The Story of My Life
GA 28
Chapter III
[ 1 ] My father had been promised by the management of the Southern Railway that he would be assigned to a small station near Vienna as soon as I should have finished at the Realschule and should need to attend the Technische Hochschule. In this way it would be possible for me to go to Vienna and return every day. So it happened that my family came to Inzersdorf am Wiener Berge. The station was at a distance from the town, very lonely, and in unlovely natural surroundings. [ 2 ] My first visit to Vienna after we had moved to Inzersdorf was for the purpose of buying a greater number of philosophical books. What my heart was now especially devoted to was the first sketch of Fichte's Wissenschaftslehre.1Theory of Science. I had got so far with my reading of Kant that I could form a notion, even though immature, of the advance which Fichte wished to make beyond Kant. But this did not greatly interest me. What interested me then was to express the living weaving of the human mind in a sharply outlined mental picture. My strivings after conceptions in natural science had finally brought me to see in the activity of the human ego the sole starting-point for true knowledge. When the ego is active and itself perceives this activity, man has something spiritual in immediate presence in his consciousness – thus I said to myself. It seemed to me that what was thus perceived ought now to be expressed in clear, vivid concepts. In order to find a way to do this, I devoted myself to Fichte's Theory of Science. And yet I had my own opinions. So I took the volume and rewrote it, page by page. This made a lengthy manuscript. I had previously striven to find conceptions for the phenomena of nature from which one might derive a conception of the ego. Now I wished to do the opposite: from the ego to penetrate into the nature's process of becoming. Spirit and nature were present before my soul in their absolute contrast. There was for me a world of spiritual beings. That the ego, which itself is spirit, lives in a world of spirits was for me a matter of direct perception. But nature would not pass over into this spirit-world of my experience.
[ 3 ] From my study of the Theory of Science I conceived a special interest in Fichte's treatises Über die Bestimmung des Gelehrten2The Vocation of the Scholar. and über das Wesen des Gelehrten.3The Nature of the Scholar. In these writings I found a sort of ideal toward which I myself would strive. Along with these I read also the Reden an die Deutsche Nation.4Addresses to the German Nation. This took hold of me much less at that time than Fichte's other works.
[ 4 ] But I wished now to come also to a better understanding of Kant than I had yet been able to attain. In the Critique of Pure Reason this understanding refused to be revealed to me. So I attacked the problem with the Prolegomena zu einer jeden Künftigen Metaphysik.5Prolegomena to all Future Metaphysics Through this book I thought I recognized that a thorough penetration into all the questions which Kant had raised among thinkers was necessary for me. I now worked more consciously to the end that I might mould into the forms of thought the immediate vision of the spiritual world which I possessed. And while I was occupied with this inner work I sought to get my bearings with reference to the roads which had been taken by the thinkers of Kant's time and the succeeding epoch. I studied the dry, bald Transcendentalen Synthetismus6Transcendental Synthesism. of Traugott Krug just as eagerly as I entered into the tragedy of knowledge by which Fichte was possessed when he wrote his Bestimmung des Menschen.7Destiny of Man. The history of philosophy by Thilo of the school of Herbart broadened my view of the evolution of philosophical thought from the period of Kant onward. I fought my way through to Schelling, to Hegel. The opposition between the thought of Herbart and of Fichte passed before my mind in all its intensity.
[ 5 ] The summer months of 1879, from the end of my Realschule period until my entrance into the Technische Hochschule, I spent entirely in such philosophical studies. In the autumn I was to decide my choice of studies with reference to my future career. I decided to prepare to teach in a Realschule. The study of mathematics and descriptive geometry would have suited my inclination. But I should have to give up the latter; for the study of this subject required a great many practice hours during the day in geometrical drawings, but in order to earn some money I had to have leisure to devote to tutoring. This was possible while attending lectures whose subject-matter, when it was necessary to be absent from lectures, could afterwards be taken up in readings, but not possible when one had to spend hours assigned for drawing regularly in the school.
[ 6 ] So I had myself enrolled for mathematics, natural history, and chemistry.
[ 7 ] Of special import for me, however, were the lectures which Karl Julius Schröer gave at that time in the Hochschule on German literature. He lectured during my first year on “Literature since Goethe” and “Schiller's Life and Work.” From the very first lecture he impressed me. He developed a survey of the life of the spirit in Germany in the second half of the eighteenth century and placed in dramatic contrast with this Goethe's first appearance and its effect upon this spiritual life. The warmth of his manner of treating the subject, the inspiring way in which he entered into the selections read from the poets, introduced us through an inner process into the nature of poetry.
[ 8 ] In connection with these lectures he had the habit of requiring “practice in oral and written lectures.” The students had then to deliver orally or read what they themselves had prepared. Schröer would give informal suggestions during these student performances as to style, manner of delivery, and the like. My first discussion dealt with Lessing's Laokoon. Then I undertook a longer paper. I worked up the theme: “To what extent is man in his actions a free being?” In connection with this paper I drew much upon Herbart's philosophy. Schröer did not like this at all. He had not shared in the enthusiasm for Herbart which then prevailed in Austria both in philosophical circles and also in pedagogy. He was devoted completely to Goethe's type of mind. So everything which was derived from Herbart seemed to him pedantic and prosaic, although he recognized the discipline of thought to be had from this philosopher.
[ 9 ] I was now able to attend also certain lectures at the university. I took great satisfaction in the Herbartian, Robert Zimmermann. He lectured on “Practical Philosophy.” I attended that part of his lectures in which he developed the ground principles of ethics. I alternated, generally attending his lecture one day and the next that of Franz Brentano, who at the same period lectured on the same field. I could not keep this up very long, for I missed too much of the courses in the Hochschule.
[ 10 ] I was deeply impressed by learning philosophy in this way, not merely out of books, but from the lips of the philosophers themselves.
[ 11 ] Robert Zimmermann was a notable personality. He had an extraordinarily high forehead and a long philosopher's beard. With him everything was measured, reduced to style. When he entered through the door and mounted to his seat, his steps seemed to be studied, and all the more so because one felt: “With this man it is obviously natural to be like that.” In posture and movement he was as if he had formed himself thus through long discipline according to the aesthetic principles of Herbart. And yet one could entirely sympathize with all this. He then slowly sat down on the chair, cast a long glance through his spectacles over the auditorium, then slowly and precisely took off his glasses, looked once more for a long time without spectacles over the circle of auditors, and finally began to lecture, without manuscript but in carefully formed, artistically spoken sentences. There was something classic in his speech. Yet, owing to the long periods, one easily lost the thread of his discourse. He expounded Herbart's philosophy in a somewhat modified form. The close logic of his teaching impressed me. But it did not impress the other hearers. During the first three or four periods the great hall in which he lectured was full. “Practical Philosophy” was required for the law students in the first year. They needed the signature of the professor on their cards. From the fifth or sixth lecture on, most of them stayed away; while one listened to the classical philosopher, one was in a very small group of auditors on the farthest benches.
[ 12 ] To me these lectures afforded a powerful stimulus, and the difference between the views of Schröer and Zimmermann interested me deeply. The little time I did not spend in attendance at lectures or in tutoring I utilized either in the Hofbibliothek8The Public Library. or the library of the Hochschule. Then for the first time I read Goethe's Faust. In truth, until my nineteenth year, when I was inspired by Schröer, I had never been drawn to this work. Then, however, it won a strong claim upon my interest. Schröer had already begun his lectures on the first part. It happened that after only a few of the lectures I became better acquainted with Schröer. He then often took me to his home, told me this or that in amplification of his lectures, gladly answered my questions, and sent me away with a book from his library, which he lent me to read. In addition he said many things about the second part of Faust, an annotated edition of which he was already preparing. This part also I read at that time.
[ 13 ] In the library I spent my time on Herbart's metaphysics through Zimmermann's Aesthetic als Formwissenschaft9Ii>Aesthetics as the Science of Form. which was written from Herbart's point of view. Together with this I made a thorough study of Haeckel's Generelle Morphologie.10General Morphology. I may say that everything which I felt to be entering into me through the lectures of Schröer and Zimmermann, as well as the reading I have mentioned, became a matter of the deepest mental experience. Riddles of knowledge and of world conception shaped themselves within me from these things.
[ 14 ] Schröer was a spirit who cared nothing for system. He thought and spoke out of a certain intuition. Besides, he gave the greatest possible care to the manner in which he clothed his views in language. For this reason he almost never lectured without manuscript. He needed to write things down undisturbed in order himself to give the requisite attention to the bodying forth of this thought in appropriate words. Then he read a lecture in such a way as to bring into prominence its true inner meaning. Yet once he spoke extemporaneously about Anastasius Grün and Lenau. He had forgotten his manuscript. In the next period, however, he treated the whole topic again, reading from his manuscript. He was not satisfied with the form he had been able to give to the matter extemporé.
[ 15 ] From Schröer I learned to understand many concrete examples of beauty. Through Zimmermann there came to me a developed theory of beauty. The two did not agree well. Schröer, the intuitive personality with a certain scorn for the systematic, stood before my mind side by side with Zimmermann, the rigidly systematic theorist of beauty.
[ 16 ] Franz Brentano, whose lectures also on “Practical Philosophy” I attended, particularly interested me through his personality. He was a keen thinker and at the same time given to reverie. In his manner of lecturing there was something ceremonious. I listened to what he said, but I had also to observe every glance, every movement of his head, every gesture of his expressive hands. He was the perfect logician. Each thought must be absolutely complete and linked up with many other thoughts. The forms of these thought-series were determined by the most scrupulous attention to the requirements of logic. But I had the feeling that these thoughts did not come forth from the loom of his own mind; never did they penetrate into reality. And such also was the whole attitude of Brentano. He held the manuscript loosely in his hand as if at any moment it might slip from his fingers; with his glance he merely skimmed along the lines. And this was the action suited to a merely superficial touch upon reality, not for a firm grasp of it. I could understand his philosophy better from his “philosopher's hands” than from his words.
[ 17 ] The stimulus which came from Brentano worked strongly upon me. I soon began to study his writings, and in the course of the following years read most of what he had published.
[ 18 ] I felt in duty bound at that time to seek through philosophy for the truth. I had to study mathematics and natural science. I was convinced that I should find no relationship between these and myself unless I could place under them a solid foundation of philosophy. But I perceived a spiritual world, none the less, as a reality. In clear vision the spiritual individuality of every one revealed itself to me. This found in the physical body and in action in the physical world merely its manifestation. It united itself with that which came down as a physical germ from the parents. Dead men I followed farther on their way in the spiritual world. After the death of a schoolmate I wrote about this phase of my spiritual life to one of my former teachers, who had been a close friend of mine during my Realschule days. He wrote back to me with unusual affection; but he did not deign to say one word about what I had written regarding the dead schoolmate.
[ 19 ] And this is what happened to me always at that time in this manner of my perception of the spiritual world. No one would pay any attention to it. From all directions persons would come with all sorts of spiritistic stuff. With this I in turn would have nothing to do. It was distasteful to me to approach the spiritual in such a way.
[ 20 ] It then chanced that I became acquainted with a simple man of the plain people. Every week he went to Vienna by the same train that I took. He gathered medicinal plants in the country and sold them to apothecaries in Vienna. We became friends. With him it was possible to talk about the spiritual world as with one who had his own experience therein. He was a personality of inner piety. He was quite without schooling. He had read very many mystical books, but what he said was not at all influenced by this reading. It was the outflowing of a spiritual life which was marked by its own quite elementary creative wisdom. It was easy to perceive that he read these books only because he wished to find in others what he knew for himself. He revealed himself as if he, as a personality, were only the mouthpiece for a spiritual content which desired to utter itself out of hidden fountains. When one was with him one could get a glimpse deep into the secrets of nature. He carried on his back his bundle of medicinal plants; but in his heart he bore results which he had won from the spirituality of nature in the gathering of these herbs. I have seen many a man smile who now and then chanced to make a third party while I walked through the streets of Vienna with this “initiate.” No wonder; for his manner of expression was not to be understood at once. One had first in a certain sense to learn his spiritual dialect. To me also it was at first unintelligible. But from our first acquaintance I was in the deepest sympathy with him. And so I gradually came to feel as if I were in company with a soul of the most ancient times who – quite unaffected by the civilization, science, and general conceptions of the present age – brought to me an instinctive knowledge of earlier eras.
[ 21 ] According to the usual conception of “learning,” one might say that it would be impossible to “learn” anything from this man. But, if one possessed in oneself a perception of the spiritual world, one might obtain glimpses very deep into this world through another who had a firm footing there. [ 22 ] Moreover, anything of the nature of mere dreams was utterly foreign to this personality. When one entered his home, one was in the midst of the most sober and simplest family of country folk. Above the entrance to his home were the words: “With the blessing of God, all things are good.” One was entertained just as by other village people. I always had to drink coffee there, not from a cup, but from a porridge bowl11THöferl. which held nearly a litre; with this I had to eat a piece of bread of enormous dimensions. Nor did the villagers by any means look upon the man as a dreamer. There was no occasion for jesting at his behaviour in his village. Besides, he possessed a sound, wholesome humour, and knew how to chat, whenever he met with young or old of the village folk, in such fashion that the people liked to hear him talk. There was no one who smiled like those persons that watched him and me going together through the streets of Vienna, and these persons simply perceived in him some thing quite foreign to themselves.
This man always continued to be, even after life had taken me again far away from him, very close to me in soul. He appears in my mystery plays in the person of Felix Balde.
[ 23 ] It was no light matter for my mental life at that time that the philosophy which I learned from others could not in its thought be carried all the way to the perception of the spiritual world. Because of the difficulty that I experienced in this respect, I began to fashion a form of “theory of knowledge” within myself. The life of thought in men came gradually to seem to me the reflection radiated into physical man from that which I experienced in the spiritual world. Thought experience was to me the thing itself with a reality into which – as something actually experienced through and through – doubt could find no entrance. The world of the senses did not seem to me so completely a matter of experience. It is there; but one does not lay hold upon it as upon thought. In it or behind it there might be an unknown reality concealed. Yet man himself is set in the midst of this world. Therefore, the question arises: Is this world, then, a reality complete in itself? When man from within weaves into this world of the senses the thoughts which bring light into this world, does he then bring into this world something foreign to it? This does not accord at all with the experience that man has when the world of the senses stands before him and he breaks into it by means of his thought. Thought then appears to be that by means of which the world of the senses expresses its own nature. The further development of this reflection was at that time a weighty part of my inner life.
[ 24 ] But I wished to be prudent. To follow a course of thought too hastily to the extent of building up a philosophical view of one's own appeared to me a risky thing. This drove me to a thorough-going study of Hegel. The manner in which this philosopher set forth the reality of thought was distressing to me. That he made his way through only to a thought world, even though a living thought-world, and not to the perception of a world of concrete spirit – this repelled me. The assurance with which one philosophizes when one advances from thought to thought drew me on. I saw that many persons felt there was a difference between experience and thought. To me thought itself was experience, but of such a nature that one lived in it, not such that it entered from without into men. And so for a long time Hegel was very helpful to me.
[ 25 ] As to my required studies, which in the midst of these philosophical interests had naturally to be cramped for time, it was fortunate for me that I had already occupied myself a great deal with differential and integral calculus and with analytical geometry. Because of this I could remain away from many lectures in mathematics without losing my connection. Mathematics was very important for me as the foundation under all my strivings after knowledge. In mathematics there is afforded a system of percepts and concepts which have been reached independently of any external sense impressions. And yet, said I to myself constantly at that time, one carries over these perceptions and concepts into sense-reality and discovers its laws. Through mathematics one learns to understand the world, and yet in order to do this one must first evoke mathematics out of the human mind.
[ 26 ] A decisive experience came to me just at that time from the side of mathematics. The conception of space gave me the greatest inner difficulty. As the illimitable, all-encompassing vacuity – the form in which it lay at the basis of the dominant theories of natural science – it could not be conceived in any definite manner. Through the more recent (synthetic) geometry, which I learned by means of lectures and in private study, there came into my mind the perception that a line which should be prolonged endlessly toward the right hand would return again from the left to its starting-point. The infinitely distant point on the right is the same as the point infinitely distant on the left.
[ 27 ] It came over me that by means of such conceptions of the newer geometry one might form a conception of space, which otherwise remained fixed in vacuity. The straight line returning upon itself like a circle seemed to be a revelation. I left the lecture at which this had first passed before my mind as if a great load had fallen from me. A feeling of liberation came over me. Again, as in my early boyhood, something satisfying had come to me out of geometry.
[ 28 ] Behind the riddle of space stood at that period of my life the riddle of time. Might a conception be possible here also which would contain within itself in idea a return out of the past by way of an advance into the infinitely distant future? My happiness over the space conception caused a profound unrest over that of time. But there was then visible no way out. All efforts of thought led only to the realization that I must beware especially of applying the clear conception of space to the problem of time. All clarification which the striving for understanding could bring was frustrated by the riddle of time. [ 29 ] The stimulus which I had received from Zimmermann toward the study of aesthetics led me to read the writings of the famous specialist in aesthetics of that time, Friedrich Theodor Vischer. I found in a passage of his work a reference to the fact that more recent scientific thought rendered necessary a change in the conception of time. There was always a sense of joy aroused in me when I found in others the recognition of any cognitional need which I had conceived. In this case it was like a confirmation in my struggle toward a satisfying concept of time.
[ 30 ] The lectures for which I was enrolled in the Technische Hochschule I always had to finish with a corresponding examination. For a scholarship had been granted me, and I could draw my allowance only when I showed each year the results of my studies. [ 31 ] But my need for understanding, especially in the sphere of natural science, was but little aided by these required studies. It was possible then, however, in the technical institutes of Vienna both to attend lectures as a visitor and also to carry on practical courses. I found everywhere those who met me half-way when I sought thus to foster my scientific life, even so far as to the study of medicine.
[ 32 ] I may state positively that I never allowed my insight into the spiritual world to become a disturbing factor when I was engaged in the endeavour to understand science as it was then developed. I applied myself to what was taught, and only in the background of my thought did I have the hope that some day the blending of natural science with the knowledge of the spirit would be granted me.
Only from two sides was I disturbed in this hope.
[ 33 ] The sciences of organic nature were then – wherever I could lay hold of them – steeped in Darwinian ideas. To me Darwinism appeared in its leading ideas as scientifically impossible. I had little by little reached the stage of forming for myself a conception of the inner man. This was of a spiritual sort. And this inner man I thought of as a member of the spiritual world. He was conceived as dipping down out of the spiritual world into nature, uniting with the organism of nature in order thereby to perceive and to act in the world of the senses.
[ 34 ] The fact that I felt a certain respect for the course of thought characterizing the evolutionary theory of organisms did not render it possible for me to sacrifice anything from the conception. The derivation of higher out of lower organisms seemed to me a fruitful idea, but the identification of this idea with that which I knew as the spiritual world appeared to me immeasurably difficult.
[ 35 ] The studies in physics were penetrated throughout by the mechanical theory of heat and the wave theory of the phenomena of light and colour.
[ 36] The study of the mechanical theory of heat had taken on for me the charm of a personal colouring because in this field of physics I attended lectures by a personality for whom I felt quite extraordinary respect. This was Edmund Reitlinger, the author of that beautiful book, Freie Blicke.12.Open Vistas
[ 37 ] This man was of the most captivating lovableness. When I became his student, he was already very seriously ill with tuberculosis. For two years I attended his lectures on the theory of heat, physics for chemists, and the history of physics. I worked under him in the physics laboratory in many fields, especially in that of spectrum-analysis.
[ 38 ] Of special importance for me were Reitlinger's lectures on the history of physics. He spoke in such a way that one felt that, on account of his illness, every word was a burden to him. And yet his lectures were in the best possible sense inspiring. He was a man of a strongly inductive method of research. For all methods in physics he liked to cite the book of Whewel on inductive science. Newton marked for him the climax of research in physics. The history of physics he set forth in two parts: the first from the earliest times to Newton; the second from Newton to recent times. He was an universal thinker. From the historical consideration of problems in physics he always passed over to the perspective of the general history of culture. Indeed, quite general philosophic ideas would appear in his discussions of physics. In this way he treated the problems of optimism and pessimism, and spoke most impressively about the legitimacy of setting up scientific hypotheses. His exposition of Kepler, his characterization of Julius Robert Mayers, were masterpieces of scientific discussion.
[ 39 ] I was then stimulated to read almost all the writings of Julius Robert Mayers, and I was able to experience the truly great pleasure of talking face to face with Reitlinger about the content of these.
[ 40 ] I was filled with a deep sorrow when, only a few weeks after I had passed my final examination on the mechanical theory of heat under Reitlinger, my beloved teacher succumbed to his grievous illness. Just a short while before his death he had given me as his legacy a testimonial of personal qualifications which would enable me to secure pupils for private tutoring. This had most fortunate results. No small part of what came to me in the following years as means of livelihood I owed to Reitlinger after his death.
[ 41 ] Through the mechanical theory of heat and the wave theory of light and of electric phenomena, I was impelled to a study of theories of cognition. At that time the external physical world was conceived as motion-events in matter. The sensations appeared to be only subjective experiences, as the effects of pure motion-events upon the senses of men. Out there in space occurred the motion-events in matter; if these events affected the human heat-sense, man experienced the sensation of heat. There are outside of man wave-events in the ether; if these affect the optic nerve, light and colour sensations are generated within man.
[ 42 ] These conceptions met me everywhere. They caused me unspeakable difficulties in my thinking. They banished all spirit from the objective external world. Before my mind there stood the idea that even if the observations of natural phenomena led to such opinions, one who possessed a perception of the spiritual world could not arrive at these opinions. I saw how seductive these assumptions were for the manner of thought of that time, educated in the natural sciences, and yet I could not then resolve to oppose a manner of thought of my own against that which then prevailed. But just this caused me bitter mental struggles. Again and again must the criticism I could easily frame against this manner of thinking be suppressed within me to await the time in which more comprehensive sources and ways of knowledge should give me a greater assurance.
[ 43 ] I was deeply stirred by the reading of Schiller's letters concerning the aesthetic education of man. His statement that human consciousness oscillates, as it were, back and forth between different states, afforded me a connection with the notion that I had formed of the inner working and weaving of the human soul. Schiller distinguished two states of consciousness in which man evolves his relationship to the world. When he surrenders himself to that which affects him through the senses, he lives under the compulsion of nature. The sensations and impulses determine his life. If he subjects himself to the logical laws and principles of reason then he is living under a rational compulsion. But he can evolve an intermediate state of consciousness. He can develop the “aesthetic mood,” which is not given over either on the one side to the compulsion of nature, or on the other to the necessities of the reason. In this aesthetic mood the soul lives through the senses; but into the sense-perception and into the action set on foot by sense-stimuli the soul brings over something spiritual. One perceives through the senses, but as if the spiritual had streamed over into the senses. In action one surrenders oneself to the gratification of the present desire; but one has so ennobled this desire that to him the good is pleasing and the evil displeasing. Reason has then entered into union with the sensible. The good becomes an instinct; instinct can safely direct itself, for it has taken on the character of the spiritual. Schiller sees in this state of consciousness that condition of the soul in which man can experience and produce works of beauty. In the evolution of this state he sees the coming to life in men of the true human being.
[ 44 ] These thoughts of Schiller's were to me very attractive. They implied that man must first have his consciousness in a certain condition before he can attain to a relationship to the phenomena of the world corresponding to man's own being. Something was here given to me which brought to greater clarity the questions which presented themselves before me out of my observation of nature and my spiritual experience. Schiller spoke of the state of consciousness which must be present in order that one may experience the beauty of the world. Might one not also think of a state of consciousness which would mediate to us the truth in the beings of things? If this is granted, then one must not, after the fashion of Kant, observe the present state of human consciousness and investigate whether this can enter into the true beings of things. But one must first seek to discover the state of consciousness through which man places himself in such a relationship to the world that things and facts reveal their being to him.
[ 45 ] And I believed that I knew that such a state of consciousness is reached up to a certain degree when man not only has thoughts which conceive external things and events, but such thoughts that he himself experiences them as thoughts. This living in thoughts revealed itself to me as quite different from that in which man ordinarily exists and also carries on ordinary scientific research. If one penetrates deeper and deeper into thought-life, one finds that spiritual reality comes to meet this thought life. One then takes the path of the soul into the spirit. But on this inner way of the soul one arrives at a spiritual reality which one also finds again within nature. One gains a deeper knowledge of nature when one then faces nature after having in living thoughts beheld the reality of the spirit.
[ 46 ] It became clearer and clearer to me how, through going forward beyond the customary abstract thoughts to these spiritual perceptions – which, however, the calmness and luminousness of the thought serve to confirm – man lives himself into a reality from which customary consciousness bars him out. This customary state has on one side the living quality of the sense-perception; on the other the abstractness of thought-conceiving. The spiritual vision perceives spirit as the senses perceive nature; but it does not stand apart in thought from the spiritual perception as the customary state of consciousness stands in its thoughts apart from the sense-perceptions. Spiritual vision thinks while it experiences spirit, and experiences while it sets to thinking the awakened spirituality of man.
[ 47 ] A spiritual perception formed itself before my mind which did not rest upon dark mystical feeling. It proceeded much more in a spiritual activity which in its thoroughness might be compared with mathematical thinking. I was approaching the state of soul in which I felt that I might consider that the perception of the spiritual world which I bore within me was confirmed before the forum of natural scientific thought.
[ 48 ] When these experiences passed through my mind I was in my twenty-second year.
Chapter III
[ 1 ] Meinem Vater war von der Direktion der Südbahngesellschaft versprochen worden, daß man ihn nach einer kleinen Station in der Nähe Wiens berufen werde, wenn ich nach Absolvierung der Realschule an die technische Hochschule kommen sollte. Mir sollte dadurch die Möglichkeit gegeben werden, jeden Tag nach Wien und zurück zu fahren. So kam denn meine Familie nach Inzersdorf am Wiener Berge. Der Bahnhof stand da, weit vom Orte entfernt, in völliger Einsamkeit in einer unschönen Naturumgebung.
[ 2 ] Mein erster Besuch in Wien nach Ankunft in Inzersdorf wurde dazu benützt, mir eine größere Zahl von philosophischen Büchern zu kaufen. Dasjenige, dem nun meine besondere Liebe sich zuwandte, war der erste Entwurf von Fichtes «Wissenschaftslehre». Ich hatte es mit meiner Kantlektüre so weit gebracht, daß ich mir eine, wenn auch unreife Vorstellung von dem Schritte machen konnte, den Fichte über Kant hinaus tun wollte. Aber das interessierte mich nicht allzu stark. Mir kam es damals darauf an, das lebendige Weben der menschlichen Seele in der Form eines strengen Gedankenbildes auszudrücken. Meine Bemühungen um naturwissenschaftliche Begriffe hatten mich schließlich dazu gebracht, in der Tätigkeit des menschlichen «Ich» den einzig möglichen Ausgangspunkt für eine wahre Erkenntnis zu sehen. Wenn das Ich tätig ist und diese Tätigkeit selbst anschaut, so hat man ein Geistiges in aller Unmittelbarkeit im Bewußtsein, so sagte ich mir. Ich meinte, man müsse nun nur, was man so anschaut, in klaren, überschaubaren Begriffen ausdrücken. Um dazu den Weg zu finden, hielt ich mich an Fichtes «Wissenschaftslehre». Aber ich hatte doch meine eigenen Ansichten. Und so nahm ich denn die «Wissenschaftslehre» Seite für Seite vor und schrieb sie um. Es entstand ein langes Manuskript. Vorher hatte ich mich damit geplagt, für die Naturerscheinungen Begriffe zu finden, von denen aus man einen solchen für das «Ich» finden könne. Jetzt wollte ich umgekehrt von dem Ich aus in das Werden der Natur einbrechen. Geist und Natur standen damals in ihrem vollen Gegensatz vor meiner Seele. Eine Welt der geistigen Wesen gab es für mich. Daß das «Ich», das selbst Geist ist, in einer Welt von Geistern lebt, war für mich unmittelbare Anschauung. Die Natur wollte aber in die erlebte Geisteswelt nicht herein.
[ 3 ] Von der «Wissenschaftslehre» ausgehend bekam ich ein besonderes Interesse für die Fichte'schen Abhandlungen «Über die Bestimmung des Gelehrten» und «Über das Wesen des Gelehrten». In diesen Schriften fand ich eine Art Ideal, dem ich selbst nachstreben wollte. Daneben las ich auch die «Reden an die deutsche Nation». Sie fesselten mich damals viel weniger als die andern Fichte'schen Werke.
[ 4 ] Ich wollte aber nun doch auch zu einem besseren Verständnis Kants kommen, als ich es bisher hatte gewinnen können. In der «Kritik der reinen Vernunft» wollte sich mir aber dieses Verständnis nicht erschließen. So nahm ich es denn mit den «Prolegomena zu einer jeden künftigen Metaphysik» auf. An diesem Buche glaubte ich zu erkennen, daß ein gründliches Eingehen auf alle die Fragen, die Kant in den Denkern angeregt hatte, für mich notwendig sei. Ich arbeitete nunmehr immer bewußter daran, die unmittelbare Anschauung, die ich von der geistigen Welt hatte, in die Form von Gedanken zu gießen. Und während diese innere Arbeit mich erfüllte, suchte ich mich an den Wegen zu orientieren, welche die Denker der Kantzeit und diejenigen in der folgenden Epoche genommen hatten. Ich studierte den trockenen, nüchternen «transzendentalen Synthetismus» Traugott Krugs ebenso eifrig wie ich mich in die Erkenntnistragik einlebte, bei der Fichte angekommen war, als er seine «Bestimmung des Menschen» schrieb. Die «Geschichte der Philosophie» des Herbartianers Thilo erweiterte meinen Blick von der Kantzeit aus über die Entwickelung des philosophischen Denkens. Ich rang mich zu Schelling, zu Hegel durch. Der Gegensatz des Denkens bei Fichte und Herbart trat mit aller Intensität vor meine Seele.
[ 5 ] Die Sommermonate im Jahre 1879, vom Ende meiner Realschulzeit bis zum Eintritte in die technische Hochschule, brachte ich ganz mit solchen philosophischen Studien zu. Im Herbst sollte ich mich für die Richtung eines Brotstudiums entscheiden. Ich beschloß, auf das Realschullehramt hinzuarbeiten. Mathematik und darstellende Geometrie zu studieren, entsprach meiner Neigung. Ich mußte auf die letztere verzichten. Denn deren Studium war verbunden mit einer Anzahl von Übungsstunden im geometrischen Zeichnen während des Tages. Aber ich mußte, um mir einiges Geld zu verdienen, Zeit dazu haben, Nachhilfestunden zu geben. Das vertrug sich damit, Vorlesungen zu hören, deren Stoff man nachlesen konnte, wenn man sie versäumen mußte, nicht aber damit, regelmäßig die Zeichenstunden in der Schule selbst durchzusitzen.
[ 6 ] So ließ ich mich denn zunächst für Mathematik, Naturgeschichte und Chemie einschreiben.
[ 7 ] Von besonderer Bedeutung aber wurden für mich die Vorlesungen, die Karl Julius Schröer damals über die deutsche Literatur an der technischen Hochschule hielt. Er las im ersten Jahre meines Hochschulstudiums über «Deutsche Literatur seit Goethe» und über «Schillers Leben und Werke». Schon von seiner ersten Vorlesung an war ich gefesselt. Er entwickelte einen Überblick über das deutsche Geistesleben in der zweiten Hälfte des achtzehnten Jahrhunderts und setzte da in dramatischer Art auseinander, wie Goethes erstes Auftreten in dieses Geistesleben einschlug. Die Wärme seiner Behandlungsart, die begeisternde Art, wie er innerhalb der Vorlesungen aus den Dichtern vorlas, führten auf eine verinnerlichte Weise in die Dichtung ein.
[ 8 ] Daneben hatte er «Übungen im mündlichen Vortrag und schriftlicher Darstellung» eingerichtet. Die Schüler sollten da vortragen, oder vorlesen, was sie selbst ausgearbeitet hatten. Schröer gab dann anknüpfend an die Schülerleistungen Unterweisungen über Stil, Vortragsform usw. Ich hielt da zuerst einen Vortrag über Lessings Laokoon. Dann machte ich mich an eine größere Aufgabe. Ich arbeitete das Thema aus: Inwiefern ist der Mensch in seinen Handlungen ein freies Wesen? Ich geriet bei dieser Arbeit stark in die Herbart'sche Philosophie hinein. Das gefiel Schröer gar nicht. Er hat die Strömung für Herbart, die damals in Österreich sowohl auf den philosophischen Lehrkanzeln wie in der Pädagogik die herrschende war, nicht mitgemacht. Er war ganz an Goethes Geistesart hingegeben. Da erschien ihm denn alles, was an Herbart anknüpfte, trotzdem er an ihm die Denkdisziplin anerkannte, als pedantisch und nüchtern.
[ 9 ] Ich konnte nun auch einzelne Vorlesungen an der Universität hören. Auf den Herbertianer Robert Zimmermann hatte ich mich sehr gefreut. Er las «Praktische Philosophie». Ich hörte den Teil seiner Vorlesungen, in denen er die Grundprinzipien der Ethik auseinandersetzte. Ich wechselte ab: ich saß gewöhnlich einen Tag bei ihm, den andern bei Franz Brentano, der zu gleicher Zeit über denselben Gegenstand las. Allzu lange konnte ich das nicht fortsetzen, denn ich versäumte dadurch an der technischen Hochschule zu viel.
[ 10 ] Es machte tiefen Eindruck auf mich, die Philosophie nun nicht bloß aus Büchern kennen zu lernen, sondern aus dem Munde von Philosophen selbst zu hören.
[ 11 ] Robert Zimmermann war eine merkwürdige Persönlichkeit. Er hatte eine ganz ungewöhnlich hohe Stirn und einen langen Philosophenbart. Alles an ihm war gemessen, stilisiert. Wenn er zur Türe hereinkam, aufs Katheder stieg, waren seine Schritte wie einstudiert und doch wieder so, daß man sich sagte: dem Mann ist es selbstverständlich-natürlich, so zu sein. Er war in Haltung und Bewegung, wie wenn er sich selbst dazu nach Herbart'schen ästhetischen Prinzipien in langer Disziplin geformt hätte. Und man konnte doch rechte Sympathie mit alledem haben. Er setzte sich dann langsam auf seinen Stuhl, schaute dann durch die Brille in einem langen Blicke auf das Auditorium hin, nahm dann langsam gemessen die Brille ab, schaute noch einmal lange unbebrillt über den Zuhörerkreis hin, dann begann er in freier Rede, aber in sorgsam geformten, kunstvoll gesprochenen Sätzen seine Vorlesung. Seine Sprache hatte etwas Klassisches. Aber man verlor wegen der langen Perioden im Zuhören leicht den Faden seiner Darstellung. Er trug die Herbart'sche Philosophie etwas modifiziert vor. Die Strenge seiner Gedankenfolge machte Eindruck auf mich. Aber nicht auf die andern Zuhörer. In den ersten drei bis vier Vorlesungen war der große Saal, in dem er vortrug, überfüllt. «Praktische Philosophie» war für die Juristen im ersten Jahre Pfiichtvorlesung. Sie brauchten die Unterschrift des Professors im Index. Von der fünften oder sechsten Stunde an blieben die meisten weg; man war, indem man den philosophischen Klassiker hörte, nur noch mit ganz wenigen Zuhörern zusammen auf den vordersten Bänken.
[ 12 ] Für mich boten diese Vorträge doch eine starke Anregung. Und die Verschiedenheit in der Auffassung Schröers und Zimmermanns interessierte mich tief. Ich verbrachte die wenige Zeit, die mir vom Anhören der Vorlesungen und dem Privatunterricht, den ich zu geben hatte, blieb, entweder in der Hofbibliothek oder in der Bibliothek der technischen Hochschule. Da las ich denn, zum ersten Male, Goethes «Faust». Ich war tatsächlich bis zu meinem neunzehnten Jahre, in dem ich durch Schröer angeregt worden bin, nicht bis zu diesem Werke vorgedrungen. Damals aber wurde mein Interesse für dasselbe sogleich stark in Anspruch genommen. Schröer hatte seine Ausgabe des ersten Teiles bereits veröffentlicht. Aus ihr lernte ich den ersten Teil zuerst kennen. Dazu kam, daß ich schon nach wenigen seiner Vorlesungsstunden mit Schröer näher bekannt wurde. Er nahm mich dann oft mit nach seinem Hause, sprach dies oder jenes zu mir in Ergänzung seiner Vorlesungen, antwortete gern auf meine Fragen und entließ mich mit einem Buche aus seiner Bibliothek, das er mir zum Lesen lieh. Dabei fiel auch manches Wort über den zweiten Teil des «Faust», an dessen Herausgabe und Erläuterung er gerade arbeitete. Ich las auch diesen in jener Zeit.
[ 13 ] In den Bibliotheken beschäftigte ich mich mit Herbarts «Metaphysik», mit Zimmermanns «Ästhetik als Formwissenschaft», die vom Herbart'schen Standpunkte aus geschrieben war. Dazu kam ein eingehendes Studium von Ernst Haeckels «Genereller Morphologie». Ich darf wohl sagen: alles, was ich durch Schröers und Zimmermanns Vorlesungen, sowie durch die gekennzeichnete Lektüre an mich herantretend fand, wurde mir damals zum tiefsten Seelenerlebnis. Wissens- und Weltauffassungsrätsel formten sich mir daran.
[ 14 ] Schröer war ein Geist, der nichts auf Systematik gab. Aus einer gewissen Intuition heraus dachte und sprach er. Er hatte dabei die denkbar größte Achtung vor der Art, wie er seine Anschauungen in Worte prägte. Er sprach wohl aus diesem Grunde in seinen Vorlesungen nie frei. Er brauchte die Ruhe des Niederschreibens, um sich selbst Genüge zu tun in der Umformung seines Gedankens in das zu sprechende Wort. Dann las er das Geschriebene mit starker Verinnerlichung der Rede ab. Doch - einmal sprach er frei über Anastasius Grün und Lenau. Er hatte sein Manuskript vergessen. Aber in der nächsten Stunde behandelte er den ganzen Gegenstand noch einmal lesend. Er war nicht zufrieden mit der Gestalt, die er ihm in freier Rede hatte geben können.
[ 15 ] Von Schröer lernte ich viele Werke der Schönheit kennen. Durch Zimmermann trat eine ausgebildete Theorie des Schönen an mich heran. Beides stimmte nicht gut zusammen. Schröer, die intuitive Persönlichkeit mit einer gewissen Geringschätzung des Systematischen, stand für mich neben Zimmermann, dem strengen systematischen Theoretiker des Schönen.
[ 16 ] In Franz Brentano, bei dem ich auch Vorlesungen über «praktische Philosophie» hörte, interessierte mich damals ganz besonders die Persönlichkeit. Er war scharfdenkend und versonnen zugleich. In der Art, wie er sich als Vortragender gab, war etwas Feierliches. Ich hörte, was er sprach, mußte aber auf jeden Blick, jede Kopfbewegung, jede Geste seiner ausdrucksvollen Hände achten. Er war der vollendete Logiker. Jeder Gedanke sollte absolut durchsichtig und getragen von zahlreichen andern sein. Im Formen dieser Gedankenreihen waltete die größte logische Gewissenhaftigkeit Aber ich hatte das Gefühl, dieses Denken kommt aus seinem eigenen Weben nicht heraus; es bricht nirgends in die Wirklichkeit ein. Und so war auch die ganze Haltung Brentanos. Er hielt mit der Hand lose das Manuskript, als ob es jeden Augenblick den Fingern entgleiten könnte; er streifte mit dem Blicke nur die Zeilen. Auch diese Geste war nur für eine leise Berührung der Wirklichkeit, nicht für ein entschlossenes Anfassen. Ich konnte aus seinen «Philosophenhänden» die Art seines Philosophierens noch mehr verstehen als aus seinen Worten.
[ 17 ] Die Anregung, die von Brentano ausging, wirkte in mir stark nach. Ich fing bald an, mich mit seinen Schriften auseinanderzusetzen und habe dann im Laufe der späteren Jahre das meiste von dem gelesen, was er veröffentlicht hat.
[ 18 ] Ich hielt mich damals für verpflichtet, durch die Philosophie die Wahrheit zu suchen. Ich sollte Mathematik und Naturwissenschaft studieren. Ich war überzeugt davon, daß ich dazu kein Verhältnis finden werde, wenn ich deren Ergebnisse nicht auf einen sicheren philosophischen Boden stellen könnte. Aber ich schaute doch eine geistige Welt als Wirklichkeit. Mit aller Anschaulichkeit offenbarte sich mir an jedem Menschen seine geistige Individualität. Diese hatte in der physischen Leiblichkeit und in dem Tun in der physischen Welt nur ihre Offenbarung. Sie vereinte sich mit dem, was als physischer Keim von den Eltern herrührte. Den gestorbenen Menschen verfolgte ich weiter auf seinem Wege in die geistige Welt hinein. Einem meiner früheren Lehrer, der mir auch nach meiner Realschulzeit freundschaftlich nahe blieb, schrieb ich einmal nach dem Tode eines Mitschülers über diese Seite meines Seelenlebens. Er schrieb mir ungewöhnlich lieb zurück, würdigte aber, was ich über den verstorbenen Mitschüler schrieb, keines Wortes.
[ 19 ] Und so ging es mir damals überall mit meiner Anschauung von der geistigen Welt. Man wollte von ihr nichts hören. Von dieser oder jener Seite kam man da höchstens mit allerlei Spiritistischem. Da wollte ich wieder nichts hören. Mir erschien es abgeschmackt, dem Geistigen sich auf solche Art zu nähern.
[ 20 ] Da geschah es, daß ich mit einem einfachen Manne aus dem Volke bekannt wurde. Er fuhr jede Woche mit demselben Eisenbahnzuge nach Wien, den ich auch benützte. Er sammelte auf dem Lande Heilkräuter und verkaufte sie in Wien an Apotheken. Wir wurden Freunde. Mit ihm konnte man über die geistige Welt sprechen wie mit jemand, der Erfahrung darin hatte. Er war eine innerlich fromme Persönlichkeit. In allem Schulmäßigen war er ungebildet. Er hatte zwar viele mystische Bücher gelesen; aber, was er sprach, war ganz unbeeinflußt von dieser Lektüre. Es war der Ausfluß eines Seelenlebens, das eine ganz elementarische, schöpferische Weisheit in sich trug. Man konnte bald empfinden: er las die Bücher nur, weil er, was er durch sich selbst wußte, auch bei andern finden wollte. Aber es befriedigte ihn nicht. Er offenbarte sich so, als ob er als Persönlichkeit nur das Sprachorgan wäre für einen Geistesinhalt, der aus verborgenen Welten heraus sprechen wollte. Wenn man mit ihm zusammen war, konnte man tiefe Blicke in die Geheimnisse der Natur tun. Er trug auf dem Rücken sein Bündel Heilkräuter; aber in seinem Herzen trug er die Ergebnisse, die er aus der Geistigkeit der Natur bei seinem Sammeln gewonnen hatte. Ich habe manchen Menschen lächeln gesehen, der zuweilen als Dritter sich angeschlossen hatte, wenn ich mit diesem «Eingeweihten» durch die Wiener Alleegasse ging. Das war kein Wunder. Denn dessen Ausdrucksweise war nicht von vorneherein verständlich. Man mußte gewissermaßen erst seinen «geistigen Dialekt» lernen. Auch mir war er anfangs nicht verständlich. Aber vom ersten Kennenlernen an hatte ich die tiefste Sympathie für ihn. Und so wurde es mir nach und nach, wie wenn ich mit einer Seele aus ganz alten Zeiten zusammen wäre, die unberührt von der Zivilisation, Wissenschaft und Anschauung der Gegenwart, ein instinktives Wissen der Vorzeit an mich heranbrächte.
[ 21 ] Nimmt man den gewöhnlichen Begriff des «Lernens», so kann man sagen: «Lernen» konnte man von diesem Manne nichts. Aber man konnte, wenn man selbst die Anschauung einer geistigen Welt hatte, in diese durch einen Andern, in ihr ganz Feststehenden, tiefe Einblicke tun.
[ 22 ] Und dabei lag dieser Persönlichkeit alles weltenferne, was Schwärmerei war. Kam man in sein Heim, so war man im Kreise der nüchternsten, einfachen Landfamilie. Über der Türe seines Hauses standen die Worte: «In Gottes Segen ist alles gelegen.» Man wurde bewirtet, wie bei andern Dorfbewohnern. Ich habe immer Kaffee trinken müssen, nicht aus einer Tasse, sondern aus einem «Häferl», das nahezu einen Liter faßte; dazu hatte ich ein Stück Brot zu essen, das Riesendimensionen hatte. Aber auch die Dorfbewohner sahen den Mann nicht für einen Schwärmer an. An der Art, wie er sich in seinem Heimatorte gab, prallte jeder Spott ab. Er hatte auch einen gesunden Humor und wußte im Dorfe mit jung und alt bei jeder Begegnung so zu reden, daß die Leute an seinen Worten Freude hatten. Da lächelte niemand so wie die Leute, die mit ihm und mir durch die Wiener Alleegasse gingen und die in ihm zumeist etwas sahen, das ihnen ganz fremd erschien. Mir blieb dieser Mann, auch als das Leben mich wieder von ihm weggeführt hatte, seelennahe. Man findet ihn in meinen Mysteriendramen in der Gestalt des Felix Balde.
[ 23 ] Nicht leicht wurde es damals meinem Seelenleben, daß die Philosophie, die ich von Andern vernahm, in ihrem Denken nicht bis an die Anschauung der geistigen Welt heranzubringen war. Aus den Schwierigkeiten, die ich nach dieser Richtung erlebte, fing sich in mir eine Art «Erkenntnistheorie» an zu bilden. Das Leben im Denken erschien mir allmählich als der in den physischen Menschen hereinstrahlende Abglanz dessen, was die Seele in der geistigen Welt erlebt. Gedanken-Erleben war mir das Dasein in einer Wirklichkeit, an die als an einer durch und durch erlebten sich kein Zweifel heranwagen konnte. Die Welt der Sinne erschien mir nicht so erlebbar. Sie ist da; aber man ergreift sie nicht wie den Gedanken. Es kann in ihr oder hinter ihr ein wesenhaftes Unbekanntes stecken. Aber der Mensch ist in sie hineingestellt. Da entstand die Frage: ist denn diese Welt eine volle Wirklichkeit? Wenn der Mensch an ihr aus seinem Innern die Gedanken webt, die dann Licht in diese Sinnenwelt bringen, bringt er dann auch tatsächlich etwas ihr Fremdes zu ihr hinzu? Das stimmt doch gar nicht zu dem Erlebnis, das man hat, wenn die Sinnenwelt vor dem Menschen steht, und er mit seinen Gedanken in sie einbricht. Dann erweisen sich doch die Gedanken als dasjenige, durch das die Sinnenwelt sich ausspricht. Die weitere Verfolgung dieses Nachsinnens war dazumal ein wichtiger Teil meines inneren Lebens.
[ 24 ] Aber ich wollte vorsichtig sein. Voreilig einen Gedankengang bis zum Ausbilden einer eigenen philosophischen Anschauung zu führen, schien mir gefährlich. Das trieb mich zu einem eingehenden Studium Hegels. Die Art, wie dieser Philosoph die Wirklichkeit des Gedankens darstellt, war mir nahegehend. Daß er nur zu einer Gedankenwelt, wenn auch zu einer lebendigen, vordringt, nicht zu einer Anschauung einer konkreten Geisteswelt, stieß mich zurück. Die Sicherheit, mit der man philosophiert, wenn man von Gedanke zu Gedanken fortschreitet, zog mich an. Ich sah, daß Viele einen Gegensatz empfanden zwischen der Erfahrung und dem Denken. Mir war das Denken selbst Erfahrung, aber eine solche, in der man lebt, nicht eine solche, die von außen an den Menschen herantritt. Und so wurde mir Hegel für eine längere Zeit sehr wertvoll.
[ 25 ] Bei meinen Pflichtstudien, die unter diesen philosophischen Interessen naturgemäß hätten zu kurz kommen müssen, kam mir zugute, daß ich schon vorher mich viel mit Differential- und Integralrechnung, auch mit analytischer Geometrie befaßt hatte. So konnte ich von mancher mathematischen Vorlesung wegbleiben, ohne den Zusammenhang zu verlieren. Die Mathematik behielt für mich ihre Bedeutung auch als Grundlage meines ganzen Erkenntnisstrebens. In ihr ist doch ein System von Anschauungen und Begriffen gegeben, die von aller äußeren Sinneserfahrung unabhängig gewonnen sind. Und doch geht man, so sagte ich mir damals unablässig, mit diesen Anschauungen und Begriffen an die Sinneswirklichkeit heran und findet durch sie ihre Gesetzmäßigkeiten. Durch die Mathematik lernt man die Welt kennen, und doch muß man, um dies erreichen zu können, erst die Mathematik aus der menschlichen Seele hervorgehen lassen.
[ 26 ] Ein ausschlaggebendes Erlebnis kam mir damals geradezu von der mathematischen Seite. Die Vorstellung des Raumes bot mir die größten inneren Schwierigkeiten. Er ließ sich als das allseitig ins Unendliche laufende Leere, als das er den damals herrschenden naturwissenschaftlichen Theorien zugrunde lag, nicht in überschaubarer Art denken. Durch die neuere (synthetische) Geometrie, die ich durch Vorlesungen und im Privatstudium kennen lernte, trat vor meine Seele die Anschauung, daß eine Linie, die nach rechts in das Unendliche verlängert wird, von links wieder zu ihrem Ausgangspunkt zurückkommt. Der nach rechts liegende unendlich ferne Punkt ist derselbe wie der nach links liegende unendlich ferne.
[ 27 ] Mir kam vor, daß man mit solchen Vorstellungen der neueren Geometrie den sonst in Leere starrenden Raum begrifflich erfassen könne. Die wie eine Kreislinie in sich selbst zurückkehrende gerade Linie empfand ich wie eine Offenbarung. Ich ging aus der Vorlesung, in der mir das zuerst vor die Seele getreten ist, hinweg, wie wenn eine Zentnerlast von mir gefallen wäre. Ein befreiendes Gefühl kam über mich. Wieder kam mir, wie in meinen ganz jungen Knabenjahren, von der Geometrie etwas Beglückendes.
[ 28 ] Hinter dem Raumrätsel stand in diesem meinem Lebensabschnitt für mich das von der Zeit. Sollte auch da eine Vorstellung möglich sein, die durch ein Fortschreiten in die «unendlich ferne» Zukunft ein Zurückkommen aus der Vergangenheit ideell in sich enthält? Das Glück über die Raumvorstellung brachte etwas tief Beunruhigendes über diejenige von der Zeit. Aber da war zunächst kein Ausweg sichtbar. Alle Denkversuche führten dazu, zu erkennen, daß ich mich insbesondere hüten müsse, die anschaulichen Raumbegriffe in die Auffassung der Zeit hineinzubringen. Alle Enttäuschungen, welche das Erkenntnisstreben bringen kann, traten an dem Zeitenrätsel auf.
[ 29 ] Die Anregungen, die ich von Zimmermann für die Ästhetik erhalten hatte, führten mich zum Lesen der Schriften des berühmten Ästhetikers der damaligen Zeit, Friedrich Theodor Vischers. Ich fand bei ihm an einer Stelle seiner Werke eine Hinweisung darauf, daß das neuere naturwissenschaftliche Denken eine Reform des Zeitbegriffes nötig mache. Ich war immer besonders freudig erregt, wenn ich Erkenntnisbedürfnisse, die sich bei mir einstellten, auch bei einem Andern fand. Es war mir in diesem Falle wie eine Rechtfertigung meines Strebens nach einem befriedigenden Zeitbegriffe.
[ 30 ] Die Vorlesungen, für die ich an der technischen Hochschule eingeschrieben war, mußte ich immer mit den entsprechenden Prüfungen abschließen. Denn mir war ein Stipendium bewilligt worden; und das konnte ich nur fortbeziehen, wenn ich jedes Jahr bestimmte Studienerfolge nachwies.
[ 31 ] Aber meine Erkenntnisbedürfnisse wurden insbesondere auf den naturwissenschaftlichen Gebieten durch dieses Pflichtstudium wenig befriedigt. Es bestand aber damals an den Wiener Hochschulen die Möglichkeit, als Hospitant Vorlesungen, ja auch Übungen mitzumachen. Ich fand überall Entgegenkommen, wenn ich in dieser Art das wissenschaftliche Leben pflegen wollte, bis in das Medizinische hinein.
[ 32 ] Ich darf sagen, daß ich meine Einsichten in das Geistige nicht störend eingreifen ließ, wenn es sich darum handelte, die Naturwissenschaften so kennen zu lernen, wie sie damals ausgebildet waren. Ich widmete mich dem, was gelehrt wurde, und hatte nur im Hintergrunde die Hoffnung, daß sich mir einmal der Zusammenschluß der Naturwissenschaft mit der Geist-Erkenntnis ergeben werde. Nur von zwei Seiten her war ich für diese Hoffnung beunruhigt.
[ 33 ] Die Wissenschaften der organischen Natur waren da, wo ich mich mit ihnen befassen konnte, durchtränkt von Darwin'schen Ideen. Mir erschien damals der Darwinismus in seinen höchsten Ideen als eine wissenschaftliche Unmöglichkeit. Ich war nach und nach dazu gekommen, mir ein Bild des Menschen-Innern zu machen. Das war geistiger Art. Und es war als ein Glied einer geistigen Welt gedacht. Es war so vorgestellt, daß es aus der Geisteswelt in das Naturdasein untertaucht, sich dem natürlichen Organismus eingliedert, um durch denselben in der Sinneswelt wahrzunehmen und zu wirken.
[ 34 ] Von diesem Bilde konnte ich mir auch dadurch nichts abdingen lassen, daß ich vor den Gedankengängen der organischen Entwickelungslehre eine gewisse Achtung hatte. Das Hervorgehen höherer Organismen aus niederen schien mir eine fruchtbare Idee. Ihre Vereinigung mit dem, was ich als Geisteswelt kannte, unermeßlich schwierig.
[ 35 ] Die physikalischen Studien waren ganz durchsetzt von der mechanischen Wärmetheorie und der Wellenlehre für die Licht- und Farbenerscheinungen.
[ 36 ] Das Studium der mechanischen Wärmetheorie hatte für mich einen persönlich gefärbten Reiz bekommen, weil ich Vorlesungen über dieses physikalische Gebiet bei einer Persönlichkeit hörte, die ich ganz außerordentlich verehrte. Es war Edmund Reitlinger, der Verfasser des schönen Buches «Freie Blicke».
[ 37 ] Dieser Mann war von der gewinnendsten Liebenswürdigkeit. Er litt, als ich sein Zuhörer wurde, bereits an einer hochgradigen Lungenkrankheit. Ich hörte zwei Jahre hindurch bei ihm Vorlesungen über mechanische Wärmetheorie, Physik für Chemiker und Geschichte der Physik. Ich arbeitete bei ihm im physikalischen Laboratorium auf vielen Gebieten, besonders auf dem der Spektralanalyse.
[ 38 ] Von besonderer Bedeutung wurden für mich Reitlingers Vorlesungen aus der Geschichte der Physik. Er sprach so, daß man das Gefühl hatte, ihm werde wegen seiner Krankheit jedes Wort schwer. Aber dennoch war sein Vortrag im allerbesten Sinne begeisternd. Er war ein Mann der streng induktiven Forschungsart; er zitierte für alles physikalisch Methodische gern das Buch Whewells über induktive Wissenschaften. Newton bildete für ihn den Höhepunkt des physikalischen Forschens. Die Geschichte der Physik trug er in zwei Abteilungen vor: die erste von den ältesten Zeiten bis zu Newton, die zweite von Newton bis zur Neuzeit. Er war ein universeller Denker. Von der historischen Betrachtung der physikalischen Probleme ging er stets auf allgemeine kulturgeschichtliche Perspektiven über. Ja auch ganz allgemeine philosophische Ideen traten bei ihm im naturwissenschaftlichen Vortrag auf So setzte er sich mit dem Optimismus und Pessimismus auseinander und sprach über die Berechtigung der naturwissenschaftlichen Hypothesenbildung außerordentlich anregend. Seine Darstellung Keplers, seine Charakteristik Julius Robert Mayers waren Meisterstücke wissenschaftlicher Vorträge.
[ 39 ] Ich wurde damals angeregt, fast alle Schriften Julius Robert Mayers zu lesen; und ich konnte als eine wirklich große Freude erleben, mit Reitlinger oft mündlich über deren Inhalt sprechen zu dürfen.
[ 40 ] Es erfüllte mich mit großer Trauer, als wenige Wochen, nachdem ich meine letzte Prüfung aus der mechanischen Wärmetheorie bei Reitlinger abgelegt hatte, der geliebte Lehrer seiner schweren Krankheit erlag. Er hatte mir noch kurz vor seinem Ende wie ein Vermächtnis Empfehlungen für Persönlichkeiten gegeben, die mir Schüler zum Privatunterricht verschaffen konnten. Das war von sehr gutem Erfolg. Für einen nicht geringen Teil dessen, was mir in den nächsten Jahren an Mitteln zum Lebensunterhalt zufloß, hatte ich dem toten Reitlinger zu danken.
[ 41 ] Durch die mechanische Wärmetheorie und die Wellenlehre für die Lichterscheinungen und Elektrizitätswirkungen wurde ich in erkenntnistheoretische Studien hineingedrängt. Die physische Außenwelt stellte sich damals als Bewegungsvorgänge der Materie dar. Die Empfindungen der Sinne erschienen nur wie subjektive Erlebnisse, wie Wirkungen reiner Bewegungsvorgänge auf die Sinne des Menschen. Da draußen im Raume spielen sich die Bewegungsvorgänge der Materie ab; treffen diese Vorgänge auf den menschlichen Wärmesinn, so erlebt der Mensch die Empfindungen der Wärme. Es sind außer dem Menschen Wellenvorgänge des Äthers; treffen diese auf den Sehnerv, so entsteht im Menschen die Licht- und Farbenempfindung.
[ 42 ] Diese Anschauung trat mir überall entgegen. Sie machte meinem Denken unsägliche Schwierigkeiten. Sie trieb allen Geist aus der objektiven Außenwelt heraus. Mir stand die Idee vor der Seele, daß, wenn die Betrachtung der Naturerscheinungen auf dergleichen Annahmen führe, man mit einer Anschauung vom Geiste an diese Annahmen nicht herankommen könne. Ich sah, wie verführerisch für die damals an der Naturwissenschaft heranerzogene Denkrichtung diese Annahmen sind. Ich konnte mich auch jetzt noch nicht entschließen, eine eigene Denkungsart auch nur für mich selber der herrschenden entgegenzusetzen. Aber eben dies ergab schwere Seelenkämpfe. Immer wieder mußte die leicht zu erdenkende Kritik dieser Denkungsart innerlich niedergerungen werden, um die Zeit abzuwarten, in der weitere Erkenntnisquellen und Erkenntniswege eine größere Sicherheit geben würden.
[ 43 ] Eine starke Anregung erhielt ich durch das Lesen von Schillers «Briefen über ästhetische Erziehung des Menschen». Der Hinweis darauf, daß das menschliche Bewußtsein zwischen verschiedenen Zuständen gleichsam hin und her schwinge, bot eine Anknüpfung an das Bild, das ich mir von dem inneren Wirken und Weben der menschlichen Seele gemacht hatte. Schiller unterscheidet zwei Bewußtseinszustände, in denen der Mensch sein Verhältnis zur Welt entwickelt. Überläßt er sich dem, was in ihm sinnlich wirkt, so lebt er unter der Nötigung der Natur. Die Sinne und die Triebe bestimmen sein Leben. Stellt er sich unter die logische Gesetzmäßigkeit der Vernunft, so lebt er in einer geistigen Notwendigkeit. Aber er kann einen mittleren Bewußtseinszustand in sich entwickeln. Er kann die «ästhetische Stimmung» ausbilden, die weder einseitig an die Naturnötigung, noch an die Vernunftnotwendigkeit hingegeben ist. In dieser ästhetischen Stimmung lebt die Seele durch die Sinne; aber sie trägt in die sinnliche Anschauung und in das von der Sinnlichkeit angeregte Handeln ein Geistiges hinein. Man nimmt mit den Sinnen wahr, aber so, als ob das Geistige in die Sinne eingeströmt wäre. Man überläßt sich im Handeln dem Wohlgefallen des unmittelbaren Begehrens, aber man hat dieses Begehren so veredelt, daß ihm das Gute gefällt, das Schlechte mißfällt Die Vernunft ist da eine innige Verbindung mit der Sinnlichkeit eingegangen. Das Gute wird zum Instinkt; der Instinkt darf sich selbst die Richtung geben, weil er in sich den Charakter der Geistigkeit angenommen hat. Schiller sieht in diesem Bewußtseinszustand diejenige Seelenverfassung, durch die der Mensch die Werke der Schönheit erleben und hervorbringen kann. In der Entwickelung dieses Zustandes findet er das Aufleben des wahren Menschenwesens im Menschen.
[ 44 ] Mich zogen diese Schiller'schen Gedankengänge an. Sie sprachen davon, daß man das Bewußtsein erst in einer bestimmten Verfassung haben müsse, um ein Verhältnis zu den Erscheinungen der Welt zu gewinnen, das der Wesenheit des Menschen entspricht. Mir war damit etwas gegeben, das die Fragen, die sich für mich aus Naturbetrachtung und Geist-Erleben stellten, zu einer größeren Deutlichkeit brachte. Schiller hat von dem Bewußtseinszustand gesprochen, der da sein muß, um die Schönheit der Welt zu erleben. Konnte man nicht auch an einen solchen Bewußtseinszustand denken, der die Wahrheit im Wesen der Dinge vermittelt? Wenn das berechtigt ist, dann kann man nicht in Kantscher Art das zunächst gegebene menschliche Bewußtsein betrachten und untersuchen, ob dieses an das wahre Wesen der Dinge herankommen könne. Sondern man mußte erst den Bewußtseinszustand erforschen, durch den der Mensch sich in ein solches Verhältnis zur Welt setzt, daß ihm die Dinge und Tatsachen ihr Wesen enthüllen.
[ 45 ] Und ich glaubte, zu erkennen, daß ein solcher Bewußtseinszustand bis zu einem gewissen Grade erreicht sei, wenn der Mensch nicht nur Gedanken habe, die äußere Dinge und Vorgänge abbilden, sondern solche, die er als Gedanken selbst erlebt. Dieses Leben in Gedanken offenbarte sich mir als ein ganz anderes als das ist, in dem man das gewöhnliche Dasein und auch die gewöhnliche wissenschaftliche Forschung verbringt. Geht man immer weiter in dem Gedanken-Erleben, so findet man, daß diesem Erleben die geistige Wirklichkeit entgegenkommt. Man nimmt den Seelenweg zu dem Geiste hin. Aber man gelangt auf diesem inneren Seelenwege zu einer geistigen Wirklichkeit, die man dann auch im Innern der Natur wiederfindet. Man erringt eine tiefere Naturerkenntnis, indem man sich der Natur dann gegenüberstellt, wenn man im lebendigen Gedanken die Wirklichkeit des Geistes geschaut hat.
[ 46 ] Mir wurde immer klarer, wie durch das Hinwegschreiten über die gewöhnlichen abstrakten Gedanken zu denjenigen geistigen Schauungen, die aber doch die Besonnenheit und Helligkeit des Gedankens sich bewahren, der Mensch sich in eine Wirklichkeit einlebt, von der ihn das gewöhnliche Bewußtsein entfernt. Dieses hat die Lebendigkeit der Sinneswahrnehmung auf der einen Seite, die Abstraktheit des Gedanken-Bildens auf der andern. Die geistige Schauung nimmt den Geist wahr wie die Sinne die Natur; aber sie steht mit dem Denken der geistigen Wahrnehmung nicht ferne wie das gewöhnliche Bewußtsein mit seinem Denken der Sinneswahrnehmung, sondern sie denkt, indem sie das Geistige erlebt, und sie erlebt, indem sie die erwachte Geistigkeit im Menschen zum Denken bringt.
[ 47 ] Eine geistige Schauung stellte sich mir vor die Seele hin, die nicht auf einem dunklen mystischen Gefühle beruhte. Sie verlief vielmehr in einer geistigen Betätigung, die an Durchsichtigkeit dem mathematischen Denken sich voll vergleichen ließ. Ich näherte mich der Seelenverfassung, in der ich glauben konnte, ich dürfe die Anschauung von der Geisteswelt, die ich in mir trug, auch vor dem Forum des naturwissenschaftlichen Denkens für gerechtfertigt halten.
[ 48 ] Ich stand, als diese Erlebnisse durch meine Seele zogen, in meinem zweiundzwanzigsten Lebensjahre.
Chapter III
[ 1 ] My father had been promised by the management of the Southern Railway Company that he would be appointed to a small station near Vienna when I graduated from secondary school and went to technical college. This would give me the opportunity to travel to Vienna and back every day. So my family came to Inzersdorf am Wiener Berge. The station stood there, far away from the town, in complete solitude in an unsightly natural setting.
[ 2 ] My first visit to Vienna after arriving in Inzersdorf was used to buy a large number of philosophical books. The one to which my particular love turned was the first draft of Fichte's "Wissenschaftslehre". I had got so far with my reading of Kant that I could form an idea, albeit an immature one, of the step Fichte wanted to take beyond Kant. But that didn't interest me too much. What mattered to me at that time was to express the living weaving of the human soul in the form of a strict conceptual image. My efforts to develop scientific concepts had finally led me to see the activity of the human "I" as the only possible starting point for true knowledge. If the ego is active and looks at this activity itself, then one has a spiritual in all immediacy in consciousness, so I said to myself. I thought that all one had to do now was to express what one sees in clear, manageable terms. To find the way to do this, I followed Fichte's "Wissenschaftslehre". But I still had my own views. And so I went through the "Wissenschaftslehre" page by page and rewrote it. The result was a long manuscript. Previously, I had struggled to find concepts for natural phenomena from which one could find one for the "I". Now, conversely, I wanted to break into the becoming of nature from the ego. Spirit and nature stood before my soul in full opposition. A world of spiritual beings existed for me. The fact that the "I", which is itself spirit, lives in a world of spirits was a direct observation for me. Nature, however, did not want to enter the spiritual world I experienced.
[ 3 ] Based on the "Wissenschaftslehre", I became particularly interested in Fichte's treatises "Über die Bestimmung des Gelehrten" and "Über das Wesen des Gelehrten". In these writings I found a kind of ideal to which I wanted to aspire myself. I also read the "Speeches to the German Nation". At the time, they captivated me much less than Fichte's other works.
[ 4 ] However, I also wanted to gain a better understanding of Kant than I had been able to so far. However, the Critique of Pure Reason did not provide me with this understanding. So I took it up with the "Prolegomena to any future metaphysics". This book made me realize that it was necessary for me to thoroughly address all the questions that Kant had stimulated in the thinkers. I now worked more and more consciously on casting the immediate view I had of the spiritual world into the form of thoughts. And while this inner work filled me, I tried to orient myself on the paths taken by the thinkers of Kant's time and those of the following epoch. I studied Traugott Krug's dry, sober "transcendental synthetism" just as eagerly as I immersed myself in the epistemology that Fichte had arrived at when he wrote his "Determination of Man". The "History of Philosophy" by the Herbartian Thilo broadened my view of the development of philosophical thought from the time of Kant. I made my way to Schelling and Hegel. The contrast of thought in Fichte and Herbart came before my soul with all its intensity.
[ 5 ] The summer months of 1879, from the end of my secondary school years until I entered the technical college, were spent entirely on such philosophical studies. In the fall I was to decide on the direction of a bread-and-butter course of study. I decided to work towards becoming a secondary school teacher. Studying mathematics and descriptive geometry suited my inclination. I had to give up the latter. Because its study was connected with a number of hours of practice in geometric drawing during the day. But in order to earn some money, I had to have time to give private lessons. This was compatible with listening to lectures whose material you could read up on if you had to miss them, but not with regularly sitting through the drawing lessons at school myself.
[ 6 ] So I initially enrolled in mathematics, natural history and chemistry.
[ 7 ] But the lectures Karl Julius Schröer gave on German literature at the technical college were of particular importance to me. In the first year of my university studies, he lectured on "German Literature since Goethe" and on "Schiller's Life and Works". I was captivated from his very first lecture. He developed an overview of German intellectual life in the second half of the eighteenth century and dramatized Goethe's first appearance in this intellectual life. The warmth of his treatment, the enthusiastic way in which he read from the poets during the lectures, introduced us to the poetry in an internalized way.
[ 8 ] He had also set up "exercises in oral and written presentation". The students were supposed to present or read out what they had worked out themselves. Schröer then gave instructions on style, presentation form etc. based on the students' performance. I first gave a lecture on Lessing's Laocoon. Then I set myself a bigger task. I worked out the topic: To what extent is man a free being in his actions? In the course of this work, I became heavily involved in Herbartian philosophy. Schröer didn't like that at all. He didn't go along with the trend in favor of Herbart, which was the prevailing trend in Austria at the time, both in the philosophical pulpits and in pedagogy. He was completely devoted to Goethe's way of thinking. Everything that followed on from Herbart seemed pedantic and sober to him, even though he recognized the discipline of thought in him.
[ 9 ] I was now also able to listen to individual lectures at the university. I was really looking forward to the Herbertian Robert Zimmermann. He read "Practical Philosophy". I listened to the part of his lectures in which he discussed the basic principles of ethics. I alternated between sitting with him one day and Franz Brentano the next, who was reading on the same subject at the same time. I couldn't continue this for too long because I missed too much at the technical college as a result.
[ 10 ] I was deeply impressed to learn about philosophy not just from books, but to hear it from the mouths of philosophers themselves.
[ 11 ] Robert Zimmermann was a strange personality. He had an unusually high forehead and a long philosopher's beard. Everything about him was measured, stylized. When he came in the door, when he stepped up to the catheter, his steps were as if rehearsed and yet again in such a way that one said to oneself: it is natural for the man to be like this. His posture and movements were as if he had formed himself in long discipline according to Herbartian aesthetic principles. And you could really sympathize with it all. He then sat down slowly on his chair, looked through his glasses at the auditorium for a long time, then slowly took off his glasses, looked again at the audience for a long time without looking back, then began his lecture in free speech, but in carefully formed, artfully spoken sentences. There was something classical about his language. But because of the long periods of listening, it was easy to lose the thread of his presentation. He presented Herbart's philosophy in a somewhat modified form. The rigor of his train of thought made an impression on me. But not on the other listeners. In the first three or four lectures, the large hall in which he lectured was overcrowded. "Practical Philosophy" was a compulsory lecture for first-year law students. They needed the professor's signature in the index. From the fifth or sixth hour onwards, most of them stayed away; listening to the philosophical classic, there were only very few listeners on the front benches.
[ 12 ] These lectures did provide me with a strong stimulus. And I was deeply interested in the differences between Schröer's and Zimmermann's views. I spent the little time I had left from listening to the lectures and the private lessons I had to give either in the court library or in the library of the technical college. There I read Goethe's "Faust" for the first time. I had not actually got as far as this work until my nineteenth year, when I was inspired by Schröer. At that time, however, my interest in the work was immediately aroused. Schröer had already published his edition of the first part. It was from it that I first became acquainted with the first part. In addition, I became acquainted with Schröer after just a few of his lectures. He often took me to his house, said this or that to me in addition to his lectures, gladly answered my questions and left me with a book from his library, which he lent me to read. He also said a few words about the second part of "Faust", which he was currently working on publishing and explaining. I also read this at that time.
[ 13 ] In the libraries, I studied Herbart's "Metaphysics" and Zimmermann's "Aesthetics as a Science of Form", which was written from Herbart's point of view. I also studied Ernst Haeckel's "General Morphology" in depth. I may well say that everything I encountered through Schröer's and Zimmermann's lectures, as well as through the marked reading, became the deepest experience of my soul at that time. Knowledge and worldview puzzles were formed for me.
[ 14 ] Schröer was a mind that was not interested in systematics. He thought and spoke from a certain intuition. He had the greatest possible respect for the way in which he put his views into words. It was probably for this reason that he never spoke freely in his lectures. He needed the peace of writing to satisfy himself in the transformation of his thoughts into the word to be spoken. He then read out what he had written with a strong internalization of the speech. But - once he spoke freely about Anastasius Grün and Lenau. He had forgotten his manuscript. But in the next lesson he read the whole subject again. He was not satisfied with the form he had been able to give it in free speech.
[ 15 ] I got to know many works of beauty from Schröer. Through Zimmermann, I was introduced to a developed theory of beauty. The two did not go well together. Schröer, the intuitive personality with a certain disdain for the systematic, stood for me next to Zimmermann, the strict systematic theorist of beauty.
[ 16 ] In Franz Brentano, with whom I also attended lectures on "practical philosophy", I was particularly interested in his personality at the time. He was sharp-thinking and pensive at the same time. There was something solemn in the way he presented himself as a lecturer. I heard what he said, but had to pay attention to every look, every movement of his head, every gesture of his expressive hands. He was the consummate logician. Every thought had to be absolutely transparent and supported by numerous others. The greatest logical conscientiousness prevailed in the forming of these lines of thought. But I had the feeling that this thinking could not escape from its own weaving; it did not break into reality anywhere. And so was Brentano's whole posture. He held the manuscript loosely in his hand, as if it might slip from his fingers at any moment; he only glanced at the lines. This gesture, too, was only a gentle touch of reality, not a firm grasp. I could understand the nature of his philosophizing even more from his "philosopher's hands" than from his words.
[ 17 ] The inspiration that Brentano gave me had a strong effect on me. I soon began to study his writings and in later years I read most of what he published.
[ 18 ] I considered it my duty at the time to seek the truth through philosophy. I should study mathematics and science. I was convinced that I would not be able to relate to them if I could not place their results on a secure philosophical foundation. But I did see a spiritual world as reality. The spiritual individuality of every human being revealed itself to me with great vividness. This only had its manifestation in the physical body and in the actions in the physical world. It united with that which came from the parents as a physical germ. I continued to follow the deceased person on his path into the spiritual world. After the death of a fellow pupil, I once wrote to one of my former teachers, who remained close to me as a friend even after my time at secondary school, about this side of my spiritual life. He wrote back to me with unusual kindness, but didn't acknowledge what I wrote about the deceased classmate at all.
[ 19 ] And so it was everywhere with my view of the spiritual world. People didn't want to hear anything about it. At most, all sorts of spiritualistic things came from this or that side. Again, I didn't want to hear anything. It seemed tasteless to me to approach the spiritual in such a way.
[ 20 ] Then it happened that I became acquainted with a simple man from the people. He traveled to Vienna every week on the same train that I used. He collected medicinal herbs in the countryside and sold them to pharmacies in Vienna. We became friends. You could talk to him about the spiritual world like someone who had experience of it. He was an inwardly pious personality. He was uneducated in all things scholastic. He had read many mystical books, but what he said was completely uninfluenced by this reading. It was the outpouring of a soul life that carried a completely elementary, creative wisdom. One could soon sense that he only read the books because he wanted to find in others what he knew through himself. But it did not satisfy him. He revealed himself as if he, as a personality, were only the organ of speech for a spiritual content that wanted to speak from hidden worlds. When you were with him, you could look deep into the secrets of nature. He carried his bundle of medicinal herbs on his back; but in his heart he carried the results he had gained from the spirituality of nature during his collecting. I have seen many a person smile, who sometimes joined me as a third person, when I walked with this "initiate" through Vienna's Alleegasse. That was no wonder. Because his way of speaking was not understandable from the outset. You first had to learn his "intellectual dialect", so to speak. I couldn't understand him at first either. But from the first time I met him, I had the deepest sympathy for him. And so, little by little, I felt as if I were with a soul from very ancient times who, untouched by the civilization, science and views of the present, brought me an instinctive knowledge of the past.
[ 21 ] If you take the usual concept of "learning", you could say that you could "learn" nothing from this man. But if one had the perception of a spiritual world oneself, one could gain deep insights into it through another person who was completely established in it.
[ 22 ] And yet this personality was far removed from everything that was rapture. When you entered his home, you were in the company of the most sober, simple country family. Above the door of his house were the words: "Everything is in God's blessing." You were entertained like other villagers. I always had to drink coffee, not from a cup, but from a "mug" that held almost a liter; I also had to eat a piece of bread that was huge. But even the villagers didn't see the man as a crush. The way he conducted himself in his hometown defied all ridicule. He also had a healthy sense of humor and knew how to talk to young and old in the village at every encounter in such a way that people enjoyed his words. Nobody smiled like the people who walked with him and me through the Alleegasse in Vienna and who mostly saw something in him that seemed completely alien to them. Even when life took me away from him again, this man remained close to my soul. You can find him in my mystery dramas in the form of Felix Balde.
[ 23 ] It was not easy for my soul life at that time that the philosophy I heard from others could not be brought close to the view of the spiritual world in its thinking. From the difficulties I experienced in this direction, a kind of "theory of knowledge" began to form in me. Life in thinking gradually appeared to me as the reflection in the physical human being of what the soul experiences in the spiritual world. Thought-experience was to me the existence in a reality that could not be approached as a thoroughly experienced reality. The world of the senses did not seem so tangible to me. It is there, but one does not grasp it like one grasps a thought. There may be an essential unknown in it or behind it. But man is placed within it. The question then arose: is this world a full reality? If man weaves thoughts into it from within himself, which then bring light into this world of the senses, does he actually add something foreign to it? That does not correspond at all to the experience one has when the world of the senses stands before man and he breaks into it with his thoughts. Then the thoughts prove to be that through which the sense world expresses itself. The further pursuit of this contemplation was then an important part of my inner life.
[ 24 ] But I wanted to be careful. It seemed dangerous to rush into a train of thought until I had formed my own philosophical view. This drove me to study Hegel in depth. The way in which this philosopher presents the reality of thought was close to me. I was repelled by the fact that he only penetrates to a world of thought, albeit a living one, and not to a view of a concrete spiritual world. I was attracted by the certainty with which one philosophizes when one progresses from thought to thought. I saw that many felt a contrast between experience and thought. To me, thinking itself was experience, but one in which one lives, not one that approaches a person from the outside. And so Hegel became very valuable to me for a long time.
[ 25 ] In my compulsory studies, which would naturally have had to be neglected under these philosophical interests, I benefited from the fact that I had already dealt a lot with differential and integral calculus, as well as analytical geometry. This allowed me to stay away from many a mathematical lecture without losing the context. Mathematics retained its importance for me as the basis of my entire quest for knowledge. After all, it provides a system of views and concepts that are independent of all external sensory experience. And yet, as I constantly told myself at the time, one approaches sensory reality with these views and concepts and finds its laws through them. Through mathematics one learns to know the world, and yet in order to achieve this, one must first allow mathematics to emerge from the human soul.
[ 26 ] A decisive experience came to me at that time precisely from the mathematical side. The idea of space presented me with the greatest inner difficulties. It could not be conceived in a manageable way as the void running into infinity on all sides, which was the basis of the prevailing scientific theories at the time. Through the newer (synthetic) geometry, which I became acquainted with through lectures and private study, the view came before my soul that a line, which is extended to the right into infinity, returns from the left to its starting point. The infinitely distant point to the right is the same as the infinitely distant point to the left.
[ 27 ] I thought that such ideas of modern geometry could be used to conceptualize space, which would otherwise stare into emptiness. The straight line returning to itself like a circle felt like a revelation to me. I walked out of the lecture in which this first came to my mind as if a hundredweight had been lifted from me. A liberating feeling came over me. Once again, as in my very young boyhood years, geometry gave me something exhilarating.
[ 28 ] After the puzzle of space, there was the puzzle of time for me at this stage of my life. Should it also be possible to imagine a progression into the "infinitely distant" future that contains an idealized return from the past? The happiness about the concept of space brought something deeply unsettling about the concept of time. But at first there was no way out. All attempts at reflection led to the realization that I had to be particularly careful not to introduce the vivid concepts of space into the concept of time. All the disappointments that the pursuit of knowledge can bring occurred with the puzzle of time.
[ 29 ] The inspiration I had received from Zimmermann for aesthetics led me to read the writings of the famous aesthete of the time, Friedrich Theodor Vischer. At one point in his works I found a reference to the fact that modern scientific thinking necessitated a reform of the concept of time. I was always particularly excited when I found a need for knowledge that arose in me in someone else. In this case, it was like a justification of my striving for a satisfactory concept of time.
[ 30 ] I always had to complete the lectures for which I was enrolled at the technical college with the corresponding examinations. This was because I had been granted a scholarship, which I could only continue to receive if I demonstrated certain academic successes every year.
[ 31 ] But this compulsory course of study did little to satisfy my need for knowledge, particularly in the natural sciences. At that time, however, it was possible to attend lectures and even tutorials as a guest student at Viennese universities. I was met with a welcoming attitude everywhere when I wanted to cultivate my academic life in this way, even in medicine.
[ 32 ] I may say that I did not allow my insights into the spiritual to interfere when it came to getting to know the natural sciences as they were developed at the time. I devoted myself to what was being taught, and only in the background did I hope that one day I would be able to unite natural science with spiritual knowledge. I was worried about this hope from only two sides.
[ 33 ] The sciences of organic nature were saturated with Darwinian ideas where I was able to deal with them. At the time, Darwinism in its highest ideas seemed to me to be a scientific impossibility. I had gradually come to form a picture of man's inner self. This was of a spiritual nature. And it was conceived as a member of a spiritual world. It was imagined in such a way that it submerged from the spiritual world into the natural world, integrating itself into the natural organism in order to perceive and act through it in the sensory world.
[ 34 ] The fact that I had a certain respect for the ideas of the organic theory of development meant that I could not be dissuaded from this view. The emergence of higher organisms from lower ones seemed to me a fruitful idea. Their unification with what I knew as the spiritual world was immeasurably difficult.
[ 35 ] The physical studies were completely interspersed with the mechanical theory of heat and the theory of waves for the phenomena of light and color.
[ 36 ] The study of the mechanical theory of heat had a personal appeal for me because I attended lectures on this field of physics given by a person whom I greatly admired. It was Edmund Reitlinger, the author of the beautiful book "Freie Blicke".
[ 37 ] This man was of the most winning amiability. When I became his listener, he was already suffering from a severe lung disease. For two years I attended his lectures on mechanical heat theory, physics for chemists and the history of physics. I worked with him in the physics laboratory in many fields, especially spectral analysis.
[ 38 ] Reitlinger's lectures on the history of physics were of particular importance to me. He spoke in such a way that one had the feeling that every word was difficult for him because of his illness. Nevertheless, his lecture was inspiring in the very best sense. He was a man of strictly inductive research; he liked to quote Whewell's book on inductive sciences for everything methodical in physics. For him, Newton was the pinnacle of physical research. He presented the history of physics in two sections: the first from the earliest times to Newton, the second from Newton to modern times. He was a universal thinker. From the historical consideration of physical problems, he always moved on to general cultural-historical perspectives. Indeed, general philosophical ideas also appeared in his scientific lectures. For example, he dealt with optimism and pessimism and spoke about the justification of scientific hypotheses in an extraordinarily inspiring way. His presentation of Kepler and his characterization of Julius Robert Mayer were masterpieces of scientific lectures.
[ 39 ] I was encouraged at the time to read almost all of Julius Robert Mayer's writings; and it was truly a great pleasure for me to be able to discuss their content with Reitlinger orally on many occasions.
[ 40 ] I was filled with great sadness when, a few weeks after I had taken my last examination in mechanical heat theory with Reitlinger, my beloved teacher succumbed to his serious illness. Shortly before his death, he had given me a legacy of recommendations for people who could provide me with students for private tuition. This was very successful. I had the dead Reitlinger to thank for a not insignificant part of the means of subsistence I received over the next few years.
[ 41 ] Through the mechanical theory of heat and the theory of waves for light phenomena and the effects of electricity, I was pushed into epistemological studies. At that time, the physical external world presented itself as the motion processes of matter. The sensations of the senses only appeared as subjective experiences, as effects of pure motion processes on the human senses. The movement processes of matter take place out there in space; when these processes meet the human sense of warmth, man experiences the sensations of warmth. There are outside the human being wave processes of the ether; if these hit the optic nerve, the perception of light and color arises within the human being.
[ 42 ] I encountered this view everywhere. It made my thinking unspeakably difficult. It drove all spirit out of the objective outside world. The idea stood before my soul that if the contemplation of natural phenomena led to such assumptions, one could not approach these assumptions with a view from the spirit. I saw how seductive these assumptions were for the school of thought that had been trained in natural science at the time. Even now, I could not decide to oppose the prevailing way of thinking even for myself. But it was precisely this that led to difficult struggles of the soul. Again and again, the easily conceivable criticism of this way of thinking had to be defeated inwardly in order to await the time when further sources of knowledge and paths of knowledge would provide greater certainty.
[ 43 ] I received a strong stimulus from reading Schiller's "Letters on the Aesthetic Education of Man". The reference to the fact that human consciousness swings back and forth between different states, as it were, provided a link to the image I had formed of the inner workings and weaving of the human soul. Schiller distinguishes between two states of consciousness in which man develops his relationship to the world. If he abandons himself to what works in him sensually, he lives under the compulsion of nature. The senses and the instincts determine his life. If he places himself under the logical laws of reason, he lives in a spiritual necessity. But he can develop a medium state of consciousness within himself. It can develop the "aesthetic mood", which is neither one-sidedly devoted to the necessity of nature nor to the necessity of reason. In this aesthetic mood, the soul lives through the senses; but it carries a spiritual element into sensual perception and into the actions stimulated by sensuality. One perceives with the senses, but as if the spiritual had flowed into the senses. In acting we abandon ourselves to the pleasure of immediate desire, but we have refined this desire in such a way that it likes the good and dislikes the bad. The good becomes instinct; instinct is allowed to give itself direction because it has taken on the character of spirituality. Schiller sees in this state of consciousness the constitution of the soul through which man can experience and produce the works of beauty. In the development of this state, he finds the revival of the true human being in man.
[ 44 ] I was attracted by these Schillerian trains of thought. They spoke of the fact that one must first have consciousness in a certain state in order to gain a relationship to the phenomena of the world that corresponds to the essence of man. This gave me something that brought the questions that arose for me from the observation of nature and the experience of the spirit into greater clarity. Schiller spoke of the state of consciousness that must exist in order to experience the beauty of the world. Could one not also think of such a state of consciousness that conveys the truth in the essence of things? If this is justified, then one cannot look at the initially given human consciousness in the Kantian manner and investigate whether it can approach the true essence of things. Rather, one must first investigate the state of consciousness through which man places himself in such a relationship to the world that things and facts reveal their essence to him.
[ 45 ] And I believed to recognize that such a state of consciousness is reached to a certain degree when man has not only thoughts that depict external things and processes, but those that he experiences as thoughts themselves. This life in thought revealed itself to me as being quite different from that in which one spends ordinary existence and also ordinary scientific research. If one goes further and further in the experience of thought, one finds that this experience is met by spiritual reality. One takes the path of the soul to the spirit. But on this inner path of the soul one arrives at a spiritual reality, which one then also finds again in the interior of nature. One attains a deeper knowledge of nature by confronting nature when one has seen the reality of the spirit in living thought.
[ 46 ] I realized more and more clearly how, by moving beyond ordinary abstract thoughts to those spiritual visions which nevertheless retain the prudence and brightness of thought, man becomes immersed in a reality from which ordinary consciousness distances him. This has the vividness of sense perception on the one hand, and the abstractness of thought-imaging on the other. Spiritual vision perceives the spirit as the senses perceive nature; but it is not distant from spiritual perception with its thinking as ordinary consciousness is from sense perception with its thinking, but it thinks by experiencing the spiritual, and it experiences by bringing the awakened spirituality in man to thought.
[ 47 ] A spiritual vision presented itself to my soul that was not based on a dark mystical feeling. Rather, it proceeded in a spiritual activity that could be fully compared to mathematical thinking in terms of transparency. I approached a state of mind in which I could believe that I could consider the view of the spiritual world that I carried within me to be justified even in the forum of scientific thought.
[ 48 ] I was in my twenty-second year when these experiences passed through my soul.