The Rudolf Steiner Archive

15. Speech and Q&A Session During the Breslau-Koberwitz Conference

[ 1 ] From the chairperson’s opening remarks: Thanks to Dr. Steiner, Dr. Steiner, and the other members of the executive board. Let us try to keep in mind the immense significance of Dr. Steiner—who has global responsibilities to fulfill—appearing among us. This will give us the necessary reverence to listen to what he has to say to us. Let us welcome him as one who knows how to be youthful—more youthful than we ourselves can be. What we offer Dr. Steiner is merely a search, and one cannot expect more from us. We are not only academics, but also businesspeople, civil servants, and for the most part not members of the Anthroposophical Society.

[ 2 ] A participant: When we look at flowers, when we look at stones, when we look at stars, when we look at the world, we grow old prematurely through this act of looking at the world. We cannot find the kind of worldview that allows us to remain youthful. That is why many give up looking at the world and simply try to experience youthfulness within themselves. In order to stand firmly in the world, we seek a worldview that allows us to remain youthful, and in this search we wish to present ourselves before Dr. Steiner.

[ 3 ] Rudolf Steiner: I thank you most sincerely for the warm words of welcome that have been spoken, and I may well say that I welcome you just as warmly, because for many years now, what is taking place in your hearts, your souls, and your minds has stood before my soul as something extraordinarily important and significant for the present. You can be absolutely certain that, when one stands impartially within the world, one takes today’s youth movement extremely seriously. Even if it appears to you—when you look around, not among your peers but among the older people of today—as though the youth movement is not taken seriously, it is most certainly taken seriously by those who are pursuing spiritual endeavors today.

[ 4 ] Several years have now passed since a small group of young people joined the Anthroposophical Society, not merely wishing to participate as listeners in what the Anthroposophical Society has to offer, but rather bringing with them the thoughts, impressions, and feelings that today’s young people embody in their very youth. And in a sense, that is precisely what that small group did when they gathered in Stuttgart years ago and posed the question to the anthroposophical movement: How can you give us a place within this anthroposophical movement? I believe that, for my part, that question from back then was truly understood. It is not always easy—and perhaps we will be able to discuss this today or in the coming days—it is not always easy to understand the question that the truly seeking person today poses to the times, and young people rightly have a number of questions that cannot be posed with complete clarity.

[ 5 ] You see, back then, when the youth movement and the anthroposophical movement first came into contact, it really seemed to me as if the two were being brought together by a kind of destiny, karma, and I must still hold fast to the belief today that this is indeed the case—that the youth movement and the anthroposophical movement are truly drawn to one another by an inner destiny. When I draw on what I myself have experienced over many decades in the pursuit of a community of people who wish to seek the spiritual, and when I hold that together with what has emerged as the youth movement since around the turn of the century, I must say that what very few people sensed even forty years ago, and which, precisely because so few felt it at the time, went largely unnoticed—is now being felt within the increasingly widespread youth movement. The welcoming remarks just spoken beautifully expressed how difficult it actually is for young people to live today.

[ 6 ] After all, even though there has always been some kind of youth movement, things were different in the past than they are today. When you talk to older people today about the youth movement, they very often respond by saying, “Oh, well, young people have always felt differently from older people; they’ve always wanted something different.” That difference has since worn away and evened out. In today’s youth movement, one need look for nothing other than what the younger generation has always wanted in relation to the older generations. — I, at least, have heard this answer to the burning question of today’s youth movement from many different quarters. And yet, this answer is completely wrong; this answer is entirely incorrect. And therein lies an immense difficulty. At all times, even when young people have been quite radical in a youth movement, there has always been something that one might call this: the institutions and various establishments established by the older generation around them were, to a certain extent, recognized by the young people and could be recognized. Young people were able to see an ideal in gradually growing into the old ways. Today, that is no longer the case. Whether one is an academic or not is no longer the point; rather, the point is that young people, if they want to live at all, must grow into the institutions that the older generation has created, and that young people feel thoroughly alienated within them; that young people perceive what they encounter there as a kind of death of the human being—indeed, that within these institutions they experience the entire way in which older people behave and conduct themselves as something mask-like. Young people feel their own inner human forms—which they find alive—while everything around them seems to them like nothing but masked faces. This is what can drive young people today to despair: that among older people they find not human beings, but mostly masks. It is truly the case that people appear to one as if they were imprints, seals of some class of people, some profession, or even some ideal—but they do not appear as inwardly alive, fully realized human beings.

[ 7 ] Now, you see, I’d like to say that even though this might seem a bit abstract, it’s actually very much alive in our feelings: we are standing today at a turning point in history unlike any humanity has ever faced, at least in historical times and, to a large extent, in prehistoric times as well. I really don’t like to keep talking about periods of transition; after all, all periods of transition are simply a matter of moving from one stage to the next—it’s just a question of what is changing. But in our time, it is indeed the case that humanity stands at a turning point unlike any it has ever faced in historical or prehistoric times. This is connected to the fact that in the depths of the human soul—less so in consciousness than in the depths of the human soul—significant things are already taking place, which are actually processes of the spiritual world that are not limited merely to the physical world. It is said that with the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, the so-called dark age has come to an end, and that a new, luminous age is beginning. Certainly, anyone who can look into the spiritual world knows that this is so. The fact that not much light is coming to the fore at present does not contradict this; people are accustomed to the old darkness, and just as a ball that has been given a push continues to roll, so too does this carry on for a while, rolling on by inertia. Our civilization today is certainly one that rolls on by inertia, and when we look at what is rolling around us by inertia, then we must say: There is already one thing that everything around us has in common. Today people want everything that exists at all—it is hard to find a living word, because things are dead—they want everything to be confirmed; in fact, everything is only legitimate insofar as it has ultimately emerged as civilization, insofar as it is confirmed. Every scientific truth must be validated; everything that any person has claimed must be validated; but the person himself must also be validated; when he enters any profession, he must be validated in some way; from the outside, the person must be validated. When one lives within the world of science, this is called: it must be proven. What is not proven does not count; it cannot be understood.

[ 8 ] Now, you see, I could go on at length about this “being confirmed,” about this “being proven.” It does sometimes present itself in a grotesque way. You see, I was young once, too—not quite so young anymore—and back then—I’ll tell you about this little experience because it’s not entirely unrelated to what I want to say—I edited a magazine and was involved in a lawsuit over a minor matter. It wasn’t a big deal; I went to court myself and won in the first instance. The plaintiff wasn’t satisfied; he appealed to the court of second instance. I went there again, and the opposing attorney came up and said, “Well, we don’t need you at all; we only need your lawyer—where is he?” I replied that I hadn’t brought one with me—I’d thought it was my own business. That didn’t help. I had to use every bit of cunning I could muster to get the trial adjourned, and I was told that I had no business being there next time—that I’d have to send a lawyer, because in the court of second instance it wasn’t customary for a person to represent themselves. I walked away amused. The whole thing had slipped my mind, and it came back to me on the very day the trial was scheduled for the next day. I went into town, thinking I couldn’t let them tell me again tomorrow that I was unnecessary. So I walked down the street, saw a sign for a lawyer, and went in. I didn’t know him at all; I knew nothing about him. He asked, “Who recommended me to you?” — I replied, “No one at all.” — I figured no one else would do any better, so I just went with the first person I came across. — Then he said, “Write down on a piece of paper what I’m supposed to say tomorrow.” I wrote it down for him and, as is customary, simply left. A few days later, he wrote to me that the case had been won. — Now you see, I could actually tell you hundreds of stories like this from my own life. It’s not at all about being present as a human being anywhere; rather, it’s about things proceeding as they’ve been arranged by people. That’s what young people feel. They don’t want everything to be confirmed; they want something else. They want to replace confirmation and proof with “experience.” Older people don’t understand this word “experience” at all. It isn’t even in their encyclopedia. See what an abomination the word “experience” is! Because you speak of spiritual experience, it is an abomination to very many people. And that is what one encounters in the transition from the dark age to the age of light. A radical turning point in time is upon us.

[ 9 ] Now, it is also only natural that this transition took place, so to speak, in two distinct currents. That is why, in a certain sense, the anthroposophical movement and the youth movement are already fatefully linked. For the anthroposophical movement brings together people of every social class, profession, and age who, at the turn of the 19th to the 20th century, felt that human beings must relate to the entire universe in a completely different way. They must not only have something confirmed or proven to them; they must be able to experience something. And so it really seemed to me to be entirely karmic, entirely fated, that the two movements were brought together. And that then led to the emergence of a kind of youth movement—a kind of anthroposophical youth movement—within the anthroposophical movement itself, and this ultimately led to the fact that, when the anthroposophical movement was reestablished at our Christmas Conference at the Goetheanum, we soon followed up by establishing a Youth Section, where the interests that today genuinely and sincerely occupy the minds of young people are to be nurtured.

[ 10 ] It was, I would say, an immensely gratifying step forward that was taken in the first few months of the year with regard to our anthroposophical youth movement. There are reasons why things have now stagnated somewhat; this stems from the difficulties inherent in the youth movement. You see, the difficulties lie in the fact that it is hard to shape anything out of the chaos—especially the spiritual chaos—that exists today. Creating something today is simply much more difficult than it has ever been. That is why it is the case—you see, it is truly far from my nature to seek recognition; those who know me will know this—but it is true that one encounters the most remarkable things today. When the extraordinarily friendly, gracious—forgive me for returning to this once more—remark by Rector Bartsch reached my ears yesterday, in which he said that when I come here to the Anthroposophical Society, I am perceived as a father—I had to say, there is certainly some truth to that. But then I’m addressed as “the father”—fathers are old; they can’t be quite young anymore. In Dornach, just as we were starting the Youth Section, I had suggested that the young people should speak out clearly and plainly of their own accord. Then a number of young people stepped forward and spoke very beautifully and honestly. I also spoke my mind. Afterward, when the whole thing was over, someone who usually knows me quite well—after having listened to that as well—said to me, “You were still the youngest among the young people.” That sort of thing can happen to you these days: one moment you’re addressed as the old father, the next as the youngest among the young people. Clearly, the terms aren’t entirely fixed anymore. So you see, when you climb up and down the rungs like that—sometimes as the little old man, sometimes as the youngest among the young people—you have just the right opportunity to get a glimpse into what stirs people’s hearts.

[ 11 ] Well, I said that the youth section had fallen into a state of stagnation. It will emerge from it again. It fell into this state because, at first, it is truly extremely difficult for the youthful mind to grasp intellectually what it feels quite clearly. You see, our civilization has lost touch with the human spirit! And when I speak now more about the deeper aspects of existence, I see that young people who have only recently descended from the spiritual world into physical existence come down with entirely different expectations of life than those who descended earlier. Why is that? You don’t have to believe me, of course. But for me, it is a realization, not merely a belief. You see, before one descends into physical life on Earth, one experiences all manner of things in the spiritual world that are more meaningful and more profound than what one has to go through on Earth. This is not to say that earthly life should be underestimated. Freedom could never develop without earthly life. But life between death and birth is even more magnificent. The souls that have descended—these are the souls that are within you, my dear friends. They have truly witnessed an immensely significant spiritual movement unfolding behind physical existence in supermundane regions—the very movement that I call the Michael Movement within our Anthroposophical Society. It is so. Whether today’s materialistic human being wants to believe it or not, it is so! And the leading power for today, for our present time—one could call it by another name, but I call it the Michael Power—is actually striving, within the spiritual guidance of the Earth and humanity, to reshape everything soul-related on Earth. The people who became so clever in the 19th century have no inkling that, from the spiritual world, the state of the soul that had developed in the 19th century as the most enlightened has been abandoned; that an end has been put to it; that a Michael community of beings—who never come to Earth but guide humanity— is striving to bring a new state of the soul into humanity. The death of the old civilization has simply come.

[ 12 ] I have often said, during the time of the Threefold Social Order movement—which failed precisely because of the death of the old civilization—that: Today, we have no threefold social order in public life based on the spiritual, the legal, and so on, and the economic, but rather a threefold social order based on empty phrases, convention, and routine. Empty phrases are what pass for spiritual life, and routine—not human goodwill or love of humanity, as should prevail in economic life—is what dominates economic life.

[ 13 ] This state of mind in which people find themselves—this state of mind is to be replaced by another that arises once again from within the human being itself, one that is experienced within the human being. This is the aspiration of spiritual beings who, I would say, are recognizable through the signs of the times and have taken on the leadership of our age. The souls who have descended to Earth in their bodies have witnessed this Michael Movement and have come down under its influence. And here they have found themselves living among a humanity that actually excludes the human being, turning the human being into a mask. And so the youth movement is actually a wonderful reminder of pre-earthly experiences, of the most important impressions of that pre-earthly life. And when one has these vague, subconscious memories of pre-earthly life—this vision of the striving for a renewal of the human soul’s constitution—one finds nothing of the sort on Earth. That is what is actually taking place in the minds of young people today.

[ 14 ] The anthroposophical movement is that which manifests itself out of the Michael movement; its purpose is to bring what is intended there down among human beings. The anthroposophical movement seeks to look up from here on Earth, from the Earth itself, toward the Michael movement. Young people bring with them the memory of their pre-earthly existence. This brings them together by destiny. Thus, everything that has taken place in connection with the youth movement and the anthroposophical movement truly appeared to me to be given from within—not merely through earthly circumstances, but through spiritual circumstances, insofar as these spiritual circumstances belong to human beings. Based on these underlying factors, I perceive this youth movement in particular as one that can inspire infinite hope for the future of what can be understood, in the true sense, as anthroposophy.

[ 15 ] Of course, one repeatedly encounters what is bound to occur given that both the anthroposophical movement and the youth movement are in their early stages. We have, after all, seen the Free Anthroposophical Society founded alongside the Anthroposophical Society in Germany, and this Free Anthroposophical Society, as was to be expected, had chosen or elected a board of directors. I believe there were seven members on the executive committee—someone says there were nine—oh, nine indeed; well, you see, there were nine, but one after another they were politely shown the door until only three remained in the end; all quite understandable, perfectly understandable. The Free Anthroposophical Society essentially wanted to capture the “youth experience.” Now a discussion arose about the “youth experience.” One by one, the members of the executive committee were accused of not having the true experience of youth. Three remained, and they naturally discussed among themselves whether they all had that experience. Here, too, something quite remarkable emerges—a fateful connection between the youth movement and the anthroposophical movement comes to light. It appears in a playful way, yet it is very serious. For when one investigates the great questions of destiny, one comes upon very significant things, and there the magnitude of destiny often reveals itself symptomatically. When we had founded the Anthroposophical Society, we also had executive committee members who quarreled terribly, and it was clear to me that some would be left standing alone if they were to show the others the door; but that this would not be the end of it—rather, the left side would then come into conflict with the right, the left side of one person with the right side of another, over whether the right or the left truly possesses the experience of youth. This may look like irony, but it is not. It merely points out that what must be called a “youth experience” today lies deep within the soul, and what is significant about the youth experience is that it cannot necessarily be put into clear words. So many clear words have been spoken in this age of cleverness! What matters is that we actually arrive at experiences. But then it should also be the case—and I would say this does indeed happen—that what is necessary to go beyond clear forms and so on actually occurs. The claim to the right to persist in the indeterminate is indeed present. Something else must be added: not to drift apart under the impression of ambiguity, but to come together and express ourselves.

[ 16 ] Since you, my young friends, are gathered here, I would like above all to express the hope that all of you—whatever you may feel, think, or sense—will stick together with an iron will, truly stick together. That is what we need above all else if we are to achieve anything today in the great questions of life. We cannot always be concerned with whether one person has an opinion that differs slightly from our own. What really matters is that we come together even in the face of the greatest differences in feelings and sensibilities. Perhaps this will later prove to be the most beautiful achievement—that, in our youth, we knew how to stick together despite our differing sensibilities. After all, it is truly the case today that what young people miss most of all is finding the human being. In the environment into which they were placed, they simply did not find the human being, because the human being has died out. There are masks, not people! Masks everywhere! So, naturally, what had to emerge did emerge. People were searching for the human being! And that is something tremendously moving. For all the various Scout movements, Wandervogel movements, and so on are all a search for the human being. People seek to unite. Everyone looks for the human being in the other. It is quite understandable. Because spiritually, the human being was actually no longer there, people said to themselves: But I feel that the human being must be there after all. So people sought the human being, seeking him above all else in these groups. But—and we must not lose sight of this—there was something immensely tragic about it. Many young people experienced this tragedy. They joined these groups, believing they would find the human being. The group did not fulfill them with anything they were seeking; they became all the more lonely as a result. And these two phases of the youth movement have emerged clearly: the phase of sociability, the phase of profound loneliness. How many young people are there today who wander through the world in solitude, truly conscious that they are not understood anywhere?

[ 17 ] The fact is, one cannot find the human being within another person unless one knows how to seek them in a spiritual way, for human beings are, after all, spiritual beings; and if one approaches them only superficially, one cannot find them, even if they are right there. It is truly lamentable today how people actually pass each other by in life. Certainly, people today are right to criticize earlier times. Much of it was barbaric. But one thing was there: people found the human being in another human being. They cannot do that today. People—the adults of today—all pass each other by. No one knows the other. People can’t even live with one another because no one listens to the other. Everyone shouts something in the other’s ear—their own opinion—and then says, “That’s my own opinion; that’s my point of view.” Today, people really do have nothing but points of view. There is no deeper substance, for what is asserted from these points of view is irrelevant. These things, viewed with the heart rather than the intellect, resonate deeply with young people. And that is why you can be certain that the feeling must be correct: that there is a fateful connection between the youth movement and the anthroposophical movement; that young people did not come to anthroposophy simply because they wanted to try it—after having tried so many other things—but rather that they were drawn to it by fate. And that gives me the certainty that we will be able to work together. We will come together, and however things develop, they must develop in such a way that, above all, the human element in the broadest sense—which lives in youth—comes to the fore. For otherwise, something entirely different will emerge if spirit does not truly well up from youthful life. Then, of course, youthful life will be there, and one will be able to experience youthfulness, but this youthfulness, without being filled with spirit, comes to an end in one’s early twenties. For physiologically, after all, we cannot preserve our youth. We must grow old, but we must be able to carry something from youth into old age. We must also understand youth in such a way that we can grow older with it in the right way, and without being touched by the spirit in the soul—in the deepest soul—one cannot get through the years between twenty and thirty without falling into the gray misery of the soul. And that is precisely what constitutes my great concern. It consists of this: How can we work together in such a way that the chasm between the ages of twenty and thirty is truly and vibrantly bridged by our youth, without it descending into that gray spiritual desolation? I have already met people who, in their mid-twenties, have fallen into that gray spiritual desolation. For, fundamentally speaking, what lives in the depths of the youthful soul after the end of the Kali Yuga is the cry for the spiritual. It is quite true—and it does not matter—that many of you are not members of the Anthroposophical Society. I wasn’t a member until Christmas either. Since I had to become chairman, I had to join. That is not what matters. What matters is that one seeks the truly concrete spiritual.

[ 18 ] With these words, I wanted to offer you a brief introduction. I hope you will have much to say. Speak your minds freely, choose a chairperson, or do as you wish. I have also asked the Dornach youth to speak openly so that we can work together. The Dornach Executive Board will certainly listen attentively, and we will take everything you have to say as valuable lessons for the Youth Section at the Goetheanum. We do not wish to respond to what you have to say in a paternalistic manner, but rather in a truly “brotherly” way.

[ 19 ] Question: One of the young friends mentioned that they wanted to work on a project together. However, they found this collaborative work difficult; the Christmas plays were what they did best. They would always get tired after a short time; they felt worn down by their jobs. — Then they talked about the Michael’s idea.

[ 20 ] Rudolf Steiner: How can one approach one’s profession in such a way as to be a truly human being within it, once again with inner joy? Yes, you see, these things are not all that easy to answer, my dear friends, but perhaps one can contribute something to the answer if one has experienced these things firsthand. You see, I had quite a few friends when I was your age. Back then, they, too, raised the question of how one can engage with one’s profession without withering away in joylessness, without, so to speak, killing off one’s soul. After they had all—back then, people called those who wanted to develop freely “hotheads”—spent a long time idling about freely, they eventually squeezed themselves into some profession or another, but they withered away spiritually in a terrible way. I don’t really like to talk about myself, but in this case I have to. I did not commit myself to any profession, for had I done so, there would have been no anthroposophical movement. In order to give shape to Goethe’s legacy, one could not be entrenched in any profession. One must shape life itself. That is why I may say a few things drawn from my own life in answer to the question. The problem cannot be solved by immersing oneself in today’s professions and retaining an inner zest for life. Yet one must still immerse oneself in today’s professions, for it requires resignation not to do so. To do this, you must bring yourself to realize that it is not possible to immerse yourself in today’s professions with a zest for life or a sense of fulfillment. That will only be possible when working life is structured in a way that is appropriate for human beings. You must give up the idea of immersing yourself in a modern profession and remaining full of zest for life. You must solve the problem beyond the realm of work. In the little time that your job leaves you, however, you must strive all the more intensely. It is extraordinarily pleasant, and I completely agree with what you said from the other perspective—about performing Christmas plays and taking joy in them; but I have met people who also came to the Christmas plays, were there, and took part, who had gray hair not only on their bodies but also on their souls. You don’t have to be young for that.

[ 21 ] Anthroposophy has a distinctive feature. If you are an ambitious person today and want to educate yourself a little, you take in what is written in the books. What claims does literature make? It claims to be unambiguous. When you pick up a scientific book, it doesn’t matter whether you’re eighteen, twenty-five, thirty-seven, or eighty years old. The truth is supposed to have an effect on you no matter what. It’s supposed to be absolutely true. That’s not the case with anthroposophy. As an eighteen-year-old, you’ll take in anthroposophy differently than you would as a twenty-six-year-old, because it grows with you. It adapts to the individual in their youth and also in their old age. Just as the individual themselves grows old, so too does anthroposophy. When one immerses oneself in this entirely new—call it a worldview, a state of mind, whatever you will—when one delights in this newness, forming communities precisely to allow this to come to life within the community, one will inevitably come to realize: There, one can be young and find one’s place in it in the right way, so that things also have a youthful effect. The older people accuse us anyway of not understanding anthroposophy. A good sign for anthroposophy! One is not supposed to understand it; one is supposed to experience it. And this last vestige of conservatism must also disappear—the belief that one can find joy in today’s professions. One must find a path alongside one’s profession and gather enough people for this path to generate the kind of force that can reshape the professions. For it is only in reshaped professions that one can find joy.

[ 22 ] Much can happen to bring this power into being, as I have described to you in relation to the Michael power. But it must find its full expression in magnificent Michael festivities. We really ought to ensure that the burgeoning life of the future—which we can still sense only in its most embryonic form—can take shape in festivals of hope, in festivals of anticipation. In festivals where people are held together solely by hope and anticipation—not by sharply defined ideals—it is precisely in these festivals that we must keep before us the image of Michael with his guiding eyes, his pointing hand, and his spiritual armor. Such a festival must come into being. Why has it not yet come into being? Just as firmly as I will point out that this festival must emerge from the bosom of the anthroposophical movement, so firmly will I also hold it back as long as the strength is not there to celebrate it with dignity. For the times are too serious to treat it lightly. If it is celebrated in a dignified manner, it will send great impulses out into humanity. Therefore, we must wait until the strength for it is present. There should not merely be a vague, hazy, ethereal inspiration from the Michaelic idea, but rather the awareness that a new world of the soul must be established among humanity. It is indeed the Michaelic principle that is the guiding force. This involves a shared experience of working toward a Michaelmas festival season, where “the spirit of hope for the future, the spirit of anticipation, can then come to life.” This is something that can take hold and, in one’s profession, provide such great satisfaction that one can approach one’s work with resignation. This should not dishearten you, but rather inspire you.

[ 23 ] Question: You are forced to be a different person at work. In the evening, you do exercises, climb the ladder, and are pulled back down again during the day.

[ 24 ] Rudolf Steiner: You can’t bring that into your profession either, because there are far too few people today for a real force to emerge. That would happen if all those who sense—however vaguely—that something different is to be expected were to strive for unity. If you’re in any profession today—and you know this quite clearly—there are still quite a few others in it who don’t feel the same way you do. These people don’t feel the need to spend their evenings at youth movement meetings; they are so deeply entrenched in their profession that they are actually content with it, because they simply don’t have what it takes to be dissatisfied; they don’t even want their profession to bring them joy. Something characteristic emerged in the second half of the 19th century. I was driven to despair at scientific gatherings. As long as there were those few hours of official proceedings, scientific discussions took place. Then people would sit down together, and anyone who uttered so much as a single word about their profession was regarded as a philistine. Those among them who did not want to be philistines were, in fact, philistines all the more. They always had the phrase on their lips: “Just don’t talk shop!” This shows that they were not at all interested in what they did professionally. This is true in all fields. People are, for the most part, victims of the times; they could also be won over to something better. This involves allowing even more power to emerge in the spiritual movements of the times, so that those who find their profession oppressive are not left standing there, crushed by others who have no such needs at all. So the more we refrain from trying to achieve something as early as tomorrow, and the more we strive to work diligently toward what should first and foremost be a spiritual community working toward a common goal, the better it will be. That is what we must aim for.

[ 25 ] Question: The contrast between young and old. The older anthroposophists want only to draw the spirit inward. The younger ones want to bring it outward. The others want to hold them back; they speak mockingly of what the young are creating.

[ 26 ] Rudolf Steiner: The contrast between young and older people need not be so strongly emphasized. It seems to me that what I said is correct: since it is already impossible at present to treat everyone the same, we should try to be, let’s say, tolerant toward one another. It is quite certain that, on the one hand, those who have the necessary temperament will strive to look out into the world with what is already there and to reach out to it. It would be sad if this were not the case. But on the other hand, there is also a considerable difference in strength. There will be stronger elements who will be able to carry out certain things sooner than others dare. But one will only achieve something truly far-reaching if the various shades of thought come together. It is possible to come together. The anthroposophical movement could do a great deal in this regard; unfortunately, it simply does not.

[ 27 ] I do believe that once the youth movement finds its way into anthroposophy, the various nuances will come to the fore. As far as I am concerned, I will never object to the youth movement that stems from the temperamental disposition you have advocated. The last thing I’d want to do is object to that. It’s just that in my youth, I saw how strongly one runs up against resistance there and ends up with a bloody forehead. It’s fine for those who want it, but you know, it’s not everyone’s cup of tea—I’d say—to really expose oneself to an uncertain fate right from the start. But if one is in a position to work in this direction again, then it should be done not so much by criticizing others who do not act this way, but rather by pointing out what has actually been created. It is certainly a matter of highlighting the positive achievements that have already been made in this direction. This, I believe, is far too little known even among young people; it remains confined to small circles. And that is the danger—even if, because it manifests itself among young people, it does not appear in such a blatant form as it does in the sects. Nothing sectarian must be allowed to occur. What is universally human must prevail within it.

[ 28 ] Question regarding the various age groups represented—ranging from eighteen to twenty-five years old—and the different educational levels of those concerned.

[ 29 ] Rudolf Steiner: The reason this is the case is, fundamentally, simply that selfishness plays such an enormously strong role in our civilization. People are unable to empathize with others. Everyone speaks and acts solely from their own perspective. Just think how different it is when one is able to empathize with others. Let’s suppose there is a man in his sixties talking to a five-year-old boy. Actually, I think the five-year-old understands the man in his sixties much better than the man in his sixties understands the child. Getting inside the other person—that is what one must learn. This can be achieved through anthroposophy, because it is flexible. When we are held together by spiritual interests, the age difference between fifteen and twenty-five easily disappears, especially when we’ve been together for a while. But if we are held together only by selfish interests, then the fifteen-year-olds and the twenty-five-year-olds will not understand one another. It is a matter of overcoming selfishness. One must find one’s way into something objective. Selfishness is the hallmark of our age. If we begin to take a genuine interest in other people, this cannot continue indefinitely. One thoroughly overcomes selfishness when one first overcomes it in something that penetrates the soul as deeply as anthroposophy. There, one must turn inward. There, one sheds selfishness and can then begin to find a way into the other person. This emerges as a fruit.

[ 30 ] The reason you cannot understand one another is that you do not have a human being. If someone isn’t a human being but a template of what a twenty-five-year-old is supposed to be like today, how can they understand other people? If you’re an academic, at twenty-five you aren’t a human being but a clothes hanger with your high school diploma hanging from it and the fear of your final exams. At fifteen, you’re a coat rack with school report cards still hanging on it that need to be signed by your parents. These different “objects” don’t understand one another, but as soon as we come to the human being, we understand one another. That’s how it is with professions—with the various professions. We are no longer upright human beings; we are, in fact, nothing more than a pale imitation of various social conditions. And therein lies the significance of the youth movement: that it has cast off this imitation, that it wants people. That is what strikes you about these people. When they step outside their professions, they want to be human beings. They will become just that when they are clearly imbued with such things.

[ 31 ] Hermann Bahr describes what it was like for him when he visited a big city. He was invited everywhere—on Sunday, on Monday—and well—you see, he couldn’t tell the ladies sitting on his left at the table apart from the ladies sitting on his right; he couldn’t tell the ladies from Sunday apart from the ladies from Monday. It all got mixed up for him. Yes, you see, when you enter such circles, people look so much alike because they’re all a carbon copy of these circumstances.

[ 32 ] Question: Should one give up one's profession and devote oneself entirely to anthroposophy, or is it possible to continue working in one's profession?

[ 33 ] Rudolf Steiner: That is an individual matter. One should never shy away from carrying out what one has recognized as the right thing to do. Sometimes you can do it, sometimes you can’t. If you can do it, you should have a knack for it and actually do it. Of course, one can also become a martyr. But that shouldn’t become a general rule. Because then one doesn’t move forward—or at least it would have to become a general rule. But if only one percent out of a hundred are willing to become martyrs, then one doesn’t get anywhere, because the others will thwart that effort. That can only be answered on an individual basis. I have answered it individually in my own life by never entering a profession. Certainly, you might say that because of this, I don’t know how to advance a career. After all, I’ve stood alongside those who were there. But it has indeed turned out that professional life has a certain rigidity to it, that—given the complexity of life’s interconnections today—it is extraordinarily difficult to accomplish much in any profession. If you have a knack for it, you can do it.

[ 34 ] Question: It was said that separate groups had been formed because it was not possible to bring young and old together. Another question about occupation.

[ 35 ] Rudolf Steiner: There isn’t much to be gained from one’s profession if one wants to be human. One must accept this and develop an independent life alongside one’s profession. What this gentleman is saying here stems from a misunderstanding of anthroposophy.

[ 36 ] The Questioner: I am not attacking anthroposophy. One must be able to understand what is good about the youth movement. Rudolf Steiner: The point is simply that the youth movement, in particular, can experience through anthroposophy how, by excluding all that is negative, one can work positively in harmony with the entire cosmos. For anthroposophy, by its very nature—since it is accepted only by those who can experience it—rules out any unfree action. I have never set out to campaign for anthroposophy. I said what I knew. I knew that if I spoke to a thousand people, at first there would be only five for whom the matter would truly take hold. I never made a big deal out of it, for it is the same with herring in the sea. There, too, out of a thousand eggs that are scattered, only two or three become actual herring. Whoever focuses on success can never achieve it. One must work from within the cause itself. What I mean is that we should allow everyone to do what they can, and not be too dismissive, not say too strongly: “This is not what youth should be; this is not what the youth movement should be.” As many people as possible should come together, each acting from their own individuality to do what they can.

[ 37 ] The difference between fifteen and twenty-five will be overcome once everyone is young—and everyone is already young. It doesn’t really matter what the difference is. The basic form is already there. Others, who stay on the outside, go to the movies; they don’t join the youth organizations.

[ 38 ] The point is that perhaps too much emphasis is placed on the idea that one must establish a certain form. Rather, the point is to achieve a sincere relationship between people—that is the form itself. If you love one another, you go where you love one another, and you do not search for a form. Perhaps it is precisely wrong to search for a form. The point is that you come together even when you are in complete disagreement; that you enjoy coming together and enjoy being together. And when this purely human, emotionally rooted quality provides the form, that is the healthiest form. Any programmatic search for form will even disrupt the youth movement. We have also considered many different aspects regarding the Youth Section at the Goetheanum, and many different things will emerge that will provide a foundation for engaging with these matters once we have moved beyond a certain point of stagnation.

[ 38 ] If the quest for light—which arises after the Kali Yuga and need not be an abstract spiritual light—is truly so strong within people that they simply cannot help but follow it, then we do not need any further forms. Having specific forms is only a distraction. What is alive within people must come together. I imagine that even if there are only two or three people in a very, very large gathering who are wholeheartedly enthusiastic about their cause, people will come together because those two or three are there, because they can be found there. It must be the human element. That will certainly be found if we don’t come together with limp arms, limp legs, and limp minds, but with zeal and a sincere inner desire to achieve something. And if we don’t expect others to entertain us, but go there wanting to accomplish something ourselves—if we want to accomplish something and expect as little as possible from others, while doing as much as possible ourselves—then we have the form. It’s so hard to talk about general programmatic matters. It all comes down to life when it comes to the things that are part of life. If you’re immersed in your profession and then have to do something extra on top of that, you’ll grow weary in your work. But enthusiasm is necessary—the kind that comes so easily to young people today precisely because it is so terribly lacking in older people. There’s no movement; enthusiasm is missing; old age has lead in its body. This can already spark enthusiasm in young people if you resolve today to truly discuss what each of you is thinking in the near future, together with those who are here today. That alone provides enough structure, and we will send out all kinds of messages and questions from the Goetheanum. Then you’ll have something to do again, and so simply look for opportunities to meet and skip the gatherings as little as possible. Then things will work out; that creates the best structure. In fact, this may even be the first principle regarding the formation of a group: We have so many friends who want to make it their first principle not to skip our gatherings. Then a structure is already in place. Question regarding the Wandervogel youth movement.

[ 39 ] Rudolf Steiner: In reality, there need not be a contradiction. With the Wandervögel, one goes out into nature; one wants to take in the impressions of nature; one wants to experience the human aspect in nature, and so on. If, afterward—after having strived for all of that and believing one has gone through it for a while—one falls into the other extreme, no longer wanting nature and turning to books instead, then one has not experienced the first in the right way either. Today, a person can travel the whole world and see nothing. I can show you the finest examples of travelers to Italy and English ramblers who saw absolutely nothing. They looked at the galleries, but in reality they saw nothing. I have seen a number of ramblers who had the urge to see something, but who saw nothing.

[ 40 ] To see something, one must have a heart. But if one is prevented from becoming a whole person as early as elementary school, one fails to see what is in nature. When one is able to reconnect with all that is in nature, then one also finds something different from others in How Does One Attain Knowledge of the Higher Worlds?. This book is by no means written to the exclusion of nature, but rather with a view of nature. It has been said that one can tell from my style that I write on a typewriter because I lack the time to do so during the day. This criticism certainly cannot be correct. I have never placed a typewriter in my bed, where I write most of my “work.” That would also look grotesque. It depends on how the works are conceived. They are conceived entirely with an eye toward nature. “How Does One Attain Knowledge of the Higher Worlds?” is very much a Wandervogel book. I see no contradiction in the fact that one is neither one thing nor the other in its entirety. To experience nature as a Wandervogel is to experience the book that is not meant to be a book at all. It only looks that way. But there are certain things that can only be brought into the world through ink. If the youth movement succeeds, we’ll also move beyond the ink. We must arrive at what is human—only, you see, the Anthroposophical Society cannot achieve everything at once; it’s already doing a great deal toward that end; unfortunately, it hasn’t succeeded yet. It was my intention never to have certain things—the kind one says from person to person—printed. I’m so glad that no one is taking notes today. Time and again, people have come along who have transcribed what was said. What turned out to be a poor transcription was published, and so I had to find a way once again to have these things printed.