The Necessity for New Ways of Spiritual Knowledge
GA 192
28 September 1919, Stuttgart
Lecture II
The best way to make ourselves familiar with ideas which can lead us, as men, into the spiritual world,is to try to obtain information through comparison of different facts which face us in the world.
What I would like to speak about today will be best explained if I start with such a comparison, i.e.—if I compare the consciousness which our present humanity should in accordance with the mission of our epoch, attain with earlier stages of consciousness attained by evolving humanity.
Just think yourselves back to the consciousness of the Greeks, to the ordinary consciousness which the Greeks had of Space. (Naturally I mean the consciousness of Space in a wide sense). You will realise without difficulty that in the consciousness of Space which the Greeks possessed only a portion of Europe was comprised—namely his own land and what bordered on it, a part of Asia and a portion of Africa, and that beyond this definitely limited region, the world was a kind of vague, indefinite quantity It might be said that what formed the horizon of the Greek's consciousness was the boundary of a something which was a vague infinity, at least to his consciousness. And this consciousness of the ancient Greek can be called (although the expression is naturally rather rough and ready, as such expressions always are because the consciousness of language is not adapted to express such things)—this consciousness which the Greek possessed may be called a land, or territorial consciousness. Now you know that the essential feature about the consciousness of humanity in the forward evolution of modern times has been that this territorial consciousness as it were, has developed into an Earth consciousness, that the surface of the Earth as it were, has shut itself off within definite boundaries. As a result of the disclosures of modern history man has imagined the surface of the Earth to be of a spherical shape. Speaking for the moment from the point of view of universal history, it may be said that simultaneously with the emergence of this Earth consciousness as a development out of a territorial consciousness, a panorama of what was outside and beyond the Earth came to be built up, a mathematical-geometrical panorama. The Copernican world-conception arose, and men have conceived of that which is outside and beyond the Earth in Space, in terms of mathematics, of geometry and of mechanics. The Copernican-Newtonian world-conception is, in its essential feature is a mathematical-mechanical picture of the world. Now, for every really thinking man, the question must naturally arise as to whether this mathematical-mechanical picture includes all that there is to be said about that which is beyond the Earth and can be perceived b by men in Space? It obviously does not include it all,,any more than the case when the old Greek confined himself as it were within the land or territory bounded by the horizon of his consciousness, and constructed what was beyond this, in phantasies. Of course the modern man does not clothe that which is beyond the Earth in such poetic phantasy as was the case with the ancient Greek with reference to what lay outside the territorial region comprised with in his consciousness, but the modern man encloses it in mathematical phantasy. Phantasy it is, none the leer for being mathematical. The essential feature in the attitude adapted by humanity in general of the present day is this; to conceive of the Earth as s great sphere in universal space, and to embrace what is beyond the Earth by mathematical and mechanical concepts, which for men who think very accurately, are merely mathematical and nothing else. The concepts which have been invented about all kinds of gravitational forces have been to-day abandoned by more thoughtful men and the world picture of what is beyond the Earth, is really only conceived of in terms of mathematics.
If we take all that we have been considering, during the course of many years, from the standpoint of spiritual science, the question must arise as to whether the time is ripe for this super-terrestrial concept of space, this mathematical and mechanical concept of space, to be ensouled by something else, by something empirical, something that can be experienced. For this mathematical-mechanical concept of Space is not empirical in any sense; the space-concept of Copernicus, Kepler, Newton, is something that has been invented, devised, built up from a comparatively small number of observations. And you will realise since there is no possibility of investigating what is beyond the Earth with physical means that such an investigation can only come to pass by means of spiritual science And that it can do to-day. The mathematical-mechanical conception yields no really human factor in this picture; it simply says something to us in abstractions, which do not touch the substantial reality which we postulate. Everything that physics an astrophysics have to tell us today about the super-terrestrial universe, is cold, barren and without any real content. As a matter of fact we are just at that point of time when it is impossible for human evolution to advance any further if we do not progress beyond a concept of the world that is merely mathematical and mechanical. Just as the old Greek had a territorial, or a land consciousness, and man since the beginning of what is called the modern historical epoch, has developed an Earth consciousness, so from now onwards, there must be an expansion to a universal or cosmic consciousness. And today I would like to devote the hour during which we can consider these things, to certain brief, aphoristical suggestions, as to the nature of this world or cosmic consciousness, which must take the place of a consciousness which merely embraces the Earth. Of course a very great deal will have to be done in the future if we are to collect in more exact detail proofs and verifications of that which I am going to put before you today in a kind of aphoristical outline.
You know that the investigations of Spiritual Science are based up-an perceptions of the soul,and in my book An Outline of Occult Science a considerable amount of knowledge gained in that way,is given out. In that Look I gave as mush as is necessary for the general consciousness of humanity at the present time, but it must be extended; what is to be found in that book must be deepened and widened.
Now with reference to the coming cosmic or universal consciousness, we are, if I may make a comparison, in the position of someone who is travelling in a railway train. He looks out through the window of the carriage and gets accustomed to the idea that he sitting still an his seat. He forgets that the train is itself moving forward. The forward movement which he himself makes with the train, is something that he forgets. He only takes into consideration the movements which he makes, when he gets up, for instance, and in relation to other men who are likewise sitting in the train, changes his position. Now, what such a traveller experiences is something that is very limited in scope, and restricted, and it can be extended by the fact of a break in the journey at some town or other. What he has experienced in the train is not, of course, changed, but the content of his consciousness is increased every time he gets out of the train at some town and experiences what is possible in just that particular place. This is all summed up, as it were, into the content of his journey, and something concrete emerges out of the abstract idea of the journey. The travellers' inner knowledge of the experiences he has had in the different towns is a guarantee that he has gone some distance and has entered into a different set of circumstances. Through the experiences which he has had, he knows that he was not standing still and that he was only able to maintain the illusion of being at rest so long as he remained in the train itself.
Now this is something entirely different from what is often said in discussions on the Copernican world-conception. Of course on such occasions mention is made of all kinds of illusions under which man labours, for example, the illusion that he believes to be standing still on the earth, whereas as a matter of fact, he moves together with it, since it is itself moving. But what I mean here is not that. I want to point out something else, namely that man can acquire certain inner knowledge in the course of his life, and especially in the course of experiences which follow one upon each other which are comparable to the experiences which a man has in towns when he gets out of a train and into it again, and so in a certain sense pulls himself up in the inner experiences of his soul, and enters the full content of inner experience at that point. Therein can be found a guarantee, a proof, that while a man is in the world, he travels through space and experiences something which says to him; You, as man, are not at rest, you are in process of taking a real world journey! I want you to be clear in your minds that something like that which is suggested by this parallelism, is the case. The proof of it can of course only be found in the actual experience. Make it clear to yourselves that there can be in the life of the soul, different experiences, in consecutive periods of time which are a guarantee of the fact that one passes on to different points in universal, in cosmic space. We shall afterwards see that this is all said by way of comparison. We shall see too that the difference between the consecutive experiences indicate an element of space which is of much more qualitative a nature than the merely quantitative element which is usually in the mind when Space is spoken of. Anyone who has real inner experience, and not merely the abstract experiences which are frequently brought forward in so external a sense when mystical matters are being talked about, knows quite well that there is something in what I have just mentioned. Whoever has inner experiences is able to notice in the course of his earth life, differences in the content of his soul life at the ages of, say, 30, 40, or 50 years. If he thinks about these inner souls experiences, he knows that he has moved on the world, that he has sought out other places and that his inner, mystical (if I like to use that term) experiences have changed their character. I am here speaking of experiences which are only taken into account by those who do not look upon mysticism in an external, abstract way, but who look upon it as something concrete in inner experiences. The abstract mystic may talk from the age of 25 years, right up to the end of his life, of the “God within him”. But a man who knows how to understand inner experiences as a concrete reality, knows that these inner experiences change their nature and content, as if on a world journey, which is not the same as a tour around the earth. If I may again express myself mystically, we traverse universal space consciously through our inner experiences. But we only do it as it ought to be done, when we reflect upon our relation to the surrounding world in a much more definite fashion than is usually the case.
It is quite possible to look upon our relation to the surrounding world in such a way that on the one side we have only our sense perceptions in mind, and on the other our desires, our willing, our deeds, our acts. The fact of holding our sense perceptions in the mind, sets us in definite relationship with the outer world; we perceive through eyes and ears, certain facts of the external world—we are in living intercourse with the outer world. What happens—happens as it were, at the margin of our corporeality. To-day I will not go into certain physiological objections, or those of theories of cognition which could seemingly be brought against what I am saying, because what I want to do is to outline the nature of the consciousness which must be attained in contradistinction to the earth and the territorial consciousness already described.
Our sense perceptions then, place us in a certain relationship to external events. And again, when we act, we stand but from the standpoint of another pole of our being in a certain relationship to external events and occurrences. We are involved in them, involved in a real sense, for we have ourselves partly brought them about. Between these two extremes of our life as human beings, is to be found everything which goes on in the field of our consciousness; on the one side there is the relationship to the outer world given us by the senses, and on the other side, by our desires and acts.
In that we develop feelings and conceptions of what our senses perceive, we live an inner life. And willing is fashioned from feeling and perceptions which have either deepened or condensed, as it were, into faculties. So that between perception and willing lies that which we psychically experience. But now, what is present in sense perception, is only seemingly a unity. In sense perception we look at the world and it appears to us as something uniform, a unity perceived through the senses. But as a matter of fact within this apparent unity, a duality is contained. For anyone who is capable of real perception, a duality is contained within what seemingly is a unity; there is a continual dying and uprising again. The world without us is in a state of perpetual dying and again coming to birth. In every moment in the world, we live in something that faces death, and out of that death, life continually comes forth again. If you look at a cloud, or anything else in the outer world it appears to you as a unity; but that it is not, The fact is that something is dying in the cloud, and out of this death something is again being born. Out of what comes from the past, there develops something which goes forward into the future. In all that we perceive there is ever contained fuel that is burning away and dying out; and fire that is arising, newly created, passing over as living form into the future. Then through such a training as is given in The Way of Initiation and Initiation and its Result, we learn how to separate these two poles of sense perception from each other, and to perceive actually the phenomena of death and coming to birth, then for the first time the world takes on a real aspect for us. When a man who is trained in the right way observes another man through the senses, he sees in that other man something that is continually dying and something that is continually arising again. Dying—coming to birth; dying—coming to birth, that is what we see when we have trained our powers of observation to some degree.
When this continual dying and coming to birth becomes objective to us, when we really see it and do not merely imagine it in an abstract way—when we see continually in a man, a corpse and a child coming into being (and it can be actually seen in this picture)—in that moment we have within our range of vision, the three hierarchies of of the Angels, Archangels and Archai. The world is full of real substance. It is no longer a unity such as we used to see when we look at nature. We cannot observe this dying and coming to birth, this Prana and Shiva of nature, without finding the whole of nature transformed and resolved as it were, into the activities of the spiritual beings of the three Hierarchies immediately above man. And so it is at the other pole of our being. In our deeds and acts there is again a continual dying and arising. But at this pole it is much more difficult to perceive it. A long and arduous training is necessary, but it can be done. And we then are within range of wisdom of the Seraphim, Cherubim and Thrones. Through meditation then, we perceive what is between the two poles: we are able to contemplate that Being Whom, as I have told you, is to be found midway between these two poles. Everything becomes more vital, more living in our epoch as we gradually acquire this way of thinking.
But by rising to this height of contemplation, our soul life changes considerably. 'hen we really have got to the point where we see in our surroundings the activities of spiritual beings, then, at the same time we get to a point where we are able concretely to observe the differences in the soul life of the different epochs of which I have already spoken. And then when we have learnt (it is difficult to learn, but it is possible)—to take account of these inner changes in concrete inner experiences—then we see ourselves to be travelling through universal, or cosmic space. And then we know, not by means of external mathematical considerations, not by the sequence of inner experiences, that we together with the earth have changed our position in cosmic space. And then cosmic space becomes a very different thing to the mathematical-mechanical space conceived of by Copernicus, Kepler, and Newton. It becomes something that is inwardly vital and living, We learn to distinguish movement which we make as men in universal space. We learn too, to distinguish a movement which is made from left to right—that is an actual movement which we make with the Earth from another movement which is an ascending one as it were; we realise that in turning, we also ascend in space. Yet a third movement—a “forward” movement I might call it—an onward movement. This is not the same thing as moving an the Earth but is something which is done together with the Earth which can be proved by inner experience. We can prove to ourselves that when we turn from left to right, we ascend and at the same time go forward. So, by inner experience, we observe a threefold movement made, not in relation to some other heavenly body but a movement in an absolute sense in space.
Now of course you will say that the present consciousness of humanity is very far away from the conception that man in this sense is a world traveller and that he can quite well prove to himself the reality of this world journey. Yet there is a means whereby such consciousness can be acquired, however far away from these things human consciousness nowadays may be. What I have described is a reality, even if men to-day know nothing about it. Their ignorance can be compared to the belief which may be held by a man in a railway train who imagines that he is sitting still, whereas he is moving forward with the whole train. Now why is this belief general? In the first place the purely mathematical and mechanical Copernican world conception has for the last three or four hundred years had a more lulling to sleep than an enlightening influence an men. I have often said that this purely mathematical-mechanical world conception is really based upon a mistake which is quite fairly obvious. It presents a convenient picture of space but really no more that that. In the well known work of Copernicus about the revolutions of the heavenly bodies in space, three tenets are to be found, but modern science bases itself only an the first two, and takes no account of the third. Copernicus knew something more than what is admitted by modern astronomical science. And this “more” he concealed in his third tenet -but no account is ever taken of that third tenet. The observations made do not agree with the Copernican system, but modern science disregards this. Today when under certain conditions a man investigates empirically where some star or other ought, according to the correct reckoning set forth in the Copernican system to be found at a particular point of time it is not there. But then there is the so-called Beseel correction, and it is applied in order to obtain the right result. The application of this “correction” is only necessary because the third tenet of Copernicus has not been taken into account. Because of this, a kind of convenient mathematical-mechanical world conception or world picture has come into existence during the last three to four hundred years. It is not in accord with many things, but of course today anyone who mentions this fact is put down as a fool! It is scientific to believe that the various facts are quite in accord with each other. Humanity has been lulled to sleep by the Copernican conception of the world with reference to certain facts—facts which are nevertheless substantiated by inner experience. Human consciousness is dulled and in the future men will have to see to it that this state of things does not continue.
I have often remarked that men do not wish to understand spiritual science with their own “healthy” sense. This is really only a result of certain educational prejudices which hold sway at the present time. It is very frequently the case nowadays that when the occultist gives out his experiences people say: Oh well, it may be so, but the only people who can know that are those who have gone through a certain “mystical” training as they describe it. Now that is right to a certain degree, but not entirely right. I have repeatedly said that up to a certain point, everyone today can recognise as fact, through his own consciousness what is, for example given in my Outline of Occult Science. There is no need to take it merely an authority. Everyone can understand it by means of an ordinary healthy human intelligence But How? It could be understood by anyone who had been sent to the Waldorf School from his seventh to his fifteenth year. In that school the forces of his soul would have been healthily developed through methods which correspond to reality, and then, if he had gone to a more advanced school, the elasticity of' his soul forces would have enabled him to absorb what people ordinarily begin to learn after the age of fifteen. That would be one way of getting men who would realise that reality is only given by what is substantiated by spiritual science—and that everything else is nonsense. The fact that men will not admit this, does not originate from any impossibility to understand spiritual science without training, but arises because our school education between the seventh and fifteenth years is of such a kind as to kill out and stultify certain forces instead of waking them into activity. It follows that men resist the acceptance of facts given by spiritual science, although they would readily accept many of them if their psychic powers were developed in a healthy way. Powers of the soul which have been developed in a healthy way are not dead and benumbed as appears to be the case in the majority of men of our modern times; they are mobile, fluidic, elastic, and anyone in whom they had been rightly developed between the ages of seven and fifteen would be irritated at the modern way of learning things. Today people are satisfied with many things because certain incorrect theories have made the illusions far greater than they really need be.
I have often quoted a characteristic example. Children in their 12th, 13th, and 14th years are told that lightning comes from friction in the clouds and it is admitted at the same time that the clouds are wet. Of course they are; but then when it is a matter of producing the electric spark which is the earthly replica of the lightning, it is found necessary to keep the electrical apparatus and everything belonging to it perfectly dry in order that no water of any kind is present; so that it comes to this—the only thing that is present when the lightning originates, is removed and yet the lightning is the same phenomena as the electric spark! Children and grown up people are quite satisfied to be lulled to sleep with all kinds of hypotheses of this kind. There are innumerable examples of the same kind where people will accept obvious nonsense simply on authority and yet in our days there is much talk of the laying aside of all authority—people say that they are no longer credulous of' authority. Yet as a matter of fact if they had been so credulous it would have been quite impossible for the Marxian-Socialistic world conception to arise in our epoch, for it is far more credulous of authority even than ancient Catholicism!
It is today one of the most essential cultural tasks,to overcome that which in so retardative a way interferes with men's powers of understanding—and to substitute for the present system a healthy educational organisation. It is one of the most important social talks to work for the removal of impediments to human understanding. And then men will not be so obstinate and perverse about accepting what spiritual science has to say; they will rather be irritated by much that orthodox science has to say today, that is if their development has been a healthy one. They will very soon learn to see through all the contradictions. There is instinctive opposition nowadays to the establishment of healthy educational conditions, for it is felt that if they were to be established the authority of modern science would be undermined in a drastic way. It is essential that fluidic soul forces should again be produced in humanity and they will emerge quite naturally as a result of the knowledge which Spiritual Science is able to impart. As a result of these elastic soul forces humanity would be able to understand what is meant when it is said that man is within a movement which is absolute; men would furthermore understand how a world consciousness can grow out of an earth consciousness.
To speak in pictures for a moment, but the picture is really a good one—it is as if a man learns to feel himself as a traveller through universal space—a traveller whose movement consists of a rotation combined with a forward movement and a movement from below upwards, If we sketch the result of these movements—moving upwards in rotation, moving forward in this upward spiral movement—the curve will represent the path of the earth through cosmic space, not mathematically and dynamically as it is built up through the Copernican- Newtonian world conception—but as a result of inner observation. This is the way in which it ought to be arrived at for then we get something that is not abstract like the Copernican-Newtonian world conception, but very concrete—something that is actually super-sensible experienced empirically, if one may be allowed to use this tautology. The importance of this kind of cosmic consciousness does not lie in the fact that through it a man begins to feel things more in accordance with the truth than is now the case when he believes the Copernican world conception and the path of the earth as conceived of by it, to be correct, but very much else is dependent upon it. I makes on inwardly a different man. A man learns to feel himself not merely a citizen of the Earth but of the Universe, of the Cosmos. The world expands,as it were, for anyone who comes near the forces which are actually operative in these movements. In the rotary movement from left to right are to be perceived the activities of the Angels; in the ascent from below upwards the activities of the Archangels; and by the advance in universal space forward are to be seen to movement of the Archai, the forces of the Time Spirits. By taking up into his consciousness this absolute movement through the cosmos man turns his gaze into a spiritual space and becomes aware of the fact that physical space is only an abstract image of this concrete, spiritual space, in which the activities of the higher Hierarchies are to be found.
It follows from what I have just said that such a consciousness is connected with something else. Anyone who has an idea that there is something of this kind bound up with the real being of man must necessarily realise what terrible harm is performed by modern education in that it allows certain forces to be paralysed in our children up to their fifteenth year and they then as students develop into something that is a natural result of these paralysed forces. It follows that young people between the ages of 15 and 21 absorb things that are not at all what the present time demands. And in their souls there exists things that are very different from what they ought to be. I assure you that by giving unctuous exhortations to children up to fifteen years old and then again later at an age when people used to have ideals as young men and girls of 20 years of age—you will attain absolutely nothing at all; or at least only that the young people at our Universities and High Schools become what they are today—which there is no need for me to describe any further! The only way to obtain real results is by giving free play to forces which should be active during student days, which nowadays are simply paralysed. Education today is a problem touching the whole of humanity. It is a problem not for arbitrary ideals, but for the whole of humanity, a problem which must be understood in the light of the very deepest demands of the present time. At most today men have a presentiment that muck ought to be different—let us say, for example, in medicine, possibly also in the realm of law and judicial matters, but that feeling when it arises is promptly squashed by the lawyers! Men have a kind of feeling that many things are not what they ought to be, but that they cannot be changed. The aim of mankind must be directed at the right period of life to the awakening and not to the paralysing of forces within them. The life period between the seventh and fifteenth years is not there for nothing. During this period, perfectly definite forces out of human nature which must be reckoned with when it is a question of education or giving instruction at this time of life. When anyone has this in view in education it is a very different thing to working arbitrarily: without any such aim. Certain things will be observed which today pass by entirely unnoticed.
I have called attention to these matters in the article which will appear in the next number of the Waldorf magazine treating them from several different points of view. I have intimated that we can no longer today be satisfied with pedagogics modelled as they often are in perfectly good faith and with the best will in the world. Certain methods and principles and standards are drawn up—in good will perhaps, but without any real insight—and it is believed that these standards of pedagogics can be learnt. Herbart and his followers have this belief to-day that just by “learning” pedagogy it is possible to become a good teacher. Now even in the case where a set of standard rules is the most perfect imaginable—the rules are almost as worthless for teaching as a well-written book on aesthetics is worthless to the artist. It is quite certain that well written books on aesthetics do not make a man into an artist—and a science never makes a true teacher. It is not necessary to learn physiology in order to be able to feed oneself; a man can feed himself by a science that is quite different from physiology. Physiology is there for another purpose and if it is brought into the question of correct feeding, it comes in as a makeshift. It was always a horror to me to meet men at table who had scales near them in order to measure out and weigh every morsel that they put into their mouths and eat at a meal. That is am example of where the science of physiology interferes in a most destructive way in the process of feeding. Ah yes, you may well laugh at that; but those who because of their scientific prejudices feel such a thing to be justifiable, would laugh for quite another reason considering what I have said to you today to be the most god-forsaken dilettantism. He may laugh at these things from diametrically opposite points of view.
Well now, a cut and dried system of Pedagogics can never produce real teachers. And why? It is drawn up in such a way that its fundamental rules have to be accepted and then education is of no benefit at all. What is desirable is to forget pedagogics altogether when one goes into a classroom; to forget everything that may be known about academic pedagogics! Every time it should grow naturally out of a wide knowledge of what man and humanity is. Nobody can be trained to be a teacher by the mere fact of learning pedagogy; pedagogy can only be stimulated in men when they have acquired a knowledge of the nature of man. We should disregard pedagogics as a science as it were, and at most regard it as artists regard aesthetics, being quite conscious of the fact that aesthetics and its laws can never teach how to paint. An artist in Munich once said to me when I was speaking to him about aesthetics and Carriere—who was a celebrated authority on the subject: “When we were in the Art School we used to call Carriere ‘an old grunter on aesthetic rhapsodies!’”(Wonnegrunzer). Now it has not occurred to students as yet to give the same kind of appellation to theoretical pedagogics, for the general idea is that in pedagogics it is possible to make use of things which cannot be used in art. But as a matter of fact, the two things are the same. Into pedagogic training there should be brought that element which is to be found in our spiritual teachings—knowledge of Man, insight into the nature of humanity and that is able to stimulate a living relationship with the human being which is developing out of the child. Pedagogy should be born afresh every moment in the teacher; the impulse to teach and instruct in a certain way arises as the immediate result of having any particular child in front of one. This will produce quite a different kind of atmosphere from what prevails in the school room today, just because it is created not by cut and dried rules of education, but because it flows of itself out of life—living life as it were! If education were to arise out of life in this way, then those forces which ought to be present at the age of fifteen will not be paralysed, and a man will enter upon his later life with forces that are fluidic in his soul-forces of a kind which are necessary in order that something similar to what happened at the transition of the Middle Ages to modern times—when territorial consciousness was transformed into an Earth consciousness, may come to pass in our epoch—in order that out of an Earth consciousness there may grow a world consciousness, a cosmic consciousness. Outer experiences will not produce this; it will only come through the development of susceptibility for inner consecutive experiences of the soul. Today man has not the faintest consciousness of the dissimilarity of there souls experiences.
Now what is the position to-day? Men are children; they act like children influenced by their environment. Then the child becomes an adult; the concepts become more abstract, the experiences richer; that is the case with everybody. But with the soul it is not the same as is the case with regard to the external bodily part of us. We get a more sharply defined countenance when we reach a certain age; we have no longer the round curves of childhood; we get white hair and wrinkles, and we very often get bald! In short, the external bodily part changes. We cannot, however, say that the inner soul nature changes in this way—at most it gets more and more crammed full—but it does not grow in such a way that it changes from the point of view of thee external world. Old age and childhood have a wrong relationship to each other. Man today has no consciousness of things of which I have often spoken to you; for instance that an old man can bless and that the blessing of an old man has a special significance—a significance which is not there in the case of a middle aged man. Men of today have no consciousness of such things—simply because it is not known in our days that if one is to be able to bless rightly in old age, one must have learnt in childhood how to fold the hands (in prayer or veneration) For the power to bless in old age arises out of the folding of the hands in prayer in childhood. The soul element has the same relationship to blessing and the folding of the hands in prayer as grey hair has to the the hair of childhood. This inner change enters the sphere of knowledge of modern humanity in a very limited sense; but it must do so again to a greater degree. Men must again come to a point where they can understand life in its different metamorphoses. Otherwise we shall never get out of the terrible state of things which, for instance, makes it possible for anyone who is 18 or 19 years old and has a little talent, to become at that age, a Feuilletonist. [A journalist responsible for the critical and literary articles which sometimes appear in a newspaper below the leading articles. The feuilletons are usually divided from the rest of the newspaper by a line.] People who read the feuilletons produced by these men have no idea that they have been written by someone only 18 years old—and take them quite authoritative utterances. But if a man writes feuilletons at the age of 18 he does not develop any further. It also comes about that men when they are only 20 or 21 years old are considered mature enough to go into Parliament, or to become a town councilor! They are supposed to be capable to do this kind of thing. It is in these cases considered to be unnecessary at the age of 40 years to try to be a more accomplished person than was the case at their age of 20, for everything that the world can offer and what can be offered to the world, has already been attained! At the age of 20 one chooses or is chosen and the thing is finished! But men will first understand the wor1d in a concrete sense when they again realise that life is something which undergoes concrete transformation. Then that abstract socialism of which we hear so much today, will disappear and something concrete will take its place.
So you see that the growth of a cosmic consciousness out of an earth consciousness will be of great significance, especially because of what is produced in men by their feelings; for the important thing in such matters is not what a man knows but how he feels. There are certain things associated with life which can be understood only when this cosmic or universal consciousness is reached.
There is a great deal of abstract talking today about the ages or generations as they follow each other in life. We think something in this way—I mean those of us who have reached a certain age, for I except young people from this; a man has capabilities of a certain kind; he lives in such and such a way; his childhood was spent in such and such a way. People are really very short-lived, for they get angry with children when they do the same things as they did at the same age; they do not understand that children of to-day do the same kind of things as they themselves used to do; they expect those who are now children to be as well behaved as they are as grown up people, and do not realise that good manners and behavious have first to be acquired. But apart from this, there is something else. Men generally imagine that children now must be just the same as they were when they were children—a generation ago; children, who are born now must be just the same as I was in the year 1860! Now that is nonsense. For we are in an absolute sense, further on in cosmic space and those who are babies now are born at a different point of space. Suppose you travel from Stuttgart to another town today—you will have had something to eat in Stuttgart today and tomorrow somewhere else. You cannot have a meal in Stuttgart when you travel. And the children who are born in our time, cannot have the same psychic constitution as those of us who have reached a respectable age had when we were children. We must realise that childhood itself changes. This is connected with our absolute movement in universal space—of which mathematical space is only a schematic image. There is a tendency today to take ever thing in an absolute sense and it is a matter for rejoicing when this is not so. I was recently very pleased in Berlin when a man came to see me who had read—well,what shall I say the “discussions” of the Threefold Commonwealth which appeared under the title of A False Prophet in the paper called Die Hilfe. I do not know whether any of you read that effusion. This man was an American and he said to himself that there was something interesting about it. And he came to see me with Herr Pfarrer Rittlelmayer and explained that in spite of the feeble style, he had realised that it was a matter of interest. Among the questions which he—all of which were quite understandable—was the following, which specially pleased me; “One can see that the Threefold State is necessary for modern times and that it must be put in the place of the old uniform State; is it your opinion that the Threefold Commonwealth is the final and conclusive solution of the social question?” I answered him: “Most assuredly not; but in the course of historical development it has come about that in past centuries the State as a unity has been more in evidence and now the times demand a threefold Commonwealth, a time will come when the Threefold Commonwealth will have to be replaced by something different. That will not however, be for about three or four hundred years and then it will be necessary again to consider what should take place of the Threefold Commonwealth”. Now that is the opposite of chiliastic thought, the opposite to the thought that imagines the kind of empire which has lasted for a thousand years to be right for all time. It is the opposite of thinking which imagines that once a blessed existence is obtained for humanity it must remain for all time. Life in the world is not so easy as that. What is essential is that what is right for a particular epoch should be brought about and then substituted at the right time by what the following epoch demands, That is the essential point, that is organic thinking in contradistinction to mechanical thinking—and mechanical thinking is what holds sway at the present time; men really imagine that there is one absolute right for all time. One thing is right for Stuttgart, another for New York, another for Australia, One thing is right for 1919, another for 2530. I assure you that the evolution of humanity is not so simple as to possess one absolute Right. Things are always right for particular places and for particular times; there must be concrete thinking which arises from the facts and relationships. And that will happen when humanity is conscious of its absolute movement in universal space. a consciousness which, however, can only be induced through inner experiences, through inner life.
I have again to-day called your attention to something which should indicate to you how things must be looked at with reference to the penetration by spiritual science of our modern culture. Anyone who understands such matters,will see that humanity's love of ease resists spiritual science, for everything else is far more convenient, far easier, Spiritual science is terribly inconvenient! Spiritual science does not permit of our thinking out a certain condition of things which can remain for ever; it forces us to think out what is good and right for the centuries immediately following, perhaps even for a still shorter period of time. But this cannot be thought out by abstract concepts of the intellect about humanity, but only when a real effort is made to understand the special characteristics of the particular epoch, and to realise thereby what it demands. That may be inconvenient, but that is the reality. Men today like the settle down comfortably into cultural evolution, especially those men whose aim it is to be leaders in it!
I will give you an example of the understanding which persons of authority at the present time have of' spiritual science. I won't relate the story in detail in case someone might get offended, but in a certain town a man had occasion to lecture about Anthroposophy in a private High School. He was lecturing about modern world conceptions and he wanted to include an address about Anthroposophy because he considered it historically necessary—you see people try nowadays to be really “all round”. Now how did this man set about it? The plan of the lectures, the programme,was drawn up at the beginning of the tem and a certain hour was allotted to “Anthroposophy” just as in certain hours the subject was Darwinism, a particular hour was set aside for “Steiner's Anthroposophy”. This was all drawn up at the beginning of the term. Now this man, when he put Anthroposophy into the programme, had not the very least idea of what was to be found in a book about Anthroposophy. When the evening for this particular lecture came round, this man went to someone who had my books, and in the morning selected the most important of them in order to get information, in order to be in a position to give his lecture an Anthroposophy in the evening. It is very convenient to familiarize oneself in such a way about a world-conception, and then to give it our authoritatively. Such a thing as this is by no means rare in our modern days, and it deserves to be mentioned. For very, very much of what is said and lectured about and written about in the present day has no greater “depth” than this and it is accepted credulously. Then out of this credulous acceptance it built up what people have in their heads and in their souls about the different world conceptions. We must not close our eyes to facts like this which show the most terrible superficiality, we must be quite clear that to-day it is essential first of all to consider who the person is who is speaking “authoritatively” an certain matters.
The stimulation of this consciousness in the present time is more important, my friends, than all the substance of what I am able to tell you; it is a consciousness which makes us realise how terribly necessary it is to consider what degree of depth there is behind that which is given us, and told us. If one speaks of these things of course many people are hurt. And particularly it is said about Anthroposophists and Theosophists that they ought to have more forbearance, to judge with greater kindliness and not to be so critical, because to be so critical hurts people. But one asks oneself whether it is real charity to ignore the fact that such men who acquaint themselves in the morning with what they have to lecture upon in the evening should be let loose in the sphere of education. In questions that arise out of actual life, the important thing is how they are put. It is important to put the questions in the right way, for then only can the right point of view result.
I have tried to bring home to you today that earth consciousness must change into a cosmic or universal consciousness just as a territorial consciousness changed into an earth consciousness; but I did this in order to indicate much that in the realm of feeling is essential for the bringing about of healthy relationships in our civilisation of today.
And Oh! this must come about. If one could only shake sleepy humanity of modern times into a realisation of this! But it isn't by any means easy nowadays. Much may be said in this direction but men avoid making themselves fundamentally familiar with such a point of view. It is not enough merely to bring forward anthroposophical theories. It is absolutely essential to make one's penetration sharp for what is necessary for our time and not shut oneself up in preconceived ideas, We must open ourselves out toward that which has to be wrestled with, in order that from the point of view of a true charity one may be able to strike actively at the present time. If something is done in this direction by stimulating the souls and hearts of men, more is attained than by the most comprehensive theories imaginable.
It makes one's heart bleed to realise the truth of what was said by Herr Molt recently, that there are people today who say: “We would rather be a province of the Allies before we will think of anything like the Threefold Social Organisation”. This attitude is unfortunately widely spread. And a great many other things are connected with this kind of attitude because as a matter of fact another attitude can only arise from a spiritual deepening. Our modern time can only grow to be healthy through such spiritual deepening.
Siebzehnter Vortrag
Mit Ideen, welche uns selbst als Menschen hineinstellen sollen in die geistige Welt, kommen wir am besten zurecht, wenn wir versuchen, uns durch Vergleiche der verschiedenen Tatsachen der Welt zu orientieren.
Wovon ich heute sprechen will, wird sich am besten erklären lassen, wenn ich von einem solchen Vergleich ausgehe, nämlich wenn ich unser gegenwärtiges Menschheitsbewußtsein, das wir uns nach der Aufgabe unserer Zeit erringen müssen, vergleiche mit früheren Bewußtseinsstufen der sich entwickelnden Menschheit.
Denken Sie einmal zurück an das Bewußtsein der Griechen, an das gewöhnliche Raumesbewußtsein der Griechen, natürlich Raumesbewußtsein im weiteren Sinne gemeint. Sie werden leicht darauf kommen, daß der Grieche mit seinem Raumbewußtsein nur eigentlich ein Stück von Europa umfaßte: sein Griechenland und was daran grenzte, ein Stück von Asien, ein Stück von Afrika, und daß außerhalb dieses begrenzten Gebietes für ihn die Welt in einer gewissen Unbestimmtheit lag. Man könnte sagen: Dasjenige, was den Horizont seines Bewußtseins bildete, das grenzte ringsherum an ein Unbestimmtes für sein Bewußtsein. Und dieses sein Bewußtsein kann genannt werden, wenn der Ausdruck gestattet ist — er ist natürlich holperig, wie immer Ausdrücke für so etwas sein werden, weil ja das Sprachbewußtsein darauf nicht hingerichtet ist —, dieses Bewußtsein des Griechen kann genannt werden ein Landbewußtsein. Nun wissen Sie, daß das Wesentliche in der Heraufentwickelung der neueren Zeit für die Menschheit und ihr Bewußtsein darin bestand, daß sich dieses Landbewußtsein zum Erdenbewußtsein entwickelte, daß für das Bewußtsein des Menschen die Oberfläche der Erde gewissermaßen sich abschloß. Der Mensch stellt sich die Oberfläche der Erde als eine Kugelgestalt vor, bewirkt durch die Entdeckungen der neueren Geschichte. Weltgeschichtlich genommen war die Sache gleichzeitig so, daß, indem dieses Weltbewußtsein, oder besser gesagt Erdenbewußtsein entstand aus dem Landbewußtsein, sich gleichzeitig ein Umblick über das Außerirdische bildete, der im wesentlichen mathematisch-geometrisch gestaltet ist. Die Kopernikanische Weltanschauung kam herauf, und man stellte sich das, was außerhalb der Erde im Raume ist, in den Formen der Mathematik und Geometrie, höchstens noch der Mechanik vor. Die Kopernikanisch-Newtonsche Weltanschauung ist ja im wesentlichen ein mathematisch-mechanisches Weltbild. Es müßte natürlich eigentlich für jeden wirklich denkenden Menschen die Frage entstehen: Ist nun dasjenige, was außer dem Irdischen vom Menschen im Raume erblickt werden kann, damit im Bilde erschöpft, daß man es mathematisch-mechanisch vorstellt? Es ist offenbar gerade so wenig erschöpft, als wenn der alte Grieche sich abschloß, sein Land vorstellte, das er aus seinem Bewußtseinshorizont überblickte, und das Äußere in einer gewissen Weise konstruierte, es gewissermaßen im Sinne der Phantasie ausgestaltete. Der moderne Mensch gestaltet das Außerirdische zwar nicht mit einer solchen mehr poetischen Phantasie aus, wie der alte Grieche es tat mit Bezug auf das, was außerhalb von ihm bewußtseinsgemäß umfaßtes Landgebiet war, aber der moderne Mensch umfaßt das, was um ihn ist, mit mathematischer Phantasie. Das ist ja auch Phantasie. Und im wesentlichen steht die Menschheit der Gegenwart durchaus noch auf diesem Standpunkte: sich vorzustellen die Erde als eine große Kugel im Weltenraum, und das Außerirdische eigentlich nur umfassend mit mathematischen, mechanischen Vorstellungen, die höchstens für einzelne, etwas exakter denkende Menschen bloß mathematische sind, weil ja die ersonnenen Begriffe über allerlei Gravitationskräfte von besonneneren Menschen heute weggelassen werden, und eigentlich das außerirdische Weltenbild nur mathematisch vorgestellt wird.
Für uns, und wir brauchen ja das nur zusammenzunehmen, was wir im Laufe der Jahre betrachtet haben auf geisteswissenschaftlichem Boden, für uns werden sich heute die Fragen aufwerfen müssen, ob denn die Zeiten reif sind, dieses mathematisch-mechanische Raumesbild, dieses außerirdische Raumesbild mit irgend etwas anderem zu beleben, mit irgend etwas Erfahrungsmäßigem zu beleben. Denn etwas Erfahrungsmäßiges ist dieses mathematisch-mechanische Raumesbild durchaus nicht. Es ist durchaus etwas Ersonnenes. Es ist etwas Konstruiertes. Aus einer verhältnismäßig kleinen Anzahl von Beobachtungen ist dieses Raumesbild, dieses Kopernikanische, Keplersche, Newtonsche Raumesbild zusammengestellt, konstruiert. Nun werden Sie begreifen, daß, da es ja noch keine Möglichkeit gibt, um physisch das Außerirdische zu durchforschen, eine solche Durchforschung nur im geisteswissenschaftlichen Sinne geschehen kann. Aber in geisteswissenschaftlichem Sinne kann sie heute schon in einer gewissen Weise geschehen. Das mathematisch-mechanisch Aufgefaßte gibt uns ja einen wirklichen menschlichen Inhalt nicht. Es sagt uns das mathematisch-mechanisch Aufgefaßte eigentlich nur etwas in Abstraktionen, etwas, was an die von uns geforderte Inhaltlichkeit gar nicht herankommt. Kalt, nüchtern, ohne einen wirklichen Inhalt ist schließlich alles, was uns die mathematische Physik, die Astrophysik heute von dem außerirdischen Weltenall zu erzählen haben. Doch wir sind bereits in den Zeitpunkt eingerückt, in dem es unmöglich ist, in der Menschheitsentwickelung weiterzukommen, wenn wir stehenbleiben bei dem bloß mechanisch-mathematischen Weltenbilde. Wie der alte Grieche ein Landbewußtsein hatte, und der Mensch seit dem Beginn dessen, was man landläufig die neuere geschichtliche Zeit nennt, ein Erdenbewußtsein entwickelt hat, so muß sich von jetzt ab das Menschheitsbewußtsein erweitern zum Weltbewußtsein. Und ich will Ihnen heute in der Stunde, die uns noch möglich ist, solchen Betrachtungen zu widmen, wenigstens kurz, aphoristisch einige Andeutungen geben, wie dieses Weltbewußtsein gestaltet sein soll, das an die Stelle des bloßen Erdenbewußtseins zu treten haben wird. Wir werden allerdings in der Zukunft noch vieles zu tun haben, wenn wir das Genauere, und auch das mehr Beweisende, Belegende zusammenzutragen haben für das, was ich heute wie in einem aphoristischen Umrisse vor Sie hinstellen werde.
Sie wissen ja, die geisteswissenschaftlichen Forschungen beruhen auf durch die Seele gemachten Erfahrungen. Sie haben eine große Anzahl solcher durch die Seele gemachten Erfahrungen in meiner «Geheimwissenschaft» mitgeteilt erhalten. In dieser «Geheimwissenschaft» bin ich so weit gegangen, als zunächst für das allgemeine Menschheitsbewußtsein heute notwendig ist. Aber es muß immer weiter und weiter gekommen werden. Das, was in meiner «Geheimwissenschaft» steht, muß vertieft und erweitert werden.
Nun sind wir mit Bezug auf das kommende, das anzustrebende Weltbewußtsein — wenn ich einen Vergleich gebrauchen darf - in der Lage eines Reisenden, der in einem Eisenbahnzug sitzt. Er schaut durch die Fenster des Wagens hinaus, und er lebt sich ein in die Vorstellung, daß er ruhig auf seiner Bank sitzt. Er vergißt, daß der Eisenbahnzug sich vorwärts bewegt. Die Bewegung, die er mit dem Zuge zusammen vorwärts macht, die vergißt er. Er zieht zunächst nur in Betracht diejenigen Bewegungen, die er macht, wenn er aufsteht oder sich bewegt, in seinem Verhältnis zu anderen, ebenfalls im Zuge sitzenden Menschen. Nun ist das, was da der Mensch als ein solcher Reisender im Wagen durchlebt, zunächst etwas sehr Eingeschränktes, und es kann erweitert werden, wenn er ab und zu aus dem Zuge aussteigt, vielleicht die Reise unterbricht in der einen oder anderen Stadt. Dann ändert sich das, was er als Erfahrung im Zuge drinnen macht, ja nicht, aber der Inhalt seines Bewußtseins erweitert sich jedesmal, wenn er in einer anderen Stadt aussteigt und dort jene Erlebnisse hat, die er eben in der Stadt haben kann. Es summiert sich dann zum Inhalt seiner Reise zusammen, und es wird aus dem abstrakten Bilde der Reise etwas Konkretes. Es wird etwas aus dem Schema der Reise, indem eingetragen wird in dieses Schema dasjenige, was konkret als Erlebnisse in den einzelnen Städten einem widerfährt. Durch diese Erlebnisse hat man etwas, was einem durch innere Erfahrung verbürgt, daß man weitergekommen ist und in andere Verhältnisse hineingekommen ist. Man weiß aus den Erlebnissen, daß man nicht in Ruhe war, daß man sich dies nur vortäuschen konnte, während man selbst in dem Zuge war.
Was ich hier meine, ist durchaus etwas anderes, als was oftmals gesagt wird, wenn die bloße Kopernikanische Weltanschauung besprochen wird. Da wird natürlich auch gesprochen von allerlei Täuschungen, in denen man ist, wenn die Erde bewegt ist, und man eigentlich glaubt, man sei in Ruhe auf der Erde, während man sich mit der ganzen Erde bewegt. Das, was man da sagt, ist aber hier nicht gemeint, sondern hier möchte ich auf etwas anderes verweisen: darauf, daß der Mensch gewisse rein innere Erfahrungen machen kann im Verlauf seines Lebens und insbesondere im Verlauf der aufeinander folgenden Erlebnisse, die sich vergleichen lassen mit den Erlebnissen in den Städten, wenn man aus dem Eisenbahnzuge aussteigt und wieder einsteigt und so gewissermaßen halt macht mit Bezug auf seine inneren Seelenerlebnisse, mit Bezug auf dasjenige, was sich in innerer Inhaltlichkeit des Erlebens ergibt. Dann könnte darin eine Bürgschaft dafür liegen, daß man in der Welt gewissermaßen Räume durchreist und in diesen Räumen etwas erlebt, was einem zeigt: Du als Mensch, du bist nicht in Ruhe, du bist auf einer wirklichen Weltenreise begriffen. — Machen Sie sich aus diesem Vergleich klar, daß es so etwas geben kann. Der Beweis dafür kann ja nut in der wirklichen Erfahrung liegen. Machen Sie sich klar, daß es so etwas geben kann wie eine verschiedene Erfahrung im Seelenzustand in aufeinanderfolgenden Zeiten, das einem verbürgt: Du bist an verschiedenen Stellen des Weltenraumes, gewissermaßen. Wir werden nachher sehen, daß das alles nur wirklich vergleichsweise gesprochen ist, daß der Unterschied zwischen den aufeinanderfolgenden Erfahrungen uns auf ein viel Qualitativeres des Raumes verweist als das bloß Quantitative, das man im Auge hat, wenn man vom Raume spricht. Derjenige, der wirklich innere Erfahrungen hat, nicht bloß die abstrakten Erfahrungen, die man sehr häufig in sehr äußerlichem Sinne angeführt findet, wo von Mystik die Rede ist, der weiß, daß es so etwas gibt wie das, was ich jetzt angedeutet habe. Wer innere Erfahrungen macht, kann im Laufe eines Erdenlebens Unterschiede merken zwischen dem Seeleninhalt, wie er ihn hatte im dreißigsten, im vierzigsten, im fünfzigsten Jahr seines Lebens. Er weiß, wenn er auf diese inneren Seelenerfahrungen reflektiert, daß er gewissermaßen sich bewegt hat in der Welt, daß er andere Orte aufgesucht hat und daß seine inneren, wenn ich es jetzt so nennen will, mystischen Erfahrungen andere geworden sind. Ich weise Sie da hin auf gewisse Erfahrungen, die allerdings nur besprochen werden von denjenigen, die Mystik nicht im äußerlich abstrakten Sinne nehmen, sondern so, wie sie sich wirklich konkret im inneren Erfahren darstellt. Der abstrakte Mystiker redet mit fünfundzwanzig Jahren von dem Gott, der in ihm lebt, mit dreißig Jahren, mit vierzig Jahren und so weiter bis an sein Lebensende. Derjenige, der konkret die inneren Erfahrungen wirklich zu fassen weiß, der weiß auch, daß sich diese Erfahrungen wie eben auf einer Weltenreise ändern, die nicht identisch ist mit einem Herumwandern auf der Erde. Wir durchmessen so, wenn ich mich wiederum mystisch ausdrücken will, den Weltenraum bewußt durch unsere inneren Erfahrungen. Da kommen wir nur zurecht, wenn wir, allerdings in viel bestimmterer Weise, als wir das gewöhnlich tun, unser Verhältnis zur Umwelt betrachten.
Wir können ja unser Verhältnis zur Umwelt nur so betrachten, daß wir auf der einen Seite unsere Sinneswahrnehmungen ins Auge fassen, auf der anderen Seite unsern Willen, unser Wollen, unser Tun, unser Handeln. Indem wir unsere Sinneswahrnehmungen ins Auge fassen, sind wir in einem bestimmten Verhältnis zur Außenwelt, wir nehmen durch die Augen, durch die Ohren bestimmte Tatsachen der Außenwelt wahr, wir sind in lebendigem Verkehr mit der Außenwelt. Dasjenige, was geschieht, geschieht gewissermaßen am Rande unserer Leiblichkeit. Ich werde mich heute nicht einlassen auf gewisse physiologische Einwände oder auf erkenntnistheoretische Einwände, die scheinbar gegen das gemacht werden können, was ich sage, denn ich will Ihnen ja das heranzuerziehende Bewußtsein im Gegensatz zum Erdenbewußtsein und Landbewußtsein skizzieren.
Wir stehen also mit unseren Sinneswahrnehmungen in einem bestimmten Verhältnis zu äußeren Vorgängen. Und wiederum, wenn wir handeln, wenn wir etwas vollbringen, stehen wir auch von der anderen Seite, von dem anderen Pol unseres Wesens, in einem gewissen Verhältnis zu äußeren Vorgängen. Wir sind verwickelt in die äußeren Vorgänge, denn wir bewirken sie zum Teil selber. Zwischen diesen zwei Extremen unseres menschlichen Lebens liegt alles das, was sich sonst in unserem Bewußtsein abspielt: auf der einen Seite jenes Verhältnis zur Außenwelt, wie es uns die Sinne geben, auf der anderen Seite unser Wollen und Handeln. Indem wir Empfindungen entwickeln an unseren Sinneswahrnehmungen, indem wir Gefühle entwickeln, leben wir ein inneres Leben. Und wiederum aus Gefühlen und Empfindungen heraus, die sich zu Fähigkeiten vertiefen oder verdichten, könnte man sagen, gestalten wir unser Wollen. Also zwischen Wahrnehmen und Wollen liegt dasjenige, was wir sonst seelisch erleben.
Nun ist aber dasjenige, was wir in der Sinneswahrnehmung haben, nur scheinbar eine Einheit. Wir blicken in der Sinneswahrnehmung auf die Welt hin, und die Welt scheint uns im Umblicken wie etwas Einheitliches, das wir eben mit den Sinnen überblicken. Aber in dieser scheinbaren Einheit ist ein Doppeltes enthalten. Derjenige, der wirklich wahrzunehmen vermag, sinngemäß wahrzunehmen vermag, für den ist in der scheinbaren Einheit deutlich ein Doppeltes enthalten: ein Ersterbendes und ein Aufgehendes, sich fortwährend Erzeugendes. Die Welt außer uns ist in einem fortwährenden Ersterben und wiederum Geborenwerden. In keinem Augenblick ist es anders in der Welt, als daß wir leben in etwas, was dem Tode entgegengeht und aus dem Tode immer wiederum das Leben heraufholt. Wenn Sie nur eine Wolke oder etwas anderes in der Außenwelt betrachten, so erscheint diese Wolke als eine Einheit. Aber das ist sie nicht. In Wahrheit stirbt etwas in der Wolke und aus dem Sterben entwickelt sich wiederum ein sich Gebärendes. Aus dem aus der Vergangenheit Heraufziehenden entwickelt sich ein in die Zukunft Gehendes. Fortwährend ist enthalten in dem, was wir anschauen, entstehender Brennstoff, das heißt Totwerdendes und sich Erzeugendes; Feuer, das heißt sich in die Zukunft Hinübergestaltendes. Lernen wir dutch eine solche Schulung, wie sie dargestellt ist in «Wie erlangt man Erkenntnisse der höheren Welten?», diese zwei Pole der Sinneswahrnehmung voneinander trennen, lernen wir wirklich empfinden jeder Erscheinung gegenüber Sterben und Geborenwerden, dann erst gewinnt die Welt für uns ein reales Antlitz. Wer richtig geschult ist, steht auch einem Menschen so gegenüber, indem er ihn sinnlich wahrnimmt, daß er in ihm fortwährend sieht etwas, was abstirbt, und etwas, was wieder entsteht. Absterben - Geborenwerden, Absterben - Geborenwerden: das ist etwas, was aufgenommen wird von unserer Wahrnehmung, wenn wir uns nur ein bißchen schulen gegenüber dieser Wahrnehmung. Nun ist es aber so, daß in dem Augenblick, wo uns gegenständlich wird dieses fortwährende Absterben und Neugeborenwerden, wo wir es wirklich sehen, wo wit es nicht bloß abstrakt erdenken, sondern wo wir es sehen, wo wir wirklich fortwährend sehen einen Leichnam werden im Menschen und ein Kind entstehen — man kann es so sehen -, in dem Augenblick, wo das Wahrnehmung wird, in dem Augenblick stehen wir drinnen im Wahrnehmen der drei Hierarchien, Angeloi, Archangeloi, Archai. Die Welt bekommt dann tatsächlich diesen Inhalt. Wir sehen sie nicht mehr, wie wir sonst in die Natur hineinblicken, wenn wir diese Natur als eine Einheit wahrnehmen. Wir können gar nicht dieses Sterben und Geborenwerden, dieses Prana und Shiwa der Natur wahrnehmen, ohne daß wir verwandelt finden, gewissermaßen aufgelöst finden die ganze Natur in die Taten von geistigen Wesenheiten der drei über den Menschen stehenden Hierarchien.
Ebenso ist es am anderen Pol. Wenn wir den anderen Pol betrachten, den Pol unseres Handelns, unseres Vollbringens, so haben wir auch da drinnen wiederum ein fortwährendes Ersterben und fortwährendes Entstehen. Aber an diesem Pol nehmen wir schwerer wahr dasjenige, was geistig darinnen lebt. Dennoch — wir können es wahrnehmen. Es ist eine längere Schulung dazu notwendig, aber wir können es wahrnehmen. Wir nehmen dann diejenigen Hierarchien wahr, die wir beschrieben finden als Seraphim, Cherubim, Throne. Und dasjenige, was dazwischen drinnen ist, das nehmen wir wahr durch Selbstbetrachtung, die Betrachtung jenes Wesens, von dem ich Ihnen gesagt habe, daß es zwischen diesen zwei Polen mitten drinnen steht. Kurz, es wird viel lebendiger und geistiger alles in dieser Welt, wenn wir zu solcher Betrachtung aufsteigen.
Aber dadurch, daß wir zu dieser Betrachtung aufsteigen, dadurch ändert sich unser Seelenleben ganz beträchtlich. In dem Augenblick, wo wir wirklich dahin kommen, in unserem Umkreis die Taten geistiger Wesenheiten zu sehen, da kommen wir auch dazu, konkret jene Unterschiede wahrzunehmen im Seelenleben in den aufeinanderfolgenden Zeiten, von denen ich vorhin vergleichsweise gesprochen habe. Und dann, wenn wir gelernt haben - es ist schwierig zu lernen, aber es kann gelernt werden — achtzugeben auf diese inneren Veränderungen im konkreten inneren Erleben, dann nehmen wir uns wirklich wahr als einen Reisenden durch den Weltenraum. Dann wissen wir, nicht aus äußeren mathematischen Erwägungen, nicht aus irgendwelchen Fernrohren, aus Winkelbetrachtungen, sondern aus der Aufeinanderfolge der inneren Erlebnisse, daß wir den Ort im Weltenraum mit der Erde geändert haben. Dann wird aus dem Weltenraum etwas anderes als der mathematisch-mechanische Weltenraum des Kopernikus, Kepler, Galilei, Newton. Dann wird der Weltenraum etwas innerlich Lebendiges. Und wir lernen unterscheiden Bewegungen, die wir machen, die wir einfach absolut machen als Menschen im Weltenraum. Wir lernen unterscheiden eine Bewegung, die wir machen von links nach rechts, also eine wirkliche Bewegung, die wir mit der Erde machen von links nach rechts. Und wir lernen eine andere Bewegung kennen, die wir machen steigend. Wir machen sie so, daß wir wissen: wir drehen uns nicht nur, sondern wir steigen im Raum. Und eine dritte Bewegung, ich möchte sie eine schreitende nennen: wir machen sie von rückwärts nach vorwärts. — Das ist nicht identisch mit einem Bewegen auf der Erde, sondern das ist etwas, was wir mit der Erde mitmachen, was wir durch inneres Erleben konstatieren können. Wir können konstatieren, daß wir uns drehen von links nach rechts, daß wir aufsteigen, indem wir uns drehen, und daß wir zu gleicher Zeit fortschreiten. Also eine dreifache Bewegung, die wir einfach absolut machen, nicht in Relation zu irgendeinem anderen Weltenkörper, sondern die wir absolut im Weltenraum machen, nehmen wir wahr an den inneren Erlebnissen.
Nun, Sie werden sagen: Das Gegenwartsbewußtsein der Menschen ist weit entfernt, eine Ahnung zu haben davon, daß der Mensch in diesem Sinne ein Weltreisender ist, und daß er gar konstatieren kann diese Weltenreise. — Ja, es gibt ein Mittel für die Menschen, ein solches Bewußtsein zu erringen, wenn auch das Menschenbewußtsein der Gegenwart noch so weit von diesen Dingen entfernt ist. Das, was ich geschildert habe, ist einfach eine Realität, und wenn die Menschen heute davon nichts wissen, so ist dieses Nichtwissen wirklich zu vergleichen mit dem Glauben, den ein Mensch hat, der im Eisenbahnzuge sitzt und sich in Ruhe glaubt, während er sich mit dem ganzen Zuge weiterbewegt. Warum hat der Mensch diesen Glauben? Erstens, es hat den Menschen seit drei bis vier Jahrhunderten mehr eingelullt als aufgeklärt gerade die rein mathematisch-mechanische Kopernikanische Weltanschauung. Ich habe ja oftmals schon darauf hingewiesen, daß diese rein mathematisch-mechanische Weltanschauung sogar auf einem ziemlich offenbaren Fehler beruht. Sie ist etwas Bequemes. Sie stellt das Raumbild bequem vor, aber eben doch eigentlich nur bequem. Sehen Sie, in dem bekannten Werk des Kopernikus über die Umwälzung der Weltenkörper im Weltenraum finden sich drei Sätze, aber die gegenwärtige Wissenschaft stützt sich nur auf die ersten zwei und läßt den dritten unberücksichtigt. Kopernikus wußte noch etwas mehr, als die gegenwärtige astronomische Wissenschaft annimmt. Und dieses Mehr, das hat er in seinen dritten Satz hineingeheimnißt! Aber der dritte Satz bleibt immer unberücksichtigt. Es stimmen nicht die Beobachtungen mit dem Kopernikanischen System, aber darüber hilft sich die Wissenschaft der Gegenwart hinweg. Wenn man heute unter gewissen Umständen rein erfahrungsgemäß untersucht, wo, von der Erde aus gesehen, zu einem bestimmten Zeitpunkt der eine oder andere Stern stehen soll nach dem richtigen Rechnen, dem Kopernikanischen System gemäß, steht er nicht da. Aber man hat dann die sogenannte Besselsche Korrektur und bringt immer eine Korrektur an bei dem Ergebnis; dann kommt das Richtige heraus. Das Anbringen dieser Korrektur ist nur nötig, weil man den dritten Satz des Kopernikus nicht berücksichtigt hat. Dadurch ist eine bequeme schematische, mathematisch-mechanische Weltanschauung, ein Weltbild zustandegekommen durch die letzten drei bis vier Jahrhunderte. Mit vielen Dingen stimmt das nicht; aber man ist heute noch ein wissenschaftlicher Trottel, wenn man davon spricht, daß die Sache nicht stimmt. Wissenschaftlich ist es, fest daran zu glauben, daß die Dinge stimmen.
Die Menschheit ist also durch das Kopernikanische Weltbild immer eingelullt worden in bezug auf gewisse Dinge, die aber innerlich deutlich zu konstatieren sind. Es wird das menschliche Bewußtsein gewissermaßen getrübt. Aber man wird in der Zukunft dafür zu sorgen haben, daß es nicht mehr getrübt wird.
Ich habe es oft gesagt, daß die Menschen das Geisteswissenschaftliche nicht einsehen wollen, durch ihre eigenen gesunden Sinne nicht einsehen wollen. Das kommt eigentlich auch nur von gewissen Erziehungsvorurteilen her, die in der Gegenwart stark walten. Sehr häufig ist es ja so, daß, wenn heute der Geisteswissenschafter seine Ergebnisse mitteilt, die Leute sagen: Gut, das mag so sein, aber das kann nur der wissen, der eine bestimmte, die Leute nennen es mystische, Schulung durchmacht. — Das ist bis zu einem gewissen Grade richtig, aber nicht ganz. Das habe ich oft betont: bis zu einem sehr hohen Grade könnte heute jeder Mensch, rein aus seinem Bewußtsein heraus, als Tatsache das einsehen, was zum Beispiel in meiner «Geheimwissenschaft» gegeben wird. Er braucht es nicht bloß auf Autorität ‚hinzunehmen, sondern er kann es einsehen durch gewöhnlichen gesunden Menschenverstand. Aber wie? Er könnte es einsehen, wenn er von seinem siebten bis zum fünfzehnten Jahr in die Waldorfschule geschickt würde und da durch eine den Tatsachen, der Wirklichkeit entsprechende Methode in gesunder Weise seine Seelenkräfte entwickelt kriegte, und dann mit diesen in gesunder Weise entwickelten Seelenkräften in höhere Schulen käme, um dann mit den nötigen elastischen Seelenkräften dasjenige aufzunehmen, was man gewöhnlich erst nach dem fünfzehnten Jahr lernt. Das wäre der Weg, um Menschen zu haben, die einfach sagen: alles übrige ist Unsinn, denn die Wirklichkeit wird nur durch dasjenige gegeben, was Geisteswissenschaft über die Welt konstatiert. Daß man das nicht zugibt, rührt nicht davon her, daß man Geisteswissenschaft nicht einsehen kann ohne Schulung, sondern es rührt davon her, daß unsere Schulerziehung zwischen dem siebten und fünfzehnten Jahr so ist, daß gewisse Kräfte statt erweckt zu werden, nur abgetötet, abgelähmt werden. Daher sträuben sich die Menschen, den Tatsachengehalt desjenigen hinzunehmen, was durch Geisteswissenschaft gegeben wird, während sie eben bis zu einem hohen Grade bei gesund entwickelten Seelenkräften ihn hinnehmen würden. Diese gesund entwickelten Seelenkräfte sind nicht so tot und starr, wie sie bei den meisten heutigen Menschen sind; sie sind viel beweglicher, viel elastischer, und sehr leicht würde der Mensch, wenn diese Seelenkräfte bei ihm zwischen dem siebten und fünfzehnten Jahr richtig entwickelt worden wären, gegenüber der heutigen Gelehrsamkeit störrisch werden. Heute lassen sich die Menschen furchtbar viel gefallen, namentlich indem man ihre Illusionen durch gewisse unberechtigte Hypothesen noch viel größer macht, als sie schon sind. Ich habe ein sehr charakteristisches Beispiel oftmals angeführt: Man erzählt den Kindern im zwölften, dreizehnten, vierzehnten Jahr, daß der Blitz durch Reibungserscheinungen in den Wolken kommt, und räumt zugleich ein, daß die Wolken naß sind. Selbstverständlich. Aber dann, wenn man das irdische Abbild des Blitzes, den elektrischen Funken erzeugen will, muß man die Elektrisiermaschine und alles, was dazu gehört, ganz trocken halten, daß ja nichts Wässeriges dabei ist, daß also alles beseitigt wird, was ausschließlich da ist, wo der Blitz entstehen soll, der die gleiche Erscheinung sein soll wie der elektrische Funke. Das lassen sich die Schüler gefallen und auch die Erwachsenen, wenn sie so eingelullt werden durch allerlei Hypothesen. Solche Beispiele gibt es unzählige, wo die Leute offenbaren Unsinn hinnehmen, einfach auf Autorität, weil ja unsere Zeit «alle Autorität abgestreift hat» und gar nicht mehr «autoritätsgläubig» ist. Aber wenn sie es nicht wäre, hätte in unserer Zeit niemals die gewöhnliche sozialistisch-marxistische Weltanschauung entstehen können, denn die ist viel autoritätsgläubiger als der alte Katholizismus.
Es handelt sich also darum, daß es heute wirklich eine Aufgabe der Kultur ist, alles dasjenige, was so hemmend eingreift in die Erfassungskräfte des Menschen, in das Begriffsvermögen des Menschen, durch gesunde Schulbildung zu überwinden. Das ist eine der allerersten sozialen Aufgaben, dahin zu kommen, daß die Hindernisse im Begreifen der Menschen hinweggeräumt werden. Dann wird man nicht mehr dasjenige, was Geisteswissenschaft liefert, in einer so widerspenstigen Weise an sich herankommen lassen. Aber die Menschen werden etwas störrisch werden, wenn sie in gesunder Weise entwickelt werden, gegen manches, was die offizielle Wissenschaft heute bietet; dann werden sie die knüppeldicken Widersprüche sehr bald gewahr werden. Daher dieses instinktive Wehren gegen gesunde Schulverhältnisse. Denn, läßt man diese gesunden Schulverhältnisse heraufkommen, dann wird die Autorität der heutigen Wissenschaftsgrößen sehr bald in furchtbarer Art untergraben sein. Darum handelt es sich, daß nun wirklich in den Menschen wiederum erzogen werden die elastischeren Seelenkräfte, die einfach aus dem gesunden Menschensinn heraus nachkommen können dem, was als Ergebnisse der Geisteswissenschaft verkündet werden kann. Dann wird man das, was zu sagen ist, auch an solchen Dingen verstehen, wie: daß der Mensch in einer absoluten Bewegung drinnen steckt. Man wird verstehen, wie entstehen kann aus dem Erdenbewußtsein ein Weltenbewußtsein. Wirklich bildlich, aber vielleicht ganz gut bildlich gesprochen: wie der Mensch sich fühlen lernen kann als ein Reisender durch den Weltenraum, der in einer drehenden, in einer von unten nach oben gehenden und in einer von rückwärts nach vorwärts gehenden Bewegung ist. Wenn man diese Bewegungen: drehend, im Drehen aufwärts, im Aufwärtsdrehen vorwärts gehend — wenn man diese Kurve hinzeichnet, bekommt man auch den Weg der Erde durch den Weltenraum. Nicht so bekommt man ihn, wie er gegenwärtig konstruiert wird, rein mathematisch-dynamisch aus der Kopernikanisch-Newtonschen Weltanschauung, sondern wenn man nachfährt demjenigen, was die innere Beobachtung ergibt. Es ist in dieser Weise nachzukonstruieren. Dann aber konstruiert man nicht ein Abstraktes wie die Kopernikanisch-Newtonsche Weltanschauung, sondern ein sehr Konkretes, ein wirklich übersinnlich empirisch Erfahrenes also, wenn man diese Tautologie gebrauchen darf. Dieses Weltbewußtsein, das ist nicht bloß wichtig dadurch, daß der Mensch gewissermaßen beginnt, sich mehr bei der Wahrheit zu fühlen, als er sich jetzt fühlt, wo er glaubt, daß die Erdenbahn, so wie sie von der Kopernikanischen Weltanschauung konstruiert wird, die richtige ist. Sondern wenn man dieses Weltbewußtsein hat, hängt von diesem Weltbewußtsein vieles andere ab. Dann wird man dadurch innerlich gewissermaßen ein anderer Mensch. Man lernt sich fühlen nicht bloß als ein Erdenbürger, sondern als ein Weltenbürger. Die Welt erweitert sich einem, indem man konkret an die Kräfte herantritt, die nun wirklich wirksam sind in diesen Bewegungen. Beim Drehen von links nach rechts wird man gewahr die Wirkungen der Angeloi. Beim Steigen von unten nach oben die Wirkungen der Erzengel. Und beim Schreiten im Weltenraum von rückwärts nach vorne wird man gewahr die Richtung der Archai, die Kräfte der Archai, der Zeitgeister. Man wendet sich hin, indem man die absolute Weltenwanderung in sein Bewußtsein aufnimmt, in einen Geistesraum. Man wird gewahr, daß der physische Raum nur ein abstraktes Abbild dieses konkreten geistigen Raumes ist, in dem die Wirksamkeiten der höheren Hierarchien das Reale darstellen.
Daß ein solches Bewußtsein mit etwas anderem verknüpft ist, geht schon aus dem hervor, was ich eben gesagt habe. Wer nur eine Ahnung davon hat, daß es so etwas gibt, daß so etwas verbunden ist mit der wirklichen Wesenheit des Menschen, der muß es doch als einen furchtbaren Schaden unseres Erziehungswesens betrachten, daß wir unsere Kinder so erziehen, nachdem wir in ihnen gewisse Kräfte ablähmen lassen bis zum fünfzehnten Jahr hin, daß sie sich als Studenten dann so entwickeln müssen, wie es eben mit diesen abgelähmten Kräften sein muß. Daher nehmen die jungen Leute zwischen dem fünfzehnten und einundzwanzigsten Jahr ganz andere Dinge auf, als sie eigentlich schon nach den Anforderungen unserer Zeit aufnehmen sollten. Dadurch sitzt allerdings etwas ganz anderes in den Seelen, als eigentlich darin sitzen sollte. Wahrhaftig, meine lieben Freunde, dadurch, daß Sie die schönsten, salbungsvollsten Ermahnungen geben bis zum fünfzehnten Lebensjahr und dann wiederum später, in der Zeit, wo früher die Leute Ideale gehabt haben, wo sie Jungfrauen und Jünglinge von zwanzig Jahren waren; durch die schönsten, salbungsvollsten Ermahnungen erreichen Sie nichts, oder nur, daß unsere Universitäts- und Hochschuljugend das wird, was sie heute ist, was ich nicht weiter zu beschreiben brauche. Nur dadurch erreichen Sie etwas, daß Sie wirklich Kräfte bloßlegen für den Aufenthalt an den Hochschulen, die heute nicht bloßgelegt, sondern gelähmt werden. Die Erziehungsfrage ist heute tatsächlich eine Menschheitsfrage. Sie ist nicht eine Frage von willkürlichen Idealen, sondern sie ist eine Menschheitsfrage, die aus den tiefsten Forderungen der gegenwärtigen Zeit heraus begriffen sein soll. Die Menschen ahnen höchstens heute, daß vieles anders sein sollte, sagen wir, in der medizinischen Behandlung der Menschen, vielleicht auch in den Rechtsverhältnissen, aber das wird ja gerade gedämpft aus dem Bewußtsein der Juristen heraus, wenn etwas geltend gemacht wird. Die Menschen ahnen, daß da manche Dinge anders sein sollten, aber sie können nicht anders gemacht werden, wenn nicht das Augenmerk darauf gelenkt wird, in den richtigen Zeitabschnitten die Kräfte des Menschen nicht zu ertöten, sondern zu erwecken. Der Mensch ist ja nicht umsonst in dem Lebensabschnitt zwischen dem siebten und fünfzehnten Jahr. In diesem Lebensabschnitt kommen ganz bestimmte Kräfte herauf aus seiner Natur, mit denen man rechnen muß, wenn man erzieht und unterrichtet in diesem Lebensabschnitt. Wenn man in der entsprechenden Richtung arbeitet in der Erziehung und im Unterricht, so ist das etwas anderes, als wenn man willkürlich, ohne die Berücksichtigung dieser Richtung arbeitet. Man wird gewisse Dinge bemerken, wenn man solches berücksichtigt, auf die heute kein Augenmerk gerichtet wird.
Ich habe in dem Aufsatz, der in der nächsten Nummer der WaldorfZeitschrift erscheinen wird, worin unsere Waldorfschule behandelt werden soll, von verschiedenen Gesichtspunkten aus auf diese Verhältnisse hingedeutet. Ich habe darauf hingedeutet, daß wir uns heute nicht mehr begnügen können mit einer solchen Pädagogik, wie sie sehr häufig aus ganz gutem, aus dem besten Willen heraus geformt wird. Da werden gewisse pädagogisch-didaktische Methoden, Grundsätze und Normen aufgestellt, und man hat den Glauben — was man sonst auch dagegen einwenden mag, es wird ja vieles aus gutem Willen, aber nicht aus gründlicher Einsicht auf diesem Felde gesagt -, man hat den Glauben, daß man lernen kann diese Normen der Pädagogik. Besonders auch die Herbartianer und ihre Nachfolger von heute haben diesen Glauben, daß man dadurch, daß man Pädagogik lernt, ein guter Erzieher und Unterrichter werden kann. Nun, setzen wir den Fall, solch eine Norm in der Pädagogik wäre das denkbar Vollkommenste — sie ist für den Unterricht fast so schlecht zu gebrauchen wie für den Maler eine gut geschriebene Schulästhetik. Man wird durch die gut geschriebene Schulästhetik der Malerei sicherlich kein Maler, und durch eine noch so gut gelernte Pädagogik auch kein Pädagoge. Man braucht ja auch wirklich schließlich die Physiologie nicht zu kennen, damit man sich ernähren kann; man kann sich ernähren aus ganz anderem Wissen als aus der Physiologie. Wir haben die Physiologie zu etwas ganz anderem als zur Ernährung, und es ist ein Surrogat, wenn eintreten muß die Physiologie für die richtige Ernährung. Es war mir immer etwas Schreckliches, wenn ich zu Menschen gekommen bin, die am Tische sitzen und neben sich die Waage haben, um jedes Stück abzumessen, abzuwiegen, das sie in den Mund stecken, das sie zu genießen haben zu einer Mahlzeit. Da greift schon in verheerender Weise Physiologie in den Ernährungsprozeß ein. Sie lachen darüber noch aus einer gewissen Naivität heraus. Im entgegengesetzten Sinn würden die lachen, die heute aus gewissen naturwissenschaftlichen Vorurteilen heraus dies als berechtigt empfinden, und die das, was ich heute zu Ihnen gesprochen habe, als gottverlassenen Dilettantismus ansehen. Man kann heute aus ganz verschiedenen Gesichtspunkten heraus über eine solche Sache lachen.
Also, eine Norm-Pädagogik kann eigentlich nicht zum wirklichen Pädagogen machen. Warum? Ja, sie ist ja eigentlich dazu bestimmt, daß man ihre Grundsätze aufnimmt und sie dann ganz und immer anwendet. Aber das hindert einen im Erziehen; das fördert einen nicht im Erziehen und Unterrichten. Da fördert einen etwas anderes: Wenn man jederzeit, wenn man seiner Klasse gegenübersteht, die Pädagogik vergessen kann, alles, was man an gelernter Pädagogik hat, vergessen kann. Und wenn man als Pädagoge einfach aufgenommen hat eine so weitgehende Menschenerkenntnis, daß man in jedem Augenblick die pädagogischen Grundsätze findet aus der Menschenerkenntnis, daß sie in jedem Augenblick neu entstehen. Das ist dasjenige, was der Pädagoge notwendig hat. Man kann nämlich gar nicht zum Pädagogen erzogen werden dadurch, daß man Pädagogik lernt, sondern die Pädagogik kann nur angeregt werden im Menschen dadurch, daß er Menschenerkenntnis erwirbt. Man sollte Pädagogik ganz streichen als Wissenschaft, höchstens sie so betrachten wie der Maler die Ästhetik, der sicher das Bewußtsein hat, daß er davon nicht malen lernen kann. Ein Münchener Maler hat mir vor einiger Zeit gesagt, als ich mit ihm über Ästhetik sprach, an Carriere anknüpfend, den berühmten Ästhetiker: Ja, wir haben dazumal, als wir auf der Malerschule waren, den Carriere genannt den «ästhetischen Wonnegrunzer». — Das ist etwas, was noch nicht als Stimmung ist in den Seminaristen, die theoretischen Pädagogen etwa zu nennen «pädagogische Wonnegrunzer », denn man glaubt noch immer, daß man in der Pädagogik dasjenige gebrauchen kann, was man in der Kunst nicht brauchen kann. Aber es ist in beiden eigentlich dasselbe. Man sollte an die Stelle der seminaristischen Pädagogik eben stellen, wie wir es getan haben in unserem Lehrerkurs: Menschenerkenntnis, Einsicht in die Menschennatur, die dann ein lebendiges Verhältnis zur werdenden Menschennatur im Kinde an‚regt, so daß in jedem Augenblick im Lehrer die Pädagogik geboren wird, daß einfach aus der Art, wie man das Kind vor sich hat, der Drang entsteht, es so und so zu erziehen und so und so zu unterrichten. Das gibt eine ganz andere Art der Atmosphäre, die im Schulzimmer herrscht, weil eben nicht aus einer Normen-Pädagogik heraus diese Atmosphäre erzeugt wird, sondern weil sie aus dem lebendigen Leben heraus in jedem Augenblick erfließt. Kommt aus solch einem lebendigen Leben heraus Erziehung und Unterricht, dann werden eben die Kräfte nicht abgelähmt, die im fünfzehnten Lebensjahr da sein sollten, sondern dann kommt der Mensch in die höheren Jahre hinein so, daß er die elastischen Seelenkräfte hat, die er haben soll, damit für unsere Zeit etwas Ähnliches geschehen kann, was geschehen ist beim Übergang vom Mittelalter in die neuere Zeit, wo sich das Landbewußtsein in ein Erdenbewußtsein umgebildet hat, damit sich das Erdenbewußtsein umbildet in ein Weltenbewußtsein. Das kann aber nicht durch äußere Erfahrungen geschehen, sondern nur dadurch, daß man innerlich empfänglich gemacht wird für die aufeinanderfolgenden verschiedenen Erlebnisse, die man innerlich, seelisch haben kann. Nicht einmal in den engsten Grenzen hat heute der Mensch ein Bewußtsein von der Verschiedenheit dieser seelischen Erlebnisse.
Wie ist es eigentlich heute? Der Mensch ist ein Kind, da benimmt er sich kindlich so, wie das seiner Umgebung gemäß geschehen kann. Dann wird er ein Erwachsener. Seine Begriffe werden abstrakter, seine Erfahrungen werden reicher; gewiß, das ist alles der Fall. Aber etwas Ähnliches tritt mit der Seele nicht ein, wie es eintritt mit unserem Äußerlich-Leiblichen. Wir bekommen ein schärfer ausgeprägtes Gesicht, wenn wir in einem gewissen Alter sind, haben nicht mehr die rundlichen Formen der Kindheit, wir bekommen weiße Haare und Runzeln und so weiter, oder oftmals auch Glatzen; kurz, die äußere Leiblichkeit ändert sich. Aber eigentlich könnte man sagen: Das Innerlich-Seelische ändert sich nicht in dieser Weise; es wird höchstens immer mehr hineingestopft, aber es wächst nicht so, daß die Art der Stellung zur Außenwelt eine andere ist. Es hängt nicht in der richtigen Weise Alter und Kindheit zusammen. Solche Dinge, wie ich sie oftmals betont habe, die hat der Mensch heute nicht mehr in seinem Bewußtsein, zum Beispiel daß, wenn man ein alter Mensch geworden ist, man segnen kann, und daß das Segnen eine gewisse Bedeutung hat, daß es nicht dieselbe Bedeutung hat bei einem im mittleren Alter stehenden Menschen. Davon haben die Menschen heute kein Bewußtsein, und zwar deshalb nicht, weil man heute nicht weiß, daß, wenn man richtig segnen will im Alter, man in der Jugend gelernt haben muß, die Hände zu falten. Denn nur aus der Faltung der Hände zum Gebet in der Kindheit entsteht die Fähigkeit des Segnens im Alter. Das Seelische hängt in bezug auf Segnen und Händefalten so zusammen, wie die greisen Haare mit den kindlichen Haaren. Dieses innerliche Um‚wandeln, das ist etwas, was in den Erfahrungskreis des gegenwärtigen Menschen nur in beschränktem Maß hineinfällt. Das muß aber wieder hineinfallen. Der Mensch muß wieder dahin kommen, das ganze Leben in seinen verschiedenen Metamorphosen einzusehen. Sonst kommen wir über die ungeheuren Schäden nicht hinaus, die zum Beispiel durch so etwas erzeugt werden, wie: wenn einer ein bißchen begabt ist und er ist achtzehn oder neunzehn Jahre alt, dann wird er ein Feuilletonist. Und diejenigen, die dann nur das Feuilleton lesen und keine Ahnung haben, daß das ein Achtzehnjähriger geschrieben hat, lesen es so, wie man in absolutem Sinne ein Feuilleton liest. Dann wird man aber nicht mehr älter, wenn man mit achtzehn Jahren ein Feuilletonist ist, Feuilletons schreibt; man bleibt eigentlich immer in dem Alter. Man entwickelt sich nicht weiter. Dann kommt aber auch das, daß man mit zwanzig, einundzwanzig Jahren reif wird, ins Parlament zu wählen oder Stadtverordnete zu wählen und gewählt zu werden; da ist man ein fertiger Mensch. Man hat nicht mehr nötig mit vierzig Jahren anzustreben, ein vollkommenerer Mensch zu werden, als man mit zwanzig Jahren war. Man hat ja alles, was die Welt einem bieten kann, und was man der Welt bieten kann, erreicht. Mit zwanzig Jahren wählt man oder wird gewählt, und es kommt nichts Rechtes mehr dazu. Erst dann, wenn man wieder einsehen wird, daß das Leben etwas konkret sich Wandelndes ist, wird man auch die Welt konkret zu fassen verstehen. Und dann wird jener abstrakte Sozialismus, der heute so vielfach vertreten wird, schwinden; es wird etwas Konkretes an seine Stelle treten.
Also das Heraufkommen des Weltenbewußtseins aus dem Erdenbewußtsein, das wird für das Leben eine bedeutsame Folge haben, namentlich durch das, was gefühlsmäßig im Menschen erzeugt wird. Nicht das, was man weiß durch solche Dinge, ist das Bedeutsame, sondern die Art, wie man durch solche Dinge fühlt, das ist das Bedeutsame. Die Menschen werden gewisse Dinge im Zusammenhang des Lebens erst einsehen, wenn sie zu diesem Weltbewußtsein gekommen sein werden.
Vor allen Dingen redet man heute ganz abstrakt von den aufeinanderfolgenden Generationen. Man denkt ungefähr - ich meine wir, die wir ein respektables Alter erreicht haben, die Jungen nehme ich jetzt aus -, also wir denken vielleicht so: Du hast jetzt diesen oder jenen Inhalt. Du lebst so und so. In deiner Kindheit hast du so gelebt. — In dieser Beziehung sind nun manche Leute sehr kurzlebig, indem sie das, was sie selbst als Kinder getrieben haben, den jetzigen Kindern sehr übelnehmen und nicht begreifen, daß die jetzigen Kinder dasselbe tun, was man selber getan hat; sie möchten, daß die jetzigen Kinder so artig sind, wie man jetzt im Alter ist, und begreifen nicht, daß man doch erst artig geworden ist durch das Heranwachsen. Aber abgesehen davon, tritt ja noch ein anderes ein. Es tritt das ein, daß der Mensch sich durchaus vorstellt: wie er in der Jugend gewesen ist, so müßten die Kinder jetzt sein. Also etwa so, wie ich in den sechziger Jahren des, vorigen Jahrhunderts gewesen bin, so sollten die Kinder, die jetzt geboren werden, auch sein. Das ist Unsinn. Denn wir haben uns absolut weiterbewegt im Weltenraum. Und die Kinder, die jetzt geboren werden - ich gehe zu meinem ursprünglichen Vergleich zurück -, werden in einem anderen Weltenraum geboren. Nicht wahr, wenn Sie heute von Stuttgart nach einem anderen Orte reisen, haben Sie heute in Stuttgart gegessen und essen morgen anderswo. Sie können nicht mehr dann in Stuttgart essen, wenn Sie reisen. Und die Kinder, die heute geboren werden, die können nicht mehr so seelisch geartet sein wie die Kinder, die wir waren, die wir heute ein respektables Alter haben. Die Kindheit selbst ändert sich, das muß man begreifen. Das hängt zusammen mit unserer absoluten Bewegung im Weltenraum, von dem der mathematische Raum nur ein schematisches Abbild ist. Die Menschen wollen immer absolutistisch die Dinge auffassen, und man freut sich heute schon, wenn die Dinge nicht absolutistisch aufgefaßt werden.
Ich habe neulich eine große Freude gehabt, und zwar dadurch, daß mich ein Mann besuchte in Berlin, der - nun, wie soll ich es nennen die Besprechung der Dreigliederung unter dem Titel «Ein falscher Prophet», in der «Hilfe» gelesen hatte. Ich weiß nicht, ob Sie dieses Elaborat kennen. Das hat also ein Amerikaner gelesen und hat sich gesagt: Wovon in solcher Weise geschrieben wird, da ist etwas dran, da muß ich mich dafür interessieren. - Und er kam dann mit Herrn Pfarrer Rittelmeyer zu mir und setzte auseinander, daß er aus dem ganzen schwächlichen Stil und so weiter entnommen habe, daß man sich für die Sache interessieren müsse. Und unter den Fragen, die er stellte und die alle sehr verständig waren, war auch die folgende, die mich besonders freute: Nun, die Dreigliederung, man kann sie für die jetzige Zeit sehr gut einsehen; man kann einsehen, daß jetzt die Dreigliederung notwendig ist, daß sie an die Stelle des alten Einheitsstaates treten muß. Sind Sie der Meinung, daß nun die Dreigliederung die letzte, endgültige Lösung der sozialen Frage ist? - Das war eine sehr verständige Frage. Ich konnte ihm antworten: Das glaube ich ganz und gar nicht. Sondern im Laufe der Geschichtsentwickelung hat sich in den verflossenen Jahrhunderten ergeben, daß mehr der Einheitsstaat heraufkam. Jetzt ist notwendig geworden durch die Zeitforderung die Dreigliederung. Und es wird wiederum eine Zeit kommen, wo die Dreigliederung überwunden werden muß. Aber das ist nicht die jetzige Zeit, das ist die Zeit in drei bis vier Jahrhunderten. Da wird man wiederum denken müssen, wie man die Dreigliederung ablösen kann. — Das ist der Gegensatz zu dem chiliastischen Denken, der Gegensatz zu dem Denken, das ein tausendjähriges Reich ein für allemal herbeiführen will, dem Denken, das sich sagt: Wir müssen einen gesegneten Zustand der Menschheit herbeiführen, dann ist er eben da, dann kann er bleiben. — So bequem lebt es sich nicht in der Welt. Da ist notwendig, daß dasjenige, was als richtig in einer bestimmten Epoche herbeigeführt wird, wiederum abgelöst wird von dem, was dann für die folgende Epoche das relativ Richtige ist. Das ist es, um was es sich handelt. Das heißt organisch denken im Gegensatz zum mechanischen Denken, das die Gegenwart beherrscht, wo man eigentlich meint, es gibt nun etwas ein für allemal absolut Richtiges. Das eine ist richtig für Stuttgart, das andere für New York, für Australien. Das eine ist richtig für 1919, das andere für 2530. Nein, so bequem macht es die Weltentwickelung den Menschen nicht, daß irgend etwas absolut Richtiges da ist. Die Dinge sind immer richtig für bestimmte Orte und für bestimmte Zeiten. Und man muß konkret aus den Verhältnissen heraus denken. Das wird man aber tun, wenn man auch sich bewußt ist, daß man im Weltenraum absolute Bewegungen ausführt, die man aber nur aus inneren Erfahrungen heraus, aus innerem Erleben heraus bemerken kann.
Ich habe Sie heute wiederum auf etwas aufmerksam gemacht, was Ihnen zeigen soll, wie die Dinge in der Gegenwart genommen werden sollen mit Bezug auf das Einverleiben der Geisteswissenschaft in unsere gegenwärtige Kultur. Wer solche Dinge begreift, wird einsehen, daß sich die Menschen in ihrer Bequemlichkeit sträuben gegen so etwas, wie die Geisteswissenschaft ist, denn alles andere ist bequemer. Geisteswissenschaft ist ja furchtbar unbequem. Sie gestattet einem nicht einmal, einen Zustand zu erdenken, der nun immer bleiben kann. Sie zwingt uns, das Gute nur für die nächsten Jahrhunderte, vielleicht noch für kürzere Zeit uns zu denken. Das kann man aber nur denken, wenn man wiederum nicht aus abstrakten Verstandesvotstellungen über die Menschheit urteilt, sondern wenn man versucht, seine Zeit in ihrer besonderen Eigentümlichkeit wirklich kennenzulernen, und dadurch ihre Anforderungen zu kennen. Das ist eben unbequem, aber es ist das, was der Wirklichkeit entspricht. Die Menschen möchten heute sehr, sehr bequem mit der Kulturentwickelung fertig werden, insbesondere diejenigen, die Führer sein wollen in der Kulturentwickelung.
Hier ein kleines Beispiel, das mir mitgeteilt worden ist mit Bezug auf Geisteswissenschaft und ihre Auffassung durch maßgebende Persönlichkeiten der Gegenwart: In einer Stadt - ich will die Dinge nicht ganz genau sagen, es wird einem übel genommen -, in einer Stadt hatte jemand die Gelegenheit, in einer Privathochschule auch über meine Anthroposophie einmal vorzutragen. Er trug vor über Weltanschauungen des Menschen der Gegenwart. Da wollte er auch einreihen, weil das historisch notwendig ist — man strebt ja nach Abrundung -, eine Vorlesung über Anthroposophie. Wie tat er das? Nun, den Lehrplan, den Vorlesungsplan macht man ja im Anfang des Semesters, da hat man die soundsovielte Stunde im Semester « Anthroposophie » eingesetzt; wie also in vorhergehenden Stunden gesprochen worden war über Darwinismus und so weiter, hatte der Mann eine bestimmte Stunde eingesetzt für «die Anthroposophie Steiners». Das war im Anfang des Semesters gemacht. Er hatte, als er das einsetzte, nicht den geringsten Dunst, was in einem anthroposophischen Buche steht. Dann kam der Abend heran, an dem die Vorlesung war, da erschien dann der Herr bei irgend jemand, der meine Bücher hat, und ließ sich am Morgen die wichtigsten von meinen Büchern auswählen von dem, der sie besaß, um sich zu informieren, und — am Abend seine Vorlesung über Anthroposophie zu halten. Das ist bequem, sich so in eine Weltanschauung «einzuleben » und sie dann «autoritativ zu vertreten». Aber das ist nicht so selten mit Bezug auf die verschiedensten Verhältnisse der Gegenwart. Das ist etwas, was verdient, besprochen zu werden. Denn aus nicht viel weitergehenden Tiefen ist sehr, sehr vieles in der Gegenwart gesagt, vorgetragen und geschrieben worden, und es wird gläubig hingenommen. Und aus diesem gläubig Hingenommenen setzt sich dann zusammen das, was die Leute in ihren Köpfen und in ihren Seelen von den verschiedenen Weltanschauungen haben. Man darf sich vor dieser Tatsache einer furchtbaren Oberflächlichkeit, die eingezogen ist, nicht verschließen. Man muß sich klar darüber sein, daß es heute notwendig ist, sich etst anzusehen, wer da steht, wo dieses oder jenes autoritativ vertreten wird.
Wichtiger als alles, was ich Ihnen inhaltlich geben kann, meine lieben Freunde, ist die Anregung dieses Bewußtseins gegenüber der heutigen Zeit; dieses Bewußtsein, daß wir es notwendig, ungeheuer notwendig haben, hinzusehen auf den Grad von Vertiefung, der in dem herrscht, was auf uns einströmt, was sich geltend macht, und was in Wirklichkeit recht hat, sich geltend zu machen. Redet man von diesen Dingen, so verletzt man heute geradezu viele Leute. Und besonders Anthroposophen und Theosophen gegenüber sagen die Leute: Die sollten doch nachsichtiger sein, sollten doch mit Wohlwollen urteilen und nicht so kritisch sein; denn wenn man so kritisch sei, so verletze das die Menschen. Aber es fragt sich, ob das Menschenliebe ist, wenn man es unbesprochen läßt, daß solche Menschen losgelassen werden auf die allgemeine Bildung, die sich am Morgen unterrichten über das, was sie am Abend vorzutragen haben. Bei den Fragen, die das Leben stellt, handelt es sich darum, wie sie gestellt werden. Es ist wichtig, daß man sie richtig stellt, dann allein können sich die richtigen Dinge ergeben.
So versuchte ich heute, Ihnen die Notwendigkeit nahezulegen, daß das Erdenbewußtsein sich in ein Weltenbewußtsein verwandele, wie sich das Landbewußtsein in ein Erdenbewußtsein verwandelt hat. Aber ich versuchte Ihnen dieses nahezulegen, um Sie wiederum von einem Gesichtspunkte aus hinzuweisen auf manches, was gefühlsmäßig notwendig ist zur Herbeiführung gesünderer Verhältnisse in unserer Kultur, als wir sie gegenwärtig haben.
Dieses Herbeiführen, oh, das muß schon geschehen! Man möchte die Leute aufrütteln dazu, das schläfrige Menschenwesen der Gegenwatt möchte man aufrufen dazu. Aber das ist gar nicht so leicht in der Gegenwart. Es wird ja manches nach dieser Richtung hin ausgeführt, aber die Menschen vermeiden es, sich gründlich mit unseren Zuständen bekannt zu machen. Es genügt nicht, daß man bloß anthroposophische Theorien aufstellt. Es ist notwendig, daß man den Blick scharf macht für das, was in unserer Zeit notwendig ist, und nicht sich einkapselt in Vorurteile. Man muß sich offen machen für das, was bekämpft werden muß, damit man gerade von dem Standpunkte einer richtigen Menschenliebe aus in die Gegenwart handelnd eingreifen kann. Wenn nur irgend etwas nach dieser Richtung hin angeregt werden kann in den Seelen und Gemütern, dann ist damit mehr erreicht als durch die umfassendsten Theorien.
Es blutet einem das Herz, wenn man weiß, wie wahr es ist, was neulich hier in der Kulturrats-Sitzung Herr Mo/t gesagt hat, daß es heute schon Leute gibt, die da sagen: Ach was, bevor wir an so etwas denken, wie das, was von der Dreigliederung des sozialen Organismus kommt, werden wir lieber eine Provinz der Entente. — Es ist leider in sehr weiten Umfange wahr. Und mit einer solchen Gesinnung hängt vieles andere zusammen, weil schließlich andere Gesinnungen nur kommen können von einer Hinneigung zur geistigen Vertiefung. Die heutige Zeit kann nur durch eine geistige Vertiefung gesunden.
Seventeenth Lecture
We can best deal with ideas that are supposed to place us as human beings in the spiritual world by trying to orient ourselves through comparisons of the various facts of the world.
What I want to talk about today can best be explained by starting with such a comparison, namely by comparing our present human consciousness, which we must attain in accordance with the task of our time, with earlier stages of consciousness of the developing human race.
Think back to the consciousness of the Greeks, to the ordinary spatial consciousness of the Greeks, spatial consciousness in the broader sense, of course. You will easily see that the Greek, with his sense of space, actually encompassed only a part of Europe: his Greece and what bordered on it, a part of Asia, a part of Africa, and that outside this limited area the world lay in a certain vagueness for him. One could say that what formed the horizon of his consciousness was bordered on all sides by something indefinite for his consciousness. And this consciousness of his can be called, if the expression is permitted—it is of course awkward, as expressions for such things always are, because linguistic consciousness is not designed for them—this consciousness of the Greek can be called a land consciousness. Now you know that the essential thing in the development of modern times for humanity and its consciousness was that this land consciousness developed into earth consciousness, that for human consciousness the surface of the earth became, in a sense, closed off. Human beings imagine the surface of the earth as a sphere, thanks to the discoveries of modern history. From a world-historical point of view, the situation was such that, as this world consciousness, or rather earth consciousness, arose from land consciousness, a view of the extraterrestrial world was simultaneously formed, which is essentially mathematical and geometric in nature. The Copernican worldview emerged, and people imagined what was outside the Earth in space in the forms of mathematics and geometry, or at most mechanics. The Copernican-Newtonian worldview is essentially a mathematical-mechanical worldview. The question should naturally arise for every truly thinking person: Is that which can be seen by humans in space outside the Earth exhausted by the fact that it can be represented mathematically and mechanically? It is obviously just as incomplete as when the ancient Greeks closed themselves off, imagined the land they could see from their horizon of consciousness, and constructed the exterior in a certain way, shaping it in their imagination, so to speak. Modern man does not shape the extraterrestrial with such poetic imagination as the ancient Greek did with regard to what was outside his conscious realm, but modern man encompasses what is around him with mathematical imagination. That is also imagination. And essentially, humanity today still stands at this point: imagining the earth as a large sphere in space, and the extraterrestrial world as something that can only be comprehended with mathematical and mechanical concepts, which are at best merely mathematical for a few individuals who think more precisely, because the concepts devised about all kinds of gravitational forces are now rejected by more level-headed people, and the extraterrestrial world is actually only imagined mathematically.
For us, and we only need to take together what we have considered over the years on the basis of spiritual science, the question must arise today whether the time is ripe to enliven this mathematical-mechanical image of space, this extraterrestrial image of space, with something else, with something based on experience. For this mathematical-mechanical image of space is certainly not something we have experienced. It is entirely something that has been conceived. It is something that has been constructed. This image of space, this Copernican, Keplerian, Newtonian image of space, has been compiled and constructed from a relatively small number of observations. Now you will understand that, since there is still no way to physically explore the extraterrestrial, such exploration can only take place in the spiritual-scientific sense. But in a spiritual-scientific sense, it can already happen today in a certain way. The mathematical-mechanical understanding does not give us any real human content. The mathematical-mechanical understanding actually tells us only something in abstractions, something that does not even come close to the content we demand. Cold, sober, without any real content is ultimately everything that mathematical physics and astrophysics have to tell us today about the extraterrestrial universe. But we have already reached the point where it is impossible to advance in human development if we remain stuck with a purely mechanical-mathematical worldview. Just as the ancient Greeks had a sense of country, and human beings have developed a sense of earth since the beginning of what is commonly called modern history, so from now on the consciousness of humanity must expand to a consciousness of the world. And today, in the hour that is still available to us, I would like to devote myself to such considerations and give you at least a few brief, aphoristic hints as to how this world consciousness, which is to take the place of mere earth consciousness, should be shaped. We will certainly have much to do in the future when we have to gather more precise and more conclusive evidence for what I am presenting to you today in aphoristic outline.
You know, of course, that spiritual scientific research is based on experiences made through the soul. You have been given a large number of such experiences made through the soul in my “Secret Science.” In this “Secret Science,” I have gone as far as is necessary for the general consciousness of humanity today. But we must always go further and further. What is written in my “Secret Science” must be deepened and expanded.
Now, with regard to the coming world consciousness that we are striving for, we are, if I may use a comparison, in the position of a traveler sitting in a train. He looks out of the carriage windows and imagines that he is sitting quietly on his seat. He forgets that the train is moving forward. He forgets the movement he is making together with the train. At first, he only considers the movements he makes when he stands up or moves in relation to other people also sitting in the train. Now, what the person experiences as a traveler in the car is initially very limited, and it can be expanded if he gets off the train from time to time, perhaps interrupting his journey in one city or another. Then what he experiences inside the train does not change, but the content of his consciousness expands each time he gets off in another city and has the experiences that he can have there. This then adds up to the content of his journey, and the abstract image of the journey becomes something concrete. It becomes something out of the pattern of the journey by entering into this pattern what actually happens to you as experiences in the individual cities. Through these experiences, you have something that is guaranteed by inner experience that you have moved forward and entered into other circumstances. One knows from one's experiences that one was not at rest, that one could only pretend to be while one was on the train.
What I mean here is quite different from what is often said when the mere Copernican worldview is discussed. Of course, people also talk about all kinds of illusions that we are under when the earth moves and we actually believe that we are at rest on the earth while we are moving with the whole earth. But that is not what I mean here. I would like to point to something else: that human beings can have certain purely inner experiences in the course of their lives, and especially in the course of successive experiences that can be compared to experiences in cities when one gets off a train and gets on again and thus, in a sense, pauses with regard to one's inner soul experiences, with regard to what emerges in the inner content of the experience. Then this could be a guarantee that one travels through spaces in the world, as it were, and experiences something in these spaces that shows one: You as a human being are not at rest; you are on a real journey through the world. — Make it clear to yourself from this comparison that such a thing can exist. The proof for this can only lie in actual experience. Realize that there can be such a thing as a different experience in the state of the soul at successive moments in time, which assures you: You are in different places in the world, so to speak. We will see later that all this is only really comparative, that the difference between successive experiences points us to a much more qualitative aspect of space than the merely quantitative aspect that we have in mind when we speak of space. Those who have real inner experiences, not just the abstract experiences that are very often cited in a very external sense when people talk about mysticism, know that there is such a thing as what I have just indicated. Those who have inner experiences can notice differences in the content of their soul during the course of their earthly life, as they had it in their thirtieth, fortieth, or fiftieth year of life. When reflecting on these inner soul experiences, they know that they have, in a sense, moved in the world, that they have visited other places, and that their inner, if I may call them that, mystical experiences have become different. I refer you here to certain experiences which, however, are only discussed by those who do not take mysticism in an outwardly abstract sense, but as it really presents itself in concrete inner experience. The abstract mystic talks at the age of twenty-five about the God who lives in him, at thirty, at forty, and so on until the end of his life. Those who really know how to grasp inner experiences concretely also know that these experiences change as if on a journey through the worlds, which is not the same as wandering around on earth. If I want to express myself mystically again, we consciously traverse the world space through our inner experiences. We can only cope with this if we consider our relationship to the environment in a much more definite way than we usually do.
We can only consider our relationship to the environment by looking at our sensory perceptions on the one hand and our will, our desires, our actions, and our behavior on the other. By considering our sensory perceptions, we are in a certain relationship to the external world; we perceive certain facts of the external world through our eyes and ears; we are in lively communication with the external world. What happens happens, so to speak, at the edge of our physicality. I will not go into certain physiological objections or epistemological objections that can apparently be made against what I am saying, because I want to outline to you the consciousness that needs to be developed in contrast to earthly consciousness and land consciousness.
So, with our sensory perceptions, we stand in a certain relationship to external processes. And again, when we act, when we accomplish something, we also stand in a certain relationship to external processes from the other side, from the other pole of our being. We are involved in external processes because we ourselves are partly responsible for them. Between these two extremes of our human life lies everything else that takes place in our consciousness: on the one hand, our relationship to the external world as perceived by our senses, and on the other hand, our will and our actions. By developing sensations from our sensory perceptions, by developing feelings, we live an inner life. And again, out of feelings and sensations that deepen or condense into abilities, one could say that we shape our will. So between perception and will lies that which we otherwise experience as soul life.
However, what we have in our sensory perception is only apparently a unity. We look at the world through our senses, and the world appears to us as something unified that we can survey with our senses. But this apparent unity contains a duality. For those who are truly capable of perception, of meaningful perception, this apparent unity clearly contains a duality: something that is dying and something that is rising, constantly generating itself. The world outside us is in a state of constant dying and being reborn. At no moment is it any different in the world than that we live in something that is moving toward death and from death always brings forth life again. If you look at a cloud or something else in the outside world, that cloud appears as a unity. But it is not. In truth, something dies in the cloud, and from this dying something new is born. From what arises from the past, something moves toward the future. What we see contains within itself a constantly emerging fuel, that is, something dying and something being created; fire, that is, something transforming itself into the future. If we learn through training such as that described in How Does One Achieve Knowledge of the Higher Worlds? to separate these two poles of sensory perception from each other, if we learn to truly perceive every phenomenon in terms of dying and being born, only then does the world take on a real face for us. Those who are properly trained also perceive human beings in such a way that they continually see in them something that is dying and something that is being reborn. Dying and being born, dying and being born: this is something that is taken in by our perception if we train ourselves just a little in this perception. But now, at the moment when this continuous dying and being born becomes concrete for us, when we really see it, when we do not just think it abstractly but see it, when we really see a corpse becoming and a child arising in human beings — one can see it that way — at the moment when this becomes perception, at that moment we stand within the perception of the three hierarchies, Angeloi, Archangeloi, Archai. The world then actually acquires this content. We no longer see it as we otherwise look into nature when we perceive nature as a unity. We cannot perceive this dying and being born, this prana and shiva of nature, without finding the whole of nature transformed, dissolved, as it were, into the deeds of spiritual beings of the three hierarchies standing above human beings.
It is the same at the other pole. When we look at the other pole, the pole of our actions, our achievements, we also find there a continuous dying and a continuous arising. But at this pole, it is more difficult for us to perceive what lives spiritually within it. Nevertheless, we can perceive it. It requires longer training, but we can perceive it. We then perceive those hierarchies that we find described as seraphim, cherubim, thrones. And what lies between them, we perceive through self-contemplation, the contemplation of that being of which I have told you that it stands between these two poles, right in the middle. In short, everything in this world becomes much more alive and spiritual when we rise to such contemplation.
But by rising to this contemplation, our soul life changes considerably. The moment we really come to see the deeds of spiritual beings in our surroundings, we also come to perceive concretely those differences in soul life in successive times, of which I spoke earlier by way of comparison. And then, when we have learned — it is difficult to learn, but it can be learned — to pay attention to these inner changes in our concrete inner experience, then we truly perceive ourselves as travelers through world space. Then we know, not from external mathematical considerations, not from any telescopes, from angular observations, but from the succession of inner experiences, that we have changed our place in the world space with the Earth. Then space becomes something other than the mathematical-mechanical space of Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, and Newton. Then space becomes something internally alive. And we learn to distinguish between movements that we make, that we simply make absolutely as human beings in space. We learn to distinguish between a movement that we make from left to right, that is, a real movement that we make with the Earth from left to right. And we learn about another movement that we make, which is rising. We do it in such a way that we know: we are not just turning, but we are rising in space. And a third movement, which I would like to call a striding movement: we do it from backward to forward. This is not identical with moving on the earth, but is something that we do together with the earth, something that we can ascertain through inner experience. We can ascertain that we are turning from left to right, that we are rising as we turn, and that we are moving forward at the same time. So it is a triple movement that we simply perform absolutely, not in relation to any other world body, but which we perform absolutely in world space, perceiving it through our inner experiences.
Now, you will say: The present consciousness of human beings is far from having any idea that human beings are world travelers in this sense, and that they can even observe this world journey. — Yes, there is a means for human beings to attain such consciousness, even if the human consciousness of the present is still so far removed from these things. What I have described is simply a reality, and if people today know nothing about it, this ignorance is really comparable to the belief of a person sitting in a train who thinks he is standing still while the whole train is moving. Why does man have this belief? Firstly, for three or four centuries, the purely mathematical-mechanical Copernican worldview has lulled people more than it has enlightened them. I have often pointed out that this purely mathematical-mechanical worldview is even based on a fairly obvious error. It is something convenient. It presents a convenient picture of space, but it is really only convenient. You see, in Copernicus's famous work on the revolution of the heavenly bodies in space, there are three propositions, but contemporary science relies only on the first two and ignores the third. Copernicus knew something more than contemporary astronomical science assumes. And he concealed this extra knowledge in his third proposition! But the third sentence is always ignored. The observations do not agree with the Copernican system, but contemporary science helps itself over this. If, under certain circumstances, one investigates purely empirically where, as seen from Earth, one star or another should be at a certain point in time according to correct calculations, according to the Copernican system, it is not there. But then we have the so-called Bessel correction, and we always apply a correction to the result; then we get the right answer. Applying this correction is only necessary because we have not taken Copernicus' third proposition into account. This has resulted in a convenient schematic, mathematical-mechanical worldview, a world picture that has prevailed for the last three to four centuries. Many things are not correct, but today you are still considered a scientific idiot if you say that something is not correct. Scientifically, it is correct to believe firmly that things are correct.
Humanity has therefore always been lulled into a false sense of security by the Copernican world view with regard to certain things, which, however, can be clearly observed internally. Human consciousness is clouded, so to speak. But in the future, we will have to ensure that it is no longer clouded.
I have often said that people do not want to understand spiritual science through their own healthy senses. This actually stems from certain educational prejudices that are very prevalent today. Very often, when a spiritual scientist shares his findings today, people say: “Well, that may be so, but only someone who has undergone a certain training, which people call mystical, can know that.” This is true to a certain extent, but not entirely. I have often emphasized that, to a very high degree, every human being today could, purely out of their own consciousness, recognize as fact what is presented, for example, in my “Secret Science.” They do not need to simply accept it on authority, but can understand it through ordinary common sense. But how? They could understand it if they were sent to a Waldorf school from the age of seven to fifteen and there developed their soul forces in a healthy way through a method that corresponds to facts and reality, and then entered higher schools with these soul forces developed in a healthy way, in order to then take in, with the necessary elastic soul forces, what is usually only learned after the age of fifteen. That would be the way to have people who simply say: everything else is nonsense, because reality is only given by what spiritual science states about the world. The reason people do not admit this is not because spiritual science cannot be understood without training, but because our school education between the ages of seven and fifteen is such that certain powers, instead of being awakened, are only killed and paralyzed. This is why people resist accepting the factual content of what spiritual science provides, whereas they would accept it to a high degree if their soul forces were healthily developed. These healthy soul forces are not as dead and rigid as they are in most people today; they are much more flexible, much more elastic, and if these soul forces had been properly developed between the ages of seven and fifteen, people would very easily become stubborn in the face of today's scholarship. Today, people put up with an awful lot, especially because their illusions are made even greater than they already are by certain unjustified hypotheses. I have often cited a very characteristic example: Children aged twelve, thirteen, and fourteen are told that lightning is caused by friction in the clouds, and at the same time they are told that clouds are wet. Of course. But then, when one wants to produce the earthly image of lightning, the electric spark, one must keep the electrifying machine and everything that belongs to it completely dry, so that there is nothing wet in it, so that everything is removed that is exclusively there where the lightning is to arise, which is to be the same phenomenon as the electric spark. The students accept this, and so do the adults when they are lulled into complacency by all kinds of hypotheses. There are countless examples of people accepting obvious nonsense simply on authority, because our age has “stripped away all authority” and is no longer “believing in authority.” But if this were not the case, the common socialist-Marxist worldview could never have arisen in our time, for it is much more credulous of authority than the old Catholicism.
So it is really a task of culture today to overcome, through healthy schooling, everything that so inhibits the powers of human comprehension, the human faculty of understanding. One of the very first social tasks is to remove the obstacles to human understanding. Then people will no longer approach what the spiritual sciences have to offer in such a rebellious manner. But if they are developed in a healthy way, people will become somewhat stubborn toward many things that official science offers today; then they will very soon become aware of the glaring contradictions. Hence this instinctive resistance to healthy school conditions. For if these healthy school conditions are allowed to arise, the authority of today's scientific giants will very soon be undermined in a terrible way. That is why it is so important that people are once again educated to develop the more elastic soul forces that can simply follow what can be proclaimed as the results of spiritual science out of a healthy human sense. Then people will understand what needs to be said about things such as the fact that human beings are caught up in an absolute movement. They will understand how a world consciousness can arise from the earth consciousness. Really figuratively, but perhaps quite well figuratively speaking: how human beings can learn to feel themselves as travelers through world space, who are in a rotating movement, in a movement going from below to above and in a movement going from backward to forward. If one draws these movements—rotating, rotating upward, moving forward while rotating upward—if one draws this curve, one also obtains the path of the earth through world space. One does not obtain it as it is currently constructed, purely mathematically and dynamically from the Copernican-Newtonian worldview, but by following what inner observation reveals. It must be reconstructed in this way. But then one does not construct something abstract like the Copernican-Newtonian world view, but something very concrete, something truly supersensible and empirically experienced, if one may use this tautology. This world consciousness is not only important because human beings begin, in a sense, to feel closer to the truth than they do now, when they believe that the Earth's orbit, as constructed by the Copernican world view, is correct. Rather, when one has this world consciousness, many other things depend on it. Then, in a sense, one becomes a different person inwardly. One learns to feel oneself not merely as a citizen of the earth, but as a citizen of the world. The world expands as one approaches the forces that are now truly effective in these movements. When turning from left to right, one becomes aware of the effects of the Angeloi. When rising from below to above, one becomes aware of the effects of the archangels. And when walking in world space from back to front, one becomes aware of the direction of the archai, the forces of the archai, the spirits of the times. By taking the absolute world migration into one's consciousness, one turns toward a spiritual space. One becomes aware that physical space is only an abstract image of this concrete spiritual space in which the activities of the higher hierarchies represent reality.
That such consciousness is connected with something else is already clear from what I have just said. Anyone who has even the slightest inkling that such a thing exists, that such a thing is connected with the real essence of the human being, must regard it as a terrible damage to our educational system that we educate our children in such a way that we allow certain forces in them to be weakened until the age of fifteen, so that they then have to develop as students in the way that is inevitable with these weakened forces. That is why young people between the ages of fifteen and twenty-one take up completely different things than they should actually be taking up according to the demands of our time. As a result, something completely different is sitting in their souls than should actually be there. Truly, my dear friends, by giving the most beautiful, unctuous admonitions until the age of fifteen and then again later, at a time when people used to have ideals, when they were virgins and young men of twenty years of age; through the most beautiful, most unctuous admonitions you achieve nothing, or only that our university and college youth become what they are today, which I need not describe further. You will only achieve something by really exposing the forces that are needed to remain at the universities, forces that today are not exposed but paralyzed. The question of education is indeed a question of humanity today. It is not a question of arbitrary ideals, but a question of humanity that must be understood from the deepest demands of the present time. At most, people today sense that many things should be different, say, in the medical treatment of people, perhaps also in legal relationships, but this is precisely suppressed from the consciousness of lawyers when something is asserted. People sense that some things should be different, but they cannot be changed unless attention is drawn to the fact that, at the right moments, human forces must be awakened rather than suppressed. It is not for nothing that human beings spend the period between the ages of seven and fifteen in this phase of life. During this period of life, very specific forces emerge from their nature that must be taken into account when educating and teaching them. Working in the right direction in education and teaching is quite different from working arbitrarily without taking this direction into account. If you take this into account, you will notice certain things that are not being paid attention to today.
In the essay that will appear in the next issue of WaldorfZeitschrift, which will deal with our Waldorf school, I have pointed out these circumstances from various points of view. I have pointed out that we can no longer be satisfied with the kind of education that is very often formed out of the best of intentions. Certain pedagogical and didactic methods, principles, and norms are established, and people believe—whatever objections may be raised against this, much of what is said in this field is said out of good will but not out of thorough insight—they believe that these pedagogical norms can be learned. The Herbartians and their followers today in particular have this belief that by learning pedagogy, one can become a good educator and teacher. Now, let us assume that such a norm in pedagogy were the most perfect conceivable—it would be almost as useless for teaching as a well-written school aesthetics book is for a painter. One certainly does not become a painter by studying well-written school aesthetics, nor does one become a pedagogue by studying pedagogy, no matter how well one studies it. After all, one does not really need to know physiology in order to feed oneself; one can feed oneself from knowledge quite different from physiology. We have physiology for something quite different from nutrition, and it is a surrogate when physiology must take the place of proper nutrition. I always found it terrible when I came to people who sat at the table with scales next to them to measure and weigh every piece of food they put in their mouths to enjoy at a meal. This is a devastating intervention of physiology in the process of nutrition. You laugh at it out of a certain naivety. Conversely, those who today consider this justified on the basis of certain scientific prejudices and regard what I have said to you today as godless dilettantism would laugh at them. Today, one can laugh at such a thing from very different points of view.
So, standardised pedagogy cannot actually make someone a real educator. Why? Because it is actually designed to be taken in and applied completely and consistently. But that hinders education; it does not promote education and teaching. Something else promotes education: when you can forget pedagogy at any time when you are facing your class, forget everything you have learned about pedagogy. And if, as an educator, you have simply acquired such a profound knowledge of human nature that you can find the educational principles in that knowledge at any moment, that they arise anew at any moment. That is what an educator needs. You cannot be trained to be an educator by learning pedagogy; pedagogy can only be inspired in people by their acquisition of knowledge of human nature. Pedagogy should be completely eliminated as a science, or at most regarded as the painter regards aesthetics, who is certainly aware that he cannot learn to paint from it. A Munich painter told me some time ago, when I was talking to him about aesthetics, referring to Carriere, the famous aesthetician: Yes, back when we were at art school, we called Carriere the “aesthetic blissful groaner.” That is something that is not yet a mood among seminar students, the theoretical educators, who might be called “educational blissful grunters,” because they still believe that what cannot be used in art can be used in education. But in both cases it is actually the same thing. Seminar-style education should be replaced, as we have done in our teacher training course, by knowledge of human nature, insight into human nature, which then stimulates a living relationship with the developing human nature in the child, so that at every moment pedagogy is born in the teacher, so that simply from the way one has the child in front of one, the urge arises to educate it in this way and teach it in that way. This creates a completely different atmosphere in the classroom, because this atmosphere is not created by a pedagogy based on norms, but because it flows from living life at every moment. When education and teaching come from such a living life, the forces that should be present at the age of fifteen are not weakened, but then the person enters their later years with with the elastic soul forces they should have, so that something similar to what happened during the transition from the Middle Ages to modern times can happen in our time, when the consciousness of the land was transformed into an earth consciousness, so that the earth consciousness can be transformed into a world consciousness. But this cannot happen through external experiences, but only by becoming inwardly receptive to the successive different experiences that one can have inwardly, soulfully. Not even within the narrowest limits does man today have an awareness of the diversity of these soul experiences.
How is it actually today? Man is a child, and he behaves childishly in accordance with his environment. Then he becomes an adult. His concepts become more abstract, his experiences become richer; certainly, that is all true. But something similar does not happen to the soul as happens to our outer physical body. We develop more distinctive facial features when we reach a certain age, we no longer have the rounded forms of childhood, we get white hair and wrinkles and so on, or often baldness; in short, our external physicality changes. But actually, one could say that the inner soul does not change in this way; at most, it becomes more and more crammed in, but it does not grow in such a way that its relationship to the outside world changes. Old age and childhood are not connected in the right way. As I have often emphasized, people today are no longer aware of such things, for example, that when one has become an old person, one can bless, and that blessing has a certain meaning, that it does not have the same meaning for a person in middle age. People today are not aware of this, because they do not know that if you want to bless properly in old age, you must have learned to fold your hands in youth. For it is only from folding one's hands in prayer in childhood that the ability to bless arises in old age. The soul is connected to blessing and folding one's hands in the same way that gray hair is connected to childlike hair. This inner transformation is something that falls only to a limited extent within the sphere of experience of the present-day human being. But it must come back again. Man must come back to seeing the whole of life in its various metamorphoses. Otherwise we will not be able to overcome the enormous damage caused, for example, by something like this: if someone is a little talented and is eighteen or nineteen years old, he becomes a feature writer. And those who then read only the feature pages and have no idea that an eighteen-year-old wrote it read it as one reads a feature page in the absolute sense. But then one does not grow older if one is a feature writer at eighteen, writing feature articles; one actually remains at that age. One does not develop further. Then, at twenty or twenty-one, you reach the age when you are mature enough to vote for parliament or city council and to be elected; at that point, you are a complete person. At forty, you no longer need to strive to become a more perfect human being than you were at twenty. You have everything the world can offer you, and you have achieved everything you can offer the world. At twenty, you vote or are elected, and nothing more really happens. Only when you realize again that life is something concrete that changes will you understand how to grasp the world concretely. And then the abstract socialism that is so widely espoused today will disappear; something concrete will take its place.
So the emergence of world consciousness from earth consciousness will have a significant consequence for life, namely through what is created emotionally in human beings. It is not what one knows through such things that is significant, but the way one feels through such things that is significant. People will only understand certain things in the context of life when they have attained this world consciousness.
Above all, people today speak in very abstract terms about successive generations. They think something like this—I mean we who have reached a respectable age, excluding the young—we think perhaps: You now have this or that content. You live this way or that way. In your childhood you lived this way. — In this respect, some people are very short-lived, in that they resent what they themselves did as children and cannot understand that today's children are doing the same things they did; they want today's children to be as well-behaved as they are now in their old age, and do not understand that it is only through growing up that one becomes well-behaved. But apart from that, there is something else that comes into play. People imagine that their children should be just as they were in their youth. For example, they think that children born today should be just like they were in the 1860s. That is nonsense. For we have moved on absolutely in the world. And the children who are now being born—I return to my original comparison—are being born into a different world. Isn't it true that when you travel from Stuttgart to another place today, you have eaten in Stuttgart today and will eat elsewhere tomorrow? You can no longer eat in Stuttgart when you travel. And the children born today can no longer be of the same mental disposition as the children we were, who are now of a respectable age. Childhood itself is changing; we have to understand that. This is connected with our absolute movement in the universe, of which mathematical space is only a schematic representation. People always want to understand things in absolute terms, and today we are already happy when things are not understood in absolute terms.
I recently had a great pleasure when a man visited me in Berlin who had read—well, how should I put it—the discussion of the threefold social order under the title “A False Prophet” in the magazine “Hilfe.” I don't know if you are familiar with this elaborate work. So an American read it and said to himself: “If someone writes about something in this way, there must be something to it; I must take an interest in it.” And then he came to me with Pastor Rittelmeyer and explained that he had gathered from the whole weak style and so on that one must take an interest in the matter. And among the questions he asked, all of which were very intelligent, was the following, which particularly pleased me: “Well, the threefold social order is very easy to understand in the present time; one can see that it is necessary now, that it must take the place of the old unitary state.” Do you believe that the threefold social order is now the final, definitive solution to the social question? That was a very intelligent question. I was able to answer him: I do not believe that at all. Rather, in the course of historical development over the past centuries, the unitary state has emerged. Now, due to the demands of the times, the threefold division has become necessary. And there will come a time when the threefold division will have to be overcome. But that is not the present time; that is the time in three or four centuries. Then we will have to think again about how to replace the threefold division. This is the opposite of chiliastic thinking, the opposite of thinking that wants to bring about a thousand-year kingdom once and for all, thinking that says: We must bring about a blessed state for humanity, then it will be there, then it can remain. Life in the world is not that comfortable. It is necessary that what is brought about as right in a particular epoch be replaced by what is then relatively right for the following epoch. That is what it is all about. This means thinking organically, in contrast to the mechanical thinking that dominates the present, where one actually believes that there is something absolutely right once and for all. One thing is right for Stuttgart, another for New York, another for Australia. One thing is right for 1919, another for 2530. No, the development of the world does not make it so convenient for human beings that there is something absolutely right. Things are always right for certain places and certain times. And one must think concretely from the circumstances. But one will do that if one is also aware that one is performing absolute movements in the world, which, however, can only be perceived from inner experiences, from inner life.
Today I have again drawn your attention to something that should show you how things should be taken in the present with regard to the incorporation of spiritual science into our present culture. Anyone who understands such things will realize that people, in their comfort, resist something like spiritual science, because everything else is more comfortable. Spiritual science is terribly uncomfortable. It does not even allow us to imagine a state that can remain forever. It forces us to think of the good only for the next few centuries, perhaps even for a shorter period of time. But we can only think this if we do not judge humanity from abstract intellectual positions, but try to really get to know our time in its particular peculiarity and thereby understand its demands. This is inconvenient, but it is what corresponds to reality. People today want to deal with cultural development in a very, very convenient way, especially those who want to be leaders in cultural development.
Here is a small example that was shared with me regarding spiritual science and its perception by influential figures of the present day: In a city—I don't want to give the exact details, as it would be taken badly—in a city, someone had the opportunity to give a lecture on my anthroposophy at a private college. He spoke about the worldviews of contemporary human beings. Because it is historically necessary — one strives for completeness, after all — he wanted to include a lecture on anthroposophy. How did he do that? Well, the curriculum, the lecture schedule, is set at the beginning of the semester, and so he had allocated a certain number of hours in the semester to “anthroposophy.” Just as previous lectures had dealt with Darwinism and so on, this man had set aside a specific hour for “Steiner's anthroposophy.” This was done at the beginning of the semester. When he did this, he didn't have the slightest idea what was in an anthroposophical book. Then the evening of the lecture arrived, and the gentleman appeared at the home of someone who had my books and had the owner select the most important ones for him in the morning so that he could inform himself and give his lecture on anthroposophy in the evening. It is convenient to “live into” a worldview in this way and then “represent it authoritatively.” But this is not so rare in relation to the most diverse circumstances of the present. This is something that deserves to be discussed. For from depths that do not go much further, very, very much has been said, presented, and written in the present, and it is accepted with faith. And it is from this credulously accepted material that people form their ideas about the various worldviews in their minds and souls. We must not close our eyes to this fact, to the terrible superficiality that has crept in. We must be clear that it is necessary today to look at who is standing where when this or that is being authoritatively represented.
More important than anything I can give you in terms of content, my dear friends, is the stimulation of this awareness of the present time; this awareness that we have a tremendous need to look at the degree of depth that prevails in what is pouring in on us, what is asserting itself, and what is actually right in assert itself. If one speaks of these things today, one offends many people. And especially toward anthroposophists and theosophists, people say: They should be more lenient, they should judge with benevolence and not be so critical; for if one is so critical, it hurts people. But it is questionable whether it is human love to leave unspoken the fact that such people are let loose on general education, teaching in the morning what they have to recite in the evening. When it comes to the questions that life poses, it is a matter of how they are posed. It is important to pose them correctly, for only then can the right things emerge.
So today I have tried to explain to you the necessity of transforming earth consciousness into world consciousness, just as country consciousness has been transformed into earth consciousness. But I tried to impress this upon you in order to point out to you, from a certain point of view, some things that are emotionally necessary for bringing about healthier conditions in our culture than we have at present.
This must happen! One would like to shake people up, to call upon the sleepy human beings of the present to do this. But that is not so easy in the present. Many things are being done in this direction, but people avoid becoming thoroughly acquainted with our conditions. It is not enough to merely put forward anthroposophical theories. It is necessary to sharpen our gaze for what is necessary in our time and not to encapsulate ourselves in prejudices. We must open ourselves to what must be fought against so that we can intervene in the present from the standpoint of true love for humanity. If anything can be inspired in this direction in people's souls and minds, then more will be achieved than through the most comprehensive theories.
It breaks one's heart to know how true it is what Mr. Mo/t said recently here at the Cultural Council meeting, that there are already people today who say: Oh, before we think about something like the threefold social order, we would rather become a province of the Entente. — Unfortunately, this is true to a very large extent. And many other things are connected with such an attitude, because ultimately other attitudes can only come from a tendency toward spiritual deepening. The present age can only be healed through spiritual deepening.