The Rudolf Steiner Archive

Eighth Lecture

[ 1 ] Yesterday, at the end of my remarks, I pointed out that—in a sense, as a matter of course—opponents of the Spiritual Science movement arise from two sides. On the one hand, from the realm of the natural sciences, in that the very structure and the entire character of the natural sciences today must, to a certain extent, be such that anyone who undergoes a scientific education and believes they can construct a worldview based on that education is allowed or even obliged to do so—feels compelled to adopt a worldview that, due to its materialistic character, must in a sense be opposed to what our Spiritual Science aims to be. One must think clearly in this area. One must be clear that a person who grows up within the natural-scientific, materialistic method of our time—which we have recognized as a necessity—is in many cases actually not at all to blame for becoming an opponent as a result of the thoughts that are stirred within them. Of course, this does not absolve anyone of the obligation to combat this opposition when it arises. But one will only combat it properly if one takes into account what I have just said.

[ 2 ] On the other hand, a similar opposition arises from the representatives of various religious communities. Just as, in a sense, the contemporary field of natural science has an interest in concealing the spiritual that lies behind nature, so too do today’s representatives of religious communities generally have an interest in concealing the spiritual that lies behind the soul. So one can say: A Spiritual Science cannot emerge from the realm of natural science because the spiritual realm behind nature is to be concealed; a Spiritual Science cannot emerge from the realm of religious communities because the spirit behind the phenomena of the soul is to be kept hidden. Here, too, the situation is exactly the same: given the nature of religious communities, they will always tend to oppose whatever emerges from Spiritual Science and enters the public sphere, not because they have no interest in revealing the spirit behind the manifestations of the soul, but because they actually have an interest in concealing the spirit behind the manifestations of the soul. One must be aware of this, and it should not serve as a reason to “ignore the opposition,” but rather to find the correct stance toward it.

[ 3 ] Now, it is extremely difficult to speak about this particular chapter. For in doing so, one is essentially touching upon things that everyone should come to realize through what they read between the lines in writings of Spiritual Science, and what they sense in the communications of Spiritual Science. For underlying the matters I have touched upon here is actually something very profound, something very significant. Underlying these matters is the fact that, for certain reasons, it is actually dangerous to point out so casually—from nature, or rather, from the surface of nature—what lies beyond nature. And because it is, so to speak, dangerous, there exists what I have described more or less symbolically when I said: The so-called secret societies or orders have everywhere a kind of “right wing”: those esotericists who wish to strictly adhere to keeping secret everything connected with the higher mysteries. Such orders all have—but as I said, the terms are meant symbolically—a sort of “right,” a sort of “center,” and a sort of “left.” The Left is always inclined to publish certain aspects of esotericism. Those on the Right, however, are actually completely averse to bringing anything they believe should be preserved by the secret orders into the public domain. For they consider the knowledge they believe should be preserved by the orders to be dangerous if it falls into the hands of unworthy individuals, or if it were to be presented to the public by people who are not sufficiently prepared for such a role.

[ 4 ] The reason it is so difficult to talk about this subject is that the moment one speaks of it, one is already compelled to make certain allusions that, so to speak, bring the matter into the open. The secret orders, which—with or without good reason—truly believe they preserve a higher knowledge, naturally choose a method by which they take certain precautions to prevent their real or supposed knowledge from leaking into the public domain.

[ 5 ] Such orders usually have degrees, and the structure is such that there are three lower degrees and three higher degrees. As a rule, those in the three lower degrees do not receive the knowledge that the higher-ranking members believe justifies their claim that: “This knowledge is dangerous in the hands of the unprepared”—but rather, in these three lower degrees, an effort is made to clothe the actual or supposed knowledge in symbols—all manner of symbols—and I have, in fact, spoken of such symbolic communications in the lectures of the past week.

[ 6 ] Well, perhaps the following should be said about these symbols: The symbols are such that, if they have truly been faithfully preserved from earlier times and have not been distorted by all sorts of machinations by later ignoramuses, they represent a kind of language for those who penetrate them—a language that can be gradually understood. And when this language is understood, it conveys a certain knowledge. However, one could also say that these symbols are a carefully staged message—a very carefully staged message. One does not adopt the selfish stance of keeping the treasures of knowledge within the innermost circle. One gives them, so to speak, to those whom one admits into the outer circle. But in giving them, one simultaneously conceals them within the symbolism, so that only those capable of deciphering the symbols can penetrate to the truths. There are orders that strictly ensure that no theoretical explanations of the symbols are given at all, but that the symbols are only taught or practiced; so that, in fact, anyone who wants to read the symbols—if they speak of them as a language—must figure it out for themselves.

[ 7 ] Now one might ask: Is this really protection? Doesn’t this mean the knowledge ends up in the wrong hands after all? — Well, at least up through the 14th and 15th centuries, one could say that the orders—which worked with symbolism—did not allow the knowledge to fall into the wrong hands. Since that time, however, things have changed—significantly so. I’ll explain why in a moment. So please, keep this in mind for now: When occult orders emerged before the 14th, 15th, and 16th centuries, the three lower degrees—to whom, as the wider circle, the knowledge was imparted in symbols—could not, in essence, abuse it, precisely because the orders limited themselves to providing only the symbols and leaving everything else to those who had to penetrate their meaning. So this was essentially a safeguard, because comprehending the symbols required a certain amount of mental effort,

[ 8 ] So suppose someone joined a lower degree of an occult order. There he was given symbols that were either taught or practiced. He was given only these symbols; he received nothing else, and he was dependent on allowing these symbols to affect him just as natural phenomena do. If he wanted to go further, if he wanted to explore the secret meaning of the symbols, then he simply had to investigate; he had to apply a spiritual power. If he had been helped, he would not have needed to apply this spiritual power. But he was not helped; so he had to apply this spiritual power himself, and he expended this spiritual power in deciphering the symbols.

[ 9 ] The question now is: What kind of intellectual power did he need to decipher the symbols? It is the same mental power that, had he not used it to decipher the symbols but instead to penetrate natural phenomena, would have served to make him a more sophisticated person—so that he would have applied certain abilities to a purpose for which they were not intended. It was therefore a task of symbolism to ensure that those powers, which could have become dangerous, were diverted toward deciphering the symbols. In this way, the powers were diverted from causing harm.

[ 10 ] A second point to note regarding these symbols is that human nature is predisposed to view such symbols in moral terms. It must also be specifically noted that these symbols were arranged in such a way that they had to be viewed morally. But when one observes natural phenomena, one cannot view them in moral terms. One cannot judge the lily by moral principles simply because it blooms; rather, one must approach it entirely objectively and dispassionately. Symbols are not like that; rather, they evoke moral feelings. And these moral feelings, which arise in the soul upon contemplation, were suited to combating unhealthy mysticism in the soul. Thus, the power of unhealthy mysticism was also deflected by the inner effects of the impression made by the symbols. This symbolism, therefore, had its very good reasons.

[ 11 ] However, since the 14th, 15th, and 16th centuries, these reasons have ceased to hold much weight; they can no longer be adequately defended. Consequently, occult orders have long since ceased to hold the significance they once had. In many respects, they have even become societies that pursue all manner of ulterior motives and special purposes. They are more like societies dedicated to indulging particular vanities and the like; they often do not possess any special knowledge at all, but at most a hollow set of formulas.

[ 12 ] The development of the natural sciences since the time of Galileo, Copernicus, and others has actually played a significant role in this. For as these scientific methods have emerged and been cultivated, the human soul is gradually losing the ability to maintain its former devotion to symbolism. Symbols are, in fact, all suited to revealing the spiritual reality behind nature. Scientific research, however, with its materialistic methods—as they reached their peak in the 19th century—prepares the human soul in such a way that it loses interest in what symbolism is all about. This is evident in practice in that anyone who believes they can construct a worldview based solely on the natural sciences no longer has a genuine inclination to engage with symbolism with seriousness and dignity. And so a phenomenon has arisen which, I would say, is now revealing its full significance.

[ 13 ] When one considers the symbols of the secret societies—which were handed down to the lower degrees as far back as the 14th, 15th, and 16th centuries—they are all expressions of profound, profound truths. But they express these truths in the manner in which such truths were expressed at that time. Under the influence of the scientific way of thinking—namely, the tendencies that arose from it—no effort was made to develop these symbols in a progressive way. Starting in the 14th, 15th, and 16th centuries, a somewhat freer approach to symbolism should have been developed; the design of the symbols should have evolved. Instead, however, they failed to take into account what humanity had simply experienced outwardly in the world. Consequently, to a person who has mastered the perspective of our modern era, they appear antiquated. And for the most part, they are indeed antiquated. However, especially among those who wish to approach the occult from a certain perspective, a tendency has emerged that I have often criticized: the tendency to unearth quite a number of such symbols that are quite old. And when one can then say of a symbol, “This can be labeled with this or that old vignette,” one is immensely pleased. One does not engage with the symbolism as such, but rather with the fact that it once sprang from something somewhere in ancient times. One often even forgoes seeking to understand it. One is content merely to have unearthed a very ancient symbolism. Thus, very little work had been done on the further development of symbolism since the centuries in question, so that in fact, when symbolism is handed down today among the stragglers of the old occult orders—one can really only call them stragglers—it is mostly antiquated, and no effort is made to carry this symbolism forward in accordance with the progress of humanity over the last few centuries.

[ 14 ] Well, people’s views have simply changed. Just as it used to be possible to keep something secret, today—according to our way of thinking—nothing can be kept secret anymore. Just try, for once, to truly grasp some genuine, ancient symbolism. You’ll see how easy it is. Our age is the age of publication; our age does not really tolerate mystery of this kind—I mean artificial mystery, that is, things made into secrets. Our age does not really tolerate that; our age wants to publish everything immediately. Consequently, one could also say that for anyone familiar with the literature that has been published on all manner of symbolism, there is hardly anything left that remains unpublished. Essentially, everything has already found its way into books, and some orders today operate in such a way that they simply do not inform their members where this or that can be read; so that what has long been available in books is accepted by the members as if only their superiors were permitted to know it as a secret. For in no other field is there as much deception as in the field of occult orders!

[ 15 ] I say that it is no longer really possible to continue upholding this principle of secrecy and barricading oneself behind symbolism. However, one can only truly understand these things by trying to get to the bottom of why certain matters were kept secret in earlier times. Well, for the reasons I’ve hinted at, it is difficult to speak about these things, as I’ve already said, because if one were to speak about them, one would have to say certain things that cannot be said so readily. Therefore, I will try to take a different approach today and tomorrow. I will tell you certain things which, if you follow them consistently, will enable you to gain some insight into the mysteries of the world—things that it is not advisable to express directly at the present time. I will go into these matters in greater detail today and tomorrow. Today, I will begin by saying certain things that can be consistently pursued in your own thinking and feeling, and that can also be pursued in your inner life. And if you pursue them, these things will, in a sense, take you a long way. Because the time has come to say these things, I will try to say them as best I can.

[ 16 ] Let me give an example. Carlyle, the great English writer, said something in one of his speeches—in a remark that, one might say, was not exactly very significant—about Dante, the author of *The Divine Comedy*. So I said: Carlyle did not say anything particularly significant about Dante at this point. The speech was about Dante and Shakespeare. Yet he did say something that is curious. Anyone who reads this speech as an ordinary reader—and most people today hardly distinguish between reading a speech by Carlyle and reading a newspaper article—will not find anything particularly striking. But anyone who has taken Spiritual Science to heart—not merely as theory but as a part of their very being—will be able to notice something precisely at this point. Carlyle points out, in fact, how remarkable it is that something immensely great has arisen from circumstances that outwardly appear to be a coincidence or even something else entirely—something that did not go according to human wishes. Carlyle illustrates this through Dante’s fate. Dante had been banished from his hometown because of his political views. He was forced to take up the pilgrim’s staff. It was precisely because he was banished—because he was forced to take up the pilgrim’s staff—that he became what he is today. It was through this—that is, as an exile—that he was compelled to write *The Divine Comedy*. Now Carlyle says: Surely Dante did not wish to be exiled from his hometown! But if he had stayed, he would have become something like a Lord Mayor in Florence; he would have had a great deal to do as one of the leaders of Florence, and the *Divine Comedy* would never have been written. So Dante had to suffer; something entirely undesirable had to happen to him so that humanity could receive the *Divine Comedy*. Thus, humanity owes the *Divine Comedy* to a fate that befell Dante—one that Dante certainly would not have wished upon himself. — And Carlyle is certainly right about that. This remark is witty. For someone reading the speech in the ordinary sense, it is not particularly significant; but to the one who reads the speech attentively, something might nevertheless catch their attention. They may not realize why their intuition pauses there, why their intuition senses something special at this point. Carlyle himself did not sense this either; he made this remark because he was a very witty man. But he did not sense anything of what I now mean. I must explain what I mean by taking a roundabout approach.

[ 17 ] Let’s suppose Dante had not been exiled, but had instead become something like a councilor or the ruler of Florence; he would have achieved everything he was capable of achieving given his talents. He could have become a prior. Had he become one, he would have been a prominent prior, and so on. In short, a great deal would have been accomplished through Dante, but there would be no “Divine Comedy.”

[ 18 ] But the matter is not quite that simple. Let us really assume that Dante had achieved his goal, had not been uprooted from Florence, and had become one of the city’s or the Church’s leaders—which is quite similar in terms of public influence. Since Dante—as you will admit, given what is presented in the *Divine Comedy*—had remarkable abilities, he would have become a prominent lord mayor; he would have been a figure of immense significance. So history would have looked quite different. Florence would have had a very prominent city and state leader. Yes, and not only that! But imagine this Florence, which would have been governed by all those councilors with the abilities that later found their way into the *Divine Comedy*. Such brilliant governance would have meant that many, many forces that existed there would have been thwarted in their mysterious workings. It is utterly foolish to claim that there are no brilliant people in the world. There are very many of them. They simply perish because they are not awakened. If Dante had become head of the city, he would also have had a successor who would have been very significant, and he would have had seven such successors. Exactly seven people would have succeeded one another—we will explain the reasoning behind this at a later time—seven significant figures would have ruled Florence in succession as its leaders. Something truly magnificent would have emerged, but there would be no *Divine Comedy*. Dante was born in 1265. We now live in a time when, if all seven of those people had been active in Florence back then, we would still be feeling the repercussions in Florence today, for they would have lasted seven centuries! Seven centuries would have passed quite differently than they actually did. None of that happened. The Catholic Church is still here, but so is the *Divine Comedy*.

[ 19 ] I have given you an example of how forces are transformed out there in the grand order of world history. I have given an example of what we are actually dealing with out there in the great transformation of world history. Things of immense significance—when we look at them this way—lie before us; things of immense significance stand before us!

[ 20 ] I used this example because I want to draw your attention to the fact that, at times in the history of human development, it is necessary for forces to be transformed—for forces to flow into a completely different current than the one into which, at first glance, they seem to be flowing. This example seems to have nothing at all to do with what I actually want to say, and yet it has everything to do with it. For if you follow through on what is contained in this example, you will come to understand why it is difficult to readily reveal to the public certain truths that relate to what lies behind external nature. It is indeed necessary to present certain things to people in such a way that it binds forces, so that certain forces cannot become dangerous.

[ 21 ] With this example, I have alluded to those forces that will develop within human nature when a person penetrates the veil of natural phenomena. But even when people do not penetrate this veil of natural phenomena, but instead set out to penetrate the veil of soul experiences—when they wish to delve into the depths of the soul—even then certain dangers exist. And here, too, I would like to use a story to offer you the opportunity to explore certain things that otherwise could not be fully elucidated. I would like to build upon a story that is well known, but about which people usually do not realize that it expresses something so profound.

[ 22 ] A man named Paulus once came to Father Antonius. This man wanted to become his student. From the way he presented himself, this man seemed to be quite a simple-minded person. But Antonius nevertheless accepted this simple-minded man—let’s call him Paulus the Simple—as a student and had him perform certain tasks year after year. I don’t think many of you would enjoy doing the tasks that Antonius assigned to his apprentice. The apprentice had to carry water, but in vessels full of holes, so that by the time he reached his destination, there was nothing left inside. And the man had to do this year after year. He had to sew clothes, and once he had sewn them, he had to cut them open again. He had to carry stones up mountains, and once he had them at the top, he had to let them roll back down so that they were back where they had started. He had to do this year after year. As a result, Paul the Simple underwent a profound deepening of his spirit, and he noticed how significant spiritual powers rose up from his subconscious, and how these spiritual powers gradually transformed him into a wise man. Paul the Simple became Paul the Wise.

[ 23 ] I do not wish to recommend that anyone follow the example set by Anthony with Paul the Simple. But I had to recount it as a fact. Suppose, for a moment, that Antonius had not chosen this method—carrying stones up mountains and letting them roll back down, carrying water in vessels through which the water seeped out again—but had instead made things easier for Paul the Simple. What would have happened? Paul the Simple-Minded would one day have said: “Yes, Anthony, your teaching is quite good, but you are actually a very wicked person. I must now take your teaching and go out into the world with it. I must fight you with your own teaching, for I have realized that you are a very wicked person. And besides, you are not doing for me at all what I am entitled to demand.” You promised me that, at a certain point, you would explain that from the very beginning, when I first came to you, I was only seemingly the Simple One, and that I was already on a much higher level back then. Then you promised to explain that your entire teaching is inspired by me. — The student could have come to such realizations. But he was spared from them by the method that Antonius employed—a method which, as I said, is no longer quite applicable today, although this is not to say that, if applied to certain temperaments, this method would not bear quite good fruit.

[ 24 ] From these two examples I have cited, if you follow them through consistently, you can discern certain dangers that threaten human beings when they become involved with the forces that lie behind external nature as the spiritual forces of nature. From the example I gave you regarding Dante, you can see what magnificent, what immensely significant things one is actually facing.

[ 25 ] Well, why is it, then—and we can now pose this question—that natural science, which does have a truly good method, an excellent, brilliant method, why doesn’t it get to the bottom of certain things that lie behind nature? The question can be answered very simply. Natural science lacks the powers to do so—the powers of cognition. It does not work to develop these powers of cognition. Isn’t it true that, as things stand in the field of external natural science, no effort is made in this direction because—as I have often mentioned—there is a certain fear of what lies behind natural phenomena.

[ 26 ] But—one might ask, on the other hand—why are those who know something about the spiritual aspect of nature nevertheless willing, to a greater extent than is currently the case, to open up the methods and paths so that human beings can develop the powers of cognition that lead them beyond nature, that allow them, as it were, to cross the threshold, that impel them toward what lies beyond nature?

[ 27 ] You see, as soon as one crosses the threshold that leads to the spiritual beings beyond nature, one comes into contact with spiritual beings. You can see this from all the descriptions I have given over the past few weeks. Such passive natural phenomena, as studied by modern science, exist only in this physical world. As soon as one crosses the threshold, one enters a world of spiritual, living beings. What is remarkable about this is that the beings one first encounters are all beings who actually make one much more capable in terms of clear thinking and so on than one was before. It is truly the case: If I regard the sum total of natural phenomena, as they are used today by materialistic natural science, as a curtain upon which the laws of nature are written, then behind it lies a swarm of spiritual beings. As a human being, one must pass through this. But with the abilities one possesses to study natural science, one cannot pierce through the curtain. If one could, one would already be doing so, given today’s tendencies. It used to be different. But one cannot pierce through it.

[ 28 ] There are, however, people who, through a genuine interpretation of symbols, could lead others to break through. Then, of course, people would come into contact with spiritual beings—beings who, in the most profound sense, have an interest in making humans very astute, very subtle, and ingeniously astute: these are certain elemental beings who devote all their efforts to imparting to human beings certain cognitive abilities that truly transform them from what they were before they break through. Moreover, through this process, human beings come into contact with these beings. Now, however, these beings possess a very special characteristic: they make human beings astute and teach them certain cognitive abilities, yet they are not benevolent toward humans. They are beings hostile to humans and animals in the truest sense, so that by breaking through to that realm, one loses one’s usual, general benevolence toward humans and animals. It is not easy to pass through without losing this friendliness toward humans and animals if one goes through unprepared. One actually develops a tendency to do all sorts of things that are not friendly toward humans, and one even acquires a certain skill in doing things that are unfriendly toward humans.

[ 29 ] In short, you will see from this that it is not exactly advisable to simply let people pass through there; that it does carry its own dangers, precisely because the beings one first encounters are by no means friendly toward humans. Now, anyone who were to pass through that path—the one through which one could indeed pass if today’s methods of natural science were continued—would, in the most profound sense, encounter these hostile beings, and would come to know these beings, who, incidentally, are not only hostile to humans but downright hostile to nature itself, as well as a vast array of forces through which one can truly destroy a great deal.

[ 30 ] It is therefore not desirable to allow those people to pass through who still have the inclination to actually use these destructive forces, for much of that destructive power would, so to speak, be handed over to them. Rather, one must strive to admit only those people who, through their self-discipline, have progressed to the point where, even if these destructive entities offer themselves to them, they make no use of such means of destruction. It was precisely in this regard that the deciphering of the symbols proved extraordinarily significant. For in doing so, one actually absorbs these forces—one consumes the forces that those beings could have used to turn people into destroyers. There was, therefore, a desire to prevent people from surrendering themselves to the beings of destruction, and those who favored keeping a certain high portion of esoteric knowledge secret now followed this line of reasoning. They said: If we make our knowledge—and the kind of knowledge that existed in secret orders and the like—readily accessible to people, so that they are spared the work of penetrating the symbols for themselves, then we turn these people into rebels against nature; then we make them bearers of destructive forces. That was the tendency. They said: We possess knowledge that would inevitably bring this about; therefore, we cannot make this knowledge exoteric. We must stand firmly on the principle that we first educate the people we bring into our fold to the most absolute love of humanity, to the most absolute love of plants, animals, and human beings; that we must first subject them to careful discipline.

[ 31 ] But today’s people will not put up with this discipline. They simply will not tolerate it; they resist it. Humanity has progressed. So what does it do? Let’s suppose this discipline were to be enforced; people would be placed in the relevant orders, and even what must be virtually imposed on most of them would be taken very seriously! What would be the result? Well, women in particular would have completely run away within three months. They would not put up with it at all. Certain orders have therefore, in order to survive, refrained from enforcing this discipline. Consequently, what was once profound knowledge has degenerated into mere straw, containing nothing at all. On the other hand, however, the tendency persisted among those who truly knew something to keep the matter secret.

[ 32 ] You see, this ties in with what I said: that when the flood of materialism came, people turned to mediumship. They thought that what people would otherwise have gained from a theoretical explanation of the symbols would become clear through the practice of mediumship.

[ 33 ] From all this, you will understand that there are already certain reasons why those who are knowledgeable in this field do not so readily allow the veil of nature’s mysteries to be lifted. However, something very specific will become clear to you from this. It will become clear to you that our spiritual movement cannot consist of simply taking some secrets of the Order, as they were preserved, and making them exoteric. If we were simply to do that—which would mean that I would take some old secrets of the Order and teach them to the public, just as we must teach—then we would be incorporating all sorts of curious elements of magic and the like into these secrets of the Order, which would do no good. This therefore means nothing other than that it is out of the question in our movement to reveal any old secrets of the Order. We cannot use old secrets of the Order to unravel the mysteries of nature. Tomorrow I will show you that we cannot simply take religious truths either, because that would in turn conjure up yet another danger. Thus it will become clear to us why we could do neither one nor the other, why we had to take a special path. And it is precisely this special path that now brings us opposition from both sides—from natural science and from religion. I will elaborate on that tomorrow.