Donate books to help fund our work. Learn more→

The Rudolf Steiner Archive

a project of Steiner Online Library, a public charity

Anthroposophy has Something to Add to Modern Sciences
GA 73

10 October 1917, Zurich

VI. The spiritual scientific make-up of psychology

From the foundations of psychology to the vital questions concerning the boundaries of human existence

It is understandable that in this scientific age people want to turn to a scientific psychology, especially with regard to the major riddles of life and the world, the riddles of the soul. However, if one is able to sum up the present situation in scientific psychology it has to be said that it is going through a kind of death, for its traditions come from ancient times and whilst it is meant to be in many ways a science, without bias, people are in fact working with those traditions.

Speaking about the scientific basis of higher insight here the day before yesterday I mentioned the name of a present-day philosopher, Richard Wahle. 100Wahle, Richard (1857–1935) Das Ganze der Philosophie und ihr Ende. Ihre Vermächtnisse an die Theologie, Physiologie, Aesthetik und Staatspädagogik, Vienna and Leipzig 1894. Ueber den Mechanismus des geistigen Lebens, Vienna and Leipzig 1906. He is not very widely known. Yet his views are extraordinarily significant, especially what he says about modern scientific psychology in his books. I would say that the approach used by this philosopher is of symptomatic importance especially for those who are able to think scientifically today. I won’t say that he is someone likely to have much of an influence, nor that he has actually had much influence, but his approach is important from the symptomatic point of view. In many respects it could tell us the way in which we have to think today to be in accord with the demands generally made in science. I am therefore able to say that on the one hand the spiritual science of which we are speaking here can agree with what such a philosopher says with regard to psychology, although on the other hand, as we shall see today, it has to be the absolute opposite of such ideas. This philosopher is well versed in the way of thinking and the attitude to research which people can have now if they are highly educated in today’s scientific way. That is why anyone who tries to approach the life of the psyche with the ideas that are current in science today will of necessity come to realize that the psychology which is generally on offer is dying.

In external terms this is evident from the fact that this philosophical psychology is gradually disappearing again from professorial chairs at universities, whilst at the same time there is a growing desire to put people who think in natural scientific ways, from physiology or another natural science, on the chairs previously held by philosophers. It is hoped by many that the enigmas of the psyche, which earlier on were to be investigated by a specific psychology, may be solved by considering the physiology of the brain, the physiology of nerve structures and the like.

If we really go into all justifiable natural science to be found in psychology, we realize that in the usual psychology people speak of many things that really can no longer be said to be valid ideas today. They speak of forming ideas, of thinking as such, of feeling, of will impulses, memory, attention, and so on. And if we try in all honesty to go into the things this psychology offers in this respect, to meet the needs of the human soul, the vitality the human soul needs, all we have in the end are really just words. And we have to say that if we consider the historical evolution of human cultural life we can say to ourselves—I can only mention it here, for today’s lecture would be too long if I were to give the proof—that in earlier times, when those concepts of thinking, of memory, attention and so on were first created, people had very different ideas about natural phenomena, ideas that would indeed serve to understand the inner life in a way adequate to those earlier times. But things that were established then and have become like spectres that still haunt psychology, turn into mere word shell, mere word, in the light of the scientific thinking which all human beings have today, albeit subconsciously, if they have made any effort at all in culture and academic learning.

Something else also comes into this. For centuries, we may reasonably say, psychology has developed in the academic caste, and within this academic caste has assumed the form we get today in the usual lectures or publications on psychology.

Someone wanting to learn something out of the fullness of life about these most important existential questions which after all culminate in questions as to the divine nature of the cosmic order and as to immortality—someone seeking information concerning these questions in modern psychology will be disappointed. Franz Brentano,101See note 18. a serious and profound investigator of the psyche who died here in Zurich last year, made great efforts to gain insight in psychology, but remained caught up in the old ideas about the psyche that have become mere words. He said a very important thing: If we look at modern psychology it will be found that psychologists think they can try and establish insights concerning the development of ideas, concerning feelings and will impulses, and also concerning attention, love and hate; yet if they seek to stick to natural science they will not go beyond this circle. Franz Brentano went on to say that however much one might say about these elementary aspects of the inner life, none of it could replace the great question which Plato and Aristotle put long ago: whether it is possible to discover something about the part of our inner life that remains when the mortal bodies which hold that inner life pass away in death. This is what an acknowledged expert in modern psychology said.

In the science of the spirit which takes its orientation from anthroposophy, the aim is to achieve a renewal of psychology on the basis of what I said here the day before yesterday. The aim is to go beyond mere word shells and investigate the reality of the inner life. The way this is done does, of course, still have to take fully into account today the objections and opposition that may come from conventional psychologists. One must be able to wrestle with everything that exists in the recognized approach to psychology. On the other hand the conditions I have outlined for the renewal of psychology should lead to knowledge of the psyche, a view of the psyche that can now truly feed the souls of striving humanity in a much wider sense and can—to use a commonplace term—be popular in the best and highest sense of the word.

Psychology must be taken out of the academic caste where, to put it metaphorically, it has become guilty of falling into abstractions. These may be brilliant, but they cannot in any way provide psychologists with insights into the boundary issues of human existence which justifiably are of burning interest in the inner life of man.

Human thinking has changed completely compared to earlier times, when the ideas used in psychology which have now become words originated. Because of this, the new psychology must also let go of the starting points people wanted to use in their desire to continue further and further into the realm of the psyche. There must be new starting points. These are such that having come to them we can only base ourselves on premises like those of which I spoke the day before yesterday, and that means remaining true to the way of thinking that has been trained in the natural sciences. We cannot simply ask: What is an idea? We cannot simply want to observe what ideas are, what thinking or will are, or what memory is, and so on. Just as modern natural science in laboratory and clinical practice starts from entirely different premises than the natural science of earlier times, so psychology must relate to the realities of life which, however, must first be distilled out, I would say, from the wholeness of human life.

Initially there are two moments in human life where the newer psychology should come in. From there it can then go back again to concepts of idea, will and so on, so that they in turn will gain full soul value. These two starting points or moments are, however, most difficult to observe, truly no easier to observe than many a process in nature that will only reveal itself when one uses carefully prepared methods and experiments. These moments flit past in human life, and their nature is such, in a way, that it is impossible to take hold of them in conscious awareness. We must first train our minds, as it were, so that we can catch hold of them. They are the moments of going to sleep and waking up.

Going to sleep and waking up are the moments in human life when the whole state of consciousness changes and the human being moves from one state of soul into another that is radically opposite. I need not say much to show that these brief moments are difficult to observe. For when we go to sleep our conscious awareness goes, and we therefore do not observe the moment of going to sleep. When we wake up, we can sense that we are tearing ourselves away from some kind of life in progress; but anyone who tries to pick up experiences he had in sleep with the conscious mind will very soon and very easily discover that he fails in this.

Here we can only train soul observation, using the means I briefly referred to the day before yesterday and about which I am now going to say more, to observe the moments of going to sleep and waking up. This training must involve a degree of strengthening, greater power given first of all to the life of ideas itself, and then also to the life of will. But the inner processes, subtle processes in the psyche, that will give such strength and power to the life of will, do differ quite considerably from anything we are used to in our everyday inner life.

The other day I called the process which strengthens the life of ideas meditation. If you use methods given in my Knowledge of the Higher Worlds and also in my Occult Science and other books to let ideas and conscious awareness be present in the mind, thinking not just in the usual sense but resting on your thinking, doing so more and more, you let your thinking enter into the soul and your soul into your thinking in a completely different way than you usually do. You then strengthen the life of ideas to such effect—as I said, details of the methods are given in my books—that you can form ideas in a way that is as lively and active as you normally know only when your mind is involved with sensory perceptions of the outside world.

Goethe had an inkling, even if initially it was only an inkling, of this way of forming ideas—having taken up something Johann Christian Heinroth102 Goethe’s essay ‘Bedeutende Foerdemis durch ein einziges geistreiches Wort’ (1823). See note 10. Goethe received Johann Christian Heinroth’s Lehrbuch der Anthropologie (Leipzig 1822) on 29 October 1822. In his Annals for the year he wrote: ‘Heinroth’s anthropology gave me insights into my approach to the study of nature just when I was endeavouring to produce my natural scientific journal.’ had said, for Goethe considered his own thinking too be too object-bound. He was able to say that he believed he was gradually able to think in such a living way that the inner strength and inner intensity of this thinking was equivalent to the mental activity which otherwise only exists when we consider the natural world outside us with our eyes, use our ears to follow events in the natural world, and so on.

It is possible to strengthen the life of ideas so much and be so intensive in this that we may say: This life of ideas itself becomes a form of direct vision; the activity is like that of direct vision; and the life of the senses is taken into the sphere of ideas in such a way that the senses are not involved although the vitality of their life is retained.

This is one aspect—strengthening the life of ideas. As you progress further and further in this a power of observation will indeed develop which is unknown in our ordinary state of mind. We need this if we are to investigate the moment of going to sleep and that of waking up in the way in which we investigate objects and events in everyday life using the methods of natural science.

It will also be necessary to train the will in a certain way. This can only be done by self control as we pay attention to something in life that is usually little regarded. In ordinary life we go along, accompanying anything we perceive in the world outside with our inner life experience. Now it is necessary to go beyond this to something else. We must turn our attention to the fact that our inner life is changing, being transformed, developing year by year, month by month and indeed day by day and hour by hour. We do not normally bring this development process in the life of the psyche into the sphere of the will. We let it flow on. With a little bit of self education we do take care to get rid of habitual faults and acquire certain virtues, abilities and so on. Something very different will have to come into our life, however, if we are to gain the self control of the will of which I am speaking. People must be able to gain the inner insight that there is something in them which they can bring into the will, I might say, bringing it into the will in such a way that self cultivation, self control will look very difficult to them, yet at the same time also appear as desirable as only the acts of will relating to wholly inevitable drives in human life normally are.

Let us look at this from another point of view. There are today particularly many people who consider themselves capable—well, maybe I am putting this in somewhat radical terms, but you’ll find such a radical view justifiable if you think more deeply about our present time—of reforming the whole world. They have ideas, as it were, as to what should happen so that people could live together happily, the social order in life was right, and so on. An enormous number of programmes exist in this area. In reality more or less everyone is a kind of reformer in his mind as soon as he begins to think about the outside world; it is just that the world does not give them the opportunity to bring their reforms or perhaps also their revolutionary ideas to realization.

Here indeed the will impulse, the desire extends to the world outside. We must know, however, that there is something in the human being to which intentions and impulses may be directed just as well that will take the individual from one period of life to another, and indeed just from one week to the other. We must know that in no way do things get going on their own in the human being, the way he mostly wills it, but that human beings are able to use their will to follow their development in time. And when the will comes in with such method in that area, the way I have described it in the books I have mentioned, you get that inner strength, the inner vision, a direct vision of the will element which we will never gain in our relationship to the outside world. You get the direct vision of the will which has to be added to the strengthening in the life of ideas I have just mentioned if you are to be able to observe the moments of going to sleep and waking up.

However, before you come to investigate those moments of going to sleep and waking up, having strengthened your inner life, you come to realize that the concepts humanity has today, and these cannot be the concepts of the old way of looking at nature, will only give you a view of the life of ideas that leads human beings to non-reality, their feeling life into confusion and their life of will to incomprehensibility.

Essentially what we have to say has also been said by the philosopher I mentioned when he spoke of philosophy having come to an end, of philosophy dissolving, handing over to physiology, and the like. He already had a feeling, though it was not entirely clear, about the concepts we are able to have today, concepts that are infinitely useful in the study of the natural world around us and for introducing to human life what is really the most essential content of a new civilization. He felt that these concepts, useful as they are when applied to outside things, do not answer the question, when we want to study the soul: What are the ideas we have of things? But it is because of them that in the life of ideas we can directly come to the ‘I think, therefore I am not,’103See Rudolf Steiner on the subject in the lecture given on 8 October 1918 (in this volume). and discover the non-reality of the inner life.

We come to realize that the more we enter into the life of ideas, the less are we able to say what the soul is if we consider the life of ideas merely the way it is in ordinary life and not in the way of which I have been speaking. We come to realize that the life of feelings we know in the ordinary life of the psyche is confused, and that the life of the will is wholly incomprehensible. Hence the interesting phenomenon that it is exactly people who think in the natural scientific way as they write works on psychology that are highly significant today believe they are able to say something about the life of ideas when they are in fact considering the physiology of the brain. They then reach a point, however, where they say to themselves that the physiology of the brain does not determine anything. Read the relevant chapters in Theodor Ziehen’s book on physiological psychology104See note 72. and you’ll find that what I have been saying is true for a renowned natural philosopher of our time.

We have to say, therefore, that this natural scientific way of thinking more or less shows what Schopenhauer also did not perceive, or only half perceived, though he had an inkling of it. This is that the will is something we cannot reach with the ideas of recent times, and that it is something incomprehensible.

It is a good preparation for the newer kind of psychology if we understand this non-reality of the soul in the life of ideas, this confusion in our life of feeling, this incomprehensibility of acts of will. Having gained clarity in this way—paradoxical though this may sound, but we have after all gained clarity about one thing—we can penetrate further. We can then use the thinking which has been made more acute, stronger, through meditation, and the life of the will that has subjected itself to self control to pay real attention to the moment, let us say, first of all of waking up. The moment of waking up can then enter into the field of observation in the soul in a quite specific way. We will experience something when considering the waking-up process that cannot be experienced in an untrained inner life. If we have gained the necessary calm by training in the way I have mentioned, we will be able to establish immediately after waking up that the whole of the inner life which was there in the unconscious on waking up has gone away. Only it does not have one quality, this life which the soul has in the time from going to sleep to waking up—it does not evoke memory of itself. You realize this when a significant moment arises: All the time you were asleep you let the soul flow in the same life in which is also flows when you are awake; but this flow of the soul in sleep does not become imprinted into your power of memory. It is therefore forgotten as you wake up. This is the essential point.

Memory is important in everyday life—as I said the day before yesterday. Forgetting is equally important, with the soul’s experience such that it can also forget what it has lived through. It is important for the development of the soul principle, for its continued flow between birth and death, and so on. Indeed, it is only if we are able to observe the moment of waking-up in this way that we get an idea of the significance which sleep really has in the life of the human soul. We come to realize that our life could not continue if it were wholly filled with things that become memories and that the memory principle loses its power to let our life flow on. We need to fall asleep in order that we may forget what we live through in the time when we are asleep. Our ordinary, everyday inner life will feed the soul and give it life if it is forgotten, not if it is remembered. Remembering things depletes the soul. Forgetting restores the vital energies of the soul.

This is how you get a definite insight into the vital process which is reflected in our waking up. And with this you perceive the inner life, though it really takes the form of a review in reverse. But now the ordinary conscious awareness was there between going to sleep and waking up is not poured out over it. You gain tremendously much in thus being able to perceive the inner life of the soul, for it will give you the basis for a level of understanding.

No one can truly grasp what it means to say: I form an idea, and what it means to say: I develop a thought in my soul, unless he is actually able to observe the moment of waking. For when we progress from merely being awake, merely living our life in the waking state, to active thinking, to developing an idea of a thought, this is qualitatively, though to a lesser degree, exactly the same inner process as waking up. You need to strengthen the transition from the sleeping to the waking state in order to know the waking up, and you have then created a basis for yourself for the principle that will answer the question: What actually happens in my psyche when I form an idea? The power we develop in the soul when we form an idea is the same as the power we must develop, though much more powerfully so, when we wake up. When we wake up, it is the unconscious mind which does it. And what the unconscious does as we wake up comes to conscious awareness if we make the inner effort that lets us think and form ideas in conscious awareness and with a will.

Here we get a quite specific view concerning the way in which ideas are formed. The mere shells of words that have come from an earlier psychology are given real content again. We realize that forming ideas is a weaker form of waking up that comes whilst we are in the waking state. This is an important insight. If we connect this insight into the nature of ideation with the nature of the waking-up process, it becomes possible to make the ideation in our everyday life, which otherwise really takes us into the non-reality of inner life, into something that is real. By connecting ideation with waking up, it becomes possible to relate to a factual element that does not depend on us.

Having made the connection with this waking-up process and thus got to know the nature of ideation, let us turn to the moment of going to sleep. Just as meditation is a special help in exploring the moment of waking up, so self control over the will is a special help in exploring the moment of going to sleep. Control of the will makes it possible to enter into the process, observing our going to sleep, truly observing how something happens as we enter into sleep that is similar to the forgetting that comes on waking up, becoming aware that memory of the inner life is extinguished during sleep. Otherwise we may always be in dispute, saying that somehow the body is always involved in what the soul experiences in sleep. If we are able to grasp the moment of going to sleep consciously, by controlling the will, we find that we enter into the same inner life which we leave when we wake up, but that we enter into it in such a way that all possibility of perceiving things through the senses comes to an end. We then come to realize what it means to say that on going to sleep we enter into a realm that lies beyond the senses. We come to know this because we find that on thus entering into the other realm we experience something that cannot come to conscious awareness in the kind of conscious awareness we usually have in our inner life. This is bound to the organization, dependent on the organization, between birth and death. We find that we become independent on the organization, something about which illustrious people may be in dispute for ever. The matter needs to be observed; we then find that on going to sleep we enter into the realm that lies beyond the senses.

And we then see the difference which exists between the inner life when we leave it on waking up and the inner life into which we enter on going to sleep. They are the same in so far as they are supersensible by nature; but by means of the observation I have characterized we note an essential difference. An analogy will help you to see this.

The difference is like the way a child differs from an old person. Both are human beings, but they are at different stages of life, different age levels. In the same way both forms of inner life are supersensible by nature—the inner life from which we rise on waking up and the inner life into which we enter on going to sleep. However, the inner life into which we enter on going to sleep is the ‘child’, and the inner life from which we waken is the one which has grown ‘older’. We follow a road from going to sleep to waking up. The inner life changes so that—no analogy is ever perfect—the element into which we enter is similar to the one from which we wake the way a child is similar to a very old person, both being human. This is a subtle difference that has to be noted. It provides something of a basis on which we can come closer to an important element in our investigation of the inner life, and that is the life of feelings.

The life of feelings, a mere collection of words in our customary psychology today, can only be truly understood if we study it on the basis of which I have been speaking, that is after we have come to perceive the supersensible inner life by observing the moments of waking up and going to sleep. There is one other important aspect of going to sleep which we must consider before we come to the life of feelings. We have to ask: What is it, really, that changes in a specific way in the inner life as we go to sleep? What is the effect of leaving the reality perceptible to the senses on going to sleep and entering into supersensible reality? It is the transformation of the will. And the process which is a more powerful one when I go to sleep also happens to a lesser degree when I resolve something in my will. We cannot grasp the will unless we do so on the basis of the going-to-sleep process.

The reality of the will in the depth of our inner life is wholly beyond comprehension in our life of ideas, just like anything that happens during sleep. This is why you do not find anything about the will in natural scientific works on psychology. It cannot be grasped because the life of ideas does not go that far. But if we know the process of going to sleep, we know that our ordinary inner life becomes submerged in an act of will, though to a lesser degree than it does when we go to sleep. Every resolution is a lesser form of going to sleep that happens when we are fully awake.

If we keep apart these two realities—waking up and going to sleep—one of which becomes explicable in relation to the life of ideas, the other with reference to the life of the will, which becomes explicable if we consider the process of going to sleep, we can begin to take a real look at the enigma presented by our life of feeling. A possibility arises of bringing clarity into the confusion which we usually see in the life of feelings. How do we bring clarity into something? By means of perceptive insight. There is nothing else. I could bring detailed epistemological proof, but that would take us too far today. With perceptive insight, clarity is brought into something if there is a clear and real distinction between the one who perceives, the one who is gaining insight, and the object perceived.

This is what makes the life of feelings always confusing for our ordinary life in the psyche. In everyday life we do not need to distinguish between two things unless we wish to gain perceptive insight into the ordinary life of feelings. These are two things of intrinsic value and they are opposite to one another, just as we are opposite to the world we perceive outside through the senses—world perceived through the senses there, human being there. In the same sense two things are opposites in the life of feelings. Which are they?

We can only perceive them, subject and object, if we are able to investigate them on the basis of ideas gained in the way I have been describing. We then come to perceive who it is who actually feels, and we discover what can actually be perceived in the life of feelings. The remarkable fact emerges that the one who feels is always the one—and this does seem a paradox—whom we have not yet lived through. If we feel something now, at this moment, it is the human being in us whom we are only now beginning to live and will continue to live tomorrow, the day after tomorrow, next year, and until we die. When we feel, the subject, which is otherwise unknown, is our life, which is in us from the moment when we have the feeling to our death. And we perceive the life we have lived through from birth to the moment when we feel—a vast prospect in investigation, that the life of feeling lies in this starting point.

You can do a number of things—I would not talk about these things in this way if I had not done these investigations in many different fields; a large number of investigations and challenges lie in this field—you can do a number of things to prove what I have just been saying in a wholly natural-scientific way. You only need to take sensibly written biographies and relate them to the requirement I have just mentioned. Take a sensible biography of Goethe. Consider Goethe in 1790; study him the way he was from 1790 until his death in 1832. Try and get a clear picture of the specific things Goethe went through from 1790 until his death, and consider the way in which it would have been perceptible in Goethe’s life of feelings in 1790. Then consider his life, his inner life, the way the outside world touched him, from his birth in 1749 to 1790. And in getting a clear idea of how the Goethe from 1790 to 1832, who was already there, inwardly perceived during one moment in 1790 what he had lived through earlier—every feeling. Every feeling we have is such that our future essential nature perceives our past essential nature.

You can also do other things. You might try and develop an eye for people whom you saw die, where you had the opportunity to share their life, perhaps for a short time, from a certain point in time until their death. Try and bring this clearly to mind—how they lived then and what their human nature was. And then try and get a clear picture—you’ll always be surprised by the result—for instance of the situation being one where death was approaching, the actual character, of how the essential nature was poured out over the life of feelings.

These are two possible ways. Other things become apparent in a genuinely natural-scientific way, though this comes close to the most profound and inward interests of human nature when you investigate what I have so briefly referred to as the life of feelings. The life of feelings, the essential nature of feeling, will then not be the empty shell of words which we have in ordinary scientific psychology today. If you want to simply inwardly observe feeling in all its confusion, you cannot in fact observe anything. Just as you cannot scientifically observe water unless you separate it into hydrogen and oxygen, so you cannot observe the life of feelings in a scientific way unless you are able to separate it into what the human being was before he had the feeling and in what comes afterwards, unless you know the active principle which lies deep down in there like a seed, just as the seed is active in this year’s plant for the plant that will grow next year.

Studying the life of feelings in this way you will find that your ideas come to be filled with real strength. And you will gain a psychology for the life of feelings which is alive from the very beginning, which we live everywhere, and which we fill with life ourselves. And if we know that anything we feel in a moment does not exist in isolation, then the moments in our inner life will also be connected with the whole process of our development from birth to death. Future and past in our development on earth will then come together in every single feeling, even the least of them. In the same way, though it is best to do so only after investigating the life of feelings, you can, under the conditions I have given, turn to the life of ideas. The results will be even more surprising, the reason being that people will consider them paradoxical because it is something they do not know, neither according to the ideas which arise in the ordinary way in our inner life nor according to the ideas held in modern science.

If you discover that every forming of an idea, of a thought, is a attenuated form of waking up, and if in your inner observation you bring together the active element in the forming of ideas and the waking-up process, then connecting a mental image with waking up, which is a true activity, you enter into a current in your vision that carries you along, showing you that waking up, too, is an attenuated form of something more powerful. This other, more powerful element which you then perceive just as if, having seen the image of a person, you then meet the real person, is the insight that the forming of an idea and every waking up is a recapitulation, attenuated to become an image, of something we may call entering into life on earth through conception and birth.

The thread you have thus spun simply widens out as an inner connection has been made in your perception between waking up and forming an idea. The power gained in this way widens out, so that you do not observe the two in isolation but in their whole context. It widens out because you realize that in forming ideas as such we do not live in reality but have an image. Yet the very insight that we have an image, something that is not real, gives us the strength to come to something that is real, and we find that every time the forming of an idea or waking up is a process of entering into the physical world, a process attenuating reality to image, going through the process of putting on a physical body, of going through conception and birth.

You then realize where something comes from that has occupied the minds of serious investigators for a very long time. If you make the effort to consider what has occupied human minds from the time of Locke, Hume and Bacon, you will find that these investigators were never in a position to form adequate ideas about the way the life of ideas relates to the real world outside which we perceive through the senses. They were unable to find an answer to the question as to how, when we observe the reality outside, using the senses, the idea which is supposed to correspond to that reality enters into the human mind.

If one has the preconditions of which I have spoken, you’ll realize that there is a problem about this question as a question. I might characterize this as follows. Let us assume someone makes the observation that carbon dioxide is exhaled by human beings. If he then assumes that the carbon dioxide comes from the lung and has therefore been produced there, he has the wrong idea. It is equally wrong if a superficial view, which is of course quite natural for our ordinary inner life, leads to the thought that the power to form ideas comes from the body. It certainly does not come from the body!

Whatever may be active there in the body, in the inner life, it is only image attenuated to image on entering into the life of the senses. And the power we have in us when we form ideas is the same power—this is what you will discover—that was active before you ever came in contact with the world perceived through the senses at your conception. It is the power which shines across through time, from the period before birth and indeed conception. This is thinking in us, and not we ourselves in the here and now. This is why scientists were unable to discover how the forming of ideas comes to human beings. Because of this we also find that the forming of ideas is something unreal. From birth, or conception, the forming of ideas has transformed its reality into bodily life. The spiritual, supersensible principle active in us which can only show itself as we wake up and as we go to sleep, when we are not in our bodies, now lives powerfully in the forming of ideas. Gaining insight into the way ideas are formed we are taken to life before birth, to life outside the body. This is done in a wholly scientific way which we have learned to use in modern natural science.

There is no need to malign the more recent science of the spirit with its anthroposophical orientation by saying that it rehashes old ideas taken from Buddhism and the like. It does not do so. Instead, inner strength is gained in the life of the psyche by consistently adhering to the natural scientific way of thinking. However, being thus consistent it takes us beyond what natural science itself can give. When we truly grasp the process of forming ideas, we see it to be image, an attenuated image of what we lived through before we were in a physical body, when we were in the world that lies beyond the physical before we were born or conceived.

From the world of ideas a tangible bridge is created to the ability to grasp the supersensible and immortal human being. The boundary questions in our existence are found if we grasp the elementary phenomena of the inner life in the right way. It is this which truly matters.

We can then also observe the following in more detail. How is it, really, with this pre-birth life that has faded to become ideation? We may ask ourselves: What would happen if what is not real but mere image in ideation were truly to enter into the life of the body, not as image but as reality?

Now we come to something that is highly significant. Taken out of its spiritual scientific context it will of course seem rather odd at first, and I’ll therefore first look at something that is closer to hand. If we make the life of ideas into immediate reality we get something that is particularly common in natural scientific research, except that people doing such work do not see it in its whole cognitive context. For when we do experiments we are not looking at the natural world, we are looking at something the human mind has put together. However, whenever we force nature into our experiment we actually have to kill its living reality. We really have a nature before us that we have killed when we do an experiment; for the experiment is entirely made up according to the non-real methods the human mind uses in forming ideas. If we take this further, of course, it will help us to realize what would actually happen to us if the forming of ideas did not enter into our lives in an attenuated form, remaining merely an image of the pre-birth existence we had before conception, but if it were to be reality, the kind of reality we have in the field we perceive through the senses in life, it would immediately kill us.

That is the situation in life. Something we live through in an image or an idea and which is an echo with image character, if I may put it like this, of our non-physical life before conception, would kill us if it were to become as real as the living human body. It would be a poison in us, penetrating us as we would be penetrated if we were to produce an artificial human being and force him through our blood and through our muscles. We see that in the natural context the non-physical enters into us as a reflection of itself in image form.

We may then move on to consider the will, complementing the thought which is thus stimulated from the one side.

We investigate the will by considering it in connection with going to sleep. We find that when we are awake during the day an attenuated going-to-sleep process is present in every act of will, so that we go down into the non-physical world. When we have established this link between the act of will and the process of going to sleep, we have again gained the power in our investigation to continue the steps we took in observing the psyche with regard to going to sleep. What we had so far gained in taking those steps then widens out, for our observation will extend not only to going to sleep but to death. And we come to perceive what dying means for the human being.

In science, things like these are often taken the easy way today. Concepts like death or dying are more or less treated in a way that would be like saying: A knife is a knife. And they give you a razor to cut up your meat. A knife may be a cutting tool, but a razor has to be used and handled differently from a table knife.

Death is today seen as something people want to investigate as such. The approach used in the science of the spirit is less easygoing, for here one aims for reality and does not seek to shape reality according to preconceived concepts and ideas. Here one must ask specifically: What is death in the plant world? What is death in the animal world? What is death in the human world? For death does not equal death, just as knife does not equal knife. People like to denigrate the science of the spirit by saying that its concepts are confused, dark and nebulous. Its distinguishing characteristic is, however, that one always seeks to enter into the most open fairway, and this science demands clarity, succinctness and unbiased observation as preconditions for human ideas. People who say that in the science of the spirit one works with confused ideas are merely bringing their own confused ideas into the science of the spirit.

Once the bridge has been built between the act of will and the process of going to sleep, looking at sensory perception takes you forward across this bridge to see what death is in the human being. You then find that the powers that take the human being out of the world perceived through the senses at the moment of death also take effect in the human act of will, though not in the fully developed but rather in a more embryonic form. Every time we will something, making our intentions come true in actions, we configure something that relates to dying the way the child relates to the old man in terms of being human.

This also builds a bridge between the principle which in form of elementary soul phenomena dies in the will in our everyday conscious awareness, with this will an attenuated dying process just as forming ideas is an attenuated process of getting born and being conceived through the soul. It is merely that forming ideas has image quality, whilst will intent is embryonic. Will intent is a reality; it is not image but reality. But it is an act that is not as yet completed. If it were to be complete, if the act of will were to be fully grown, it would always be a process of dying. What makes the will into will is that whatever evolves in will intent remains embryonic and does not enter into existence in reality. For if it were to develop further from the embryonic state of will intent and gain full strength, it would always be a dying process. In our will intent we are potentially dying all the time. We bear the powers of death in us. And for someone able to penetrate the soul as an investigator, every act of will is an attenuated dying process that has remained embryonic.

In the genuine observation of the psyche which has developed more recently, an elementary act of soul thus also makes the connection with the great boundary riddles of human existence. We then come to perceive not only the triad of being born, waking up and developing a thought but also the triad of will intent, going to sleep and dying. We can actually gain our orientation from the going-to-sleep process by investigating this process, where we enter into the sphere beyond the senses, withdrawing from the senses; here we have the process of dying in embryo. And we perceive dying to be a transition from the world perceived through the senses to the world that is beyond the senses. Will intent can only be perceived in its embryonic state because we have previously realized that on going to sleep it is the young life of the soul which the soul perceives. Otherwise we would never be able to bring the embryonic nature of will intent before the inner eye in any way whatsoever.

You see that thinking, feeling and will intent are understood on the basis of facts. By becoming facts in the anthroposophically orientated psychology that must evolve, they take us at the same time to the great boundary issues of human soul life. No one is fantasizing about some kind of immortality but an investigation is made into the nature of ideation. This will in one respect take us to immortality, to life before birth. The will is investigated. It takes us to immortality after birth. And when these are taken together we come to immortality as a whole, the eternal quality of human nature which has its roots in the world beyond that perceived by the senses.

Through meditative life—I can refer to it only briefly—we thus come to perceive more and more how unreal the ordinary I is, for it has wholly and entirely given over its existence to the body. And in pursuing this non-reality in a way similar to the way in which we have pursued the other elements that come into the inner life, we also gain insight into repeated lives on earth, an aspect which seems so incomprehensible to people today—the repeated lives on earth through which the human being goes, with lives in the world of the spirit coming in between.

This general outline which, as I said, does still sound strange today, need not necessarily be taken to be the logical conclusion. For someone who takes the route of genuine study of the psyche which has been characterized today, the insights that take him through the forming of ideas and through the will and bring the non-physical to such immediate, factual reality out of the moments of going to sleep and waking up, lead to the realization that we go through repeated lives on earth.

Having shown you how the connection can be made from a psychology that once again is concerned with realities to the great boundary issues of human existence, I still have to point out to you that the state of soul on which this is based and which must enter into scientific research again if we are to have a true psychology, must indeed evoke a quite specific constitution of the inner life for specific elements or moments in doing research, but not for the whole of everyday life. For to gain true insight in the way I have been describing today we must be able to attach special significance in life to our waking up and going to sleep. It means we should not merely live the inner life as something that happens by the way, which is how we live through it in the ordinary way. We must strengthen our thinking in the way I have described and gain self control in the will so that we live the inner life to a higher degree than we live our ordinary lives. The precondition for this investigation of the soul is a state of soul which is little known in everyday life. It will be easiest for me to characterize it in the following way.

If you are really active in ordinary life and not a lazy person, you will after a certain number of hours during which you have been awake feel the need to sleep, to be at rest and sleep. Just as you live through this physical existence in your ordinary waking life, so you need to be able to live in such a natural, matter-of-course way through the inner life as an investigator of the psyche, an inner life that comes with strengthened thinking and self control in the will.

Then it must also be possible for certain phenomena to occur. For example the kind of thinking which we are accustomed to in ordinary life can really go on and on without hindrance. Sometimes it might really give one the horrors, especially when one hears people gossiping over their tea cups or other things, to think of the ways in which people can go on thinking all the time, accompanying external life with their thoughts. This is something you cannot do with the inner life that takes you into the soul’s reality in the way I have described. When an investigator of the psyche works the way he is meant to do in anthroposophy, so that he will truly obtain the kind of results I have spoken of today, he will very soon feel—in the way he is working, for example, with regard to anything he seeks to elicit from the element or moment of going to sleep and waking up, so that he may then develop it further with greater acuity of thinking and to support the will—he will very soon feel, with as much necessity as we otherwise feel when we have done hard physical work with our muscles, hands and arms, that he cannot go on working. That is the inner feeling one gets after doing investigations in the way I meant today for just a short time. You can’t go on, you need to relax. And you find this relaxation in everyday life. Care is thus taken to see that the true psychologist does not turn into a dreamer or solitary visionary, an eccentric. If he investigates the soul in the right way, which I have described, he will speak of getting tired in the soul just as the physical body grows tired if we labour long and hard in the ordinary sense. And just as you need rest and sleep for this, so you need here to change to everyday life, the absolutely cheerful, hard-working and quite ordinary everyday life. We need this in a healthy way, not in the way of an eccentric. The investigator of soul and spirit needs this as much as we need sleep in ordinary life.

Someone who does not dream up all kinds of fantastic and unreal things about the life of the psyche but enters into the true nature of it in the kind of serious way I have described, with simple phenomena taking us to the most sublime questions of immortality and indeed to accepting the truth of immortality, will never be someone who is useless in ordinary life. Entering into the world beyond that perceived through the senses demands that he stands firmly, robustly in waking life, taking it fully and soundly, just as sound waking life calls for a change in the form of sleep. This is the one thing, There are other things as well, which I must leave aside today. But I wanted to speak of these difficulties to show the kind of inner condition one has to develop if one wants to be a true psychologist in the newer, anthroposophical sense.

I would have liked to have seen a possibility to speak directly about natural science, social science, about religion and history, which would complement this quite appropriately. But it is not to be, though there is a suggestion that further lectures may follow.

You will have seen—this is what I'd like to say in conclusion—that with psychology, too, even if it is based on anthroposophy, it truly is not a matter of somehow just talking and talking, using confused ideas, but that even where we consider the question of immortality, it must be a matter of proceeding in a serious and properly trained way in the psychology that takes its orientation from anthroposophy. However, it will be possible for this serious, specially trained approach—where we still have to struggle today to come to terms with ordinary psychology and therefore use the kind of expressions I have been using today—gradually to take us closer and closer to the popular way of thinking. For this psychology will take matters of the soul out of the scholar’s study. It will be possible to offer the results of its investigations to every human heart and every human soul. We’ll not face the danger of really only counting on abstract, prepared questions such as What is the forming of ideas? What is will, memory, attentiveness? What is love and hate? Instead it will build a bridge from the ordinary everyday phenomena of forming ideas, feeling and doing things out of the will to life before birth and after death, to the life that exists beyond sensory perception, if I may put it like this, and human immortality.

Such a psychology will be able to meet the hopes—as the psychiatrist Brentano105Brentano, Franz. Psychologie vom empirischen Standpunkt 1. Band. Leipzig 1874. called them, though he himself did not find them fulfilled—the hopes of Plato and Aristotle that psychology will help us to know something about the best part of our essential nature, something which remains when the mortal earthly body decays. Brentano, a great mind, attempted to develop such a psychology on the basis of scientific thinking. He did not want to move on to genuine investigation in the fields that go beyond sensory perception. Since he was however honest enough to go only as far as he was able to go, this led to the remarkable result that this scientist wrote the first volume of his psychology in 1873, promising his publisher—the first volume appeared in the spring—that the second would follow in the autumn, and then the third and the fourth. Those further volumes never appeared. To anyone who knows Brentano’s story—I described it in my obituary, which is the third chapter in my book Von Seelenrätseln—this was not only for external reasons but the fact that Brentano felt a need to approach phenomena of the psyche with concepts that were not the traditional ones. Yet for the reasons I discussed the day before yesterday, which still live in the subconscious of people today, he shrank back from making the transition to investigative work in the sphere beyond anything perceived by the senses. When this transition can be made, we shall have a psychology that will interest not only academics but can be grasped by the whole of humanity. It can be the basis for a truly healthy human life, for it will not stop at things that can only be made interesting in artificial ways in a scholar’s study but will pour forth on everything that wells up in every healthy human heart, the soul of every healthy human being as a need to gain insight in the spirit. The psychology of which I am speaking, a psychology that goes into spheres beyond those perceived by the senses will be a popular psychology for everyone as the basis for a healthy religious life.

Anyone who knows psychology and its present situation will be able to say to himself—and I would like to conclude with this as something that throws a light, as it were, on our time and into the future—anyone who knows what can be gained with supersensible investigation in psychology will say that a psychology—and perhaps today’s attempt to characterize it has been very inadequate as yet—a psychology that truly takes us to the question of the soul’s immortality, to the most sublime phenomena of the soul, must be the psychology for the future. For as we have seen exactly from our look at psychology as it is current today, either it will have no future at all, as philosophers like Richard Wahle say, who are perfectly right about this, or this future will be the way it will have to be if it arises from the anthroposophical view of the world.

Questions and answers

Following the lecture given in Zurich on 10 October 1918

Question. How do feelings relate to bodily life, seen from the spiritual scientific point of view?

This is the very question, and it is a most interesting one, which I have tried to consider in the appendix to my book Von Seelenrätseln. There I also said that in the science of the spirit, such questions must have highly significant preconditions. You can only talk in the right way about such issues—spiritual science is strongly connected with our personal life—by speaking of your own investigations. I may say that I have indeed been working with questions that go in this direction for more than 30 years, and that 1 considered these things from many different points of view before I dared to talk about them in public the way I did after 30 years in that book, just touching on the subject. For questions like this only find an answer if you go back to them again and again in your investigations—questions as to the essence of the whole life of the psyche, as to the way the whole life of the psyche relates to the bodily sphere.

And I found—time is short; permit me therefore to give just a brief indication—that conventional science is altogether not investigating these relationships in an adequate way. The way people usually talk when they want to investigate these relationships is to put the soul on one side and bodily life on the other. But this causes total confusion. You don’t get anywhere at all. You will only get results—you’ll discover this if you carry out a serious investigation—if you place the life of the psyche on one side, that you truly differentiate it into living in one’s thinking, living in one’s feelings, living in one’s will intent. Once you have differentiated the life of the psyche so that you have a proper overview, you can relate it to bodily life. And you will find that every element in this life of the psyche has quite specific relationships to life in the body.

First of all you have to consider the life of forming ideas, of thinking. This relates to life in the nerves if we understand it rightly in a scientific way. The mistake people usually make is to relate the whole life of the psyche to life in the nerves. Of course it is still quite unacceptable today to hear the truth on this subject. It will, however, soon be known. Today, people relate the whole life of the psyche, including feeling and will intent, to life in the nerves. But we should only relate thinking life to life in the nerves.

This will also make it clear that there truly is a real connection—like the real connection between someone standing in front of a mirror and the mirror itself—between thinking and the life of ideas on the one hand and life in the nerves on the other. For someone who seeks the truth and not preconceived notions, it will be apparent that the life of feelings relates to something quite different, compared to the way in which thinking life relates to life in the nerves. The life of feeling demonstrably relates to life in the body in such a way that everything rhythmical in the life of the body corresponds to it—the whole life of rhythms, blood rhythm, respiration, and altogether everything that moves in rhythms. This is a direct connection, not one first mediated by the nerves. It is immediate.

One should not presuppose that confused notions are used in spiritual science. Instead one is working towards much more sustainable ideas than those used in conventional science, where confusion often reigns. We need only to be factual, investigating such real things as an impression gained in music, for instance. The spiritual investigator knows all the objections that may be raised; he raises them himself and does not even need to hear them from people who want to raise them, for he has sufficient practice in raising them himself. People will say that we hear musical notes with our ears, and the experience therefore arises with an impression made on the senses. No. The matter is not as simple as that but rather completely different. The situation is that there is indeed a relationship between the actual musical experience, which we have in our feelings, and everything that is rhythmical in our bodies.

You need only think of a hidden rhythm. Specific movements arise in the diaphragm, for instance, when we breathe in. As a result, the cerebrospinal fluid continually surges up and down in the head. This is a rhythmical inner process that corresponds to an experience of music in the soul. Because this rhythmical element, this rhythmical experience impacts on sensory impression, the experience of music arises in the harmony between the human bodily rhythm and the impression gained through the sense of hearing.

The important point is, however, that an impression on the sense of hearing only becomes the experience of music if it comes up against the inner rhythm in the human soul. A psychological study of the experience of music is enormously interesting. It merely substantiates what I am saying, which is that the life of feeling relates to the life in rhythmic movement inside the human being.

And the life of will—strange though it may also seem—relates to metabolism, metabolism in the widest sense. It appears to be most materialistic of all, although the life of will is actually the most supersensible of all. Energies enter into the life of matter. One day, when natural science sees itself in the right light, scientists will be able to take further—not actually generate, but take further—what I have said with regard to the life of will. They will find—the beginnings are already there—that with every act of will specific poisons arise out of the human organization itself, and that ‘in terms of the physical body’ what happens in the will process is really a toxic process. This will build a bridge between the act of will, which really is death in embryo being a toxic process, a kind of poisoning, and death itself, which is merely an act of will on a larger scale. I have thus shown how these three—will, feeling and thinking—relate to bodily experience. I could only do it briefly, so that I may now move on to the other question which exactly because of this last question is to some degree connected with what I have just been saying.

Question. How does the science of the spirit relate to psychopathology’, that is, to diagnosing mental diseases and so on?

There cannot be real diseases of the mind or soul—I can only say this briefly—and diseases of the psyche are really always in some way diseases of the organism. The organism cannot be used as an instrument in the right way. And just as we cannot perform the necessary function if the instrument is useless, so the organism, in living out the life of the psyche, cannot do so in the right way. This does not lead to materialism but actually to proper insight into the supersensible. One thing is particularly interesting here. It is interesting that insight gained in the science of nature, where we are more and more compelled to do experiments abstracted from nature, does indeed help us to gain the scientific insights that provide the basis for technology. But the more we experiment, I would say, the more do we come to the scientifically established conviction of which Goethe had an inkling when he said that all experimenting done with tools, external tools, really takes us away from the world of nature.106 Goethe’s actual words were: ‘The human being as such, in so far as he uses his sound senses, is the greatest and most accurate physical apparatus there can be, and it is indeed the greatest evil in modern physics that experiments have been separated off from the human being, as it were, and the aim is to gain insight into nature only from what artificial instruments show, thus limiting it and providing proof.’ Sprüche in Prosa, see note 10.

Goethe also had the right feeling for the other thing, the opposite. This is most interesting. Whilst experimentation does not tell us anything worthwhile about the natural world at a deeper level but only about the most superficial connections in it, abnormal developments given in nature itself take us into those deeper backgrounds. An experiment pushes us out of those backgrounds, as it were; abnormal developments take us deeper into nature.

Oddly enough, experimentation is singularly unfruitful in the psychology which seeks to base itself on physiology—not in all areas, but certainly in the areas that matter most. Something which is extraordinarily fruitful is observation of brain traumas and of other disorders in the organism which also make the life of the psyche appear abnormal. We are able to say that whilst experimentation separates us from the world of nature, observing the sick organism bring us together with it. Again a paradox, but we should not be afraid of reality, should not be afraid, even unconsciously so, when wanting to enter into the real world. The condition of the brain, also in the case of criminals, for example, takes us deeply into the secrets of nature. This branch of natural science is not fruitless, but it is connected with what the science of the spirit is able to establish—that everything connected with the will—and the will, though an independent entity, influences all else, including our thinking—is in a sense, in a certain respect, connected with the development of toxic states, abnormalities in the human organism.

And if the misfortune should happen and the human organism grow abnormal, then because of the very fact that the supersensible is driven out of the abnormal organism—for it only fits rightly in a normal organism; if the brain is injured, therefore, the supersensible is driven out—then it is because of this that the person, who may otherwise continue to be connected with the supersensible, is unable to gain his orientation, he loses it. Things that are often considered to be pathological in the psyche are therefore due to a physical abnormality.

We are thus able to say that we must really study the will in order to perceive why the study of abnormalities in the brain and so on gives such deep insight into certain conditions of the psyche. Just as we take everything supersensible out of the body on going to sleep and enter into the life of the psyche, but in a healthy way, so does an organism which has become abnormal push the supersensible out when there is pathology. We then enter into that life in a disoriented way, whilst we enter in a healthy way, which helps us to cope with the situation, when we enter into healthy sleep.

Der Geisteswissenschaftliche Aufbau der Seelenforschung von Deren Grundlagen bis zu den Lebenswichtigen Grenzfragen des Menschendaseins

Es ist begreiflich, daß in unserem wissenschaftlichen Zeitalter die Menschen gerade mit Bezug auf die wichtigsten Lebens- und Welträtsel, die Seelenrätsel, sich an die wissenschaftliche Seelenkunde wenden wollen. Allein man muß sagen, wenn man in der Lage ist, die gegenwärtigen Situationen der wissenschaftlichen Seelenforschung zusammenzufassen, daß so etwas vorliegt wie eine Art Sterben der wissenschaftlichen Seelenforschung, die ihre Traditionen aus sehr alten Zeiten her hat und die, trotzdem sie vielfach vorurteilslose Wissenschaft sein will, eben mit diesen Traditionen arbeitet.

Ich habe vorgestern hier, als ich über die wissenschaftliche Begründung einer übersinnlichen Erkenntnis sprach, den Namen eines Philosophen der Gegenwart angeführt, Richard Wähle. Er ist ja in weiteren Kreisen weniger bekanntgeworden. Dennoch ist außerordentlich bedeutungsvoll, was er als seine Anschauung, namentlich über die wissenschaftliche Seelenkunde der Gegenwart, in seinen Büchern: «Das Ganze der Philosophie und ihr Ende» und «Der Mechanismus des menschlichen Geisteslebens» niedergelegt hat. Ich möchte sagen, gerade für den, der heute naturwissenschaftlich denken kann, ist die Anschauung dieses Philosophen symptomatisch bedeutend. Ich will nicht sagen, daß er geeignet ist, einen besonderen Einfluß zu üben, noch weniger, daß er einen solchen Einfluß geübt hat; aber seine Anschauung ist symptomatisch bedeutend. In vielem könnte sie der Art und Weise nach aussprechen, wie man in der Gegenwart nach den gebräuchlichen wissenschaftlichen Forderungen denken muß. Und daher kann ich auf der einen Seite sagen, daß die Geisteswissenschaft, die hier gemeint ist, einverstanden sein kann mit dem, was ein solcher Philosoph mit Bezug auf die Seelenkunde sagt, obwohl sie auf der anderen Seite, wie wir gerade heute sehen werden, in dem allerschärfsten Gegensatz gegen solche Vorstellungen stehen muß. Denn dieser Philosoph ist ganz eingeschult in die Denkweise und Forschergesinnung, die der Mensch heute haben kann, wenn er gewissermaßen auf der Höhe der Zeitbildung steht, die naturwissenschaftlich gelehrt wird. Und da kommt man eben, wenn man versucht, mit den gerade heute wissenschaftlich zeitgemäßen Vorstellungen sich dem Seelenleben zu nähern, ganz notwendig zu der Überzeugung, daß die Seelenkunde, die zumeist geboten wird, am Sterben ist.

Äußerlich drückt sich das ja dadurch aus, daß diese philosophische Seelenkunde von den Lehrstühlen der Universitäten allmählich verschwindet und eigentlich das Bestreben immer mehr und mehr sich geltend macht, an die Stelle, wo früher Philosophen gesessen haben, naturwissenschaftlich denkende Leute aus der Physiologie oder aus sonstiger Naturwissenschaft hervorgehende Leute hinzusetzen. Man hofft in vielen Kreisen, daß man dasjenige, was früher für die Rätsel des menschlichen Seelenlebens eine besondere Psychologie, eine besondere Seelenkunde erforschen wollte, durch die Physiologie des Gehirnes, durch die Physiologie des Nervenbaues und dergleichen für den Menschen beantworten könne.

Nun kommt man, wenn man sich recht einläßt auf das Berechtigte des Naturwissenschaftlichen in der Seelenforschung, zu der Überzeugung, daß die gebräuchliche Seelenwissenschaft von vielen Dingen spricht, die eigentlich heute nicht mehr zu einer gültigen Vorstellung zu erheben sind. Sie spricht vom Vorstellen, vom Denken selbst, sie spricht vom Fühlen, sie spricht vom Wollen, vom Gedächtnis, von der Aufmerksamkeit und so weiter. Und wenn man nun den ganz ehrlichen Versuch macht, sich einzulassen für die Bedürfnisse dieses menschlichen Seelenlebens, für das, was der Mensch an seelischer Lebenskraft braucht, auf dasjenige, was diese Seelenkunde über Fühlen, Wille, Denken, Gedächtnis, Aufmerksamkeit vorbringt, dann hält man eigentlich zuletzt im Grunde nichts mehr in der Hand als Worte. Und man muß sagen, wer den geschichtlichen Gang des menschlichen Geisteslebens durchmißt, der kann sich sagen — das kann ich nur anführen, ein Beweis würde dem Rahmen des heutigen Vortrages eine zu große Ausdehnung geben -, daß in alten Zeiten, wo diese Begriffe von diesem Denken, diesem Gedächtnis, von dieser Aufmerksamkeit und so weiter zunächst geprägt worden sind, daß da ganz andere Vorstellungen vorlagen über die Naturerscheinungen, Vorstellungen, mit denen man auch das seelische Leben, so wie es für die Bedürfnisse der damaligen Zeit hinreichte, erfassen konnte. Was man aber da aufgestellt hat, was heute noch gespenstisch in der Seelenwissenschaft fortspukt, das wird vor dem naturwissenschaftlichen Denken, das doch, wenn auch unterbewußt, vorhanden ist in allen heutigen Menschen, die überhaupt strebsam sind nach dem Geistesleben, das wird zur bloßen Worthülse, zum bloßen Worte.

Dazu tritt noch etwas anderes. Dazu tritt das, daß ja, man kann schon sagen seit Jahrhunderten, diese Seelenwissenschaft sich innerhalb der gelehrten Kaste ausgebildet hat, und diese gelehrte Kaste eben diejenige Form angenommen hat, die man heute in den gebräuchlichen Vorlesungen oder Veröffentlichungen der Seelenwissenschaft findet.

Wenn nun der Mensch aus dem ganzen vollen Leben heraus über die wichtigsten Fragen des Daseins, die ja doch schließlich in Fragen nach der Göttlichkeit der Weltordnung und nach der Unsterblichkeit gipfeln, wenn der Mensch über diese Fragen irgendwie Auskunft sucht bei dieser Seelenkunde - er findet eine solche Auskunft nicht. Und wahr ist, was ein ernster, tiefer Seelenforscher sagte, der hier im vorigen Jahre in Zürich gestorben ist, Franz Brentano, der sich alle Mühe gegeben hat, in der Seelenforschung Licht zu gewinnen, der aber doch an den alten Seelenvorstellungen hängengeblieben ist, die zu Worten geworden sind. Er sagte: Sieht man sich in der heutigen Seelenwissenschaft um, so wird der Versuch bemerkbar sein, daß die Seelenforscher glauben, Erkenntnisse aufstellen zu können über das Vorstellen, über das Fühlen, über das Wollen, über die Aufmerksamkeit, über das Lieben und Hassen; allein wenn sie naturwissenschaftlich sein wollen, dann bleiben sie auch innerhalb dieses Kreises stehen. - Und nun meint Franz Brentano: Ja, wenn noch soviel gesagt werden könnte über diese elementaren Bestandteile des menschlichen Seelenlebens, ersetzen könnte das alles nicht die große Frage, die wir schon bei Plato und Aristoteles so bedeutsam gestellt finden: Ob es möglich ist, zu erforschen etwas über dasjenige in unserem Seelenleben, welches bleibt, wenn die sterbliche Hülle im Tode dahinfällt? — Das sagte ein offizieller gelehrter Seelenforscher der Gegenwart.

Die Geisteswissenschaft, die anthroposophisch orientiert ist, versucht aus solchen Voraussetzungen heraus, wie ich sie vorgestern hier geltend gemacht habe, zu einer Erneuerung der Seelenwissenschaft zu kommen. Sie sucht hinauszukommen über die bloßen Worthülsen zu einer seelischen Wirklichkeitsforschung. Und der Weg, den sie einschlägt, der muß allerdings heute noch so dastehen, daß voll Rechnung getragen wird den Widersprüchen und Gegnerschaften, die da von den gebräuchlichen Seelenforschern kommen können. Es muß gerungen werden können mit dem, was in der anerkannten Seelenwissenschaft da ist. Aber es wird auf der anderen Seite aus solchen Voraussetzungen einer Erneuerung der Seelenlehre, wie ich sie heute geltend mache, hervorgehen ein solches Seelenwissen, eine solche Seelenanschauung, die nun wirklich für die weitesten Kreise der strebenden Menschheit wiederum Seelennahrung werden kann, die — wenn ich das triviale Wort gebrauchen darf im allerbesten und höchsten Sinne des Wortes populär werden kann.

Herausgeholt werden muß die Seelenforschung aus dem Bereich der gelehrten Kaste, in welcher sie sich, wenn ich mich bildlich ausdrücken darf, die Schuld aufgeladen hat, in Abstraktionen zu verfallen, die sehr geistreich sein mögen, die aber durchaus nicht imstande sind, die Seelenforschung über diejenigen Grenzfragen des menschlichen Daseins zu erweitern, die vor allen Dingen einem berechtigten, brennenden Interesse des menschlichen Seelenlebens entsprechen,

Da sich gegenüber früheren Zeiten, aus denen die zu Worten gewordenen Vorstellungen der Seelenkunde stammen, eben das ganze menschliche Denken geändert hat, so muß die neue Seelenwissenschaft Abschied nehmen auch von den Ausgangspunkten, von denen man immer seinen Weg weiter nehmen wollte in das Gebiet des Seelenlebens hinein. Es müssen neue Ausgangspunkte kommen. Und diese neuen Ausgangspunkte sind solche, daß man, bei ihnen angekommen, nur fußen kann auf solchen Voraussetzungen, wie sie vorgestern hier geltend gemacht worden sind, nämlich, wenn man der heutigen an der Naturwissenschaft herangezüchteten Denkweise treu bleibt. Man kann nicht einfach fragen: Was ist Vorstellung? — Man kann nicht einfach beobachten wollen, was Vorstellungen sind, was Denken oder was der Wille ist, oder was Gedächtnis ist und so weiter. Geradeso wie die heutige Naturwissenschaft im Laboratorium und in der Klinik von ganz anderen Voraussetzungen ausgeht als die Naturwissenschaft älterer Zeiten, so muß die Seelenwissenschaft an Realitäten des Lebens anknüpfen, die aber allerdings erst, ich möchte sagen, herausdestilliert werden müssen aus der Ganzheit des menschlichen Lebens.

Zwei Momente im menschlichen Leben sind es zunächst, an welche die neuere Seelenwissenschaft anknüpfen muß, von denen ausgehend sie wiederum zurückkehren kann zu den Begriffen von Vorstellung, Wille und so weiter, um für dieseBegriffe wiederum einen vollinhaltlichen seelischen Wert zu bekommen. Diese beiden Ausgangspunkte sind zwei Momente, die allerdings sehr schwierig zu beobachten sind, wahrhaftig nicht leichter zu beobachten sind als mancher Naturvorgang, der sich erst sorgfältig zugerichteten Methoden und Experimenten erschließt. Es sind Momente, die hinhuschen im menschlichen Leben und die gewissermaßen die bewußte Erfassung durch ihre eigene Natur und Wesenheit ausschließen. Und man muß erst durch ein gewisses geschultes Geistesleben diese Momente erfassen lernen. Es sind die betden Momente des menschlichen Lebens: des Einschlafens und des Aufwachens.

Das Einschlafen und das Aufwachen sind diejenigen Augenblicke im menschlichen Leben, in denen die ganze Bewußtseinsverfassung sich wandelt, in denen der Mensch aus einer Seelenverfassung in die radikal entgegengesetzte hinübergeht. Es braucht nicht viel gesagt zu werden, um einleuchtend zu machen, daß diese kurzen Augenblicke schwierig zu beobachten sind. Denn wenn man einschläft, so hört eben das Bewußtsein auf, daher beachtet man den Augenblick des Einschlafens nicht. Wenn man aufwacht, kann man verspüren, daß man sich aus irgendeinem Lebensverlauf herausreißt; aber gerade derjenige, der versucht, nur irgendwie mit dem Bewußtsein anzuknüpfen an das, was er im Schlafe erlebt hat, wird das Scheitern eines solchen Versuches sehr bald, sehr leicht bemerken können.

Nun kann man nur durch diejenigen Mittel, die schon vorgestern hier angedeutet worden sind und über die ich nun weitere Andeutungen machen will, die Seelenbeobachtung heranschulen, um die Momente des Einschlafens und des Aufwachens zu beobachten. Dieses Heranschulen muß geschehen erstens durch eine gewisse Erkraftung, Verstärkung, Durchkräftigung des Vorstellungslebens selber, zweitens auch des Willenslebens. Aber diejenigen inneren Vorgänge, intimen Seelenvorgänge, die zu einer solchen Erkraftung, Durchdringung mit dieser Kraft des Willenslebens führen, sie weichen schon wesentlich ab von demjenigen, was man im gewöhnlichen Seelenleben gewohnt ist.

Ich habe vorgestern dasjenige, was zur Erkraftung des Vorstellungslebens führt, Meditieren genannt. Wenn man nämlich nach bestimmten Methoden, die ich beschrieben habe in meinem Buche «Wie erlangt man Erkenntnisse der höheren Welten?» und auch in meiner «Geheimwissenschaft im Umriß» und in anderen Büchern, wenn man nach gewissen Methoden Vorstellungen und Bewußtsein anwesend sein läßt, so daß man nicht nur im gewöhnlichen Sinne denkt, sondern auf dem Denken ruht und immer mehr und mehr auf dem Denken ruht, dadurch ganz anders die Seele mit dem Denken durchdringt und das Denken mit der Seele, als das im gewöhnlichen Seelenleben der Fall ist, dann kommt man dahin, das Vorstellungsleben so zu erkraften — wie gesagt, die genaueren Methoden finden Sie in den angeführten Büchern -, daß man so lebendig regsam vorstellen kann, wie man sonst nur in seinem Bewußtsein lebt, wenn man in den äußeren Sinneswahrnehmungen ist.

Goethe hat etwas geahnt, wenn es auch zunächst nur eine Ahnung war, von dieser Art des Vorstellens — der Psychologe Heinroth hatte ihn dazu veranlaßt, der sein Denken gegenständlich fand -, indem er zu dem Glauben sich bekennen konnte, daß er so lebendig allmählich zu denken in der Lage war, daß dieses Denken gleich sei an innerer Stärke, an innerer Intensität derjenigen Seelentätigkeit, die sonst nur vorhanden ist, wenn man mit Augen die äußere Natur beobachtet, mit Ohren die äußeren Vorgänge der Natur verfolgt und so weiter.

Es ist möglich, daß das Vorstellen so verstärkt wird, daß man so intensiv bei dem Vorstellen ist, daß man sagen kann: Dieses Vorstellen wird selber eine Anschauung, die Tätigkeit ist wie die eines Anschauens; und das Sinnesleben wird so hereingenommen in die Sphäre des Vorstellens, daß sich die Sinne nicht beteiligen, obwohl die Lebendigkeit des Sinnenlebens noch vorhanden bleibt.

Das ist die eine Seite, die Erkraftung des Vorstellungslebens. Kommt man immer weiter und weiter in dieser Erkraftung des Vorstellungslebens, dann stellt sich in der Tat eine der gewöhnlichen Seelenverfassung unbekannte innere Beobachtungskraft ein, die man braucht, um die beiden Momente des Einschlafens und Aufwachens wirklich so zu durchforschen, wie man im äußeren Leben naturwissenschaftlich Objekte und Vorgänge durchforscht.

Aber dazu ist weiter notwendig, daß auch der Wille in einer gewissen Weise mitgeschult wird. Dieser Wille kann nur geschult werden durch Selbstzucht, wenn man aufmerksam ist auf etwas im Leben, auf das man im gewöhnlichen Leben wenig achtgibt. Im gewöhnlichen Leben lebt man dahin und begleitet dasjenige, was man äußerlich wahrnimmt, mit dem inneren Erleben. Von diesem gewöhnlichen Hinleben muß man sich zu etwas anderem erheben. Man muß seine Aufmerksamkeit darauf richten, daß eigentlich unser Seelenleben von Jahr zu Jahr, von Monat zu Monat, von Woche zu Woche, ja von Tag zu Tag, von Stunde zu Stunde ein anderes wird, sich verwandelt, im Werden ist. Dieses Werden des Seelenlebens zwischen Geburt und Tod stellen wir im gewöhnlichen Verlaufe unseres Lebens nicht in unseren Willen herein. Wir lassen dieses Leben verfließen. Wir achten nur mit einem geringen Grade einer gewissen Selbsterziehung allerdings darauf, daß wir uns gewisse Fehler abgewöhnen, gewisse Tugenden aneignen, gewisse Fähigkeiten ausbilden und dergleichen. Allein, wenn die hier gemeinte Selbstzucht des Willens eintreten soll, dann muß noch etwas ganz anderes in das Leben kommen, Dann muß der Mensch zu der inneren Einsicht kommen können, daß er in sich etwas hat, was er, ich möchte sagen, in seinen Willen hereinstellen kann, so in seinen Willen hereinstellen kann, daß die Selbstkultur, die Selbstzucht ihm so schwierig erscheint, aber zu gleicher Zeit so begehrenswert erscheint wie sonst nur diejenigen Willenshandlungen, die ganz unvermeidlichen Trieben des menschlichen Lebens entsprechen.

Sehen wir die Sache von einer anderen Seite an. Es gibt heute ganz besonders viele Menschen, die sich die Fähigkeit zuschreiben — nun, vielleicht rede ich damit etwas radikal, aber Sie werden diesen Radikalismus dennoch berechtigt finden, wenn Sie tiefer über die Gegenwart nachdenken -, die ganze Welt zu reformieren, die sozusagen sich Ideen machen über dasjenige, was geschehen sollte, damit die Menschen glücklich nebeneinander leben können, damit alle Ordnung im sozialen Leben richtig sei und so weiter. Die Zahl der Programme auf diesem Gebiete ist eine ungeheure. Und eigentlich ist jeder mehr oder weniger schon, wenn er nur anfängt, über die äußere Welt zu denken, in seinem Sinne so etwas wie eine Art Reformator, nur gibt ihm die Welt nicht Gelegenheit, seine Reformen oder vielleicht auch seine revolutionären Gedanken wirklich in die Tat umzusetzen.

Da erstreckt sich in der Tat der Willensimpuls, das Begehren auf die Welt draußen. Man muß aber wissen, daß im Inneren des Menschen etwas ist, worauf man ebenso die Intentionen, die Impulse lenken kann, um den Menschen aus einem Lebensalter in das andere, ja nur von einer Woche in die andere hinüberzuführen, daß keineswegs im Inneren des Menschen das ist, was so von selbst loszugehen braucht, wie er zumeist will, sondern daß der Mensch sein Werden in der Zeit mit seinem Willen verfolgen kann. Und wenn da der Wille auf diesem Gebiete in so methodischer Weise eintritt, wie das in den genannten Büchern beschrieben ist, dann tritt jene innere Erkraftung, jene innere Schau, Anschauung des Willensmäßigen, das wir nimmermehr gewinnen können in unserem Verhältnis zur äußeren Welt, jene Schau des Willens tritt ein, die hinzukommen muß zu der eben erwähnten Verstärkung des Vorstellungslebens, wenn die Momente des Einschlafens und Aufwachens beobachtet werden sollen.

Bevor man aber zu dieser Untersuchung über die Momente des Einschlafens und Aufwachens kommt, gelangt man allerdings, wenn man in der Weise, wie ich es jetzt angedeutet habe, das Seelenleben verstärkt, dazu, einzusehen, daß man mit den Begriffen, die heute die Menschheit eben hat, die nicht die Begriffe der alten Naturanschauung sein können, daß man mit jenen Begriffen nur kommen kann zu einer Anschauung über das Vorstellungsleben des Menschen, das den Menschen in die Unwirklichkeit, das Gefühlsleben in die Verworrenheit, das Willensleben in die Unbegreiflichkeit führt.

Und im Grunde genommen ist es das, was man heute zu konstatieren hat, was auch der vorhin genannte Philosoph konstatiert, der vom Ende der Philosophie spricht, von der Auflösung der Philosophie, einer Abgabe an Physiologie und dergleichen. Er ahnt schon, wenn auch nicht mit solcher Klarheit, daß die Begriffe, die man heute haben kann und die so unendlich brauchbar sind, um die äußere Natur zu ergründen und um dasjenige in das menschliche Leben einzuführen, was eigentlich der wesentlichste Inhalt einer neueren Kultur ist, daß diese auf dem äußeren Gebiete so brauchbaren Begriffe, wenn man die Seele erforschen will, nicht zu einer Antwort führen auf die Frage: Was sind Vorstellungen? -, sondern sie führen dazu, im Vorstellungsleben, daß wir unmittelbar haben können das: Ich denke, also bin ich nicht -, die Unwirklichkeit des Seelenlebens zu finden. Man kommt darauf: Je mehr man in das Vorstellungsleben eindringt, desto weniger kann man sagen, was die Seele ist, wenn man das Vorstellungsleben nur so betrachtet, wie es im gewöhnlichen Leben ist, wenn man es nicht betrachtet, wie ich es dargestellt habe. Man kommt zu der Einsicht, daß das Gefühlsleben, so wie es sich dem gewöhnlichen Seelenleben darlebt, verworren ist, und daß das Willensleben völlig unbegreiflich ist. Daher die interessante Erscheinung, daß gerade naturwissenschaftlich denkende Menschen, die heute sehr, sehr bedeutungsvolle Seelenkunden schreiben, glauben, indem sie eigentlich die Hirnphysiologie abhandeln, etwas über das Vorstellungsleben sagen zu können. Aber sie kommen dahin, sich zu sagen: Über das Willensleben ist durch die Hirnphysiologie nichts entschieden. — Lesen Sie die betreffenden Kapitel in Theodor Ziehens «Leitfaden der physiologischen Psychologie» nach, so werden Sie sehen, wie gerade bei einem bedeutenden naturwissenschaftlichen Denker der Gegenwart sich erweist, was ich eben ausgesprochen habe.

So muß man sagen, daß diese naturwissenschaftliche Denkungsweise mehr oder weniger dasjenige realisiert, was Schopenhauer auch nicht oder halb erkannt hat, aber geahnt hat: daß der Wille etwas ist, an das man mit dem Vorstellungsleben der neueren Zeit nicht heran kann, daß der Wille das Unbegreifliche ist.

Es ist eine gute Vorbereitung für den weiteren Aufbau einer neueren Seelenlehre, wenn man diese Unwirklichkeit der Seele im Vorstellungsleben einsieht, diese Verworrenheit des Lebens im Gefühl, diese Unbegreiflichkeit der Willensaktion. Wenn man auf diese Weise sich, ich möchte sagen, Klarheit verschafft hat - obwohl das paradox klingt, aber man hat sich doch über einen Tatbestand Klarheit verschafft —, dann kann man weiter vordringen. Dann kann man jenes Denken anwenden, das durch Meditation geschärft ist, erkraftet ist, jenes Willensleben, das sich der Selbstzucht unterworfen hat, man kann es anwenden dazu, um wirklich aufmerksam zu werden auf den Moment, sagen wir, zunächst des Aufwachens. Dann wird der Moment des Aufwachens in das seelische Beobachtungsfeld hereinrücken können in einer ganz besonderen Art. Dann wird man an dem Aufwachen etwas erleben, was man durch ein ungeschultes Seelenleben nicht erleben kann. Dann wird man, unmittelbar nach dem Aufwachen, wenn man sich durch die angedeutete Schulung die Ruhe erworben hat, die dazu nötig ist, erkunden können, daß eigentlich im Unbewußten das ganze Seelenleben, wie es beim Aufwachen war, fortgegangen ist. Nur daß es eine Eigenschaft nicht hat, dieses Seelenleben in der Zeit vom Einschlafen bis zum Aufwachen: es ruft dieses Seelenleben keine Erinnerung von sich hervor. Und das merkt man in einem bedeutungsvollen Momente, der eintritt: Du hast während des ganzen Schlafens die Seele fließen lassen in demselben Leben, in dem sie fließt auch im Wachen; aber dieses Fließen des Seelischen im Schlafe, das prägt sich nur nicht der Erinnerungskraft ein. Daher ist es mit dem Kommen des Erwachens vergessen. Darauf kommt es an.

So wichtig das Gedächtnis, die Erinnerung für das äußere Leben ist - ich habe das vorgestern ausgeführt —, so wichtig ist das Vergessen, das Erleben der Seele so, daß sie das Erlebte auch vergessen kann, für das Werden des Seelischen, für das Fortfließen des Seelischen zwischen Geburt und Tod und so weiter. Ja, man bekommt, wenn man so den Moment des Aufwachens beobachten kann, erst eine Vorstellung davon, welche Bedeutung der Schlaf im menschlichen Seelenleben eigentlich hat. Man bekommt nämlich Einsicht in die Tatsache, daß unser Leben nicht fortgehen könnte, wenn es ausgefüllt wäre vom Erinnerungsgemäßen allein, daß das Erinnerungsgemäße die Kraft verliert, unser Leben fortfließen zu lassen. Wir müssen gerade deshalb in Schlaf sinken, damit wir dasjenige vergessen können, was wir in der Zeit des Schlafens erleben. Denn das gewöhnliche, alltägliche Seelenleben ist dann Seelennahrung, ist dann Bringer des Seelenlebens, wenn es vergessen wird, nicht wenn es erinnert wird. Erinnerung zehrt an der Seele. Vergessenheit stellt die Lebenskräfte der Seele wieder her.

So erlangt man eine konkrete, eine bestimmte Einsicht in jenen Lebensvorgang, der sich im Aufwachen ausdrückt. Und man erblickt dadurch gewissermaßen, wenn auch nur eigentlich in der Rückschau, das seelische Leben, über das nur nicht das gewöhnliche Bewußtsein ausgegossen ist, das sich abgespielt hat zwischen dem Einschlafen und dem Aufwachen. Mit diesem Anblick des Seelenlebens hat man ungeheuer viel gewonnen, denn man hat sich dadurch die Grundlage für ein gewisses Verständnis erworben.

Niemand kann in Wahrheit begreifen, was es heißt: Ich stelle vor —, was es heißt: Ich bilde mir in meinem Seelenleben einen Gedanken -, der nicht den Moment des Aufwachens wirklich beobachtend erfaßt. Denn wenn wir übergehen vom bloßen Wachen, vom bloßen Hinleben im Wachzustande zum aktiven Denken, zum Ausbilden einer Vorstellung eines Gedankens, dann ist das immer qualitativ, wenn auch in schwächerem Maße, ganz derselbe Seelenvorgang wie das Aufwachen. Und nur wer in der Verstärkung des Überganges vom Schlafzustande zum Wachzustande das Aufwachen kennt, der hat damit eine Grundlage sich geschaffen für das, was die Antwort gibt auf die Frage: Was geschieht eigentlich in meiner Seele, wenn ich eine Vorstellung fasse? — Die Kraft, die man in der Seele entfaltet, wenn man eine Vorstellung faßt, die ist genau dieselbe wie die Kraft, die man entfalten muß, allerdings jetzt in viel verstärkterem Maße, wenn man aufwacht. Wenn man aufwacht, tut es das Unbewußte. Ins Bewußtsein herüber vermittelt ist dasjenige, was das Unbewußte beim Aufwachen tut, wenn wir uns aus innerer Anstrengung anschicken, bewußt, willentlich zu denken, vorzustellen.

Hier kommt man zu einer ganz bestimmten Anschauung über das Vorstellen. Was aus der alten Seelenkunde heraus eine bloße Worthülse geworden ist, das bekommt wiederum einen konkreten Inhalt. Man lernt das Vorstellen als ein im Wachen bestehendes schwächeres Aufwachen kennen. Es ist ein Aufrütteln, ein Aufwachen. Und das ist eine bedeutungsvolle Einsicht; denn durch die Verbindung dieser Einsicht von der Natur des Vorstellens mit der Natur des Aufwachens bildet sich die Möglichkeit aus, das Vorstellen des gewöhnlichen Lebens, das eigentlich sonst in das Unwirkliche des Seelenlebens hineinführt, ins Wirkliche umzusetzen. Man bekommt dadurch, daß man das Vorstellen anknüpfen kann an das Aufwachen, die Möglichkeit, an eine Tatsächlichkeit, die von einem nicht abhängt, anzuknüpfen. Nun, knüpft man an dieses Aufwachen an und lernt dadurch die Natur des Vorstellens kennen, dann wendet man sich zu dem Moment des Einschlafens.

So wie die Meditation einem besonders hilft, den Moment des Aufwachens zu erforschen, so hilft einem die Selbstzucht des Willens ganz besonders dazu, den Moment des Einschlafens zu erforschen. Und diese Selbstzucht des Willens macht es einem möglich, sich wirklich hineinzufinden, das Einschlafen zu beobachten, wirklich zu beobachten, wie etwas Ähnliches eintritt beim Hineingehen in den Schlaf wie beim Aufwachen mit dem Vergessen, mit dem Gewahrwerden, daß während des Schlafes die Erinnerung vom Seelenleben ausgelöscht wird. Sonst kann man sich immer streiten, der Leib sei irgendwie beteiligt an dem, was die Seele erlebt im Schlafe. Wenn man bewußt, durch Selbstzucht des Willens den Moment des Einschlafens erfassen kann, dann merkt man, daß man untertaucht in dasselbe Seelenleben, das man im Aufwachen verläßt, daß man aber untertaucht in dieses Seelenleben so, daß jetzt die Möglichkeit einer Wahrnehmung, an der sich die Sinne beteiligen würden, aufhört. Man lernt erst erkennen, was es heißt: man tritt durch das Einschlafen in das Übersinnliche ein. Man lernt kennen dieses Hineintauchen in das Übersinnliche, weil man merkt, man erlebt etwas mit diesem Hineintauchen in das Übersinnliche, was nicht zum Bewußtsein kommen kann durch jenes Bewußtsein, das man im gewöhnlichen Seelenleben hat, das doch zwischen Geburt und Tod an die Organisation gebunden ist, von der Organisation abhängig ist. Man merkt das Unabhängigwerden von der Organisation, über welches sich sonst erlauchte Leute lange streiten können. Beobachtet muß die Sache werden; dann merkt man, daß man mit dem Einschlafen in das Übersinnliche hineintaucht.

Und dann lernt man den Unterschied erkennen, der besteht zwischen dem Seelenleben, wenn man es beim Aufwachen verläßt, und dem Seelenleben, in das man untertaucht beim Einschlafen. Sie sind gleich, nämlich, sie sind übersinnlicher Natur; aber man merkt auf dem Wege jener Beobachtung, die ich charakterisiert habe, einen ganz wesentlichen Unterschied. Dieser Unterschied kann durch einen Vergleich sehr leicht vor das Seelenauge geführt werden.

Der Unterschied besteht darinnen, daß sie sich unterscheiden wie ein Mensch, der Kind ist, von einem Menschen, der alt ist. So wie beides Menschen sind, aber auf verschiedenen Stufen des Daseins, des Alters, so sind beide Seelenleben übersinnlicher Wesenheit: dasjenige, aus dem man wieder aufsteigt, wenn man aufwacht, und dasjenige, in das man untertaucht, wenn man einschläft. Aber dasjenige, in das man untertaucht, wenn man einschläft, ist gewissermaßen das kindliche, das junge, und das, aus dem man aufwacht, das ist das ältergewordene. Man geht einen Gang durch vom Einschlafen bis zum Aufwachen. Das Seelenleben verwandelt sich, so daß - ein Vergleich hinkt natürlich immer — dasjenige, in das man untertaucht, so ähnlich ist dem, in welchem man aufwacht, wie das Kind als Mensch dem Greis als Mensch ähnlich ist. Diesen feinen Unterschied muß man bemerken. Dann ist eine gewisse Grundlage geschaffen, um sich zu nähern einem wichtigen Bestandteile unseres Seelenlebenforschens, nämlich dem Gefühlsleben.

Das Gefühlsleben, das für die gebräuchliche Seelenkunde heute nur noch in einer Versammlung von Worten besteht, dieses Gefühlsleben kann nur wirklich erkannt werden, wenn man es bei den Grundlagen erforscht, die eben entwickelt worden sind, wenn man es so erforscht, daß man vor der Erforschung das übersinnliche Seelenleben aus dem Momente des Aufwachens und des Einschlafens erkannt hat. Nur muß man bezüglich des Einschlafens, bevor man an das Gefühlsleben kommt, noch ein anderes Wichtiges bemerken, ein anderes wichtiges Aperçu machen. Man muß die Frage aufwerfen: Was eigentlich ist es, welches im Einschlafen sich besonders im Seelenleben verwandelt? Was bewirkt durch das Einschlafen das Herausziehen aus der sinnenfälligen Wirklichkeit und das Untertauchen in die übersinnliche Wirklichkeit? — Das ist die Verwandlung des Willens. Und dasselbe, was verstärkt vorgeht, wenn ich einschlafe, geht während des Wachens vor in geringerer Stärke, wenn ich einen Willensentschluß fasse. Man kann den Willen nicht greifen, wenn man ihn nicht auf der Grundlage des Einschlafens erfaßt.

Was der Wille in den Tiefen unseres Seelenlebens eigentlich ist, entzieht sich tatsächlich dem Vorstellungsleben so, wie sich dasjenige entzieht, was im Schlafe vorgeht. Daher finden Sie in den naturwissenschaftlichen Psychologien nichts über den Willen. Er ist eben deshalb unbegreiflich, weil das Vorstellungsleben nicht zu ihm reicht. Aber wenn wir den Vorgang des Einschlafens kennen, dann wissen wir, daß unser gewöhnliches Seelenleben, wenn es einen Willensakt vollzieht, ebenso untertaucht, nur in geringerem Maße, wie im Einschlafen. Jeder Willensentschluß ist ein weniger starkes Einschlafen bei vollwachendem Bewußtsein.

Hält man diese beiden Tatsachen auseinander, die des Aufwachens und die des Einschlafens, die eine mit Bezug auf das Vorstellungsleben, das durch das Aufwachen erklärlich wird, die andere mit Bezug auf das Willensleben, das durch das Einschlafen erklärlich wird, dann kann man darangehen, die Rätsel des Gefühlslebens wirklich ins Auge zu fassen. Dann kommt man in die Möglichkeit, das, was sonst Verworrenheit im Gefühlsleben ist, zur Klarheit zu bringen. Wodurch bringt man etwas zur Klarheit? Durch das Erkennen. Es gibt nichts anderes — ich könnte es ausführlich erkenntnistheoretisch beweisen, aber das würde heute zu weit führen -, im Erkennen bringt sich etwas zur Klarheit, wenn genau der Unterschied vorliegt, der genaue wirkliche Unterschied zwischen dem Erkenner, zwischen dem Wahrnehmer und dem wahrgenommenen Gegenstand, dem wahrgenommenen Objekt.

Das Gefühlsleben bleibt deshalb für das gewöhnliche Seelenleben verworren, weil der Mensch für das gewöhnliche Leben zwei Dinge nicht zu unterscheiden braucht, wenn er nicht erkennen will das gewöhnliche Gefühlsleben, zwei wesenhafte Dinge in sich selber, die einander gegenüberstehen so, wie wir gegenüberstehen der äußeren Sinneswelt, wenn wir diese Sinneswelt wahrnehmen: Sinneswelt dort, Mensch da. So stehen zwei sich gegenüber im Gefühlsleben.

Welches sind die zwei? Man lernt sie erst erkennen, Subjekt und Objekt, wenn man sie untersuchen kann auf Grundlage derjenigen Vorstellungen, die so gewonnen sind, wie ich es eben jetzt beschrieben habe. Dann lernt man erkennen, wer der eigentlich Fühlende ist, und was eigentlich im Gefühlsleben wahrzunehmen ist. Da stellt sich die höchst bemerkenswerte Tatsache heraus, daß der Fühlende immer derjenige ist — so paradox es zunächst klingt —, der von uns noch nicht durchlebt worden ist. Wenn wir jetzt in diesem Augenblick fühlen, so fühlt in uns derjenige Mensch, den wir jetzt erst anfangen zu leben, und morgen und übermorgen, im nächsten Jahre weiterleben werden bis zu unserem Tode. Im Momente, wo wir fühlen, ist das Subjekt, das sonst unbekannte Subjekt, unser Leben, das schon in uns steckt zwischen dem Augenblicke, wo wir fühlen, und dem Tod. Und dasjenige, was wahrgenommen wird, das ist das Leben, das wir durchlebt haben von der Geburt bis zu dem Momente, wo wir fühlen - eine ganz große Perspektive der Forschung, daß das Gefühlsleben in diesem Ausgangspunkte liegt.

Man kann mancherlei anstellen — und ich würde nicht über diese Dinge so sprechen, wenn ich nicht auf den verschiedensten Gebieten diese Forschungen angestellt hätte, eine ganze Summe von Forschungen und Forderungen liegt auf diesem Gebiete -, man kann manches anstellen, um nun ganz in naturwissenschaftlicher Denkweise das zu belegen, was ich jetzt gesagt habe. Man braucht nur Biographien, die vernünftig geschrieben sind, zu nehmen und braucht sie auf diese Forderung einzustellen, die ich eben ausgesprochen habe. Nehmen Sie eine vernünftig gehaltene Biographie Goethes. Betrachten Sie Goethe im Jahre 1790; studieren Sie ihn, wie er war von 1790 bis zu seinem Tode 1832. Versuchen Sie sich klarzumachen, welche Eigentümlichkeiten dieser Goethe von 1790 bis zu seinem Tode durchgemacht hat, und nehmen Sie das so, wie es wahrnehmbar im Goetheschen Gefühlsleben war 1790. Und jetzt stellen Sie sich vor die Seele dasjenige, was Goethe gelebt hat, innerlich gelebt hat, wie er von der Außenwelt berührt wurde, von seiner Geburt an, 1749, bis zu 1790. Und indem Sie sich eine genaue Vorstellung darüber bilden, wie der Goethe nach dem Jahre 1790, der schon drinnengesteckt hat, bis zum Jahre 1832, wie der wahrnahm innerlich in einem Momente des Jahres 1790 dasjenige, was er früher durchlebt hat, eben jegliches Gefühl. Jegliches Gefühl verläuft so, daß unser zukünftiges Wesen unser vergangenes Wesen wahrnimmt.

Man kann auch andere Betrachtungen anstellen. Man versuche, sich einen Blick anzueignen für Menschen, die man hat sterben sehen, bei denen man Gelegenheit gehabt hat, vielleicht eine kurze Spanne Zeit mit ihnen zu durchleben von einem gewissen Zeitpunkte bis zu ihrem Tode. Man versuche, sich das ganz genau zu vergegenwärtigen, wie sie da gelebt haben, was ihre menschliche Wesenheit war. Und man versuche sich dann klarzumachen — man wird immer ein überraschendes Resultat gewinnen -, wie zum Beispiel von dem Umstand, daß ein Tod schon heranrückte, über das Gefühlsleben der eigentliche Charakter, die eigentliche Wesenheit ausgegossen wird.

Das sind zwei Wege. Manches andere eröffnet sich ganz in echt naturwissenschaftlichem Sinne, allerdings in einem Sinne, der eng heranrückt an die tiefsten innerlichen Interessen der Menschennatur, wenn man dasjenige erforscht, was ich hier über das Gefühlsleben andeute. Dann bleibt das Gefühlsleben, das Wesen des Gefühles, nicht jene Worthülse, die sie in der gewöhnlichen wissenschaftlichen Psychologie heute ist. Wenn man das Gefühl in seiner Verworrenheit einfach in der Seele beobachten will, dann kann man nämlich gar nichts beobachten. Ebensowenig wie das Wasser, wenn Sie es nicht in Wasser- und Sauerstoff zerlegen, ebensowenig kann man das Gefühlsleben wissenschaftlich beobachten, wenn man es nicht auseinandernehmen kann, auseinanderlegen kann in das, was der Mensch war, bevor er gefühlt hat, und in das, nachdem er gefühlt hat, wenn man nicht weiß, was da schon als Keim so tief und tätig steckt, wie tätig der Keim in der Pflanze dieses Jahres steckt für die Pflanze des nächsten Jahres.

Indem man so das Gefühlsleben studiert, wird man wiederum zu einer Erfüllung der Vorstellungen kommen, die Erfüllung mit durchkrafteten Inhalten. Und man wird eine Seelenkunde bekommen für das Gefühlsleben, das da lebt von vornherein, das wir überall leben, das wir selbst durchleben. Und auch die Augenblicke des Seelenlebens werden — wenn wir wissen, daß, was wir in einem Momente fühlen, nicht isoliert dasteht - im Zusammenhang stehen mit unserem ganzen Werden zwischen Geburt und Tod. Da fließen Zukunft und Vergangenheit unseres Erdenwerdens in jedem einzelnen, im geringsten Gefühle ineinander.

Ebenso, aber am besten erst nachher, wenn man das Gefühlsleben durchforscht hat, kann man sich nach den Voraussetzungen, die ich geschildert habe, dem Vorstellungsleben nähern. Da kommen allerdings noch überraschendere Resultate heraus, überraschend aus dem Grunde, weil der Mensch das ganz für paradox hält, was da herauskommt, weil er es ja nicht kennt, weder nach dem Vorstellen des gewöhnlichen Seelenlebens noch nach den Vorstellungen der heutigen Wissenschaft.

Lernt man erkennen, wie jedes Vorstellungfassen, jedes Gedankenfassen ein schwächeres Aufwachen ist, bringt man innerlich beobachtend zusammen das Aktive in dem Vorstellungbilden und das Aufwachen, dann kommt man dadurch, daß man das Vorstellungsbild an diesen realen Akt des Aufwachens anknüpft, in eine Strömung des Anschauens hinein, die einen weitertreibt, und die einem zeigt, daß auch das Aufwachen etwas Schwächeres ist von einem anderen Stärkeren. Und dieses andere Stärkere, das einem so vor Augen tritt, wie wenn man, nachdem man das Bild eines Menschen gesehen hat, dann hintritt vor die Wirklichkeit, dieses andere ist die Erkenntnis, daß jedes Vorstellungfassen, jedes Aufwachen eine zum Bilde abgeschwächte Wiederholung desjenigen ist, was man nennen kann: den Eintritt in das Erdenleben durch Empfängnis und Geburt. Es erweitert sich einfach dasjenige, was man angesponnen hat dadurch, daß man die innere Verbindung im Anschauen hergestellt hat zwischen Aufwachen und Vorstellungfassen, es erweitert sich die Kraft, die man dadurch gewonnen hat, daß man beide nicht isoliert beobachtet, sondern im Zusammenhang. Sie erweitert sich dadurch, daß man erkennt, daß man im Vorstellen selber nicht in der Wirklichkeit lebt, daß man ein Bild hat. Aber gerade aus der Erkenntnis, daß man ein Bild hat, daß man etwas Nichtwirkliches hat, schöpft man die Kraft, zu etwas Wirklichem heranzukommen, und man bemerkt, daß jedes Vorstellungfassen, jedes Aufwachen ein abschwächendes, zum Bilde abschwächendes Hereindringen in die physische Welt ist, ein Durchgehen durch das Anziehen der physischen Hülle, ein Durchgehen durch Empfängnis und Geburt.

Und jetzt lernt man erkennen, woher etwas kommt, was seit langen Zeiten sehr ernste Forscher bewegt hat. Wenn man sich Mühe gibt, hinzusehen auf das, was seit Locke, seit Hume, seit Bacon ernste Forscher mit Bezug auf das menschliche Erkennen bewegt hat, so kommt man dahin, daß diese Forscher nie in der Lage waren, sich befriedigende Gedanken zu machen über die Beziehung des menschlichen Vorstellungslebens zu der äußeren sinnenfälligen Wirklichkeit. Sie konnten sich die Frage nicht beantworten: Wie kommt in den Menschen durch die Beobachtung der äußeren sinnenfälligen Wirklichkeit die Vorstellung herein, die dann dieser sinnenfälligen Wirklichkeit entsprechen soll? — Man merkt, wenn man die Voraussetzungen hat, die ich vor Ihnen heute geltend gemacht habe, daß diese Frage schon als Frage an einem Fehler leidet, den ich etwa in der folgenden Art charakterisieren kann. Nehmen wir an, daß jemand beobachtet: aus dem Menschen wird Kohlensäure ausgeatmet. Wenn er dann zu der Ansicht kommt, Kohlensäure komme aus der Lunge und in der Lunge werde daher die Kohlensäure erzeugt, so denkt er etwas Falsches. So falsch denkt der Mensch, wenn er aus der Oberflächenbetrachtung, die aber dem gewöhnlichen Seelenleben ganz natürlich ist, meint, die vorstellende Kraft komme aus dem Leibe heraus. Sie kommt gar nicht aus dem Leibe heraus!

Was da im Leibe, im Seelenleben auch tätig ist, das ist nur das Bild, das sich abgeschwächt hat zum Bilde beim Eintreten in das Sinnenleben. Und die Kraft, die in uns waltet, wenn wir vorstellen, das ist dieselbe Kraft - darauf kommt man -, welche gewaltet hat, bevor wir durch die Empfängnis überhaupt in Berührung mit der Sinneswelt gekommen sind. Was in uns denkt, das sind nicht wir im jetzigen Zeitpunkte, das ist die Kraft, die herüberstrahlt durch die Zeit von vor der Geburt, ja vor der Empfängnis. Deshalb konnten die Forscher nicht darauf kommen, wie sich das Vorstellen in den Menschen hereinfindet. Deshalb findet man auch, daß das Vorstellen ein Unwirkliches ist. Seit der Geburt oder Empfängnis hat das Vorstellen seine Wirklichkeit verwandelt ins leiblicheLeben. Das, was in uns geistig wirkt, übersinnlich wirkt, was sich nur zeigen kann im Aufwachen, was sich zeigt im Einschlafen, wenn wir nicht im Leibe sind, das lebt nun kraftvoll im Vorstellen. Und wir werden durch die Erkenntnis des Vorstellens zu unserem vorgeburtlichen Leben geführt, zu unserem Leben außerhalb des Leibes auf ganz wissenschaftliche Weise, auf eine Weise, die heranerzogen ist an der modernen Naturwissenschaft.

Man braucht nicht die neuere Geisteswissenschaft, die anthroposophisch orientiert ist, dadurch zu verleumden, daß man sagt, sie wärme alte Begriffe auf, die aus dem Buddhismus und dergleichen gekommen sind. Das tut sie nicht, sondern sie eignet sich eine innere Kraft des Seelenlebens an, die ganz heraus entsteht gerade aus dem konsequent verfolgten naturwissenschaftlichen Denken, das aber, weil es das konsequente Denken der Naturwissenschaft ist, hinausgeht über dasjenige, was die Naturwissenschaft selber geben kann. Und indem das Vorstellen wirklich erfaßt wird, wird es als Bild erkannt, als Abbild, als schwächeres Abbild desjenigen, was wir durchlebt haben, bevor wir in einem physischen Leibe waren, was wir in der überphysischen Welt erlebt haben vor der Geburt und vor der Empfängnis.

Von der Vorstellungswelt aus baut sich die greifbare Brücke zu der Erfassung des übersinnlich-unsterblichen Menschen. Die Grenzfragen des Daseins werden durch richtiges Erfassen der Elementarerscheinungen des Seelenlebens gefunden. Das ist es, worauf es ankommt.

Und dann kann man auch genauer beobachten: Wie ist es eigentlich mit diesem abgeblaßten, zum Vorstellen gewordenen vorgeburtlichen Leben? Man kann sich die Frage aufwerfen: Wenn dasjenige, was im Vorstellen unwirklich ist, bloß Bild ist, wenn das wirklich in unser Leibesleben einziehen würde, nicht als Bild, sondern als Wirklichkeit eindringen würde, was würde denn dann geschehen?

Da kommt eine sehr bedeutungsvolle Sache. Ich möchte, weil die Sache natürlich, so herausgegliedert aus dem geisteswissenschaftlichen Zusammenhang, zunächst recht paradox erscheint, sie an etwas Naheliegendem erläutern. Wenn wir das Vorstellungsleben unmittelbar in Wirklichkeit umsetzen, so bekommen wir etwas, was eigentlich gerade im naturwissenschaftlichen Forschen sehr häufig da ist, was man nur innerhalb dieses Forschens nicht in den ganzen Erkenntniszusammenhang hineinsetzt. Wenn wir nämlich experimentieren, da schauen wir ja nicht die Natur an, sondern wir schauen das an, was der menschliche Verstand zusammengesetzt hat. Wir müssen aber immer, wenn wir die Natur in das Experiment hineinzwängen, das lebendige Wesen in der Natur ertöten. Wir haben eigentlich die getötete Natur vor uns, wenn wir das Experiment ausführen; denn das Experiment ist ganz aufgebaut nach den unwirklichen Methoden des menschlichen Vorstellens. Das hilft einem, wenn man es natürlich weiterverfolgt, zu erkennen, was eigentlich mit uns geschähe, wenn das Vorstellen nicht als bildhafte Abschwächung des Vorgeburtlichen, vor der Empfängnis liegenden Lebens in unserem Leben aufträte, sondern wenn es als Wirklichkeit aufträte, als solche Wirklichkeit, wie sie im Sinnenfeld im Leben vorhanden ist. Das würde uns sofort töten.

So ist der Zusammenhang des Lebens. Dasjenige, was wir im Bilde, in der Vorstellung erleben, und das, wenn ich so sagen darf, der bildhafte Nachklang ist unseres übersinnlichen Lebens vor der Empfängnis, das würde in dieselbe Wirklichkeit umgesetzt, die der Körper hat, uns töten, das würde in uns ein Gift sein, das würde uns so durchdringen, wie uns eben durchdringen würde, wenn wir einen künstlichen Menschen erzeugen und den durch unser Blut und durch unsere Muskeln treiben würden. Wir sehen, wie im Naturzusammenhange das Übersinnliche sich hineinstellt in uns, wie es der bildhafte Ausdruck ist seiner selbst. Wir können dann übergehen zu der Untersuchung des Willens und den Gedanken, der dadurch von der einen Seite angeregt ist, ergänzen.

Wir untersuchen den Willen dadurch, daß wir ihn erforschen im Zusammenhange mit dem Einschlafen. Wir finden, daß im wachen Tagesleben in jedem Willensakt ein abgeschwächtes Einschlafen vorhanden ist, also ein Hinuntertauchen in die übersinnliche Welt. Wenn man diese Brücke hergestellt hat zwischen dem Willensakt und dem Einschlafen, dann hat man wiederum die Kraft der Forschung gewonnen, um den Gang, den man vom Einschlafen vollzieht, in der Seelenbeobachtung fortzusetzen. Dann erweitert sich dasjenige, was man in diesem Gang gewonnen hat, indem man nicht nur bis zum Einschlafen dringt mit seiner Beobachtung, sondern bis zum Tod. Und man lernt erkennen, was für den Menschen Sterben heißt.

Die Wissenschaft. macht es sich mit solchen Begriffen vielfach heute bequem. Sie behandelt solche Begriffe, wie Tod oder Sterben, ungefähr so, wie wenn man sagen würde: Ein Messer ist ein Messer —- und man bekommt ein Rasiermesser in die Hand, um sich das Fleisch damit zu schneiden. Obwohl ein Messer zum Schneiden ist, muß ein Rasiermesser anders verwendet und gehandhabt werden als ein Tischmesser.

Heute sieht man im Tode etwas, das man als solches erforschen will. Geisteswissenschaft macht es sich nicht so bequem, weil sie auf die Wirklichkeit geht und nicht von vorgefaßten Begriffen und Ideen aus die Wirklichkeit modeln will. Die Geisteswissenschaft muß besonders fragen: Was ist der Tod im Pflanzenreich? Was ist der Tod im Tierreich? Was ist der Tod im Menschenreich? Denn Tod ist nicht Tod, so wie Messer nicht Messer ist! Man verleumdet die Geisteswissenschaft gern, daß sie verworrene, dunkle, nebulose Begriffe führe, Gerade das ist ihr Kennzeichen, daß sie überall in das klarste Fahrwasser hineingehen will, daß sie gerade solche Forderungen an die menschlichen Vorstellungen stellt, die Klarheit, Bündigkeit, unbefangene Beobachtung voraussetzen! Diejenigen, die da reden davon, daß Geisteswissenschaft mit verworrenen Vorstellungen arbeite, tragen nur ihre eigenen verworrenen Vorstellungen in die Geisteswissenschaft hinein.

Hat man die Brücke gebaut zwischen dem Willensakt und dem Einschlafen, dann kommt man durch die Wahrnehmung über diese Brücke weiter, um dasjenige anzuschauen, was der Tod im Menschen ist. Und dann merkt man: Dieselben Kräfte, welche im Todesmoment den Menschen aus der Sinneswelt herausführen, die sind, noch unausgebildet, gewissermaßen embryonal wirksam im menschlichen Willensakte. Jedesmal wenn wir etwas wollen, wenn wir unser Wollen in Handlung umsetzen, so gestalten wir etwas, was sich zum Sterben geradeso verhält, wie sich das Kind zum Greis verhält in bezug auf das Menschsein.

Dadurch wird aber auch die Brücke gebaut zwischen dem, was als elementare Seelenerscheinungen im alltäglichen Bewußtsein hereinstirbt im Willen, der ebenso ein abgeschwächtes Sterben ist, wie das Vorstellen ein abgeschwächtes Geborenwerden und Empfangenwerden durch die Seele ist. Nur ist das Vorstellen bildhaft, das Wollen embryonal. Das Wollen ist eine Wirklichkeit; es ist nicht ein Bild, es ist eine Wirklichkeit. Aber es ist ein noch unvollendeter Akt. Würde sich der Akt vollenden, würde er vollständig auswachsen, der Akt des Willens, so wäre er immer ein Sterben. Das macht den Willen zum Willen, daß dasjenige, was sich anspinnt im Wollen, embryonal bleibt, daß das nicht wirklich ins Dasein tritt. Denn würde es in seiner vollen Stärke weiter aus dem Embryonalzustand des Wollens sich entwickeln, so wäre es immer ein Sterben. Wir sterben, indem wir wollen, der Anlage nach fortwährend. Wir tragen die Kräfte des Todes in uns. Und demjenigen, der die Seele durchforschen kann, ist jeder Willensakt ein abgeschwächtes, das heißt, ein embryonal gebliebenes Sterben.

So wiederum verbindet sich ein elementarer Seelenakt vor der wirklichen Seelenbeobachtung der neueren Zeit mit den großen Grenzrätseln des menschlichen Daseins. Dann lernt man erkennen ebenso wie die Dreiheit: Geborenwerden, Aufwachen, Gedankenfassen, die Dreiheit: Wollen, Einschlafen, Sterben. Dann kann man gerade sich orientieren an dem Einschlafen, indem man das Einschlafen erforscht, das Hineingehen in das Übersinnliche, das SichEntziehen den Sinnen; da hat man ein embryonales Sterben. Und man begreift das Sterben als einen Übergang aus der Sinnenwelt in die übersinnliche Welt. Man kann das Wollen nur deshalb in seiner Embryonalität erkennen, weil man früher erkannt hat, daß beim Einschlafen das junge Seelenleben vor die Seele tritt. Sonst würde man niemals die embryonale Natur des Wollens überhaupt ins Seelenauge fassen können.

Sie sehen, Denken, Fühlen, Wollen werden aus Tatsachen heraus begriffen, und indem sie Tatsachen werden in der anthroposophisch orientierten Seelenlehre, die da kommen muß, führen sie zu gleicher Zeit zu den großen Grenzfragen des menschlichen Seelenlebens. Es wird nicht phantasiert über irgendeine Unsterblichkeit, es wird untersucht die Natur des Vorstellens, die führt zur Unsterblichkeit nach der einen Seite, zu dem Leben vor der Geburt. Es wird untersucht der Wille. Er führt zu der Unsterblichkeit nach der Geburt. Und aus diesem Zusammen erfließt dann die volle Unsterblichkeit, die Ewigkeit der Menschennatur, die in der übersinnlichen Welt wurzelt.

Und lernt man immer mehr und mehr durch das meditative Leben — das kann ich nur andeuten — erkennen die Unwirklichkeit des gewöhnlichen Ich, das ganz und gar sein Sein an den Leib abgegeben hat, dann lernt man gerade aus dieser Unwirklichkeit, indem man sie in ähnlicher Weise verfolgt wie die anderen Einschläge seelischen Lebens, auch das erkennen, was dem modernen Menschen noch so unbegreiflich erscheint: die wiederholten Erdenleben, den Durchgang des Menschen durch die wiederholten Erdenleben, zwischen denen Leben in der geistigen Welt liegen.

Diese Überschau, die, wie gesagt, heute noch paradox klingt, man braucht sie ja nicht unbedingt als Konsequenz zu ziehen. Für denjenigen, der den Weg der wirklichen Seelenforschung einschlägt, der heute charakterisiert worden ist, für den tritt zuletzt aus den Erkenntnissen, die ihn durch das Vorstellen, durch den Willen führen, die ihm das Übersinnliche so unmittelbar tatsächlich nahelegen aus den Momenten des Einschlafens und Aufwachens, es tritt die Erkenntnis der wiederholten Erdenleben in dieSeele herein.

Nun aber, indem ich Ihnen geschildert habe, wie die Brücke zu schlagen ist von einer Seelenkunde, die wiederum auf Realitäten, auf Wirklichkeiten geht, zu den großen Grenzfragen des menschlichen Daseins, muß ich noch aufmerksam machen, daß diejenige Seelenverfassung, die dem zugrunde liegt und die ihren Einzug halten muß in die Wissenschaft, wenn es wirklich wiederum eine Seelenkunde geben soll, daß diese Seelenverfassung tatsächlich für gewisse Momente des Forschens, nicht für das ganze äußere Leben, sondern für gewisse Momente des Forschens eine besondere Verfassung des Seelenlebens hervorrufen muß. Man muß nämlich, wenn man richtig so erkennen will, wie ich es heute geschildert habe, dahin kommen, Aufwachen und Einschlafen eine erhöhte Lebensbedeutung geben zu können. Man muß gewissermaßen das Seelenleben nicht als solche Begleiterscheinung bloß erleben, wie es im gewöhnlichen Dasein durchlebt wird. Man muß dieses Seelenleben durch die Verstärkung des Denkens, die ich geschildert habe, und durch die Selbstzucht des Willens in einem höheren Grade durchleben, als wie man sonst das wirkliche Leben durchlebt. Eine Seelenverfassung ist die Voraussetzung zu dieser Seelenforschung, die man im gewöhnlichen Leben wenig kennt. Ich kann sie auf die folgende Art am leichtesten charakterisieren.

Wenn man im gewöhnlichen Leben wirklich richtig tätig ist, wenn man nicht Faulenzer ist, so hat man nach einer bestimmten Zahl von Stunden, die man wachend durchlebt hat, das Bedürfnis, zu schlafen, ruhig zu schlafen. So wie man im gewöhnlichen wachenden Leben dieses äußere Dasein durchlebt, in einer so natürlichen, so selbstverständlichen Weise muß man jedes Seelenleben als Seelenforscher durchleben können, welches von verstärktem Denken und von der Selbstzucht des Willens herrührt.

Dann müssen aber auch gewisse Erscheinungen auftreten können. Zum Beispiel kann man das Denken, das im gewöhnlichen Leben gang und gäbe ist, eigentlich ungehindert fortsetzen. Es könnte einem ja manchmal angst und bange werden, besonders wenn man Kaffeeklatschen zuhört oder anderen Dingen, wie die Leute unausgesetzt denken können, das äußere Leben begleiten können mit den Gedanken. Das kann man nicht mit demjenigen Seelenleben, das so, wie ich es geschildert habe, in das Wirkliche, in die Wirklichkeit der Seele hineinführt. Wenn der Seelenforscher, wie ihn die Anthroposophie meint, sich betätigt, so daß er wirklich zu solchen Ergebnissen kommt, wie ich sie heute vor Ihnen dargelegt habe, dann fühlt er sehr bald - in der Handhabe zum Beispiel in bezug auf das, was er versucht herauszubringen aus dem Momente des Einschlafens und Aufwachens, um es dann weiter auszubilden durch das verschärfte Denken und zur Unterstützung des Willens -, er fühlt sehr bald geradeso notwendig, wie man sonst fühlt, wenn man physisch sich abgerackert hat mit Muskeln, Händen, Armen: Man kann nicht weiterarbeiten — so fühlt man seelisch, wenn man nur eine geringe Zeit geforscht hat in der Weise, wie das heute gemeint war: Man kann jetzt nicht weiter, man braucht Erholung. — Und man findet diese Erholung im gewöhnlichen Tagesleben. Dafür ist schon gesorgt, daß der wahre Seelenforscher kein Träumer wird, kein einsamer Schwärmer wird, kein Lebenssonderling wird. Denn betreibt er richtig die Seelenforschung, so wie ich es geschildert habe, dann wird er ebenso von einer Ermüdung seelisch sprechen, wie der physische Leib ermüdet wird, wenn man sich abrackert in der äußeren Arbeit. Und so wie man da die Ruhe, den Schlaf braucht, so braucht man hier den Übergang in das gewöhnliche Tagesleben, in das absolut frohe, arbeitsreiche, ganz gewöhnliche Alltagsleben. Dieses ganz gewöhnliche Alltagsleben braucht man in gesunder Weise, nicht in Sonderlingsweise. Und dies ist dem Seelenforscher, dem Geistesforscher so notwendig, wie notwendig ist der Schlaf dem gewöhnlichen Leben.

Derjenige, der nicht allerlei Phantastereien, Unwirklichkeiten über das Seelenleben träumt, sondern in die wahre Natur des Seelenlebens in dieser ernsten Weise eindringt, wie ich es geschildert habe, wo die einfachen Erscheinungen bis zu den höchsten Fragen der Unsterblichkeit und bis zu der Bejahung der Unsterblichkeit führen, der wird niemals ein für das Leben unbrauchbarer Mensch werden. Denn sein Eintreten in die übersinnliche Welt fordert von ihm, daß er sich robust, in vollem gesundem Erfassen in das wache Tagesleben hineinstellt, wie sich das gesunde wache Tagesleben die Abwechslung suchen muß in dem gesunden Schlaf. Das ist schon eines. Es gibt noch anderes, das muß ich heute unerwähnt lassen. Aber ich wollte durch dieses Aufzeigen von Schwierigkeiten andeuten, wie die Seelenverfassung ist, in die man sich hineinleben muß, wenn man im neueren Sinne, im anthroposophischen Sinne ein wirklicher Seelenforscher werden will.

Ich würde gerne an diesen Vortrag angeschlossen haben dasjenige, das in rechtem Sinne eine Ergänzung würde sein können über Naturwissenschaft, Sozialwissenschaft, über Religion und Geschichte, unmittelbar zu sprechen. Das aber soll nicht sein, aber es ist ja projektiert, daß die weiteren Vorträge an diesen jetzt gehaltenen sich anschließen können.

Sie werden gesehen haben — das möchte ich zum Schluß noch bemerken -, daß es sich wahrhaftig auch bei der Seelenforschung, selbst wenn sie auf anthroposophischen Grundlagen getrieben wird, nicht handelt um irgendwelches Herumreden in verworrenen Vorstellungen, sondern daß es sich auch da, wo es sich um die Unsterblichkeitsfrage handelt, für die anthroposophisch orientierte Seelenwissenschaft handeln muß um ernstes, geschultes Vorgehen. Aber dieses ernste, geschulte Vorgehen wird allmählich immer mehr und mehr — heute muß es noch ringen mit der gewöhnlichen Seelenforschung und daher solche Ausdrücke wählen, wie ich sie gebraucht habe — der populären Denkweise noch näher und näher kommen können. Denn diese Seelenforschung wird die Seelenangelegenheiten wiederum aus der Gelehrtenstube herausholen, und sie wird die Forschungsergebnisse darüber in jedes Menschen Herz, in jedes Menschen Seele hineintragen können. Sie wird nicht der Gefahr ausgesetzt sein, eigentlich nur zu rechnen auf die abstrakten, abgezogenen Fragen: Was ist Vorstellen? Was ist Wille, Gedächtnis, Aufmerksamkeit? Was ist Liebe und Haß? — Sondern sie wird die Brücke schlagen von den gewöhnlichen alltäglichen Erscheinungen des Vorstellens, des Fühlens, des Wollens zu dem Vorgeburtlichen, zu dem Nachtodlichen, zu dem, wenn ich den Ausdruck gebrauchen darf, übersinnlichen Leben, zur menschlichen Unsterblichkeit.

Solch eine Seelenkunde wird wiederum erfüllen können die Hoffnungen, wie sie Brentano nannte, der Seelenforscher, der aber nicht zur Erfüllung dieser Hoffnungen kam, die Hoffnungen von Plato und Aristoteles, daß wir durch die Seelenkunde etwas wissen können über das Beste unseres Wesens, das übrigbleibt, wenn die irdische sterbliche Hülle verfällt. Brentano, der geistvolle Mann, versuchte aus wissenschaftlichem Denken heraus eine solche Seelenkunde; aber er wollte nicht übergehen zu einem wirklichen übersinnlichen Forschen. Da er aber ehrlich genug war, nur so weit zu gehen, als er kam, so trat die merkwürdige Tatsache ein, daß dieser Forscher 1873 den ersten Band seiner «Seelenkunde» schrieb und versprach — der erste Band erschien im Frühling -, für den Herbst den zweiten folgen zu lassen, dann den dritten, vierten Band. Die folgenden Bände erschienen nicht mehr! Das liegt nicht nur, wenn man Brentanos Entwickelungsgang kennt — ich habe ihn beschrieben in meinem Nachruf, der als drittes Kapitel in meinem Buche «Von Seelenrätseln» zu finden ist -—, das liegt nicht nur in äußerlichen Gründen, das liegt darinnen, daß Brentano die Notwendigkeit empfand, an die Seelenerscheinungen mit anderen Begriffen als den hergebrachten heranzukommen, daß er aber zurückschreckte aus den Gründen, die ich vorgestern erörtert habe, die im Unterbewußten des heutigen Menschen noch leben, zurückschreckte vor dem Übergang zur Forschung im Übersinnlichen. Wenn aber dieser Übergang zur Forschung im Übersinnlichen gefunden wird, dann wird auch eine Seelenkunde da sein, die nicht bloß Gelehrte interessiert, sondern die ganze Menschheit erfassen kann, welche Grundlage werden kann für ein wirklich gesundes menschliches Leben, weil sie nicht stehenbleiben wird bei dem, wofür das Interesse bei gewissen Kreisen auf künstliche Weise erst in der Gelehrtenstube erreicht werden soll, sondern weil sie sich ergießen wird über dasjenige, was aus jedes gesunden Menschen Herzen, aus jedes gesunden Menschen Seele heraus als geistiges Erkenntnisbedürfnis quillt. Eine populäre Seelenkunde für jeden Menschen als Grundlage eines gesunden religiösen Lebens wird die ins Übersinnliche gehende, hier gemeinte Seelenkunde sein.

Wer die Seelenkunde und ihre Situation in der Gegenwart kennt, wird sich sagen können — womit ich diese Betrachtungen schließen möchte als gewissermaßen ein in die Zeit und in die Zukunft hineinleuchtendes Ergebnis —, wer da weiß, wohin man kommen kann mit der Seelenkunde durch übersinnliches Forschen, der wird sagen: Eine solche Seelenwissenschaft, die vielleicht heute noch sehr unvollkommen hier zu charakterisieren versucht wurde, eine solche Seelenwissenschaft, die wirklich bis zu der Frage der Unsterblichkeit der Seele, bis zu den allerhöchsten Seelenerscheinungen führt, muß die Seelenkunde der Zukunft sein! Denn, entweder — das zeigt uns gerade die Betrachtung der heute landläufigen Seelenkunde — es wird nach der Meinung solcher Philosophen, die ganz recht haben, wie Richard Wahle, die Seelenwissenschaft überhaupt keine Zukunft haben, oder diese Zukunft wird so sein, wie sie aus der anthroposophischen Weltbetrachtung folgen muß.

Fragenbeantwortung

Frage: In welcher Beziehung steht das Gefühl, geisteswissenschaftlich betrachtet, zum körperlichen Leben?

Gerade diese Frage, die sehr interessant ist, habe ich versucht zu behandeln in dem Anhange zu meinem Buche «Von Seelenrätseln». Ich habe es da auch ausgesprochen, daß geisteswissenschaftlich gerade solche Fragen sehr bedeutsame Voraussetzungen haben müssen. Man kann ja über solche Dinge — Geisteswissenschaft hängt sehr mit dem persönlichen Leben zusammen - nur richtig sprechen, indem man gewissermaßen seine eigenen Forschungen erzählt. Ich darf sagen, daß ich mich gerade mit Fragen nach solcher Richtung hin wahrhaftig länger als dreißig Jahre lang beschäftigt habe, und daß ich an die Dinge von den verschiedensten Gesichtspunkten aus herangegangen bin, bevor ich mich getraut habe, über solche Sachen öffentlich so zu sprechen, wie es andeutungsweise in meinem Buche «Von Seelenrätseln» nach dreißig Jahren geschah. Denn solche Fragen beantworten sich nur, wenn man immer wieder und wiederum im Forschen auf sie zurückgeht: Die Fragen nach dem Wesentlichen des gesamten Seelenlebens, nach den Beziehungen des gesamten Seelenlebens zum Körperlichen hin.

Und da ergab sich mir — der Kürze der Zeit halber lassen Sie mich nicht mehr als eine kurze Andeutung machen -, daß diese Beziehungen von der landläufigen Wissenschaft überhaupt recht mangelhaft untersucht werden. Man redet, wenn man diese Beziehungen untersuchen will, gewöhnlich so, daß man die Seele auf die eine Seite stellt und das körperliche Leben auf die andere Seite. Aber da verwirrt sich alles untereinander. Da kommt man überhaupt zu keinem Resultat. Man kommt nur zu einem Resultat — man merkt es im Verlauf einer ernsten Forschung —, wenn man das Seelenleben so auf die eine Seite stellt, daß man es wirklich gliedert in denkendes Erleben, fühlendes Erleben, wollendes Erleben; dann kann man das ganze Seelenleben, das man aber jetzt differenziert ordentlich überschaut, in Beziehung bringen zu dem körperlichen Leben. Und da ergibt sich, daß jedes Glied dieses Seelenlebens seine ganz bestimmten Beziehungen zum Körperleben hat. Da muß man zunächst betrachten das vorstellende, denkende Leben.

Dieses vorstellende, denkende Leben hat seine Beziehung zu dem richtig, allerdings naturwissenschaftlich richtig erfaßten Nervenleben. Und das ist der Fehler, der gewöhnlich gemacht wird, daß man das ganze Seelenleben zum Nervenleben in Beziehung bringt. Heute ist es allerdings auf diesem Gebiete noch ganz verpönt, die Wahrheit zu hören. Sie wird aber sehr bald erkannt werden. Man stellt heute das ganze Seelenleben, auch das Fühlen und das Wollen, in Beziehung zum Nervenleben. Aber man sollte nur das Denkleben in Beziehung zum Nervenleben stellen.

Dadurch wird auch erkannt, daß wirklich ein realer Bezug besteht — so wie zwischen dem, der vor dem Spiegel steht, und dem Spiegel ein wahrer Bezug besteht — zwischen dem Denken und Vorstellungsleben und dem Nervenleben. Für den, der auf die Wirklichkeit geht, nicht auf vorgefaßte Begriffe, für den ergibt sich dagegen, daß das Gefühlsleben ebenso zu etwas ganz anderem in Beziehung steht wie das Denkleben zum Nervenleben. Das Gefühlsleben steht nachweislich in einem solchen Bezug zum Körperleben, daß ihm im Körperleben entspricht alles Rhythmische, alles rhythmische Leben, Blutrhythmus, Atmung, überhaupt alles, was einen rhythmischen Gang hat, und die Beziehung ist eine unmittelbare, nicht etwa erst eine durch die Nerven vermittelte, sondern eine unmittelbare.

Man muß eben nicht voraussetzen, daß Geisteswissenschaft verworrene Begriffe nachdenkt, sondern nach viel tragfähigeren Vorstellungen hinarbeitet als die gewöhnliche Wissenschaft, die vielfach eben verworren ist. Man braucht nur so etwas ganz ordentlich sachgemäß, wirklichkeitsgemäß zu untersuchen, wie zum Beispiel einen musikalischen Eindruck. Den musikalischen Eindruck - so könnte man natürlich leicht einwenden; der Geistesforscher kennt alle Einwände, er macht sie sich selber, er braucht sie gar nicht zu hören von denjenigen, die solche Einwände machen wollen, denn er ist vorher schon darin geübt, jeden kritischen Einwurf sich selber zu machen -, den musikalischen Ton hört man ja doch mit dem Ohre, also da entsteht doch das musikalische Erlebnis bei dem Sinneseindruck. — Nein, so einfach liegt die Sache nicht, sondern es ist ganz anders, es ist so, daß tatsächlich ein Verhältnis besteht zwischen dem, was das eigentliche musikalische Erlebnis ist, das ein Gefühlserlebnis ist, und dem ganzen Rhythmischen in der Körperlichkeit.

Sie brauchen sich nur einen verborgeneren Rhythmus zu denken. In der Tat, bei unserem Einatmen entstehen immer ganz bestimmte Bewegungen des Zwerchfells; dadurch entsteht ein fortwährendes Aufundabschwingen der Gehirnflüssigkeit. Das ist ein rhythmisches, inneres Entsprechen dem, was seelisch das musikalische Erlebnis ist. Dadurch, daß dieses Rhythmische, dieses rhythmische Erleben, das im Menschen als Menschen veranlagt ist, anstößt an dasjenige, was der Sinneseindruck ist, dadurch entsteht das musikalische Erlebnis im Zusammenklang des mensclichen körperlichen Rhythmus mit dem Gehöreindruck.

Aber das Wesentliche ist das, daß der Gehöreindruck erst dann zum musikalischen Erlebnis wird, wenn er an den inneren Rhythmus des menschlichen Seelenlebens stößt. Das musikalische Erlebnis, psychologisch untersucht, ist ein ungeheuer interessantes. Es belegt nur das, was ich sage, daß das Gefühlsleben zum rhythmischen Bewegungsleben im Inneren des Menschen in einem Verhältnisse steht.

Und das Willensleben — so sonderbar das wieder klingt -, das steht in Beziehung zum Stoffwechsel, Stoffwechsel im umfassendsten Sinne. Es schaut das am materialistischsten aus, trotzdem das Willensleben gerade das Übersinnlichste ist. Kräfte gehen in das Stoffesleben; daher wird, wenn die Naturwissenschaft einmal sich richtig selbst verstehen wird, sie gerade wird fördern können, nicht wirklich zustande bringen können, aber fördern können das, was ich heute gesagt habe in bezug auf das Willensleben. Man wird nämlich finden — die Ansätze sind überall schon dazu gemacht -, daß sich bei jedem Willensakt gewisse Gifte ergeben durch die menschliche Organisation selber, daß der Willensvorgang «körperlich erfaßt», eigentlich ein toxischer Prozeß ist. Und dadurch wird die Brücke gebaut werden zwischen dem Willensakt, der eigentlich embryonaler Tod ist, weil er ein toxischer Prozeß, eine Art Vergiftung ist, und dem Tode selbst, der nur ein vergrößerter Willensakt ist.

Damit habe ich gezeigt, wie die drei: Wille, Gefühl, Denken, zum körperlichen Erleben stehen. Ich konnte es nur in einer kurzen Andeutung tun, und ich kann nun übergehen zu der anderen Frage, welche gerade durch die letzte Bemerkung etwas verwandt ist mit dem, was ich eben gesagt habe.

Frage: Wie verhält sich die Geisteswissenschaft zur Psychopathologie, also zur Erfassung der Geisteskrankheiten und so weiter?

Eigentliche Geistes- oder Seelenkrankheiten kann es nicht geben - ich kann das nur andeuten —, sondern Seelenkrankheiten sind eigentlich immer in irgendeiner Weise Krankheiten des Organismus. Der Organismus kann nicht in richtiger Weise als Instrument gebraucht werden. Und so, wie wir mit einem unbrauchbaren Instrument nicht die nötigen Funktionen ausüben können, so kann auch der Organismus, wenn er das Seelenleben darlebt, das nicht in der richtigen Weise ausführen. Das führt nicht zum Materialismus, sondern gerade zur richtigen Erkenntnis des Übersinnlichen. Und da ist besonders eines interessant. Interessant ist, daß uns dasjenige naturwissenschaftliche Erkennen, das immer mehr und mehr zum von der Natur abgezogenen Experiment drängt, zwar in all denjenigen naturwissenschaftlichen Erkenntnissen fördert, die zur Grundlage der Technik werden. Aber je mehr wir experimentieren, möchte ich sagen, desto mehr kommen wir zu der wissenschaftlich begründeten Überzeugung, die Goethe geahnt hat, indem er sagte, daß alles Experimentieren, das durch Werkzeuge geschieht, durch äußerliche Werkzeuge, eigentlich von der Natur abführt.

Aber das andere hat Goethe auch richtig geahnt, was der Gegensatz ist. Das ist sehr interessant. Während man durch das Experimentieren nichts Rechtes erfahren kann über die tieferen Zusammenhänge der Natur, sondern nur über die oberflächlichsten Zusammenhänge der Natur, führen uns die Abnormitäten, die durch die Natur selbst gegeben sind, in die tieferen Zusammenhänge hinein. Das Experiment drängt uns gewissermaßen aus den Zusammenhängen heraus; die Abnormitäten führen uns tiefer in die Natur hinein.

Kurioserweise ist für die Seelenkunde, die auf Physiologie begründet sein will, das Experimentieren sehr unfruchtbar, nicht auf allen Gebieten, aber wenigstens auf den Gebieten, die die wichtigsten sind. Aber außerordentlich fruchtbar ist die Beobachtung von Gehirnverletzungen, von sonstigen Störungen im Organismus, welche das Seelenleben auch als abnorm erscheinen lassen. Und wir können sagen: Während uns das Experiment von der Natur abtrennt, bringt uns die Betrachtung des kranken Organismus mit der Natur wieder zusammen. — Ein paradoxes Resultat wiederum; aber man soll sich nicht vor Wirklichkeiten scheuen, soll nicht Furcht haben, unbewußte Furcht, wenn man in die Wirklichkeit eindringen will. Die Beschaffenheiten des Gehirns, auch zum Beispiel bei Verbrechern, die führen einen tief in die Geheimnisse der Natur hinein. Dieser Zweig der Naturforschung ist nicht unfruchtbar, aber er steht mit dem in Zusammenhang, was geisteswissenschaftlich erforscht werden kann: daß alles das, was mit dem Willen zusammenhängt — und der Wille wirkt ja, obwohl er eine selbständige Entität ist, in alles, auch in das Denken wiederum hinein -, in gewissem Sinne, in gewisser Beziehung schon mit der Erzeugung von toxischen Zuständen, von Abnormitäten im menschlichen Organismus zusammenhängt.

Und wenn nun das Unglück eben eintritt, daß der menschliche Organismus abnorm wird, dann wird gerade dadurch, daß herausgetrieben wird das Übersinnliche aus dem abnormen Organismus — es paßt nur in den normalen Organismus hinein -, also wenn das Gehirn verletzt wird, wird herausgetrieben das Übersinnliche. Dadurch kann sich der Mensch, wenn er sonst mit dem Übersinnlichen in Zusarmmenhang bleibt, nicht orientieren, er verliert die Orientierung. Und dadurch wird gerade im Abnormen dasjenige herbeigeführt, was auch oftmals als Pathologisches im Seelenwesen aufgefaßt wird.

So daß man sagen kann: Das wirkliche Studium des Willens lehrt einen erst erkennen, warum eigentlich das Studium der Gehirnabnormitäten und so weiter einen so tief hineinblicken läßt in gewisse seelische Zusammenhänge. Wie wir im Einschlafen unser ganzes Übersinnliches eben hinausbefördern aus dem Leibe, wie wir da untertauchen in das Seelenleben — aber in gesunder Weise —, so drängt der Organismus, der abnorm geworden ist, das Übersinnliche hinaus im kranken Zustande. Dann treten wir unorientiert hinein, während wir in gesunder Weise eintreten, die uns hinweghilft über die Zustände, wenn wir in den gesunden Schlaf versinken.

The Spiritual-Scientific Structure of Soul Research, from its Foundations to the Vital Questions Concerning the Limits of Human Existence

It is understandable that in our scientific age, people want to turn to scientific psychology, especially with regard to the most important mysteries of life and the world, the mysteries of the soul. However, if one is in a position to summarize the current situation of scientific soul research, one must say that there is something like a kind of dying of scientific soul research, which has its traditions from very ancient times and which, despite its desire to be an unprejudiced science in many ways, works precisely with these traditions.

The day before yesterday, when I spoke here about the scientific basis of supersensible knowledge, I mentioned the name of a contemporary philosopher, Richard Wähle. He has become less well known in wider circles. Nevertheless, what he has written about his views, particularly on contemporary scientific psychology, in his books Das Ganze der Philosophie und ihr Ende (The Whole of Philosophy and Its End) and Der Mechanismus des menschlichen Geisteslebens (The Mechanism of Human Mental Life) is extremely significant. I would say that the views of this philosopher are symptomatically important, especially for those who are capable of scientific thinking today. I do not mean to say that he is capable of exerting any particular influence, nor that he has exerted any such influence, but his views are symptomatically significant. In many respects, they could express the way in which one must think today in accordance with current scientific requirements. And so, on the one hand, I can say that the spiritual science referred to here can agree with what such a philosopher says with regard to psychology, although, on the other hand, as we shall see today, it must stand in the sharpest contrast to such ideas. For this philosopher is thoroughly schooled in the way of thinking and the spirit of research that people today can have if they are, so to speak, at the height of the current education in the natural sciences. And when one tries to approach the life of the soul with the ideas that are scientifically up-to-date today, one inevitably comes to the conclusion that the psychology that is mostly offered is dying.

Outwardly, this is expressed by the fact that this philosophical psychology is gradually disappearing from university chairs and that there is actually a growing tendency to replace philosophers with people who think scientifically, people who come from physiology or other natural sciences. Many circles hope that what was previously sought to be explored by a special psychology, a special science of the soul, in order to solve the riddles of human spiritual life, can now be answered for humans through the physiology of the brain, the physiology of the nervous system, and the like.

Now, if one really engages with the legitimacy of natural science in soul research, one comes to the conviction that conventional soul science speaks of many things that can no longer be elevated to a valid concept today. It speaks of imagination, of thinking itself, it speaks of feeling, it speaks of willing, of memory, of attention, and so on. And if one now makes a completely honest attempt to engage with the needs of this human soul life, with what human beings need in terms of soul vitality, with what this psychology of the soul has to say about feeling, will, thinking, memory, and attention, then in the end one is left with nothing more than words. And one must say that anyone who measures the historical course of human spiritual life can say to themselves — I can only mention this, as proof would go beyond the scope of today's lecture — that in ancient times, when these concepts of thinking, memory, attention, and so on were first formed, there were completely different ideas about natural phenomena, ideas with which one could also comprehend spiritual life as it was sufficient for the needs of that time. But what was established then, what still haunts the science of the soul today, becomes mere empty words, mere words in the face of scientific thinking, which is nevertheless present, even if subconsciously, in all people today who are at all striving for spiritual life.

There is something else to add to this. There is the fact that, for centuries, this science of the soul has developed within the learned caste, and this learned caste has taken on the form that we find today in the usual lectures or publications on the science of the soul.

When human beings, out of the fullness of their lives, seek answers to the most important questions of existence, which ultimately culminate in questions about the divinity of the world order and about immortality, when human beings seek answers to these questions in this science of the soul, they do not find such answers. And it is true what a serious, profound researcher of the soul said, Franz Brentano, who died here in Zurich last year, who made every effort to gain insight into the soul, but who nevertheless remained attached to the old ideas about the soul that had been put into words. He said: If one looks around in today's psychology, one will notice the attempt by psychologists to believe that they can establish insights about imagination, about feeling, about willing, about attention, about loving and hating; but if they want to be scientific, then they remain within this circle. And now Franz Brentano says: Yes, even if so much could be said about these elementary components of human soul life, it could not replace the great question that we already find so significantly posed by Plato and Aristotle: Is it possible to investigate something about that in our soul life which remains when the mortal shell falls away in death? — This was said by an official scholar of the soul of the present day.

The spiritual science that is anthroposophically oriented attempts, on the basis of such premises as I asserted here the day before yesterday, to bring about a renewal of the science of the soul. It seeks to go beyond mere empty words to a spiritual investigation of reality. And the path it takes must still be such today that full account is taken of the contradictions and opposition that may come from conventional soul researchers. It must be possible to grapple with what exists in recognized soul science. But on the other hand, from such premises for a renewal of the science of the soul as I am proposing today, there will emerge a knowledge of the soul, a view of the soul, which can truly become nourishment for the soul for the widest circles of striving humanity, which — if I may use the trivial word in the very best and highest sense of the word — can become popular.

Soul research must be brought out of the realm of the learned caste, in which, if I may express myself figuratively, it has burdened itself with the guilt of falling into abstractions that may be very witty, but which are by no means capable of extending soul research beyond those borderline questions of human existence that correspond above all to a justified, burning interest of human soul life.

Since, compared to earlier times, from which the ideas of psychology that have been put into words originate, the whole of human thinking has changed, the new science of the soul must also bid farewell to the starting points from which one always wanted to continue one's journey into the realm of soul life. New starting points must be found. And these new starting points are such that, once we have arrived at them, we can only base ourselves on the assumptions that were put forward here the day before yesterday, namely, if we remain true to today's way of thinking, which has been cultivated by natural science. We cannot simply ask: What is imagination? — We cannot simply want to observe what imaginations are, what thinking or what the will is, or what memory is, and so on. Just as today's natural science in the laboratory and in the clinic starts from completely different premises than the natural science of earlier times, so must the science of the soul connect with the realities of life, which, however, must first, I would say, be distilled out of the totality of human life.

There are two moments in human life to which the newer science of the soul must first connect, from which it can then return to the concepts of imagination, will, and so on, in order to obtain a full spiritual value for these concepts. These two starting points are two moments that are, however, very difficult to observe, truly no easier to observe than many natural processes that can only be understood through carefully prepared methods and experiments. These are moments that flit by in human life and which, in a sense, exclude conscious perception by their very nature and essence. And one must first learn to grasp these moments through a certain trained spiritual life. They are the two moments of human life: falling asleep and waking up.

Falling asleep and waking up are those moments in human life when the entire state of consciousness changes, when the human being passes from one state of mind to its radical opposite. It does not take much to make it clear that these brief moments are difficult to observe. For when one falls asleep, consciousness ceases, and therefore one does not notice the moment of falling asleep. When one wakes up, one can feel that one is being torn out of some course of life; but precisely those who try to somehow connect their consciousness with what they experienced in sleep will very soon and very easily notice the failure of such an attempt.

Now, only by means of those methods that were already hinted at here the day before yesterday, and about which I will now make further hints, can one train the observation of the soul to observe the moments of falling asleep and waking up. This training must take place, first, through a certain strengthening, reinforcement, and fortification of the life of imagination itself, and second, of the life of the will. But those inner processes, those intimate soul processes that lead to such strengthening, such permeation with this power of the will, differ significantly from what one is accustomed to in ordinary soul life.

The day before yesterday, I called meditation that which leads to the strengthening of the life of imagination. For if, according to certain methods that I have described in my book “How to Attain Knowledge of Higher Worlds” and also in my “Outline of Secret Science” and in other books, if one allows imagination and consciousness to be present according to certain methods, so that one does not only think in the ordinary sense, but rests on thinking and rests more and more on thinking, thereby permeating the soul with thinking and thinking with the soul in a completely different way than is the case in ordinary soul life, then one comes to strengthen the life of imagination in such a way — as I said, you will find the more precise methods in the books mentioned — that one can imagine as vividly and actively as one otherwise only lives in one's consciousness when one is in the external sense perceptions.

Goethe had an inkling, even if it was only a vague idea at first, of this kind of imagination — the psychologist Heinroth had prompted him to do so, finding his thinking concrete — by professing his belief that he was gradually able to think so vividly that this thinking was equal in inner strength to the inner intensity of that soul activity which is otherwise only present when one observes external nature with one's eyes, follows the external processes of nature with one's ears, and so on.

It is possible that imagination is so intensified that one is so intense in imagining that one can say: This imagining itself becomes a perception, the activity is like that of perceiving; and the sensory life is so drawn into the sphere of imagining that the senses do not participate, although the liveliness of the sensory life still remains.

That is one side, the strengthening of the life of imagination. If one continues further and further in this strengthening of the life of imagination, then an inner power of observation, unknown to the ordinary state of mind, actually arises, which is needed to truly investigate the two moments of falling asleep and waking up, just as one investigates objects and processes in external life through natural science.

But for this, it is also necessary that the will be trained in a certain way. This will can only be trained through self-discipline, by paying attention to something in life that one pays little attention to in ordinary life. In ordinary life, one lives along and accompanies what one perceives externally with inner experience. One must rise above this ordinary way of living. One must focus one's attention on the fact that our soul life actually changes from year to year, from month to month, from week to week, indeed from day to day, from hour to hour; it is in a state of becoming. In the ordinary course of our lives, we do not bring this becoming of the soul life between birth and death into our will. We let this life flow by. We pay attention only to a small degree of self-discipline, ensuring that we break certain bad habits, acquire certain virtues, develop certain abilities, and so on. However, if the self-discipline of the will referred to here is to occur, then something completely different must come into life. Then man must be able to come to the inner realization that he has something within himself which he can, I would say, bring into his will, bring into his will in such a way that self-cultivation, self-discipline, appear to him as difficult, but at the same time as desirable as only those acts of will which correspond to the completely unavoidable drives of human life.

Let us look at the matter from another angle. Today, there are a great many people who attribute to themselves the ability—well, perhaps I am speaking somewhat radically here, but you will nevertheless find this radicalism justified if you think more deeply about the present—to reform the whole world, who, so to speak, form ideas about what should happen so that people can live happily side by side, so that all order in social life is right, and so on. The number of programs in this area is enormous. And actually, everyone is more or less, as soon as they start thinking about the outside world, a kind of reformer in their own sense, only the world does not give them the opportunity to really put their reforms or perhaps even their revolutionary ideas into practice.

In fact, the impulse of the will, the desire, extends to the outside world. But one must know that there is something inside human beings to which one can direct one's intentions and impulses in order to guide them from one stage of life to another, or even from one week to the next, that it is by no means something inside human beings that needs to happen automatically, as they usually want, but that human beings can pursue their development in time with their will. And when the will enters this realm in such a methodical way, as described in the books mentioned, then that inner empowerment, that inner vision, the vision of the will, which we can never gain in our relationship to the outer world, that vision of the will arises which must be added to the aforementioned strengthening of the life of imagination if the moments of falling asleep and waking up are to be observed.

But before one comes to this investigation of the moments of falling asleep and waking up, one does indeed arrive, if one strengthens the life of the soul in the way I have just indicated, one comes to realize that with the concepts that humanity has today, which cannot be the concepts of the old view of nature, one can only arrive at a view of the human life of imagination that leads people into unreality, the life of feeling into confusion, and the life of will into incomprehensibility.

And basically, this is what we have to acknowledge today, what the philosopher mentioned earlier also acknowledges, who speaks of the end of philosophy, of the dissolution of philosophy, a surrender to physiology and the like. He already senses, albeit not with such clarity, that the concepts we have today, which are so infinitely useful for exploring external nature and introducing into human life what is actually the most essential content of a newer culture, that these concepts, so useful in the external realm, do not lead to an answer to the question when we want to explore the soul: What are ideas? Instead, they lead us to find the unreality of the soul's life in the life of ideas, which we can immediately grasp: I think, therefore I am not. One comes to the conclusion that the more one penetrates into the life of ideas, the less one can say what the soul is, if one considers the life of ideas only as it is in ordinary life, if one does not consider it as I have described it. One comes to the realization that the life of feeling, as it presents itself in ordinary soul life, is confused, and that the life of will is completely incomprehensible. Hence the interesting phenomenon that precisely those people who think in scientific terms, who today write very, very significant works on the soul, believe that by dealing with brain physiology they can say something about the life of imagination. But they come to say to themselves: Nothing has been decided about the life of the will through brain physiology. — Read the relevant chapters in Theodor Ziehen's “Leitfaden der physiologischen Psychologie” (Guide to Physiological Psychology), and you will see how what I have just said is proven by a significant scientific thinker of the present day.

So we must say that this scientific way of thinking more or less realizes what Schopenhauer did not recognize, or only half recognized, but suspected: that the will is something that cannot be approached with the imagination of modern times, that the will is the incomprehensible.

It is good preparation for the further development of a newer doctrine of the soul to understand this unreality of the soul in the life of the imagination, this confusion of life in feeling, this incomprehensibility of the action of the will. Once you have gained clarity in this way, I would say — although it sounds paradoxical, you have nevertheless gained clarity about a fact — then you can go further. Then one can apply that thinking which has been sharpened and strengthened through meditation, that life of the will which has subjected itself to self-discipline, one can apply it in order to become truly attentive to the moment, let us say, of awakening. Then the moment of waking up will be able to enter the field of mental observation in a very special way. Then one will experience something in waking up that cannot be experienced with an untrained soul life. Then, immediately after waking up, if one has acquired the necessary calm through the training indicated, one will be able to discover that the whole soul life, as it was at waking up, has actually continued in the unconscious. Only this soul life in the time between falling asleep and waking up has one characteristic: it does not evoke any memory of itself. And you notice this in a significant moment that occurs: during the entire time you were asleep, you let your soul flow in the same life in which it flows when you are awake; but this flow of the soul during sleep is not imprinted on your memory. Therefore, it is forgotten when you wake up. That is what matters.

As important as memory is for external life — I explained this the day before yesterday — forgetting is just as important, the experience of the soul in such a way that it can also forget what it has experienced, for the development of the soul, for the continued flow of the soul between birth and death, and so on. Yes, when one can observe the moment of awakening in this way, one begins to understand the significance of sleep in human soul life. One gains insight into the fact that our life could not continue if it were filled solely with memories, that memories lose the power to allow our life to flow on. It is precisely for this reason that we must sink into sleep, so that we can forget what we experience during the time we are asleep. For ordinary, everyday soul life is nourishment for the soul, it is the bringer of soul life, when it is forgotten, not when it is remembered. Memory consumes the soul. Forgetfulness restores the soul's life forces.

In this way, one gains a concrete, specific insight into the life process that is expressed in waking up. And through this, one sees, as it were, even if only in retrospect, the soul life that has taken place between falling asleep and waking up, over which ordinary consciousness is not poured out. With this insight into the life of the soul, one has gained an enormous amount, for one has thereby acquired the basis for a certain understanding.

No one can truly understand what it means to say, “I imagine” — what it means to say, “I form a thought in my soul life” — who does not really observe the moment of awakening. For when we pass from mere waking, from mere living in the waking state, to active thinking, to forming an idea of a thought, this is always qualitatively, albeit to a lesser degree, the very same soul process as waking up. And only those who know waking up in the intensification of the transition from the state of sleep to the state of wakefulness have thus created a basis for themselves for what answers the question: What actually happens in my soul when I form an idea? The power that is unfolded in the soul when one forms an idea is exactly the same as the power that must be unfolded, albeit to a much greater degree, when one wakes up. When one wakes up, the unconscious does this. What is conveyed to consciousness is what the unconscious does when we wake up, when we set out to think and imagine consciously and deliberately through inner effort.

This leads to a very specific view of imagination. What has become a mere empty phrase in ancient psychology is given concrete content again. We learn to understand imagination as a weaker awakening that exists in the waking state. It is a stirring, an awakening. And this is a meaningful insight; for by connecting this insight into the nature of imagination with the nature of awakening, the possibility arises of transforming the imagination of ordinary life, which otherwise leads into the unreality of the soul life, into reality. By connecting imagination with awakening, one gains the opportunity to connect with a reality that does not depend on oneself. Now, if one connects with this awakening and thereby learns about the nature of imagination, one turns to the moment of falling asleep.

Just as meditation is particularly helpful in exploring the moment of waking up, self-discipline of the will is particularly helpful in exploring the moment of falling asleep. And this self-discipline of the will makes it possible to really get into it, to observe falling asleep, to really observe how something similar happens when falling asleep as when waking up, with forgetting, with becoming aware that during sleep the memory of the soul life is erased. Otherwise, one can always argue that the body is somehow involved in what the soul experiences in sleep. If, through self-discipline of the will, one can consciously grasp the moment of falling asleep, then one notices that one submerges into the same soul life that one leaves upon waking, but that one submerges into this soul life in such a way that the possibility of perception involving the senses now ceases. One learns to recognize what it means to enter the supersensible world through falling asleep. One learns to know this immersion into the supersensible because one notices that one experiences something with this immersion into the supersensible that cannot come to consciousness through the consciousness one has in ordinary soul life, which is bound to the organization between birth and death and dependent on the organization. You notice the independence from the organism, about which otherwise illustrious people can argue for a long time. The matter must be observed; then you notice that when you fall asleep, you dive into the supersensible.

And then one learns to recognize the difference between the soul life one leaves behind when waking up and the soul life one plunges into when falling asleep. They are the same, namely, they are of a supersensible nature; but through the observation I have described, one notices a very significant difference. This difference can be easily brought before the mind's eye through a comparison.

The difference is that they differ like a person who is a child from a person who is old. Just as both are human beings, but at different stages of existence, of age, so both soul lives are supersensible beings: the one from which one rises again when one wakes up, and the one into which one submerges when one falls asleep. But the one into which one submerges when one falls asleep is, in a sense, the childlike, the young, and the one from which one awakens is the older one. One goes through a process from falling asleep to waking up. The life of the soul is transformed, so that—a comparison is always imperfect, of course—that into which one sinks is as similar to that in which one awakens as the child as a human being is similar to the old man as a human being. One must note this subtle difference. Then a certain foundation is laid for approaching an important component of our research into the life of the soul, namely the life of feeling.

The life of feeling, which for conventional psychology today consists only of a collection of words, can only be truly understood if one investigates it at the foundations that have just been developed, if one investigates it in such a way that, before the investigation, one has recognized the supersensible life of the soul from the moment of waking up and falling asleep. But before we come to the life of feeling, we must note something else important about falling asleep, make another important observation. We must ask the question: What is it that actually changes in the life of the soul when we fall asleep? What causes us to withdraw from sensory reality and submerge into supersensible reality when we fall asleep? — It is the transformation of the will. And the same thing that happens more intensely when I fall asleep happens to a lesser degree while I am awake, when I make a decision of the will. One cannot grasp the will unless one understands it on the basis of falling asleep.

What the will actually is in the depths of our soul life eludes our imagination, just as what happens during sleep eludes us. That is why you will find nothing about the will in scientific psychology. It is incomprehensible precisely because our imagination cannot grasp it. But if we know the process of falling asleep, then we know that our ordinary soul life, when it performs an act of will, also submerges, only to a lesser degree than in falling asleep. Every decision of the will is a less intense falling asleep with fully awake consciousness.

If we keep these two facts apart, that of waking up and that of falling asleep, the one relating to the life of imagination, which can be explained by waking up, the other relating to the life of the will, which can be explained by falling asleep, then we can begin to really grasp the mysteries of the life of feeling. Then it becomes possible to bring clarity to what is otherwise confusion in the life of feeling. How does one bring clarity to something? Through recognition. There is nothing else — I could prove this in detail from an epistemological point of view, but that would go too far today — in recognition, something is brought to clarity when there is precisely the difference, the exact real difference between the recognizer, between the perceiver and the perceived object, the perceived object.

The emotional life remains confused for the ordinary soul life because, in ordinary life, human beings do not need to distinguish between two things if they do not want to recognize the ordinary emotional life, two essential things within themselves that stand opposite each other, just as we stand opposite the external sensory world when we perceive this sensory world: the sensory world there, the human being here. Thus, two things stand opposite each other in emotional life.

What are the two? One first learns to recognize them, subject and object, when one can examine them on the basis of the ideas that have been gained as I have just described. Then one learns to recognize who the actual feeler is and what is actually to be perceived in emotional life. This reveals the highly remarkable fact that the one who feels is always the one — as paradoxical as it may sound at first — who has not yet been lived through by us. When we feel at this moment, it is the person whom we are only now beginning to live, and who will continue to live tomorrow and the day after tomorrow, and in the coming year, until our death, who feels within us. At the moment when we feel, the subject, the otherwise unknown subject, is our life, which already exists within us between the moment when we feel and the moment of death. And what is perceived is the life we have lived from birth to the moment when we feel — a very broad perspective of research, that emotional life lies in this starting point.

One can do many things—and I would not speak about these things if I had not conducted research in a wide variety of fields; there is a whole body of research and demands in this area—one can do many things to prove what I have just said in a completely scientific way of thinking. One need only take biographies that are written sensibly and apply them to the demand I have just expressed. Take a sensibly written biography of Goethe. Consider Goethe in 1790; study him as he was from 1790 until his death in 1832. Try to understand what peculiarities Goethe went through from 1790 until his death, and take this as it was perceptible in Goethe's emotional life in 1790. And now imagine in your soul what Goethe lived, lived inwardly, how he was touched by the outside world, from his birth in 1749 until 1790. And by forming a precise idea of how Goethe, after 1790, who was already inside, until 1832, perceived inwardly in a moment of 1790 what he had previously lived through, every feeling. Every feeling proceeds in such a way that our future being perceives our past being.

One can also make other observations. Try to acquire a perspective on people whom you have seen die, with whom you had the opportunity to live through perhaps a short period of time from a certain point in time until their death. Try to visualize very precisely how they lived, what their human essence was. And then try to realize — you will always arrive at a surprising result — how, for example, the fact that death was approaching poured out the actual character, the actual essence, through the emotional life.

These are two ways. Many other things open up in a truly scientific sense, albeit in a sense that comes close to the deepest inner interests of human nature, when one explores what I am hinting at here about the life of feeling. Then the life of feeling, the essence of feeling, does not remain the empty phrase that it is in ordinary scientific psychology today. If one simply wants to observe feeling in its confusion in the soul, then one cannot observe anything at all. Just as one cannot observe water unless one breaks it down into hydrogen and oxygen, so one cannot observe the life of feeling scientifically unless one can take it apart, break it down into what the human being was before he felt, and into what they were after they felt, if you do not know what is already there as a seed, as deep and active as the seed in this year's plant is for next year's plant.

By studying the life of feeling in this way, you will in turn come to a fulfillment of your ideas, a fulfillment with powerful content. And one will gain a knowledge of the soul for the emotional life that lives there from the outset, that we live everywhere, that we ourselves live through. And even the moments of the soul life will — when we know that what we feel in a moment does not stand alone — be connected with our entire becoming between birth and death. The future and past of our earthly existence flow into each other in every single, smallest feeling.

Similarly, but preferably only afterwards, when one has explored the life of feeling, one can approach the life of imagination according to the conditions I have described. This, however, yields even more surprising results, surprising because people consider what emerges to be completely paradoxical, since they are unfamiliar with it, neither in terms of the ordinary life of the soul nor in terms of the ideas of modern science.

If one learns to recognize how every conception, every thought is a weaker awakening, and if one observes inwardly the active element in the formation of ideas and the awakening, then by linking the image of the idea to this real act of awakening, one enters into a stream of perception that carries one forward and shows one that even awakening is something weaker than something else that is stronger. And this other, stronger thing that appears before one's eyes, as when, after seeing the image of a person, one then steps before reality, this other thing is the realization that every grasping of an idea, every awakening, is a repetition, weakened to an image, of what one might call the entry into earthly life through conception and birth. What one has spun out simply expands by establishing the inner connection between waking up and forming an idea, the power that one has gained by observing both not in isolation but in connection with each other expands. It expands by recognizing that in imagining, one does not live in reality, that one has an image. But it is precisely from the realization that one has an image, that one has something unreal, that one draws the power to approach something real, and one notices that every conception, every awakening is a weakening, image-weakening penetration into the physical world, a passing through the attraction of the physical shell, a passing through conception and birth.

And now one learns to recognize where something comes from that has moved very serious researchers for a long time. If one makes an effort to look at what has moved serious researchers since Locke, since Hume, since Bacon, with regard to human cognition, one comes to the conclusion that these researchers were never able to form satisfactory ideas about the relationship between human imagination and external sensory reality. They could not answer the question: How does the idea that is supposed to correspond to this sensory reality enter the human mind through the observation of external sensory reality? — If you have the prerequisites that I have presented to you today, you will notice that this question already suffers from a flaw, which I can characterize in the following way. Let us assume that someone observes that carbon dioxide is exhaled from humans. If they then come to the conclusion that carbon dioxide comes from the lungs and is therefore produced in the lungs, they are thinking something that is wrong. People think in this wrong way when, based on a superficial observation that is quite natural in ordinary mental life, they believe that the power of imagination comes from the body. It does not come from the body at all!

What is active in the body, in the life of the soul, is only the image that has weakened to become a picture when it enters the sensory life. And the power that reigns within us when we imagine is the same power — one comes to realize — that reigned before we even came into contact with the sensory world through conception. What thinks within us is not us at the present moment, it is the power that shines through from the time before birth, even before conception. That is why researchers could not figure out how imagination finds its way into human beings. That is also why imagination is considered to be unreal. Since birth or conception, imagination has transformed its reality into physical life. That which works spiritually within us, works supersensibly, which can only manifest itself in waking, which manifests itself in falling asleep, when we are not in the body, now lives powerfully in imagination. And through the knowledge of imagination, we are led to our pre-birth life, to our life outside the body in a completely scientific way, in a way that is close to modern natural science.

There is no need to slander the newer spiritual science, which is anthroposophically oriented, by saying that it rehashes old concepts that have come from Buddhism and the like. It does not do this, but rather appropriates an inner power of soul life that arises entirely from consistently pursued scientific thinking, which, however, because it is the consistent thinking of natural science, goes beyond what natural science itself can provide. And when the idea is truly grasped, it is recognized as an image, as a weaker reflection of what we experienced before we were in a physical body, what we experienced in the superphysical world before birth and before conception.

From the world of imagination, a tangible bridge is built to the comprehension of the supersensible, immortal human being. The borderline questions of existence are found through the correct comprehension of the elementary phenomena of the soul life. That is what matters.

And then one can also observe more closely: What is this faded, imagined prenatal life actually like? One can ask the question: If what is unreal in imagination is merely an image, if it were to really enter our physical life, not as an image but as reality, what would happen then?

This is a very significant point. Because this matter, taken out of its spiritual-scientific context, seems quite paradoxical at first, I would like to explain it using something more familiar. When we translate our imaginative life directly into reality, we get something that is actually very common in scientific research, but which is not placed within the overall context of knowledge in this field of research. When we experiment, we do not look at nature, but at what the human mind has put together. However, whenever we force nature into the experiment, we must kill the living being in nature. When we carry out the experiment, we actually have killed nature before us, because the experiment is entirely constructed according to the unreal methods of human imagination. This helps us, if we pursue it further, to recognize what would actually happen to us if imagination did not appear in our lives as a pictorial attenuation of the pre-birth, pre-conception life, but if it appeared as reality, as the reality that is present in the sensory field of life. That would kill us immediately.

Such is the connection of life. What we experience in images, in imagination, and that, if I may say so, is the pictorial echo of our supersensible life before conception, would be transformed into the same reality that the body has, it would kill us, it would be a poison within us, it would permeate us just as it would permeate us if we created an artificial human being and drove it through our blood and our muscles. We see how, in the context of nature, the supersensible enters into us, how it is the pictorial expression of itself. We can then move on to the investigation of the will and supplement the thought that is stimulated by it from one side.

We examine the will by exploring it in connection with falling asleep. We find that in waking daily life, every act of will involves a weakened falling asleep, that is, a descent into the supersensible world. Once this bridge has been established between the act of will and falling asleep, one has gained the power of research to continue the journey one takes from falling asleep in the observation of the soul. Then what one has gained in this journey expands, as one penetrates with one's observation not only to falling asleep, but to death. And one learns to recognize what dying means for human beings.

Science today often takes the easy way out with such concepts. It treats concepts such as death or dying in much the same way as if one were to say: a knife is a knife — and one is given a razor to cut one's flesh with. Although a knife is for cutting, a razor must be used and handled differently from a table knife.

Today, death is seen as something to be researched as such. Spiritual science does not take such a comfortable approach, because it deals with reality and does not seek to model reality on the basis of preconceived concepts and ideas. Spiritual science must ask in particular: What is death in the plant kingdom? What is death in the animal kingdom? What is death in the human kingdom? For death is not death, just as a knife is not a knife! Spiritual science is often slandered for using confused, obscure, nebulous concepts. But its very hallmark is that it seeks to navigate the clearest waters everywhere, that it makes demands on human ideas that presuppose clarity, conciseness, and unbiased observation! Those who say that spiritual science works with confused ideas are only bringing their own confused ideas into spiritual science.

Once the bridge between the act of will and falling asleep has been built, perception can be used to cross this bridge and see what death is in human beings. And then one realizes: the same forces that lead human beings out of the sensory world at the moment of death are, in an undeveloped, embryonic form, at work in human acts of will. Every time we want something, every time we translate our will into action, we create something that relates to dying in the same way that a child relates to an old person in terms of human existence.

But this also builds a bridge between what dies in everyday consciousness as elementary soul phenomena in the will, which is just as much a weakened dying as imagining is a weakened being born and being conceived by the soul. Only imagining is pictorial, while willing is embryonic. Willing is a reality; it is not an image, it is a reality. But it is still an unfinished act. If the act were to be completed, if it were to grow to full maturity, the act of will, it would always be a dying. What makes the will the will is that what is spun in willing remains embryonic, that it does not really come into existence. For if it were to develop further from the embryonic state of wanting in its full strength, it would always be a dying. We die by wanting, continuously according to our disposition. We carry the forces of death within us. And for those who can search the soul, every act of will is a weakened, that is, an embryonic dying.

Thus, in turn, an elementary act of the soul before the actual observation of the soul in modern times is connected with the great mysteries of human existence. Then one learns to recognize, just as one recognizes the trinity of being born, waking up, and thinking, the trinity of wanting, falling asleep, and dying. Then one can orient oneself precisely to falling asleep by exploring falling asleep, entering into the supersensible, withdrawing from the senses; there one has an embryonic dying. And one understands dying as a transition from the sensory world to the supersensible world. One can only recognize the embryonic nature of the will because one has previously recognized that when falling asleep, the young soul life comes before the soul. Otherwise, one would never be able to grasp the embryonic nature of the will with the soul's eye.

You see, thinking, feeling, and willing are understood from facts, and by becoming facts in the anthroposophically oriented soul teaching that must come, they simultaneously lead to the great boundary questions of human soul life. There is no fantasizing about some kind of immortality; rather, the nature of imagination is examined, which leads to immortality on the one hand, to life before birth. The will is examined. It leads to immortality after birth. And from this combination flows full immortality, the eternity of human nature, which is rooted in the supersensible world.

And as one learns more and more through meditative life — I can only hint at this — to recognize the unreality of the ordinary ego, which has surrendered its entire being to the body, then one learns, precisely from this unreality, by pursuing it in a similar way to the other impacts of soul life, to recognize what still seems so incomprehensible to modern man: repeated earthly lives, the passage of human beings through repeated earthly lives, between which lie lives in the spiritual world.

This overview, which, as I said, still sounds paradoxical today, does not necessarily have to be taken as a conclusion. For those who embark on the path of true soul research, as has been characterized today, the insights that guide them through imagination and will, which so directly suggest the supersensible to them from the moments of falling asleep and waking up, ultimately lead to the recognition of repeated earthly lives entering the soul.

Now, however, having described to you how to build a bridge from a psychology that is based on realities to the great borderline questions of human existence, I must also point out that the state of mind that underlies this and that must find its way into science, if there is to be a true science of the soul again, that this state of mind must actually bring about a special state of soul life for certain moments of research, not for the whole of outer life, but for certain moments of research. For if one wants to recognize correctly, as I have described today, one must come to be able to give waking and falling asleep a heightened significance in life. In a sense, one must not experience the life of the soul merely as an accompanying phenomenon, as it is experienced in ordinary existence. One must experience this soul life to a higher degree than one otherwise experiences real life, through the strengthening of thinking that I have described and through the self-discipline of the will. A state of mind is the prerequisite for this soul research, which is little known in ordinary life. I can most easily characterize it in the following way.

If one is truly active in ordinary life, if one is not lazy, then after a certain number of hours of being awake, one feels the need to sleep, to sleep peacefully. Just as one lives through this external existence in ordinary waking life in such a natural, self-evident way, so must one be able to live through every soul life as a soul researcher, which results from intensified thinking and self-discipline of the will.

But then certain phenomena must also be able to occur. For example, one can actually continue thinking, which is commonplace in ordinary life, without hindrance. One might sometimes feel anxious and fearful, especially when listening to coffee klatches or other things, as people can think incessantly, accompanying external life with their thoughts. This is not possible with the kind of soul life that I have described, which leads into the real, into the reality of the soul. When the soul researcher, as understood by anthroposophy, is active in such a way that he really arrives at the results I have presented to you today, then he very soon feels — for example, in his handling of what he is trying to bring out of the moment of falling asleep and waking up, in order to develop it further through intensified thinking and with the support of the will — he very soon feels just as necessary as one otherwise feels when one has physically exhausted oneself with muscles, hands, arms: One cannot continue working — this is how one feels spiritually after only a short time of research in the manner intended today: one cannot continue now, one needs rest. — And one finds this rest in ordinary daily life. Care has been taken to ensure that the true soul researcher does not become a dreamer, a lonely enthusiast, or an eccentric. For if he pursues soul research correctly, as I have described, he will speak of mental fatigue in the same way that the physical body becomes tired when one works hard at external tasks. And just as one needs rest and sleep there, so here one needs the transition to ordinary daily life, to the absolutely joyful, busy, completely ordinary everyday life. This completely ordinary everyday life is needed in a healthy way, not in an eccentric way. And this is as necessary to the soul researcher, the spirit researcher, as sleep is necessary to ordinary life.

Those who do not dream all kinds of fantasies and unrealities about the life of the soul, but penetrate into the true nature of the life of the soul in this serious way, as I have described, where simple phenomena lead to the highest questions of immortality and to the affirmation of immortality, will never become people who are useless for life. For his entry into the supersensible world requires him to stand robustly, in full healthy comprehension, in alert daily life, just as healthy alert daily life must seek variety in healthy sleep. That is one thing. There is more, but I must leave that unsaid today. But by pointing out these difficulties, I wanted to indicate the state of mind one must enter into if one wants to become a true soul researcher in the newer sense, in the anthroposophical sense.

I would like to follow up this lecture with something that could be a real supplement on natural science, social science, religion, and history. But that will not happen, although it is planned that further lectures will follow on from the one given here today.

You will have seen — I would like to note this in conclusion — that soul research, even when it is based on anthroposophical principles, is not about talking around in confused ideas, but that even when it comes to the question of immortality, anthroposophically oriented soul science must take a serious, trained approach. But this serious, trained approach will gradually come closer and closer to the popular way of thinking — today it still has to struggle with ordinary soul research and therefore choose expressions such as those I have used. For this soul research will bring soul matters out of the scholar's study and carry the results of its research into every human heart, into every human soul. It will not be exposed to the danger of relying solely on abstract, detached questions: What is imagination? What is will, memory, attention? What is love and hate? — Instead, it will build a bridge from the ordinary, everyday phenomena of imagination, feeling, and will to the pre-natal, the post-natal, to what I might call the supersensible life, to human immortality.

Such a study of the soul will in turn be able to fulfill the hopes, as Brentano called them, the soul researcher who did not, however, come to fulfill these hopes, the hopes of Plato and Aristotle, that through the study of the soul we can know something about the best of our being, which remains when the earthly mortal shell decays. Brentano, the brilliant man, attempted such a study of the soul from a scientific perspective, but he did not want to move on to actual supernatural research. However, since he was honest enough to go only as far as he could, the remarkable fact occurred that this researcher wrote the first volume of his “Seelenkunde” in 1873 and promised — the first volume appeared in the spring — to follow it with the second in the fall, then the third and fourth volumes. The following volumes never appeared! This is not only because, if one is familiar with Brentano's development—I have described it in my obituary, which can be found as the third chapter in my book Von Seelenrätseln (On the Mysteries of the Soul)— it is not only due to external reasons, it is also because Brentano felt the need to approach the phenomena of the soul with concepts other than the traditional ones, but he shied away from this for the reasons I discussed the day before yesterday, which still live in the subconscious of today's human beings, shied away from the transition to research into the supersensible. But if this transition to research into the supersensible is found, then there will also be a psychology that is not only of interest to scholars, but can encompass all of humanity, which can become the basis for a truly healthy human life, because it will not stop at what certain circles want to achieve artificially in the study of scholars, but because it will pour out of what springs from the heart of every healthy human being, from the soul of every healthy human being, as a spiritual need for knowledge. A popular psychology for every human being as the basis for a healthy religious life will be the psychology that goes into the supersensible, as meant here.

Anyone who is familiar with psychology and its situation in the present will be able to say — and with this I would like to conclude these reflections as a result that shines into the present and the future — anyone who knows where psychology can lead through supersensible research will say: Such a science of the soul, which has perhaps been characterized very imperfectly here today, such a science of the soul, which really leads to the question of the immortality of the soul, to the highest manifestations of the soul, must be the science of the soul of the future! For, either — as the study of the soul that is common today shows us — according to the opinion of philosophers who are quite right, such as Richard Wahle, the science of the soul will have no future at all, or this future will be as it must be according to the anthroposophical view of the world.

Answering questions

Question: From a spiritual scientific point of view, how does feeling relate to physical life?

I have attempted to address this very interesting question in the appendix to my book “Von Seelenrätseln” (On the Mysteries of the Soul). I have also stated there that, from a spiritual scientific point of view, such questions must have very significant prerequisites. One can only speak correctly about such things — spiritual science is very much connected with personal life — by recounting one's own research, so to speak. I can say that I have been dealing with questions of this kind for more than thirty years, and that I have approached them from a wide variety of perspectives before I dared to speak about such things publicly, as I did, in a suggestive way, in my book “Von Seelenrätseln” after thirty years. For such questions can only be answered by returning to them again and again in one's research: questions about the essence of the entire life of the soul, about the relationship of the entire life of the soul to the physical body.

And it became clear to me — for the sake of brevity, let me just hint at this — that these relationships are very poorly researched by conventional science. When people want to investigate these relationships, they usually talk about the soul on one side and physical life on the other. But then everything gets confused. This leads to no result at all. One only arrives at a result — as one realizes in the course of serious research — if one places the life of the soul on one side in such a way that it is truly divided into thinking, feeling, and willing experiences; then one can relate the whole life of the soul, which one now sees clearly differentiated, to physical life. And then it turns out that every part of this soul life has its own specific relationship to physical life. First, we must consider the imaginative, thinking life.

This imaginative, thinking life has its relationship to the nerve life, which is correctly understood, at least in scientific terms. And that is the mistake that is usually made, that the whole soul life is related to the nerve life. Today, however, it is still quite frowned upon in this field to hear the truth. But it will be recognized very soon. Today, the whole soul life, including feeling and willing, is related to the nerve life. But only the life of thinking should be related to the nerve life.

This also reveals that there really is a real connection — just as there is a true connection between the person standing in front of the mirror and the mirror — between thinking and the life of imagination and the life of the nerves. For those who focus on reality, not on preconceived notions, it becomes clear that the life of feeling is related to something completely different, just as the life of thinking is related to the life of the nerves. The life of feeling is demonstrably related to the life of the body in such a way that everything rhythmic in the life of the body corresponds to it: everything rhythmic, the rhythm of the blood, breathing, everything that has a rhythmic course, and the relationship is an immediate one, not one mediated by the nerves, but an immediate one.

One must not assume that spiritual science contemplates confused concepts, but rather works toward much more viable ideas than ordinary science, which is often confused. One need only examine something quite properly and realistically, such as a musical impression. The musical impression – one could easily object, of course; the spiritual researcher knows all the objections, he makes them himself, he does not need to hear them from those who want to make such objections, because he is already practiced in making every critical objection himself – one hears the musical tone with the ear, so the musical experience arises from the sensory impression. No, it's not that simple; it's quite different. In fact, there is a relationship between what is the actual musical experience, which is an emotional experience, and the whole rhythmic aspect of physicality.

You only need to think of a more hidden rhythm. In fact, when we inhale, very specific movements of the diaphragm always occur; this causes a continuous up and down oscillation of the cerebral fluid. This is a rhythmic, inner counterpart to what the musical experience is for the soul. Because this rhythmic experience, which is inherent in human beings as human beings, encounters what the sensory impression is, the musical experience arises in the harmony of the human physical rhythm with the auditory impression.

But the essential point is that the auditory impression only becomes a musical experience when it encounters the inner rhythm of human soul life. The musical experience, examined psychologically, is an enormously interesting one. It only confirms what I am saying, that the life of feeling is related to the rhythmic life of movement within the human being.

And the life of the will — as strange as that may sound — is related to metabolism, metabolism in the broadest sense. This seems most materialistic, even though the life of the will is precisely the most supersensible thing there is. Forces go into the life of matter; therefore, once natural science truly understands itself, it will be able to promote, not really bring about, but promote what I have said today in relation to the life of the will. For it will be found — the beginnings of this are already everywhere — that with every act of will certain poisons are produced by the human organism itself, that the process of will, “grasped physically,” is actually a toxic process. And this will build a bridge between the act of will, which is actually embryonic death because it is a toxic process, a kind of poisoning, and death itself, which is only an enlarged act of will.

I have thus shown how the three: will, feeling, and thinking relate to physical experience. I could only do so in a brief hint, and I can now move on to the other question, which, precisely because of the last remark, is somewhat related to what I have just said.

Question: How does spiritual science relate to psychopathology, i.e., the study of mental illness and so on?

There can be no such thing as actual mental or soul illnesses — I can only hint at this — but soul illnesses are actually always illnesses of the organism in some way. The organism cannot be used properly as an instrument. And just as we cannot perform the necessary functions with an unusable instrument, so too the organism, when it lives out the life of the soul, cannot perform these functions in the right way. This does not lead to materialism, but precisely to the correct recognition of the supersensible. And one thing is particularly interesting here. It is interesting that scientific knowledge, which increasingly pushes us toward experiments detached from nature, promotes all those scientific discoveries that form the basis of technology. But the more we experiment, I would say, the more we come to the scientifically based conviction that Goethe anticipated when he said that all experimentation that is done with tools, with external tools, actually leads away from nature.

But Goethe also correctly anticipated the opposite, which is very interesting. While experimentation cannot teach us anything meaningful about the deeper connections in nature, but only about the most superficial connections, the abnormalities that are given by nature itself lead us into the deeper connections. Experimentation pushes us out of the connections, so to speak; the abnormalities lead us deeper into nature.

Curiously, experimentation is very unproductive for psychology, which claims to be based on physiology, not in all areas, but at least in the most important ones. However, the observation of brain injuries and other disorders in the organism that also cause the psyche to appear abnormal is extremely productive. And we can say: while experimentation separates us from nature, the observation of the diseased organism brings us back together with nature. — Again, a paradoxical result; but one should not shy away from realities, should not be afraid, unconsciously afraid, if one wants to penetrate reality. The nature of the brain, even in criminals, for example, leads us deep into the mysteries of nature. This branch of natural science is not fruitless, but it is related to what can be researched in the humanities: that everything connected with the will — and the will, although it is an independent entity, has an effect on everything, including thinking — is in a certain sense, in a certain relationship, already connected with the creation of toxic states, of abnormalities in the human organism.

And when the misfortune occurs that the human organism becomes abnormal, then precisely because the supersensible is driven out of the abnormal organism — it only fits into the normal organism — that is, when the brain is injured, the supersensible is driven out. As a result, if the person otherwise remains connected to the supersensible, they cannot orient themselves; they lose their orientation. And this is what causes what is often perceived as pathological in the soul being, precisely in the abnormal.

So one can say that the real study of the will teaches us to recognize why the study of brain abnormalities and so on allows us to look so deeply into certain psychological connections. Just as we expel all our supersensible elements from our bodies when we fall asleep, just as we submerge ourselves in our soul life — but in a healthy way — so the organism that has become abnormal expels the supersensible in its diseased state. Then we enter disoriented, whereas when we enter in a healthy way, we are helped beyond these states when we sink into healthy sleep.