Apollonius of Tyana
GA 203
28 March 1921, Dornach
Translated by D. S. Osmond and C. Davy
[ 1 ] To examine the standpoints from which various seekers after the spirit in earlier epochs took their start has a certain importance at the present time. It is important not only because ill-intentioned and dilettante opponents of Spiritual Science maintain that many things have simply been taken over from ancient traditions, but above all because the knowledge of what can be discovered to-day from the original spiritual sources is clarified when we compare it with the faculties possessed by mankind in earlier times, and with the different kinds of quests for knowledge of the spirit in epochs of evolution when men's consciousness was essentially instinctive in character. In order to indicate something in this direction I want to speak to-day of how Christ-Jesus has often been brought into conjunction with one who was His contemporary—Apollonius of Tyana.1The following passage occurs in Lecture III of the Course From Jesus to Christ, given by Rudolf Steiner in Carlsruhe, October, 1911.
"Apollonius of Tyana is an individuality who went through many incarnations, who had acquired lofty powers and who reached a certain climax in his incarnation at the beginning of our era. Note carefully.—The individuality of whom we are speaking, and who in past ages had had many incarnations, is he who lived in the body of Apollonius of Tyana, and had therein his earthly field of action . . . And be-cause we know that a human individuality takes part in the building of his human body, that the latter is not simply a duality but that the human being works upon the form his body takes, we have to say: The body of this individuality was built up by him into a certain form purposely for his own use. This we cannot say in reference to Christ-Jesus. The Christ came in the thirtieth year of the life of Jesus of Nazareth into the physical body, etheric body and astral body; the Christ therefore had not from childhood built up for Himself this body. The relationship is quite different between the Christ-Individuality and the body, and the Apollonius-individuality and his body…"
See inter alia: Emil Bock, The Three Years, chapter I "Apollonius of Tyana and Jesus of Nazareth"; and G. R. S. Mead, Apollonius of Tyana, the philosopher-reformer of the first century A.D.
The only complete Life of Apollonius of Tyana is by Philostratus, an Athenian of the third century A.D. This work is quoted by Emil Bock, and exists in English translation.
The two figures have in a certain sense been confused, and endeavours have been made to compare, in a quite unhistorical way, the life of Apollonius of Tyana with that of Christ-Jesus. Such a comparison does, admittedly, bring to light a fairly considerable number of external, biographical details where similarity is shown. We know that in the Gospel narratives of Christ-Jesus there is much that for the modern mind falls within the concept of "miracle", and the biographies of Apollonius of Tyana also tell of all kinds of miraculous deeds performed by him. The way in which such things are expounded today, however, simply shows what superficial ideas prevail about the evolution of humanity. These stories of healing of the sick and similar happenings, called "signs" in the Gospels, are connected with a stage of human evolution altogether different from the one in which we are living to-day. The psychic influence of one man upon another, even man's psychic influence upon the inorganic environment, has waned greatly in the course of time as far as ordinary life is concerned, and when we are told of such happenings at the beginning of the Christian era, one who has inner understanding knows that what men in those times were able to demonstrate was viewed altogether differently from things of a similar nature that may happen to-day. Quite different premises must be the starting-point in our times, premises that must be created through spiritual- scientific knowledge.
If we want to understand the Gospels rightly, we must not by any means place the main value upon the stories of the miracles but we must realise that stories of miracles performed by a man of outstanding moral eminence were in those times accepted as a simple matter of course. No difference whatever in this respect was assumed to exist between one such as Jesus of Nazareth, in whom dwelt the Christ, and a man such as Apollonius of Tyana.
[ 2 ] Let us understand one another clearly.—What is narrated about such men and is to-day called a "miracle" was taken as a matter of course. Nothing of special importance was meant to be conveyed by such narratives. And when modern theology is at pains to deduce the divine nature of Christ-Jesus from the fact that He performed miracles, this theology only shows that its standpoint is not truly Christian—apart altogether from the fact that such a conception runs counter to historical reality. With Christ-Jesus the essential thing is never the actual performing of the miracle, but always that which is disclosed to us through the stories of the miracles. The important point to emphasise always is that when men of earlier times strove to work wonders, they had recourse to a lower force of the Ego, whereas Christ-Jesus worked out of the force of the Ego itself. We should not rightly understand the Lord's Prayer if we were to explain its existence by saying that, the single sentences are already to be found among earlier peoples and that it is therefore ancient. Anyone who compares these earlier forms of the sentences in the Lord's Prayer with the Lord's Prayer itself, will realise that with the Lord's Prayer the essential thing was that what had formerly been expressed in a way which did not point to the Ego, should now be expressed in a way which did point to the Ego.2See Lecture IX of the Course The Gospel of St Matthew, pp. 139-44. Dr Steiner quotes from the German translation of the book by J. M. Robertson, Christianity and Mythology, Part III, The Gospel Myths, pp. 415-21, where arguments are adduced in an attempt to show that the sentences contained in the Lord's Prayer were derived from pre-Christian Jewish sources. But these older versions do not contain the sentence: "Thy Will be done on Earth as it is in Heaven"—which implies the activity of the Ego itself. In pre-Christian times, men experienced the Father God as the ground of existence while they were in a state of suppressed consciousness. But with the coming of the Kingdom of Heaven to Earth, the experience was henceforward to take place in full consciousness. "Christ Jesus inaugurated an evolution in human nature based on the retention of the full Ego consciousness. He inaugurated the initiation of the Ego…” p. 144.
The terms used by Owen Barfield in his recent book Saving the Appearances, to depict the evolution of human consciousness, are very illuminating in this connection.—Whereas the old, pre-Christian sentences still assumed "Original Participation", the Gospel version of the Lord's Prayer points to "Final Participation".
[ 3 ] We should not therefore go in search of the similarities with Christ-Jesus recorded in these particular biographical data. It is natural, of course, that similarities should appear in narratives concerned with the performing of miracles—that is to say, happenings that are now called miraculous. Account must be taken of something altogether different if we are to be clear as to how a figure such as Apollonius of Tyana stands in relation to Christ-Jesus. And the first thing to notice is the following:—
[ 4 ] Of Apollonius of Tyana it is told how in his childhood and growing years he showed evidence of great gifts; how he participated in the very highest kinds of instruction available in those days, as for example the teachings that had grown out of the Pythagorean School. But then it is further narrated that in order to acquire knowledge, Apollonius of Tyana set out on long journeys; we are told of these journeys, first of those less distant and then of his far journey to the sages of India. We hear how he learnt to admire and venerate these sages, and how through them he pressed forward to certain wellsprings of knowledge. Then we are told how he returned, inspired by what he had witnessed among these Indian sages, and taught in manifold ways again in Southern Europe. It is also said that he went to Egypt, and how, having first absorbed in the North of Egypt all that was accessible there, he found it very insignificant, compared with the wonderful wisdom he had encountered among the Indians. He journeyed up the Nile towards its sources, and also to the centres of the so-called Gymnosophists—the community of wise men who, after the Brahmin sages of India, were the most deeply venerated in those times. But we are told that Apollonius was already so steeped in Indian wisdom that he could distinguish between it and the lesser wisdom possessed by the Gymnosophists of Egypt. He returned from Egypt and went on various other remarkable journeys; in Rome he was persecuted, thrown into prison, and so on.
[ 5 ] Now the fact of paramount interest to us is that these great journeys undertaken by Apollonius of Tyana are always associated with the widening and extension of his own wisdom. His wisdom increases all the time through his contact with the wisest men in the world of his day. He travels from place to place, seeking out those who were in possession of the greatest wisdom at that time.
[ 6 ] In this he is to be distinguished from Christ Jesus, whose sojourn on earth is spent in a comparatively small area, who utters what He has to say to mankind entirely from the inmost essence of His Being, who has to speak, not of wisdom to be found in the surrounding earthly world, but of what He has brought down to the earth from worlds beyond the earth.
Attempts have actually been made to ascribe journeys to India to Christ-Jesus as well, but that is all sheer dilettantism. The essence of the matter is that two beings stand in contrast to one another in the same epoch: on the one side, Christ-Jesus, who speaks only out of the super-earthly; and on the other, Apollonius of Tyana, who gathers what is actually to be found on the earth, although through his own great gifts he is able to absorb it into his very soul. That is the fundamental and significant difference, and those who do not perceive it fail to understand what the existence of these two personalities signifies for a later age.
[ 7 ] Now certain matters associated with the person of Apollonius of Tyana point to features characteristic of very early times. I am speaking now of times long before the Mysteries, times, therefore, of great antiquity in human evolution. Something of these characteristics remained in the days of a later humanity, and we shall see how Apollonius of Tyana comes across what has thus remained, both among the Indian sages, the Brahmins, and among the Gymnosophists in Egypt. But we understand the point in question quite clearly when in spiritual-scientific historical research we go back to very early times, and Apollonius of Tyana himself, according to his biographers, points to it in emphatic words. He asserts that the well-nigh immeasurable wisdom he encountered among the Indian sages is bound up with the influences from beyond the earth which stream down upon men inhabiting a particular-region of the earth. This is an indication that man is not exposed to earthly influences alone.
It is easy to study these earthly influences, although in the case of the human being they are now being thrown into the background by others. There are, however, certain lower organic creatures which take on, purely through metabolism, the colouring of what they consume. In such creatures we can perceive exactly how the products of metabolism give them their colouring and other characteristic qualities. I have spoken to you of how, in the sense of Scholastic philosophy, Vincent Knauer, my old friend from the Benedictine Order—that is to say, he, not I, was in this Order—stressed that what is contained in the spiritual substance of a concept is still a reality vis-à-vis the purely material form of existence, the material object. In line with the Schoolmen, he said: If a wolf could be segregated and fed only with lamb's flesh for a very long period, the wolf would not become a lamb, although he would then consist only of lamb's flesh. For Vincent Knauer this proves that in the wolf, in its form and configuration—that is to say, in what the concept "wolf" embraces—there is something other than matter, for in respect of matter the wolf would be a lamb if he had eaten only lambs. But the wolf does not become a lamb.
In the higher animals, then, things are somewhat different from what they are in the very low organic creatures; even in their colouring these creatures make manifest the influences of their metabolism. The influences of metabolism in man are even less marked than they are in the wolf; if it were otherwise, the people living in districts where a great deal of paprika is consumed would have yellow complexions, and it is common knowledge that, at most conditions resembling jaundice and the like set in when certain substances are eaten. To a high degree man is already independent of the influence of earthly metabolism. But today, in the age of materialism—which in truth has not only a theoretical but an absolutely real basis—he is less open to the influences of the world beyond the earth than was formerly the case. And ancient Indian wisdom has its essential source in—to put it summarily—the particular way in which the rays of the sun stream down upon the land of India. The angle at which the rays stream down is not the same there as it is in other regions. This means that the extra-earthly, the cosmic, influences upon man are different from those elsewhere. And if a man of ancient India had spoken entirely according to his own consciousness, then—if he had had any knowledge at all of what Europe is—he would have said something like this: Over there in Europe the people can never attain to any wisdom, for the sun does not stream down upon them in such a way as to make this possible; they can't help being tied down to what their metabolic processes cook up from earthly substances. Over in Europe there can be no talk of wisdom. The men there are an inferior breed, half-animal, for they have none of the sunlight that is essential if anyone desires to be a wise man.—This, in effect, is what an ancient Indian would have said if he had spoken at all about these things. Because of his special relationship to the downstreaming rays of the sun, he would have spoken about the rabble living in Europe very much as a man of to-day speaks about his domestic animals. Not that he would have had no love for these inferior human beings. A man may greatly love his domestic animals, but he will not regard them as his equal in spiritual capacity.
[ 8 ] By this I want only to indicate that the earlier wisdom native to man was dependent upon the earthly locality. This is also connected with something else. In earlier epochs, this condition of dependence was the cause of differentiation in humanity to a far greater extent than was the case later on. Differentiation in the human race arose directly settled peoples left their place of abode, somewhere or other, and went to other regions. Then they changed psychically, even physically. The differentiation in evidence all over the earth is connected with this. And so what came to expression through a man of antiquity was essentially what he received from his earthly surroundings, when he absorbed these influences of the earth into himself. We can therefore say: In olden times man was a true sage only if he lived in a place on the earth where it was possible to become wise. For this reason the men of old were in a certain sense right to seek out such places. If, in a similar way a man were to believe nowadays that wisdom is restricted to somewhere in Asia, this would prove only that he is not living abreast of his times—that is to say, of modern times. True, there are curious people who even to-day are always talking about specially favourable localities on the surface of the earth. In the sense of genuine spiritual knowledge these things are dilettantism, but when we go back to very early times we must think of a man who was truly wise being dependent upon his place of abode.
[ 9 ] What kind of man, then, is Apollonius of Tyana? Apollonius of Tyana has the urge to become a wise man on earth, in spite of the fact that his home is not in such places as the region near the sources of the Nile where the Gymnosophists lived; for this was also a place where wisdom could be acquired in great abundance. He had within him the urge to become wise, and therefore he set out on travels—as once upon a time Pythagoras had done, in the same situation.
[ 10 ] So we see how Apollonius of Tyana is, in a certain sense, a man who seeks over the earth's expanse for that which satisfies the inner needs of the human being and leads him to the attainment of spirituality. For the times to which what I have just said about man's dependence on an earthly locality very specially applies—these times continued on, more or less in echoes only, into the days of Apollonius of Tyana. Something of what ancient India had once been still survived there, and of this Apollonius of Tyana acquired knowledge. But to men representative of a more modern age he was already an example of one who is obliged to seek in particular localities for what in the highest sense can be human wisdom; he is prompted, however, to seek it by distant journeyings.
[ 11 ] The Mystery of Golgotha stands before us here, pointing the way to the new phase in the evolution of humanity. And we can say: Because in Jesus of Nazareth there dwelt the Christ, Jesus of Nazareth was that Being of the earth who has set the standard for this quest—a quest that is no longer dependent upon locality. On this account, Apollonius of Tyana and Christ-Jesus are in utter contrast. Apollonius, as a contemporary of Christ-Jesus, is someone who, in respect of his human makeup, no longer lives in the age of antiquity, but already in a new era. But in this new era human life cannot do without the Christ Impulse. The Christ Impulse comes from Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus of Nazareth and Apollonius of Tyana stand at the two poles of humanity at the beginning of our era.
[ 12 ] Here we have an indication, of what it is that has come into humanity through Christ-Jesus. It is important above all for us to grasp what I referred to in the lecture yesterday,3This lecture, entitled Spirit Triumphant, is included in the Easter volume of the series The Festivals and their Meaning, p.62. that what has entered into humanity comes to expression in the Resurrection-thought. The Resurrection-thought affirms that what binds man to the earth need not lead to his perishing, but that when he takes the Christ Impulse into himself he can find something within his being that raises itself out of and above the earthbound. What rends and agonises the heart in the picture of the Man of Sorrows on the Cross is in reality the forces that are inculcated by earth-existence into the human body, and therewith into man's being as a whole. In contemplating the Crucified One, the face drenched in suffering and the body wracked with agony, we find the very deepest expression of what earthly existence can stamp into the human being. But if we look upwards to what should be seen above the Cross, to the Resurrected One, then we become aware of that which can perpetually be resurrected in man, can rise above that which contains the earth-forces only, thus revealing to us that man's nature is cosmic, that the earth impregnates its forces only into one part of his being, but that out of these forces there can rise what is in truth the cosmic element in him.
[ 13 ] These are the things that must be realised in connection with the Resurrection-thought, especially in our day when we are striving for the resurrection of spirit-knowledge. The Resurrection-thought must above all help us to grasp that in earlier times there existed an instinctive wisdom, truly great and essentially linked with man's eternal being. But the wisdom in these olden times had always an element of suggestion in it, an influence that came over a man, in which he did not live with the freedom inherent in his real being. In all the ages of antiquity there was relatively little expression of man's own will. But it is paramountly the will that must be developed in the epoch of earth-evolution following the Mystery of Golgotha. In respect of his will, the man of ancient time lived in a state of dullness. But the will must be permeated with wisdom, with the force contained in ideas, with spirituality. Upon this, everything depends. Hence above all things it is necessary that the Christ Impulse shall draw into man's will—only this must be understood in the true sense. From the present time onwards into the future, the unfolding of the will is particularly essential. Man must become more and more conscious in respect of his will. In the general life of civilisation to-day we experience merely the reaction that is generated by convenient adherence to old conceptions, the reaction against the development of the will. At the present time men would do anything rather than develop the will; they have a downright hatred of it.
The translation cuts off before the end of the lecture and is added here for completeness.
[ 14 ] When he is asked to be a whole human being, a complete human being, who is also guided by wisdom in his will, he says: I will not get involved in that; let the Church guide my will. The Church has its old commandments; the Church will tell me how to use my will. Or if he does not say this, people today say something else; they say: Oh, why should I give my will a direction, I have the state. The state has its laws, the state has its institutions, the state does everything. The state takes care of the child. It already takes care of it now, if only it has somehow overcome the greatest difficulties. The time will also come when the state will manage to take over the care of children even at an age when these difficulties are still associated with all sorts of other problems. But why shouldn't there also be courtiers for draining land and a ministry for drainage? These would be all sorts of interesting things for the future organization of various authorities and the like.
[ 15 ] But then, in later times, when things are no longer so uncomfortable, when they are cleaner in terms of child rearing, the state no longer allows itself to trust anyone to make a judgment, and people as a whole are basically quite satisfied with this. They do not need to think about what is good for their children, for example, because — although the state does not really think about it either — at least people believe that it does think about it. Well, I could go on with this line of thought for a long time. Wherever human beings strive to put their will into action, to imbue it with wisdom, there they become beings who appeal to something else that is not at the center of their will and radiates light from there. But what matters is precisely that the will takes up the luminous impulses, and that is precisely what lies in the correctly understood idea of Christ.
[ 16 ] Christ is the being who never takes possession of groups in any way, who never involves himself with any groups. It is the greatest absurdity to speak of a German, French, Scandinavian, Dutch, Montenegrin Christ, or of a Christ from Morocco or somewhere similar. Christ is the being who knows no groups, who knows only individual beings, and anyone who believes that there is some connection between the Christ being and groups misunderstands the Christ being. who believes that there is some connection between the Christ being and groups.
[ 17 ] But this understanding of Christ must first come, it must come with the understanding of human individuality in general. Then, when that happens, the idea of resurrection will also be there again, because the spirit can only be resurrected in the individual human individuality. The spirit can only be resurrected if the individual human individualities are given the opportunity to unfold. Of course, this can only happen if spiritual life is removed from the rest of the state structure, as intended by the threefold social order. Today, many people may still find it difficult to reconcile the idea of resurrection with something like the threefold social order. But those who have a sense and understanding of the unity of human civilization will also understand how that which is intended for social life must necessarily arise from the grasping of what is highest for human beings, of what is accessible to them. The idea of resurrection must be grasped in a spiritual sense. This can only be done if one does not merely rely on observation, that is, on intellectualism, but tries to understand in the right way how the will of the human being must be grasped.
[ 18 ] And spiritual science, as it is meant here, is indeed something that goes to the will of the human being. Spiritual science, as it is meant here, does not understand all other talk. Take everything that is written in our literature. Where will people end up if they only want to use their intellect to grasp the concepts and ideas found in our literature? Only in stumbling discussions! They will be able to engage in all kinds of profane discussions about what spiritual science says. But what is contained in spiritual science in terms of thoughts and ideas wants to be grasped by the will; it wants to engage the whole human being. One must want to understand if one wants to understand spiritual science. And so the cultivation of the will in relation to spiritual science begins with understanding.
[ 19 ] I would like to say that this must really enter into the whole human being of those who place themselves in what is called the spiritual scientific movement. This spiritual scientific, this anthroposophical movement had to turn to all possible practical applications in the latest period, first out of its own nature, but especially out of its relationship to the development of the times. Not in order to characterize anything in a suggestive way — that is far from my intention at this moment — but in order to draw attention to a few things that may be the case, let me mention the following.
[ 20 ] You see, we have recently established all kinds of practical institutions. We need people for practical institutions; we have to employ people in them. We naturally employ those who understand something, or at least should understand something, of the intentions that exist within the anthroposophical movement. Now, one assumes — this could be one way of looking at it, I am just presenting possibilities — that anthroposophists now enter our practical positions and, out of the whole fire of anthroposophy, work in these practical positions and say to themselves: Now, when practical things are done, they must be done from a different foundation; I am now, as I stand, truly an anthroposophist involved in the whole thing, and it does not matter to me whether I do much more than is usual in this day and age. I am one with what is intended by these practical things. That would be one possible view. The other possible view would be to see that there are all kinds of practical institutions, there is an opportunity to be active as an anthroposophist in some way. But I am an anthroposophist, so I don't want to be treated as was customary in the old offices and the like. Yes, in the old offices, you had to arrive on time and leave on time — that no longer exists. I go in when I feel like it, leave when I feel like it, sometimes I don't go at all, or I do something other than what is supposed to be done, because in anthroposophy things have to be different than in the old philistine world. — That would be the extreme opposite view. I only want to point out possibilities, because attention must be drawn to these possibilities today, because what we are dealing with is far too serious for us to continue spreading what is spreading among wider circles of anthroposophists who are attracted to the old sectarian spirit of such things. These circles sometimes find it perfectly natural: well, for so many years people have been drinking tea, people have been talking over tea — well, let's leave aside what people have talked about over tea or coffee or after their black coffee in the afternoon! But why shouldn't one also talk over tea or coffee about Saturn, the sun, the moon, why not also about reincarnation, why shouldn't one imagine all sorts of things about what this or that person might have been in a previous incarnation! In other words, why shouldn't one engage in a little salon anthroposophy or something similar?
[ 21 ] We have moved beyond these things, however. That is no longer possible. Our gaze can no longer fall on that. Today, our gaze can only fall on the two other possibilities. I only want to characterize and am not saying that I want to present anything that already exists, but I am only pointing out that these two possibilities are roughly such that one could make good progress with one, while with the other, where the anthroposophists want a different, new tone, something very special, and no longer appear at eight o'clock, but at half past ten because they have to meditate until then, perhaps, and so on, that with this eventuality it will certainly not be possible to combine a proper culture of will, as it now needs to be characterized. The time is too serious not to consider these two polar opposites of anthroposophical handling of things. I don't want to say anything about this myself, but I advise you to look around a little to see whether these two possibilities exist, and then form your own opinion, and possibly act in accordance with this opinion in some way. It is very nice to profess anthroposophy, but that is not enough for the present time. The present age demands of human beings that which appeals to the will, that which also intervenes in a way that is absolutely beneficial to the development of humanity itself.
[ 22 ] It is perhaps extremely uplifting to say: there or there, somewhere hidden and inaccessible, sits this or that “master.” From a certain quarter, such a specific location was once indicated for Hungary, and some naive Budapesters then had the police files investigated and did not find this master's seat at the location in question! When one was told that the great spiritual powers of the earth had been investigated in this way, one could do nothing else but smile at such things, for it was naive on the part of those who investigated them in this way, who were, so to speak, searching for the postal addresses of the spiritual leaders of humanity; just as it was sometimes naive on the part of those who pointed to these things as if one could ask for postal addresses. But I would rather not go into that! However, many people have many different views on these things. For example, there was once a certain man among us—yes, what did he call himself at the time? In his books he called himself Max Heindel, but here he had a different name, he called himself Grashof. This man had initially taken in everything he could find in public lectures and books. He compiled these into a somewhat mystical book called “Rosicrucian Cosmo Conception,” and then in a second edition he included what is written in the cycles and what he had copied elsewhere. He then told his people over in America that he had indeed attained the first level here, but that in order to attain the second, he had traveled deep into Hungary to a master. He claimed to have received from him what was, however, merely copied from the cycles he had received, and in particular from all the lectures he had obtained, which to copy was mere plagiarism! Some of you will know that something utterly comical then happened: this work was translated back into German, with the comment that although something like this could also be found in Europe, it was better to have it in the form in which it had been created under the free sun of America.
[ 23 ] Humanity is very fond of accepting what it can take in without will. The culture of will, when truly implemented, ensures that such a thing cannot be possible. If the will remains weak, it will become weaker and weaker in relation to the ability to judge what confronts it from the outside world. We must learn to connect the highest with what we experience in everyday life. We must not keep separate accounts, so to speak, for these things. We must be clear that when we grasp the spirit, we also go beyond the superficial judgment of ordinary life. And when we express certain things emotionally, then, strange as it may seem when we say it like that, we are close to the element of the belief in resurrection that we need today. We need the first element, I would say, the very beginning, which consists in taking into our will what can come from spiritual science. Then the path to true belief in the resurrection lies in the direction we are taking, in the direction we are being guided. Today we must come to a broadening of the Easter idea. We must bring together what anthroposophy should be for us as human beings with what is actually only a word for people in the wider world today, a word that has no real content anymore. And such a word is the word resurrection, the word Easter for the widest circles of humanity. Meaning must once again be connected with these things. We must gain knowledge within ourselves, knowledge of human development, and we must learn to understand again, but from the full, clear light of human consciousness, what the Pauline word means: “If Christ has not been raised, then your faith is futile.” All knowledge and all human striving are also vain if they cannot take up the real Easter idea of resurrection into the innermost depths of the human mind.
Siebzehnter Vortrag
[ 1 ] Es ist in der gegenwärtigen Zeit von einer gewissen Bedeutung, die Gesichtspunkte aufzusuchen, von denen die verschiedenen Geistsucher älterer Zeiten ausgegangen sind, nicht etwa allein darum, weil böswillige und dilettantische Gegnerschaft der hier vertretenen Geisteswissenschaft zumutet, daß sie allerlei aus älteren Zeiten einfach herübergenommen habe, sondern vor allen Dingen darum, weil die Erkenntnis desjenigen, was gegenwärtig aus ursprünglichem geistigem Quell heraus gefunden werden kann, verständlich wird, wenn man es zusammenhält mit den Kräften, welche die Menschheit in älteren Zeiten innegehabt hat, mit den verschiedenen Arten des Suchens nach Geisteserkenntnis in älteren, instinktiven Zeiten der Menschheitsentwickelung. Und um Sie auf so etwas hinzuweisen, möchte ich heute sprechen von einem gewissen Zusammenwerfen, das oftmals gemacht worden ist in bezug auf den Christus Jesus und einen seiner Zeitgenossen, Apollonius von Tyana. Man hat die beiden in einer gewissen Weise zusammengeworfen, und es gibt ja sogar Bestrebungen, welche in unhistorischer Weise das Leben des Apollonius von Tyana mit dem Leben des Christus Jesus vergleichen. Wenn man den Apollonius von Tyana vergleicht mit dem Christus Jesus, so treten ja allerdings eine größere Anzahl von Äußerlichkeiten im biographischen Element zutage, die eine Ähnlichkeit zeigen. Vor allen Dingen wissen wir ja, daß die Evangelienerzählungen, die an den Christus Jesus anknüpfen, manches bringen, was der heutigen Zeit unter den Begriff des Wunders fällt, und auch die Biographen des Apollonius von Tyana erzählen allerlei Wundergeschichten von diesem Apollonius. Die Art und Weise, wie heute solche Dinge erzählt werden, die beweist ja nichts anderes, als daß man sich ganz dilettantisch verhält zu der Menschheitsentwickelung. Was da an Krankenheilungen und ähnlichen Dingen, die in den Evangelien Zeichen genannt werden, erzählt wird, entspricht eben einer ganz anderen Stufe der menschheitlichen Entwickelung, als diejenige ist, in der wir heute leben. Der psychische Einfluß des einen Menschen auf den anderen, ja sogar der psychische Einfluß des Menschen auf die unlebendige Umgebung, sind im Laufe der Zeit für das gewöhnliche Leben sehr zurückgegangen. Und wenn uns für die Zeit vom Beginne unserer christlichen Zeitrechnung von solchen Dingen erzählt wird, so weiß derjenige, welcher die Dinge wirklich innerlich kennt, daß eben das, was ein Mensch in jenen Zeiten darleben konnte, in anderer Weise sich ausnahm als das, was heute in dieser Richtung geschehen kann. Heute muß von anderen Voraussetzungen ausgegangen werden, von Voraussetzungen, die eben durch das geisteswissenschaftliche Erkennen wieder geschaffen werden sollen. Und wenn wir die Evangelien in der rechten Art verstehen wollen, so dürfen wir durchaus nicht den Hauptwert auf die Wundererzählungen legen, sondern wir müssen uns klar sein darüber, daß Wundererzählungen von einem im moralischen Sinne hervorragenden Menschen für die Zeiten, um die es sich hier handelt, etwas ganz selbstverständliches waren. Man setzte gar nicht voraus, daß das anders sein könne bei einem Menschen wie etwa Jesus von Nazareth, in dem der Christus wohnte, oder auch bei einem Menschen wie Apollonius von Tyana.
[ 2 ] Verstehen wir uns gerade hierin recht; ich möchte sagen, daß man von einem solchen Menschen dasjenige erzählt, was man Wunder nennt, das ist etwas, was sich von selbst versteht. Man meint gar nichts Besonderes mit solchen Erzählungen. Und wenn die heutige Theologie etwa darnach strebt, die Göttlichkeit des Christus Jesus ganz besonders aus dem Umstande erschließen zu wollen, daß er Wunder tat, so zeigt eben diese Theologie nichts anderes, als daß sie nicht auf christlichem Standpunkte steht, abgesehen davon, daß eine solche Auffassung unhistorisch ist. Niemals handelt es sich bei dem Christus Jesus um das Vollbringen der Wunder, sondern immer um dasjenige, was uns anhand der Wundererzählungen dargelegt wird. Immer handelt es sich darum, daß aufmerksam darauf gemacht wurde, daß, während die früheren Menschen, wenn sie groß wirken wollten, mit einer geringeren Kraft des Ich wirkten, der Christus Jesus gerade aus der Kraft des Ich heraus wirkte. Geradeso würden wir das Vaterunser nicht verstehen, wenn wir es damit erklären wollten, daß wir die einzelnen Sätze schon bei früheren Menschen finden und deshalb sagen würden, das Vaterunser sei alt. Wer diese früheren Gestaltungen der Sätze, die sich im Vaterunser finden, mit dem Vaterunser selbst vergleicht, wird sich eben klarwerden darüber, daß es beim Vaterunser überall darauf ankam, herüberzuleiten dasjenige, was früher gewissermaßen nicht mit der Hinlenkung zum Ich gesagt war, nun mit der Hinlenkung zum Ich zu sagen.
[ 3 ] So dürfen wir auch nicht irgendwie die Ähnlichkeiten aufsuchen, die in bezug auf dieses biographische Moment bei dem Christus Jesus auftraten. Es ist ja auch natürlich, daß in einer gewissen Weise ähnliche Erzählungen dann auftreten werden, wenn es sich um das Verrichten von Wundern handelt, das heißt, um das Verrichten dessen, was man jetzt Wunder nennt. Wir müssen auf ganz anderes hinsehen, wenn wir uns klarwerden wollen, wie eine solche Gestalt wie der Apollonius von Tyana zusammengestellt ist mit dem Christus Jesus. Und da muß zunächst auf das Folgende verwiesen werden.
[ 4 ] Allerdings wird von Apollonius von Tyana erzählt, wie er schon in seiner Kindheit große Anlagen zeigte, wie er mit diesen großen Anlagen heranwuchs, wie er teilnahm an den vorzüglichsten Unterrichten, die dazumal gegeben werden konnten, wie zum Beispiel dem Unterricht, der aus der Pythagoräerschule herausgewachsen war. Aber dann wird weitererzählt, daß Apollonius von Tyana gerade zur Erlangung des Wissensgroße Reisen angetreten hat, und es werden uns seine Reisen erzählt, zunächst die weniger weit ausholenden, dann aber die weite Reise, die er zu den indischen Weisen gemacht hat. Es wird uns erzählt, wie er die indischen Weisen da verehren und bewundern lernt, wie er durch sie vorgedrungen ist zu gewissen Quellen des Wissens. Es wird uns dann weiter erzählt, wie er wiederum zurückgekommen ist, wie er, man möchte sagen, befeuert von dem, was er angeschaut hat bei diesen indischen Weisen, dann wiederum in Südeuropa in der verschiedensten Weise gelehrt hat. Es wird uns dann aber auch erzählt, wie er nach Ägypten gegangen ist, wie er zunächst im nördlichen Ägypten das aufgenommen hat, was er da aufnehmen konnte und wie es ihm gering erschien, sehr gering gegenüber dem, was er an wunderbarer Weisheit bei den Indern gefunden hatte. Es wird uns dann erzählt, wie er den Nil aufwärts fuhr, zu den Nilquellen hin, aber auch zu den Sitzen der sogenannten Gymnosophisten; das war die Gemeinschaft derjenigen Weisen, die nach den Brahmanen, nach den indischen Weisen, das größte Ansehen in der damaligen Zeit hatten. Es wird aber auch erzählt, wie Apollonius von Tyana schon so durchtränkt war mit indischer Weisheit, daß er unterscheiden konnte zwischen dieser und der geringeren der ägyptischen Gymnosophisten. Und dann wird erzählt, wie er wiederum zurückkehrte, wie er dann seine verschiedenen wunderbaren Reisen machte nach Rom, wo man ihn verfolgte, wo man ihn ins Gefängnis brachte und so weiter.
[ 5 ] Aber für uns ist ja vorzugsweise die Tatsache interessant, daß dem Apollonius von Tyana diese großen Reisen zugeschrieben werden, und daß diese Reisen durchaus zusammengebracht werden mit dem steten Erweitern seiner eigenen Weisheit. Apollonius wird immer weiser und weiser dadurch, daß er zusammenkommt mit den weisesten Menschen seiner damaligen Welt. Er wandert sozusagen von Ort zu Ort. Er sucht diejenigen Menschen auf, welche im Besitze der größten Weisheit der damaligen Zeit waren.
[ 6 ] Dadurch unterscheidet er sich von dem Christus Jesus, der sein Erdenwandeln auf einem verhältnismäßig kleinen Fleck verbringt, der das, was er der Menschheit zu sagen hat, ganz aus dem Inneren heraus sagt, der nicht von demjenigen zu sprechen hat, was im Umkreise der Erde selber an Weisheit anzutreffen ist, sondern dasjenige der Menschheit mitzuteilen hat, was er aus außerirdischen Welten auf die Erde herabgebracht hat. Es ist ja manchmal sogar der Versuch gemacht worden, auch dem Christus Jesus allerlei Reisen nach Indien zuzuschreiben, allein das ist ja der purste Dilettantismus. Dasjenige, um was es sich eben gerade handelt, das ist, daß sich in demselben Zeitalter gegenüberstehen zwei Wesenheiten, auf der einen Seite der Christus Jesus, der ganz nur aus dem Überirdischen heraus spricht, und auf der anderen Seite Apollonius von Tyana, der dasjenige sammelt, was auf der Erde zu finden ist, wenn er es auch durch seine großen Anlagen in die eigene Seele aufzunehmen in der Lage ist. Das ist der prinzipielle, der bedeutsame Unterschied, und wer ihn nicht schaut, der erkennt eben dasjenige nicht, was der späteren Zeit gesagt wird durch das Dasein dieser zwei Persönlichkeiten.
[ 7 ] Nun aber weist uns dasjenige, was sich gerade an die Person des Apollonius von Tyana knüpft, auf gewisse Eigentümlichkeiten älterer Zeiten hin. Ich meine jetzt Zeiten, die weit hinter dem Mysterium zurückliegen, also sehr alte Zeiten der Menschheit. Einiges davon hat sich ja dann in der späteren Menschheit erhalten, und wir werden sehen, wie Apollonius von Tyana das, was sich so erhalten hat, sowohl bei den indischen Weisen, bei den Brahmanen, wie bei den Gymnosophisten in Ägypten antrifft. Aber man erkennt dasjenige, um was es sich handelt, ganz klar, wenn man mit geisteswissenschaftlicher Geschichtsforschung in ältere Zeiten zurückgeht, und Apollonius von Tyana selbst weist — nach seinem Biographen -— mit starken Worten auf das hin, worauf es hier ankommt. Er weist darauf hin, wie die schier unermeßliche Weisheit, die er bei den Indern angetroffen hat, gebunden ist an die außerirdischen Einflüsse, die auf den Menschen an einem bestimmten Erdenflecke herabströmen. Hingewiesen werden wir da darauf, daß der Mensch ja nicht nur irdischen Einflüssen ausgesetzt ist. Diese irdischen Einflüsse sind leicht zu studieren, obwohl sie ja auch beim Menschen gegenüber anderen Einflüssen selbst heute noch zurücktreten. Gewisse niedere organische Wesen bekommen die Färbung desjenigen, was sie genießen, dem reinen Stoffwechsel nach. Wir können bei gewissen niederen organischen Wesen genau sehen, wie das, was sie an Stoffwechselprodukten aufnehmen, ihnen ihre Färbung, ihre sonstigen Eigenschaften gibt. Ich habe Sie darauf aufmerksam gemacht, wie aus der Scholastik heraus Vincenz Knauer, mein alter Freund aus dem Benediktiner-Orden — das heißt nicht, daß ich etwa in diesem Orden war, sondern er war drinnen -, darauf aufmerksam gemacht hat, daß ja doch dasjenige, was in dem geistigen Inhalt des Begriffes liegt, etwas Reales gegenüber dem bloß sinnlichen Dasein des Materiellen ist. Er sagte ja im Sinne der Scholastiker: Wenn man einen Wolf abschließen könnte, und ihm lange Zeit nur Lammfleisch geben könnte, so würde aus dem Wolf noch immer kein Lamm werden, trotzdem er dann aus lauter Lammfleisch bestehen würde. Das bezeugt für Vincenz Knauer, daß im Wolf, in der Gestalt, in der Konfiguration des Wolfes, also in dem, was der Begriff Wolf umfaßt, doch noch etwas anderes liegt als das Materielle, denn dem Materiellen nach wäre der Wolf ja ein Lamm, wenn er immer nur Lämmer gegessen hätte. Das wird er aber nicht. Das ist also schon gewissermaßen bei den höheren Tieren anders als bei den ganz niederen organischen Wesen; die zeigen durchaus bis in die Farbe hinein die Einflüsse ihres Stoffwechsels. Bei Menschen ist das ja nun in einem noch höheren Maße der Fall als beim Wolf, daß sie nicht die Einflüsse des Stoffwechsels zeigen; sonst müßte es in den Gegenden, wo viel Paprika genossen wird, ja bloß gelbe Menschen geben, und man weiß ja, daß höchstens, wenn gewisse Dinge vom Menschen genossen werden, gelbsuchtähnliche Zustände eintreten und dergleichen. Der Mensch ist schon auch jetzt noch in einem hohen Grade unabhängig von den irdischen Stoffwechseleinflüssen. Aber er ist auch heute im materialistischen Zeitalter, das ja nicht nur einen theoretischen, sondern einen durchaus realen Untergrund hat, weniger den Einflüssen der außerirdischen Welt, des Kosmos ausgesetzt, als das früher der Fall war. Und die alte indische Weisheit ist im wesentlichen zurückzuführen — um es zusammenfassend auszudrücken — auf den besonderen Einfall des Sonnenstrahles in den indischen Gegenden. Der Sonnenstrahl fällt dort unter einem anderen Winkel ein als anderswo. Das bedeutet, daß die außerirdischen, die kosmischen Einflüsse auf den Menschen andere sind als woanders. Und wenn so ein alter Inder ganz aus seinem Bewußtsein heraus gesprochen hätte, so hätte er, wenn er überhaupt davon gewußt hätte, was Europa ist und so weiter, etwa folgendes gesagt. Ach, da drüben in Europa können die Menschen niemals zu irgendeiner Weisheit kommen, bei denen fällt ja die Sonne nicht so ein, daß sie zu irgendeiner Weisheit kommen können; die können nur gebunden sein an das, was der Stoffwechsel heraufkocht aus dem Irdischen. Von einer Weisheit kann drüben in Europa nicht die Rede sein. Da sind nur Menschen minderer Sorte, das sind die Halbtiere, denn sie haben gar nicht ein solches Sonnenlicht, wie man es haben muß, wenn man ein weiser Mensch werden will. - So würde der alte Inder, wenn er über diese Dinge überhaupt gesprochen hätte, gesagt haben. Er würde wegen dieses seines besonderen Verhältnisses zum Einfall der Sonnenstrahlen kaum viel anders geredet haben über das, was da als Menschengeschmeiß in Europa ist, wie der heutige Mensch über seine Haustiere redet. Nicht als ob er diese Menschen niederer Sorte nicht geliebt hätte, der Mensch kann ja auch seine Haustiere sehr lieben, aber er wird sie nicht an geistiger Kapazität für gleichwertig halten.
[ 8 ] Ich wollte damit nur darauf hinweisen, wie dasjenige, was gerade an älterer Weisheit den Menschen eigen war, abhängig war vom Orte der Erde. Das hängt ja auch mit etwas anderem noch zusammen. In älteren Zeiten der Erdenentwickelung hat sich die Menschheit überhaupt viel mehr durch diese Abhängigkeit differenziert, als das später der Fall war. Die Differenzierung der Menschen ist sogleich aufgetreten, wenn irgendwo seßhafte Menschen den Ort ihrer Seßhaftigkeit verlassen haben und nach anderen Gegenden gezogen sind. Sie haben sich verändert, sie sind seelisch, ja physisch andere geworden. Damit hängt ja die Differenzierung über die Erde hin zusammen. Es war also im wesentlichen dasjenige, was der alte Mensch vom Umkreis der Erde hatte, was er wiederum darstellte, wenn er in entsprechender Weise diese Einflüsse des Umkreises der Erde in sich aufnahm. So können wir sagen: ein richtiger Weiser war in älteren Zeiten derjenige, der an demjenigen Orte der Erde lebte, wo man eben weise werden kann. Aus diesem Grunde sahen diese Alten aber auch mit einem gewissen Rechte nach diesem Orte hin. Würde man heute etwa in derselben Weise glauben, daß die Weisheit irgendwo in Asien umschlossen sei, so würde man damit nur den Beweis liefern, daß man nicht in seiner Zeit, nämlich nicht in der heutigen Zeit lebt. Es gibt ja allerdings merkwürdige Leute, die heute noch immer von solchen besonders günstigen Orten auf der Erdoberfläche reden; aber diese Dinge sind eben in höherem Sinne, im Sinne einer wirklichen Geist-Erkenntnis durchaus dilettantisch zu nennen. Aber wenn wir in die ältesten Zeiten zurückgehen, müssen wir schon den Menschen, der weise war, verbunden denken mit seinem Orte.
[ 9 ] Was ist daher Apollonius von Tyana für ein Mensch? Apollonius von Tyana will weise werden auf der Erde, trotzdem er nicht an solchen Orten lebt- auch die Gegend in der Nähe der Nilquellen, wo die Gymnosophisten lebten, war ein solcher Ort, wo man in einem ganz hervorragenden Maße weise werden konnte. Er hatte nur den Drang nach solchem Weisewerden in sich. Daher begab er sich auf die Reise, wie ja einstmals Pythagoras auch, der in demselben Falle war.
[ 10 ] Und so sehen wir, wie Apollonius von Tyana in einem gewissen Sinne ein Mensch ist, der in der Weite der Erde dasjenige sucht, was den Menschen mit innerer Befriedigung erfüllen soll, was ihn dazu bringt, innerliche Geistigkeit sich zu erringen. Denn diejenigen Zeiten, in denen das, was ich jetzt von der Gebundenheit des Menschen an einen Ort der Erde gesagt habe, ganz besonders galt, diese Zeiten lebten ja in der Zeit des Apollonius von Tyana mehr oder weniger nur im Nachklange. Es war noch etwas geblieben im alten Indien von dem, was es einstmals war, und das lernte Apollonius von Tyana kennen. Aber er stellte bereits den Repräsentanten einer neueren Zeit dar, denjenigen Menschen, der darauf angewiesen ist, an jedem Orte der Erde dasjenige zu suchen, was im höchsten Sinne menschliche Weisheit sein kann. Nur ist er darauf angewiesen, es auf weiten Wanderungen zu suchen.
[ 11 ] Hier stellt sich richtunggebend für die neuere MenschheitsentwickeJung eben das Mysterium von Golgatha vor uns, stellt sich so vor uns, daß wir sagen können: dadurch, daß in dem Jesus von Nazareth der Christus gewohnt hat, wurde Jesus von Nazareth zugleich diejenige Wesenheit der Erde, die tonangebend geworden ist für dieses Suchen, unabhängig von der Lokalisation auf der Erde selber. Dadurch sind Apollonius von Tyana und der Christus Jesus die größten Gegensätze. Apollonius von Tyana ist gewissermaßen der Zeitgenosse des Christus Jesus, welcher seiner menschheitlichen Verfassung nach nicht mehr in der alten Zeit, sondern schon in einer neuen Zeit lebt. Aber in dieser neuen Zeit kann man nur mit dem Christus-Einschlag leben. Der Christus-Einschlag kommt von dem Jesus von Nazareth. Jesus von Nazareth und Apollonius von Tyana sind die beiden Pole von Menschen vom Beginne unserer Zeitrechnung.
[ 12 ] Und gerade dadurch werden wir auf das hingewiesen, was in die Menschheit hereingekommen ist durch den Christus Jesus. Was ich gestern erwähnt habe, daß vor allen Dingen dasjenige, was in die Menschheit hereingekommen ist, in dem Auferstehungsgedanken zum Ausdrucke kommt, das ist vor allen Dingen wichtig für uns zu erfassen. Der Auferstehungsgedanke sagt, daß der Mensch nicht unterzugehen brauche durch dasjenige, was ihn an die Erde bindet, sondern daß er in sich etwas finden kann, was sich erhebt aus dem an die Erde Gebundenen, wenn er den Christus-Impuls aufnimmt. Alles, was da zerrt, was da quält an dem Schmerzensmanne, der am Kreuze hängt, das sind zuletzt doch die Kräfte, die vom Erdendasein aus dem menschlichen Leib und damit dem Menschen überhaupt eingefügt sind. Schauen wir hinauf zu dem Kruzifixus mit dem leidensdurchtränkten Gesichte, mit dem schmerzdurchwühlten Leibe, dann finden wir den tiefsten Ausdruck desjenigen, was das Erdendasein den Menschen einprägen kann. Schauen wir aber zu demjenigen hinauf, worauf ich gestern aufmerksam gemacht habe, das wir im Grunde genommen über dem Kreuze als den Auferstehenden erblicken sollen, dann werden wir aufmerksam auf das, was im Menschen immerdar auferstehen kann, was sich erheben kann aus dem, was die Erdenkräfte nur enthält, und was uns zeigt, wie der Mensch ein kosmisches Wesen ist, wie die Erde nur einem Teil von ihm ihre Kräfte einprägt, wie aber aus diesen Kräften auferstehen kann, was kosmisches Ingrediens des Menschen eigentlich ist.
[ 13 ] Das sind die Dinge, welchegesehen werden müssen im Zusammenhange mit dem Auferstehungsgedanken, und das sind die Dinge, die besonders in unserer Zeit, wo wir nach der Auferstehung der Geist-Erkenntnis streben, eingesehen werden müssen. Was wir vor allen Dingen erfassen müssen an dem Auferstehungsgedanken, das ist, daß ja in älteren Zeiten eine instinktive Weisheit vorhanden war. Was da vorhanden war, war etwas Großes, mit der ewigen Wesenheit des Menschen durchaus Zusammenhängendes. Wenn wir aber in die alten Zeitalter zurückgehen, so war diese Weisheit immer zugleich etwas Suggestives, etwas, was den Menschen überkam, etwas, worinnen der Mensch nicht in seiner Freiheit lebte. Die Willensnatur des Menschen war in allen älteren Zeiten weniger ausgedrückt. Die Willensnatur des Menschen ist es, die sich in derjenigen Zeit der Erdenentwickelung besonders ausbilden muß, welche auf das Mysterium von Golgatha folgt. In bezug auf seinen Willen lebte der alte Mensch durchaus in einem dumpfen Zustande. Der Wille aber muß durchsetzt werden von Weisheit, von Ideenkraft, von Spiritualität. Darauf kommt es an. Daher ist es vor allen Dingen nötig, daß der Christus-Impuls in den Willen des Menschen seinen Einzug hält. Das muß nur im richtigen Sinne verstanden werden. Auf die Ausbildung des Willens kommt es von der Gegenwart in die Zukunft hinein ganz besonders an. Der Mensch muß in bezug auf seinen Willen immer bewußter und bewußter werden. Heute erleben wir im allgemeinen Zivilisationsleben eben nur die Reaktion, die herausgeboren ist aus dem bequemen Festhalten an alten Vorurteilen, die Reaktion gegen die Ausbildung des Willens. Man möchte in der Gegenwart nur ja nicht den Willen irgendwie ausbilden. Man haßt es geradezu, den Willen auszubilden. Wie benimmt sich in dieser Richtung der Mensch?
[ 14 ] Wenn an ihn die Anforderung gestellt wird, ein ganzer Mensch, ein Vollmensch zu sein, der auch in seinem Willen von der Weisheit ergriffen werde, dann sagt er: Darauf lasse ich mich nicht ein, meinen Willen mag die Kirche lenken. Die Kirche hat ihre alten Gebote, die Kirche wird mir sagen, wie ich mit meinem Willen verfahren soll. Oder wenn er nicht dieses sagt, so sagt der Mensch heute noch anderes; er sagt: Ach, was soll ich meinem Willen eine Richtung geben, ich habe den Staat. Der Staat, der hat seine Gesetze, der Staat hat seine Einrichtungen, der Staat macht alles. Der Staat übernimmt das Kind. Er übernimmt es jetzt schon, wenn es nur irgendwie über die größten Schwierigkeiten hinaus ist. Es wird auch die Zeit noch kommen, wo der Staat es zuwege bringen wird, die Pflege des Kindes auch schon in dem Lebensalter zu übernehmen, wo diese Schwierigkeiten noch mit allerlei verknüpft sind. Aber warum sollte es denn nicht auch Hofleute für das Trockenlegen geben und ein Ministerium des Trockenlegens geben! Das wären ja allerlei interessante Dinge für die zukünftige Gestaltung von irgendwelchen Behörden und dergleichen.
[ 15 ] Dann aber, in späteren Zeiten, wo die Dinge nicht mehr so unbehaglich sind, wo sie reinlicher sind in bezug auf die Kindesführung, da läßt sich ja der Staat nicht mehr ein darauf, irgendwie noch jemanden ein Urteil zuzutrauen, und die Menschen sind in ihrer Gänze im Grunde genommen durchaus damit zufrieden. Sie brauchen nicht nachzudenken, was ihren Kindern zum Beispiel frommt, denn — darüber denkt allerdings der Staat auch nicht richtig nach, aber man glaubt wenigstens, daß er nachdenkt. Nun, ich könnte diese Betrachtung noch lange fortsetzen. Wo der Mensch darnach trachten soll, seinen Willen in Tätigkeit zu versetzen, mit Weisheit zu durchtränken, da wird heute der Mensch durchaus dasjenige Wesen, das da appelliert an etwas anderes, was nur ja nicht im Zentrum seines Willens sitzt und dort etwa einiges Licht ausstrahlend ist. Aber darauf kommt es nämlich gerade an, daß der Wille die lichtvollen Impulse aufnimmt, und das ist es gerade, was im richtig verstandenen Christus-Gedanken liegt.
[ 16 ] Christus ist diejenige Wesenheit, die niemals von Gruppen irgendwie Besitz ergreift, die niemals sich zu tun macht mit irgendwelchen Gruppen. Das größte Unding ist es, von einem deutschen, von einem französischen, von einem skandinavischen, von einem holländischen, montenegrinischen Christus, oder von einem Christus, sagen wir, von Marokko oder dergleichen zu sprechen, sondern der Christus ist dasjenige Wesen, das keine Gruppen kennt, das nur einzelne Individuen kennt, und jeder mißversteht das Christus-Wesen, der glaubt, es gebe vom Christus-Wesen aus irgendwelchen Zusammenhang in den Gruppen.
[ 17 ] Aber dieses Christus-Verständnis, es muß ja erst kommen, es muß kommen mit dem Verständnis der menschlichen Individualität überhaupt. Dann, wenn das eintritt, wird auch wieder der Auferstehungsgedanke da sein, denn auferstehen kann der Geist eben nur in der einzelnen menschlichen Individualität. Auferstehen kann der Geist nur, wenn den einzelnen menschlichen Individualitäten die Möglichkeit gegeben wird, sich zu entfalten. Das kann natürlich nur geschehen, wenn man das Geistesleben in seiner Verwaltung herausnimmt aus der übrigen staatlichen Konfiguration, so wie es gemeint ist durch die Dreigliederung des sozialen Organismus. Es kann heute vielen Menschen noch, ich möchte sagen, gewaltsam gedacht erscheinen, wenn man den Auferstehungsgedanken zusammenbringt mit so etwas, wie es der Dreigliederungsgedanke ist. Aber derjenige, der Sinn und Verständnis hat für die Einheitlichkeit der menschlichen Zivilisation, der wird auch begreifen, wie dasjenige, was für das soziale Leben gedacht ist, durchaus hervorgehen muß aus demjenigen Erfassen, das für den Menschen nach dem Höchsten, das ihm überhaupt zugänglich ist, hingeht. Der Auferstehungsgedanke, er muß im geistigen Sinne erfaßt werden. Das wird er nur, wenn man nicht sich bloß auf das Betrachten, das heißt, auf das Intellektualistische verlegt, sondern wenn man in der richtigen Weise zu verstehen versucht, wie der Wille des Menschen ergriffen werden muß.
[ 18 ] Und Geisteswissenschaft, wie sie hier gemeint ist, ist ja durchaus etwas, was auf den Willen des Menschen geht. Alles übrige Reden versteht die Geisteswissenschaft, wie sie hier gemeint ist, doch nicht. Nehmen Sie alles dasjenige, was in unserer Literatur steht. Wozu werden denn die Menschen kommen, wenn sie nur darauf gehen wollen, das, was in unserer Literatur an Begriffen, an Ideen steht, bloß mit dem Intellekt zu umfassen? Nur zu holperigen Diskussionen! Sie werden allerlei profane Diskussionen anstellen können über dasjenige, was die Geisteswissenschaft sagt. Aber dasjenige, was in der Geisteswissenschaft an Gedanken und Ideen enthalten ist, das will vom Willen ergriffen werden, das will den ganzen Menschen in Anspruch nehmen. Man muß schon begreifen wollen, wenn man Geisteswissenschaft verstehen will. Und so fängt die Willenskultur gegenüber der Geisteswissenschaft eben schon im Begreifen an.
[ 19 ] Ich möchte sagen, diese müßte so recht eingehen in das ganze menschliche Wesen derjenigen, welche sich hineinstellen in dasjenige, was hier die geisteswissenschaftliche Bewegung genannt wird. Diese geisteswissenschaftliche, diese anthroposophische Bewegung mußte ja erst aus ihrem Wesen heraus, aber namentlich aus ihrem Verhältnis zur Zeitentwickelung heraus in der neuesten Zeit sich auch nach allem möglichen Praktischen wenden. Nicht um irgend etwas, ich möchte sagen, anzüglich zu charakterisieren — das liegt mir in diesem Augenblicke ganz fern -, aber um auf einiges aufmerksam zu machen, was so oder so sein kann, sei das Folgende angeführt.
[ 20 ] Sehen Sie, wir haben in der letzten Zeit allerlei praktische Einrichtungen getroffen. Zu den praktischen Einrichtungen brauchen wir Menschen, wir müssen Menschen in ihnen beschäftigen. Wir beschäftigen selbstverständlich diejenigen, die von den Intentionen, die innerhalb der anthroposophischen Bewegung sind, etwas verstehen, wenigstens etwas verstehen sollten. Nun setzt man voraus — das könnte die eine Art der Auffassung sein, ich will nur Eventualitäten hinstellen —, daß Anthroposophen nun in unsere praktischen Stellungen hineinkommen und aus dem ganzen Feuer der Anthroposophie heraus in diesen praktischen Stellungen wirken und sich sagen: Jetzt muß, wenn die praktischen Dinge gemacht werden, aus einem anderen Untergrunde heraus gewirkt werden; ich bin nun, wie ich stehe, wirklich als Anthroposoph drinnen in der ganzen Sache, und es kommt mir nicht darauf an, auch einmal viel mehr zu tun, als es sonst üblich ist in der heutigen Zeit. Ich bin eins mit demjenigen, was da gewollt wird durch diese praktischen Dinge. - Das wäre eine mögliche Auffassung. Die andere mögliche Auffassung wäre diese, daß gesehen wird: Nun ja, da sind allerlei praktische Einrichtungen, da gibt es eine Möglichkeit, nun auch irgendwie sich zu betätigen als Anthroposoph. Aber ich bin Anthroposoph, deshalb will ich mich nicht so behandeln lassen, wie es bei den alten Ämtern und dergleichen üblich war. Ja, bei den alten Ämtern, da mußte man pünktlich erscheinen, pünktlich wiederum verlassen — das gibt es nun nicht mehr, da gehe ich hinein, wie es mir gefällt, gehe wieder heraus, wie es mir gefällt, zuweilen gehe ich gar nicht hin, oder ich mache irgend etwas anderes, als gemacht werden soll, denn in der Anthroposophie muß es anders zugehen als in der alten philiströsen Welt. — Das wäre die extreme andere Auffassung. Ich will nur Eventualitäten hinstellen, denn auf diese Eventualitäten darf schon heute aufmerksam gemacht werden, weil dasjenige, mit dem wir zu tun haben, allerdings viel zu ernst ist, als daß wir etwa weiter fortsetzen könnten dasjenige, was ganz aus den selbstverständlichen Untergründen heraus weitere Kreise von Anthroposophen, die am alten sektiererischen Geist solcher Dinge Lust haben, weiter verbreiten. Diese Kreise finden es ja zuweilen als das allernatürlichste: Nun ja, seit so und so vielen Zeiten trinken die Menschen Tee, haben die Menschen beim Tee geredet — nun ja, lassen wir das weg, über was alles die Menschen beim Tee oder Kaffee oder nach dem schwarzen Kaffee am Nachmittag geredet haben! Aber warum soll man nicht einmal auch reden beim Tee oder Kaffee von Saturn, Sonne, Mond, warum nicht auch von Wiederverkörperungen, warum soll man da nicht sich allerlei ausdenken über dasjenige, was dieser oder jener Mensch in der vorigen Inkarnation gewesen sein könnte! Warum soll man mit anderen Worten, nicht etwas Salon-Anthroposophie oder so etwas ähnliches treiben?
[ 21 ] Über diese Dinge sind wir allerdings hinaus. Das geht nicht mehr. Darauf kann der Blick nicht mehr fallen. Der Blick kann heute nur fallen auf die zwei anderen Eventualitäten. Ich will ja nur charakterisieren und sage jetzt auch gar nicht, daß ich irgend etwas, was es schon gibt, hinstellen möchte, sondern ich mache nur darauf aufmerksam, daß diese zwei Eventualitäten ja so wären ungefähr, daß man mit der einen gut vorwärtskommen könnte, daß mit der anderen, wo die Anthroposophen gerade einen anderen, einen neuen Ton, etwas ganz Besonderes wollen und nicht mehr etwa um acht Uhr erscheinen, sondern um halb elf Uhr, weil sie bis dahin meditieren müssen vielleicht und so weiter, daß mit dieser Eventualität sich ganz gewiß eine richtige Willenskultur, wie sie jetzt charakterisiert werden mußte, nicht eigentlich verbinden lassen wird. Die Zeit ist zu ernst, um nicht doch diese zwei polaren Gegensätze anthroposophischer Handhabung der Dinge ins Auge zu fassen. Ich will darüber selber nichts aussagen, aber ich rate Ihnen an, ein wenig Umschau zu halten, ob diese zwei Eventualitäten vorhanden sind, und sich dann ein Urteil zu bilden, und eventuell nach diesem Urteil dann in irgendeiner Weise sich zu verhalten. Es ist sehr schön, sich zu bekennen zum Anthroposophentum; aber das ist für die heutige Zeit nicht genug. Die heutige Zeit erfordert vom Menschen dasjenige, was an den Willen geht, dasjenige, was auch unbedingt fördernd in die Menschheitsentwickelung selber eingreift.
[ 22 ] Es ist ja ganz außerordentlich erhebend vielleicht, zu sagen: Da oder dort, irgendwo im Verborgenen unzugänglich, da sitzt dieser oder jener «Meister». - Von gewisser Seite her wurde ja einmal für Ungarn ein solcher bestimmter Ort angegeben, und einige naive Budapester haben dann nachforschen lassen in den Polizeiakten und haben an dem betreffenden Ort diesen Meistersitz nicht gefunden! Wenn einem dann so etwas erzählt worden ist, daß auf diese Weise nachgegangen worden ist den großen geistigen Mächten der Erde, dann konnte man ja nichts anderes tun, als zu diesen Dingen etwas lächeln, denn es war eben auf seiten derjenigen, die den Dingen nachgingen, auf diese Art, die also gewissermaßen nach den Postadressen der geistigen Leiter der Menschheit suchten, naiv; wie es manchmal naiv war auf seiten derjenigen, die so hindeuteten auf diese Dinge, als ob man nach Postadressen fragen könnte. Das will ich aber lieber nicht ausführen! Über diese Dinge haben allerdings mancherlei Menschen mancherlei Ansichten. So zum Beispiel trieb sich einmal unter uns herum ein gewisser — ja, wie nannte er sich dazumal? In seinen Büchern nannte er sich dann Max Heindel, aber hier hatte er einen anderen Namen, Grashof nannte er sich. Dieser Mann hatte hier zunächst alles dasjenige aufgenommen, was er in öffentlichen Vorträgen und Büchern aufnehmen konnte. Davon hat er, etwas mystisch, ein Buch «Rosicrucian Cosmo Conception» gemacht, und dann hat er in eine zweite Auflage auch dasjenige aufgenommen, was in den Zyklen steht, und was er sich sonst abgeschrieben hat. Dann hat er seinen Leuten drüben in Amerika erzählt, daß er ja allerdings die erste Stufe hier aufgenommen habe, aber um die zweite zu erringen, sei er tief nach Ungarn gewandert zu einem Meister. Von dem behauptete er dann dasjenige bekommen zu haben, was allerdings bloß abgeschrieben war aus den Zyklen, die er bekommen hatte, und namentlich aus all denjenigen Vorträgen, die er sich erlistet hatte, und die nachzuschreiben ein bloßes Plagiat war! Einige von Ihnen werden ja wissen, daß dann auch noch das Urkomische eingetreten ist, daß diese Sache wiederum zurückübersetzt worden ist ins Deutsche, mit dem Bemerken, daß man ja zwar in Europa auch so etwas haben kann, daß es aber besser sei, es in derjenigen Gestalt zu bekommen, in der es entstehen konnte unter der freien Sonne Amerikas.
[ 23 ] Die Menschheit läßt sich eben sehr gern dasjenige bieten, was sie ohne den Willen aufnehmen darf. Die Willenskultur, die bringt schon auch durchaus, wenn sie wirklich durchgeführt wird, dasjenige, daß so etwas nicht möglich sein kann. Wenn der Wille schwach bleibt, dann wird er auch immer schwächer und schwächer gegenüber der Beurteilungsmöglichkeit desjenigen, was ihm von der Außenwelt entgegentritt. Wir müssen lernen das Höchste anzuknüpfen an dasjenige, was wir im Alltag erleben. Wir dürfen doch nicht über diese Dinge gewissermaßen eine getrennte Buchführung haben. Wir müssen uns klarsein, daß wir, wenn wir den Geist erfassen, dann auch über die oberflächliche Beurteilung des gewöhnlichen Lebens hinauskommen. Und wenn wir gefühlsmäßig manches vorbringen, dann sind wir, so sonderbar das erscheinen kann, wenn man es so ausspricht, dem Elemente des Auferstehungsglaubens nahe, das wir heute gerade brauchen. Wir brauchen das erste Element, möchte ich sagen, den allerersten Anfang, der darinnen besteht, daß wir in unseren Willen aufnehmen dasjenige, was aus Geisteswissenschaft kommen kann. Dann liegt in der Linie, die wir da einschlagen, in der Richtung, in der wir gewiesen werden, der Weg zum wahren Auferstehungsglauben. Wir müssen heute zu einer Erweiterung des Ostergedankens kommen. Wir müssen zusammenbringen dasjenige, was uns als Menschen Anthroposophie sein soll, mit demjenigen, was eigentlich heute für die Menschen im weiteren Umkreise nur ein Wort ist, das eigentlich keinen Inhalt mehr hat. Und ein solches Wort ist das Wort Auferstehung, das Wort Ostern für die weitesten Kreise der Menschen. Sinn muß wiederum verbunden werden können mit diesen Dingen. Wir müssen im Menschen Erkenntnis erringen, Erkenntnis der menschheitlichen Entwickelung, und wir müssen wieder verstehen lernen, allerdings vom vollen klaren Lichte menschlichen Bewußtseins aus, was das paulinische Wort bedeutet: «Ist Christus nicht auferstanden, dann ist euer Glaube eitel.» Eitel ist auch alles Erkenntnis- und alles menschliche Streben, wenn es nicht den wirklichen Ostergedanken von der Auferstehung in das Innerste des menschlichen Gemütes aufnehmen kann.
Seventeenth Lecture
[ 1 ] In the present time, it is of some importance to seek out the points of view from which the various spiritual seekers of earlier times proceeded, not merely because malicious and dilettantish opponents of the spiritual science represented here expect that it has simply taken over all kinds of things from earlier times, but above all because the knowledge of what can now be found from the original spiritual source becomes understandable when it is held together with the forces that humanity possessed in earlier times, with the various kinds of seeking for spiritual knowledge in earlier, instinctive times of human development. And to point this out to you, I would like to speak today about a certain conflation that has often been made in relation to Christ Jesus and one of his contemporaries, Apollonius of Tyana. The two have been conflated in a certain way, and there are even efforts to compare the life of Apollonius of Tyana with the life of Christ Jesus in an unhistorical manner. When one compares Apollonius of Tyana with Christ Jesus, a large number of similarities in biographical elements do indeed come to light. Above all, we know that the Gospel accounts relating to Jesus Christ contain many things that today would be considered miracles, and the biographers of Apollonius of Tyana also tell all kinds of miraculous stories about him. The way in which such things are recounted today proves nothing other than that people are behaving in a completely amateurish manner toward human evolution. What is recounted in the Gospels as signs, such as healings of the sick and similar things, corresponds to a completely different stage of human development than the one we live in today. The psychic influence of one human being on another, and even the psychic influence of human beings on their inanimate environment, have greatly diminished in the course of time in ordinary life. And when we are told of such things from the beginning of our Christian era, those who truly know these things inwardly know that what a human being could experience in those times was different from what can happen today in this regard. Today we must start from different premises, premises that are to be recreated through spiritual scientific knowledge. And if we want to understand the Gospels in the right way, we must not place the main value on the miracle stories, but we must be clear that miracle stories about a morally outstanding person were something quite natural for the times in question. It was not assumed that it could be any different for a person such as Jesus of Nazareth, in whom Christ dwelt, or for a person such as Apollonius of Tyana.
[ 2 ] Let us understand this correctly: I would say that it is self-evident that people would tell stories about such a person that they call miracles. No one means anything special by such stories. And if today's theology strives to prove the divinity of Christ Jesus particularly from the fact that he performed miracles, then this theology shows nothing other than that it does not stand on a Christian point of view, apart from the fact that such a view is unhistorical. Christ Jesus is never concerned with performing miracles, but always with what is presented to us through the miracle stories. It is always a matter of pointing out that while earlier people, when they wanted to do great things, acted with a lesser power of the ego, Christ Jesus acted precisely out of the power of the ego. We would not understand the Lord's Prayer if we tried to explain it by saying that we find the individual sentences in earlier writings and therefore say that the Lord's Prayer is old. Anyone who compares these earlier formulations of the sentences found in the Lord's Prayer with the Lord's Prayer itself will realize that in the Lord's Prayer it was important throughout to convey what had not been said earlier with the focus on the ego, but now with the focus on the ego.
[ 3 ] So we must not somehow seek similarities that arose in relation to this biographical moment in the life of Christ Jesus. It is only natural that similar stories will arise in a certain way when it comes to the performance of miracles, that is, the performance of what we now call miracles. We must look at something completely different if we want to understand how a figure such as Apollonius of Tyana is connected with Christ Jesus. And here we must first refer to the following.
[ 4 ] It is said of Apollonius of Tyana that he showed great aptitude even in his childhood, that he grew up with this great aptitude, that he participated in the most excellent teachings that could be given at that time, such as the teachings that had grown out of the Pythagorean school. But then it is recounted that Apollonius of Tyana undertook great journeys precisely to attain knowledge, and we are told of his travels, first the less extensive ones, but then the long journey he made to the Indian sages. We are told how he learned to revere and admire the Indian sages, how he gained access to certain sources of knowledge through them. We are then told how he returned, how, one might say, fired by what he had seen among these Indian sages, he then taught in various ways in southern Europe. But we are also told how he went to Egypt, how he first absorbed what he could in northern Egypt, and how insignificant it seemed to him, very insignificant compared to the wonderful wisdom he had found among the Indians. We are then told how he traveled up the Nile to its source, but also to the seats of the so-called Gymnosophists; this was the community of those sages who, after the Brahmins, the Indian sages, had the greatest prestige at that time. But it is also told how Apollonius of Tyana was already so imbued with Indian wisdom that he could distinguish between this and the lesser wisdom of the Egyptian Gymnosophists. And then it is told how he returned, how he then made his various wonderful journeys to Rome, where he was persecuted, where he was imprisoned, and so on.
[ 5 ] But what is particularly interesting to us is the fact that these great journeys are attributed to Apollonius of Tyana, and that these journeys are clearly linked to the constant expansion of his own wisdom. Apollonius becomes wiser and wiser by meeting the wisest people of his time. He wanders from place to place, so to speak. He seeks out those people who possessed the greatest wisdom of the time.
[ 6 ] This distinguishes him from Jesus Christ, who spent his earthly life in a relatively small place and who said what he had to say to humanity entirely from within himself, who does not have to speak about the wisdom that can be found in the vicinity of the earth itself, but has to communicate to humanity what he has brought down to earth from extraterrestrial worlds. Attempts have even been made to attribute all kinds of journeys to Christ Jesus in India, but that is pure amateurism. What is at stake here is that in the same age two beings stand opposite each other: on the one hand, Christ Jesus, who speaks entirely from the super-earthly, and on the other, Apollonius of Tyana, who gathers what can be found on earth, even though he is able to take it into his own soul through his great faculties. That is the fundamental, significant difference, and those who do not see it do not recognize what is said to later times through the existence of these two personalities.
[ 7 ] Now, however, what is connected with the person of Apollonius of Tyana points us to certain peculiarities of earlier times. I am referring to times far beyond the Mystery, that is, very ancient times of humanity. Some of this has been preserved in later humanity, and we will see how Apollonius of Tyana encounters what has been preserved in this way among the Indian sages, the Brahmins, and the Gymnosophists in Egypt. But one can recognize quite clearly what this is all about when one goes back to older times with spiritual-scientific historical research, and Apollonius of Tyana himself points out — according to his biographer — with strong words what is important here. He points out how the sheer immeasurable wisdom he encountered among the Indians is bound up with extraterrestrial influences that stream down upon human beings at a certain spot on earth. We are reminded that human beings are not only exposed to earthly influences. These earthly influences are easy to study, although even today they recede in the face of other influences on human beings. Certain lower organic beings take on the coloration of what they enjoy, according to their pure metabolism. In certain lower organic beings, we can see exactly how what they take in as metabolic products gives them their coloration and other characteristics. I have drawn your attention to how Vincenz Knauer, my old friend from the Benedictine order — which does not mean that I was in that order, but that he was — drew attention to the fact that what lies in the spiritual content of the concept is something real as opposed to the merely sensual existence of the material. He said, in the sense of the scholastics: If you could lock up a wolf and feed it only lamb meat for a long time, the wolf would still not become a lamb, even though it would then consist entirely of lamb meat. For Vincenz Knauer, this proves that there is something else in the wolf, in the form, in the configuration of the wolf, that is, in what the concept of wolf encompasses, other than the material, because according to the material, the wolf would be a lamb if it had always eaten only lambs. But it does not. This is therefore already different in higher animals than in very low organic beings, which show the influences of their metabolism even in their color. In humans, this is even more the case than with wolves, in that they do not show the influences of metabolism; otherwise, in regions where a lot of paprika is consumed, there would only be yellow-skinned people, and we know that, at most, when certain things are consumed by humans, jaundice-like conditions occur and the like. Even now, humans are still highly independent of earthly metabolic influences. But even today, in the materialistic age, which has not only a theoretical but also a thoroughly real basis, he is less exposed to the influences of the extraterrestrial world, of the cosmos, than was the case in earlier times. And the ancient Indian wisdom can essentially be traced back — to put it in summary — to the special incidence of sunlight in the Indian regions. The sun's rays strike the earth at a different angle there than elsewhere. This means that the extraterrestrial, cosmic influences on human beings are different than elsewhere. And if an ancient Indian had spoken from his own consciousness, he would have said something like the following, if he had known anything about Europe and so on. Ah, over there in Europe, people can never attain any wisdom, because the sun does not shine on them in such a way that they can attain any wisdom; they can only be bound to what the metabolism brings up from the earthly realm. There can be no talk of wisdom over there in Europe. There are only people of a lesser sort, they are half-animals, because they do not have the kind of sunlight that one must have if one wants to become a wise person. That is what the old Indian would have said, if he had spoken about these things at all. Because of this special relationship with the sun's rays, he would hardly have spoken much differently about what is human vermin in Europe than modern humans speak about their domestic animals. Not that he did not love these people of a lower sort; humans can love their domestic animals very much, but they do not consider them equal in spiritual capacity.
[ 8 ] I only wanted to point out how what was characteristic of older wisdom depended on the place on earth. This is also connected with something else. In earlier times of Earth's development, humanity differentiated itself much more through this dependence than was later the case. The differentiation of human beings occurred as soon as people who had settled somewhere left their place of residence and moved to other areas. They changed; they became different, both spiritually and physically. This is connected with the differentiation across the Earth. So it was essentially what the ancient human being had from the surroundings of the Earth that he in turn represented when he took in these influences of the Earth's surroundings in a corresponding way. So we can say that in earlier times, a true wise man was someone who lived in that place on Earth where one can become wise. For this reason, the ancients also looked toward this place with a certain degree of justification. If one were to believe today in the same way that wisdom is enclosed somewhere in Asia, one would only prove that one does not live in one's own time, namely, in the present time. There are, of course, strange people who still talk about such particularly favorable places on the surface of the earth; but these things are, in a higher sense, in the sense of real spiritual knowledge, to be called thoroughly amateurish. But if we go back to the most ancient times, we must think of the wise man as connected with his place.
[ 9 ] What kind of person is Apollonius of Tyana? Apollonius of Tyana wants to become wise on earth, even though he does not live in such places—the area near the sources of the Nile, where the Gymnosophists lived, was also such a place where one could become wise to a remarkable degree. He only had the urge to become wise. Therefore, he set out on his journey, as Pythagoras once did, who was in the same situation.
[ 10 ] And so we see how Apollonius of Tyana is, in a certain sense, a man who seeks in the vastness of the earth that which is to fill man with inner satisfaction, that which leads him to attain inner spirituality. For those times in which what I have now said about man's bondage to a place on earth was particularly true, those times lived on more or less only in echoes in the time of Apollonius of Tyana. Something of what it once was had remained in ancient India, and Apollonius of Tyana came to know this. But he already represented a newer era, the kind of person who is compelled to search everywhere on earth for what can be human wisdom in the highest sense. Only he is compelled to search for it on long journeys.
[ 11 ] Here, the mystery of Golgotha presents itself to us as the guiding principle for the new development of humanity, presenting itself in such a way that we can say: Through the fact that Christ dwelt in Jesus of Nazareth, Jesus of Nazareth became at the same time the essence of the earth that set the tone for this search, independent of its location on the earth itself. This makes Apollonius of Tyana and Christ Jesus the greatest opposites. Apollonius of Tyana is, in a sense, the contemporary of Christ Jesus, who, according to his human constitution, no longer lives in the old time but already in a new time. But in this new time, one can only live with the Christ impulse. The Christ impact comes from Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus of Nazareth and Apollonius of Tyana are the two poles of humanity from the beginning of our calendar.
[ 12 ] And it is precisely this that points us to what has come into humanity through Christ Jesus. What I mentioned yesterday, that above all what has come into humanity finds expression in the idea of resurrection, is particularly important for us to grasp. The idea of the resurrection says that human beings do not need to perish through that which binds them to the earth, but that they can find something within themselves that rises above that which is bound to the earth when they take up the Christ impulse. Everything that pulls and torments the man of suffering hanging on the cross is ultimately the forces that have been incorporated into the human body and thus into human beings in general through their earthly existence. If we look up at the crucifix with its face drenched in suffering, with its body racked with pain, we find the deepest expression of what earthly existence can impress upon human beings. But if we look up at what I pointed out yesterday, what we should basically see above the cross as the risen one, we become aware of what can always rise again in human beings, what can rise up from what the earthly forces merely contain, and what shows us how human beings are cosmic beings, how the earth imprints only a part of its forces on them, but how what is actually the cosmic ingredient of human beings can rise again from these forces.
[ 13 ] These are the things that must be seen in connection with the idea of resurrection, and these are the things that must be understood especially in our time, when we are striving for spiritual knowledge after the resurrection. What we must grasp above all in the idea of resurrection is that in earlier times there was an instinctive wisdom. What existed there was something great, something thoroughly connected with the eternal essence of the human being. But if we go back to ancient times, this wisdom was always at the same time something suggestive, something that came over people, something in which people did not live in freedom. The will nature of human beings was less expressed in all earlier times. It is the will nature of human beings that must develop particularly during the period of Earth's evolution following the Mystery of Golgotha. In relation to their will, the people of old lived in a completely dull state. But the will must be permeated by wisdom, by the power of ideas, by spirituality. That is what matters. Therefore, it is necessary above all that the Christ impulse find its way into the will of human beings. This must be understood in the right sense. The development of the will is particularly important from the present into the future. Human beings must become more and more conscious of their will. Today, in general civilized life, we experience only the reaction that arises from the comfortable clinging to old prejudices, the reaction against the training of the will. In the present, people do not want to train the will in any way. They downright hate to train the will. How does the human being behave in this regard?
[ 14 ] When he is asked to be a whole human being, a complete human being, who is also guided by wisdom in his will, he says: I will not get involved in that; let the Church guide my will. The Church has its old commandments; the Church will tell me how to use my will. Or if he does not say this, people today say something else; they say: Oh, why should I give my will a direction, I have the state. The state has its laws, the state has its institutions, the state does everything. The state takes care of the child. It already takes care of it now, if only it has somehow overcome the greatest difficulties. The time will also come when the state will manage to take over the care of children even at an age when these difficulties are still associated with all sorts of other problems. But why shouldn't there also be courtiers for draining land and a ministry for drainage? These would be all sorts of interesting things for the future organization of various authorities and the like.
[ 15 ] But then, in later times, when things are no longer so uncomfortable, when they are cleaner in terms of child rearing, the state no longer allows itself to trust anyone to make a judgment, and people as a whole are basically quite satisfied with this. They do not need to think about what is good for their children, for example, because — although the state does not really think about it either — at least people believe that it does think about it. Well, I could go on with this line of thought for a long time. Wherever human beings strive to put their will into action, to imbue it with wisdom, there they become beings who appeal to something else that is not at the center of their will and radiates light from there. But what matters is precisely that the will takes up the luminous impulses, and that is precisely what lies in the correctly understood idea of Christ.
[ 16 ] Christ is the being who never takes possession of groups in any way, who never involves himself with any groups. It is the greatest absurdity to speak of a German, French, Scandinavian, Dutch, Montenegrin Christ, or of a Christ from Morocco or somewhere similar. Christ is the being who knows no groups, who knows only individual beings, and anyone who believes that there is some connection between the Christ being and groups misunderstands the Christ being. who believes that there is some connection between the Christ being and groups.
[ 17 ] But this understanding of Christ must first come, it must come with the understanding of human individuality in general. Then, when that happens, the idea of resurrection will also be there again, because the spirit can only be resurrected in the individual human individuality. The spirit can only be resurrected if the individual human individualities are given the opportunity to unfold. Of course, this can only happen if spiritual life is removed from the rest of the state structure, as intended by the threefold social order. Today, many people may still find it difficult to reconcile the idea of resurrection with something like the threefold social order. But those who have a sense and understanding of the unity of human civilization will also understand how that which is intended for social life must necessarily arise from the grasping of what is highest for human beings, of what is accessible to them. The idea of resurrection must be grasped in a spiritual sense. This can only be done if one does not merely rely on observation, that is, on intellectualism, but tries to understand in the right way how the will of the human being must be grasped.
[ 18 ] And spiritual science, as it is meant here, is indeed something that goes to the will of the human being. Spiritual science, as it is meant here, does not understand all other talk. Take everything that is written in our literature. Where will people end up if they only want to use their intellect to grasp the concepts and ideas found in our literature? Only in stumbling discussions! They will be able to engage in all kinds of profane discussions about what spiritual science says. But what is contained in spiritual science in terms of thoughts and ideas wants to be grasped by the will; it wants to engage the whole human being. One must want to understand if one wants to understand spiritual science. And so the cultivation of the will in relation to spiritual science begins with understanding.
[ 19 ] I would like to say that this must really enter into the whole human being of those who place themselves in what is called the spiritual scientific movement. This spiritual scientific, this anthroposophical movement had to turn to all possible practical applications in the latest period, first out of its own nature, but especially out of its relationship to the development of the times. Not in order to characterize anything in a suggestive way — that is far from my intention at this moment — but in order to draw attention to a few things that may be the case, let me mention the following.
[ 20 ] You see, we have recently established all kinds of practical institutions. We need people for practical institutions; we have to employ people in them. We naturally employ those who understand something, or at least should understand something, of the intentions that exist within the anthroposophical movement. Now, one assumes — this could be one way of looking at it, I am just presenting possibilities — that anthroposophists now enter our practical positions and, out of the whole fire of anthroposophy, work in these practical positions and say to themselves: Now, when practical things are done, they must be done from a different foundation; I am now, as I stand, truly an anthroposophist involved in the whole thing, and it does not matter to me whether I do much more than is usual in this day and age. I am one with what is intended by these practical things. That would be one possible view. The other possible view would be to see that there are all kinds of practical institutions, there is an opportunity to be active as an anthroposophist in some way. But I am an anthroposophist, so I don't want to be treated as was customary in the old offices and the like. Yes, in the old offices, you had to arrive on time and leave on time — that no longer exists. I go in when I feel like it, leave when I feel like it, sometimes I don't go at all, or I do something other than what is supposed to be done, because in anthroposophy things have to be different than in the old philistine world. — That would be the extreme opposite view. I only want to point out possibilities, because attention must be drawn to these possibilities today, because what we are dealing with is far too serious for us to continue spreading what is spreading among wider circles of anthroposophists who are attracted to the old sectarian spirit of such things. These circles sometimes find it perfectly natural: well, for so many years people have been drinking tea, people have been talking over tea — well, let's leave aside what people have talked about over tea or coffee or after their black coffee in the afternoon! But why shouldn't one also talk over tea or coffee about Saturn, the sun, the moon, why not also about reincarnation, why shouldn't one imagine all sorts of things about what this or that person might have been in a previous incarnation! In other words, why shouldn't one engage in a little salon anthroposophy or something similar?
[ 21 ] We have moved beyond these things, however. That is no longer possible. Our gaze can no longer fall on that. Today, our gaze can only fall on the two other possibilities. I only want to characterize and am not saying that I want to present anything that already exists, but I am only pointing out that these two possibilities are roughly such that one could make good progress with one, while with the other, where the anthroposophists want a different, new tone, something very special, and no longer appear at eight o'clock, but at half past ten because they have to meditate until then, perhaps, and so on, that with this eventuality it will certainly not be possible to combine a proper culture of will, as it now needs to be characterized. The time is too serious not to consider these two polar opposites of anthroposophical handling of things. I don't want to say anything about this myself, but I advise you to look around a little to see whether these two possibilities exist, and then form your own opinion, and possibly act in accordance with this opinion in some way. It is very nice to profess anthroposophy, but that is not enough for the present time. The present age demands of human beings that which appeals to the will, that which also intervenes in a way that is absolutely beneficial to the development of humanity itself.
[ 22 ] It is perhaps extremely uplifting to say: there or there, somewhere hidden and inaccessible, sits this or that “master.” From a certain quarter, such a specific location was once indicated for Hungary, and some naive Budapesters then had the police files investigated and did not find this master's seat at the location in question! When one was told that the great spiritual powers of the earth had been investigated in this way, one could do nothing else but smile at such things, for it was naive on the part of those who investigated them in this way, who were, so to speak, searching for the postal addresses of the spiritual leaders of humanity; just as it was sometimes naive on the part of those who pointed to these things as if one could ask for postal addresses. But I would rather not go into that! However, many people have many different views on these things. For example, there was once a certain man among us—yes, what did he call himself at the time? In his books he called himself Max Heindel, but here he had a different name, he called himself Grashof. This man had initially taken in everything he could find in public lectures and books. He compiled these into a somewhat mystical book called “Rosicrucian Cosmo Conception,” and then in a second edition he included what is written in the cycles and what he had copied elsewhere. He then told his people over in America that he had indeed attained the first level here, but that in order to attain the second, he had traveled deep into Hungary to a master. He claimed to have received from him what was, however, merely copied from the cycles he had received, and in particular from all the lectures he had obtained, which to copy was mere plagiarism! Some of you will know that something utterly comical then happened: this work was translated back into German, with the comment that although something like this could also be found in Europe, it was better to have it in the form in which it had been created under the free sun of America.
[ 23 ] Humanity is very fond of accepting what it can take in without will. The culture of will, when truly implemented, ensures that such a thing cannot be possible. If the will remains weak, it will become weaker and weaker in relation to the ability to judge what confronts it from the outside world. We must learn to connect the highest with what we experience in everyday life. We must not keep separate accounts, so to speak, for these things. We must be clear that when we grasp the spirit, we also go beyond the superficial judgment of ordinary life. And when we express certain things emotionally, then, strange as it may seem when we say it like that, we are close to the element of the belief in resurrection that we need today. We need the first element, I would say, the very beginning, which consists in taking into our will what can come from spiritual science. Then the path to true belief in the resurrection lies in the direction we are taking, in the direction we are being guided. Today we must come to a broadening of the Easter idea. We must bring together what anthroposophy should be for us as human beings with what is actually only a word for people in the wider world today, a word that has no real content anymore. And such a word is the word resurrection, the word Easter for the widest circles of humanity. Meaning must once again be connected with these things. We must gain knowledge within ourselves, knowledge of human development, and we must learn to understand again, but from the full, clear light of human consciousness, what the Pauline word means: “If Christ has not been raised, then your faith is futile.” All knowledge and all human striving are also vain if they cannot take up the real Easter idea of resurrection into the innermost depths of the human mind.