to so many people. Because they are too comfort-loving they do not want a life that is active in spirit, a life that has already reached a stage of energetic activity when conceptions are accepted such as those given by Spiritual Science. They would like these to be brought up to date in a more usual form of thought, preferring to remain with what is old and hoping that out of this lack of thought there might spring what should explain present-day mankind. Naturally this is no adverse judgment about what is venerable, but from every point of view it must be indicated that one should not venture to deny what is placed as spiritual necessity into the present evolution of mankind, the evolution beginning with the age of the consciousness soul. The important thing is for man really to understand what today is required of mankind in world-evolution. I believe that out of right feeling for the very things which men find irksome, and do not want, a better attitude towards Spiritual Science will be adopted more and more, and only when this better attitude to Spiritual Science has come about will the social life also be enriched. At this point man will be able to become clear about the life of mankind because he will then have the necessary strength of thought to enlighten himself concerning man's life. For where this enlightenment about man's life is concerned man of today suffers from a very precarious state of affairs. Whether you are a follower of Lenin or Trotsky, whether you are a Marxist or any other kind of thinker about the right form for the social structure of men, in each of these views there lives a state of affairs that is precarious and cannot be understood without the fruitful intervention of Spiritual Science. Doubtless you will admit that man has now entered the epoch of the consciousness soul. He has to develop consciously what arises as social structure. Otherwise nothing will go right. He has to take his place consciously in the world; it is really necessary that man should be conscious. But he should also consciously grasp the relation between men, life in society, the social life. An uncertain state of affairs hinders him in this. The fatal thing is that man can never have a conception of more than one man. And as neither two men (I mean physical men) nor two things (physical things) can be in the same place at the same time—which decides the law of impermeability—two men cannot be in human consciousness at the same time, the actual conception cannot be made of two men! simultaneously. It is very important to take note of this. We cannot live with another man without making a conception of him, neither can we develop any knowledge about the social life in common unless we make conceptions about other men. But today man, because he is able to conceive only of one man, generally prefers to conceive only of himself, to make a conception of himself as man. And social thinking is content to demand a co-operative life in which man's conception is always merely of himself. Man does not get away from the conception of his own self; he often talks of doing so, but in reality today he does not easily get rid of himself. It is only when he makes every effort to fulfil the requirements of Spiritual Science that he gradually finds it possible in some measure to get free of himself. For Spiritual Science sows in the world the seeds of thoughts having a very wide perspective, and this is how man grows into the habit of getting free from himself. As today, if he becomes a spiritualist, man grows more egoistic than he was before, if he would penetrate into the spiritual world on that other path, the path of Spiritual Science, he becomes more selfless. Spiritual Science, therefore, is not simply the handing over of knowledge, but spirit-knowledge is actually something unconditionally necessary for educating modern man in social life. It is for this reason that no cure will be forthcoming if a start is not made in this matter, it men do not really give heed to the necessity for first making a conception. There can be no social reform without schooling to begin with, without men first being instructed. And when this is neglected men miss the possibility of receiving concepts that embrace their longing. And, if I am to get at the root of the matter, men will became more frenzied than ever.
This is the inner connection, my dear friends. But it is desirable that this same inner connection should be perceived. One would wish above all things that this inner connection should be felt by everyone entering upon Spiritual Science and wishing to live in it up to some point or other. This is something that everyone will want to ponder who has the wish to take Spiritual Science and the Movement of Spiritual Science in earnest. It cannot well be overlooked, it cannot well remain unnoticed, that when we enter into relation with Spiritual Science this Spiritual Science makes certain demands on the human heart and mind to widen the interests beyond narrow, personal interests. It is really true that in talking of Spiritual Science one simply speaks of things which, if a right relation is to be established with them, makes it necessary for man to free himself from his most narrow interests! He need have no fear of becoming unpractical on that account: he becomes much more practical. It is just this belief that he is practical which has gradually been arrived at through being unspiritual. In reality the practical man of today is terribly unpractical. And these 'practical' men have actually landed us in the present catastrophe. Herein lies something of tremendous importance which man really must always take for granted if he wishes rightly to understand what has to do with Spiritual Science, namely that he must get free from his narrowest interests. He must rid himself of the immediately personal; for it does not help matters when people carry their narrow personal interests into the Anthroposophical Movement. That is always just the cause of any kind of mischief in the relation taken up towards Spiritual Science. It is also naturally the reason for what is still such a difficulty in our Movement, that people although often abstractly in theory, having the good will to come to Spiritual Science with their own thinking, feeling and willing, nevertheless do not bring all the necessary strength really to enter upon selflessness, which indeed must be called upon for understanding rightly what is said from the standpoint of Spiritual Science. Thus a kind of spirit-condition not easily found today in the world, but the opposite of which is prevalent in the modern world, must be demanded for the health of the Anthroposophical Movement, my dear friends! For the difference between the sincere presentation of the knowledge of Spiritual Science and all other knowledge arising at present, lies in this presentation of Spiritual Science being no personal affair, no personal opinion. Were I obliged to hold the view that I should lecture only about merely personal opinions and not concerning what is revealed today and just what is necessary for mankind, I should prefer to remain silent. For to uphold personal opinions and personal aspirations in a Movement that is anthroposophical is something impermissible. That should not be. A Movement such as is striven for here is justified only when there is the will to present merely what one is allowed to observe out of the spiritual world.
When you describe the appearance of any town you may, according to circumstance, make the description either interesting or tedious, but what the town looks like does not depend upon you. You describe something objective. What you yourself want, what is your own opinion, should come just as little to expression in Spiritual Science. What must take effect in Spiritual Science according to modern demands is all that is spiritually observed. Those who are able actually to will merely what is personal can for that reason only imperfectly understand what should hold good in a movement for Spiritual Science. They continually confuse what should hold good in a Movement such as is meant here with something else drawn, more than ever from the personal. How many there are who coming to Anthroposophy would like their own opinion to be justified by Spiritual Science. They are not always equipped with the open mind necessary for the acceptance of Spiritual Science. Very often they come to it with something quite different to this open mind. They would like this or that to be true, then in some way, while admitting that the investigator of Spiritual science may know something about the truth, persuade themselves that what one thinks oneself one says. Then they would be happy. But this fine distinction must be noticed; it is a fine distinction although a tremendously far-reaching one; there is a far reaching and important distinction between the one who wants to accept what is imparted by the spiritual world and the one who actually wishes only to have confirmation of what it pleases him to think. Only by the most punctilious self-examination, by conscientious self-examination, will the distinction be discovered. The distinction is often unnoticed by those who come to Spiritual Science; it must, however, be noticed. If it is noticed it will become apparent that through a Movement for Spiritual Science something of a new stream of life must flow which was not there before. It is really not possible for an Anthroposophical Movement to be like a mere soft current of air blowing towards anyone who brings to Spiritual Science the Philistine tendencies of his earlier life and then believes he will find what he is only too willing to acknowledge in Philistinism corroborated by Spiritual Science.
When we proceed in this matter earnestly, conscientiously, we shall not want merely to find corroboration of our actual individual opinion; and we shall also come to understand many things which might be said to be obliged to arise as new things in a Movement for Spiritual Science of this kind, things that must do harm if left unnoticed. In a movement in the act of arising like this Movement for Spiritual Science much can work harmfully that cannot cause so much harm in old, dried up Movements, no longer of use or of very little use. We have really to go into these fins points, my dear friends! You see, connected with the endeavour merely to see our own opinions, our own aspirations, justified by what is revealed through Spiritual Science, a remarkable technique of 'touching-up' is developed concerning what comes forth and comes forth perfectly naturally, within a movement such as ours. In this movement for Spiritual Science we must be alive to the fact that phenomena with men cannot be taken as if in a bowling club or something of the kind where men can reveal how verbose they have become in the ordinary world where nothing new is required of them. We must recognise in all earnestness that the aims of investigation into what is spiritual cannot find expression through our own conceptions; we must really prepare ourselves to receive the things. We should picture that something is wishing to flow into the world, something that should more and more widen itself out, so that everything should really be received in full consciousness. Many connections not yet perceived will be perceived later. This willingness to receive everything as in some sense a preparation, will certainly not be present in those who carry their personal aspirations into the impulse of Spiritual Science, for at the first possible moment they will get done with things, giving them the bent of their ordinary opinions. They do not mould their opinions in accordance with Spiritual Science, they mould the knowledge gained through Spiritual Science in accordance with their opinions. And so we often have given out the kind of thing I would like to describe in the following way.
Now you know that the Anthroposophist has to judge the world in a certain way, the world of nature as well as the world of human beings. Education in Spiritual Science consists indeed in our learning to judge afresh the surrounding world and our relation to it and in our learning to look more deeply, into the world. People very often remark when, let us say, the relation of three men is in question: The Anthroposophist B. has been criticizing the man A. And, my dear friends, as soon as we overstep the usual Philistine sphere, so largely around us today, two standpoints can be put forward where the formation of judgment between man and man is concerned: one of these standpoints is that of reason, the second being the standpoint of sympathy. Thus B's judgment of A may be in accordance with what arises from an inner necessity at same time to do something or other purely out of his—B's—sympathy for A. Should it now suit C to be antipathetic because he does not reflect sufficiently and does not assume that it may be possible for pure sympathy to come into the matter here, out of necessity, then, basing his judgment simply on reason he will say: whatever can he be doing that for? Or this inner necessity may speak in such a way that it is not sympathy that becomes dominant but, because of certain factors, reason. Yes, and when it suits the other better he lets sympathy have its say and gives as his verdict: what an unsympathetic person! How utterly without feeling the man is and what a prosy rationalist! He judges purely from the standpoint of reason. In this way the crudest misunderstandings arise in the case of just those who bestir themselves to grasp the inner nerve of existence, where they have at one time to do something based on reason, another time something just out of sympathy. And when it suits this other man (C) in accordance with the sympathetic view he condemns what is done from reason, and what is done out of sympathy he condemns from the point of view of reason, and he can always condemn or praise as he likes. By this path we never arrive at what is right, we only arrive at what is right if we begin by saying: I must consider the case, I must look into the causes why sympathy or reason have held sway here. It is things like this out of which the little misunderstandings in life arise which often grow to very destructive proportions in men's life in common. It is just this that our education in Spiritual Science should help us to overcome. For life is such that it expresses itself in a twofold way. And because it expresses itself in a twofold way one can always condemn at pleasure one of the two cases. This is very little taken into account, however, above all not taken into account where the teachings of Spiritual Science itself is concerned. This, too, must be placed in the world with definite intention. In an individual case either one or other of the two standpoints can be chosen according to convenience, if greater attention is not paid to the deeper grounds out of which the spiritual seeker is obliged to act. He may often be misunderstood. And if there is no agreement in what must be done out of inner duty in accordance with the facts, then it is possible to misunderstand everything, since the world has this dual form of expression.
You see we can fall into the following error for example. When anyone is eager to have what suits him substantiated, he may just fall into the worst form of belief in authority. Belief in authority can naturally make its influence felt, and this influence is actually frequent and of wide range in the very sphere where Spiritual Science also would be active, which wishes to make man into a perfectly free, self-reliant being. The other pole of the belief in authority, however, is hatred of authority. And fundamentally the man who does not feel himself drawn to Spiritual Science through entering into the facts revealed from the spiritual world, but wishes to have these truths conveyed to him by authority, wanting to believe in authority because it is easier than going into things—this man is terribly apt to spring over from his belief in authority, that always has in it a certain kind of love of authority, to hatred of authority. And all manifestations that have arisen in our particular movement of this leap from blind worship of authority, which sometimes has even appeared with a certain shamelessness in the moment of passing over to hatred, this passing from blind worship of authority to hate—all this is something inwardly present as a danger. It is very important to keep these connections in mind, for these connections make it terribly difficult today to create an Anthroposophical Movement so that it will prosper. It must be created in a successful way for the sake of mankind's welfare.
Now, my dear friends, in my life I have found quite a number of people who were spiritual people and were seeking in all sincerity away into Spiritual Science, into some kind of Spiritual Science, who were also in a way advanced in their development. A certain type among them was disillusioned, people who had been disillusioned by one or other of the modern spiritual movements and who then in some place or another came across us—how many are disillusioned today by the Blavatsky Movement, the Besant Movement or some other Movement. There we do not see the characteristic phenomenon that takes such curious forms in the Anthroposophical Movement; but there we have people, for example, who are to a certain extent spiritually advanced; then after some time one again comes across them but now they say: You are completely wrong! And these meetings are not infrequent. Spirituality today is not at all common but there are men indeed who say to one after a time: You are actually wrong, for, you see, the things you give out in Spiritual Science—there's no possible sense in publishing them! But men are not in inclined to accept them; they are certainly not sufficiently mature. All this can only serve one purpose to be developed in oneself and then kept to oneself. I have found many such people who say: It is a definite characteristic of the man who is really advanced spiritually that it no longer enters his head to speak about it to his fellowmen; he keeps the matter to himself. There is indeed no lack of such people in the world. I have never been able to come to an understanding with these people about what out of a certain inner ground I learn from the spiritual world. These men do quite useful work in a spiritual community but they have a hermit tendency, even when at the same time they remain in association with others. For it is possible to become a hermit in spite of wearing elegant shoes and leading an Hotel life. This one sees this double life being led by a number of people; they are indeed the modern Hotel dwellers; for all I care they may be well dressed but they lead this life as an outward mask to hide what is within them; they have their inner life of the spirit with no wish to share it with their fellow men. This seems to one to be doing what is not right, to be sinning against mankind. For one is right in saying that such men have en effect on the spiritual life, what they experience goes into the spiritual stream. Man is not a self-contained being, therefore what he experiences has value and its own significance in the spiritual world, but the question of time always plays its part there. Men like this who live in such a way nowadays, as many do whom I have known, bring about something indeed in the spiritual world which however only comes to maturity after a long time, in the later epochs of mankind. Then, however, can, and quite certainly would, were there always only those who as hermits develop their spiritual being, having no wish to teach what knowledge they have gained from the spiritual world, what they have developed in themselves—then by the time the fruits of these men are ripe, people outside would have so deteriorated that they would no longer be able to receive the knowledge! Earth evolution would be endangered: connection would be missed. We live indeed today at a time when certain spiritual truths such as those of which we have been speaking must unconditionally be imparted to mankind. Things will not be helped by the attitude expressed, for example, by one of my acquaintances who in a certain sense was spiritually advanced. He came to Berlin and I asked him whether he would come to hear a lecture of mine, just to see how the Movement was run (this is some time ago). He answered: No, holding lectures and talking to people serves no possible purpose! To sit together for half-an-hour and have a little talk I find very pleasant—but let us leave spiritual things alone when we can; everyone must settle those for himself! To pay a civil visit and pass the time of day is best for just those people who are seeking the spiritual. And this attitude is a prevalent one. It would be more comfortable, my dear friends, to live in accordance with such an attitude. And the word comfortable certainly does not describe what it is nowadays days to get up in front of people to impart what one feels impelled to impart as a duty. In an Anthroposophical Movement it should be borne in mind that work is done out of inner necessity, and what happens is not a matter of choice but the punctual observance of a duty.
I have used these words at the end of our studies today because I have wanted once again to take the opportunity of calling attention to what is necessary if a movement for Spiritual Science is to be taken nowadays as earnestly as it should be taken. For what can be made of an Anthroposophical Movement, if personal aspirations, personal ambition, is brought in, can cause much injury must cause much injury. Besides there is still the shadow side, namely, that whoever thinks to find only what is just personal corroborated through Spiritual Science cannot discern whether the other may not be acting also merely from personal ambition. And a terrible doom is then forthcoming. I wanted to give an indication of these things, my dear friends. We shall be speaking further next Friday.
Dritter Vortrag
Sie werden aus den gestrigen Betrachtungen ersehen haben, wie leicht der ganze Entwickelungsgang der Menschheit mißzuverstehen ist, und wie er insbesondere von vielen Seiten in der Gegenwart mißverstanden wird zum Schaden sowohl der gegenwärtigen Erkenntnis wie auch zum Schaden des gegenwärtigen sozialen Strebens der Menschheit. Wir wollen heute einmal einige Ergebnisse der Geisteswissenschaft vor unsere Seele führen, die solcher Art sind, daß sie, ich möchte sagen, von der andern Seite hineinleuchten können in Dinge, die rätselhaft sind, wenn man sich auf die Vorstellungen beschränkt, die sich die Gegenwart von ihnen macht. Ich habe Ihnen gesagt, daß der Mensch mit der Gegenwart nur dann zurechtkommen wird, wenn er sich entschließt, durch ein Hingehen zum Geisteswege sich wirklich neu zu orientieren, sowohl in bezug auf sein Verhältnis zur äußeren Natur, da die alten Orientierungsmittel nicht mehr ausreichen, wie auch mit Bezug auf das Verhältnis von Mensch zu Mensch, da auch da die alten Orientierungsmittel nicht mehr ausreichen, um einzusehen, welche Impulse für die gegenwärtige soziale Struktur der Menschheit nötig sind. Man muß sich ja, will man in diesen Dingen: zurechtkommen, ganz ernstlich vor die Seele rücken, daß so, wie der Mensch heute im Erdendasein zwischen Geburt und Tod hineingestellt ist in die Welt, er nur die äußere Offenbarung der eigentlichen Wesenheit sieht, wie er auch eigentlich nur zu der äußeren Offenbarung seines Mitmenschen in ein Verhältnis tritt.
Das Leben gestaltet sich für die verschiedenen Epochen der Menschheitsentwickelung verschieden, und wir bemühen uns, diese Dinge gerade mit Bezug auf den gegenwärtigen Menschen wirklich zu studieren. Denn in der gegenwärtigen Zeitepoche entscheidet sich für den Erdenmenschen sehr viel. Bis ins 15. Jahrhundert, und, man könnte sagen, weil die Dinge nicht gleich auf einen Schlag vorübergehen, bis in die Gegenwart herein stand der Mensch eigentlich noch immer mehr oder weniger unter der Erbschaft alter Begriffe, alter Impulse. Dieser fünfte nachatlantische Zeitraum ist ja in einer gewissen Beziehung mit Bezug auf die menschliche Entwickelung etwas Außerordentliches. Denn nicht wahr, Sie wissen: Wenn man die gesamte Erdenentwickelung nimmt, so gliedert sie sich in sieben aufeinanderfolgende große Epochen, von denen die vierte die atlantische war, die jetzige fünfte die nachatlantische ist; dann würde die sechste, dann die siebente kommen. In der atlantischen Periode liegt gewissermaßen eine Art Entscheidung. Denn bis dahin war ja das gesamte Erdendasein eine Wiederholung vom früheren Saturn-, Sonnen-, Mondendasein. In der atlantischen Periode liegt eine Art Entscheidung, aber eben nur ein Anfang einer Entscheidung. Nur vorbereitet haben sich da die Dinge, die sich eigentlich erst ausbilden sollen in der folgenden Erdenentwickelung. So daß der Mensch bis zur atlantischen Zeit eigentlich nur dasjenige war, was er als Saturn-, Sonnen- und Mondenmensch in andern Formen schon war. In der atlantischen Zeit aber war er nur in Andeutung dasjenige, was er als eigentlicher Erdenmensch werden soll. Dann geht es weiter, und jetzt sind wir in der fünften nachatlantischen Periode. In der nachatlantischen Periode, durch die urindische, urpersische Entwickelung und so weiter traten schon immer bestimmtere und bestimmtere Verhältnisse auf. Aber die griechisch-lateinische Zeit, die vierte nachatlantische Periode, liefert wiederum doch nur eine Art Wiederholung, wenn auch in anderer Form, dessen, was in der Atlantis auf einem andern Daseinsniveau schon vorhanden war. Erst jetzt in der fünften nachatlantischen Periode, in einer Zeit, die seit dem 15. Jahrhundert begonnen hat, steht der Mensch gewissermaßen so in seiner Gesamtentwickelung drinnen, daß so recht merkbare, in seinem Wesen merkbare neue Impulse auftreten. Sie waren früher nicht so merkbar; jetzt treten sie in seinem Wesen merkbar auf, und noch immer haben sie sich nur angedeutet. Die furchtbaren katastrophalen Ereignisse in unserer Zeit, von denen man schon sagen kann, daß sie die Menschheit ganz kolossal erschüttern werden, sie sind der Ausdruck dafür, daß sich neue Verhältnisse in die Menschheitsentwickelung hereinbegeben. Und ich habe Ihnen ja angedeutet, wie diese neuen Verhältnisse von einer gewissen Seite her dadurch zu charakterisieren sind, daß man darauf hinweist, wie man deutlich wahrnimmt ein Hereinfluten einer geistigen Welle, herrührend gewissermaßen von einem Aufsteigen in der Entwickelung der Geister der Persönlichkeit.
Nun bemerkt man, wenn man geisteswissenschaftlich gerade diese eigentümliche Seelenverfassung ins Auge faßt, in welcher der Mensch der Gegenwart hier auf der Erde ist, man bemerkt gegenwärtig also in geisteswissenschaftlicher Anschauung recht stark, wie der Mensch sich eigentlich der Offenbarungen des Naturseins sowohl wie des Seins seiner Mitmenschen nur dann bewußt ist, wenn er wahrnimmt, oder wenn er äußerlich wollend tätig ist und nichts weiß von den wirklichen Wesenheiten, in die er eben doch in einer gewissen Weise hineinwachsen muß im Laufe seiner Entwickelung, und in die er hineingewachsen sein wird, wenn die Entwickelung weitergegangen sein wird. Der Mensch ist ja, wie Sie wissen, in der Welt so drinnenstehend, daß er, wenn man grob charakterisiert, die umliegende Welt wahrnimmt im Mineralreich, im Pflanzenreich, im Tierreich und in seinem eigenen Reich, im Menschenreich. Das ist dasjenige, was sichtbar um den Menschen herum ist. Und im sichtbaren Menschenreich spielt sich ja auch ab dasjenige, was aus dem Wollen hervorgeht und was in der sozialen Struktur eine gewisse Ordnung finden soll.
Nun, es haben die Menschen vielfach nachgedacht — aber mit einem ungenügenden Denken nachgedacht -, wie der Mensch zu seiner Umgebung steht. Man hat die Ergebnisse dieses Nachdenkens in verschiedenen Erkenntnistheorien verarbeitet. Aber es kann bei diesen Erkenntnistheorien nicht sehr viel herauskommen. Und dasjenige, was heute schulmäßig in diesen Erkenntnistheorien den jungen Leuten, die dann philosophisch zu der Welt sprechen sollen, gelehrt wird, das ist wirklich recht ungenügendes Zeug. Denn eine wahre Einsicht in das, was sich da eigentlich in der Menschenumgebung offenbart, gewinnt man ja doch nur, wenn man die Sache geisteswissenschaftlich betrachtet. Auf der einen Seite kann der Mensch hinblicken auf das mineralische und auf das Pflanzenreich, auf der andern Seite auf das Tierreich und das menschliche Reich selbst. Beides, sowohl Mineralreich und Pflanzenreich wie Menschenreich und Tierreich, enthüllt sich ihm so, daß er, wenn er jetzt im theoretischen Sinne ehrlich ist, in der Enthüllung, in der Offenbarung Widersprüche bemerkt. Er kann nicht zurechtkommen mit der Art, wie sich ihm auf der einen Seite das Mineralreich, das Pflanzenreich, auf der andern Seite das Tierreich und Menschenreich offenbart. Und wenn die Menschen glauben zurechtzukommen, so rührt das nur von einer gewissen Stumpfheit her. Sie wollen nicht auf alle die Zweifel, welche heraussprühen aus der Beobachtung der Naturreiche, eingehen, weil sie zu bequem sind dazu. Nun aber, wenn man etwas vordringt in der Erkenntnis, wenn man sich etwas schult in der Richtung, die angegeben ist in «Wie erlangt man Erkenntnisse der höheren Welten?», dann verwandelt sich in einer gewissen Beziehung sowohl der Anblick des Mineral- und Pflanzenreiches wie auch der Einblick in das Verhältnis zu Tier- und Menschenreich. Die Menschen haben unbewußt heute schon in hohem Grade eine eben nicht zum Bewußtsein kommende Empfindung von dieser Verwandlung. Aber es bleibt eben unbewußt, so wie ich gesagt habe, daß unbewußt heute der Mensch in der ganz natürlichen Entwickelung vor den Hüter der Schwelle hintritt. Es ist eigentlich immer eine gewisse Furcht vor der Wahrheit, welche die Menschen unbewußt abhält, nun wirklich so vorzudringen, daß sie zu dieser Verwandlung kommen. Ich rede in Imaginationen, in Imaginationen, die in Worte umgesetzt sind. Man kann die Dinge nicht anders wirklich treffend charakterisieren. Denn wenn man in sich lebendig macht dasjenige, was man lebendig machen kann, indem man auf sich das anwendet, was in «Wie erlangt man Erkenntnisse der höheren Welten?» beschrieben ist, so wird man, mit dieser verwandelten Erkenntniskraft hinblickend auf das Mineral- und Pflanzenreich, immer etwas empfinden wie Furcht. Nicht wahr, Sie müssen nicht erschauern, nicht eine Gänsehaut bekommen bei der Charakteristik dieser Verhältnisse. Die Menschen gehen ihnen aus dem Wege, weil sie Furcht haben: daraus müssen Sie schon verstehen, daß natürlich, wenn man solche Verhältnisse schildert, es auch so ist, daß man eine gewisse Gänsehaut bekommen kann; deshalb haben ja eben die Leute gerade Furcht. Es ist immer etwas bei der vorgerückten Erkenntnis, wenn man das Mineralreich und Pflanzenreich dann ins Auge faßt, wie Leichengeruch, den man empfindet, ein Leichengeruch, der einem wie in einem lebendigen Gefühl das charakterisiert, was im Mineral und Pflanzenreich lebt. Dagegen, wenn man das Tier- und das Menschenteich in der verwandelten Erkenntnis anschaut, dann hat man immer eine Empfindung, die man so charakterisieren kann, daß man sagen möchte: Eigentlich — nicht wahr, Sie verzeihen mir, daß ich diese Imagination in Worte umsetze — bleiben doch die Menschen, auch die vorgerücktesten, solange sie in diesem physischen Leibe weilen, gegenüber dem, was in ihnen in Wirklichkeit steckt, immer Kinder, richtige Kinder. Es ist einfach wahr, daß im Menschen viel mehr steckt, als er herausentwickeln kann, herausoffenbaren kann aus seinem Wesen zwischen Geburt und Tod.
Sie sehen daraus, weil man ja in dieser übersinnlichen Erkenntnis vom Schein allmählich immer mehr zu der wahren Wirklichkeit aufsteigt, daß - indem man diese Welt außen, so wie sie ist, ansieht, betrachtet -, man es eigentlich nur mit einem Schein zu tun hat. Denn der Leichengeruch, von dem ich Ihnen gesprochen habe, und die Kinderei der Menschen - verzeihen Sie - verhüllen sich. Der Leichengeruch findet, wenn ich so sagen darf, an unserem physischen Menschen eine zu stumpfe Nase, die ätherische Nase ist nicht genügend ausgebildet. Und die Kinderei der Menschen, die läßt uns nicht recht zum Geständnis kommen, daß sie da ist, weil wir als Menschen schon einmal zu eingebildet sind dazu. Aber so ist doch die Sache. Und indem man dies, was ich eben jetzt charakterisiert habe, auseinanderhält, weist man ja zu gleicher Zeit darauf hin, daß im Menschen viel mehr steckt, als betätigt werden kann. Man kann sich dann die Frage aufwerfen: Ja, in Mineralien, in Pflanzen nimmt der Mensch keine Wirklichkeiten wahr; in Tieren, und nicht einmal in seinem eigenen Menschenwesen, nimmt er auch nicht Wirklichkeiten wahr. Worauf ist denn eigentlich dann der Mensch eingestellt hier auf der Erde? Er ist nämlich merkwürdigerweise eingestellt auf Wesen, die weder dem mineralischen und Pflanzenreich, noch dem Tier- und Menschenreich angehören, sondern die zwischendrinnen liegen. Auf eine Art Pflanzentiere oder Tierpflanzen ist er eingestellt. Wenn es Wesen geben würde hier auf der Erde, die weder Pflanzen noch Tiere sind, sondern die bloße Pflanzennatur haben in bezug auf ihre innere Organisation, aber die gehen könnten, Wesen, welche nicht Muskel und Blut hätten, sondern welche in ihrer Anatomie so wären wie die Pflanzen, die nur solche Zellen hätten und solche Gewebe wie die Pflanzen, die sich aber willkürlich bewegen könnten wie die Tiere, oder wenn auf unserer Erde Tiere herumwandeln würden, die eben, wenn sie sterben, so etwas hinterlassen wie eine Pflanzenleiche: dann würde für solche Wesen der Mensch in seiner ganzen Seelenverfassung wirklich eingestellt sein. Die würde er, solche Wesen würde der Mensch eigentlich hier in seinem Erdendasein fassen können. Aber das Merkwürdige ist wiederum: Diese Wesen können ihrerseits nicht im Erdendasein sein, diese Wesen sind nur in andern Welten zu finden. Sie sind ihrerseits so, daß sie im Erdendasein nicht gedeihen könnten. Also man kann sagen: Dem Menschen fehlt eigentlich dasjenige Erkenntnisvermögen — und das ist in der Gegenwart besonders sichtbar -, welches ihn befähigt, unmittelbar einzudringen in das Wesen von Mineralien und Pflanzen und auch von Tieren und Menschen. Und die Wesen, die er wohl unmittelbar wahrnehmen würde ihrer ganzen Konstitution nach, die können wieder sich nicht auf der Erde aufhalten. So merkwürdig steht der Mensch mit Bezug auf sein Verhältnis zu der umgebenden Natur.
Aber auch zu sich selbst steht der Mensch hier auf der Erde in einem merkwürdigen Verhältnisse. Der Mensch ist auf der einen Seite ein vorstellendes Wesen. Wenn er aber das Vorstellungsvermögen betätigt, dann verliert er im Vorstellen seine eigene Wesenheit. Und diese eigene Wesenheit, die im Vorstellen nicht zutage treten kann, die hat er eigentlich nur dadurch, daß etwas, der Wille, aus dem Unbewußten heraufwirkt. Würde der Wille nicht heraufwirken, würden wir nicht den Willen in uns verspüren, die ganze Welt käme uns gespenstig vor, wenn wir sie nur vorstellen könnten. Wir würden eine gespenstige Welt vor uns haben, so wie ungefähr die Welt der naturwissenschaftlichen Begriffe ist; die wäre dann wirklich unsere Welt. Denken Sie sich, wenn die Welt so ausschauen würde, wie die Naturwissenschafter oder Zoologen es beschreiben, denken Sie, wenn nichts anderes da wäre, als was in Büchern über Botanik und Mineralogie steht — die wirklichen Pflanzen und Gesteine enthalten ja viel mehr, als was in den Büchern steht, aber denken Sie sich, Sie würden geführt in eine Welt, wie sie in den Büchern beschrieben ist, wo nicht mehr da wäre, als was in den Büchern beschrieben ist: es wäre nur eine Gespensterwelt, eine richtige Gespensterwelt. Nur dadurch ist diese Welt keine Gespensterwelt, daß immer der Wille mitspricht. Wenn Sie fliegen könnten, nicht mit einem Apparat, sondern selbst fliegen, das heißt, wenn Sie keinen Boden unter den Füßen brauchten, könnten Sie sich also frei bewegen ohne Boden, dann würden Sie nahe daran kommen, die Welt so gespenstig wahrzunehmen. Sie würde Ihnen, wenn Sie nur im wachen Zustande mit den Augen die Welt verfolgen würden, sehr gespenstig schon erscheinen; nicht so stark, wie der Naturforscher sie beschreibt, aber sie würde Ihnen da schon sehr gespenstig erscheinen. Sie haben ein solides Gefühl von dem Weltendasein nur dadurch, daß Sie mit den Füßen auf dem Boden stehen. Und dieses Drücken mit Ihren Füßen auf den Boden, das gibt Ihnen das Gefühl, das mit dem Willen verwandt, das nur eine Abschwächung des Willens ist, daß Sie nicht bloß in einer Gespensterwelt sind, sondern in einer soliden Welt. Wenn Sie dieses Gefühl nicht hätten, sondern nur sehen würden, dann würde Ihnen die Welt sehr gespenstig vorkommen. Was im Unterbewußten sich abspielt, das sagen Sie sich nämlich nicht. Im Unterbewußten spielt sich stets das ab, daß eigentlich der Mensch sich sagt, im Unterbewußten sagt er es sich: Ja, eigentlich schaut die Welt wie ein Gespenst aus! Aber wenn die Welt so wäre, wie sie mir meine Augen zeigen, da könnte ich nicht fest stehen, da müßte ich untersinken. Und ich sinke doch nicht unter, also ist die Welt nicht so, wie sie mir meine Augen zeigen. - Dieser Schluß wird im Unbewußten fortwährend gemacht. So kompliziert ist das ganz gewöhnliche, alltäglichste Verhältnis zur Welt. Es ist immer ein unbewußter Schluß, der in gewisser Beziehung aus dem Willen stammt. Also beim bloßen Vorstellen fehlt uns eigentlich - wenn ich mich jetzt gelehrt, das heißt, pedantisch ausdrücken will - das Subjekt, das fällt heraus. Daß wir ein Subjekt haben, uns mit der Welt zusammenfühlen, kommt aus dem Willen.
Und wiederum, wenn wir wollen, wenn wir den Willen entwickeln, da fehlt uns eigentlich das Objekt. Das Objekt, das kommt uns gar nicht ordentlich solid zum Bewußtsein. Wenn ich einfach dieses Büchelchen hier von der linken Seite zur rechten Seite herüberheben will und es auch wirklich tue - ja, das eigentliche Objekt des Wollens, das kommt nicht zum Bewußtsein. Sie sehen den Weg, den das Büchelchen macht, die Vorstellung, die gespenstet so hinein in das Wollen, aber das eigentliche Objekt des Wollens kommt nicht zum Bewußtsein. So daß der Mensch sowohl, indem er vorstellend ist, wie auch, indem er wollend ist — das ist wiederum grotesk ausgesprochen, weil man eine Imagination in Worte kleiden muß -, daß der Mensch eigentlich sowohl als Vorstellender wie als Wollender, verzeihen Sie, ein Krüppel ist. Er stellt gespenstig vor und will eigentlich unvollständig. Was der Mensch wirklich ist, das ist eigentlich weder in der Vorstellung noch im Willen ganz drinnen, das ist wiederum in der Mitte drinnen zwischen dem Vorstellen und dem Willen. Aber da ist die Sache so, daß uns das nicht zum Bewußtsein kommen kann im gewöhnlichen Leben. Geradeso wie in die äußere Natur das Pflanzentier nicht eintreten kann, so kann dem Menschen nicht zum Bewußtsein kommen, was er eigentlich ist. Deshalb habe ich Ihnen von einem andern Gesichtspunkte diese Tatsache öfter ausgesprochen, indem ich Ihnen sagte: Das eigentliche Ich nimmt der Mensch wahr wie ein Loch in den Ereignissen des Lebens. Nicht wahr, man muß sich darüber nur klar sein, daß man Löcher auch wahrnehmen kann. Vom Schlafen weiß der Mensch nichts, er wacht, schläft, wacht, schläft, wacht, schläft; aber indem er sein Leben überblickt, da stellt sich ihm das ausgesparte Bewußtsein, das Bewußtseinsloch in den Lebenslauf hinein, und er sieht gerade so, wie wenn er eine Fläche hat, die weiß ist und die schwarze Löcher hat, wo er eigentlich nichts sieht, so sieht er die Bewußtseinslöcher des Schlafes. Aber so ist es mit unserem Ich auch in unserem Wachleben. Unser Ich wird nicht in Wahrheit ins Bewußtsein hereingehoben, sondern im Bewußtsein ist von diesem Ich nur ein Loch, und die Wahrnehmung dieses Loches macht uns darauf aufmerksam, daß wir eben das wirkliche Ich haben.
Diese Dinge, die dem heutigen groben Menschen noch wie eine Spintisiererei erscheinen, sie müssen allmählich ein elementares Bewußtsein der Menschen werden. Denn man kann nicht in der Zukunft auf solche Glaubensvorstellungen das Leben gründen, wie man es in vergangenen Zeiten hat gründen können, weil noch die Reste und die Nachwirkungen atavistischen Hellsehens vorhanden waren. In der Zukunft wird man auf deutlich durchschaubare Grundlagen das Leben stellen müssen. Zu den alltäglichen Vorstellungen wird das gehören müssen, daß man auf das Mineral- und Pflanzenreich so hinschaut, wie Goethe hingeschaut hat, der nur das Phänomen angesehen hat, der nicht geglaubt hat, daß in dem Phänomen etwas anderes als höchstens die Grundphänomene, die Urphänomene sich offenbaren, aber daß die Phänomene nicht in Gedanken ausdrückbare Naturgesetze offenbaren. Nach Naturgesetzen hat Goethe nie geforscht, das wäre ihm sehr phantastisch erschienen. Die Phänomene hat er verfolgen wollen, denn es zeigt uns die äußere Welt im mineralischen und Pflanzenreiche nichts als die Wahrnehmungen, die Erscheinungen. So muß der Mensch hinschauen auf die äußere Welt, daß er sich bewußt ist: Ich sehe im Mineral- und Pflanzenreich eigentlich nur die Außenseite; und wenn ich dem Tier- und Menschenreiche gegenüberstehe, sehe ich eigentlich auch nur etwas, was wie ein Embryo des ganzen Wesens ist. — Das muß auch so sein. Sehen Sie, im Mineral- und Pflanzenreiche sind ja in Wirklichkeit vorhanden Wesen, die sich nur nach einer gewissen Seite hin enthüllen, wenn der Mensch sie anschaut, weil sie, ich möchte sagen, sich nicht anders enthüllen können. Denn im Mineral- und Pflanzenreiche lebt etwas, was man vollständig nur erkennt, wenn man - nun verstehen Sie mich recht — zurückblickt auf diejenige Welt, aus der man herausgekommen ist, als man durch die Geburt dieses physische Dasein angetreten hat. Könnten Sie mit jenem Bewußtsein, das über die Geburt nach rückwärts hinausgeht, gedächtnismäßig behaftet bleiben nach der Geburt, könnten Sie also das Geborenwerden als ein solches Ereignis in Ihrem Leben betrachten, wie etwa, sagen wir, den Übergang vom fünfzehnten zu dem sechzehnten Jahre, würde nicht nach rückwärts der Faden des Bewußtseins abreißen, weil das Bewußtsein ganz andersartig war vor der Geburt beziehungsweise vor der Empfängnis, so würden Sie ohne weiteres eine ganz andere Ansicht über das Mineral- und Pflanzenreich bekommen, als Sie nur dadurch bekommen, daß Sie sie anschauen vom Standpunkte des Lebens zwischen Geburt und Tod. Denn Sie würden sich dann folgendes sagen: Ich bin herausgetreten aus dem geistigen Reich durch die Geburt. Ich bin hier in dieses physische Reich eingetreten. Warum habe ich denn das getan? Warum bin ich denn da nicht drinnen geblieben in dem geistigen Reiche? Warum hat es mich denn überhaupt auf die Erde heruntergelockt? Denn man kann von einem solchen Locken sprechen. Da könnten Sie dann sagen, wenn Sie sich erinnern könnten: Es hat mich auf die Erde heruntergelockt aus dem Grunde, weil plötzlich im Laufe meiner Entwickelung zwischen Tod und neuer Geburt ich in eine Sphäre hineinkam, wo es so aussah, als ob gewisse Wesen herausgeflohen wären, als ob sie eigentlich drinnen sein sollten, fehlten und nicht drinnen sind. - Wenn ich mich grob ausdrücken darf: In der letzten Zeit vor der Geburt erlebt man in der geistigen Welt auf Schritt und Tritt, daß einem da Wesen fehlen, die eigentlich hergehören und die nicht da sind. Es zeigt alles: diese Wesen fehlen. Und tritt man jetzt durch die Geburt, so sind in den Mineralien und in den Pflanzen diese Wesen da, aber wie Verbannte, wie wenn diese Wesen verbannt wären aus der Welt, in der man drinnen war, und wie wenn sie nicht vollständig gedeihen könnten, halb sterben würden und daher den Leichengeruch bilden, halb sterben würden in der Welt, in die man eingetreten ist. Man sehnt sich vor der Geburt nach der Bekanntschaft mit gewissen Verbannten. Man weiß nur: Da sind verbannte Wesen, aber wo sind die? Da geht man in die physische Welt heraus und nimmt sie wahr, aber, ich möchte sagen, einbalsamiert, mumifiziert. Denn in der Welt, in die man eingetreten ist, können sie nicht anders sein als einbalsamiert, als mumifiziert, vertrocknet. Das ist die vollständig richtige Empfindung, wenn man der Mineral- und pflanzlichen Welt so gegenübertritt, daß man in ihr die Wesen sieht, die verbannt sind aus der geistigen Welt, aus der Sphäre, in der man gerade war, bevor man in das physische Leben eintreten mußte.
Und wenn man auf Tiere und Menschen hinschaut und ihre Kinderei sieht, dann kommt man darauf, wenn man einen Blick auf die tiefere Wesenheit entwickeln kann, daß diese Tiere und Menschen, so wie sie einmal in der Welt hier sind, in der wir zwischen Geburt und Tod leben, nie fertig werden, nie eigentlich ihr ganzes, durch ihr Innenwesen bedingtes Leben zum Abschluß bringen. Wer Tiere richtig anschaut, wer sie anschauen kann mit vollständiger innerer lebendiger Erkenntniskraft, der weiß zwar, daß die Tiere nicht unsterblich sind, aber er weiß auch, daß die Tiere die ganze Tragik dieser Nichtunsterblichkeit in ihren Gruppenseelen durchmachen. Die Gruppenseelen sind ja hinausdauernd über das individuelle Leben des Tieres; aber dasjenige, was hier auf der Erde ist von den Tieren, das ist, wie ich schon neulich sagte, eigentlich krank, das ist so, daß es verdirbt, weil es in eine andere Welt gehört und in diese Welt hinein verbannt ist. Und der Mensch seiner äußeren physischen Gestalt nach ist auch in diese Welt hinein verbannt; daher bleibt er verkrüppelt, bleibt ein Kind. Der Mensch bleibt ein Kind. Das Tier ist überhaupt in seinem Wesen seiner physischen Gestalt nach vertrocknet, denn das, was zu Tier und Mensch gehört, das findet man, wenn man durch den Tod geht und in die geistige Welt unmittelbar eintritt, die man nun nach dem ’Tode betrachtet. Denn eigentlich beschreibt man einen Kreis in dem Leben zwischen Tod und neuer Geburt. Das, was einem verborgen bleibt hier vom Tier- und Pflanzenreich, weswegen man wahrnimmt, daß Tiere und Menschen Verbannte sind aus der geistigen Welt - der Mensch der äußeren physischen Gestalt nach -, das nimmt man zunächst wahr, indem man durch die Pforte des Todes eintritt in die geistige Welt. Da macht man eine Entwickelung durch, und man kommt dazu, daß einem immer mehr und mehr nach dieser Weltenmitternacht, die ich in dem Mysteriendrama beschrieben habe, klar wird: Da fehlt etwas, und was da fehlt, das ist gewissermaßen davongelaufen aus der geistigen Welt. Dem läuft man nach durch die Geburt und findet es dann im mineralischen und Pflanzenreich auf der physischen Erde. Über das Mineral- und pflanzliche Reich ist man eigentlich nicht erstaunt, wenn man durch die Geburt ins Dasein tritt, denn man hat es erwartet. Daß man auch hier auf der: physischen Erde Tiere findet und den Menschen mit einer äußeren Gestalt, die nur vollkommener ist, aber an das Tier erinnert, das ist etwas, was einen einigermaßen erstaunt, nachdem man geboren worden ist mit der Bewußtseinsveranlagung. Man fängt aber an, es zu begreifen, wenn man weiß: Mit dieser äußeren Gestalt der Tiere und Menschen ist ja ein Anfang gegeben, der erst weiterwächst in der Welt, in die man eintritt durch die Todespforte.
Man könnte sagen: Für die abstrakten und vollständig ausgedörrten Glaubensvorstellungen, die noch geblieben sind - früher waren ja diese Vorstellungen viel lebendiger und gaben dem Menschen wirklich etwas — in unser Bewußtseinszeitalter herein, für die steht zu unvermittelt [nebeneinander] dasjenige, was die Menschen hier in der physischen Welt wahrnehmen, und dasjenige, was sie sich vorstellen sollen, daß es der Welt zugrunde liegt, welche der Mensch durchlebt zwischen dem Tod und einer neuen Geburt. Das, was der Mensch dutchlebt zwischen dem Tod und einer neuen Geburt, bleibt deshalb heute den Menschen so zweifelhaft und kann so leicht von dem grob materialistischen Geiste geleugnet werden, weil ja der Mensch, indem er in das Zeitalter der Bewußtseinsseele, das heißt, ins intellektuelle Zeitalter eingetreten ist, dadurch nur in Spiegelbildern im Bewußtsein lebt, wie ich ausgeführt habe. Er kann also auch nur in Spiegelbildern leben, wenn er über die Wahrnehmungen hinausgeht, in die ihm, wie ich Ihnen angedeutet habe, im Aufstehen der Füße der Wille hineinspielt. Aber wenn kein Wille hineinspielt - und ins unsterbliche Leben nach dem Tode spielt ja kein Wille hinein - und der Mensch nur darauf angewiesen ist, in den Spiegelbildern des Vorstellens das vor seine Seele zu rücken, was die Welt ist zwischen dem Tod und einer neuen Geburt, dann wird ihm diese Welt zweifelhaft, nicht nur gespenstig, sondern zweifelhaft. Ja, man kann sogar folgendes sagen: Wenn sich die Menschen darauf versteifen würden, nur Naturwissenschaften gelten zu lassen, nur die gespenstige Welt sich vor Augen zu rücken, welche die Naturwissenschaft gibt, so haben sie eigentlich recht, das Leben zwischen dem Tod und einer neuen Geburt, überhaupt das Leben nach dem Durchgang durch die Todespforte zu leugnen.; Denn was die Naturwissenschaft gibt, sind ja nur Bilder, ist ja gespenstig. Und das hört auch auf, indem der Mensch durch die Todespforte tritt. Die Naturwissenschaft kann nichts enthalten von dem, was der Mensch erlebt in dem Reiche nach dem Tode und vor der Geburt. Denn sehen Sie: In den Mineralogiebüchern und in den Botanikbüchern und in allem, was damit zusammenhängt, Physiologie, Geologie und so weiter, in all den Vorstellungen, die Sie überhaupt aufnehmen können über Pflanzen und Mineralien, da können Sie ja nur etwas aufnehmen über Wesen, die hier hinein verbannt sind in die physische Welt. Und wiederum in den Tieren und in den Menschenkörpern können Sie auch nur etwas wahrnehmen, was hier hinein verbannt ist — auch in den Zoologiebüchern und Anthropologiebüchern -, und damit setzt sich ja im Grunde, wenn man das im weitesten Sinne denkt, alles Wissen zusammen: Sie können nur dasjenige wahrnehmen, was hier in der Verbannung lebt. Aber wenn Sie bedenken, daß vor der Geburt Ihnen die Wesen gerade fehlen - also da sind sie ja nicht -, die Sie hier erleben nach der Geburt, daß in Tieren und Menschen dasjenige erlebt wird, was hier nicht vorhanden ist, so werden Sie begreifen, daß in das gewöhnliche naturwissenschaftliche Vorstellungsleben gar nichts von dem unsterblichen Leben hereingehen kann, daß die Naturwissenschaft von sich aus ganz recht hat, wenn sie sich um das unsterbliche Leben gewissermaßen nicht kümmert, weil sie in Bildern lebt. Und daher ist es so, daß in dem Zeitalter seit dem 15. Jahrhundert, in dem die naturwissenschaftlichen Vorstellungen alle Kreise beherrschen, der Mensch auf der einen Seite gewissermaßen die robuste, rohe Natur hat, die ihm eigentlich allein als Wirklichkeit gilt, und auf der andern Seite ein Reich, das er nur mit den abgeschwächten Spiegelbildern des Zeitalters der Bewußtseinsseele erreichen will, wo es ihm eigentlich so vorkommt, wie wenn er sich sagt: Nun, indem ich darauf komme, daß das nur Spiegelbilder sind, die ich da denke und im Unterbewußtsein kommt er darauf, denn dann wird er ein Zweifler an der Unsterblichkeit -, dann wäre ich, wenn ich glaubte, daß diese Spiegelbilder und auch mein eigenes Spiegelbild nach meinem Tode noch da seien, ebenso dumm, wie wenn ich glaubte, daß mir aus dem Spiegel an der Wand die Menschen entgegenkommen, daß sie nicht bloß sich spiegelten, sondern mir entgegenkämen.
Es liegt einfach im Charakter dieses Zeitalters der Entwickelung der Bewußtseinsseele, daß dem Menschen, wenn er nicht aufrücken will zu einer geistigen Erfassung der Welt, immer mehr und mehr der Zusammenhang schwindet mit der Welt, in die er eintritt, wenn er durch die Todespforte tritt. Und es schwindet ihm aus der Vorstellung, es schwindet ihm aus dem bewußten Leben, aber es schwindet ihm nicht aus der Sehnsucht. Und selbst die schlimmsten Unsterblichkeitsleugner haben in ihren Untergründen in der Willenssphäre, aus der ja die Sehnsucht stammt, sie haben Sehnsucht, von der Welt etwas zu erfahren, in die der Mensch durch die Todespforte eintritt, aus der er herausgetreten ist, indem er durch die Geburtspforte gegangen ist. Sehnsucht haben sie. An dieser Sehnsucht ist sogar die Gegenwart krank. Und die mancherlei Krankheiten der Gegenwart drücken sich aus, weil diese Sehnsucht in den Menschen waltet und der Mensch keine bewußten Vorstellungen für diese Sehnsucht finden kann. Wenn etwas in unserer Willenssphäre lebt, was der Mensch mit der Vorstellung nicht bewältigen kann - man muß da wiederum sehr radikale Begriffe entwickeln, wenn man über diese Dinge redet -, dann fängt er an zu toben. Das ist das Wesen des Tobens, der Tobsucht, daß etwas in der Willenssphäre lebt, was der Mensch nicht mit seinem Vorstellungsvermögen umfassen kann. Und wenn die Menschen sich nicht dazu bequemen werden, einzugehen auf die Erfassung der geistigen Welt, um durch das Erfassen der geistigen Welten dasjenige zu umfassen, was in der Willenssphäre sich schon herausgestaltet, dann wird die Toberei in der Welt immer größer und größer werden, die Toberei, die sich heute als das nächste Stadium nach dem nicht eintretenden, aber von den Menschen immer erhofften Friedensschluß eben für die Menschen einstellt. Das ist nicht etwas, worüber man reden kann wie in einem Kegelklub, wo man nach den gewöhnlichen philiströsen Vorstellungen meint, da oder dort über das oder jenes Abhilfe schaffen zu können, indem man sich verständigt, nein, das ist etwas, was mit dem tiefsten Wesen der menschlichen Entwickelung zusammenhängt. Der Mensch kann sich nicht dagegen sträuben, daß dasjenige in ihm sich entwickelt, was in seine Willenssphäre eintritt. Darüber hat er keine Macht. Er kann nur sich dazu entschließen, bewußt in die Geistessphäre so einzudringen, daß er das verstehen lernt, was in seine Willenssphäre eindringt. Dadurch wird an Stelle der Toberei geordnetes Menschenzusammenleben sich entwickeln können in der Zukunft.
Sie sehen, es ist keine Angelegenheit, die den Menschen nur subjektiv angeht, daß der Mensch sich hinwende zur geistigen Welt, die sich offenbaren will durch eine besondere Welle des Geschehens in unserer Zeit, sondern es ist eine objektive Notwendigkeit, daß der Mensch sich der geistigen Welt zuwendet im Zeitalter der Bewußtseinsseele. Denn Veränderungen sind eben eingetreten in der Menschheitsentwickelung.
Bis zu dem Zeitpunkt, in dem sich abgespielt hat im Erdenleben das Mysterium von Golgatha, kam alles das, was der Mensch brauchte, um in der Welt hier einigermaßen sicher zu stehen, eben aus dem Schlafe. Man hat anders geschlafen, wenn das auch die heutigen Physiologen nicht zugeben, vor dem Mysterium von Golgatha, als man jetzt schläft. Solche prophetischen Naturen, denen sich in Träumen so Großartiges geoffenbart hat wie den hebräischen Propheten, die gibt es daher auch in dieser Form nicht mehr; denn den Seinen gibt es der Herr heute nicht mehr im Schlafe. Er hat es ihnen gegeben. Das ist eben der große Übergang in der Entwickelung. Und nicht nur den prophetischen Naturen wurden die Bilder der Zukunft gegeben, sondern die Gedanken wurden den Menschen noch bis in die griechische Zeit hinein aus dem Schlaf heraus gegeben. Wenn man aufwachte, brachte man sich die Gedanken mit. Es war der menschliche Organismus noch so konstruiert, daß man sich die Gedanken mitbrachte. Das hat noch eine Weile nachgewirkt, obschon die Sache so war, daß die Menschen eigentlich schon im 15. Jahrhundert kopflos geworden sind — verzeihen Sie! —, das heißt: Der Kopf war nicht mehr recht zu brauchen, der Kopf konnte nicht mehr aus dem Schlaf heraus die Gedanken mitbringen.
Es ist schon ein Resultat der Geisteswissenschaft, zu erkennen, daß unser Kopf seit dem 15. Jahrhundert ein recht viel weniger brauchbares Werkzeug geworden ist, viel vertrockneter ist, als er vorher war. Aber so recht bemerklich macht sich das erst in der Gegenwart, und es wird sich immer mehr bemerklich machen, wenn nicht ein Ersatz geschaffen wird, so daß das Ausgedünstete des Kopfes wiederum von der geistigen Welt her ersetzt wird. Denn bis in unsere Zeit, bis in das 19. Jahrhundert herein, da war noch immer die andere Natur, die Brustnatur des Menschen gewöhnt an das, was der Kopf aus dem Schlafe heraus noch während der griechisch-lateinischen Zeit bekam. Die Brustnatur war daran gewöhnt, und da haben die Menschen noch die nachwirkenden Impulse in ihre Kopflosigkeit herein gehabt. Sie war noch daran gewöhnt; ich möchte sagen, die Geste des Gedankens, den Schatten des Gedankens hatten die Menschen noch. Aber auch dieser Schatten wird vergehen, die Menschen werden gar keine Gedanken haben, wenn sie sich nur ihrem Kopfe überlassen wollen. Und so ist es ja auch, und es zeigt sich darin, daß die Menschen nicht denken wollen. Immer weniger wollen sie denken. Sie möchten auf der einen Seite sich von der Natur die Gedanken diktieren lassen, am liebsten bloß experimentieren und sich vom Experiment sagen lassen, was sie denken sollen. Selber denken möchten die Menschen nicht. Dazu haben sie auch gar kein rechtes Vertrauen, denn was sie ausdenken, das, meinen sie, ist ja doch keine Wirklichkeit. Es ist ja auch, wenn man die bloßen Gedanken nimmt, keine Wirklichkeit. Aber man kann gewahr werden: Das Denken, nicht die Gedanken, das muß aktiv werden. Dieses Aktivwerden des Denkens, das kommt von dem Hereinspielen der geistigen Welt. Und Sie können heute, wenn Sie wirklich anfangen, aktiv zu denken, gar nicht anders, als die geistige Welt in sich hereinspielen zu lassen. Sonst denken Sie nicht, sonst denken Sie so wenig, wie die Naturforscher heute denken, die sich am liebsten vom Experiment oder der Naturforschung alles diktieren lassen möchten, oder so wenig, wie heute die sozialen Forscher denken, die eigentlich, weil sie nicht aktiv sein wollen, weil sie nicht wirklich soziale Impulse erfassen, welche nur in der Aktivität erfaßt werden können, mit dem arbeiten, was historisch erforscht werden kann, was Vererbung ist. Denken Sie doch nur einmal, wie die Menschen darauf verfallen sind, weil sie nicht mehr selbst die Impulse haben, durch welche die soziale Struktur geschaffen werden kann, zurückzuschauen in die Zeit, wo noch Gedanken sich gebildet haben. Die Menschen sehen nur von einem falschen Gesichtswinkel aus die Sache an. Rousseau war es, der den Menschen den Naturzustand vorgemacht hatte, weil er es spürte: aus der Gegenwart kann man nichts gewinnen, wenn man nicht aktiv wird im Sinn der Erkenntnis höherer Welten. Und der moderne Sozialismus, der ergeht sich am liebsten darinnen, Urzustände der Menschheit zu studieren — das ist ja dasjenige, worein sich besonders die Sozialisten vertiefen -, primitive Zustände zu studieren, zu studieren an allerwildesten Urvölkern und primitivsten Völkern, um zu verstehen, wie die Menschen in der sozialen Zusammenfassung sein sollen. Wer mit diesen Sachen bekannt ist, der weiß das. Überall eine gewisse Furcht vor dem, was so notwendig hereindringt als die erste Morgenröte des Zusammenhangs mit der geistigen Welt, eine gewisse Furcht vor dem aktiven Denken.
Daher versteht man so schwer dasjenige, was auf aktives Denken Anspruch macht, wie zum Beispiel meine «Philosophie der Freiheit». Da sind die Gedanken anders, als die heut üblichen Gedanken sind. Und beim Lesen dieses Buches hören die Menschen manchmal sehr bald auf zu lesen, aus dem einfachen Grunde: sie möchten es lesen wie ein anderes Buch. Aber, nicht wahr, die andern Bücher, die man heute besonders gern hat, nun, die liest man, setzt sich hin auf die Chaiselongue, legt etwas den Rücken zurück, dann wird man möglichst passiv und läßt so die Gedankenbilder vorbeigehen. Manche Menschen betreiben ja das Lesen schließlich überhaupt nur noch so. Betrügen Sie sich nicht, indem Sie glauben, daß sie die Zeitungen oftmals anders lesen, diese Menschen - nicht wahr, die Anwesenden sind immer ausgenommen, selbstverständlich -, es mischen sich nur manchmal Emotionen hinein, Sorgen hinein; aber auch die Zeitungen, die so sensationell aufgenommen werden, die werden .auch so gelesen, daß die Bilder so vorbeihuschen. Ja, so läßt sich so etwas, wie es versucht worden ist darzustellen in der «Philosophie der Freiheit», nicht lesen. Da muß man sich immerfort einen Ruck geben, damit diese Gedanken einen nicht einschläfern. Denn darauf ist nicht gerechnet, daß man auf der Chaiselongue bloß sitzt. Man kann ja sitzen, selbstverständlich, kann sogar den Rücken zurücklehnen, aber man muß dann versuchen, aus dem ganzen Menschen, gerade dadurch, daß man die äußere Leiblichkeit in Ruhe gebracht hat, das innere geistigseelische Wesen in Bewegung zu setzen, so daß das ganze Denken in Bewegung kommt. Anders geht es nicht vorwärts, sonst schläft man ein. Es schlafen auch viele dabei ein, und das sind nicht einmal die unehrlichsten. Die unehrlichsten sind diejenigen, welche die «Philosophie der Freiheit» lesen wie ein anderes Buch und dann glauben, daß sie wirklich die Gedanken verfolgt haben. Sie haben sie nicht verfolgt, sondern sie haben sie nur so übersetzt wie Worthülsen; sie lesen nur so die Worte und nehmen nicht heraus, was eigentlich aus den Worten erst folgt, wie wenn man am Feuerstein den Stahl schlägt. Das ist schon dasjenige, was beansprucht werden muß von dem, was in der Gegenwart und in der nächsten Zukunft in die Menschheitsentwickelung eingreifen muß, denn dadurch wird die Menschheit allmählich in gesunder Art sich in die geistige Welt hinauf erheben. An dem aktiven Denken wird sich entzünden die innere Verwandtschaft des Menschen mit der geistigen Welt, und dann wird der Mensch immer weiter hinaufkommen. Er kann ja heute schon sehr weit kommen, wenn er solche Dinge beobachtet, wie sie in «Wie erlangt man Erkenntnisse der höheren Welten?» beschrieben sind. Aber auch da ist hinlänglich darauf hingedeutet, daß es doch notwendig ist, daß das kohärente, wenn ich mich des Ausdrucks bedienen darf, das zusammenhängende Denken, wo niemals der Gedankenfaden abreißt, sondern alles am Gedankenfaden verfolgt wird, vorzugsweise entwickelt werde.
Aus alten Zeiten mischt sich in diese heute noch mehr oder weniger unklar und unbewußt gebliebene Sehnsucht, mit dem bewußten Denken aufzurücken in die Sphäre, wo die Geister sind — was man kann -, es mischt sich erst recht hinein ein müdes Verharrenwollen beim inkohärenten Denken. Ich habe schon neulich darauf aufmerksam gemacht: Es ist den Menschen unbequem, immer fortschreiten zu sollen mit dem bewußten Denken von Schritt zu Schritt. Sie möchten lieber durch ein mehr unbewußtes, nicht mit den Gedanken zu verfolgendes Gebiet gehen, und dann erst wiederum den nächsten Schritt machen, nicht wahr? Es ist nicht so, daß man Geisteswissenschaft, wie sie hier gemeint ist und die, wie Sie wissen, in gesunder Weise rechnet mit dem steten Verfolgen der Gedanken, nicht verstehen kann, wenn man die Gedanken wirklich rege macht; sondern es wünschen die Menschen nur, sie anders zu verstehen, als man sie verstehen muß. Statt eines steten Verfolgens des Gedankens wünschen die Menschen, daß der Gedankenfaden immer abreißt. Wenn Sie sich vertiefen in das, was Ihnen die Geisteswissenschaft gibt, dann können Sie, wenn Sie sich nur wirklich energisch vertiefen - haben Sie Geduld, das kann im heutigen Zeitalter nur in Andeutungen noch vorhanden sein —, schon heute, indem Sie die Kraft der Gedanken entwickeln, um mit den Gedanken Saturn, Sonne und Mond zu verfolgen, wie sie in meiner «Geheimwissenschaft im Umriß» beschrieben sind, diese Entwickelung bis da herein verfolgen, wo der Mensch dasteht in der Welt, und bis in Ihr eigenes Leben dringen, und mit dem also intensiver gemachten Gedanken Ihr eigenes Leben durchdringen. Dann kommen Sie zu gewissen, wenn auch anders aussehenden, als man es haben wollte, aber durchaus in dem Zusammenhange, in der Kohärenz des Denkens liegenden Vorstellungen, die Sie aufklären über Ihr Wesen, über die Art, wie Sie sind, über Ihren Charakter. Sie können nämlich, indem Sie wirklich lebendig machen, was über Saturn, Sonne und Mond und dann über die Erdenentwickelung gesagt ist, und das anwenden auf sich als einzelnen Menschen, fortschreiten bis zu Ihrem eigenen Wesen, nur müssen Sie mit dem Gedanken fortgehen zu Ihrer Selbstanschauung, nicht den Gedanken abreißen lassen, sondern kohärent den Gedanken lassen, ihn zusammenhängen lassen. Das, was der Mensch heute auf diese Weise rechtmäßig beginnt, klärt ihn bis zu dem Grade, bis zu dem er aufgeklärt sein soll, über sein eigenes, persönliches Wesen auf. In diese Sehnsucht, die aber beim Menschen mehr oder weniger unbewußt noch vorhanden ist, mischt sich etwas anderes hinein mit dem Abreißen des Gedankenfadens, so etwas Errechnetes. Der Mensch möchte über sein Wesen Aufklärung gewinnen. Was tut er? Er nimmt eine alte, antiquierte Wissenschaft, die durchaus in bezug auf ihre Ehrwürdigkeit nicht herabgesetzt werden soll, selbstverständlich, aber die einer Erklärung bedarf, wenn sie in das neue Zeitalter hereingestellt werden soll, und rechnet, wobei er alle Augenblicke den Gedankenfaden abreißen läßt, Sternkonstellationen aus; nachher kann der Gedankenfaden abreißen, und rein äußerlich, ohne Denken soll sich entwickeln dieses Wesen des Menschen, so wie er dasteht auf der Erde.
Sehen Sie: Die römisch-katholische Kirche, wie ich gestern dargestellt habe, verleugnet dasjenige, was heute das Allernotwendigste ist; aber gerade wenn man so etwas nimmt wie die Beschreibung der inneren Beschauung des Johannes vom Kreuz, so kann dieses erfüllt werden, wenn man heute im Sinne der Entwickelung lebt, entsprechend «Wie erlangt man Erkenntnisse der höheren Welten?». Was in diesem Buche enthalten ist, das ist — gerade für die heutige Zeit — die Befolgung desjenigen, was ein Mensch wie der heilige Johannes vom Kreuz will, während die katholische Kirche das ableugnet und heute noch immer die alte Art des Johannes vom Kreuz auch auf den heutigen Menschen angewendet wissen will, wie es auch manche Menschen tun. Sie wollen nicht, weil sie zu bequem sind, jenes aktive Leben im Geiste, das schon auf einer sehr stark wirkenden Stufe vorhanden ist, wenn man solche Vorstellungen aufnimmt, wie sie in der Geisteswissenschaft gegeben werden. Sie wollen das in gebräuchlicheren Gedanken bis in die unmittelbare Gegenwart herein fortsetzen, wollen lieber beim alten bleiben, damit ihnen herausspringe aus den Ungedanken dasjenige, was sie aufklären soll über ihren gegenwärtigen Menschen. Selbstverständlich ist über das also Ehrwürdige kein absprechendes Ürteil gefällt; aber hingewiesen werden muß von allen Seiten darauf, daß man dasjenige nicht verleugnen darf, was in den geistigen Notwendigkeiten der gegenwärtigen Menschheitsentwickelung, die in das Zeitalter der Bewußtseinsseele eintritt, eben gelegen ist. Darum handelt es sich, daß man wirklich versteht, was heute von dem Menschen gewollt wird in der Weltenentwickelung. Ich glaube, wenn ich mich des Ausdrucks bedienen darf - es ist ja nur eine «facon de parler» -, daß aus dem rechten Empfinden gerade desjenigen, was die Menschen heute unbequem finden und nicht wollen, immer mehr und mehr sich die bessere Stellung zur Geisteswissenschaft ergeben wird, und erst, wenn sich diese bessere Stellung zur Geisteswissenschaft ergibt, dann wird diese auch das soziale Leben befruchten. Dann wird der Mensch über das Menschenleben sich aufklären können, weil er dann nur die starken Gedanken hat, um sich über das Menschenleben aufzuklären. Denn bei dieser Aufklärung über das Menschenleben, da leidet der gegenwärtige Mensch an einem sehr mißlichen Umstande. Ob Sie Leninist oder Trotzkist oder ob Sie Marxist sind, oder ob Sie sonst irgendwie denken, die soziale Struktur des Menschen in der richtigen Weise auszuformen: in alldem lebt ein mißlicher Umstand, der nicht durchschaut wird, auch praktisch nicht durchschaut wird, wenn man nicht von Geisteswissenschaft sich befruchten läßt. Nicht wahr, der Mensch ist ja nun einmal ins Zeitalter der Bewußtseinsseele eingetreten. Er muß bewußt entwickeln dasjenige, was als soziale Struktur sich erhebt. Anders geht es gar nicht. Er muß bewußt drinnenstehen in der Welt; es ist einmal notwendig, daß der Mensch bewußt drinnensteht. Nur soll er auch das Verhältnis von Mensch zu Mensch, das Leben in der Sozietät, das soziale Leben bewußt auffassen. Daran hindert ihn nämlich ein mißlicher Umstand. Das Fatale ist, daß der Mensch immer nur einen Menschen vorstellen kann. Genau ebenso, wie nicht zwei Menschen — physische Menschen, meine ich -, wie nicht zwei Dinge — physische Dinge meine ich jetzt wiederum — gleichzeitig an einem Ort sein können, was das Gesetz der Undurchdringlichkeit ausmacht, so können im menschlichen Bewußtsein nicht gleichzeitig zwei Menschen sein, gleichzeitig zwei Menschen wirklich real vorgestellt werden. Das ist sehr wichtig, daß man das berücksichtigt. Aber man kann nicht mit dem andern Menschen leben, ohne daß man ihn vorstellt, und man kann auch kein Wissen über das soziale Zusammenleben ausbilden, ohne daß man den andern Menschen vorstellt. Aber heute ist es so, daß der Mensch, weil er immer nur einen Menschen vorstellen kann, es gewöhnlich vorzieht, nur sich vorzustellen, seinen Menschen vorzustellen. Und das soziale Denken begnügt sich auch damit, ein Zusammenleben zu fordern, wo immer nur der Mensch selbst von sich vorgestellt wird. Der Mensch kommt nicht los von der Vorstellung seines Selbstes; er redet sich oft ein, davon loszukommen, aber er kommt in Wirklichkeit heute noch nicht leicht davon los. Nur wenn er sich bemüht, die Zumutungen zu erfüllen, die durch die Geisteswissenschaft gestellt sind, dann gewinnt er allmählich die Möglichkeit, von sich etwas loszukommen. Denn Geisteswissenschaft setzt solche Gedanken in die Welt, die sehr weite Perspektiven erreichen. Dadurch kommt der Mensch in die Gewohnheit hinein, von sich loszukommen. Wie der Mensch heute, wenn er Spiritist wird, noch egoistischer wird, als er früher schon war, so wird er selbstloser, wenn er auf dem andern Wege, auf dem Wege der Geisteswissenschaft in die geistige Welt eindringen will. Daher ist Geisteswissenschaft nicht bloß die Überlieferung einer Wissenschaft, sondern ist tatsächlich dasjenige, was für die Erziehung der gegenwärtigen Menschheit zum sozialen Leben unbedingt notwendig ist. Daher wird auch kein Heil entstehen, wenn man nicht in diesem Punkt anfängt, wenn man nicht wirklich daran denkt: bei dem Vorstellen muß angefangen werden. Man kann nicht sozial reformieren, wenn man nicht beim Schulwesen anfängt, beim Unterricht der Menschen anfängt. Und versäumt man dieses, so versäumt man die Möglichkeit, daß die Menschen Begriffe aufnehmen, welche ihre Sehnsuchten umfassen. Und sie werden immer tobsüchtiger werden, die Menschen, wenn ich mich radikal ausdrücken will.
Also so ist der innere Zusammenhang. Man möchte nur, daß gerade dieser innere Zusammenhang überschaut würde. Man möchte, daß vor allen Dingen dieser innere Zusammenhang gefühlt werde von jedem, welcher an die Geisteswissenschaft herantritt und in ihr bis zu dem einen oder bis zu dem andern Punkt leben möchte. Das ist etwas, was überlegt sein will von jedem, der es mit der Geisteswissenschaft und mit der geisteswissenschaftlichen Bewegung ernst nehmen will. Es läßt sich nicht gut übersehen, es läßt sich nicht gut außer acht lassen, daß, wenn man zur Geisteswissenschaft in eine Beziehung tritt, von der Geisteswissenschaft in gewissem Sinne die Anforderung an das Menschengemüt ja gestellt wird, die Interessen über die engen persönlichen Interessen hinaus zu erweitern. Es ist wirklich so, daß, indem von Geisteswissenschaft gesprochen wird, man einfach von Dingen spricht, welche notwendig machen, wenn man sich in ein richtiges Verhältnis zu ihnen setzen will, daß der Mensch sich von seinen engsten Interessen loslöst. Er soll nur keine Angst bekommen, daß er deshalb ein unpraktischer Mensch wird; er wird ein viel praktischerer. Dasjenige, in das sich die Menschen nach und nach hineingebracht haben dadurch, daß sie so ungeistig geworden sind, das ist ja nur der Glaube, daß sie praktisch sind. In Wirklichkeit sind ja die Praktiker heute furchtbar unpraktische Leute. Und die Praktiker haben ja eigentlich diese Katastrophe der Menschheit herbeigeführt. Und darinnen liegt schon etwas ungeheuer Wichtiges, daß man eigentlich immer voraussetzen muß, wenn man recht verstehen will das Geisteswissenschaftliche: Loslösen muß man sich von seinen engsten Interessen. Man muß etwas loskommen von seiner unmittelbaren Persönlichkeit, denn es tut nicht gut, wenn man in die geisteswissenschaftliche Bewegung die engen persönlichen Interessen hereinträgt. Das bewirkt gerade immer irgendeinen Unfug in dem Verhältnis, durch das man zur Geisteswissenschaft in Beziehung tritt. Darinnen liegt ja natürlich auch dasjenige, was heute die geisteswissenschaftliche Bewegung noch schwierig macht. Manchmal haben die Menschen theoretisch und abstrakt den guten Willen, in die Geisteswissenschaft hineinzugehen mit ihrem eigenen Denken und Fühlen und ihrem Wollen, aber sie bringen doch nicht ganz die Kraft auf, nun wirklich in die Losgelöstheit einzutreten, die doch schon einmal gefordert werden muß, um richtig zu verstehen, was vom Standpunkt der Geisteswissenschaft aus gesprochen wird. Also eine Art von Geisteszustand, der nicht ohne weiteres in der heutigen Welt vorhanden ist, sondern wovon vielfach das Gegenteil in der heutigen Welt vorhanden ist, der wird gefordert, wenn geisteswissenschaftliche Bewegung heilsam sein soll. Denn dadurch unterscheidet sich das ehrliche Vorbringen geisteswissenschaftlicher Erkenntnisse von allem andern, was in der Gegenwart auftritt, daß dieses ehrliche Vorbringen geisteswissenschaftlicher Erkenntnisse ja auch keine persönliche Angelegenheit ist, nicht das Vorbringen einer persönlichen Meinung. Würde ich die Ansicht haben müssen, daß ich nur persönliche Meinungen vortrage, daß ich nicht dasjenige vortrage, was sich eben heute offenbart, was gerade der Menschheit notwendig ist, so würde ich lieber schweigen. Denn persönliche Meinungen und persönliche Aspirationen geltend zu machen in einer geisteswissenschaftlichen Bewegung, das ist eigentlich etwas Unerlaubtes. Das sollte nicht stattfinden. Gerechtfertigt ist eine solche Bewegung, wie sie hier angestrebt wird, nur dann, wenn vorliegt der Wille, nur das vorzubringen, was sich aus der geistigen Welt heraus beobachten läßt.
Nicht wahr, wenn Sie erzählen, wie irgendeine Stadt ausschaut, so können Sie ja unter Umständen interessant oder langweilig erzählen, aber wie die Stadt ausschaut, hängt doch nicht von Ihnen ab. Sie erzählen Objektives. So wenig muß, was Sie selbst wollen, was Sie selbst meinen, in der Geisteswissenschaft zum Ausdruck kommen. Es muß das geistig Beobachtete in der Geisteswissenschaft nach den heutigen Anforderungen wirken. Wer selbst nur Persönliches eigentlich wollen kann, der kann das, was in einer geisteswissenschaftlichen Bewegung walten soll, eigentlich deshalb doch nur mangelhaft verstehen. Er verwechselt immer dasjenige, was in einer geisteswissenschaftlichen Bewegung, wie sie hier gemeint ist, walten soll, mit etwas anderem, was so recht erst wiederum aus der Persönlichkeit genommen ist. Wie viele kommen an die Geisteswissenschaft heran und möchten gerade dasjenige, was ihnen paßt als ihre Meinung, durch die Geisteswissenschaft gerechtfertigt haben. Mit jenem offenen Sinn, der notwendig ist für das Empfangen der Geisteswissenschaft, ist man nicht immer ausgerüstet. Man ist vielmehr oftmals an die Geisteswissenschaft herankommend mit etwas ganz anderem als diesem offenen Sinn. Man hätte gern, wenn dies oder jenes wahr wäre und man dann auf irgendeine Weise - indem man zugibt, der geisteswissenschaftliche Forscher kann über die Wahrheit etwas wissen - sich einredet: Das, was man selber meine, das sage er. Dann ist einem das angenehm. Aber man muß diesen feinen Unterschied bemerken; es ist ein feiner Unterschied, aber es ist ein ungeheuer weithin strahlender Unterschied, ein weithin bedeutsamer Unterschied, ob man nun wirk-. lich die Mitteilungen aus der geistigen Welt aufnehmen will, oder ob man eigentlich nur bestätigt haben will, was einem selbst als Meinung gefällt. Und man wird nur in sorgfältigster Selbsterforschung, in gewissenhafter Selbsterforschung den Unterschied finden. Den Unterschied bemerkt mancher nicht, der zur Geisteswissenschaft herankommt; aber dieser Unterschied muß bemerkt werden. Und bemerkt man diesen Unterschied, dann wird man schon gewahr werden, daß durch eine geisteswissenschaftliche Bewegung etwas von einem neuen Lebensstrom, der vorher nicht da war, gehen muß. Es kann wirklich nicht so sein, daß eine geisteswissenschaftliche Bewegung nur ein sanfter Windzug ist, der dem entgegenkommt, der die Philisterhaftigkeit seines bisherigen Daseins dieser Geisteswissenschaft entgegenbringt und nun glaubt, dasjenige, was er so gern für wahr erkennen würde aus dieser Philisterhaftigkeit heraus, bekräftigt zu sehen durch diese Geisteswissenschaft.
Geht man in diesem Punkte ernst und gewissenhaft vor, will man nicht bloß das bestätigt haben, was man eigentlich selber meint, dann wird man sich auch auseinandersetzen mit mancherlei Dingen, die gerade in einer geisteswissenschaftlichen Bewegung als, ich möchte sagen, neue Dinge auftreten müssen, und die zum Schaden werden müssen, wenn man sie nicht beachtet. In einer solchen im Anfange begriffenen Bewegung, wie es die geisteswissenschaftliche Bewegung ist, kann manches zum Schaden gereichen, was in alten, vertrockneten Bewegungen, die nichts mehr nützen, oder wenig nützen, nicht so sehr zum Schaden gereichen kann. In solche Feinheiten müßte man sich eigentlich einlassen. Mit dem Bestreben, seine eigenen Meinungen, seine eigenen Aspirationen nur bekräftigt zu sehen von der geisteswissenschaftlichen Offenbarung her, hängt es dann zusammen, daß man eigentlich ein merkwürdiges Retuschieren entfaltet mit Bezug auf dasjenige, was auftritt, ganz naturgemäß auftritt innerhalb einer geisteswissenschaftlichen Bewegung. Man muß in der geisteswissenschaftlichen Bewegung darauf aufmerksam sein, daß Erscheinungen mit Menschen nicht so genommen werden können wie in einem Kegelklub oder sonst irgendwo, wo sich die Menschen in ihrer ganzen Breite, die sie durch die Außenwelt bekommen haben, wo sie nichts Neues zu bekommen brauchen, enthüllen können. Man muß schon ernst machen damit, daß man nicht durch seine eigenen Vorstellungen die Intentionen der Geistesforschung bezeugen soll, sondern man muß da wirklich sich bereit machen, die Dinge aufzunehmen. Man soll sich doch vorstellen, daß da etwas hereinfließen will in die Welt, das immer weiter und weiter sich ausbreiten soll, so daß man alles, was man aufnimmt, eigentlich mit dem Bewußtsein aufnehmen sollte: Man wird manche Zusammenhänge, die man jetzt noch nicht überschaut, erst später überschauen. — Diesen guten Willen, gewissermaßen immer alles als Vorbereitung aufzunehmen, wird ja derjenige ganz gewiß nicht haben, der persönliche Aspirationen in den geisteswissenschaftlichen Betrieb hineinträgt, denn der will so schnell wie möglich mit den Dingen fertig werden und biegt die Dinge nach seinen gewöhnlichen Meinungen um. Er biegt nicht seine Meinungen nach der Geisteswissenschaft um, sondern er biegt die geisteswissenschaftlichen Erkenntnisse nach seinen Meinungen um. Und so stellt sich oftmals besonders so etwas heraus, wie das ist, was ich in der folgenden Art charakterisieren möchte.
Nicht wahr, der Geisteswissenschafter muß ja die Welt in einer gewissen Weise beurteilen, die Welt der Natur und auch die Welt der Menschen. Darinnen besteht ja die geisteswissenschaftliche Erziehung, daß man sich und seine Umwelt und sein Verhältnis zur Umwelt neu beurteilen lernt, daß man etwas tiefer hineinschauen lernt in die Welt. Nun kommt es sehr häufig vor, wenn es sich darum handelt, daß, sagen wir, das Verhältnis von drei Menschen wirkt, gesagt wird: Ja, der Geisteswissenschafter B beurteilt den Menschen A in einer bestimmten Weise. - Und sehen Sie, sobald man nur ein wenig die Sphäre überschreitet, die die gewöhnliche Philistersphäre ist, die ja heute häufig ist, dann können sich immer zwei Standpunkte geltend machen mit Bezug auf eine solche Urteilsbildung von Mensch zu Mensch. Der eine Standpunkt ist der Standpunkt der Vernünftigkeit, der zweite Standpunkt ist der Standpunkt des Mitgefühles. So daß der B den A beurteilen kann, und je nachdem eine innere Notwendigkeit vorliegt, kann der B dem A gegenüber bald einmal irgend etwas tun aus reinem Mitgefühl. Paßt es dann dem C, die Sache abzulehnen, weil er nicht weiter darüber nachdenkt, weil er nicht voraussetzt: da könnte eine Notwendigkeit vorliegen des reinen Mitgefühles, dann urteilt der aus reiner Vernünftigkeit und sagt: Wie kann man so etwas machen! — Oder aber es spricht diese innere Notwendigkeit so, daß man nun einmal nicht das Mitgefühl, sondern aus gewissen Gründen, die vorliegen, die Vernünftigkeit walten läßt. Ja, wenn es dem andern besser paßt, so läßt er jetzt das Mitgefühl sprechen, und nun verurteilt erund sagt: Was ist der B für ein nichtmitfühlender Mensch! Was ist das für ein liebloser Mensch, was ist das für ein trockener Vernunftmensch! Der beurteilt das nur von dem Standpunkt der Vernünftigkeit aus! — Und so können die stärksten Verkennungen entstehen gerade bei demjenigen, der sich bemüht, den inneren Nerv des Daseins zu ergreifen, wo er manchmal etwas aus dem Vernünftigen, manchmal gerade etwas aus Mitgefühl tun muß. Wenn es dem andern dann paßt, so beurteilt er das, was aus Vernunft geschehen ist, nach dem Gesichtswinkel des Mitgefühls, das, was aus Mitgefühl geschehen ist, nach dem Gesichtswinkel der Vernunft, und er kann immer verurteilen oder loben, je nachdem er will. Zum Richtigen kommt man nicht auf diesem Wege, zum Richtigen kommt man nur, wenn man sich erst frägt: Ich muß den Fall mir anschauen, ich muß anschauen, aus welchem Grunde hier Mitgefühl oder Vernünftiges gewaltet hat. — Dadurch entstehen die kleinen Mißverständnisse des Lebens, die sich oftmals zu den furchtbarsten Verheerungen innerhalb des menschlichen Zusammenlebens auswachsen, und über die uns gerade hinwegtragen soll dasjenige, was die geisteswissenschaftliche Erziehung in uns macht. Denn das Leben ist so, daß es sich dualistisch äußert, und weil es sich dualistisch äußert, kann man immer, je nachdem es einem paßt, irgendeinen Fall beurteilen. Das wird aber ganz wenig in Betracht gezogen, und das wird vor allen Dingen nicht in Betracht gezogen gegenüber der geisteswissenschaftlichen Lehre selber. Die muß auch aus gewissen Intentionen in die Welt gesetzt werden. Je nachdem es einem paßt, kann man den einen oder den andern Standpunkt im einzelnen Fall wählen, wenn man nicht eingeht auf dasjenige, was aus tieferen Gründen heraus der Geistesforscher tun muß. Er kann oftmals mißverstanden werden. Und wenn man nicht eingeht auf dasjenige, was er tun muß aus innerer Verpflichtung gegenüber den Tatsachen, dann kann man alles mißverstehen, denn die Welt äußert sich einmal dualistisch.
Man kann zum Beispiel in folgenden Fehler verfallen: Man kann gerade, wenn man so recht darauf aus ist, das zu wollen, das bestätigt zu haben, was einem paßt, in den schlimmsten Autoritätsglauben verfallen. Gerade auf dem Gebiete, auf dem auch Geisteswissenschaft tätig sein will, die nur den Menschen zum ganz freien, auf sich selbst stehenden Wesen machen will, kann natürlich der Autoritätsglaube sich geltend machen, tut es auch im weitesten Umfange sehr häufig. Aber der andere Pol des Autoritätsglaubens ist der Autoritätshaß. Und im Grunde genommen ist ein Mensch, der nicht durch Eingehen auf die Tatsachen, die geoffenbart werden aus der geistigen Welt, sich zur Geisteswissenschaft hingedrängt fühlt, sondern der von der Autorität getragen diese Wahrheiten haben will und der an Autorität glauben will, weil das bequemer ist, als auf die Dinge einzugehen, er ist so, daß er furchtbar leicht überspringen kann vom Autoritätsglauben, der immer eine bestimmte Art von Autoritätsliebe hat, zum Autoritätshaß. Und solche Erscheinungen, wie sie gerade in unserer Bewegung aufgetreten sind, dieses Überspringen von blinder Autoritätsanbetung, die manchmal mit einer gewissen Schamlosigkeit sogar eingestanden wird in dem Momente, wo man dann zum Haß übergegangen ist, dieses Übergehen von blinder Autoritätsanbetung zum Haß, das ist schon etwas, was innerlich als eine Gefahr vorliegt. Das ist sehr wichtig, daß man diese Zusammenhänge ins Auge faßt, denn diese Zusammenhänge sind es, welche ungeheuer schwierig machen, eine geisteswissenschaftliche Bewegung heute in einer gedeihlichen Weise zu gestalten. Sie muß in gedeihlicher Weise um des Heiles der Menschheit willen gestaltet werden.
Ich habe in meinem Leben eine ganze Anzahl von Menschen gefunden, die geistige Menschen waren, die ehrlich gesucht haben nach einem Weg in die Geisteswissenschaft hinein, in, nun eben, so oder so geartete Geisteswissenschaft hinein, die auch in einer gewissen Weise vorgerückt waren in ihrer Entwickelung. Ein gewisser Typus daraus waren Enttäuschte, solche, die in irgendeiner von den jetzigen spirituellen Bewegungen enttäuscht worden waren, und die einem dann da oder dort begegnet sind. Wie viele sind von der BlavatskyBewegung, der Besant-Bewegung, andern Bewegungen heute enttäuscht! Die charakteristische Erscheinung ist nicht die, daß so kuriose Umschläge stattfinden, wie sie gerade bei uns in der anthroposophischen Bewegung stattfinden, sondern daß man da Leute findet, die in einer gewissen Weise geistig fortgeschritten sind; nach längeren Zeiten findet man sie wiederum, aber sie sagen: Sie haben total unrecht! — Das ist nicht selten, daß man solche Menschen trifft. Die Geistigkeit ist heute überhaupt nicht sehr häufig, aber solche Menschen gibt es schon, die einem nach einiger Zeit sagen: Sie haben eigentlich unrecht, denn sehen Sie, daß man die Dinge, die Sie da in der Geisteswissenschaft verkünden, öffentlich verkündigt vor den Menschen, das hat doch gar keinen Sinn! Die Menschen sind doch nicht geneigt, sie anzunehmen, sie sind doch gar nicht reif dazu. Es hat nur einen Sinn, in sich selber das auszubilden und einsam damit zu bleiben. —- Solche Menschen habe ich viel gefunden, die das sagen! Und es ist geradezu ein Charakteristikon des geistig wirklich fortgeschrittenen Menschen, daß es ihm gar nicht mehr einfällt, zu seinen Mitmenschen darüber zu sprechen, sondern er behält die Sache bei sich. Dieser Menschen gibt es gar nicht so wenige in der Welt. Ich habe mit diesen Menschen nie einverstanden sein können nach dem, was ich von der geistigen Welt erkenne, aus einem gewissen inneren Grund. Diese Menschen wirken ja nützlich im geistigen Zusammenhang, aber es werden diese Menschen zu Einsiedlern, wenn sie auch manchmal ganz in gesellschaftlichem Zusammenhange bleiben. Man kann ja Einsiedler werden, nicht wahr, trotzdem man Lackstiefel trägt und ein Hotelleben führt. Man sieht dann also dieses zweifache Menschenleben, das eine Anzahl von Menschen führen; sie sind sogar moderne Hotelmenschen, haben Lackstiefel und meinetwillen sogar Zylinderhut, aber führen dieses äußere Leben, um sich zu maskieren, um sich innerlich zu verbergen, haben ihr innerliches Geistesleben, das sie ihren Mitmenschen nicht mitteilen wollen. Das erscheint einem als ein Tun, das nicht richtig ist, das ein Versündigen gegen die Menschheit ist. Denn es ist ja richtig: Solche Menschen wirken schon im geistigen Leben, es geht in die geistige Strömung hinein, was sie erleben; der Mensch ist ja nicht bloß ein abgeschlossenes Wesen, also was er erlebt, hat in der geistigen Welt einen Wert und seine Bedeutung - aber es spielt da immer die Zeitfrage eine Rolle. Solche Menschen, die gegenwärtig so leben wie manche, die ich kennengelernt habe, auf solche Weise, die wirken schon etwas in der geistigen Welt, aber das kommt erst zur Reife nach langer Zeit, in späteren Zeitepochen der Menschheit. Dann kann aber und würde ganz gewils, wenn es nur solche immer gäbe, die ja als Eremiten ihr geistiges Sein entwickeln und nicht lehren wollen dasjenige, was sie wissen aus der geistigen Welt, was sie in sich entwickelt haben, dann würde die äußere Menschheit in der Zeit, wo die Früchte dieser Leute reif werden, schon so verfallen sein, daß sie es nicht mehr aufnehmen könnte. Die Erdenentwickelung würde gefährdet sein, es würde der Anschluß versäumt werden. Wir leben eben in der heutigen Zeit so, daß diese gewissen geistigen Wahrheiten, von denen wir sprechen, unbedingt der Menschheit mitgeteilt werden müssen. Es geht nicht mit der Gesinnung, die zum Beispiel ein Bekannter von mir äußerte, der in gewissem Sinne ein geistig fortgeschrittener Mensch war. Er kam nach Berlin. Ich sagte zu ihm, ob er nicht von mir einen Vortrag hören wolle, nur um zu sehen, wie da die Bewegung getrieben wird - es ist jetzt schon lange her -, da sagte er: Nein, einen Vortrag halten und zu den Leuten zu sprechen, das hat doch keinen Zweck! Uns auf ein Stündchen zusammenzusetzen und so ein bißchen zu reden, das ist mir sehr angenehm, aber geistige Dinge möglichst aus dem Spiele lassen; die muß jeder mit sich selber abmachen! — So einen Höflichkeitsbesuch sich gegenseitig machen, von Alltäglichkeiten reden, das ist das beste gerade bei dieser Art geistig strebsamer Menschen. Und diese Gesinnung findet sich sehr häufig. Es wäre behaglicher, solch einer Gesinnung gemäß nachzuleben. Und behaglich ist es gerade nicht in der Gegenwart, vor die Menschheit hinzutreten und dasjenige, was man mitzuteilen als eine Verpflichtung empfindet, mitzuteilen. Aber das sollte bei einer geisteswissenschaftlichen Bewegung durchaus berücksichtigt werden, daß aus einer inneren Notwendigkeit heraus gewirkt wird, daß es nicht eine Wahl ist, sondern die Einhaltung einer Verpflichtung, was so geschieht.
Ich habe diese Worte am Schluß der heutigen Betrachtungen angebracht, weil ich immer wieder die Gelegenheit ergreifen möchte, auf das aufmerksam zu machen, was notwendig ist, wenn man ernst machen will, so wie ernst gemacht werden sollte mit einer geisteswissenschaftlichen Bewegung in der Gegenwart. Denn dasjenige, was sonst aus einer solchen geisteswissenschaftlichen Bewegung gemacht werden kann, wenn persönliche Aspirationen, persönlicher Ehrgeiz hereingetragen werden, das kann zu schweren Schäden führen, muß zu schweren Schäden führen. Es hat ja außerdem noch die Schattenseite, daß derjenige, der selbst nur meint, Persönliches durch die Geisteswissenschaft bestätigt zu finden, gar nicht unterscheiden kann, ob der andere die Sache nun auch bloß aus persönlichen Ambitionen treibt. Dadurch kommen dann die allerschlimmsten Verhängnisse.
Nun, ich wollte auf solche Dinge hinweisen. Wir sprechen dann am nächsten Freitag wiederum weiter.
Third Lecture
From yesterday's reflections, you will have seen how easy it is to misunderstand the entire course of human development, and how it is misunderstood from many sides in the present day, to the detriment of both current knowledge and the present social aspirations of humanity. Today we want to bring before our souls some results of spiritual science which are of such a nature that they can, I would say, shed light from the other side on things that are mysterious if one limits oneself to the ideas that the present has of them. I have told you that human beings will only be able to cope with the present if they decide to truly reorient themselves by turning to the spiritual path, both in relation to their relationship with external nature, since the old means of orientation are no longer sufficient, and in relation to the relationship between human beings, since here too the old means of orientation are no longer sufficient to understand what impulses are necessary for the present social structure of humanity. If we want to cope with these things, we must seriously consider that, just as human beings today are placed in the world between birth and death in their earthly existence, they see only the outer manifestation of their actual being, just as they actually enter into a relationship only with the outer manifestation of their fellow human beings.
Life takes different forms in the various epochs of human development, and we strive to study these things in relation to the present human being. For in the present epoch, much is being decided for human beings on Earth. Until the 15th century, and one might say because things do not pass away all at once, human beings were actually still more or less under the influence of old concepts and old impulses. This fifth post-Atlantean period is, in a certain sense, something extraordinary in relation to human development. For, as you know, if we take the entire development of the earth, it is divided into seven successive great epochs, of which the fourth was the Atlantean, the present fifth is the post-Atlantean; then the sixth would come, then the seventh. The Atlantic period represents a kind of decision. For up to that point, the entire existence of the earth was a repetition of the earlier Saturn, Sun, and Moon existences. The Atlantic period represents a kind of decision, but only the beginning of a decision. It was merely a preparation for the things that were actually to develop in the subsequent evolution of the earth. So that until the Atlantean period, human beings were actually only what they already were in other forms as Saturn, Sun, and Moon beings. In the Atlantean period, however, they were only a hint of what they were to become as actual Earth beings. Then it goes on, and now we are in the fifth post-Atlantean period. In the post-Atlantean period, through the ancient Indian, ancient Persian development, and so on, more and more definite conditions arose. But the Greek-Latin period, the fourth post-Atlantean period, again provides only a kind of repetition, albeit in a different form, of what already existed in Atlantis on a different level of existence. Only now, in the fifth post-Atlantean period, in a time that began in the 15th century, is humanity, in its overall development, in such a position that new impulses are emerging that are truly noticeable in its essence. They were not so noticeable before; now they are becoming noticeable in its essence, and yet they have only hinted at themselves. The terrible catastrophic events of our time, which we can already say will shake humanity to its very foundations, are the expression of new conditions entering into human evolution. And I have already indicated to you how these new conditions can be characterized from a certain point of view by pointing out how one clearly perceives the influx of a spiritual wave, originating, so to speak, from an ascent in the development of the spirits of personality.
Now, when one considers from a spiritual scientific point of view the peculiar state of soul in which human beings find themselves here on earth at present, one notices very strongly how human beings are actually only aware of the revelations of nature and of the existence of their fellow human beings when they perceive, or when they are outwardly active and know nothing of the real beings into which they must grow in a certain way in the course of their development, and into which they will have grown when their development has progressed further. As you know, human beings are so immersed in the world that, to characterize it roughly, they perceive the surrounding world in the mineral kingdom, in the plant kingdom, in the animal kingdom, and in their own kingdom, the human kingdom. That is what is visible around human beings. And in the visible human kingdom, what emerges from the will and what is supposed to find a certain order in the social structure also takes place.
Now, people have thought a great deal — but with insufficient thinking — about how human beings relate to their environment. The results of this thinking have been processed in various theories of knowledge. But these theories of knowledge cannot yield very much. And what is taught today in these theories of knowledge to young people who are then supposed to speak philosophically about the world is really quite inadequate. For true insight into what is actually revealed in the human environment can only be gained by looking at things from a spiritual scientific perspective. On the one hand, human beings can look at the mineral and plant kingdoms, and on the other hand at the animal kingdom and the human kingdom itself. Both the mineral and plant kingdoms and the human and animal kingdoms reveal themselves to human beings in such a way that, if they are honest in a theoretical sense, they notice contradictions in this revelation. They cannot come to terms with the way in which the mineral kingdom and the plant kingdom reveal themselves on the one hand, and the animal kingdom and the human kingdom on the other. And if people believe they can come to terms with this, it is only because of a certain dullness. They do not want to address all the doubts that spring from observing the natural kingdoms because they are too comfortable to do so. But now, when one advances somewhat in knowledge, when one trains oneself in the direction indicated in How to Know Higher Worlds, then in a certain respect both the view of the mineral and plant kingdoms and the insight into the relationship to the animal and human kingdoms are transformed. Today, human beings already have a high degree of unconscious awareness of this transformation. But it remains unconscious, just as I have said, that in their natural development, human beings today unconsciously stand before the guardian of the threshold. It is actually always a certain fear of the truth that unconsciously prevents people from really advancing to the point where they undergo this transformation. I am speaking in imaginations, in imaginations that have been translated into words. There is no other way to characterize things accurately. For when you bring to life within yourself that which you can bring to life by applying to yourself what is described in How to Know Higher Worlds, then, looking at the mineral and plant kingdoms with this transformed power of knowledge, you will always feel something like fear. You don't have to shudder or get goose bumps when describing these conditions. People avoid them because they are afraid: from this you must understand that when such conditions are described, it is natural that one may get a certain goose bumps; that is why people are afraid. When you look at the mineral and plant kingdoms with advanced knowledge, there is always something like the smell of a corpse, a corpse smell that characterizes what lives in the mineral and plant kingdoms as if it were a living feeling. On the other hand, when you look at the animal and human realms with transformed knowledge, you always have a feeling that can be characterized as follows: Actually — forgive me for putting this imagination into words — as long as they remain in this physical body, even the most advanced human beings are always children, real children, compared to what is really within them. It is simply true that there is much more in human beings than they can develop and reveal from their nature between birth and death.
You can see from this, because in this supersensible knowledge one gradually rises more and more from appearance to true reality, that when one looks at this world outside, as it is, one is actually only dealing with an appearance. For the smell of the corpse, of which I have spoken to you, and the childishness of human beings — forgive me — are veiled. The smell of corpses, if I may say so, finds our physical human nose too dull; the etheric nose is not sufficiently developed. And the childishness of human beings prevents us from really admitting that it exists, because we as human beings are already too conceited for that. But that is how it is. And by distinguishing between what I have just characterized, we point out at the same time that there is much more to human beings than can be expressed. We can then ask ourselves: Yes, human beings do not perceive realities in minerals or plants; nor do they perceive realities in animals, or even in their own human nature. What, then, is human beings actually attuned to here on Earth? Strangely enough, they are attuned to beings that belong neither to the mineral and plant kingdoms nor to the animal and human kingdoms, but lie somewhere in between. They are attuned to a kind of plant animal or animal plant. If there were beings here on earth that were neither plants nor animals, but had the mere nature of plants in terms of their internal organization, but could walk, beings that had no muscles or blood, but were anatomically like plants, that had only cells and tissues like plants, but could move arbitrarily like animals, or if animals were to walk around on our earth, which, when they die, leave behind something like a plant corpse: then, for such beings, man in his entire soul constitution would really be at a standstill. He would be able to comprehend such beings here in his earthly existence. But the strange thing is that these beings cannot exist in the earthly existence; these beings can only be found in other worlds. They are such that they could not thrive in earthly existence. So one can say that human beings actually lack the faculty of knowledge — and this is particularly evident in the present — that enables them to penetrate directly into the essence of minerals and plants, as well as animals and human beings. And the beings that he would perceive directly, according to their entire constitution, cannot remain on Earth. This is how strangely humans stand in relation to the nature that surrounds them.
But humans also stand in a strange relationship to themselves here on Earth. On the one hand, humans are imaginative beings. But when he exercises his power of imagination, he loses his own essence in the act of imagining. And this essence of his own, which cannot come to light in the act of imagining, he actually possesses only through something, the will, which works up from the unconscious. If the will did not work upward, if we did not feel the will within us, the whole world would seem ghostly to us if we could only imagine it. We would have a ghostly world before us, much like the world of scientific concepts; that would then truly be our world. Imagine if the world looked the way natural scientists or zoologists describe it. think if there were nothing else than what is written in books on botany and mineralogy—real plants and rocks contain much more than what is written in books, but imagine you were led into a world as described in books, where there would be nothing more than what is described in books: it would be only a ghost world, a real ghost world. The only reason this world is not a ghost world is that the will always has a say. If you could fly, not with a machine, but fly yourself, that is, if you did not need the ground beneath your feet, if you could move freely without the ground, then you would come close to perceiving the world as ghostly. If you were to observe the world with your eyes while awake, it would already appear very ghostly to you; not as strongly as the natural scientist describes it, but it would already appear very ghostly to you. You have a solid sense of the world's existence only because you stand with your feet on the ground. And this pressing of your feet on the ground gives you the feeling, which is related to the will, which is only a weakening of the will, that you are not merely in a ghostly world, but in a solid world. If you did not have this feeling, but only saw, then the world would seem very ghostly to you. You do not tell yourself what is going on in your subconscious. In the subconscious, what is actually happening is that the person says to himself, in his subconscious: Yes, actually, the world looks like a ghost! But if the world were as my eyes show me, I could not stand firm, I would have to sink. And yet I do not sink, so the world is not as my eyes show me. This conclusion is constantly being made in the unconscious. That is how complicated our ordinary, everyday relationship with the world is. It is always an unconscious conclusion that, in a certain sense, stems from the will. So when we merely imagine something, we actually lack—if I want to express myself in a scholarly, pedantic way—the subject; it falls away. The fact that we have a subject, that we feel connected to the world, comes from the will.
And again, when we want something, when we develop the will, we actually lack the object. The object does not come properly and solidly into our consciousness. If I simply want to lift this little book from the left side to the right side and actually do so — yes, the actual object of the will does not come to consciousness. You see the path that the little book takes, the idea that haunts the will, but the actual object of the will does not come to consciousness. So that human beings, both in their imagination and in their will—which is again grotesquely expressed, because one has to clothe imagination in words—that human beings are actually, both as imagining and as willing beings, forgive me, cripples. They imagine ghostly images and actually want incompletely. What man really is is actually neither completely in the imagination nor in the will; it is in the middle between imagination and will. But the thing is that we cannot become aware of this in ordinary life. Just as the plant cannot enter into external nature, so man cannot become aware of what he really is. That is why I have often pointed out this fact to you from another point of view, saying: Man perceives his actual self as a hole in the events of life. Isn't it true that one must be clear about the fact that one can also perceive holes? Man knows nothing about sleeping; he wakes, sleeps, wakes, sleeps, wakes, sleeps; but when he looks back on his life, the omitted consciousness, the hole in consciousness, appears in the course of life, and he sees just as if he had a surface that is white and has black holes where he actually sees nothing; in the same way he sees the holes in consciousness caused by sleep. But this is also the case with our I in our waking life. Our ego is not truly lifted into consciousness, but in consciousness there is only a hole left by this ego, and the perception of this hole makes us aware that we have the real ego.
These things, which still seem like speculation to today's coarse-minded people, must gradually become an elementary consciousness for all people. For in the future, it will not be possible to base life on such beliefs as it was possible to do in past times, because the remnants and after-effects of atavistic clairvoyance were still present. In the future, life will have to be based on clearly transparent foundations. It will have to become part of everyday thinking to look at the mineral and plant kingdoms as Goethe did, who only looked at the phenomenon, who did not believe that anything other than the basic phenomena, the primordial phenomena, were revealed in the phenomenon, but that the phenomena did not reveal natural laws that could be expressed in thought. Goethe never researched natural laws; that would have seemed very fantastical to him. He wanted to pursue phenomena, because the external world in the mineral and plant kingdoms shows us nothing but perceptions, appearances. Thus, human beings must look at the external world in such a way that they are conscious of the fact that in the mineral and plant kingdoms they actually see only the outer side; and when they stand before the animal and human kingdoms, they actually see only something that is like an embryo of the whole being. — It must be so. You see, in the mineral and plant kingdoms there are actually beings that reveal themselves only in a certain way when human beings look at them, because, I would say, they cannot reveal themselves in any other way. For in the mineral and plant kingdoms there lives something that can only be fully recognized when one — now understand me correctly — looks back to the world from which one came when one entered this physical existence through birth. If you could remain in memory with that consciousness that goes back beyond birth, if you could therefore regard being born as an event in your life, like, say, the transition from the fifteenth to the sixteenth year, if the thread of consciousness did not break backwards, because consciousness was completely different before birth or before conception, you would immediately gain a completely different view of the mineral and plant kingdoms than you would by merely looking at them from the standpoint of life between birth and death. For you would then say to yourself: I have stepped out of the spiritual realm through birth. I have entered this physical realm. Why did I do that? Why didn't I remain in the spiritual realm? Why was I drawn down to earth in the first place? For one can speak of such a drawing. Then you could say, if you could remember: I was drawn down to earth because suddenly, in the course of my development between death and new birth, I entered a sphere where it seemed as if certain beings had fled, as if they should actually be there but were missing and were not there. If I may express it crudely: in the last period before birth, one experiences at every turn in the spiritual world that beings are missing who actually belong there and who are not there. Everything shows that these beings are missing. And when one now passes through birth, these beings are present in the minerals and in the plants, but like exiles, as if these beings had been banished from the world in which one was, and as if they could not flourish completely, would half die and therefore form the smell of death, would half die in the world into which one has entered. Before birth, one longs to get to know certain exiles. One only knows that there are exiled beings, but where are they? One goes out into the physical world and perceives them, but, I would say, embalmed, mummified. For in the world one has entered, they cannot be anything other than embalmed, mummified, dried up. This is the completely correct perception when one approaches the mineral and plant world in such a way that one sees in it the beings that have been banished from the spiritual world, from the sphere in which one was just before one had to enter physical life.
And when you look at animals and humans and see their childishness, then you come to realize, if you can develop a view of their deeper essence, that these animals and humans, as they once are in the world here, in which we live between birth and death, will never be finished, will never actually bring their whole life, which is determined by their inner being, to completion. Anyone who looks at animals correctly, who can look at them with complete inner living power of insight, knows that animals are not immortal, but they also know that animals go through the whole tragedy of this non-immortality in their group souls. The group souls extend beyond the individual life of the animal; but what is here on earth of the animals is, as I said recently, actually sick, in the sense that it is decaying because it belongs to another world and has been banished to this world. And human beings, according to their outer physical form, are also banished into this world; therefore they remain crippled, remain children. Human beings remain children. Animals are completely dried up in their physical form, for what belongs to animals and human beings can be found when one passes through death and enters directly into the spiritual world, which one then observes after death. For actually, one describes a circle in life between death and new birth. That which remains hidden here from the animal and plant kingdoms, which is why one perceives that animals and humans are banished from the spiritual world—humans in their outer physical form—is first perceived when one enters the spiritual world through the gate of death. One undergoes a development and comes to realize more and more after this world midnight, which I have described in the Mystery Drama, that something is missing, and what is missing has, so to speak, run away from the spiritual world. One runs after it through birth and then finds it in the mineral and plant kingdoms on the physical earth. One is not really surprised by the mineral and plant kingdoms when one enters existence through birth, because one has expected them. The fact that one also finds animals here on the physical earth, and human beings with an outer form that is only more perfect but reminiscent of animals, is something that surprises one to some extent after one has been born with the predisposition of consciousness. But one begins to understand when one knows that this outer form of animals and humans is only a beginning, which continues to grow in the world one enters through the gate of death.
One could say that for the abstract and completely dried-up beliefs which still remain—in the past, these ideas were much more alive and really gave people something—in our age of consciousness, there is a sudden juxtaposition between what people perceive here in the physical world and what they are supposed to imagine as underlying the world that people experience between death and a new birth. What people experience between death and a new birth therefore remains so doubtful to them today and can so easily be denied by the crude materialistic spirit, because, as I have explained, since entering the age of the consciousness soul, that is, the intellectual age, people live only in mirror images in their consciousness. He can therefore only live in mirror images when he goes beyond the perceptions into which, as I have indicated to you, the will plays in the rising of the feet. But if no will plays a part—and no will plays a part in immortal life after death—and human beings are dependent only on bringing before their souls, in the mirror images of imagination, what the world is between death and a new birth, then this world becomes doubtful to them, not only ghostly, but doubtful. Yes, one can even say the following: If people were to insist on accepting only the natural sciences, on bringing before their eyes only the ghostly world that natural science presents, they would actually be right to deny life between death and a new birth, indeed life after passing through the gates of death. For what natural science presents are only images, which are ghostly. And that also ceases when man passes through the gates of death. Natural science cannot contain anything of what man experiences in the realm after death and before birth. For you see, in mineralogy books and in botany books and in everything related to them, physiology, geology, and so on, in all the ideas you can possibly absorb about plants and minerals, you can only absorb something about beings that are banished here into the physical world. And again, in animals and in human bodies, you can only perceive something that is banished here — also in zoology books and anthropology books — and thus, if you think about it in the broadest sense, all knowledge is basically composed of this: you can only perceive what lives here in banishment. But if you consider that before birth you lack the beings that you experience here after birth — that is, they are not there — and that what is experienced in animals and humans is what is not present here, then you will understand that nothing of immortal life can enter into the ordinary scientific imagination, that natural science is quite right in itself when it does not concern itself with immortal life, because it lives in images. And that is why, in the age since the 15th century, in which scientific ideas have dominated all circles, man has, on the one hand, the robust, raw nature that is actually his only reality, and on the other hand, a realm that he can only reach with the weakened mirror images of the age of the conscious soul, where it actually seems to him as if he were saying to himself: Well, when I come to the conclusion that these are only mirror images that I think, and in his subconscious he comes to this conclusion, because then he becomes a doubter of immortality—then, if I believed that these mirror images and also my own mirror image would still be there after my death, I would be just as stupid as if I believed that the people coming toward me in the mirror on the wall that they were not merely reflected, but were coming toward me."
It is simply in the nature of this age of the development of the conscious soul that, unless a person wants to advance to a spiritual understanding of the world, he loses more and more of his connection with the world he enters when he passes through the gate of death. And it disappears from his imagination, it disappears from his conscious life, but it does not disappear from his longing. And even the worst deniers of immortality have, in their subconscious, in the sphere of the will, from which longing originates, a longing to learn something about the world into which human beings enter through the gate of death, from which they emerged when they passed through the gate of birth. They have longing. Even the present is sick with this longing. And the various illnesses of the present express themselves because this longing reigns in human beings and human beings cannot find conscious ideas for this longing. When something lives in our sphere of will that human beings cannot cope with through their imagination—and here again, very radical concepts must be developed when talking about these things—then they begin to rage. That is the essence of rage, of frenzy: that something lives in the sphere of will that human beings cannot comprehend with their powers of imagination. And if people do not bring themselves to enter into the realm of the spiritual world in order to comprehend, through this comprehension, that which is already taking shape in the sphere of the will, then the raging in the world will become greater and greater, the raging that today presents itself as the next stage after the peace that does not come about, but always hoped for by people, will come about for people. This is not something that can be discussed in a bowling club, where, according to the usual philistine ideas, people think they can remedy this or that by coming to an agreement. No, this is something that is connected with the deepest essence of human development. Human beings cannot resist the development of that which enters their sphere of will. They have no power over it. They can only decide to consciously enter the spiritual sphere in such a way that they learn to understand what is entering their sphere of will. In this way, orderly human coexistence will be able to develop in the future instead of turmoil.
You see, it is not a matter that concerns human beings only subjectively, that human beings turn to the spiritual world, which wants to reveal itself through a special wave of events in our time, but it is an objective necessity that human beings turn to the spiritual world in the age of the consciousness soul. For changes have just taken place in human evolution.
Until the moment when the mystery of Golgotha took place in earthly life, everything that human beings needed in order to stand reasonably secure in the world came from sleep. People slept differently before the mystery of Golgotha, even if today's physiologists do not admit it, than they do now. Prophetic natures, to whom such great things were revealed in dreams as to the Hebrew prophets, no longer exist in this form; for the Lord no longer gives to His own in sleep. He has given it to them. This is precisely the great transition in evolution. And it was not only prophetic natures who were given images of the future; until Greek times, thoughts were still given to people out of their sleep. When they woke up, they brought their thoughts with them. The human organism was still constructed in such a way that people brought their thoughts with them. This continued for a while, even though people had actually become headless in the 15th century — forgive me! — that is to say, the head was no longer really useful, the head could no longer bring thoughts with it out of sleep.
It is already a result of spiritual science to recognize that since the 15th century our head has become a much less useful tool, much more dried up than it was before. But this only becomes really noticeable in the present, and it will become more and more noticeable unless a substitute is created so that what has evaporated from the head is replaced by the spiritual world. For until our time, until well into the 19th century, there was still the other nature, the breast nature of human beings, accustomed to what the head received from sleep during the Greek-Latin period. The breast nature was accustomed to this, and people still had the lingering impulses in their headlessness. It was still accustomed to it; I would say that people still had the gesture of thought, the shadow of thought. But this shadow will also pass, and people will have no thoughts at all if they want to abandon themselves to their heads. And this is indeed the case, and it shows itself in the fact that people do not want to think. They want to think less and less. On the one hand, they want nature to dictate their thoughts to them; they would prefer to simply experiment and let the experiment tell them what to think. People do not want to think for themselves. They have no real confidence in themselves, because they believe that what they think up is not reality. And indeed, if one takes mere thoughts, they are not reality. But one can become aware that thinking, not thoughts, must become active. This activation of thinking comes from the spiritual world coming into play. And today, if you really begin to think actively, you cannot help but let the spiritual world come into play within you. Otherwise, you will not think, or you will think as little as natural scientists do today, who prefer to let everything be dictated to them by experiments or natural research, or as little as social researchers do today, who, because they do not want to be active, because they do not really grasp social impulses, which can only be grasped in activity, work with what can be researched historically, with what is heredity. Just think how people have fallen into this trap because they no longer have the impulses themselves that can create social structure, looking back to a time when thoughts were still being formed. People only see things from the wrong angle. It was Rousseau who presented the natural state to people because he sensed that nothing can be gained from the present unless one becomes active in the sense of gaining knowledge of higher worlds. And modern socialism, which delights in studying the primitive states of humanity—which is what socialists in particular immerse themselves in—studying primitive states, studying the wildest primitive peoples and the most primitive peoples in order to understand how people should be in social groups. Anyone who is familiar with these things knows this. Everywhere there is a certain fear of what is so necessarily emerging as the first dawn of connection with the spiritual world, a certain fear of active thinking.
That is why it is so difficult to understand anything that claims to be active thinking, such as my Philosophy of Freedom. The thoughts there are different from the thoughts that are common today. And when reading this book, people sometimes stop reading very quickly, for the simple reason that they want to read it like any other book. But, isn't it true that the other books that are particularly popular today are read by sitting down on a chaise lounge, leaning back a little, becoming as passive as possible, and letting the images pass by? Some people, after all, only read in this way. Do not deceive yourselves by believing that you read newspapers differently, these people—not those present, of course—only sometimes emotions and worries interfere; but even newspapers that are received with such sensation are read in such a way that the images flit by. Yes, something like what has been attempted in the Philosophy of Freedom cannot be read like that. You have to constantly pull yourself together so that these thoughts don't put you to sleep. For it is not expected that one will simply sit on a chaise lounge. One can sit, of course, one can even lean back, but then one must try, precisely because one has brought the outer physicality to rest, to set the inner spiritual and mental being in motion, so that the whole thinking process is set in motion. There is no other way forward, otherwise you fall asleep. Many fall asleep in the process, and they are not even the most dishonest. The most dishonest are those who read The Philosophy of Freedom like any other book and then believe that they have really followed the thoughts. They have not followed them, but have only translated them as empty phrases; they only read the words and do not extract what actually follows from the words, as if striking steel against flint. This is what must be demanded of what must intervene in human development in the present and in the near future, for through this humanity will gradually rise up into the spiritual world in a healthy way. Active thinking will ignite the inner kinship of human beings with the spiritual world, and then human beings will continue to ascend. They can already go very far today if they observe such things as are described in How to Know Higher Worlds. But even there it is sufficiently pointed out that it is nevertheless necessary to develop coherent, if I may use the expression, connected thinking, where the thread of thought is never broken, but everything is followed along the thread of thought.
From ancient times, this desire to advance with conscious thinking into the sphere where the spirits are — what one can do — has been mixed in, still more or less unclear and unconscious today, and it is mixed in even more by a weary desire to remain with incoherent thinking. I pointed this out recently: it is uncomfortable for people to always have to progress with conscious thinking, step by step. They would rather go through a more unconscious realm that cannot be followed with the mind, and only then take the next step, wouldn't they? It is not that spiritual science, as it is meant here and which, as you know, calculates in a healthy way with the constant pursuit of thoughts, cannot be understood if one really makes one's thoughts active; but people only want to understand it differently than it must be understood. Instead of constantly pursuing a thought, people want the thread of thought to always break off. If you immerse yourself in what spiritual science gives you, then you can, if you immerse yourself really energetically — have patience, in the present age this can only be hinted at — already today, by developing the power of thought to follow Saturn, the Sun, and the Moon with your thoughts, as described in my “Outline of Esoteric Science,” , follow this development to the point where human beings stand in the world, and penetrate into your own life, and with your intensified thoughts, permeate your own life. Then you will arrive at certain ideas, albeit different from what you might have wanted, but entirely consistent with the coherence of your thinking, which will enlighten you about your nature, about the way you are, about your character. For by truly bringing to life what is said about Saturn, the Sun, and the Moon, and then about the development of the Earth, and applying this to yourself as an individual human being, you can progress to your own nature. You only have to continue with your thoughts toward your self-perception, not allowing your thoughts to be interrupted, but allowing them to remain coherent and connected. What people today legitimately begin in this way enlightens them to the degree that they should be enlightened about their own personal nature. In this longing, which is still more or less unconscious in human beings, something else interferes with the breaking off of the thread of thought, something calculated. Human beings want to gain insight into their nature. What does he do? He takes an old, antiquated science, which should certainly not be disparaged in terms of its venerability, but which requires explanation if it is to be brought into the new age, and calculates, allowing the thread of thought to break at every moment, the constellations of the stars; afterwards, the thread of thought can break, and purely outwardly, without thinking, this human being is supposed to develop as he stands there on earth.
You see: the Roman Catholic Church, as I explained yesterday, denies what is most necessary today; but if you take something like the description of the inner contemplation of John of the Cross, this can be fulfilled if you live today in the spirit of evolution, in accordance with “How does one attain knowledge of the higher worlds?” What is contained in this book is — especially for the present time — the following of what a person like St. John of the Cross wants, while the Catholic Church denies this and still wants to apply the old way of John of the Cross to people today, as some people do. They do not want to because they are too comfortable to live that active life in the spirit, which is already present at a very powerful level when one takes up such ideas as are given in spiritual science. They want to continue this in more familiar thoughts right up to the present moment, preferring to stick with the old, so that what is supposed to enlighten them about their present human condition will spring out of their unthought thoughts. Of course, no disparaging judgment is being made about what is venerable; but it must be pointed out from all sides that one must not deny what is inherent in the spiritual necessities of the present stage of human evolution, which is entering the age of the consciousness soul. It is a matter of truly understanding what is wanted of human beings today in the evolution of the world. I believe, if I may use the expression—it is only a “facon de parler”—that from the right feeling for precisely what people today find uncomfortable and do not want, a better position toward spiritual science will increasingly emerge, and only when this better position toward spiritual science emerges will it also enrich social life. Then human beings will be able to enlighten themselves about human life, because they will then have only strong thoughts with which to enlighten themselves about human life. For in this enlightenment about human life, the present human being suffers from a very unfortunate circumstance. Whether you are a Leninist or a Trotskyist, or whether you are a Marxist, or whether you think in some other way that the social structure of human beings can be shaped in the right way: in all of this there is a difficult circumstance that is not understood, not even practically understood, if one does not allow oneself to be enriched by spiritual science. Isn't it true that human beings have now entered the age of the conscious soul? They must consciously develop what arises as social structure. There is no other way. They must consciously stand within the world; it is necessary that human beings consciously stand within it. But they must also consciously understand the relationship between human beings, life in society, social life. A unfortunate circumstance prevents them from doing so. The fatal thing is that human beings can only ever imagine one human being. Just as two people—physical people, I mean—just as two things—physical things, I mean again—cannot be in the same place at the same time, which is the law of impenetrability, so two people cannot be in human consciousness at the same time, two people cannot be truly imagined at the same time. It is very important to take this into account. But one cannot live with another human being without imagining him, and one cannot develop any knowledge of social coexistence without imagining other human beings. But today, because human beings can only ever imagine one other human being, they usually prefer to imagine only themselves, to imagine their own human beings. And social thinking is also content to demand coexistence where only the individual is presented. People cannot escape the idea of themselves; they often convince themselves that they can, but in reality it is not easy for them to do so today. Only when they strive to fulfill the demands made by spiritual science do they gradually gain the ability to detach themselves from themselves. For spiritual science brings into the world thoughts that reach very broad perspectives. This enables human beings to get into the habit of detaching themselves from themselves. Just as people today, when they become spiritualists, become even more selfish than they were before, so they become more selfless when they want to enter the spiritual world by the other path, the path of spiritual science. Spiritual science is therefore not merely the transmission of a science, but is in fact what is absolutely necessary for the education of the present human race for social life. Therefore, no salvation will come about unless we begin at this point, unless we really think about it: we must begin with the imagination. We cannot reform society unless we begin with the school system, with the education of human beings. And if we fail to do this, we fail to give human beings the opportunity to grasp concepts that encompass their longings. And people will become more and more violent, if I may express myself radically.
So that is the inner connection. One would only wish that this inner connection were understood. One would wish, above all, that this inner connection were felt by everyone who approaches spiritual science and wants to live in it to one degree or another. This is something that needs to be considered by everyone who wants to take spiritual science and the spiritual scientific movement seriously. It cannot be easily overlooked or ignored that when one enters into a relationship with spiritual science, spiritual science in a certain sense demands that the human mind expand its interests beyond narrow personal interests. It is really the case that when we speak of spiritual science, we are simply speaking of things that make it necessary, if we want to relate to them in the right way, for human beings to detach themselves from their narrowest interests. They should not be afraid that this will make them impractical; they will become much more practical. What people have gradually brought upon themselves by becoming so unspiritual is simply the belief that they are practical. In reality, today's practical people are terribly impractical. And it is the practical people who have actually brought about this catastrophe for humanity. And therein lies something tremendously important that one must always presuppose if one wants to understand spiritual science correctly: one must detach oneself from one's narrowest interests. One must detach oneself somewhat from one's immediate personality, because it is not good to bring narrow personal interests into the spiritual scientific movement. This always causes some kind of confusion in the relationship through which one enters into contact with spiritual science. This is, of course, also what makes the spiritual scientific movement so difficult today. Sometimes people have the theoretical and abstract good will to enter into spiritual science with their own thinking, feeling, and willing, but they cannot quite muster the strength to truly detach themselves, which is necessary in order to properly understand what is being said from the standpoint of spiritual science. So a kind of state of mind that is not readily available in today's world, but rather the opposite of which is often found in today's world, is required if the spiritual science movement is to be beneficial. For what distinguishes the honest presentation of spiritual scientific knowledge from everything else that occurs in the present is that this honest presentation of spiritual scientific knowledge is not a personal matter, not the presentation of a personal opinion. If I had to believe that I was only presenting personal opinions, that I was not presenting what is revealing itself today, what is necessary for humanity, then I would prefer to remain silent. For it is actually impermissible to assert personal opinions and personal aspirations in a spiritual scientific movement. That should not happen. A movement such as the one we are striving for here is only justified if there is a willingness to present only what can be observed from the spiritual world.
Isn't it true that when you describe what a city looks like, you may tell it in an interesting or boring way, but how the city looks does not depend on you. You are describing something objective. What you yourself want or think has just as little to do with spiritual science. In spiritual science, what is spiritually observed must have an effect in accordance with today's requirements. Anyone who can only want something personal can therefore only have a limited understanding of what should prevail in a spiritual scientific movement. They always confuse what should prevail in a spiritual-scientific movement, as it is meant here, with something else that is really taken from their own personality. How many people approach spiritual science and want to have what suits them as their opinion justified by spiritual science? People are not always equipped with the open mind that is necessary for receiving spiritual science. Rather, they often approach spiritual science with something quite different from this open mind. They would like this or that to be true, and then, in some way—by admitting that the spiritual scientist can know something about the truth—they convince themselves: That what one means oneself, he says. Then one feels comfortable. But one must notice this subtle difference; it is a subtle difference, but it is an immensely far-reaching difference, a far-reaching and significant difference, whether one really wants to receive the messages from the spiritual world, or whether one actually only wants to have confirmed what one likes as one's own opinion. And you will only find the difference through the most careful self-examination, through conscientious self-examination. Many who approach spiritual science do not notice the difference, but this difference must be noticed. And once you notice this difference, you will already become aware that through a spiritual scientific movement something of a new life stream must flow that was not there before. It really cannot be that a spiritual scientific movement is just a gentle breeze that comes to meet those who bring the philistinism of their previous existence to this spiritual science and now believe that what they would so much like to recognize as true out of this philistinism is confirmed by this spiritual science.
If one proceeds seriously and conscientiously on this point, if one does not merely want to have confirmed what one actually thinks oneself, then one will also have to grapple with many things that, especially in a spiritual scientific movement, must appear as, I would say, new things, and which must be harmful if they are not taken into account. In a movement that is just beginning, such as the spiritual science movement, many things can be harmful that are not so harmful in old, dried-up movements that are of little or no use anymore. One should really get into such subtleties. The desire to see one's own opinions and aspirations confirmed by spiritual-scientific revelation leads to a strange retouching of what occurs quite naturally within a spiritual-scientific movement. In the spiritual scientific movement, one must be aware that phenomena involving human beings cannot be taken as they are in a bowling club or elsewhere, where people can reveal themselves in all their breadth, which they have acquired through the external world, where they do not need to acquire anything new. One must take seriously the fact that one should not testify to the intentions of spiritual research through one's own ideas, but must really be prepared to take things in. One should imagine that something wants to flow into the world, something that wants to spread further and further, so that everything one takes in should actually be taken in with the awareness that Some connections that are not yet clear will only become clear later. Those who bring personal aspirations into spiritual science will certainly not have this willingness to take everything in as preparation, because they want to get things done as quickly as possible and bend things to fit their usual opinions. They do not bend their opinions to spiritual science, but bend spiritual scientific insights to their opinions. And so it often turns out to be something like what I would like to characterize in the following way.
Isn't it true that scholars of the humanities must judge the world in a certain way, both the natural world and the human world? This is what humanities education is all about: learning to reevaluate oneself, one's environment, and one's relationship to the environment, learning to look deeper into the world. Now, when it comes to, say, the relationship between three people, it is very common to say: Yes, the humanities scholar B judges person A in a certain way. And you see, as soon as you step outside the sphere of ordinary philistinism, which is so common today, two points of view can always be asserted with regard to such judgments made by one person about another. One point of view is that of reason, the second is that of empathy. So B can judge A, and depending on whether there is an inner necessity, B may soon do something to A out of pure empathy. If C then decides to reject the idea because he does not think about it further, because he does not assume that there could be a necessity arising from pure compassion, then he judges out of pure reason and says: How can you do such a thing! Or this inner necessity speaks so strongly that one does not allow compassion to prevail, but rather reason, for certain reasons that exist. Yes, if it suits the other person better, he now allows compassion to speak, and now he condemns and says: What kind of uncompassionate person is B! What kind of unloving person is that, what kind of dry, rational person! He judges it only from the standpoint of reason! — And so the strongest misjudgments can arise precisely in those who strive to grasp the inner nerve of existence, where they sometimes have to do something out of reason and sometimes out of compassion. When it suits the other person, he judges what has been done out of reason from the point of view of compassion, and what has been done out of compassion from the point of view of reason, and he can always condemn or praise as he pleases. You don't get to the right thing this way. You only get to the right thing if you first ask yourself: I have to look at the case, I have to see what reason compassion or reason has prevailed here. This gives rise to the little misunderstandings of life, which often grow into the most terrible devastation within human coexistence, and it is precisely this that the spiritual scientific education within us is supposed to carry us over. For life is such that it expresses itself dualistically, and because it expresses itself dualistically, one can always judge any case as one sees fit. But this is very rarely taken into consideration, and above all it is not taken into consideration with regard to spiritual scientific teaching itself. This must also be brought into the world with certain intentions. Depending on what suits us, we can choose one or the other point of view in individual cases if we do not go into what the spiritual researcher must do for deeper reasons. He can often be misunderstood. And if one does not go into what he must do out of inner obligation to the facts, then one can misunderstand everything, for the world expresses itself dualistically.
One can, for example, fall into the following error: precisely when one is really bent on wanting to have confirmed what suits one, one can fall into the worst belief in authority. Precisely in the field in which spiritual science wants to be active, which wants only to make human beings completely free, self-contained beings, belief in authority can naturally assert itself, and indeed it does so very frequently in the broadest sense. But the other pole of belief in authority is hatred of authority. And basically, a person who does not feel compelled to turn to spiritual science because of the facts that are revealed from the spiritual world, but who, carried by authority, wants to have these truths and wants to believe in authority because it is more convenient than dealing with things, is such that he can very easily jump from belief in authority, which always has a certain kind of love of authority, to hatred of authority. And such phenomena as have just arisen in our movement, this leap from blind worship of authority, which is sometimes even admitted with a certain shamelessness at the moment when one has passed over into hatred, this transition from blind worship of authority to hatred, is something that is already present as an inner danger. It is very important to recognize these connections, because they are what make it so incredibly difficult to shape a spiritual scientific movement in a fruitful way today. It must be shaped in a fruitful way for the sake of the salvation of humanity.
In my life I have met quite a number of people who were spiritual people, who were honestly seeking a way into spiritual science, into spiritual science of one kind or another, and who had also advanced in their development in a certain way. A certain type of these were disappointed people, those who had been disappointed in one or other of the present spiritual movements, and who then came across us here or there. How many are disappointed today in the Blavatsky movement, the Besant movement, and other movements! The characteristic phenomenon is not that such curious reversals take place, as they do in our anthroposophical movement, but that one finds people who are spiritually advanced in a certain way; after a long time, one finds them again, but they say: You are totally wrong! It is not uncommon to meet such people. Spirituality is not very common today, but there are people who, after a while, say to you: “You are actually wrong, because you see, the things you proclaim in spiritual science, proclaiming them publicly before people, that makes no sense at all! People are not inclined to accept them, they are not ready for them. It only makes sense to develop this within yourself and remain alone with it. — I have found many people who say this! And it is a characteristic of people who are truly spiritually advanced that it does not even occur to them to talk to their fellow human beings about it, but rather they keep it to themselves. There are quite a few people like this in the world. I have never been able to agree with these people, based on what I know of the spiritual world, for a certain inner reason. These people seem useful in a spiritual context, but they become hermits, even if they sometimes remain fully integrated into society. One can become a hermit, even if one wears patent leather boots and lives in a hotel. So you see this double life that a number of people lead; they are even modern hotel people, they have patent leather boots and, for all I care, even top hats, but they lead this outward life to mask themselves, to hide themselves inwardly, they have their inner spiritual life that they do not want to share with their fellow human beings. This seems to be something that is not right, that is a sin against humanity. For it is true that such people are already active in the spiritual life; what they experience enters into the spiritual stream. Man is not merely a closed being, so what he experiences has value and meaning in the spiritual world – but the question of time always plays a role here. People who currently live as some of those I have met do, in this way, are already having an effect in the spiritual world, but this will only come to fruition after a long time, in later epochs of humanity. But then, if there were only such people who developed their spiritual being as hermits and did not want to teach what they knew from the spiritual world, what they had developed within themselves, then outer humanity would have decayed so much by the time the fruits of these people's labor ripened that it would no longer be able to receive them. The development of the earth would be endangered; the connection would be lost. We live in such a way today that these certain spiritual truths of which we speak must absolutely be communicated to humanity. It is not possible with the attitude expressed, for example, by an acquaintance of mine who was, in a certain sense, a spiritually advanced person. He came to Berlin. I asked him if he would like to hear a lecture from me, just to see how the movement was progressing—this was a long time ago—and he said: No, giving a lecture and speaking to people is pointless! Sitting down together for an hour or so and talking a little is very pleasant for me, but spiritual matters should be left out of it as much as possible; everyone has to work that out for themselves! — Paying each other a courtesy visit, talking about everyday things, that's the best thing to do with this kind of spiritually ambitious people. And this attitude is very common. It would be more comfortable to live according to such an attitude. And it is not comfortable at present to stand before humanity and communicate what one feels obliged to communicate. But in a spiritual movement, it should definitely be taken into account that one acts out of an inner necessity, that it is not a choice but the fulfillment of an obligation.
I have included these words at the end of today's reflections because I would like to take every opportunity to draw attention to what is necessary if we want to take seriously, as we should, a spiritual scientific movement in the present day. For what can otherwise be made of such a spiritual scientific movement when personal aspirations and personal ambition are brought into it can lead to serious damage, must lead to serious damage. There is also the downside that those who believe they find confirmation of their own personal views in spiritual science cannot distinguish whether others are also driven by personal ambition. This then leads to the worst possible consequences.
Well, I wanted to point out such things. We will continue our discussion next Friday.