Donate books to help fund our work. Learn more→

The Rudolf Steiner Archive

a project of Steiner Online Library, a public charity

The Mission of the Archangel Michael
GA 194

28 November 1919, Dornach

IV. The Culture of the Mysteries and the Michael Impulse. Self-knowledge and its Permeation of the Three Strata of Consciousness

IN PURSUANCE of the considerations I placed before you in the lectures of last week I should like today to prepare the ground for what I shall develop in detail tomorrow and the day after tomorrow. It will be a matter of calling back to your memory, in a way different from the one heretofore employed, of much that we shall need in order to pursue our present theme.

If we try to make clear to ourselves the way in which Earth evolution unfolded we can do so best by considering and arranging the various events in relation to the central point of Earth evolution; for through such an arrangement we arrive at a certain structure in man's own evolution. This central point, this center of gravity is, as you know, the Mystery of Golgotha through which the whole Earth evolution received its meaning, its true inner content.

If we go back in the evolution of occidental humanity which received the impulse of the Mystery of Golgotha from the orient, we must say: approximately in the fifth century before the occurrence of the Mystery of Golgotha there begins, out of Greek culture, a kind of preparation for this Mystery of Golgotha. This uniform trend is introduced through the figure of Socrates, finds its continuation in Greek culture in its entirety—also in art the same trend is discernible—it is continued by the mighty and outstanding personality of Plato and receives a more scholarly character, as it were, in Aristotle.

You know from various lectures I delivered before you that the Middle Ages, mainly in the time after St. Augustine, were especially bent on using the guidance that could be gained from the Aristotelian mode of thinking in order to comprehend what prepared the Mystery of Golgotha and what followed it. Greek thinking became of such great importance precisely for the Christian evolution of the occident up to the end of the Middle Ages through the fact that it was used for the comprehension of the real nature of the Mystery of Golgotha. It is well that we should realize what it was that took place in Greece during these last centuries prior to the event of the Mystery of Golgotha.

What took place in the thinking, feeling and willing of the Greek was the last echo of a primeval culture of mankind no longer appreciated today. Historical considerations can no longer see these things in their proper light, for our historical considerations do not reach back to those times in which a Mystery culture that extended over the civilized earth of that age permeated all human willing and feeling. We must go back into those millennia into which history does not reach, we must go back with the methods which you find indicated in my book, Occult Science, an Outline, (Anthroposophic Press, New York) in order to see what was the nature of this human primeval culture. It had its origin in the ancient Mysteries into which those human beings who were found to be objectively suited for direct initiation were admitted by great leading personalities. The knowledge which was thus imparted to those initiates in the Mysteries flowed, through them, out to other human beings. One cannot understand ancient culture in its entirety if one does not focus one's attention upon the maternal soil of the Mysteries. If one is willing to do so, this maternal soil of the Mysteries can be clearly discerned in the works of Aeschylos. It can be sensed in Plato's philosophy. But the revelations concerning the Divine which mankind received from the Mysteries have been lost historically. Only in the most primitive fashion are they still contained in that which has become historically demonstrable culture. We can best judge what has happened here if we make clear to ourselves what it is that has remained, in the post-Socratean age of Greek civilization, of the primeval Mystery culture in which Greek civilization was rooted. What has remained is a certain mode of thinking, a certain way of visualizing.

As you know, outer history relates how Socrates founded dialectics, how he was the great teacher of thinking, of that thinking which, later on, Aristotle developed in a more scientific way. But this Greek mode of thinking is only the last echo of the Mystery culture, for this culture of the Mysteries was rich in content. Spiritual facts which are the fundamental causes for our cosmic order were adopted into man's entire view of things. These sublime and mighty contents were gradually lost. But the way of thinking developed by the Mystery pupils has remained and has become historical, first, in Greek thinking, then, again, in Medieval thinking, in the thinking of the Christian theologians who acquired this Greek thinking in order to grasp with the thought forms, with the ideas and concepts which were a continuation of Greek thinking, that which has flowed into the world through the Mystery of Golgotha. Medieval philosophy, so-called scholasticism, is a confluence of the spiritual truths of the Mystery of Golgotha and Greek thinking. The elaboration, the thought-penetration of the Mystery of Golgotha has been carried out—if I may use the trivial expression—with the tool of Greek thinking, of Greek dialectics. Up to the Mystery of Golgotha, about four and one half centuries elapsed from the time when the content of the Mysteries was lost and the merely formal element, the mere thought element of the ancient Mysteries was retained. We may say, approximately, four and one half centuries. Thus we have to visualize the following: In a pre-historical age, the culture of the Mysteries extends over the civilized earth of that time. In the course of evolution only a distillate of it remains, namely, Greek dialectics, Greek thinking. Then the Mystery of Golgotha takes place. In the occident this is, at the outset, comprehended by means of this Greek dialectics. Anyone who wishes to familiarize himself with the science, let us say, even of the tenth, the eleventh, the twelfth, the thirteenth, the fourteenth century, which still comprises theology, must employ his thinking in a way that is quite different from the present-day natural-scientific mode of thought. Most human beings who today pass an opinion on scholasticism cannot do it justice because they only have a natural-scientific training, and scholasticism requires a training of thought that is different from modern natural-scientific training.

Now, my dear friends, today we live at a point of time in which again four and one half centuries have elapsed since this natural-scientific mode of thinking took hold of mankind. In the middle of the fourteenth century, human beings of the Occident begin to think in the way we find developed, already to the degree of brilliancy, in Galileo or in Giordana Bruno. This, then, is carried over into our age. Indeed, my dear friends, it is, seemingly, the same logic as that of the Greeks; yet, in reality, it is a completely different logic. It is a logic which is gradually derived from the nature processes in the way the Greek logic was derived from that which the Mystery pupils beheld in the Mysteries.

Let us now try to make clear to ourselves the difference that exists between the four and one half centuries prior to the event of the Mystery of Golgotha in the civilized world of that time, which was almost limited to Greece, and the four and one half centuries in which humanity was trained for natural-scientific thinking. It is easiest for me to describe this to you graphically. Visualize the culture of the Mysteries like a kind of mountain summit of human spiritual culture in very ancient times. This culture of the Mysteries—I shall proceed step by step—then becomes logic in Greece, up to the Mystery of Golgotha. This, then, finds its continuation in the Middle Ages through scholasticism.

During four and one half centuries prior to the Mystery of Golgotha we have the last ramification, the echo of the ancient Mystery culture. With the fifteenth century A.D. a new way of thinking begins which we might call thinking in the style of Galileo. The period of time that elapsed between this starting point and our present day is of the same length as that which elapsed between the appearance of the Greek way of thinking and the Mystery of Golgotha. But while the latter period is a final echo, an evening glow, as it were, the former is a prelude, something that has to be evolved, that has to be brought to a certain height. Greek culture stood at an end. We stand at a beginning.

We shall only gain a complete understanding of this placing, side by side, of an end and a beginning if we observe the evolution of mankind from a certain spiritual-scientific point of view.

I have repeatedly stated that it is not without reason that in the present age the attempt toward self-knowledge of mankind is made, the tools for which are offered by the anthroposophically-oriented spiritual science. For the large majority of mankind confronts a significant future possibility. In this connection it is important that we take seriously the fact that the evolving historical humanity is an organism that develops continuously. Just as in the case of the single organism we have puberty, and also later epochal transitions, so likewise, in human history, we have epochal transitions. Today, human beings still meet the doctrine of repeated earth lives with the objection that human beings do not remember their previous earth lives.

Anyone who, in a factual manner, conceives of the evolutionary history of mankind as of an organism, as I have just indicated, should not be surprised that human beings do not today, in their ordinary knowledge, remember their former earth lives. For I ask you: what does man remember in ordinary life? That which he first has thought. What he has not thought he cannot remember. Just think how many events of a day remain unobserved by you. You do not remember them because you did not think them in spite of their having taken place in your surroundings. You can only remember what you have thought.

Now, in the former centuries and millennia of mankind's evolution, human beings did not attain to any factual clarity about their own nature. To be sure, since the appearance of Greek thinking the “know thyself” exists like a longing, but this “know thyself” will only be fulfilled through real spiritual cognition. Only through the fact that human beings once employ one life in order to comprehend in thought their own self—and humanity has only become ripe for this in our age—is memory prepared for the next earth life. For we must first have thought about that which we are to remember later. Only those who, in earlier ages, through initiation (which need not have been acquired in the Mysteries) could look factually upon their own self are able in the present age to look back upon former earth lives. And there are not so few human beings who are able to do this. Nevertheless, the situation is such that man, also with respect to his purely bodily evolution, undergoes a transformation. These things cannot be observed externally in physiology, but they can be observed spiritual-scientifically. Mankind today does not have the same bodily constitution it had two thousand years ago, and in two thousand years from today it will again have a different constitution. I have talked to you about this subject repeatedly. Human beings live toward a time in the future in which their brains will be constructed in a way that is quite different from the way their brains are constructed today in an external sense. The brain will have the possibility of remembering former earth lives. But those who have not prepared themselves today through reflection upon their own self will sense this faculty—which will be theirs mechanically—merely as an inner nervousness, if I may use the current expression, as an inner deficiency. They will not find what they are lacking, because mankind in the meantime will have become ripe, in regard to its corporeality, to look back upon its previous earth lives, but if it has not prepared this retrospect, it cannot look back; it then will sense this faculty only as a deficiency. Therefore, proper knowledge of the present-day powers of transformation of mankind indicates by its very nature that human beings are brought to self-knowledge through the anthroposophically-oriented spiritual science. Now, it is possible, and today I shall only indicate this, it is possible to point out the nature of this special experience which will suggest to human beings to take into account previous earth lives.

Today we live in an age in which those shades of feeling which will become more and more prevalent are indicated only in a few human beings; but still, they are indicated in these few human beings. Not much attention is paid to them yet. I shall describe them to you in the way in which they will appear eventually. Human beings will be born into the world and they will say to themselves: by living with other human beings, I am educated, consciously or unconsciously, for a certain way of thinking. Thoughts arise in me. I am born into and educated for a certain way of thinking, of visualizing. But at the same time I look at my outer surroundings: my thinking, my visualizing does not properly fit this outer surrounding world.—this shade of feeling is already present today in individual human beings. They must think in a direction which makes it appear to them as if outer nature said something entirely different, as if outer nature demanded something completely different from them. Whenever such human beings appeared that have felt this discrepancy between what they must think and what external nature says, they have been ridiculed. Hegel, for instance, is a classical example for this. He has expressed certain thoughts about nature—and not all of Hegel's thoughts are foolish!—and has arranged them systematically. Then the philistines came and said: Well, these are your ideas concerning nature; but just look at this or that process in nature: it does not agree with your ideas. Then Hegel answered: Too bad for nature!

Naturally, this seems paradoxical; nevertheless, subjectively this feeling is well founded. It is absolutely possible that one surrenders, without prejudice, to one's innate thinking and says: if nature were really to correspond to this thinking, she would have to take on a different form. To be sure, after some time one will also become accustomed to that which nature teaches. Most people who find themselves in such a position do not notice that by having acquired nature observation they really bear two souls within themselves, two truths, as it were. Those who do notice it may suffer greatly from this discrepancy brought into their soul life. What I am describing to you here and which is present in some human beings today although they are not aware of it will become ever more present. Human beings will say to themselves more and more: through what I am by birth, my head really forces me to form a picture about nature. But this does not coincide with nature herself. Then, as I become more familiar with life, I also acquire in the course of time what nature herself teaches. I must find a way out of this.

These discordant sensations will arise in our souls when they return again to earth. A source of inner thoughts and sensations will arise in us which will cause us to say: you sense clearly how the world ought to be; it is, however, different. Then, again, we shall familiarize ourselves with this world; we shall learn to know a second kind of law, and we shall have to seek a balance between the two.

Let us assume the human being enters physical existence through birth. He brings with him in his thinking and feeling the result of his previous earth life. While he was not united with the life of the earth, this external earth life has actually undergone a change. He senses a discrepancy between his thinking, the effects of which he brings from his previous life, and the things as they have developed in the period during which he was absent from the earth. His thinking does not harmonize with them. And now gradually he adjusts himself to his new life, but he does by no means completely take up into this consciousness what he may learn from his surroundings. He only takes it up as though through a veil. He elaborates it only after death, and then, again, carries it into his next life. Man will constantly live in this duality of his soul life. He will always become aware of the following: You are bringing with you something in regard to which the world into which you have grown through birth is new. But through your physical being you now receive something from this world which does not completely penetrate your soul, which you will have to work over, however, after death.

The human being of the present day ought to become thoroughly acquainted with the way of experiencing life. For only by familiarizing himself with such a thing does he become aware of the forces which pulse through our existence and which otherwise remain entirely unnoticed. We are drawn into the web of these forces. But if we do not try to penetrate them with our consciousness, they make us to a certain degree sick in our soul. This falling apart the human being will perceive more and more: the falling apart of that which has stayed with him from the previous life and that which is prepared in the present life for the next one. And since man will sense this duality more and more, he will be in need of an inner mediation, a real inner mediation. And the great question will become ever more burning: Where must we look for this inner mediation? We can only find an answer to this question if we consider the following:

I have often told you that we human beings are completely awake only in our thinking in the period between awaking and falling asleep of ordinary life. The life of thought means complete wakefulness. We are not completely awake, even in waking life, in regard to our feelings. Our feelings are at the stage of dream consciousness, even though we are fully awake in our conceptions and thoughts. He who is able to make research in this field knows through direct perception that feelings have no greater vitality than have dreams; only, the conception through which feelings are represented makes it appear differently. But the life of feelings as such arises out of the depths of consciousness like the surging up of dreams. And the actual life of will is asleep in us, even in our waking life; in regard to the will we are asleep. Thus, also in waking life, we carry these three states of consciousness within us. During the day, we walk around with a waking life of thoughts; we deceive ourselves in believing that we are awake also in our will because we have thoughts about that which the will performs. Not the experience of the will itself, but only its mental image is what enters our consciousness. We dream our feelings, we sleep our willing. But if imaginative knowledge raises up what otherwise dreams in the feelings and makes it a matter of complete, clear world cognition, then we become aware of the fact that wisdom is contained not only in our thoughts—let us call it “wisdom” although with many human beings it is “un-wisdom”—but that wisdom is also contained in our feelings, and that it is also contained in our willing. In regard to present-day human existence we can only speak clearly about that which is contained in our thought life. In regard to the world of feelings mankind today entertains thoughts which hardly differ from those it entertains in regard to dream life; and yet, wisdom is also contained in the life of feeling.

My dear friends, the person who earnestly applies to his own soul the exercises which are described in my book, Knowledge of the Higher Worlds and Its Attainment (Anthroposophic Press, New York) will come closest to experiencing a certain inner soul-surging which takes its course in a dreamlike manner, as it were. For most human beings it will not contain more regularity than ordinary dreaming; but it is possible, at a comparatively early moment, to bring so much order into this inner experiencing that one becomes aware of the fact that, although this inner experience is not governed by ordinary logic—indeed, it is sometimes governed by a very grotesque logic, and the most varied fragments of thought arrange themselves and occur in a dreamlike fashion—one becomes aware of the fact that something real takes place there. This first inner experience, which is still very primitive, may be recognized by the one who applies, even to some degree, to his own soul life what has been described in my book, Knowledge of the Higher Worlds and Its Attainment. When the human being dives down into this surging of waking dreams, a new reality emerges in contrast to the ordinary reality of external life. Comparatively soon the human being may become aware of this arising of a new reality. And also comparatively soon may he become aware that wisdom is contained in all this, but a wisdom he cannot take hold of, for which he does not feel himself mature enough to become fully conscious of it. It escapes him time and again, and he does not understand it. But he becomes aware, or at least, may become aware of the fact that wisdom does not only flow through the upper stratum of his consciousness which permeates him in ordinary waking day-life, but that below this there lies another stratum of his consciousness which appear illogical to him for the simple reason that he himself calls it that since he cannot yet take hold of its wisdom. We may say: the moment we have completely acquired imaginative cognition, these waking dreams cease to be as grotesque as they appear to ordinary life; they then permeate themselves with a wisdom that points to another content of reality, to a world different from the sense world which we fathom with ordinary wisdom.

You see, my dear friends, in ordinary life only the world of feeling surges up into our every-day consciousness out of this substratum of our consciousness. And out of a still deeper stratum, which lies below the one just mentioned, there surges up the world of will which is also permeated by wisdom. We are connected with this wisdom, but we are not at all aware of it in ordinary consciousness. Thus we may say: We human beings are governed by three strata of consciousness. The first is our conceptual consciousness in which we live every day. The second is an imaginative consciousness. And the third is an inspired consciousness which remains very deeply hidden, which works in us, to be sure, but whose nature we do not recognize in ordinary life. If only modern philosophy were less perplexed in its concepts—I am not referring here to people who have nothing to do with philosophy, but philosophers should grasp such matters, yet they refuse to do so—if only modern philosophy were less confused it would have to notice the great difference that exists between truths that are arrived at purely upon the basis of external observation of nature and the truths that are found in the sciences, such as mathematics and geometry, which are employed in the endeavor to understand external nature.

We are in a sense justified in saying that in regard to the truths which man acquires through external observation—this has so often been stressed in the history of philosophy that a special reference to it ought to be superfluous for the philosopher—in regard to the truths of external observation we can never speak of actual certainty. Kant and Hume have elaborated this especially clearly by their grotesque assertion that, although it is true that we observe that the sun rises, we cannot, however, assert from this observation that the sun will rise again tomorrow; we only can conclude from the fact that the sun has risen up to now every day that is will also rise tomorrow. This is the way with all truths which we derive from external observation. But it is not so in the case of mathematical truths. If we have once grasped them we know they are valid for all future times. Whoever knows and is able to prove, out of inner reasons, that the square above the hypotenuse equals the sum of the square of the two other sides of the right-angled triangle knows that it would be impossible to draw a rectangular triangle for which this law does not hold good.

These mathematical truths are different from the truths we arrive at through external observations; we know the facts, but with the means of present-day research we are unable to grasp the underlying reason. The reason is to be found in the fact that mathematical truths originate deep down in the inner being of man, that they arise on the third level of consciousness, in the lowest stratum and, without his being aware of it, shoot up into man's upper consciousness, where he then perceives them inwardly. We possess mathematical truths through the fact that we ourselves behave mathematically in the world. We walk, we stand, and so forth; we describe certain lines on the earth. Through this will relationship to the external world we actually receive the inner perception of mathematics. Mathematics arises below in the third consciousness and shoots up from there.

Conceptual life: Complete Wakefulness: Wisdom

Feeling: Dreaming: Wisdom

Will: Sleeping: Wisdom

I. Conceptual Life

II. Imaginations

III. Inspirations

Thus, although we are not conscious of its origin, we have very clear concepts of at least one part of this lowest stratum of consciousness: we are aware of the mathematical and geometrical concepts. The middle stratum is of a dreamlike and confused character. And here, “in the upper story,” where the day-waking conceptual life takes place, we are clear again. What plays up from the third stratum of consciousness is also clear in us. What lies between the two reaches most human beings like a confused waking dreaming. It is very significant that we should make this fact clear to ourselves. For, you see, the Greeks, during the four and one half centuries (number one), which they had retained as the remainder of the Mystery culture. And this is a purely Luciferic element. I have described it to you recently: it is the intellectualistic culture. Clarity rules in our head. It is permeated by wisdom, generally valid wisdom. But this is the Luciferic element in us.

And, again, that which exists here below and which is so much beloved by modern scientists and was so much beloved by Kant that he said: in regard to nature, science exists only in as far as it contains mathematics—this is the purely Ahrimanic element, which arises from below through our human nature. It is the Ahrimanic element.

It does not suffice, my dear friends, to know of something that it is correct. We know that the things we comprehend intellectually through our head are correct; but this is a gift of the Luciferic element. And we know that mathematics is correct; but this sovereign correctness of mathematics we owe to Ahriman who sits in us. The most uncertain element is in the middle. It consists of seemingly illogical, billowing dreams.

I will describe to you another symptom so that you may grasp the full significance of this matter. In reality, the whole mathematical conception of the world as it arose with Galileo and Giordano Bruno stems from this deepest stratum of consciousness. Four and one half centuries have elapsed since we have begun to acquire this world conception, since we have begun to introduce this Ahrimanic element into our human thinking and sensing. Whereas in Greek thinking the last echo of the Mystery culture shone into the clearest brightness of consciousness, there arises in our deepest, darkest strata of consciousness that which only in the future will reach its climax. This is beginning to arise down there.

I. Conceptual Life (Lucifer)

II. Imaginations (consciousness)

III. Inspirations (Ahriman)

Our soul life is like a scale beam which has to try to establish equilibrium, on one hand the Luciferic, on the other the Ahrimanic element. The Luciferic element lies in our clear head, the Ahrimanic element below in the wisdom which permeates our will. Between the two, we have to try to establish a state of balance in an element which at first does not seem to be permeated by anything.

How does wisdom enter this middle part of man? Man is placed in the world at present in such a way that his head is supported by Lucifer, his metabolic wisdom, his limb-wisdom by Ahriman. That which we have described as the middle state of consciousness is dependent upon our heart organization and the human rhythmical system (read what I saw concerning this fact in my book, Von Seelenraetseln). This sphere of our existence must gradually become just as ordered as the head wisdom became ordered through logic and the Ahrimanic wisdom through mathematics, geometry, through external rational nature observation. What will bring inner logic, inner wisdom, inner power of orientation into this middle part of our human nature? The Christ impulse, that which passed over into the earth culture through the Mystery of Golgotha.

Thus you see, we have a spiritual-scientific anatomy which shows us what is culture of the head, what is culture of metabolism, which also shows us the nature and needs of that sphere of our organism which lies between the two. That man permeates himself with the Christ impulse is a requisite part of his nature.

Let us for a moment hypothetically assume that the Mystery of Golgotha had not entered Earth evolution: the human being would have his head wisdom. He also would have what has arisen since the fifteenth century A.D. But in regard to his central being he would be desolate and void. He would feel more and more the disagreement between the two inner spheres mentioned above. He would be unable to bring about the state of equilibrium. We can only bring about this state of equilibrium by permeating ourselves more and more with the Christ impulse which calls forth the state of balance between the Luciferic and Ahrimanic element.

From this you will see that we may say: In the pre-Christian four and one half centuries there was bestowed upon the human being, like a preparation for the Mystery of Golgotha, the last ramification of the ancient Mystery culture, which has settled like a head-memory of this ancient culture. And in our modern age, the human being passed through four and one half centuries of preparation for a new spirit direction, for a new kind of Mystery culture. But in order that these two might be connected in the historical evolution of mankind, the Mystery of Golgotha had to take place as an objective fact in mankind's evolution. Internally, however, this evolution takes its course in such a way that human beings grow and develop until, beginning with the fifteenth century A.D. they receive the new impulse which I have characterized as an Ahrimanic impulse, and through which they will feel more and more: we need the possibility of building a bridge between the two periods.

In this way we may inwardly comprehend the threefold human being. And we shall comprehend him still more accurately if we join to what I have said today something which I have repeatedly mentioned. It was impossible for the ancient Greeks who retained the remnants of ancient Mystery culture to be an atheist—although it happened in a few abnormal cases, but not to the degree it occurs today. Atheism has only arisen in more recent times, at least in its radical form. For the Greek who was really imbued with dialectics felt the Divine holding sway in thinking, even in thinking void of content.

If we know this and then look upon the appearance of atheism, upon the complete denial of the Divine, we shall find the reason for this atheism. Only those human beings, my dear friends—naturally, we need the methods of spiritual science in order to recognize this—only those human beings are atheists in whose organism something is organically disturbed. To be sure, this may lie in very delicate structural conditions, but it is a fact that atheism is in reality a disease.

This is the first thing we have to hold fast: atheism is a disease. For, if our organism is completely healthy, the harmonious functioning of its various members will bring it about that we ourselves sense our origin from the Divine—ex deo nascimur.

The second point, to be sure, is something different. Man may sense the Divine but may have no possibility to sense the Christ. In this respect we do not differentiate carefully enough today. We are satisfied with words, also in other spheres. For, if we test today the actual spiritual content of the view of many human beings of the occident and are not influenced by their words—they say they agree with Christian precepts, they believe in the freedom of the will, and so forth—we shall find that the whole configuration of their thinking contradicts what they thus express. Only through their participation in cultural life have they become accustomed to speak of Christ, of freedom, and so forth. In reality, my dear friends, a great number of human beings living among us are nothing but Turks; for the content of their faith is the same as the fatalistic content of faith of the Mohammedans—although this fatalism is often described as a necessity of nature. Mohammedanism is much more prevalent than we think. If we do not focus our attention upon the words but upon the spirit-soul content, we shall find that many Christians are Turks. They call themselves “Christians” even though they cannot find the transition from the God they sense to the Christ.

I only need to draw your attention to the classical example of a modern theologian, Adolf Harnack, who wrote the book, Wesen des Christentums. (Essence of Christianity.) Please, make the following test: scratch out in this book the name of Christ wherever it occurs and replace it by the name of God, this will change nothing in the content of this book. There is no necessity that what this man states should refer to the Christ. What he states refers to the general Father god who lies at the foundation of the world. There is no need at all that he should refer to the Christ with what he states. Wherever he proves something it is externally and internally untrue as he borrows the various communications from the Gospels. In the way he elaborates these communications there can be seen no reason whatsoever for connecting them with the Christ. We must acquire the possibility of conceiving of the Christ in such a way that we do not identify Him with the Father god. Many of the modern evangelical theologians are no longer able to differentiate between the general concept of God and the concept of the Christ. To be unable to find the Christ in life is a different matter from being unable to find the Father God—You know that it is not here a matter of doubting the Divinity of the Christ. It is a matter of clear differentiation, in the sphere of the Divine, between the Father God and the Christ God. This comes to expression in the soul of man. Not to find God the Father is a disease; not to find the Christ is a misfortune. For the human being is so connected with the Christ as to be inwardly dependent upon this connection. He is, however, also dependent upon that which has taken place as a historical event. He must find a connection with the Christ here upon earth, in external life. If he does not find it is a misfortune. Not to find the Father god, to be an atheist, is an illness. Not to find the Son God, the Christ, is a misfortune.

And what does it mean if we do not find the Spirit? To be unable to take hold of one's own spirituality in order to find the connection of one's own spirituality with the spirituality of the world signifies mental debility; not to acknowledge the Spirit is a deficiency of mind, a psychic imbecility.

Please remember these three deficiencies of the human soul constitution. Then we shall be able to continue tomorrow in the right way. Remember what I have told you today about the three kinds of consciousness; remember that it is a disease if we are an atheist, if we do not find the God out of whom we are born and whom we must find if we possess a completely sound organism; that it is a misfortune if we do not find the Christ; that it is a psychic deficiency if we do not find the Spirit.

This is also the way in which the paths that lead man to the Trinity differ from one another. It will become more and more necessary for mankind to enter into these concrete facts of soul life and not to remain stuck in general, nebulous notions. People are specially inclined today toward these nebulous notions. To replace this inclination by the inclination to enter into concrete facts of soul life is an essential task of our age.

Vierter Vortrag

Im Anschlusse an manches, das ich in den Vorträgen der vorigen Woche hier vorgebracht habe, möchte ich heute gerade etwas Vorbereitendes sagen, das dann morgen und übermorgen weiter ausgebaut werden soll. Es wird sich darum handeln, Ihnen mancherlei auf eine andere Art, als das bisher geschehen ist, ins Gedächtnis zurückzurufen, mancherlei von dem, was wir brauchen werden, um unser ja bereits angeschlagenes Thema weiter zu verfolgen.

Wenn wir uns klarmachen, wie der Verlauf der Erdenentwickelung war, so können wir dies am besten dadurch, daß wir immer, ich möchte sagen, die Ereignisse auf den Schwerpunkt der Erdenentwickelung hin betrachten, anordnen. Denn durch diese Anordnung kommt eine gewisse Struktur in all dasjenige hinein, in dem der Mensch durch die Entwickelung der Menschheit in seiner eigenen Entwickelung darinnensteht. Dieser Schwerpunkt ist ja, wie Sie wissen, das Mysterium von Golgatha, durch das alle übrige Erdenentwickelung erst ihren Sinn, ihren wahren inneren Gehalt erhalten hat.

Wenn wir zurückgehen in der Entwickelung der abendländischen Menschheit, die ja den Impuls des Mysteriums von Golgatha wie einen Einschlag herein empfangen hat aus dem Orient, so müssen wir uns sagen: Etwa im 5. Jahrhundert vor dem Eintritte dieses Mysteriums von Golgatha beginnt, und zwar aus der griechischen Kultur heraus, eine Art von Vorbereitung für dieses Mysterium von Golgatha. Wir können sagen, es ist ein gewisser einheitlicher Zug in dem griechischen Denken, Empfinden und Wollen durch etwa viereinhalb Jahrhunderte vor dem Eintritte des Mysteriums von Golgatha. Und dieser einheitliche Zug leitet sich ein durch die Gestalt des Sokrates, setzt sich dann fort in aller griechischen Kultur, eigentlich auch im Künstlerischen ist derselbe Zug bemerklich, er setzt sich fort in der gewaltigen, überragenden Persönlichkeit des Plato und bekommt dann einen mehr, ich möchte sagen, gelehrt aussehenden Charakter in Aristoteles.

Sie wissen ja aus den verschiedenen Darstellungen, die ich gegeben habe, daß das Mittelalter, namentlich in der Zeit nach Augustinus, besonders bemüht war, die Anleitung, die man bekommen konnte aus der Denkweise des Aristoteles heraus, zu benützen, um alles das zu verstehen, was sich an das Mysterium von Golgatha, seine Vorbereitung und seinen Nachklang, anschließt. Dadurch ist gerade das griechische Denken so wichtig geworden, auch für die christliche Entwickelung des Abendlandes bis zum Ende des Mittelalters, daß eigentlich griechisches Denken dazu benützt worden ist, um zu durchdringen den Gehalt des Mysteriums von Golgatha. Wir tun gut, wenn wir uns klarmachen, was da eigentlich in diesen letzten Jahrhunderten vor dem Einschlag des Mysteriums von Golgatha in Griechenland geschehen ist.

Das, was da sich abgespielt hat im Denken, Empfinden, Wollen des griechischen Menschen, ist eigentlich der letzte Ausklang einer heute nicht mehr gewürdigten Urkultur der Menschheit. Mit unseren geschichtlichen Betrachtungen können wir ja diese Dinge wahrhaftig nicht in ihrem rechten Lichte sehen, denn unsere geschichtlichen Betrachtungen gehen nicht bis zu jenen Zeiten zurück, in denen eine über die damals zivilisierte Erde hin sich erstreckende Mysterienkultur alles menschliche Wollen und Empfinden im Grunde durchdrungen hat. Wir müssen schon in die Jahrtausende, in welche die Geschichte nicht mehr reicht, zurückgehen, mit den Methoden zurückgehen, die Sie ja wenigstens andeutungsweise finden in meinem Buche «Die Geheimwissenschaft im Umriß», um zu schauen, welcher Art diese menschliche Urkultur war. Sie hatte ihren Quell in den alten Mysterien, in jenen alten Mysterien, zu denen von großen führenden Persönlichkeiten zugelassen wurden diejenigen Menschen, die man objektiv zur unmittelbaren Einweihung geeignet finden mußte. Durch solche Eingeweihte wiederum strömte dasjenige, dessen diese Eingeweihten als Erkenntnis teilhaftig geworden waren in den Mysterien, zu den anderen Menschen hinaus. Und man kann im Grunde genommen die ganze alte Kultur nicht verstehen, wenn man nicht den Mutterboden der Mysterienkultur ins Auge faßt. Bei Äschylos sieht man, wenn man nur will, diesen Mutterboden der Mysterien noch ganz deutlich. In Platos Philosophie kann man ihn auch verspüren. Aber dasjenige, was eigentlich die Menschheit durch Mysterien an Offenbarungen über das Göttliche erhalten hat, das ist geschichtlich verloren gegangen. Das ist nur im primitivsten noch in dem enthalten, was geschichtlich nachweisbare Kultur geworden ist. Nun, was da eigentlich geschehen ist, das kann eben am besten dadurch beurteilt werden, daß man sich klarmacht, was denn eigentlich in der nachsokratischen Zeit des Griechentums noch zurückgeblieben ist von jener Urmysterienkultur, in der auch das Griechentum wurzelt. Es ist zurückgeblieben eine gewisse Art des Denkens, eine gewisse Art des Vorstellens.

Sie wissen ja, in der äußeren Geschichte wird erzählt, wie Sokrates die Dialektik begründet hat, wie er eigentlich der große Lehrmeister des Denkens war, jenes Denkens, das dann Aristoteles mehr wissenschaftlich denkend ausgebildet hat. Aber dies, was so griechische Denkungs- und Vorstellungsweise war, das ist eigentlich nur der letzte Ausklang der Mysterienkultur, denn die Mysterienkultur war eine sehr inhaltsvolle. Man hat in die Gesamtanschauung des Menschen geistige Tatsachen, die grundlegende Ursachen für unsere Weltordnung sind, erkenntnismäßig aufgenommen. Die Inhalte, die gewaltigen, großen Inhalte sind allmählich verglommen. Aber die Art des Denkens, welche die Mysterienschüler ausgebildet haben, die Vorstellungsart, die Konfiguration des Denkens, die ist geblieben, und die ist eigentlich historisch geworden, historisch geworden zunächst im griechischen Denken, dann wiederum im mittelalterlichen Denken, im Denken der christlichen Theologen, die ja sich im wesentlichen für ihre Theologie angeeignet haben dieses griechische Denken, um aus der Denkschulung heraus mit den Gedankenformen, mit den Ideen und Begriffen, die im Grunde eine Fortsetzung des griechischen Denkens waren, das zu begreifen, was durch das Mysterium von Golgatha in die Welt geflossen ist. Was mittelalterliche Philosophie, sogenannte Scholastik ist, ist durchaus ein Zusammenfluß der geistigen Wahrheiten des Mysteriums von Golgatha mit griechischem Denken. Die Ausarbeitung, die gedankenmäßige Durcharbeitung der Golgatha-Mysterien, die ist durchaus — wenn ich mich des trivialen Ausdrucks bedienen darf - mit dem Handwerkszeug des griechischen Denkens, der griechischen Dialektik gemacht worden. Bis zum Mysterium von Golgatha verfließen ungefähr von dem Verlust des Inhaltes der Mysterien, von dem Auftreten des bloß Formalen, des bloß Gedankenmäßigen der alten Mysterien viereinhalb Jahrhunderte. Wir können approximativ sagen: viereinhalb Jahrhunderte. So daß wir also uns vorzustellen haben: In einer vorgeschichtlichen Zeit breitet sich über die damals zivilisierte Erde die Mysterienkultur aus. Die wird gleichsam so weiterentwickelt, daß nur ein Destillat zurückbleibt, die griechische Dialektik, das griechische Denken. Dann tritt das Mysterium von Golgatha ein. Das wird zunächst im Abendlande begriffen mit dieser griechischen Dialektik. Wer sich ganz einleben will etwa in die noch durchaus Theologie tragende Wissenschaft, sagen wir, selbst erst des 10., 11., 12., 13., 14. Jahrhunderts, der muß anders sein Denken einrichten, als heute die Menschheit aus der naturwissenschaftlichen Vorstellungsart heraus gewöhnt ist. Diejenigen Menschen, die heute gewöhnlich über die Scholastik urteilen, können ihr nicht gerecht werden, weil sie alle im Grunde nur naturwissenschaftlich geschult sind, und die Scholastik eine andere Gedankenschulung voraussetzt, als die heutige naturwissenschaftliche Schulung ist.

Nun leben wir heute in einem Zeitpunkte, in dem wiederum viereinhalb Jahrhunderte verflossen sind, seit diese andere Denkweise, die naturwissenschaftliche Denkweise die Menschheit ergriffen hat. Um die Mitte des 14. Jahrhunderts beginnt das. Da fangen im Abendlande die Menschen an, so zu denken, wie wir es dann schon bis zu einem gewissen Grade hell ausgebildet finden bei Galilei etwa oder bei Giordano Bruno. Das wird dann heraufgetragen bis in unsere Zeiten. Ja, das ist scheinbar dieselbe Logik wie die griechische Logik, und dennoch eine ganz, ganz andere Logik. Das ist eine Logik, die ebenso abgelesen ist allmählich an den Naturvorgängen, wie abgelesen war die griechische Logik an dem, was die Mysterienschüler, was die Mysten schauten in den Mysterien.

Und jetzt wollen wir uns einmal den Unterschied klarmachen, der da besteht zwischen den viereinhalb Jahrhunderten vor dem Auftreten des Mysteriums von Golgatha in der damals ja fast einzig zivilisierten Welt, der griechischen, und unseren viereinhalb Jahrhunderten, in denen die Menschheit erzogen wurde durch die naturwissenschaftliche Schulung. Am besten kann ich Ihnen dieses graphisch darstellen. (Es Tafel 6 wird zu zeichnen begonnen:)

Denken Sie sich einmal die Mysterienkultur wie eine Art Chimborazo der menschlichen Geisteskultur in sehr alter Zeit (weiß). Diese Mysterienkultur wird dann in Griechenland - ich will das der Farbe nach beschreiben — Logik, bis zu dem Mysterium von Golgatha (roter Linienstrich bis zum ersten roten senkrechten Strich). Das wird dann im Mittelalter fortgesetzt durch die Scholastik (weiße Linie bis zum zweiten roten senkrechten Strich). Da (obere rote Klammer) haben wir diesen letzten Ausläufer, diesen Ausklang der alten Mysterienkultur durch viereinhalb Jahrhunderte (über die rote Klammer wird geschrieben: 4½ Jh.). Und nun, seit dem 15. Jahrhundert, beginnt eine neue Art der Vorstellungsweise, wir könnten sie die Galileische nennen. Wir sind ungefähr so weit entfernt von dem Ausgangspunkte (kleiner roter Kreis und dritter roter senkrechter Strich), wie die Zeit betrug, die man gebraucht hat von dem Auftreten dieser griechischen Denkweise bis zu dem Mysterium von Golgatha (untere rote Klammer vor dem ersten roten senkrechten Strich). Aber während das ein Ausklang ist (weißer Bogen unter der unteren roten Klammer), gewissermaßen eine Abendröte, haben wir es zu tun mit einem Vorklang (weißer Bogen zwischen dem zweiten und dritten roten Strich und 4½ Jh.), mit etwas, was herauf sich entwickeln muß, was wir hinaufbringen müssen zu einer gewissen Höhe. Die griechische Kultur stand an einem Ende. Wir stehen an einem Anfange.

Vollständig verstehen werden wir diese Zusammenstellung eines Endes und eines Anfanges nur, wenn wir geisteswissenschaftlich einmal auf die Entwickelung der Menschheit von einem gewissen Gesichtspunkte aus eingehen.

Ich habe Ihnen ja früher schon einmal ausgeführt und bin wiederholt darauf zurückgekommen, daß in der Gegenwart nicht umsonst jene Selbsterkenntnis der Menschheit versucht wird, die geliefert werden soll durch die anthroposophisch orientierte Geisteswissenschaft. Denn die weitaus größte Mehrzahl der Menschheit steht ja vor einer bedeutungsvollen Zukunftsmöglichkeit. Sehen Sie, es ist da notwendig, daß man ernst nehme die Tatsache, daß die sich fortentwickelnde Menschheit der Geschichte ein sich fortentwickelnder Organismus ist. Wie beim einzelnen Organismus die Geschlechtsreife eintritt, und auch später epochale Übergänge da sind, so sind schon einmal auch in der Geschichte der Menschheit epochale Übergänge da. Heute setzen die Menschen noch der Lehre von den wiederholten Erdenleben immer wieder und wieder den Einwand entgegen: ja, die Menschen erinnern sich nicht daran, die Menschen erinnern sich nicht an ihr früheres Erdenleben.

Wer die Entwickelungsgeschichte der Menschheit, wie ich gerade andeutete, als einen Organismus auffaßt, der sollte sich nicht wundern — wenn er diese Entwickelungsgeschichte wirklich sachgemäß ins Auge faßt -, daß die Menschen sich heute nicht an ihre früheren Erdenleben im gewöhnlichen Erkennen erinnern. Denn ich frage Sie: An was erinnert sich der Mensch im gewöhnlichen Leben denn eigentlich? An dasjenige, was er zuerst gedacht hat. Was er nicht gedacht hat, an das erinnert er sich ja nicht. Denken Sie, wie viele Ereignisse im Tage von Ihnen unbeachtet bleiben. Sie erinnern sich nicht daran, weil Sie sie nicht gedacht haben, trotzdem sie sich vielleicht in Ihrer Umgebung zugetragen haben. Sie können sich nur an dasjenige erinnern, was Sie gedacht haben.

Nun ist die Entwickelung der Menschheit in den früheren Jahrhunderten und Jahrtausenden nicht so gewesen, daß die Menschen sachgemäß sich wirklich das Wesen des Menschen klargemacht haben. Es gibt zwar seit dem griechischen Denken wie eine Sehnsucht das «Erkenne dich selbst», aber dieses «Erkenne dich selbst» soll erst erfüllt werden durch wirkliche Geisteserkenntnis. Erst dadurch, daß die Menschen einmal ein Leben anwenden — wozu die Menschheit erst in unserer Zeit reif geworden ist —, um in Gedanken zu erfassen das eigene Selbst, erst dadurch wird für das nächste Erdenleben vorbereitet das Erinnern. Denn man muß zuerst nachgedacht haben über dasjenige, woran man sich erinnern soll. Nur diejenigen, die in früheren Zeiten durch die Einweihung, die ja nicht immer in Mysterien erworben sein muß, wirklich sachgemäß hinschauen konnten auf das eigene Selbst, die können in der Gegenwart — und die Menschen sind ja nicht so selten, die es können — wirklich zurückblicken auf frühere Erdenleben. Aber die Sache liegt doch so, daß die Menschen auch in bezug auf ihre rein körperliche Entwickelung eine Umwandlung durchmachen. Diese Dinge lassen sich nicht physiologisch äußerlich, aber geisteswissenschaftlich beobachten. Die Menschheit ist heute nicht so, wie sie vor zwei Jahrtausenden war mit Bezug auf ihre körperliche Konstitution, und sie wird nach zwei Jahrtausenden wiederum nicht so sein wie heute. Über diese Sache habe ich ja öfter gesprochen. Die Menschen leben in eine Zeit, in eine Zukunftszeit hinein, in der — wenn ich mich banal ausdrücken möchte — die Gehirne anders konstruiert sein werden, als die Gehirne heute beim Menschen konstruiert sind in äußerer Beziehung. Das Gehirn wird die Möglichkeit der Rückerinnerung an frühere Erdenleben haben. Aber diejenigen, die heute nicht vorgesorgt haben werden durch Nachdenken über das eigene Selbst, die werden diese Fähigkeit, die doch in ihnen mechanisch sein wird, nur wie eine innere Nervosität — um den heutigen Ausdruck zu gebrauchen -, wie einen inneren Mangel empfinden. Sie werden nicht finden, was ihnen fehlt, weil die Menschheit mittlerweile mit Bezug auf ihre Körperlichkeit reif wird, zurückzuschauen auf ihre früheren Erdenleben. Aber wenn sie nicht vorbereitet hat diese Rückschau, so kann sie nicht zurückschauen. Dann empfindet sie die Fähigkeit nur als einen Mangel. Deshalb liegt es im richtigen Erkennen der gegenwärtigen Umwandlungskräfte der Menschheit selbst, daß durch anthroposophisch orientierte Geisteswissenschaft die Menschen zur Selbsterkenntnis gebracht werden. Nun kann man, und heute will ich das zunächst andeuten, nun kann man auch heute schon darauf hinweisen, wie das besondere Erlebnis sein wird, das den Menschen nahelegen wird, mit den früheren Erdenleben zu rechnen.

Heute leben wir noch in einem Zeitalter, wo jene Empfindungsnuancen eigentlich bei wenigen Menschen, aber doch schon bei wenigen Menschen angedeutet sind, die immer mehr und mehr vorhanden sein werden. Heute werden diese Empfindungsnuancen noch nicht recht beachtet. Ich will sie Ihnen schildern in der Weise, wie sie einmal auftreten werden. Die Menschen werden hineingeboren werden in die Welt und werden sich sagen: Ja, ich werde, indem ich mit den anderen Menschen zusammenlebe, entweder bewußt oder unbewußt erzogen für ein gewisses Denken. Es steigen mir Gedanken auf. Ich werde in eine gewisse Art des Vorstellens hineingeboren und erzogen. Aber zu gleicher Zeit sehe ich mir die äußere Umgebung an: mein Denken, mein Vorstellen paßt nicht recht zur äußeren umgebenden Welt. - Diese Empfindungsnuance ist heute schon bei einzelnen Menschen vorhanden. Sie müssen denken in einer Richtung, die ihnen so erscheint, als ob die äußere Natur etwas ganz anderes sagte, als ob die äußere Natur etwas ganz anderes verlangte von ihnen. Wo einmal solche Menschen aufgetreten sind, die diese Diskrepanz gefühlt haben zwischen dem, was sie denken müssen, und dem, was die äußere Natur sagt, da hat man sie ausgelacht. Hegel zum Beispiel ist ein klassisches Beispiel dafür. Er hat gewisse Gedanken — nicht alle Hegelschen Gedanken sind ja töricht — über die Natur geäußert, sie systematisch zusammengestellt. Dann sind die Spießer gekommen und haben gesagt: Ja, das sind deine Ideen über die Natur. Aber schaue dir einmal diesen oder jenen Vorgang in der Natur an, das ist ja nicht so. Da sagte Hegel: Um so schlimmer für die Natur.

Das erscheint natürlich ganz paradox, und dennoch, es liegt subjektiv durchaus Begründetes in dieser Empfindung darinnen. Es ist durchaus möglich, daß man ganz unbefangen sich auf der einen Seite dem eingeborenen Denken überläßt und sich sagt, es müßte eigentlich die Natur anders sich formen, wenn sie wirklich diesem Denken entsprechen würde. Dann kommt man allerdings nach einiger Zeit darauf, sich auch an das zu gewöhnen, was der Natur abgelauscht ist. Da merken die meisten Menschen dann nicht, daß sie eigentlich dann, wenn sie herangereift sind, das zu beobachten, was der Natur abgelauscht ist, im Grunde genommen etwas wie eine Doppelseele in sich haben, wirklich etwas wie zwei Wahrheiten. Diejenigen, die das schon richtig bemerken, können sehr darunter leiden, weil dadurch in die Seele eine Diskrepanz hineingebracht wird. Aber das, was ich Ihnen jetzt schildere, was heute bei wenigen Menschen, aber bei diesen schon vorhanden ist, obwohl sie es oftmals nicht sehen, das wird immer mehr und mehr überhandnehmen. Die Menschen werden immer mehr und mehr sich sagen: Ja, so wie ich geboren bin, so zwingt mich eigentlich mein Kopf dazu, über die Natur mir ein Bild zu machen. Es stimmt eigentlich nicht recht mit der Natur. Dann lebe ich mich in das Leben hinein, und im Laufe der Zeit eigne ich mir auch dasjenige an, was die Natur sagt. Dann muß ich einen Ausweg schaffen.

Diese zwiespältigen Empfindungen werden unsere Seelen ganz besonders haben, wenn sie wiederum auf die Erde zurückkommen werden. Da wird nämlich deutlich auftreten eine Art innerer Gedankenund Empfindungsquell, durch den man sich sagen wird: Ja, du empfindest, wie die Welt eigentlich sein sollte, aber sie ist nicht so, sie ist anders. - Dann wiederum wird man sich in diese Welt hineinleben, man wird eine zweite Art von Gesetzmäßigkeit kennenlernen und wird einen Ausgleich suchen müssen. Worauf wird das beruhen?

AltName

Nehmen Sie an (es wird zu zeichnen begonnen), der Mensch geht durch die Geburt ins physische Dasein. Er bringt sich mit dasjenige, was in seinem Denken und Empfinden das Ergebnis seines früheren Erdenlebens ist. Während er mit diesem Erdenleben nicht vereint war, hat sich tatsächlich das äußere Erdenleben in einer gewissen Weise verändert. Er empfindet eine Diskrepanz zwischen dem Denken, dessen Wirkungen er mitbringt aus dem früheren Erdenleben, das nicht mehr stimmt zu dem, wie die Dinge geworden sind in der Zeit, in der er abwesend war von der Erde. Und nun lebt er sich allmählich in sein neues Leben hinein und nimmt keineswegs in sein Bewußtsein dasjenige vollständig auf, was von ihm aus der Umgebung abgelauscht werden kann. Er nimmt es nur, ich möchte sagen, wie durch Schleier auf. Er verarbeitet es ja erst nach dem Tode, dann trägt er es in das nächste Leben wiederum hinein. Immer wird der Mensch in dieser Zweiheit seines Seelenlebens drinnenstehen. Immer wird der Mensch gewahr werden: Du bringst dir etwas mit, dem gegenüber die Welt neu ist, in die du als physischer Mensch durch die Geburt hineingewachsen bist. Aber durch deinen physischen Menschen nimmst du jetzt in dieser Welt etwas auf, was nicht gleich vollständig in deine Seele dringt, was du erst nach dem Tode wiederum zu verarbeiten hast.

In diese Art, das Leben zu empfinden, müßte der gegenwärtige Mensch sehr intensiv eigentlich sich hineinleben. Denn nur dadurch, daß man sich in so etwas hineinlebt, wird man gewahr die Kräfte, die eigentlich durch unser Dasein pulsen, und die einem sonst ganz entgehen. Und wir sind eingesponnen in sie. Aber wenn wir nicht versuchen, sie mit dem Bewußtsein zu durchdringen, bleiben sie im Unterbewußten und machen uns bis zu einem gewissen Grade seelisch krank. Dieses Auseinanderfallen wird der Mensch immer mehr wahrnehmen: das Auseinanderfallen desjenigen, was ihm aus dem vorigen Lebenslauf bleibt, und desjenigen, was sich in diesem Lebenslauf für den nächsten Lebenslauf vorbereitet. Und weil der Mensch diese Zweiheit immer mehr empfinden wird, wird er eine innerliche Vermittlung brauchen, eine wirkliche innerliche Vermittlung. Und die große Frage wird immer brennender werden: Wie kommt der Mensch zu dieser innerlichen Vermittlung? Dieser Frage gegenüber können wir nur eine Antwort finden, wenn wir das Folgende überlegen.

Ich habe Ihnen öfters ausgeführt: Wir sind als Menschen im gewöhnlichen Leben zwischen Aufwachen und Einschlafen eigentlich nur vollständig wach für unser Vorstellungsleben. (Im folgenden wird der obere Teil des Schemas auf Seite 74 an die Tafel geschrieben.) Das Vorstellungsleben, das bedeutet vollständig wachen. Nicht vollständig wachen tun wir, auch wenn wir sonst wachen, mit Bezug auf unser Gefühlsleben. Unsere Gefühle sind nämlich, auch wenn wir für unsere Vorstellungen und Gedanken voll wach sind, innerhalb unseres Bewußtseins von keiner anderen Daseinsstufe als sonst die Träume. Wer untersuchen kann in diesem Felde, der weiß es durch unmittelbare Anschauung, daß in unserem Bewußtsein die Gefühle nicht lebendiger sind, nur läßt die Vorstellung, durch die wir die Gefühle repräsentiert haben, das anders erscheinen. Aber das Gefühlsleben als solches kommt aus den Untergründen des Bewußtseins so herauf, daß das, was da heraufwogt, gleich ist einem Träumen. Und der Wille in seinem eigentlichen Leben bedeutet für uns erwas, was in uns schläft, auch wenn wir sonst wachen. In bezug auf den Willen schlafen wir. So daß wir also diese drei Bewußtseinszustände auch wachend in uns tragen. Wir gehen herum bei Tag wachend in unserem Vorstellungsleben, täuschen uns, daß wir auch im Willen wach sind, weil wir von dem, was unser Wille vollbringt, Vorstellungen haben. Aber was der Wille erlebt, das geht nicht in unser Bewußtsein herauf, sondern nur das Vorstellungsbild. Wir träumen unsere Gefühle, wir verbringen schlafend unsere Wollungen. Aber wenn man durch die imaginative Erkenntnis heraufholt dasjenige, was sonst in den Gefühlen träumt, es zu vollständiger, klarer Welterkenntnis bringt, dann merkt man: Nicht nur in unseren Vorstellungen und Gedanken ist Weisheit, wenn ich das jetzt so nennen darf - wir können es technisch so nennen, wenn es auch bei vielen Menschen Unweisheit ist —, Weisheit ist in unseren Gedanken, Weisheit ist aber auch in unseren Gefühlen, und Weisheit ist auch in unserem Willen. (Dabei wurde «Weisheit» an die Tafel geschrieben.)

Vorstellungsleben: vollständig wachen: Weisheit
Gefühle: träumen : Weisheit
Wille: Schlafen : Weisheit

Wir können mit Bezug auf das heutige Menschendasein eigentlich nur klar sprechen über dasjenige, was in unserem Vorstellungsleben ist. Was in der Gefühlswelt lebt, darüber hat die Menschheit heute im allgemeinen kaum andere Ideen als über das Traumleben, und dennoch ist Weisheit darinnen.

Am ehesten ist es ja für denjenigen möglich, der ernsthaftig die Übungen auf die eigene Seele anwendet, die in meinem Buche «Wie erlangt man Erkenntnisse der höheren Welten?» beschrieben sind, kennenzulernen ein gewisses inneres Seelenwogen, das gewissermaßen traumhaft verläuft, für die meisten Menschen nur traumhaft verläuft, nicht viel mehr Regelmäßigkeit hat als das gewöhnliche Träumen. Aber so viel Ordnung kann verhältnismäßig bald hereingebracht werden in dieses innere Erleben, daß man merkt: Zwar dieselbe Logik herrscht nicht in diesem innerlichen Erleben — manchmal herrscht eine sehr groteske Logik, und die verschiedensten Gedankenfetzen ordnen sich zusammen, spielen sich traumhaft ab, es herrscht manchmal eine merkwürdige Logik darinnen -, aber daß darinnen sich doch erwas abspielt, das kann, wie gesagt, als eine erste innere Erfahrung, die noch sehr primitiv ist, derjenige erkennen, der nur ein wenig auf das eigene Seelenleben das anwendet, was in meinem Buche «Wie erlangt man Erkenntnisse der höheren Welten?» geschildert ist. Da taucht ja, wenn der Mensch hinuntertaucht in dieses Gewoge wacher Träume, in der Tat eine neue Realität auf gegenüber der gewöhnlichen Realität des äußeren Lebens. Dann kann der Mensch verhältnismäßig bald bemerken, daß da eine neue Realität auftaucht. Er kann auch verhältnismäßig bald bemerken, daß in diesem Ganzen auch Weisheit darinnen ist, aber eine Weisheit, die er nicht fassen kann, für die er sich nicht reif genug fühlt, um sie ins Bewußtsein voll hereinzubringen. Es entschlüpft ihm immer wieder, und er weiß nicht, was das soll. Und so merkt denn der Mensch, kann es wenigstens merken, daß Weisheit nicht nur durchflutet die Oberschichte seines Bewußtseins, das ihn durchdringt im gewöhnlichen wachen Tagesleben, sondern daß darunter eine andere Schichte seines Bewußtseins liegt, die ihm nur unlogisch erscheint, weil er sie selber so nennt, weil er ihre Weisheit noch nicht erfassen kann. Man kann sagen: In dem Augenblicke, wo man sich vollständig das imaginative Erkennen angeeignet hat, da hören diese wachen Träume auf, so grotesk zu sein, wie sie im gewöhnlichen Leben erscheinen, dann. durchdringen sie sich mit einer Weisheit, die nur hinweist auf einen anderen Realitätsgehalt, auf eine andere Welt als die Sinneswelt ist, die wir mit der gewöhnlichen Weisheit überschauen.

Im gewöhnlichen Leben wogt herauf in unser alltägliches Bewußtsein aus dieser Unterschichte des Bewußtseins nur die Gefühlswelt. Und aus einer tieferen Schichte, die noch darunterliegt, wogt herauf die Willenswelt, die aber auch von Weisheit durchzogen, die durchaus auch von Weisheit durchzogen ist. Mit dieser Weisheit sind wir auch verbunden, nur bekommen wir sie erst recht nicht in unser gewöhnliches Bewußtsein herauf. So daß wir sagen können: Wir sind eigentlich als Menschen beherrscht von drei Bewußtseinsschichten. Das erste ist unser Vorstellungsbewußtsein, in dem wir alle’Tage drinnen leben. Das zweite ist ein Imaginationsbewußtsein. Und das dritte ist ein inspiriertes Bewußtsein, das aber sehr tief unten bleibt, das zwar in uns wirkt, richtig wirkt, aber dessen Eigenart wir nicht im gewöhnlichen Leben erkennen. (Es wurde an die Tafel geschrieben:)

I. Vorstellungsbewußtsein
II. Imaginationsbewußtsein
III. Inspirationsbewußtsein

Wenn nur einigermaßen unsere Gegenwartsphilosophie nicht so begriffsstutzig wäre, wie sie ist, so würde dieser Gegenwartsphilosophie sehr stark auffallen - ich sage nicht demjenigen, der mit dieser Philosophie nichts zu tun hat, aber Philosophen sollten so etwas begreifen können, sie tun es aber heute nicht -, es sollte aber dieser Gegenwartsphilosophie sehr stark auffallen, in ganz anderer Intensität noch auffallen, was für ein großer Unterschied ist zwischen dem, was man an Wahrheiten rein auf Grundlage der äußeren Naturbeobachtung bemerkt, und demjenigen, was man in den Wissenschaften findet, zum Beispiel aus Mathematik und Geometrie heraus, mit denen man ja bestrebt ist, die äußere Natur zu verstehen.

Man kann mit einem gewissen Recht sagen: Für die Wahrheiten, die sich der Mensch aneignet durch äußere Beobachtung - es ist ja das so oft wiederholt worden in der Philosophiegeschichte, daß es eigentlich für den Philosophen selber überflüssig sein sollte, diese Dinge besonders scharf auseinanderzusetzen -, für das, was äußerlich zu beobachten ist, können wir niemals eigentlich von einer Sicherheit sprechen. Kant oder Hume haben ja das ganz besonders deutlich ausgeführt, indem sie grotesk sogar behauptet haben: Wir beobachten zwar, daß die Sonne aufgeht, aber wir haben aus dem Beobachten heraus nicht ein Recht zu behaupten, daß die Sonne nun morgen auch aufgehen wird. Wir schließen nur daraus, daß bis jetzt die Sonne immer aufgegangen ist, daß sie auch morgen aufgehen wird. — So ist es mit den Wahrheiten, die wir äußerlich aus der Beobachtung entlehnen. Aber so ist es zum Beispiel nicht mit den mathematischen Wahrheiten. Haben wir sie einmal begriffen, dann wissen wir, die gelten auch für alle Zukunft. Wer da weiß, aus inneren Gründen beweisen kann, daß das Quadrat über der Hypotenuse gleich ist der Summe der Quadrate über den beiden Katheten, der weiß, daß niemals einer ein rechtwinkliges Dreieck wird zeichnen können, für welches das nicht gilt.

Mit diesen mathematischen Wahrheiten ist es anders als mir den Wahrheiten, die man aus den äußeren Beobachtungen kennt. Diese Tatsache weiß man, aber man ist nicht in der Lage, mit den Mitteln des heutigen Forschens den Grund einzusehen. Der Grund liegt darinnen, daß die mathematischen Wahrheiten tief aus dem Inneren des Menschen herauskommen, daß die mathematische Wahrheit im dritten Bewußtsein, hier in der unteren Schichte des Bewußtseins entspringt, und ohne daß der Mensch etwas davon ahnt, in sein oberstes Bewußtsein heraufschießt, wo er sie dann innerlich sieht. Die mathematischen Wahrheiten haben wir daher, daß wir uns selbst mathematisch in der Welt verhalten. Wir gehen, stehen und so weiter, wir beschreiben da Linien. Durch dieses Willensverhältnis zur Außenwelt bekommen wir eigentlich die innere Anschauung von der Mathematik. Die Mathematik entsteht da unten im dritten Bewußtsein (siehe Schema S. 78) und schießt herauf.

Wir haben also im Grunde genommen, wenn auch in diesem Fall der Ursprung dem gewöhnlichen Bewußtsein nicht vorliegt, wenigstens von einem Teile dieses unterschichtigen Bewußtseins sehr klare Vorstellungen. Die mathematischen, die geometrischen Vorstellungen, die kommen uns da herauf. Traumhaft, verworren wird nur die mittlere Schichte. Die mittlere Schichte, die hat etwas von traumhaft Verworrenem. Da oben im Oberstübchen, da, wo das gewöhnliche Tagwachen im Vorstellungsleben stattfindet, da sind wir wieder klar. Und dann ist in uns das klar, was da heraufspielt aus der dritten Schichte des Bewußtseins. Was dazwischen ist, das erreicht die meisten Menschen nur wie ein verworrenes Wachträumen. Das ist sehr bedeutsam, daß wir diese Tatsache uns klarmachen. Denn mit diesem Bewußtsein waren insbesondere die Griechen in diesen viereinhalb Jahrhunderten verbunden. Dieses Bewußtsein I haben sie aufgenommen, dasjenige, was ihnen als Rest der Mysterienkultur zurückgeblieben ist. Und das ist ein rein luziferisches Element, ein rein luziferisches Element. Ich habe es Ihnen neulich beschrieben. Es ist die intellektualistische Kultur. In unserem Kopfe ist es sehr klar. Er ist von Weisheit durchdrungen, von einer allgemein gültigen Weisheit. Aber das ist ein luziferisches Element in uns. (Es wird «luziferisch» an die Tafel geschrieben.) Und wiederum, was da unten ist, was die heutigen Wissenschafter so sehr lieben, Kant schon sehr geliebt hat, so daß er gesagt hat: Es ist nur so viel Wissenschaft der Natur gegenüber vorhanden, als Mathematik drinnen ist -, das ist rein ahrimanisches Element, das da durch unser Menschenwesen heraufkommt. Das ist ahrimanisches Element. (Es wird «ahrimanisch» an die Tafel geschrieben. Das Schema ist nun vollständig.)

Es genügt nicht, daß wir von irgend etwas wissen, daß es richtig ist. Wir wissen, daß die Dinge, die wir intellektuell durch unseren Kopf begreifen, richtig sind, aber es ist eine Gabe des luziferischen Elementes. Und wir wissen, daß die Mathematik richtig ist, aber diese mächtige Richtigkeit der Mathematik, die verdanken wir dem Ahriman, der in uns sitzt. Und das unsicherste Element ist in der Mitte, Das sind scheinbar unlogisch wogende Träume.

Ich will Ihnen noch ein anderes Kennzeichen anführen, damit Sie die ganze Wichtigkeit dieser Sache begreifen. Im Grunde genommen rührt all das mathematische Durchdringen der Welt, wie es aufgekommen ist durch Galilei, Giordano Bruno, aus dieser tieferen Schichte des Bewußtseins her. Viereinhalb Jahrhunderte sind verflossen, seit wir uns das aneignen, viereinhalb Jahrhunderte, seit wir dieses ahrimanische Element bemüht sind in unser menschliches Denken und Empfinden einzuführen. Während in die hellste Klarheit des Bewußtseins hineinschien der letzte Nachklang der Mysterienkultur im griechischen Denken, istin den untersten, dunkelsten Schichten unseres Bewußtseins erst der Aufgang desjenigen, was seinen Chimborazo erst in der Zukunft erringen soll. Das muß da herauf.

AltName

Wir Menschen stehen mit unserem Seelenleben wirklich so, daß dieses Seelenleben wie ein Waagebalken ist, der das Gleichgewicht zunächst suchen muß zwischen dem luziferischen Element auf der einen Seite, dem ahrimanischen Element auf der anderen Seite. Nur daß das luziferische Element in unserem hellen Kopfe liegt, das ahrimanische Element unten liegt in der Weisheit, die unseren Willen durchzieht. Dazwischen müssen wir das Gleichgewicht suchen in etwas, was eigentlich zunächst uns nicht als von etwas durchzogen erscheint.

AltName

Wie kommt Weisheit in diesen mittleren Teil des Menschen hinein? So wie der Mensch zunächst in der Welt steht, wird er seinem Kopfe nach von Luzifer gehalten, wird er seiner Stoffwechsel-Weisheit nach, der Gliedmaßen-Weisheit nach von Ahriman gehalten. Aber dem Herzen nach — denn dasjenige, was da als der mittlere Zustand des Bewußtseins geschildert ist, das ist ebenso abhängig von unserer Herzorganisation mit dem menschlichen Rhythmus, lesen Sie darüber nach in meinem Buche «Von Seelenrätseln», wie unsere Intellektualität mit dem Kopfe zusammenhängt -, in diese Sphäre unseres Daseins muß nach und nach eine ebenso große Ordnung hineinkommen, wie sie in die Kopfweisheit durch die Kopflogik hineingekommen ist, wie sie in alles dasjenige, was wir auf ahrimanische Weise wissen, durch die Mathematik, Geometrie, überhaupt durch diese äußerlich rationelle Naturbeobachtung kommt. Wodurch kommt in diesen mittleren Teil unseres Menschenwesens die innere Logik, die innere Weisheit, Orientierungsfähigkeit hinein? Durch den Christus-Impuls, durch dasjenige, was in die Erdenkultur übergegangen ist durch das Mysterium von Golgatha.

Es gibt eine geisteswissenschaftliche Anatomie, die uns zeigt, was Kopfkultur ist, die uns zeigt, was Stoffwechselkultur ist, die uns auch zeigt, was diejenige Organisationssphäre ist, die zwischen beiden darinnenliegt, und was diese braucht. Es gehört zu unserem Menschenwesen die Durchdringung mit dem Christus-Impuls.

So daß wir uns sagen können: Nehmen wir einen Augenblick hypothetisch an, das Mysterium von Golgatha wäre nicht in die Erdenentwickelung hereingekommen, dann würde der Mensch die Kopfweisheit auch haben. Er würde auch dasjenige haben, was seit dem 15. Jahrhunderte heraufgekommen ist. Aber er würde mit Bezug auf seine Mittelpunktswesenheit leer und öde sein. Er würde immer mehr und mehr bloß den Zwiespalt empfinden zwischen den beiden angeführten inneren Sphären. Er würde nicht den Gleichgewichtszustand herbeiführen können. Diesen Gleichgewichtszustand können wir nur herbeiführen dadurch, daß wir uns immer mehr und mehr durchdringen mit dem Christus-Impuls, der den Gleichgewichtszustand hervorruft zwischen dem luziferischen und dem ahrimanischen Elemente.

Daraus ersehen Sie, daß wir sagen können: In diesen vorchristlichen viereinhalb Jahrhunderten ist dem Menschen beschert worden wie eine Vorbereitung zum Mysterium von Golgatha der letzte Ausläufer der alten Mysterienkultur, der sich festgesetzt hat wie eine Kopfeserinnerung an diese alte Mysterienkultur. Und in der neueren Zeit, durch viereinhalb Jahrhunderte, ist durch das Menschenwesen gegangen die Vorbereitung für eine neue Geistesrichtung, für eine neue Art von Mysterienkultur. Aber daß diese beiden auch in der geschichtlichen Entwickelung der Menschheit verbunden werden können, dazu mußte das Mysterium von Golgatha objektiv in die Menschheitsentwickelung hineingestellt werden. Von außen betrachtet verläuft die Menschheitsentwickelung so, daß das Mysterium von Golgatha als eine objektive Tatsache hineingestellt wird. Innerlich aber verläuft die Menschheitsentwickelung so, daß die Menschen mittlerweile heranwachsen, bis sie vom 15. Jahrhundert ab jenen neuen Einschlag bekommen, den ich Ihnen eben charakterisiert habe als einen Ahriman-Einschlag, und durch den sie erst recht empfinden werden: sie brauchen die Möglichkeit, eine Brücke zu bauen zwischen dem einen und dem anderen.

So können wir innerlich den dreigliedrigen Menschen begreifen. Und wir werden ihn noch genauer begreifen, wenn wir mit dem, was ich Ihnen heute gesagt habe, etwas verbinden, was ich schon wiederholt erwähnt habe. Dem alten Griechen mit seinen letzten Resten aus der alten Mysterienkultur wäre es gar nicht möglich gewesen — außer daß es aufgetreten ist bei einigen Entarteten, aber auch nicht in dem Grade, wie in unserer Zeit, es wäre ihm gar nicht möglich gewesen, atheistisch zu sein. Der Atheismus ist im Grunde genommen erst ein neueres Gebilde, wenigstens in seinen radikalen Ausgestaltungen. Denn der Grieche, der wirklich Dialektik innehatte, der fühlte noch im Denken, sogar im inhaltslosen Denken das Walten des Göttlichen.

Wenn man dies weiß und dann auf das Auftreten des Atheismus sieht, auf die völlige Leugnung des Göttlichen, dann kommt man darauf, worauf eigentlich dieser Atheismus beruht. Atheisten - man braucht natürlich geisteswissenschaftliche Methoden, um das zu erkennen -, Atheisten sind nur diejenigen Menschen, bei denen — es kann ja das in sehr feinen Strukturverhältnissen sein, aber es ist so — etwas nicht in der Ordnung ist organisch. Der Atheismus ist in Wirklichkeit eine Krankheit.

Das ist dasjenige, was wir zuerst festhalten müssen: Der Atheismus ist eine Krankheit. Denn wenn unser Organismus vollständig gesund ist, so kann er in seinen einzelnen Gliederungen nicht anders zusammenwirken, als daß wir unseren Ursprung aus dem Göttlichen — ex deo nascimur — selber empfinden.

Das zweite ist allerdings etwas anderes. Der Mensch kann das Göttliche empfinden, aber keine Möglichkeit haben, den Christus zu empfinden. Man macht in dieser Beziehung heute nicht sehr feine Unterschiede. Man begnügt sich heute zu sehr mit Worten, auch auf anderen Gebieten. Wenn man nämlich heute den eigentlichen geistigen Gehalt recht vieler abendländischer Menschen prüft und sich nicht nach den Worten richtet — sie sagen, sie glauben an eine Freiheit des Willens und so weiter —, zeigt es sich, wie die ganze Konfiguration des Denkens widerspricht diesem, was sie damit ausdrücken. Nur im Zusammenhang der Kultur sind sie gewohnt worden, von Christus zu sprechen, von Freiheit und so weiter. In Wirklichkeit ist eine große Anzahl unter uns lebender Menschen nichts weiter als Türken; denn ihr Glaubensinhalt ist genau derselbe fatalistische - wenn auch dieser Fatalismus oftmals als Naturnotwendigkeit geschildert ist —, wie der Glaubensinhalt der Mohammedaner ist. Der Mohammedanismus ist viel verbreiteter, als man denkt. Wenn man eben nicht auf die Worte geht, sondern auf den geistig-seelischen Inhalt, dann sind manche Christen eigentlich Türken, viele Christen sind Türken. Und so nennen sich die Leute auch Christen, wenn sie auch nicht den Übergang finden können zwischen dem Gott, den sie empfinden und dem Christus.

Ich brauche Sie nur hinzuweisen auf das klassische Beispiel eines modernen 'Theologen, Adolf Harnack, der das «Wesen des Christentums» schrieb. Bitte, machen Sie die Probe, streichen Sie im «Wesen des Christentums» überall den Christus-Namen aus und schreiben Sie bloß den Gottes-Namen hin, es ändert gar nichts an dem Inhalt dieses Buches. Es besteht gar keine Notwendigkeit, daß der Mann das, was er aussagt, von dem Christus aussagt. Er braucht es nur auszusagen von dem allgemeinen, von dem der Welt zugrunde liegenden Vater-Gotte. Es ist gar keine Nötigung, daß er dasjenige, was er aussagt, auf den Christus bezieht. Wo er etwas beweist, ist es äußerlich und innerlich unwahr, indem er eben aus den Evangelien die einzelnen Mitteilungen entlehnt; aber in der Art, wie er sie verarbeitet, ist keine Veranlassung, sie an den Christus anzulehnen. Man muß die Möglichkeit gewinnen, den Christus nicht so aufzufassen, daß man ihn identifiziert mit dem Vater-Gotte. Das können schon ganz besonders sehr viele neuere evangelische 'Theologen nicht mehr: einen Unterschied machen zwischen dem allgemeinen Gottes-Begriff und dem Christus-Begriff. Christus nicht zu finden im Leben ist etwas anderes, als Gott nicht zu finden, den Vater-Gott nämlich. Daß es sich hier nicht darum handelt, irgendwie die Göttlichkeit des Christus zu bezweifeln, wissen Sie. Es handelt sich nur darum, daß man innerhalb der Sphäre des Göttlichen genau unterscheiden muß zwischen dem Vater-Gott und dem Christus-Gott. Aber das drückt sich auch aus in dem Seelenleben des Menschen. Gott-Vater nicht zu finden, ist eine Krankheit; den Christus nicht zu finden, ist ein Unglück. Denn mit dem Christus ist der Mensch so verbunden, daß er innerlich darauf angewiesen ist. Aber er ist angewiesen auf etwas, das als ein historisches Ereignis sich abgespielt hat. Er muß im äußeren Leben hier auf der Erde einen Zusammenhang finden mit dem Christus. Findet er ihn nicht, so ist das ein Unglück. Es ist eine Krankheit, Atheist zu sein, den Vater-Gott nicht zu finden. Es ist ein Unglück, den Sohnes-Gott nicht zu finden, den Christus.

Und was ist das, den Geist nicht zu finden? Nicht die Möglichkeit zu haben, die eigene Geistigkeit zu erfassen, um den Zusammenhang der eigenen Geistigkeit mit der Geistigkeit der Welt zu finden, das ist eine Schwachgeistigkeit; ein seelischer Schwachsinn ist es, den Geist nicht anzuerkennen.

An diese drei Mängel der menschlichen Seelenverfassung bitte ich Sie, sich noch einmal zu erinnern — dann werden wir in der richtigen Weise in dieser Betrachtung morgen fortfahren können -, sich zu erinnern an dasjenige, was ich Ihnen heute von einem anderen Gesichtspunkte aus wieder über die drei Bewußtseine gesagt habe, und sich zu erinnern daran: Atheist zu sein, den Gott, aus dem wir geboren sind — den wir finden müssen bei einer vollständig gesunden Organisation — nicht zu finden, ist eine Krankheit, und den Christus nicht zu finden, ist ein Unglück, den Geist nicht zu finden, ist ein seelischer Schwachsinn.

In dieser Weise unterscheiden sich auch die Wege des Menschen zur Trinität voneinander. Und das wird für die Menschheit immer mehr und mehr notwendig, auf diese konkreten Dinge des Seelenlebens einzugehen, nicht immer in allgemeinen, verschwommenen, nebulosen Dingen stecken zu bleiben. Und zu dieser Nebulosität hat man heute eine ganz besondere Neigung. Zu ersetzen diese Neigung durch die Neigung, ins Konkrete des Seelenlebens wiederum einzutreten, das ist eine wesentliche Aufgabe der Zeit.

Fourth Lecture

Following on from some of the points I raised in last week's lectures, I would like to say something preparatory today, which will be expanded upon tomorrow and the day after tomorrow. It will be a matter of recalling to your memory, in a different way than has been done so far, many things that we will need in order to pursue our already begun theme.

When we try to understand the course of Earth's development, we can best do so by always, I would say, viewing events in relation to the focal point of Earth's development. For this arrangement brings a certain structure to everything in which human beings stand through the development of humanity in their own development. This center of gravity is, as you know, the mystery of Golgotha, through which all the rest of Earth's development has received its meaning, its true inner content.

If we go back in the development of Western humanity, which received the impulse of the Mystery of Golgotha like an impact from the East, we must say to ourselves: Around the 5th century before the advent of this Mystery of Golgotha, a kind of preparation for this Mystery of Golgotha began, namely out of Greek culture. We can say that there is a certain uniform trait in Greek thinking, feeling, and willing for about four and a half centuries before the mystery of Golgotha. This uniform trait is initiated by the figure of Socrates, continues throughout Greek culture, and is also noticeable in the arts. It continues in the powerful, towering personality of Plato and then takes on a more, I would say, scholarly character in Aristotle.

You know from the various descriptions I have given that the Middle Ages, especially in the period after Augustine, made a particular effort to use the guidance that could be obtained from Aristotle's way of thinking in order to understand everything connected with the Mystery of Golgotha, its preparation and its aftermath. This is precisely why Greek thinking became so important, also for the Christian development of the West until the end of the Middle Ages, that Greek thinking was actually used to penetrate the content of the mystery of Golgotha. We would do well to realize what actually happened in Greece in the last centuries before the impact of the mystery of Golgotha.

What took place in the thinking, feeling, and willing of the Greek people is actually the last echo of a primordial culture of humanity that is no longer appreciated today. With our historical observations, we cannot truly see these things in their proper light, for our historical observations do not go back to those times when a mystery culture spread across the then civilized earth and fundamentally permeated all human will and feeling. We must go back thousands of years, beyond the reach of history, using the methods that you will find at least in outline in my book “An Outline of Secret Science,” in order to see what kind of culture this ancient human culture was. It had its source in the ancient mysteries, in those ancient mysteries to which great leading personalities admitted those people who were objectively considered suitable for immediate initiation. Through such initiates, in turn, that which these initiates had come to know in the mysteries flowed out to other people. And basically, one cannot understand the whole of ancient culture without considering the fertile soil of the mystery culture. In Aeschylus, if one is willing to see it, one can still see this fertile soil of the mysteries quite clearly. One can also sense it in Plato's philosophy. But what humanity actually received through the mysteries in terms of revelations about the divine has been lost to history. It is only still contained in the most primitive form in what has become historically verifiable culture. Now, what actually happened there can best be judged by realizing what actually remained in the post-Socratic period of Greek culture from that original mystery culture in which Greek culture itself has its roots. What remained was a certain way of thinking, a certain way of imagining.

You know, of course, that external history tells us how Socrates founded dialectics, how he was actually the great teacher of thinking, that thinking which Aristotle then developed in a more scientific way. But what was the Greek way of thinking and imagining was actually only the last echo of the mystery culture, because the mystery culture was very rich in content. Spiritual facts that are the fundamental causes of our world order were cognitively incorporated into the overall view of human beings. The contents, the powerful, great contents, have gradually faded away. But the way of thinking that the mystery students developed, the way of imagining, the configuration of thinking, that has remained, and has actually become historical, first in Greek thinking, then again in medieval thinking, in the thinking of Christian theologians, who essentially appropriated this Greek thinking for their theology, in order to use the thought forms, ideas, and concepts that were basically a continuation of Greek thinking to understand what had flowed into the world through the mystery of Golgotha. What medieval philosophy, so-called scholasticism, is, is definitely a confluence of the spiritual truths of the mystery of Golgotha with Greek thinking. The elaboration, the intellectual working through of the Golgotha mysteries, was definitely—if I may use the trivial expression—done with the tools of Greek thinking, Greek dialectics. Approximately four and a half centuries elapsed between the loss of the content of the mysteries and the emergence of the purely formal, purely intellectual aspects of the ancient mysteries, until the mystery of Golgotha. We can say approximately: four and a half centuries. So we must imagine that in prehistoric times, the mystery culture spread across the then civilized earth. It developed further, so to speak, until only a distillate remained: Greek dialectic, Greek thinking. Then the mystery of Golgotha occurred. This is initially understood in the West with this Greek dialectic. Anyone who wants to fully immerse themselves in the science that still carries theology, say, even in the 10th, 11th, 12th, 13th, and 14th centuries, must organize their thinking differently than humanity today is accustomed to doing based on the scientific way of thinking. Those who today usually judge scholasticism cannot do it justice because they are all basically trained in natural science, and scholasticism presupposes a different kind of training of thought than today's natural scientific training.

Now we live at a time when another four and a half centuries have passed since this other way of thinking, the scientific way of thinking, took hold of humanity. This began in the middle of the 14th century. At that time, people in the West began to think in a way that we find clearly developed to a certain degree in Galileo or Giordano Bruno, for example. This was then carried forward to our times. Yes, it is apparently the same logic as Greek logic, and yet it is a completely different logic. It is a logic that has been gradually deduced from natural processes, just as Greek logic was deduced from what the mystery students, the mystics, saw in the mysteries.

And now let us clarify the difference between the four and a half centuries before the appearance of the mystery of Golgotha in what was then almost the only civilized world, the Greek world, and our four and a half centuries in which humanity has been educated through scientific training. I can best illustrate this graphically. (He begins to draw on the blackboard:)

Imagine the mystery culture as a kind of Chimborazo of human spiritual culture in very ancient times (white). This mystery culture then becomes logic in Greece — I will describe this in terms of color — until the mystery of Golgotha (red line to the first red vertical line). This is then continued in the Middle Ages through scholasticism (white line up to the second red vertical line). There (upper red bracket) we have this last offshoot, this finale of the ancient mystery culture through four and a half centuries (written above the red bracket: 4½ centuries). And now, since the 15th century, a new way of thinking has begun, which we could call Galilean. We are about as far removed from the starting point (small red circle and third red vertical line) as the time it took from the emergence of this Greek way of thinking to the mystery of Golgotha (lower red bracket before the first red vertical line). But while this is a fading away (white arc below the lower red bracket), a kind of evening glow, we are dealing with a prelude (white arc between the second and third red lines and 4½ centuries), with something that must develop, that we must bring up to a certain height. Greek culture was at an end. We are at a beginning.

We will only fully understand this juxtaposition of an end and a beginning if we approach the development of humanity from a certain point of view using spiritual science.

I have already explained to you before, and have repeatedly returned to this point, that it is not in vain that humanity is currently attempting to gain the self-knowledge that is to be provided by anthroposophically oriented spiritual science. For the vast majority of humanity stands before a significant future possibility. You see, it is necessary to take seriously the fact that the evolving humanity of history is an evolving organism. Just as sexual maturity occurs in the individual organism, and later there are epochal transitions, so too are there epochal transitions in the history of humanity. Today, people still repeatedly object to the teaching of repeated earth lives: yes, people do not remember, people do not remember their previous earth lives.

Anyone who understands the history of human development, as I have just indicated, as an organism should not be surprised — if they really take a proper look at this history of development — that people today do not remember their previous lives on earth in their ordinary consciousness. For I ask you: What does a person actually remember in ordinary life? What they first thought. They do not remember what they did not think. Think of how many events in your day go unnoticed. You do not remember them because you did not think them, even though they may have happened around you. You can only remember what you have thought.

Now, the development of humanity in earlier centuries and millennia has not been such that people have really understood the nature of the human being. Since Greek thinking, there has been a longing to “know thyself,” but this “know thyself” can only be fulfilled through real spiritual knowledge. Only by spending a lifetime — something humanity has only become ready for in our time — trying to grasp their own selves in thought can people prepare their memories for their next life on Earth. You have to think about what you want to remember first. Only those who in earlier times, through initiation, which does not always have to be acquired in mysteries, were able to look truly and properly at their own selves, can in the present — and there are not so few people who can do this — truly look back on previous earthly lives. But the fact is that human beings also undergo a transformation in terms of their purely physical development. These things cannot be observed physiologically, but they can be observed through spiritual science. Humanity today is not the same as it was two millennia ago in terms of its physical constitution, and in two millennia it will not be the same as it is today. I have spoken about this often. People are living in a time, in a future time, in which — to put it bluntly — brains will be constructed differently than they are today in terms of their external structure. The brain will have the ability to remember previous lives on Earth. But those who have not prepared themselves today by thinking about their own selves will experience this ability, which will nevertheless be mechanical in them, only as an inner nervousness — to use today's expression — as an inner deficiency. They will not find what they are missing, because humanity will have matured in relation to its physicality and will be able to look back on its previous lives on earth. But if they have not prepared themselves for this looking back, they will not be able to do so. Then they will perceive this ability only as a deficiency. Therefore, it is essential to recognize correctly the present forces of transformation within humanity itself, so that through anthroposophically oriented spiritual science, people may be led to self-knowledge. Now, and I would like to indicate this first today, we can already point out what the special experience will be that will prompt people to reckon with their previous earthly lives.

Today we still live in an age where those nuances of feeling are actually only hinted at in a few people, but they will become more and more prevalent. Today, these nuances of feeling are not yet really noticed. I will describe them to you in the way they will one day appear. People will be born into the world and will say to themselves: Yes, by living together with other people, I will be educated, either consciously or unconsciously, for a certain way of thinking. Thoughts arise in me. I am born into a certain way of thinking and am educated in it. But at the same time, I look at my external surroundings: my thinking, my imagination does not quite fit in with the external world around me. This nuance of feeling already exists in individual people today. They have to think in a direction that seems to them as if external nature were saying something completely different, as if external nature were demanding something completely different from them. Wherever such people have appeared who have felt this discrepancy between what they have to think and what external nature says, they have been laughed at. Hegel, for example, is a classic example of this. He expressed certain thoughts — not all of Hegel's thoughts are foolish — about nature and systematically compiled them. Then the philistines came and said: Yes, those are your ideas about nature. But look at this or that process in nature, that's not how it is. Hegel replied: So much the worse for nature.

This seems completely paradoxical, of course, and yet there is something subjectively justified in this feeling. It is quite possible to be completely unbiased, to surrender oneself to one's innate thinking and say that nature would actually have to be different if it really corresponded to this thinking. Then, after a while, one becomes accustomed to what has been gleaned from nature. Most people do not realize that when they have matured to the point of observing what has been gleaned from nature, they actually have something like a double soul within themselves, something like two truths. Those who already realize this can suffer greatly because it creates a discrepancy in the soul. But what I am describing to you now, which is present in a few people today, although they often do not see it, will become more and more prevalent. People will increasingly say to themselves: Yes, the way I was born, my head actually forces me to form a picture of nature. It doesn't really fit with nature. Then I live my life, and over time I also adopt what nature says. Then I have to find a way out.

Our souls will have these conflicting feelings in particular when they return to Earth. For then a kind of inner source of thoughts and feelings will clearly emerge, through which one will say to oneself: Yes, you feel how the world should actually be, but it is not so, it is different. Then again, one will live into this world, one will get to know a second kind of lawfulness and will have to seek a balance. What will this be based on?

AltName

Suppose (we will begin to draw) that a human being enters physical existence through birth. He brings with him that which is the result of his previous earthly life in his thinking and feeling. While he was not united with this earthly life, the external earthly life actually changed in a certain way. He feels a discrepancy between the thinking whose effects he brings with him from his previous earthly life, which no longer corresponds to how things have become in the time he was absent from the earth. And now he gradually lives himself into his new life and does not take into his consciousness everything that can be gleaned from his surroundings. He only takes it in, I would say, as if through a veil. He only processes it after death, and then carries it over into the next life. Human beings will always remain within this duality of their soul life. Human beings will always be aware that they bring with them something that is new to the world into which they have grown as physical beings through birth. But through their physical being, they now take in something in this world that does not immediately penetrate completely into their soul, something that they must process again after death.

Contemporary human beings should really try to immerse themselves very intensely in this way of perceiving life. For it is only by immersing oneself in something like this that one becomes aware of the forces that actually pulsate through our existence and which otherwise escape us completely. And we are entangled in them. But if we do not try to penetrate them with our consciousness, they remain in the subconscious and make us mentally ill to a certain degree. Human beings will become increasingly aware of this disintegration: the disintegration of what remains of their previous life and what is being prepared in this life for the next. And because human beings will feel this duality more and more, they will need an inner mediation, a real inner mediation. And the big question will become more and more pressing: How do human beings achieve this inner mediation? We can only find an answer to this question if we consider the following.

I have often explained to you that in ordinary life, between waking and falling asleep, we as human beings are actually only fully awake to our life of imagination. (The upper part of the diagram on page 74 is written on the board.) The life of imagination means being fully awake. Even when we are otherwise awake, we are not fully awake in relation to our emotional life. Even when we are fully awake to our ideas and thoughts, our feelings are, within our consciousness, on no other level of existence than dreams. Anyone who can investigate this field knows from direct observation that feelings are no more alive in our consciousness than they are in dreams; it is only the ideas through which we represent feelings that make them appear otherwise. But emotional life as such rises up from the depths of consciousness in such a way that what wells up is like a dream. And the will, in its actual life, means something to us that lies dormant within us, even when we are otherwise awake. In relation to the will, we are asleep. So we carry these three states of consciousness within us even when we are awake. We go about our daily lives awake in our imaginative life, deceiving ourselves that we are also awake in our will because we have ideas about what our will accomplishes. But what the will experiences does not rise into our consciousness, only the image of the imagination. We dream our feelings, we spend our desires asleep. But when one brings up through imaginative knowledge that which otherwise dreams in the feelings, bringing it to a complete, clear knowledge of the world, then one realizes: Wisdom is not only in our ideas and thoughts, if I may call it that — we can call it that technically, even if for many people it is unwise — wisdom is in our thoughts, but wisdom is also in our feelings, and wisdom is also in our will. (The word “wisdom” was written on the board.)

Imaginative life: fully awake: Wisdom
Feelings: dreaming : Wisdom
Will: Sleeping : Wisdom

With regard to human existence today, we can really only speak clearly about what is in our imagination. Humanity today generally has hardly any ideas about what lives in the world of feelings other than those found in dreams, and yet wisdom is to be found there.

It is most likely possible for those who seriously apply the exercises described in my book “How to Know Higher Worlds” to their own souls to experience a certain inner soul movement that is, in a sense, dreamlike, and for most people is nothing more than a dream, with no more regularity than ordinary dreaming. But it is possible to bring so much order into this inner experience relatively quickly that one realizes: Although the same logic does not prevail in this inner experience—sometimes a very grotesque logic prevails, and the most diverse fragments of thoughts arrange themselves, play out like dreams, and sometimes a strange logic prevails within them—yet something is happening there, can be recognized, as I said, as a first inner experience, which is still very primitive, by anyone who applies just a little of what is described in my book “How to Know Higher Worlds” to their own soul life. When a person dives down into this sea of waking dreams, a new reality does indeed emerge in contrast to the ordinary reality of outer life. Then the person can relatively quickly notice that a new reality is emerging. He can also notice relatively quickly that there is wisdom in all of this, but a wisdom that he cannot grasp, for which he does not feel mature enough to bring fully into consciousness. It slips away from him again and again, and he does not know what it means. And so the person notices, or at least can notice, that wisdom not only floods the upper layer of their consciousness, which permeates them in their ordinary waking life, but that beneath it lies another layer of their consciousness, which seems illogical to them because they call it that, because they cannot yet grasp its wisdom. One can say that at the moment when one has completely acquired imaginative knowledge, these waking dreams cease to be as grotesque as they appear in ordinary life; then they become imbued with a wisdom that points only to a different reality, to a world other than the sensory world that we perceive with ordinary wisdom.

In ordinary life, only the world of feelings surges up into our everyday consciousness from this lower layer of consciousness. And from a deeper layer, which lies even below, the world of the will surges up, but this is also permeated by wisdom, which is thoroughly permeated by wisdom. We are also connected to this wisdom, but we cannot bring it up into our ordinary consciousness. So we can say that we humans are actually ruled by three layers of consciousness. The first is our conceptual consciousness, in which we live every day. The second is an imaginative consciousness. And the third is an inspired consciousness, which remains very deep within us, which works within us, works properly, but whose nature we do not recognize in ordinary life. (It was written on the board:)

I. Conceptual consciousness
II. Imaginative consciousness
III. Inspired consciousness

If only our contemporary philosophy were not so slow on the uptake as it is, this would strike contemporary philosophy very strongly — I am not saying this to those who have nothing to do with this philosophy, but philosophers should be able to understand such things, and yet they do not today — but it should strike contemporary philosophy very strongly, strike it with even greater intensity, what a great difference there is between what one notices as truths purely on the basis of external observation of nature and what one finds in the sciences, for example in mathematics and geometry, with which one strives to understand external nature.

It is fair to say that for the truths that humans acquire through external observation – it has been repeated so often in the history of philosophy that it should actually be superfluous for philosophers themselves to distinguish these things so sharply – for what can be observed externally, we can never really speak of certainty. Kant and Hume made this particularly clear by grotesquely claiming that although we observe that the sun rises, we have no right to claim from this observation that the sun will also rise tomorrow. We only conclude from the fact that the sun has always risen until now that it will also rise tomorrow. — This is the case with truths that we derive externally from observation. But this is not the case with mathematical truths, for example. Once we have understood them, we know that they will also apply in the future. Anyone who knows, for internal reasons, that the square of the hypotenuse is equal to the sum of the squares of the two cathetes knows that no one will ever be able to draw a right-angled triangle for which this is not true.

These mathematical truths are different from the truths we know from external observation. We know this fact, but we are not able to understand the reason for it with the means of today's research. The reason lies in the fact that mathematical truths come from deep within the human being, that mathematical truth arises in the third consciousness, here in the lower layer of consciousness, and without the human being suspecting anything, shoots up into his highest consciousness, where he then sees it inwardly. We have mathematical truths because we behave mathematically in the world. We walk, stand, and so on; we describe lines. Through this relationship of will to the external world, we actually gain an inner perception of mathematics. Mathematics arises down there in the third consciousness (see diagram on p. 78) and shoots up.

So basically, even if in this case the origin is not in ordinary consciousness, we have very clear ideas, at least of a part of this underlying consciousness. The mathematical and geometric ideas come up from there. Only the middle layer becomes dreamlike and confused. The middle layer has something dreamlike and confused about it. Up there in the upper chamber, where ordinary waking life takes place in the life of imagination, we are clear again. And then what comes up from the third layer of consciousness is clear to us. What lies in between is only reached by most people as a confused waking dream. It is very important that we realize this fact. For it was this consciousness that the Greeks in particular were connected with during those four and a half centuries. They took up this consciousness, what remained to them as a remnant of the mystery culture. And that is a purely Luciferic element, a purely Luciferic element. I described it to you recently. It is the intellectualistic culture. It is very clear in our minds. It is permeated with wisdom, with a universally valid wisdom. But this is a Luciferic element within us. (Luciferic is written on the blackboard.) And again, what is down below, what today's scientists love so much, what Kant already loved so much that he said: There is only as much science in relation to nature as there is mathematics in it — that is a purely Ahrimanic element that comes up through our human nature. That is the Ahrimanic element. (Ahrimanic is written on the board. The diagram is now complete.)

It is not enough for us to know that something is right. We know that the things we understand intellectually through our minds are right, but this is a gift of the Luciferic element. And we know that mathematics is right, but we owe this powerful correctness of mathematics to Ahriman, who sits within us. And the most uncertain element is in the middle. These are seemingly illogical, fluctuating dreams.

I would like to give you another characteristic so that you can understand the full importance of this matter. Basically, all the mathematical penetration of the world, as it arose through Galileo and Giordano Bruno, comes from this deeper layer of consciousness. Four and a half centuries have passed since we appropriated this, four and a half centuries since we have been striving to introduce this Ahrimanic element into our human thinking and feeling. While the last echoes of the mystery culture shone into the brightest clarity of consciousness in Greek thinking, in the lowest, darkest layers of our consciousness there is only the dawn of that which will only reach its Chimborazo in the future. That must come up.

AltName

We humans really are in such a state with our soul life that this soul life is like a balance beam that must first seek equilibrium between the Luciferic element on the one side and the Ahrimanic element on the other. Only that the Luciferic element lies in our bright head, while the Ahrimanic element lies below in the wisdom that permeates our will. In between, we must seek equilibrium in something that does not initially appear to us as permeated by anything.

AltName

How does wisdom enter this middle part of the human being? As the human being initially stands in the world, he is held by Lucifer in his head, and by Ahriman in his metabolic wisdom, in the wisdom of his limbs. But according to the heart — for what is described here as the middle state of consciousness is just as dependent on our heart organization with the human rhythm (read about this in my book “The Riddles of the Soul,” how our intellectuality is connected with the head) — into this sphere of our existence, an equally great order must gradually enter, as has come into the wisdom of the head through the logic of the head, as has come into everything we know in an Ahrimanic way through mathematics, geometry, and in general through this outwardly rational observation of nature. How does inner logic, inner wisdom, and the ability to orient oneself enter into this middle part of our human being? Through the Christ impulse, through that which has passed into earthly culture through the Mystery of Golgotha.

There is a spiritual scientific anatomy that shows us what head culture is, that shows us what metabolism culture is, that also shows us what the organizational sphere between the two is and what it needs. It belongs to our human nature to be permeated by the Christ impulse.

So we can say to ourselves: Let us hypothetically assume for a moment that the mystery of Golgotha had not entered into the evolution of the earth, then human beings would also have head wisdom. They would also have what has come up since the 15th century. But they would be empty and barren in relation to their central being. They would increasingly feel only the conflict between the two inner spheres mentioned above. They would not be able to bring about a state of equilibrium. We can only bring about this state of equilibrium by permeating ourselves more and more with the Christ impulse, which brings about equilibrium between the Luciferic and Ahrimanic elements.

From this you can see that we can say: In these four and a half centuries before Christ, the last remnants of the ancient mystery culture were given to human beings as a preparation for the mystery of Golgotha, and these remnants became established as a memory in the head of this ancient mystery culture. And in more recent times, over four and a half centuries, the preparation for a new spiritual direction, for a new kind of mystery culture, has passed through the human being. But in order for these two to be connected in the historical development of humanity, the mystery of Golgotha had to be objectively placed within human evolution. Viewed from the outside, human evolution proceeds in such a way that the mystery of Golgotha is placed within it as an objective fact. Internally, however, human evolution proceeds in such a way that human beings grow up until, from the 15th century onwards, they receive that new influence which I have just characterized as an Ahriman influence, and through which they will feel even more strongly that they need the possibility of building a bridge between the one and the other.

This is how we can understand the threefold human being inwardly. And we will understand it even more precisely if we connect what I have said today with something I have mentioned repeatedly. It would not have been possible for the ancient Greeks, with their last remnants of the ancient mystery culture, to be atheistic — except that it did occur in a few degenerate individuals, but not to the same degree as in our time. Atheism is basically a recent phenomenon, at least in its radical forms. For the Greek, who truly possessed dialectic, still felt the rule of the divine even in his thinking, even in meaningless thinking.

When one knows this and then looks at the emergence of atheism, at the complete denial of the divine, one comes to understand what atheism is actually based on. Atheists—one needs spiritual scientific methods to recognize this, of course—are only those people in whom something is not organically right, even if this may be in very subtle structural relationships. Atheism is in reality a disease.

This is what we must first establish: atheism is a disease. For if our organism is completely healthy, its individual parts cannot interact in any other way than that we ourselves feel our origin in the divine — ex deo nascimur.

The second point is something else, however. Man can feel the divine, but has no way of feeling Christ. Today, people do not make very subtle distinctions in this regard. Today, people are too content with words, even in other areas. For if one examines the actual spiritual content of many Western people today and does not go by their words — they say they believe in freedom of will and so on — it becomes apparent how the whole configuration of their thinking contradicts what they express. It is only in the context of culture that they have become accustomed to speaking of Christ, of freedom, and so on. In reality, a large number of people living among us are nothing more than Turks, for their beliefs are exactly the same fatalistic beliefs as those of the Mohammedans, even though this fatalism is often described as a natural necessity. Mohammedanism is much more widespread than one thinks. If one does not go by words but by spiritual and emotional content, then some Christians are actually Turks, many Christians are Turks. And so people call themselves Christians even if they cannot find the transition between the God they feel and Christ.

I need only refer you to the classic example of a modern 'theologian', Adolf Harnack, who wrote 'The Essence of Christianity'. Please try this experiment: delete the name of Christ from 'The Essence of Christianity' and replace it with the name of God. The content of the book will remain unchanged. There is no need for the man to say what he says about Christ. He only needs to say it about the general Father God who is the foundation of the world. There is no compulsion for him to refer what he says to Christ. Where he proves something, it is outwardly and inwardly untrue, in that he borrows the individual statements from the Gospels; but in the way he processes them, there is no reason to attribute them to Christ. One must gain the ability to understand Christ in such a way that one does not identify him with the Father-God. Many newer Protestant “theologians” in particular are no longer able to do this: to make a distinction between the general concept of God and the concept of Christ. Not finding Christ in life is something different from not finding God, namely God the Father. You know that this is not a matter of somehow doubting the divinity of Christ. It is only a matter of making a clear distinction within the sphere of the divine between the Father-God and the Christ-God. But this is also expressed in the soul life of the human being. Not finding God the Father is a disease; not finding Christ is a misfortune. For the human being is so connected to Christ that he is inwardly dependent on him. But he is dependent on something that took place as a historical event. He must find a connection with Christ in his outer life here on earth. If he does not find it, it is a misfortune. It is a sickness to be an atheist, not to find God the Father. It is a misfortune not to find God the Son, Christ.

And what is it to not find the spirit? Not to have the ability to grasp one's own spirituality in order to find the connection between one's own spirituality and the spirituality of the world is a weakness of spirit; it is spiritual idiocy not to recognize the spirit.

I ask you to remember these three deficiencies of the human soul — then we will be able to continue in the right way in tomorrow's reflection — to remember what I have said to you today from a different point of view about the three consciousnesses, and to remember this: To be an atheist, not to find the God from whom we are born — whom we must find if we are completely healthy — is a disease; not to find Christ is a misfortune; not to find the spirit is mental infirmity.

In this way, the paths of human beings to the Trinity also differ from one another. And it is becoming more and more necessary for humanity to address these concrete aspects of the soul life and not always remain stuck in general, vague, nebulous things. And today there is a very special tendency toward this nebulosity. To replace this tendency with the tendency to enter once again into the concrete aspects of the soul life is an essential task of the time.