Education
GA 307
6 August 1923, Ilkley
II. Principles of Greek Education
That the subject of education is exercising the mind and soul of all men at the present day is not to be questioned. It is everywhere apparent. If, then, an art of education is advocated here which is derived directly from spiritual life and spiritual perception, it is its inner nature rather than the urgency of its outward appeal which differentiates it from the reforms generally demanded to-day.
There is a general feeling nowadays that the conditions of civilization are in rapid transition, and that for the sake of the organization of our social life we must pay heed to the many new changes and developments of modern times. Already there is a feeling—a feeling which only a short time ago was rarely present—that the child of to-day is a very different being from the child of a recent past, and that it is much more difficult nowadays for age to come to an understanding with youth than was the case in earlier times.
The art of education, however, of which I have here to speak, is concerned rather with the inner development of human civilization. It is concerned with what has changed the souls of men in the course of ages, with the evolution through which, in the course of hundreds, nay even thousands of years, these souls have passed. The attempt will be made to explore the means by which, in this particular age, we may reach the being of man as it lives in the child. It is generally admitted that the successive periods of time in Nature can be differentiated. We need only think of the way in which man takes these differentiations into account in daily life. Take the example nearest to hand—the day. Our relation to the processes of Nature is quite different in the morning, at noon, and at night, and we should think it absurd to ignore the course of the day. We should also think it absurd not to pay due heed to the development revealed in human life itself—to ignore, for instance, the fact that an old man's needs are different from those of a child. In the case of Nature we respect this fact of development. But man has not yet accustomed himself to respect the fact of the general evolution of humanity. We do not take account of the fact that centuries ago there lived a humanity very different from the humanity of the Middle Ages or of the present time. We must learn to know the nature of the inner forces of human beings if our treatment of children at the present time is to be practical and not merely theoretical. We must investigate from within those forces which hold sway in this present day.
The principles of Waldorf School education—as it may be called—are, therefore, in no sense revolutionary. In Waldorf School education there is full recognition of all that is great and worthy of esteem in the really brilliant achievements of all countries during the nineteenth century. There is no desire to cast everything aside and imagine that the only possible thing is something radically new. The aim is rather to investigate the inner forces now ruling in the nature of man in order to be able to take them into account in the sphere of education, and thereby to find a true place in social life for the human being in body, soul and spirit. For—as we shall see in the course of these lectures—education has always been a concern of social life, and still is so at the present time. It must be a social concern in the future as well. In education, therefore, there must be an understanding of the social demands of any given epoch. To begin with, I want to describe to you in three stages the development of the nature of education in Western civilization. The best way will be to consider the educational ideals of the different epochs—the ideals striven for by those who desired to rise to the highest stage of human existence, to the stage from which they could render the most useful service to their fellow-men. It will be well in such a study to go back to the earliest of those past ages which we feel to survive as a cultural influence even at the present time. Nobody, to-day, will dispute the still living influence of the Greek civilization in all human aims and aspirations, and the question, “In what way did the Greek seek to raise the human being to a certain stage of perfection?” must be of fundamental significance to the educationalist. We must also consider the progress of subsequent epochs in respect of the perfecting of the education and instruction of the human being.
Let us see, to begin with—and indeed, we shall have to study this question in detail—what was the Greek ideal for the teacher, that is to say, for the man who desired to develop to the highest stage of humanity not only for his own sake, but for the sake of his being able to guide others along their path. What was the Greek ideal of education? The Greek ideal of education was the Gymnast, that is to say, one who had completely Harmonized his bodily nature and, to the extent that was thought necessary in those days, all the qualities of his soul and spirit. A man able to bring the divine beauty of the world to expression in the beauty of his own body, able to bring the divine beauty of the world into bodily expression in the child, in the boy—this was the Gymnast, the man by whom Greek civilization was up-borne.
It is easy, from a kind of modern superiority, to look down upon the Gymnast's manner of education, based as it was on the bodily nature of man. But there is a total misunderstanding of what was meant in Greece by the word Gymnast. If, nevertheless, we do still admire Greek civilization and culture to-day, if we still regard it as the ideal of highest development to be permeated with Greek culture, we shall do well to remember while we do this, that the Greek himself was not primarily concerned with the development of so-called “spirituality” in the human being. He was only concerned to develop the human body in such a way that as a result of the harmony of its parts and its modes of activity the body itself should come to be a manifestation of divine beauty. The Greek expected of the body just what we expect of the plant; that it will of itself unfold into blossom under the influence of sunlight and warmth if the root has received the proper kind of treatment. And in our devotion to Greek culture to-day we must not forget that the bearer of this culture was the Gymnast, one who had not taken the third step first, so to speak, but the first step first: the harmonization of the bodily nature of man. All the beauty, all the greatness, all the perfection of Greek culture was not directly “sought,” but was looked for as the natural growth of the beautiful, harmonious, powerful body, a result of the inner nature and activity of earthly man. Our understanding of Greek civilization, especially of Greek education, will be one-sided unless our admiration for the spiritual greatness of Greece is linked with the knowledge that the Gymnast was the ideal of Greek education.
Then, as we follow the continuous development of humanity, we see that a most significant break occurs, in the transition from Greek to Roman culture. In Roman civilization we have, to begin with, the emergence of that cultivation of abstractions which later led to the separation of spirit, soul, and body, and placed too a special emphasis on this threefold division. We can see how the principle of beauty in Greek “gymnastic” education was indeed imitated in Roman culture, but how, nevertheless, the education of body and soul fell into two separate spheres. The Roman still set great store by the training of the body, but little by little and almost imperceptibly this fell into a secondary place. The attention was directed to something that was considered more important in human nature—to the element of soul. The training which in Greece was bound up with the ideal of the Gymnast, gradually changed, in Roman culture, into a training of the soul qualities.
This is developed throughout the Middle Ages, an epoch when the qualities of soul were considered to be of a higher order than those of the body. And from this “Romanized” human nature, as we may call it, there arises another ideal of education. Early in the Middle Ages there appears an educational ideal for the men of highest development which was a fruit of Roman civilization. It was in its essence a culture of the soul—of the soul in so far as this reveals itself outwardly in man.
The Gymnast was gradually superseded by another type of human being. To-day we no longer have any strong, historical consciousness of this change, but those who study the Middle Ages intimately will realize that it actually took place. The ideal of education was no longer the Gymnast, but the Rhetorician, one whose main training was the training of speech, that is to say, of something that is essentially a quality of soul. How the human being can work through speech, as a Rhetorician—this was an outcome of Roman culture carried over into the first period of the Middle Ages. It represents the reaction from an education adapted purely to the body to an education more particularly of the soul, one which ^carries on the training of the body as a secondary activity. And because the Middle Ages made use of the Rhetorician for spreading the spiritual life as it was cultivated in the monastic schools and elsewhere in medieval education, it came about, though the name was not always used, that the Rhetorician assumed in the sphere of education the place which had once been held by the Greek Gymnast. Thus, in reviewing the ideals which have been regarded as the highest expression of man, we see how humanity advances from the educational ideal of Gymnast to that of the Rhetorician.
Now this had its effect upon the methods of education. The education of children was brought into line with what was held to be human perfection. And one who has the gift of historical observation will perceive that even the usages of our modern education, the manner in which language and speech are taught to children, are a heritage from the practice of the Middle Ages which had the Rhetorician as educational ideal.
Then, in the course of the Middle Ages, came the great swing over to the intellectual, with all the honour and respect which it paid to the things of the intellect. A new educational ideal of human development arose, an ideal which represents exactly the opposite of the Greek ideal. It was an ideal which gave the highest place to the intellectual and spiritual development of man. He who knows something—the Knower—now became the ideal. Whereas throughout the whole of the Middle ages he who could do something, do something with the powers of his soul, who could convince others, remained the ideal of education, now the knower becomes the ideal. We have only to look at the earliest University Institutions, at the University of Paris in the Middle Ages, to realize that the ideal there is not the knower, but the doer, the man who can convince most through speech, who is the most skilful in argument, the master of Dialectic—of the word which now takes on the colour of thought. We still find the Rhetorician as the ideal of education, though the Rhetorician himself is tinged with the hue of thought.
And now with this new civilization another ideal arises for evolving man, an ideal which is again reflected in the education of the child. Our own education of children, even in this age of materialism, has remained under the influence of this ideal right down to the present time. Now for the first time there arises the ideal of the Doctor, the Professor. The Doctor becomes the ideal for the perfect human being.
Thus we see the three stages in human education: the Gymnast, the Rhetorician, the Doctor. The Gymnast is one who can handle the whole human organism from what he regards as its divine manifestation in the world, in the Cosmos. The Rhetorician only knows how to handle the soul-nature in so far as it manifests in the bodily nature. The Gymnast trains the body, and through it, the soul and spirit, to the heights of Greek civilization. The Rhetorician is concerned with the soul, and attains his crown and his glory as the orator of the things of the soul, as the Church orator. And lastly, we see how skill as such ceases to be valued. The man who only knows, the man, that is, who no longer handles the soul-nature in its bodily-working, but only that which reigns invisibly in the inner being, the man who only knows now stands as the ideal of the highest stage of education. This, however, reflects itself into the most elementary principles of education. For it was the Gymnasts in Greece who also educated the children. It was the Rhetoricians, later on, who educated the children. Finally, in more modern times and in the time of the rise of materialism in civilization as a whole, it was the Doctor who educated the children. Thus bodily, gymnastic education develops into rhetorical, soul-education, and this in turn develops into “doctorial” education. Our modern education is the outcome of the “doctorial” ideal. And those who seek, in the very deepest principles of modern education for those things which really ought to be understood, must carefully observe what has been introduced as a result of this doctorial ideal.
Side by side with this, however, a new ideal has emerged into greater and greater prominence in the modern age. It is the ideal of the “universal human.” Men had eyes and ears only for what belonged by right to the Doctor, and the longing arose to educate once again the whole human being, to add to the doctorial education, which was even being crammed into the tiny child (for the Doctors wrote the text books, thought out the methods of teaching), to add to this the education of the “universal human.” And to-day, those who judge from a fundamental, elementary feeling for human nature, want to have their say in educational matters.
Thus for inner reasons the problem of education to-day has become a problem of the times. We must bear this inner process of human evolution in mind if we would understand the present age, for a true development of education must tend to nothing less than a superseding of this “Doctor” principle. If I were briefly to summarize one particular aspect of the aim of Waldorf School education, I should say, to-day, of course merely in a preliminary sense, that it is a question of turning this “doctorial” education into an education of man as a whole.
Now we cannot understand the essential nature of the education which had its rise in Greek civilization and has continued in its further development on into our own times, unless we look at the course of human evolution from the days of Greek civilization to our own in the right light. Greek civilization was really a continuation, an offshoot, as it were, of Oriental civilization. All that had developed in the evolution of humanity for thousands of years in Asia, in the East, found its final expression in a very special way in Greek education. Not till then did there come an important break in evolution: the transition to Roman culture. Roman culture is the source of all that later flowed into the whole of Western civilization, even so far as to America.
Hence it is impossible to understand the essential nature of Greek education unless we have a true conception of the whole character of Oriental development. To one who stood by the cradle of the civilization out of which proceeded the Vedas and the wonderful Vedanta it would have seemed the purest nonsense to imagine that the highest development of human nature is to be attained by sitting with books in front of one in order to get through examinations. And it would have seemed the purest nonsense to imagine that anyone could become a perfected human being after having literally maltreated (for “trained” is not the word) for years if the man be industrious, for months if he be lazy, an indefinite something that goes by the name of the “human spirit” in order then to be questioned by someone as to how much he knows. We do not understand the development of human civilization unless we sometimes pause to consider how the ideal of one epoch appears to the eyes of another. For what steps were taken by a man of the ancient East who desired to acquire the sublime culture offered to his people in the age preceding that of the inspiration behind the Vedas? What he practised was fundamentally a kind of bodily culture. And he hoped, as the result of a special cult of the body, one-sided though this would appear to-day, to attain to the crowning glory of human life, to the loftiest spirituality, if this lay within his destiny. Hence an exceedingly delicate culture of the body was the method adopted in the highest education of the ancient East, not the reading of books and the maltreatment of an abstract “spirit.” I will give you an example of this refined bodily culture. It consisted in a definite and rigorously systematic regulation of the breathing. When man breathes—as indeed he must do in order to provide himself with the proper supply of oxygen from minute to minute—the process is an unconscious one. He carries out the whole breathing process unconsciously. The ancient oriental made this breathing process, which is fundamentally a bodily function, into something which was carried out with consciousness. He drew in his breath in accordance with a definite law; held it back and breathed it out again according to a definite law. The whole process was conditioned by the body. The legs and arms must be held in certain positions, that is to say, the path of the breath through the physical organism when it reached the knee, for instance, must proceed in the horizontal direction. And so the ancient Oriental who was seeking to reach the stage of human perfection sat with legs crossed beneath him. The man who wished to experience the revelation of the spirit in himself must achieve it as the result of a training of the body, a training directed in particular to the air-processes in the human being, but centred, nevertheless, in the bodily nature.
Now what lies at the basis of this kind of training and education? The flower and fruit of a plant live within the root and if the root receives proper care, both flower and fruit develop under the light and warmth of the sun. In the same way, the soul and sprit live in the bodily nature of man, in the body that is created by God. If a man then takes hold of the roots in the body, knowing that Divinity lives within them, develops these bodily roots in the right way and then gives himself up to the life that is freely unfolding, the soul and spirit within the roots develop as do the inner forces of the plant that pour out of the root and unfold under the light and warmth of the sun.
Any abstract development of spirit would have seemed to the Oriental just as if we were to shut off all our plants from the sunlight, put them into a cellar and then make them grow under electric light, possibly because we did not consider the free light of the sun good enough for them. The fact that the Oriental only looked to the bodily nature was deeply rooted in his whole conception of humanity. This bodily development afterwards, of course, became one-sided, had already become so by the time of Jewish culture, but the very one-sidedness shows us that the universal view was: body, soul, and spirit are one. Here, on earth, between birth and death, the soul and spirit must be sought for in the body.
This aspect of ancient oriental spiritual culture may possibly cause some astonishment but when we study the true course of human evolution we shall find that the very loftiest achievements of civilization were attained in times when man was still able to behold the soul and spirit wholly within the body. This was a development of the very greatest significance for the essential nature of human civilization. Now why was the Oriental, for it must be remembered that his whole concern was a quest for the spirit, why was the Oriental justified in striving for the spirit by methods that were really based upon the bodily nature of man? He was justified because his philosophy did not merely open his eyes to the earthly but also to the super-sensible. And he knew: To regard the soul and spirit here on earth as being complete, is to see them (forgive this rather trivial analogy but in the sense of oriental wisdom it is absolutely correct) in the form of a ‘plucked hen,’ not a hen with feathers and therefore not a complete hen. The idea we have of the soul and spirit would have seemed to the Oriental analogous to a hen with its feathers plucked, for he knew the soul and spirit, he knew the reality of what we seek in other worlds. He had a concrete super-sensible perception of it. He was justified in seeking for the material, bodily revelation of man because his fundamental conviction was that in other worlds, the plucked hen, the naked soul, is endowed with spiritual feathers when it reaches its proper dwelling-place.
Thus it was the very spiritual nature of his conception of the world that prompted the Oriental, in considering the earthly evolution of the human being, to bear in mind before all else that within the body when man is born, when he comes forth as a purely physical being, there is soul and spirit. Soul and spirit sleep in the physical body of the little child in a most wonderful way. For the Oriental knew that when this Physis is handled in the truly spiritual way, soul and spirit will proceed from it. This was the keynote of the education, even of the Sage, in the East. It was a conviction which passed over into Greek culture, for Greek culture is an offshoot of oriental civilization. And now we understand why it was that the Greeks, who brought the conviction of the East to its most objective expression, adopted, even in the case of the young, their own particular kind of training of the human being. It was the result of oriental influence. The particular attention paid to the bodily nature in Greek civilization is simply due to the fact that the Greek was the result of colonization from The East and from Egypt, whence his whole mode of existence was derived.
When we look at the Greek palæstra where the Gymnasts worked, we must see in their activities a continuation of the development which the East, from a profoundly spiritual conception of the world, strove for in the man who was to reach the highest ideal of human perfection on earth. The Oriental would never have considered a one-sided development of soul or spirit to be the ideal of human perfection. The learning and instruction that has become the ideal of later times, would have seemed to him a deadening of that which the Gods had given to man for his life on earth. And, fundamentally, this was still the conception of the Greek.
It is a strange experience to realize how the spiritual culture of Greece, which we to-day think of as so sublime, was regarded in those times by non-Greek peoples. An historic anecdote, handed down by tradition, tells us that a barbarian prince once went to Greece, visited the places where education was being carried on and had a conversation with one of the most famous Gymnasts. The barbarian prince said: “I cannot understand these insane practices of yours! First you rub the young men with oil, the symbol of peace, then you strew sand over them, just as if they were being prepared for some ceremony specially connected with peace, and then they begin to hurl themselves about as if they were mad, seizing hold of and jumping at each other. One throws the other down or punches his chin so vigorously that his shoulders have to be well shaken to prevent him from suffocating. I simply do not understand such a display and it can be of no conceivable use to the human being.” This was what the barbarian prince said to the Greek. Nevertheless, the spiritual glory of Greece was derived from what the barbarian prince thought to be so much barbarism. And just as the Greek Gymnast had only ridicule for the barbarian who did not understand how the body must be trained in order to make the spirit manifest, so would a Greek, if he could rise again and see our customary methods of teaching and education (which really date from earlier times) laugh within himself at the barbarian that has developed since the days of Greece and that speaks of an abstract soul and spirit. The Greek in his turn would say: “This is analogous to a plucked hen. You have taken away man's feathers from him!” The Greek would have thought it barbaric that the boys should not wrestle and fall upon one another in the manner described. Yet the barbarian prince could see no meaning or purpose in Greek education. Thus by studying the course of human development and observing what was held to be of value in other epochs, we may acquire a foundation upon which we can also come to a right valuation of things in our own time.
Let us now turn our attention to those places where the Greek Gymnast educated and taught the youths who were entrusted to him in the seventh year of life. What we find there naturally differs essentially from the kind of national educational ideal, for instance, that held sway in the nineteenth century. In this connection, what I shall say does not merely hold good for this or that particular nation, but for all civilized nations. What we behold when we turn our attention to one of these places in Greece where the young were educated from the seventh year of life onwards, can, if it is rightly permeated with modern impulses, afford us a true basis for understanding what is necessary for education and instruction to-day. The youths were trained—and the word ‘trained’ is here always used in its very highest sense—on the one hand in Orchestric and on the other in Palæstric. Orchestric, to the outer eye, was entirely a bodily exercise, a kind of concerted dance, but arranged in a very special way. It was a dance with a most complicated form. The boys learned to move in a definite form in accordance with measure, beat, rhythm, and above all in accordance with a certain plastic-musical principle. The boy, moving in this choral dance, felt a kind of inner soul-warmth pouring through all his limbs and co-ordinating them. This experience was simultaneously expressed in the form of a very beautiful musical dance before the eyes of the spectators. The whole thing was a revelation of the beauty of the Godhead and at the same time an experience of this beauty in the inner being of man. All that was experienced through this orchestric was felt and sensed inwardly, and thus it was transformed from a physical, bodily process into something that expressed itself outwardly, inspiring the hand to play the zither, inspiring speech and word to become song. To understand song and the playing of the zither in ancient Greece we must see them as the crown of the choral dance. Out of what he experienced from the dance, man was inspired to set the strings in movement so that he might hear the sound and the tone arising from the choral dance. From his own movement he experienced something that poured into his word, and his words became song.
Gymnastic and musical development, this was the form taken by education in the Greek palæstra. But the musical and soul qualities thus acquired were born from the outer bodily movements of the dances performed in the palæstra. And if to-day one penetrates with direct perception to the meaning of these ordered movements in a Greek palæstra—which the barbarian prince could not understand—one finds that all the forms of movement, all the movements of the individual human being, were most wonderfully arranged, so wonderfully indeed that the further effect was not only the musical element that I have already described, but something else. When we study the measures and the rhythms that were concealed in orchestric, in the choral dance, we find that nothing could have a more healing, health-giving effect upon the breathing system and the blood circulation of man than these bodily exercises which were carried out in the Greek choral dances. If the question were put: How can the human being be made to breathe in the most beneficial way? What is the best way to stimulate the movement of the blood by the breath?—the answer would have been that the boy must move, must carry out dance-like movements from his seventh year onwards. Then—as they said in those times—he opens up his systems of breathing and blood circulation not to forces of decadence but to those of healing. The aim of all this orchestric was to enable the systems of breathing and blood circulation in the human being to express themselves in the most perfect way. For the conviction was that when the blood circulation is functioning properly it works right down to the very finger tips, and then instinctively the human being will strike the strings of the zither or the strings of the lute in the right way. This was, as it were, the crown of the process of blood circulation. The whole rhythmic system of the human being was made skilful in the right way through the choral dance.
As a result of this, one might hope for a musical, spiritual quality to develop in the playing, for it was known that when the individual being carries out the corresponding movements with his limbs in the choral dance, the breathing system is so inspired that it quite naturally functions in a spiritual way. And the final consequence is that the breath will overflow into what the human being expresses outwardly through the larynx and its related organs. It was known that the healing effects of the choral dance on the breathing system would enkindle song. And thus the crowning climax, zither-playing and song, was drawn from the healthy organism trained in the right way through the choral dance. And so the physical nature, the soul and the spirit were looked upon as an inner unity, an inner totality in earthly man. And this was the whole spirit of Greek education.
And now let us look at what was developed in palæstric—which gave its name to the places of education in Greece because it was the common property, so to speak, of the educated people. What was it, we ask, that was studied in those forms, in which, for instance, wrestling was evolved? And we see that the whole system existed for the purpose of unfolding two qualities in the human being. The will, stimulated by bodily movement, grew strong and forceful in two directions. All movement and all palæstric in wrestling was intended to bring suppleness, skill and purposeful agility into the limbs of the wrestler. Man's whole system of movement was to be harmonized in such a way that the separate parts should work together truly and that for any particular mood of his soul he should be able to make the appropriate movements with skill, controlling his limbs from within. The moulding and rounding of the movements into harmony with the purposes of life—this was one side of palæstric. The other side was the radial of the movement, as it were, where force must flow into the movement. Skill on the one side, force on the other. The power to hold out against and overcome the forces working in opposition and to go through the world with inner strength—this was one aspect. Skill, proficiency, and harmonization of the different parts of the organism, in short the development of power to be able freely to radiate and express his own being everywhere in the world—this was the other side.
It was held that when the human being thus harmonized his system of movement through palæstric, he entered into a true relationship with the Cosmos. The arms, legs and the breathing as developed by palæstric were then given over to the activities of the human being in the world, for it was known that when the arm is rightly developed through palæstric it links itself with the stream of cosmic forces which in turn flow to the human brain and then, from out of the Cosmos, great Ideas are revealed to man. Just as music was not considered to depend upon a specifically musical training but was expected as the result of the development of the blood circulation and breathing—and indeed did not express itself in most cases until about the age of twenty—so mathematics and philosophy were expected to be a result of the bodily culture in palæstric. It was known that geometry is inspired in the human being by a right use of the arms.
To-day people do not learn of these things from history, for they have been entirely forgotten. What I have told you is, nevertheless, the truth, and it justifies the Greeks in having placed the Gymnasts at the head of their educational institutions. For the Gymnast succeeded in bringing about the spiritual development of the Greeks by giving them freedom. He did not cram their brains or try to make them into walking encyclopaedias but assisted the trained organs of the human being to find their true relationship to the Cosmos, and in this way man became receptive to the spiritual world. The Greek Gymnast was as convinced as the man of the ancient East of the truth of the spiritual world, only in Greece, of course, this realization expressed itself in a later form.
What I have really done to-day by giving an introductory description of an ancient method of education, is to put a question before you. And I have done so because we must probe very deeply if we are to discover the true principles of education in our time. It is absolutely necessary to enter into these depths of human evolution in order to discover, in these depths, the right way to formulate the questions which will help us to solve the problem of our own education and methods of instruction. To-day, therefore, I wanted to place before you one aspect of the subject we are considering. In a wider sense, the lectures are intended to give a more detailed answer, an answer suited to the requirements of the present age, to the question which has been raised to-day and will be developed tomorrow.
Our mode of study, therefore, must be the outcome of a true understanding of the great problem of education raised by the evolutionary course of humanity and we must then pass on to the answers that may be given by a knowledge of the nature and constitution of the human being at the present time.
Zweiter Vortrag
Daß Erziehung und Unterricht in der gegenwärtigen Zeit alle Seelen und alle Geister auf das intensivste beschäftigen, kann ja nicht bezweifelt werden. Wir sehen es überall. Wenn nun von mir hier eine aus dem unmittelbaren geistigen Leben und Anschauen herausgeholte Erziehungs- und Unterrichtskunst geltend gemacht wird, so unterscheidet sich diese von der allgemeinen Forderung nicht so sehr äußerlich durch das Intensive des Geltendmachens, sondern mehr innerlich.
Man fühlt heute allgemein, wie die Zivilisationsverhältnisse in einem raschen Übergange begriffen sind, wie wir nötig haben, für die Einrichtungen des sozialen Lebens an manches Neue, an manches Aufsteigende zu denken. Man fühlt ja sogar heute schon, was man vor kurzem noch wenig gefühlt hat, daß das Kind eigentlich ein anderes Wesen geworden ist, als es vor kurzem war. Man fühlt, daß das Alter mit der Jugend heute viel schwerer zu Rande kommt, als das in früheren Zeiten der Fall war.
Diejenige Erziehungs- und Unterrichtskunst, von der ich hier vor Ihnen zu sprechen haben werde, rechnet aber mehr mit dem inneren Gang der menschlichen Zivilisation, mit demjenigen, was im Laufe der Zeiten die Seelen der Menschen verändert hat, mit dem, was die Seelen der Menschen im Laufe von Jahrhunderten, ja ich kann sagen von Jahrtausenden, für eine Entwickelung durchgemacht haben. Und es wird gesucht zu ergründen, wie man gerade in der gegenwärtigen Zeit an den Menschen im Kinde herankommen kann. Man gibt ja im Allgemeinen zu, daß in der Natur die aufeinanderfolgenden Zeiten Differenzierungen aufweisen. Man braucht sich nur zu erinnern, wie der Mensch im alltäglichen Leben mit diesen Differenzierungen rechnet. Nehmen Sie das allernächstliegende Beispiel, den Tag. Wir rechnen in anderer Weise mit den Vorgängen der Natur am Morgen, am Mittag, am Abend. Und wir würden uns absurd vorkommen, wenn wir dieser Entwickelung des Tages nicht Rechnung trügen. Wir würden uns auch absurd vorkommen, wenn wir einer anderen Entwickelung im Menschenleben nicht Gerechtigkeit widerfahren ließen, wenn wir zum Beispiel nicht berücksichtigen würden, daß wir ein anderes an den alten Menschen heranbringen müssen als an das Kind. Wir respektieren in dieser Naturentwickelung die Tatsachen. Aber noch nicht hat sich die Menschheit gewöhnt, die Tatsachen auch in der allgemeinen Menschheitsentwickelung zu respektieren.
Wir rechnen nicht damit, daß vor Jahrtausenden eine andere Menschheit da war als im Mittelalter und als es in der Gegenwart der Fall ist. Man muß lernen, sich die inneren Kräfte der Menschen zur Erkenntnis zu bringen, wenn man praktisch und nicht theoretisch heute die Kinder behandeln will. Man muß aus dem Inneren ergründen, welche Kräfte gerade heute im Menschen walten.
Und so sind die Prinzipien der Waldorfschul-Pädagogik nichts irgendwie Revolutionäres. Man erkennt bei der Waldorfschul-Pädagogik durchaus an das Große, das Anerkennenswerte und Sympathische, das von den Pädagogen aller Länder im 19. Jahrhundert ja in so glänzender Weise geleistet worden ist. Man will nicht alles umstoßen und sich dem Glauben hingeben, daß man nur ein radikal Neues begründen könne. Man will nur die innerlichen Kräfte, die gegenwärtig in der Menschennatur walten, ergründen, um sie in der Erziehung zu berücksichtigen, und um durch diese Berücksichtigung den Menschen heute in das soziale Leben nach Körper, Seele und Geist richtig hineinzustellen. Denn die Erziehung — wir werden das noch im Laufe der Vorträge sehen — war eigentlich immer eine soziale Angelegenheit. Sie ist es auch in der Gegenwart; sie muß es auch in der Zukunft sein. Und daher muß sie ein Verständnis haben für die sozialen Anforderungen irgendeines Zeitalters.
Nun möchte ich zunächst in drei Etappen die Entwickelung des Erziehungswesens der Menschheit in der abendländischen Zivilisation vor Sie hinstellen. Wir können das am besten, wenn wir in Betracht ziehen, wozu es in den einzelnen Zeitaltern derjenige Mensch hat bringen wollen, der zur höchsten Stufe des Menschentums hat hinaufsteigen wollen, zu jener höchsten Stufe, wo er am nützlichsten seinen Mitmenschen hat werden können. Wir werden gut tun, bei einer solchen Betrachtung so weit in der Zeit zurückzugehen, als wir glauben, daß diese Zeit mit ihren Menschheitskräften in der Gegenwart noch fortlebt.
Kein Mensch kann heute leugnen, daß ganz lebendig noch ist in allem, was Menschenseelen wollen, was Menschenseelen anstreben, das Griechentum. Und für den Erzieher muß es eigentlich doch eine Grundfrage sein: Wie wollte der Grieche den Menschen zu einer gewissen Vollkommenheit bringen? Dann sollte man sehen, wie die Zeiten, in bezug auf die Vervollkommnung, die Erziehung und den Unterricht des Menschen fortschreiten.
Stellen wir uns zunächst einmal — wir werden ja diese Frage ganz genau zu betrachten haben — das Griechenideal vor Augen, das man für den Erzieher gehabt hat; für denjenigen also, der nicht nur in sich selbst die höchste Stufe der Menschheit zur Ausbildung hat bringen wollen, sondern der auch diese höchste Stufe der Menschheit deswegen in sich zur Ausbildung bringen wollte, damit er andere leiten konnte auf ihrem Menschheitsweg. Welches war das Griechenideal der Erziehung?
Nun, das Griechenideal der Erziehung war der Gymnast, derjenige also, der bei sich alle körperlichen, und soweit man in der damaligen Zeit notwendig glaubte, die seelischen und geistigen Eigenschaften zur Harmonie aller ihrer Teile gebracht hat. Derjenige, der imstande war, die göttliche Schönheit der Welt in der Schönheit des eigenen Körpers zur Offenbarung zu bringen, und der verstand, diese göttliche Schönheit der Welt auch bei dem jungen Menschen, bei dem Knaben, zur äußerlichen körperlichen Darstellung zu bringen, der war der Gymnast, der war der Träger der Griechenzivilisation.
Leicht ist es, von einem gewissen modernen Standpunkte aus, man möchte sagen, von oben herunter auf diese nach dem Körperlichen hin gerichtete Erziehungsweise des Gymnasten zu sehen. Allein man mißversteht ganz und gar, was mit dem Worte Gymnast eigentlich innerhalb des Griechentums gemeint war.
Bewundern wir doch heute noch die griechische Kultur und Zivilisation, sehen wir es doch heute noch als unser Ideal an, uns zu durchdringen für eine höhere Bildung mit der griechischen Kultur und Zivilisation.
Wenn wir das tun, müssen wir uns gar wohl auch daran erinnern, daß der Grieche nicht daran gedacht hat, zunächst das sogenannte, das von uns so genannte Geistige im Menschen zu entwickeln, sondern daß er nur daran gedacht hat, den menschlichen Körper in einer solchen Weise zu entwickeln, daß dieser durch die Harmonie seiner Teile und durch die Harmonie seiner Betätigungsweise hinaufstieg zu einer körperlichen Offenbarung der Schönheit Gottes. Und dann erwartete der Grieche ruhig die weitere Entwickelung, wie man von der Pflanze erwartet, wenn man die Wurzel in der richtigen Weise behandelt hat, daß sie durch Sonnenlicht und Wärme sich von selber zur Blüte entwickelt. Und wenn wir heute so hingebungsvoll hinschauen auf die griechische Kultur und Zivilisation, so dürfen wir nicht vergessen, daß der Träger dieser griechischen Kultur und Zivilisation der Gymnast war, derjenige, der nicht den dritten Schritt, möchte ich sagen, zuerst gemacht hat, sondern den ersten Schritt zuerst machte — die körperliche Harmonisierung des Menschen -, und daß alle Schönheit, alle Größe, alle Vollkommenbheit der griechischen Kultur nicht unmittelbar beabsichtigt war, sondern als ein selbstverständlich Gewachsenes aus dem schönen, gewandten, starken Körper durch die innerliche Wesenheit und Beschaffenheit des Erdenmenschen hervorgehen sollte.
So haben wir nur ein einseitiges Verständnis des Griechentums, namentlich in bezug auf seine Erziehung, wenn wir nicht neben die Bewunderung der geistigen Größe Griechenlands die Tatsache hinstellen, daß der Grieche sein Erziehungsideal in dem Gymnasten gesehen hat.
Und dann sehen wir, wie die Menschheit sich fortentwickelt, und wir sehen, wie ein wichtiger Einschnitt in der Fortentwickelung der Menschheit vor sich geht, indem die Griechenkultur und -zivilisation übergeht auf das Römertum. Und im Römertum sehen wir zunächst heraufkommen jene Kultur der Abstraktion, die dann dazu übergeht, Geist, Seele und Leib zu trennen, auf diese Dreiheit besonders zu schauen.
Wir sehen im Römertum, wie zwar nachgeahmt wird das Schönheitsprinzip der gymnastischen Erziehung der Griechen; aber wir sehen zugleich, wie die körperliche und die seelische Erziehung auseinanderfallen. Wir sehen, wie im Römertum nunmehr, ganz leise — denn der Römer gibt viel auf körperliche Erziehung -, aber doch schon ganz leise die körperliche Erziehung anfängt eine Nebensache zu werden, und wie der Blick hingewendet wird mehr auf dasjenige, was eigentlich in der Menschennatur als vornehmer angesehen wird: das Seelische. Und wir sehen, wie nun jene Trainierung, die in Griechenland nach dem Ideal des Gymnasten hinging, im Römertum allmählich heraufrückt in eine Trainierung des Seelischen.
Und das pflanzt sich dann fort durch das Mittelalter, jenes Mittelalter, welches im Seelischen etwas Höheres als im Körperlichen sieht. Und wir sehen wiederum ein Erziehungsideal aus diesem romanisierten Menschheitswesen heraus entspringen.
Wir sehen namentlich in der ersten Zeit des Mittelalters dasjenige als Erziehungsideal des höheren Menschen sich aufrichten, was aus dem Römertum hervorgeblüht ist, was nunmehr eine Kultur des Seelenwesens eigentlich ist, insoferne dieses Seelenwesen allerdings sich äußerlich am Menschen offenbart.
Wir sehen an die Stelle des Gymnasten einen anderen Menschen treten. Wir haben heute kein starkes historisches Bewußtsein mehr von diesem Umschwung. Aber derjenige, der innerlich das Mittelalter anschaut, wird gewahr werden, daß dieser Umschwung da war. Es ist der Umschwung in bezug auf das Menschenerziehungsideal vom Gymnasten zum Rhetor, zu demjenigen, bei dem nun ein seelisch sich Offenbarendes, die Rede, hauptsächlich trainiert wird.
Wie der Mensch wirken kann durch die Rede als Rhetor, das ist hervorgegangen aus dem Römertum, das ist übergegangen auf die ersten Zeiten des Mittelalters, das manifestiert den Umschwung von der rein körpergemäßen Erziehung zu der nunmehr seelischen Erziehung, neben welcher die körperliche Erziehung gewissermaßen wie eine Beigabe einherläuft.
Und dadurch, daß das Mittelalter insbesondere den Rhetor brauchte für die Verbreitung des Geistlebens, wie es in den Klosterschulen, wie es überhaupt innerhalb des mittelalterlichen Erziehungswesens galt, dadurch kam, wenn man auch das Wort nicht immer aussprach, der Rhetor im Grunde genommen zu der Stellung in dem Erziehungswesen der Menschheitszivilisation, die der griechische Gymnast eingenommen hat.
So sehen wir die Menschheit gewissermaßen in ihrem Erziehungsideal vorrücken von dem Gymnasten zu dem Rhetor, wenn wir hinblicken, in welchen Idealen man die höchste Verkörperung des Menschen gesehen hat.
Das aber hat gewirkt auf die Ansichten in der Erziehung. Die Kindererziehung wurde so eingerichtet, daß sie gemäß war dem, was man als ein Menschheitsideal der Vervollkommnung ansah. Und noch unsere moderne Erziehungsgewohnheit, wie man das Sprachwesen, das Sprachenlernen bei den Kindern heute behandelt, ist für denjenigen, der die Sache historisch betrachten kann, ein Erbstück dessen, was mit Bezug auf den Rhetor als ein Ideal vor der mittelalterlichen Erziehung stand.
Nun kam die Mitte des Mittelalters mit ihrem großen Umschwung zum intellektuellen Wesen, mit ihrer Verehrung und Respektierung des intellektualistischen Wesens. Es entstand ein neues Ideal für die erzieherische Menschheitsentwickelung, ein Ideal, das geradezu das Gegenteil vorstellt von dem, was das Griechenideal war: es entstand dasjenige Ideal, das vor allem als vornehm ansah am Menschen die intellektualistisch-geistige Bildung. Und der, welcher etwas weiß, wurde nun das Ideal. Während das ganze Mittelalter hindurch noch derjenige, der etwas konnte, seelisch konnte, der die anderen Menschen überzeugen konnte, das Erziehungsideal war, wurde jetzt der Wissende das Erziehungsideal.
Man sehe nur hin auf die ersten Universitätseinrichtungen, man sehe auf die Pariser Universität im Mittelalter hin, und man wird sehen, daß da noch nicht das Ideal gesehen wird in dem Wissenden, sondern in dem Könnenden, in demjenigen, der durch die Rede am meisten überzeugen kann, der die größte Geschicklichkeit besitzt in dem Aufbringen von Gründen, in der Handhabung der Dialektik, des schon gedankengefärbten Wortes. Da haben wir noch den Rhetor als Erziehungsideal, wenn auch der Rhetor schon nach dem Gedanklichen hin gefärbt ist.
Und jetzt kommt mit der ganzen neuen Zivilisation ein neues Ideal herauf für den sich entwickelnden Menschen, das wiederum abfärbt auf die Kindererziehung, und unter dessen Einfluß im Grunde genommen unsere Kindererziehung zum großen Teil geblieben ist bis zum heutigen Tage, selbst in der materialistischen Zeit. Jetzt kommt erst herauf das Ideal des Doktors. Der Doktor wird dasjenige, was man als Ideal des vollkommenen Menschen ansieht.
Und so sehen wir in der Menschheitsentwickelung die drei Stufen: den Gymnasten, den Rhetor, den Doktor. Der Gymnast, der den ganzen menschlichen Organismus handhaben kann von demjenigen aus, was man als das göttliche Wirken und Walten in der Welt, im Kosmos ansieht; der Rhetor, der nur noch das Seelische, insoferne es sich körperlich äußert, zu handhaben weiß. Der Gymnast, der den Körper trainiert, und damit das Seelische und Geistige miterreicht bis zu der Höhe der griechischen Kultur und Zivilisation; der Rhetor, der bedacht ist auf das Seelische, der seine Höhe, seinen Glanz erreicht in dem Redner über das Seelische, in dem Kirchenredner. Und wir sehen dann, wie das Können vollständig in die Unterschätzung hinuntertritt, und wie derjenige, der nur noch weiß — der also nicht mehr die Seele in ihrer körperlichen Wirksamkeit handhabt, sondern der nur noch das, was ganz unsichtbar im Inneren waltet, handhabt, der nur noch weiß -, als Erziehungsideal der höchsten Stufe erglänzt.
Das aber färbt ja ab auf die untersten Prinzipien der Erziehung. Denn diejenigen, die Gymnasten waren, haben in Griechenland auch die Erziehung der Kinder gemacht. Diejenigen, die Rhetoren waren, haben in der späteren Zeit die Erziehung der Kinder gemacht. Und die Doktoren waren es schließlich, welche die Erziehung der Kinder in der neuesten Zeit machten, gerade in der Zeit, als in der allgemeinen Kultur und Zivilisation der Materialismus heraufkam.
Und so sehen wir gewissermaßen die Erziehung vorrücken von einer körperlich-gymnastischen Erziehung durch eine seelisch-rhetorische Erziehung zu einer Doktorerziehung.
Und dasjenige, was unsere Erziehung geworden ist, ist sie eigentlich durch den Doktor geworden. Derjenige, der aufsuchen will gerade in den tiefsten Prinzipien der modernen Pädagogik das, was verstanden werden sollte, muß sorgfältig darauf schauen, was der Doktor in das Erziehungswesen hineingebracht hat.
Neben diesem aber ist immer mehr und mehr aufgetaucht ein anderes Ideal in der modernen Zeit, das allgemeine Menschheitsideal. Man hatte ja nur noch Augen und Ohren für dasjenige, was dem Doktor gebührte. Und so kam herauf die Sehnsucht, nun wiederum den ganzen Menschen zu erziehen, hinzuzunehmen zu der Doktorerziehung, die man schon in das kleine Kind hineinpfropfte - weil ja die Doktoren auch die Lehrbücher schrieben und die Lehrmethoden ausdachten -, die allgemeine Menschheitserziehung. Und heute möchten eben die Menschen, die ursprünglich, elementar aus der Menschennatur heraus urteilen, ihr Wort mitreden im Erziehungswesen.
Daher ist die Erziehungsfrage aus innerlichen Gründen heute eine Zeitfrage geworden. Und diesen innerlichen Gang der Menschheitsentwickelung, den müssen wir uns vor die Seele stellen, wenn wir den gegenwärtigen Zeitpunkt begreifen wollen. Denn nach nichts Geringerem muß eine wirkliche Fortbildung des Erziehungswesens gehen als nach Überwindung des Doktorprinzipes. Und wenn ich dasjenige, was eigentlich nach einer bestimmten Seite hin Waldorfschul-Erziehung will, in ein paar Worten zusammenfassen will, so möchte ich zunächst präliminarisch selbstverständlich, nur heute sagen: es handelt sich darum, die Doktorenerziehung zu einer Menschheitserziehung zu machen.
Insbesondere ein Verständnis des Erziehungswesens, wie es im Griechentum aufgekommen ist, das eigentlich noch in seiner Weiterentwickelung bis heute wirkt, eignet man sich nicht an, wenn man nicht den Gang der Menschheitsentwickelung vom Griechentum bis in unsere Zeit im rechten Lichte sieht. Das Griechentum war in der Tat noch eine Fortsetzung, gewissermaßen ein Anhang des orientalischen Zivilisationswesens. Was sich in der Menschheitsentwickelung durch Jahrtausende herausgebildet hat drüben in Asien, im Orient, das fand dann, und wie ich glaube, ganz besonders im Erziehungs- und Unterrichtswesen, bei den Griechen den letzten Ausdruck. Erst dann tritt ein bedeutsamer Entwickelungseinschnitt ein zum Römertum hinüber. Und vom Römertum stammt dann dasjenige, was in Zivilisation und Kultur des ganzen Abendlandes bis in die amerikanische Kultur hinein später eingeflossen ist.
Daher versteht im Grunde genommen insbesondere das griechische Erziehungswesen niemand, der nicht auf das ganze Eigentümliche der orientalischen Entwickelung des Menschen einen richtigen Blick werfen kann. Daß man die höchste Menschheitsbildung dadurch erringt, daß man sich, um Examina abzulegen, vor Bücher setzt, und da irgend etwas Unbestimmtes, was man den menschlichen Geist nennt, man kann nicht sagen trainiert, sondern malträtiert, und nachdem man diesen sogenannten Geist, vielleicht jahrelang, wenn man fleißig ist, monatelang, wenn man faul ist, malträtiert hat, dann sich fragen läßt von jemandem, wieviel man nun weiß, nachdem man den Geist jahrelang malträtiert hat, daß man auf diese Weise ein vollkommener Mensch werden könne, das würde dem, der an der Wiege jener Zivilisation gestanden hat, aus welcher die Veden und die wunderbare Vedanta hervorgegangen sind, als der reinste Wahnsinn erschienen sein. Man versteht die menschliche Zivilisationsentwickelung nicht, wenn man nicht zuweilen einen Blick darauf wirft, wie sich dasjenige, was ein Zeitalter als das Ideal ansieht, vor den Blicken eines anderen Zeitalters ausnimmt. Denn was hat der getan, der im alten Oriente die Zivilisation und Kultur, die sein Volk als höchste dargeboten hat, erringen wollte, erringen wollte in jener Zeit, welcher dann erst folgte jene große Inspiration, die zu den Veden geführt hat? Im Grunde genommen war das, was er geübt hat, eine Art Körperkultur. Und er hat die Hoffnung gehabt, daß er durch einen besonderen, wenn uns auch heute einseitig erscheinenden Körperkultus die Blüte des menschlichen Lebens, die höchste Geistigkeit erreicht, wenn das in seinem Schicksal ihm vorgezeichnet ist.
Daher war nicht Bücherlesen und den abstrakten Geist malträtieren die Methode der höchsten Ausbildung im alten Orient, sondern eine, wenn auch außerordentlich verfeinerte, Körperkultur. Ich will nur ein Beispiel aus der verfeinerten Körperkultur herausheben: das war ein ganz bestimmtes, streng systematisch geregeltes System des menschlichen Atmens.
Wenn der Mensch atmet in der Weise, wie er es eben notwendig hat, um sich von Minute zu Minute mit der richtigen Sauerstoffmenge zu versorgen, dann atmet er unbewußt. Er treibt das ganze Atmungsgeschäft unbewußt. Der alte Orientale gestaltete dieses Atmungsgeschäft — also im Grunde genommen jene körperliche Verrichtung - zu etwas aus, was mit Bewußtheit vollzogen wurde. Er atmete ein nach einem bestimmten Gesetze; er hielt den Atem zurück und atmete wieder aus nach einem bestimmten Gesetze. Dabei war er in einer ganz bestimmten körperlichen Verfassung. Die Beine mußten eine bestimmte Lage haben, die Arme mußten eine bestimmte Lage haben. Das heißt, der Atemweg durch den physischen Organismus mußte zum Beispiel, wenn es auftraf auf das Knie, sich umbiegen in die horizontale Lage. Daher saß der alte orientalische Mensch, der die menschliche Vervollkommnung suchte, mit untergelegten Unterbeinen. Und es war eine eben auf das Luftförmige im Menschen hinorientierte, aber immerhin körperlich orientierte Entwickelung, die derjenige durchzumachen hatte, welcher dann als den Erfolg, als die Konsequenz dieser körperlichen Trainierung die Offenbarung des Geistes in sich erleben wollte.
Und was liegt denn einer solchen Trainierung, einer solchen Erziehung des Menschen zugrunde? Ja, dem liegt eigentlich folgendes zugrunde. Ebenso wie in der Wurzel der Pflanze die Blüte und die Frucht schon drinnenstecken und, wenn die Wurzel in der richtigen Weise gepflegt wird, sich dann auch Blüte und Frucht unter dem Sonnenlichte und der Sonnenwärme in der richtigen Weise entfalten müssen, so liegen, wenn man auf das Körperliche des Menschen hinschaut, in dem Körper, der gottgeschaffen ist, auch schon Seele und Geist drinnen. Wenn man die Wurzel im Körper ergreift, aber so, daß man das Göttliche in dieser Körperwurzel erfaßt, dann entwickeln sich aus ihr, wenn man in einer richtigen Weise diese körperliche Wurzel zur Entfaltung gebracht hat und sich einfach dem freien Leben überläßt, die in ihr liegende Seele und der Geist, so wie sich die inneren Kräfte der Pflanze, die aus der Wurzel schießen, unter dem Sonnenlicht und der Sonnenwärme frei entwickeln.
Dem Orientalen würde die besondere abstrakte Ausbildung des Geistes so vorgekommen sein, wie wenn wir unsere Pflanzen im großen Maße abschließen wollten von dem Sonnenlichte, um sie in einen Keller zu tun und sie dann vielleicht unter elektrischem Lichte zur Entfaltung bringen wollten, weil wir die freie Sonnenentfaltung nicht mehr vornehm genug für das Pflanzenwachstum finden.
So war es tief begründet in der ganzen orientalischen Menschheitsanschauung, nur auf das Körperliche hinzuschauen. Wenn auch diese körperliche Entfaltung dann einseitig geworden ist, ja sogar in dieser Form, in der ich sie geschildert habe, schon einseitig war beim Judentum, so weist uns gerade diese Einseitigkeit darauf hin, daß man überall die Ansicht hatte, Körper, Seele und Geist sind Eines; daß man genau wußte: Hier auf Erden zwischen Geburt und Tod muß man die Seele und den Geist im Körper suchen.
Das führt vielleicht zu einigem Erstaunen, wenn man gerade die alte spirituelle Kultur des Orients in diesem Lichte zeigt. Allein wenn Sie den wirklichen Gang der Menschheitsentwickelung studieren, dann werden Sie eben finden, daß die spirituellsten Konsequenzen der Menschheitszivilisation in denjenigen Zeiten errungen worden sind, in denen man Seele und Geist noch voll in dem Körperlichen zu schauen verstand. Hier hat sich eine für das Innerste der Menschheitszivilisation außerordentlich bedeutsame Entwickelung vollzogen.
Warum durfte der Orientale, dem es ganz und gar darauf ankam, den Geist zu suchen, warum durfte er dieses Suchen nach dem Geist durch Methoden anstreben, die eigentlich körperliche waren? Es durfte der Orientale dies anstreben, weil ihm seine Philosophie die Ansicht gab nicht nur dessen, was irdisch ist, sondern auch dessen, was übersinnlich ist. Und er wußte: Betrachtet man Seele und Geist hier auf Erden als etwas Selbständiges, ja, dann — verzeihen Sie den etwas trivialen Vergleich, er ist durchaus aber im Sinne der orientalischen Weisheit gehalten —, dann betrachtet man Seele und Geist wie ein gerupftes Huhn, nicht wie ein Huhn, das Federn hat, also nicht wie ein vollständiges Huhn. Wie ein Huhn, dem man die Federn ausgerissen hat, so wäre dasjenige, was wir uns von Seele und Geist vorstellen, dem Orientalen vorgekommen; denn von dem, was Seele und Geist ist, von dem, was wir in anderen Welten suchen, von dem hatte er eine konkrete übersinnliche Anschauung. Er durfte es sich erlauben, hier den Erdenmenschen in seiner irdisch-sinnlichen körperlichen Offenbarung zu suchen, weil er für andere Welten gründlich überzeugt war, daß das gerupfte Hühnchen, die bloße Seele, dort wiederum ihre spirituellen Federn bekommt, wenn sie an dem richtigen Orte anlangt.
So war es gerade der Spiritualismus der Weltanschauung, welche dem Orient eingab, für die Erdenentwickelung des Menschen in erster Linie darauf zu sehen, daß dasjenige, was verborgen im Körper ist, wenn der Mensch geboren wird, wo er als ein bloß physisches Wesen erscheint, was aber in wunderbarer Weise in dieser Physis im Kinde drinnen ruht, Seele und Geist ist. Denn es war dem Orientalen klar, daß aus dieser Physis, wenn diese Physis richtig geistig behandelt wird, Seele und Geist sich ergibt.
Das ist die besondere Färbung, welche — selbst für die höchste Erziehung zum Weisen — im Oriente drüben galt. Und das als innere Überzeugung, die weiter gewirkt hat, ist dann übergegangen auf das Griechentum, das ein Ausläufer des Orientalismus ist. Und wir verstehen, warum der Grieche nun - ich möchte sagen, bis zum Äußersten hintreibend dasjenige, was der Orient als seine Überzeugung behalten hat -, wie der Grieche durch den orientalischen Einfluß gerade zu seiner besonderen Art der Menschheitsausbildung schon in der Jugend gekommen ist.
Nichts anderes war dieses besondere Hinblicken auf die Körperlichkeit beim Griechentum, als was der Grieche geworden ist als derjenige Mensch, der durch Kolonisation aus dem Oriente und von Ägypten herüber eigentlich sein gesamtes Geistesleben erhalten hat.
Und so muß man, wenn man in die griechische Palästren hineinschaut, in denen der Gymnast wirkte, in diesem Wirken des Gymnasten eine Fortsetzung dessen sehen, was aus tiefer spiritueller Weltanschauung heraus der Orient gerade für denjenigen Menschen als Menschheitsentwickelung anzustreben hatte, der bis zum höchsten Ideal menschlicher Vollkommenheit auf Erden kommen sollte.
Der Orientale hätte niemals eine einseitig entwickelte Seele, einen einseitig entwickelten Geist als eine menschliche Vollkommenheit angesehen. Er hätte angesehen ein solches Lernen, ein solches Unterrichten, wie es in der späteren Zeit Ideal geworden ist, als ein Ertöten desjenigen, was von den Göttern den Menschen für das Erdenleben geworden ist. Und so sah es im Grunde genommen auch noch der Grieche an.
Und so erlebt man es in einer eigentümlichen Weise, wie die griechische Geisteskultur, die wir heute als etwas ganz ungeheuer Hohes ansehen, von dem damaligen nichtgriechischen Menschen angesehen wurde. Es ist uns ja überliefert die anekdotische Geschichte, daß ein Barbarenfürst Griechenland besucht hat, sich die Erziehungsstätten angesehen hat, mit einem der allervollkommensten Gymnasten Zwiesprache gepflogen hat. Der Barbar sagt: Ich kann nicht verstehen, was ihr eigentlich da für wahnsinniges Zeug treibt. Ich sehe, daß eure Jungen zuerst mit Öl, dem Friedenszeichen, eingesalbt werden, dann mit Sand bestreut werden, so als ob sie nun zu besonders friedlichen Verrichtungen kommen sollten. Dann aber beginnen sie wie toll sich herumzutreiben, fassen einander an; der eine wirft sich auf den anderen, wirft ihn, stößt ihm das Kinn in die Höhe, so daß ein anderer hinzukommen und ihm die Schulter in Bewegung setzen muß, damit er nicht erstickt — es ist eine Beschäftigung, die ich nicht verstehe, die zum mindesten dem Menschen keinen Nutzen bringen kann. — So sagte der Barbar zu dem Griechen.
Und dennoch, aus dem, was der Barbar so barbarisch an dem Griechen gefunden hat, ist die hohe geistige Kulturblüte Griechenlands hervorgegangen. Und geradeso wie der griechische Gymnast nur ein Lächeln hatte für den Barbaren, der nicht verstand, wie man den Körper pflegen muß, um den Geist zur Erscheinung zu bringen, so würde der Grieche, wenn er heute aufstehen könnte und unseren aus älteren Zeiten gebräuchlichen Unterricht und unsere Erziehung sehen würde, still in sich versenkt innerlich lächeln über das Barbarentum, das sich entwickelt hat seit dem Griechentum, und das von einer abstrakten Seele und von einem abstrakten Geist spricht. Auch der Grieche würde noch sagen: Das ist ja wie ein gerupftes Hühnchen; da habt ihr dem Menschen die Federn genommen. — Der Grieche würde dasjenige, was nicht, so wie angedeutet, im Knabenalter sich gewürgt und umeinander geworfen hat, eben barbarisch gefunden haben. Aber der Barbar konnte keinen Zweck sehen, keinen Nutzen finden in der griechischen Erziehung.
Wenn man in dieser Weise den Menschheitslauf betrachtet und sieht, was in anderen Zeiten geschätzt worden ist, dann kann das doch schon eine Art Unterlage geben, um auch wiederum in unserer Zeit zu einer richtigen Schätzung der Dinge zu kommen.
Schauen wir jetzt ein wenig hinein in diejenige Stätte, wo der griechische Gymnast die Jugend, die ihm als männliche Jugend im siebenten Jahre anvertraut worden ist, erzogen und unterrichtet hat.
Dasjenige, was wir da gewahr werden, unterscheidet sich allerdings sehr wesentlich von dem, was man als eine Art Erziehungsideal im 19. Jahrhundert zum Beispiel für das Nationale hatte. In dieser Beziehung gilt wahrhaftig dasjenige, was zu sagen ist, nicht für diese oder jene Nation, sondern für alle zivilisierten Nationen. Und was wir erblicken, wenn wir in eine solche Lehr- und Erziehungsstätte hineinschauen - eine Lehr- und Erziehungsstätte für die Jugend vom siebenten Lebensjahre an —, kann heute noch, wenn es in der richtigen Weise mit modernen Impulsen durchdrungen wird, eine richtige Grundlage abgeben für das Verständnis dessen, was heute für Erziehung und Unterricht notwendig ist.
Da wurden die Knaben namentlich nach zwei Seiten hin — wenn ich mich so ausdrücken darf, das Wort ist immer in seinem höchsten Sinne gemeint — trainiert. Die eine Seite war die Orchestrik, die andere Seite war die Palästrik.
Die Orchestrik war, von außen angesehen, vollkommen eine körperliche Übung, eine Art Gruppentanz, der aber in einer ganz bestimmten Weise eingerichtet war — ein solcher Reigen in der mannigfaltigsten, kompliziertesten Gestaltung, wo die Jungen lernten, sich in bestimmter Form nach Maß, Takt, Rhythmus und überhaupt nach einem gewissen plastisch-musikalischen Prinzipe zu bewegen, so daß dasjenige, was der im Chorreigen sich bewegende Junge wie eine innerliche Seelenwärme empfand, die sich organisierend durch alle Glieder ergoß, zu gleicher Zeit als schön geformter Reigentanz für denjenigen sich offenbarte, der das von außen anschaute.
Das ganze war durchaus eine Offenbarung der Schönheit der göttlichen Natur und zugleich ein Erleben dieser Schönheit für das Innerste des Menschen. Dasjenige, was da erlebt wurde durch diese Orchestrik, das wurde innerlich gefühlt und empfunden. Und indem es innerlich gefühlt und empfunden wurde, verwandelte es sich als körperlicher, physischer Vorgang in dasjenige, was sich seelisch äußerte, was die Hand begeisterte zum Kitharaspiel, was die Rede, das Wort begeisterte zum Gesang.
Und will man verstehen, was Kitharaspiel und Gesang in Griechenland waren, so muß man sie ansehen als Blüte des Chorreigens. Aus dem Tanze heraus erlebte der Mensch dasjenige, was ihn inspirierte zum Bewegen der Saiten, so daß er den Ton hören konnte aus dem Chorreigen heraus. Aus der menschlichen Bewegung erlebte der Mensch dasjenige, was sich ergoß in sein Wort, so daß das Wort zum Gesang wurde.
Gymnastische und musische, musikalische Bildung war dasjenige, was wie die Erziehungs- und Unterrichtssphäre alles durchwallte und durchwebte in einer solchen griechischen Palästra. Aber was als Musisch-Seelisches gewonnen wurde, es war geboren aus dem, was in wunderbarer Gesetzmäßigkeit als äußere körperliche Bewegung sich abspielte in den Tanzbewegungen in den griechischen Palästren.
Und wenn man heute durch eine unmittelbare Anschauung näher eingeht auf dasjenige, was nun eigentlich der den Barbaren unbekannte Sinn dieser geformten Bewegungen in einer griechischen Palästra war, dann findet man: Wunderbar sind da alle Bewegungsformen eingerichtet, wunderbar sind die Bewegungen des einzelnen Menschen eingerichtet! — So daß das Nächste, was nun daraus als Konsequenz sich ergibt, nicht etwa gleich das Musikalische ist, das ich charakterisiert habe, sondern noch ein anderes.
Wer eingeht auf jene Maße, auf jene Rhythmen, die hineingeheimnißt wurden in die Orchestrik, in den Chorreigentanz, der findet, daß man nicht besser heilend, gesundend wirken kann auf das menschliche Atmungssystem und auf das menschliche Blutzirkulationssystem, als wenn man gerade solche körperlichen Übungen ausführt, wie sie in diesem griechischen Chorreigen ausgeführt wurden.
Wenn man die Frage aufgestellt hätte: Wann atmet der Mensch am besten ganz von selber? Wie bringt der Mensch am besten sein Blut durch die Atmung in Bewegung? — so hätte man antworten müssen: Er muß sich äußerlich bewegen, er muß als Knabe vom siebenten Jahre an tanzartige Bewegungen ausführen, dann unterliegt sein Atmungs- und Blutzirkulationssystem nicht der Dekadenz, sondern der Heilung, wie man dazumal sagte.
Und alle diese Orchestrik war darauf abgesehen, Atmungssystem und Blutzirkulationssystem in der vollkommensten Weise beim Menschen auszudrücken. Denn man war überzeugt: Derjenige, der richtig die Blutzirkulation hat, in dem wirkt diese Blutzirkulation bis in die Fingerspitzen, so daß er aus dem Instinkt heraus die Saiten der Kithara, die Saiten der Leier in der richtigen Weise bewegt.
Das ergibt sich als Blüte der Blutzirkulation. Das ganze rhythmische System des Menschen wurde durch den Chorreigen in der richtigen Weise angefacht. Daraus erwartete man dann in der Konsequenz das Musisch-Geistige in bezug auf das Spielen, und man wußte: wenn der Mensch als einzelner Mensch im Chorreigen mit seinen Gliedern in entsprechender Weise Bewegungen ausführt, so inspiriert dies das Atmungssystem, so daß es auf natürlich-elementare Weise in einer geistigen Weise in Bewegung kommt.
Aber zugleich ergibt sich als eine letzte Konsequenz, daß der Atem überfließt in dasjenige, was der Mensch durch seinen Kehlkopf und die anderen in Verbindung stehenden Organe nach außen offenbart.
Man wußte: wenn man heilsam durch den Chorreigen auf das Atmungssystem wirkt, so entflammt die richtige Heilung des Atmungssystems den Gesang. Und so wurde aus dem richtigen Organismus, den man zuerst in einer richtigen Weise erzog durch den Chorreigen, als höchste Blüte, als höchste Konsequenz Kitharaspiel und Gesang hervorgeholt.
So sah man eine innerliche Einheit, eine innerliche Totalität für den irdischen Menschen in dem Physischen und in dem Psychischen, in dem Spirituellen. Das war durchaus der Geist der griechischen Erziehung.
Und wiederum, sieht man hin auf dasjenige, was insbesondere als Palästrik gepflegt wurde, von der ja — weil sie sozusagen Allgemeingut war für diejenigen, die überhaupt in Griechenland zur Erziehung kamen — die Erziehungsstätten den Namen haben, und fragt man sich dann, was da besonders gepflegt wurde, bis in die besonderen Formen, wie der Ringkampf entwickelt wurde, so zeigt sich, daß das geeignet war, zweierlei im Menschen zu entwickeln: zwei Arten, wie der Wille angeregt wird von den körperlichen Bewegungen aus, so daß er stark und kräftig wird nach zwei Seiten. Auf der einen Seite sollte alle Bewegung, alle Palästrik im Ringkampf so sein, daß derjenige, der den Ringkampf ausführte, eine besondere Gelenkigkeit, Gewandtheit, Beweglichkeit, zweckvolle Beweglichkeit in seine Glieder bekam. Das ganze Bewegungssystem des Menschen sollte so harmonisiert werden, daß die einzelnen Teile in der richtigen Weise zusammenwirkten, daß der Mensch überall, wenn er in einer bestimmten Lage des Seelenlebens war, die zweckvollen Bewegungen gewandt ausführte, so daß er von innen aus seine Glieder beherrschte. Die Rundung der Bewegungen zum zweckvollsten Leben, das war die eine Seite, die ausgebildet wurde in der Palästrik; die andere Seite war, ich möchte sagen, das Radiale der Bewegung, wo die Kraft in die Bewegung hineingestellt werden mußte. Gewandtheit auf der einen Seite — Kraft auf der anderen Seite; Aushaltenkönnen und Überwinden der gegenwirkenden Kräfte einerseits — selber kraftvoll sein können, um etwas in der Welt zu erleben, das war die andere Seite. Gewandtheit, Geschicklichkeit, äußere Harmonisierung der Teile in der Kraftentfaltung — auf der einen Seite; frei in alle Richtungen sein Menschenwesen in die Welt hinausstrahlen können — auf der anderen Seite.
Und man war überzeugt, daß, wenn der Mensch durch die Palästrik so sein Bewegungssystem harmonisiert, er dann in die richtige Lage zum ganzen Kosmos kommt. Und man überließ dann die Arme, die Beine, mit der Atmung, wie sie durch die Palästrik ausgebildet war, dem Wirken des Menschen in der Welt. Man war überzeugt: der Arm, der richtig durch die Palästrik ausgebildet ist, der fügt sich in jene Kräfteströmung des Kosmos hinein, die dann wiederum zum menschlichen Gehirn geht, und aus dem Kosmos heraus dem Menschen die großen Ideen offenbart.
Wie man das Musische nicht von einer besonderen musikalischen Ausbildung erwartete — die schloß sich nur an, hauptsächlich erst bei den Zwanzigjährigen an dasjenige, was man aus der Blutzirkulation und aus der Atmung herausholte -, so schloß sich das, was man zum Beispiel als Mathematik und Philosophie zu lernen hatte, an die Körperkultur in der Palästrik an. Man wußte, daß das richtige Drehen der Arme die Geometrie innerlich inspirierte.
Das ist dasjenige, was heute die Menschen auch nicht mehr aus der Geschichte lesen, was ganz vergessen ist, was aber eine Wahrheit ist und dasjenige rechtfertigt, was die Griechen taten: den Gymnasten an die Spitze des Erziehungswesens zu stellen. Denn der Gymnast erreichte die spirituelle Entwickelung der Griechen am besten dadurch, daß er ihnen ihre Freiheit ließ, die Köpfe der Menschen nicht vollpfropfte und zum Buch machte, sondern die befähigsten Organe des Menschen in der richtigen Weise in den Kosmos hineinstellte. Dann wird der Mensch empfänglich für die geistige Welt, dessen war er überzeugt — in ähnlicher Weise noch wie der Orientale, nur in einer späteren Gestalt.
Ich habe zunächst durch eine einleitende Schilderung des alten Erziehungswesens heute nur etwas vor Sie hingestellt wie ein Fragezeichen. Und es ist -— da man sehr tief schürfen muß, will man heute die richtigen Erziehungsprinzipien finden — schon notwendig, sich zunächst auch in diese Tiefen der Menschheitsentwickelung zu begeben, um von da aus dann die richtige Fragestellung zu finden für dasjenige, was als Rätsel unseres Erziehungs- und Unterrichtswesens zu lösen ist.
Und so wollte ich heute zunächst einmal einen Teil des ganzen Fragezeichens, das uns beschäftigen soll, vor Sie hinstellen. Die Vorträge sollen im weiteren die eben für die heutige Zeit angemessene, ausführliche Antwort bringen auf dieses Fragezeichen, das wir heute hinstellen, das wir morgen noch in einem gewissen Sinne ergänzen wollen.
So wird die Betrachtungsweise, die wir hier anstellen, das richtige Verständnis für die große Frage sein müssen, die uns die Menschheitsentwickelung für Erziehung und Unterricht aufgibt — und dann das Schreiten zu denjenigen Antworten, die wir aus der Erkenntnis des Menschenwesens der Gegenwart heraus für diese große Frage gerade in dieser heutigen Zeit gewinnen können.
Frage: Wie wollte der Grieche den Menschen zu einer gewissen Vollkommenheit bringen?
Dr. Steiner: Auf die gestellte Frage möchte ich folgendes sagen: Es ist sehr leicht ein Mißverständnis möglich, wenn Verhältnisse geschildert werden, die dem gegenwärtigen Leben so fern sind. Ich habe mir ja natürlich Mühe gegeben, heute morgen die Dinge so fundamental als möglich zu schildern. Aber es ist durchaus eben zuzugeben, daß sehr leicht bei der Schilderung solch fernabliegender Verhältnisse eben Mißverständnisse sich ergeben. Man hat ja so sehr die Neigung, die abgelaufenen Zeitalter nach dem gegenwärtigen zu beurteilen. Die Menschen stellen sich immer vor, die Seelen und die Menschen im allgemeinen wären eigentlich immer so gewesen, wie sie jetzt sind, soweit man in der Geschichte zurückgehen kann; nur, an einem bestimmten Punkte recht unbestimmt weit zurück, da wird dann haltgemacht, und da geht es plötzlich über in das Menschlich-Animalische. Man hat also irgendwo am Ausgangspunkt der Entwickelung den tierischen Menschen. Den schildert man ähnlich der Tierheit von heute. Dann stellt man sich so ungefähr die Geschichte in der Art verlaufend vor, daß die menschlichen Seelen, der Mensch im ganzen so gewesen sind, wie die heutigen sind. Das ist aber nicht der Fall, sondern die menschliche Seelenentwickelung hat ungeheure Differenzierungen durchgemacht, und mit demjenigen, was man heute über den Menschen vorstellen kann, was man selbst als Mensch in sich mit dem gewöhnlichen Bewußtsein erlebt, kommt man höchstens zurück bis zum 4. nachchristlichen Jahrhundert. Dann beginnt die menschliche Seele so verschieden zu sein, daß man sie eben innerlich schauen muß in ihrer Verschiedenheit von der heutigen.
Die griechische Seele, der griechische Mensch war eben durchaus verschieden von dem heutigen. Und deshalb muß es durchaus auch aufrechterhalten werden, daß solch eine Erziehung, wie sie übrigens nicht Kindern, sondern älteren Jünglingen gegeben wurde, von Plato und Aristoteles, daß die viel mehr auf die Pflege des Körperlichen abzielte als dasjenige, was heute den kleinsten Kindern bei uns zugemutet wird in dieser Beziehung. Man muß, wenn man so etwas beurteilen will, sich schon klar darüber sein, daß ja einfach der Wortinhalt in Griechenland etwas anderes bedeutet hat, als er heute bedeutet. Wenn heute der Mensch spricht von Ideen, Idealen, dann meint er eigentlich etwas durchaus Abstraktes, etwas ganz Gedankliches, Begriffliches. Wenn Plato von Ideen sprach, war das so nicht der Fall. Wenn Plato von Ideen sprach, war dies etwas Anschauliches, etwas Konkretes. Und die heutigen Plato-Leser haben eigentlich eine ganz falsche Vorstellung, wenn sie den Plato übersetzen in die gewöhnliche begriffliche Sprache. Um den Plato wirklich zu verstehen, muß man ein viel anschaulicheres, ich möchte sagen, körperhaft-anschauliches Vorstellungsvermögen entwickeln, als man das heute eigentlich in der Lage ist. So daß man sagen kann, die Griechen waren in bezug auf ihre Kindererziehung durchaus auf dasjenige bedacht, was ich heute morgen geschildert habe. Nur waren sie sich klar darüber, daß durch diese körperliche Erziehung zu gleicher Zeit die Seelenpflege herauskam. Und auch Plato, und namentlich Aristoteles haben nicht so geteilt: hier das Körperliche, dort das Seelische, wie wir das heute tun. Für Aristoteles zum Beispiel war der ganze menschliche Körper dasjenige, was von dem Seelischen durchkraftet ist. Jedes einzelne Glied des menschlichen Körpers war zu gleicher Zeit ein Seelisches. Daher spricht ja Aristoteles nicht in einer solchen abgezogenen Weise von dem Seelischen wie wir heute, sondern er spricht von der Form des Materiellen, von demjenigen, was gewissermaßen als der innere Künstler arbeitet und wirkt in dem Materiellen, dem Stofflichen, dem Körperlichen.
Also es handelt sich durchaus darum, daß wir nicht bei der Beurteilung fernabliegender Zeitepochen uns mißverstehen dadurch, daß wir die heutigen Begriffe in diese Zeitepochen hineintragen. Das heutige Plato-Lesen, das heutige Aristoteles-Lesen ist in der Regel schon ein Verabstrahieren der alten Meister. Es beginnt erst in der Mitte des Mittelalters, möchte ich sagen, diejenige Zeit, wo man Plato und Aristoteles so aufgefaßt hat, namentlich Aristoteles, wie das heute noch üblich ist; während man sehr darauf achten sollte, daß ja Plato zum Beispiel dasjenige, was er gegeben hat, selbst in unmittelbar vollmenschlicher Weise vorgetragen hat. Er wollte gar nicht so Theorien, Satz für Satz entwickeln, wie wir heute; er wollte die Leute miteinander sprechen lassen, er wollte menschliche Kräfte aufeinanderprallen lassen. Man sieht durch die Gespräche des Plato, ob der eine, der irgendeine Anschauung vertritt, etwas korpulent ist oder schmächtig, ob er blaß ist, oder ob er Pausbacken hat. Das alles ist in voller Körperlichkeit selbst in den Plato-Gesprächen dazu vorzustellen, sonst kommt man mit ihnen nicht zurecht. Das Seelische lebt eben bei den Griechen durchaus in der Offenbarung des Körperlichen, und man stellt sich dasjenige, was in Griechenland geschehen ist, nur richtig vor, wenn man die Vorstellung eben hat: alles Seelische lebt sich körperlich aus. Also die Meinung, als ob Plato und Aristoteles im Widerspruche stünden mit dem, was ich heute morgen gesagt habe, ist durchaus eben nicht berechtigt.
Second Lecture
There can be no doubt that education and teaching are currently occupying all souls and minds to the utmost. We see it everywhere. When I now assert here an art of education and teaching drawn from immediate spiritual life and observation, it differs from the general demand not so much externally in the intensity of its assertion, but more internally.
Today, there is a general feeling that the conditions of civilization are undergoing rapid change, that we need to think about many new and emerging aspects of the institutions of social life. Even today, we already feel what we felt little of until recently, namely that children have actually become different beings than they were not long ago. We feel that old age is much more difficult for young people to cope with today than it was in earlier times.
The art of education and teaching that I am going to talk to you about here, however, takes more account of the inner course of human civilization, of what has changed the souls of human beings over the course of time, of what the souls of human beings have undergone in the course of centuries, indeed, I might say, millennia. And it seeks to fathom how, especially in the present time, one can reach the human being in the child. It is generally admitted that in nature, successive times show differentiations. One need only remember how human beings reckon with these differentiations in everyday life. Take the most obvious example, the day. We deal with the processes of nature differently in the morning, at noon, and in the evening. And we would find it absurd if we did not take this development of the day into account. We would also find it absurd if we did not do justice to another development in human life, if, for example, we did not take into account that we must approach the elderly differently than we do children. We respect the facts in this natural development. But humanity has not yet become accustomed to respecting the facts in general human development as well.
We do not expect that thousands of years ago there was a different humanity than in the Middle Ages and than is the case today. One must learn to recognize the inner forces of human beings if one wants to treat children practically and not theoretically today. One must fathom from within what forces are at work in human beings today.
And so the principles of Waldorf education are not revolutionary in any way. Waldorf education fully recognizes the great, commendable, and sympathetic achievements of educators in all countries in the 19th century. We do not want to overturn everything and surrender to the belief that we can only establish something radically new. We only want to explore the inner forces that currently prevail in human nature in order to take them into account in education and, through this consideration, to place people today in social life in the right way in terms of body, soul, and spirit. For education — as we shall see in the course of these lectures — has always been a social matter. It is so in the present; it must also be so in the future. And therefore it must have an understanding of the social requirements of any age.
Now I would like to begin by presenting to you the development of education in Western civilization in three stages. We can do this best by considering what those who wanted to ascend to the highest level of humanity, to that highest level where they could be most useful to their fellow human beings, wanted to achieve in the individual ages. In doing so, we would do well to go back as far in time as we believe that this era, with its human forces, still lives on in the present.
No one today can deny that Greek culture is still very much alive in everything that human souls want and strive for. And for the educator, it must really be a fundamental question: How did the Greeks want to bring human beings to a certain perfection? Then one should see how the times have progressed in terms of the perfection, education, and instruction of human beings.
Let us first of all — we will have to examine this question very closely — consider the Greek ideal that was held for the educator; that is, for the one who not only wanted to bring the highest level of humanity to fruition in himself, but who also wanted to bring this highest level of humanity to fruition in himself so that he could guide others on their path of humanity. What was the Greek ideal of education?
Well, the Greek ideal of education was the gymnast, that is, the person who had brought all his physical and, as far as was considered necessary at the time, his mental and spiritual qualities into harmony with all their parts. The one who was able to reveal the divine beauty of the world in the beauty of his own body, and who understood how to bring this divine beauty of the world to external physical expression in young people, in boys, was the gymnast, the bearer of Greek civilization.
It is easy, from a certain modern point of view, one might say, to look down on this physical education of the gymnast. But this is a complete misunderstanding of what the word gymnast actually meant in Greek culture.
We still admire Greek culture and civilization today, and we still consider it our ideal to immerse ourselves in Greek culture and civilization for a higher education.
When we do so, we must also remember that the Greeks did not think of developing first what we call the spiritual in man, but only of developing the human body in such a way that, through the harmony of its parts and the harmony of its activities, it rose to a physical manifestation of the beauty of God. And then the Greeks calmly awaited further development, just as one awaits a plant to blossom when one has treated the root in the right way, so that it develops into a flower through sunlight and warmth. And when we look so devotedly at Greek culture and civilization today, we must not forget that the bearer of this Greek culture and civilization was the gymnast, the one who did not take the third step first, I would say, but took the first step first — the physical harmonization of man — and that all the beauty, all the greatness, all the perfection of Greek culture was not directly intended, but was to emerge as a matter of course from the beautiful, agile, strong body through the inner essence and nature of the earthly human being.
Thus, we have only a one-sided understanding of Greek culture, particularly with regard to its education, if we do not place alongside our admiration for the intellectual greatness of Greece the fact that the Greeks saw their educational ideal in the gymnast.
And then we see how humanity develops, and we see how an important turning point in the development of humanity takes place when Greek culture and civilization passes over to Roman civilization. And in Roman civilization we first see the emergence of that culture of abstraction, which then goes on to separate spirit, soul, and body, to look particularly at this trinity.
In Roman culture, we see how the principle of beauty in Greek gymnastic education is imitated, but at the same time we see how physical and spiritual education are falling apart. We see how in Roman culture, very quietly — because the Romans attach great importance to physical education — but nevertheless very quietly, physical education begins to become a secondary matter, and how attention is turned more to what is actually considered more noble in human nature: the soul. And we see how the training that in Greece was based on the ideal of the gymnast gradually gives way in Roman culture to training of the soul.
And this then continues through the Middle Ages, which sees something higher in the soul than in the body. And we see once again an educational ideal emerging from this Romanized human being.
We see, particularly in the early Middle Ages, the educational ideal of the higher human being emerging, which blossomed out of Roman culture and which is now actually a culture of the soul, insofar as this soul reveals itself outwardly in human beings.
We see another human being taking the place of the gymnast. Today, we no longer have a strong historical awareness of this change. But those who look inwardly at the Middle Ages will realize that this change took place. It is the change in the ideal of human education from the gymnast to the rhetorician, to the one who now mainly trains what is revealed in the soul, namely speech.
How human beings can influence others through speech as rhetoricians emerged from Roman culture and carried over into the early Middle Ages, manifesting the shift from purely physical education to spiritual education, alongside which physical education now runs as a kind of supplement.
And because the Middle Ages needed the rhetorician in particular for the dissemination of intellectual life, as was the case in monastery schools and in medieval education in general, the rhetorician essentially came to occupy the position in the education system of human civilization that the Greek gymnast had occupied, even if the word was not always spoken aloud.
Thus, we see humanity advancing, as it were, in its educational ideal from the gymnast to the rhetorician, when we look at the ideals in which the highest embodiment of the human being was seen.
But this had an effect on views on education. The education of children was organized in such a way that it was in accordance with what was considered the ideal of human perfection. And even our modern educational habits, such as the way we treat language and language learning in children today, are, for those who can view the matter historically, a legacy of what was considered the ideal of medieval education with regard to the rhetorician.
Then came the Middle Ages with its great shift toward the intellectual nature, with its veneration and respect for the intellectual nature. A new ideal for the educational development of humanity emerged, an ideal that was the very opposite of the Greek ideal: the ideal that regarded intellectual and spiritual education as the most noble aspect of human beings. And those who knew something now became the ideal. While throughout the Middle Ages the educational ideal was still the person who could do something, who could convince other people, now the educational ideal became the person who knew something.
Just look at the first university institutions, look at the University of Paris in the Middle Ages, and you will see that the ideal was not yet seen in the knowledgeable, but in the skilled, in those who could convince others most through speech, who possessed the greatest skill in presenting arguments, in the use of dialectics, of words already colored by thought. Here we still have the rhetorician as the educational ideal, even if the rhetorician is already colored by thought.
And now, with the whole new civilization, a new ideal is emerging for the developing human being, which in turn is rubbing off on the education of children, and under whose influence, basically, our education of children has remained to a large extent to this day, even in this materialistic age. Now the ideal of the doctor is emerging. The doctor is becoming what is regarded as the ideal of the perfect human being.
And so we see three stages in human development: the gymnast, the rhetorician, and the doctor. The gymnast, who can control the entire human organism from what is regarded as the divine workings and rule in the world, in the cosmos; the rhetorician, who knows how to control only the soul, insofar as it manifests itself physically. The gymnast, who trains the body and thereby also trains the soul and spirit, reaching the height of Greek culture and civilization; the rhetorician, who is concerned with the soul, who reaches his height, his glory, in the speaker on the soul, in the church speaker. And we then see how skill completely descends into underestimation, and how the one who only knows — who no longer handles the soul in its physical effectiveness, but only handles what reigns completely invisibly within, who only knows — shines as the educational ideal of the highest level.
But this rubs off on the lowest principles of education. For those who were gymnasts also educated children in Greece. Those who were rhetoricians educated children in later times. And it was ultimately the doctors who educated children in more recent times, precisely at the time when materialism was on the rise in general culture and civilization.
And so we see education advancing, as it were, from physical and gymnastic education through spiritual and rhetorical education to doctor education.
And what our education has become is actually due to the doctor. Anyone who wants to find what should be understood in the deepest principles of modern pedagogy must carefully look at what the doctor has brought into education.
Alongside this, however, another ideal has emerged more and more in modern times, the general ideal of humanity. People only had eyes and ears for what was due to the doctor. And so the longing arose to educate the whole human being, to add to the doctor's education, which was already grafted onto the small child – because the doctors also wrote the textbooks and devised the teaching methods – the general education of humanity. And today, it is precisely those people who judge originally, fundamentally from human nature, who want to have a say in education.
For inner reasons, the question of education has therefore become a question of time today. And we must keep this inner course of human development before our minds if we want to understand the present moment. For nothing less than the overcoming of the doctor principle is required for a real advancement of education. And if I want to summarize in a few words what Waldorf education actually aims to achieve in a certain respect, I would like to say, preliminarily of course, only today: it is a matter of transforming doctor education into human education.
In particular, an understanding of education as it arose in Greek culture, which actually continues to have an effect in its further development to this day, cannot be acquired unless one sees the course of human development from Greek culture to our time in the right light. Greek culture was in fact a continuation, in a sense an appendage, of Oriental civilization. What had developed over thousands of years in human evolution in Asia, in the Orient, found its final expression in Greece, particularly, I believe, in the field of education and teaching. Only then did a significant turning point in development occur with the advent of Roman civilization. And it is from Roman civilization that what later flowed into the civilization and culture of the entire Western world, including American culture, originated.
Therefore, basically, no one who cannot take a proper look at the whole peculiarity of the Oriental development of the human being can understand the Greek educational system in particular. That the highest human education is achieved by sitting down in front of books to take exams, and that something indefinable, which is called the human spirit, is not so much trained as maltreated, and after this so-called spirit has been maltreated, perhaps for years if one is diligent, or for months if one is lazy, then to be asked by someone how much one now knows, after having maltreated the spirit for years, that one can become a perfect human being in this way, would have seemed like pure madness to those who stood at the cradle of that civilization from which the Vedas and the wonderful Vedanta emerged. One cannot understand the development of human civilization without occasionally taking a look at how what one age considers to be the ideal appears to the eyes of another age. For what did those in the ancient Orient who wanted to achieve the civilization and culture that their people presented as the highest want to achieve at that time, which was then followed by the great inspiration that led to the Vedas? Basically, what they practiced was a kind of physical culture. And he had the hope that through a special, albeit one-sided, cult of the body, he would achieve the flowering of human life, the highest spirituality, if that was his destiny.
Therefore, the method of higher education in the ancient Orient was not reading books and maltreating the abstract mind, but a physical culture, albeit an extremely refined one. I would like to highlight just one example from this refined physical culture: a very specific, strictly systematic system of human breathing.
When a person breathes in the way that is necessary to supply themselves with the right amount of oxygen from minute to minute, they are breathing unconsciously. They carry out the whole business of breathing unconsciously. The ancient Orientals turned this breathing process — basically a physical activity — into something that was performed consciously. They inhaled according to a specific law; they held their breath and exhaled again according to a specific law. In doing so, they were in a very specific physical condition. The legs had to be in a certain position, the arms had to be in a certain position. This meant, for example, that when the breath passed through the physical organism, it had to bend into a horizontal position when it reached the knee. Therefore, the ancient Oriental, who sought human perfection, sat with his lower legs tucked under him. And it was a development oriented toward the airy aspect of the human being, but nevertheless physically oriented, which had to be undergone by those who then wanted to experience the revelation of the spirit within themselves as the success, as the consequence of this physical training.
And what is the basis of such training, such education of the human being? Yes, the basis is actually the following. Just as the flower and the fruit are already contained within the root of the plant, and if the root is cared for in the right way, then the flower and the fruit must also unfold in the right way under the sunlight and the warmth of the sun, so too, when we look at the physical aspect of the human being, the soul and spirit are already contained within the body, which is created by God. If one grasps the root in the body, but in such a way that one grasps the divine in this bodily root, then, if one has brought this physical root to development in the right way and simply surrenders to free life, the soul and spirit lying within it will develop, just as the inner forces of the plant, which shoot out of the root, develop freely under the sunlight and the warmth of the sun.
To Orientals, the special abstract training of the spirit would have seemed as if we wanted to shut our plants off from sunlight to a large extent, put them in a cellar, and then perhaps bring them to fruition under electric light, because we no longer consider free development in the sun to be good enough for plant growth.
Thus, it was deeply rooted in the entire Oriental view of humanity to look only at the physical. Even if this physical development then became one-sided, and indeed was already one-sided in Judaism in the form I have described, it is precisely this one-sidedness that points to the fact that everywhere the view prevailed that body, soul, and spirit are one; that it was known precisely that Here on earth, between birth and death, one must seek the soul and spirit in the body.
This may come as something of a surprise when the ancient spiritual culture of the Orient is viewed in this light. But if you study the real course of human development, you will find that the most spiritual consequences of human civilization were achieved in those times when people still understood how to see the soul and spirit fully in the physical. Here, a development took place that was extremely significant for the innermost core of human civilization.
Why was the Oriental, for whom it was of utmost importance to seek the spirit, allowed to pursue this search for the spirit through methods that were actually physical? The Oriental was allowed to pursue this because his philosophy gave him a view not only of what is earthly, but also of what is supersensible. And they knew that if one regarded the soul and spirit here on earth as something independent, then — forgive the somewhat trivial comparison, but it is entirely in keeping with Oriental wisdom — one regarded the soul and spirit as a plucked chicken, not as a chicken with feathers, that is, not as a complete chicken. What we imagine the soul and spirit to be would have seemed to the Oriental like a chicken that has had its feathers plucked; for he had a concrete, supersensible view of what the soul and spirit are, of what we seek in other worlds. He could afford to seek earthly human beings here in their earthly, sensual, physical manifestation, because he was thoroughly convinced that in other worlds the plucked chicken, the mere soul, would regain its spiritual feathers when it arrived at the right place.
It was precisely the spiritualism of the worldview that inspired the Orient to focus primarily on the earthly development of human beings, on what is hidden in the body when a person is born, when they appear as a purely physical being, but which in a wonderful way rests within this physicality in the child: the soul and spirit. For it was clear to the Orientals that soul and spirit arise from this physical nature when it is treated in the right spiritual way.
This is the special coloring that prevailed in the Orient, even for the highest education of the wise. And this, as an inner conviction that continued to have an effect, then passed on to Greek culture, which is an offshoot of Orientalism. And we understand why the Greeks now — I would say, taking to the extreme what the Orient had retained as its conviction — how the Greeks, through Oriental influence, came to their particular way of educating humanity already in their youth.
This special focus on physicality in Greek culture was nothing other than what the Greeks had become as a people who, through colonization from the Orient and Egypt, had actually received their entire spiritual life.
And so, when we look into the Greek palaestrae where the gymnast worked, we must see in the work of the gymnast a continuation of what the Orient, out of a deep spiritual worldview, had to strive for as human development, especially for those human beings who were to attain the highest ideal of human perfection on earth.
The Oriental would never have regarded a one-sidedly developed soul, a one-sidedly developed mind, as human perfection. He would have regarded such learning, such teaching, as it became the ideal in later times, as a killing of that which the gods had given to human beings for their life on earth. And this was basically how the Greeks saw it too.
And so we experience in a peculiar way how Greek intellectual culture, which we today regard as something tremendously lofty, was viewed by the non-Greek people of that time. We have been handed down the anecdotal story of a barbarian prince who visited Greece, looked at the educational institutions, and conversed with one of the most accomplished gymnasts. The barbarian says: I cannot understand what kind of crazy stuff you are doing there. I see that your boys are first anointed with oil, the sign of peace, and then sprinkled with sand, as if they were about to perform particularly peaceful tasks. But then they start to run around like mad, grabbing each other; one throws himself on top of another, throws him, pushes his chin up so that another has to come and move his shoulder so that he doesn't suffocate — it's an activity that I don't understand, which at least cannot be of any use to humans. — So said the barbarian to the Greek.
And yet, from what the barbarian found so barbaric in the Greek, the high spiritual culture of Greece emerged. And just as the Greek gymnast had only a smile for the barbarian who did not understand how to care for the body in order to bring forth the spirit, so the Greek, if he could rise today and see our teaching and education as it was in earlier times, would smile silently to himself at the barbarism that has developed since Greek times, and which speaks of an abstract soul and an abstract spirit. The Greek would also say: It's like a plucked chicken; you've taken away the feathers from the human being. — The Greek would have found barbaric that which, as indicated, did not struggle and fight each other in boyhood. But the barbarian could see no purpose, find no use in Greek education.
If we look at the course of human history in this way and see what has been valued in other times, then this can provide a kind of basis for arriving at a correct assessment of things in our own time.
Let us now take a brief look at the place where the Greek gymnast educated and taught the young men entrusted to him at the age of seven.
What we perceive there, however, differs very significantly from what was considered an ideal form of education in the 19th century, for example, for the nation. In this respect, what needs to be said truly applies not to this or that nation, but to all civilized nations. And what we see when we look into such a teaching and educational institution – a teaching and educational institution for young people from the age of seven – can still today, if it is imbued with modern impulses in the right way, provide a proper basis for understanding what is necessary for education and teaching today.
There, the boys were trained in two areas in particular — if I may express it this way, the word is always meant in its highest sense. One area was orchestrics, the other was palaestrics.
Viewed from the outside, orchestrics was entirely a physical exercise, a kind of group dance, but one that was arranged in a very specific way — a round dance in the most varied and complicated form, where the boys learned to move in a certain way according to measure, rhythm, rhythm, and in general according to a certain plastic-musical principle, so that what the boy moving in the choir dance felt as an inner warmth of the soul, which poured through all his limbs in an organizing manner, at the same time revealed itself as a beautifully formed round dance to those who watched it from the outside.
The whole thing was a revelation of the beauty of divine nature and at the same time an experience of this beauty for the innermost being of man. What was experienced through this orchestration was felt and sensed inwardly. And as it was felt and sensed inwardly, it was transformed as a physical process into that which was expressed spiritually, which inspired the hand to play the kithara, which inspired speech, the word, to sing.
And if one wants to understand what kithara playing and singing were in Greece, one must regard them as the flowering of choral dance. Through dance, people experienced what inspired them to move the strings so that they could hear the sound from the choral dance. Through human movement, people experienced what poured into their words, so that words became song.
Gymnastic and musical education was what permeated and interwove everything in such a Greek palaestra, as did the sphere of education and teaching. But what was gained in terms of musicality and spirituality was born out of what took place in wonderful regularity as external physical movement in the dance movements in the Greek palaestrae.
And if we take a closer look today at what was actually the meaning of these formed movements in a Greek palaestra, which was unknown to the barbarians, we find that all forms of movement are wonderfully arranged, and the movements of the individual human being are wonderfully arranged! — So that the next thing that follows from this as a consequence is not necessarily the musical aspect that I have characterized, but something else.
Anyone who delves into those measures, those rhythms that were incorporated into orchestral music and choral dancing will find that there is no better way to heal and restore the human respiratory and circulatory systems than by performing physical exercises such as those performed in Greek choral dancing.
If the question had been asked: When does a person breathe best on their own? How can humans best get their blood moving through breathing? — the answer would have been: They must move externally, they must perform dance-like movements from the age of seven, then their respiratory and blood circulation systems will not be subject to decay, but to healing, as they said at the time.
And all this orchestration was aimed at expressing the respiratory and circulatory systems in the most perfect way in humans. For people were convinced that those who had proper blood circulation would feel this circulation right down to their fingertips, so that they would instinctively move the strings of the kithara, the strings of the lyre, in the right way.
This is the result of blood circulation. The entire rhythmic system of the human being was stimulated in the right way by the choral dance. As a consequence, one expected the musical-spiritual aspect of playing, and one knew that when the individual performs movements with his limbs in the choir dance in the appropriate manner, this inspires the respiratory system so that it comes into motion in a natural, elementary, spiritual way.
But at the same time, the ultimate consequence is that the breath overflows into what the individual reveals to the outside world through their larynx and other related organs.
It was known that if the choir dance had a healing effect on the respiratory system, the proper healing of the respiratory system would inspire singing. And so, from the correct organism, which was first educated in the right way through choral dancing, kithara playing and singing emerged as the highest blossoming, as the highest consequence.
Thus, an inner unity, an inner totality for earthly human beings was seen in the physical, the psychological, and the spiritual. That was entirely the spirit of Greek education.
And again, if we look at what was cultivated in particular as palaestra, which — because it was, so to speak, common property for those who came to Greece for education — the educational institutions have the name, and if one then asks oneself what was cultivated there in particular, down to the specific forms in which wrestling was developed, it becomes apparent that this was suitable for developing two things in human beings: two ways in which the will is stimulated by physical movements, so that it becomes strong and powerful in two directions. On the one hand, all movement, all palaestric exercise in wrestling, should be such that the person performing the wrestling gained a special flexibility, agility, mobility, and purposeful mobility in his limbs. The whole movement system of the human being was to be harmonized in such a way that the individual parts worked together in the right way, so that wherever the human being was in a certain state of soul life, he performed the purposeful movements deftly, so that he controlled his limbs from within. The rounding of movements for the most purposeful life was one side that was trained in the gymnastics; the other aspect was, I would say, the radial aspect of movement, where strength had to be put into the movement. Agility on the one hand — strength on the other; being able to endure and overcome counteracting forces on the one hand — being able to be powerful oneself in order to experience something in the world, that was the other aspect. Agility, dexterity, external harmonization of the parts in the development of strength — on the one hand; being free in all directions, being able to radiate one's human being out into the world — on the other hand.
And it was believed that when a person harmonized their movement system through palestra, they then came into the right position in relation to the whole cosmos. And then the arms and legs, with the breathing trained by palestra, were left to the workings of the human being in the world. It was believed that the arm, properly trained by palestra, would fit into the flow of energy of the cosmos, which in turn would go to the human brain and reveal great ideas to the human being from the cosmos.
Just as one did not expect musicality to come from special musical training—which only followed, mainly at the age of twenty, from what one gained from blood circulation and breathing—so what one had to learn, for example, as mathematics and philosophy, followed from physical culture in the palaestra. It was known that the correct turning of the arms inspired geometry internally.
This is what people no longer read about in history today, what has been completely forgotten, but what is true and justifies what the Greeks did: placing the gymnast at the top of the educational system. For the gymnast best achieved the spiritual development of the Greeks by leaving them their freedom, not filling their heads and turning them into books, but placing the most capable organs of the human being in the cosmos in the right way. Then the human being becomes receptive to the spiritual world, he was convinced — in a similar way to the Oriental, only in a later form.
I have initially presented you with something like a question mark today through an introductory description of the ancient educational system. And since one must dig very deep to find the right principles of education today, it is necessary to first delve into these depths of human development in order to find the right questions to ask about the mysteries of our education and teaching systems.
And so today I would first like to present to you part of the whole question mark that we are to deal with. The lectures will then provide a detailed answer, appropriate for the present time, to this question mark that we are posing today and which we intend to supplement in a certain sense tomorrow.
The approach we take here must therefore be the correct understanding of the great question that human development poses for education and teaching — and then the progression to those answers that we can gain for this great question, precisely in today's world, from our knowledge of the human being of the present.
Question: How did the Greeks want to bring people to a certain level of perfection?
Dr. Steiner: I would like to say the following in response to the question posed: It is very easy for misunderstandings to arise when describing circumstances that are so far removed from our present-day lives. I have, of course, tried to describe things as fundamentally as possible this morning. But it must be admitted that misunderstandings can easily arise when describing such distant circumstances. We have such a tendency to judge past ages by the standards of the present. People always imagine that souls and human beings in general have always been as they are now, as far back as history can be traced; only at a certain point, quite indeterminately far back, does one come to a halt, and there it suddenly changes into the human-animalistic. So somewhere at the starting point of development, we have the animalistic human being. This is described as similar to the animalistic nature of today. Then we imagine history unfolding in such a way that human souls, human beings as a whole, have always been as they are today. But that is not the case. Human soul development has undergone tremendous differentiation, and what we can imagine about human beings today, what we ourselves experience as human beings with ordinary consciousness, goes back at most to the 4th century AD. Then the human soul begins to be so different that one must look inwardly at its difference from today.
The Greek soul, the Greek human being, was quite different from today's. And therefore it must also be maintained that such an education, which, incidentally, was given not to children but to older youths by Plato and Aristotle, was much more aimed at the cultivation of the physical than what is expected of the youngest children in our society today in this regard. When judging such things, one must be clear that the meaning of words in Greece was simply different from what it is today. When people today speak of ideas and ideals, they actually mean something quite abstract, something entirely conceptual and intellectual. When Plato spoke of ideas, this was not the case. When Plato spoke of ideas, they were something vivid, something concrete. And today's readers of Plato actually have a completely false idea when they translate Plato into ordinary conceptual language. In order to truly understand Plato, one must develop a much more vivid, I would say, physical and vivid imagination than one is actually capable of today. So that one can say that the Greeks were very much concerned with what I described this morning in relation to their children's education. Only they were clear that this physical education also resulted in spiritual cultivation. And Plato, and Aristotle in particular, did not divide things as we do today: the physical on one side, the spiritual on the other. For Aristotle, for example, the entire human body was imbued with the spiritual. Every single limb of the human body was at the same time a spiritual limb. That is why Aristotle does not speak of the spiritual in such an abstract way as we do today, but rather speaks of the form of the material, of that which, in a sense, works and acts as the inner artist in the material, the physical, the bodily.
So it is certainly a matter of not misunderstanding ourselves when assessing distant eras by applying today's concepts to those eras. Reading Plato today, reading Aristotle today, is generally already an abstraction of the old masters. It was not until the middle of the Middle Ages, I would say, that Plato and Aristotle, especially Aristotle, were understood in the way we still understand them today; whereas we should be very careful to note that Plato, for example, presented what he had to say in a directly human way. He did not want to develop theories sentence by sentence, as we do today; he wanted to let people talk to each other, he wanted to let human forces clash with each other. Through Plato's dialogues, one can see whether the person representing a particular view is corpulent or slight, whether he is pale or has chubby cheeks. All of this must be imagined in full physicality, even in Plato's dialogues, otherwise one cannot come to terms with them. For the Greeks, the spiritual lives entirely in the revelation of the physical, and one can only imagine what happened in Greece correctly if one has the idea that everything spiritual is lived out physically. So the opinion that Plato and Aristotle contradict what I said this morning is completely unjustified.