Theosophy
GA 9
Addenda
[ 1 ] (1) To page 26. To speak of a “Life-Force” was still regarded only a short time ago, as a mark of an unscientific mind. Here and there among scientists to-day there are some who are not averse from the idea of a “life-force,” such as was accepted in former times. But anyone who examines the course of modern scientific development will, nevertheless, perceive the more consistent logic of those who, in view of this development, refuse to hear of such development, refuse to hear of such “life-force.” “Life-force” does not belong to what are called to-day “forces of Nature.” And anyone who is not willing to pass from the habits of thought and the conceptions of modern science to a higher mode of thinking should not speak of “life-force.” Only the mode of thinking and the premises of spiritual science make it possible to deal with such subjects without inconsistency. Further, those thinkers who seek to form their conclusions purely on the ground of natural science, have abandoned the belief which obtained in the latter half of the nineteenth century, namely, that the phenomena of life could be explained only through the same forces which are at work in inanimate Nature. The book of so noted a naturalist as Oscar Hertwig: The Development of Organisms: A Refutation of Darwin's Theory of Chance is a scientific phenomenon that sheds its light far and wide. It opposes the assumption that the inter-workings of mere physical and chemical laws are able to shape the living thing. It is also significant that, in what is called “Neo-Vitalism,” a view is becoming prevalent which also admits the action of a special force in the living thing, much as did the older adherents of “life-force.” But no one will be able in this domain to get beyond shadowy abstract conceptions unless he can recognise that to arrive at what transcends the working of the inorganic forces in life is only possible through a mode of perception which rises to vision of the supersensible. The point is that the natural scientific knowledge which has been applied to the inorganic, cannot be carried over into the region of life, but that knowledge of a different nature must be achieved.
[ 2 ] (2) To page 26. When the “sense of touch” of the lower organisms is spoken of here, the word “sense” does not mean the same thing as is referred to by this term in the usual descriptions of the “senses.” Indeed, from the point of view of spiritual science, much can be said against the use of this expression. What is meant here by “sense of touch” is rather a general “becoming aware” of an external impression, in contrast to the particular “becoming aware,” which consists in seeing, hearing, etc.
[ 3 ] (3)To page 24-44. It may appear as if the way in which the being of man is membered in this book is based upon a purely arbitrary differentiation of parts within the unitary soul-life. As against this it must be emphasised that this differentiation within the unitary soul-life may be compared with the appearance of the seven shades of colour in the rainbow, when fight passes through a prism. What the physicist accomplishes with regard to phenomenon of light through his study of this process, and the seven shades of colour which result from it, the spiritual scientist accomplishes with regard to the soul-nature of man. The seven members of the soul are not merely distinctions made by the intellect. They are this as little as are the seven colours in relation to light. The differentiation depends in both cases upon the inner nature of the facts; only that the seven members in the case of light become visible through an external contrivance, and the seven members of the soul through a mode of spiritual observation suited to the nature of the soul. The soul's true nature cannot be grasped without the knowledge of this membering. For through the three members, physical body, life-body, and soul-body, the soul belongs to the transitory world; through the other four members it is rooted in the eternal. In the “unitary soul” the transitory and the eternal are indistinguishably united. Unless one is aware of this differentiation in the soul, it is not possible to understand its relation to the world as a whole. Another comparison may also be used. The chemist separates water into hydrogen and oxygen. Neither of these substances can be observed in the “unitary” water. Nevertheless each has its own identity. Hydrogen and oxygen both combine with other substances. And so, at death, the three lower members of the soul unite with the transitory part of world-being; the four higher members unite with the eternal. Anyone who objects to taking this membering of the soul into account is like a chemist who might refuse to know anything about the separation of water into hydrogen and oxygen.
[ 4 ] (4) To page 31. The descriptions given by spiritual science must be understood with utmost exactitude; for they are of value only when they are accurate expressions of the ideas. For example, in the sentence: “They (the sensations, etc.) do not in its case (namely, that of the animal) become interwoven with independent thoughts, transcending the immediate experience”—if the words “independent, transcending the immediate experience” are left out of account, it would be easy to fall into the mistake of thinking that it is being claimed here that the sensations and instincts of animals do not contain thoughts. But true spiritual science is based on knowledge which says that all inner experiences of animals (as indeed of existence in general) are permeated with thought. Only the thoughts of the animal are not those of an independent ego living in the animal, but are those of the animal group-ego, which is to be regarded as a being controlling the animal from outside. This group-ego is not present in the physical world, as is the ego of man, but works down into the animal from the soul-world described previously. (Further details regarding this are to be found in my Occult Science.) The point to make clear is, that in man, thoughts attain an independent existence: that in him, they are not experienced indirectly in sensation, but are experienced in the soul directly as thought.
[ 5 ] (5) To page 35. When it is pointed out that little children say “Charles is good,” “Mary wants to have that,” it must be remembered that the important point is not so much how soon children use the world “I,” but when they connect the corresponding idea with that word. When children hear adults using the word, they may well use it too, without forming the idea of the “I.” But the generally late use of the word points to an important fact of development, namely, to the gradual unfolding of the idea “I” out of the dim “I”-feeling.
[ 6 ] (6)To pages 38/9. A description of the real nature of “Intuition” is to be found in my books, Knowledge of the Higher Worlds and its Attainment and >Occult Science—an Outline Through inadequate attention a contradiction might be detected between the use of the word in those books, and what is said concerning it in this one. But for the careful observer there is no such contradiction. It will be seen that what is revealed in its fullness from the spiritual world to supersensible perception, through Intuition, makes itself known in its lowest manifestation to the Spirit-self, just as the external physical world makes itself known in sensation.
[ 7 ] (7) To page 45. On “Re-embodiment of the Spirit and Destiny.” It must be borne in mind—disregarding for the moment the facts of spiritual science already given in other parts of the book—that in this section the attempt is made, by means of the study of the course of human life, to gain an idea of the extent to which this human life, with its destiny, points to a series of earth-lives. These ideas will, of course, appear very questionable to those who regard the customary belief in a single life on earth as the only well-founded one. But it should also be borne in mind that the intention here is to show that the ordinary way of looking at things can never lead to an understanding of the deeper foundations of life. For this reason, other conceptions which apparently contradict the generally accepted ones must be sought. And this search is only hindered by a deliberate refusal to apply the same consideration of a course of events belonging to the soul, as is applied to a series of events in the physical world. In thus refusing, no value is attached, for instance, to the fact that when a stroke of fate falls upon the “I,” the effect in the realm of feeling is related to that produced when the memory meets an experience related to what is remembered. But anyone who tries to perceive how a stroke of fate is really experienced will be able to differentiate this experience from the assertions which must arise if an external standpoint is taken—through which, of course, every living connection of this stroke of fate with the ego is lost. For such a point of view, the blow appears to be either the result of chance, or to have been determined by some external cause. The fact that there are also strokes of fate which, in a certain way, break into a human life for the first time, only showing their results later on, makes the temptation all the greater to generalise on this basis, without taking other possibilities into account. People do not begin to pay heed to these other possibilities until experience of life has brought their imaginative faculty into a direction similar to that which may be observed in Goethe's friend, Knebel, who wrote in a letter as follows: “On close observation it will be seen that there is a plan in the lives of most people which seems traced out for them, either through their own nature, or through the circumstances which affect them. Their lot in life may be infinitely varied and changeable, but taken as a whole, a certain conformity will be apparent in the end ... However secretly it may operate, the hand of a definite destiny, whether it be moved by an outer cause, or by an inner impulse, may be clearly discerned; even conflicting causes often move in its direction. However confused the course of life may be, plan and definite direction are always discernible.”
[ 8 ] Objections to observations of this kind may easily be raised by people who are not willing to consider experiences of a soul-nature. But the author of this book believes that in what he has said about repeated earth-lives and destiny, he has accurately drawn the boundary line within which conceptions can be formed about the underlying causes which shape human life. He has pointed out the fact that the mode of viewing things to which these conceptions lead, can only be defined by them as it were in “silhouette,” that they can only prepare the thoughts for what must be discovered by means of spiritual science. But this thought-preparation is an inner work of the soul, which, if it does not overstep the mark, if it does not seek to “prove” but aims merely at being an exercise of the soul, makes a man impartially open to items of knowledge which without such preparation, appear foolish to him.
[ 9 ] (8) To page 69. The subject of the “spiritual organs of perception” which is only briefly alluded to at the end of this book in the chapter on “The Path of Knowledge,” is more fully dealt with in my books, Knowledge of the Higher Worlds and its Attainment and Occult Science—an Outline.
[ 10 ] (9) To page 89. It would be incorrect to imagine that there is ceaseless unrest in the spiritual world, because a “state of rest, a remaining in one place, such as is found in the physical world,” is not present there. In the realm where the “Archetypes are creative Beings,” there is not what can be called “rest in one place,” but there is rest of a spiritual kind that is compatible with active mobility. It may be likened to the restful contentment and happiness of the spirit which are manifest in deeds, not in inactivity.
[ 11 ] (10) To page 93. One is obliged to use the word “purposes” with regard to the great driving powers of world-creation, although in so doing, inducement is given to the temptation to conceive of these powers simply in the sense of human purposes. In the case of such words, which have naturally to be taken from the sphere of the human world, this temptation can be avoided only by perceiving a new significance and meaning in them, a meaning from which everything that they contain of the narrow, limited, human element has been eliminated; while in place of this there has been imparted to them the meaning which a man gives them at moments in his life when he rises above himself.
[ 12 ] (11) To page 94. Further particulars with regard to the “Spiritual World” are to be found in my Occult Science—an Outline.
[ 13 ] (12) To page 105. When it is said here: “from out of the Eternal he can determine the direction for the future,” this is intended to point to the special constitution of the human soul during the time between death and a new birth. A stroke of destiny which befalls a person during life in the physical world, may seem, from the point of view of that (physical) life, to contain something altogether opposed to the man's own will: in the life between death and re-birth a force, akin to will, rules in the soul which gives to the man the urge towards experiencing this very blow of fate. The soul sees, as it were, that an imperfection has clung to it from earlier earth-lives: an imperfection which had its original in an ugly deed or an ugly thought. Between death and re-birth there arises in the soul a will-like impulse, to make good this imperfection. The soul therefore becomes imbued with the tendency to plunge into a misfortune in the coming earth-life, in order, through enduring it, to bring about compensation. After its birth in the physical body, the soul, when met by some hard fate, has no glimmering of the fact that in the spiritual life before birth, the impulse which led to this hard fate had been deliberately given. Therefore, what seems completely undesired from the point of view of the earth-life, is willed by the soul in the supersensible. “From out of the eternal the human being determines the future for himself.”
[ 14 ] (13) To page 115. The chapter in this book on “Thought-forms and the Human Aura” is doubtless the one which may most easily lead to misconception. It is precisely with regard to these descriptions that antagonistic feelings find the best opportunity for raising objections. It is indeed very natural to demand, for instance, that the statements of the seer in this domain should be proved by experiments in keeping with the scientific mode of thinking. It may be demanded that a number of people who assert that they are able to see the spiritual element in the aura should place themselves in front of other people, and allow their auras to work upon them. Then these seers should be asked to say what thoughts, feelings, etc., they see as the auras of the people they are observing. If their reports coincide, and if it is found that the persons who are observed really have the feelings, thoughts, etc., reported by the seers, then the existence of the aura could be believed in. That is certainly in accord with the methods of natural science. The following, however, must be taken into account. The work which the spiritual investigator carries out upon his own soul, through which he acquires the capacity for spiritual vision, has, as its aim, the acquisition of this capacity. Whether he is then able in any given case to perceive something in the spiritual world, and what he perceives, does not depend upon himself. It flows to him as a gift from the spiritual world. He cannot take it by force, he must wait until it comes to him. His intention to bring about the perception has no bearing on the real causes of its happening. But this intention is exactly what natural science demands for the experiment. The spiritual world, however, will not allow itself to be commanded. If the above attempt is to succeed, it would have to be instituted from the spiritual world. In that world a Being would have to have the intention to reveal the thoughts of one or more persons to one or more “seers.” These seers would then have to be brought together, through a “spiritual impulse,” for their work of observation. In that case their reports would most certainly agree with each other. Paradoxical as all this may appear to the purely scientific mind, it is true, nevertheless. Spiritual “experiments” cannot be undertaken in the same way as those of a physical nature. If the seer, for example, receives the visit of a person who is a stranger to him, he cannot at once “undertake” to observe the aura of this person. But he sees the aura when there is occasion in the spiritual world for it to be revealed to him.
[ 15 ] These few words are intended merely to draw attention to the misconception in the objection described above. What spiritual science has to do, is to point out the way by which a man may come to see the aura, by what means he may bring about the experience of its reality. Thus the only reply that spiritual science can make to the would-be seer is: “The conditions have been made known; apply them to your own soul, and you will see.” It would certainly be more convenient if the above demands of the natural scientific methods could be fulfilled; but whoever asks for tests of this kind shows that he has not made himself acquainted with the very first elements of spiritual science.
[ 16 ] The statements made in this book about the “human aura” are not intended to encourage the desire for “supersensible” sensationalism. This desire only admits itself satisfied, as regards the spiritual world, when it is shown something as “spirit,” which cannot be distinguished in the presentation from the physically sensible, so that it can rest comfortably and remain with its conceptions in that same physical sense-world. What is said on page 117 about the way in which the auric colour is to be imagined, could certainly be calculated to prevent such misunderstanding. But anyone who is striving for true insight into these things must clearly perceive that the human soul, in experiencing the spiritual and psychic, has of necessity the spiritual, not the physical, sight of the aura. Without this sight the experience remains in the unconscious. It is a mistake to confuse the pictorial sight with the actual experience itself: but we must also make quite clear to ourselves that in this same pictorial vision the experience finds a completely adequate expression: not one for instance which the beholding soul creates arbitrarily, but such a one as takes shape of itself, in supersensible perception. At the present time a natural scientist would be forgiven should he feel called upon to speak of a kind of “human aura” as Prof. Dr. Moritz Benedikt speaks in his book on the Rod and Pendulum Theory (Ruten und Pendellehre): “There exist, even though in small numbers, human beings who are adapted to the dark. A relatively large fraction of this minority sees in the dark very many objects without colours, and only relatively very few see the objects coloured also. ... A considerable number of learned men and doctors have been investigated in my dark room by my two classical ‘subjects’ or ‘seers in the dark’ and those investigated in this way could retain no justifiable doubt as to the correctness of the observations, and descriptions ... Now those ‘adapted to the dark’ who see colours, see in the front the forehead and scalp blue, the rest of the right half likewise blue and the left red, or some see it ... orange-yellow. To the rear one finds the same division and the same colouring.” But the spiritual investigator is not so easily forgiven when he speaks of the “aura.” There is no intention here of taking up any kind of attitude to the things worked out by Benedikt, which belong to the most interesting modern theories about Nature. Neither is it intended to take advantage of a cheap opportunity to “make excuses” for spiritual science through natural science, as many are so glad to do. The only intention has been to point out how, in one instance, a natural scientist can make assertions which are not entirely unlike those of spiritual science. But at the same time it must be emphasised that the aura spoken of in this book, which can only be comprehended spiritually, is something quite different from what can be investigated by physical means and about which Benedikt is speaking. It is a gross illusion to think that the “spiritual aura” can be one that may be investigated by the external means of natural science. It is accessible only to that spiritual seeing which is reached by the Path of Knowledge (as described in the last chapter of this book). But it would also be a mistake to suppose that the truth and reality of what is spiritually perceived could be demonstrated in the same way as that which is perceived through the senses.
Einzelne Bemerkungen und Ergänzungen
[ 1 ] Zu Seite 35. Von «Lebenskraft» sprechen galt noch vor kurzer Zeit als ein Merkmal eines unwissenschaftlichen Kopfes. Gegenwärtig beginnt man da und dort auch wieder in der Wissenschaft der Idee einer solchen «Lebenskraft» nicht abgeneigt zu sein, wie sie in älteren Zeiten angenommen worden ist. Wer den Gang der wissenschaftlichen Entwicklung in der Gegenwart durchschaut, wird aber doch die konsequentere Logik bei denjenigen sehen, welche in Anbetracht dieser Entwicklung von «Lebenskraft» nichts wissen wollen. Zu dem, was man gegenwärtig «Naturkräfte» nennt, gehört «Lebenskraft» durchaus nicht. Und wer von den Denkgewohnheiten und Vorstellungsarten der gegenwärtigen Wissenschaften nicht zu höheren übergehen will, der sollte nicht von «Lebenskraft» sprechen. Erst die Art des Denkens und die Voraussetzungen der «Geisteswissenschaft» machen es möglich, widerspruchslos an solche Dinge heranzutreten. Auch solche Denker, die ihre Anschauungen auf einem rein naturwissenschaftlichen Boden gewinnen wollen, haben gegenwärtig den Glauben verlassen, der in der zweiten Hälfte des 19. Jahrhunderts auch für die Erklärung der Lebenserscheinungen nur solche Kräfte gelten lassen wollte, die auch in der leblosen Natur wirksam sind. Das Buch eines so bedeutenden Naturforschers wie Oscar Hertwig: «Das Werden der Organismen. Eine Widerlegung von Darwins Zufallstheorie», ist eine weithin leuchtende wissenschaftliche Erscheinung. Es widerspricht der Annahme, dass die bloßen physikalischen und chemischen Gesetzeszusammenhänge das Lebendige gestalten können. — Bedeutsam ist es auch, dass im sogenannten Neovitalismus sich eine Anschauung geltend macht, die für das Lebendige wieder besondere Kraftwirkungen gelten lässt, ähnlich wie es die älteren Anhänger der «Lebenskraft» taten. — Aber niemand wird auf diesem Gebiete über schemenhaft abstrakte Begriffe hinausgelangen, der nicht anerkennen kann, dass sich das im Leben über die unorganischen Kräfte hinaus Wirksame nur in einer Wahrnehmung erreichen lässt, die zum Anschauen eines Übersinnlichen aufsteigt. Nicht auf eine gleichartige Fortsetzung des auf Unorganisches gerichteten naturwissenschaftlichen Erkennens in das Lebensgebiet hin kommt es an, sondern auf die Erringung einer andersgearteten Erkenntnis.
[ 2 ] Zu Seite 36. Wenn hier vom «Tastsinn» der niederen Organismen gesprochen wird, so ist mit diesem Worte nicht das gemeint, was in den gewöhnlichen Darstellungen der «Sinne» mit diesem Ausdrucke bezeichnet wird. Gegen die Berechtigung dieses Ausdruckes könnte sogar vom Gesichtspunkte der Geisteswissenschaft viel eingewendet werden. Es ist vielmehr hier mit «Tastsinn» ein allgemeines Gewahrwerden eines äußeren Eindruckes gemeint, im Gegensatz zu dem besonderen Gewahrwerden, das im Sehen, Hören und so weiter besteht.
[ 3 ] Zu Seite 36-60. Es kann scheinen, als ob die in diesen Ausführungen gegebene Gliederung der menschlichen Wesenheit auf einer rein willkürlichen Unterscheidung von Teilen innerhalb des einheitlichen Seelenlebens beruhte. Demgegenüber ist zu betonen, dass diese Gliederung im einheitlichen Seelenleben eine ähnliche Bedeutung hat wie das Erscheinen der sieben Regenbogenfarbennuancen beim Durchgange des Lichtes durch ein Prisma. Was der Physiker vollbringt zur Erklärung der Lichterscheinungen, indem er diesen Durchgang und die sieben Farbennuancen in seinem Gefolge studiert, das vollbringt in entsprechender Art der Geistesforscher für die Seelenwesenheit. Die sieben Seelenglieder sind nicht bloße Unterscheidungen des abstrahierenden Verstandes. Sie sind dies ebensowenig wie die sieben Farben gegenüber dem Lichte. Es beruht in beiden Fällen die Unterscheidung auf der inneren Natur der Tatsachen. Nur dass die sieben Glieder am Lichte sichtbar werden durch eine äußerliche Vorrichtung, die sieben Glieder der Seele durch die auf das Wesen der Seele gehende geistgemäße Betrachtung. Es kann das wahre Wesen der Seele ohne die Erkenntnis dieser Gliederung nicht erfasst werden. Denn durch die drei Glieder: physischer Leib, Lebensleib, Seelenleib, gehört die Seele der vergänglichen Welt an; durch die andern vier Glieder wurzelt sie im Ewigen. In der «einheitlichen Seele» ist Vergängliches und Ewiges unterschiedslos verbunden. Man kann, wenn man die Gliederung nicht durchschaut, nicht das Verhältnis der Seele zur Gesamtwelt kennenlernen. Noch ein anderer Vergleich darf gebraucht werden. Der Chemiker spaltet das Wasser in Wasserstoff und Sauerstoff. Diese beiden Stoffe kann man in dem «einheitlichen Wasser» nicht beobachten. Sie haben aber ihre eigene Wesenheit. Sowohl der Wasserstoff als auch der Sauerstoff bilden Verbindungen mit anderen Stoffen. So gehen im Tode die drei «niederen Glieder der Seele» Verbindungen mit der vergänglichen Weltwesenheit ein; die vier höheren fügen sich dem Ewigen ein. Wer sich sträubt, in die Gliederung der Seele sich einzulassen, der gleicht einem Chemiker, der nichts davon wissen wollte, das Wasser in Wasserstoff und Sauerstoff zu zerlegen.
[ 4 ] Zu Seite 43. Geisteswissenschaftliche Darstellungen müssen ganz genau genommen werden. Denn nur in der genauen Prägung der Ideen haben sie einen Wert. Wer zum Beispiel in dem Satze: «Sie (die Empfindungen und so weiter) werden bei ihm (nämlich beim Tier) nicht mit selbständigen, über das unmittelbare Erleben hinausgehenden Gedanken durchwoben», die Worte «selbständigen, über das unmittelbare Erleben hinausgehenden» unbeachtet lässt, der könnte leicht in den Irrtum verfallen, hier werde behauptet, in dem Empfinden oder in den Instinkten der Tiere seien keine Gedanken enthalten. Nun steht aber gerade wahre Geisteswissenschaft auf dem Boden einer Erkenntnis, die sagt, dass alles innere Erleben der Tiere (wie alles Dasein überhaupt) gedankendurchwoben ist. Nur sind die Gedanken des Tieres nicht selbständige eines im Tiere lebenden «Ich», sondern sie sind diejenigen des tierischen Gruppen-Ich, welches als ein von außen das Tier beherrschendes Wesen anzusehen ist. Es ist dieses Gruppen-Ich nicht in der physischen Welt vorhanden wie das Ich des Menschen, sondern es wirkt auf das Tier herein aus der auf Seite 90 ff. beschriebenen Seelenwelt. (Genaueres darüber ist in meiner «Geheimwissenschaft» zu finden.) Worauf es beim Menschen ankommt, das ist, dass die Gedanken in ihm selbständiges Dasein gewinnen, dass sie nicht mittelbar in der Empfindung, sondern unmittelbar als Gedanken auch seelisch erlebt werden.
[ 5 ] Zu Seite 48. Wenn gesagt wird, kleine Kinder sagen: «Karl ist brav», «Marie will das haben», so muss wohl beachtet werden, dass es weniger darauf ankommt, wie früh Kinder das Wort «Ich» gebrauchen, als darauf, wann sie mit diesem Worte die entsprechende Vorstellung verknüpfen. Wenn Kinder das Wort von Erwachsenen hören, so mögen sie immerhin dasselbe gebrauchen, ohne dass sie die Vorstellung des «Ich» haben. Doch deutet der zumeist späte Gebrauch des Wortes allerdings auf eine wichtige Entwicklungstatsachen hin, nämlich ich auf die allmähliche Entfaltung der Ich-Vorstellung aus dem dunklen Ich-Gefühl heraus.
[ 6 ] Zu Seite 52 und 53. Man wird in meinem Buche «Wie erlangt man Erkenntnisse der höheren Welten?» und in meiner «Geheimwissenschaft» die eigentliche Wesenheit der «Intuition» beschrieben finden. Man könnte leicht bei ungenauer Beachtung der Sache zwischen dem Gebrauche dieses Wortes in den beiden Büchern und demjenigen, der sich in diesem Buche auf Seite 52 findet, einen Widerspruch finden. Er ist für den nicht vorhanden, der genau beachtet, dass dasjenige, was aus der geistigen Welt durch die Intuition sich in voller Wirklichkeit für die übersinnliche Erkenntnis enthüllt, sich in seiner niedersten Offenbarung dem Geistselbst so ankündigt wie das äußere Dasein der physischen Welt in der Empfindung.
[ 7 ] Zu Seite 61 ff. Über «Wiederverkörperung des Geistes und Schicksal». Gegenüber den Ausführungen dieses Abschnittes wird zu bedenken sein, dass hier der Versuch gemacht ist, aus der gedanklichen Betrachtung des menschlichen Lebenslaufes selbst, ohne Hinblick auf geisteswissenschaftliche Erkenntnisse, wie sie in den andern Abschnitten dargestellt werden, Vorstellungen zu gewinnen darüber, inwiefern dieses Menschenleben und sein Schicksal über sich selbst hinaus zu wiederholten Erdenleben weist. Diese Vorstellungen werden ganz selbstverständlich demjenigen recht bedenklich erscheinen müssen, der nur die gewohnten, auf das Einzelleben gerichteten «fest begründet» findet. Allein, man sollte auch bedenken, dass die hier gegebene Darstellung die Meinung zu begründen sucht, eine solch gewohnte Vorstellungsart könne eben nicht zu Erkenntnissen über die Gründe des Lebenslaufes führen. Deshalb müssen andere Vorstellungen gesucht werden, die den gewohnten scheinbar widersprechen. Und man sucht diese anderen Vorstellungen nur dann nicht, wenn man es grundsätzlich ablehnt, auf einen nur seelisch zu erfassenden Verlauf von Vorgängen die gedankliche Betrachtung ebenso anzuwenden wie auf einen im Physischen sich vollziehenden. Bei einer solchen Ablehnung legt man zum Beispiel keinen Wert auf die Tatsache, dass ein Schicksalsschlag, der das Ich trifft, in der Empfindung sich verwandt erweist dem Auftreffen einer Erinnerung auf ein Erlebnis, das dem erinnerten verwandt ist. Aber wer versucht, wahrzunehmen, wie ein Schicksalsschlag wirklich erlebt wird, der kann dieses Erleben unterscheiden von den Aussagen, die entstehen müssen, wenn der Gesichtspunkt in der Außenwelt genommen wird und dadurch jede lebendige Beziehung des Schlages zum Ich selbstverständlich wegfällt. Für einen solchen Gesichtspunkt erscheint der Schlag entweder als Zufall oder als eine von außen kommende Bestimmung. Da es auch solche Schicksalsschläge gibt, die gewissermaßen einen ersten Einschlag in das Menschenleben bilden und die ihre Folgen erst später zeigen werden, ist die Versuchung um so größer, das für diese Geltende zu verallgemeinern und auf eine andere Möglichkeit gar nicht zu achten. Man beginnt darauf zu achten, wenn die Lebenserfahrungen das Vorstellungsvermögen in eine Richtung bringen, wie sie bei Goethes Freund Knebel sich findet, der in einem Briefe schreibt: «Man wird bei genauer Beobachtung finden, dass in dem Leben der meisten Menschen sich ein gewisser Plan findet, der, durch die eigene Natur oder durch die Umstände, die sie führen, ihnen gleichsam vorgezeichnet ist. Die Zustände ihres Lebens mögen noch so abwechselnd und veränderlich sein, es zeigt sich am Ende doch ein Ganzes, das unter sich eine gewisse Übereinstimmung bemerken lässt ... Die Hand eines bestimmten Schicksals, so verborgen sie auch wirken mag, zeigt sich auch genau, sie mag nun durch äußere Wirkung oder innere Regung bewegt sein: ja, widersprechende Gründe bewegen sich oftmals in ihrer Richtung. So verwirrt der Lauf ist, so zeigt sich immer Grund und Richtung durch.» Solch einer Beobachtung kann leicht mit Einwänden begegnet werden, insbesondere von solchen Persönlichkeiten, die sich auf die Beachtung der Seelenerlebnisse nicht einlassen wollen, aus der sie stammt. Der Verfasser dieses Buches glaubt in den Ausführungen über wiederholte Erdenleben und Schicksal aber genau die Grenzen gezeichnet zu haben, innerhalb der man Vorstellungen über die Gründe der Lebensgestaltung bilden kann. Er hat darauf verwiesen, dass die Anschauung, zu der diese Vorstellungen lenken, von ihnen nur «silhouettenhaft» bestimmt wird, dass sie nur gedanklich vorbereiten können auf dasjenige, was geisteswissenschaftlich gefunden werden muss. Aber diese gedankliche Vorbereitung ist eine innere Seelenverrichtung, die, wenn sie ihre Tragweite nicht falsch einschätzt, wenn sie nicht «beweisen», sondern die Seele bloß «üben» will, den Menschen vorurteilslos-empfänglich macht für Erkenntnisse, die ihm ohne solche Vorbereitung töricht erscheinen.
[ 8 ] Zu Seite 96. Was in diesem Buche in dem späteren Kapitel «Pfad der Erkenntnis» von «geistigen Wahrnehmungsorganen» nur kurz gesagt wird, davon findet sich eine ausführliche Darstellung in meinen Büchern «Wie erlangt man Erkenntnisse der höheren Welten?» und in meiner «Geheimwissenschaft».
[ 9 ] Zu Seite 122. Es wäre unrichtig, wenn man deswegen eine rastlose Unruhe in der geistigen Welt annehmen wollte, weil es in ihr «eine Ruhe, ein Verweilen an einem Orte, wie sie in der physischen Welt vorhanden sind», nicht gibt. Es ist dort, wo «die Urbilder schaffende Wesenheiten» sind, zwar nicht das vorhanden, was «Ruhe an einem Orte» genannt werden kann, wohl aber jene Ruhe, welche geistiger Art ist und welche mit tätiger Beweglichkeit vereinbar ist. Sie lässt sich vergleichen mit der ruhigen Befriedigung und Beseligung des Geistes, die im Handeln, nicht im Untätigsein sich offenbaren.
[ 10 ] Zu Seite 127 und 129. Man muss das Wort «Absichten» gegenüber den treibenden Gewalten der Weltentwicklung gebrauchen, obwohl dadurch zu der Versuchung Veranlassung gegeben wird, diese Gewalten einfach so vorzustellen, wie menschliche Absichten sind. Vermieden kann diese Versuchung nur werden, wenn man sich bei solchen Worten, die doch nun einmal aus dem Bereich der menschlichen Welt genommen werden müssen, erhebt zu einer Bedeutung derselben, in welcher ihnen alles genommen ist, was sie an engbegrenztem Menschlichem haben, dafür ihnen aber gegeben wird dasjenige, was der Mensch ihnen in den Fällen seines Lebens annähernd gibt, in denen er sich gewissermaßen über sich selbst erhebt.
[ 11 ] Zu Seite 128. Weiteres über das «geistige Wort» findet man in meiner «Geheimwissenschaft».
[ 12 ] Zu Seite 144. Wenn an dieser Stelle gesagt ist: «... er kann von dein Ewigen aus die Richtung für die Zukunft bestimmen», so ist dies ein Hinweis auf die besondere Art der menschlichen Seelenverfassung in der entsprechenden Zeit zwischen dem Tode und einer neuen Geburt. Ein Schicksalsschlag, der den Menschen im Leben der physischen Welt trifft, kann für die Seelenverfassung dieses Lebens etwas dem Willen des Menschen ganz Widerstrebendes zu haben scheinen: in dem Leben zwischen Tod und Geburt waltet in der Seele eine dem Willen ähnliche Kraft, welche dem Menschen die Richtung gibt nach dem Erleben dieses Schicksalsschlages. Die Seele sieht gewissermaßen, dass ihr aus früheren Erdenleben eine Unvollkommenheit anhaftet. Eine Unvollkommenheit, die von einer unschönen Tat oder einem unschönen Gedanken herrührt. In der Seele entsteht zwischen Tod und Geburt der willensähnliche Impuls, die Unvollkommenheit auszugleichen. Sie nimmt deswegen in ihr Wesen die Tendenz auf, in dem weiteren Erdenleben sich in ein Unglück zu stürzen, um durch dessen Erleiden den Ausgleich herbeizuführen. Nach der Geburt im physischen Leibe ahnt die Seele, die von einem Schicksalsschlage getroffen wird, nicht, dass sie in dem rein geistigen Leben vor der Geburt sich selbst die Richtung nach diesem Schicksalsschlage gegeben hat. Was also völlig ungewollt erscheint vom Gesichtspunkt des Erdenlebens, ist von der Seele gewollt im Übersinnlichen. «Von dem Ewigen aus bestimmt sich der Mensch die Zukunft.»
[ 13 ] Zu Seite 158 ff. Das Kapitel dieses Buches: «Von den Gedankenformen und der menschlichen Aura», ist wohl das, welches am leichtesten zu Missverständnissen Anlass gibt. Gegnerische Empfindungen finden gerade in diesen Ausführungen die besten Gelegenheiten zu ihren Einwänden. Es liegt zum Beispiel wirklich recht nahe, zu verlangen, dass die Aussagen des Sehers auf diesem Gebiete durch Versuche bewiesen werden sollen, welche der naturwissenschaftlichen Vorstellungsart entsprechen. Man kann fordern, es sollen sich eine Anzahl von Menschen, die vorgeben, das Geistige der Aura zu schauen, anderen Menschen gegenüberstellen und deren Aura auf sich wirken lassen. Dann mögen die Seher sagen, welche Gedanken, Empfindungen und so weiter sie als Aura bei den beobachteten Menschen schauen. Wenn dann ihre Angaben untereinander übereinstimmen und wenn sich herausstellt, dass die beobachteten Menschen wirklich die von den Sehern angegebenen Empfindungen, Gedanken und so weiter gehabt haben, dann wolle man an das Vorhandensein der Aura glauben. Das ist gewiss ganz naturwissenschaftlich gedacht. Allein, es kommt das Folgende in Betracht: Die Arbeit des Geistesforschers an der eigenen Seele, die ihm die Fähigkeit des geistigen Schauens gibt, geht dahin, eben diese Fähigkeit zu erwerben. Ob er dann in einem einzelnen Falle etwas in der geistigen Welt wahrnimmt und was er wahrnimmt, das hängt nicht von ihm ab. Das fließt ihm zu als eine Gabe aus der geistigen Welt. Er kann sie nicht erzwingen, er muss warten, bis sie ihm wird. Seine Absicht, die Wahrnehmung herbeizuführen, kann nie zu den Ursachen des Eintreffens dieser Wahrnehmung gehören. Gerade diese Absicht aber fordert die naturwissenschaftliche Vorstellungsart für das Experiment. Die geistige Welt aber lässt sich nicht befehlen. Sollte der Versuch zustande kommen, so müsste er von der geistigen Welt aus angestellt werden. In dieser müsste ein Wesen die Absicht haben, die Gedanken eines oder mehrerer Menschen einem oder mehreren Sehern zu offenbaren. Diese Seher müssten dann durch «geistigen Antrieb» zur Beobachtung zusammengeführt werden. Dann würden ihre Angaben ganz gewiss miteinander stimmen. So paradox dies alles für das rein naturwissenschaftliche Denken erscheinen mag: es ist doch so. Geistige «Experimente» können nicht wie physische zustande kommen. Wenn der Seher zum Beispiel den Besuch einer ihm fremden Person erhält, so kann er nicht ohne weiteres sich «vornehmen», die Aura dieser Person zu beobachten. Aber er schaut die Aura, wenn innerhalb der geistigen Welt Veranlassung ist, dass sie sich ihm enthüllt. — Mit diesen wenigen Worten soll nur auf das Missverständliche des oben angedeuteten Einwurfes hingewiesen werden. Was die Geisteswissenschaft zu erfüllen hat, ist, anzugeben, auf welchem Wege der Mensch zum Schauen der Aura kommt; auf welchem Wege er sich also selbst die Erfahrung von ihrem Vorhandensein verschaffen kann. Es kann also die Wissenschaft dem, der erkennen will, nur erwidern: wende die Bedingungen des Schauens auf deine eigene Seele an, und du wirst schauen. Die obige Forderung der naturwissenschaftlichen Vorstellungsart erfüllt zu sehen, wäre allerdings bequemer; allein, wer sie stellt, zeigt, dass er sich nicht von den allerersten Ergebnissen der Geisteswissenschaft wirklich unterrichtet hat.
[ 14 ] Mit der in diesem Buche gegebenen Darstellung der «menschlichen Aura» sollte nicht der auf das «Übersinnliche» gehenden Sensationslust entgegengekommen werden, die sich gegenüber der geistigen Welt nur dann für befriedigt erklärt, wenn man ihr etwas als «Geist» vorweist, das sich in der Vorstellung nicht von dem Sinnlichen unterscheidet, bei dem sie also mit ihrem Vorstellen bequem in diesem Sinnlichen bleiben kann. Was auf seiten 158 und 159 f. gesagt ist über die besondere Art, wie die aurische Farbe vorzustellen ist, könnte doch wohl geeignet sein, diese Darstellung vor einem solchen Missverständnis zu bewahren. Aber es muss auch von dem, der nach rechter Einsicht auf diesem Gebiete strebt, durchschaut werden, dass die Menschenseele notwendig die geistige — nicht sinnliche — Anschauung des Aurischen vor sich hinstellt, wenn sie das Erlebnis des Geistigen und Seelischen hat. Ohne eine solche Anschauung bleibt das Erlebnis im Unbewussten. Man sollte die bildhafte Anschauung nicht mit dem Erlebnis selbst verwechseln; aber man sollte sich auch klar darüber sein, dass in dieser bildhaften Anschauung das Erlebnis einen völlig zutreffenden Ausdruck findet. Nicht einen solchen etwa, den die anschauende Seele willkürlich macht, sondern einen solchen, der sich selbst im übersinnlichen Wahrnehmen bildet. — Man wird gegenwärtig einem Naturforscher verzeihen, wenn er sich veranlasst findet, von einer Art «menschlicher Aura» so zu sprechen, wie es Professor Dr. Moritz Benedikt in seinem Buche über «Ruten- und Pendellehre» tut. «Es gibt, wenn auch eine geringe Anzahl von Menschen, die «dunkelangepasst» sind. Ein relativ größerer Teil dieser Minorität sieht in der Dunkelheit sehr viel Objekte ohne Farben, und nur relativ sehr wenige sehen die Objekte auch gefärbt ... Eine größere Anzahl Gelehrte und Ärzte wurden in meiner Dunkelkammer von meinen zwei klassischen «Dunkelangepassten»... untersucht, und es konnte den von denselben Untersuchten kein gerechter Zweifel an der Richtigkeit der Beobachtung und Schilderung zurückbleiben... Farbenwahrnehmende Dunkelangepasste sehen nun an der Vorderseite die Stirn und den Scheitel blau, die übrige rechte Hälfte ebenfalls blau und die linke rot oder manche ... orangegelb. Rückwärts findet dieselbe Teilung und dieselbe Färbung statt.» Aber man wird das Sprechen von «Aura» dem Geistesforscher nicht so leicht verzeihen. Hier soll nun weder zu diesen Ausführungen Benedikts — die zu den interessantesten der modernen Naturlehre gehören — irgendwie Stellung genommen werden, noch soll eine billige Gelegenheit ergriffen werden, die manche so gerne ergreifen, um Geisteswissenschaft durch die Naturwissenschaft zu «entschuldigen». Es sollte nur darauf hingewiesen werden, wie in einem Falle ein Naturforscher zu Behauptungen kommen kann, die solchen der Geisteswissenschaft nicht so ganz unähnlich sind. Betont muss dabei aber auch werden, dass die geistig zu erfassende Aura, von der in diesem Buche die Rede ist, etwas ganz anderes ist als die mit physischen Mitteln zu erforschende, von der bei Benedikt die Rede ist. Man gibt sich natürlich einer groben Täuschung hin, wenn man meint, die «geistige Aura» könne ein mit äußeren naturwissenschaftlichen Mitteln zu Erforschendes sein. Sie ist nur dem geistigen Schauen zugänglich, das durch den Erkenntnispfad gegangen ist (wie er im letzten Kapitel dieses Buches beschrieben ist). Aber auf einem Missverständnisse beruhte es auch, wenn man geltend machte, dass die Wirklichkeit des geistig Wahrzunehmenden auf dieselbe Art erwiesen werden soll wie diejenige des sinnlich Wahrzunehmenden.
Some comments and additions
[ 1 ] To page 35. Until recently, talking about "life force" was considered a characteristic of an unscientific mind. At present, here and there in science, too, the idea of such a "life force", as it was assumed in older times, is beginning to be accepted again. However, anyone who looks through the course of scientific development in the present day will see the more consistent logic of those who, in view of this development, do not want to know anything about "life force". Life force" does not belong to what is currently called the "forces of nature". And those who do not want to move from the habits of thought and modes of conception of the present sciences to higher ones should not speak of "life force". Only the way of thinking and the prerequisites of "spiritual science" make it possible to approach such things without contradiction. Even those thinkers who want to gain their views on a purely scientific basis have now abandoned the belief that, in the second half of the 19th century, only those forces that are also active in inanimate nature should be accepted to explain the phenomena of life. The book by such an important natural scientist as Oscar Hertwig: "Das Werden der Organismen. A refutation of Darwin's theory of chance", is a widely recognized scientific phenomenon. It contradicts the assumption that mere physical and chemical laws can shape living things. - It is also significant that in so-called neovitalism a view is asserting itself that once again accepts special force effects for the living, similar to the older followers of the "life force". - But no one in this field will get beyond shadowy abstract concepts who cannot recognize that what is effective in life beyond the inorganic forces can only be achieved in a perception that ascends to the perception of a supersensible. What matters is not a similar continuation of scientific cognition directed towards the inorganic into the realm of life, but the attainment of a different kind of cognition.
[ 2 ] To page 36. When the "sense of touch" of the lower organisms is spoken of here, this word does not mean what is designated by this expression in the usual descriptions of the "senses". Much could be objected to the justification of this expression even from the point of view of spiritual science. Rather, what is meant here by "sense of touch" is a general awareness of an external impression, in contrast to the particular awareness that consists in seeing, hearing and so on.
[ 3 ] To page 36-60. It may seem as if the division of the human being given in these explanations is based on a purely arbitrary differentiation of parts within the unified life of the soul. On the other hand, it must be emphasized that this division in the unified soul life has a similar meaning to the appearance of the seven shades of the rainbow when light passes through a prism. What the physicist accomplishes to explain the phenomena of light by studying this passage and the seven shades of color in its wake, the spiritual researcher accomplishes in a corresponding way for the soul entity. The seven members of the soul are not mere distinctions of the abstracting intellect. They are no more so than the seven colors in relation to the light. In both cases the distinction is based on the inner nature of the facts. It is only that the seven members of the light become visible through an external device, the seven members of the soul through spiritual contemplation of the soul's essence. The true nature of the soul cannot be grasped without recognizing this division. For through the three members: physical body, life body, soul body, the soul belongs to the transient world; through the other four members it is rooted in the eternal. In the "unified soul", the transient and the eternal are indiscriminately connected. If one does not see through the structure, one cannot get to know the relationship of the soul to the world as a whole. Another comparison may be used. The chemist splits water into hydrogen and oxygen. These two substances cannot be observed in the "unified water". However, they have their own essence. Both hydrogen and oxygen form compounds with other substances. Thus, in death, the three "lower members of the soul" enter into connections with the transient world entity; the four higher ones join the eternal. Anyone who is reluctant to get involved in the division of the soul is like a chemist who wanted nothing to do with breaking water down into hydrogen and oxygen.
[ 4 ] To page 43. Spiritual scientific representations must be taken very precisely. For they have value only in the precise shaping of ideas. Whoever, for example, in the sentence: "They (the sensations and so on) are not interwoven in him (namely in the animal) with independent thoughts going beyond the immediate experience", ignores the words "independent thoughts going beyond the immediate experience", could easily fall into the error of asserting that no thoughts are contained in the sensations or instincts of animals. But true spiritual science is based on a knowledge that says that all inner experiences of animals (like all existence in general) are interwoven with thoughts. However, the thoughts of the animal are not the independent thoughts of an "I" living in the animal, but are those of the animal's group ego, which is to be regarded as a being dominating the animal from the outside. This group ego is not present in the physical world like the ego of the human being, but it affects the animal from the soul world described on page 90 ff. (More details on this can be found in my "Secret Science".) What is important in man is that the thoughts gain independent existence in him, that they are not experienced indirectly in sensation, but directly as thoughts in the soul.
[ 5 ] To page 48. When it is said that small children say: "Karl is good", "Marie wants this", it should be noted that it is less important how early children use the word "I" than when they associate the corresponding idea with this word. When children hear the word from adults, they may still use it without having the idea of "I". However, the mostly late use of the word points to an important developmental fact, namely the gradual unfolding of the concept of "I" out of the dark sense of "I".
[ 6 ] To page 52 and 53. You will find the actual nature of "intuition" described in my book "Wie erlangt man Erkenntnisse der höheren Welten?" and in my "Geheimwissenschaft". One could easily find a contradiction between the use of this word in the two books and the one found in this book on page 52 if one does not pay close attention to the matter. It does not exist for those who pay close attention to the fact that that which reveals itself in full reality for supersensible knowledge from the spiritual world through intuition announces itself in its lowest revelation to the spirit self in the same way as the external existence of the physical world in perception.
[ 7 ] To page 61 ff. On "Re-embodiment of the spirit and destiny". With regard to the explanations in this section, it should be borne in mind that an attempt has been made here to gain ideas about the extent to which this human life and its destiny points beyond itself to repeated earth lives, without reference to spiritual scientific knowledge as presented in the other sections. It goes without saying that these ideas must appear quite dubious to those who only find the usual "firmly founded" ideas directed towards individual lives. However, one should also bear in mind that the description given here seeks to justify the opinion that such a habitual way of thinking cannot lead to insights into the reasons for the course of life. Therefore, other ideas must be sought that seem to contradict the usual ones. And these other ideas are only not sought if one fundamentally rejects applying mental observation to a course of events that can only be grasped mentally in the same way as to one that takes place in the physical world. In such a rejection, for example, no value is attached to the fact that a stroke of fate that strikes the ego proves to be related in sensation to the encounter of a memory with an experience that is related to the remembered one. But anyone who tries to perceive how a stroke of fate is really experienced can distinguish this experience from the statements that must arise if the point of view is taken from the outside world and thus any living relationship of the stroke to the ego naturally disappears. For such a point of view, the blow appears either as a coincidence or as a destiny coming from outside. Since there are also such strokes of fate which form, as it were, a first impact on human life and which will only show their consequences later, the temptation is all the greater to generalize what applies to them and to pay no attention at all to another possibility. One begins to pay attention to this when life experiences lead the imagination in a direction such as that found in Goethe's friend Knebel, who writes in a letter: "On close observation, one will find that in the lives of most people there is a certain plan which, through their own nature or through the circumstances that lead them, is as it were predetermined for them. No matter how varied and changeable the conditions of their lives may be, in the end a whole emerges that shows a certain consistency among them ... The hand of a certain destiny, however hidden it may be, shows itself exactly, it may be moved by external effects or inner impulses: indeed, contradictory reasons often move in its direction. As confused as the course is, the reason and direction always show through." Such an observation can easily be met with objections, especially from those personalities who do not want to get involved in observing the soul experiences from which it originates. However, the author of this book believes that in his remarks on repeated earth lives and destiny he has precisely outlined the boundaries within which one can form ideas about the reasons for shaping one's life. He has pointed out that the view to which these ideas lead is determined by them only "in silhouette", that they can only prepare us mentally for that which must be found through spiritual science. But this mental preparation is an inner exercise of the soul which, if it does not misjudge its scope, if it does not want to "prove" but merely "exercise" the soul, makes man unprejudicedly receptive to insights that appear foolish to him without such preparation.
[ 8 ] To page 96. What is only briefly said in this book in the later chapter "Path of Knowledge" about "spiritual organs of perception" can be found in detail in my books "How to Attain Knowledge of the Higher Worlds" and in my "Secret Science".
[ 9 ] To page 122. It would be incorrect to assume a restless restlessness in the spiritual world because in it "there is no rest, no lingering in one place, as there is in the physical world". There, where "the archetypes are creating entities", there is not what can be called "rest in one place", but there is that rest which is of a spiritual nature and which is compatible with active mobility. It can be compared to the calm satisfaction and beatification of the spirit, which manifest themselves in action, not in inactivity.
[ 10 ] To pages 127 and 129. The word "intentions" must be used in relation to the driving forces of world development, although this gives rise to the temptation to imagine these forces simply as human intentions are. This temptation can only be avoided if such words, which after all must be taken from the realm of the human world, are elevated to a meaning in which they are deprived of all that they have of the narrowly limited human, but in return are given that which man approximately gives them in the cases of his life in which he rises above himself, so to speak.
[ 11 ] To page 128. More about the "spiritual word" can be found in my "Secret Science".
[ 12 ] To page 144. When it is said at this point: "... he can determine the direction for the future from your eternal", this is a reference to the special kind of human soul constitution in the corresponding time between death and a new birth. A stroke of fate that strikes a person in the life of the physical world can seem to have something quite contrary to the will of the person for the soul constitution of this life: in the life between death and birth a power similar to the will rules in the soul, which gives the person the direction according to the experience of this stroke of fate. The soul sees, as it were, that an imperfection clings to it from previous lives on earth. An imperfection that stems from an unpleasant deed or an unpleasant thought. Between death and birth, a will-like impulse arises in the soul to compensate for the imperfection. It therefore takes into its being the tendency to plunge into a misfortune in its further life on earth in order to bring about compensation by suffering it. After birth in the physical body, the soul that is struck by a stroke of fate does not suspect that in the purely spiritual life before birth it has given itself the direction towards this stroke of fate. So what appears completely unintentional from the point of view of earthly life is intentional on the part of the soul in the supersensible. "From the eternal, man determines his future."
[ 13 ] To page 158 ff. The chapter of this book: "On Thought Forms and the Human Aura", is probably the one that most easily gives rise to misunderstandings. Opposing sentiments find the best opportunities for their objections precisely in these explanations. For example, it is really quite obvious to demand that the seer's statements in this area should be proven by experiments that correspond to the scientific way of thinking. One can demand that a number of people who claim to see the spiritual aspects of the aura should confront other people and let their aura have an effect on them. Then the seers may say which thoughts, sensations and so on they see as an aura in the people they observe. If their statements then agree with each other and if it turns out that the people observed really did have the sensations, thoughts and so on that the seers stated, then one should believe in the existence of the aura. This is certainly quite scientific thinking. However, the following comes into consideration: The spiritual researcher's work on his own soul, which gives him the ability of spiritual vision, is aimed at acquiring precisely this ability. Whether he then perceives something in the spiritual world in an individual case and what he perceives does not depend on him. It flows to him as a gift from the spiritual world. He cannot force it, he must wait until it becomes his. His intention to bring about the perception can never be one of the causes of the occurrence of this perception. But it is precisely this intention that the scientific mode of perception demands for the experiment. The spiritual world, however, cannot be commanded. If the experiment were to come about, it would have to be carried out from the spiritual world. In this world, a being would have to have the intention of revealing the thoughts of one or more people to one or more seers. These seers would then have to be brought together by "spiritual impulse" for observation. Then their statements would certainly agree with each other. As paradoxical as all this may seem to purely scientific thinking, it is true. Spiritual "experiments" cannot come about in the same way as physical ones. For example, if the seer receives a visit from a stranger, he cannot simply "undertake" to observe this person's aura. But he will see the aura if there is cause within the spiritual world for it to reveal itself to him. - These few words are only intended to point out the misunderstanding of the above-mentioned objection. What spiritual science has to accomplish is to indicate the way in which man comes to see the aura; in other words, the way in which he can procure for himself the experience of its existence. Science can therefore only reply to those who want to recognize: apply the conditions of seeing to your own soul and you will see. It would, however, be more convenient to see the above demand of the scientific way of imagination fulfilled; but whoever makes it shows that he has not really informed himself of the very first results of spiritual science.
[ 14 ] The description of the "human aura" given in this book was not intended to satisfy the sensationalism that goes to the "supersensible", which only declares itself satisfied with the spiritual world when something is presented to it as "spirit" that does not differ in the imagination from the sensible, and in which it can therefore remain comfortably in this sensible with its imagination. What is said on pages 158 and 159 f. about the special way in which the auric color is to be imagined might well be suitable to save this representation from such a misunderstanding. But it must also be understood by those who strive for right insight in this field that the human soul necessarily presents the spiritual - not sensual - view of the auric to itself when it has the experience of the spiritual and the soul. Without such a view, the experience remains in the unconscious. One should not confuse the pictorial perception with the experience itself; but one should also be clear about the fact that in this pictorial perception the experience finds a completely accurate expression. Not one that the contemplating soul creates arbitrarily, but one that forms itself in supersensible perception. - At present, a natural scientist will be forgiven if he finds himself compelled to speak of a kind of "human aura" as Professor Dr. Moritz Benedikt does in his book on "Ruten- und Pendellehre". "There are, albeit a small number of people who are "dark-adapted". A relatively larger part of this minority sees in the dark a great many objects without colors, and only a relatively very few see the objects also colored ... A large number of scholars and doctors were examined in my darkroom by my two classical "dark-adapted"... and no just doubt could remain in the minds of those examined by them as to the correctness of the observation and description... Color-perceiving dark-adapted persons now see the forehead and the top of the head blue on the front, the remaining right half also blue and the left red or some ... orange-yellow. The same division and the same coloration take place backwards." But it will not be so easy to forgive the spiritual researcher for speaking of "aura". This is not intended to comment in any way on these statements by Benedict - which are among the most interesting in modern natural science - nor is it intended to seize a cheap opportunity that some so readily seize to "excuse" spiritual science through natural science. It should only be pointed out how, in one case, a natural scientist can arrive at assertions that are not entirely dissimilar to those of the humanities. It must also be emphasized, however, that the aura to be grasped spiritually, which is mentioned in this book, is something quite different from the aura to be investigated by physical means, which is mentioned by Benedict. Of course, one is grossly deceived if one thinks that the "spiritual aura" can be something that can be investigated by external scientific means. It is only accessible to spiritual vision that has gone through the path of knowledge (as described in the last chapter of this book). But it was also based on a misunderstanding if it was claimed that the reality of the spiritually perceived should be proven in the same way as that of the sensually perceived.