The Inner Nature and the Essence of the Human Soul
GA 80b
1 February 1921, Basle
Translated by Mary Adams
4. The Threshold In Nature and In Man
It will be clear, I think, from what has been said on earlier occasions that the Spiritual Science cultivated at the Goetheanum has nothing sectarian about it, nor does it set out to found a new religion. It gives full recognition to the progress of natural science in modern times, drawing indeed, in a certain sense, the ultimate necessary consequences of the whole trend and spirit of modern science. This will be particularly evident when we come to consider questions concerning our inner life and our knowledge of the world; and to-day I will ask your attention for one such specific question. It embraces a very wide realm, and all I can do here is to give a few indications towards its solution. I shall try to give these in such a way as to throw light on what we consider to be the tasks of the Goetheanum in Dornach.
The subject before us is concerned with two ideas that man can never contemplate without on the one hand feeling an intense longing awaken within him, and on the other being brought face to face with deep doubts and riddles. These two ideas are: the inner being of Nature and the inner being of the human soul.
In his knowledge man feels himself outside Nature. What would induce him to undertake the labour of cognition, were it not the hope of penetrating beyond the immediate region within which he stands in ordinary life, of entering more deeply into the Nature that presents herself in her external aspect to his senses and his intellect? It is, after all, a fact of the life of soul, and one that becomes more and more apparent the more seriously we occupy ourselves with questions of knowledge, that man feels separated from the inner being of Nature. And there remains always the question—to which one or another will have a different answer according to his outlook on the world—whether it be possible for men to enter sufficiently deeply into the being of Nature to allow him to gain some degree of satisfaction from his search. We have at the same time the feeling that whatever in the last resort can be known concerning the being of Nature is somehow also connected with what we may call the being of man's soul.
Now this question of the being of the human soul has presented itself to human cognition since very early times. We have only to recall the Apollonian saying: “Know thyself.” This saying sets forth a demand which the conscientious seeker after knowledge will feel is by no means easy of fulfillment.
We shall perhaps be able to come to a clearer idea of the tasks of the present day in this connection if we go back to earlier ages and remind ourselves of conceptions that were intimately bound up, for the men of olden times, on the one hand with the knowledge of the inner being of Nature, on the other with the self-knowledge of man. Let us then look for a little at some of these conceptions, even though they will take us into fields somewhat remote from the ordinary consciousness of to-day.
In olden times, these two aims—knowledge of Nature and knowledge of self—were associated in the mind of man with quite strange, not to say terrifying, conceptions. It was indeed not thought possible for man to continue in his ordinary way of life if he wanted to set out on the path to knowledge; for on that path he would inevitably find himself in the presence of deep uncertainties before he could come to any satisfying conviction. In our day we are not accustomed to think of the path of knowledge as something that leads us away from.the natural order of our life; it leaves us free to go forward in everyday life as before. And one must admit that the knowledge offered to us in our laboratories and observatories and clinics is not such as to throw us “right off the rails,” in the way attributed to the path of knowledge that the pupils of wisdom in early times had to tread.
They beheld a kind of abyss between what man is and can experience in ordinary life, and what he becomes and is confronted with when he penetrates into the depths of world-existence, or into the knowledge of his own being. They described how man feels the ground sink away from under his feet, so that only if he be strong enough not to succumb to giddiness of soul can he go forward at all into the field of ultimate knowledge. To tread this path of knowledge unprepared would involve man in a harder test than he is able to meet. Serious and conscientious preparation was necessary before he dare bridge the abyss. In ordinary life man is unaware of the abyss; he simply does not see it. And that, they said, is for him a blessing. Man is enveloped in a kind of blindness that protects him from being overcome by giddiness and falling headlong into the abyss. They spoke too of how man had to cross a “Threshold” in order to come into the fields of higher knowledge, and of how he must have become able to face without fear the revelations that await him at the Threshold. Again, in ordinary life man is protected from crossing the Threshold. Call it personification or what you will, in those ancient schools of wisdom they were relating real experiences when they spoke of man being protected by the “Guardian of the Threshold,” and of undergoing beyond it a time of darkness and uncertainty before ultimately attaining to a vision of reality, a “standing within” spirit-filled reality.
It is inevitable that in our day all manner of confused and hazy notions should connect themselves with such expressions as “Threshold,” “Guardian of the Threshold.” Let me say at once that mankind is undergoing evolution; nor is it only the outer cultural renditions that change and develop, but man's life of soul is changing all the time, moving onward from state to state; consequently the expressions which in olden times could be used to describe intimate processes in the life of soul, cannot bear the same meaning for present-day mankind. What man meant in olden times when he spoke of the Threshold and the Guardian of the Threshold was something different from the processes that take place in man to-day, when he resolves to go forward from ordinary knowledge to super-sensible knowledge; and it is only with a view to making more comprehensible what I shall have to say regarding these latter that I bring in a comparison with ancient conceptions.
What was it of which the men of olden times were afraid? What was it for which the pupil in the School of Wisdom had to be prepared by means of an exact and thoroughgoing discipline of the will—a discipline that should make the will strong and vigorous, able to stand firm in extremely difficult and perplexing situations in Life? Strange though it may sound, it becomes clear to us if we are able to survey the course of human evolution, that what men feared in those times was actually none other than the condition of soul which mankind in general has reached to-day. They wanted to protect the pupil from coming all unprepared to the condition of mind and soul to which we have been brought by the scientific education of the last three or four centuries. Let me illustrate this for you in a particular case.
We all accept to-day the so-called Copernican view of the universe. This view places the sun in the centre of our planetary system; the planets revolve round the sun, with the earth as a planet among the other planets. Ever since the time of Copernicus, this is the picture men have had. In earlier times, quite another picture of the world lived in the general consciousness of mankind. The earth was seen in the centre, and the sun and stars revolving round the earth. Man had, that is to say, a geocentric picture of the world. Copernicus replaced it with a heliocentric picture of the world. Man has now no longer the feeling of standing on firm ground; he sees himself being hurled through space, together with the earth, at a terrific speed. As for how it all looks to the eye, that, we are told, is a mere illusion, induced by relations of perspective and the like, to which human vision is subject.
Now, this heliocentric picture of the world already existed in earlier ages. Plutarch is a writer from whom we can learn a great deal concerning the men of olden times, and how they thought about the world. Let me read you a passage translated from his writings. Plutarch is speaking of Aristarchus of Samos, and he describes the way in which Aristarchus conceived the world. We are therefore taken back into early Greek times, into an epoch many centuries before the Middle Ages, and before Copernicus. In the opinion of Aristarchus, says Plutarch, the universe is much bigger than it looks; for Aristarchus makes the assumption that the stars and the sun do not move, but that the earth revolves round the sun as centre, while the sphere of the fixed stars, whose centre is also in the sun, is so immense that the circumference of the circle described by the earth is to the distance of the fixed stars as is the centre of a sphere to its entire surface.
We find thus in Greek times the heliocentric conception of the world; we find the very same picture as we have to-day of man's place in the planetary system and his relation to the heaven of the fixed stars. In olden times, however, this heliocentric conception of the world was a secret known only to a few, who had undergone a strict training of the will before such knowledge could be imparted to them.
It is important to grasp the significance of this fact. What is common knowledge to-day, freely spoken of by everyone, was in earlier times a wisdom known to a select few. What such a wisdom-pupil knew, for example, concerning the sun and its relation to the earth was considered a knowledge that lay “beyond the Threshold”; man must needs first cross the Threshold before he can come into those fields where the soul discovers this new relationship to the universe. The very same knowledge that our whole education renders familiar and natural to us to-day, was for them on the other side of a Threshold that must not be crossed without due preparation.
What we have shown with regard to the astronomical conception of the world could quite well be worked out for other spheres of knowledge. We should again and again find evidence of how the whole of mankind has in the course of evolution been pushed across what was for Olden times a Threshold on the path to higher knowledge. The apprehension that was felt in those times about the condition of soul evoked by such knowledge, has shown itself frequently in later centuries in the attitude of the churches, which preserve and tend to perpetuate the traditions of the past. Again and again the churches have rejected knowledge that has been attained in the progress of civilisation; and when, for example, the Roman Church refused to acknowledge the teaching of Copernicus (as it did until the year 1827), the reason was the same as [that which] in ancient times prevented the priests from giving out Mystery knowledge to the masses—namely, that the knowledge would bring man into uncertainty if he were not duly prepared beforehand.
Now it is well-known that no power on earth can withstand for long the march of progress; and we in these days have to think in an entirely new way about what one may call the “Threshold of the Spiritual World.” Spiritual Science is no “warming up” of Gnostic or other ancient teaching, but works absolutely on the principles of modern natural science, as I think will have been evident from the example we have been considering.
How was it that men of olden times feared knowledge which today is the common property of all mankind? In my book Die Ratsel der Philosophie1The Riddles of Philosophy, I have described the changes that have come about in man's mind and soul since early Greek times. The Greek had not a self-consciousness that was fully detached from the external world. When he thought about the world, he felt himself, so to speak, “grown together” with it; he was as closely united with it as we are to-day in the act of sense-perception. For him thought was also, in a manner speaking, sense-perception. Red, blue, G, C sharp—these are for us sense-perceptions; but thought we ourselves produce by inner activity. For the Greek this kind of inner activity did not yet exist. Just as we get red, green, G, C sharp from sense-perception, so did he get the thoughts too from the external world. He had not yet the independence that comes from the comprehension of self. Only quite gradually has the perception and understanding of the self developed to what it is to-day. Self-consciousness has grown steadily stronger in the course of time, and man has thereby detached himself from surrounding Nature. He has learned to look into himself, inwardly to comprehend himself as something that acts independently. In doing so he has placed himself over against Nature; he stands outside her, that he may then contemplate her inner being from without. And with this detachment of thought from external objective life is connected also the birth of the feeling of freedom, that sense of freedom which is in reality a product only of the last few centuries.
We have come to regard history more and more in its purely external aspect; but if we were to consider it, as we try to do in spiritual science, in a more inward way, we should discover that the experience we have to-day when we speak of “freedom” was not there for the Greek. Although we translate the corresponding word in their writings with our word “freedom,” the feeling we associate with the word was quite unknown to the Stoic, for example, and other philosophers. A careful and unbiased study of Greek times will not fail to make this clear.
I laid stress in my Philosophie der Freiheit2Philosophy of Spiritual Activity which was written in the early nineties, on the connection of the experience of freedom with what I called “pure thinking”—that thinking which is completely detached from the inner organic life, and which (if the expression be not misunderstood) becomes, even in ordinary life, cognition on a higher level. For when we permeate pure thinking with moral ideas and impulses—that is, with ideas and impulses that are not associated with desires, or with sympathies and antipathies, but solely with pure, loving devotion to the deed that is to be done—when we do this and allow the impulse to quicken in our soul to action, then the action we perform is truly free.
One cannot really put the question concerning freedom in the way that is frequently done, when it is asked: Is man free or unfree? All one can say is that man is on the way to freedom. By cultivating self-evolution and self-knowledge, by achieving inner liberation from his accustomed attitude of mind and soul, man is treading a path that will enable him to rise to pure thinking; and on this path he becomes increasingly free. It is thus not a matter of “either—or,” but rather of gradual approach, or, shall we say, of both. For we are at once free and unfree; unfree where we are still governed by our desires, by what rises up out of our organism, out of the life of instinct; free, on the other hand, where we have grown independent of the instinctive life, where we are able to awaken within us pure love for the deed that has been envisaged in pure thinking.
The condition of mind that leads to the experience of freedom—the condition, namely, of pure thinking, to which man is able to surrender himself—must necessarily, for present-day man, remain an ideal; an ideal, however, that is indissolubly bound up with his worth and dignity as man.
We are on the way to such an ideal, and it is natural science that has set us upon the path. In all the development of natural science in modern times—and the results of this natural science carry authority in the widest circles and tend more and more to become the groundwork of our whole education and culture—one thing stands out clearly. Study the development of natural science and you will be struck with the growing recognition of the value and importance of the thought—the thought that is elaborated by man himself inwardly. This is true in the realm of the inorganic, from physics up to astronomy, as well as in the realm of the organic, and in spite of the fact that scientists base their results everywhere on observation and experiment. And through the work he does in thinking, man develops an enhanced self-consciousness; which means, that his detachment from the inner being of Nature grows.
We can here take once more the example of Astronomy. What Copernicus did, fundamentally speaking, was to reduce to calculation the results of observation. In this way one arrives at a world system that is completely detached from man. The world systems of ancient times were not so; they were always intimately connected with the human being. Man felt himself within the world; he was part of it. In our time man is, so to speak, incidental. He sees himself hurled through universal space together with the planet Earth, and his picture of the whole structure of the world is completely divorced from himself; that which lives in his own inner being must on no account be allowed to play a part in his conception of the universe. Man becomes filled, that is to say, with a thought-content that is the means of detaching him from himself. True, he thinks his thoughts, and in thinking remains always united with his thoughts; but he thinks them in such a way that they have no sort of connection with what rises up out of his organism, out of his life of instinct. He is under necessity so to think that, although the thought remains united with him, it nevertheless wrests itself free from the human-personal in him, so that in his thoughts he becomes, in effect, completely objective.
And this experience brings man to greater consciousness of self. The strenuous efforts required for finding one's way to clear conceptions in the field of astronomy or physics or chemistry to-day, or even only for following in thought the results of others' work, are bound to lead to a strengthening of the consciousness of self.
In the ancient civilisations—and herein lies the great difference between them and our own—education was not directed to the strengthening of self-consciousness. Rather had it the tendency to make man's thinking correspond with what he saw with his eyes. So arose the Ptolemaic conception of the world, which in all essentials is a reproduction of what we perceive with the external senses. Man was not thrust so far out of himself as he is by the modern scientific outlook; hence his self-consciousness did not grow. He remained more within his body—held there, as it were, by enchantment. Consciousness of self he derived from his instincts, and from the feeling of life and vitality within him. Although in our age we have drifted into materialism, this living in the body has been overcome by the development of thinking; and the consciousness of self has grown correspondingly. The very fact that we have become materialists, and lost our awareness of the spiritual in the objects perceived by the senses, has contributed to the achievements of thought. In olden times it was feared that if a man were brought unprepared to the kind of thinking such as is necessary, for example, to grasp the heliocentric system, he would “faint” in his soul; his consciousness of self would not be strong enough to sustain him.
This accounts for the emphasis on the training of the will; for a strong and vigorous will strengthens also the consciousness of self. The preparation of the pupil in the Wisdom School was therefore directed primarily to the will, in order that he might grow strong enough to endure, beyond the Threshold, that picture of the world for which a highly-developed consciousness of self is required.
We see, then, what it was men feared in olden times for the pupil who was to be guided into the inner being of the things of the world, into the inner being of Nature. They were afraid lest he be hurt in his soul, through falling into a condition of uncertainty and darkness, a condition comparable, in the realm of soul, with physical faintness. This danger they hoped to avoid by a thoroughgoing discipline of the will. In ordinary life, they said, man must remain on this side of the realm where the dangerous knowledge is to be found; a Guardian holds him back from the region for which he is unfit, thus protecting him from being overcome by faintness of soul. And their description of the experiences the pupil had to undergo if he wanted to cross the Threshold and pass the Guardian correspond exactly to inner experiences of the soul.
It was told how, when the pupil draws near the Threshold, he immediately has a feeling of uncertainty. If he has been sufficiently prepared, he is able to stand upright in the realm which would otherwise make him giddy; he passes the Guardian of the Threshold and, by virtue of the powers of his soul, enters into the spiritual world—which the Guardian would otherwise not allow him even to behold. But he must be able also to stay in the spiritual world with full consciousness. For the tremendous experiences that await him there call for strength and not for weakness, and if he were to let go, these experiences would have a shattering effect on his whole organisation; he would suffer grievous harm.
And now the strange thing is that in course of evolution a knowledge that could be attained by pupils of the ancient Wisdom Schools only after most careful preparation has become the common property of all mankind. We stand to-day in our ordinary knowledge beyond what the men of old felt to be a Threshold. The purpose they had in view in the ancient Wisdom Schools was that the pupil, when he looked into his own inner being, should feel himself united there with the inner being of Nature. And believing that if he did so unprepared, he would sink into a kind of spiritual faintness, they would not allow him to attempt this exploration until he had received the right discipline and training. And yet in our age everyone penetrates into this region utterly unprepared!
As a matter of fact man is experiencing to-day precisely what the ancients took such care to avoid. He acquires his knowledge of Nature; and he acquires also a strong consciousness of self that enables him to stand upright amid all the knowledge that is current to-day in astronomy, physics, chemistry, biology, etc. He imbibes this knowledge and can remain steadfast without losing his balance. Nevertheless there is a quality in his life of soul that the men of old would deeply deplore. Because in the course of evolution we have acquired thought and the feeling of freedom and a stronger selfconsciousness, therefore we do not lose ourselves when we study the results of natural science; but we do lose something, and the loss is only too manifest to-day in the soul-life of mankind everywhere.
In this matter we labour under great illusion; we dream, and we cling to our dreams, and will not let them go. I have often spoken of how natural science brings conscientious students to a recognition of the boundaries of knowledge, boundaries man cannot pass without taking his power of cognition into forbidden—nay, into impossible—regions. A very distinguished scientist of modern times has spoken of the “Ignorabimus,” reading into the word a confession that however far we go in the knowledge we acquire from sense-observation and the intellect, we never penetrate to the inner being of Nature. I here touch on a subject that at once lands us in conflict, as was felt even at a time when natural science was far less advanced than it is to-day. It was Albrecht von Haller who expressed the “Ignorabimus” in the well-known lines:
To Nature's heart
No living soul can reach.
Thrice happy he
To whom she shows
Even her outer shell.
Goethe, who used constantly to hear these words on the lips of those who shared Haller's attitude towards Nature, labeled such thinkers “Philistine.” For him they are men who do not want to rouse themselves to inner activity of soul; for by dint of inner activity the soul of man can kindle a light within—a light which, shining upon the heart of Nature, shall carry the soul into her innermost being. Goethe proclaims this in forcible and trenchant manner in his poem Allerdings, quoting to begin with the words to Haller:
‘To Nature's heart
No living soul can reach.’
O Philistine,
To me and mine
What use in such a speech?
We think, through every part
We enter into her heart.
Still the cry goes,
‘Thrice happy he
To whom she shows
Even her outer shell.’
For sixty years I have heard that cry;
I curse it, but secretly, silently,
Say to myself a thousand times,
Gladly she gives and she gives us all!
Nature is neither kernel nor shell,
She is both in one; she is one and all.
Look in your own heart, man, and tell
If you yourself are kernel or shell!3English translation from Goethe and Faust; an Interpretation by F. M. Stawell and G. L. Dickinson. G. Bell & Sons, 1928.
Out of an instinctive feeling that was conscious and yet at the same time unconscious, Goethe rejected utterly the separation of the being of man's soul from the innermost being of Nature. He saw clearly that if the soul becomes conscious, in a healthy manner, of its own real being, then that consciousness brings with it the experience of standing within the innermost heart of Nature.
This conviction it was that kept Goethe from accepting Kant's philosophy. They make a great mistake who assert that at one time of his life Goethe came very near to the philosophy of Kant. In contradistinction to what Kant recognised as the human faculty of cognition, Goethe postulated what he called “perceptive judgment.” This means that in order to form a judgment we do not merely pass in abstract reasoning from concept to concept; rather do we use inwardly for thought the kind of beholding we use outwardly in sense perception. Goethe says he never thought about thinking; what he set himself continually to do was to behold the living element in the thought. And in this beholding of the thoughts he saw a way to unite the human soul with the very being of Nature.
Anthroposophical Spiritual Science would go further on the same path. This perceptive judgment—which, as presented by Goethe, was still in its beginnings—it sets out to develop in the direction indicated in my book How to Attain Knowledge of the Higher Worlds. Faculties of cognition, which in ordinary life, and in the pursuit also of ordinary science, remain latent in man, are led up to “vision,” to a “new beholding.” Just as man perceives around him with the physical eye colours, or light and darkness, so with the eye of the spirit does he now behold the spiritual. By the practice of certain intimate exercises of the soul, he calls forth and develops within him powers that usually remain hidden, and so lifts himself up to a higher kind of knowledge which is able to plunge into the very heart of external Nature. You have frequently heard me speak of the successive stages of this higher knowledge, and I would like here to say a little about their evolution from a particular point of view.
We are accustomed to think of the course of our life as divided between waking and sleeping. These two conditions must, we know, alternate for us if we are to remain healthy in mind and body. How is it with us from the time of awakening to the time of falling asleep? The experiences of the soul are permeated with thoughts; the thoughts receive a certain colouring from the life of feeling; and there is also the life of will, which wells up from dim depths of our being under the guidance of the thoughts, and accomplishes deeds. In the other condition, that of sleep, we lie still; our thoughts sink into darkness; our feelings vanish and our will is inactive. The ordinary normal life of man shows these two alternating conditions. The picture is, however, incomplete; and we shall not arrive at any satisfactory idea of the nature of man if we are content to see the course of his life in this simple manner.
We take it for granted that between waking up and falling asleep we are awake. But the fact is, we are not awake in our whole being. This is overlooked, and consequently we have no true psychology; we come to no right understanding of the soul. If, ridding ourselves of all prejudice, we try to observe inwardly what we experience when we feel, We discover that our feeling life is by no means so illumined with the light of consciousness as is the life of thought and ideation. It is dim, by comparison. For a sense of self, for an experience of self, the life of feeling is undoubtedly every bit as real as—even perhaps in some ways more real than—the life of thought: but clarity, light-filled clarity, is enjoyed by thought alone. There is always something undefined about the life of feeling. Indeed, if we examine the matter carefully, comparing different conditions of soul one with another, we are led finally to the conclusion that the life which pulsates in feeling may be compared with dream life. Study the dream life of man; consider how it surges up from unknown depths of his being; how it manifests in pictures, but in pictures that are vague and indeterminate, so that one does not see all at once exactly how they are connected with external reality. Has not the life of feeling the same quality and character?
Feelings are, of course, something altogether different from dream pictures, but when we compare the degree of consciousness in both, we find it to be very much the same. The life of feeling is a kind of waking dream; the pictures that appear in the dream are here pressed down into the whole organic life. The experience is different in each case, and yet the experience is present in the soul in the same manner in both. So that in reality we are awake only in the life of ideation; in the feeling life we dream even while we are awake.
With the life of the will it is again different. We do not as a rule give much thought to the matter, but is it not so that the impulse of will arises within us without our having any clear consciousness of its origin? We have a thought; and out of the thought springs an impulse of will. Then again we see ourselves acting; and then again we have a thought about the action. But we cannot follow with consciousness what comes between. How a thought becomes an impulse for the will and shoots into my muscle-power; how the nerve registers the movement of the muscles; how, in other words, that which has been sent down into the depths of my being as thought, comes to be carried out in action, afterwards to emerge again when I perceive myself performing the action—all this lives in me in no other way than do the experiences of sleep.
In deep sleep we have in a sense lost our own being; we pass through the experiences of sleep without being aware of them; and it is the same with what comes about through the activity of the will-impulse in man. We dream in our life of feeling, and we are asleep in our willing; dreaming and sleeping are thus perpetually present in waking life. And in these unknown depths of being where the will has its origin, arises also that which we eventually gather up—focus, as it were—in consciousness of self. Man comes to a recognition of his full humanity only when he knows himself as a being that thinks and feels and wills.
Ordinary life, therefore, embraces unconscious conditions. And it is just through the life of ideation becoming separated from the rest of the soul life and lifted up into consciousness, that a way is made for the development of the experience of freedom. Here, in a sense, we divide ourselves up. We are awake in a part of ourselves, in the life of ideation, whilst in relation to another part of us we are as unconscious as we are in relation to the inner being of Nature.
It is at this point that Anthroposophical Spiritual Science steps in with its methods for attaining higher knowledge. This spiritual science is very far removed from any dreamy, obscure mysticism, nor does it support itself, like spiritualism, on external experiment. The foundation for the whole method of spiritual scientific research lies in the inner being of man himself; it can be evolved in full consciousness and will manifest the same clarity as the most exact material conceptions. The world of feeling, which generally, as we have seen, leads a kind of dream life, can become hooded with the same light that permeates thoughts and ideas—which, according to some schools of philosophy, themselves originate in the feelings. By means of exercises described in my book, How to Attain Knowledge of the Higher Worlds. this lighting up of the world of feeling is brought about, with the result that the region which is usually dreamlike in character now lives in the soul as “imaginative” consciousness. The moment man gives himself up to this imaginative consciousness, something is present for him in consciousness that remains generally beneath the Threshold. He thinks pictures, knowing, however, quite well that he is not dreaming them, but that they correspond to realities.
Spiritual Science then leads on further, to “inspired” consciousness, and here we are taken into the realm of the will. Little by little, we are brought to the point of being able to behold clairvoyantly—please do not misunderstand the expression—how the whole human organisation functions when the will pulsates in it. We see what actually takes place in the muscle when the will is active. Such a knowledge is “inspired” knowledge. Man dives down into his own inner being and acquires a self-knowledge which is generally veiled from him. We come to know more of man than stands before us as “given” between birth and death. Feeling and willing being now also flooded with the light of consciousness, we can know man not only as a created being, perceiving in him that which wakes up every morning and enters again into a body ready-made; we can recognise in him also the creative power which comes down from spiritual worlds at the time of birth or conception, and itself forms and organises the body. In effect, at this further stage man comes to know his own eternal being which lives beyond birth and death; he attains to a direct beholding of the eternal and spiritual in his soul.
As man learns in this way to know himself, not merely as natural man, but as spirit, he finds that he is also now within the inner being of Nature; in the spirit of his own nature he recognises the spirit of the Nature that is all around him. And at this point a fact of deep significance is revealed—namely, that with our modern knowledge of Nature we are already standing on the other side of the Threshold, in the old sense of the word. The men of olden times believed they would lose their self-consciousness if they entered this region unprepared. We do not lose our self-consciousness, but we do lose the world.
The full clarity of thought and idea, to which man owes his consciousness of self, has been achieved by him only in modern times; and now this consciousness of self needs to be carried a step further. The men of old paid particular heed to the training of the will; we have now to press forward, as I emphasised in my “Philosophy of Spiritual Activity,” to pure thinking. We must develop our thinking; it must grow into Imagination, Inspiration and Intuition. And this will bring us once again to a Threshold, a new Threshold into the spiritual world. We must not remain in the world that offers itself for sense-perception and leaves the inner being of Nature beyond the boundaries of knowledge. We must cross another Threshold, the Threshold that lies before our own inner being.
At this Threshold we shall no longer let our imagination run away with us and conjure up all manner of atoms and molecules to account for the impressions of colour and sound and heat; for when we come consciously to recognise, and be within, our own spirit, then we shall find we are also within the spirit of Nature. We shall learn to know Nature herself as spirit. In the region where to-day we talk of an atomistic world (we are really only postulating behind Nature a second equally material Nature), in the very region where to-day we are losing the world, we shall find the spirit. And then we shall have the right fundamental feeling towards the inner being of Nature and, also, the being of the human soul.
It is, as you see, a different attitude we have to attain from that of olden times. We must be conscious that we are living in conditions the men of old wanted to avoid. This does not mean, however, that we are in danger of losing ourselves; our world of thought has been too strongly developed for that. And if we develop the world of thought still further, then we shall also not lose what we are in danger of losing. The men of olden times were threatened with the loss of self, with a kind of faintness of the soul. We are faced with the danger of losing the world for our ego-consciousness; of being so surrounded and overborne by purely mathematical pictures of the world, purely atomistic conceptions, that we lose all sense of the “whole” world in its infinite variety and richness. In order that we may find the world again—in order, that is, that we may find the spirit in the world—we must cross what constitutes for modern man the Threshold.
We may even put it this way: if the men of olden times feared the Guardian of the Threshold, and needed to be fully prepared before they might pass him, we in our day must desire earnestly to pass the Guardian. We must long to carry knowledge of the spirit into those regions where hitherto we have relied only on external sense-perception in combination with the results of intellectual reasoning and experiment. Knowledge of the spirit must be taken into the laboratory, into the observatory and into the clinic. Wherever research is carried on, knowledge of the spirit must have place.
Otherwise, since all the results that are arrived at in such institutions come from beyond the Threshold, man is thereby cut off from the world in a manner that is dangerous for him. He feels himself in the presence of an inner being of Nature which he can never approach on an external path, which he can approach only by becoming awake in his soul and pressing forward to the immortal part of his own being. As soon, however, as he does this, he is at that moment also within the spirit of Nature. He has stepped across the Threshold that lies in his own being, and finds himself in the presence of the spiritual in Nature.
To point out to man this path is the task of Anthroposophical Spiritual Science. It has to give what the other sciences cannot give. And it may rightly claim to be Goethean, for to those who say:
To Nature's heart
No living soul can reach.
Goethe replies:
Nature is neither kernel nor shell,
She is both in one, she is one and all.
Look in your own heart, man, and tell
If you yourself are kernel or shell!
We are “shell” as long as we remain in the life of ideas alone. We sever ourselves from Nature, and all we can do is to talk about her. But the man who penetrates to his own inner “kernel,” and experiences himself in the very centre of his soul—he discovers that he is at the same time in the very innermost of Nature; he is experiencing her inner being.
Such, then, is the kind of impulse that Anthroposophical Spiritual Science is ready to give to the whole of human life, and in particular to the several sciences. These several sciences need not remain the highly specialised fields that they have been hitherto; rather shall each be a contribution to that quest which man must ever follow if he would rise to a consciousness of his true dignity—the quest for the eternal in the human being. All that the individual sciences can teach to-day is still only a knowledge that looks on Nature from without. But if those who are working in them tread, as well as the outer, also the inner path of knowledge, then the knowledge acquired in the different fields can grow into a knowledge of man, a comprehensive knowledge of mankind. We need such a knowledge in our time if we are to guide the social problems of the future into paths where right and healthy solutions can be found—as I have explained in my book, “The Threefold Commonwealth.”
One who carries deeply enough in his heart the development of spiritual science will find himself continually face to face with this question of the connection between the being of man and the inner being of Nature. The specialised sciences cannot help us here; they only spread darkness over the world. The darkness is to be feared, even as the men of olden times feared the region beyond the Threshold. But it is possible for man to kindle a light that shall light up the darkness; and this light is the light that shines in the soul of man when he attains to spiritual knowledge.
Das Innere Der Natur und das Wesen der Menschenseele
Meine sehr verehrten Anwesenden! Gestern erlaubte ich mir, im Allgemeinen zu sprechen über die Aufgaben des Goetheanums in Dornach, und ich denke, dass aus den gestrigen Ausführungen hervorgegangen ist, wie diejenige geisteswissenschaftliche Richtung, die in diesem Goetheanum gepflegt wird, nichts zu tun hat mit irgendeiner sektiererischen, auch nichts zu tun hat etwa mit dem Versuch einer neuen Religionsgründung oder dergleichen, sondern dass sie steht durchaus auf dem Boden einer wissenschaftlichen Weltanschauung, einer solchen wissenschaftlichen Weltanschauung, welche durchaus rechnen will mit den Fortschritten des modernen naturwissenschaftlichen Erkennens, welches gewissermaßen fortwährend sich innerlich Rechenschaft ablegen will in der Richtung, dass ihre Methoden, dass die ganze Art ihres Forschens in der Richtung wohl liegt, welche die neuere Erkenntnis anstrebt, aber die zu gleicher Zeit in einem gewissen Sinne die letzten notwendigen Konsequenzen dieser neuzeitlichen Forschungsrichtung zieht. Insbesondere zeigt sich dieses dann, wenn man auf spezielle Fragen der Menschenseele, der Welterkenntnis eingeht, und auf eine solche spezielle Frage gestatten Sie mir heute einzugehen. Allerdings werde ich nur, da ich gerade mit dieser Frage ein sehr weites, ausgebreitetes Gebiet betrete, werde ich nur einzelne Andeutungen geben können. Allein ich werde versuchen, diese Andeutungen so zu geben, dass sie in einer gewissen Beziehung beleuchten gerade dasjenige, was mit den Aufgaben des Goetheanums in Dornach in einem weiteren und engeren Sinne zusammenhängt.
Dasjenige, was das heutige Thema enthält, sind ja zwei Ideen, zwei menschliche Impulse, nach denen des Menschen Seele fortwährend in solcher Weise hinblicken muss, dass auf der einen Seite ihre intensivsten Sehnsuchten wach werden, auf der anderen Seite immer wieder und wiederum Rätsel und Zweifel vor ihr stehen: «Das Innere der Natur und das Wesen der Menschenseele.»
Das Innere der Natur: Der Mensch fühlt sich mit seiner Erkenntnis in einem gewissen Sinne außerhalb der Natur, denn wie sollte er denn überhaupt veranlasst sein, Erkenntnisarbeit zu verrichten, wenn diese Erkenntnisarbeit nicht den Zweck haben sollte, über dasjenige hinauszudringen, indem man im gewöhnlichen Leben steht, wenn diese Erkenntnisarbeit nicht den Zweck haben sollte, tiefer hineinzukommen in dasjenige, was sich dem Sinne und dem kombinierenden Verstande nach der Außenseite als Natur darbietet? Es ist einmal eine innere Tatsache des Seelenlebens, die umso mehr auftritt, je ernster man es mit den Erkenntnisfragen nimmt, dass man sich von der Natur, von dem Innern der Natur in einem gewissen Sinne getrennt fühlt. Und dann ist es eine Frage, die sich der eine nach seiner Weltanschauung so, der andere anders beantwortet, ob man in dieses Innere der Natur genügend weit hineinkommen könne, so weit hineinkommen könne, dass der Mensch aus diesem Hineinkommen eine gewisse Befriedigung schöpfe oder nicht. Man fühlt ja wohl auch, wie in einer gewissen Weise zusammenhängt dasjenige, was man eventuell wissen kann über das Innere der Natur, mit demjenigen, was man nennen kann das Wesen der Menschenseele.
Aber auf der anderen Seite steht wiederum diese Frage nach dem Wesen der Menschenseele — man möchte sagen — wie etwas Uraltes vor der menschlichen Erkenntnis. Man braucht sich nur zu erinnern an das Herübertönen des apollinischen Griechenspruches «Erkenne dich selbst». Er enthält eine Aufforderung, eine Aufforderung, von der gerade der gewissenhafte Erkenner fühlt, dass sie nicht so ohne Weiteres zu erfüllen ist.
Man wird sich vielleicht — meine sehr verehrten Anwesenden - orientieren können über dasjenige, was nach diesen Richtungen für die Menschenseele vorliegt, und was insbesondere zu den Aufgaben der Gegenwart auf diesem Gebiete gehört, wenn man sich zurückerinnert an Vorstellungen, die in älteren Zeiten ernst und gewissenhaft strebende Menschen verbunden haben auf der einen Seite mit der Erkenntnis des Naturinneren, auf der anderen Seite mit der Selbsterkenntnis des Menschen, und ich möchte heute auf solche Vorstellungen hinweisen, obwohl sie dem gewöhnlichen Bewusstsein der Gegenwart etwas ferner liegen. Ich möchte hinweisen darauf, dass mit ganz besonderen - man möchte fast sagen — schreckhaften Vorstellungen in alten Zeiten gedacht worden ist an die Zielpunkte der Naturerkenntnis und der Selbsterkenntnis.
Man hat sich vorgestellt, dass der Mensch nicht ohne Weiteres seinen gewöhnlichen Lebensgang durchmachen könne, wenn er zu diesem Ziele der Erkenntnis strebt, dass er Überwindungen, Entbehrungen, Leiden, Schmerzen auch vor sich habe, dass er in Ungewissheiten hineinkomme, bevor er irgendwie zu einer befriedigenden Gewissheit kommen könne. Wir sind heute gewöhnt, nach unseren gebräuchlichen Ideen, auch im Erkenntnisweg, den wir so durch unsere Bildungsanstalten gehen, etwas zu sehen, was uns gewissermaßen nicht aus dem alltäglichen Geleise bringt, was uns in gewohnter Weise fortschreiten lässt. Und man muss ja auch sagen: Durch dasjenige, was wir antreffen in unseren Laboratorien, in unseren Observatorien, in unseren Kliniken, durch das können wir nicht in einer solchen Weise aus dem Geleise gewissermaßen geworfen werden des gewöhnlichen Lebens, wie es geschildert wird vielfach von den Erkenntniswegen, die in alten Zeiten von den Schülern der Weisheit gegangen werden mussten.
Man sah gewissermaßen eine Art Abgrund zwischen dem, was der Mensch im gewöhnlichen Leben ist, was der Mensch im gewöhnlichen Leben erfahren kann, und demjenigen, was er wird, wenn er in die Tiefen des Weltenseins und in die Erkenntnis der eigenen Wesenheit hineindringt und was ihm da entgegentritt. Man schilderte diesen Abgrund als etwas, was in einer gewissen Beziehung dem Menschen den Boden eben unter den Füßen wegnimmt, sodass er sich schwindelfrei — innerlich seelisch meine ich das —, schwindelfrei in das Feld letzter Erkenntnisse hineinbegeben müsse. Und man sagte, der Mensch im gewöhnlichen Leben könnte es gar nicht ertragen, ohne Vorbereitung diesen Weg in die höheren Erkenntnisse hinein anzutreten, er braucht solche ernste, gewissenhafte Vorbereitung, und erst, wenn er sie hat, kann er es wagen, den Abgrund zu überspringen. Der Mensch würde gewissermaßen im gewöhnlichen Leben in einer Seelenverfassung gehalten, die ihn unwissend sein lässt über diesen Abgrund, ihn diesen Abgrund nicht sehen lässt. Das sei eine Wohltat für ihn. Er sei gewissermaßen eingehüllt in eine Art von Blindheit. Er sei behütet davor, sich unversehens in denjenigen Abgrund hineinzustürzen, der da aufgerichtet ist vor der letzten Erkenntnis der Dinge.
Und man — nennen Sie es personifiziert oder dergleichen, obwohl es durchaus reale Erlebnisse bezeichnete in jenen alten Weisheitsschulen —, man sagte: Der Mensch hätte zu überschreiten, um in die Gefilde der höheren Erkenntnis zu kommen, eine gewisse Schwelle, und er müsse furchtlos gegenüber demjenigen geworden sein, was sich ihm bei dieser Schwelle für sein Seelenleben enthüllt - und im gewöhnlichen Leben sei er behütet, behütet durch seine allgemeine Seelenverfassung. Das, was ihn da hütete, das kann man wiederum personifiziert nennen den Hüter der Schwelle. Wie gesagt, man kann das personifiziert nennen; allein für denjenigen, für den Seelenerlebnisse eine Realität sind, für den sind diese Dinge auch keine Personifikation, sondern sie sind eben etwas, was durchgemacht, was überwunden werden muss, überwunden werden muss, wenn der eine Zustand - wie man meinte in jenen alten Zeiten —, der eine Zustand der Unwissenheit und Finsternis überwunden werden soll und erreicht werden soll der Zustand lichtvollen Anschauens der geistigen Wirklichkeit und des Darinnenstehens innerhalb dieser geisterfüllten Wirklichkeit.
Nun möüssen sich natürlich zunächst für den heutigen Menschen mit solchen Begriffen «Schwelle», wie «Hüter der Schwelle» höchst unbestimmte Dinge verquicken. Ich möchte gleich vorausschicken: Die Menschheit ist durchaus — das habe ich ja in vielen Vorträgen, die ich von derselben Stelle hier halten durfte, gesagt —, die Menschheit ist durchaus in einer Entwicklung, die Menschheit schreitet von Zustand zu Zustand, und da entwickeln sich nicht nur die äußeren Kulturverhältnisse, da entwickelt sich auch von Stufe zu Stufe das Seelenleben, und dasjenige, womit in alten Zeiten gerade die intimsten Vorgänge dieses Seelenlebens bezeichnet werden konnten, das kann nicht für die heutige Menschheit gelten. Daher werden wir auch, wenn wir charakterisieren wollen — und wir wollen das, um uns zu orientieren über diese Dinge —, wir werden, wenn wir charakterisieren wollen dasjenige, was in alten Zeiten verstanden worden ist unter «Schwelle» und «Hüter der Schwelle», wir werden es uns anders zu denken haben, als es gilt für diejenigen Vorgänge, die sich für den heutigen Menschen abspielen, wenn er aus den gewöhnlichen Erkenntnissen zu den übersinnlichen vorschreiten will. Und um das Letztere charakterisieren zu können, möchte ich, rein um etwas verständlicher zu werden, den Vergleich mit den alten Vorstellungen heranziehen. Und man kann im Grunde genommen leichter als mancher, der diese Dinge nur historisch betrachtet, ohne geisteswissenschaftliche Untersuchung zu Hilfe zu ziehen, man kann hinweisen auf dasjenige, was eigentlich als etwas — ich sagte schon, man möchte es fast schreckhaft nennen —, was eigentlich als etwas Schreckhaftes, als etwas Furchtbares, als etwas, was zunächst für den Unvorbereiteten zu vermeiden ist, was da in dieser Art in den alten Weisheitsschulen hingestellt worden ist.
Im Grunde genommen, was fürchtete man für das unvorbereitete Seelenleben in jenen alten Zeiten, und wofür suchte man zunächst den Schüler in der Weisheitsschule vorzubereiten durch eine ganz bestimmte Zucht des Willens, der stark und energisch werden sollte, der lernen sollte, sich aufrecht zu erhalten in schwierigen, schwindelerregenden Fällen des Lebens? Was fürchtete man eigentlich für den Unvorbereiteten? Nun, so sonderbar es klingen mag — meine sehr verehrten Anwesenden —, wer überschaut den Entwicklungsgang der Menschheit, der kann durchaus einsehen, dass dasjenige, was man im Wesentlichen fürchtete, dass das derjenige Zustand der Seelenverfassung ist, den einfach die gegenwärtige Menschheit bis zu einem gewissen Grade durch die äußerliche Kultur erreicht hat. So sonderbar das klingt, dasjenige wollte man vermeiden bei dem unvorbereiteten Schüler des Altertums, dass er ohne Weiteres zu einer solchen Seelenverfassung komme, wie sie innerhalb unserer Kultur heute ganz allgemein ist, namentlich allgemein ist durch die naturwissenschaftliche Bildung der letzten drei bis vier Jahrhunderte. Ich möchte Ihnen an einem einzelnen Fall das versinnlichen.
Nicht wahr, die Menschheit bekennt sich heute zu der sogenannten kopernikanischen Weltanschauung. Diese Weltanschauung setzt die Sonne in den Mittelpunkt unseres Planetensystems, lässt die anderen Planeten um diese Sonne herum kreisen, die Erde als einen der Planeten mit den anderen. So wie das heute von der Menschheit vorgestellt wird, geschieht es seit der Zeit des Kopernikus. Vorher hatte man im allgemeinen Bewusstsein ein anderes räumliches Weltbild von unserem Planetensystem. Man hatte das Weltbild, welches die Erde in den Mittelpunkt unseres Systems gerückt hatte. Man ließ die Sonne und die Sterne um diese Erde herumgehen. Man hatte — wie man sagen kann — ein geozentrisches Weltbild, ein solches, welches eben die Erde in den Mittelpunkt unseres Planetensystems rückte. Der Kopernikus setzte an die Stelle das heliozentrische Weltbild. Der Mensch wurde gewissermaßen in eine Lage versetzt, sodass er einen festen Boden im Weltenall nicht unter seinen Füßen hatte, sondern mit einer Riesengeschwindigkeit durch den Raum geschleudert wird mit der Erde zugleich. Und dasjenige, was der Augenschein bietet, das sollte nur eine Illusion sein, hervorgerufen durch gewisse perspektivische und andere Verhältnisse, die sich aus der menschlichen Anschauung ergeben.
Nun braucht man nur eine gewisse Stelle zu lesen bei jenem Plutarch, der uns vieles mitteilt über alte Anschauungen und Menschen der älteren Zeit, und man wird sich überzeugen, dass dasjenige, was wir heute heliozentrische Weltanschauung nennen, im Allgemeinen durchaus nicht bloß eine Errungenschaft unserer Zeit ist. Ich möchte die betreffende Stelle Ihnen in wörtlicher Übersetzung vorlesen. Sie bezieht sich auf Aristarch von Samos und die Art und Weise, wie er sich das Weltenbild vorgestellt hat; und wir werden dadurch zurückversetzt in frühere griechische Jahrhunderte, also in eine Zeit, die Jahrhunderte und Jahrhunderte vor dem Mittelalter, vor dem Kopernikanismus liegt. Nach seiner Meinung, sagt Plutarch: Die Welt ist viel größer als soeben gesagt wurde. — Er hat nämlich vorher dasjenige beschrieben, was der Augenschein darbietet, denn er, Aristarch von Samos, setzt voraus, dass die Sterne und die Sonne unbeweglich seien, dass die Erde sich um die Sonne als Zentrum bewege und dass die Fixsternsphäre, deren Zentrum ebenfalls in der Sonne liege, so groß sei, dass der Umfang aus von der Erde beschriebenen Kreisen sich zu der Distanz der Fixsterne verhalte wie das Zentrum einer Kugel zu der Oberfläche.
Wir haben im griechischen Altertum die heliozentrische Weltanschauung, wir haben im Wesentlichen, wenigstens insofern in Betracht kommt die Stellung der Menschenseele zum Weltenall, im Wesentlichen dasselbe, was die heutige Menschheit auch über ihre Stellung zum Planetensystem, zum Fixsternhimmel denkt. Diese heliozentrische Weltanschauung war allerdings in jenen alten Zeiten gewissermaßen das Geheimnis einiger weniger, und zwar gerade derjenigen, die sorgfältig vorbereitet wurden, die so vorbereitet wurden, dass ihnen eine besondere Zucht des Willens angedeihen gelassen wurde, dass sie stark werden mussten von Willen; dann erst überlieferte man ihnen eine solche Erkenntnis.
Das ist etwas, worauf man hinsehen sollte sehr bedeutungsvoll, dass es in alten Zeiten eine Weisheit weniger, gut vorbereiteter Menschen — der Weisheitsschüler im Besonderen — war; was heute Allgemeingut ist, wovon heute in einer gewissen Beziehung jeder redet. Und wie gesagt, so sonderbar es klingen mag, dasjenige, was solch ein Weisheitsschüler zum Beispiel über die Sonne und ihr Verhältnis zur Erde wusste, von dem stellte man sich vor, es liege für den Menschen jenseits der Schwelle, man müsse erst die Schwelle überschreiten, dann ist man in jenen Gefilden, wo die Seele sich anders stellt zum Weltenall als vorher. Mit anderen Worten, die Alten versetzten jenseits einer Schwelle — um die zu überschreiten, musste man erst gut vorbereitet sein — dasjenige, worinnen heute jeder durch die ganz allgemeine Menschenbildung drinnensteht. Und warum geschah das in jenen alten Zeiten?
Man könnte — meine sehr verehrten Anwesenden — dasjenige, was ich jetzt durch das Beispiel der astronomischen Weltanschauung erörtert habe, man könnte es für andere Gebiete des menschlichen Erkennens durchaus ebenfalls erörtern, und überall würde sich zeigen, dass wir im Grunde genommen einfach durch die Zivilisationsentwicklung der neueren Zeit als ganze Menschheit hinübergeschoben worden sind über dasjenige, was man in jenen alten Zeiten die «Schwelle zur höheren Erkenntnis» nannte. Es ist aus den Empfindungen — die man hatte gegenüber jenem Zustand der Seele, in den sie kommt, wenn sie in solche Erkenntnis eintritt —, aus ihren Empfindungen ist das zurückgeblieben, was bei den verschiedenen Konfessionen, die Traditionelles fortpflanzen, dann dazu geführt hat, einfach abzulehnen dasjenige, was in dieser Weise durch die Zivilisation heraufgebracht worden ist. Wenn zum Beispiel die katholische Kirche bis zum Jahre 1822 nicht anerkannt hat die kopernikanische Lehre, so war der Grund dieses Nichterkennens dasjenige, was aus jenen Altertumszeiten zurückgeblieben ist von dem Grunde, von dem geglaubten Grunde dieser Ablehnung. Man hielt das für etwas, was den Menschen in Unsicherheit hineinbringt, wenn er nicht in genügender Weise vorbereitet ist.
Nun — meine sehr verehrten Anwesenden —, gegen den Fortschritt kann auf die Dauer sich keine Macht der Erde auflehnen. Aber über solche Dinge muss doch in ernster Weise unter Menschen verhandelt werden, denn über dasjenige, was man nennen kann die Schwelle zur geistigen Welt, muss eben durchaus heute völlig anders gedacht werden, als in alten Zeiten gedacht worden ist. Einfach an diesem Beispiel, das ich in der Weise, wie ich es eben tue, erörtere, könnten diejenigen, die nicht aus leichtgeschürzten Verleumdungen heraus anthroposophische Geisteswissenschaft charakterisieren wollten, sondern wirklich auf sie eingehen wollten, sie könnten erkennen, dass diese Geisteswissenschaft nichts zu tun hat mit dem Aufwärmen irgendwelcher alter gnostischer oder ähnlicher Dinge, sondern dass sie durchaus herausarbeitet aus der modernen Wissenschaftlichkeit.
Warum — sage ich — hat man in jenen alten Zeiten eine gewisse Furcht, etwas Schreckhaftes gehabt vor dem Hineingehen in diejenigen Erkenntnisse, die heute durchaus Allgemeingut der Menschheit sind? Nun — meine sehr verehrten Anwesenden —, ich habe hingewiesen auf jene Tatsache, die da vorliegt für die Menschheitsentwicklung, in meinem Buche «Die Rätsel der Philosophie», indem ich gezeigt habe, wie in der Tat die Seelenverfassung der Menschheit sich seit den alten griechischen Zeiten ganz wesentlich bis in unsere Tage verändert hat. Dasjenige, was für den Griechen ganz eigentümlich war, das war, dass er noch nicht ein völliges von der Außenwelt losgelöstes Selbstbewusstsein hatte. Wenn er die Welt dachte, so war er in einem ähnlichen Sinne mit dieser Welt verwachsen, wie wir es heute sind, wenn wir nur sinnlich wahrnehmen. Für den Griechen war der Gedanke in einem gewissen Sinne auch eine sinnliche Wahrnehmung.
Wie wir das Rot, das Blau, das G, das Cis aus den sinnlichen Wahrnehmungen schöpfen, den Gedanken aber innerlich aktiv dazu bringen, sodass wir es selbst sind, die im Gedanken arbeiten, so war für den Griechen dieses innerliche aktive Arbeiten noch nicht da. Er entnahm ebenso wie wir den sinnlichen Wahrnehmungen — ebenso wie wir das Rot und Grün, das G und Cis der Sinneswahrnehmung —, so entnahm er auch die Wahrnehmungen von der äußeren Welt. Für ihn löste sich die Gedankenwahrnehmung noch nicht los von der äußeren Welt. Er hatte noch nicht jene Selbstständigkeit im Erfassen jenes menschlichen Selbstes, das erst im Laufe der Menschheitsentwicklung in der Art, wie es heute allgemein bekannt ist, heraufgezogen ist. Das Ich-Bewusstsein ist im Laufe der Zeiten im Wesentlichen verstärkt worden. Dadurch hat der Mensch in einer gewissen Weise sich losgelöst von der umgebenden Natur. Er ist dazu gekommen, in sich hineinzuschauen und im Innerlichen sich als etwas Selbsttätiges zu erfassen. Dadurch aber hat er sich gegenübergestellt der Natur, gewissermaßen sich aus der Natur herausgestellt, um dann das Innere der Natur wie etwas außer ihm Liegendes zu betrachten.
Diese Betrachtung des Inneren der Natur wie etwas, was außerhalb der Menschenseele liegt, sie trat erst im Laufe der Zeiten hervor. Im alten Griechentum fühlte sich der Mensch mit seinem ganzen Gedankenleben noch im Inneren der Natur drinnen. Er fühlte noch verbunden das Weben der Menschenseele mit dem Inneren der Natur. Im Weiterschreiten der Entwicklung ist das dann anders gekommen. Der Mensch ist gerade dadurch zum Erfassen seines Selbstes gekommen, dass der Gedanke sich losgelöst hat von dem äußeren objektiven Leben. Und mit diesem Loslösen des Gedankens von dem äußeren objektiven Leben, mit dem hängt wiederum zusammen das Heraufkommen des Freiheitsgefühles, des Freiheitssinnes, der im Wesentlichen auch ein Ergebnis ist der neueren Jahrhunderte.
Würde man die Geschichte mehr innerlich betrachten, würde man nicht nur immer mehr und mehr dazu gekommen sein, in den letzten Zeiten, das Äußere der Geschichte anzuschauen, sondern würde man die Geschichte mehr innerlich betrachten, wie es wiederum die anthroposophisch orientierte Geisteswissenschaft tut, so würde man sehen, dass dasjenige, was wir heute innerlich erleben, wenn wir von Freiheit sprechen, dass das in demselben Sinne von dem Griechen nicht empfunden worden ist, dass es nicht einmal auftrat — derjenige, der die Dinge wirklich unbefangen studiert, der weiß es —, nicht einmal auftrat da, wo wir das entsprechende Wort mit «Freiheit» übersetzen, wie zum Beispiel bei den Stoikern oder ähnlichen Philosophen.
Ich habe in meiner «Philosophie der Freiheit» bereits im Beginne der Neunziger Jahre des vorigen Jahrhunderts hervorgehoben, wie zusammenhängt mit dem Erfassen des reinen Denkens, des innerlich selbstständig arbeitenden Denkens, dasjenige, was das Freiheitserlebnis ist. Ich habe gesagt, dass alles dasjenige, was der Mensch als innerhalb des Freiheitserlebnisses stehend sieht, dass er das zusammenhängend findet mit dem, was ich das reine Denken genannt habe, jenes Denken, das ganz losgelöst ist von dem inneren organischen Leben, jenes Denken, das, wenn der Ausdruck nicht missverstanden wird, schon im gewöhnlichen Leben eine Art heraufgehobener Erkenntnis ist. Denn wenn wir durchziehen unser reines Denken mit sittlichen Ideen und Impulsen, mit solchen Ideen und Impulsen, die nicht zusammenhängen mit Begierden, nicht zusammenhängen mit Sympathien und Antipathien, sondern nur zusammenhängen mit der reinen, liebevollen Hingabe an die Tat, die begangen werden soll, wenn wir so den Impuls zu einer Tat, zu einer Handlung in unserer Seele aufleben lassen, dann ist die Tat, die Handlung, die aus einem solchen Impuls hervorgeht, eine wirklich freie. Daher kann man nicht die Frage nach der Freiheit in dem Sinne aufwerfen, wie das so vielfach aufgeworfen worden ist: Ist der Mensch frei oder ist der Mensch unfrei? Sondern man kann nur sagen: Der Mensch ist auf dem Wege zur Freiheit durch seine Selbstentwicklung, durch seine Selbsterkenntnis, durch sein innerliches Loskommen von seiner gewöhnlichen Seelenverfassung zu jener Seelenverfassung, in der er sich erhebt zu dem Erfassen des reinen Gedankens, der sich erfüllt mit dem sittlichen Ideale. Durch das wird er immer freier und freier.
Die Freiheit ist etwas, dem man sich fortwährend nähert. Daher gibt es hier kein Entweder-oder, sondern es gibt nur ein Sich-Nähern, ein Sowohl-als-auch. Man ist sowohl frei als unfrei, unfrei in Bezug auf dasjenige, wo wir noch bestimmt sind von unseren Begierden, von demjenigen, was gewissermaßen heraufsteigt aus unserem Organismus, aus dem instinktiven Leben; frei in Bezug auf dasjenige, in dem wir unabhängig geworden sind von dem instinktiven Leben, indem wir aufleben lassen können die reine Liebe zur Tat, die von uns erschaut wird in dem reinen Gedanken.
Nun - meine sehr verehrten Anwesenden —, das, was man da schildert als den Zustand des Freiheitserlebnisses auf der einen Seite, als den Zustand des Gedankens, des reinen Gedankens, dem man sich hingeben könne, das ist natürlich für den heutigen Menschen durchaus noch ein Ideal, aber ein Ideal, das als etwas in seiner Seele schwebt, das mit seiner Menschenwürde durchaus zusammenhängt, ohne dessen Anstreben man sich eigentlich heute eine wirkliche Menschenwürde gar nicht denken kann.
Nun ist der Mensch in der neueren Zeit aber dennoch auf dem Wege nach einem solchen Ideal, und er ist auf diesen Weg gekommen gerade durch die naturwissenschaftliche Entwicklung der neueren Zeit. Wer diese naturwissenschaftliche Entwicklung, die ja in ihren Ergebnissen die weitesten Kreise beherrscht und immer mehr und mehr beherrschen wird, immer mehr und mehr die Grundlage der ganz allgemeinen Menschenbildung werden soll, wer diese naturwissenschaftliche Bildung der neueren Zeit ins Auge fasst, der weiß, dass man, sei es auf dem Gebiete des Unlebendigen, von dem Physikalischen bis zum Astronomischen, sei es auf dem Gebiete des Organischen, Lebendigen, dass man da so denken muss, dass immer mehr und mehr, trotzdem man sich auf Erfahrung und Experiment stützt, dass immer mehr und mehr der Gedanke, der innerlich vom Menschen erarbeitet wird, zur Geltung kommt. Und indem der Mensch da arbeitet, indem er geradeso arbeitet, wie das in der neueren naturwissenschaftlichen Weltanschauung der Fall ist, dadurch entwickelt sich dasjenige, was man sein gesteigertes Selbstbewusstsein nennen kann; seine Loslösung von dem Inneren der Natur, sie entwickelt sich dadurch.
Man kann das wiederum sehen — meine sehr verehrten Anwesenden — an dem Beispiel der Astronomie. Indem man dasjenige, was die Beobachtung gibt, in Rechnung verwandelt hat, denn das ist ja im Wesentlichen dasjenige, was Kopernikus getan hat, erlangte man ein Weltsystem, das gewissermaßen vom Menschen selber ganz losgelöst ist - so war kein altes Weltsystem, dasjenige, was alte Weltsysteme waren, das war immer mit dem Menschen verbunden, der Mensch erlebte sich selbst als drinnenstehend in der Welt —, sodass der Mensch gewissermaßen nur ganz nebensächlich da ist, mit dem Planeten Erde durch den Weltenraum geschleudert wird, und ein Weltbild, das Weltgebäude zeigt, ganz abgesondert vom Menschen, ohne dass dasjenige, was im Inneren des Menschen lebt, sich hineinmischen darf.
Dadurch wird aber der Mensch mit einem Gedankeninhalt erfüllt, wodurch er loskommt von sich selbst in einer gewissen Weise. Er denkt natürlich seinen Gedanken. In dem Denken ist er als Mensch immer noch damit verbunden, aber er denkt ihn so, dass nicht dasjenige, was aufsteigt aus seinem Organismus, was aus seinem instinktiven Leben kommt, damit verbunden ist; sondern er muss so denken, dass, obzwar der Gedanke noch mit ihm verbunden bleibt, doch dieser Gedanke sich loslöst von dem Menschlich-Persönlichen, dass er in diesen Gedanken gewissermaßen ganz objektiv wird. Dadurch ist es gerade, dass der Mensch zu seinem Selbstbewusstsein, zu seinem starken Selbstbewusstsein kommt. Diejenigen Anstrengungen, die durchzumachen sind, sei es in der modernen Astronomie, um zu einer Anschauung zu kommen, sei es in der modernen Physik oder in der modernen Chemie, um zu einer Anschauung zu kommen oder nur [um die Ergebnisse dieser Anschauung wirklich klar zu durchdenken], sei es auch im Felde der Biologie, der Lebenslehre, durch alles das, was da durchgemacht werden muss, muss der Mensch sein Selbstbewusstsein denkend erstarken.
Zu diesem Erstarken des Selbstbewusstseins wurde der Mensch der alten Zeiten nicht erzogen, und das ist der gewaltige Unterschied zwischen unserer Zeit und den älteren Kulturzeiten der Menschheitszivilisation. In alten Kulturzeiten wurde der Mensch wenigstens in weitesten Kreisen, mit Ausnahme derjenigen, die in den Weisheitsschulen erzogen wurden und eben gut vorbereitet wurden durch Zucht des Willens — in alten Zeiten wurde der Mensch im Wesentlichen erzogen so, dass er dasjenige Denken hatte in seiner Weltanschauung, was sich seinen Augen darbot. Daher die ptolemäische Weltanschauung, die im Wesentlichen ein Abbilden desjenigen war, was man mit den äußeren Sinnen wahrnahm. Der Mensch wurde gewissermaßen nicht so weit aus sich herausgestoßen, wie er wird durch die moderne naturwissenschaftliche Weltanschauung. Und weil er das nicht wurde, erstarkte auch in jenen alten Zeiten sein Selbstbewusstsein nicht. Er blieb gewissermaßen in seinen Leib hineingebannt. Sein Selbstbewusstsein hing ab von seinen Instinkten, hing ab davon, dass er sich innerlich vital erfühlte. Dieses Leben im Leibe, das ist, trotzdem wir in den Materialismus hineingesegelt sind durch das Denken der neueren Zeit, dennoch überwunden worden. Das Selbstbewusstsein ist erstarkt, und gerade indem man in den Materialismus hineingesegelt ist, indem man gewissermaßen das Geistige in den Sinnendingen verlor, erstarkte dasjenige, was innerlich denkend erarbeitet wurde. In jenen alten Zeiten fürchtete man, dass der Mensch, wenn er zu so etwas geführt würde unvorbereitet, wie es notwendig ist zu denken etwa im heliozentrischen System oder demjenigen, was ihm gleichwertig ist, dass er gewissermaßen seelisch in eine Ohnmacht verfallen würde, weil sein Selbstbewusstsein nicht stark genug war.
Das ist dasjenige, was man fürchtete, dass der Mensch sein Selbstbewusstsein verlieren könne, wenn er zu einem solchen Wissen gebracht würde. Daher legte man den großen Wert auf die Willenszucht, auf dasjenige, was den Willen stark und energisch machte; denn aus dem Willen heraus stärkt sich und kraftet sich das Selbstbewusstsein. Auf dem Umwege eben durch den Willen suchte man vorzubereiten in dem Schüler der Weisheit dasjenige, was dann ertragen konnte jenseits der Schwelle jene Anschauung von der Welt, zu der eben ein starkes Selbstbewusstsein notwendig ist.
Was fürchtete man also in jenen alten Zeiten, wenn man den Schüler hineinführte in das Innere der Dinge, in das Innere der Natur? Man fürchtete, dass er an dem Wesen seiner Seele Schaden nehmen könne, indem er gewissermaßen in eine seelisch-geistige Ohnmacht, in eine seelisch-geistige Unwissenheit, Finsternis verfallen könnte, in einen Zustand - allerdings seelisch-geistig genommen —, der sich vergleichen lässt mit einer physischen Ohnmacht. Diesen Zustand, ihn wollte man durch die Willenszucht vermeiden. So kann man sagen: Die Menschen jener alten Zeiten glaubten, dass der Mensch in seinem Selbstbewusstsein Schaden leiden müsse, wenn man ihm eine Weltanschauung überliefert, die starkes Denken notwendig macht. Daher musste er erst sorgfältig vorbereitet werden. Und man sah das gewöhnliche Leben so an, dass der Mensch diesseits jenes Gebietes stehe, in dem die ihn gefährdenden Erkenntnisse sind, dass ein Hüter, der ihn [abhält von] der Sphäre, in die er nicht hineinpasst, dass ein Hüter ihn bewahrt davor, in eine seelisch-geistige Ohnmacht zu verfallen. Und man schilderte dasjenige, was der Schüler durchzumachen hatte, wenn er die Schwelle überschreiten sollte und an dem Hüter der Schwelle vorbeikommen sollte, man schilderte es so, wie es durchaus den inneren Seelenerlebnissen entsprach.
Man sagte: Zunächst fühlt der Mensch, indem er an die Schwelle herankommt, etwas von Unsicherheit. Ist er aber genügend vorbereitet durch Willenszucht, so hält er sich in jener Sphäre, die ihm sonst Schwindel verursachen würde. Er schreitet an dem Hüter der Schwelle, der ihm sonst die geistige Welt verhüllt, vorbei, und er tritt durch die innere Kraft seines Seelenlebens in diese geistige Welt ein. Dann aber muss er auch mit seinem ganzen Bewusstsein in dieser geistigen Welt drinnenbleiben. Denn würde er diese geistige Welt wiederum verlieren, so würde sich dasjenige, was er darinnen erlebt hat als etwas, was auf Stärke des Menschen, nicht auf Schwäche Anspruch macht, es würde sich wie etwas ihn Zersprengendes in seiner Organisation geltend machen, und er würde erst recht Schaden nehmen an seiner Seelenverfassung.
Nun, es liegt doch eben aber die eigentümliche Tatsache vor, dass uns die Menschheitsentwicklung das gebracht hat — meine sehr verehrten Anwesenden —, was diese alten Weisheitsschulen bei ihren Schülern erst sorgsam vorbereiten wollten, dass wir gewissermaßen in Bezug auf dasjenige, was die Alten jenseits der Schwelle dachten, wir bereits jenseits dieser Schwelle stehen, und dass es einfach Allgemeingut des Wissens ist, was dazumal nur nach einer sorgfältigen Vorbereitung an den Menschen herangebracht worden ist. Und indem man dazumal sagte: Wenn der Mensch in dieses Gebiet hineingetrieben wird unvorbereitet, so leidet er Schaden an seinem Selbstbewusstsein, so muss man heute durchaus sagen: Dasjenige, was in alten Zeiten vermieden werden sollte, weil man eben den Menschen in einer gewissen Seelenverfassung haben wollte — man wollte, dass er, indem er sein Inneres fühlte, in diesem Inneren aufleuchten fühlte das Innere der Natur —, man wollte, dass er sich verbunden fühlte mit jenem, was der Natur Inneres sei, wenn er seine Seele erlebte. Und indem man glaubte, dass er unvorbereitet in eine Art geistiger Ohnmacht versinken würde, so sagte man, er könne zu diesem Inneren der Natur nur vordringen vorbereitet oder indem er sich selbst verliert.
Nun ja — meine sehr verehrten Anwesenden —, in unserer heutigen Zeit dringen aber alle ganz unvorbereitet im Sinne jener alten Zeiten in dieses Gebiet ein; und gesagt muss werden, dass durchaus dasjenige, was da heute erlebt ist, eben dasjenige ist, was die Alten vermeiden wollten. Der Mensch erwirbt heute die Naturerkenntnisse. Der Mensch erwirbt dasjenige Selbstbewusstsein, das ihn aufrecht erhält, trotzdem ihm die gebräuchlichen Erkenntnisse übermittelt werden in Astronomie, in Physik, in Chemie, in Biologie und so weiter. Er erwirbt das alles. Er lebt aber auch in einer solchen Weise in Bezug auf seine Seele, wie die Alten es an der Menschheit nicht haben wollten. Wir brauchen ja nur hinzuweisen darauf, dass wir allerdings, weil die Menschheitsentwicklung uns den Gedanken, das Freiheitsgefühl und damit das starke Selbstbewusstsein gebracht hat, dass wir ja allerdings das Selbst nicht verlieren, wenn wir uns vertiefen in diejenigen Ergebnisse, die die naturwissenschaftliche Erkenntnis heute liefert.
Aber wir brauchen nur auf ganz bekannte Erscheinungen hinzuweisen, dann werden wir sehen, dass wir doch etwas verlieren, ja, dass dieses Verlieren heute allgemein die menschliche Seelenverfassung einmal ist. Man gibt sich nur über diese Dinge Illusionen hin. Man will sich über diese Dinge durchaus von gewissen Träumereien nicht befreien. Ich habe ja auch in diesen Vorträgen, die ich hier von dieser Stelle aus halten durfte, durch Jahre hindurch immer wieder darauf hingewiesen, wie unsere Naturerkenntnis gerade die gewissenhaften Leute führt zu einer Anerkennung von Grenzen des Naturerkennens. Grenzen, über die wir nicht hinüberschreiten können, ohne unser Erkenntnisvermögen eben in unerlaubte, in unmögliche Gebiete hineinzuführen. Vom «Ignorabimus» wurde gesprochen von einem bedeutenden, tief eindringenden Naturforscher der neueren Zeit, von dem «Wir können nicht erkennen». Sodass in einem solchen Ignorabimus das Geständnis vorliegt: Wie weit wir uns auch verbreiten in dieser Erkenntnis, die wir aus der Sinnesbeobachtung und aus dem kombinierenden Verstande gewinnen, wir dringen doch in das Innere der Natur nicht ein. Hier liegt eben ein Konflikt vor, der schon gefühlt worden ist, als diese neuere Naturerkenntnis bis zu einer gewissen Etappe heraufgekommen war.
Haller prägte ja das Wort: «Ins Inn’re der Natur dringt kein erschaff’ner Geist, glückselig, wem sie nur die äuß’re Schale weist». Goethe, der da hörte immer wieder und wiederum von denjenigen, die so vor der Natur standen wie Albrecht von Haller, diese Worte wiederholen, man könne durch menschliche Erkenntnisse nicht in das Innere der Natur hineindringen, Goethe wandte ein dasjenige, was in seinem bekannten Gedichte an die «Philister» liegt, denn für ihn waren diejenigen, welche stehen bleiben bei den Worten: «Ins Inn’re der Natur dringt kein erschaff’ner Geist», für ihn waren sie durchaus zu rechnen in die Kategorie der Philister, derjenigen Leute, welche das Innere ihrer Seele nicht in genügende Regsamkeit bringen wollen, um durch das so innerlich angezündete Licht dasjenige zu beleuchten, was sonst Inneres der Natur ist, und so das menschliche Seelenwesen hineinzuversetzen in das Innere der Natur. Goethe sagt ja darüber die wirklich eindringlichen Verse, indem er zitiert: «Ins Inn’re der Natur dringt kein erschaff’ner Geist».
«Ins Innere der Natur
O, du Philister!
«Dringt kein erschaff’ner Geist.»
Mich und Geschwister
Mögt ihr an solches Wort
Nur nicht erinnern;
Ich denke: Ort für Ort
Sind wir im Innern.
«Glückselig, wem sie nur
Die äußere Schale weist!»Das zitiert Goethe wiederum und er sagt:
Das hör’ ich an die sechzig Jahre wiederholen.
Und fluche drauf, aber verstohlen;
Sage mir tausend, tausendmale,
Alles gibt sie reichlich gern;
Natur hat weder Kern
Noch Schale,
Alles ist sie mit einem Male;
Dich prüfe du nur allermeist,
Ob du selber Kern oder Schale seist.
Goethe konnte gewissermaßen aus einem bewusst-unbewussten, instinktiven Empfinden heraus nicht aushalten dieses Trennen des Wesens der Menschenseele vom Inneren der Natur. Für ihn war es klar, dass derjenige, der in gesunder Weise die Menschenseele in ihrem Wesen zum Bewusstsein bringt, dass der sich als in dem Inneren der Natur stehend auch erfahren und erleben müsse. Das war es, warum Goethe auch niemals den Kantianismus angenommen hat. Und diejenigen, die behaupten, Goethe wäre selber zu irgendeiner Zeit seines Lebens dem Kantianismus nahegestanden, die irren gar sehr. Goethe hat, entgegengesetzt demjenigen, was Kant als menschliches Erkenntnisvermögen anerkannte, dasjenige, was er anschauende Urteilskraft nennt; und er glaubte dadurch, dass man nicht bloß dasjenige Urteil in sich ausbildet, was von Begriff zu Begriff in abstraktem Sinne geht, sondern dass man dasjenige, was sonst nur in der sinnlichen Anschauung äußerlich lebt, dass man das innerlich anwendet auf das Gedankenanschauen. Goethe sagt, er habe nie über das Denken gedacht, aber er hat unablässig dasjenige, was im Gedanken als Lebendiges lebt, anschauen wollen. Durch dieses Gedankenanschauen wollte Goethe etwas erreichen, wodurch das Wesen der Menschenseele sich wiederum verbindet mit demjenigen, was das Innere der Natur ist.
Und auf diesem Wege — meine sehr verehrten Anwesenden —- will fortschreiten dasjenige, was anthroposophisch orientierte Geisteswissenschaft ist. Sie will ausbilden diese anschauende Urteilskraft Goethes, die so, wie sie Goethe vorstellt, noch in ihren Anfängen lag, zu demjenigen, was geschildert ist in meinem Buche «Wie erlangt man Erkenntnisse der höheren Welten?», was herausführen soll diejenigen Erkenntnisfähigkeiten des Menschen, die sonst nur latent, verborgen in seinem Inneren ruhen im gewöhnlichen Leben und in der gewöhnlichen Wissenschaft, und die ihn dann zum Schauen führen, die ihn dazu führen, dass er so, wie er mit seinem sinnlichen Auge die Farben, das Helldunkel um sich herum sieht, so auch das Geistige wirklich anschaut. Ich habe schon gestern erwähnt, dass der Mensch, indem er durch gewisse intime Maßnahmen der Seele dasjenige, was sonst im gewöhnlichen Leben und in der Wissenschaft ja tief in der Seele unten verborgen bleibt, dass das der Mensch aus sich herausentwickeln kann, so wie sonst aus dem Kinde herausentwickelt wird dasjenige, was später eben dieses Kind zur Orientierung im Leben braucht, dass dadurch der Mensch zur höheren Erkenntnisstufe aufrückt — die ich nur dem Namen nach anführen will, ich habe sie oftmals von diesem Orte hier auseinandergesetzt —, dass der Mensch sich aufschwingen kann zu einer imaginativen Erkenntnis, zu einer inspirierten Erkenntnis, zu einer wahrhaft intuitiven Erkenntnis, dass er dadurch mit seinem Seelenwesen untertaucht in die äußere Natur. Ich möchte heute von einem besonderen Gesichtspunkte aus auf diese Erkenntnisentwicklung noch einmal hinweisen.
Sehen Sie — meine sehr verehrten Anwesenden —, im gewöhnlichen Menschenleben wird ja, weil das ganz offenbar ist, unterschieden zwischen denjenigen Zuständen, zwischen denen dieses menschliche Leben wechseln muss, wenn der Mensch seelisch und physisch gesund bleiben soll. Der Mensch muss wechseln zwischen dem wachen Tagesleben vom Aufwachen bis zum Einschlafen, wo durchsetzt ist dasjenige, was er innerlich seelisch erlebt, von Gedanken oder Vorstellungen, wo diese Gedanken eine gewisse Farbe erhalten durch das Gefühlsleben, wo aus unbestimmten Tiefen, aber geleitet von den Gedanken, das Willensleben aus dem Inneren des Menschen hervorquillt und Taten vollbringt; und zwischen diesem Zustande des menschlichen Seelenlebens und demjenigen, wo der Mensch regungslos liegt, wo die Gedanken in Finsternis getaucht sind, wo die Gefühle schwimmen, wo der Wille sich nicht betätigt. Also, zwischen dem Wachzustande und dem Schlafzustande wechselt das gewöhnliche normale Menschenleben. So sieht man dieses normale Menschenleben an.
Aber das ist nicht vollständige Anschauung vom menschlichen Wesen, und man kommt zu keiner genügenden Auffassung vom Wesen der Menschenseele, wenn man das, was vorliegt, nur in dieser Weise ansieht. Wir wachen nach gewöhnlicher Auffassung zwischen dem Aufwachen und dem Einschlafen. Aber dieses Wachen bezieht sich durchaus nicht auf unseren ganzen Menschen, und das wird gewöhnlich nicht beachtet. Deshalb haben wir auch heute durchaus keine ordentliche Seelenkunde, keine wirkliche Psychologie, weil dieses nicht beachtet wird. Wenn wir vergleichen nämlich, im unbefangenen inneren Erleben vergleichen dasjenige, was in unserem Gefühl auftritt, so ist das durchaus nicht durchzogen von einer solchen inneren Bewusstseinshelligkeit wie das Vorstellen. Es ist ein großer, gewaltiger Unterschied zwischen der Bewusstseinsunterscheidung der Gedanken, der Vorstellungen, und desjenigen, was mehr dumpf, dämmerhaft als Gefühlsnuance dieses Vorstellungsleben durchzieht. Zwar ist dieses Gefühlsleben für unser menschliches Sich-Erfühlen, für unser menschliches Sich-Erleben ebenso real, ja vielleicht realer als das Gedankenleben in einer anderen Beziehung. Aber von lichtvoller Klarheit kann nur das Gedankenleben durchzogen sein. Das Gefühlsleben bleibt in einer gewissen Unbestimmtheit in der Seele ausgebreitet.
Und wenn wir uns fragen: Wie können wir darauf kommen, wie dieses Gefühlsleben in der Seele vorhanden ist, dann müssen wir vergleichen einen Seelenzustand mit anderen Seelenzuständen, und man kommt nach und nach — ich habe auch darüber hier schon gesprochen, mehr beweisend, heute will ich diese Dinge nur heranziehen und gewissermaßen mitteilen —, man kommt da dazu, zu vergleichen dasjenige, was im Gefühlsleben pulsiert, mit demjenigen, was im Traumleben auftritt. Wer das wirklich studiert, wer das wirklich genau kennt, wie es sich vor das Bewusstsein stellt, wie es aus unbestimmten Tiefen des menschlichen Wesens heraufquillt, wie es zwar in Bildern auftritt, aber doch in einer unbestimmten, dämmerhaften Weise, sodass man nicht recht weiß, wie es mit irgendeiner äußeren Wahrheit zusammenhängt zunächst.
So ist es mit dem Gefühlsleben. Gefühle sind gewiss etwas anderes als Traumbilder; aber wenn wir den Grad von Bewusstheit gegenüber den Gefühlen vergleichen mit dem Grade der Bewusstheit gegenüber den Traumbildern, so ist dieser Grad durchaus der gleiche oder wenigstens ein ähnlicher. Und wir können sagen: Das Gefühlsleben ist das wache Träumen; gewissermaßen dasjenige, was in Träumen als Bilder auftritt, das wird in die Allgemeinheit des organischen Lebens hinuntergedrängt. Es wird anders erlebt, aber es ist in derselben Weise in der Seele präsent, vorhanden, wie das Traumwesen, sodass wir sagen können: In Wirklichkeit wachen wir nur in Bezug auf unser Vorstellungsleben; wir träumen auch wachend in Bezug auf das Gefühlsleben. Wer wirklich in all dasjenige, was das menschliche Leben bedeutet, hineinsieht und sich frägt, welche Rolle die Gefühle — namentlich durch einen größeren Zeitraum des menschlichen Erlebens hindurch - spielen, der wird sich schon sagen können, dass dasjenige, was ihm sonst in den Traumbildern auftaucht, so zusammenhängt mit seinen gewöhnlichen Lebensschicksalen, mit demjenigen, was er erfahren hat, dass in einer übereinstimmenden Weise in den Traumbildern dasjenige lebt, was sonst im Leben erfahren wurde. Aber genau ebenso drückt sich dasjenige, was sonst im Leben sich schicksalsmäßig darstellt, aus in den Gefühlen, die unsere Vorstellungen nuancieren, die unseren Vorstellungen gewisse Grundlagen abgeben. Eine gewissenhafte Betrachtungsweise des Seelenlebens wird diese Verwandtschaft des Gefühlslebens mit dem Traumleben schon ergeben.
Und ein anderes — meine sehr verehrten Anwesenden — ist das Willensleben. Dieses Willensleben, man denkt gewöhnlich nicht darüber nach, aber quillt nicht der Willensimpuls aus uns hervor, ohne dass wir über seinen eigentlichen Urgrund in unserer Seele ein klares Bewusstsein haben? Wir haben den Gedanken. Aus diesem Gedanken geht der Willensimpuls hervor. Wir sehen uns dann, indem wir handeln, meine lieben Freunde, wir beobachten uns gewissermaßen als Handelnde selbst, haben über unser Handeln aber einen Gedanken. Aber was dazwischen liegt, davon haben wir kein Bewusstsein, wie dasjenige, was als Gedankenimpulse für den Willen in mir aufschießt, hineingeht in meine Muskelkraft, wie der Nerv empfindet die eigene Bewegung der Arm- und Handmuskeln, wie dann ausgeführt wird dasjenige, was da vom Gedanken aus in, ich möchte sagen die Tiefen des menschlichen Wesens hinuntertaucht, um dann wiederum aufzutauchen, wenn wir uns selber als Handelnde finden. Das lebt tatsächlich in uns so, wie allein das lebt, was wir im tiefen Schlafe durchmachen. Geradeso wie wir im Schlafe gewissermaßen unser eigenes Wesen verloren haben, wie wir nicht dasjenige, was wir im Leibe erleben, wachend im Schlafe durchmachen, so machen wir dasjenige nicht durch, was sich in unserer Menschenwesenheit vollzieht, wenn der Wille seine Impulse erscheinen lässt. Wir träumen nicht nur wachend in unserem Gefühlsleben, wir schlafen in unserem wachenden Leben, indem wir wollen, sodass Träumen und Schlafen fortwährend in uns spielen. Aber aus diesen unbekannten Tiefen herauf, aus jenen Tiefen, aus denen der Wille kommt, aus denen kommt auch dasjenige, was wir schließlich in unserem Selbstbewusstsein zusammenfassen. Wir erkennen unsere völlige Menschlichkeit erst, wenn wir im gewöhnlichen Leben uns als ein denkendes oder vorstellendes, fühlendes oder wollendes Wesen wissen.
Aber wir nehmen in dieses gewöhnliche Leben unbewusste Zustände herein. Wir würden nicht zum Gefühl der Freiheit kommen, wenn wir nicht aussondern könnten aus unserem Wesen etwas, was sich gewissermaßen heraushebt aus unserem ganzen Organischen zunächst. Gerade indem sich das Vorstellungsleben heraushebt, entwickelt es dasjenige, was ich früher charakterisiert habe als dem Freiheitserlebnis zugrunde liegend. Davon sondern wir uns in einer gewissen Weise von uns selber ab. Wir leben wachend nur in einem Teile von uns, nur in demjenigen, was uns das Vorstellungsleben repräsentiert. Wir leben gewissermaßen in Bezug auf einen anderen Teil von uns in derselben Weise unbewusst, wie wir in Bezug auf das Innere der Natur unbewusst leben. Da tritt anthroposophisch orientierte Geisteswissenschaft ein, indem sie die Methoden entwickelt zu höherer Erkenntnis. Sie beruht nicht auf irgendetwas, was nur im Entferntesten mit den träumerischen obskurantesten Mystikern verwandt wäre, sie beruht nicht auf irgendetwas, was im äußeren Experiment wie im vertrackten Spiritismus zu erreichen wäre; sie beruht durchaus auf demjenigen, was mit einer so hellen Klarheit aus dem inneren Menschen hervorgeholt werden kann, wie nur die reinsten materiellen Vorstellungen. Bei vollem Bewusstsein wird das aus dem Inneren des Menschen hervorgeholt, was in die Methoden der geisteswissenschaftlichen Untersuchungen einfließen soll.
Aber dasjenige, was sonst so lebt in der gewöhnlichen menschlichen Seelenverfassung, wie das Traumleben, nämlich die Gefühlswelt, das wird von demselben Lichte durchsetzt, von dem durchsetzt ist das Vorstellen, das aus dem Gefühl heraus, wie manche Gefühlsphilosophie oder Gefühlstheologie, schöpft.
Geisteswissenschaft, sie durchsetzt erst durch ihre Übungen, die in meinem Buche «Wie erlangt man Erkenntnisse der höheren Welten?» geschildert sind, sie durchsetzt erst das Gefühlsleben mit dem Lichte, das sonst nur waltet in dem Vorstellungsleben, sodass diejenige Region, die sonst traumhaft bleibt, in der menschlichen Seele nunmehr lebt als das imaginative Bewusstsein. Nicht ein Traum ist da, nicht das traumhafte Gefühlsleben ist da in dem Momente, wo man sich diesem imaginativen Bewusstsein hingibt, sondern dasjenige ist da, was sonst eben unter der Schwelle des gewöhnlichen Bewusstseins bleibt. Man denkt Bilder, aber Bilder, von denen man weiß, sie sind nicht erträumt, sondern sie entsprechen Realitäten.
Und noch weiter kommt diese Methode, die ich geschildert habe, wie das in anthroposophisch orientierter Geisteswissenschaft dargelegt ist, im inspirierten Bewusstsein. Da wird tatsächlich dasjenige erreicht, was sonst Wille ist. Ich habe gestern geschildert, wie sich umgestaltet dasjenige, was sonst abstraktes theoretisches Erkennen ist, in etwas, was sich vergleichen lässt dem künstlerischen Anschauen vom Menschenbau. So wird aber auch hingeschaut auf den Willen. Nach und nach gelangt man dazu, dass wirklich — der Ausdruck soll nicht missverstanden werden — hellseherisch durchschaut wird, wie das Ganze der menschlichen Organisation funktioniert, indem der Wille hineinpulsiert in diese menschliche Organisation. Geschaut wird, was wirklich vorgeht im Muskel, indem erkannt wird, was da hineinschießt, indem der Willensimpuls sich betätigt, und das ist dann inspirierte Erkenntnis. Da taucht der Mensch in sein eigenes Innere unter. Da allerdings erlangt er dann eine Erkenntnis von sich selbst, über die sonst ein Schleier gebreitet ist. Da gelangt man dazu, nicht nur zu erkennen dasjenige, was fertig dasteht zwischen der Geburt und dem Tode, sondern da gelangt man dazu, indem, was in seinem Gefühl, in seinem Willen lebt, die jetzt durchzogen sind von eben solchem Bewusstseinslichte, wie sonst nur das Vorstellungsleben, da gelangt man dazu, nicht bloß das Geschaffene in seinem Wesen zu erkennen, sondern das Schaffende, das Schöpferische, dasjenige, was nun nicht bloß aufwacht und in den schon fertigen Leib wiederum hineingeht, wie es beim Aufwachen des Menschen der Fall ist, sondern das aus geistigen Welten heruntersteigt, indem der Mensch durch die Geburt oder Empfängnis geht und sich den Leib selber organisiert, da gelangt der Mensch dazu, durch diese höhere Erkenntnisstufe sein Ewiges zu erkennen, dasjenige in ihm zu erkennen, was über Geburt und dem Tode hinauslebt. Er gelangt durch eine unmittelbare Anschauung dazu, das Ewige des Geistigen in sich selber zu erkennen. Er gelangt zu einer Anschauung des Wesens der Menschenseele; aber er gelangt dann auch dazu, indem er in sein eigenes Wesen hinuntertaucht, da, wo er sonst nur als Natürlicher erkennt, indem er den Geist in sich findet, er gelangt dazu, dass er schon, indem er in sich selber hinuntergestiegen ist, nicht mehr bloß in sich steht, sondern dass er nun in dem Inneren der Natur drinnensteht, dass er in dem Geiste seiner eigenen Natur den Geist der Natur erkennt.
Und jetzt enthüllt sich für ihn das Bedeutungsvolle, — sehen Sie, es ist tatsächlich, dass wir gewissermaßen in altem Sinne jenseits der Schwelle stehen, mit unseren Naturerkenntnissen. Die Alten glaubten in diesem Gebiete das Selbstbewusstsein zu verlieren, wenn sie nicht vorbereitet waren in einer entsprechenden Weise. Der neuere Mensch verliert nicht sein Selbstbewusstsein, aber er verliert die Welt, das Vorstellen mit jener hellen Klarheit, wie es uns das Selbstbewusstsein gibt; das hat sich ja in der neueren Zeit erst entwickelt. Dieses Selbstbewusstsein, das ist es, was wir ausbilden müssen. Während die Alten besonders gesehen haben auf die Zucht des Willens, müssen wir, wie schon in meiner «Philosophie der Freiheit» betont, zum reinen Denken vordringen. Wir müssen das Denken besonders ausbilden, damit dann das Denken, indem es sich weiterentwickelt, zur Imagination, zur Inspiration, zur Intuition kommt.
Dadurch aber ergibt sich für uns eine neue Schwelle in die geistige Welt, jene Schwelle, die jetzt vor uns steht. Wir sagen uns, wir dürfen nicht darinnen stehen bleiben in derjenigen Welt, die uns nur die ausgebreitete Sinnesanschauung gibt, die uns dasjenige, was Inneres der Natur ist, jenseits der Grenze liegen lässt. Wir dürfen nicht da stehen bleiben, wir müssen eine andere Schwelle überschreiten, diejenige, die uns in das eigene Innere, in das Wesen der Seele führt, und die uns nicht mehr phantasieren lässt von allerlei Atomen und Atomistik und allerlei Molekülen, die hinter dem stehen sollen, was da Farbe und Ton und Wärmeempfindung und so weiter ist, sondern wir lernen erkennen, indem wir unseren eigenen Geist erkennen und in diesem Geiste drinnenstehen, wir lernen erkennen, drinnenzustehen in dem Geiste der Natur, wir lernen die Natur selber als geistig kennen. Da, wo die Menschen die Welt verlieren wollen, indem sie hinter die Natur — man möchte sagen — eine zweite grob materielle Natur setzen in einer atomistischen Welt, da findet derjenige, der im neueren Sinne die [Schwelle] überschreitet, den Geist, und das ist es, was wir als eine Grundempfindung gegenüber dem Inneren der Natur und dem Wesen der Menschenseele entwickeln müssen als unterschiedlich von dem, was die Alten hatten.
Wir müssen die Empfindung haben: Ja, wir leben in den Zuständen drinnen, die die Alten vermeiden wollten unvorbereitet. Wir haben zwar nicht die Gefahr vor uns, unser Selbst zu verlieren, dazu ist in der neueren Bildung die Gedankenwelt zu stark ausgebildet, aber wenn wir diese Gedankenwelt noch weiter ausbilden, dann können wir auch nicht dasjenige verlieren, was nun uns verloren gehen kann. Den Alten drohte der Verlust des Selbstbewusstseins, eine Art seelischer Ohnmacht; uns das Verlieren der Welt, das Aufgehen in rein mathematischen Weltbildern, in atomistischen Vorstellungen, sodass wir gar nicht mehr zusammenhängen mit demjenigen, was uns als Fülle der Welt umgibt. Wir stehen vor der Gefahr, dass uns zwar nicht das Selbstbewusstsein, wohl aber gegenüber unserem Ego-Bewusstsein die Welt verloren geht. Und um die Welt wiederzufinden, das heißt, den Geist in der Welt zu finden, müssen wir dasjenige, was die neuere Menschheit die Schwelle nennen muss, müssen wir diese Schwelle überschreiten. Und wir können in einer gewissen Weise sagen: Fürchteten sich die Alten vor dem Hüter der Schwelle, und mussten sie gut vorbereitet sein, um an ihm vorbeizukommen, so muss der neuere Mensch geradezu diesen Hüter herbeisehnen. Er muss die Gelegenheit herbeisehnen, bekannt zu werden mit demjenigen, was ihm sonst nur als äußerliche Sinnesanschauung in Verbindung mit den Ergebnissen des kombinierenden Verstandes und des Experimentes entgegentrat, um das zu erlangen durch die Erkenntnis des Geistes.
So soll Geist-Erkenntnis überall hineingetragen werden, in das Laboratorium, auf das Observatorium, in die Klinik; überall da, wo man sinnlich forscht und mit dem Verstande kombiniert, da soll Geist-Erkenntnis hineingetragen werden. Denn sonst ist dasjenige, was in diesen Bildungsstätten erreicht wird, jenseits der Schwelle erreicht, und der Mensch wird in einer verhängnisvollen Weise dadurch gerade von der Welt abgeschnitten, fühlt sich einem Inneren der Natur gegenüber, das er niemals auf äußerliche Weise erreichen kann, sondern nur, wenn er erst sich selber erweckt, wenn er erst vordringt zu dem unsterblichen, ewigen Wesen der Menschenseele. Und dringt er zu diesem vor, so steht er in dem Geiste der Natur drinnen. Er dringt über diese Schwelle, die in ihm selber liegt, zu dem geistigen Gebiete der Natur vor.
Das ist dasjenige, was als Aufgabe obliegt gegenüber demjenigen, was die anderen Wissenschaften nicht geben können, anthroposophisch orientierter Geisteswissenschaft. Deshalb darf sich anthroposophisch orientierte Geisteswissenschaft Goetheanismus nennen, denn Goethe hat entgegengerufen denen, die da sagen:
«Ins Innere der Natur
Dringt kein erschaff’ner Geist.»
Natur hat weder Kern
Noch Schale,
Alles ist sie mit einem Male;
Prüfe dich du nur allermeist,
Ob du selber Kern oder Schale seist.
Man ist Schale, solange man mit dem bloßen Vorstellungsleben da steht. Dadurch aber schneidet man sich selber von der Natur ab. Von dem Inneren der Natur spricht nur derjenige, der sich die Natur selber zur Schale erst gemacht hat, derjenige, der selber Schale geworden ist. Derjenige aber, der zu seinem eigenen Kern vordringt, der weiß sich, indem er sich erlebt in dem Wesenskern seiner Menschenseele, er weiß sich im Innersten der Natur drinnenstehend, er erlebt dieses Innerste der Natur.
Das — meine sehr verehrten Anwesenden — ist der Impuls, den anthroposophisch orientierte Geisteswissenschaft nicht nur im allgemeinen menschlichen Leben, vor allem diesem, aber auch den einzelnen Wissenschaften geben möchte. Dann steht vor ihr das Ideal, dass alle einzelnen Wissenschaften nach und nach nicht bloß jene Spezialitäten bleiben, die sie bisher waren, sondern dass aus jeder einzelnen Wissenschaft etwas hervorquillt, was einen Beitrag liefert zu dem, wonach der Mensch unablässig streben muss, wenn er seiner Menschenwürde ganz bewusst sein will, zu dem Ewigen des Menschenwesens.
Dasjenige, was die einzelnen Wissenschaften geben können, es bleibt äußerlich gegenüber dem Inneren der Natur, wenn es nicht in dieser Weise ergänzt wird durch innerliche Erkenntniswege, diese innerlichen Erkenntniswege zu den äußeren hinzufügt, um so aus der einzelnen Erkenntnis eine umfassende Menschheitserkenntnis zu machen, die dann den Menschen auch stark macht, wie in meinen «Kernpunkten der sozialen Frage» gezeigt ist in Bezug auf die soziale Auffassung des Lebens, in Bezug auf das Hineinstellen in das soziale Leben, die geeignet sein wird, auch die sozialen Forderungen und Fragen der Zukunft in ein geeignetes heilsames, dem Menschenfortschritt dienendes Fahrwasser zu bringen. Das soll Aufgabe anthroposophisch orientierter Geisteswissenschaft sein.
Unablässig — meine sehr verehrten Anwesenden — steht, weil sie das glaubt aus der gegenwärtigen Natur der Menschheitszivilisation zu erkennen, unablässig steht in ganz ehrlichem, aufrichtigem Streben nach wahrer Erkenntnis des Menschen, nach Vertiefung des Menschenwesens, nach Erweiterung des menschlichen Tätigkeitswesens, der menschlichen Tätigkeitsenergie, unablässig — das lassen Sie mich zum Schlusse zusammenfassend sagen —, unablässig steht vor demjenigen, der anthroposophische Geisteswissenschaft aus ihrem inneren Kern heraus will, unablässig steht vor ihm der Zusammenhang zwischen dem Wesen der Menschenseele und dem Inneren der Natur so, dass allerdings dasjenige, was uns die spezialistischen Wissenschaften geben, Finsternisse über die Welt ausbreiten, die eigentlich im Grunde genommen so gefürchtet werden müssten, wie von den Alten das, was jenseits der Schwelle liegt, gefürchtet wurde. Aber möglich ist es - meine sehr verehrten Anwesenden —, ein Licht anzuzünden, damit in diese Finsternisse, in die Finsternisse des Inneren der Natur, der Mensch hineinschauend gelangen könne. Und dieses Licht kann nur sein dasjenige, was angezündet wird durch eine innerliche, geistig-seelisch vertiefte Erkenntnis in der Menschenseele selbst.
The Inner Nature of Nature and the Essence of the Human Soul
Ladies and gentlemen! Yesterday, I took the liberty of speaking in general terms about the tasks of the Goetheanum in Dornach, and I think that yesterday's remarks made it clear that the spiritual scientific direction cultivated in this Goetheanum has nothing to do with any kind of sectarianism, nor does it have anything to do with attempting to found a new religion or anything of the sort, but that it is based entirely on a scientific worldview, a scientific worldview that takes into account the advances of modern scientific knowledge, which, in a sense, continually seeks to justify itself internally in the direction that its methods, that the whole nature of its research, is in line with the direction that newer knowledge strives for, but at the same time, in a certain sense, draws the ultimate necessary consequences of this modern direction of research. This becomes particularly apparent when one addresses specific questions concerning the human soul and knowledge of the world, and allow me to address one such specific question today. However, since this question takes me into a very broad and extensive field, I will only be able to offer a few hints. Nevertheless, I will try to give these hints in such a way that they shed light, in a certain sense, on precisely what is connected with the tasks of the Goetheanum in Dornach in a broader and narrower sense.
Today's topic contains two ideas, two human impulses, according to which the human soul must continually look in such a way that, on the one hand, its most intense longings are awakened and, on the other hand, it is repeatedly confronted with mysteries and doubts: “The inner nature of nature and the essence of the human soul.”
The inner nature of nature: With their knowledge, human beings feel in a certain sense outside of nature, for how could they be motivated to engage in cognitive work if this cognitive work did not have the purpose of going beyond what one encounters in ordinary life, if this cognitive work did not have the purpose of delving deeper into what presents itself to the senses and the combining intellect as nature on the outside? It is an inner fact of the soul life, which becomes all the more apparent the more seriously one takes questions of knowledge, that one feels separated from nature, from the inner nature of nature, in a certain sense. And then there is a question that one person answers in one way according to his worldview, and another person answers differently, namely whether one can penetrate sufficiently far into this inner nature, far enough that one derives a certain satisfaction from this penetration. One also feels that what one can possibly know about the inner nature of nature is in a certain way connected with what one might call the essence of the human soul.
But on the other hand, there is again this question of the essence of the human soul — one might say — as something ancient before human knowledge. One need only recall the echo of the Apollonian Greek saying, “Know thyself.” It contains a challenge, a challenge that the conscientious seeker of knowledge feels cannot be easily met.
Perhaps, dear audience, you will be able to orient yourselves with regard to what lies ahead for the human soul in these directions, and what in particular belongs to the tasks of the present in this field, if one recalls ideas that in earlier times connected serious and conscientious striving people on the one hand with the knowledge of the inner nature, and on the other hand with the self-knowledge of the human being, and I would like to point out such ideas today, even though they are somewhat distant from the ordinary consciousness of the present. I would like to point out that in ancient times, very special — one might almost say frightening — ideas were used to think about the goals of knowledge of nature and self-knowledge.
It was imagined that human beings could not simply go through their ordinary course of life if they strove toward this goal of knowledge, that they would also have to overcome obstacles, endure privations, sufferings, and pains, that they would encounter uncertainties before they could somehow arrive at a satisfactory certainty. Today, according to our customary ideas, we are accustomed to seeing something in the path of knowledge that we follow through our educational institutions that, in a sense, does not take us off our everyday track, that allows us to progress in the usual way. And it must also be said that what we encounter in our laboratories, in our observatories, in our clinics, cannot throw us off the track of ordinary life in the way that is often described by the paths of knowledge that had to be followed in ancient times by the students of wisdom.
In a sense, a kind of abyss was seen between what man is in ordinary life, what man can experience in ordinary life, and what he becomes when he penetrates into the depths of world existence and into the knowledge of his own being, and what he encounters there. This abyss was described as something that, in a certain sense, pulls the ground away from under a person's feet, so that they must enter the field of ultimate knowledge without fear of falling — inwardly, spiritually, I mean. And it was said that human beings in ordinary life could not bear to embark on this path to higher knowledge without preparation; they need such serious, conscientious preparation, and only when they have it can they dare to leap across the abyss. In ordinary life, people are kept in a state of mind that keeps them ignorant of this abyss, that prevents them from seeing it. This is a blessing for them. They are, in a sense, enveloped in a kind of blindness. They are protected from suddenly plunging into the abyss that lies before the ultimate knowledge of things.
And one — call it personified or something similar, although it referred to very real experiences in those ancient schools of wisdom — said: In order to reach the realms of higher knowledge, man must cross a certain threshold, and he must become fearless in the face of what is revealed to his soul at this threshold — and in ordinary life he is protected, protected by his general state of mind. What protected them there can in turn be called personified: the guardian of the threshold. As I said, one can call this personified; but for those for whom soul experiences are a reality, these things are not personifications, but rather something that must be gone through, something that must be overcome, if the one state — as was believed in those ancient times — the state of ignorance and darkness is to be overcome and the state of luminous contemplation of spiritual reality and standing within this spirit-filled reality is to be attained.
Now, of course, for people today, terms such as “threshold” and “guardian of the threshold” must initially conjure up highly vague ideas. I would like to say right away: Humanity is definitely — as I have said in many lectures that I have been allowed to give here — humanity is definitely in a process of development, humanity is progressing from one state to another, and it is not only external cultural conditions that are developing, but also the life of the soul, which is developing from stage to stage, and that which in ancient times could be used to describe the most intimate processes of this life of the soul cannot apply to humanity today. Therefore, if we want to characterize — and we want to do so in order to orient ourselves about these things — if we want to characterize what was understood in ancient times as the “threshold” and the “guardian of the threshold,” we will have to think of it differently than it applies to those processes that take place for modern man when he wants to progress from ordinary knowledge to supersensible knowledge. And in order to characterize the latter, I would like to draw on the comparison with the ancient ideas, purely for the sake of clarity. And it is actually easier than for some who view these things only historically, without the aid of spiritual scientific investigation, to point to what is actually something — as I said, one might almost call frightening — what was actually presented in the ancient schools of wisdom as something frightening, something terrible, something to be avoided at first by the unprepared.
Basically, what did they fear for the unprepared soul life in those ancient times, and what did they initially seek to prepare the student for in the school of wisdom through a very specific training of the will, which was to become strong and energetic, which was to learn to maintain itself in difficult, dizzying situations in life? What did they actually fear for the unprepared? Well, strange as it may sound — my dear audience — anyone who surveys the course of human development can well understand that what they essentially feared was the state of mind that contemporary humanity has simply reached to a certain degree through external culture. Strange as it may sound, what people wanted to avoid in the unprepared student of antiquity was that he should readily arrive at a state of mind such as is quite common in our culture today, namely, through the scientific education of the last three to four centuries. I would like to illustrate this with a single case.
It is true that humanity today professes the so-called Copernican worldview. This worldview places the sun at the center of our planetary system, with the other planets orbiting around it, the earth being one of the planets among the others. This is how humanity has imagined it since the time of Copernicus. Before that, the general consciousness had a different spatial view of our planetary system. The worldview placed the Earth at the center of our system. The sun and the stars revolved around this Earth. People had, so to speak, a geocentric world view, one that placed the Earth at the center of our planetary system. Copernicus replaced this with the heliocentric world view. Humans were, in a sense, placed in a position where they no longer had solid ground under their feet in the universe, but were instead hurtling through space at tremendous speed along with the Earth. And what we see with our eyes is said to be only an illusion, caused by certain perspectives and other conditions that arise from human perception.
Now, one need only read a certain passage in Plutarch, who tells us a great deal about ancient beliefs and people of earlier times, to be convinced that what we today call the heliocentric worldview is by no means merely an achievement of our time. I would like to read you the relevant passage in a literal translation. It refers to Aristarchus of Samos and the way he imagined the world, and it takes us back to earlier Greek centuries, to a time centuries and centuries before the Middle Ages and Copernicanism. According to Plutarch, Aristarchus believed that the world is much larger than has just been said. He had previously described what is apparent to the eye, because he Aristarchus of Samos, assumes that the stars and the sun are immovable, that the earth revolves around the sun as its center, and that the sphere of fixed stars, whose center also lies in the sun, is so large that the circumference of the circles described by the earth is to the distance of the fixed stars as the center of a sphere is to its surface.
In ancient Greece, we have the heliocentric worldview; we have, in essence, at least as far as the position of the human soul in relation to the universe is concerned, essentially the same thing that humanity today thinks about its position in relation to the planetary system and the fixed starry sky. In those ancient times, however, this heliocentric worldview was, in a sense, the secret of a few, namely those who had been carefully prepared, who had been trained in such a way that they were given a special discipline of the will, that they had to become strong in will; only then was such knowledge handed down to them.
This is something that should be considered very significant, that in ancient times it was the wisdom of a few well-prepared people — the students of wisdom in particular — which is now common knowledge, something that everyone talks about in a certain sense today. And as I said, strange as it may sound, what such a student of wisdom knew, for example, about the sun and its relationship to the earth, was imagined to lie beyond the threshold for human beings; one had to cross the threshold first, and then one was in those realms where the soul relates to the universe differently than before. In other words, the ancients placed beyond a threshold — which one had to be well prepared to cross — that which today everyone possesses through general human education. And why did this happen in those ancient times?
Ladies and gentlemen, what I have now discussed using the example of the astronomical worldview one could certainly discuss it in relation to other areas of human knowledge, and everywhere it would become apparent that, as a whole, humanity has simply been pushed beyond what was called in those ancient times the “threshold to higher knowledge” by the development of civilization in modern times. It is from the feelings — the feelings people had toward that state of the soul into which it enters when it attains such knowledge — it is from their feelings that what has remained behind has led the various denominations that perpetuate tradition to simply reject what has been brought about in this way by civilization. For example, when the Catholic Church did not recognize the Copernican doctrine until 1822, the reason for this non-recognition was what remained from those ancient times of the reason, the believed reason for this rejection. It was considered something that would lead people into uncertainty if they were not sufficiently prepared.
Now, ladies and gentlemen, no power on earth can resist progress in the long run. But such matters must be discussed seriously among people, for what might be called the threshold to the spiritual world must be thought of in a completely different way today than it was in ancient times. Simply from this example, which I am discussing in the way I am doing, those who did not want to characterize anthroposophical spiritual science on the basis of easily stirred up slander, but really wanted to engage with it, could recognize that this spiritual science has nothing to do with rehashing some old Gnostic or similar ideas, but that it is thoroughly developed from modern science.
Why, I ask, did people in those ancient times have a certain fear, a certain dread of entering into those insights that are now common knowledge among humanity? Well, my dear friends, I have pointed out this fact about human development in my book The Riddles of Philosophy, showing how the soul state of humanity has changed significantly from ancient Greek times to the present day. What was very peculiar to the Greeks was that they did not yet have a self-consciousness that was completely detached from the outside world. When they thought about the world, they were intertwined with it in a similar way to how we are today when we perceive it only through our senses. For the Greeks, thought was, in a certain sense, also a sensory perception.
Just as we draw red, blue, G, and C sharp from our sensory perceptions, but actively engage our thoughts internally so that we ourselves are the ones working in our thoughts, this internal active work was not yet present for the Greeks. Just as we derive red and green, G and C sharp from our sensory perceptions, so too did they derive their perceptions from the external world. For him, the perception of thoughts was not yet detached from the external world. He did not yet have the independence in grasping the human self that has only emerged in the course of human development in the way it is generally known today. Self-awareness has essentially been strengthened over time. As a result, humans have, in a certain way, detached themselves from the surrounding nature. They have come to look within themselves and perceive themselves as something self-acting. In doing so, however, they have set themselves apart from nature, in a sense removed themselves from nature, in order to then view the inner nature of nature as something outside themselves.
This view of the inner nature of nature as something outside the human soul only emerged over time. In ancient Greece, humans still felt that their entire thought life was within nature. They still felt connected to the inner nature of nature. As development progressed, this changed. Human beings have come to understand themselves precisely because thought has detached itself from external objective life. And this detachment of thought from external objective life is in turn connected with the emergence of the feeling of freedom, the sense of freedom, which is essentially also a result of recent centuries.
If we were to look at history more inwardly, we would not only have come to look more and more at the external aspects of history in recent times, but if we were to look at history more inwardly, as anthroposophically oriented spiritual science does, we would see that what we experience inwardly today when we speak of freedom, was not felt in the same sense by the Greeks, that it did not even occur — those who study things truly impartially know this — it did not even occur where we translate the corresponding word as “freedom,” as for example with the Stoics or similar philosophers.
In my Philosophy of Freedom, at the beginning of the 1890s, I already emphasized how the experience of freedom is connected with the grasping of pure thinking, of thinking that works independently within us. I said that everything that human beings see as part of the experience of freedom, they find to be connected with what I have called pure thinking, that thinking which is completely detached from inner organic life, that thinking which, if the expression is not misunderstood, is already a kind of elevated knowledge in ordinary life. For when we permeate our pure thinking with moral ideas and impulses, with ideas and impulses that are not connected with desires, not connected with sympathies and antipathies, but only connected with pure, loving devotion to the deed that is to be done, when we thus revive the impulse to a deed, to an action in our soul, then the deed, the action that arises from such an impulse, is truly free. Therefore, one cannot raise the question of freedom in the sense that has so often been raised: Is man free or is man unfree? Instead, one can only say: Man is on the path to freedom through his self-development, through his self-knowledge, through his inner liberation from his ordinary state of mind to that state of mind in which he rises to the comprehension of pure thought, which is filled with moral ideals. Through this he becomes freer and freer.
Freedom is something that one continually approaches. Therefore, there is no either/or here, but only an approaching, a both/and. One is both free and unfree, unfree in relation to that which still determines us, our desires, that which arises, so to speak, from our organism, from our instinctive life; free in relation to that in which we have become independent of our instinctive life, in that we can bring to life the pure love of action that we see in pure thought.
Now, ladies and gentlemen, what is described here as the state of experiencing freedom on the one hand, as the state of thought, of pure thought, to which one can surrender, is of course still an ideal for people today, but an ideal that floats in their soul, that is closely connected with their human dignity, without the pursuit of which one cannot actually imagine real human dignity today.
Now, however, in recent times, human beings have nevertheless been on the path toward such an ideal, and they have come onto this path precisely through the scientific development of recent times. Anyone who considers this scientific development, which in its results dominates the widest circles and will increasingly dominate them, and which is to become more and more the basis of general human education, anyone who considers this scientific education of recent times, knows that, whether in the field of the inanimate, from the physical to the astronomical, or in the field of the organic, living, one must think in such a way that, despite relying on experience and experiment, the thought that is developed internally by the human being becomes increasingly important. And as human beings work in this way, working in exactly the same way as in the modern scientific world view, they develop what might be called an increased self-awareness; their detachment from the inner nature of things develops as a result.
This can be seen again, ladies and gentlemen, in the example of astronomy. By converting what observation provides into calculations, which is essentially what Copernicus did, a world system was achieved that is, in a sense, completely detached from human beings themselves — unlike the old world systems, which were always connected to human beings, humans experienced themselves as being inside the world — so that humans are, in a sense, only incidentally present, hurled through space with the planet Earth, and a worldview that shows the structure of the world, completely separate from humans, without allowing what lives inside humans to interfere.
But this fills humans with a content of thought, whereby they detach themselves from themselves in a certain way. Of course, they think their thoughts. In thinking, they are still connected to it as human beings, but they think in such a way that what arises from their organism, what comes from their instinctive life, is not connected to it; rather, they must think in such a way that, although the thought remains connected to them, this thought detaches itself from the human-personal, so that they become, as it were, completely objective in these thoughts. It is precisely through this that the human being comes to his self-consciousness, to his strong self-consciousness. The efforts that must be made, whether in modern astronomy to arrive at a view, or in modern physics or modern chemistry to arrive at a view or simply [to think through the results of this view really clearly], whether in the field of biology, the study of life, through everything that must be endured, human beings must strengthen their self-awareness through thinking.
The people of ancient times were not educated to strengthen their self-awareness, and that is the enormous difference between our time and the older cultural periods of human civilization. In ancient times, at least in the widest circles, with the exception of those who were educated in the schools of wisdom and were well prepared through training of the will, people were essentially educated in such a way that their worldview was based on what they saw with their own eyes. Hence the Ptolemaic worldview, which was essentially a reflection of what was perceived with the outer senses. Human beings were not pushed so far out of themselves as they are by the modern scientific worldview. And because they were not, their self-awareness did not grow stronger in those ancient times. They remained, so to speak, bound to their bodies. Their self-awareness depended on their instincts, depended on their feeling vital inside. This life in the body has nevertheless been overcome, even though we have sailed into materialism through the thinking of modern times. Self-confidence has grown stronger, and precisely by sailing into materialism, by losing the spiritual in the things of the senses, so to speak, what was worked out internally through thinking grew stronger. In those ancient times, it was feared that if people were led unprepared to think in terms of the heliocentric system or its equivalent, they would, in a sense, fall into a state of spiritual powerlessness because their self-awareness was not strong enough.
That is what people feared, that human beings would lose their self-confidence if they were led to such knowledge. Therefore, great importance was attached to the training of the will, to that which made the will strong and energetic; for it is out of the will that self-confidence is strengthened and empowered. It was precisely through the will that they sought to prepare the student of wisdom for what he could then endure beyond the threshold, that view of the world for which a strong self-confidence is necessary.
So what was feared in those ancient times when students were led into the inner nature of things, into the inner nature of nature? They feared that he might damage the essence of his soul by falling into a kind of spiritual powerlessness, spiritual ignorance, darkness, a state — in spiritual terms, at least — that can be compared to physical powerlessness. They wanted to avoid this state through the discipline of the will. So we can say that people in those ancient times believed that human beings would suffer damage to their self-awareness if they were taught a worldview that required strong thinking. Therefore, they first had to be carefully prepared. And ordinary life was viewed in such a way that human beings stood on this side of the realm in which the insights that endangered them were to be found, that a guardian kept them away from the sphere into which they did not fit, that a guardian protected them from falling into a state of mental and spiritual powerlessness. And what the student had to go through when he was to cross the threshold and pass the guardian of the threshold; it was described in a way that corresponded perfectly to the inner soul experiences.
It was said: At first, when approaching the threshold, the human being feels a sense of uncertainty. But if he is sufficiently prepared through discipline of the will, he remains in that sphere which would otherwise cause him to feel dizzy. He passes by the guardian of the threshold, who otherwise veils the spiritual world from him, and enters this spiritual world through the inner power of his soul life. But then they must also remain in this spiritual world with their entire consciousness. For if they were to lose this spiritual world again, what they had experienced there would assert itself as something that claims strength from the human being, not weakness, it would assert itself as something that shatters their organization, and they would suffer even greater damage to their soul constitution.
Now, however, there is the peculiar fact that human development has brought us — my dear audience — what these ancient schools of wisdom wanted to carefully prepare their students for, namely that we are, in a sense, already beyond the threshold of what the ancients thought, we already stand beyond this threshold, and that what was once only brought to people after careful preparation is now simply common knowledge. And whereas in those days it was said that if a person is driven into this realm unprepared, their self-confidence will suffer, today we must say that What was to be avoided in ancient times, because people wanted to have people in a certain state of mind — they wanted them to feel their inner being and feel the inner nature of nature shining within them — they wanted them to feel connected to the inner nature of nature when they experienced their soul. And because it was believed that they would sink unprepared into a kind of spiritual powerlessness, it was said that they could only penetrate this inner nature if they were prepared or if they lost themselves.
Well, my dear friends, in our time today, everyone enters this realm completely unprepared in the sense of those ancient times; and it must be said that what is experienced today is precisely what the ancients wanted to avoid. Today, human beings acquire knowledge of nature. Human beings acquire the self-awareness that sustains them, even though they are taught the usual knowledge of astronomy, physics, chemistry, biology, and so on. They acquire all of this. But they also live in such a way with regard to their souls that the ancients did not want for humanity. We need only point out that, because human development has brought us the idea of freedom and with it a strong sense of self-confidence, we do not lose ourselves when we immerse ourselves in the findings that scientific knowledge provides today.
But we need only point to well-known phenomena to see that we are indeed losing something, indeed that this loss is now a general state of the human soul. People simply indulge in illusions about these things. They do not want to free themselves from certain fantasies about these things. In the lectures I have been privileged to give here over the years, I have repeatedly pointed out how our knowledge of nature leads conscientious people in particular to recognize the limits of natural knowledge. Limits that we cannot cross without leading our cognitive abilities into impermissible, impossible areas. An important, deeply insightful natural scientist of recent times spoke of “Ignorabimus,” of “We cannot know.” So that in such an Ignorabimus there is an admission: no matter how far we spread ourselves in this knowledge, which we gain from sensory observation and from the combining intellect, we still do not penetrate into the innermost nature of things. Here lies a conflict that was already felt when this newer knowledge of nature had reached a certain stage.
Haller coined the phrase: “No created spirit can penetrate the innermost depths of nature; blessed are those to whom it reveals only its outer shell.” Goethe, who heard these words repeated again and again by those who stood before nature like Albrecht von Haller, that human knowledge cannot penetrate the innermost depths of nature, objected to what is written in his famous poem to the “Philistines,” for to him, those who stand by the words: “No created spirit can penetrate the innermost depths of nature,” were, for him, to be counted among the philistines, those people who do not want to bring the innermost depths of their souls to sufficient liveliness to illuminate, through the light thus kindled within, that which is otherwise the innermost depths of nature, and thus to transport the human soul into the innermost depths of nature. Goethe says the truly poignant verses about this, quoting: “No created spirit penetrates into the innermost depths of nature.”
“Into the innermost depths of nature
O, you philistine!
”No created spirit penetrates."
You and my siblings
May you not remember
Such words;
I think: place by place
We are inside.
“Blessed are those to whom
Only the outer shell is shown!”Goethe quotes this again and says:
I have heard this repeated for sixty years.
And curse it, but secretly;
Tell me a thousand, thousand times,
She gives everything abundantly;
Nature has neither core
Nor shell,
She is everything at once;
Just examine yourself most of all,
Whether you yourself are core or shell.
Goethe, in a sense, could not bear this separation of the essence of the human soul from the inner nature of the world, based on a conscious-unconscious, instinctive feeling. For him, it was clear that anyone who brings the human soul to consciousness in a healthy way must also experience and live as if they were standing within the inner nature of the world. That was why Goethe never accepted Kantianism. And those who claim that Goethe himself was close to Kantianism at some point in his life are very much mistaken. Contrary to what Kant recognized as human cognitive ability, Goethe had what he called intuitive judgment; and he believed that one should not only develop within oneself the judgment that goes from concept to concept in an abstract sense, but that one should apply internally to the contemplation of thoughts that which otherwise only lives externally in sensory perception. Goethe says that he never thought about thinking, but he constantly wanted to contemplate that which lives as something alive in thought. Through this contemplation of thought, Goethe wanted to achieve something whereby the essence of the human soul would reconnect with the inner nature of nature.
And in this way — my dear friends — anthroposophically oriented spiritual science wants to progress. It wants to develop Goethe's contemplative power of judgment, which, as Goethe imagines it, was still in its infancy, into what is described in my book “How to Attain Knowledge of Higher Worlds?” , which is intended to bring out those cognitive abilities in human beings that otherwise lie latent, hidden within them in ordinary life and in ordinary science, and which then lead them to see, lead them to really see the spiritual in the same way that they see the colors and the light and dark around them with their physical eyes. I already mentioned yesterday that by means of certain intimate measures of the soul, human beings can develop from within themselves that which otherwise remains deeply hidden in the soul in ordinary life and in science, just as that which the child later needs for orientation in life is developed from within the child. In this way, human beings can rise to a higher level of knowledge — which I will only mention by name, as I have often discussed them here — that human beings can rise to imaginative knowledge, to inspired knowledge, to truly intuitive knowledge, that through this they can immerse their soul being in outer nature. Today I would like to refer once again to this development of knowledge from a special point of view.
You see, my dear audience, in ordinary human life, because it is quite obvious, a distinction is made between the states between which human life must alternate if human beings are to remain mentally and physically healthy. Human beings must alternate between waking daily life from waking up to falling asleep, where what they experience inwardly in their souls is interspersed with thoughts or ideas, where these thoughts take on a certain color through the life of feeling, where from indeterminate depths, but guided by thoughts, the life of will springs forth from within human beings and accomplishes deeds; and between this state of human soul life and that in which the human being lies motionless, where thoughts are plunged into darkness, where feelings float, where the will is not active. Thus, ordinary normal human life alternates between the waking state and the sleeping state. This is how we see this normal human life.
But this is not a complete view of the human being, and one cannot arrive at a sufficient understanding of the nature of the human soul if one views what is present only in this way. According to the usual view, we are awake between waking up and falling asleep. But this waking state does not refer to our whole human being, and this is usually not taken into account. That is why we still have no proper psychology today, no real psychology, because this is not taken into account. If we compare, in unbiased inner experience, what arises in our feelings, it is by no means permeated by the same inner clarity of consciousness as imagination. There is a great, enormous difference between the conscious distinction of thoughts and ideas and what pervades this life of imagination in a more dull, dim way as a nuance of feeling. Admittedly, this emotional life is just as real for our human feelings, for our human experience, as the life of thought, and perhaps even more real in another respect. But only the life of thought can be permeated by luminous clarity. The emotional life remains spread out in the soul in a certain vagueness.
And when we ask ourselves: How can we understand how this emotional life is present in the soul? Then we must compare one state of the soul with other states of the soul, and gradually — I have already spoken about this here, more as proof; today I only want to refer to these things and, in a sense, communicate them — we come to compare what pulsates in the life of feeling with what occurs in the life of dreams. Anyone who really studies this, anyone who really knows exactly how it presents itself to consciousness, how it wells up from the indeterminate depths of the human being, how it appears in images, but in an indeterminate, twilight manner, so that one does not really know at first how it is connected with any external truth.
This is how it is with the life of feeling. Feelings are certainly something different from dream images; but if we compare the degree of consciousness in relation to feelings with the degree of consciousness in relation to dream images, this degree is quite the same, or at least similar. And we can say: emotional life is waking dreaming; in a sense, what appears as images in dreams is pushed down into the generality of organic life. It is experienced differently, but it is present in the soul in the same way as dream beings, so that we can say: in reality, we are only awake in relation to our imaginative life; we also dream while awake in relation to our emotional life. Anyone who really looks into all that human life means and asks themselves what role feelings play — especially over a longer period of human experience — will be able to say that what otherwise appears to them in dream images is connected with their ordinary life experiences, with what they have experienced, that what has otherwise been experienced in life lives on in a corresponding way in the dream images. But in exactly the same way, what otherwise presents itself as fate in life is expressed in the feelings that nuance our ideas, that provide certain foundations for our ideas. A conscientious observation of the life of the soul will reveal this connection between the life of feeling and the life of dreams.
And another — my dear audience — is the life of the will. We don't usually think about this life of the will, but doesn't the impulse of the will spring from us without us having a clear awareness of its actual source in our soul? We have the thought. The impulse of the will springs from this thought. We then see ourselves, my dear friends, as we act; we observe ourselves, as it were, as actors, but we have a thought about our actions. But we have no awareness of what lies in between, such as what shoots up in me as thought impulses for the will, enters into my muscular power, how the nerve feels the movement of the arm and hand muscles, how what emerges from the thought then I would say the depths of the human being, only to resurface when we find ourselves as actors. This actually lives within us, just as what we go through in deep sleep lives within us. Just as we have, in a sense, lost our own being in sleep, just as we do not experience what we experience in our bodies while awake in sleep, so we do not experience what takes place in our human being when the will allows its impulses to appear. Not only do we dream while awake in our emotional life, we sleep in our waking life by willing, so that dreaming and sleeping are constantly at play within us. But from these unknown depths, from those depths from which the will comes, there also comes that which we ultimately summarize in our self-consciousness. We only recognize our complete humanity when we know ourselves in ordinary life as thinking or imagining, feeling or willing beings.
But we bring unconscious states into this ordinary life. We would not come to the feeling of freedom if we could not separate from our being something that, in a sense, stands out from our entire organic nature at first. It is precisely by standing out that the life of imagination develops what I have previously characterized as the basis of the experience of freedom. In a certain way, we separate ourselves from ourselves. We live awake only in one part of ourselves, only in that which our imaginative life represents. In relation to another part of ourselves, we live, in a sense, unconsciously, just as we live unconsciously in relation to the inner nature of the world. This is where anthroposophically oriented spiritual science comes in, developing methods for higher knowledge. It is not based on anything remotely related to the dreamy, most obscure mystics, nor is it based on anything that could be achieved in external experiments such as complicated spiritualism; it is based entirely on what can be brought out of the inner human being with such bright clarity as only the purest material ideas can. With full consciousness, that which is to flow into the methods of spiritual scientific investigations is brought forth from within the human being.
But that which otherwise lives in the ordinary human soul, such as the dream life, namely the world of feelings, is permeated by the same light that permeates the imagination, which draws from feeling, as in some philosophies or theologies of feeling.
Spiritual science, through its exercises described in my book “How to Attain Knowledge of Higher Worlds,” permeates the emotional life with the light that otherwise only prevails in the life of imagination, so that the region that otherwise remains dreamlike now lives in the human soul as imaginative consciousness. It is not a dream that is there, not the dreamlike life of feeling, at the moment when one surrenders to this imaginative consciousness, but rather that which otherwise remains below the threshold of ordinary consciousness. One thinks images, but images that one knows are not dreamed, but correspond to realities.
And this method, which I have described as it is presented in anthroposophically oriented spiritual science, goes even further in inspired consciousness. There, what is otherwise will is actually achieved. Yesterday I described how what is otherwise abstract theoretical knowledge is transformed into something that can be compared to the artistic view of the human structure. But the will is also viewed in this way. Gradually, one comes to see — and the expression should not be misunderstood — clairvoyantly how the whole of the human organization functions when the will pulsates into this human organization. One sees what really happens in the muscle by recognizing what shoots into it when the impulse of the will is activated, and that is then inspired knowledge. There, the human being delves into his own inner being. There, however, he then gains a knowledge of himself that is otherwise veiled. One comes to recognize not only what stands ready between birth and death, but also what lives in one's feelings and will, which are now permeated by the same light of consciousness that otherwise only illuminates the life of imagination. one comes to recognize not only what has been created in one's being, but also what is creative, what is creative, that which now not only awakens and enters back into the already finished body, as is the case when a person awakens, but which descends from spiritual worlds as a person goes through birth or conception and organizes the body itself. there, through this higher level of knowledge, the human being comes to recognize his eternal nature, to recognize that which lives on beyond birth and death. Through direct observation, he comes to recognize the eternal nature of the spiritual within himself. He comes to an understanding of the essence of the human soul; but they also attain this by diving down into their own being, where they otherwise only recognize the natural, by finding the spirit within themselves, they attain the point where, by descending into themselves, they no longer stand merely within themselves, but now stand within the innermost part of nature, recognizing the spirit of nature in the spirit of their own nature.
And now the meaningful reveals itself to him — you see, it is indeed the case that, in a certain sense, we stand beyond the threshold, with our knowledge of nature. The ancients believed that they would lose their self-awareness in this realm if they were not prepared in an appropriate manner. Modern man does not lose his self-awareness, but he loses the world, the imagination with that bright clarity that self-awareness gives us; this has only developed in modern times. This self-awareness is what we must cultivate. While the ancients focused particularly on training the will, we must, as I have already emphasized in my Philosophy of Freedom, advance to pure thinking. We must train thinking in particular so that, as it develops further, it leads to imagination, inspiration, and intuition.
This, however, presents us with a new threshold into the spiritual world, the threshold that now stands before us. We tell ourselves that we must not remain in the world that gives us only the extended sensory perception, that leaves what is inner to nature beyond the boundary. We must not remain there; we must cross another threshold, the one that leads us into our own inner being, into the essence of the soul, and that no longer allows us to fantasize about all kinds of atoms and atomistics and all kinds of molecules that are supposed to be behind what is color and sound and warmth and so on, but we learn to recognize by recognizing our own spirit and standing within this spirit, we learn to recognize, to stand within the spirit of nature, we learn to know nature itself as spiritual. Where people want to lose the world by placing behind nature — one might say — a second, coarse, material nature in an atomistic world, those who cross the [threshold] in the newer sense find the spirit, and that is what we must develop as a basic feeling toward the inner nature of nature and the essence of the human soul, as different from what the ancients had.
We must have the feeling: Yes, we live in the conditions that the ancients wanted to avoid unprepared. We do not face the danger of losing ourselves, for the world of thought is too strongly developed in modern education, but if we develop this world of thought even further, then we cannot lose what can now be lost to us. The ancients were threatened with the loss of self-awareness, a kind of spiritual powerlessness; we are threatened with the loss of the world, with becoming absorbed in purely mathematical worldviews, in atomistic ideas, so that we are no longer connected with what surrounds us as the fullness of the world. We face the danger that, although we will not lose our self-awareness, we will lose the world in relation to our ego-consciousness. And in order to rediscover the world, that is, to find the spirit in the world, we must cross what modern humanity must call the threshold. And in a certain sense we can say: while the ancients feared the guardian of the threshold and had to be well prepared to pass him, modern man must actually long for this guardian. They must long for the opportunity to become acquainted with that which otherwise only confronted them as external sensory perception in connection with the results of the combining intellect and experiment, in order to attain it through the knowledge of the spirit.
Thus, spiritual knowledge should be brought everywhere, into the laboratory, into the observatory, into the clinic; wherever sensory research is conducted and combined with the intellect, spiritual knowledge should be brought in. For otherwise, what is achieved in these educational institutions is achieved beyond the threshold, and man is cut off from the world in a fateful way, feeling himself confronted with an inner nature that he can never reach in an external way, but only when he first awakens himself, when he first penetrates to the immortal, eternal essence of the human soul. And when they advance to this, they stand within the spirit of nature. They cross this threshold, which lies within themselves, and advance to the spiritual realm of nature.
This is the task of anthroposophically oriented spiritual science in relation to what other sciences cannot provide. That is why anthroposophically oriented spiritual science can call itself Goetheanism, for Goethe responded to those who say:
“No created spirit penetrates into the innermost being of nature.”
Nature has neither core
nor shell;
Nor shell,
It is all at once;
Examine yourself most carefully,
Whether you yourself are core or shell.
One is a shell as long as one stands there with one's mere life of imagination. But in doing so, one cuts oneself off from nature. Only those who have made nature itself their shell, those who have become shells themselves, speak of the inner nature of nature. But those who penetrate to their own core, who know themselves by experiencing themselves in the core of their human soul, know themselves to be standing at the innermost core of nature; they experience this innermost core of nature.
This, ladies and gentlemen, is the impulse that anthroposophically oriented spiritual science would like to give not only to human life in general, but above all to the individual sciences. Then it faces the ideal that all the individual sciences will gradually cease to remain merely the specialties they have been up to now, but that something will spring forth from each individual science that contributes to what human beings must strive for incessantly if they want to be fully conscious of their human dignity, to the eternal nature of the human being.
What the individual sciences can provide remains external to the inner nature of things if it is not supplemented in this way by inner paths of knowledge, adding these inner paths of knowledge to the outer ones in order to turn individual knowledge into a comprehensive knowledge of humanity, which then also makes human beings strong, as shown in my “Key Points of the Social Question” with regard to the social conception of life, with regard to placing it in social life, which will also be suitable for bringing the social demands and questions of the future into a suitable, salutary channel that serves human progress. This should be the task of anthroposophically oriented spiritual science.
Unceasingly — my dear friends — because it believes this to be evident from the present nature of human civilization, unceasingly stands in quite honest, sincere striving for true knowledge of the human being, for deepening the human being, for expanding human activity, human energy, unceasingly — let me summarize this in conclusion —, incessantly stands before those who want anthroposophical spiritual science from its inner core, incessantly stands before them the connection between the nature of the human soul and the inner nature of the natural world, so that what the specialized sciences give us spreads darkness over the world, which should actually be feared as much as the ancients feared what lies beyond the threshold. But it is possible, ladies and gentlemen, to light a light so that human beings can look into this darkness, into the darkness of the inner nature of the world. And this light can only be that which is kindled by an inner, spiritually and soulfully deepened knowledge in the human soul itself.
