Occult Science
GA 13
Preface, Sixteenth to Twentieth Edition
[ 2 ] Originally, it was my plan to add its essential content as final chapters to my book Theosophy, which had been published previously. This proved to be impossible. At the time of the publication of Theosophy the subject matter of Occult Science did not yet live in me in its final form as was the case with Theosophy. In my imaginative perceptions the spiritual nature of individual man stood before my soul and I was able to describe it; the cosmic relationships, however, which had to be presented in Occult Science did not yet live in my consciousness in the same way. I perceived details, but not the complete picture.
[ 3 ] I, therefore, decided to publish Theosophy with the content I had seen as the nature of the life of individual man, and then to carry through Occult Science in the near future, without undue haste.
[ 4 ] The contents of this book had, in accordance with my soul mood at that time, to be given in thoughts that are further elaborations of the thoughts employed in natural science, suited for the presentation of the spiritual. In the preface to the first edition, reprinted in this book, it will be noted how strongly responsible I felt toward natural science in all that I wrote at that time about the science of the spirit.
[ 5 ] What reveals itself to spiritual perception as the world of spirit cannot, however, be presented in such thoughts alone. For this revelation does not fit into a mere thought content. He who has experienced the nature of such revelation knows that the thoughts of ordinary consciousness are only suited to express what is perceived by the senses, not what is seen by the spirit.
[ 6 ] The content of what is spiritually perceived can only be reproduced in pictures (imaginations) through which inspirations speak, which have their origin in spiritual entity intuitively perceived.1All that it is necessary to know concerning the nature of imagination, inspiration, and intuition is to be found in this book, Occult Science, in my book, Knowledge of the Higher Worlds and its Attainment, also in The Stages of Higher Knowledge.
[ 7 ] But he who describes imaginations from the world of spirit cannot at present merely present these imaginations. For in doing so he would be presenting something that would stand as quite a different content of consciousness alongside the content of knowledge of our age, without any relationship whatsoever to it. He has to fill modern consciousness with what can be recognized by another consciousness that perceives the world of spirit. His presentation will then have this world of spirit as content, but this content will appear in the form of thoughts into which it flows. Through this it will be completely comprehensible to ordinary consciousness, which thinks in terms of the present day but does not yet behold the world of spirit.
[ 8 ] This comprehensibility will only then be lacking if we ourselves raise barriers against it, that is, if we labor under the prejudices that the age has produced regarding “the limits of knowledge” through an incorrectly conceived view of nature.
[ 9 ] In spiritual cognition everything is immersed in intimate soul experience, not only spiritual perception itself, but also the understanding with which the unseeing, ordinary consciousness meets the results of clairvoyant perception.
[ 10 ] Those who maintain that anyone who believes he understands is merely suggesting the understanding to himself have not the slightest inkling of this intimacy.
[ 11 ] But it is a fact that what expresses itself merely in concepts of truth and error within the scope of comprehension of the physical world becomes experience in regard to the spiritual world.
[ 12 ] Whoever permits his judgment to be influenced—be it ever so slightly—by the assertion that the spiritually perceived is incomprehensible to the everyday, still unperceiving consciousness—because of its limitations—will find his comprehension obscured by this judgment as though by a dark cloud, and he really cannot understand.
[ 13 ] What is spiritually perceived is fully comprehensible to the unprejudiced, unperceiving consciousness if the seer gives his perceptions thought form. It is just as comprehensible as the finished picture of the painter is to the man who does not paint. Moreover, the comprehension of the spirit world is not of the nature of artistic feeling employed in the comprehension of a work of art, but it bears the stamp of thought employed in natural science.
[ 14 ] In order, however, to make such a comprehension really possible, the one who presents what he perceives spiritually must bring his perceptions up to a point where he can pour them into thought form without loss of their imaginative character within this form.
[ 15 ] All this stood before my soul as I developed my Occult Science.
[ 16 ] In 1909 I felt that, under these premises, I might be able to produce a book which, in the first place, offered the content of my spiritual vision brought, to a sufficient degree, into thought form, and which, in the second place, could be understood by every thinking human being who allows no obstructions to interfere with his understanding.
[ 17 ] I say this today, stating at the same time that in 1909 the publication of this book appeared to be a risk. For I knew indeed that professional scientists are unable to call up in themselves the necessary impartiality, nor are the numerous personalities able to do so who are dependent on them for their judgment.
[ 18 ] But, before my soul there stood the very fact that at the time when the consciousness of mankind was furthest removed from the world of spirit, the communications from that world would answer a most urgent necessity.
[ 19 ] I counted upon the fact that there are human beings who feel, more or less desperately, the remoteness from all spirituality as a grave obstacle to life that causes them to seize upon the communications of the spiritual world with inner longing.
[ 20 ] During the subsequent years this has been completely confirmed. Theosophy and Occult Science, books that presume the goodwill of the reader in coping with a difficult style of writing, have been widely read.
[ 21 ] I have quite consciously endeavored not to offer a “popular” exposition, but an exposition that makes it necessary for the reader to study the content with strict effort of thought. The character I impressed upon my books is such that their very study is the beginning of spiritual training. For the calm, conscious effort of thought that this reading makes necessary strengthens the forces of the soul and through this makes them capable of approaching the spirit world.
[ 22 ] The fact that I have entitled this book Occult Science has immediately called forth misunderstandings. From many sides was heard, “What claims to be science must not be secret, occult.” How little thought was exercised in making such an objection! As though someone who reveals a subject matter would want to be secretive about it. This entire book shows that it was not the intention to designate anything “occult,” but to bring everything into a form that renders it as understandable as any science. Or do we not wish to say when we employ the term “natural science” that we are dealing with the knowledge of “nature”? Occult science is the science of what occurs occultly insofar as it is not perceived in external nature, but in that region toward which the soul turns when it directs its inner being toward the spirit.
[ 23 ] Occult Science is the antithesis of Natural Science.
[ 24 ] Objections have repeatedly been made to my perceptions of the spiritual world by maintaining that they are transformed reproductions of what, in the course of the ages, has appeared in human thought about the spirit world. It is said that I had read this or that, absorbed what I read into the unconscious, and then presented it in the belief that it originated in my own perception. I am said to have gained my expositions from the teachings of the Gnostics, from the poetic records of ancient oriental wisdom, and so on.
[ 25 ] These objections are superficial.
[ 26 ] My knowledge of things of the spirit is a direct result of my own perception, and I am fully conscious of this fact. In all details and in the larger surveys I had always examined myself carefully as to whether every step I took in the progress of my perception was accompanied by a fully awake consciousness. Just as the mathematician advances from thought to thought without the unconscious or autosuggestion playing a role, so—I told myself—spiritual perception must advance from objective imagination to objective imagination without anything living in the soul but the spiritual content of clear, discerning consciousness.
[ 27 ] The knowledge that an imagination is not a mere subjective picture, but a representation in picture form of an objective spiritual content is attained by means of healthy inner experience. This is achieved in a psycho-spiritual way, just as in the realm of sense-perception one is able with a healthy organism to distinguish properly between mere imaginings and objective perceptions. [ 28 ] Thus the results of my perception stood before me. They were, at the outset, “perceptions” without names. [ 29 ] Were I to communicate them, I needed verbal designations. I then sought later for such designations in older descriptions of the spiritual in order to be able to express in words what was still wordless. I employed these verbal designations freely, so that in my use of them scarcely one coincides with its ancient meaning.
[ 30 ] I sought, however, for such a possibility of expression in every case only after the content had arisen in my own perception.
[ 31 ] I knew how to exclude what had been previously read from my own perceptive research by means of the state of consciousness that I have just described.
[ 32 ] Now it was claimed that in my expressions reminiscences of ancient ideas were to be found. Without considering the content, attention was fixed on the expressions. If I spoke of “lotus flowers” in the astral body of man, that was a proof, to the critic, that I was repeating the teachings of ancient India in which the expression is to be found. Indeed, if I spoke of “astral body,” this was the result of my reading the literature of the Middle Ages. If I employed the expressions “Angeloi,” “Archangeloi,” and so forth, I was simply renewing the ideas of Christian Gnosis.
[ 33 ] I found such entirely superficial thinking constantly opposing me.
[ 34 ] I wanted to point to this fact, too, now that a new edition of Occult Science is to be published, for the book contains the outline of Anthroposophy as a whole. It will, therefore, be chiefly beset by the misunderstandings to which Anthroposophy is exposed. [ 35 ] Since the time when the imaginations that this book presents merged into a complete picture in my soul, I have advanced uninterruptedly in my ability to investigate, by means of soul and spirit perception, the historical evolution of mankind, the cosmos, and so forth. In the details I have continuously arrived at new results. But what I offered as an outline in Occult Science fifteen years ago remains for me basically undisturbed. Everything I have been able to say since then, if inserted in this book in the proper place, appears as an amplification of the outline given at that time.
Rudolf Steiner
January 10, 1925, Goetheanum
Dornach, Switzerland
Vorrede zur 16. – 20. Auflage
[ 1 ] Jetzt, nachdem fünfzehn Jahre seit dem ersten Erscheinen dieses Buches verflossen sind, darf ich wohl vor der Öffentlichkeit einiges sagen über die Seelenverfassung, aus der heraus es entstanden ist.
[ 2 ] Ursprünglich war mein Plan, seinen wesentlichen Inhalt als letzte Kapitel meinem lange vorher erschienenen Buche «Theosophie» anzufügen. Das ging nicht. Dieser Inhalt rundete sich damals, als die «Theosophie» ausgeführt wurde, nicht in der Art in mir ab wie derjenige der «Theosophie». Ich hatte in meinen Imaginationen das geistige Wesen des Einzelmenschen vor meiner Seele stehen und konnte es darstellen, nicht aber standen damals schon die kosmischen Zusammenhänge, die in der «Ge- heimwissenschaft» darzulegen waren, ebenso vor mir. Sie waren im einzelnen da; nicht aber im Gesamtbild.
[ 3 ] Deshalb entschloss ich mich, die «Theosophie» mit dem Inhalte erscheinen zu lassen, den ich als das Wesen des Lebens eines einzelnen Menschen erschaut hatte, und die «Geheimwissenschaft» in der nächsten Zeit in aller Ruhe durchzuführen.
[ 4 ] Der Inhalt dieses Buches musste nach meiner damaligen Seelenstimmung in Gedanken gegeben werden, die für die Darstellung des Geistigen geeignete weitere Fortbildungen der in der Naturwissenschaft angewendeten Gedanken sind. Man wird es den hier wieder abgedruckten «Vorbemerkungen zur ersten Auflage» anmerken, wie stark ich mich mit allem, was ich damals über Geisteserkenntnis schrieb, vor der Naturwissenschaft verantwortlich fühlte.
[ 5 ] Aber man kann nicht in solchen Gedanken allein das zur Darstellung bringen, was sich dem geistigen Schauen als Geist-Welt offenbart. Denn diese Offenbarung geht in einen bloßen Gedankeninhalt nicht ein. Wer das Wesen solcher Offenbarung erlebend kennengelernt hat, der weiß, dass die Gedanken des gewöhnlichen Bewusstseins nur geeignet sind, das sinnlich Wahrgenommene, nicht aber das geistig Geschaute, auszudrücken.
[ 6 ] Der Inhalt des geistig Geschauten lässt sich nur in Bildern (Imaginationen) wiedergeben, durch die Inspirationen sprechen, die von intuitiv erlebter geistiger Wesenheit herrühren. (Über das Wesen von Imagination, Inspiration und Intuition findet man das Notwendige in dieser «Geheimwissenschaft» selbst und in meinem Buche «Wie erlangt man Erkenntnisse der höheren Welten?».)
[ 7 ] Aber der Darsteller der Imaginationen aus der Geist-Welt kann gegenwärtig nicht bloß diese Imaginationen hinstellen. Er stellte damit etwas dar, das als ein ganz anderer Bewusstseinsinhalt neben dem Erkenntnisinhalt unseres Zeitalters, ohne allen Zusammenhang mit diesem, stünde. Er muss das gegenwärtige Bewusstsein mit dem erfüllen, was ein anderes Bewusstsein, das in die Geist-Welt schaut, erkennen kann. Dann wird seine Darstellung diese Geist-Welt zum Inhalte haben; aber dieser Inhalt tritt in der Form von Gedanken auf, in die er hineinfließt. Dadurch wird er dem gewöhnlichen Bewusstsein, das im Sinne der Gegenwart denkt, aber noch nicht in die Geist-Welt hineinschaut, voll verständlich.
[ 8 ] Diese Verständlichkeit bleibt nur dann aus, wenn man sich selbst Hindernisse vor sie legt. Wenn man die Vorurteile, die die Zeit aus einer falsch aufgefassten Naturanschauung von «Grenzen des Erkennens» sich gebildet hat, zu den eigenen macht.
[ 9 ] Im Geist-Erkennen ist alles in intimes Seelen-Erleben getaucht. Nicht nur das geistige Anschauen selbst, sondern auch das Verstehen, das das nicht-schauende gewöhnliche Bewusstsein den Ergebnissen des Schauenden entgegenbringt.
[ 10 ] Von dieser Intimität hat keine Ahnung, wer in dilettantischer Art davon spricht, dass der, der zu verstehen glaubt, sich das Verständnis selbst suggeriert.
[ 11] Aber es ist so, dass, was innerhalb des Begreifens der physischen Welt bloß in Begriffen als Wahrheit oder Irrtum sich auslebt, der geistigen Welt gegenüber Erlebnis wird.
[ 12 ] Wer in sein Urteil nur leise empfindend die Behauptung einfließen lässt, das geistig Geschaute sei von dem gewöhnlichen, noch nicht schauenden Bewusstsein — wegen dessen Grenzen — nicht erfassbar, dem legt sich dieses empfindende Urteil wie eine verfinsternde Wolke vor das Erfassen; und er kann wirklich nicht verstehen.
[ 13 ] Aber dem unbefangenen nicht-schauenden Bewusstsein ist das Geschaute voll verständlich, wenn es der Schauende bis in die Gedankenform hineinbringt. Es ist verständlich, wie dem Nicht-Maler das fertige Bild des Malers verständlich ist. Und zwar ist das Verständnis der Geist-Welt nicht das künstlerisch-gefühlsmäßige wie bei einem Kunstwerk, sondern ein durchaus gedankenmäßiges wie der Naturerkenntnis gegenüber.
[ 14 ] Um aber ein solches Verständnis wirklich möglich zu machen, muss der Darsteller des geistig Geschauten seine Schauungen bis zu einem richtigen Hineingießen in Gedankenform bringen, ohne dass sie innerhalb dieser Form ihren imaginativen Charakter verlieren.
[ 15 ] Das stand alles vor meiner Seele, als ich mein «Geheimwissenschaft» ausarbeitete.
[ 16 ] 1909 fühlte ich dann, dass ich mit diesen Voraussetzungen ein Buch zustandebringen könne, das: erstens den Inhalt meiner Geistesschau bis zu einem gewissen, aber zunächst genügenden Grade, in die Gedankenform gegossen, brachte; und das zweitens von jedem denkenden Menschen, der sich keine Hindernisse vor das Verständnis legt, verstanden werden kann.
[ 17 ] Ich sage das heute, indem ich zugleich ausspreche, dass damals — 1909 — mir die Veröffentlichung des Buches als ein Wagnis erschien. Denn ich wusste ja, dass die geforderte Unbefangenheit gerade diejenigen nicht aufbringen können, die Naturwissenschaft beruflich treiben, und ebensowenig alle die zahlreichen Persönlichkeiten, die in ihrem Urteile von diesen abhängig sind.
[ 18 ] Aber es stand gerade die Tatsache vor meiner Seele, dass in der Zeit, in der sich das Bewusstsein der Menschheit von der Geist-Welt am weitesten entfernt hatte, die Mitteilungen aus dieser Geist-Welt einer allerdringendsten Notwendigkeit entsprechen.
[ 19 ] Ich zählte darauf, dass es auch Menschen gibt, die mehr oder weniger die Entfernung von aller Geistigkeit so schwer als Lebenshindernis empfinden, dass sie zu Mitteilungen aus der Geist-Welt mit innerer Sehnsucht greifen.
[ 20 ] Und die folgenden Jahre haben das ja voll bestätigt. Die «Theosophie» und «Geheimwissenschaft» haben als Bücher, die im Leser guten Willen voraussetzen, auf eine schwierige Stilisierung einzugehen, weite Verbreitung gefunden.
[ 21 ] Ich habe ganz bewusst angestrebt, nicht eine «populäre» Darstellung zu geben, sondern eine solche, die notwendig macht, mit rechter Gedankenanstrengung in den Inhalt hineinzukommen. Ich habe damit meinen Büchern einen solchen Charakter aufgeprägt, dass deren Lesen selbst schon der Anfang der Geistesschulung ist. Denn die ruhige, besonnene Gedankenanstrengung, die dieses Lesen notwendig macht, verstärkt die Seelenkräfte und macht sie dadurch fähig, der geistigen Welt nahe zu kommen.
[ 22 ] Daß ich dem Buche den Titel Geheimwissenschaft» gegeben habe, hat sogleich Missverständnisse hervorgerufen. Von mancher Seite wurde gesagt, was «Wissenschaft» sein will, darf nicht «geheim» sein. Wie wenig bedacht war ein solcher Einwand. Als ob jemand, der einen Inhalt veröffentlicht, mit diesem «geheim» tun wolle. Das ganze Buch zeigt, dass nichts als «geheim» bezeichnet, sondern eben in eine solche Form gebracht werden sollte, dass es verständlich sei wie nur irgendeine «Wissenschaft». Oder will man, wenn man das Wort «Naturwissenschaft» gebraucht, nicht andeuten, dass es sich um Wissen von der «Natur» handelt? Geheimwissenschaft ist Wissenschaft von dem, was sich insoferne im «Geheimen» abspielt, als es nicht draußen in der Natur wahrgenommen wird, sondern da, wohin die Seele sich orientiert, wenn sie ihr Inneres nach dem Geiste richtet.
[ 23 ] «Geheimwissenschaft» ist Gegensatz von «Naturwissenschaft».
[ 24 ] Meinen Schauungen in der geistigen Welt hat man immer wieder entgegengehalten, sie seien veränderte Wiedergaben dessen, was im Laufe älterer Zeit an Vorstellungen der Menschen über die Geist-Welt hervorgetreten ist. Man sagte, ich hätte mancherlei gelesen, es ins Unterbewusste aufgenommen und dann in dem Glauben, es entspringe aus dem eigenen Schauen, zur Darstellung gebracht. Aus gnostischen Lehren, aus orientalischen Weisheitsdichtungen und so weiter soll ich meine Darstellungen gewonnen haben.
[ 25 ] Man ist, indem man dieses behauptet hat, mit den Gedanken ganz an der Oberfläche geblieben.
[ 26 ] Meine Erkenntnisse des Geistigen, dessen bin ich mir voll bewusst, sind Ergebnisse eigenen Schauens. Ich hatte jederzeit bei allen Einzelheiten und bei den großen Übersichten mich streng geprüft, ob ich jeden Schritt im schauenden Weiterschreiten so mache, dass vollbesonnenes Bewusstsein diese Schritte begleite. Wie der Mathematiker von Gedanke zu Gedanke schreitet, ohne dass Unbewusstes, Autosuggestion und so weiter eine Rolle spielen, so — sagte ich mir — muss geistiges Schauen von objektiver Imagination zu objektiver Imagination schreiten, ohne dass etwas anderes in der Seele lebt als der geistige Inhalt klar besonnenen Bewusstseins.
[ 27 ] Daß man von einer Imagination weiß, sie ist nicht bloß subjektives Bild, sondern Bild-Wiedergabe objektiven Geist-Inhaltes, dazu bringt man es durch gesundes inneres Erleben. Man gelangt dazu auf geistig-seelische Art, wie man im Bereich der Sinnesanschauung bei gesunder Organisation Einbildungen von objektiven Wahrnehmungen richtig unterscheidet.
[ 28 ] So hatte ich die Ergebnisse meines Schauens vor mir. Sie waren zunächst «Anschauungen», die ohne Namen lebten.
[ 29 ] Sollte ich sie mitteilen, so bedurfte es der Wortbezeichnungen. Ich suchte dann später nach solchen in älteren Darstellungen des Geistigen, um das noch Wortlose in Worten ausdrucken zu können. Ich gebrauchte diese Wortbezeichnungen frei, so dass wohl kaum eine derselben in meinem Gebrauche zusammenfällt mit dem, was sie dort war, wo ich sie fand.
[ 30 ] Ich suchte aber nach solcher Möglichkeit, mich auszudrücken, stets erst, nachdem mir der Inhalt im eigenen Schauen aufgegangen war.
[ 31 ] Vorher Gelesenes wusste ich beim eigenen forschenden Schauen durch die Bewusstseinsverfassung, die ich eben geschildert habe, auszuschalten.
[ 32 ] Nun fand man in meinen Ausdrücken Anklänge an ältere Vorstellungen. Ohne auf den Inhalt einzugehen, hielt man sich an solche Ausdrücke. Sprach ich von «Lotosblumen» in dem Astralleib des Menschen, so war das ein Beweis, dass ich indische Lehren, in denen man den Ausdruck findet, wiedergäbe. ja, sprach ich von «Astralleib» selbst, so war dies das Ergebnis des Lesens mittelalterlicher Schriften. Gebrauchte ich die Ausdrücke: Angeloi, Archangeloi und so weiter, so erneuerte ich einfach die Vorstellungen christlicher Gnosis.
[ 33 ] Solches ganz an der Oberfläche sich bewegende Denken fand ich immer wieder mir entgegengehalten.
[ 34] Auch auf diese Tatsache wollte ich gegenwärtig beim Wiedererscheinen der «Geheimwissenschaft» in neuer Auflage hinweisen. Das Buch enthält ja die Umrisse der Anthroposophie als eines Ganzen. Es wird daher vorzüglich betroffen von den Missverständnissen, denen diese ausgesetzt ist.
[ 35 ] Ich habe seit der Zeit, in der in meiner Seele die Imaginationen, die das Buch wiedergibt, in ein Gesamtbild zusammengeflossen sind, unausgesetzt das forschende Schauen in den Menschen, in das geschichtliche Werden der Menschheit, in den Kosmos und so weiter fortgebildet; ich bin im einzelnen zu immer neuen Ergebnissen gekommen. Aber, was ich in der «Geheimwissenschaft» vor fünfzehn Jahren als Umriss gegeben habe, ist für mich in nichts erschüttert worden. Alles, was ich seither sagen konnte, erscheint, wenn es an der rechten Stelle diesem Buche eingefügt wird, als eine weitere Ausführung der damaligen Skizze.
Goetheanum, 10. Januar 1925
Rudolf Steiner
Preface to the 16th - 20th edition
[ 1 ] Now that fifteen years have passed since the first appearance of this book, I think I may say a few things to the public about the state of mind from which it emerged.
[ 2 ] Originally, my plan was to add its essential content as the last chapter to my book "Theosophy", which had appeared long before. That did not work out. At that time, when "Theosophy" was completed, this content did not round itself out in me in the same way as that of "Theosophy". In my imagination I had the spiritual being of the individual before my soul and was able to depict it, but the cosmic connections, which were to be depicted in "spiritual science", were not already before me at that time. They were there in detail, but not in the overall picture.
[ 3 ] Therefore I decided to let "Theosophy" appear with the content that I had seen as the essence of the life of an individual human being, and to carry out "Secret Science" in the near future in all tranquillity.
[ 4 ] The content of this book had to be given in thoughts that are suitable further developments of the thoughts used in the natural sciences, according to the mood of my soul at that time. It will be evident from the "Preliminary remarks to the first edition" reprinted here how strongly I felt responsible to natural science for everything I wrote about spiritual knowledge at that time.
[ 5 ] But such thoughts alone cannot represent what is revealed to spiritual vision as the spirit-world. For this revelation does not enter into a mere thought content. Anyone who has experienced the nature of such revelation knows that the thoughts of ordinary consciousness are only suitable for expressing what is perceived by the senses, but not what is spiritually seen.
[ 6 ] The content of what is spiritually seen can only be expressed in images (imaginations), through which inspirations that stem from intuitively experienced spiritual essence speak. (The necessary information about the nature of imagination, inspiration and intuition can be found in this "secret science" itself and in my book "How to Gain Knowledge of the Higher Worlds".
[ 7 ] But the performer of the imaginations from the spirit world cannot merely present these imaginations. He would be representing something that would stand as a completely different content of consciousness next to the cognitive content of our age, without any connection to it. He must fill the present consciousness with that which another consciousness, looking into the spirit-world, can recognize. Then its representation will have this spirit-world as its content; but this content appears in the form of thoughts into which it flows. This makes it fully comprehensible to ordinary consciousness, which thinks in terms of the present but does not yet see into the spirit world.
[ 8 ] This comprehensibility only fails to materialize if we place obstacles in front of it. When one adopts as one's own the prejudices that time has formed from a misconceived view of nature of the "limits of cognition".
[ 9 ] In spiritual cognition, everything is immersed in the intimate experience of the soul. Not only the spiritual gazing itself, but also the understanding that the non-gazing ordinary consciousness brings to the results of the gazer.
[ 10 ] Of this intimacy he has no idea who dilettantishly speaks of the fact that he who believes to understand suggests understanding to himself.
[ 11 ] But it is so that what is lived out within the comprehension of the physical world merely in concepts as truth or error becomes experience in relation to the spiritual world.
[ 12 ] Whoever allows the assertion to flow into his judgment that what is spiritually seen cannot be grasped by the ordinary, not yet seeing consciousness - because of its limitations - lays this perceiving judgment like a darkening cloud before the grasping; and he really cannot understand.
[ 13 ] But to the unbiased non-seeing consciousness, what is seen is fully comprehensible if the seer brings it into the thought-form. It is understandable, just as the finished picture of the painter is understandable to the non-painter. And indeed, the understanding of the spirit world is not an artistic-emotional one as with a work of art, but a thoroughly intellectual one as with the knowledge of nature.
[ 14 ] But in order to make such an understanding truly possible, the performer of the spiritually seen must bring his visions to the point of a proper casting into thought form, without them losing their imaginative character within this form.
[ 15 ] This was all before my soul when I worked out my "Secret Science".
[ 16 ] In 1909 I then felt that with these premises I could produce a book which: firstly, brought the content of my spiritual vision to a certain, but initially sufficient degree, cast in thought form; and secondly, which can be understood by any thinking person who places no obstacles in front of understanding.
[ 17 ] I say this today by saying that at the time - in 1909 - the publication of the book seemed to me to be a risk. For I knew that the required impartiality could not be mustered by those who pursue natural science professionally, nor by all the numerous personalities who depend on it for their judgment.
[ 18 ] But it was just the fact before my soul that in the time in which the consciousness of mankind had moved furthest away from the spirit-world, the communications from this spirit-world correspond to a most urgent necessity.
[ 19 ] I counted on the fact that there are also people who more or less perceive the distance from all spirituality so severely as an obstacle to life that they reach for messages from the spirit world with inner longing.
[ 20 ] And the following years have fully confirmed this. "Theosophy" and "Secret Science" were widely distributed as books that required the reader to be willing to accept a difficult stylization.
[ 21 ] I have quite consciously aimed not to give a "popular" presentation, but one that makes it necessary to enter into the content with real effort of thought. I have thus given my books such a character that reading them is itself the beginning of training the mind. For the calm, prudent effort of thought that this reading requires strengthens the powers of the soul and thereby enables it to come closer to the spiritual world.
[ 22 ] The fact that I gave the book the title "Secret Science" immediately gave rise to misunderstandings. Some people said that what wants to be "science" must not be "secret". How little thought was given to such an objection. As if someone who publishes content wanted to do something "secret" with it. The whole book shows that nothing should be described as "secret", but should be put into such a form that it is understandable like only any "science". Or, when one uses the word "natural science", does one not want to imply that it is about knowledge of "nature"? Secret science is the science of that which takes place in the "secret" insofar as it is not perceived outside in nature, but where the soul orients itself when it directs its inner being towards the spirit.
[ 23 ] "Secret science" is the opposite of "natural science".
[ 24 ] My visions in the spiritual world have repeatedly been objected to as being altered renditions of what people's ideas about the spirit world have emerged in the course of older times. It was said that I had read some things, absorbed them into the subconscious and then presented them in the belief that they arose from my own vision. I am said to have gained my depictions from Gnostic teachings, oriental wisdom poems and so on.
[ 25 ] By asserting this, one has remained entirely on the surface with one's thoughts.
[ 26 ] My insights into the spiritual, of which I am fully aware, are the results of my own seeing. At all times, in all details and in the great overviews, I have strictly examined myself to see whether I am taking each step in the process of looking further in such a way that full consciousness accompanies these steps. Just as the mathematician moves from thought to thought without the unconscious, autosuggestion and so on playing a role, so - I said to myself - spiritual vision must move from objective imagination to objective imagination without anything living in the soul other than the spiritual content of clearly prudent consciousness.
[ 27 ] The fact that one knows from an imagination that it is not merely a subjective image, but an image-reproduction of objective spiritual content, is achieved through healthy inner experience. One arrives at it in a spiritual-mental way, just as one correctly distinguishes imagination from objective perceptions in the area of sensory perception with a healthy organization.
[ 28 ] So I had the results of my seeing before me. They were initially "views" that lived without names.
[ 29 ] If I wanted to communicate them, I needed word names. I then later searched for them in older depictions of the spiritual in order to be able to express what was still wordless in words. I used these word designations freely, so that hardly any of them coincide in my use with what they were where I found them.
[ 30 ] But I always looked for such a way of expressing myself only after the content had dawned on me in my own contemplation.
[ 31 ] I knew how to eliminate what I had previously read through the state of consciousness I have just described in my own exploratory contemplation.
[ 32 ] Now one found echoes of older ideas in my expressions. Without going into the content, one kept to such expressions. If I spoke of "lotus flowers" in the astral body of man, this was proof that I was reproducing Indian teachings in which the expression is found. indeed, if I spoke of "astral body" itself, this was the result of reading medieval writings. If I used the expressions: Angeloi, Archangeloi and so on, I was simply renewing the ideas of Christian gnosis.
[ 33 ] I found myself repeatedly confronted with this kind of thinking, which was completely superficial.
[ 34 ] I also wanted to point out this fact when the new edition of "Geheimwissenschaft" reappeared. The book contains the outlines of anthroposophy as a whole. It is therefore particularly affected by the misunderstandings to which it is exposed.
[ 35 ] Since the time in which the imaginations which the book reproduces have flowed together in my soul into an overall picture, I have continued to develop my inquiring gaze into the human being, into the historical development of humanity, into the cosmos and so on; I have always come to new results in detail. But what I outlined in "Secret Science" fifteen years ago has not been shaken in any way. Everything I have been able to say since then, when added to this book in the right place, appears as a further elaboration of the outline I gave then.
Goetheanum, January 10, 1925
Rudolf Steiner