The Story of My Life
GA 28
Chapter IX
[ 1 ] It was at this time (1888) that I took my first journey into Germany. This was made possible through the invitation to participate in the Weimar edition of Goethe, which was to be prepared by the Goethe Institute under a commission from the Grand-duchess Sophie of Saxony. Some years earlier Goethe's grandson, Walther von Goethe, had died. He had left as a legacy to the Grand-duchess the manuscripts of Goethe. She had thereupon founded the Goethe Institute and, in conjunction with a number of Goethe specialists – chief among whom were Hermann Grimm, Gustav von Loeper, and William Scherer – had determined to prepare an edition of Goethe in which his already known works should be combined with the unpublished remains.
[ 2 ] My publications concerning Goethe were the occasion of my being requested to prepare a part of Goethe's writings on natural science for this edition. I was called to Weimar to make a general survey of the natural-scientific part of the remains and to take the first steps required by my task.
[ 3 ] My sojourn for some weeks in Goethe's city was a festival time in my life. For years I had lived in the thoughts of Goethe; now I was permitted to be in the places where these thoughts had arisen. [ 4 ] I passed these weeks in the elevated impression arising from this feeling. I was able from day to day to have before my eyes the papers in which were contained the supplements to that which I had already prepared for the edition of Goethe for the Kürschner National-Literatur.
[ 5 ] My work in connection with this edition had given me a mental picture of Goethe's world-conception. Now the question to be settled was how this picture would stand in view of the fact that hitherto unpublished material dealing with natural science was to be found in these literary remains. With the greatest intensity I worked at this portion of the Goethe legacy.
[ 6 ] I soon thought I could recognize that the previously unpublished material afforded an important contribution toward the very task of more thoroughly understanding Goethe's form of cognition.
[ 7 ] In my writings published up to that time I had conceived this form of cognition as consisting in the fact that Goethe perceived vitally. In the ordinary state of consciousness man is at first a stranger to the being of the world by which he is surrounded. Out of this remoteness arises the impulse first to develop, before knowing the world, powers of knowledge which are not present in ordinary consciousness.
[ 8 ] From this point of view it was highly significant for me when I came upon such directing thoughts as the following among Goethe's papers: –
[ 9 ] “In order to get our bearings to some extent in these different sorts [Goethe here refers to the different sorts of knowledge in man and his different relationships to the outer world] we may classify these as: practising, knowing, perceiving, and comprehending.
[ 10 ] “1. Practical, benefit-seeking, acquisitive persons are the first who, so to speak, sketch the field of science and lay hold upon practice. Consciousness gives a sort of certitude to these through experience, and necessity gives them a certain breadth.
[ 11 ] “2. Knowledge-craving persons require a serene look free from personal ends, a restless curiosity, a clear understanding, and these stand always in relationship with the previous type. They likewise elaborate what they discover, only they do this in a scientific sense.
[ 12 ] “3. The perceptive are in themselves productive; and knowledge, while itself progressing, calls for perception without intending this, and goes over into perception; and, no matter how much the knowers may make the sign of the cross to shield themselves from imagination, yet they must none the less, if they are not to deceive themselves, call in the aid of the imagination.
[ 13 ] “4. The comprehending, whom one may call in a proud sense the creative, are in themselves in the highest sense productive; beginning as they do with the idea, they express thereby the unity of the whole, and it is in a certain sense in accord with the facts of nature thus to conform themselves with this idea.”
[ 14 ] It becomes clear from such comment that Goethe considered man in his ordinary consciousness as standing outside the being of the external world. He must pass over into another form of consciousness if he desires knowingly to unite with this being. During my sojourn in Weimar the question arose within me in more and more decisive form: How must a man build further upon the foundations of knowledge laid by Goethe in order to be guided knowingly over from Goethe's sort of perceptions to that sort which can take up into itself actual experience in the spirit, as this has been given to me?
Goethe goes forward from that which is attained on the lower stages of knowledge, by “practical” persons and by those “craving knowledge.” Upon this he causes to shine in his mind whatever can shine in the “perceiving” and the “comprehending” through productive powers of the mind upon the content of the lower stages of knowledge. When he stands thus with the lower knowledge in the mind in the light of the higher perception and comprehension, then he feels that he is in union with the being of things. [ 15 ] To live knowingly in the spirit is, to be sure, not yet attained in this way; but the road to this is pointed out from one side, from that side which results from the relation of man to the outer world. It was clear to my mind that satisfaction could come only with a grasp upon the other side, which arises from man's relation to himself.
[ 16 ] When consciousness becomes productive, and therefore brings forth from within itself something to add to the first pictures of reality, can it then remain within a reality, or does it float out of this to lose itself in the unreal? What stands against consciousness in its own “product” – it is this thing that we must look into. Human consciousness must first effect an understanding of itself; then can man find a confirmation of the experience of pure spirit. Such were the ways taken by my thoughts, repeating in clearer fashion their earlier forms, as I pored over Goethe's papers in Weimar.
[ 17 ] It was summer. Little was to be seen of the contemporary art life of Weimar. One could yield oneself in complete serenity to the artistic, which represented, as it were, a memorial to Goethe's work. One did not live in the present; one was drawn back to the time of Goethe. At the moment it was the age of Liszt in Weimar. But the representatives of this age were not there.
[ 18 ] The hours after work I passed with those who were connected with the Institute. In addition there were others sharing in the work who came from elsewhere for longer or shorter visits. I was received with extraordinary kindness by Bernhard Suphan, the director of the Goethe Institute; and in Julius Wahle, a permanent collaborator, I found a dear friend. All this, however, took on a definite form when I went there two years later for a longer period, and it must be narrated at the point where I shall tell about that period of my life.
[ 19 ] More than anything else at that time I craved to know personally Eduard von Hartmann, with whom I had corresponded for years in regard to philosophical matters. This was to take place during a brief stay in Berlin which followed that in Weimar.
[ 20 ] I had the privilege of a long conversation with the philosopher. He lay upon a sofa, his legs stretched out and his upper body erect. It was in such a posture that he passed by far the greater part of his life from the time when the suffering with his knee began. I saw before me a forehead which was an evident manifestation of a clear and keen understanding, and eyes which in their look revealed that assurance felt in the innermost being of the man as to that which he knew. A mighty beard framed in the face. He spoke with complete confidence, which showed how he had woven certain basic thoughts about the whole world-concept and thus in his way illuminated it. In these thoughts everything which came to him from other points of view was at once overwhelmed with criticism. So I sat facing him while he sharply passed, judgment upon me, but in reality never inwardly listened to me. For him the being of things lay in the unconscious, and must ever remain hidden there so far as concerned human consciousness; for me the unconscious was something which could more and more be raised up into consciousness through the strivings of the soul's life. During the course of the conversation about this, I said that one should not assume beforehand that a concept is something severed from reality and representing only an unreality in consciousness. Such a view could never be the starting-point for a theory of cognition. For by this means one shuts oneself off from access to all reality in that one can then only believe that one is living in concepts and that one can never approach toward a reality except, through hypothetical concepts – that is, in an unreal manner. One should rather seek to prove beforehand whether this view of the concept as an unreality is tenable, or whether it rises out of a preconception. Eduard von Hartmann replied that there could be no argument as to this; in the very definition of the term “concept” lay the evidence that nothing real is to be found there. When I received such an answer I was chilled to the soul. Definitions to be the point of departure for conceptions of life! I realized how far removed I was from contemporary philosophy. While I sat in the train on my return journey, buried in thoughts and recollections of this visit, which was nevertheless so valuable to me, I felt again that chilling of the heart. It was something which affected me for a long time afterward.
[ 21 ] Except for the visit to Eduard von Hartmann, the brief sojourns I made at Berlin and Munich, while passing through Germany after my stay at Weimar, were given over entirely to absorption in the art which these places afforded. The broadening of the scope of my perception in this direction seemed to me at that time especially enriching to my mental life. So this first long journey that I was able to take was of very comprehensive significance in the development of my conceptions as to art. A fullness of vital impressions remained with me when I spent some weeks just after this visit in the Salzkammergut with the family whose sons I had already been teaching for a number of years. I was further advised to find my vocation in private tutoring, and I was inwardly determined upon the same course because I desired to bring forward to a certain point in his life evolution the boy whose education had been entrusted to me some years before, and in whom I had succeeded in awakening the soul from a state of absolute sleep.
[ 22 ] After this, when I had returned to Vienna, I had the opportunity to mingle a great deal in a group of persons bound together by a woman whose mystical, theosophical type of mind made a profound impression upon all the members of this group. The hours I spent in the home of this woman, Marie Lang, were in the highest degree useful to me. An earnest type of life-conception and life-experience was present in vital and nobly beautiful form in Marie Lang. Her profound inner experiences came to expression in a sonorous and penetrating voice. A life which struggled hard with itself and the world could find in her only in a mystical seeking a sort of satisfaction, even though one that was incomplete. So she almost seemed created to be the soul of a group of seeking men. Into this circle had penetrated theosophy initiated by H. P. Blavatsky at the close of the preceding century. Franz Hartmann, who by reason of his numerous theosophical works and his relations with H. P. Blavatsky, had become widely known, also introduced his theosophy into this circle – Marie Lang had accepted much out of this theosophy. The thought-content which is there to be found seemed in many respects to harmonize with the characteristics of her mind. Yet what she took from this source had attached itself to her in a merely external way. But within herself she had mystical possession which had been lifted into the realm consciousness in a quite elementary fashion out of a heart tested by life.
[ 23 ] The architects, littérateurs, and other persons whom I met in the home of Marie Lang would scarcely have been interested in the theosophy offered by Franz Hartmann had not Marie Lang to some extent participated in this. Least of all would I myself have been interested in it; for the way of relating oneself to the spiritual world which was evidenced in the writings of Franz Hartmann was absolutely opposite to the bent of my own mind. I could not concede that it was possessed of real and inner truth. I was less concerned with its content than with the manner in which it affected men who, nevertheless, were truly seekers.
[ 24 ] Through Marie Lang I became acquainted with Frau Rosa Mayreder, who was a friend of hers. Rosa Mayreder was one of those persons to whom in the course of my life I have given the greatest reverence, and in whose development I have had the greatest interest. I can well imagine that what I have to say here will please her very little; but this is the way that I feel as to what came into my life by reason of her. Of the writings of Rosa Mayreder which since that time have justly made so great an impression upon so many persons, and which undoubtedly gave her a very conspicuous place in literature, nothing had at that time appeared. But what is revealed in these writings lived in Rosa Mayreder in a spiritual form of expression to which I had to respond with the strongest possible inner sympathy. This woman impressed me as if she possessed each of the gifts of the human mind in such measure that these in their harmonious interaction constituted the right expression of a human being. She united various artistic gifts with a free, penetrating power of observation. Her paintings are just as much marked by individual unfoldings of life as by absorption in the depths of the objective world. The stories with which she began her literary career are perfect harmonies made up of personal strivings and objective observations. Her later works show this character more and more. Most clearly of all does this come to light in her late two-volume work, Kritik der Weiblichkeit.1A survey of the Woman Problem. I consider it a beautiful treasure of my life to have spent many hours during the time about which I am here writing together with Rosa Mayreder during the years of her seeking and mental strivings.
[ 25 ] I must in this connection refer again to one of my human relationships which took its rise and reached a vital intensity above the sphere of thought-content, and, in a sense, quite independently of this. For my world-conception, and even more my emotional tendencies, were not those of Rosa Mayreder. The way by which I ascended from that which is in this respect recognized as scientific into an experience of the spiritual cannot possibly be congenial to her. She seeks to use the scientific as the foundation for ideas which have as their goal the complete development of human personality without permitting the knowledge of a world of pure spirit to find access into this personality. What is to me a necessity in this direction to her means almost nothing. She is wholly devoted to the furtherance of the present human individuality and pays no attention to the action of spiritual forces within these individualities. Through this method of hers she has achieved the most significant exposition yet produced of the nature of womanhood and the vital needs of woman.
Neither could I ever satisfy Rosa Mayreder in respect to the view she formed of my attitude toward art. She thought that I denied true art, because I sought to get a grasp upon specific examples of art by means of the view which entered my mind by reason of my experience of the spiritual. Because of this she maintained that I could not sufficiently penetrate into the revelation of the sense-world and thus arrive at the reality of art, whereas I was seeking just this thing – to penetrate within the full truth of the sensible forms. But all this did not detract from the inner friendly interest in this personality which developed in me at the time, during which I owe to her some of the most valuable hours of my life – an interest which in truth remains undiminished even to the present day.
[ 26 ] At the home of Rosa Mayreder I was often privileged to share in conversations for which gifted men gathered there. Very quiet, seemingly with his gaze inward upon himself rather than listening to those about him, sat Hugo Wolf, who was an intimate friend of Rosa Mayreder. One listened inwardly to him even though he spoke so little. For whatever entered into his life was communicated in mysterious fashion to those who might be with him. With heartfelt affection was I attached to the husband of Frau Rosa, Karl Mayreder, so fine a person both as man and as artist, and also to his brother, Julius Mayreder, so enthusiastic in regard to art. Marie Lang and her circle and Friedrich Eckstein, who was then wholly given over to the spiritual tendencies and world-conception of theosophy, were often present.
This was the time when my Philosophy of Spiritual Activity was taking more and more definite form in my mind. Rosa Mayreder is the person with whom I talked most concerning this form at the time when my book was thus coming into existence. She relieved me of a part of the inner loneliness in which I had lived. She was striving for a conception of the actual human personality; I toward a revelation of the world which might seek for this personality at the basis of the soul by means of spiritual eyes thus opened. Between the two there were many bridges. Often in later life has there arisen before my grateful spirit one or another picture from this experience, for example, memory pictures of a walk through the noble Alpine forests, during which Rosa Mayreder and I discussed the true meaning of human freedom.
Chapter IX
[ 1 ] In diese Zeit (1889) fällt meine erste Reise nach Deutschland. Sie ist veranlaßt worden durch die Einladung zur Mitarbeiterschaft an der Weimarer Goethe-Ausgabe, die im Auftrage der Großherzogin Sophie von Sachsen durch das Goethe-Archiv besorgt wurde. Einige Jahre vorher war Goethes Enkel, Walter von Goethe, gestorben; er hatte Goethes handschriftlichen Nachlaß der Großherzogin als Erbe übermacht. Diese hatte damit das Goethe-Archiv begründet und im Verein mit einer Anzahl von Goethe-Kennern, an deren Spitze Herman Grimm, Gustav von Loeper und Wilhelm Scherer standen, beschlossen, eine Goethe-Ausgabe zu veranstalten, in der das von Goethe Bekannte mit dem noch unveröffentlichten Nachlaß vereinigt werden sollte.
[ 2 ] Meine Veröffentlichungen zur Goethe-Literatur waren die Veranlassung, daß ich aufgefordert wurde, einen Teil der naturwissenschaftlichen Schriften Goethes für diese Ausgabe zu bearbeiten. Um mich in dem naturwissenschaftlichen Nachlaß zu orientieren und die ersten Schritte zu meiner Arbeit zu machen, wurde ich nach Weimar gerufen.
[ 3 ] Mein durch einige Wochen dauernder Aufenthalt in der Goethe-Stadt war für mich eine Festeszeit meines Lebens. Ich hatte jahrelang in Goethes Gedanken gelebt; jetzt durfte ich selber an den Stätten sein, an denen diese Gedanken entstanden sind. Unter dem erhebenden Eindrucke dieses Gefühles verbrachte ich diese Wochen.
[ 4 ] Ich durfte nun Tag für Tag die Papiere vor Augen haben, auf denen Ergänzungen zu dem standen, was ich vorher für die Goethe-Ausgabe der Kürschner'schen «National-Literatur» bearbeitet hatte.
[ 5 ] Die Arbeit an dieser Ausgabe hat in meiner Seele ein Bild von Goethes Weltanschauung ergeben. Jetzt handelte es sich darum, zu erkennen, wie dieses Bild bestehen kann im Hinblick darauf, daß sich vorher nicht Veröffentlichtes über Naturwissenschaft im Nachlasse vorfand. Mit großer Spannung arbeitete ich mich in diesen Teil des Goethe-Nachlasses hinein.
[ 6 ] Ich glaubte bald zu erkennen, daß das noch Unveröffentlichte einen wichtigen Beitrag lieferte, um namentlich Goethes Erkenntnisart genauer zu durchschauen.
[ 7 ] Ich hatte in meinen bis dahin veröffentlichten Schriften diese Erkenntnisart so aufgefaßt, daß Goethe in der Anschauung lebte, der Mensch stehe zunächst mit seinem gewöhnlichen Bewußtsein dem wahren Wesen der ihn umgebenden Welt ferne. Und aus diesem Ferne-Stehen sproßt der Trieb auf, vor dem Erkennen der Welt erst Erkenntniskräfte in der Seele zu entwickeln, die im gewöhnlichen Bewußtsein nicht vorhanden sind.
[ 8 ] Von diesem Gesichtspunkte aus war es bedeutungsvoll für mich, wenn aus Goethes Papieren mir Ausführungen wie die folgenden entgegentraten:
[ 9 ] «Um uns in diesen verschiedenen Arten einigermaßen zu orientieren (Goethe meint die verschiedenen Arten des Wissens im Menschen und seines Verhältnisses zur Außenwelt), wollen wir sie einteilen in: Nutzende, Wissende, Anschauende und Umfassende.
[ 10 ] 1. Die Nutzenden, Nutzensuchenden, Fordernden sind die ersten, die das Feld der Wissenschaft gleichsam umreißen, das Praktische ergreifen. Das Bewußtsein durch Erfahrung gibt ihnen Sicherheit, das Bedürfnis eine gewisse Breite.
[ 11 ] 2. Die Wißbegierigen bedürfen eines ruhigen, uneigennützigen Blickes, einer neugierigen Unruhe, eines klaren Verstandes und stehen immer im Verhältnis mit jenen; sie verarbeiten auch nur im wissenschaftlichen Sinne dasjenige, was sie vorfinden.
[ 12 ] 3. Die Anschauenden verhalten sich schon produktiv, und das Wissen, indem es sich selbst steigert, fordert, ohne es zu bemerken, das Anschauen und geht dahin über, und so sehr sich auch die Wissenden vor der Imagination kreuzigen und segnen, so müssen sie doch, ehe sie sich versehen, die produktive Einbildungskraft zu Hilfe rufen.
[ 13 ] 4. Die Umfassenden, die man in einem stolzen Sinne die Erschaffenden nennen könnte, verhalten sich im höchsten Sinne produktiv, indem sie nämlich von Ideen ausgehen, sprechen sie die Einheit des Ganzen schon aus, und es ist gewissermaßen nachher die Sache der Natur, sich in diese Idee zu fügen. »
[ 14 ] Klar wird aus solchen Bemerkungen: Goethe ist der Ansicht, der Mensch steht mit der gewöhnlichen Bewußtseinsform außerhalb des Wesens der Außenwelt. Er muß zu einer andern Bewußtseinsform übergehen, wenn er mit diesem Wesen sich erkennend vereinigen will. Mir war während meines Weimarer Aufenthaltes die Frage immer entschiedener aufgetaucht: wie soll man auf den Erkenntnisgrundlagen, die Goethe gelegt hat, weiterbauen, um von seiner Anschauungsart aus denkend zu derjenigen hinüberzuleiten, die geistige Erfahrung, wie sie sich mir ergeben hatte, in sich aufnehmen kann? Goethe ging von dem aus, was die niederen Stufen des Erkennens, die der «Nutzenden» und der «Wißbegierigen» erreichen. Dem ließ er in seiner Seele entgegenleuchten das, was in den «Anschauenden» und «Umfassenden» dem Inhalt der niedern Erkenntnisstufe durch produktive Seelenkräfte entgegenleuchten kann. Wenn er so mit dem niederen Wissen in der Seele in dem Lichte des höheren Anschauens und Umfassens stand, so fühlte er sich mit dem Wesen der Dinge vereinigt.
[ 15 ] Das erkennende Erleben im Geiste ist damit allerdings noch nicht gegeben; aber der Weg dazu ist von der einen Seite her vorgezeichnet, von derjenigen, die sich aus dem Verhältnis des Menschen zur Außenwelt ergibt. Vor meiner Seele stand, daß erst im Erfassen der anderen Seite, die sich aus dem Verhältnis des Menschen zu sich selbst ergibt, Befriedigung kommen könne.
[ 16 ] Wenn das Bewußtsein produktiv wird, also von sich aus zu den nächsten Bildern der Wirklichkeit etwas hinzubringt: kann es da noch in einer Wirklichkeit bleiben, oder entschwebt es dieser, um in dem Unwirklichen sich zu verlieren? Was in dem vom Bewußtsein «Produzierten » diesem gegenübersteht, das mußte durchschaut werden. Eine Verständigung des menschlichen Bewußtseins mit sich selbst müsse zuerst bewirkt werden; dann könne man die Rechtfertigung des rein geistig Erlebten finden. Solche Wege nahmen meine Gedanken, ihre früheren Formen deutlicher wiederholend, als ich über Goethes Papieren in Weimar saß.
[ 17 ] Es war Sommer. Von dem damals gegenwärtigen Kunstleben Weimars war wenig zu bemerken. Man konnte sich in voller Ruhe dem Künstlerischen hingeben, das wie ein Denkmal für Goethes Wirken dastand. Man lebte nicht in der Gegenwart; man war entrückt in die Goethe-Zeit. Gegenwärtig war ja dazumal in Weimar die Liszt-Zeit. Aber die Vertreter dieser waren nicht da.
[ 18 ] Die Zeiten nach den Arbeiten wurden mit den Persönlichkeiten, die im Archiv arbeiteten, verlebt. Dazu kamen die Mitarbeiter, die von auswärts für kürzere oder längere Zeit das Archiv besuchten. Ich ward mit außerordentlicher Liebenswürdigkeit von Bernhard Suphan aufgenommen, dem Direktor des Goethe-Archivs, und ich fand in Julius Wahle, einem ständigen Mitarbeiter des Archivs, einen lieben Freund. Doch alles das nahm erst bestimmtere Formen an, als ich nach einem Jahr für längere Zeit wieder in das Archiv eintrat; und es wird dann erzählt werden müssen, wenn diese Zeit meines Lebens darzustellen ist.
[ 19 ] Meine Sehnsucht ging nun vor allem darauf, Eduard von Hartmann, mit dem ich seit Jahren in brieflichem Verkehre über Philosophische Dinge stand, persönlich kennen zu lernen. Das sollte während eines kurzen Aufenthaltes in Berlin, der sich an den Weimarischen anschloß, geschehen.
[ 20 ] Ich durfte ein langes Gespräch mit dem Philosophen führen. Er lag mit aufgerichtetem Oberkörper, die Beine ausgestreckt, auf einem Sopha. In dieser Lage verbrachte er, seit sich sein Knieleiden eingestellt hatte, den weitaus größten Teil seines Lebens. Eine Stirne, die ein deutlicher Ausdruck eines klaren, scharfen Verstandes war, und Augen, die in ihrer Haltung die innerlichst gefühlte Sicherheit im Erkannten offenbarten, standen vor meinem Blicke. Ein mächtiger Bart umrahmte das Antlitz. Er sprach mit einer vollen Bestimmtheit, die andeutete, wie er einige grundlegende Gedanken über das ganze Weltbild geworfen hatte, und dieses dadurch in seiner Art beleuchtete. In diesen Gedanken wurde alles sogleich mit Kritik überzogen, was an ihn von andern Anschauungen herankam. So saß ich ihm denn gegenüber, indem er mich scharf beurteilte, aber eigentlich mich innerlich doch nicht anhörte. Für ihn lag das Wesen der Dinge im Unbewußten und muß für das menschliche Bewußtsein immer dort verbergen bleiben; für mich war das Unbewußte etwas, das durch die Anstrengungen des Seelenlebens immer mehr in das Bewußtsein heraufgehoben werden kann. Ich kam im Verlauf des Gespräches darauf, zu sagen: man dürfe doch in der Vorstellung nicht von vorneherein etwas sehen, das vom Wirklichen abgesondert nur ein Unwirkliches im Bewußtsein darstelle. Es könne eine solche Ansicht doch nicht der Ausgangspunkt einer Erkenntnistheorie sein. Denn durch dieselbe versperre man sich den Zugang zu aller Wirklichkeit, indem man dann doch nur glauben könne, man lebe in Vorstellungen, und könne sich einem Wirklichen nur in Vorstellungshypothesen, das heißt auf unwirkliche Art nähern. Man müsse vielmehr erst prüfen, ob die Ansicht von der Vorstellung als eines Unwirklichen Geltung habe, oder ob sie nur einem Vorurteil entspringe. Eduard von Hartmann erwiderte: darüber ließe sich doch nicht streiten; es läge doch schon in der Wort-Erklärung der «Vorstellung», daß in ihr nichts Reales gegeben sei. Als ich diese Erwiderung vernahm, bekam ich ein seelisches Frösteln. «Wort-Erklärungen» der ernsthafte Ausgangspunkt von Lebensanschauungen! Ich fühlte, wie weit ich weg war von der zeitgenössischen Philosophie. Wenn ich auf der Weiterreise im Eisenbahnwagen saß, meinen Gedanken und den Erinnerungen an den mir doch so wertvollen Besuch hingegeben, so wiederholte sich das seelische Frösteln. Es war etwas, das in mir lange nachwirkte.
[ 21 ] Mit Ausnahme des Besuches bei Eduard von Hartmann waren die kurzen Aufenthalte, die ich im Anschlusse an denjenigen in Weimar auf meiner Reise durch Deutschland in Berlin und München nehmen konnte, ganz dem Leben in dem Künstlerischen gewidmet, das diese Orte bieten. Die Ausdehnung meines Anschauungskreises nach dieser Richtung empfand ich damals als eine besondere Bereicherung meines Seelenlebens. Und so ist diese erste größere Reise, die ich machen konnte, auch für meine Kunstanschauungen von einer weitgehenden Bedeutung gewesen. Eine Fülle von Eindrücken lebte in mir, als ich zunächst nach dieser Reise wieder für einige Wochen im Salzkammergute bei der Familie lebte, deren Söhne ich schon seit vielen Jahren unterrichtete. Ich war auch weiter darauf angewiesen, eine äußere Beschäftigung im Privatunterrichte zu finden. Und ich wurde in demselben auch innerlich gehalten, weil ich den Knaben, dessen Erziehung mir vor Jahren anvertraut war, und bei dem es mir gelungen war, die Seele aus einem völlig schlummernden Zustande zum Wachen zu bringen, bis zu einem gewissen Punkte seiner Lebensentwickelung bringen wollte.
[ 22 ] In der nächsten Zeit, nach der Rückkehr nach Wien, durfte ich viel in einem Kreise von Menschen verkehren, der von einer Frau zusammengehalten wurde, deren mystisch-theosophische Seelenverfassung auf alle Teilnehmer des Kreises einen tiefen Eindruck machte. Mir waren die Stunden die ich in dem Hause dieser Frau, Marie Lang damals verleben durfte, in hohem Maße wertvoll. Ein ernster Zug der Lebensauffassung, und Lebensempfindung lebte bei Marie Lang sich in einer edel-schönen Art dar. In einer klangvoll-eindringlichen Sprache kamen ihre tiefen Seelenerlehnisse zum Ausdrucke. Ein innerlich mit sich und der Welt schwer ringendes Leben konnte in ihr nur im mystischen Suchen eine wenn auch nicht völlige Befriedigung finden. So war sie zur Seele eines Kreises von suchenden Menschen wie geschaffen In diesen Kreis war die Theosophie gedrungen, die von H P Blavatsky am Ende des vorigen Jahrhunderts ausgegangen war. Franz Hartmann, der durch seine zahlreichen theosophischen Werke und durch seine Beziehungen zu H. P. Blavatsky in weiten Kreisen berühmt geworden ist, hat auch in diesen Kreis seine Theosophie hineingebracht. Marie Lang hatte manches von dieser Theosophie aufgenommen. Die Gedankeninhalte, die sie da finden konnte, schienen in mancher Beziehung dem Zuge ihrer Seele entgegenzukommen. Doch war, was sie von dieser Seite annahm, ihr nur äußerlich angeflogen. Sie trug aber ein mystisches Gut in sich, das auf ganz elementarische Art sich aus einem durch das Leben geprüften Herzen in das Bewußtsein gehoben hatte.
[ 23 ] Die Architekten, Literaten und sonstigen Persönlichkeiten, die ich in dem Hause von Marie Lang traf, hätten sich wohl kaum für die Theosophie, die von Franz Hartmann vermittelt wurde, interessiert, wenn nicht Marie Lang einigen Anteil an ihr genommen hätte. Und am wenigsten hätte ich mich selbst dafür interessiert. Denn die Art, sich zur geistigen Welt zu verhalten, die sich in den Schriften Franz Hartmanns darlebte, war meiner Geistesrichtung völlig entgegengesetzt. Ich konnte ihr nicht zugestehen, daß sie von wirklicher innerer Wahrheit getragen ist. Mich beschäftigte weniger ihr Inhalt, als die Art, wie sie auf Menschen wirkte, die doch wahrhaft Suchende waren.
[ 24 ] Durch Marie Lang wurde ich bekannt mit Frau Rosa Mayreder, die mit ihr befreundet war. Rosa Mayreder gehört zu denjenigen Persönlichkeiten, zu denen ich in meinem Leben die größte Verehrung gefaßt und an deren Entwickelungsgang ich den größten Anteil genommen habe. Ich kann mir ganz gut denken, daß, was ich hier zu sagen habe, sie selbst wenig befriedigen werde; allein ich empfinde, was durch sie in mein Leben getreten ist, in solcher Art. Von den Schriften Rosa Mayreders, die nachher auf viele Menschen einen so berechtigt großen Eindruck gemacht haben, und die sie ganz zweifellos an einen ganz hervorragenden Platz in der Literatur stellen, war damals noch nichts erschienen. Aber, was sich in diesen Schriften offenbart, lebte in Rosa Mayreder in einer geistigen Ausdrucksform, zu der ich mich mit der allerstärksten inneren Sympathie wenden mußte. Diese Frau machte auf mich den Eindruck, als habe sie jede der einzelnen menschlichen Seelengaben in einem solchen Maße, daß diese in ihrem harmonischen Zusammenwirken den rechten Ausdruck des Menschlichen formten. Sie vereinigt verschiedene Künstlergaben mit einem freien, eindringlichen Beobachtungssinn. Ihre Malerei ist ebenso getragen von individueller Lebensentfaltung wie von hingebender Vertiefung in die objektive Welt Die Erzählungen, mit denen sie ihre schriftstellerische Laufbahn begann, sind vollendete Harmonien, die aus persönlichem Ringen und ganz objektiv Betrachtetem zusammenklingen. Ihre folgenden Werke tragen immer mehr diesen Charakter. Am deutlichsten tritt das in ihrem später erschienenen zweibändigen Werke «Kritik der Weiblichkeit» zu Tage. Ich betrachte es als einen schönen Gewinn meines Lebens, manche Stunde in der Zeit, die ich hier schildere, mit Rosa Mayreder in den Jahren ihres Suchens und seelischen Ringens verbracht zu haben.
[ 25 ] Ich muß auch da wieder auf eines meiner Verhältnisse zu Menschen blicken, die über die Gedanken-Inhalte hinüber und in einem gewissen Sinne ganz unabhängig von diesen entstanden sind und intensives Leben gewannen. Denn meine Weltanschauung und noch mehr meine Empfindungstichtung waren nicht diejenigen Rosa Mayreders. Die Art, wie ich aus der gegenwärtig anerkannten Wissenschaftlichkeit zum Erleben des Geistigen aufsteige, kann ihr unmöglich sympathisch sein. Sie sucht diese Wissenschaftlichkeit zur Begründung von Ideen zu verwenden, die auf die volle Ausgestaltung der menschlichen Persönlichkeit zielen, ohne daß sie in diese Persönlichkeit die Erkenntnis einer rein geistigen Welt hereinspielen läßt. Was mir nach dieser Richtung eine Notwendigkeit ist, kann ihr kaum etwas sagen. Sie ist ganz hingegeben an die Forderungen der unmittelbaren menschlichen Individualität und wendet den in dieser Individualität wirkenden geistigen Kräften nicht ihre Aufmerksamkeit zu. Sie hat es durch diese ihre Art zu der bisher bedeutsamsten Darstellung des Wesens der Weiblichkeit und deren Lebensforderungen gebracht. Ich konnte Rosa Mayreder auch nie befriedigen durch die Anschauung, die sie sich von meinem Verhältnis zur Kunst bildete. Sie meinte: ich verkenne das eigentlich Künstlerische, während ich doch gerade danach rang, dieses spezifisch Künstlerische mit der Anschauung zu erfassen, die sich mir durch das Erleben des Geistigen in der Seele ergab. Sie hielt dafür, daß ich in die Offenbarungen der Sinneswelt nicht genug eindringen und dadurch an das wirklich Künstlerische nicht herankommen könne, während ich darnach suchte, gerade in die volle Wahrheit der sinnengemäßen Formen einzudringen. - Das alles hat nichts weggenommen von dem innigen freundschaftlichen Anteil, den ich an dieser Persönlichkeit in mir entwickelte in der Zeit, als ich ihr wertvollste Stunden meines Lebens verdankte, und der sich bis zum heutigen Tage wahrhaftig nicht vermindert hat.
[ 26 ] Im Hause Rosa Mayreders durfte ich des öfteren teilnehmen an den Unterhaltungen, zu denen sich da geistvolle Menschen versammelten. Still, scheinbar mehr in sich schauend als auf die Umgebung hörend, saß da Hugo Wolf, mit dem Rosa Mayreder eng befreundet war. Man hörte in der Seele auf ihn, auch wenn er noch so wenig sprach. Denn, was er lebte, teilte sich auf geheimnisvolle Art denen mit, die mit ihm zusammen sein konnten. - In inniger Liebe war ich zugetan dem Gatten von Frau Rosa, dem menschlich und künstlerisch so feinen Karl Mayreder und auch dessen künstlerisch enthusiastischem Bruder Julius Mayreder. Marie Lang und ihr Kreis, Friedrich Eckstein, der damals ganz in theosophischer Geistesströmung und Weltauffassung stand, waren oft da. Es war dies die Zeit, in der in meiner Seele sich meine «Philosophie der Freiheit» in immer bestimmteren Formen ausgestaltete. Rosa Mayreder ist die Persönlichkeit, mit der ich über diese Formen am meisten in der Zeit des Entstehens meines Buches gesprochen habe. Sie hat einen Teil der innerlichen Einsamkeit, in der ich gelebt habe, von mir hinweggenommen. Sie strebte nach der Anschauung der unmittelbaren menschlichen Persönlichkeit, ich nach der Weltoffenbarung, welche diese Persönlichkeit auf dem Grunde der Seele durch das sich öffnende Geistesauge suchen kann. Zwischen beiden gab es manche Brücke. Und oft hat im weiteren Leben in dankbarster Erinnerung vor meinem Geiste das eine oder das andere Bild der Erlebnisse gestanden von der Art wie ein Gang durch die herrlichen Alpenwälder, auf dem Rosa Mayreder und ich über den wahren Sinn der menschlichen Freiheit sprachen.
Chapter IX
[ 1 ] My first trip to Germany took place at this time (1889). It was prompted by an invitation to collaborate on the Weimar Goethe edition, which was commissioned by the Goethe Archive on behalf of the Grand Duchess Sophie of Saxony. A few years earlier, Goethe's grandson, Walter von Goethe, had died; he had bequeathed Goethe's manuscript estate to the Grand Duchess. She had thus founded the Goethe Archive and, together with a number of Goethe connoisseurs, headed by Herman Grimm, Gustav von Loeper and Wilhelm Scherer, decided to organize a Goethe edition in which Goethe's known works would be combined with the as yet unpublished estate.
[ 2 ] My publications on Goethe literature were the reason why I was asked to edit part of Goethe's scientific writings for this edition. I was called to Weimar to find my bearings in the scientific estate and to take the first steps towards my work.
[ 3 ] My stay in the city of Goethe, which lasted several weeks, was a festive time in my life. I had lived in Goethe's thoughts for years; now I was allowed to be in the places where these thoughts originated. I spent these weeks under the uplifting impression of this feeling.
[ 4 ] I was now allowed to have the papers before my eyes day after day, on which additions to what I had previously edited for the Goethe edition of Kürschner's "National-Literatur" were written.
[ 5 ] The work on this edition created a picture in my mind of Goethe's world view. Now it was a matter of recognizing how this picture could exist in view of the fact that previously unpublished works on natural science were to be found in his estate. I worked my way into this part of Goethe's estate with great excitement.
[ 6 ] I soon realized that what had not yet been published made an important contribution to understanding Goethe's way of knowing more precisely.
[ 7 ] In my previously published writings, I had understood this way of knowing in such a way that Goethe lived in the view that man, with his ordinary consciousness, is initially distant from the true essence of the world around him. And from this standing at a distance sprouts the urge before recognizing the world to first develop powers of cognition in the soul that are not present in ordinary consciousness.
[ 8 ] From this point of view, it was significant for me when I encountered statements such as the following from Goethe's papers:
[ 9 ] "In order to orient ourselves to some extent in these different kinds (Goethe means the different kinds of knowledge in man and his relationship to the outside world), let us divide them into: Users, Knowers, Viewers and Comprehensives.
[ 10 ] 1. The utilizers, those who seek benefits, those who demand are the first to outline the field of science, as it were, to grasp the practical. Consciousness through experience gives them security, the need a certain breadth.
[ 11 ] 2. The inquisitive require a calm, disinterested gaze, a curious restlessness, a clear mind, and are always in relation to them; they also process only in the scientific sense that which they find.
[ 12 ] 3. The contemplative already behaves productively, and knowledge, by increasing itself, demands contemplation without realizing it, and passes over to it, and however much the knowers crucify and bless themselves before the imagination, they must, before they know it, call the productive imagination to their aid.
[ 13 ] 4. The comprehensive ones, who in a proud sense could be called the creators, behave productively in the highest sense, for by starting from ideas, they already express the unity of the whole, and it is to a certain extent subsequently the business of nature to fit itself into this idea."
[ 14 ] It is clear from such remarks: Goethe is of the opinion that man, with the ordinary form of consciousness, stands outside the essence of the external world. He must pass over to another form of consciousness if he wants to unite with this being in a recognizing way. During my stay in Weimar, the question arose more and more decisively: how should one continue to build on the foundations of knowledge laid by Goethe in order to move from his way of seeing to the way of thinking that can absorb spiritual experience, as it had presented itself to me? Goethe started from what the lower levels of cognition, those of the "utilizers" and the "inquisitive", achieve. He allowed that to shine forth in his soul which can shine forth in the "contemplators" and "comprehenders" towards the content of the lower level of knowledge through productive soul forces. When he thus stood with the lower knowledge in his soul in the light of the higher contemplation and comprehension, he felt united with the essence of things.
[ 15 ] The cognitive experience in the spirit is not yet given; but the path to it is marked out from the one side, from that which results from the relationship of man to the outside world. Before my soul stood that satisfaction could only come from grasping the other side, which results from man's relationship to himself.
[ 16 ] When consciousness becomes productive, that is, brings something of its own accord to the next images of reality: can it still remain in a reality, or does it float away from it in order to lose itself in the unreal? What is "produced" by consciousness in opposition to it must be seen through. An understanding of human consciousness with itself had to be brought about first; then one could find the justification of the purely spiritual experience. Such were the paths my thoughts took, repeating their earlier forms more clearly as I sat over Goethe's papers in Weimar.
[ 17 ] It was summer. There was little to be seen of Weimar's artistic life at the time. One could devote oneself in complete peace to the artistic, which stood there like a monument to Goethe's work. One did not live in the present; one was transported back to Goethe's time. The Liszt era was present in Weimar at that time. But the representatives of this were not there.
[ 18 ] The times after the work were spent with the personalities who worked in the archive. Then there were the employees who visited the archive from abroad for shorter or longer periods. I was received with extraordinary kindness by Bernhard Suphan, the director of the Goethe Archive, and I found a dear friend in Julius Wahle, a permanent employee of the archive. But all this only took on a more definite form when, after a year, I rejoined the archive for a longer period; and it will then have to be told when this period of my life is depicted.
[ 19 ] My main desire now was to get to know Eduard von Hartmann, with whom I had been in correspondence about philosophical matters for years, in person. This was to happen during a short stay in Berlin, which followed the Weimar one.
[ 20 ] I was allowed to have a long conversation with the philosopher. He was lying on a sofa with his upper body erect and his legs stretched out. He had spent most of his life in this position since his knee ailment had set in. A forehead that was a clear expression of a clear, sharp mind and eyes that revealed in their posture the inwardly felt certainty in what he recognized stood before my gaze. A mighty beard framed his face. He spoke with a full determination that indicated how he had thrown some fundamental thoughts over the whole world view, thereby illuminating it in its own way. In these thoughts, everything that approached him from other points of view was immediately covered with criticism. So I sat opposite him and he judged me harshly, but didn't actually listen to me inwardly. For him, the essence of things lay in the unconscious and must always remain hidden there for human consciousness; for me, the unconscious was something that could be raised more and more into consciousness through the efforts of the soul's life. In the course of the conversation I came to say that one should not see in the imagination from the outset something that, separated from the real, only represents an unreal in consciousness. Such a view could not be the starting point of a theory of knowledge. For through it one blocks one's access to all reality, in that one can then only believe that one lives in ideas, and can only approach the real in imaginary hypotheses, that is, in an unreal way. Rather, one must first examine whether the view of the imagination as something unreal is valid or whether it arises only from prejudice. Eduard von Hartmann replied: There can be no argument about that; it is already in the word explanation of "imagination" that there is nothing real in it. When I heard this reply, I got a chill down my spine. "Word-explanations" are the serious starting point of views on life! I felt how far removed I was from contemporary philosophy. When I sat in the train carriage on the onward journey, lost in my thoughts and memories of the visit that was so precious to me, the chill in my soul repeated itself. It was something that stayed with me for a long time.
[ 21 ] With the exception of the visit to Eduard von Hartmann, the short stays I was able to make in Berlin and Munich after the one in Weimar on my journey through Germany were entirely devoted to the artistic life that these places offer. At the time, I found the expansion of my circle of vision in this direction to be a particular enrichment of my spiritual life. And so this first major journey that I was able to make was also of far-reaching significance for my views on art. A wealth of impressions lived in me when, after this trip, I lived for a few weeks in the Salzkammergut with the family whose sons I had been teaching for many years. I was still dependent on finding an external occupation in private teaching. And I was also kept in it internally, because I wanted to bring the boy, whose education had been entrusted to me years ago and in whom I had succeeded in bringing the soul from a completely dormant state to wakefulness, to a certain point in his life development.
[ 22 ] In the next period, after my return to Vienna, I was able to spend a lot of time in a circle of people who were held together by a woman whose mystical-theosophical state of mind made a deep impression on all the participants in the circle. The hours I spent in the home of this woman, Marie Lang, were extremely valuable to me. Marie Lang had a serious outlook on life and a feeling for life that was expressed in a noble and beautiful way. Her deep soul experiences were expressed in a melodious and penetrating language. A life struggling inwardly with itself and the world could only find satisfaction, if not complete satisfaction, in mystical searching. Thus she was made for the soul of a circle of searching people. Theosophy, which had started from H P Blavatsky at the end of the last century, had penetrated this circle. Franz Hartmann, who became famous in wide circles through his numerous theosophical works and his relationship with H. P. Blavatsky, also brought his theosophy into this circle. Marie Lang had absorbed some of this theosophy. In some respects, the ideas she found there seemed to correspond to the course of her soul. However, what she accepted from this side was only external to her. But she carried within her a mystical good that had risen to consciousness in a very elemental way from a heart that had been tested by life.
[ 23 ] The architects, writers and other personalities I met in Marie Lang's house would hardly have been interested in the theosophy taught by Franz Hartmann if Marie Lang had not taken some interest in it. And least of all would I have been interested in it myself. For the way in which she related to the spiritual world, as expressed in Franz Hartmann's writings, was completely contrary to my way of thinking. I could not concede that it was based on real inner truth. I was less concerned with its content than with the way it affected people who were, after all, true seekers.
[ 24 ] Through Marie Lang I became acquainted with Mrs. Rosa Mayreder, who was a friend of hers. Rosa Mayreder is one of the personalities for whom I have had the greatest admiration in my life and in whose development I have taken the greatest interest. I can well imagine that what I have to say here will be of little satisfaction to her; but I feel what has entered my life through her in this way. At that time nothing had yet appeared of Rosa Mayreder's writings, which subsequently made such a justifiably great impression on many people, and which undoubtedly place her in a very prominent position in literature. But what was revealed in these writings lived in Rosa Mayreder in a spiritual form of expression to which I had to turn with the strongest inner sympathy. This woman gave me the impression that she possessed each of the individual gifts of the human soul to such an extent that in their harmonious interaction they formed the right expression of the human. She combines various artistic gifts with a free, penetrating sense of observation. Her painting is as much a product of individual life development as it is of devoted immersion in the objective world. The stories with which she began her literary career are perfect harmonies that resonate from personal struggles and completely objective observations. Her subsequent works increasingly bear this character. This is most evident in her later two-volume work "Critique of Femininity". I consider it a great gain in my life to have spent many an hour with Rosa Mayreder in the years of her search and spiritual struggle during the time I am describing here.
[ 25 ] I also have to look at one of my relationships with people who, beyond the content of my thoughts and in a certain sense quite independently of them, came into being and gained intense life. For my view of the world, and even more so my perception, were not those of Rosa Mayreder. The way in which I rise from the currently recognized scientificity to the experience of the spiritual cannot possibly be sympathetic to her. She seeks to use this scientificity to justify ideas which aim at the full development of the human personality, without allowing the knowledge of a purely spiritual world to play into this personality. What is a necessity to me in this direction can hardly mean anything to her. It is entirely devoted to the demands of immediate human individuality and does not turn its attention to the spiritual forces at work in this individuality. In this way, she has achieved the most significant portrayal of the nature of femininity and its demands on life to date. I was never able to satisfy Rosa Mayreder with the view she formed of my relationship to art. She said that I failed to recognize what was actually artistic, whereas I was struggling to grasp this specifically artistic aspect with the view that arose from experiencing the spiritual in my soul. She thought that I could not penetrate enough into the revelations of the sense world and thus could not reach the truly artistic, while I sought to penetrate precisely into the full truth of the sensory forms. - None of this has taken anything away from the intimate friendship that I developed with this personality at the time when I owed her the most precious hours of my life, and which has truly not diminished to this day.
[ 26 ] In Rosa Mayreder's house, I was often allowed to take part in the conversations where spiritual people gathered. Hugo Wolf, with whom Rosa Mayreder was close friends, sat there quietly, seemingly looking more into himself than listening to his surroundings. People listened to him in their souls, no matter how little he spoke. For what he lived communicated itself in a mysterious way to those who could be with him. - I was deeply in love with Mrs. Rosa's husband, Karl Mayreder, who was so fine as a person and artist, and also his artistically enthusiastic brother Julius Mayreder. Marie Lang and her circle, Friedrich Eckstein, who at that time was completely in tune with the theosophical current of thought and world view, were often there. This was the time when my "philosophy of freedom" took on ever more specific forms in my soul. Rosa Mayreder is the person with whom I spoke most about these forms at the time of writing my book. She took away some of the inner loneliness in which I lived. She strove for the contemplation of the immediate human personality, I for the revelation of the world, which this personality can seek at the bottom of the soul through the opening spiritual eye. There were many bridges between the two. And in later life, one or the other of these experiences has often stood before my mind in the most grateful memory, like a walk through the magnificent Alpine forests, on which Rosa Mayreder and I talked about the true meaning of human freedom.