The Rudolf Steiner Archive

Second Lecture

[ 1 ] Yesterday we had to address questions concerning human karma, and we attempted to approach these questions of human karma in such a way that they appear to us in connection with inner processes of the human soul; one might say that they appear to us in connection with something attainable. For it was pointed out that one can, so to speak, introduce certain things into one’s inner life on a trial basis, and that by doing so one can evoke certain inner experiences in one’s inner life which must lead to a very definite conviction of the truth of the law of karma. When we repeatedly bring such questions into the scope of our anthroposophical contemplation, this is by no means arbitrary, but rather it is connected to the fact that it will become increasingly necessary to recognize how that which we call Anthroposophy in the true, genuine sense of the word relates to life and to the whole of human development. One can undoubtedly form at least a roughly accurate mental image of how all human life must gradually be transformed once a larger number of people have made their own the conviction that underlies a contemplation such as yesterday’s. Life must change in a certain way as a result of people adopting a different attitude toward life through the penetration of such truths. And this brings us to the extraordinarily important question that must be a matter of conscience for those individuals who align themselves with the anthroposophical movement; we come to the question: What actually makes a person of the present day an anthroposophist?

[ 2 ] It is, of course, very easy for a misunderstanding to arise when one attempts to answer this question in an appropriate manner, for even today many people—including some of our own—confuse the anthroposophical movement with some kind of external organization. Nothing is to be said against such an external organization, which, in a certain sense, must exist so that the cultivation of anthroposophy is possible on the physical plane; but it is important to realize that, in essence, such an external organization can include all those people who have a serious, sincere interest in the questions of spiritual life and who wish to deepen their worldview in the spirit of such a movement of spiritual life. This already implies that no dogma, no positive creed, need be demanded of those who join an organization characterized in this way. But it is another matter to point out once and for all what actually makes modern people, the people of our time, anthroposophists.

[ 3 ] The common belief that we are dealing with a spiritual world is certainly the starting point of the anthroposophical conviction, and it must always be emphasized whenever anthroposophy is presented to the public and its tasks, goals, and current mission are discussed in public. But within the actual anthroposophical circles, one must realize that something much more definite, much more distinct than merely the belief in a spiritual world is what defines the anthroposophist. For, after all, this belief in a spiritual world has always existed in those circles that were not strictly materialistic. What makes the modern person an anthroposophist—something that was not yet fundamentally present in the theosophy of, for example, Jakob Böhme or any other theosophist of earlier times—is something toward which Western culture has striven with all its might; on the one hand, to such an extent that this very striving has become a characteristic feature of the aspirations of many people. And on the other hand, there is the fact that this very thing which so peculiarly characterizes the anthroposophist as such is still today most strongly challenged by external culture and external human education, and is regarded as something foolish.

[ 4 ] Certainly, we learn a great deal through anthroposophy. We come to know the evolution of humanity; we even come to know the evolution of our Earth and our planetary system. All these things form part of the foundations for those striving toward anthroposophy. But what is meant here—and is particularly significant for the contemporary anthroposophist—is the attainment of a conviction regarding the questions of reincarnation and karma. And the way in which people will come to hold this conviction regarding reincarnation and karma, how they will find the means to integrate the concept of reincarnation and karma into everyday life—this is precisely what will fundamentally transform modern life from the present into the future. It will create entirely new forms of life, an entirely new way of human coexistence; but such a coexistence is necessary if human culture is not to fall into decline, but rather to truly rise and move forward. Such considerations, such inner spiritual experiences as were highlighted yesterday, can in fact be made by every modern person; and if they have sufficient energy and drive, they will come to an inner conviction of the truth of reincarnation and karma. But what true anthroposophy is actually meant to achieve stands, one might say, in contrast to the entire fundamental character of our present age.

[ 5 ] This fundamental character of our present age is perhaps expressed most radically and characteristically in the fact that one can still find a greater or lesser interest in the central questions relating to religious matters, to the development of humanity and the world, and also to karma and reincarnation. One will still find, even when such questions pertain to the specific positive teachings of the various religious denominations—say, regarding the nature of the Buddha or the Christ—one will still find widespread interest today in the discussion of such questions. But this interest is becoming significantly weaker, is waning; it is waning quite considerably even among those who call themselves anthroposophists today when the discussion turns to the specific, concrete details of how anthroposophy is to be integrated into every aspect of external life. This is, of course, essentially very understandable. Human beings are immersed in external life; one person has this position in the world, another that one. One might say that, as the world presents itself with its present-day structures, it almost resembles a vast establishment; the individual human being is like a cog within it. This is how he feels in this world with his work, his worries, and the things that occupy him from morning to night, and he knows nothing other than that he must submit to this external world order.

[ 6 ] Alongside this arises the question that must be present for every soul capable of lifting its gaze even slightly from the concerns of daily life: the question of the soul’s destiny, of the beginning and end of the soul’s life, of its connection to the divine-spiritual beings, and of the forces of the world. And between what everyday life has to offer the human being—the things they worry about and so on—and what they receive in the realm of anthroposophy, a deep abyss, a wide chasm, opens up. And one might say: For most people, and also for contemporary anthroposophists, this harmony between their anthroposophical convictions and what they do and create with their mental images out there in everyday life is almost entirely absent. One need only raise some concrete question in public and address it from a perspective of Spiritual Science, an anthroposophical perspective, and one will immediately see that the interest which still existed for the treatment of general religious and similar questions is not present for such concrete questions. Now, one cannot demand that anthroposophy take root immediately, that everyone already express it in their daily actions. But attention must be drawn to the fact that anthroposophical Spiritual Science has the mission of introducing into life—of incorporating into life—precisely all that must flow from a soul that is gradually acquiring the conviction that the ideas of reincarnation and karma are realities. Thus, one could almost say that a characteristic feature of the contemporary anthroposophist is that he is on the path to acquiring a well-founded inner conviction regarding the operation of the ideas of reincarnation and karma. Everything else, one might say, then follows of its own accord as an immediate consequence, as a secondary effect.

[ 7 ] Of course, it cannot be that everyone now thinks, “With what I gain from reincarnation and karma, I will now directly influence my external life.” That is, of course, not possible. But one must gain a mental image of how reincarnation and karma must find their way into external life so that they can become guiding forces in that life.

[ 8 ] Let us consider the idea of karma, specifically how karma operates through a person’s various incarnations. When a person enters the world, we must ultimately view their abilities and powers as the result of causes they themselves set in motion in previous incarnations. If we carry this idea through consistently, we must truly treat every human being as a kind of inner mystery, as something from which must emerge what hovers in the dark depths of their past incarnations. Not only in education, but in life as a whole, a very significant transformation is brought about when such an idea of karma is taken seriously. And if this were recognized, the idea of karma would be transformed from a merely theoretical concept into something that must truly intervene in practical life, something that could truly become a practical matter of life.

[ 9 ] All external life, as it presents itself to us today, is everywhere a reflection of a human context that has been shaped and formed through the exclusion—indeed, the denial—of the idea of reincarnation and karma. And as if one wanted to block all possibilities that people might, through the development of their own souls, come to realize that reincarnation and karma exist, so is this external life organized today. In fact, there is, for example, nothing so hostile to a genuine belief in reincarnation and karma as the principle that one must reap a reward commensurate with the work one performs—a reward that literally pays for the work. Doesn’t that sound strange, quite strange! Now, you need not view the matter as if Anthroposophy were seeking to radically overturn the principles of a way of life and introduce a new social order overnight. That cannot be. But the idea should strike people that, in fact, in a world order where one believes that wages and work must correspond directly, where one must, so to speak, earn through one’s work what is necessary for life, a true fundamental conviction in reincarnation and karma can never flourish. Of course, the existing social order must remain as it is for the time being, for the anthroposophist, of all people, must recognize that what exists has in turn been brought about by the law of karma, and that in this respect it exists rightly and necessarily. But they must certainly have the opportunity to grasp that, like a new seed within the organism of our world order, that which can and must follow from the acceptance of the idea of reincarnation and karma is developing.

[ 10 ] Above all, it follows from the idea of karma that we should not feel placed within the world order by chance—as I believe is evident from yesterday’s discussion—nor should we feel placed by chance in the position we occupy in life, but rather that this placement is based, as it were, on a kind of subconscious volitional decision; that, in a sense, before we entered this earthly existence—which we worked our way toward from the spiritual world between death and birth—we made a decision of will in the spiritual world as a result of our previous incarnations—a decision we simply forgot again as we settled into the body—to place ourselves in the position where we stand. So that the result of a pre-birth, pre-earthly decision of our own will places us in our place in life and endows us precisely with the disposition for those blows of fate that befall us. When a person then comes to the conviction of the truth of the law of karma, it is inevitable that, in a certain sense, they will begin to feel an affinity, perhaps even love, for the position in the world they have taken upon themselves, whatever that position may be.

[ 11 ] Now, of course, you might say: Yes, you speak in very strange words, odd, strange words! With poets, writers, and other people who work in the realm of the spirit, this might be acceptable. In that case, when you speak to them, you can preach effectively that they should have joy, love, and devotion for the position they hold in life. But what about all those people who occupy positions in life that are, in truth, not initially suited to making a particularly sympathetic impression on others through their content or activities—positions that are likely to evoke in people’s souls the feeling that they belong to the neglected, the personalities subjugated by life? — Who would deny that a large part of current cultural endeavors is aimed at continually introducing improvements into our lives that can, so to speak, remedy that dissatisfaction with such an unsympathetic placement in life? How many diverse factions, how many sectarian endeavors exist that seek, so to speak, to improve life in every direction so that, even in an external sense, a kind of tolerability of the entire earthly life of humanity might be achieved.

[ 12 ] But all these efforts fail to take into account one crucial fact: namely, that the kind of dissatisfaction which, for many people today, must necessarily arise from life is connected in many ways with the entire course of human development; that, fundamentally speaking, the way in which people developed in the past has led them to such karma, and that the current state of human cultural development has necessarily emerged from the interplay of these various karmas. And if we wish to characterize this state of culture, we must say that it proves to be extremely complex. We must also say that what a person does, what they carry out, is increasingly disconnected from what they love. And if one were to count today the people who must perform an activity they do not love in their external life situation, their number would truly be far greater than the number of those who profess: I can say nothing other than that I love my external activity, that it makes me happy and content!

[ 13 ] Just recently, I heard someone say some strange words to a friend of mine. He said: When I look back on my life in all its details, I must say that if I were to start this life over again from childhood at this very moment and could live it exactly as I would like, I would do exactly what I have done so far. — To which my friend replied: Then you are one of the rarest people to be found in the present day. — This person is probably right regarding most people of the present day. There are not many contemporaries who would say that, if it were up to them, they would immediately begin life again with all that it has brought in terms of joy, pain, strokes of fate, and obstacles, and would be entirely content if it were to offer them exactly the same things again. One cannot say that this fact, namely that there are so few people today who would, so to speak, take on their present karma again in all its details, is unrelated to everything that the current state of human culture has brought about. Our life has become more complicated, but it has become what it is through the diverse karmas of the individual personalities living on Earth today. That is quite beyond doubt. For anyone who looks even a little into the course of human development, the situation is by no means such that we might be heading toward a life in the future that would be less complicated. On the contrary, life will become ever more and more complicated! External life is becoming ever more complicated, and even if in the future machines take over so many of humanity’s activities: there will be very little of the kind of life that brings joy to people in this physical incarnation, unless conditions arise that are entirely different from those currently prevailing in our culture. And these other conditions must be those that arise from the human soul being permeated by the truth of reincarnation and karma.

[ 14 ] Through this truth, one will come to realize that, as external culture becomes more complex, something entirely different will be unfolding in parallel. What will be necessary for people to become increasingly imbued with the truth of reincarnation and karma? What will be necessary so that the concept of reincarnation and karma—as must certainly be the case if our culture is not to experience a decline—will, in a relatively short time, permeate our school education to such an extent that it captivates people already in their childhood, just as the conviction of the correctness of the Copernican world system already captivates children today?

[ 15 ] What was necessary for the Copernican system of the world to capture people’s imaginations? — There is something quite peculiar about this Copernican system of the world. I do not wish to speak about the Copernican system of the world itself, but only about its emergence into the world. Just consider for a moment that this Copernican world system was conceived by a Christian canon, and that Copernicus was able to think of this world system in such a way that he dedicated his work, in which he had elaborated this world system, to the Pope. He could believe that what he had conceived was entirely in the spirit of Christianity. Was there any proof of Copernicanism back then? Could anyone prove what Copernicus had conceived? No one could prove Copernicanism. And yet, consider the speed with which it took hold among humanity! Since when has it been possible to prove it? Only with reasonable certainty, insofar as it is correct, since the 1850s, only since Foucault’s pendulum experiment. There was no proof in the past that the Earth rotates. It is nonsense to claim that Copernicus was able to prove everything he posited and understood as a hypothesis; this also applies to the claim that the Earth rotates on its axis.

[ 16 ] It was only after it was realized that the oscillating polar pendulum tends to maintain its plane of oscillation relative to the Earth’s rotation, and that when a long pendulum is set in motion, its direction of oscillation rotates relative to the Earth’s surface, that the conclusion could be drawn: the Earth must have rotated away from beneath the pendulum. This experiment, which is actually the first real proof that the Earth moves, was not conducted until the 19th century. Previously, there was no way to regard Copernicanism as anything other than a hypothesis. Nevertheless, it had such an effect on the nature of the modern human soul that, although Copernicus believed he could dedicate his work to the Pope, it remained on the Index until 1822. It was not until 1822 that the work upon which Copernicanism is based was removed from the Index. It was thus removed before there was any real proof of Copernicus’s view. The force of the impulse with which the Copernican world system took root in the human soul—this Copernicanism itself—compelled the Church to recognize it as something that is not heretical.

[ 17 ] It has always struck me as profoundly characteristic that, when I was a young boy, this knowledge of the Earth’s motion was first presented to me at school by a pastor, not by a teacher. And who would doubt that Copernicanism has taken root, that it has taken root even in the minds of children? — But let us not speak now of its truths and its errors.

[ 18 ] The truth of reincarnation and karma must take root—but humanity does not have as much time for this as it did for accepting Copernicanism—if human culture is not to experience a decline. And those who call themselves anthroposophists today are called upon to do their part so that the truth of reincarnation and karma may permeate even the minds of children. This does not mean, of course, that those anthroposophists who have children should now teach this to their children as a dogma. One must have an understanding of these things.

[ 19 ] I did not mention Copernicanism for no reason. From what brought Copernicanism its success, we can learn what might bring the ideas of reincarnation and karma their cultural success. What, then, contributed to Copernicanism spreading so rapidly? — I am now going to say something terribly heretical, something downright abhorrent to modern people. But the point is precisely that anthroposophy must be taken just as seriously and regarded as significant by anthroposophists as Christianity was once taken by the first Christians when it first arose, who also set themselves in opposition to what existed at the time. If anthroposophy is not taken so seriously by its adherents, it cannot accomplish for humanity what must be accomplished.

[ 20 ] Well, I have to say something rather gruesome, and it is this: Copernicanism—that which people today learn as the Copernican world system, whose great merit and thus its significance as a cultural fact of the very highest order should certainly not be denied—was able to take root in the human soul because one could be a superficial person and still be a follower of this system. Superficiality and external focus were part of the process of becoming convinced of Copernicanism more quickly. This is not to say that Copernicus’s significance for humanity should be diminished. No; but it can be said that one need not be a very deep person, that one need not internalize but rather must, in fact, externalize oneself in order to be a follower of Copernicanism. And truly, it took a high degree of externalization of the human mind for people to come up with such statements as the trivial ones found in modern, monistic books, where one says with a certain enthusiasm: The Earth, as inhabited by humans, is a speck of dust in the universe compared to the other worlds. — This is a trivial tirade, for the simple reason that this speck of dust, in all its details, concerns the people on Earth, whereas the other things spread out in the universe—to which the Earth is supposed to be compared—concern people very little. Human development had to detach itself completely in order to, so to speak, become quick-witted enough to accept Copernicanism.

[ 21 ] But what must humanity do to embrace the doctrine of reincarnation and karma? — This doctrine must take hold much more quickly if humanity is not to face decline. But what is necessary for it to take root in the minds of children?

[ 22 ] Externalization was necessary for Copernicanism; internalization is necessary to come to terms with the truths of reincarnation and karma; the ability to take such things seriously, as we discussed yesterday, the ability to respond to inner soul experiences, to the intimacies of the mind, to those things that every soul must experience in the deep inner recesses of its own core being. What has resulted from Copernicanism for contemporary culture is presented everywhere today, in all popular media, and a particular success is seen in the fact that all of this can also be presented to people in images, if possible in cinematographic recordings. This alone characterizes the immense externalization of this culture.

[ 23 ] Little can be shown in images, little can be conveyed about the intimate nature of those truths that are summed up in the words reincarnation and karma. It is through the training and internalization of such things as were spoken of yesterday that people will come to realize that the belief in reincarnation and karma is well-founded. Thus, the opposite pole will be necessary for the ideas of reincarnation and karma to take root in humanity—the very opposite of what is currently the norm in our present external culture. Therefore, it must be insisted upon that this internalization truly takes place in the field of anthroposophy. While it cannot be denied that certain schematic representations can be useful for the intellect’s grasp of fundamental truths, it must nevertheless be said: The most important thing in the field of anthroposophy is to direct attention to the laws at work in the depths of the soul, to that which acts inwardly among the soul’s forces in a manner similar to how the external physical laws act out there in the worlds of time and space.

[ 24 ] But even today, people still understand very little about these individual laws of karma. We can see this, so to speak, in the things that are repeated over and over again in modern culture. Who among those considered enlightened in modern society would not think that humanity has moved beyond the childhood stage in which it believed, and that humanity has entered adulthood, where it can know? Such statements are declaimed over and over again, and much stems from them that beguiles people in the wider world—but which should never beguile anthroposophists—sayings such as that knowledge must replace faith.

[ 25 ] But all these tirades about faith and knowledge fail to take into account what might be called karmic connections in life. If one who is capable of conducting occult research were to observe particularly devout, fervently believing individuals of the present day and ask oneself: Why is this or that person a particularly devout individual? Why is there such fervor of faith, such enthusiasm; why is there in this or that person a veritable genius for religious devotion, for directing the thoughts toward the supersensible world? — when one asks these questions, one receives a remarkable answer. If one goes back, in the case of such devout individuals—in whom faith may even emerge as a significant aspect of their lives only in later years—to earlier incarnations, one discovers the curious fact that these are individuals who were knowledgeable beings in earlier, preceding incarnations. The knowledge of their previous incarnation, the rational element of reason from the earlier incarnation, has transformed precisely into the element of faith in the present incarnation. Here we have one of those curious karmic facts that stands so strangely alongside another fact: When one now approaches people who, as particularly materialistic individuals, no longer believe but only want to know—forgive me if I say something that would not shock anyone here, but would certainly shock many outsiders who swear only by, and declare they will accept only, what the senses and the intellect limited to the brain present— one finds—it is a complete mystery—spiritual dullness in the previous incarnation. So that a genuine investigation of the various incarnations yields this strange result: that it is precisely those enthusiastic, believing souls—who are not fanatical but are inwardly steadfast in the orientation of their being toward the higher worlds— have built their present faith upon a knowledge they acquired in previous incarnations, whereas knowledge on a materialistic basis has been acquired through dullness toward the worldviews of earlier incarnations.

[ 26 ] Consider how one’s entire outlook on life changes when one shifts one’s gaze from what one experiences in the immediate present to what human individuality experiences as it passes through its various incarnations!

[ 27 ] Many things of which a person is proud in their present incarnation seem strange when viewed in the context of how they were acquired in a previous incarnation. When viewed from the perspective of reincarnation, many things do not seem so unbelievable. One need only consider how a person develops in an incarnation under the influence of these inner soul forces. One need only consider the soul force of faith, the soul force that a person can possess in believing in something that, as the supersensible, rises above ordinary sensory phenomena. No matter how much a modern materialistic monist may resist this, he may say: “Only knowledge counts; faith has no secure foundation”—but there is another fact that stands in opposition to this, the fact that it is precisely the soul relationship of faith that has a vitalizing effect on our astral body, while unbelief, the inability to believe, withers the astral body, causing it to dry up. Just as food affects the physical body, so does faith affect the astral body. And is it not important to realize what faith does for the human being, for his salvation, for the health of his soul, and—since this is also what promotes physical health—for this body? Is it not strange that, on the one hand, one wants to do away with faith and make room for knowledge, while on the other hand it is true that a person who cannot believe must end up with a parched, withered astral body? If one is to truly take this into account, it can be done by considering just a single life. For to recognize that a person without faith develops a withered astral body, one need not survey successive incarnations; it is sufficient to observe the person in a single incarnation. We can therefore say: lack of faith withers our astral body; we impoverish ourselves through lack of faith; in the subsequent incarnation, we dry up our individuality. Through lack of faith, we become dull for the next incarnation and incapable of acquiring knowledge. It is a vain, dry, sober logic to set knowledge in opposition to faith. For those who look into the depths of things, all the trivialities put forward about faith and knowledge have roughly the same significance as a discussion between two people, one of whom claimed that men had been of greater importance for human development up to now, while the other would say women. In the childhood of humanity, then, one sex was significant, but now the other is. For the connoisseur of spiritual facts, it is clear: just as the two sexes relate to one another in external physical life, so do faith and knowledge. We must regard this as a sharp and significant fact, and in doing so we see correctly. The parallelism extends so far that we can say: Just as a human being—as we have often emphasized—changes gender in successive incarnations, so that they are generally alternately male and female, so too does a more devout incarnation generally follow a more rational one, then again a more devout one, and so on. There are, of course, exceptions, so that several male or female incarnations may follow one another. But as a rule, these things are thoroughly intertwined and complementary.

[ 28 ] But there are other human faculties that complement one another in a similar way, for example, the two soul faculties that we might call the capacity for love and inner strength, so that within the human being there is a sense of self, inner harmony, an inner sense of self-reliance, and the knowledge of what we are meant to do in life. In this regard, too, human karma works alternately across different incarnations, manifesting more strongly in one incarnation a selfless love for one’s surroundings—a kind of self-forgetfulness, a kind of merging with one’s surroundings. And such an incarnation will alternate with one in which the person feels more called upon not to lose themselves to the external world, but to strengthen themselves inwardly, so that they use that strength to advance themselves. Of course, the latter must not degenerate into lovelessness, just as the former must not and cannot degenerate into a complete loss of one’s own self. These two things, in turn, belong together. And it must certainly be emphasized again and again that it is not enough for anthroposophists merely to want to make a sacrifice. Some people are quite willing to make many sacrifices—but in order to make sacrifices that are of value to the world, a person must first have the strength for these sacrifices. A person must first be something before they can sacrifice themselves; otherwise, the sacrifice of the ego is not worth very much. In a certain sense, it is also a kind of—albeit restrained—egoism, of complacency, when one does not strive to perfect oneself, to strive further, so that what one can accomplish is also something of value.

[ 29 ] It might seem—but please do not misunderstand me—as if we were preaching a lack of love. The fact is that the outside world very easily accuses anthroposophists today: You strive to perfect your soul, to make progress in regard to your soul! You are becoming egoists! — Now it must be admitted that many eccentricities, many flaws, and errors can arise in this human striving for perfection. One need not always feel mere sympathy for what very often appears among anthroposophists under the principle of development. Behind this striving lies, in many cases, an extraordinary amount of unwarranted egoism.

[ 30 ] On the other hand, it must be emphasized that we live in a time, in a cultural era, in which an infinite amount of waste is generated precisely through a selfless willingness to make sacrifices. Even though lovelessness is present everywhere, there is also an immense amount of wastefulness in love and self-sacrifice. This should not be misunderstood; but one must be clear that love, if it does not occur alongside wise guidance in life and a wise understanding of the relevant circumstances, can be very much out of place and thus be more to the detriment than to the benefit of people.

[ 31 ] We live in an age in which a great many people need something to enter their souls once again—something capable of moving the soul forward, something of what anthroposophy offers—to make their souls richer and more meaningful. Humanity must strive, for the next incarnation and even for the work between death and new birth, toward actions that are not merely based on old traditions, but are new actions. These things must certainly be regarded with great seriousness and true dignity, for it must be established as a fact that anthroposophy has a mission, that it is like a cultural seed that grows into the future and must sprout. But we can best understand how this takes place in life when we consider such karmic connections as faith and reason, love and self-awareness. The person who, in the spirit of our times, is convinced that when one passes through the gate of death, an otherworldly eternity immediately follows, somewhere outside this world, will never be able to truly appreciate the progress of the soul, for they will say to themselves: “If there is progress, you cannot fully grasp it as such, for you are only temporary, only here for a brief moment in this world, and must prepare yourself for the other world.”

[ 32 ] And yet, it is true that we gain the greatest wisdom from the things we have failed to achieve. We learn from our failures. It is precisely through what we have failed to achieve that we become wisest of all. And ask yourself seriously, how often do you have the opportunity to repeat what you failed at in exactly the same situation as before? Rarely will such a situation arise. And would life not be utterly meaningless if the wisdom we can gain from our mistakes were lost to this earthly humanity? Only if we can return again, if we can apply in a completely new life what we have acquired as life experience in previous lives—only then does life have meaning. Therefore, it is pointless to strive for the perfection of the soul at all, both for this earthly existence—if it is regarded as the only one—and for that extraterrestrial eternity.

[ 33 ] And it is all the more pointless for those who, after passing through the gates of death, consider all existence to be over. What strength, what energy, and what assurance of life would people have if they knew that they could make use of the power that seems to be lost in a new life! Contemporary culture is what it is because extraordinarily little has been gathered for this culture in the incarnations that human beings have previously undergone. Truly, souls have become impoverished through successive incarnations. Why is it that souls have become impoverished?

[ 34 ] Let us look back to those ancient times that preceded the Mystery of Golgotha; back then, there was still an ancient form of clairvoyance, and magical powers of the will were still present. This remained the case well into the Christian era. But what had intruded from the higher worlds in the final days of ancient clairvoyance was nothing but evil, the demonic. Everywhere in the Gospels we see demonic beings mentioned in the surroundings of Christ Jesus. What had existed in human souls in ancient times as an original connection with the divine-spiritual forces and beings had been lost to the souls. Then Christ entered into humanity. The people living today have experienced two, three, or four incarnations since that time, depending on their karma. Just as Christianity has worked up to now, so it had to work, because there were weak, emptied souls within humanity. It could not unfold its inner power because there were weak souls within the course of human development. One can gauge how this was the case by considering another wave of human culture, namely the wave that led human development in the East toward Buddhism. Buddhism holds the belief in reincarnation and karma, but it holds them in such a way that it views the course of human development as if its sole task were to bring people out of life as quickly as possible. In the East, a wave was at work in which the urge for existence was no longer present. So we see how everything that is meant to inspire people toward their earthly mission, to guide them—how all of that has given way among the adherents of the cultural wave that carries Buddhism. And if Buddhism were to gain particular traction in the West, this would be proof that there are numerous souls who belong to the weakest, the least capable of living, for it would be they who would embrace it. Wherever Buddhism might appear in any form in the West, this would be proof that the souls wish to leave the earthly mission as quickly as possible, that they cannot come to terms with it.

[ 35 ] As Christianity spread throughout southern Europe and was adopted by the northern peoples, the souls of these peoples were strong in their instinctive power. They incorporated Christianity, but at first it could only emphasize its outer aspects—that is, those for which it is particularly important that human beings in the present culture may achieve a deepening of the Christ impulse, so that this Christ impulse becomes the innermost power of the human soul itself, and thus the soul becomes ever richer and richer and ever more inward as it lives toward the future. Human souls have gone through weaker incarnations; Christianity initially supported them externally. Now the time has come when souls must become strong and powerful inwardly. Therefore, in the course of the future, it will matter little what the soul does in external life. What will matter, however, is that it finds itself, that it internalizes itself, that it gains mental images into how to bring the inner into outer life, how to carry out the earthly mission with what one gains in consciousness and strong inner life through being imbued with the truths of reincarnation and karma.

[ 36 ] Even if the beginning is only a modest one, with the ideas of reincarnation and karma gradually entering our lives, these modest beginnings are nonetheless of immense importance. The more we come to judge people, so to speak, according to their inner capacities, and to internalize life, the more we bring about what must be the fundamental character of a future humanity. Outer life is becoming ever more complicated; that cannot be stopped. But souls will come together in the inner realm. While the individual may outwardly perform this or that activity, it is the inner goodness of the soul that will bring individual souls together in anthroposophical life and enable them to work toward this anthroposophical life increasingly flowing into outer culture as well. We know that the entire outer life is strengthened when the soul finds its reality in anthroposophy; that is why people from all walks of life, all professions, and all walks of life come together. The soul of the external cultural movement itself is created by what can meet us in anthroposophy: the animation of external life. For this to take place, the awareness of the important law of karma must first enter the soul. The more we live toward the future, the more the individual must be able to feel within himself the animation of all life.

[ 37 ] External laws and institutions will make the conduct of daily life so complicated that people will no longer be able to find their way. In contrast, as the soul becomes imbued with the law of karma, the knowledge of what it must do to navigate the world from within will take root. They will find this best where things are governed by the inner life of the soul. We have situations in life where things go quite well because everyone follows the inner impulse that guides them safely. One such example is walking on the street. It is by no means prescribed for every single person that they must move to this or that side of the street. And yet, two people who meet do not collide every time, because there is an inner necessity that they follow. Otherwise, one would have to place a traffic cop next to every person, ordering them to go left or right. It is true that in certain circles there is a desire for people to always have a traffic cop on one side and a doctor on the other; but that is not yet feasible! Yet one makes the best progress where one follows one’s unconstrained inner nature. For this, that inner nature must be oriented in human coexistence toward human respect; it must take human dignity into account. And this can only happen when people are understood as they can be understood, when the law of reincarnation and karma is taken into account. This human coexistence will only take place on a higher plane when the significance of this law of reincarnation and karma takes root in the soul. This is best illustrated by a concrete consideration such as the connection between faith, fervor, and knowledge, between love and self-esteem; such a consideration, as we undertook yesterday, shows us this.

[ 38 ] It is not without reason that I wanted to give lectures such as yesterday’s and today’s before you. It is not so much a matter of what is said; that could also be expressed differently. What was said yesterday and today does not seem to be of primary importance. What seems important to me, however, is that those who profess allegiance to the cultural movement of anthroposophy become so imbued with the ideas of reincarnation and karma that they gain an awareness of how life must change when the consciousness of reincarnation and karma is present in every human soul. Contemporary cultural life has developed precisely by excluding the awareness of reincarnation and karma. And this is the most significant thing that will come about through anthroposophy: that these things will now actually take hold of life, that they will permeate culture and thereby also fundamentally transform it.

[ 39 ] Just as a person today who says that reincarnation and karma are mere fantasy, nonsense—after all, one sees how people are born and how they die, but one does not see anything flying out at death, so there is no need to take them into account—just as a person who speaks this way relates to the one who says: You don’t see it flying out, but you can take these laws into account, and only then will you find all life processes explainable and be able to grasp certain things that would otherwise be inexplicable—so will the culture of the present relate to that of the future, which will then encompass the laws, the doctrine of reincarnation and karma. And while these two concepts played no role as general ideas of humanity in the formation of present-day culture, in all cultures of the future these ideas will play a primary role!

[ 40 ] The fact that the anthroposophist feels he is contributing in this way to the creation of a new culture must be alive in his consciousness. This sense, this feeling of the profound significance of reincarnation and karma for life, would be something that could hold a group of people together today, regardless of the external circumstances in which these people find themselves. People held together by such a mindset can only come together through anthroposophy.