Natural Science; the Anthroposophical Movement
GA 203
16 January 1921, Dornach
Translated by Hanna von Maltitz
Our consideration during my presence this time will be to contemplate the vital earnestness embedded in anthroposophical knowledge needed for the great task of our time. When we say “with regard to the great task of our time” we don't need to think of something drifting over our heads which has been organized by some person in authority but we should be clear today that whatever weaves between people in everyday life contains, or is permeated to some extent, with something which belongs to the great task of our time. This should obviously be one of the primary implications of the Anthroposophic world view moving through our souls. This Anthroposophic world view directs us towards recognizing the existence of the spirit within everything, not existing somewhere in abstract heights, but living within the existence surrounding our everyday lives. This is what we must learn to apply to the great task of life and to every small daily experience and action.
When we consider life today from this angle we can ask ourselves: what are the components of life surrounding us from the reference point of spirituality? We have the remnants of ancient knowledge in various forms which was passed traditionally by word of mouth to adherents gathered in communities and their faith in the everlasting nature of the human being. In the most varied forms, most differentiated nuances, this most varied knowledge of this faith was brought to people. Humanity lived within this faith with the belief that all their soul needs were satisfied through this way. Besides this belief of confessions respective to their followers of that time, we have a popular addition today which originated from science, attributed to the present educational institutions. This science was gradually skilled by only considering sense-physical matter, at most penetrating it with inadequate spiritual suggestions, the latter now on the wane. The tendency is increasing towards regarding science as the only physical sense perceptible observation which at best can be combined with the mind.
Wherever we look at today's civilized world we get the impression that people create from two sources: on the one hand out of what is taught as so-called serious, exact knowledge, accepted on authority because on authority everyone accepts knowledge if they have not themselves worked within the subject of the knowledge in question, and therefore this knowledge is mostly accepted. Besides this, people surrender to their popular publications regarding how they should think about facts regarding astronomy, physics and chemistry, about biology, zoology, mineralogy, botany, history and so on, and more besides, submitting to it all and agreeing to be informed in such a way that they can say: All this must be true because it originates from the people who are in control of things through familiar instances of authority and so we accept whatever else flows from their various declarations. Proposing the creation of a bridge between the two is kicked out, because these declarations mostly instruct people to keep knowledge and faith separate and in no way try and merge them. Rising out towards a conscious penetration of these facts is rarely found. Efforts are necessary throughout to recognize scientific authorities arriving through the usual channels to presenting exact knowledge. However, one is inclined not to research these things in order to prove how they really relate to their creation through their scientific methodology.
On the other hand one is disinclined to research the origins of knowledge propagated through tradition which today is offered by official representatives. Awakening fully consciously towards what actually is presented rarely happens. When it does happen it very seldom results in seeing the issue in its true light. Should we accept it offends someone if we oppose what is termed dogma within the Catholic or Protestant denomination, regarding this dogma as “nonsense,” then we are opposing it for the sake of it and at the same time rejecting traditional confession, without finding the possibility to replace it with an alternative.
An example of dogma—I want to refer to a central dogma—is for instance that of the Trinity, the threefold personality of the godly Being. Whoever finds a dogma such as this presented through the denominations, finds it easy to some extent to oppose it according to today's scientific way of thinking. This expression can easily be revealed as “nonsense” in such a dogma. Whoever does go back to the way such a dogma was created will find that dogmas of common confessions have for a long time been propagated within humanity and that the point of origin of these dogmas, often characterized as humanity's earlier evolutionary steps according to instinctive clairvoyance, atavistic clairvoyance, are there, by looking into the spiritual world. Out of such clairvoyance these dogmas have emerged and one can say that something like the Trinity dogma has emerged out of deep, thorough insights within the structure of world existence. At one time this dogma of the Trinity was a deeply recognized truth. It presented a deep insight into the relationship of reality. However this was during ancient times when within the soul's abilities the powers of an instinctive clairvoyant knowledge fitted within such a dogma. This dogma then spread itself. It no longer fits into the current teachings of human soul forces. As a rule each person who has experienced this dogma from its origins has since then gone through several earthly incarnations. Souls had various experiences during these incarnations. In the outer world this dogma has been retained, transmitted from one generation to the next. Today it has taken on a form through words used to proclaim it which no longer can be understood. Now these souls are born again and come across this dogma in church. There is no human relationship between on the one side what the confession of the human soul is met with and on the other side what the soul from within itself strives to experience and to know. What works so badly at present is not that the dogmas are false but that the dogmas are in a form trapping the truth which in today's time are obsolete and thus the dogmas no longer offer what the soul of today needs. Thus we can say: these dogmas are preached today as if breathed by the wind.—Even those who inwardly confess to them do not apply these confessions as soul truths because they don't understand them for the most part. By accepting something which is not understood, creates an inner falsehood. As a result of this inner untruth so much damage has been done through the falsehoods in the world.
The results of untruthfulness within humanity in the last few years have really been immeasurable. Basically it shouldn't surprise us that this is so, from the simple basis that when the soul lives in falsehood the ego can be recognised as not having any sense of truthfulness in outer life. This should be kept in mind by all those who believe today that they should uphold traditional declarations. This is quite a serious situation with which we need to deal in this area.
Regarding dogmas, one could say the souls who have experienced various earthly lives where these dogmas were current, have grown out of them since they were formulated. Just as I have mentioned in the last two lectures that we need to be serious about these things, so we must during the examination of repeated earthly lives be serious. Vitally serious.
Just look from the same point of view at what humanity is given today through physical science. Here knowledge is being formed from purely physical sense perceptions. This has to be joined with what lives in the soul which has to fill itself with something which is merely sense perceptible material.
Examine how a living person stands within his or her life. They carry within them a soul which has gone through earthly lives and now don't find any connection to outer religious declarations. They connect however in certain areas of their life with what today is recognized as scientific. The question must be asked: What happens in the human soul when it connects with this recognised, merely physical sensory aspect of observable science? The soul, now integrated in the physical organism, had during an earlier incarnation incorporated quite a different relationship to nature, to the environment and the relevant world which cannot today be found in this knowledge. Only relatively few presently incarnated souls can be discovered who were not sufficiently incorporated in their former life in such a way as to relate to a definite knowledge containing spiritual imaginations, as I mentioned about natural phenomena, by incorporating a spiritual element. The sheer abstract science which has developed over the last three to four centuries didn't exist before. Not so very far back the kind of natural science existing then was such, even though it contained a sense perceptible element, it also contained within it something permeated by the spiritual. As a result many people who don't accredit it with anything special, presently with physical sense perceptible science don't find anything satisfactory about science, so they leave it lying and don't bother about it, or go digging and researching all kinds of tomes, what Basilius Valentinus or some or other person had handed out for natural science. It is true that all kinds of spirituality lived within the imagination about nature it at that time, but today, deep respect is only stirred within those who engage with it and just because it is not understood it is regarded most profound.
The important thing here is that even today's incarnated soul has no real relationship with ancient wisdom and with what goes on through the rest of life which is already fed, even grafted in school, in some or other form coming from sense perceptible observations. What is really presenting itself here if one considers the inner aspect?
Within our body we have the soul which has been in previous lives yet we come to some extent into our body without having any relationship to what the soul had experienced in a previous life. Throughout various earthly lives—as a necessity for the development of freedom—the soul developed in such a way that it was emptied of all it had absorbed before, in order not to have a relationship any longer to anything taken up earlier and thus have available capacity for what is actually living in the world at present. Our soul no longer brings with it anything from former earthly lives. We do bring results of our moral qualities with us but basically not what has lived in us from earlier earthly lives from which any kind of innate knowledge of world secrets could result. Today souls do not enter bodies in the same way it happened in Greek times. Souls who incarnated during the Hellenistic time entered life with still some old empowered knowledge which enlivened the body with soul spiritual life forces. Today this is not the case. Today the soul enters the body in a way which is consumptive. To an ever increasing degree this is the case; the souls which are born today has some destructive influence and lame the body, gradually dragging death forces through it. If evolution is to continue this way it will lead to the undermining and decline of earthly life. People would become weaker and weaker in their will forces. People will appear less and less able to have a grasp for detecting active impulses. People will gradually go through life like automatic detectors. How sad this is that we have to see the future in this way, and how seldom it happens that people are inwardly fired up through lively ideas. How often we find that people at present can be said to suffer from a soul sclerosis, turning out dead ideas and only allowing their minds to accept tradition and thus becoming machines.
It is really like this: if we go with an unprejudiced attitude through life and observe how people are placed in life, we can basically not differentiate, one person from another, amongst dozens of them. We can actually not tell them apart. We talk to A, to B, and then with C and they all say the same thing. Each one individually believes in having said something particular, but we can't find any particular difference between them, they all say the same thing. We actually only have one kind of human being in a variety of copies, and we can ask ourselves: Are we not being deceived—isn't what we talked about today the same as yesterday's conversation?—This corresponds completely to the observation of consecutive earthly lives in relation to our present earthly life. The soul no longer brings with it what it had in earlier lives, which went from one earthly life to the next and ever again appear, although with a decreasing power which is like an innate wisdom. That is no longer there. When we consider such souls and their connection to the external, sense perceptible scientific observation, then we see they are packed with transitory wisdom; with a wisdom which when expressed in imaginative ideas, is regarded as transitory. In order to conceal this fact by a terrible illusion, the old “Law of conservation of matter” in the nineteenth century was reinvented by the “Law of the conservation of energy.” This law was made up to conceal that there is nothing which can be conserved in nature, that everything is transient, even matter and energy. Nothing is left over for the soul when it is reincarnated in the future as a human machine; the soul being crammed with sensory observation and scientific material, because this fails to exercise anything alive and gives no fructifying power to the soul.
The soul born today comes over from an earlier earthly life, eager to be fructified by something which in turn will help it progress in its next earthly life. However the absorption of knowledge stemming only from the perishable offers a soul death; murders the soul. This is something which must be considered in all earnestness today, when the idea continues that non-understanding can relate to obsolete dogma, that only laming, deadening can come through non-spiritually penetrated scientific knowledge, and that the soul must experience a second death, suffer a soul death. It depends on individuals and on humanity, to rejuvenate their souls. Humanity dare not choose some comfortable passive attitude and say: I am an everlasting being, and the everlasting kernel of my being will preserve me forever through all circumstances.—This doesn't correspond to the effect of reality. The everlasting kernel within human beings exists of course but it has to be fructified in this decisive age if it doesn't want to be destroyed. There is no other way to keep the soul alive than to break free of mere sensory scientific observations and to justify a true spiritual science and to see how in all sensory observations the spirit is alive even in relation to physical facts. It comes down to not only registering purely sensory material but to promote what lives in everything that is sensory and penetrate it with spiritual imagination which actually lives within it and must not be excluded. As a result the souls coming out of a previous earthly life can take up this spirit-filled natural science, become fructified and thereby enable their vitality to be carried forward to the next incarnation. The continued existence of the soul, its health, in fact the continued existence of the soul life itself, the aversion to the soul death of humanity depends upon the spiritualization of our natural knowledge!
From of these facts and not out of any kind of prejudice today we are required to spiritualize natural science. When so many human beings turn against this spiritualization then this attitude, while ignorant about the actual meaning of these facts, are spurred on by minds we all well know about, in order to assert themselves so much more in their human nature, thus reducing what souls bring with them from earlier incarnations. Out of the entire grain of our present lives where the spiritual is being composed out of not only spiritual science but also sense perceptible knowledge, it is apparent in the most absurd sense that repeated antagonistic acts are against the intention to spiritualize natural science. It can't be stressed often enough how necessary it is in our time to deeply and inwardly understand such things—and if I dare use such a word—modify such facts. We can't take this seriously enough that today there's a rejection of spiritually permeated scientific knowledge, whether it comes across in the manner which I've heard mentioned—I don't know to what extent it is connected to the truth—through a decision by colour supporting students who boycotted lectures in the last weeks or if it appears in some other form. Today one can collect a whole jolt of writings opposing spiritual science. Dark, unsavoury streams validate that these things like to slumber and yet relatively soon they will become strongly apparent. Today it is much more comfortable to be unaware of things than being aware of them. However we no longer stand at a point where we can undo the past and remain uncommunicative to the world. This can no longer be allowed. The only way now is forwards. However this forward striving is connected to an active participation which can take on ever more evil forms—one can no longer call them discussions, but let us do so—“discussions” of the time. Only if we succeed from a strong basis, only if each one does his or her part and can come together, representing spiritual science and not be shy, everywhere unreservedly characterize it in an unconcealed manner where hidden aspects let hostility rise against spiritual science, only then can we hope to survive. It deals far less with only the literal interpretation of hostility against spiritual science, being caught up and acting defensively against it. It is certainly in one way or another necessary but it is not enough. Ultimately it is only a secondary appearance—when out of foolish misleading or misunderstanding ill-willed hostility rises against spiritual science. This is to some extend something secondary which naturally needs to be placed in the right light. Secondary it's obvious—I have recently mentioned it in an open lecture—what such people like Frohnmeyer have to say regarding the main statue group in Dornach, which can be experienced as a Christ figure: “In Dornach can be found a `Statue of the ideal human being' with above a `luciferic' trait and below one with animal characteristics.”—It is certainly necessary to point this out but ultimately not only to merely defend spiritual science but from a far deeper, more meaningful foundation. Whoever is capable of presenting such a terrible falsehood in the world, damages humankind in everything which is written and spoken, where it works instructively on mankind. Not only is it most significant that such a bludgeon of a lie is spoken but it is most significant that a person today is capable of such a strong lie as a symptom of paths mankind followed earlier. Attacks on spiritual science are recognisable according to how today's sense of truth is grasped. As a result, wider field work should be carried out in the spiritual realm. This is what it comes down to. We dare not shrink back from encountering this lack of a sense of truth on all fronts. Humanity must learn to understand that only with a real sense of truth can one work into the future when the soul has to find the way through this incarnation into the incarnation of the next age. Today this doesn't involve some kind of formality but actually the real life of the soul through consecutive earthly lives. If you search you will find the connection between every earlier characterized falsehood in thinking—in outer encountered confessions of the soul, without an inner connection with the truth—and the falsehood of the outer world. Actually it is quite an amazing phenomenon that such falsehoods come to the fore so strongly particularly in those—which doesn't mean I want to say they are not present in colleagues of other faculties—who pose as teachers of mankind, who should be the great Keepers of the Seals of religious truths.
This is the primary responsibility of today's humanity who strives for some kind of relationship with a spiritual life: to seek out cultural historical falsehoods. It is extraordinary how deeply these cultural historical falsehoods are taken up. They are a characteristic of our time. From out of politics where it has sown its foul marsh plants it has finally penetrated into other areas. Already the condition has arisen that people can hardly differentiate between truthfulness and falsehood in relation to certain phenomena of life. You see, step by step a certain life phenomenon plays into falsehood in daily life which plays a role in both daily life as well as in the greater affairs of life. Finally falsehood today itself has sprung from the same tendency, unconcerned whether it appears amongst enlightened men—certainly lit by a strange light—who gather in Geneva, or whether it appears in various bourgeois and proletarian coffee-gossipers. Whatever has lived as spirit in Geneva's various bourgeois and proletarian coffee-gossiping found it a popular falsehood, and I might mention in parenthesis—those present should not take it as evil—those who are within the Anthroposophical movement haven't quite been ratted out. This untruthfulness is a cultural phenomenon of the present and needs to be examined. Above all it should in no circumstances be excused but should be characterized before the contemporaries are revealed. We repeatedly experience that when something appears out of a pressing urgency and point to these things, that individuals within the anthroposophical movement, while finding these things uncomfortable, while they must live within this falsehood and as a result experience the characteristics of falsehood and find if highly uncomfortable some way or another, always take this characteristic of untruth as evil.
These things I have spoken about today should be thought about in relation to my two or three previous lectures related to the reincarnation of souls into today's civilised world, as well as to the interests present in part of humanity, that decisive element which wants to connect with humanity in the present age, and not to allow it to come close to humanity, can give an understanding of the immense seriousness of the task of our time within which we stand.
These present tasks are permeated with the deepest earnestness. Because of this, because it is so essential to examine these points of view on our home ground, I had spoken about things in conclusion and how painful it is for me that today so much time is taken into account without the simultaneous possibility of continuing the earlier anthroposophical work, as it was accessible just before this need—a requirement it is indeed—to work through these things which have often been spoken about and even today do actually exist. If we should want to place ourselves really in the right relationship with these things then it is necessary, imperative from out of the spiritual beings of present tasks.
Today we must make it increasingly clear: Our friends have engaged themselves in the anthroposophical movement in manifold ways since its inception at the start of the twentieth century. The anthroposophical movement is something which is not only a reality on the physical plane but which forms an uninterrupted ingredient of the spiritual worlds, a direct part of the spiritual world. Obviously outer practical participation is also a part of the spiritual worlds but not in the sense as it is within the anthroposophical movement. Regarding this, I want to say a few words.
The anthroposophical movement continues in its spiritual aspects whether the people representing it are hardworking or lazy; whether they make the effort to work progressively or against progress, going forward quicker or slower, yet they remain present in their spiritual reality. Because it has become necessary to bring about practical things in life which have grown out of the demands of the present, it appears different with these things. These things must be done at their allotted time, because it is impossible to cope with them when they are not completed at the right time. For things in practical life it can be so that when done in a slow trot, they simply happen too late. Within the anthroposophical movement one has in many cases become accustomed to things happening slowly or quickly. It is becoming more often the practice that what has been acquired here is being applied to things where the same practice is unsuitable. This is precisely what lies at the foundation of what I have recently wanted to characterise, by my indication to create a renewed possibility for that from which everything finally flows namely the anthroposophical movement, and maintaining it as such. How long have I already pointed out that it is not possible to have personal interviews now? Yes my dear friends, we have in the last days of the past week—very few people really work in practical matters—we have filled our days until three in the morning. People still turn indignant when their wishes are not taken into account after a personal meeting. However I'd like to know where the time should come for that. It has to be understood. For this reason no kind of casual manner should exist in anthroposophical life—just the opposite—a life enforcing strength comes from the anthroposophical life. As you are guaranteed that such empowerment comes from anthroposophical life, then other necessities will impact on practical life by themselves. Above all else this re-strengthening must come. This empowerment must come in such a way as to drive out all dreaminess from the soul. Whatever is brewing in some or other island of life, not bothered by what is going on in life today, is exactly what lames the pursuit of real tasks. These tasks are paralyzed when people on the one hand remain blind, sleepy towards what is happening in outer events around them and on the other, their salvation, even though this is more the lust of their soul becoming involved in all kinds of alien mystical problems on their island of life.
I'm touching on something extraordinarily important, something which is a direct application of ideas regarding the great tasks of our time and our own movement.
Every one of us must work together towards the enlivening of the anthroposophical movement. We can only work towards the strengthening of the anthroposophical movement when we cultivate a free and open insight for what causes decline in the greatest part of our cultural life. Anthroposophists for the most part don't worry about the appearances of decline. They don't get anything out of turning to the force permeating our civilization today which steers it towards the abyss. Despite it not wanting to be heard on the one side, on the other side it is again forgotten, I have to ever again point out that things do not improve on their own. Today's contemplative brooding, which is a kind of transcendental demonstration with many, is something which harms us tremendously. Instead of shaking up the will and saying to yourself: `I will do this'—contemplation persists whether here or there the relationships are such that something could be done.
My dear friends, at the beginning of the (20th) century the way the anthroposophical movement was thought about is not the way you would think about it today. Clever people who appeared at that time would have stipulated how things must work, and the cleverer ones would have distinguished between Schwabing and Munich, and everyone could hear the grass grow which indicated who could procure which area. Then some came who had discovered extraordinary relationships in Hannover and Frankfurt. This was encountered all over the place. If someone had really listened then no one would have taken a single step. At the time it was already a wicked thing but today, where much is dealt with in everyday practical life, it is even more evil because today it is not about tracking down such grass growing but that we engage our will forces to do something, to really work. It is of course tremendously easy to say: `I sense the transcendental atmosphere of this or that place, that one could do this or that ...' It is much easier than doing something. One should hardly ever apply the external and as far as possible bring about the inner approach. This is something which of course can't be stressed enough.
With anthroposophical seriousness encouraged, the real power can be cultivated in our relationship to external things and these must be encountered with real interest. We need to know after all what is going on in the world—and there are many things that do advance. Yet in our circles it is amazing how few are concerned with what is happening.
I want to highlight a deplorable fact. This fact has many causes but there is only enough time today to list a few. Clearly the subscription to our magazine for three-foldness hasn't increased by a single one. In addition our membership comprises thousands and thousands of members. It is really very sad that such a fact must be recorded. Yet this is a fact and this is only one of them. Do you believe that it is quite true to say that the opponents are the other guys and they are at their posts everywhere? These machinations are spreading around us. I say these things not without care and not without caution for what we should incur today, when we don't summon all the individual strengths we have. We need them. We must be steeped in so much anthroposophy that we can get to it or we will be too late. On the other hand I don't see that what has to be undertaken is being done, to then only lapse by saying that we got to it too late.
There is much beauty in the advancing, above all in the participation, of some students in our striving. From this very area the most fruit can develop when these things are met with real, true understanding but we must be clear about how these things should be met. Nebulous mysticism is out of the question. It depends on how something is met out of one's inner life's diligence.
So this and much more can be said today but I think that whatever else you need can be discover within yourselves when you develop a train of stimulated thought and take it further. In order for you to develop further is the issue I want to pose as my preliminary wish at the conclusion of this last agreement. Now the times are such that I can't express such a wish in what is to be fulfilled in years to come but that I can only look for the weeks when I can be here again. Basically the situation is like this, that we really use our time, that actually not a single week can be lost because we have not used it.
Therefore my dear friends, I would like to say two things in conclusion: first I want to express the wish that what I have said today must be understood until our next meeting, and secondly, that our next meeting can take place as a result of things which have been aligned with this wish. With this in mind I wish you farewell!
Vierter Vortrag
[ 1 ] Unsere Betrachtungen während meiner diesmaligen Anwesenheit bezogen sich darauf, wie voller Lebensernst gemacht werden kann aus der anthroposophischen Erkenntnis gegenüber den großen Aufgaben unserer Zeit. Wenn man sagt «gegenüber den großen Aufgaben unserer Zeit», so braucht man ja durchaus nicht immer an dasjenige zu denken, was gewissermaßen über den Menschen schwebt und was von einigen autoritativen Menschen über die Köpfe der anderen hinüber geregelt werden muß, sondern man muß sich heute darüber klar sein, daß durchaus dasjenige, was von Mensch zu Mensch im Alltag spielt, das in sich enthält, gewissermaßen durch sich durchströmend hat, was zu den großen Aufgaben der Zeit gehört. Das sollte doch selbstverständlich als eine erste Konsequenz anthroposophischer Weltanschauung durch unsere Seelen ziehen. Denn diese anthroposophische Weltanschauung führt uns ja dahin, anzuerkennen, daß das Geistige in allem lebt, nicht lebt irgendwo in abstrakten Höhen, sondern lebt in dem uns umgebenden Leben, in dem wir alltäglich drinnenstehen. Und gerade das müssen wir anwenden lernen auf die großen Aufgaben des Lebens und auf die kleinen alltäglichen Erlebnisse und Handlungen.
[ 2 ] Wenn wir das heutige Leben gerade von diesem Gesichtspunkte aus ins Auge fassen, können wir uns fragen: Was haben wir denn als die Bestandteile dieses Lebens, namentlich in bezug auf das Geistige, um uns herum? Worin leben wir denn heute in diesem Zeitalter als Menschen geistig? — Wir haben dasjenige, was die Überreste alter Bekenntnisse sind, dieser verschiedenen Bekenntnisse, welche ihre Anhänger in Gemeinden versammeln und ihnen auf irgendeine Weise, die traditionell ist, die überliefert ist, beibringen, was angesehen wird als der Glaube an die ewige Natur des Menschen. In den verschiedensten Formen, den verschiedensten Nuancen wird eben durch die verschiedenen Bekenntnisse dieser Glaube den Menschen beigebracht. Die Menschen leben dann in diesem Glauben und meinen auch, den Bedürfnissen ihrer Seele Genüge zu tun durch diesen Glauben. Neben diesem Glauben haben wir dann heute schon durchaus so populär, wie die einzelnen Bekenntnisse selbst jeweilig bei ihren Anhängern sind, dasjenige, was aus der Wissenschaft stammt, die heute an unseren Bildungsanstalten getrieben wird. Diese Wissenschaft hat sich ja allmählich dazu ausgebildet, bloß das sinnlich-physische Material zu betrachten, höchstens es zu durchdringen mit einigen unzulänglichen geistigen Vorstellungen, die aber auch schon mehr oder weniger im Schwinden sind. Immer mehr und mehr geht die Tendenz dahin, als Wissenschaft nur dasjenige anzusehen, was in sinnlich-physischer Beobachtung aufgefunden und höchstens durch den Verstand kombiniert werden kann.
[ 3 ] Wir mögen die heutige zivilisierte Welt wo immer ansehen, es wird sich uns der Anblick darbieten, daß die Menschen aus diesen zwei Quellen heraus schöpfen: einerseits aus demjenigen, was ihnen beigebracht wird als sogenanntes ernstes, exaktes Wissen, das sie auf Autorität hin annehmen; denn auf Autorität hin nimmt ja jeder das Wissen auf, der nicht gerade in einem der Wissensfächer selber arbeitet, und nimmt vor allen Dingen die große Menge der Menschen das Wissen auf. Und neben dem, daß man in seiner populären Zeitschrift sich unterrichten läßt darüber, wie man zu denken hat über astronomische, physikalische, chemische Tatsachen, über Biologisches, Zoologisches, Mineralogisches, Botanisches, Geschichtliches und so weiter, neben dem, daß man diese Dinge aufnimmt und sich auf diese Weise unterrichten läßt und dann sagt: Das alles muß wahr sein, denn es rührt ja von denjenigen Leuten her, welche für die Sache durch die gewohnten Instanzen als Autorität bestellt sind, neben dem nimmt man das andere auf, das aus den verschiedenen Bekenntnissen fließt. Eine Brücke zwischen beiden schlägt man nicht, denn aus den Bekenntnissen heraus wird ja zumeist den Leuten gelehrt, daß sie nur ja Wissen und Glauben auseinanderhalten sollen, daß sie nur ja Wissen und Glauben nicht in irgendeiner Weise verschmelzen sollen. Ein Aufraffen zu einem bewußten Durchschauen dieses Tatbestandes findet nur in den seltensten Fällen statt. Man bemüht sich, durchaus anzuerkennen, was durch die gewohnten Kanäle von den wissenschaftlichen Autoritäten her den Menschen als exakte Wahrheit mitgeteilt wird. Aber man geht den Dingen nicht nach, um zu prüfen, wie es sich in Wirklichkeit mit der Arbeitsmethode verhält, durch die solche Wissenschaftlichkeit gewonnen ist.
[ 4 ] Auf der anderen Seite geht man auch wenig der Entstehung desjenigen nach, was sich als Bekenntnisse durch die Zeiten herauf fortgepflanzt hat und traditionell von den heutigen amtlichen Vertretern dieser Bekenntnisse an die Menschheit herangebracht wird. Ein Aufraffen zu einem vollen Bewußtsein dessen, was da eigentlich vorliegt, das findet in den seltensten Fällen statt. Und wenn es stattfindet, dann kommt man heute nur wenig dazu, die Sache im richtigen Licht zu sehen. Denn nehmen wir an, es bäumt sich irgend jemand, sagen wir, innerhalb des katholischen oder protestantischen Bekenntnisses auf gegen das, was Dogma genannt wird, dann wird es in der Regel so geschehen, daß dieses Dogma als ein «Unsinn» angesehen wird, daß man gegen dieses Dogma polemisiert und damit dasjenige fortwirft, was traditionelles Bekenntnis ist, daß man aber nicht die Möglichkeit findet, irgend etwas an die Stelle zu setzen.
[ 5 ] Ein solches Dogma - ich will gleich ein Zentraldogma anführen ist zum Beispiel das der Trinität, der Drei-Persönlichkeit des göttlichen Wesens. Wer ein solches Dogma so vorfindet, wie es ihm heute durch die Bekenntnisse entgegengebracht wird, hat es in einer gewissen Weise leicht, gegen ein solches Dogma zu polemisieren, wenn er sich wiederum auf den Standpunkt der heutigen wissenschaftlichen Denkweise stellt. Denn er wird in diesem Sinne sehr leicht enthüllen können, was «Unsinn» an einem solchen Dogma ist. Derjenige aber, der zurückgeht auf die Entstehungsweise eines solchen Dogmas, der findet, daß die Dogmen der gebräuchlichen Bekenntnisse sich durch lange Zeiten in der Menschheit fortgepflanzt haben, daß aber am Ausgangspunkt bei der Entstehung dieser Dogmen dasjenige steht, was ich oftmals charakterisiert habe als das in früheren Entwickelungsstufen der Menschheit vorhandene instinktive Hellsehen, das atavistische Hellsehen, das Hineinschauen in die geistige Welt. Aus diesem Hellsehen sind also solche Dogmen hervorgegangen, und man möchte sagen: So etwas wie das Trinitätsdogma ist hervorgegangen aus tiefen, aus gründlichen Einsichten in das Gefüge des Weltendaseins. — Es war einmal dieses Dogma der Trinität eine tief erkannte Wahrheit. Es stellte dar eine tiefe Einsicht in Wirklichkeitszusammenhänge. Aber das war vorhanden in jener alten Zeit, in welcher die menschlichen Seelenfähigkeiten, die Erkenntniskräfte, die, wie gesagt, eine Art instinktiven Hellsehens waren, zusammenpaßten mit einem solchen Dogma. Das Dogma hat sich dann fortgepflanzt. Es paßt nicht mehr zu der heutigen Ausbildung der menschlichen Seelenkräfte. Es sind in der Regel für jeden Menschen, der dieses Dogma bei seiner Entstehung mit durchgemacht hat, seit jener Zeit mehrere Erdenleben verflossen. Die Seelen haben verschiedene Erlebnisse während dieser Erdenleben durchgemacht. In der äußeren Welt hat sich das Dogma erhalten, es ist von Generation zu Generation fortgepflanzt worden. Es hat heute eine Gestalt angenommen, daß es aus den Worten heraus, mit denen es mitgeteilt wird, gar nicht mehr verstanden werden kann. Und nun sind diese Seelen wiedergeboren; aus dem Kirchlichen heraus wird ihnen das Dogma entgegengebracht. Es ist keine innere menschliche Beziehung zwischen dem, was da von den Bekenntnissen den menschlichen Seelen entgegengebracht wird, und demjenigen, was die Seelen aus sich heraus anstreben zu erfahren, zu wissen. Was so schlimm wirkt in der Gegenwart, ist nicht, daß die Dogmen falsch sind, sondern worauf es ankommt, ist, daß die Dogmen eine solche Form sind, die Wahrheit zu fassen, die den heutigen Zeitverhältnissen nicht mehr entspricht, daß die Dogmen nicht mehr entgegenkommen dem, was die menschlichen Seelen brauchen. So daß wir sagen können: Diese Dogmen werden heute gepredigt, indem sie eigentlich in den leeren Wind hinausgehaucht werden. - Auch diejenigen, die sich zu ihnen bekennen, tun dieses Bekennen nicht in innerer Seelenwahrheit, denn sie verstehen die Dogmen zumeist nicht. Aber dasjenige annehmen, was man nicht versteht, ist eine innere Unwahrheit. Und im Grunde kommt es von dieser inneren Unwahrheit her, daß in unserer Gegenwart so viel Schaden angerichtet wird durch die Unwahrhaftigkeit der Welt.
[ 6 ] Was in den letzten Jahren durch die Menschheit gegangen ist an Unwahrhaftigkeit, ist ja wirklich unermeßlich. Aber im Grunde genommen ist es nicht zu verwundern, daß es so ist, aus dem einfachen Grunde, weil, wenn die Seelen in jener Unwahrhaftigkeit leben, die ich eben jetzt gekennzeichnet habe, es eben kein Wunder ist, wenn sie keinen Sinn für die Wahrhaftigkeit im äußeren Leben haben. Das sollten vor allen Dingen diejenigen bedenken, welche heute glauben, eintreten zu müssen für die traditionellen Bekenntnisse. Es ist durchaus eine ernste Angelegenheit, mit der man sich auf diesem Gebiet beschäftigen muß.
[ 7 ] Man könnte sagen, über die Dogmen sind die Seelen, die mittlerweile durch verschiedene Erdenleben gegangen sind, hinausgewachsen, seit diese Bekenntnisse sich gebildet haben. Geradeso wie man mit denjenigen Dingen, die ich Ihnen in den beiden letzten Vorträgen hier entwickelt habe, Ernst machen muß gegenüber dem Leben, so muß man mit der Anschauung von den wiederholten Erdenleben auch auf diesem Gebiete Ernst machen, Lebensernst machen.
[ 8 ] Aber betrachten wir von demselben Gesichtspunkte aus dasjenige, was der Menschheit heute gegeben wird an äußerer Wissenschaft. Da wird geformt ein Wissen, bloß entstammend der sinnlich physischen Beobachtung. Das soll vereint werden mit demjenigen, was als menschliche Seele da in uns selber lebt, sie soll aufnehmen, sich erfüllen mit dem, was bloß sinnlich-physisches Beobachtungsmaterial ist.
[ 9 ] Betrachten Sie den Menschen lebendig drinnenstehend im Leben. Er trägt in sich die Seele, die durch Erdenleben hindurchgegangen ist, die äußerlich in den Religionsbekenntnissen nicht das findet, womit sie sich verbinden kann. Sie verbindet sich aber, wenigstens für gewisse Gebiete des Lebens, mit dem, was heute anerkannte Wissenschaftlichkeit ist. Die Frage muß aufgeworfen werden: Was geschieht mit der menschlichen Seele, wenn sie sich verbindet mit dieser anerkannten, bloß auf dem sinnlich-physischen Gebiete beobachtenden Wissenschaft? — Die Seelen, die heute sich einverleiben den physischen Organismen, diese Seelen haben ja in der Tat in früheren Verkörperungen dasjenige in sich aufgenommen, was noch ganz anderen Verhältnissen zur Natur, zur Umgebung, zur Welt entsprach als das, was heute in diesem Wissen aufgenommen wird. Man kann nur verhältnismäßig wenige Seelen, die jetzt verkörpert sind, finden, welche nicht in ihrem vorigen Leben noch so verkörpert waren, daß sie zum Beispiel mit dem, was ihnen über die Naturerscheinungen gesagt worden ist, verbanden ein gewisses Wissen oder, sagen wir, ein gewisses Vorstellen über Geistiges. Solch eine geistentblößte Naturwissenschaft, wie sie seit drei bis vier Jahrhunderten heraufgezogen ist, gab es ja vorher nicht. Was als Naturwissenschaft der Menschheit in jenen älteren Zeiten gegeben worden ist, in jenen verhältnismäßig gar nicht so lang hinter uns liegenden Zeiten, das war so, daß man, indern man einen sinnlichen Tatbestand hinstellte, immer noch in diesem sinnlichen Tatbestand etwas hatte, was diesen sinnlichen Tatbestand durchtränkte mit Geistigem. Daher kommt es ja auch, daß viele Menschen der Gegenwart, denen nichts Besonderes daran liegt, mit ihrer Zeit zu gehen, in der gegenwärtigen sinnlich-physischen Naturwissenschaft nichts finden, was sie befriedigt, diese daher links liegen lassen und sich nicht damit beschäftigen, dafür aber allerlei alte Schmöker aufstöbern und nun nachforschen, was Basilius Valentinus oder irgendein anderer in seiner Art den Menschen an Naturwissen überliefert hat. Es ist richtig, daß in den Vorstellungen, die man sich damals über die Natur machte, noch allerlei von Geistigem drinnen lebte, aber gewöhnlich beruht der tiefe Respekt derjenigen, die sich heute mit diesen Dingen befassen, nur darauf, daß sie sie nicht verstehen und daß sie dasjenige für sehr tief halten, was man nicht versteht.
[ 10 ] Was wichtig ist auf diesem Gebiet, ist, daß eben die menschlichen Seelen, die in gegenwärtigen Leibern verkörpert sind, auch zu jenem alten Wissen keine reale Beziehung mehr haben und mit dem, was durch das übrige Leben geht und womit heute jeder schon in der Schule gefürtert wird, eben angepfropft werden, also in irgendeiner Weise das der sinnlich-physischen Beobachtung entstammende Wissensmaterial aufnehmen. Was aber liegt, wenn man die Sache innerlich betrachtet, da eigentlich vor?
[ 11 ] Wir kommen heute in unsere Leiber hinein mit dem, was unsere Seelen in früheren Leben durchlebt haben, aber wir kommen in einer gewissen Weise so in unsere Leiber herein, daß wir kein Verhältnis mehr zu dem haben, was die Seelen in früheren Erdenleben durchlebt haben. Wir haben durch die verschiedenen Erdenleben hindurch - das mußte geschehen, weil das ja die Vorbereitung zur Ausbildung der Freiheit war — die Seelen so ausgebildet, daß sie in einer gewissen Weise ausgehöhlt sind von dem, was sie früher in sich aufgenommen haben, daß sie keine Beziehung mehr haben zu dem, was sie früher aufgenommen haben, daß sie in einer gewissen Weise leer sind gegenüber demjenigen, was eigentlich in der Welt lebt. Wir bringen in unseren Seelen nichts mehr herüber in dieser Beziehung aus früheren Erdenerlebnissen. Wir bringen wohl die Ergebnisse unserer moralischen Qualitäten herüber, aber wir bringen im Grunde genommen aus den früheren Erlebnissen, aus den früheren Erdenleben nicht dasjenige in dieses Erdenleben hinein, was zu einem irgendwie gearteten angeborenen Wissen von den Geheimnissen der Welt führen könnte. Die Seelen kommen heute nicht so in die Leiber herein, wie sie zum Beispiel noch in die griechischen Leiber hereingekommen sind. Die Seele, die durch die Geburt gegangen war im griechischen Leben, die kam noch mit einer durch das alte Wissen gespeisten Kraft in den physischen Leib herein, so daß sie diesen physischen Leib durchfrischen konnte mit geistig-seelischer Lebenskraft. Das ist heute nicht der Fall. Heute kommt zumeist die Seele so in den Leib herein, daß sie etwas für den Leib Aufzehrendes hat. Und in immer stärkerem und stärkerem Maße ist das der Fall, daß die Seelen, die heute geboren werden, etwas für den Leib Aufzehrendes haben, daß sie den Leib lähmen, daß sie ihn gewissermaßen mit Todesgewalten durchziehen. Würde die Entwickelung in diesem Sinne vorschreiten, so kämen wir ganz gewiß in die Untergrabung, in den Niedergang des Erdenlebens hinein. Die Menschen würden immer willensschwächer und willensschwächer. Die Menschen würden immer mehr und mehr zeigen, wie sie sich nicht aufraffen können zum Erfassen von aktiven Impulsen. Die Menschen würden gewissermaßen nur wie automatische Erfasser des Lebens durch dieses Leben gehen. Wie traurig ist es, daß wir in der Gegenwart sehen müssen, wie selten es ist, daß sich die Menschen innerlich befeuern lassen von lebendigen Ideen. Wie sehr finden wir, daß die Menschen der Gegenwart, man möchte sagen, an seelischer Sklerose leiden, daß sie tote Ideen wälzen, daß sie nur dasjenige, was sie mit den Traditionen aufnehmen, in ihren Köpfen wälzen und Automaten werden.
[ 12 ] Es ist ja wirklich so: Wenn man mit unbefangenem Sinn heute durch die Welt geht und diejenigen Menschen betrachtet, die heute im Leben stehen, so kann man sie eigentlich im Grunde genommen zu Dutzenden gar nicht voneinander unterscheiden. Man kann sie wirklich nicht unterscheiden. Man redet mit dem A, mit dem B, mit dem C, alle erzählen sie dasselbe. Jeder glaubt selbstverständlich, sein Eigenes zu sagen; aber man kann gar nicht darauf kommen, einen besonderen Unterschied zwischen ihnen anzugeben, sie erzählen alle dasselbe. Man hat eigentlich nur eine Art des Menschen in verschiedenen Exemplaren vor sich, und man frägt sich manchmal? Gibt man sich nicht einer Täuschung hin, ist nicht der, mit dem du heute sprichst, derselbe, mit dem du gestern gesprochen hast? — Das entspricht aber durchaus dem, was sich auch ergibt aus der Betrachtung der aufeinanderfolgenden Erdenleben im Verhältnis zu diesem jetzigen, besonderen Erdenleben. Die Seelen bringen sich eben nicht dasjenige mehr mit, was sie früher gehabt haben, was von Erdenleben zu Erdenleben gegangen ist und immer wiederum erschienen ist, wenn auch in absteigender Kraft, und was wie ein angeborenes Wissen da war. Das ist eben nicht mehr da. Und wenn dann mit solchen Seelen verbunden wird dasjenige, was nur äußerlich beobachtetes, physisch-sinnlich beobachtetes Naturwissen ist, dann werden diese Seelen angefüllt mit einem Wissen vom Vergänglichen, mit einem Wissen, das nur dasjenige in Ideengebilden ausdrückt, was äußerlich, vergänglich ist. Das 19. Jahrhundert hat ja, um sich in einer furchtbaren Illusion hinwegzutäuschen über diese Tatsache, zu dem schon älteren «Gesetz von der Erhaltung des Stoffes» hinzuerfunden das sogenannte «Gesetz von der Erhaltung der Kraft». Es hat diese Gesetze erfunden, um sich darüber hinwegzutäuschen, daß in der Natur nichts erhalten wird, sondern alles vergänglich ist, daß auch der Stoff und die Kraft vergänglich sind. Es bleibt von der Seele nichts mehr übrig, wenn die Inkarnationen sich in der Zukunft wiederholen, als der Menschheitsautomat, wenn diese leere Seele nur angefüllt wird mit dem sinnlich beobachteten, naturwissenschaftlichen Material. Denn das übt keine belebende, keine befruchtende Kraft auf die Seele aus.
[ 13 ] Die Seele wird heute geboren, herüberkommend aus früheren Erdenleben, lechzend darnach, befruchtet zu werden von irgend etwas, um wiederum weiterzukommen durch die folgenden Erdenleben. Aber die Aufnahme des Wissens von bloß Vergänglichem gibt ihr nur den Seelentod, mordet die Seele. Das ist dasjenige, was heute im Ernste durchschaut werden muß, daß, wenn es fortan bleibt, daß nur Nichtverstehen sein kann gegenüber den altgewordenen Dogmen, dann nur Lähmung, Tötung eintreten könnte durch ein nicht geistdurchdrungenes Naturwissen, und die Seele den zweiten Tod, den Seelentod erleiden müßte. Es hängt durchaus an den Menschen und an der Menschheit, die Seelen lebendig zu erhalten. Es darf sich der Mensch heute nicht jener bequemen Passivität hingeben, indem er sagt: Ich bin ein ewiges Wesen, und mein ewiger Wesenskern wird mir unter allen Umständen erhalten bleiben. -— Das entspricht nicht einem Wirklichkeitsergebnis. Dieser ewige Wesenskern ist allerdings im Menschen vorhanden, aber er muß gerade in diesem Zeitalter der Entscheidung befruchtet werden, wenn er nicht absterben soll. Und es gibt kein anderes Mittel, um die Seele lebendig zu erhalten, als zu brechen mit den bloß physisch-sinnlichen Naturbeobachtungen und zu begründen eine wirkliche Geist-Wissenschaft, auch gegenüber den Naturtatsachen zu zeigen, wie in allem sinnlich zu Beobachtenden der Geist lebt. Es kommt darauf an, nichts gelten zu lassen, was bloß Registrierung sinnlich-physischen Materials ist, sondern zu fordern, daß alles physisch-sinnliche Material durchdrungen werde von Vorstellungen des Geistigen, das ja darin lebt, das nur nicht herausgetrieben werden darf. Denn wenn dann die Seelen, die aus früheren Erdenleben kommen, dieses geisterfüllte Naturwissen aufnehmen, dann werden sie befruchtet und dadurch in die Lage versetzt, ihre Lebendigkeit hinüberzutragen in die folgenden Erdenleben. Der Fortbestand der Seele, ihre Gesundheit, ja der Fortbestand des Seelenlebens selbst, die Abwendung des Seelentodes der Menschheit hängen an der Durchgeistigung unseres Naturwissens!
[ 14 ] Aus diesen Tatsachen heraus und nicht aus irgendeinem beliebigen Vorurteil wird heute von uns angestrebt diese Durchgeistigung der Naturwissenschaft. Und wenn die Menschheit in vielen ihrer Exemplare sich gegen diese Durchgeistigung der Naturwissenschaft wendet, dann ist diese Menschheit, eben weil sie unwissend ist gegenüber der eigentlichen Bedeutung der Tatsachen, eben aufgestachelt von Geistern, die wir ja gut kennen, die sich um so mehr in der menschlichen Natur geltend machen können, je weniger die Seele mitgebracht hat aus ihren früheren Inkarnationen. Aus dem ganzen Gefüge unseres Gegenwartslebens, das geistig sich zusammensetzt aus geistentblößter Naturwissenschaft und sinnentblößten Bekenntnissen, geht dasjenige hervor, was immerfort wieder und wiederum in der absurdesten Weise sich gegnerisch verhält gegen den Willen zu einer geistigen Durchdringung des Naturwissens. Es kann nicht oft genug betont werden, wie notwendig es ist in unserer Zeit, solchen Sachverhalt tief innerlich zu verstehen und sich, wenn ich das Wort gebrauchen darf, einzustellen auf eine solche Tatsache. Wir können nicht ernst genug nehmen, was heute auf Ablehnung hingeht einer geistdurchdrungenen Wissenschaftlichkeit, ob es nun aufsprießt in jener Weise, die ich heute nachmittag habe erwähnen hören — ich weiß nicht, inwieweit sie auf Wahrheit beruht -: daß sogar auf einen Beschluß der Farben tragenden Studenten hin die erst in der vergangenen Woche gehaltenen Vorträge boykottiert worden sind, oder ob es in einer anderen Form auftritt. Man kann ja heute die Schriften, die sich gegen diese Geisteswissenschaft wenden, zu ganzen Stößen sammeln. Und was in recht dunkeln, unsauberen Strömungen sich geltend macht, das werden diejenigen, die diese Dinge zu verschlafen lieben, doch auch in verhältnismäßig vielleicht recht kurzer Zeit recht stark wahrnehmen können. Es ist ja heute noch bequemer, unaufmerksam zu sein auf diese Dinge, als aufmerksam zu sein auf sie. Aber wir stehen eben nicht mehr auf dem Punkte, wo wir den Weg zurückmachen könnten zum Unbesprochenbleiben von der Welt. Das läßt sich nicht mehr machen. Und deshalb gibt es nur ein Vorwärtsgehen. Aber dieses Vorwärtsgehen ist gebunden an ein aktives SichBeteiligen an den immer schlimmere Gestalten annehmenden — man kann es ja nicht mehr Diskussionen nennen, aber wollen wir es einmal so nennen — «Diskussionen» der Zeit. Nur wenn es uns gelingt, aus einer starken Kraft heraus, die nur, wenn jeder das Seinige tut, zusammenfließen kann, für Geisteswissenschaft einzutreten und uns nicht zu scheuen, überall in ungeschminkter Weise rückhaltlos zu charakterisieren, wo im Verborgenen offenbar Feindseligkeit gegen die Geisteswissenschaft vorhanden ist, nur dann kann eine Hoffnung bestehen, durchzukommen. Es handelt sich dabei viel weniger darum, bloß dasjenige, was etwa wörtlich genommen als Gegnerschaft gegen die Geisteswissenschaft auftritt, aufzufangen und dagegen verteidigend aufzutreten. Das ist gewiß in dem einen oder anderen Fall durchaus notwendig; aber es genügt das nicht. Denn schließlich ist das doch nur die sekundäre Erscheinung, wenn aus törichtem Mißverständlichen oder aus Mißverstehen entsprungen böswillig Gegnerschaft gegen die Geisteswissenschaft sich erhebt. Das ist gewissermaßen etwas Sekundäres, das ja natürlich ab und zu in das richtige Licht gesetzt werden muß. Sekundär ist es selbstverständlich, wenn - ich habe das neulich schon im öffentlichen Vortrag angeführt - solche Menschen wie Frohnmeyer über die Hauptgestalt der plastischen Gruppe in Dornach, die als die Christus-Gestalt erlebt werden kann, vorbringen: Daß sich in Dornach eine «Statue des Idealmenschen» befinde, «oben mit «luziferischen» Zügen, unten mit tierischen Merkmalen». - Es ist gewiß notwendig, daß auf so etwas hingewiesen wird, aber schließlich gar nicht einmal deswegen, um bloß unsere Geisteswissenschaft zu verteidigen, sondern aus einem viel tieferen, bedeutsameren Untergrunde heraus. Wer imstande ist, eine solche furchtbare Unwahrheit in die Welt zu setzen, der wirkt schädigend auf die Menschheit in allem, was er schreibt und sagt, wo er erziehend auf die Menschheit wirken soll. Und nicht das ist das Bedeutsame, daß so jemand einmal eine knüppeldicke Lüge ausspricht, sondern das ist das Bedeutsame, daß man von diesem Symptom aus, daß ein Mensch so stark lügen kann, ersieht, auf welchen Pfaden gewisse Führer der Menschheit heute wandeln. Man kann erkennen an den Angriffen gegen die Geisteswissenschaft, wie der heutige Wahrheitssinn beschaffen ist. Und auf dieses breitere Feld hinaus muß die Arbeit auf diesem geistigen Gebiet geführt werden. Das ist es, worauf es ankommt. Man darf nicht zurückschrecken vor dem Aufsuchen dieses mangelnden Wahrheitssinnes auf allen Gebieten. Und es muß die Menschheit verstehen lernen, daß nur mit wirklichem Wahrheitssinn der Zukunft entgegengearbeitet werden kann, wenn die Seelen den Weg finden sollen aus der Inkarnation dieses Zeitalters in die Inkarnation der nächsten Zeitalter hinein. Es handelt sich heute dabei nicht um etwas Formales, sondern durchaus um das reale Leben der Seele durch die aufeinanderfolgenden Erdenleben hindurch. Man suche und man wird finden, wie der Zusammenhang ist zwischen jener Ihnen früher charakterisierten innerlichen Unwahrhaftigkeit des Denkens - in äußerlich der Seele entgegengebrachten Bekenntnissen, ohne eine innerliche Verbindung herzustellen mit der Wahrheit - und der Unwahrhaftigkeit in der äußeren Welt. Denn schließlich ist es doch eine merkwürdige Erscheinung, daß solche Unwahrhaftigkeiten besonders bei denjenigen so stark auftreten — womit ich aber nicht sagen will, daß sie bei Genossen von den anderen Fakultäten nicht vorhanden wären -, die eigentlich die Belehrer der Menschheit, die großen Siegelbewahrer der religiösen Wahrheiten sein sollten.
[ 15 ] Das ist die erste Pflicht des heutigen Menschen, der irgendeine Beziehung zum geistigen Leben haben will: die kulturhistorisch gewordene Unwahrhaftigkeit aufzusuchen. Es ist merkwürdig, wie tief eingefressen diese kulturhistorische Unwahrhaftigkeit ist. Sie ist ein Charakteristikum unseres Zeitalters. Aus der Politik, in der sie ihre üblen Sumpfpflanzen getrieben hat, ist sie ja schließlich eingedrungen auch in manches andere Gebiet. Und es ist schon der Zustand eingetreten, daß die Menschen kaum mehr unterscheiden können zwischen Wahrhaftigkeit und Unwahrhaftigkeit in bezug auf gewisse Erscheinungen des Lebens. Sie sehen, es spielt eine gewisse Lebenserscheinung, die Unwahrhaftigkeit, der wir auf Schritt und Tritt im täglichen Leben begegnen, sowohl] in diesem täglichen Leben ihre Rolle, wie auch in den großen Angelegenheiten des Lebens. Schließlich ist die Unwahrhaftigkeit heute demselben Hang entsprossen, gleichgültig, ob sie nun auftritt bei den erleuchteten Herren - allerdings von einem merkwürdigen Licht erleuchtet -, die in Genf versammelt waren, oder ob sie auftritt bei den verschiedenen bürgerlichen und proletarischen Kaffeeklatschen. Was als Geist in Genf und in den bürgerlichen und proletarischen Kaffeeklatschen gelebt hat, ist als Unwahrhaftigkeit beliebt, und in Parenthese möchte ich sagen die Anwesenden müssen mir das nicht übelnehmen, in Parenthese darf ich es wohl sagen —, daß sie auch durchaus nicht ausgerottet ist innerhalb der Anthroposophischen Gesellschaft. Diese Unwahrhaftigkeit ist eine kulturhistorische Erscheinung der Gegenwart, und mit ihr muß man sich befassen. Sie darf vor allen Dingen auf keinem Gebiet bloß entschuldigt werden, sondern sie muß charakterisiert, vor die Zeitgenossen hingestellt werden. Wir erleben es ja immer wiederum, daß, wenn einmal die dringende Notwendigkeit sich herausstellt, auf solche Dinge hinzuweisen, uns auch von Leuten, die in der anthroposophischen Bewegung stehen, weil ihnen die Dinge unbequem sind, weil sie leben müssen innerhalb der Unwahrhaftigkeit und ihnen daher die Charakteristik der Unwahrhaftigkeit in dem einen oder andern Falle höchst unbequem ist, dieses Charakterisieren der Unwahrhaftigkeit immer wiederum übelgenommen wird.
[ 16 ] Diese Dinge, die ich heute gesagt habe, in Verbindung gedacht mit dem, was ich in den zwei vorigen Betrachtungen gesagt habe in bezug auf die Wiederverkörperung der Seelen über die heutige zivilisierte Welt hin, sowie über das Interesse, das bei einem Teil der Menschheit vorhanden ist, das Entscheidende, das im gegenwärtigen Zeitalter an die Menschheit heran will, nicht an diese Menschheit herankommen zu lassen, kann einen Begriff geben von dem großen Ernste der Zeitaufgaben, in denen wir drinnenstehen. |
[ 17 ] Diese Zeitaufgaben sind durchaus vom tiefsten Ernste durchdrungen. Und deshalb, weil es so notwendig ist, gerade auf unserem Boden von diesem Gesichtspunkte auszugehen, habe ich das letzte Mal am Schlusse davon gesprochen, wie schmerzlich es mir ist, daß heute so viel Zeit in Anspruch genommen wird, ohne daß zu gleicher Zeit die Möglichkeit vorhanden ist, die frühere anthroposophische Arbeit so fortzusetzen, wie sie vorhanden war, bevor die Notwendigkeit - eine Notwendigkeit ist es ja— sich ergeben hat, in den Dingen zu arbeiten, die ja hier oftmals besprochen worden sind, und die eben heute durchaus da sein müssen. Allein, wenn wir uns in das richtige Verhältnis zu diesen Dingen setzen wollen, dann ist es notwendig, notwendig gerade aus dem Geiste der großen Zeitaufgaben heraus.
[ 18 ] Wir müssen uns nämlich nur folgendes heute immer klarer und klarer machen: Unsere Freunde haben sich vielfach eingelebt in die anthroposophische Bewegung, wie sie ja im Grunde seit dem Beginn dieses Jahrhunderts da ist. Diese anthroposophische Bewegung ist etwas, was nun wirklich nicht bloß eine Realität hier auf dem physischen Plan hat, sondern was fortdauernd eine Angelegenheit der geistigen Welten ist, eine unmittelbare Angelegenheit der geistigen Welten ist. Selbstverständlich sind auch die äußersten praktischen Maßnahmen eine Angelegenheit der geistigen Welten, aber nicht in dem Sinn, wie es die anthroposophische Bewegung selbst ist. Und darüber muß ich heute ein paar Worte sagen. - Die anthroposophische Bewegung in ihren geistigen Aspekten, sie geht fort, ob die Menschen hier, die sie vertreten, fleißig oder faul sind; ob die Menschen, die sie vertreten, sich Mühe geben, die Dinge vorwärtszubringen oder nicht vorwärtszubringen, sie geht eben dann schneller oder langsamer vorwärts, aber sie bleibt in ihrer geistigen Realität vorhanden. Da es notwendig geworden ist, praktische Dinge ins Leben zu rufen, die unmittelbar aus den Forderungen der Gegenwart herausgewachsen sind, so steht es mit diesen Dingen anders. Diese Dinge müssen in ihrer richtigen Zeit gemacht werden, da es unmöglich ist, mit diesen Dingen zurechtzukommen, wenn sie nicht in der richtigen Zeit absolviert werden. Für die Dinge des praktischen Lebens kann es so liegen, daß, wenn sie in langsamem Trott gemacht werden, sie einfach zu spät kommen. Innerhalb der anthroposophischen Bewegung hat man sich aber vielfach gewöhnt an dasjenige, was langsam oder schnell gehen kann. Und es wird jetzt vielfach die Praxis, die man sich dort angeeignet hat, auch hinübergetragen in diejenigen Dinge, in denen diese Praxis nicht geht. Und das ist dasjenige, hauptsächlich, was zugrunde liegt dem, was ich neulich charakterisieren wollte, indem ich hingewiesen habe darauf, daß wiederum die Möglichkeit geschaffen werden muß, dasjenige, woraus ja doch schließlich alles fließt, die anthroposophische Bewegung als solche zu pflegen. Wie lange mußte ich schon darauf hinweisen, daß es gar nicht möglich ist, persönliche Unterredungen jetzt zu haben. Ja, meine lieben Freunde, wir haben in den letzten Tagen der vorigen Woche — die paar wenigen Leute, die nun wirklich arbeiten können in den praktischen Angelegenheiten -, wir haben unsere Tage bis gegen drei Uhr morgens besetzt gehabt. Und doch sind die Leute immer wiederum unwillig, wenn nicht dem Wunsche nach persönlicher Besprechung Rechnung getragen werden kann. Aber ich möchte wissen, woher die Zeit kommen soll dazu. Das muß verstanden werden. Daraus darf nicht eine Lässigkeit im anthroposophischen Leben selber fließen; sondern im Gegenteil, es muß geradezu eine Erkraftung des anthroposophischen Lebens daraus kommen. Denn seien Sie versichert, wenn diese Erkraftung des anthroposophischen Lebens kommt, dann kommt das andere Notwendige auch auf den praktischen Lebensgebieten von selber. Aber die Erkraftung muß kommen vor allen Dingen. Diese Erkraftung muß so kommen, daß wir versuchen, alles Träumerische aus unseren Seelen auszutreiben. Was bloß brüten will auf irgendeiner Lebensinsel, was sich nicht kümmern will um dasjenige, was im Leben heute vorgeht, ist dasjenige, was die Verfolgung der wirklichen Aufgaben des Lebens so lähmt. Diese Aufgaben werden gelähmt, wenn die Menschen auf der einen Seite einfach blind bleiben, schläfrig bleiben gegenüber dem, was im äußeren Leben sich abspielt, und ihr Heil, was aber mehr die Wollust ihrer Seele ist, suchen in der Bearbeitung allerlei lebensfremder, mystischer Probleme auf ihren Lebensinseln.
[ 19 ] Ich berühre damit etwas außerordentlich Wichtiges, etwas, was eine unmittelbare Anwendung der Ideen über die großen Aufgaben der Zeit auf unsere eigene Bewegung ist. — Jeder einzelne von uns müßte mitarbeiten an der Erkraftung dieser anthroposophischen Bewegung. Man kann nur mitarbeiten an der Erkraftung dieser anthroposophischen Bewegung, wenn man sich ein freies und offenes Auge anerzieht für dasjenige, was die Niedergangserscheinungen in unserem Kulturleben im Großen sind. Für Anthroposophen geht es nicht an, sich nicht zu kümmern um diese Niedergangserscheinungen im Großen. Es geht nicht an für Sie, sich nicht hinzuwenden zu dem, was die heutige Zivilisation durchdringt mit einer Kraft, die sie in den Abgrund hineintreibt. — Trotzdem es auf der einen Seite nicht gerne gehört wird, auf der anderen Seite immer wiederum vergessen wird, muß ich immer wiederum darauf hinweisen, daß die Dinge von selber nicht besser werden. Und das kontemplative Brüten heute, das eine Art transzendentaler Demonstration bei vielen ist, das ist dasjenige, was uns außerordentlich schadet. Statt daß der Wille aufgerüttelt wird und man sich sagt: Ich will tun -, brütet man darüber nach, ob da oder dort die Verhältnisse so sind, daß man etwas tun kann.
[ 20 ] Meine lieben Freunde, wenn man vom Beginn des Jahrhunderts so nachgedacht hätte über die anthroposophische Bewegung, niemals wäre sie heute dasjenige, was sie ist. Denn die gescheiten Leute, die dazumal aufgetreten sind, haben gesagt, in München müsse man so und so arbeiten; und die noch gescheiteren haben wieder unterschieden zwischen Schwabing und München, und haben überall das Gras wachsen hören, das ihnen anzeigte, wie die betreffenden Orte beschaffen sind. Dann sind solche gekommen, die haben in Hannover, in Frankfurt ganz besondere Verhältnisse gefunden. Das war etwas, dem man überall begegnete. Hätte man irgendwie darauf gehört, man wäre keinen Schritt vorwärtsgekommen. Es war das dazumal schon eine üble Sache, aber heute, wo es sich um Aufgaben des praktischen Lebens vielfach handelt, ist es eine noch üblere Sache. Denn heute handelt es sich nicht darum, daß wir solche Graswachserei aufstöbern, sondern darum, daß wir unseren Willen anspannen, um etwas zu tun, um wirklich zu arbeiten. Es ist natürlich ungemein leicht, zu sagen: Ich verspüre in der transzendentalen Atmosphäre dieses oder jenes Ortes, daß man da nicht das oder jenes tun kann — es ist viel leichter, als einfach etwas tun wollen. Man sollte so wenig wie möglich sich auf das Äußere heute berufen, und so viel wie möglich das Innere in Gang bringen. Das ist dasjenige, was nun wirklich nicht oft genug betont werden kann.
[ 21 ] Und dazu kommt eben, daß zwar der anthroposophische Ernst durchaus aufrechterhalten werden muß, daß aber wirklich die Kraft aufgebracht werden muß, in bezug auf das Äußere eben einfach wirklich mit Interesse auf die Dinge einzugehen. Wir müssen doch wissen, was in der Welt vor sich geht - und es gehen viele Dinge vor sich. Aber es ist erstaunlich, wie auch in unseren Kreisen man sich wenig kümmert um das, was geschieht.
[ 22 ] Ich will eine betrübliche Tatsache hervorheben. Diese Tatsache hat viele Ursachen, aber es würde heute die Zeit nicht ausreichen, alle die einzelnen Ursachen Ihnen zu schildern. Aber das liegt doch vor, daß unsere Zeitschrift für Dreigliederung seit dem Mai um fast keinen einzigen Abonnenten vorwärtsgekommen ist. Und dabei sind wir eine Gesellschaft, die Tausende und Tausende von Mitgliedern hat. Es ist wirklich recht traurig, daß eine solche Tatsache eben verzeichnet werden muß. Aber solche Tatsachen sind da, und das ist nur eine derselben. Glauben Sie, es ist durchaus wahr: die Gegner sind da andere Kerle, die sind überall auf ihrem Posten. Und deren Machinationen, die breiten sich aus. Ich sage diese Dinge nicht ohne Bedacht, und namentlich nicht ohne Bedacht dessen, was wir gewärtig sein müssen, wenn wir nicht alle Kraft zusammennehmen, die wir in uns haben, wenn wir nicht summieren all die einzelnen, individuellen Kräfte. Das brauchen wir. Wir müssen nun so viel Anthroposophie in uns haben, daß wir an die Werke gehen können, sonst kommen wir zu spät. Und ich sehe nicht, daß von anderer Seite dasjenige unternommen wird, was unternommen werden muß, sonst würde ich wahrhaftig nicht darauf verfallen, just von uns zu sagen, daß wir zu spät kommen.
[ 23 ] Es ist manches Schöne im Anzuge, vor allen Dingen die Teilnahme eines Teiles der Studentenschaft bei unseren Bestrebungen. Gerade aus diesem Gebiet heraus kann das Fruchtbarste erwachsen, wenn man dieser Sache mit echtem, wahrem Verständnis entgegenkommt; aber wir müssen uns auch klarsein darüber, wie man dieser Sache entgegenkommen muß. Da geht es ganz gewiß mit unklarem Mysteln nicht. Da handelt es sich darum, daß man aus innerem Lebensfleiß heraus der Sache entgegenkommt.
[ 24 ] Dieses und noch manches andere wäre vielleicht heute zu sagen, aber ich denke, das andere könnte sich bei Ihnen selbst einfinden, wenn Sie die Gedankengänge, die angeregt worden sind, in sich selber weiter entwickeln. Aber daß sie sich weiter entwickeln möchten, das ist dasjenige, was ich am Schlusse dieses letzten Vortrages als einen vorläufigen Wunsch hinstellen möchte. Und jetzt sind die Zeiten so, daß ich einen solchen Wunsch nicht hinstellen kann für die Erfüllung auf Jahre hinaus, sondern daß ich nur sehen kann auf die Wochen, bis ich wiederum hier sein kann. Denn im Grunde stehen die Dinge jetzt so, daß wir wirklich die Zeit brauchen, daß wirklich jede Woche verloren sein kann, die wir nicht benützen.
[ 25 ] Deshalb, meine lieben Freunde, möchte ich Ihnen am Schlusse dieses Vortrages zweierlei sagen: Erstens möchte ich den Wunsch aussprechen, daß dasjenige verstanden werde, was ich heute gesagt habe, bis wir uns wiedersehen. Das zweite: daß dieses Wiedersehn eben erfolgen könnte, indem hingewiesen werden kann auf Dinge, die in der Richtung dieses Wunsches liegen. In diesem Sinne sage ich Ihnen auf Wiedersehen!
Fourth lecture
[ 1 ] During my visit this time, our reflections focused on how the anthroposophical understanding of the great tasks of our time can be taken seriously in life. When we say “in relation to the great tasks of our time,” we do not necessarily mean what hovers above humanity, so to speak, and must be regulated by a few authoritative individuals over the heads of others. Rather, we must be clear today that what plays out between people in everyday life contains within itself, flows through itself, so to speak, what belongs to the great tasks of the time. This should naturally be the first consequence of the anthroposophical worldview to sink into our souls. For this anthroposophical worldview leads us to recognize that the spiritual lives in everything, not somewhere in abstract heights, but in the life that surrounds us, in which we stand every day. And it is precisely this that we must learn to apply to the great tasks of life and to the small everyday experiences and actions.
[ 2 ] If we look at today's life from this point of view, we can ask ourselves: What are the components of this life, especially in relation to the spiritual, that surround us? In what do we live spiritually as human beings in this age? We have the remnants of old creeds, these various creeds that gather their followers into communities and teach them, in some traditional way that has been handed down, what is regarded as the belief in the eternal nature of man. In the most diverse forms and nuances, this belief is taught to people through the various creeds. People then live in this belief and also think that they are satisfying the needs of their souls through this belief. Alongside this belief, we now have something that is just as popular as the individual creeds themselves among their followers, namely, what comes from the science that is taught in our educational institutions today. This science has gradually developed to consider only the sensory-physical material, at most permeating it with a few inadequate spiritual ideas, which are already more or less disappearing. There is an increasing tendency to regard as science only that which can be found in sensory-physical observation and at most combined by the intellect.
[ 3 ] Wherever we look in today's civilized world, we see that people draw from two sources: on the one hand, from what is taught to them as so-called serious, exact knowledge, which they accept on authority; for everyone who does not work in one of the intellectual professions accepts knowledge on authority, and it is above all the great mass of people who accept knowledge in this way. And besides being taught in popular magazines how to think about astronomical, physical, chemical facts, about biology, zoology, mineralogy, botany, history, and so on, besides absorbing these things and being taught in this way and then saying: All this must be true, because it comes from those people who are appointed as authorities on the subject by the usual authorities, one also takes in the other things that flow from the various creeds. No bridge is built between the two, because people are usually taught by their creeds that they must keep knowledge and belief strictly separate, that they must not merge knowledge and belief in any way. Only in the rarest of cases does a conscious effort to see through this state of affairs take place. People make every effort to acknowledge what is communicated to them as exact truth through the usual channels of scientific authority. But they do not investigate the matter to examine how the working methods by which such scientific knowledge is obtained actually function.
[ 4 ] On the other hand, little attention is paid to the origins of what has been handed down through the ages as creeds and is traditionally presented to humanity by the official representatives of these creeds today. A stirring toward a full awareness of what is actually at hand takes place only in the rarest of cases. And when it does take place, there is little opportunity today to see things in their proper light. For let us suppose that someone, say, within the Catholic or Protestant confession, rebels against what is called dogma. then what usually happens is that this dogma is regarded as “nonsense,” that people argue against it and thereby reject what is traditional belief, but they don't find anything to replace it with.
[ 5 ] Such a dogma—I will cite a central dogma right away—is, for example, that of the Trinity, the three persons of the divine being. Anyone who encounters such a dogma as it is presented to him today in the creeds will find it easy, in a certain sense, to argue against it if he takes the standpoint of today's scientific way of thinking. For in this sense he will be able to reveal very easily what is “nonsense” about such a dogma. But those who go back to the origin of such a dogma will find that the dogmas of the common creeds have been handed down through long periods of human history, but that at the starting point of the origin of these dogmas stands what I have often characterized as the instinctive clairvoyance that existed in earlier stages of human development, atavistic clairvoyance, the ability to look into the spiritual world. Such dogmas have thus arisen from this clairvoyance, and one might say: something like the dogma of the Trinity has arisen from deep, profound insights into the structure of world existence. Once upon a time, this dogma of the Trinity was a deeply recognized truth. It represented a profound insight into the connections of reality. But that was present in those ancient times when the human soul's abilities, the powers of cognition, which, as I said, were a kind of instinctive clairvoyance, were in harmony with such a dogma. The dogma then spread. It no longer fits the present development of the human soul forces. As a rule, several earth lives have passed since that time for every human being who experienced this dogma when it arose. The souls have undergone various experiences during these earth lives. In the outer world, the dogma has been preserved; it has been passed down from generation to generation. Today it has taken on a form that can no longer be understood from the words with which it is communicated. And now these souls are reborn; the dogma is presented to them from the church. There is no inner human relationship between what is presented to human souls through the creeds and what the souls themselves strive to experience and know. What seems so bad in the present is not that the dogmas are false, but what matters is that the dogmas are a form of grasping the truth that no longer corresponds to the conditions of the present time, that the dogmas no longer meet the needs of human souls. So we can say that these dogmas are preached today by being breathed out into the empty wind. Even those who profess to believe in them do not do so in inner soul truth, for they mostly do not understand the dogmas. But to accept what one does not understand is an inner untruth. And it is basically this inner untruth that is causing so much damage in our present time through the untruthfulness of the world.
[ 6 ] What has passed through humanity in recent years in terms of untruthfulness is truly immeasurable. But basically, it is not surprising that this is so, for the simple reason that when souls live in the untruthfulness I have just described, it is no wonder that they have no sense of truthfulness in their outer lives. This should be borne in mind above all by those who believe today that they must stand up for traditional beliefs. It is indeed a serious matter with which one must concern oneself in this area.
[ 7 ] One could say that the souls who have passed through various earthly lives have outgrown the dogmas since these creeds were formed. Just as one must take seriously the things I have developed for you in the last two lectures here in relation to life, so must one take seriously the view of repeated earthly lives in this area as well, take it seriously in terms of life.
[ 8 ] But let us consider from the same point of view what is given to humanity today in the form of external science. There, knowledge is formed that originates solely from sensory physical observation. This is to be united with what lives in us as the human soul; it is to take in and fill itself with what is merely sensory-physical material of observation.
[ 9 ] He carries within himself the soul that has passed through earthly life, which does not find anything in religious creeds with which it can connect. However, it connects, at least for certain areas of life, with what is today recognized as science. The question must be raised: What happens to the human soul when it connects with this recognized science, which observes only in the sensory-physical realm? — The souls that are now incorporated into physical organisms have indeed taken into themselves in previous incarnations that which corresponded to conditions of nature, the environment, and the world that were completely different from what is taken in by this knowledge today. One can find only relatively few souls that are now embodied which were not in their previous lives so embodied that they connected, for example, with what had been told them about natural phenomena a certain knowledge or, let us say, a certain conception of the spiritual. Such a spiritual science, as it has developed over the last three or four centuries, did not exist before. What was given to humanity as natural science in those older times, in those times not so long ago, was such that when one presented a sensory fact, one still had something in that sensory fact that permeated it with something spiritual. This is why many people today, who are not particularly interested in keeping up with the times, find nothing satisfying in contemporary sensory-physical natural science, and therefore ignore it and do not concern themselves with it, but instead dig up all kinds of old books and investigate what Basilius Valentinus or some other person of his kind has handed down to humanity in terms of knowledge about nature. It is true that in the ideas people had about nature at that time, all kinds of spiritual things still lived on, but usually the deep respect of those who deal with these things today is based only on the fact that they do not understand them and that they consider what they do not understand to be very profound.
[ 10 ] What is important in this field is that the human souls embodied in present bodies no longer have any real connection with that ancient knowledge and are grafted onto what passes through the rest of life and what everyone is taught in school today, are grafted onto them, that is, they absorb in some way the knowledge material derived from sensory-physical observation. But when one considers the matter inwardly, what is actually there?
[ 11 ] Today we enter our bodies with what our souls have experienced in previous lives, but we enter our bodies in such a way that we no longer have any connection with what the souls experienced in previous earthly lives. Throughout our various earthly lives — this had to happen because it was the preparation for the development of freedom — we have trained our souls in such a way that they are, in a sense, hollowed out of what they previously absorbed, so that they no longer have any relationship to what they previously absorbed, so that they are, in a sense, empty of what actually lives in the world. We no longer bring anything from our previous earthly experiences into our souls in this respect. We do bring over the results of our moral qualities, but basically we do not bring into this earthly life anything from our previous experiences, from our previous earthly lives, that could lead to any kind of innate knowledge of the mysteries of the world. Today, souls do not enter bodies in the same way as they did, for example, in Greek bodies. The soul that had passed through birth in Greek life still entered the physical body with a power nourished by ancient knowledge, so that it could refresh this physical body with spiritual-soul life force. This is not the case today. Today, the soul usually enters the body in such a way that it has something that consumes the body. And it is increasingly the case that the souls born today have something that consumes the body, that they paralyze the body, that they permeate it, as it were, with forces of death. If development were to continue in this sense, we would certainly end up undermining and destroying life on earth. People would become weaker and weaker in their will. They would show more and more that they are unable to muster the energy to grasp active impulses. They would, in a sense, go through life as mere automatic recorders of life. How sad it is that we must see in the present how rare it is for people to allow themselves to be inspired by living ideas. How much do we find that people of the present, one might say, suffer from spiritual sclerosis, that they roll around dead ideas, that they only roll around in their heads what they have absorbed from tradition and become automatons.
[ 12 ] It is really true: if you go through the world today with an unbiased mind and look at the people who are living today, you cannot really distinguish between dozens of them. You really cannot tell them apart. You talk to A, to B, to C, and they all say the same thing. Everyone naturally believes they are saying something unique, but it is impossible to discern any particular difference between them; they all say the same thing. One is actually faced with only one type of human being in different forms, and one sometimes wonders: Are we not deceiving ourselves? Is the person you are talking to today not the same person you talked to yesterday? — But that corresponds perfectly to what emerges from the consideration of successive earthly lives in relation to this present, particular earthly life. Souls no longer bring with them what they had before, what passed from one earthly life to another and always reappeared, albeit with diminishing power, and what was there as innate knowledge. That is no longer there. And when such souls are connected with what is only externally observed, physically and sensually observed knowledge of nature, then these souls become filled with a knowledge of the transitory, with a knowledge that expresses only what is external and transitory in idea formations. In order to delude itself about this fact, the 19th century added the so-called “law of conservation of energy” to the already older “law of conservation of matter.” It invented these laws to delude itself that nothing is conserved in nature, but that everything is transitory, that even matter and energy are transitory. Nothing remains of the soul when incarnations repeat themselves in the future, as the human automaton, when this empty soul is filled only with the sensually observed, scientific material. For this exerts no invigorating, no fertilizing power on the soul.
[ 13 ] The soul is born today, coming over from previous earthly lives, thirsting to be fertilized by something in order to progress through subsequent earthly lives. But the absorption of knowledge of mere transience only brings about the death of the soul, murders the soul. This is what must be seriously understood today: that if it remains the case that there can only be a lack of understanding of the outdated dogmas, then only paralysis and death can result from a knowledge of nature that is not imbued with spirit, and the soul will suffer a second death, the death of the soul. It is entirely up to human beings and humanity to keep souls alive. Human beings today must not indulge in comfortable passivity by saying: I am an eternal being, and my eternal core will remain with me under all circumstances. That does not correspond to the reality of the situation. This eternal core of our being does exist in human beings, but it must be fertilized in this age of decision if it is not to die. And there is no other means of keeping the soul alive than to break with mere physical-sensory observations of nature and to establish a real spiritual science that shows, even in relation to natural facts, how the spirit lives in everything that can be observed with the senses. It is important not to accept anything that is merely a recording of physical-sensory material, but to demand that all physical-sensory material be permeated by ideas of the spiritual, which lives within it and must not be driven out. For when the souls that come from previous earthly lives take up this spirit-filled knowledge of nature, they are fertilized and thereby enabled to carry their vitality over into their subsequent earthly lives. The continued existence of the soul, its health, indeed the continued existence of the soul life itself, the averting of the death of the soul of humanity, depend on the spiritualization of our knowledge of nature!
[ 14 ] Based on these facts, and not on any arbitrary prejudice, we are striving today for this spiritualization of natural science. And if humanity in many of its members turns against this spiritualization of natural science, then this humanity, precisely because it is ignorant of the true meaning of the facts, is incited by spirits whom we know well, who can assert themselves all the more in human nature the less the soul has brought with it from its previous incarnations. From the whole structure of our present life, which is spiritually composed of science stripped of spirit and confessions stripped of meaning, emerges that which constantly and again and again behaves in the most absurd manner contrary to the will for a spiritual penetration of natural science. It cannot be emphasized often enough how necessary it is in our time to understand such facts deeply within ourselves and, if I may use the word, to adjust ourselves to such a reality. We cannot take seriously enough what is happening today in terms of rejection of a spiritual science, whether it sprouts in the way I heard mentioned this afternoon—I do not know to what extent it is based on truth—that even on the decision of students wearing colors, the lectures held only last week were boycotted, or whether it appears in another form. Today, one can collect whole stacks of writings that are directed against this spiritual science. And what is asserting itself in rather dark, unclean currents will be perceived quite strongly, perhaps in a relatively short time, by those who love to sleep through these things. Today, it is still more comfortable to be inattentive to these things than to be attentive to them. But we are no longer at the point where we can turn back to remaining unspoken by the world. That is no longer possible. And therefore there is only one way forward. But this way forward is bound to active participation in the increasingly terrible forms—one can no longer call them discussions, but let us call them that for the sake of argument—of the “discussions” of the time. Only if we succeed, out of a strong force that can only come together if everyone does their part, in standing up for spiritual science and not shying away from characterizing unreservedly and unvarnishedly wherever there is hidden hostility toward spiritual science, only then can there be any hope of getting through. It is much less a matter of merely countering what appears to be opposition to spiritual science in the literal sense and defending ourselves against it. This is certainly necessary in one case or another, but it is not enough. For ultimately, it is only a secondary phenomenon when malicious opposition to spiritual science arises from foolish misunderstanding or misinterpretation. This is, so to speak, something secondary, which of course must be put into the right light from time to time. It is of course secondary when—as I recently mentioned in a public lecture—people like Frohnmeyer make statements about the main figure of the plastic group in Dornach, which can be experienced as the Christ figure, saying that there is a “statue of the ideal human being” in Dornach, “with Luciferic features at the top and animal characteristics at the bottom.” It is certainly necessary to point this out, but ultimately not even to defend our spiritual science, but from a much deeper, more significant underlying reason. Anyone who is capable of putting such a terrible untruth into the world has a damaging effect on humanity in everything they write and say, wherever they are supposed to have an educational influence on humanity. And what is significant is not that someone like this utters a blatant lie, but that this symptom, that a person can lie so strongly, reveals the paths on which certain leaders of humanity are walking today. The attacks against spiritual science reveal the nature of today's sense of truth. And it is in this broader field that work in this spiritual realm must be carried out. That is what matters. We must not shy away from seeking out this lack of truthfulness in all areas. And humanity must learn to understand that only with a genuine sense of truth can we work toward the future if souls are to find their way out of the incarnation of this age and into the incarnation of the next. This is not a matter of form today, but of the real life of the soul through successive earthly lives. Seek and you will find the connection between the inner untruthfulness of thinking that I characterized earlier—in outward confessions made to the soul without establishing an inner connection with the truth—and the untruthfulness in the outer world. For it is indeed a strange phenomenon that such untruthfulness occurs so strongly among those who should actually be the teachers of humanity, the great guardians of religious truths—though I do not mean to say that it is not present among their colleagues in other faculties.
[ 15 ] This is the first duty of people today who want to have any connection with spiritual life: to seek out the untruthfulness that has become part of cultural history. It is remarkable how deeply ingrained this cultural-historical untruthfulness is. It is a characteristic feature of our age. From politics, where it has grown into a foul swamp, it has finally penetrated many other areas. And we have already reached the point where people can hardly distinguish between truthfulness and untruthfulness in relation to certain phenomena of life. You see, there is a certain phenomenon of life, untruthfulness, which we encounter at every turn in our daily lives, and which plays a role both in this daily life and in the great affairs of life. Ultimately, untruthfulness today has sprung from the same tendency, regardless of whether it appears among the enlightened gentlemen—albeit enlightened by a strange light—who gathered in Geneva, or whether it appears in the various bourgeois and proletarian coffee klatches. What has lived as spirit in Geneva and in bourgeois and proletarian coffee klatches is popular as untruthfulness, and in parentheses I would like to say that those present need not take offense at this, in parentheses I may well say that it is by no means eradicated within the Anthroposophical Society. This untruthfulness is a cultural-historical phenomenon of the present, and we must deal with it. Above all, it must not be merely excused in any area, but must be characterized and presented to our contemporaries. We experience time and again that when the urgent need arises to point out such things, even people who are part of the anthroposophical movement because they find things uncomfortable, because they have to live within untruthfulness and therefore find the characterization of untruthfulness in one case or another highly inconvenient, this characterization of untruthfulness is always taken badly.
[ 16 ] These things I have said today, considered in connection with what I said in the two previous reflections concerning the reincarnation of souls in the present civilized world, as well as concerning the interest that exists among a part of humanity in the decisive factor that wants to reach humanity in the present age, not be allowed to reach this humanity, can give us an idea of the great seriousness of the tasks of the times in which we live.
[ 17 ] These tasks of the times are thoroughly permeated with the deepest seriousness. And because it is so necessary to start from this point of view, especially in our country, I spoke at the end of my last lecture about how painful it is for me that so much time is being taken up today without the possibility of continuing the earlier anthroposophical work as it existed before the necessity — for it is indeed a necessity — arose to work on the things that have often been discussed here and which are absolutely necessary today. But if we want to relate to these things in the right way, then it is necessary, necessary precisely out of the spirit of the great tasks of the times.
[ 18 ] For we must make ourselves increasingly clear today that our friends have in many ways become accustomed to the anthroposophical movement as it has existed since the beginning of this century. This anthroposophical movement is something that is truly not merely a reality here on the physical plane, but is continually a matter for the spiritual worlds, an immediate matter for the spiritual worlds. Of course, the most practical measures are also a matter for the spiritual worlds, but not in the same sense as the anthroposophical movement itself. And I must say a few words about this today. The anthroposophical movement in its spiritual aspects continues, whether the people here who represent it are diligent or lazy, whether the people who represent it make an effort to advance things or not; it simply progresses more quickly or more slowly, but it remains present in its spiritual reality. Since it has become necessary to bring practical things into being that have grown directly out of the demands of the present, the situation is different with these things. These things must be done at the right time, because it is impossible to cope with them if they are not accomplished at the right time. In practical life, things may be such that if they are done at a slow pace, they simply arrive too late. Within the anthroposophical movement, however, people have become accustomed to what can be done slowly or quickly. And now the practice that has been acquired there is often carried over to things where this practice does not work. And that is mainly what underlies what I wanted to characterize recently when I pointed out that the possibility must be created again to cultivate the anthroposophical movement as such, from which everything ultimately flows. How long have I had to point out that it is not at all possible to have personal conversations now. Yes, my dear friends, in the last few days of last week — the few people who are really able to work on practical matters — we worked until around three in the morning. And yet people are always unwilling when their desire for personal discussion cannot be accommodated. But I would like to know where the time for this is supposed to come from. This must be understood. This must not lead to a laxity in anthroposophical life itself; on the contrary, it must lead to a strengthening of anthroposophical life. For you may be assured that when this strengthening of anthroposophical life comes, then the other necessities will also come of their own accord in the practical areas of life. But this strengthening must come first and foremost. This strengthening must come in such a way that we try to drive all dreaminess out of our souls. What merely wants to brood on some island of life, what does not want to concern itself with what is happening in life today, is what so paralyzes the pursuit of the real tasks of life. These tasks are paralyzed when people on the one hand remain blind, remain sleepy to what is happening in outer life, and seek their salvation, which is more the lust of their souls, in the elaboration of all kinds of unworldly, mystical problems on their islands of life.
[ 19 ] I am touching here on something extremely important, something that is a direct application of the ideas about the great tasks of the time to our own movement. — Each and every one of us must work to strengthen this anthroposophical movement. One can only cooperate in strengthening this anthroposophical movement if one trains oneself to have a free and open eye for what are the signs of decline in our cultural life as a whole. It is not acceptable for anthroposophists to ignore these signs of decline in the larger picture. It is not acceptable for you to turn away from what is permeating today's civilization with a force that is driving it into the abyss. Although it is not pleasant to hear on the one hand, and is always forgotten on the other, I must repeatedly point out that things will not improve on their own. And the contemplative brooding of today, which is a kind of transcendental demonstration for many, is what is doing us extraordinary harm. Instead of stirring up the will and saying, “I want to do something,” people brood over whether the circumstances here or there are such that something can be done.
[ 20 ] My dear friends, if people had thought about the anthroposophical movement in this way at the beginning of the century, it would never have become what it is today. For the clever people who appeared at that time said that in Munich one had to work this way or that way; and those who were even cleverer distinguished between Schwabing and Munich, and heard the grass growing everywhere, which told them what the places in question were like. Then came those who found very special conditions in Hanover and Frankfurt. That was something one encountered everywhere. If one had listened to them, one would not have made any progress. It was a bad thing back then, but today, when it comes to practical tasks, it is even worse. For today it is not a question of digging up such grass, but of summoning up our will to do something, to really work. It is, of course, extremely easy to say: I feel in the transcendental atmosphere of this or that place that one cannot do this or that — it is much easier than simply wanting to do something. One should refer as little as possible to the external today and set the internal in motion as much as possible. That is something that really cannot be emphasized often enough.
[ 21 ] And then there is the fact that, although the anthroposophical seriousness must be maintained, we really must summon up the strength to engage with things externally with genuine interest. We must know what is going on in the world — and there is a lot going on. But it is astonishing how little attention is paid to what is happening, even in our circles.
[ 22 ] I would like to highlight a sad fact. There are many reasons for this, but there is not enough time today to describe them all to you. But the fact remains that our magazine on threefold social order has gained almost no new subscribers since May. And yet we are a society with thousands and thousands of members. It is truly sad that such a fact must be recorded. But such facts exist, and this is just one of them. Believe me, it is absolutely true: our opponents are different people, they are everywhere in their positions. And their machinations are spreading. I do not say these things without consideration, and especially not without consideration of what we must expect if we do not gather all the strength we have within us, if we do not add up all the individual forces. That is what we need. We must now have so much anthroposophy within us that we can get to work, otherwise we will be too late. And I do not see that what needs to be done is being done from other quarters, otherwise I would not be inclined to say that we are too late.
[ 23 ] There are many beautiful things in the making, above all the participation of some of the student body in our endeavors. It is precisely from this area that the most fruitful results can arise, if one approaches this matter with genuine, true understanding; but we must also be clear about how to approach this matter. There is certainly no room for vague mysticism here. It is a matter of approaching the matter with inner zeal.
[ 24 ] This and many other things could perhaps be said today, but I think the rest will come to you if you continue to develop the ideas that have been suggested within yourselves. But that you would like to develop them further is what I would like to express as a provisional wish at the end of this last lecture. And now the times are such that I cannot express such a wish for fulfillment years from now, but can only look forward to the weeks until I can be here again. For basically, things are now such that we really need the time, that every week we do not use can really be lost.
[ 25 ] Therefore, my dear friends, I would like to say two things to you at the end of this lecture: First, I would like to express the wish that what I have said today will be understood by the time we meet again. Second, that this reunion may take place by pointing to things that are in the direction of this wish. With this in mind, I bid you farewell!