The Rudolf Steiner Archive

Sixteenth Lecture

[ 1 ] I wanted to speak to you once more this evening because I feel it is necessary to summarize and present, in a few broad strokes, certain points related to everything that has happened here and that has emanated from here with regard to the cultural movement of our time. And specifically with regard to everything that, in a sense, may still lie latent in the events and intentions that have originated from here.

[ 2 ] I may not have a great many exceptionally new things to tell you today, but it is precisely necessary to say now those concluding remarks that are meant to resonate once more within our souls.

[ 3 ] It is this fundamental tone that I would like to speak from today as well—one that has been struck here many times, especially recently—a tone intended to suggest that a truly genuine spiritual deepening is necessary for humanity at the present time, a spiritual deepening through those newer spiritual methods of knowledge that are precisely possible today, and which I have, after all, characterized often enough.

[ 4 ] It has also been said time and again recently: We will not be able to make progress in the social sphere either if our understanding of social realities does not stem from a corresponding intellectual deepening, utilizing the associated newer intellectual tools of knowledge. And it has been pointed out how seriously—radically seriously—this very striving for humanity’s spiritual deepening must be pursued in the present, precisely with these newer means of knowledge, and how only those who are truly able to take seriously what lies in the call for spiritual deepening and who, on the other hand, can finally come to the conviction that this spiritual deepening, at its very core—at least in essence—cannot make any compromises whatsoever with any older paths into the spiritual world. Any attempt at compromise, after all, only leads astray. Can one really say that in our time, people who presume to be leaders in this or that field actually take seriously what the pursuit of the spiritual means today? Such people would need to have a sense not only for theories about the spirit, but also for the real, living effectiveness in and through the spiritual realm. But when one speaks of this real effectiveness in and through the spiritual realm, for many people today one is still speaking of something that is utterly incomprehensible to them.

[ 5 ] I’ll illustrate what I mean with an example right away. I received a letter the other day. I’d just like to talk about this letter, so to speak, without mentioning any names. I recently received a letter from someone—let’s say—who is active in the intellectual sphere today, who begins by saying that he had come across the “Appeal to the Cultural World” and had embraced the idea of the threefold social order with the most enthusiastic approval. He then writes that he owes the book *The Key Points* valuable insights and inspiration, which he has repeatedly expressed publicly. But then he goes on to mention that the leadership of the Federation for Threefold Social Order recently sent him a transcript of the lecture I once gave to the workers at the Daimler plants. And now he speaks about this lecture, saying that he does not dare to voice a single word of criticism regarding the factual content of this lecture. But then, in the remaining pages of the letter, he harshly criticizes this lecture because he feels its tone should have been different from what it actually is; he feels, so to speak, offended—for example, by the fact that bourgeois culture to date has been discussed in a somewhat disparaging manner, and so on. I do not wish to go into the details.

[ 6 ] Well, what exactly is going on here? Today, I want to look at this matter in a way that is entirely in line with reality.

[ 7 ] You see, this is a man—and it’s a good thing there are people like him—who theoretically agrees with what is written in the “Call,” who theoretically agrees and has even adopted some of what is written in the “Key Points.” He even agrees with the content of this lecture I gave to the workers at the Daimler plants, but he criticizes the tone, calling it demagogic and the like.

[ 8 ] What is actually going on here? The man agrees in theory—even with this lecture. But agreeing with something in theory doesn’t help at all today. The man, in fact, has no sense of the reality of the situation. He cannot distinguish how a matter should be handled. When I sit in Dornach and write an appeal to the cultural world—in which I have before me, in an ideal sense, the people of the present who are capable of receiving such a message—not just something I’ve spun out of thin air and written down theoretically, but something I write in a living connection with those who could or should understand it—then that is something drawn from a real context. In doing so, the spirit prevailing in the present is fully taken into account. And again: I write the “key points.” I do not write so that the words appear in small printed letters on paper and may be criticized by theorists, but I write them for the people of the present. I write in the way one speaks from one’s desk to the people of the present—realistically, in accordance with reality. Now I walk into a hall where, for the most part, workers from the Daimler plants are seated. Then it is completely natural for me—because I speak from a living, immediate spirit—that the moment I walk in, I know how to speak to these people, how to choose my words. Anyone who works from the living spirit today does not give academic lectures. Academic lectures are those in which one has thought things through and throws one’s own esteemed opinions in people’s faces. But whoever is immersed in the living spirit speaks from the heart, not to people’s foreheads.

[ 9 ] This is something that needs to be said once and for all. Even people who are theoretically capable of following these matters have no idea that someone who wants to work through the spirit must do so from the spirit into which they are currently incorporated at that very moment. This can, of course, also be criticized from an external perspective. I can assure you that the lecture I gave back then to the Daimler people was understood by those present at the time. If I had spoken the way the writer likes, then of course the people would have laughed at me; it would have resulted in nothing other than the people laughing at me. The point today is not to preserve these ancient—for today they are ancient—theoretical habits of being able to personally agree or disagree with something, but rather to have a living sense of the workings, essence, and weaving of the spirit, of the spirit’s very existence. That is why, time and again, even when our friends over the years brought up this or that—things that had been said here or there and that, on the surface, sounded like some of the things I myself say—I had to say: This harmony in the words, sentences, and even paragraphs is not what matters at all. What matters is from which corner of the spirit the reality of what is said originates. There is still much for people today to understand in this regard. For people still believe that if they have taken in the content of a matter today, they have taken in the matter itself. If one has taken in the content today, one has only the wording within oneself and can be very far removed from the spirit of a matter.

[ 10 ] It is particularly important to understand this when we seek to integrate into our materialistic present the insights that spiritual science has to offer in the social sphere. Otherwise, it will be impossible to understand the connection between the anthroposophically oriented, spiritual-scientific essence and social action.

[ 11 ] Today, more than we realize, we are living in the midst of a wave of materialistic culture in all areas of life. And what is often said today—that this materialistic culture has been overcome here and there—is an illusion. For while materialistic culture may indeed be fought against in words here and there, it is not fought against from the spirit. One can issue a highly idealistic, professorial manifesto today or write a book—yet it can still stem entirely from a materialistic spirit. Above all, it is necessary today to recognize one thing: how we actually came to be drawn into this contemporary materialism. For if we do not recognize this, we will not be able to free ourselves from it.

[ 12 ] What, then, is the truly destructive nature of the materialistic impulses of our time? It lies in the fact that something flares up very quickly whenever spiritual insights are asserted today on the basis of a living experience of reality. Suppose, for example, that someone’s experiences have led him to speak about the animal kingdom, and he speaks about it in such a way as to make it clear that spiritual forces are at work in the animal kingdom and its development. Based on his understanding of the spiritual forces at work in the animal world, he might then have to speak in such a way that immediately this or that group of Protestant or Catholic theologians would spring into action, tearing him to shreds without even addressing the substance of what he is claiming—simply because he dares to speak of the spirit based on his understanding of the reality of the animal world. Or one might argue that it is necessary to introduce spiritual forces into human social life, because a genuine social transformation can only be achieved by recognizing spiritual forces and incorporating them into the social order. Immediately, the aggressiveness of the Marxists and some socialists flares up, just as, in the other case, the aggressiveness of Protestant or Catholic pastors does. And the tone in which both sides speak is not all that different. One must simply bear in mind at times that one—and I mean this quite good-naturedly—grew up more in a sentimental-theological, religious atmosphere, while the other grew up more in a rough-and-tumble atmosphere—I do not mean to claim that the latter is worse than the sentimental one—; but the underlying tone from which these things actually resonate is, in certain cases, the same.

[ 13 ] In light of these things, we must ask: Where does the materialistic spirit of our time actually come from? Who fostered it? — It was actually the religious creeds that fostered this materialistic spirit. And the fact that it is also alive and well in today’s social worldview is solely because the social worldview is a faithful disciple of everything that has, in essence, come from the religious creeds over the centuries. It was truly more significant than one might think that the Catholic Church, in the year 869 at the General Council of Constantinople—which I have mentioned on several occasions—abolished the concept of the spirit. From that time on, it was forbidden within Catholic scholarship to speak of human beings as possessing a spirit. One was only permitted, so to speak, to speak of human beings as having a body and a soul. This remained the case throughout the entire Middle Ages. And nothing did medieval Catholic scholars fear more than any mention of the trichotomy—that is, the threefold division of the human being into body, soul, and spirit. For the Council of Constantinople had decreed: Human beings consist of body and soul, and the soul possesses certain spiritual powers and qualities; there is indeed some spirit within the soul, but one must not speak of a distinct spirit. Consequently, scientists and philosophers believed that they were distinguishing between body and soul based on unconditional science, whereas in reality they were doing so solely under the influence of ninth-century church dogma. Even such reputable professors as Wilhelm Wundt are merely disciples of Catholic dogmatism, even as psychologists. This connection is usually not recognized.

[ 14 ] How did it come to be that, when discussing secular science, one is not allowed to speak of the spirit at all? In part, it stems from this dogma. But one is not even allowed to speak of the soul. One must not speak of the true soul, because religious denominations claim for themselves the right to speak of the soul and—to the extent they wish, and to the extent that dogma permits—of the spirit; this is monopolized by them. In fact, when one speaks of the soul and the spirit, one is speaking of something that does not belong to one, for that belongs to those who address people from the standpoint of a religious denomination. What choice did real science—this poor zoology, physiology, chemistry, and physics—have but to speak of material processes? When something flares up here or there, when they speak of the spirit, they are meddling in the affairs of religious denominations. This poor secular science has no choice but to become materialistic, because religious denominations have deprived it of the possibility of touching upon anything spiritual.

[ 15 ] Therein lies something very important. It is very important to recognize that the forces that brought about materialism are the ecclesiastical powers of the West. We owe materialism to the churches. And materialism will grow ever stronger unless the churches, as religious and denominational institutions, lose their power. In this regard, there is no room for illusions if one is serious about culture. Today, however, the issue is whether we take these matters seriously. Today, we must not, out of any human weakness, seek to make compromise after compromise. If one is compelled to make a compromise in one’s outward actions, one must be aware of it and not gloss over it lightly. One must calmly tell oneself: Of course, one must yield to force. But one must not compromise one’s own convictions. One must not believe that what one does under the influence of force is right.

[ 16 ] It is therefore necessary to lay a foundation here for knowledge that is, at long last, a secure foundation. Today, things must be emphasized sharply—very sharply. And here, on this ground, lie the things that must be emphasized very sharply. For we are now living in a time when we must take the knowledge of the spiritual world seriously. Scientific knowledge, which emerged in the fifth post-Atlantean period—a period that began with Galileo, Giordano Bruno, Kepler, Copernicus—this scientific period, which had, for example, one of its most significant representatives in the nineteenth century in Julius Robert Mayer—follows scientific methods and proceeds from a scientific mindset that is new in comparison to what existed in terms of methods and mindset in the creeds that have been handed down from ancient times. There is no possibility of uniting these scientific methods and scientific mindset with the methods of the creeds. Spiritual science, however—the spiritual science that has truly grown out of today’s culture—must stand on the same foundation of knowledge as natural science. It must take seriously what I once stated in my book *Mysticism at the Dawn of Modern Spiritual Life*. Such matters must certainly be taken seriously. But they are not taken seriously unless one acknowledges that everything we observe in the world is the result of the spirit working against us. Matter is nowhere present solely as matter. Everywhere, concrete matter is to be found together with concrete spirit. And when a person today says that he stands in the world as a human being, with the three kingdoms—the animal kingdom, the plant kingdom, and the mineral kingdom—below him, he is making a half-truth unless he simultaneously acknowledges that just as the animal kingdom, the plant kingdom, and mineral kingdom, so too, ascending upward, there are three spiritual kingdoms—the kingdoms of the spiritual hierarchies—which we designate as the kingdoms of the Angeloi, Archangeloi, and Archai. No one has the right to speak of the animal, plant, and mineral kingdoms as descending into the physical realm unless they know that the three other kingdoms ascend into the spiritual realm. For human beings, as they exist in the physical world, are connected through their bodies to the three kingdoms—the animal, plant, and mineral kingdoms; and through their soul-spiritual nature, they are connected to the three higher kingdoms, which are spiritual realities for complete human perception just as the three lower kingdoms are physical realities for the physical senses. And until it is recognized that one arrives at the recognition of the spirit through complete observation of external reality itself—and does not allow oneself to be hindered by any traditional religious creed from making a statement about the spiritual world —just as one cannot be prevented from asserting that whales exist—before one reaches this point, one cannot grasp what must act as an impulse in the present. These matters must be given serious thought today.

[ 17 ] The fact is this: We have entered a phase of human evolution in which human beings have become different from what they were in earlier epochs of Earth’s development. Humanity was always engaged in a certain process of development. When the great Atlantean flood had subsided and the first post-Atlantean cultural blossoms emerged from a much older culture during the ancient Indian period, human beings were still developing very strongly upward in terms of their physical nature. The same was true during the second cultural period, the ancient Persian era. The same was true in the third cultural period, the Egyptian-Chaldean era; and even, to a certain extent, in the Greco-Latin era, which lasted until the middle of the fifteenth century. Since that time, the forward development—the upward development—of human beings in physical terms has gradually come to a halt. Human physical development is complete. We do not face the future in such a way that we can say: Just as development was ascending through the first, second, third, and fourth post-Atlantean epochs, so too will the physical development of humankind continue to ascend in the future. — No, it will not. The human body will no longer ascend during the remainder of Earth’s development. The human body has passed the peak of its upward development and, as a body filled with physical forces, is no longer heading toward upward development but toward downward development. For if we inquire into this using the means of spiritual knowledge that we know well from the literature that lives among us—if we ask why this is so—then we must say: Just as human beings today have entered into a different relationship with the animal world—for example, during the Egyptian-Chaldean period they still had much more of the animal within them than today, and life was much more animalistic and instinctive—so too are they now developing a different relationship with the three higher realms. These three higher realms, in fact, had a very special interest in engaging with human beings right up to our own age. People today will have to begin to understand that when we speak of these things, we are speaking of realities. The spirits of the hierarchies of the Angeloi, the Archangeloi, and the Archai had a keen interest in engaging with human beings. Now this interest is coming to an end. It began to wane in the middle of the fifteenth century, when the fifth post-Atlantean epoch began. These beings of the higher hierarchies regarded it as their ideal to obtain an image of humanity—a perfect image of humanity. They could not obtain this until our time, because humanity had not yet reached the pinnacle of its perfection. They had to wait. Today, with the confused notions of God that so easily turn people into atheists, it is hard to comprehend that the spiritual beings standing above humankind must also wait for something. They had to wait until they had brought humankind to the point where it presented an image of its perfection before their spiritual eyes. That is why, in earlier times, instinctive insights, feelings, and impulses of will arose in people’s subconscious: these were the deeds of these beings. Human beings could not bring this forth of their own volition; they did so instinctively; but these were the deeds of these beings. And these beings were interested in ensuring that human beings made progress, for only when they succeeded in bringing human beings to the stage they have reached since the mid-fifteenth century did they have before them the image they needed to have for the sake of their own development. Now they have brought human beings this far. From this point of view, humanity no longer interests them. That is why humanity is so spiritually adrift even in the present, because the spirits have lost a certain interest in it. That is why humanity so easily becomes an opponent of all spiritual knowledge in the present, because the spirits are no longer working on it. For those beings who stand immediately above us in the hierarchical order, interest in this regard has faded. And it is this interest that human beings must now reawaken of their own free will. Just as they were once prompted by their physical bodies to develop toward the spirit through their instincts, they must now, through their free understanding, develop toward the spirit as they look toward the future. He must, so to speak, of his own accord provide the higher beings with new material to engage with, by drawing upon them and seeking to grasp concepts that are their own—concepts that now go beyond what is instinctively planted within us.

[ 18 ] We must therefore find a way to approach the spirit in an entirely new way. Of course, this must still be expressed to humanity today in a cautious manner. Yesterday I tried to speak about this quite cautiously. But precisely because we must speak cautiously on the one hand, we must point to these things sharply and radically on the other. For if there were no people at all who could bear the truth in this area today, the state of contemporary spiritual culture would be very dire.

[ 19 ] What, for example, has come to an end with regard to the nature of the developing human being? In earlier times, people spoke quite rightly of a person as being gifted or having a predisposition toward genius. And they rightly sought the prerequisites for this genius in the person’s physical constitution. As an educator, one could focus solely on the person’s physical constitution, and by developing it properly, their genius would emerge. Their aptitudes would emerge in general. From now on, physical development is complete. If one seeks merely to develop the body according to some form of physical pedagogy, nothing will come of it. Today one must turn to the soul. Today one must take into account not merely what arises through physical hereditary development—for nothing more arises from that—but one must turn to that which the human being carries within, because in this earthly life they are reliving previous earthly lives. Today we must approach the developing human being with the living awareness that we are dealing with a soul. The innate physical aptitudes have ceased to the extent that it would be nonsense to speak of them in the context of future humanity. We will no longer be able to speak of a person being gifted in one way or another by virtue of their body, but rather of a person being gifted in one way or another by virtue of their soul. This is something of immense significance in the life of present-day humanity. For much of what was said in earlier times about human beings is false when stated today. When we read educational theories today that have not yet been permeated by spiritual science, we find that they are all still based on the old belief—which was justified at the time—in the physiological endowment of human beings. Today, these theories no longer hold true. Today, it makes sense only to speak of the soul’s endowment in human beings.

[ 20 ] We must therefore begin to educate in a new way. This is what the development of humanity itself demands in the present. When we speak using old concepts, we are not speaking of something that is still applicable to the present. Certainly, it is wonderful to speak to people today, from a historical perspective, about how to view Christ correctly when viewed in the sense of Luther. But people today cannot view him in this way, because this view no longer has any reality for them and becomes nothing but a lie if they try to uphold it. If people today want to find Christ, they must find him through direct perception. Just as we find nature through external perception, so do we find Christ through inner perception. What spiritual science has been emphasizing to us continuously for many years could have served as the foundation for an understanding of a social impulse at the very moment when such a social impulse became necessary due to the development of modern civilized humanity.

[ 21 ] Things must be viewed in context. After all, outward appearances make it abundantly clear that today it is necessary to remind people to take the most basic impulses of their own religious beliefs seriously. For, you see, even for Christians there is a commandment that the name of God should not be taken in vain. But when someone comes along and speaks of social issues, people immediately say: “Well, he’s not talking about Christ at all; so that’s not Christian.”—It certainly does not become Christian simply by mentioning the name of Christ every third line. One need only speak in such a way that one is imbued with the conviction that it is spoken from the spirit in which Christ wishes us to speak in the present. But once one speaks from the very spirit of the present, and strives to speak from this spirit of the present, then people come and say: “Yes, he’s not talking about Christ at all.” “He should speak more from within.” — And then the so-called “inner life” is presented in the most outward manner. You know, after all, that it was out of a certain “aunt-like” mentality that the attack came, claiming that one should actually have spoken of “inner life” after every fifth word. Of course, it would be much more comfortable for me not to touch on this “aunt-like” mentality at all. But it is necessary in the present to address this “aunt-like” and “uncle-like” attitude, because it causes great harm with regard to what really needs to happen. I would really like to ask whether such “aunt-like” and “uncle-like” attitudes truly strive to penetrate into what must be brought to the fore as the truly spiritual in the present. We must have the courage to tell ourselves: What we do in specific ways—for example, by teaching in specific ways—must be done out of the recognition that humanity now carries within itself different developmental impulses than it did even a relatively short time ago, and that, in fact, leading spirits of the supersensible world had, until recently, an interest in bringing human beings up to a certain point. However, the human form is complete, and human beings must themselves seek a connection to the spiritual from within, so that what they now produce beyond their physical nature and physical predispositions will once again make them of interest to the spirits above them. Otherwise, our culture will wither away, fizzle out, and stagnate. Nothing that seeks in any way to rehash the old can save us from this. Only the courage to embark on the spiritual path with the same spirit with which naturalism set out in the fifteenth century—in opposition to the old creeds—can save us from this. That is essentially what I wanted to elaborate on before you today: that we can only truly look up to certain higher spirits if we admit to ourselves that, with the end of the nineteenth century, the old relationship with them has come to an end, and that since the last third of the nineteenth century, humanity has been compelled to enter into a new relationship with the spiritual world. Let us be truthful on this point. Let us be truthful, for example, in the following: one need not be inhuman just because one is truthful, but let us be truthful. As far as outward appearances are concerned, a person cannot immediately undergo the entire metamorphosis of humanity. He is brought up by what continues to flow from old impulses. Thus, those who today proclaim the old creeds from the pulpit were brought up by what continued from old impulses. Why shouldn’t one be completely kind and human toward what comes from that side? One can certainly do that, but for God’s sake, one must not take it seriously as a means of fathoming the truth in the present. One should say to oneself: Certainly, these people were raised that way; they cannot change their calling in later years; so let them speak. But one should not believe that it is necessary to give any weight—other than in an outward manner, by defending oneself—to discussions coming from that side. And similar things.

[ 22 ] As I said, it would be more convenient to leave these matters unspoken. But we are facing such difficult and serious times that it is quite impossible to leave these matters unspoken. And human weakness is far too widespread when it comes to not taking these matters seriously. Certainly, anyone might say: “I can’t change who I am, or my position, or whatever.” But let them not justify it; rather, let them admit to themselves that they are merely making compromises for the time being. Upholding the truth—even if one regards this truth as necessary solely in light of current circumstances—that is what matters most in our time. If one considers how humanity today has been swept up into those terrible catastrophes of recent years, one finds no other reason for this than that people have strayed so far from always looking from things to words, and from words to things. Today, in many cases, people merely focus on the words, and then believe they know something about the things themselves. This tendency to take phraseology to its extreme—that is the fundamental tendency of our present age—and then: failing to see that, even when the words are there, the things themselves are not yet there.

[ 23 ] Over the past few weeks, we have been working on organizing the training course for the Waldorf School teaching staff. The aim was to transform what is dead pedagogy into a living art of education. There, a truth came vividly into view—one that is often overlooked simply because words are treated as mere words. For example, it became vividly clear when we had to grapple with thick volumes—printed, thick volumes—labeled “Official Gazette” on the cover. For it is an excerpt from an official gazette. Or “Curriculum” is written on the cover of this or that thick volume. “Curriculum”—it doesn’t just say inside: this or that is to be taught in this or that class at this or that school, or—which could still be flexible—this or that is to be mastered up to this or that goal; but it actually says—you wouldn’t believe it—how one is to teach, how one is to handle the material. Today, this is already the content of a regulation—the content of state regulations. What does that mean when you grasp it in terms of reality? Well, to put it this way: an official gazette decrees, in a benevolent, paternalistic, patronizing manner, how teaching should be conducted, and if you don’t give it much thought, you can simply ignore it. But if one thinks about it—which is an uncomfortable exercise for most people today—then one comes to realize: Pedagogy and didactics are not taught in high schools today so that people can understand them; rather, pedagogy is prescribed by law. Just as people are told not to steal, they are told through official gazettes and decrees how they are to teach. And people do not perceive what lies behind this. And it is the case that only in the perception of what has actually emerged in recent times could the starting point for the restoration of healthy conditions lie. Fifty people who hold positions where their words are heard in the same way that the words of the members of the Weimar National Assembly were heard—fifty people who perceive something like the anomaly of legislation governing education—that would mean more for the restoration of the world than the insipid chatter that has been uttered in that very place over the past few months.

[ 24 ] For this, too, there must be a feeling, and this feeling can come from nothing other than the fact that the powers of spiritual knowledge take root, alive, in human souls and in human hearts. Not mere theory, which allows us to agree with things in theory, but then teaches us nothing about taking the spirit seriously. To take the spirit seriously means that when you enter a room, you are at one with the spirit and the souls of the people who are inside. Creeds formulated theoretically are nothing today. Feeling and sensing oneself in the spirit—that is the only thing that can make humanity healthy today.

[ 25 ] That was the intention when we began to work for social change here. To act out of a living spirit—that was the intention. So far, people have only managed to say: “I agree with this or that,” in terms of the meaning of the words or the content of the sentence. That people today are so intelligent as to be able to easily agree with the content of a sentence—this is certainly least denied by those who, out of inner spiritual insight, dare to assert: The spiritual beings who have been working on evolution up to now have brought humanity so far that it has reached their ideal of perfection. It is not denied that people today are wise, that they are capable of critical thinking, that they are intellectually very advanced, and that in a certain sense they are even perfect earthly beings. But precisely because they are this way, they must open up a new source within themselves—a completely new source.

[ 26 ] Certainly, those who understand spiritual life consider the people of today to be perfect. But precisely because they are perfect—because they have become perfect through beings other than themselves—they must now begin to make something of themselves.

[ 27 ] That was what prompted me, decades ago, to place the science of morality on a new foundation, for example, and to speak in my *Philosophy of Freedom* of “moral imagination”—that is, of the creative power that springs from within human beings, even in the moral realm. Because it was clear to me: What human beings instinctively develop from within themselves—and what has always been called ethics—has no future.

[ 28 ] I have often said here, at the end of my remarks, that I would be so happy if I could, despite the imperfect way in which such a thing must naturally be presented, find an echo in the hearts of my friends—a true echo. For my aim is never merely to make this or that plausible to them in a theoretical sense, but rather to interpret what the signs of the times seek to impress upon people in the present. My aim is not to surprise—or not to surprise—with this or that assertion, but simply to say what is truly necessary for the present.

[ 29 ] Are these principles not the foundation of the anthroposophically oriented spiritual science, as I represent it? In the face of any other principle, it might have been better to refrain from working for this anthroposophically oriented spiritual science. To refrain for the simple reason that it is only natural that, given what is alive in people today, the individual who advocates spiritual science will be pelted with all manner of filth. That is only natural. It cannot be otherwise, for that is simply the nature of the present in today’s transitional epoch. The only thing that matters is to advocate for spiritual science, to proclaim spiritual science, because one recognizes the urgent necessity of bringing what is proclaimed through spiritual science to humanity, especially in the present. One must not speak merely of a gradual development, but rather of turning points in development. A plant also develops gradually, but the transition from a leaf to a colorful petal is an abrupt one. Humanity, too, has developed gradually; but the transition from the time when humanity’s development was guided by divine-spiritual beings who led people to perfection, to the time when human beings must take the initiative themselves—this transition is an abrupt one, and it must be accomplished. And without acknowledging this abrupt transition, one cannot cross the Rubicon of today’s cultural crisis. Anyone who constantly wants this or that simply because it is convenient to carry it over from the old ways will not truly reach the other side—the realms from which the impulses of future culture can develop.

[ 30 ] Truly, the things that must be undertaken today—if they are to have any hope of success—are not of the kind that are being conceived here and there, but are of the kind exemplified, for instance, by our Waldorf School. With the Waldorf School, something is being undertaken that one simply cannot describe in any other way than as becoming the greatest concern of one’s life for those who take it seriously. I, for example, will confess quite openly: When I consider the spiritual constitution of the present age and see the necessity of helping to establish such a school, something stirs in my heart that I may already describe as follows: I have indeed had many worries, but this Waldorf School ranks among my greatest concerns. That cannot deter me from undertaking these things. Not merely because I believe it will fail. It will succeed. But because we will have to ensure that the right things are always done to make this success possible. It would be utterly vain not to admit that these concerns exist. But perhaps we have already done quite a bit specifically for this particular task by striving to be truthful—utterly truthful—even in our discussion of this chapter. And so that things cannot be taken in such a way that one sees only one side of the story, I wanted to say to you today what I have just said. Of course, I could not strike the same tone yesterday in the opening address. I could not speak to the people gathered there about the interests of the higher hierarchies, or about the fact that the image of the human being is complete, that something else must take its place, and so on. But if you photograph a tree from one side, it must also be photographed from the other side so that a complete picture emerges. That is why I also had to add what I have spoken to you about today. For in our time, what is true must be spoken in a true way. We must also learn this principle: that we are not merely to uphold the truth, but that we must also uphold the truth truthfully. For today, through the development of humanity, we have arrived at an epoch where the truth can also be presented untruthfully. We will have to learn to speak the truth truthfully. For in many areas today, truths are as common as blackberries, because one need only pick them up here and there. Human culture is perfect in this regard. But only those who do more than simply do what is easy to do today will fulfill the task for the future; for linking any concepts together—even into a new worldview—is easy to do. Those who proceed in this way do not create anything that will have an impact on the future; only those who speak the truth from the depths of their true soul create something fruitful. What matters today is not merely the wording, but the spiritual aura that permeates it. To do this, however, one must cultivate a certain sensibility today. People are often quite far removed from this sensibility. Even today, one can read entire pages without realizing that the person who wrote them is a deceitful individual. To achieve this, people will have to develop the ability not only to perceive what is logical, but also to sense the source of truth. Much more inner than those who today believe they are speaking of inner life imagine, much more inner will be that which will enable people in the future to truly act, to truly do something—even within the smallest circle—that carries humanity into the future.

[ 31 ] That is why, for all these years, it has been necessary for the matters we discuss among ourselves to be examined from a wide variety of perspectives. Only in this way do we gain the opportunity to experience them fully and powerfully. We must arm ourselves with this inner longing to approach the mysteries of the world and to perceive them inwardly as true and powerful; we must equip ourselves with this longing. My sole intention in speaking these words today was to help you learn to sense within yourselves the necessity of this longing and the prevalence of so much untruth in our time and among the people of our time. May truth prevail! It is this desire that one wishes to cry out to humanity again and again today, straight from the very depths of one’s most anxious heart.

[ 32 ] There is still much, much to be learned about things like the one I started with: that someone may agree completely with something in letter, but cannot comprehend it because it comes from the spirit. Try to understand learning in this way, and you will serve the tasks that the present sets before you. You will find many other things besides what you have already found, and much still lies hidden within the bosom of the present that must be discovered so that healing may come to humanity. But not everything that has been spoken has yet been discovered by humanity. And whoever sees through the way things operate today knows only too well that just because he has said one thing or another, it has not yet been discovered by humanity. Help to ensure that such a word is properly understood, and then you will not fail to help ensure that the truth is spread among humanity—not merely in its outward, logical form, but truly. Only then will you be members of that order we need—that order whose motto is to truly uphold the truth. And its secret is that it is possible to spread the truth, yet to spread it in a false manner, thereby causing more harm than is often caused by the spreading of lies. This, my dear friends, is worth considering: what it means to cause harm by asserting the truth in a false way.