Philosophy, Cosmology & Religion
GA 215
6 September 1922, Dornach
1. The Three Steps of Anthroposophy
Before I begin my lecture today may I express to our esteemed guests my heartiest greetings out of the spirit that prevails here in the Goetheanum and that underlies all the work that is developed here. This kind of spirit does not spring from any human one-sidedness, but from a total all-encompassing humanness. For this reason, what is offered and accomplished here can originate in scientific knowledge, art and religious devotion while at the same time its spirit should be that of a free humanness, combined with generosity of heart and soul.
Now when the construction of the Goetheanum was begun in 1913 it was upon this spirit that it rested, as on the finest foundation stone. At a period when the whole of Europe and vast areas beyond were embroiled in warfare and bitter hostilities, here in Dornach people from all the nations of Europe worked together out of a free, encompassing humanness. Here, the international work never ceased. Allow me to point to this fact especially today because I desire to bring you this greeting out of such an international spirit. Out of no other spirit can the work done here be carried on, for only this spirit of many-sided, universal, free humanness can produce genuine spiritual science, spiritual art and truth-filled religion, which in itself can only be spiritual and international. But this spirit also gives, I think, that largeness of heart that is able to welcome and greet every human being affectionately. So, it is out of this spirit that rules here at the Goetheanum that I speak of these first words of greeting. They are therefore meant from the heart. In this heartfelt manner, then, may I express the wish that in the days to come we may successfully work together and exchange ideas on some topics drawn from the most varied areas of science and life, something that everyone who had wanted to come here will carry home with a certain measure of gratification. When we who have worked at the Goetheanum for years find that our visitors look back with joy to what they have experienced here, we are filled with special satisfaction. With this feeling let me welcome you and thank you for coming and express the wish that your visit may prove gratifying to you all.
As already indicated, the aim here is to engage in spiritual research so that it will be the foundation for making life in all its aspects more fruitful. The spiritual knowledge we seek here at this Goetheanum should not be confused with much that today is promoted as occultism, or the many things that go by the name of mysticism. This occultism, pursued today in many forms, actually runs contrary to the spirit of our age, the spirit of real modern life, which results from the development of natural scientific knowledge in recent times. What is cultivated here as spiritual knowledge must certainly reckon with what in the strictest sense of the word is in keeping with the spirit of modern scientific knowledge. What is frequently called occultism today is founded on ancient traditions; it is not directly governed by the spirit of the present time. Old traditions are revived. But since present-day humanity cannot unfold corresponding perceptions from the same substrata of soul, one can say that these old traditions are often misunderstood; as such, they are presented in dilettante fashion by one or the other group today as a knowledge intended to gratify the human soul.
We have as little to do with such partly misunderstood traditional occultism as we have with the kind of occultism that seeks to do research in the supersensible worlds by borrowing the usual scientific methods of sense observation and experimentation. If this is done, the fact is overlooked that the methods of scientific research developed during the past few centuries are preeminently adapted for gaining knowledge of the external sense reality; for this very reason, however, they are unsuitable as a means of research into the supersensible realm.
On the other hand, much is said today about mystical immersion, inner mystical experience. There, too, one often has to do with nothing else than immersing oneself in the soul experiences of the old mystics, trying to repeat these soul experiences of the past. But again, the unclear introspection that is used can lead only to a dubious knowledge.
I only pointed to these things in order to warn against confusing the work here at the Goetheanum with what is often carried on in such an amateur, dilettante fashion, even if out of sincere good-will. Here a scientific method for gaining supersensible knowledge as being cultivated, as rigorous, as exact and as scientific as is demanded today of the methods in the area of natural scientific research. We can reach the supersensible realm only if we do not remain limited to the paths of research suited only to the sense world. We cannot, however, scientifically ascend into the supersensible worlds by proceeding in a spirit other than the one that has proven itself so well in the domain of the sense world. Today I should like to give just a few indications concerning the purposes and goals of the work carried on here. Therefore, more detailed discussions of what I will but mention today will follow in the days to come. May I point out first that for the purpose of supersensible research here we are concerned with drawing from the depths of the human soul those forces for gaining knowledge that can penetrate the supersensible world in the same way as the forces of the outer senses penetrate the physical sense world. What the spiritual research requires first of all is to direct his soul's attention to his own soul-spiritual organism, which is able to approach the super-sensible. This distinguishes the spiritual investigator from the ordinary scientist. The latter uses the human organism as it is, directs it toward nature, and employs the exactness needed to gain results about the facts of outer nature. But the spiritual researcher, just because he is grounded in correct natural scientific knowledge, cannot proceed in this way. He must first direct his attention to the soul-spiritual organ of knowledge—I can perhaps call it 'eye of the spirit.' But this attention, which initially prepares and develops the spiritual eye, must be such that the inner conformity of this spiritual eye appears before it exactly; as exact, for instance, as a mathematical problem appears to a mathematician, or the content of his experiment appears to the experimenter. This work that must be applied by the researcher upon himself in preparation for the actual attainment of knowledge is the essential point in spiritual research. Thus, as the mathematician or natural scientist is exact in the search for results, the spiritual researcher must be exact in preparing his soul-spiritual organism, which then can perceive a spiritual fact as the eye or ear perceives facts in the sense world.
The spiritual research referred to here must be exact, in the same way that mathematics or natural science is exact. But I should say that where natural science with its exactness stops, spiritual science with its own kind of exactness begins. It must be rigorous in developing one's own human nature, so that all the work man does on himself in order to become a spiritual researcher is carried on in rigorous manner. For this exact work, then, fully justifiable to science, turns, as it were, into the inner spiritual eye when it begins spiritual research and encounters the existence of the supersensible world. While what is often termed mysticism has little clear understanding of the soul, in genuine spiritual research every minute step must be taken with the same clarity and insight as is required of a mathematician confronted by a mathematical problem. This will then lead to a kind of awakening, an awakening on a higher level of consciousness comparable to what we experience when we awaken from our usual sleep and have the sense world around us again.
When I speak here of the exactness needed especially for spiritual research, the word relates to the exact, scientific preparation of what must precede the research, namely the soul-spiritual organization of man. It is this above all that must stand before the spiritual researcher in transparent clarity. Then he may begin to penetrate within the world of supersensible phenomena.
This is just a preliminary indication, not one that proves anything. Because one strives for this exactness in preparing for genuine spiritual perception, if one is to call the kind of spiritual perception meant here 'clairvoyance,' one can indeed speak of 'exact clairvoyance.' It is to be the specific characteristic of the spiritual research carried on here that it is based on methodologically exact clairvoyance. The exactness of the clairvoyance is to be the distinctive mark of the spiritual research practiced here. From this point of view, one would want to consider not only a narrowly circumscribed area, but to attain to something into which flow all other sciences and patterns of life of the present age. What is spiritually achieved here is not merely to be a spiritual super-structure having as its foundation the natural scientific mode of observation; what humanity has developed in the spirit of this modern natural scientific point of view should also be led up into the spiritual region in order that the attainments of natural science may be crowned with what spiritual research can provide.
As an example, I may cite medicine. The way this science has developed today out of materialistic knowledge, and has achieved its admirable results, is fully recognized by what is cultivated here as spiritual knowledge. But it is possible to carry further by means of the spirit of an exact clairvoyance what has now been achieved out of a purely external approach to medicine. Only then will the whole fruitfulness of natural scientific medicine as presently practiced be attained. Similarly, we desire to gain here in a spiritual way knowledge that is in a position to lead the artistic into the spiritual. We strive for an artistic element here, which in a spiritual way arises out of the totality of man's nature, as does the knowledge we seek. A religious, a social element is also to be cultivated here in such a way that they both arise as something self-evident flowing from the spiritual knowledge attained.
The spiritual knowledge we strive for is to lay hold of the whole man, is to come forth from him, not from a single human faculty. It is therefore the nature of this knowledge that it desires to have all areas of theoretical as well as practical life flow into the spiritual life, and that thereby only the completely human, the universally human, is to be achieved. From this standpoint I would like to speak to you in these lectures mainly about three areas of knowledge, using these three examples to show to what extent the spirit of modern science can lead into the spirit of higher spiritual science. I would like to speak to you about philosophy, cosmology and religion, in a manner that shows how through anthroposophy they are to gain a certain spiritual form.
Philosophy was once the all-inclusive knowledge, which, in ancient times, threw light on all the separate areas of reality that men experienced. It was not a specialized science. It was the universal science, and all the sciences we cultivate today developed fundamentally out of the substance of philosophy as it still existed in Greece. In recent times, a specific philosophy has arisen by its side that lives in a certain sum of ideas. The strange thing that came about is that this philosophy, out of which all other sciences actually have grown, has now come to the point of having to justify its own existence before them. The other sciences, which have indeed grown out of philosophy, busy themselves with this or that recognized field of reality. The field of reality is there for the senses, or for observation, or experiment.
One cannot doubt the justification for all this scientific pursuit of knowledge. In spite of all these separate areas of study having been born out of philosophy, it is forced today to justify its own existence, to explain why it develops a certain body of ideas, whether these ideas are perhaps quite unreal, do not relate to any reality, are merely something people have thought out. Just consider how much hard thinking is devoted nowadays to justifying those ideas, which, incidentally, have already taken on a quite abstract character and today are called the content of philosophy, in order that they can still enjoy a certain standing in the world. They have nurtured the sciences, which, I might say, are well accredited in regard to their own specific areas of reality. Philosophy, on the contrary, is not accredited today. It first has to prove that its existence is justifiable. In ancient Greece that was never brought into question. There, a man who was capable of developing himself far enough to attain a philosophy felt the reality of philosophizing in the same way a healthy person feels the reality of breathing. But today, when a philosopher examines his philosophy, he experiences the abstract, cold, sober quality of the ideas he has developed in it. He does not feel that he stands solidly in reality. Only a person working in a chemistry or physics laboratory, or in a hospital, has matters well in hand, so to say. One who nowadays has philosophical ideas and acts upon them often feels miles removed from reality.
There is an additional consideration. It is with good reason that philosophy bears a name that does not point merely to theoretical knowledge. Philosophy is “love of wisdom,” and love exists not only in one's reason and intellect but has its roots in the whole human heart and soul. A comprehensive soul experience, the experiencing of love, is what has given philosophy its name. The whole human being should be engaged in the development of philosophy, and one cannot love, in the true sense of the word, what is mere theory, matter of fact and cold. If philosophy is love of wisdom, those who have experienced it assume that this Sophia, this wisdom, is something worth loving, something real and tangible, whose existence does not require to be proven. Just think a moment. If a man were to love a woman, or a woman a man, but would find it necessary to first prove the existence of the loved one—, quite an absurd thought! But this is just the case with philosophy taken in its present sense. From something that was warmly alive and received in a heartfelt way by man, the existence of which was self-evident, philosophy has turned into something abstract, cold, dull and theoretical. What caused this?
When one turns back to the origin of philosophical life—not through outer history but with an inwardly experienced and felt knowledge of history—one finds that philosophy originally did not live in man as it does today. Man, today, basically only recognizes as valid what is achieved through sense observation, or through experiments developed in the field of the senses, when he thinks in a scientific way; this is then put together by the intellect. But these achievements belong to physical man, for the senses are physical organs imbedded in the physical body. What man's physical body attained in knowledge is today considered scientifically acceptable, but in this way one only reaches as far as physical man. In him what the ancients considered as philosophy cannot be found. I will go further into this in the days to follow but must here point out that what was called philosophy in the golden age of Greek philosophy—that spiritual substance experienced within the soul—was not experienced in the physical body but in a human organization that permeates the physical body as etheric man.
In present-day science we really know only physical man. We do not know the body that, as a fine etheric organism, permeates man's physical body and in which the Greek philosopher experienced his philosophy. In the physical body we experience breathing, and the process of seeing. But just as we have this physical organization before us, so man also has an etheric body; he is an etheric man. When we look at the physical body we see something of the breathing process; physically and biologically we can make clear to ourselves the process of seeing. When we look at supersensible, etheric man we see the medium in which the Greek carried on his philosophizing. The Greek constitution was such that a man of that time felt—lived—in his etheric organism. In the activity of exerting himself through his organism—as one does physically in breathing and seeing—philosophy came into being in the etheric man. As there never can be any doubt about the reality of our breathing, because we are conscious of our physical body, so the Greek never doubted that what he experienced as philosophy, as wisdom, which he loved, was rooted in reality, for he was conscious of his etheric body. He was clearly aware that his philosophizing took place in his etheric body.
Modern man has lost perception of the etheric body. In fact, he does not know he has one. Therefore, traditional philosophy is a sum of abstract ideas for the reason that it considers to be reality only what one experiences as reality while philosophizing. If one has lost the knowledge of etheric man, the reality in philosophy is also lost. One feels it as abstract; one feels the necessity to prove that it really exists.
Now imagine that man were to develop an organism still more powerful, solid and material than his present physical body. Then the breathing process, for instance, would gradually appear to be almost imperceptible by comparison with this more powerful experience, until finally he would no longer know anything about what is now his physical body, just as modern man knows nothing about his etheric body. The breathing process would be a theory, a sum of ideas, and one would have to 'prove' that breathing was a reality, just as one must now prove that philosophy is rooted in reality. Doubt as to the reality of what one should love in philosophy has arisen because the etheric body has been lost to human perception, for it is in the etheric, not in the physical body, that the reality of philosophy is experienced. If, then, one is to recover a feeling for philosophy as a reality one must first gain a knowledge of etheric man. Out of this knowledge a true experience of philosophy can come. The first step in anthroposophy therefore is to bring out the facts concerning man's etheric organism.
I want to proceed in three steps and would like to ask Dr. Sauerwein1Dr. Jules Sauerwein, born in 1880; one of the most prominent French journalists between World War I and World War II; he met Rudolf Steiner in Vienna in 1906 and translated a number of his works into French. to translate now. After the translation I shall continue.
In philosophy man has initially an inner experience of himself, of his etheric body. From the time humanity began to think it has also felt the need to incorporate each single human being into the whole cosmos. Man not only needs a philosophy, he needs a cosmology. As an individual firmly grounded within his organism at a certain place on the earth, he wants to understand in how far he belongs to the whole universe, and to what extent he has evolved out of it.
In the earliest stages of human evolution man felt himself to be a member of the whole cosmos. As physical man, however, he cannot feel himself as part of the cosmos. His experience as physical man between birth and death belongs directly to the life of his physical sensory surroundings. Beyond this he has his inner soul life, which is completely different from what he bears in his physical body out of his physical sensory environment. Since man wishes to feel, to know himself as a member of the whole cosmos, he also must feel and know his inner life of soul as part of the universe.
In the most ancient periods of human evolution men were actually able to see the soul life in the cosmos, not only by means of what today is mistakenly called anthropomorphism, but through an inner power of vision. They could perceive their own soul life as part of the soul-spiritual life of the universe, as one can see one's physical bodily life as part of natural sense existence. But in most recent times men have only developed in an exact way natural scientific knowledge based on sense observation, experiment, and a thinking similarly limited. Out of the natural scientific results achieved in this way, bringing together all the separate findings, a universal science, a cosmology, has been formed. But this cosmology contains merely the picture of facts from sense reality that are combined by thinking. One constructs a picture of the universe, but the separate parts of this picture are only the recognized laws of physical sensory phenomena.
This picture produced by the natural scientific cosmology of modern times is not like that of ancient times, which also contained the life of soul and spirit, for it contains only the sense world that natural science is able to examine. In this picture that stands as cosmology of the modern age man can re-discover his physical body, but not the inner life of his soul. In ancient times the inner soul life could be derived from the picture of cosmology; the soul's inner life cannot be derived from the cosmological view based upon natural science. This is in turn connected with the fact that modern perception cannot see the soul-spiritual in the same way as an old primitive perception was able to do. So, when modern knowledge speaks of the soul element in the body it speaks of the manifestations, the inner experiences of thinking, feeling and willing. It views the soul's life as being an outflow of what comes to expression in what is thought, felt and willed, separately and intermingled. It makes a picture of those three activities as phenomena playing a role in the soul's inner life.
When one observes the inner life of soul and spirit in this way one is forced to say, “Yes, what you have recognized and designated as an intermingling of thinking, feeling and willing arises in embryonic life, develops in the child, and perishes at death.” A scientist holding this view cannot fail to conclude that the soul must disappear at death. For actually, this thinking, feeling and willing between birth and death appear to be intimately bound up with the life of the physical body. Just as we see its members grow we watch thinking and feeling grow. As the body calcifies and we see it approaching physical decline, we see also how the phenomena of thinking, feeling and willing gradually diminish.
The distinguishing quality of the ancient viewpoint was a perception of the inner soul life that went beyond what lives in mere thinking, feeling and willing. The ancients perceived hidden within these a foundation for the life of soul of which they are only a reflection. We see thought, feeling and will originating and then developing further between birth and death. What lies beneath—of which thinking, feeling and willing are but the outer reflection—was beheld by the old primitive clairvoyance as the astral being of man.
So, as one at first recognizes the etheric body as a super-sensible member in physical man, one recognizes the astral body as a higher member in physical etheric man. This astral being of man does not consist of thought, feeling and will. It is the basis for them. It is the being which, out of soul-spiritual worlds, finds its way into our existence between birth and death. This astral man clothes himself between birth and death with the physical and etheric bodies, and after death goes out into a soul-spiritual world. In regard to this astral nature of man birth and death are only outer manifestations. Thinking, feeling and willing can be understood only in the context of man's physical organization, and can be found only between birth and death. There they develop, gradually decline, and disappear. The astral being underlying them, the foundation for the inner life of the soul, extends above physical and etheric man and is incorporated in a cosmic world. It is not enclosed within man's physical organism.
In order to arrive at a comprehensive cosmology, we need a knowledge of etheric and astral man, of which thinking, feeling and willing are a reflection. But, as manifested in each individual man, they cannot be incorporated in the cosmos. What constitutes their background, what is concealed in them between birth and death and is only accessible to a primitive or an exact clairvoyance—that can be incorporated in a spiritual cosmos of which the physical sensory cosmos is merely the reflection.
Modern cosmology is but a super-structure founded on the results of natural scientific research; a combination of facts found in the physical sense world. In such a cosmic picture man's inner life cannot be incorporated; but we only have such a cosmology because modern knowledge does not provide a picture of astral man. Anyone conceiving soul life as merely a combination of thinking, feeling and willing cannot defend the idea of its continuing beyond birth and death. Only if one first advances from these three activities to what lies concealed within them, to astral man, only then does one arrive at the human element that is no longer bound to the physical body and can be thought of as membered into the soul-spiritual universe. But man will never re-discover such a spiritual cosmos after abandoning it, because he has lost the perception of astral man. He will never be able to construct a picture of such a spirit-soul cosmos until he regains a picture of man's astral being. The possibility of a cosmology that again has soul-spiritual content depends upon the development of a perception of man's astral being. If we have merely an external cosmology comprising the physically perceptible, man himself has no place in it. We have come to such a physical cosmology because the perception of astral man has been lost. If the perception is again achieved, it will be possible to have a picture of the cosmos in which man himself is incorporated.
So, our concern is to succeed in developing a knowledge of man's astral being. Then we will also be able to attain a true cosmology that includes man. This is to be the second step for anthroposophy.
After Dr. Sauerwein has been so kind as to translate the second part, I shall discuss how matters stand with the third step in the last segment of my lecture.
Man experiences himself as condensed together into himself as for example when he philosophizes—and he also feels himself to be a part of the cosmos as depicted by cosmology. But in addition, he experiences himself as an entity independent of his own physical body as well as of the cosmos to which he belongs. He feels himself to be independent of his own corporeality and does not even feel part of the cosmos when he points to his own higher spiritual being—something that is today only hinted at when we utter the word 'I.'
When we say, 'I,' we do not refer to that part of us encompassed by our physical, our etheric, or our astral body, insofar as through the latter we are part of the cosmos. We refer to an inner, self-contained entity. We feel it as belonging to a special world, to a divine world, of which the cosmos is only the outer reflection, the external replica. As human beings who address themselves as “I,” we feel that this entity, this spiritual man indicated by the word “I,” is only enclothed with everything in the cosmos; that even the physical sense body is a covering of the actual being.
Because man in ancient times—through an inner if primitive vision—experienced his human entity as independent both of his body and of the cosmos, he knew he belonged to a divine world. But he also knew that between birth and death he was placed outside of this world and was clothed in a physical body. He knew he was placed in the soul-physical cosmos. He knew that his ego, the essence of his being, is concealed by the cosmic, by the physical-bodily elements, and he sought for union of this I-being with the divine world to which it belongs. In this way primitive man—with his clairvoyant experience of his egohood attained above and beyond his physical and etheric bodies and his astral nature—attained a union, religion , with the divine world. Religious life was that into which flowed a perception that was both philosophical and cosmological. Man found himself united with that from which he had been separated by his own body and by the outwardly visible soul-sensory cosmos. In religious experience he was united with the divine world, and this religious experience was the highest flowering of the perceptual life.
This religious experience on a primitive level, however, depended on a real inner experience of egohood, of the real spirit man. Only when the ego is experienced can the longed-for union with the divine world be attained—the religious feeling.
But to the modern way of thinking, what has the ego, this true spiritual man, become? It has become nothing but the phenomena of thinking, feeling and willing conceived of as a single, abstract idea. The ego has now become a kind of cosmic, or at most one or another composite formulation made up of thought, feeling and will—in any case something abstract. Philosophers themselves arrive at a notion of the ego by combining the experiences of thought, feeling and will into an abstract concept. But in this composite, nothing has been found that is not disproven every night when a person sleeps. Take the characterizations of modern philosophers concerning the “I,” for example, Bergson. Throughout, you will only find in these characterizations something that is disproven every night in sleep, for what the ego absorbs of these concepts, these ideas, is extinguished every night in sleep. Reality refutes these definitions, these characterizations of the ego. Furthermore, what I say here is not refuted by claiming that memory reconnects us after sleep with the “I.” It is not a matter of interpretations, but of facts. This implies that modern knowledge, even the finest philosophical knowledge, has lost perception of the ego, the true spirit man, and with it also the way to an understanding of religion.
So it has developed that in recent times, alongside the knowledge resulting from the attainable world of observation and experimenting, there are traditions handed down from a true religious life of past ages. They are accepted in a historical sense. But man's knowledge no longer has access to them; therefore, he only believes in them. Thus, for modern man, who will not extend knowledge to cover religious experience, science and faith confront each other. The whole content of the faith of today was once knowledge and is brought up only as a memory retained in tradition. No declaration of faith exists that is not a reminder of ancient knowledge. Because mankind today does not have a living perception of the true ego through exact clairvoyance—the ego that is not extinguished with every sleep but underlies both the sleeping and waking conditions—the path of knowledge is not pursued all the way into religion. Faith, which actually only perpetuates the memory of old traditions, is then placed alongside knowledge.
Today, therefore, what once was a unity—knowledge both of the physical and the divine worlds—has split into two external, parallel fields, knowledge and faith. That has come about because the old, primitive clairvoyant vision of the true ego—the foundation of man's being even when sleep extinguishes thought, feeling and will—that ancient knowledge has been lost, and exact clairvoyance is not yet advanced enough to see man's true egohood, the spiritual man. Only when it wants to advance to this point—as it must advance to seeing the etheric and astral parts of man's constitution—only then will a direct extension of knowledge of the outer world into knowledge of the divine world take place. Then, again, the content of science will pour into religious life.
This gap between knowledge and faith exists because the living, clairvoyant vision of the true ego, the fourth member of man's being, has been lost. Therefore, it is the task of the new spiritual life to restore knowledge of the true ego through exact clairvoyance. Then the way will open for advancing out of world knowledge to divine knowledge, out of the knowledge of the world to a renewal of religious life. We shall be able to view faith only as a special, higher form of knowledge, not, as now, something specifically different from knowledge.
So, what we need is the possibility for a real knowledge of the ego. From that will also result the possibility for a new experience of religion. We need to bring about this ego knowledge so that it takes its place within spiritual science just as does the previously characterized cognition of etheric man, who is not perceived in the human physical body, and the perception of astral man, who endures beyond birth and death. Thus, too, a perception of the ego, which exists beyond sleeping and waking as the foundation for both, needs to be cultivated to bring about a revitalization of life. This is to be the third step of anthroposophy. What should result organically from the viewpoint of anthroposophical research is therefore:
A modern philosophy through an exact clairvoyant knowledge of the ether body.
A cosmology that includes man, through a clear grasp of his astral organism.
A renewal of religious life through an exact clairvoyant comprehension of the true human ego which exists beyond sleeping and waking.
From this point of view, I will make further observations in the next lectures on philosophy, cosmology and religion.
Die drei Schritte der Anthroposophie
[ 1 ] Gestatten Sie, daß ich, bevor ich mit meinem heutigen Vortrag beginne, die verehrten Anwesenden auf das allerherzlichste begrüße, begrüße aus jenem Geiste heraus, der hier in diesem Goetheanum herrschen soll und von dem auch all diejenige Arbeit getragen werden soll, die in diesem Goetheanum verrichtet wird. Es soll dies ja sein ein Geist, der nicht aus einer menschlichen Einseitigkeit hervorgeht, sondern aus dem vollen, umfassenden Menschentum. Und das kann so sein, daß auf der einen Seite hier dasjenige, was gegeben wird, was erarbeitet wird, stammt aus wissenschaftlicher Erkenntnis, aus Kunst und religiöser Hingebung. Auf der anderen Seite soll dieser Geist sein der des freien, weitherzigen und weitseelischen Menschentums.
[ 2 ] Dieser Geist nun hat es sein sollen, auf dem als auf dem besten Grundstein 1913 begonnen wurde, dieses Goetheanum zu bauen. Und wir haben es ja zustande gebracht, daß in der Zeit, als ganz Europa und weite Gebiete über Europa hinaus in Fehde lagen, in schweren Feindschaften untereinander waren, daß hier aus einem freien, umfassenden Menschentum alle Nationen Europas in Dornach zusammengearbeitet haben. Hier hat die internationale Arbeit niemals aufgehört. Auf diese Tatsache darf ich wohl heute ganz besonders hinweisen, weil ich die Begrüßung, die ich Ihnen hiermit bringe, aus diesem internationalen Geiste heraus bringen will. Was hier erarbeitet werden soll, kann ja aus keinem anderen Geiste heraus erarbeitet werden, denn nur dieser Geist allseitigen universellen freien Menschentums kann auch wirkliche spirituelle Wissenschaft, spirituelle Kunst und wahrhafte Religion bringen, die an sich allein spirituell und international sein kann. Dieser Geist gibt aber auch, ich denke, jene Weite des Herzens, die in der Lage ist, jeden Menschen liebevoll zu empfangen und zu begrüßen. Und so soll es dieser Geist sein, der hier im Goetheanum waltet, aus dem heraus ich die ersten Begrüßungsworte spreche. Sie müssen deshalb herzlich gemeint sein. In dieser Herzlichkeit möchte ich den Wunsch aussprechen, daß es uns in den nächsten Tagen gelingen möge, auf den verschiedensten Gebieten der Wissenschaft und des Lebens einiges hier zusammen zu arbeiten, zu besprechen, das ein jeglicher, der hierher hat kommen wollen, mit einer gewissen Befriedigung wiederum nach Hause trägt.
[ 3 ] Wenn wir, die wir hier seit Jahren im Goetheanum arbeiten, in der Lage sein werden, den Gedanken hervorzurufen, daß man nach einem solchen Besuche doch wiederum immer mit einiger Freude zurückblickt auf das, was man hier erlebt hat, so wird dies diejenigen, die hier am Goetheanum wirken, mit ganz besonderer Befriedigung erfüllen. In diesem Sinne lassen Sie mich Sie begrüßen, Ihnen danken dafür, daß Sie hierher gekommen sind. Und lassen Sie mich den Wunsch aussprechen, daß dieser Besuch auch Ihnen zu einiger Befriedigung dienen möge.
[ 4 ] Hier soll, wie schon angedeutet worden ist, spirituelle Erkenntnis getrieben werden als eine Grundlage für die Befruchtung des Lebens nach seinen verschiedenen Seiten. Die spirituelle Erkenntnis, welche hier in diesem Goetheanum gesucht werden soll, sollte nicht verwechselt werden mit mancherlei, was heute in der Welt als Okkultismus getrieben wird, oder auch mit mancherlei, wofür man heute den Namen Mystik anwendet. Dieser Okkultismus, der vielfach heute getrieben wird, ist im Grunde genommen dem Geiste unserer Zeit, dem Geiste des wirklichen modernen Lebens doch zuwiderlaufend. Denn dieser Geist des wirklichen modernen Lebens ist doch gegeben durch die Entwickelung der naturwissenschaftlichen Erkenntnisse in der neueren Zeit. Was hier als spirituelle Erkenntnis getrieben wird, soll durchaus rechnen mit dem, was dem Geiste moderner naturwissenschaftlicher Erkenntnis im strengsten Sinne des Wortes entspricht. Dasjenige, was heute oftmals Okkultismus genannt wird, fußt auf alten Traditionen; es herrscht in ihm nicht ein unmittelbarer Geist der Gegenwart. Alte Traditionen werden herübergeholt. Da aber die Menschen der Gegenwart nicht aus denselben seelischen Untergründen heraus die entsprechenden Erkenntnisse entfalten können, so kann man sagen, diese alten Traditionen sind oftmals mißverstanden und als mißverstandene in laienhafter Weise heute von diesen oder jenen wie eine die menschliche Seele befriedigen sollende Erkenntnis vorgebracht worden.
[ 5 ] Mit solchem zum Teil mißverstandenem, traditionellem Okkultismus hat das, was hier getrieben wird, ebensowenig zu tun wie mit dem, was ' zuweilen sogar von wissenschaftlicher Seite her gesucht wird auch als eine Art Okkultismus, indem man die gewöhnlichen wissenschaftlichen Methoden des sinnlichen Beobachtens und Experimentierens nachahmt für eine Erforschung des übersinnlichen Gebietes. Man verkennt dabei, daß diejenigen Methoden des naturwissenschaftlichen Forschens, die sich in den letzten Jahrhunderten entwickelt haben, ganz ausgezeichnet ausgebildet worden sind für die Erkenntnis der äußeren sinnlichen Wirklichkeit, daß sie aber gerade deshalb ungeeignet sind als Forschungswege hinauf in das übersinnliche Gebiet.
[ 6 ] Auf der anderen Seite wird vielfach heute von mystischer Vertiefung, von mystischem innerem Erleben gesprochen. Auch da hat man es oftmals mit nichts anderem zu tun als mit einem Sich-Versenken in die Seelenerlebnisse alter Mystiker, mit einem Erneuern solcher Seelenerlebnisse, und doch im Grunde genommen wiederum nur mit etwas, das in einer gewissen unklaren Selbstschau zu einer fragwürdigen Erkenntnis führt.
[ 7 ] Ich wollte auf diese Dinge nur hindeuten, um von der Verwechslung desjenigen, was hier in diesem Goetheanum getrieben wird, mit dem, was manchmal in so laienhafter, dilettantischer, wenn auch durchaus gutgewollter Weise getan wird, zu warnen. Hier soll eine wissenschaftliche Methode für die Erkenntnis des Übersinnlichen ausgebildet werden, so streng, so exakt, so wissenschaftlich, wie dies für die wissenschaftlichen Methoden heute auf dem Gebiete des Naturforschens verlangt wird. Man kann nur dann in das übersinnliche Gebiet hinaufgelangen, wenn man nicht stehenbleibt bei den Forschungswegen, die bloß für das Sinnliche geeignet sind. Man kann aber nicht wissenschaftlich in die übersinnlichen Welten hinaufgelangen, wenn man aus einem anderen Geiste heraus verfährt als der ist, der sich so tüchtig bewährt hat für das Gebiet der sinnlichen Wirklichkeit. Nur einige einleitende Andeutungen über Absichten und Ziele der hier getriebenen spirituellen Wissenschaft möchte ich heute geben. Daher wird die nähere Auseinandersetzung über das, was ich heute andeuten will, erst in den nächsten Tagen gegeben werden können. Hinweisen möchte ich zunächst darauf, daß es sich hier zum Zwecke der Erforschung übersinnlicher Welten darum handelt, aus den Tiefen der Menschenseele heraus diejenigen Kräfte zu suchen, die als Erkenntniskräfte in das Übersinnliche so eindringen können, wie die Kräfte der äußeren Sinne in die physisch-sinnliche Welt. Was dem Geistesforscher zunächst obliegt, das ist, seinen Seelenblick hinzulenken auf die seelisch-geistige Organisation in ihm, die an das Übersinnliche herandringen kann. Dadurch unterscheidet sich der Geistesforscher von dem Naturforscher. Dieser nimmt die menschliche Organisation, wie sie ist, wendet sie auf die Natur an und verwendet diese Exaktheit dazu, Ergebnisse über die Tatsachen der äußeren Natur zu gewinnen.
[ 8 ] Der Geistesforscher kann, gerade wenn er zunächst auf dem Boden richtiger naturwissenschaftlicher Erkenntnisse steht, nicht so vorgehen. Er muß zuerst den Blick auf das seelisch-geistige Erkenntnisorgan, ich darf es vielleicht nennen das «Geistesauge», lenken. Aber dieser Blick, der zunächst das geistige Auge zubereitet, entwickelt, der muß so sein, daß vor ihm exakt die innere Gesetzmäßigkeit dieses geistigen Auges so liegt, wie exakt zum Beispiel vor dem Mathematiker ein mathematiisches Problem oder vor dem Experimentator der Inhalt seines Experimentes liegt. Diese von dem Forscher an sich selbst vorzunehmende Arbeit, die Vorbereitung erst zur Wissenschaft, das ist in der Geistesforschung das Wesentliche. Und so wie der Mathematiker oder Naturforscher im Aufsuchen von Ergebnissen exakt ist, so muß der Geistesforscher exakt sein im Zubereiten seiner geistig-seelischen Organisation, die dann, wie im Sinnlichen das Auge oder das Ohr, die Tatsache wahrnimmt.
[ 9 ] Exakt muß die hier gemeinte spirituelle Forschung sein; exakt ist Mathematik oder Naturwissenschaft. Aber ich möchte sagen: wo mit der Exaktheit Naturwissenschaft aufhört, da fängt Geistesforschung mit dieser Exaktheit erst an. Geistesforschung muß exakt sein in bezug auf die Bearbeitung der eigenen Menschlichkeit, so daß alles dasjenige, was getan wird am Menschen selbst, damit er ein Geistesforscher werde, exakt verrichtet wird und gewissermaßen durch exakte und vor der Wissenschaft gerechtfertigte Arbeiten das geistige Auge darstellt, wenn es mit der Geistesforschung beginnt, wenn es an die Tatsache der übersinnlichen Welt herantritt. Während bei dem, was man oftmals Mystik nennt, das innere Seelische in einer ziemlichen Unklarheit behandelt wird, muß bei wirklicher Geistesforschung jeder kleinste Schritt mit solcher inneren Klarheit und Durchschaubarkeit behandelt werden wie sonst das, was der Mathematiker vor sich hat in einem mathematischen Problem. Dann wird herbeigeführt eine Art Erwachen, ein Erwachen auf einer höheren Stufe des Bewußtseins, vergleichbar mit dem Erwachen, das wir sonst erleben, wenn wir aus dem gewöhnlichen Schlafe ‚herauskommen, um die sinnliche Welt um uns herum zu haben.
[ 10 ] Wenn ich insbesondere bei der Geistesforschung, die hier gemeint ist, von Exaktheit spreche, so bezieht sich dieses Wort Exaktheit auf die exakte, wissenschaftliche Vorbereitung dessen, was beim Menschen dem Forschen vorangehen muß: die Organisation geistig-seelischer Art. Das ist es, was in exakter Durchschaubarkeit zunächst vor dem Geistesforscher sein muß. Dann beginnt er seine Blicke hinein zu tun in die Welt der übersinnlichen Tatsachen.
[ 11 ] Das soll zunächst nur ein vorbereitender, noch nicht beweisender Hinweis sein. Weil in der Vorbereitung der eigentlichen übersinnlichen geistigen Anschauung diese Exaktheit angestrebt wird, darf wohl, wenn man die Art des Geist-Anschauens, die hier gemeint ist, hellsichtige Clairvoyance nennt, von exakter Clairvoyance gesprochen werden. Das soll das spezifisch Eigentümliche der Geistesforschung sein, die hier gepflegt wird, daß sie beruht auf der methodisch exakten Clairvoyance. Die Exaktheit der Clairvoyance soll das Charakteristische der hier gemeinten Geistesforschung sein.
[ 12 ] Von diesem Gesichtspunkte aus möchte man mit der hier getriebenen spirituellen Forschung nicht nur ein eng umgrenztes Gebiet beurteilen, sondern etwas erarbeiten, wohinein alle übrigen Wissenschaften und Lebensformen der Gegenwart münden. Nicht nur soll das, was hier spirituell erarbeitet wird, ein geistiger Überbau der naturwissenschaftlichen Anschauung sein, sondern es sollen auch diejenigen Erkenntnisgebiete, die im Geiste dieser naturwissenschaftlichen Anschauung in der modernen Zeit von der Menschheit erarbeitet worden sind, heraufgeführt werden in das Spirituelle, damit sie gewissermaßen durch das, was spirituelle Forschung geben kann, gekrönt werden.
[ 13 ] Ich möchte als Beispiel nur die Medizin anführen. Die Medizin wird in der Art, wie sie heute aus naturwissenschaftlicher Erkenntnis heraus aufgebaut ist, wie sie ja mit bewunderungswürdigem Resultate dasteht, voll anerkannt von dem, was hier als spirituelle Erkenntnis getrieben wird. Aber es ist möglich, dasjenige, was heute aus rein äußerer Anschauung für die Medizin erarbeitet ist, weiterzuführen durch den Geist einer exakten Clairvoyance. Dann erst ergibt sich eigentlich die ganze Fruchtbarkeit auch des rein naturwissenschaftlich Medizinischen, das heute getrieben wird. Ebenso möchte man auf spirituelle Art hier eine. Erkenntnis gewinnen, welche das Künstlerische ins Geistige hineinzuführen in der Lage ist. Und ein Künstlerisches wird hier angestrebt, das ebenso in spiritueller Art aus der Gesamtnatur des Menschen hervorgeht wie das, was hier als Erkenntnis angestrebt wird. Und ein religiöses, ein soziales Element soll hier gepflegt werden so, daß sich das Religiöse und das Soziale wie etwas Selbstverständliches aus der errungenen spirituellen Erkenntnis ergeben.
[ 14 ] Die spirituelle Erkenntnis, die hier gesucht wird, soll den ganzen Menschen ergreifen und aus dem ganzen Menschen kommen, nicht aus einer einzelnen menschlichen Fähigkeit. Deshalb ist es so mit dieser Erkenntnis, daß sie alle Gebiete des theoretischen wie des praktischen Lebens einmünden lassen will in das spirituelle Leben, so daß dadurch erst ein Vollmenschliches, ein Universell-Menschliches erreicht werden soll.
[ 15 ] Von diesem Gesichtspunkte aus möchte ich Ihnen in diesen Vorträgen in der Hauptsache über drei Gebiete der Erkenntnis sprechen, um an diesen drei Beispielen zu erläutern, inwiefern aus dem Geiste der gegenwärtigen Wissenschaftlichkeit in den Geist der höheren, spirituellen Wissenschaftlichkeit hineingeführt werden kann. Ich möchte in diesen Vorträgen Ihnen sprechen von Philosophie, von Kosmologie und von Religion in der Art, wie sie durch Anthroposophie eine gewisse spirituelle Gestalt gewinnen sollen.
[ 16 ] Philosophie war einst die universelle Erkenntnis, die in ältesten Zeiten dem Menschen Aufschluß gegeben hat über alle einzelnen Wirklichkeitsgebiete des Daseins. Philosophie war nicht eine spezielle Wissenschaft. Philosophie war die universelle Wissenschaft, und alle anderen Wissenschaften, die wir heute pflegen, sind ja im Grunde genommen aus der Substanz der Philosophie, wie sie noch in Griechenland war, heraus gewachsen. Daneben ist nun in der neueren Zeit eine besondere, eine spezielle Philosophie entstanden, die in einer gewissen Summe von Ideen lebt. Es ist nur das Eigentümliche eingetreten, daß diese Philosophie, aus der im Grunde genommen alle anderen Wissenschaften herausgewachsen sind, nun in die Lage gekommen ist, ihr eigenes Dasein gegenüber den anderen Wissenschaften rechtfertigen zu müssen. Die anderen Wissenschaften, die doch aus der Philosophie herausgewachsen sind, beschäftigen sich mit diesem oder jenem anerkannten Wirklichkeitsgebiet. Das Wirklichkeitsgebiet ist für die Sinne oder für die Beobachtung oder für das Experiment da.
[ 17 ] Man kann die Berechtigung, sich wissenschaftlich, erkenntnismäßig damit zu befassen, nicht bezweifeln. Trotzdem alle diese einzelnen Gebiete herausgeboren sind aus der Philosophie, ist die Philosophie heute genötigt, ihr eigenes Dasein zu rechtfertigen, zu sagen, warum sie eine gewisse Summe von Ideen entwickelt, und ob diese Ideen nicht vielleicht ganz unwirklich sind, sich auf gar keine Wirklichkeit beziehen, nur etwas menschlich Ausgedachtes sind. Denken wir nur einmal, wie viele harte Denkarbeit heute darauf verwendet wird, jene Ideen, die übrigens schon einen sehr abstrakten Charakter angenommen haben, die man heute Inhalt der Philosophie nennt, so zu rechtfertigen, daß sie noch in einer gewissen Weise in der Welt ein Ansehen genießen. Sie haben die Wissenschaften erzeugt; diese sind, ich möchte sagen, wohlakkreditiert gegenüber ihren einzelnen Wirklichkeitsgebieten. Philosophie dagegen ist heute nicht akkreditiert. Sie muß eigentlich ihr Dasein als gerechtfertigt erst erweisen. Davon konnte im alten Griechenland nicht einmal die Rede sein. Da fühlte der Mensch, der nur überhaupt bis zur Philosophie sich hin entwickelte, die Wirklichkeit des Philosophierens so, wie der gesunde Mensch die Wirklichkeit des Atmens fühlt. Wenn dagegen der heute Philosophierende seine Philosophie überschaut, dann empfindet er die Abstraktheit, das Kalte, das Nüchterne der Ideen, die er in der Philosophie entwickelt. Er fühlt sich nicht recht robust in der Wirklichkeit drinnen stehend. Nur der im chemischen Laboratorium, im physikalischen Laboratorium oder in der Klinik Arbeitende hat, möchte ich sagen, etwas in der Hand. Wer heute philosophische Ideen in sich trägt und ausführt, der fühlt sich oftmals meilenweit von der Wirklichkeit weg entfernt.
[ 18 ] Dazu kommt ein anderes. Es ist tief begründet, daß Philosophie nicht einen Namen trägt, der bloß auf theoretisches Erkennen hinweist. Liebe zur Weisheit ist Philosophie. Liebe ist etwas, was nicht bloß im Verstande und in der Vernunft, sondern was in der ganzen menschlichen Seele, in dem ganzen menschlichen Gemüt wurzelt. Ein umfassendes seelisches Erleben, das Liebeserleben, hat der Philosophie den Namen gegeben. Der ganze Mensch soll gewissermaßen engagiert sein, indem er Philosophie entwickelt. Und man kann ja schließlich nicht lieben, lieben im wahren Sinne des Wortes dasjenige, was bloß theoretisch, nüchtern und kalt ist. Wenn Philosophie Liebe zur Weisheit ist, so setzt das voraus bei denen, die Philosophie in dieser Weise erlebt haben, daß auch diese Sophia, diese Weisheit, etwas Liebenswertes, etwas Wirkliches, Wesenhaftes sei, etwas, dessen Dasein man ja nicht erst beweisen soll. Denn schließlich, denken Sie: wenn jemand als Mann ein weibliches Wesen oder als Weib ein männliches Wesen lieben sollte, es aber erst nötig fände, das Dasein des oder der Geliebten zu beweisen — nicht wahr, ein ganz absurder Gedanke! Aber bei der Philosophie in ihrem heutigen Sinne ist das nicht anders. Es ist, ich möchte sagen, aus der Philosophie als einem Warmen, herzlich vom Menschen Aufgenommenen, in seiner Existenz Selbstverständlichen etwas Abstraktes, Kaltes, Nüchternes, Theoretisches geworden. Woher kommt das?
[ 19 ] Wenn man nicht mit äußerer Geschichte, sondern mit innerlich erlebter und erfühlter Geschichtserkenntnis zu dem Ursprunge des philosophischen Lebens zurückgeht, dann findet man: Philosophie hat eben ursprünglich im Menschen nicht so gelebt, wie sie heute in ihm lebt. Heute läßt der Mensch im Grunde genommen, wenn er wissenschaftlich denkt, nur dasjenige gelten, was durch die sinnliche Beobachtung oder durch das in dem Felde des Sinnlichen erarbeitete Experiment erworben ist. Das Erworbene wird dann durch den Verstand zusammengefaßt. Was auf diese Weise erworben ist, das ist erworben durch den physischen Menschen. Die Sinne sind physische Organe, sind eingebettet im physischen Menschen. Das, was der physische Menschenkörper erkenntnismäßig erwirbt, wird heute wissenschaftlich anerkannt. Mit dem aber kann man auch nur herangelangen bis zum physischen Menschen selbst. In diesem physischen Menschen kann nicht dasjenige gefunden werden, was die Alten als Philosophie angeschaut haben. Wie gesagt kann ich heute nur einleitend sprechen und werde das, worauf ich hindeute, in den nächsten Tagen weiter auseinanderzusetzen haben; aber eben hindeuten muß ich doch darauf, daß das, was noch in der Blütezeit der griechischen Philosophie Philosophie genannt worden ist — diese innerlich in der Seele erlebte geistige Substanz -, nicht in dem physischen Menschenleib erlebt worden ist, sondern in einer menschlichen Organisation, die als ein ätherischer Mensch den physischen Menschenleib durchsetzt.
[ 20 ] Wir kennen in unserer heutigen Wissenschaft eigentlich nur den physischen Menschen. Wir kennen ja nicht jenen Leib, der als ein feiner ätherischer durchsetzt den physischen Menschenleib, in dem der griechische Philosoph seine Philosophie erlebt hat. In dem physischen Leib erleben wir das Atmen, erleben wir den Sehvorgang. Aber so, wie wir diese physische Menschenorganisation vor uns haben, so ist im Menschen auch ein ätherischer Körper, ein ätherischer Mensch. Schauen wir auf den physischen Körper hin, so schauen wir etwa den Atmungsvorgang, können uns physikalisch oder biologisch den Sehvorgang klarmachen. Schauen wir auf den übersinnlichen ätherischen Menschen, so schauen wir auf den, in dem im griechischen Sinne philosophiert worden ist. Die griechische Menschheitskonstitution war noch so, daß sich der Mensch erfühlte, erlebte in seinem ätherischen Organismus. Und indem er den ätherischen Organismus so anstrengte, so in Tätigkeit überführte, wie man den physischen Organismus zum Beispiel beim Atmen oder beim Sehen in Tätigkeit überführt, entstand im ätherischen Menschen Philosophie. So wie wir niemals im Zweifel darüber sein können, daß das wirklich ist, was wir als Atmungsvorgang haben, weil wir uns unseres physischen Leibes bewußt sind, so konnte der Grieche niemals im Zweifel darüber sein, daß das, was er als Philosophie erlebte, als Weisheit, die er liebte, daß das in der Wirklichkeit wurzelte, denn er war sich seines ätherischen Leibes bewußt. Er war sich bewußt, daß das, was philosophiert, in seinem ätherischen Leibe vor sich geht; er war sich darüber klar.
[ 21 ] Der moderne Mensch hat für seine Erkenntnis den ätherischen Leib verloren; er weiß nicht, daß er einen ätherischen Leib hat. Die traditionelle Philosophie ist dadurch eine Summe von abstrakten Ideen, daß sie als Wirklichkeit nur ansehen kann, was man als Wirklichkeit erlebt, worin man sich philosophisch betätigt. Hat man aber für die Erkenntnis den ätherischen Menschen verloren, dann hat man auch die Wirklichkeit der Philosophie verloren. Man fühlt sie als abstrakt; man fühlt die Notwendigkeit, ihr Dasein zu beweisen.
[ 22 ] Denken Sie sich, der Mensch wüchse in einen noch robusteren, dichteren, materielleren Organismus hinein, als sein physischer ist. Dann würde zum Beispiel der Atmungsvorgang sich allmählich für dieses robustere Erleben sehr verfeinert ausnehmen, und zuletzt würde der Mensch nichts mehr wissen von dem, was jetzt unser physischer Leib ist, so, wie heute der moderne Mensch nichts weiß von seinem ätherischen Leib. Dann würde das Atmen, der Atmungsvorgang, eine Theorie sein, eine Summe von Ideen, und man würde erst «beweisen» müssen, daß das Atmen eine Wirklichkeit ist, wie man heute beweisen muß, daß die Philosophie in einem Wirklichen wurzelt. Der Zweifel an der Wirklichkeit desjenigen, was man lieben soll in der Philosophie, der ist entstanden dadurch, daß der ätherische Leib aus der Erkenntnis des Menschen verloren worden ist. Denn im ätherischen Leib, nicht im physischen Leib, wird die Wirklichkeit der Philosophie erlebt.
[ 23 ] Soll daher wiederum Philosophie als Wirklichkeit empfunden werden, so muß erst die Erkenntnis des ätherischen Menschen aufkommen. Dann wird aus der Erkenntnis des ätherischen Menschen wiederum ein richtiges philosophisches Erleben kommen können.
[ 24 ] Diese Erkenntnis des ätherischen Menschen zu vermitteln, soll der erste Schritt der Anthroposophie sein. Ich will in drei Abschnitten vorgehen und möchte jetzt Herrn Dr. Sauerwein bitten, zu übersetzen. Nach der Übersetzung werde ich fortfahren.
[ 25 ] In der Philosophie hat der Mensch zunächst ein inneres Erlebnis seiner selbst, das Erlebnis seines ätherischen Körpers. Seit die Menschheit begonnen hat nachzudenken, fühlte sie aber auch das Bedürfnis, den einzelnen Menschen einzugliedern in den ganzen Kosmos, in das Universum. Der Mensch braucht nicht nur eine Philosophie, der Mensch braucht auch eine Kosmologie. Er will verstehen, wie er als dieser Einzelne, der dasteht innerhalb seines Organismus an einem bestimmten Ort der Erde, an einem bestimmten Ort der Welt, inwiefern er dem ganzen Weltenall angehört, inwiefern er sich aus diesem ganzen Weltenall heraus entwickelt hat.
[ 26 ] In den ältesten Zeiten der Menschheitsentwickelung fühlte sich der Mensch als ein Glied des ganzen Kosmos. Allein als physischer Mensch kann man sich nicht als ein Glied des ganzen Kosmos fühlen. Was man als physischer Mensch im Erleben zwischen Geburt und Tod in sich trägt, das gehört dem unmittelbaren Leben der physisch-sinnlichen Umgebung an. Darüber hinaus hat der Mensch sein seelisches Innenleben. Dieses seelische Innenleben ist etwas durchaus anderes als das, was der Mensch in seinem physischen Körper aus der physisch-sinnlichen Umgebung in sich trägt. Indem der Mensch sich fühlen, sich empfinden, sich wissen will als ein Glied des ganzen Kosmos, als ein Glied des Universums, muß er auch sein seelisches Innenleben als Teil, als Glied des Universums empfinden, fühlen, wissen.
[ 27 ] In ältesten Zeiten der Menschheitsentwickelung waren die Menschen wirklich imstande, nicht nur durch dasjenige, was man mißverständlich heute Anthropomorphismus nennt, sondern durch ein inneres Anschauen im Universum, im Kosmos Seelisches, Inneres zu schauen. Da konnten die Menschen das, was in ihnen selbst inneres seelisches Leben war, so als ein Glied des seelischen und geistigen Lebens im Universum anschauen, wie man das physisch-sinnliche körperliche Leben des Menschen als einen Teil des natürlichen, des sinnlichen Daseins ansehen kann.
[ 28 ] Aber die Menschen haben in der neuesten Zeit in exakter Weise nur das naturwissenschaftliche Erkennen ausgebildet, das auf Sinnesbeobachtung und Experiment gegründet ist, und auf jenes Denken, das sich nur auf Sinnesbeobachtung und Experiment stützt.
[ 29 ] Aus dem, was man auf diese Weise als naturwissenschaftliche Ergebnisse gewonnen hat, bildete man, indem man die einzelnen Ergebnisse zusammenfaßte, ein universelles Wissen. Aus den einzelnen Ergebnissen der Naturwissenschaft bildete man eine Kosmologie. Allein diese Kosmologie enthält bloß das Bild von sinnlich-wirklichen Tatsachen, im Denken zusammengefaßt. Man bildet sich das Bild eines Universums, aber die einzelnen Teile, die einzelnen Glieder in diesem Bilde sind nur die erkannten Gesetze der sinnlich-physischen Tatsachen.
[ 30 ] In diesem Bilde, das die naturwissenschaftliche Kosmologie der neueren Zeit ausgebildet hat, ist nicht so wie in der Kosmologie der Alten auch das seelische, das geistige Leben darinnen, sondern es ist nur dasjenige darinnen, was naturwissenschaftlich angeschaut werden kann: die sinnliche Welt. In diesem Bilde, das als Kosmologie in der neueren Zeit dasteht, kann sich der Mensch zwar seinem physischen Leibe nach wiederfinden, nicht aber seinem seelischen Innenleben nach.
[ 31 ] In alten Zeiten konnte man das seelische Innenleben aus dem Bilde der Kosmologie herausholen. Aus dem auf Naturwissenschaft gebauten kosmologischen Bilde kann man das seelische Innenleben nicht herausholen. Aber das hängt wiederum damit zusammen, daß die moderne Erkenntnis nicht in derselben Weise auf das geistig-seeliche Innenleben hinschauen kann, wie es eine alte, primitive Erkenntnis gekonnt hat. Was tut denn die moderne Erkenntnis, wenn sie von Seelischem im Leibe spricht? Sie spricht von den Erscheinungen, von den inneren Erlebnissen des Denkens, Fühlens und Wollens, und man sieht das seelische Innenleben so an, daß es ein Ausfluß ist von dem, was in dem Gedanklichen, im Gefühlten, im Gewollten sich vereinzelt und durcheinander auslebt. Man macht sich ein Bild, in dem Denken, Fühlen und Wollen als Tatsache des seelischen inneren Lebens eine Rolle spielen.
[ 32 ] Wenn man das seelisch-geistige Innenleben so betrachtet, kann man dieses Bild niemals davor schützen, daß gesagt werden muß: Ja, was du da erkennst und verzeichnest als ineinanderfließendes Denken, Fühlen, Wollen, das entsteht mit der Geburt, mit dem Keimesleben, entwickelt sich mit dem Kinde und geht mit dem Tode zugrunde. — Es gibt keine Möglichkeit einer wissenschaftlichen Einsicht, die dieses Bild eines seelischen Lebens davor schützen könnte, so angesehen zu werden, daß dieses seelische Leben mit dem Tode verschwindet. Denn in der Tat: dieses Denken, Fühlen und Wollen erscheint zwischen Geburt und Tod innig verbunden mit dem physisch-körperlichen Leibesleben. Und ebenso wie wir die Glieder wachsen sehen, so sehen wir das Denken, das Fühlen heranwachsen. Wie wir den Körper verkalken und dem physischen Niedergang entgegengehen sehen, so sehen wir mit dem Körperlichen die Erscheinungen des Denkens, Fühlens und Wollens sich allmählich ablähmen.
[ 33 ] Was den alten Anschauungen eigen war, das war eine Erkenntnis des seelischen Innenlebens, die sich hinaushob über dasjenige, was im bloßen Denken, Fühlen und Wollen lebt. Man sah hin auf eine Grundlage des seelischen Innenlebens, die sich im Denken, Fühlen und Wollen nur verbirgt, von der Denken, Fühlen und Wollen der Abglanz sind. Denken, Fühlen und Wollen sehen wir entstehen und sich weiterentwickeln zwischen Geburt und Tod. Was darunter liegt, wovon Denken, Fühlen und Wollen der äußere Abglanz ist, das sah ein älteres, primitives hellsichtiges Erkennen als den astralischen Menschen.
[ 34 ] So, wie man zunächst den ätherischen Menschen als einen übersinnlichen Menschen im physischen Menschen erkennt, kann man im physisch-ätherischen Menschen den astralischen Menschen als ein höheres Glied erkennen. Dieser astralische Mensch besteht nicht in Denken, Fühlen und Wollen; er liegt dem Denken, Fühlen und Wollen zugrunde. {Er ist das, was aus geistig-seelischen Welten sich hereinlebt in das Dasein, das wir zwischen Geburt und Tod verbringen. Dieser astralische Mensch ist das, was sich mit dem physischen und ätherischen Körper umkleidet zwischen Geburt und Tod und das wiederum nach dem Tode in eine geistig-seelische Welt hinaus geht. Dieser astralische Mensch ist dasjenige im Menschen, dem gegenüber Geburt und Tod nur Erscheinungsformen sind.
[ 35 ] Denken, Fühlen und Wollen kann man nur innerhalb der physischen Organisation des Menschen verstehen und nur finden zwischen Geburt und Tod. Da entwickelt es sich, da lähmt es sich allmählich ab, da verschwindet es auch. Was als astralischer Mensch dem Denken, Fühlen und Wollen, diesem seelischen Innenleben zugrunde liegt, das geht über den physischen und über den ätherischen Menschen hinaus; es läßt sich eingliedern in eine kosmische, in eine universelle Welt. Das ist nicht eingeschlossen innerhalb der physischen Organisation des Menschen.
[ 36 ] Wir brauchen, um zu einer umfassenden Kosmologie zu kommen, eine Erkenntnis des ätherischen und astralischen Menschen, von dem Denken, Fühlen und Wollen ein Abglanz sind. Aber Denken, Fühlen und Wollen stehen in der einzelnen menschlichen Individualität da, lassen sich nicht kosmisch eingliedern. Dasjenige aber, was ihnen als Hintergrund zugrunde liegt, was in ihnen zwischen Geburt und Tod verborgen ist, was nur einer primitiven oder exakten Clairvoyance zugänglich ist, das läßt sich einem geistigen Kosmos eingliedern, von dem der physisch-sinnliche Kosmos nur das Abbild ist.
[ 37 ] Die moderne Kosmologie ist nur ein Überbau über naturwissenschaftliche Forschungsergebnisse, eine Zusammenschließung dessen, was als Tatsache in dem Physisch-Sinnlichen da ist. In das Bild einer solchen Kosmologie läßt sich das Innenleben des Menschen nicht eingliedern, aber man hat nur eine solche Kosmologie, weil die moderne Erkenntnis überhaupt nicht ein Bild des astralischen Menschen gibt. Wer das seelische Leben nur als eine Zusammensetzung von Denken, Fühlen und Wollen erkennt, der kann dieses seelische Leben nicht geschützt denken über Geburt und Tod hinaus. Erst, wenn man vom Denken, Fühlen und Wollen fortschreitet zu dem, was sich in ihnen verbirgt, zu dem astralischen Menschen, kommt man zu jenem Menschlichen, das nicht mehr an den physischen Leib gebunden ist und das sich in den Kosmos, in das geistig-seelische Universum eingegliedert denken läßt. Aber man wird niemals einen solchen geistigen Kosmos wiederfinden, nachdem man ihn verlassen hat, weil man die Erkenntnis des astralischen Menschen verloren hat. Man wird niemals einen solchen geistigen, einen solchen seelischen Kosmos im Bilde aufbauen können, wenn man nicht erst wiederum zum Bilde des astralischen Menschen gelangt.
[ 38 ] Die Möglichkeit einer Kosmologie, welche wieder Geistig-Seelisches enthält, hängt ab von dem Aufbau einer Erkenntnis des astralischen Menschen. Wir werden nur eine äußerliche Kosmologie haben, die Sinnlich-Physisches umfaßt — dann wird der Mensch nicht mitumfaßt werden von dieser Kosmologie. Wir haben eine solche sinnlich-physische Kosmologie bekommen, weil die Erkenntnis des astralischen Menschen verlorengegangen ist. Wird die Erkenntnis des astralischen Menschen wieder errungen, dann ist auch die Möglichkeit einer Kosmologie vorhanden, die ein Bild des Kosmos enthält, das den Menschen mitumfaßt.
[ 39 ] So handelt es sich darum, daß man dazu gelangt, eine Erkenntnis des astralischen Menschen zu entwickeln. Dann wird dadurch auch wieder errungen werden können eine wahre, den Menschen mitumfassende Kosmologie.
[ 40 ] Das soll der zweite Schritt der Anthroposophie sein. Wie es sich mit dem dritten Schritt verhält, werde ich, nachdem Dr. Sauerwein so gut war, den zweiten Teil zu übersetzen, im dritten Abschnitt meines Vortrags besprechen.
[ 41 ] Außer dem, daß sich der Mensch, wie etwa im philosophischen Erleben, in sich zusammengefaßt erlebt, und daß er sich erlebt, wie es die Kosmologie darstellt, als ein Glied des Kosmos, außer dem erlebt sich der Mensch als in einer Wesenheit, durch die er sowohl gegenüber seiner eigenen physischen Körperlichkeit wie gegenüber dem Kosmos, dem er als ein Glied angehört, selbständig ist. Unabhängig von sich als seiner Leiblichkeit, unabhängig von seiner Gliedlichkeit gegenüber dem Kosmos fühlt sich der Mensch, wenn er auf sich als den eigentlichen Geistesmenschen hinweist, auf den eigentlich gegenwärtig nur hingedeutet wird, wenn wir das Wörtchen Ich aussprechen.
[ 42 ] Wenn wir das Wörtchen Ich aussprechen, so meinen wir doch dasjenige in unserer Wesenheit, das weder von unserem physischen Leibe, noch von unserem ätherischen Körper, noch von unserem astralischen Körper, insofern wir durch diesen ein Glied des Kosmos sind, umfaßt wird, sondern was eine innerliche, auf sich selbst gestellte Wesenheit ist. Diese Wesenheit fühlen wir als einer besonderen Welt, als der göttlichen Welt angehörig, von welcher der Kosmos nur der äußere Abglanz, das äußere Abbild ist. Wir fühlen als Menschen, indem wir uns als Ich ansprechen, daß diese Wesenheit, daß der Geistesmensch, auf den mit dem Wörtchen Ich hingedeutet wird, mit all dem, was im Kosmos enthalten ist, eigentlich nur umkleidet ist, und daß auch diese physisch-sinnliche Körperlichkeit eine Umkleidung des eigentlichen Wesens ist. Indem der Mensch in älteren Zeiten durch ein gewisses innerliches, wenn auch primitives Schauen, diese sowohl von der eigenen Leiblichkeit wie von dem Kosmos unabhängige Menschen-Wesenheit erlebte, wußte er sich einer göttlichen Welt angehörig. Aber er wußte sich auch zwischen Geburt und Tod herausgestellt aus dieser göttlichen Welt; er wußte sich zwischen Geburt und Tod eingekleidet in einen physischen Leib. Er wußte sich zwischen Geburt und Tod hineingestellt in den seelisch-physischen Kosmos. Er wußte sozusagen, daß seine eigentliche Wesenheit, seine Ich-Wesenheit, durch das Kosmische, durch das Physisch-Leibliche verborgen ist, und er suchte nach einer Vereinigung dieser Ich-Wesenheit mit der göttlichen Welt, der doch diese Ich-Wesenheit angehört.
[ 43 ] Damit gelangte der Mensch gerade in primitiveren, in älteren Zeiten mit dem innerlich geschauten Erlebnis der Ichheit über den physischen, über den ätherischen Körper und über seine astralische Wesenheit hinaus in das Erfühlen des Ich, und er gelangte zu einer Vereinigung, religio, mit der göttlichen Welt. Das religiöse Leben war dasjenige, in welches die Erkenntnis, die eine philosophische war, die eine kosmologische war, einmündete. Der Mensch fand sich gewissermaßen vereinigt mit dem, wovon ihn sein eigener Leib trennte, wovon ihn der äußerlich angeschaute, sinnlich-seelische Kosmos trennte. Er fand sich vereinigt mit dieser göttlichen Welt im religiösen Erleben. Das religiöse Erleben war die höchste Blüte des Erkenntniserlebens.
[ 44 ] Aber wovon war dieses religiöse Erleben auf primitiven Stufen der Menschheitsentwickelung abhängig? Es war abhängig von einem wirklichen inneren Erleben der Ichheit, des eigentlichen Geistesmenschen. Nur wenn das Ich erlebt wird, kann für dieses Ich auch wiederum ersehnt und erlebt werden die Vereinigung mit der göttlichen Welt: das religiöse Empfinden.
[ 45 ] Was aber ist der modernen Erkenntnis das Ich geworden, der eigentliche Geistesmensch? Der modernen Erkenntnis ist das Ich dasjenige geworden, wodurch als in einer abstrakten Idee die Tatsachen des Denkens, des Fühlens und Wollens zusammengefaßt werden. Eine Art kosmisches oder höchstens irgendein anderes zusammenfassendes Formelhaftes aus Denken, Fühlen und Wollen, jedenfalls etwas sehr Abstraktes ist nun das Ich geworden. Selbst Philosophen kommen zu einer Beschreibung, zu einer Charakteristik des Ich, indem sie die Erlebnisse des Denkens, Fühlens und Wollens wie in einem Abstraktum zusammenfassen.
[ 46 ] Aber in dem, was man so als eine Zusammenfassung von Denken, Fühlen und Wollen im Ich hat, darin hat man nichts gefunden, was nicht jede Nacht, wenn der Mensch schläft, widerlegt wird. Nehmen Sie die Charakteristiken der modernen Philosophen, zum Beispiel Bergsons, vom Ich. Sie werden in diesen Charakteristiken überall nur etwas finden, was in jedem Schlafe widerlegt wird, denn das, was von diesen Begriffen, von diesen Ideen vom Ich aufgenommen wird, das wird im Schlafe ausgelöscht. Die Realität widerlegt diese Definitionen, diese Charakteristiken vom Ich! Und das, was ich hier sage, wird nicht dadurch aus der Welt geschafft, daß man etwa sagt, gedächtnismäßig werde nach dem Schlafe wieder angeknüpft an das Ich. Es handelt sich nicht um Interpretationen, es handelt sich um Tatsachen. Das heißt aber: Die moderne Erkenntnis, auch die feinst-philosophische, hat eine Erkenntnis des Ich, des eigentlichen Geistesmenschen, verloren, damit aber auch den Erkenntnisweg zum Religiösen.
[ 47 ] So hat es sich denn herausgebildet, daß in der neueren Zeit neben die Erkenntnis, die sich nur erstreckt auf die dem Menschen in Beobachtung und Experiment erreichbare Welt, sich hinstellen die Traditionen, die man in einem wirklichen wahren religiösen Leben früherer Zeiten einmal gehabt hat, die man historisch aufnimmt, zu denen man aber den Erkenntnisweg nicht mehr hat, daher nur an sie glaubt. So stellen sich für den modernen Menschen, der die Erkenntnis nicht hingelangen lassen will bis zum religiösen Erleben, Wissen und Glauben nebeneinander. Aller Glaubensinhalt, der heute existiert, war einmal ein alter Erkenntnisinhalt, der nur als Reminiszenz heraufgebracht wird, indem die Tradition sich ihn erhalten hat. Es gibt keinen Glaubensinhalt, der . nicht Reminiszenz eines alten Erkenntnisinhaltes ist. Und weil man heute die lebendige Anschauung, die Anschauung durch exakte Clairvoyance von dem wahren Ich, das nicht von jedem Schlafe abgelähmt wird, sondern das dem Schlafzustand und dem Wachzustand zugrunde liegt, weil man die exakte, clairvoyante Erkenntnis des Ich nicht hat, deshalb hat man auch nicht die Fortsetzung des Erkenntnisweges in den religiösen Weg hinein und stellt den Glauben, der eigentlich nur alte Traditionen als Reminiszenzen wieder heraufbringt, neben das Wissen hin.
[ 48 ] Daß heute das, was einstmals Einheit war — Erkenntnis der physischen Welt und Erkenntnis der göttlichen Welt -, daß das zerfällt in zwei äußerlich nebeneinanderstehende Gebiete, Wissen und Glauben, das rührt davon her, daß die alte, primitive hellseherische Anschauung von dem wahren Ich - das nicht so charakterisiert wird, daß jeder Schlaf es auslöscht, sondern das angeschaut wird als die Grundlage des Menschen, auch wenn der Schlaf Denken, Fühlen und Wollen auslöscht -, daß diese alte Erkenntnis verlorengegangen ist und daß die exakte Clairvoyance noch nicht vorgeschritten ist zu der Anschauung der wirklichen Ichheit des Menschen: des Geistesmenschen.
[ 49 ] Erst, wenn wiederum eine exakte Clairvoyance bis zur Anschauung der wahren Ichheit des Menschen fortschreiten will — wie sie fortschreiten muß zur Anschauung des ätherischen Wesens des Menschen, des astralischen Wesens des Menschen -, dann wird eine geradlinige Fortsetzung von der Erkenntnis der äußeren Welt zu der Erkenntnis der göttlichen Welt stattfinden. Dann wird wiederum einmünden Wissenschaft in das religiöse Leben.
[ 50 ] Wir haben darum die Spaltung zwischen Wissen und Glauben, weil wir die lebendige, clairvoyante Anschauung des wahren Ich, des vierten Gliedes der menschlichen Wesenheit, verloren haben. Deshalb ist es auch die Aufgabe des neueren Geisteslebens, diese Erkenntnis des wahren Ich durch exakte Clairvoyance wiederum herbeizuführen. Dann wird sich wieder der Weg ergeben, aus der Welterkenntnis heraus zur Gotteserkenntnis weiterzuschreiten, aus der Weltauffassung heraus wieder zum religiösen Leben zu kommen, und den Glauben nur sein zu lassen als eine besondere höhere Art des Wissens, nicht als etwas spezifisch vom Wissen Verschiedenes.
[ 51 ] Was wir also nötig haben, ist die Möglichkeit einer wirklichen IchErkenntnis. Daraus ergibt sich dann auch die Möglichkeit eines neuen religiösen Erlebens. Diese Ich-Erkenntnis so herbeizuführen, daß sie dasteht innerhalb der spirituellen Wissenschaft wie die vorhin charakterisierte Erkenntnis des ätherischen Menschen, der nicht im physischen Menschenkörper wahrgenommen wird, wie die Erkenntnis des astralischen Menschen, der über Geburt und Tod erhaben ist, so auch die Erkenntnis des Ich, das über Schlafen und Wachen erhaben ist, als der Hintergrund von Schlafen und Wachen - diese Erkenntnis herbeizuführen und damit die Erneuerung des Lebens zu bewirken, das soll nun der dritte Schritt der Anthroposophie sein. Auf diese Weise soll sich organisch ergeben von dem Gesichtspunkt anthroposophischer Forschung aus:
[ 52 ] eine moderne Philosophie durch die exakte clairvoyante Erkenntnis des ätherischen Leibes,
[ 53 ] eine den Menschen umfassende Kosmologie durch eine klare Erfassung der astralischen Wesenheit des Menschen,
[ 54 ] eine Erneuerung des religiösen Lebens durch eine exakte clairvoyante Erfassung des wahren, über Schlaf und Wachen erhabenen menschlichen Ich.
[ 55 ] Von diesem Gesichtspunkt aus werde ich mir erlauben, in den nächsten Vorträgen Philosophie, Kosmologie und Religion weiter zu betrachten.
The three steps of anthroposophy
[ 1 ] Before I begin my lecture today, allow me to extend a most cordial welcome to all those present, a welcome in the spirit that should prevail here in the Goetheanum and that should also inspire all the work that is done here. This should be a spirit that does not arise from human one-sidedness, but from the full, comprehensive humanity. And this can be so because, on the one hand, what is given here, what is worked out, comes from scientific knowledge, from art, and from religious devotion. On the other hand, this spirit should be that of free, broad-minded, and broad-souled humanity.
[ 2 ] This spirit was to be the best foundation on which the Goetheanum was begun in 1913. And we have indeed achieved that, at a time when all of Europe and large areas beyond Europe were at war, in serious enmity with one another, all the nations of Europe have worked together here in Dornach out of a free, comprehensive humanity. Here, international work has never ceased. I would like to emphasize this fact today because I want to express my welcome to you in this international spirit. What is to be accomplished here cannot be accomplished in any other spirit, for only this spirit of universal, free humanity can bring about true spiritual science, spiritual art, and true religion, which can only be spiritual and international in nature. But I believe that this spirit also gives us the breadth of heart that enables us to receive and welcome every human being with love. And so it is this spirit that reigns here at the Goetheanum, and it is from this spirit that I speak my first words of welcome. They must therefore be meant from the heart. In this spirit of cordiality, I would like to express the wish that in the coming days we may succeed in working together and discussing various topics in the most diverse fields of science and life, so that everyone who has come here may return home with a sense of satisfaction.p>
[ 3 ] If we, who have been working here at the Goetheanum for years, are able to inspire the thought that after such a visit one always looks back with some joy on what one has experienced here, this will fill those who work here at the Goetheanum with particular satisfaction. In this spirit, let me welcome you and thank you for coming here. And let me express the wish that this visit may also be of some satisfaction to you.
[ 4 ] As has already been indicated, spiritual knowledge is to be pursued here as a basis for enriching life in its various aspects. The spiritual knowledge that is sought here in the Goetheanum should not be confused with many things that are pursued today in the world as occultism, or with many things that are today called mysticism. This occultism that is widely practiced today is fundamentally contrary to the spirit of our time, the spirit of real modern life. For this spirit of real modern life is given by the development of scientific knowledge in recent times. What is pursued here as spiritual knowledge must be in complete accord with what corresponds to the spirit of modern scientific knowledge in the strictest sense of the word. What is often called occultism today is based on old traditions; there is no immediate spirit of the present in it. Old traditions are brought over. But since people today cannot develop the corresponding insights from the same spiritual foundations, it can be said that these old traditions are often misunderstood and, as misunderstandings, have been presented in a layman's way by this or that person as insights that are supposed to satisfy the human soul.
[ 5 ] What is being pursued here has just as little to do with such partly misunderstood, traditional occultism as with what is sometimes even sought from a scientific point of view as a kind of occultism, by imitating the usual scientific methods of sensory observation and experimentation for the investigation of the supersensible realm. This fails to recognize that the methods of scientific research that have developed over the last few centuries have been excellently developed for the recognition of external sensory reality, but that they are therefore unsuitable as research methods in the supersensible realm.
[ 6 ] On the other hand, there is much talk today of mystical deepening and mystical inner experience. Here, too, one often has to do with nothing more than immersing oneself in the soul experiences of ancient mystics, renewing such soul experiences, and yet, in essence, only with something that leads to questionable knowledge in a certain unclear self-contemplation.
[ 7 ] I wanted to point this out only to warn against confusing what is being done here at the Goetheanum with what is sometimes done in such a layman's, dilettantish, albeit well-meaning way. The aim here is to develop a scientific method for the knowledge of the supersensible, as strict, as precise, as scientific as is required for scientific methods today in the field of natural science. One can only ascend into the supersensible realm if one does not remain stuck in the research methods that are only suitable for the sensory realm. However, one cannot ascend scientifically into the supersensible worlds if one proceeds from a spirit other than that which has proven so effective in the realm of sensory reality. Today I would like to give only a few introductory hints about the intentions and goals of the spiritual science pursued here. Therefore, a more detailed discussion of what I intend to outline today will only be possible in the coming days. I would first like to point out that, for the purpose of researching supersensible worlds, we are concerned here with seeking out those forces in the depths of the human soul that, as powers of cognition, can penetrate into the supersensible world in the same way as the powers of the outer senses penetrate into the physical-sensible world. The first task of the spiritual researcher is to direct his soul's gaze toward the soul-spiritual organization within himself that can approach the supersensible. This is what distinguishes the spiritual researcher from the natural scientist. The latter takes the human organization as it is, applies it to nature, and uses this precision to obtain results about the facts of external nature.
[ 8 ] The spiritual researcher cannot proceed in this way, especially if he is initially standing on the ground of correct scientific knowledge. He must first direct his gaze to the soul-spiritual organ of knowledge, which I might call the “spiritual eye.” But this gaze, which initially prepares and develops the spiritual eye, must be such that the inner lawfulness of this spiritual eye lies before it as precisely as, for example, a mathematical problem lies before the mathematician or the content of an experiment lies before the experimenter. This work, which the researcher must do on himself, the preparation for science, is the essence of spiritual research. And just as the mathematician or natural scientist is precise in seeking results, so the spiritual researcher must be precise in preparing his spiritual-soul organization, which then, like the eye or ear in the sensory realm, perceives the fact.
[ 9 ] The spiritual research referred to here must be precise; mathematics and natural science are precise. But I would like to say that where natural science ends with precision, spiritual research begins with this precision. Spiritual research must be precise in relation to the development of one's own humanity, so that everything that is done to the human being in order for him to become a spiritual researcher is done precisely and, in a sense, through precise work justified by science, represents the spiritual eye when it begins spiritual research, when it approaches the reality of the supersensible world. Whereas in what is often called mysticism, the inner soul is treated with considerable obscurity, in real spiritual research every smallest step must be treated with such inner clarity and transparency as the mathematician has before him in a mathematical problem. Then a kind of awakening is brought about, an awakening to a higher level of consciousness, comparable to the awakening we otherwise experience when we ‘come out’ of ordinary sleep to have the sensory world around us.
[ 10 ] When I speak of precision, particularly in relation to spiritual research, which is what is meant here, this word precision refers to the precise, scientific preparation of what must precede research in human beings: the organization of the spiritual-soul nature. This is what must first be clearly transparent to the spiritual researcher. Then he begins to look into the world of supersensible facts.
[ 11 ] This is only meant to be a preliminary, not yet conclusive indication. Because this precision is sought in the preparation for actual supersensible spiritual perception, it is appropriate to speak of precise clairvoyance when referring to the type of spiritual perception meant here. The specific characteristic of the spiritual research cultivated here is that it is based on methodically exact clairvoyance. The exactness of clairvoyance is to be the characteristic feature of the spiritual research referred to here.
[ 12 ] From this point of view, the spiritual research pursued here is not intended to evaluate a narrowly defined field, but to develop something into which all other sciences and forms of life of the present day can flow. Not only should what is spiritually developed here be a spiritual superstructure of the scientific view, but those areas of knowledge that have been developed by humanity in modern times in the spirit of this scientific view should also be brought up into the spiritual realm, so that they may be crowned, as it were, by what spiritual research can provide.
[ 13 ] I would like to cite medicine as an example. Medicine, as it is structured today on the basis of scientific knowledge, with its admirable results, is fully recognized by what is pursued here as spiritual knowledge. But it is possible to take what has been developed for medicine today from purely external observation and carry it further through the spirit of precise clairvoyance. Only then does the full fruitfulness of purely scientific medicine as it is practiced today actually emerge. In the same way, one would like to gain spiritual insight here that is capable of introducing the artistic into the spiritual. And what is sought here is something artistic that arises in a spiritual way from the whole nature of the human being, just like what is sought here as knowledge. And a religious, social element is to be cultivated here in such a way that the religious and the social arise as something self-evident from the spiritual knowledge that has been gained.
[ 14 ] The spiritual knowledge sought here should grasp the whole human being and come from the whole human being, not from a single human ability. That is why this knowledge seeks to bring all areas of theoretical and practical life together in spiritual life, so that a fully human, universal humanity can be achieved.
[ 15 ] From this point of view, I would like to speak to you in these lectures mainly about three areas of knowledge, in order to explain, using these three examples, to what extent the spirit of contemporary science can lead to the spirit of higher, spiritual science. In these lectures, I would like to speak to you about philosophy, cosmology, and religion in the way that they are to take on a certain spiritual form through anthroposophy.
[ 16 ] Philosophy was once universal knowledge, which in the earliest times gave human beings insight into all the individual realms of existence. Philosophy was not a special science. Philosophy was the universal science, and all the other sciences we practice today have basically grown out of the substance of philosophy as it still existed in Greece. In addition, a special philosophy has emerged in more recent times, which lives in a certain sum of ideas. It is only peculiar that this philosophy, from which all other sciences have essentially grown, has now found itself in a position where it must justify its own existence vis-à-vis the other sciences. The other sciences, which have grown out of philosophy, deal with this or that recognized area of reality. The area of reality is there for the senses or for observation or for experimentation.
[ 17 ] There can be no doubt about the legitimacy of dealing with them scientifically and cognitively. Nevertheless, even though all these individual fields have emerged from philosophy, philosophy today is compelled to justify its own existence, to say why it develops a certain set of ideas and whether these ideas are perhaps completely unreal, do not refer to any reality at all, but are merely human constructs. Let us just think for a moment how much hard mental work is being done today to justify those ideas, which, incidentally, have already taken on a very abstract character and are now called the content of philosophy, so that they still enjoy a certain prestige in the world. They have given rise to the sciences, which are, I would say, well accredited in their respective fields of reality. Philosophy, on the other hand, is not accredited today. It must actually prove its existence as justified. This was not even an issue in ancient Greece. There, people who had only developed as far as philosophy felt the reality of philosophizing in the same way that healthy people feel the reality of breathing. When, on the other hand, today's philosophers look at their philosophy, they feel the abstractness, the coldness, the sobriety of the ideas they develop in philosophy. They do not feel very robustly grounded in reality. Only those who work in chemical laboratories, physics laboratories, or clinics, I would say, have something tangible in their hands. Those who carry philosophical ideas within themselves and carry them out today often feel miles away from reality.
[ 18 ] There is another reason for this. There is a deep-rooted reason why philosophy does not have a name that refers merely to theoretical knowledge. Love of wisdom is philosophy. Love is something that is not merely in the mind and in reason, but is rooted in the whole human soul, in the whole human mind. A comprehensive spiritual experience, the experience of love, has given philosophy its name. The whole human being should, in a sense, be committed to developing philosophy. And after all, one cannot truly love, in the true sense of the word, that which is merely theoretical, sober, and cold. If philosophy is the love of wisdom, then this presupposes that those who have experienced philosophy in this way also believe that this Sophia, this wisdom, is something lovable, something real, something essential, something whose existence does not first have to be proven. After all, think about it: if a man were to love a woman or a woman were to love a man, but first felt the need to prove the existence of the beloved—what an absurd idea! But with philosophy in its present sense, it is no different. I would say that philosophy, which was once warm and heartily embraced by human beings, something that was self-evident in its existence, has become something abstract, cold, sober, and theoretical. Where does this come from?
[ 19 ] If we go back to the origins of philosophical life, not with external history, but with historically experienced and felt knowledge, we find that philosophy did not originally live in human beings as it lives in them today. Today, when people think scientifically, they basically only accept what has been acquired through sensory observation or through experiments carried out in the field of the senses. What has been acquired is then summarized by the intellect. What is acquired in this way is acquired by the physical human being. The senses are physical organs, embedded in the physical human being. What the physical human body acquires in terms of knowledge is scientifically recognized today. But with this, one can only reach the physical human being himself. In this physical human being, one cannot find what the ancients regarded as philosophy. As I said, I can only speak by way of introduction today and will have to discuss what I am pointing to in more detail in the next few days; but I must point out that what was still called philosophy in the heyday of Greek philosophy — this spiritual substance experienced inwardly in the soul — was not experienced in the physical human body, but in a human organization that permeates the physical human body as an etheric human being.
[ 20 ] In our present-day science, we actually know only the physical human being. We do not know that body which, as a fine etheric body, permeates the physical human body in which the Greek philosopher experienced his philosophy. In the physical body we experience breathing, we experience the process of seeing. But just as we have this physical human organization before us, so too is there an etheric body, an etheric human being, within the human being. When we look at the physical body, we see, for example, the process of breathing, and we can understand the process of seeing in physical or biological terms. When we look at the supersensible etheric human being, we see the being in whom philosophy was practiced in the Greek sense. The Greek constitution of humanity was still such that human beings felt and experienced themselves in their etheric organism. And by exerting the etheric organism in this way, by putting it into activity, just as the physical organism is put into activity when breathing or seeing, for example, philosophy arose in the etheric human being. Just as we can never doubt that what we experience as breathing is real because we are conscious of our physical body, so the Greek could never doubt that what he experienced as philosophy, as wisdom that he loved, was rooted in reality, because he was conscious of his etheric body. They were aware that what philosophizes takes place in their etheric body; they were clear about that.
[ 21 ] Modern man has lost the etheric body for his knowledge; he does not know that he has an etheric body. Traditional philosophy is a sum of abstract ideas because it can only regard as reality what is experienced as reality, in which one is philosophically active. But if we have lost the etheric human being for our knowledge, then we have also lost the reality of philosophy. We feel it as abstract; we feel the need to prove its existence.
[ 22 ] Imagine that humans grew into an even more robust, denser, more material organism than their physical one. Then, for example, the process of breathing would gradually become very refined for this more robust experience, and ultimately humans would no longer know anything about what is now our physical body, just as modern humans today know nothing about their etheric body. Then breathing, the process of respiration, would be a theory, a sum of ideas, and one would first have to “prove” that breathing is a reality, just as one must prove today that philosophy is rooted in reality. The doubt about the reality of what one should love in philosophy arose because the etheric body has been lost from human knowledge. For it is in the etheric body, not in the physical body, that the reality of philosophy is experienced.
[ 23 ] If philosophy is to be perceived as reality again, then the knowledge of the etheric human being must first arise. Then, from the knowledge of the etheric human being, a true philosophical experience will be able to arise again.
[ 24 ] Conveying this knowledge of the etheric human being is to be the first step of anthroposophy. I will proceed in three sections and would now like to ask Dr. Sauerwein to translate. I will continue after the translation.
[ 25 ] In philosophy, human beings first have an inner experience of themselves, the experience of their etheric body. However, ever since humanity began to think, it has also felt the need to integrate the individual human being into the whole cosmos, into the universe. Humans do not only need a philosophy, they also need a cosmology. They want to understand how they, as individuals standing within their organisms in a specific place on Earth, in a specific place in the world, belong to the entire universe and how they have developed from this entire universe.
[ 26 ] In the earliest times of human development, humans felt themselves to be part of the whole cosmos. As physical beings alone, however, we cannot feel ourselves to be part of the whole cosmos. What we carry within us as physical beings in our experience between birth and death belongs to the immediate life of our physical, sensory environment. Beyond that, humans have their inner spiritual life. This inner soul life is something completely different from what humans carry within themselves in their physical bodies from their physical-sensory environment. In wanting to feel, perceive, and know themselves as a member of the entire cosmos, as a member of the universe, humans must also perceive, feel, and know their inner soul life as part of, as a member of, the universe.
[ 27 ] In the earliest times of human development, human beings were truly capable of seeing the soul, the inner life, not only through what we now misunderstand as anthropomorphism, but through an inner vision of the universe, of the cosmos. People were able to view what was inner spiritual life within themselves as a member of the spiritual and soul life in the universe, just as one can view the physical, sensory, bodily life of human beings as part of natural, sensory existence.
[ 28 ] But in recent times, people have developed only scientific knowledge based on sensory observation and experimentation, and a way of thinking that relies solely on sensory observation and experimentation.
[ 29 ] From what has been gained in this way as scientific results, universal knowledge has been formed by summarizing the individual results. From the individual results of science, a cosmology has been formed. But this cosmology contains only the image of sensually real facts, summarized in thought. We form a picture of the universe, but the individual parts, the individual links in this picture, are only the recognized laws of the sensory-physical facts.
[ 30 ] In this picture, which has been developed by modern scientific cosmology, spiritual life is not included as it was in the cosmology of the ancients, but only that which can be viewed scientifically: the sensory world. In this picture, which stands as cosmology in modern times, man can indeed find himself again in his physical body, but not in his inner spiritual life.
[ 31 ] In ancient times, it was possible to extract the inner spiritual life from the picture of cosmology. From the cosmological picture based on natural science, one cannot extract the inner life of the soul. But this in turn has to do with the fact that modern knowledge cannot look at the spiritual-soul life in the same way as ancient, primitive knowledge was able to do. What does modern knowledge do when it speaks of the soul in the body? It speaks of phenomena, of the inner experiences of thinking, feeling, and willing, and one views the inner life of the soul as an outflow of what is isolated and confused in the realm of thought, feeling, and will. One forms a picture in which thinking, feeling, and willing play a role as facts of the inner life of the soul.
[ 32 ] If one views the inner spiritual life in this way, one can never protect this picture from the statement that must be made: Yes, what you recognize and describe as intertwined thinking, feeling, and willing arises with birth, with embryonic life, develops with the child, and perishes with death. — There is no scientific insight that could protect this picture of a spiritual life from being regarded as disappearing with death. For in fact, between birth and death, this thinking, feeling, and willing appear to be intimately connected with physical life. And just as we see the limbs grow, we see thinking and feeling grow. Just as we see the body calcify and decline physically, so we see the phenomena of thinking, feeling, and willing gradually fade away with the physical body.
[ 33 ] What was characteristic of the old views was a recognition of the inner life of the soul that went beyond what lives in mere thinking, feeling, and willing. People looked to a foundation of the inner life of the soul that is only hidden in thinking, feeling, and willing, of which thinking, feeling, and willing are reflections. We see thinking, feeling, and willing arise and develop between birth and death. What lies beneath, of which thinking, feeling, and willing are the outer reflections, was seen by an older, primitive clairvoyant knowledge as the astral human being.
[ 34 ] Just as we first recognize the etheric human being as a supersensible human being within the physical human being, we can recognize the astral human being as a higher member within the physical-etheric human being. This astral human being does not consist of thinking, feeling, and willing; it underlies thinking, feeling, and willing. {It is that which lives its way into the existence we spend between birth and death from the spiritual-soul worlds. This astral human being is that which surrounds itself with the physical and etheric bodies between birth and death and which in turn passes out into a spiritual-soul world after death. This astral human being is that in the human being to which birth and death are only manifestations.
[ 35 ] Thinking, feeling, and willing can only be understood within the physical organization of the human being and can only be found between birth and death. There it develops, there it gradually becomes paralyzed, and there it also disappears. What underlies thinking, feeling, and willing as the astral human being, this inner life of the soul, goes beyond the physical and etheric human beings; it can be integrated into a cosmic, universal world. This is not enclosed within the physical organization of the human being.
[ 36 ] In order to arrive at a comprehensive cosmology, we need an understanding of the etheric and astral human beings, of which thinking, feeling, and willing are reflections. But thinking, feeling, and willing exist in the individual human being and cannot be integrated into the cosmos. However, what lies behind them, what is hidden within them between birth and death, what is accessible only to primitive or precise clairvoyance, can be integrated into a spiritual cosmos of which the physical-sensory cosmos is only a reflection.
[ 37 ] Modern cosmology is merely a superstructure built on the results of scientific research, a compilation of what exists as fact in the physical-sensory realm. The inner life of human beings cannot be integrated into the picture of such a cosmology, but we only have such a cosmology because modern knowledge does not provide a picture of the astral human being at all. Anyone who recognizes the soul life as merely a composition of thinking, feeling, and willing cannot think of this soul life as protected beyond birth and death. Only when we progress from thinking, feeling, and willing to what is hidden within them, to the astral human being, do we arrive at that which is human, which is no longer bound to the physical body and which can be thought of as integrated into the cosmos, into the spiritual-soul universe. But one will never find such a spiritual cosmos again after leaving it, because one has lost the knowledge of the astral human being. One will never be able to construct such a spiritual, such a soul cosmos in the mind if one does not first arrive at the image of the astral human being.
[ 38 ] The possibility of a cosmology that once again contains the spiritual and soul aspects depends on the development of an understanding of the astral human being. We will only have an external cosmology that encompasses the physical and sensory aspects — and then the human being will not be included in this cosmology. We have acquired such a physical cosmology because knowledge of the astral human being has been lost. If knowledge of the astral human being is regained, then the possibility of a cosmology that contains a picture of the cosmos that includes the human being will also exist.
[ 39 ] So it is a matter of developing a knowledge of the astral human being. Then it will also be possible to regain a true cosmology that includes human beings.
[ 40 ] This is to be the second step of anthroposophy. I will discuss the third step in the third section of my lecture, after Dr. Sauerwein has been kind enough to translate the second part.
[ 41 ] Apart from the fact that human beings experience themselves as unified, as in philosophical experience, and that they experience themselves as part of the cosmos, as cosmology describes, human beings also experience themselves as existing in an entity through which they are independent both of their own physical bodies and of the cosmos to which they belong as part of it. Independent of themselves as physical beings, independent of their membership in the cosmos, human beings feel themselves to be actual spiritual beings when they refer to themselves as such, which is actually only indicated when we utter the little word “I.”
[ 42 ] When we utter the word “I,” we mean that part of our being which is not encompassed by our physical body, nor by our etheric body, nor by our astral body, insofar as we are a member of the cosmos through these bodies, but rather that which is an inner, self-contained entity. We feel this essence as a special world, belonging to the divine world, of which the cosmos is only the outer reflection, the outer image. As human beings, when we address ourselves as “I,” we feel that this entity, the spiritual human being to which the word “I” refers, is actually only clothed in everything that is contained in the cosmos, and that this physical, sensory corporeality is also a covering for the actual essence. In earlier times, through a certain inner, albeit primitive, vision, human beings experienced this human essence, which was independent of both their own physicality and the cosmos, and thus knew that they belonged to a divine world. But they also knew that between birth and death they were separated from this divine world; they knew that between birth and death they were clothed in a physical body. They knew that between birth and death they were placed in the soul-physical cosmos. They knew, so to speak, that their actual being, their I-being, was hidden by the cosmic, by the physical-bodily, and they sought a union of this I-being with the divine world, to which this I-being nevertheless belonged.
[ 43 ] In this way, in more primitive, older times, human beings, through the inner experience of the self, rose above the physical and etheric bodies and above their astral being into the feeling of the self, and they attained a union, religio, with the divine world. Religious life was the outlet for knowledge that was philosophical and cosmological. Human beings found themselves, in a sense, united with that from which their own bodies separated them, from which the externally perceived, sensory-soul cosmos separated them. They found themselves united with this divine world in religious experience. Religious experience was the highest flowering of the experience of knowledge.
[ 44 ] But on what did this religious experience depend in the primitive stages of human development? It depended on a real inner experience of the self, of the actual spiritual human being. Only when the ego is experienced can this ego in turn long for and experience union with the divine world: religious feeling.
[ 45 ] But what has the ego, the actual spiritual human being, become in modern knowledge? In modern knowledge, the ego has become that through which the facts of thinking, feeling, and willing are summarized as an abstract idea. The ego has now become a kind of cosmic or, at most, some other formulaic summary of thinking, feeling, and willing, in any case something very abstract. Even philosophers arrive at a description, a characterization of the ego, by summarizing the experiences of thinking, feeling, and willing as if in an abstraction.
[ 46 ] But in what one has as a summary of thinking, feeling, and willing in the ego, one has found nothing that is not refuted every night when the human being sleeps. Take the characteristics of the ego as described by modern philosophers, for example Bergson. In these characteristics you will find only things that are refuted in every sleep, because what is taken up by these concepts, by these ideas of the ego, is erased in sleep. Reality refutes these definitions, these characteristics of the ego! And what I am saying here cannot be dismissed by saying that, after sleep, we reconnect with the ego through memory. These are not interpretations, they are facts. This means, however, that modern knowledge, even the most subtle philosophical knowledge, has lost its knowledge of the ego, of the actual spiritual human being, and with it the path to religious knowledge.
[ 47 ] Thus it has come about that in recent times, alongside knowledge that extends only to the world accessible to human observation and experiment, there stand the traditions that were once part of a real, true religious life in earlier times, which are accepted historically but to which the path of knowledge no longer leads, and therefore are only believed in. Thus, for modern people who do not want to allow their knowledge to extend to religious experience, knowledge and belief stand side by side. All the content of belief that exists today was once old knowledge that is brought back only as a reminiscence, preserved by tradition. There is no belief that is not a reminiscence of an old piece of knowledge. And because today we do not have the living perception, the perception through exact clairvoyance of the true self, which is not dulled by sleep but underlies both the sleeping and waking states, because we do not have the exact, clairvoyant knowledge of the self, therefore one does not have the continuation of the path of knowledge into the religious path and places faith, which actually only brings back old traditions as reminiscences, alongside knowledge.
[ 48 ] The fact that what was once unity — knowledge of the physical world and knowledge of the divine world — has now fallen into two outwardly separate realms, knowledge and faith, stems from the fact that the old, primitive clairvoyant view of the true self — which is not characterized as being extinguished by sleep, but is regarded as the foundation of the human being, even when sleep extinguishes thinking, feeling, and willing — that this ancient knowledge has been lost and that precise clairvoyance has not yet advanced to the perception of the real selfhood of the human being: the spiritual human being.
[ 49 ] Only when exact clairvoyance again advances to the perception of the true self of the human being — as it must advance to the perception of the etheric being of the human being, the astral being of the human being — will there be a direct continuation from the knowledge of the external world to the knowledge of the divine world. Then science will once again flow into religious life.
[ 50 ] We have the division between knowledge and faith because we have lost the living, clairvoyant perception of the true self, the fourth member of the human being. That is why it is also the task of the newer spiritual life to bring about this knowledge of the true self through precise clairvoyance. Then the path will open up again to progress from knowledge of the world to knowledge of God, from the world view back to religious life, and to allow faith to remain only as a special higher form of knowledge, not as something specifically different from knowledge.
[ 51 ] What we need, then, is the possibility of real self-knowledge. From this will then arise the possibility of a new religious experience. To bring about this self-knowledge in such a way that it stands within spiritual science like the knowledge of the etheric human being, which is not perceived in the physical human body, like the knowledge of the astral human being, which is transcendent to birth and death, and like the knowledge of the ego, which is transcendent to sleeping and waking, as the background of sleeping and waking — to bring about this knowledge and thereby effect the renewal of life — this is now to be the third step of anthroposophy. In this way, from the point of view of anthroposophical research, the following should emerge organically:
[ 52 ] a modern philosophy through the precise clairvoyant knowledge of the etheric body,
[ 53 ] a cosmology encompassing the human being through a clear understanding of the astral being of the human being,
[ 54 ] a renewal of religious life through an exact clairvoyant understanding of the true human ego, which is exalted above sleep and waking life.
[ 55 ] From this point of view, I will take the liberty of continuing to examine philosophy, cosmology, and religion in the next lectures.