The Rudolf Steiner Archive

The Task of Spiritual Science and the Building in Dornach

[ 1 ] Dear attendees! When I attempt this evening to say a few words about the so-called Spiritual Science, as it is to be dealt with in the Dornach building with which you are familiar, and about this building itself, it is by no means my intention to engage in any kind of propaganda or agitation for this Spiritual Science or for this building. Every individual who joins the circle of those interested in the Spiritual Science does so entirely of their own free will. And any propaganda, any agitation other than saying in one place or another what the content of our endeavors actually is, is completely foreign to us.

[ 2 ] When I considered how I should organize my reflections for this evening, I had in mind, dear attendees, to discuss certain misunderstandings that we know exist, certain misunderstandings, certain understandable misconceptions about our cause. Let us begin with the one according to which a more or less unknown thing, when it occurs here or there, is judged. Goethe's “Faust,” “a name is but a sound and smoke.” And this passage from “Faust” is meant to suggest that one should judge by the thing itself and not by its name. But it is only too forgivable that those who are not yet very familiar with a matter see something in the name from which they want to characterize the matter, from which they want to understand the matter. Anthroposophy and the Anthroposophical Society are names that have become known in this area through the Dornach building. Anthroposophy is by no means just any new name.

[ 3 ] When, a number of years ago, it came to giving a name to our cause, I myself came up with a name that had become dear to me because a philosophy professor whom I had listened to a lot in my youth, whose lectures had become important to me in a way, because a philosophy professor named Robert Zimmermann had called his magnum opus “Anthroposophy.” That was back in the 1880s. And the name “anthroposophy” goes back a long way in literature. It was already in use in the 18th century; indeed, it goes back much, much further in intellectual history, having been used by individuals.

[ 4 ] What does the name actually mean? Of course, the first question to ask is: What did those who gave the name to something mean? For one can never use a name that has developed from a completely different context as if it were a new thing; one can never use a name to describe a thing precisely. Therefore, the name cannot contain everything that characterizes the thing in question in some way. I would first like to say what the name should definitely not mean in the ordinary sense of the word, at least not on its own: the name should not mean “knowledge of man.” It is the express intention of those who gave the name that it should not mean “knowledge of man,” but rather that the name is given with a different intention. Through what I will share with you in the course of this evening, it will become clear that the knowledge sought within this Society of Spiritual Science is not sought by the person who initially appears before us externally, nor is it sought by the person who needs his senses, who needs his intellect, who is bound to the brain and who applies it directly in ordinary life and ordinary science. Rather, within this, let us say, sensory human being lies a spiritual human being, an inner human being, a second human being, so to speak. Even Schiller spoke of a second human being within the human being, one that one can develop into, one can awaken within oneself.

[ 5 ] While what we know about the human being who appears to our senses, what we can know about this human being, or rather, what this human being can know about himself, is usually called “anthropology,” what the inner human being within us can know, this second human being who uses the tools I will discuss later, that should be called “anthroposophy.” So what the actual spiritual human being within us can know should be called anthroposophy. Anthroposophy is therefore the knowledge of the spiritual human being, and this knowledge of the spiritual human being does not extend merely to human beings. It is not merely knowledge of human beings, but knowledge of the whole world, namely knowledge of everything that the spiritual human being can perceive in the spiritual world, just as the sensory human being truly perceives the sensory world. So the name “anthroposophy” indicates that, in a sense, a different human being than the outer human being knows. And because this other human being, this inner human being, is the spiritual human being, what he acquires as knowledge can also be called " Spiritual Science." And the name Spiritual Science is even less new than the name anthroposophy. In fact, it is not at all rare, and it would be a complete misunderstanding if anyone were to believe that I or anyone close to us had coined the name anthroposophy. Spiritual Science is used everywhere where people believe they can acquire knowledge that is not merely natural science, but knowledge of something spiritual. And many of our contemporaries call history a Spiritual Science, call sociology, national economy, aesthetics, and the philosophy of religion humanities. When we use the name, we do so in a slightly different sense. But we did not coin the name. We do so in the sense that we understand the spirit as something real, while those who today mostly speak of history and economics as Spiritual Science believe that the spirit consists only of abstract ideas. We speak of the spirit not as abstract ideas, but — as we shall see in a moment — as something much more real than the external sensory world.

[ 6 ] Now, because this too could easily be misunderstood, I must also say a little about the whole development of our Anthroposophical Society. It is said, for example, that our Anthroposophical Society is only a kind of development out of what is called the “Theosophical Society.” Although what we do within our Anthroposophical Society was active for a time within the general Theosophical Society, our Anthroposophical Society should by no means be confused with the Theosophical Society. And to prevent this from happening, I must say a few things, which may seem personal, about the gradual emergence of what we now call the Anthroposophical Society.

[ 7 ] Many years ago, I was asked by a small circle of people to give certain lectures on Spiritual Science. These lectures were later printed in my book “Mysticism in the Dawn of Modern Spiritual Life and Its Relationship to the Scientific Worldview.” Until then, I had been trying, I might say in a solitary way of thinking, to construct a worldview that, on the one hand, took full account of the great and significant achievements of natural science and, on the other hand, sought to rise to an insight into the spiritual worlds. I must emphasize that when I was asked at that time to speak about this topic of Spiritual Science, which I have just mentioned, in a small circle in Germany, I had read nothing, absolutely nothing, not even a part of a book by Blavatsky or Annie Besant. When I looked into these books, I found that they did not really suit me. Based purely on what I had found, I had tried to indicate some points of view about the spiritual worlds at that time. These lectures were printed and soon translated into English by a member of the Theosophical Society, which was particularly flourishing in England at the time. And it was from that quarter that I was encouraged to join the Theosophical Society. I never had any other idea than to present something based on my own independent research method if I was offered a field of work or activity within the Theosophical Society. So it must be said that what is now the content of the anthroposophical worldview, what lives within our Anthroposophical Society, was not taken from the Theosophical Society at that time, but was brought in as something completely independent, and functioned as something independent as long as it was not considered heretical there. The worldview was never derived in any way from what the other Theosophical Society offered, but was an independent member of it. And what it was as an independent member then developed further, was expanded further and further, and it was a completely incidental event that one day the leader of the Theosophical Society found that her views were incompatible with what I, for example, represented, and that she showed us the door.

[ 8 ] It would therefore be a completely erroneous view to derive what lives in the Anthroposophical Society in any way or to bring it into an inner organic connection with what represented by Blavatsky and Besant. Blavatsky did indeed present significant truths about the spiritual world in her books, but they were mixed with so much error and so much harm that only those who have thoroughly penetrated these things succeed in separate the few meaningful things in these books, which are mixed up in chaos with the harm and injustice. Therefore, our anthroposophical movement must claim to be understood as something completely independent. This is not meant to be immodest, but only to set the record straight objectively.

[ 9 ] Then came the time when it became necessary to embody what our Spiritual Science, our anthroposophy, offered through teachings in an artistic dramatic way. We began doing this in Munich in 1909. From then until 1913, we attempted every year in dramatic performances in Munich to present in figures, in a dramatic procession before the soul, that which, according to our research, we must assume lives in the world as spiritual forces, spiritual beings, spiritual impulses. These dramatic performances these artistic performances were initially given in an ordinary theater. However, it soon became apparent that an ordinary theater could not provide the right setting for what was, in a certain sense, new to the spiritual development of humanity. And it simply became necessary to have a separate building for such performances, indeed for the entire operation of our Spiritual Science and spiritual art, a building whose architectural style would be an expression of what was spiritually intended. At first, it was thought that it would be good to erect such a building in Munich, but when that proved impossible, or at least extremely difficult, we had the opportunity to bring this building here, to this area, to the beautiful Dornach hills, where a larger piece of land was offered to us by a dear Swiss friend who had this land at his disposal and who is devoted to our cause. Thus, in a very natural way, a situation arose in which a thing that had come into the world was given the setting that it deserved. And so, through circumstances that are quite easy to understand, it came about that this building was erected right here at the northwestern end of Switzerland.

[ 10 ] And now, dear friends, before I say anything more about the Dornach building, I would like to say a few words, if I may, about the task of Spiritual Science itself. It is really understandable that something like this, such as this Spiritual Science, such as this anthroposophy, something that enters as something new into the spiritual development of humanity, is initially misunderstood. Really, one can believe that those who are firmly grounded in this Spiritual Science find it completely understandable that it is met with many misunderstandings. And those who are familiar with the course of humanity's spiritual development will never be surprised by such misunderstandings. So one should not believe that those who are engaged in Spiritual Science themselves are somehow surprised when they are told that what they are doing is vain fantasy, daydreaming, or perhaps something worse. As a rule, things that have entered into the spiritual development of humanity in a similar way to the Spiritual Science have always been perceived in this way. And besides, it can very easily seem as if the Spiritual Science bears a resemblance to certain things that have occurred in the course of [cultural development] of [humanity], and of which it can be said that they may not have a particularly good reputation at present.

[ 11 ] You see, one could say that if one looks at what Spiritual Science, what anthroposophy, wants to achieve from the outside, if one does not engage with it closely but looks at it from the outside, one might find that it bears a distant resemblance to what certain adherents of a worldview in the early Christian centuries, the Gnostics, used to practice. But anyone who gradually gets to know what our Spiritual Science is will find that it bears no more resemblance to the Gnostics than modern science bears resemblance to the science of the eighth or sixth century, for example. Of course, one can find similarities between all things if one leaves out enough of the differences. For example, one might say: Now this Spiritual Science, this anthroposophy, wants to understand the world in a spiritual way. The Gnostics also wanted to understand the world in a spiritual way. Consequently, it is the same thing. Exactly the same can be said of our present-day natural science, which has made such great, tremendous progress: it seeks to fathom the secrets of nature; the alchemists, the quacks of the Middle Ages, sought the same thing. So basically there is no particular difference, but rather the newer natural science is just a new name for what was done in the Middle Ages.

[ 12 ] In a similar way, one could confuse our Spiritual Science with what was then, let's say, alchemy, magic in the Middle Ages. But all this is based on a complete misunderstanding of what this Spiritual Science, this anthroposophy, actually wants, what its task is. If one wants to understand what the task of the Spiritual Science is, one must first look at how, over the last three to four centuries, the modern scientific way of thinking has actually developed from a completely different way of thinking.

[ 13 ] Dear attendees, one only has to consider what it meant for humanity when, three to four centuries ago, that change occurred which can be expressed in the following words: Until then, the vast majority, indeed all people, laymen and scholars alike, believed that the Earth stood still in the universe and that the sun and stars moved around the Earth. It can be said that at that time, what had become necessary through Copernicus and Galileo, the ground beneath people's feet became unstable. Today, when we take the movement of the Earth for granted, we no longer have any feeling or sense of how infinitely surprising this was for humanity and everything connected with it. It is not an anecdote, but something that is a real fact when I tell the following story.

[ 14 ] You see, throughout the Middle Ages, right up to the time of Galileo, anatomy, the study of the external physical human being, was not practiced as it is today, where one approaches the corpse, but rather anatomy was taught, taught for centuries, as the great ancient Greek sage Aristotle taught it. Certainly, Aristotle was an outstanding mind for his time, as few others have been in the intellectual history of humanity. But he lived for his time; and what was written in Aristotle's books, not what was seen on the corpse itself or observed in humans – that was not considered at all – but what was written in Aristotle's books was taught to students year after year, and this became firmly embedded in people's minds, leading them to believe that Aristotle had spoken the final word, which must now remain fixed for all time.

[ 15 ] Galileo, one of those who revolutionized this branch of Spiritual Science, had a friend. He tried to enlighten this friend, who was a learned man who knew everything Aristotle had written about the human body, on one point. He said: Look, Aristotle says that the nerves originate in the heart. But today we can see from autopsy findings that the human nerves originate in the brain. I would like to see that something that completely contradicts Aristotle could be true, said the friend. Galileo took his friend to the corpse and explained everything to him. Then the friend said: Yes, when I look at it, I can see that the nerves do not originate in the heart, but in the brain. But Aristotle says otherwise; I believe Aristotle more than nature.

[ 16 ] It is not even necessary, dear audience, to laugh at such a mistake today; it is quite understandable. For we are standing in the time three to four centuries ago, at the dawn of modern science. What has become habitual thinking today, what everyone is accustomed to today, had to be achieved back then. People do not realize the enormous upheaval that took place.

[ 17 ] What was attempted at that time for natural science in the interpretation and explanation of the mysteries of nature is now being attempted for the spirit and the soul by Spiritual Science in our time. This Spiritual Science wants to be nothing other than for spiritual -spiritual life, similar to what natural science has become for external natural life. And anyone believes, for example, that our Spiritual Science has anything to do with ancient Gnosticism completely misunderstands that something new entered into the spiritual development of humanity with this scientific worldview at that time, and likewise wants something new to enter — even if perhaps with many errors, which are always linked to what is desired in humanity — through Spiritual Science. But now Spiritual Science must research in a completely different way than natural science. Precisely if it wants to proceed entirely in the spirit of natural science, then it must conduct its research in a completely different way than natural science. Then it must find ways and means to penetrate the spiritual realm, which cannot be seen with the physical eyes, cannot be grasped with the intellect, which is bound to the brain; it must find ways and means to penetrate the spiritual realm.

[ 18 ] Now, dear friends, it is still difficult today to make oneself understood about the ways and means that Spiritual Science seeks to penetrate the spiritual realm, because today there are many, many misconceptions in the widest circles about the way in which human beings can learn about unknown worlds, and the spiritual worlds are often called unknown worlds. Above all, it must be noted that through the power of cognition that human beings have for ordinary life and that they also apply in ordinary science, nothing can be learned about the spiritual world; this must be noted above all else. In this respect, Spiritual Science will become more and more convincing because it will be found to be in complete agreement and harmony with natural science. However, natural science does not recognize certain abilities in human beings that can be developed and that lie dormant in them. But it is difficult to speak about these abilities today because they are widely confused with all kinds of pathological abilities in human beings. For example, there is much talk in the outside world today about human beings being able to acquire certain abilities. And those educated in natural science then explain that, yes, but these abilities are based solely on the fact that the otherwise normal human nervous system, the otherwise normal human brain, has become abnormal, pathological. And wherever the natural scientist is right in making such a statement, the spiritual researcher, the adherent of Spiritual Science, also agrees with him completely. But that means one must not confuse what Spiritual Science is with what is often referred to in the broadest circles in a trivial sense: clairvoyance. One must not confuse Spiritual Science with what occurs, for example, through the various phenomena of hypnotism. One must not confuse Spiritual Science with what occurs under the name of spiritualism, and so on and so forth.

[ 19 ] It is essential that Spiritual Science be distinguished from everything that is based in any way on pathological human dispositions.

[ 20 ] In order to make myself completely clear on this point, dear audience, I must at least say a few words about how the spiritual scientist comes to do his research. In doing so, however, I must touch on another point. For it is true that Spiritual Science, as it is meant here, is still something new, and therefore its basic element is still difficult, I would say, for the usual mental images. When people think, feel, and act in ordinary life, they use their senses, they use their entire physical organization. They use their ordinary life of mental images.

[ 21 ] Now, the method of research for Spiritual Science is based on something that, in the most eminent sense, has nothing to do with anything physical. If, for example, it were said that Spiritual Science is based on some kind of asceticism, as certain human abilities were once sought to be developed through asceticism; or that it is based on the nervous system being prepared in a certain way, being excited, or something similar; or that it is based entirely on bringing spirits into appearance in an external physical way — all of that would be a completely misunderstood conception. What the spiritual researcher has to do in order to acquire the ability to look into the spiritual world are purely spiritual-soul processes, that has nothing to do with the body, that has nothing to do with the physical. And it is precisely the spiritual researcher who will be careful to ensure that everything he does has no effect on the physical body. I would just like to mention in passing that if a large number of those who profess Spiritual Science are vegetarians, for example, this is a matter of taste. It is not something that has anything to do with spiritual research methods in principle. It only has to do with a certain easing of life; I would even say it has to do with making life more comfortable, in a sense, because it is easier to work spiritually when one does not eat meat. But that is a side issue and has nothing to do with the main issue. The main issue is that spiritual research must lead to a science, and that it must start from what modern natural science has worked towards, I would say explored from the facts of nature itself.

[ 22 ] This newer scientific worldview has emerged, I would say a certain logic that adheres to the facts of nature. And a great deal of training has taken place among those who have studied natural science in relation to the inner handling of thinking, in relation to the inner handling of logic. But this logic, I will now try to make myself understood by means of a comparison, this logic, dear audience, which the natural scientist applies, I would like to compare it with forms, with beautiful forms — for logic should not be disparaged by this comparison —with the beautiful forms that a very beautiful statue has. In this way, logic, too, if one wants to understand external natural facts through logic, this logic is also something dead. I would like to say that we know, we have mental images in our concepts, in our ideas, by thinking logically, but these images are only inner thought forms, just as the forms of a statue are forms.

[ 23 ] Now the spiritual researcher approaches precisely this kind of thinking. And in my book “How to Attain Knowledge of Higher Worlds,” you will find instructions on what one must do with thinking in order for thinking to become something else. The spiritual researcher cultivates his thinking. He develops his thinking. He disciplines his thinking in a certain very special way. Due to the limited time available, I cannot go into the details today. You can find more information on how this thinking is treated, how the logical thinking that has just been developed is treated, in my book: “How to Attain Knowledge of Higher Worlds” or in other books that belong to our worldview. But then, when thinking, when the logic that reigns in human beings is treated in this way, the whole inner life of the soul changes. And then something happens that transforms this whole inner life of the soul into something else, which I will now develop further in a comparison, in order to illustrate it.

[ 24 ] Imagine, dear audience, that the statues, which previously existed only in dead forms, suddenly began to walk, came to life. The statue cannot do this, but human thinking, this inner logical activity, can do so through what is undertaken according to the rules I have spoken of, according to the exercises that thinking performs, that is, the spiritual researcher puts himself in a state where there is not only a thought logic within him, but a living logic, so that the logic within us becomes a living being. But in this way, instead of dead concepts, he has grasped something living and active within himself. He is permeated by something living and active. And if you have already heard that spiritual research assumes, in addition to the physical body that you can see with your eyes and touch with your hands, then there is nothing magical about it, nothing else is meant by it, but it simply means that by calling the inner logical image to life, so to speak, the human being feels inner activity and vitality and teaches the second human being from within. This is a matter of experience, a matter of observation that can be achieved. But it must be done, just as other experiments in nature must be done in order to uncover nature's secrets.

[ 25 ] Now you see, just as one cultivates thinking, just as one causes thinking so that it is no longer experienced as dead inside, but is kept lively and active inside, so too can one cultivate the will in a certain way, train the will in a certain way. Again, the methods by which the will is treated in such a way that one does not get to know it as in ordinary life, but gets to know it in a different way, as I have described in “How to Attain Knowledge of Higher Worlds.” Yes, one can also get to know this will in a different way, but then something completely different comes out than when one treats thinking in the way I have described. When one treats the will in such a way that one experiences it quite differently than in ordinary life, the following happens: Isn't it true that in ordinary life, when we want something — let's say we are working, we have to move our hands, we say: we want. But the will then penetrates, as it were, into our limbs. We do not know what the will is doing there. The will is an expression of our movements. But it actually remains unknown. However, if one practices in a certain way, one can detach the will from its connection with the limbs. One can experience the will alone. You can stimulate your thinking so that it becomes an inner living force, a kind of etheric body. You can peel away the will, separate it from its connection to the physical body, and then you experience that you have a second person within you in an even higher sense than when you think. Through the will, you experience that you have a second person within you who has consciousness.

[ 26 ] You see, if you work on your will in this way continuously, the following occurs, which I can only explain by reminding you, dear audience, that there are two alternating states in ordinary human life: waking and sleeping. When awake, the human being is conscious; while during sleep, consciousness ceases. Now, first of all, it is an assertion to say that the soul-spiritual does not cease between falling asleep and waking up. But it is no longer directly in the body; it is outside. That is initially an assertion. But the spiritual researcher brings it to the point where he can arbitrarily command his body to come to a standstill, as happens involuntarily when falling asleep, commanding the senses to come to a standstill, commanding the ordinary mind to come to a standstill. This can be achieved through a certain development of the will. And then it happens that one arbitrarily brings about the same state that one otherwise has involuntarily as a state of sleep, but what one has now brought about is totally opposite to sleep. While in sleep one becomes unconscious, knowing nothing about oneself or one's surroundings, by developing the will one consciously steps out of one's body and has the body outside oneself, just as one otherwise has an external object outside oneself. And then you realize: there lives within us, within all of us, what can be discovered in the will: a spectator within us. This is not an image, not a figurative expression, but a reality. Something lives in our will that constantly observes us internally. That is where the actual spiritual-soul human being resides. And when one has these two: the mobile thinking human being, I would say the etheric human being, and this inner human being, and what one now experiences, what one really experiences, what is an experience, an observation, not something fantastical, you can call that the astral human. It doesn't matter what word you use. Something that can really be found in the human being, just as oxygen can be found in water.

[ 27 ] These now interact with each other: this human being, who is mobile logic, and the other human being, who is a higher consciousness, a different consciousness, now work together. When one gets to know these in the human being, then one knows that which what is present in the human being, even when their physical body decays, when the human being passes through the gate of death. In other words, you get to know that being in the human being that otherwise does not act, because otherwise the human being acts through the outer body, but which is spiritual-soul, which will be present after death, which was also present before birth or, let's say, conception. One comes to know the eternal essence of the human being in such a way that one has, as it were, extracted it from the ordinary mortal human being, just as one can extract oxygen from water through a chemical process.

[ 28 ] Everything I have now presented to you, ladies and gentlemen, still seems strange, I would even say fantastic; but it is no more fantastic in relation to our usual mental images than it was when Copernicus appeared and said: it is not the sun that moves and the stars that move around the earth, but the earth that moves around the sun.

[ 29 ] What is surprising is only the unfamiliarity of it, and it is really not a matter of saying anything speculative or dreamt up with what has just been discussed, but rather that it is experienced as fact through inner experiences.

[ 30 ] The spiritual researcher does not simply speak of the nature of the human being by listing: the human being consists of a physical body, an etheric body, and an astral body, but rather shows how that which, as has been said, is human nature, when viewed in its entirety, breaks down into certain members of which it is composed. And it is really, really, when you look at the matter in its fundamental nature, nothing more enchanting, nothing more magical than the fact that human beings consist of individual nuances of human nature, of individual shades, than it is enchanting that light can be made to appear in seven colors.

[ 31 ] Just as light must be broken down into seven colors in order to study it, so too must human beings be broken down into their constituent parts in order to truly study them, in order to get to know their essence. And one gets to know their essence by showing in this way, as one shows in sunlight that it consists of seven colors, and that red is something different from blue, as one learns to know this, so one must learn to know how the physical is the mortal in man, but that the other is the immortal, that it unites with the eternal forces of the eternal worlds when the human being passes through death.

[ 32 ] And there is something else underlying this: when you get to know this second human being within the human being, who lives in the will, then you really learn through experience. One cannot expect to be able to present what is spiritual before the eyes, before the senses. It must be experienced inwardly, spiritually. And for those who do not want to accept this inner experience as a spiritual experience as fact at all, it can only be empty verbal sparring. For those who get to know it, it is a reality that stands much higher than the outer reality of the senses. By passing through the gate of death, one learns something that stands on a much higher level than the outer reality of the senses. When a plant grows and develops flowers and fruits, a new plant develops from each plant seed, and we know that when we get to know the seed, the seed has all the power of the plant within it, and a new plant arises from this seed. Those who know the nature of the seed know that it cannot be otherwise than that a new plant arises from the seed; but they learn this from the facts.

[ 33 ] One must learn about the spiritual-soul out of spiritual-soul facts, then one knows: this is the seed of life that passes through the gate of death, passes through the spiritual world, and then returns to earthly life. And just as surely as the plant seed develops a new plant, so truly does that which is the core of a person's being develop a new earthly life. One can already see this new person within the human being, for everything truly comes alive within. This is not magic; it is simply thinking on a higher level. I would like to illustrate this.

[ 34 ] You all know, dear attendees, that natural science has methods for calculating certain things. It is well known that one can calculate when solar and lunar eclipses will occur in the future based on the position and mutual relationship of the sun and moon. One only needs to know the relevant factors and you can calculate when a certain constellation of stars will occur in the future. Because you are dealing with outer space, you have to do this by applying mathematics. But that which what one experiences inwardly as the seed of life is something living. And in experiencing this seed of life, one experiences inwardly that one knows it already points to something, just as the present positions of the stars point to a future lunar eclipse, so what already lives within us points to a future life on earth.

[ 35 ] This connection becomes clear as an inner fact. And one is not dealing here with what in the most improper sense can be called transmigration of souls or the like, but with something that recent spiritual research finds in the facts of spiritual life that can be researched, finds and can communicate in the manner described, can be put into words. Spiritual research is therefore something that consists of spiritual research methods, something that is achieved through spiritual research methods. But it is also natural that the spiritual cannot be achieved in such a way that it can be presented to the outer senses; for then it is something sensual, then it is no longer spiritual.

[ 36 ] Now, certain things must be carefully considered if one wants to understand the actual foundations of spiritual research, that which one attains by doing the exercises described, by following the path I have described. In this way, one again comes to step out of the body with one's actual spiritual-soul being. One is then outside, and just as one otherwise has external things beside and in front of oneself, one has one's own physical body outside oneself in front of oneself. But the essential thing is that one can really always observe it. And when it comes to spiritual research in the true sense of the word, as it is meant here, then what occurs in any pathological soul life must never occur.

[ 37 ] What is characteristic of a pathological soul life? You see, when someone is in a hypnotic state or in a trance, as they say, when they speak somehow from the subconscious, so that in trivial usage it is called a kind of clairvoyance, which manifests itself in dreamlike consciousness, in trance, what is there? In this case, the person's normal behavior and normal consciousness are not present. They have been transformed into this subdued or perhaps pathological consciousness. If you have a pathological mental state, you will never be able to say: “Alongside this pathological mental state, the healthy one is still there,” because then the person would not be ill. If the healthy state of mind were there, then they would not be ill, because then they would themselves pass over into the healthy state of mind.

[ 38 ] In real spiritual research, the person as a normal human being is constantly standing beside themselves. The state in which the spiritual researcher finds themselves does not develop out of the ordinary, normal soul life, if it is correct, but alongside it. And truly, it is so: if someone is a true spiritual researcher, then they live outside their body; but his body, with all its normal sensory functions and ordinary intellect, which remains completely normal, continues on its way. The person remains correct if they are a true spiritual researcher; even though they have stepped out of their body with what they have developed within themselves, they also remain a normal person, whom those who cannot themselves enter into spiritual research truly do not need to regard that he lives in another world. Next to the hypnotized person is not the non-hypnotized person; next to the person who develops an abnormal spiritual life through a pathological soul life is not the person with a normal spiritual life. But that is precisely the characteristic feature, that the normal state remains completely intact, that ordinary normal thinking remains within normal logic, alongside the fact that the normal person has an inner living logic through which he grows together with the spiritual world.

[ 39 ] It is precisely this, however, that enables the spiritual researcher to increasingly distinguish what true spiritual research is from what one encounters in any pathological state of mind. And if it could even be suggested that spiritual research has anything in common with ordinary spiritualism — not to say that all kinds of facts cannot be found through spiritualism — but these belong to natural science, not to Spiritual Science; for what is found through spiritualism is brought before the outer senses, whether through materializations or knocking sounds or the like. This belongs to the realm of natural science.

[ 40 ] What presents itself as an object to the spiritual researcher is spiritual-soul, and that cannot be represented externally in space, for example; it must really be experienced inwardly. And then a comprehensive, extensive Spiritual Science emerges, a Spiritual Science that not only enlightens us about the nature of the human being about passing through various earthly lives, but also enlightens us about what underlies our world as spiritual worlds and spiritual beings, which can also enter into the world that human beings pass through after their death. However, one should not believe that what what in a certain sense appears as abnormal abilities in ordinary life, as abnormal abilities, that this somehow, I would say, has a very special value in Spiritual Science. You see, there is much talk today about the possibility of the remote effect of thoughts. We will not go into all the pros and cons now. People have to get used to many things over time. Our present age in particular has compelled serious researchers to learn the full significance, for example, of the divining rod, which is now used in such an extensive sense and on which one of the most sober researchers is currently conducting important experiments to find out under what influence a person lives who has achieved some success through the use of divining rods. But all this belongs only to the realm of the finer sciences. It also belongs to the realm of the finer sciences that thoughts harbored by one person can have an effect on another person at a distance. These are forces that do have an effect on this world, even if they come from the [world of thought forces]. These things should not be denied. But the point is that true spiritual research will never use them as they are directly, to gain knowledge about the spiritual and soul world of human beings. Anyone who believes that Spiritual Science regards the doctrine of distant effects as something other than a refined physiology, a refined natural science, completely misunderstands Spiritual Science.

[ 41 ] Spiritual Science never touches on what is known today as spiritualism. When Spiritual Science considers the human souls that undergo a purely spiritual life in a spiritual world between death and a new birth, this Spiritual Science knows that these souls are in a state in the spiritual world in which you yourself are, except that on earth the spiritual-soul lives in the physical body between birth and death. If you now use your spiritual-soul to send thoughts filled with pure love toward the dead, thoughts that free you from the physical, then there is a real connection. This is what Spiritual Science shows. And so, directing one's own soul life toward the dear departed can take on a deep meaning even while one is still in the physical world. It cannot contradict any religious belief if, precisely through the spiritual scientific worldview, the memory of the dead, the active coexistence with the dead, is cultivated in this way, if Spiritual Science encourages us to cultivate this coexistence with the dead. It goes without saying that we always remember that the dead person will perceive what we cherish for him in our souls only if he is in a position to want, as it were, to be connected with us. This is quite natural for the spiritual researcher. And somehow to exercise power over the dead is completely foreign to the spiritual researcher. The spiritual researcher knows very well that the dead live in a sphere where other conditions of will prevail, and if the spiritual researcher wanted to, he would enter the spiritual world with what he can develop here within the physical world in his soul, and if he were to intervene powerfully in the spiritual world, he would feel as if — to use a comparison — a society were sitting here and suddenly a lion appeared from underground and caused disorder; if it appeared here and caused disorder, that is how it would feel to the spiritual researcher if he were to intrude inappropriately into the lives of the dead. There is a sphere that is as exalted above ours as our sphere is above that of an animal that caused disorder in our sphere. Therefore, there can be no question of summoning the dead, as is attempted in spiritualism, because the relationship between the living and the dead is wonderfully transfigured by what Spiritual Science can inspire in our souls. And since I have come to realize, dear attendees, that among the various misunderstandings that are brought up against our Spiritual Science, is that Spiritual Science somehow has a connection with spiritualism, particularly in relation to the dead, it is necessary to emphasize this misunderstanding more clearly. Nothing could be further from the truth in relation to this point in Spiritual Science than to say that Spiritual Science has anything to do with what spiritualists call “summoning of the dead.”

[ 42 ] As I said, I do not want to create any kind of mood or propaganda for our cause, but only to discuss misunderstandings that I know exist, and to indicate as clearly as possible how Spiritual Science relates to these things.

[ 43 ] Well, dear attendees, when asked – and this question is so obvious – how Spiritual Science or anthroposophy relates to the religious life of human beings, then all that needs to be taken into account is what is generally known. Spiritual Science does not stand on the ground of directly intervening in any religious confession or in the realm of any religious life. I would like to clarify this point in the following way. Let us assume that we have natural science. We do not imagine that by gaining knowledge of nature we can create anything in nature itself. Knowledge of nature does not create anything in nature. Nor will we imagine that by gaining knowledge of spiritual conditions we can create anything in spiritual conditions.

[ 44 ] We observe spiritual conditions. We seek to uncover their secrets. Religions, dear attendees, religions are facts in the historical life of humanity. Spiritual Science can also extend to to consider these spiritual phenomena that have appeared as religions in the course of world development. But Spiritual Science can never, just as it does not indulge in the illusion of creating something in nature, strive to create a religion. Therefore, within the circle of the Spiritual Science worldview, the most diverse religious confessions can coexist in the deepest peace and complete harmony and strive for spiritual knowledge in such a way that what the individual holds as religious conviction is not impaired in any way. Nor should the intensity with which he practices his religious or religious needs need to be impaired in any way by what people find in Spiritual Science. Rather, it must be said that natural science, as it has emerged in recent times, has in many ways led people away from a religious understanding of life, from inner, true religiosity. And this is precisely an experience we have with Spiritual Science, the experience that those who have been alienated from all religious life by the half-truths of natural science, when natural science wants to be a worldview in its own right, can be led back to religious life through Spiritual Science; and no one needs to be led away from their religious life by Spiritual Science in any way. Therefore, one cannot say that Spiritual Science is any kind of religious creed. It neither seeks to create a religious creed, nor does it seek to change people in any way with regard to what they hold as their religious creed.

[ 45 ] The most diverse religious beliefs can be united on the basis of Spiritual Science. Nevertheless, it seems as if people are concerned about the religion of anthroposophists. In truth, one cannot speak of this at all, because all religious beliefs are represented within the Anthroposophical Society, and no one is prevented from practicing their religious beliefs in the fullest and most intensive way. most comprehensive and intensive way. But that is what Spiritual Science wants: to look at the whole world; it also wants to look at historical life, including that which has entered historical life from the highest spiritual realm. The fact that it also considers religions for this reason in no way detracts from what I have just said. And so it is that the view of Spiritual Science of the world must deepen in a certain respect, also in relation to the objects of religious life.

[ 46 ] But if, for example, as can easily happen, Spiritual Science, anthroposophy as it is meant here, were to be reproached for not speaking of a personal God — indeed, if the opinion were to prevail that I myself prefer not to speak of God very often, but rather to speak of the Godhead, or that I choose words that are not directly the word God, but rather to view the world in some other way, even when touching on the divine mysteries of existence. Yes, the opinion is also spreading that what is referred to as the divine could take on a character in Spiritual Science similar to the pantheism of monists or naturalists or the like. Precisely the fact the fact that Spiritual Science leads one to real spiritual beings, to the real spiritual beings that human beings become after death, but also to other real beings that fill our world like nature beings and do not descend to physical embodiment. Precisely because one is led to concrete, real spiritual beings, one also comes to a complete understanding of how absurd—and I say this explicitly—it is to speak of a pantheistic God, to deny the personality of God. On the contrary, one comes to realize that one must speak not only of the personality, but perhaps of a super-personality of God, if I may coin this word. It is precisely the most thorough refutation of pantheism that can be found in Spiritual Science. And it would be a complete misunderstanding to accuse Spiritual Science of anything pantheistic, especially with regard to the idea of God. And can it be a reproach, dear attendees, if the spiritual researcher, out of those feelings that glow and blossom in his soul from the inspiration of Spiritual Science, when he speaks with deep reverence, when he timidly points to the infinity of the divine, whether from nature or from spiritual facts. How often is it said in our Spiritual Science circles: “In God we live, weave, and are.” And those who want to comprehend God with a concept do not know that all concepts cannot comprehend God, because all concepts are contained within God. In God we live, weave, and are. But at the same time, to recognize God as a being who, in a much higher sense, in a sense that cannot even be guessed at through Spiritual Science, in a much higher sense, than the human personality is, is made clear to people, I would say, naturally, especially through Spiritual Science. Religious concepts are not shifted by Spiritual Science in a pantheistic sense, but at most deepened. We live, weave, and are in God. And when we speak of God also speaking in our own hearts, in our own souls, this is the conviction of many religious people. And again and again it is said that this cannot be the case, that this is not an attempt to deify human beings.

[ 47 ] I have often used the parable: when I say that a drop taken from the sea is water, I say: Is the drop the sea? When I say that something divine speaks in individual human souls, a drop from the sea of the infinite divine, am I saying anything that deifies the individual human soul? Am I saying anything that brings nature together with God in a pantheistic way? Never, ever! And finally, when, out of certain basic feelings inspired by Spiritual Science, the name of God is often not mentioned but described in shy reverence, can this really be condemned from a religious point of view? I ask: is there not even one of the Ten Commandments that says, “Thou shalt not take the name of God in vain”? Could it not be an inspiration from Spiritual Science to faithfully fulfill this commandment if the name of God is not uttered every quarter of an hour?

[ 48 ] And what about the name and being of Christ? Dear friends, it is precisely Spiritual Science that can be said to make every effort to understand the being of Christ, and in doing so it never comes into conflict with what any religious confession develops on the basis of true foundations. But in this area, things are highly peculiar, highly strange. For example, if someone comes along and says they have this or that opinion, this or that view, this or that feeling about Christ, about Jesus, and then you say to them: Certainly, these feelings are fully justified; but Spiritual Science leads us to think many other things as well. We do not deny yours. We even accept yours. But we must add many other things.

[ 49 ] Precisely because Spiritual Science expands the spiritual gaze, the soul's eye, beyond the spiritual world, it is necessary, for example, to recognize in the being whom the Christian looks up to as his Christ not only the being who walked the earth, but also to bring this being into connection with the entire cosmos. And then many other things follow. But nothing what follows is anything other than what is added to what the religious person, the truly Christian religious person, has to say about Christ. And as a spiritual researcher, it never seems any different to me when someone attacks the concept of Christ Jesus from Spiritual Science than when someone comes and says: I have this or that to say about Christ; do you believe that? One says to him: Yes. “Yes, but you don't just believe this, you believe something else too!” He won't allow that. He is not content with one admitting what he represents, but forbids one to think of Christ as even more glorious, even greater than himself.

[ 50 ] Can it really be, dear friends, be heretical if Spiritual Science, based on its foundations, on the observation of what as spirit pervades the entire course of the Earth in relation to human and other development, if Spiritual Science comes to say: This entire Earth existence would have no meaning for the universe if the Mystery of Golgotha had not taken place within Earth existence? Yes, the spiritual researcher must say: if any inhabitants of distant worlds could look down on the earth and see what the earth is, they would see no meaning in the whole development of the earth if Christ had not lived and died and risen again on this earth. The event of Golgotha gives meaning and content to earthly life for the whole world. If they were to engage in spiritual research, they would see that the worship of Christ, the devotion to Christ, cannot be diminished by spiritual research, but on the contrary can only be increased.

[ 51] Time is pressing, and I cannot go into various misunderstandings that have spread about this or that view that is supposed to exist among anthroposophists — as they are called, although it would be better to avoid the word one should only speak of anthroposophy — about certain mental images that are said to have spread about this or that, about how this or that should be understood in the Bible. But, dear attendees, the point is that one can be a very good spiritual researcher without in any way sharing what what has been said in our society about the Gospels, based on certain principles, for those circles who want to know something about it. But if this is read in context, one will not find anywhere, for example, that I could ever have said the nonsense that repeated earthly lives can be proven from the Bible, because in the passage about Nathanael, I meant that when Christ says, “I saw you sitting under the fig tree,” he was referring to a previous incarnation where he had seen Nathanael sitting under the fig tree. I can only do one thing when these things are circulating around the world today as misunderstandings. I can only do one thing: marvel at how such things could have arisen from what was actually said. This is proof of how what is actually said, when passed from mouth to ear, is changed in the most varied ways and how the opposite, because in this case it is truly the opposite that has come out of what was said, what was said as true, is turned into the opposite.

[ 52 ] I do not want to get into refuting other misunderstandings that could easily be refuted. I just want to talk about one thing that could very easily be said, for example: Yes, you anthroposophists believe in the Bible. An anthroposophist will not yield to anyone who understands the Bible in terms of Bible worship and devotion to the Bible. He will try to understand it faithfully, even though, as is only natural, he may err in details. But if someone were to ask: Yes, how do you feel about the fact that there is nothing in the Bible about repeated earthly lives? And it could be that someone might say: He cannot believe in these repeated earthly lives for the simple reason because, in his opinion, there is a contradiction between the assumption of these repeated earthly lives—which spirits such as Lessing, for example, have professed—and what is written in the Bible.

[ 53 ] Well, dear audience, repeated earthly lives will be recognized as a scientific, a Spiritual Science fact. And regarding the relationship of such a Spiritual Science fact, which once had to be found, to the Bible, one will learn to think in the following way. Could one consider it possible that someone said: He does not believe that America exists because there is nothing in the Bible, in the Gospels, that says that America exists? Does the existence of America therefore contradict the Bible? Or does one believe that one is doing the Bible some disservice by saying: I find it completely in harmony with reverence for the Bible that America exists, even though it is not found in the Bible. Or does the Bible say anything about the Copernican worldview being correct? There have been people who, for this reason, have regarded the Copernican worldview as something wrong, something forbidden, but they have become accustomed to it. And today there will be no one who, standing on the real educational standpoint of his time, could say that he finds a contradiction between the teachings of Copernicus and the Bible, yet the teachings of Copernicus are not found in the Bible.

[ 54 ] The same can be said about the fact of Spiritual Science that there is nothing in the Bible that contradicts the recognition of the truths of salvation in the Bible, that, for example, the repeated earthly lives could not be found in the Bible, just as little as the fact that there is an America, or the fact that there is a world order that corresponds to the Copernican worldview in relation to space. One only has to look at these points from the right perspective. But then, when one looks at them from the right perspective, one may well remember and I always think, when someone says they do not want to acknowledge repeated earthly lives for the simple reason that it contradicts the Bible, I always have to think about how times change. There was a time when Galileo, because he had something to say that apparently, but only apparently, contradicted the sanctity of the Bible, was treated in a very peculiar, indeed well-known way. Or think of Giordano Bruno, how he was treated because he had something to say that could also be claimed to be unverifiable from the Bible. I am reminded of a priest who, a few years ago, became rector of a university from the theological faculty and who, in his rector's speech as a priest, said something like the following. He said: Times are changing, and with them the way people perceive recognized facts. In his time, Galileo—the priest gave his rector's speech about Galileo—in his time, Galileo was treated in the well-known manner; but now every true Christian realizes that the discovery of the glory of the structure of the universe, as made known by Galileo, only increases the glory and splendor of God and devotion to God, not diminished. That was also priestly, that was also Christian, indeed perhaps truly Christian spoken.

[ 55 ] All in all, from a point of view of Spiritual Science, I would like to say to you, dear attendees: From the perspective of what Christianity is, what Christianity is, of what Christ is to the world, the spiritual scientist, the anthroposophist, must think in such a way that he says: How little faith I actually find in those who believe that some discovery in the physical or spiritual realm could diminish the greatness that comes to us from the revelation of Christ! No, to the spiritual researcher, those who believe that some fact — even one as serious as repeated earthly lives — that through some fact discovered in the physical or spiritual realm, the splendor of the Christ event and the influence of Christ could be diminished for the Christian who believes this, let him also believe that the sun loses its power because it does not shine only on Europe but also on America. Whatever physical or spiritual facts may be discovered in the future, dear friends, the great truths of Christianity will outshine them. This is recognized by those approaches the Christ impulse and the whole Christian worldview from a spiritual research perspective. They have no fear. They are not faint-hearted and say: The splendor of Christianity could be diminished by some research. They know that those who think small about Christianity believe that it could be diminished by some discovery, because they considers what is to be thought about Christ to be so great that it could never be diminished in any way by any new discovery.

[ 56 ] It really is important that the various misunderstandings that exist about what the Dornach building is an outward sign of, I would say an outward dwelling, that these various misunderstandings are dispelled. I don't want to say anything else about the Dornach building itself today other than that it is intended to be nothing more than an artistic expression of what is inspired in our senses and feelings when we have taken the living spirit of Spiritual Science, spiritual research, and anthroposophy into our souls. Therefore, this building is not intended to represent the ideas of Spiritual Science in the form of symbols or allegories. That is not the case at all.

[ 57 ] When you look at this building, dear friends, you will find that this building has the peculiarity that there is nothing mysterious about it, that there is not a single symbol in it, in fact not a single sign, nothing of an allegorical nature or anything like that. This should be completely absent from this building, precisely because of the whole nature of this building.

[ 58 ] If someone were to say: Yes, but you have to be familiar with Spiritual Science if you want to understand what you see there. Yes, dear attendees, but the art of the Dornach building has that in common with every other art form. Take the Sistine Madonna, take the wonderful image of the Mother with the infant Jesus: I think that if a Turk who has never heard of Christianity — not to mention a Chinese person — stands in front of the Sistine Madonna, then you have to explain to him what is there, and even then he will not be able to understand it immediately from his feelings alone. So it goes without saying that you have to be inside the whole stream, the whole stream of Spiritual Science, if you want to understand its art, just as you have to be inside Christianity if you want to understand the Sistine Madonna, for example. But if you disregard this, then you are tempted not to express ideas from Spiritual Science symbolically, as I said, symbolically, but rather the underlying fact of our worldview that Spiritual Science is something that—as is evident from the words I have spoken here—touches the inner being of the human being so vividly and powerfully that abilities that otherwise lie dormant within him, including artistic abilities, are awakened. And since Spiritual Science is something new—not just a new name for something, but something truly new—just as today's natural science is something new compared to medieval natural science, then [gap] that is also something new, just as Gothic art stood alongside ancient art as a new art form, and just as people approached it with the opinion that only ancient art should be valid, so naturally they reviled Gothic art, just as they reviled a newer style that arose from a newer way of feeling. If one wants to accept only what has been handed down to us today.

[ 59 ] Everywhere in Dornach, attempts were made to accommodate in a natural way, in part the material, and in part what arises in a meaningful but not symbolic way. If one understands this, one can say quite strange things about the fact that a double-domed building rises up there, that next to it stands such a strange building, which ends in a long tube that is shaped.

[ 60 ] Yes, [with] a boiler house, [one] is tempted to design it artistically using the most modern material, concrete. Concrete was taken into account. And on the other hand, everything that is inside was taken into account. If someone [comes] and interprets these forms symbolically, that there are all kinds of symbols inside, well, then he is just someone who is crazy, a speculator who dreams, a fantasist, not someone who sees what is there, who sees: this and that should happen in there. Just as the nut kernel develops, and the nut kernel develops a shell, and this shell is formed in such a way that it is appropriate for the nut kernel: a real artist wants to form a shell for what is inside in what he builds, a natural shell, so that one can see what is inside in the outer form. That is what has been attempted. And those who want to judge it and don't find it beautiful – one can understand them, because one has to get used to these things first. But they could try this: imagine another chimney, like the ones they make today, placed next to it, a real red one that goes up high – and then compare these things. After all, everything in the world is relative.

[ 61 ] Of course, we know very well, very dear attendees, that what is being attempted with the building in Dornach is a beginning, even a very imperfect beginning. But it should be the beginning of something that must be desired as a new architectural style and must take its place in the spiritual development of humanity, just as the ancient, Gothic, and other architectural styles have taken their place. There were also people who said: Yes, you have made seven columns, you see, seven columns on each side of the main room. You are indeed a rather superstitious society. You build on the number seven.

[ 62 ] Yes, someone might also find it superstitious that there are seven colors in the rainbow! Then you would have to find nature superstitious for doing that. But when someone talks about these seven columns, one should not focus on the number at first, but rather see what new thing has been attempted here. Otherwise, it is always the case that when one column stands next to another, they are always the same. In our columns, the capitals are conceived in continuous development; the second column is different from the first, the third is different again, and one emerges from the other, creating a progressive organism that is as internally necessary as there are seven tones up to the seventh, and the octave is the repetition. This came about quite naturally. We could not do anything to make it seven, because in the seven columns, which develop from capital to capital, the seventh is a conclusion, just as in the seven colors of the rainbow, starting with red, violet is a conclusion and beyond that one can no longer find a color.

[ 63 ] And so one will find that nowhere has anything been worked out from ideas, from symbolism, from the mysterious, but everywhere an attempt has been made to strive for the artistic in forms and colors, but in such a way that the entire building could provide the right envelope for what is to be done within it. This necessitates the following, for example, and this in turn is related to the entire form of the building: Isn't it true that buildings have walls. But with walls that have been built up to now, we are accustomed to seeing something in the walls that encloses the space, that is shaped in such a way that it encloses the space. Our forms from the inside are such that one does not have the feeling that the space is enclosed by the form, but rather one reckons with the sensation, with the forms, and goes out into infinity. The walls are shaped in such a way that they cancel themselves out, as it were, so that we remain connected with nature and with the whole world. The wall breaks through itself through its shapes.

[ 64 ] These are all things that must occur at some point in human development, because human development must be a totality of the most comprehensive details. And just as in individual human life, not all individual stages of life can be the same, just as each individual stage of life brings something new to human development, so it is also in historical development; and one can go along with historical development if one can gain an understanding of it.

[ 65 ] And I mean, dear audience, that I certainly did not want to convince anyone today with these brief reflections. I only wanted to achieve what I emphasized at the beginning: I want to inspire, not convince. There can be no question of anyone being convinced in any way by my discussions today. But I would like to emphasize this: The way in which one finds one's way into a worldview depends on one's habits of thinking. And anyone who is familiar with the intellectual development of humanity knows that truths have always had to develop through obstacles and through prejudices.

[ 66 ] Just think, without making any comparison – of course, in all modesty, I am only pointing out the similarity between today's endeavors in Spiritual Science and the scientific endeavors of the past, as I have indicated – just think how Giordano Bruno had to stand before humanity, before a humanity that had always believed: Up there is the blue vault of heaven, which encloses space. And now Giordano Bruno had to tell people: There is nothing where the blue vault of heaven is; you yourselves create it with your perceptions. It is only your perception that makes the sky be there; but space extends out into infinity, and infinite worlds are in infinite space. What Giordano Bruno did for sensory perception at that time, Spiritual Science has to do for the spiritual-soul and for the temporal. In relation to the spiritual-soul, there is also a kind of firmament between birth or, let's say, conception and death. But this firmament is in truth just as little a reality as the blue firmament above; but only because ordinary human cognitive abilities can only see as far as birth or conception and death, people believe that there is a boundary, just as they believed that the firmament was a boundary. But just as the firmament is not a boundary, but rather infinite worlds in infinite space, so we must see through expanded abilities [beyond knowledge] of birth and death how temporal infinity, with the development of the temporal-soul in infinity, are ever-recurring forms of human life and, in our time, repeated earthly lives. Things are no different in the spiritual realm than in the natural sciences. One might therefore ask how it is that so many misunderstandings are encountered on so many sides of Spiritual Science. And here I must say, if I may express my personal opinion, that I find the reasons why Spiritual Science encounters so much opposition and misunderstanding to be partly objective and partly subjective.

[ 67 ] Among the objective reasons, dear audience, I would like to highlight the following above all: Spiritual Science is something that requires the most serious immersion, a long, long, serious work, a work that is certainly linked to many events and also many disappointments. But that is basically the case with any work of knowledge, and the threads cannot easily be untangled by an external observation, but which are nevertheless, for those who look more closely, deliberately and appropriately interwoven. But there is one thing, and this seems to me to be essential if one wants to find the objective reasons for the misunderstandings of Spiritual Science, it seems to be common practice to say: To understand a clock – yes, you have to learn how the wheels work together. That requires some effort. But to understand human beings, you don't have to learn anything, even though human beings are the most wonderful thing in the world that we have before us, and also the most complicated. It is not always acknowledged that you first have to learn a great deal in order to understand human beings. Therein lies, I would say, the easily recognizable objective reason.

[ 68 ] Spiritual Science is difficult. But because human beings are infinitely more perfect beings than a clock, one would actually have to objectively expect that Spiritual Science cannot be grasped as easily as the description of a clockwork mechanism. But someone who has not studied mechanics will not want to describe a clockwork mechanism. With Spiritual Science, one is easily tempted to pass judgment based on the mental images one has already formed. Basically, it seems to me that these are the objective reasons.

[ 69 ] Then there are subjective reasons. And these subjective reasons lie precisely in what I have already explained. People generally find it difficult to reconcile the mental images they have already formed with mental images that they encounter in the world, mental images that do not even need to deny what has already been imagined, but only add something to what has already been imagined.

[ 70 ] This has always been the case with truth. What is contradicted are habits of thought. And from this point of view, if one seeks the subjective reasons for the misunderstandings of Spiritual Science, one must say: they lie on the same ground as why the Copernican doctrine was rejected by the whole world when it first appeared. It was simply something new. Why other things have been rejected is understandable and completely comprehensible. But truth must prevail in the world, and it does prevail in the world. Therefore, those who are interwoven with all that Spiritual Science is and what it can inspire may feel, based on experience, that truth always works its way through the finest cracks in the rock of prejudice that people have erected. Those who are involved in Spiritual Science and its inspirations, and who observe the history of spiritual human life, may say: It may still be possible to hate Spiritual Science today. But those who hate it will at most be able to cause others who are devoted to them and swear by their word to hate it with them. But never in the world has any truth been eradicated by being hated.

[ 71 ] One can also revile the truth. But the truth acquires a sense of its own value in the soul of those who have connected with it, and the revilements can be endured.

[ 72 ] The truth can be misunderstood and misinterpreted at any time, but there will always be more and more people who recognize and understand it correctly. And even if what Spiritual Science wants to say in our time is not recognized today, is misunderstood and misjudged — the time will come when it will become part of the spiritual development of humanity under all circumstances. The truth can even be suppressed, but it cannot be destroyed. It must be born again and again, no matter how often it is suppressed. That is its peculiarity.

[ 73 ] For truth is deeply and vividly connected with the human soul and is deeply rooted in the human soul, so that it may seem, if one now considers truth itself for a moment as a sensual being, a living being, that the human soul and truth are sisters, belonging together like sisters. And even if they develop some kind of discord for times and places, some kind of misunderstanding arises between them, there must always be recognition, there must always be mutual love between the soul and the truth. For they are sisters, sisters who have their origin in a common source, and who in love always remember their common origin, the origin that we must call: the world spirit that pervades the whole world, that carries and creates and sustains everything. Yes, soul and truth are founded in the spiritual, and even if they could separate for a while, there will always be places and times when the two sisters will recognize their common origin in the spirit that pervades and permeates the world, which Spiritual Science seeks to explore in an honest, sincere, and appropriate manner through spiritual paths.