The Rudolf Steiner Archive

Fourth Lecture

[ 1 ] It should be fairly clear from the three lectures so far that the spiritual truths can be rediscovered in the Gospel of John. But it should also have become clear that in order to find these truths, it is necessary to really put every word of this Gospel of John on the gold scale. In this religious document, it is indeed essential that the real, genuine wording be absolutely understood. For everything in this document, as we shall see in various cases, is of the deepest possible significance. But not only the wording of this or that sentence is important, but something else is also important. That is the structure, the composition, the composition of the document. Modern man no longer has the right feeling for such things. The ancient writers, if we may call them that, put much more of an architectural structure, of inner structure, into their works than is usually realized. You only have to think of a relatively late poet to find this confirmed: Dante. How everything in the “Divine Comedy” is architecturally structured in terms that are based on the number three. And it is no coincidence that each part of Dante's Comedy ends with the words “stars”. This is just to illustrate how the ancient writers built their work architecturally. And especially with the great religious documents, we must never lose sight of this architectural structure, because it may mean a great deal. However, one must first find out what that meaning is.

[ 2 ] It should be remembered that at the end of the tenth chapter of the Gospel of John there is a sentence that we want to keep in mind. It says in verse 41:

“And many came to him and said, ‘John never performed a miracle, but everything John said about this man was true’.”

[ 3 ] That is, in this verse of chapter 10 we find a reference to the fact that the testimony that is given about Christ Jesus through John is true; it is expressed through a special word that this testimony is true. And now we come to the end of the Gospel of John and find a corresponding verse. It says in verse 24 of chapter 21:

“This disciple is the one who testifies to these things, and who wrote these things, and we know that his testimony is true.”

[ 4 ] So at the end of the whole thing, we have an indication that the testimony of the one who reports is a truthful one. Such congruities and harmonies, that here or there a special word is said, are never without significance in the old scriptures; and it is precisely behind this congruity that something significant is hidden. And we will put our considerations in the right light when we point out its reason.

[ 5 ] There is a fact in the middle of the Gospel of John, without whose understanding the Gospel of John cannot be grasped at all. Immediately after the passage where this word is quoted to affirm the testimony of truth, comes the chapter about the resurrection of Lazarus. The entire Gospel of John falls into two parts through this chapter about the resurrection of Lazarus. And it is pointed out at the end of the first part that the testimony of John the Baptist is to apply to everything that is asserted, that is to be confirmed, about Christ Jesus; and it is pointed out at the very end that the testimony of the disciple, whom we often hear refer to as “the one whom the Lord loved” (13:23), is to apply to everything that comes after the chapter about the resurrection of Lazarus. “whom the Lord loved“ (13:23). What, then, does the ‘raising of Lazarus’ mean at all?

[ 6 ] Let me remind you that after the account of the raising of Lazarus, there is a seemingly enigmatic sentence in the Gospel of John. Imagine the whole situation: Jesus the Christ accomplishes what is usually called a miracle, in the Gospel itself a “sign”: the resurrection of Lazarus. And afterwards there are several sentences that say, “This man does many signs” (11:47), and everything that follows indicates that the accusers do not want to have anything to do with him because of these signs. When you read these words, however they may be translated, you must ask: What is the underlying reason for this? The resurrection of a human being is precisely what prompts Christ's opponents to take a stand against Him. Why does the resurrection of Lazarus upset the opponents so much? Why does the persecution begin precisely there? Anyone who knows how to read must realize that a mystery is hidden in this chapter. This mystery that is hidden behind it is nothing other than the message about who is actually the real author of the Gospel of John, who actually says everything that is said in the Gospel of John. To understand this, we must take a look at what we call the “initiation” into the ancient mysteries. How did this initiation into the ancient mysteries take place?

[ 7 ] A person who had been initiated could have experiences in the spiritual worlds himself, so that he could become a witness of the spiritual worlds. Those who were found mature enough to be initiated were drawn into these mysteries. Everywhere - in Greece, among the Chaldeans, among the Egyptians, among the Indians - there were such mysteries. There the initiates were taught for a long time about the things that we learn in spiritual science today; and when they had been sufficiently taught, what opened the way for them to see for themselves followed. But in ancient times this could not be brought about in any other way than by placing the human being, in relation to his four members: physical body, etheric body, astral body and I, in a very special state. What happened to the person being initiated was that, through the initiator, through the person initiating, who understood the matter, he was placed in a dead-like state for three and a half days. This happened for the following reason. When a person sleeps in the usual sense in today's cycle of development, his physical body and ether body lie in bed, while the I, with the astral body, is lifted out. The person cannot perceive any spiritual events around him, because his astral body does not yet have the spiritual sense organs to perceive the world in which the person then is. Only when his astral body and his ego slip back into his physical and etheric bodies, and make use of his eyes and ears again, does the person perceive the physical world, that is, his environment, again. Through what the initiates had learned, they became able to develop the spiritual sense organs of their astral body. When they had developed these sense organs in their astral body, it was necessary to ensure that everything the astral body had taken in was imprinted in the etheric body, just as the words of a seal are imprinted in the sealing wax. That is what matters. All the preparations for the initiation were based on the fact that man devoted himself to such inner processes as reorganized his astral body. Man was once so constituted in his physical body also that he had no eyes and ears as he has today, but indifferent organs at this point; like animals that have never been exposed to light have no eyes. Light forms the eye, sound forms the ear. What the human being practices through meditation and concentration, and what he experiences inwardly as a result, has the same effect as light on the eye and sound on the ear. Through this, the astral body is transformed and the organs of perception are brought forth to see in the astral, the higher world. But at this stage they are not yet sufficiently firmly established in the etheric body; they become fixed through the fact that what is formed first in the astral body is impressed upon the etheric body. But as long as the etheric body is still within the physical body, it is not possible for what is achieved through the exercises to be clearly reflected in the etheric body. For this to happen, the etheric body had to be lifted out of the physical body. So when the etheric body was lifted out of the physical body during the three and a half days of death-like sleep, everything that had been prepared in the astral body was imprinted. The human being experienced the spiritual world. When he was then recalled back into the physical body by the priest-initiator, he was a witness to what takes place in the spiritual worlds, through his own testimony.

[ 8 ] This procedure has become unnecessary with the appearance of Christ Jesus. This death-like sleep lasting three and a half days can now be replaced by the power emanating from Christ. For we will see in a moment that the Gospel of John contains the strong powers that, today, the astral body, even if the etheric body is inside the physical body, has the strength to fire nevertheless what was prepared in it before. But for this, the Christ Jesus had to be there first. Before that, human beings had not reached the point where, without the characterized procedure, what had been formed in the astral body through meditation and concentration could have been released in the ether body. This was a process that often took place in the mysteries: a person to be initiated is brought into a death-like sleep by the priest-initiator; then the person concerned is guided through the higher worlds; then he is called back into his physical body by the priest-initiator, and now, through his own experience, he is a witness to the spiritual worlds.

[ 9 ] This was always done in the deepest secrecy, and the outer world knew nothing of the proceedings in the old mysteries. Through Jesus Christ, a new initiation was to take the place of the old one, brought about by those forces of which we shall speak again. The old form of initiation was to be brought to a close, as it were. But a transition was to be made from the old to the new time! For the transition, someone was to be initiated once more in the old way, but into the Christian esoteric. This could only be done by Christ Jesus Himself – and it was to be the one who is called Lazarus who was to be initiated. “This sickness is not unto death” (11, 4), it says; it is the three and a half day death-like sleep. This is clearly pointed out. You will see that it is done in a very veiled presentation, but that it presents itself as an initiation for those who can decipher such a veiled manner at all.

[ 10 ] The individuality of Lazarus should be initiated in such a way that this Lazarus could become a witness of the spiritual worlds. And we are told a word that is very significant in the mystery language: we are told “that the Lord loved Lazarus”. What does “to love” mean in the language of the mysteries? It expresses the relationship between the disciple and the teacher. “Whom the Lord loved” is the most intimate, the most initiated disciple. The Lord Himself initiated Lazarus, and as an initiate, Lazarus rose from the grave, that is, from his place of initiation. And the same word “whom the Lord loved” is used later by John – or rather, we should say, by the author of the Gospel of John; for the name “John” is not mentioned. It refers to the beloved disciple, to whom the Gospel of John can be traced. This is the resurrected Lazarus himself. And the writer of the Gospel of John wanted to say: What I have to say, I have to say by virtue of the initiation that was given to me by the Lord himself. - Therefore, the writer of the Gospel of John distinguishes between what happened before the resurrection of Lazarus and what happened after the resurrection of Lazarus. Before the resurrection of Lazarus, an old initiate is mentioned, one who has come to the knowledge of the spirit, and it is emphasized that his testimony is true. — But what is to be said about the deepest things, about the mystery of Palestine, I myself, the resurrected one, will speak about it, but I can only speak about it after the resurrection. — Therefore, in the first part of the Gospel of John, we have the testimony of the old John, and in the second part, the testimony of the new John, whom the Lord Himself initiated. For the same is the resurrected Lazarus. Only when we grasp this do we understand the real meaning of this chapter. It is there because John wanted to say: I refer to my supersensible seeing, not to my perception in the physical world; I tell you what I have seen in the spiritual world through the Lord's initiation.

[ 11 ] Thus we must trace back the characteristics of Christ Jesus, as they appear to us in the first chapters of the Gospel of John up to the end of chapter 10, to the knowledge that, so to speak, could also be had by someone who had not yet been initiated in the deepest sense by Christ Jesus Himself.

[ 12 ] Now you will say: Yes, we ourselves have heard in these lectures the profound words about Christ Jesus as the embodied Logos, as the Light of the World, and so on. — It is not surprising that these profound words about Christ Jesus are already spoken in the first chapters. For in the ancient mysteries, the Christ Jesus, that is, the Christ who was to appear in the world in the future, was not an unknown entity. And all mysteries pointed to One who was to come. That is why the ancient initiates are called “prophets” because they had to prophesy about a future event. That is why the purpose of the initiations was to make it clear that the Christ would reveal himself in the future of humanity. Thus, from what he could already know at that time, the truth emerged for the Baptist, which could let him prophesy that the one of whom was spoken of in the mysteries was standing before him in the Christ Jesus.

[ 13 ] How the whole matter is connected, and what the so-called Baptist himself has to say about the Christ Jesus, will be most clearly shown to us if we answer two questions.

[ 14 ] One is: How does the Baptist place himself in his time? And the other goes back to the explanation of various things in the beginning of the Gospel of John.

[ 15 ] How does the Baptist place himself in his time? What is the Baptist actually? He is one who, like the others who have heard something in the initiations, has been given a hint about the coming Christ, but who is presented as the only one in relation to whom the real secret of Christ Jesus dawns: that the One who has appeared is the Christ. Now those who had been called “Pharisees” or had been given other names saw in Christ Jesus someone who actually opposed their old principle of initiation, who in their eyes was doing something that they, in their conservative sense, could not admit. They said, because they were conservative: We must hold fast to the old principle of initiation! And this contradiction: always speaking of the future Christ, but never allowing the point in time to occur when he is really there, that is precisely what underlies their conservatism. Therefore, when Christ Jesus initiated Lazarus, they had to see it as a break with the old mystery tradition. “Man does many signs!” We cannot have fellowship with him! In their view, he has betrayed the mysteries, made public what should be locked away in the depths of the mystery secrets. And now we understand that this was like a betrayal to them and appeared to be the reason why they had to take a stand against him. Thus begins the turning point, the persecution of Christ Jesus.

[ 16 ] What does the Baptist prove to be in the first chapters of the Gospel of John?

[ 17 ] First, as one who knows the mystery truth of the Christ who was to come, knows it so well that the writer of the Gospel of John can repeat it himself, which the Baptist could also have known, and of which he convinced himself through what we are about to learn.

[ 18 ] We have seen what the very first words of the Gospel of John mean. Now let us take a little consideration of what is said about the Baptist himself. But let us present it to us again in the most correct translation possible. We have only heard the first words so far.

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
He was in the beginning with God.
All things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being that has come into being.
In him was life, and the life was the light of men.
And the light shone in the darkness, but the darkness did not comprehend it.
There came a man sent from God, whose name was John.
He came for a witness, to bear witness about the Light, so that all might believe through him.
He was not the Light, but a witness of the Light.
For the true light that enlightens all men was coming into the world.
It was in the world, and the world was made through it, but the world did not recognize it.
It came to what is individual in people (it came to what is individual in first-person people); but what is individual in people (what is individual in first-person people) did not receive it.
But those who did receive it were able to reveal themselves as children of God through it.
Those who trusted in his name were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of human will, but of God.
And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we heard his teaching, the teaching of the only Son of the Father, full of devotion and truth.
John bears witness about him and clearly proclaims: This was the one of whom I said, 'After me will come the one who has been before me. For he is my predecessor.' For out of his abundance we have all received, grace upon grace. For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. God has never seen anyone with his eyes. The only-begotten Son, who was in the bosom of the Father of the world, has become the guide in this beholding.“ (1:1-18)

[ 19 ] These are the words that roughly convey the meaning of these first sentences of the Gospel of John. Before we proceed to their explanation, we must add one more thing. How then does John explain himself? You will recall that messengers are sent to inquire who John the Baptist is. Priests and Levites come to ask him who he is. We shall see why the answer given is the one that precedes it. For now, let us consider only what he himself says. He said:

“I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness.” (1:23)

[ 20 ] These are the words that are written. “I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness!” In the wilderness, there stands - quite literally - ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ. In Greek, the word “hermit” means “the lonely one”. Now you will understand that it is more correct to say, “I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness” than, “I am the voice of a preacher in the desert.” And we shall better understand everything that is stated in the opening words of the Gospel of John if we bear this self-characterization of John in mind. Why does he call himself “the voice of one crying in the wilderness”?

[ 21 ] In the course of human development, we have seen that the true mission on earth is the development of love, but that this is only conceivable if it is given as a voluntary gift by self-aware human beings, and that man gradually conquers his ego and that the ego slowly and gradually sinks into human nature. We know that animals as such have no individual ego. If the individual lion could say “I”, it would not mean the individual animal, but the group ego in the astral world; all lions would say “I” to it. Thus, whole groups of animals of the same form say “I” to the group ego that can be perceived supernaturally in the astral world. This is the great advantage of man over animals, that man has an individual ego. But the individual ego develops only gradually. Man also began with a group ego, with an ego that belonged to a whole group of people.

[ 22 ] If you go back to ancient peoples, to ancient races, you would find everywhere that people originally formed small groups. With the Germanic peoples, you did not even have to go back very far. In the writings of Tacitus, you can see that the individual Germanic man cares more about his entire tribe than about his individuality. The individual feels himself more as a member of the Cherusci tribe or the Sigambri tribe than as an individual personality, and therefore the individual also advocates the fate of the whole tribe; it is also unimportant who from the tribe avenges an insult when an insult has been done to an individual member or to the tribe. Then, in the course of time, it happens that individual people step out of the tribal community, so that the tribes are broken up and no longer remain compact. From the group soul character, the human being has also developed and gradually swung himself up to feel the I in the individual personality.

[ 23 ] We can only understand certain things, especially religious documents, if we know this secret of group souls and group selves. Among the peoples who had already developed a certain perception of their own ego, there was still an ego that extended not only over spatial, simultaneously living groups, but also over temporal groups. Today, the memory of people is such that the individual only remembers his youth. But there was a time when a different memory was still present, when man not only remembered his deeds, but also remembered the deeds of his father and grandfather as his own. The memory extended far into the blood relationship of the ancestors to the progenitor, whose blood flowed down through the generations. For centuries, memory was preserved with the blood, and a grandson or a scion of a tribe said “I” to the deeds and thoughts of his ancestors as he would to himself. One did not feel trapped between birth and death, but rather as a link in the chain of generations, with the ancestor at its center. For the cohesion of the ego is that one remembered the deeds of the father, the grandfather and so on. In ancient times, this was already expressed externally by the naming. The son not only remembered his own deeds, but also those of the father, grandfather and so on. Memory extended far back through the generations. In ancient times, everything that memory encompassed was given a name, for example, “Noah” or “Adam.” This does not refer to individual people, but to the “I” that preserved memory for centuries. This secret is also hidden behind the patriarchal names. Why did the patriarchs live so long? It would never have occurred to people in ancient times to give a name to the individual human being who stands between birth and death. Adam was preserved in memory for centuries because the spatial and temporal limitations were not considered in the ancient naming practice.

[ 24 ] Thus, little by little, the individual human ego gradually detached itself from the group soul, from the group ego; little by little, man became aware of his individual ego. Before that, he felt his ego in the tribal affiliation, in the group of people with whom he was related by blood, either in space or in time; hence the saying, “I and my father Abraham are one,” that is, we are one ego. And there the individual felt secure in a whole, because the common blood rolled through all the veins of all the members of the respective people. But development went forward: the time came when, within these nations, people were to feel their individual selves.

[ 25 ] To give people what they needed to feel secure and firm in this single individual self, that was the mission of Christ. We must also understand the word, which can so easily be misunderstood: “If anyone does not renounce wife and child, father and mother, brother and sister, he cannot be my disciple!” (Mark. 10, 29). We must not understand this in the trivial sense that someone receives an order to run away from the family; but it is meant: You should feel that each of you is an individual ego and that this individual ego is directly one with the spiritual Father who flows through the world. In the past, the confessor of the Old Testament said, “I and the Father Abraham are one,” because the I felt at rest in the blood relationship. Now the feeling of being one with the spiritual Father-ground should be freed. No longer should blood relationship be the guarantee that man belongs to a whole, but the knowledge of the purely spiritual Father-principle, with which all are one.

[ 26 ] Thus we are told through the Gospel of John that the Christ is the great source of inspiration for what man needs to feel eternal in his individual self. This is the turning point from the old covenant to the new covenant, that the old covenant always has something of group soulfulness, where the one I feels associated with the other I's and feels neither itself nor the other I's right, but instead feels for that in which they are sheltered together, the folk I or tribal I.

[ 27 ] So how must an I feel that has matured to the point of no longer feeling connected to the other individual personalities of the group soul? How must the isolated ego have felt in a time when one could say: The time is no longer when one can feel the togetherness with other persons, with all the I's that belong to a group soul, as a real human truth of life; but that one must first come, which gives the soul the spiritual bread of life, through which the individual ego receives its nourishment. The individual ego had to feel lonely, and the forerunner of Christ had to say: “I am an ego that has peeled itself away and feels lonely. And precisely because I have learned to feel lonely, I feel like a prophet to whom the ego in solitude gives the right spiritual nourishment. That is why the proclaimer had to describe himself as a voice in the wilderness, that is, as the already lonely self, isolated from the group soul, that cries out for the nourishment of the individual self. “I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness.” Here we hear the profound truth again: every human individual ego is completely on its own; I am the voice of the ego that is detached and seeks its foundation on which it can stand as a detached ego. Now we understand the passage: “I am the voice of one crying out in solitude.”

[ 28 ] To understand the exact words of the Gospel of John, we need to familiarize ourselves a little with the way names and designations were given in general at that time. Naming was not as abstract and meaningless then as it is today. And if the interpreters of the Biblical documents would only consider a little how much is said with them, many a trivial interpretation would not see the light of day. I have already pointed out that when the Christ says, “I am the light of the world” (8:12), He really means that He was the first to give expression and impulse to the “I am”. Therefore, wherever the “I am” appears in the first chapters, this “I am” must be particularly emphasized. All names and designations in ancient times were used in a certain way that was both thoroughly real and deeply symbolic.

[ 29 ] Enormous errors are often made here in two directions. On superficial examination, some might say: Yes, according to such an interpretation, much is meant symbolically, and we do not go along with such an interpretation, where everything is meant only symbolically, since you then evaporate the historical biblical events! And those who understand absolutely nothing of the historical events may say: That is all meant only symbolically. But those who speak thus understand nothing of the gospel. Not the historical reality is denied by a symbolic explanation, but it must be emphasized that the esoteric explanation includes both: the view of the facts as historical, and in that they are historical, they themselves at the same time signify what we attach to them. Of course, anyone who sees only the brutal external facts, namely a person born somewhere at a particular time, will not understand that this person is something else besides a mere human being with the name in question, whose biography can be written. But he who knows the spiritual connection will learn to understand that the man who is born in a certain place is, in addition, a symbol for his time, and that one expresses his entire significance for the development of humanity through his name.

[ 30 ] Symbolic and historical at the same time, not only one or the other, that is what is at stake in the real explanation of the Gospels. And so we will see in almost all events and references that John, or the writer of the Gospel of John, who actually sees in supernatural perceptions, at the same time sees the events and the revelation of deeper spiritual truths: He has the historical figure of the Baptist in mind, he sees the historical figure; but at the same time, the actual historical figure is also the symbol for all people who, in ancient times, were already called to imprint the “I” on themselves, but who were only on the way to doing so. The light of the world could shine into the individual “I”, but not for those who were not yet able to comprehend the light of the world in their darkness. That which appeared as life, as light and logos in the Christ Jesus, has always shone in the world; but it was not recognized by those who were only beginning to mature. The light was always there. For if the light had not been there, the potential for the ego could not have arisen at all. While man still lived on the moon, the only parts of him that existed were the physical body, the etheric body and the astral body; there was no I in them. Only because the light had changed to the way it shines on earth did it have the power to ignite the individual I's and slowly bring them to maturity: “The light shone in the darkness; but the darkness could not yet comprehend it” (1:5). “It came into the individual human beings,” it came as far as the I-human beings; for the I-human beings could not have come into being at all if it had not been poured into them through the Logos. ”But the I-human beings did not receive it.” Only a few took it in, the initiates; they rose to the spiritual worlds; they always bore the name “children of God” because they had a knowledge of the Logos, of the Light and Life, and could always bear witness to it. It was individuals who always knew about the spiritual worlds through the ancient mysteries. What was it then that lived in them? That which is eternal in man lived in them. It lived in them quite consciously. They already sensed the great Word: “I and the Father are one” (10:30), namely, I and the great Primordial Ground are one! And the deepest thing they carried in their consciousness, their own ego, they had not received from their father and mother, but through initiation into the spiritual world. Not from the blood and not from the flesh and not from the will of a father or mother, but “from God,” that is, from the spiritual world they received it. There you have the explanation of the words that the great number of people, although they already had the disposition of the I-human being, did not receive the light, that it did come down to the group I, but that the individuals did not receive it. But those who received it - and they were few - could make themselves children of God through it; but those who trusted in Him became children of God through initiation. This gives us a clear picture. But in order that all men with earthly minds might recognize the existing God, He had to appear on earth in such a way that He could be seen with the physical eyes. That is, He had to take on a fleshly form, because such a form can only be seen with the physical eyes. In the past, only the initiates in the mysteries could see him; but now he had taken on flesh for the salvation of all: “The Word or Logos became flesh” (1:14). Thus the writer of the Gospel of John links the historical appearance of Christ Jesus to the entire evolution. “We have heard his teaching, the teaching of the only begotten Son of the Father” (1:14). What kind of teaching is this? What kind of people are other people born?

[ 31 ] In the ancient times when the Gospels were written, those who were born of the flesh were called “born of two”. They were called born of two, let us say, through the mixing of the blood of father and mother. That which is born not of the flesh, and is not begotten by human agency and not by the mingling of blood, is “born of God”; that is “only-begotten.” Those who were formerly called “children of God” were always already in a certain sense the “only-begotten”; and the doctrine of the Son of God is the doctrine of the “only-begotten.” The physical man is the “second-born,” the spiritual man is the “only-begotten.” Do not take this to mean “born into,” no, “only-begotten” is the opposite of “second-born.” And the word indicates that man, in addition to physical birth, can also undergo a spiritual birth, namely, union with the Spirit, the birth by which he becomes an only-begotten child or son of Divinity. And such a teaching could only be heard through Him who was the Word made flesh. Through him, the teaching became general, “the teaching of the only begotten Son of the Father, full of devotion and truth” (1:14). “Devotion” needs to be better translated here, because although it has to do with being born out of the Godhead, it also involves staying together and, at the same time, removing all illusions. This latter comes only from being born of two and encompasses man with illusions, in contrast to the one teaching that brings the truth in the Christ Jesus, as he stood and dwelt among men as the embodied Logos. But John called himself - that is what it literally means -: the forerunner, the forerunner, the one who goes before to proclaim the I. John describes himself as the one who knew that this I must become independent in the individual, but who had to bear witness to the one who will come to bring this about. He said clearly: The one who is to come is the “I am” that is eternal, that can truly say of itself: Before Abraham was, was “I am”. John could say: The I that is spoken of here has been before me; it is at the same time, although I am his predecessor, my predecessor; I bear witness to what was before in every human being; “after me will come the one who has been before me” (1:15).

[ 32 ] And now significant words are said: “For from his abundance we have all received grace upon grace” (1:16). There are many people who call themselves Christians and who read past the word “pleroma”, who do not think of anything particularly precise when they see this word. “Pleroma” means ‘abundance’ in Greek. This is also stated in the Gospel of John: ‘For from the pleroma we have all received grace upon grace!’ I said that every word of the Gospel of John must be weighed up if you want to understand it at all. So what is pleroma, the abundance? Only he can understand it who knows that in the old mysteries the Pleroma or abundance was spoken of as something quite definite. For it was already taught in those days that when the first spiritual beings to reveal themselves were those who had ascended to divinity during the old moon, the Elohim, one of them separated from them: One remained on the moon and radiated the power of love from there until men were sufficiently mature for the light of the remaining six Elohim. Thus one distinguished between Yahweh, the single God, the reflector, and the six-fold abundance of the Godhead, “Pleroma”. But since the Christ is meant by the collective consciousness of the Solar Logos, when pointing to him one had to speak of the fullness of the gods. This profound truth is hidden behind it: “For from the Pleroma we have all taken grace upon grace.”

[33] Now let us go further back in time to the time of the group soul, when the individual felt his I as a group I. Let us now consider what lived in the group as a social order. After all, the people, insofar as they were visible people, lived as individuals. They felt the group I, but for the senses they were individuals. Since they did not yet feel as individuals, they could not yet have love in its full inner extent. One loves the other because he is related to him by blood. Blood relationship is the basis of all love. The blood relatives loved each other first, and love also arises from blood relationship, provided it is not sex love. From this group soul love, people should free themselves more and more and offer love as a free gift of the I. At the end of the development on earth, people will achieve that a time will come when the I, having become independent, will have the impulse in its innermost being to do what is right and good out of complete devotion. Because the I has this impulse, it does what is right, it does what is good. When love is so spiritualized that no one will want to do anything but what is right, then what Christ Jesus wanted to bring into the world will have been fulfilled. For that is one of the secrets of Christianity, that it teaches: Look to Christ, be filled with the power of his example, be tempted as he was, follow him; then your liberated self will be such that it needs no law, that as a being free in its innermost being it will do the good, the right thing. Thus Christ brings the impulse of freedom from the law, so that good is not done because of the law, but as an impulse of the love that lives within.

[ 34 ] This impulse will, however, need the whole of the rest of its time on earth to develop. The beginning of this has been made through Christ Jesus, and the Christ form will always be the power that will educate people to it. As long as human beings were not mature enough to receive an independent ego, as long as they existed as members of a group, they had to be regulated socially by an outwardly revealed law. And even today people have not yet progressed beyond the group ego in all respects. In how many things is the human being today not at all an individual human being, but a group being! The human being who would be a free being today – at a certain level of esoteric discipleship one is called the “homeless” – is still an ideal! He who voluntarily places himself in the world process is individual, he is not regulated by the law. In the Christ principle lies the overcoming of the law: “For the law was given through Moses; but grace and truth came through Christ” (John 1:17). In the Christian sense, grace is the ability of the soul to do good out of its inner being. Grace and the truth recognized in the inner being came into being through Christ. You see how deeply this thought intervenes in the evolution of humanity.

[ 35 ] In the past, those who were initiated were brought to higher spiritual perception. Never before has anyone seen a God with their physical eyes. The only begotten Son, who dwells in the bosom of the Father, is the first to have led us to see a God in the way that people on earth see their surroundings with earthly senses. Before that, God had remained invisible. He revealed Himself in the supersensible through dreams or something else in the places of initiation. Now God had become a historical, sensual fact, a fleshly form. This is expressed in the words: “God has never been seen by anyone. The only-begotten Son, who was in the bosom of the Father, he has become the guide in this vision” (1:18). He has brought people to see a God with the senses of the earth.

[ 36 ] Thus we see, indeed, how sharply and significantly the Gospel of John points to the historical event in Palestine and with what paradigmatic, well-defined words, but which must be weighed carefully if we want to use them to understand esoteric Christianity. And now, in the next lectures, we will see how this theme is further developed and at the same time shown that the Christ is not only the leader of those who are connected with the group soul, but how he comes into every single human being and wants to endow the individual ego with his impulse. The blood relationship remains, but the spirituality of love is added. And He gives the impulse to this love, which goes from free I to free I. For those who are initiated, one truth after another is revealed day by day. An important truth always reveals itself on the third day. That is when one fully learns to understand that in the evolution of the earth there is a point where material love, tied to blood, becomes more and more spiritualized. This is the event that is to illustrate the transition from pure blood love to spiritual love. This is pointed out with significant words by Christ Jesus when he says: “A time will come, which is my time, when the most important things will be created by people who are no longer connected by blood, but by those who stand alone. But this time has yet to come. The Christ Himself, who gives the first impulse, says on an important occasion that this ideal will one day be fulfilled, but that its time has not yet come. He points this out prophetically when the mother stands there and asks Him to do something for humanity, when she alludes, as it were, to her right to prompt Him to do an important deed for people. And he replies: “Yes, what we can do today still has something to do with blood ties, with the relationship between ‘me and you’; ‘for my time has not yet come’ (v. 4). That such a time will come, when the individual must stand for himself, is expressed in the account of the wedding at Cana; and the request ”They have no wine!” (2:3) is answered by Jesus in such a way that he says: “This is something that still has to do with ‘me and you’; my time has not yet come.” Hence the words “from me to you” and “my time has not yet come”. What is written in the text points to this secret. Like many other things, this passage has always been translated rather roughly. It should not read, “Woman, what do I have to do with you?” but rather, “What is going from me to you?” The text is so fine and subtle that it is only understandable to those who want to understand it. But when these religious documents are repeatedly explained by all sorts of people today, one might well ask: Do those who call themselves Christians have no sense of what it means when they have Christ say – according to an incorrect translation – “Woman, what do I have to do with you?”

[ 37 ] With so much of what calls itself Christianity today and claims to be the gospel, one must ask: Do they even have the gospel? It is a matter of first having the gospel. And with such a profound document as the Gospel of John, it is really a matter of weighing every word on the gold scale in order to recognize its true value.