The Rudolf Steiner Archive

Reincarnation of the spirit and fate
(Reincarnation and karma)

[ 1 ] The soul lives in the middle between body and spirit. The impressions it receives through the body are temporary. They are only present as long as the body opens its organs to the things of the outside world. My eye perceives the color of the rose only as long as the rose is in front of it and it itself is open. The presence of the thing in the outside world as well as that of the bodily organ are necessary for an impression, a sensation or perception to come about. But what I have recognized in the spirit as the truth about the rose does not pass with the present. And its truth is not at all dependent on me. It would be true even if I had never come face to face with the rose. What I recognize through the spirit is founded in an element of the life of the soul, through which the soul is connected with a world content that reveals itself in it independently of its transient bodily foundations. It is not a question of whether the revelation itself is everywhere imperishable, but of whether the revelation for the soul happens in such a way that not its perishable bodily basis comes into consideration, but that which in it is independent of this perishable. That which is permanent in the soul is placed under observation at the moment one becomes aware that there are experiences which are not limited by their transient nature. Nor is it a question of whether these experiences first become conscious through transient activities of the body's organization, but rather that they contain something that lives in the soul but is nevertheless independent in its truth from the transient process of perception. The soul is placed between presence and duration by holding the middle ground between body and spirit. But it also mediates presence and duration. It preserves the present for memory. In doing so, it snatches it from transience and incorporates it into the duration of its spirituality. It also imprints the permanent on the transient by not only surrendering to temporary stimuli in its life, but by determining things of its own accord, incorporating their essence into the actions it performs. Through memory, the soul preserves yesterday; through action, it prepares for tomorrow.

[ 2 ] My soul would always have to perceive the red of the rose anew in order to have it in consciousness if it could not retain it through memory. That which remains after the external impression, that which can be retained by the soul, can become perception again independently of the external impression. Through this gift, the soul makes the outer world into its own inner world in such a way that it can then retain it through memory - for the memory - and continue to lead its own life with it independently of the impressions gained. The life of the soul thus becomes the permanent effect of the transient impressions of the outside world. But the action also becomes permanent once it has been imprinted on the outside world. If I cut a branch from a tree, something has happened through my soul that completely changes the course of events in the outside world. Something completely different would have happened to the branch on the tree if I had not intervened. I have brought into being a series of effects that would not have existed without my presence. What I have done today will last for tomorrow. It becomes permanent through action, just as my impressions of yesterday have become permanent for my soul through memory.

[ 3 ] For this becoming permanent through the deed, one does not form an idea in ordinary consciousness in the same way as the one one has for "memory", for the becoming permanent of an experience that takes place on the basis of a perception. But is not the "I" of the human being connected with the change that has taken place in the world through his deed in the same way as with the memory that arises from an impression? The "I" judges new impressions differently depending on whether or not it has one or the other memory. But it has also entered into a different connection with the world as an "I", depending on whether or not it has performed one or the other action. Whether or not I have made an impression on another person through an act depends on whether or not something is present in the relationship of the world to my "I". I am a different person in my relationship to the world after I have made an impression on my surroundings. The fact that what is meant here is not noticed in the same way as the change of the "I" through the acquisition of a memory, is solely due to the fact that the memory, as soon as it is formed, connects itself with the life of the soul that one has always felt to be one's own; the external effect of the deed, however, proceeds, detached from this life of the soul, in consequences that are still something other than what one retains of it in memory. Nevertheless, one should admit that, after an accomplished deed, there is something in the world on which its character is imprinted by the "I". If we really think through what we are considering here, we will come to the question: Could it not be that the consequences of an accomplished deed, on which its nature is imprinted by the "I", receive a tendency to rejoin the I, just as an impression preserved in memory revives when an external occasion arises? That which is preserved in memory awaits such an occasion. Could not that which is preserved in the outer world with the ego-character also wait to approach the human soul from the outside in the same way as the memory approaches this soul from within when the occasion arises? Here this matter is only put forward as a question: for, certainly, it could be that the occasion would never arise for the consequences of an act, which are tainted with the ego-character, to affect the human soul. But that they are present as such and that their presence determines the relationship of the world to the ego, that immediately appears as a possible idea, if one pursues what is present in thought. In the following considerations, we will examine whether there is something in human life that points to a reality from this "possible" idea.

[ 4 ] First, let us consider memory. How does it come about? Obviously in a completely different way than sensation or perception. Without the eye, I cannot have the sensation of "blue". But through the eye I do not yet have the memory of the "blue". If the eye is now to give me this sensation, a blue thing must confront it. Physicality would always allow all impressions to sink back into nothingness if, through the act of perception, the present conception were not formed, and at the same time something took place in the relationship between the outer world and the soul which has such a consequence in man that he can later, through processes within himself, again have a conception of that which formerly caused a conception from without. Anyone who has practiced mental observation will find that the expression is quite wrong which is based on the opinion that one has an idea today and tomorrow this idea reappears through the memory after it has been somewhere in the person in the meantime. No, the idea I have now is a phenomenon that passes with the "now". When memory occurs, a process takes place in me that is the consequence of something that has taken place in the relationship between the outside world and me apart from the evocation of the present idea. The idea evoked by the memory is a new one and not the retained old one. Memory consists in the fact that it is possible to imagine again, not that an idea can be revived. What reappears is something other than the imagination itself. (This remark is made here because in the field of spiritual science it is necessary to form more precise ideas about certain things than in ordinary life and even in ordinary science). - I remember, that is, I experience something that is no longer there. I connect a past experience with my present life. It is the same with every memory. Suppose I meet a person and recognize him because I met him yesterday. He would be a complete stranger to me if I couldn't connect the image I formed of him yesterday with my impression of him today. Today's image is given to me by my perception, i.e. my sensory organization. But who conjures up yesterday's image in my soul? It is the same being in me that was present in my experience yesterday and that is also present in today's experience. It was called the soul in the previous explanations. Without this faithful keeper of the past, every external impression would always be new for the human being. It is certain that the soul imprints the process by which something becomes memory on the body as if by a sign; but it is the soul that must make this imprint and then perceive its own imprint, just as it perceives something external. Thus it is the keeper of memory.

[ 5 ] As the keeper of the past, the soul continually collects treasures for the spirit. The fact that I can distinguish what is right from what is wrong depends on the fact that I, as a human being, am a thinking being who is able to grasp the truth in the spirit. The truth is eternal; and it could reveal itself to me again and again in things, even if I were to lose sight of the past again and again and every impression would be a new one for me. But the spirit in me is not limited to the impressions of the present alone; the soul expands its circle of vision over the past. And the more it is able to add to it from the past, the richer it makes it. Thus the soul passes on to the spirit what it has received from the body. - The human spirit thus carries two things within it at every moment of its life. Firstly, the eternal laws of truth and goodness and secondly, the memory of past experiences. What he does, he accomplishes under the influence of these two factors. If we want to understand a human spirit, we must therefore also know two things about it: firstly, how much of the eternal has been revealed to it, and secondly, how many treasures from the past lie within it.

[ 6 ] These treasures by no means remain unchanged in the spirit. The impressions that man gains from the experiences gradually fade from his memory. But not their fruits. One does not remember all the experiences one went through in childhood while acquiring the art of reading and writing. But you would not be able to read and write if you had not had these experiences and their fruits had not been preserved in the form of skills. And this is the transformation that the mind carries out with the treasures of memory. It leaves what can lead to images of individual experiences to its destiny and only draws from it the power to increase its abilities. Thus no experience passes by unused: the soul preserves it as a memory, and the spirit draws from it that which can enrich its abilities, its life content. The human spirit grows through the processed experiences. - So even if past experiences are not stored in the spirit as if in a collection chamber, their effects can be found in the abilities that the person has acquired.

[ 7 ] So far, the spirit and the soul have only been considered within the boundaries that lie between birth and death. One cannot stop there. Anyone who wanted to do this would be like someone who only wanted to consider the human body within the same boundaries. One can certainly find much within these boundaries. But one can never explain the human form from what lies between birth and death. It cannot be built up directly from mere physical substances and forces. It can only descend from a form similar to itself, which results from that which has reproduced itself. The physical substances and forces build up the body during life: the forces of reproduction allow another to emerge from it that can have its form, that is, one that can be the bearer of the same life body. - Every living body is a repetition of its ancestor. It is only because it is this that it does not appear in just any form, but in the one it has inherited. The forces that made my human form possible lay in my ancestors. But the spirit of man also appears in a certain form (whereby the word form is of course meant spiritually). And the forms of the spirit are the most diverse imaginable in individual people. No two people have the same spiritual form. One only has to observe just as calmly and objectively in this area as in the physical. One cannot say that the differences between people in spiritual terms are solely due to the differences in their environment, their upbringing and so on. No, that is not at all the case; for two people develop in quite different ways under the same influences of environment, education and so on. It must therefore be admitted that they have started out in life with quite different dispositions. - Here we are faced with an important fact that sheds light on the nature of man if we recognize its full significance. Those who want to focus their view only on the side of material events could, however, say that the individual differences of human personalities stem from the differences in the constitution of the material germs. (And taking into account the laws of heredity found by Gregor Mendel and further developed by others, such a view can say much that gives it the appearance of justification even before scientific judgment). But such a judge only shows that he has no insight into the real relationship between man and his experience. For proper observation shows that external circumstances affect different people in different ways through something that does not directly interact with material development. For the really precise investigator in this field, it becomes apparent that what comes from the material dispositions can be distinguished from what arises through the interaction of the human being with the experiences, but can only take shape through the soul itself entering into this interaction. The soul is clearly related to something within the external world that, by its very nature, cannot have any relation to material germinal dispositions.

[ 8 ] The physical form of human beings distinguishes them from their animal fellow creatures on earth. But within certain limits, they are equal to one another in terms of this form. There is only one human species. However great the differences of races, tribes, peoples and personalities may be, in physical terms the similarity between man and man is greater than that between man and any species of animal. Everything that is expressed in the human species is conditioned by heredity from ancestors to descendants. And the human form is bound to this inheritance. Just as the lion can only inherit its physical form through lion ancestors, so man can only inherit his physical form through human ancestors.

[ 9 ] Just as the physical similarity of human beings is clearly visible, so the difference of their spiritual forms is revealed to the unprejudiced spiritual gaze. - There is an obvious fact through which this is expressed. It consists in the existence of a person's biography. If man were merely a generic being, there could be no biography. A lion and a pigeon occupy the interest insofar as they belong to the lion and pigeon species. One has understood the individual in all essentials when one has described the species. It matters little here whether we are dealing with father, son or grandson. What interests them is what father, son and grandson have in common. What man means, however, only begins where he is not merely a species or genus, but where he is an individual being. I have by no means understood the nature of Mr. Schulze in Krähwinkel when I have described his son or his father. I must know his own biography. Anyone who thinks about the nature of biography will realize that in spiritual terms every human being is a species in itself. - Of course, anyone who understands biography merely as an external compilation of life events may claim that he can write a biography of a dog in the same sense as a biography of a human being. But whoever describes the real character of a person in a biography understands that he has something in it that corresponds to the description of an entire species in the animal kingdom. What matters is not that one can say something biographical about an animal - especially a clever one - which is really self-evident, but that the human biography does not correspond to this animal biography, but to the description of the animal species. There will always be people who want to refute what has been said here by saying that menagerie owners, for example, know how individual animals of the same species differ. However, anyone who judges in this way only shows that they are unable to distinguish between individual differences and differences that are only acquired through individuality.

[ 10 ] If the species or genus can only be understood in the physical sense if it is understood in its conditionality through heredity, then the spiritual essence can only be understood through a similar spiritual heredity. I have my physical human form because of my descent from human ancestors. Where did I get what is expressed in my biography? As a physical human being I repeat the form of my ancestors. What do I repeat as a spiritual human being? Whoever wants to claim that what is included in my biography needs no further explanation, that it must be accepted, should also claim that he has seen a mound of earth somewhere on which the lumps of material have gathered into a living human being all by themselves.

[ 11 ] As a physical human being, I am descended from other physical human beings, because I have the same form as the entire human species. The characteristics of the species could therefore be acquired within the species through inheritance. As a spiritual human being, I have my own form, just as I have my own biography. I can therefore have this form from no one else but myself. And since I did not enter the world with indeterminate, but with definite spiritual dispositions, since my path through life, as expressed in my biography, is determined by these dispositions, my work on myself cannot have begun at birth. I must have existed as a spiritual human being before my birth. I was certainly not present in my ancestors, because they are different from me as spiritual people. My biography cannot be explained from theirs. Rather, as a spiritual being, I must be the repetition of one from whose biography mine can be explained. The other initially conceivable case would be that I owe the shaping of what is the content of my biography only to a spiritual life before birth (or conception). However, this idea would only be justified if one wanted to assume that what affects the human soul from the physical environment is the same as what the soul has from a purely spiritual world. Such an assumption contradicts truly accurate observation. For what is determining for the human soul from this physical environment is such that it has the same effect as something experienced later in physical life on something experienced earlier in the same way. In order to observe these relationships correctly, one must acquire an eye for how there are effective impressions in human life that act on the soul's dispositions in the same way as standing before a deed to be performed in relation to what one has already practiced in physical life; only that such impressions do not impinge on what has already been practiced in this immediate life, but on soul dispositions that can be impressed in the same way as the abilities acquired through practice. He who sees through these things comes to the idea of earth lives which must have preceded the present one. In his thinking he cannot stop at purely spiritual experiences before this life on earth. - The physical form that Schiller carried with him was inherited from his ancestors. But just as little as this physical form can have grown out of the earth, so little can it be Schiller's spiritual being. He must be the repetition of another spiritual entity, from whose biography his own can be explained, just as Schiller's physical human form can be explained by human reproduction. - So just as the physical human form is again and again a repetition, a re-embodiment of the human species entity, so the spiritual man must be a re-embodiment of the same spiritual man. For as a spiritual human being, each one is a separate species.

[ 12 ] One can object to what has been said here: these are mere statements of thought; and one can demand external proofs, as one is accustomed to from ordinary natural science. On the other hand, it must be said that the re-embodiment of the spiritual man is a process which does not belong to the field of external physical facts, but one which takes place entirely in the spiritual field. And no other of our ordinary spiritual powers has access to this field than thinking alone. Whoever does not want to trust the power of thinking cannot enlighten himself about higher spiritual facts. - For those whose spiritual eye is open, the above trains of thought work with exactly the same power as a process that takes place before their physical eye. Whoever grants a so-called "proof", which is constructed according to the method of ordinary scientific knowledge, more persuasive power than the above explanations about the meaning of biography, may be a great scientist in the ordinary sense of the word: but he is very far removed from the paths of genuine spiritual research.

[ 13 ] It is one of the most alarming prejudices to try to explain a person's mental qualities by inheritance from father or mother or other ancestors. Anyone who is guilty of the prejudice that Goethe, for example, inherited what makes up his nature from his father and mother, can hardly be helped with reasons at first, because there is a deep antipathy to unprejudiced observation. A materialistic suggestion prevents him from seeing the connections between phenomena in the right light.

[ 14 ] In such explanations, the prerequisites are given for pursuing the human being beyond birth and death. Within the boundaries determined by birth and death, the human being belongs to the three worlds of corporeality, the soul and the spirit. The soul forms the middle link between body and spirit by permeating the third member of the body, the soul body, with sentience and by permeating the first member of the spirit, the spirit self, as the consciousness soul. It thus shares in the body as well as in the spirit during life. This share is expressed in its entire existence. It will depend on the organization of the soul body how the sentient soul can develop its abilities. And on the other hand, it will depend on the life of the consciousness soul how far the spirit self can develop within it. The more well-formed the soul body is, the better will the sentient soul communicate with the outside world. And the more the consciousness soul nourishes it, the richer and more powerful the spirit self will become. It has been shown that during life this nourishment is supplied to the spirit self through the processed experiences and the fruits of these experiences. For the interaction between soul and spirit described above can of course only take place where soul and spirit are in each other, permeated by each other, i.e. within the connection of "spirit self with consciousness soul".

[ 15 ] First, let us consider the interaction between the soul body and the consciousness soul. The soul body is, as it turns out, the finest manifestation of the physical body, but it belongs to it and is dependent on it. Physical body, etheric body and soul body make up a whole in certain respects. Therefore, the soul body is also included in the laws of physical inheritance, through which the body receives its form. And since it is the most mobile, as it were the most fleeting form of corporeality, it must also show the most mobile and fleeting manifestations of heredity. Therefore, while the physical body is the least different only according to races, peoples and tribes, and the etheric body shows a greater deviation for individual people, but still a predominant similarity, this difference is already very great in the soul body. It expresses what is already perceived as an external, personal characteristic of the human being. It is therefore also the bearer of what is inherited from this personal characteristic from parents, grandparents and so on to the descendants. - It is true that the soul as such, as has been explained, leads a completely independent life; it is self-contained with its inclinations and aversions, with its feelings and passions. But it is nevertheless active as a whole, and therefore this whole is also expressed in the intuitive soul. And because the sentient soul permeates the soul body, fills it as it were, it forms itself according to the nature of the soul, and as a carrier of heredity it can then transmit the inclinations, passions and so on from the ancestors to the descendants. This is the basis of what Goethe says: "From my father I have the stature to lead life seriously; from my mother the cheerful nature and the desire to fabulate." Of course, he did not get genius from either. In this way we can see what a person passes on, as it were, from his spiritual qualities to the line of physical inheritance. The substances and forces of the physical body are of the same kind in the whole environment of external physical nature. They are continually absorbed from there and given back to it. Within a few years the mass of matter that makes up our physical body is completely renewed. The fact that this mass of matter takes on the form of the human body and that it is constantly renewed within this body depends on the fact that it is held together by the etheric body. And its form is not determined solely by the processes between birth - or conception - and death, but is dependent on the laws of heredity, which extend beyond birth and death. The fact that spiritual qualities can also be transmitted by way of inheritance, i.e. that the progress of physical inheritance has a spiritual impact, is due to the fact that the soul body can be influenced by the sentient soul.

[ 16 ] So how does the interaction between soul and spirit work? During life, the spirit is connected to the soul in the manner described above. It receives from it the gift of living in what is true and good and thereby expressing the spirit itself in its own life, in its inclinations, drives and passions. The spirit self brings the eternal laws of truth and goodness to the "I" from the world of the spirit. These are linked through the consciousness soul with the experiences of the soul's own life. These experiences themselves pass. But their fruits remain. The fact that the spirit self was connected with them makes a lasting impression on it. When the human spirit approaches such an experience, which is similar to another with which it has already been connected, it sees something familiar in it and knows how to behave differently towards it than if it were facing it for the first time. All learning is based on this. And the fruits of learning are acquired abilities. - In this way, the fruits of temporary life are imprinted on the eternal spirit. - And do we not perceive these fruits? What is the basis of the dispositions that have been described above as characteristic of the spiritual man? But only in abilities for this or that, which man brings with him when he begins his earthly path of life. To a certain extent, these abilities are quite similar to those that we can also acquire during our lives. Take the genius of a person. It is known of Mozart that as a boy he was able to write down from memory a long musical work of art that he had once heard. He was only able to do this because he could see the whole thing at once. Within certain limits, a person also expands his ability to comprehend, to penetrate contexts during his lifetime, so that he then possesses new abilities. Lessing said of himself that he had acquired something approaching genius through his critical powers of observation. If one does not want to marvel at such abilities, which are founded in dispositions, as miracles, then one must regard them as the fruits of experiences that the spirit self has had through a soul. They have been imprinted on this spirit self. And since they were not implanted in this life, they were implanted in a previous one. The human spirit is its own species. And just as the human being as a physical species inherits its characteristics within the species, so the spirit inherits them within its species, that is, within itself. In one life, the human spirit appears as a repetition of itself with the fruits of its previous experiences in previous lives. This life is thus the repetition of others and brings with it what the spirit self has acquired in the previous life. When it takes into itself something that can become fruit, it interpenetrates with the spirit of life. Just as the body of life repeats the form from species to species, so the spirit of life repeats the soul from personal existence to personal existence.

[ 17 ] Through the preceding considerations, the idea is elevated into the realm of validity, which seeks the reason for certain life processes of man in repeated earthly lives. This idea can probably only receive its full meaning through an observation that arises from spiritual insights, such as those acquired by following the path of knowledge described at the end of this book. It should only be shown here that an ordinary observation, properly oriented by thinking, already leads to this idea. However, such an observation will initially leave the conception in silhouette, so to speak. And it will not be able to protect it completely from the objections of an observation that is not precise and not properly guided by thinking. But on the other hand, it is true that whoever acquires such a conception through ordinary thinking observation prepares himself for supersensible observation. In a sense, he forms something that one must have before this supersensible observation, just as one must have the eye before sensory observation. Anyone who objects that by forming such an idea one can suggest to oneself the supersensible observation only proves that he is not able to enter into reality in free thinking and that he thereby suggests his own objections.

[ 18 ] Thus the experiences of the soul are permanently preserved not only within the boundaries of birth and death, but also beyond death. However, the soul not only imprints its experiences on the spirit that lights up within it, but as (page 62) has been shown, also on the outer world through action. What man did yesterday is still present in its effect today. A picture of the connection between cause and effect in this direction is given by the parable of sleep and death. - Sleep has often been called the younger brother of death. I get up in the morning. My continuous activity was interrupted by the night. Now, under normal circumstances, it is not possible for me to resume my activity in the morning in any way. I have to pick up where I left off yesterday if there is to be order and coherence in my life. My actions of yesterday are the preconditions for those that are incumbent upon me today. With what I accomplished yesterday, I have created my destiny for today. I have separated myself from my activity for a while; but this activity belongs to me and it draws me back to it after I have withdrawn from it for a while. My past remains connected to me; it lives on in my present and will follow me into my future. I would not have to wake up this morning, but be created anew, out of nothing, if the effects of my actions yesterday were not to be my fate today. It would be pointless if I did not move into a house that I had built for myself under regular circumstances.

[ 19 ] Just as man is not created anew in the morning, neither is the human spirit when it begins its earthly journey through life. Try to understand what happens when you enter this path of life. A physical body appears, which receives its form through the laws of heredity. This body becomes the carrier of a spirit that repeats a previous life in a new form. Between the two is the soul, which leads a self-contained life of its own. Its inclinations and aversions, its wishes and desires serve it; it places thinking at its service. As a sentient soul, it receives the impressions of the outside world; and it carries them to the spirit so that it may draw the fruits from them for the long term. It has, as it were, a mediating role, and its task is fulfilled when it fulfills this role. The body forms the impressions for it; it transforms them into sensations, preserves them in the memory as ideas and passes them on to the spirit so that it may carry them through the duration. The soul is actually that through which man belongs to his earthly life. Through his body he belongs to the physical human species. Through it he is a member of this species. With his spirit he lives in a higher world. The soul temporarily binds both worlds together.

[ 20 ] But the physical world that the human spirit enters is not a foreign scene to it. The traces of his deeds are imprinted in it. Something of this scene belongs to him. It bears the imprint of his nature. It is related to him. Just as the soul once transmitted the impressions of the outside world to him so that they would become permanent, so it, as his organ, has transformed the abilities bestowed on it by him into deeds that are also permanent in their effects. Thus the soul has actually flowed into these deeds. In the effects of his deeds, the human soul continues to live a second independent life. This, however, can give cause to look at life in terms of how the processes of destiny enter into this life. Something "happens" to the human being. At first, he is probably inclined to regard such an "incident" as something that enters his life "by chance". But he can realize how he himself is the result of such "coincidences". Anyone who looks at himself in his fortieth year of life and does not want to stop at an insubstantial, abstract conception of the self with the question of his soul being may say to himself: I am nothing other than what I have become through what has "happened" to me by fate up to the present day. Wouldn't I be different if, for example, I had had a certain series of experiences at the age of twenty instead of the ones that happened to me? He will then look for his "I" not only in his developmental impulses coming from "within", but also in what intervenes in his life "from outside". In what "happens to him", he will recognize his own ego. If one gives oneself to such a realization without bias, then only a further step of truly intimate observation of life is necessary in order to see in what flows to one through certain experiences of fate something that grips the ego from the outside in the same way that memory works from within to make a past experience light up again. One can thus make oneself capable of perceiving in the experience of destiny how an earlier act of the soul takes the path to the ego, just as in memory an earlier experience takes the path to the imagination when there is an external cause for it. It was previously spoken of as a "possible" idea that the consequences of the deed can affect the human soul again (see page 64 ff.). Within the individual life on earth such a meeting is excluded for certain consequences of the deed because this life on earth was predisposed to accomplish the deed. The experience lies in the accomplishment. A certain consequence of the deed can affect the soul as little as one can remember an experience in which one still stands. In this respect it can only be a matter of experiencing the consequences of the deed, which do not affect the "I" with the dispositions it has in the earthly life out of which it performs the deed. The gaze can only be directed towards the consequences of deeds from other earth lives. Thus one can - as soon as one feels that what apparently "happens" to one as an experience of destiny is connected with the ego, like that which is formed "from within" this ego itself - only think that in such an experience of destiny one is dealing with the consequences of deeds from earlier earth lives. You see, one is led to the assumption, paradoxical for the ordinary consciousness, that the fateful experiences of an earthly life are connected with the deeds of previous earthly lives, by an intimate perception of life guided by thinking. Again, this conception can only attain its full content through supersensible knowledge: without this it remains silhouetted. But again, gained from ordinary consciousness, it prepares the soul so that it can see its truth in truly supersensible observation.

[ 21 ] Only one part of my deed is in the outside world; the other is in myself. A simple comparison from the natural sciences makes this relationship between self and action clear. Animals that once migrated into the caves of Kentucky as sighted people have lost their eyesight through living in them. The stay in the darkness has put the eyes out of action. As a result, the physical and chemical activity that takes place during vision is no longer carried out in these eyes. The stream of food that was previously used for this activity now flows to other organs. Now these animals can only live in these caves. Through their actions, through immigration, they have created the conditions for their later life. Immigration has become part of their destiny. An entity that was once active has become linked to the results of its actions. So it is with the human spirit. The soul has only been able to impart certain abilities to it by being active. And these abilities correspond to the deeds. Through a deed which the soul has performed, the power-filled disposition to perform another deed lives in it, which is the fruit of this deed - the soul carries this within itself as a necessity until the latter deed has happened. One can also say that through a deed the necessity to perform the consequence of this deed is imprinted in the soul.

[ 22 ] With its deeds, the human spirit has truly prepared its destiny. He finds himself bound to what he did in his previous life in a new one. - The question can be raised: how can this be, since the human spirit is transferred to a completely different world in its re-embodiment than the one it once left? This question is based on an idea of the chaining of destinies that clings to the externals of life. When I move my scene from Europe to America, I also find myself in a completely new environment. And yet my life in America depends entirely on my previous life in Europe. If I became a mechanic in Europe, my life in America will be very different from what it would have been if I had become a bank clerk. In the one case I will probably be surrounded by machines in America, in the other by banking facilities. In each case my previous life determines my surroundings; it draws to itself, as it were, from the whole environment those things that are related to it. So it is with the spirit self. In a new life it necessarily surrounds itself with that with which it is related from previous lives. - And that is why sleep is a useful image for death, because during sleep man is withdrawn from the scene where his fate awaits him. While one sleeps, the events on this scene continue. For a time, we have no influence on this course. Nevertheless, our life on a new day depends on the effects of our actions on the previous day. Our personality really embodies itself anew every morning in our world of deeds. What was separated from us during the night is, as it were, placed around us during the day. - So it is with the deeds of man's earlier embodiments. They are connected with him as his fate, just as life in the dark caves remains connected with the animals that have lost their sight by migrating into these caves. Just as these animals can only live if they are in the environment in which they have placed themselves, so the human spirit can only live in the environment that it has created for itself through its actions. The immediate course of events ensures that I find myself in the morning in the situation I created the day before. The relationship between my re-embodied spirit and the things of the environment ensures that when I re-embody I find an environment that corresponds to the result of my deeds from the previous life. You can then form an idea of how the soul is incorporated into the essence of the human being. The physical body is subject to the laws of heredity. The human spirit, on the other hand, must embody itself again and again; and its law is that it takes over the fruits of previous lives into the following ones. The soul lives in the present. But this life in the present is not independent of the previous lives. The incarnating spirit brings its destiny with it from its previous embodiments. And this destiny determines its life. Which impressions the soul will be able to have, which desires it will be able to satisfy, which joys and sufferings it will experience, with which people it will come together: that depends on how the deeds in the previous embodiments of the spirit were. People with whom the soul was connected in one life, it will have to find again in a following one, because the deeds that have been between them must have their consequences. Like the one soul, those connected to it will also strive for re-embodiment at the same time. The life of the soul is thus a result of the self-created destiny of the human spirit. Three things determine the course of a person's life within birth and death. And threefold, it is therefore dependent on factors that lie beyond birth and death. The body is subject to the law of heredity; the soul is subject to self-created destiny. This destiny created by man is called, with an old expression, his karma. And the spirit is subject to the law of re-embodiment, of repeated earthly lives. - The relationship between spirit, soul and body can therefore also be expressed as follows: the spirit is immortal; birth and death take place in the body according to the laws of the physical world; the life of the soul, which is subject to fate, mediates the connection between the two during an earthly life course. All further insights into the nature of man presuppose an acquaintance with the "three worlds" themselves, to which he belongs. The following will deal with these.

[ 23 ] A way of thinking that confronts the phenomena of life and does not shy away from pursuing the thoughts arising from a lively observation to their ultimate conclusions can arrive at the mental image of repeated earthly lives and the law of destiny through pure logic. Just as it is true that the seer with the “spiritual eye” open can experience past lives as if they were an open book, so it is true that the truth of all this can dawn on the contemplative mind. ^{1See Remarks and Additions to Page 61 ff.}