The Rudolf Steiner Archive

Third Lecture

[ 1 ] If we wish to speak of initiation and its significance for the whole of human life and for human development, we must attempt to penetrate the essence of what is actually at stake, using those concepts and mental images that are simply necessary in order to characterize the supersensible worlds correctly. It is, after all, understandable that at every stage of its development, the human soul has the deepest longing to learn something about what it is like in those worlds to which one can, more or less justifiably, apply the attribute of eternity. Therefore, it must also seem understandable that human souls strive to penetrate these higher worlds without much preparation, using only the mental images and ideas they possess in their sensory existence. I say explicitly: this is understandable. And this can also be met to a certain extent where the satisfaction of the longing for eternity is concerned in this or that religious creed. But when it comes—in a truly theosophical sense—to penetrating more deeply into the source of all that is spiritual, and thus specifically into the source of all soul life, then one must—at least gradually—come to terms with the necessity of transforming one’s mental images and concepts in a certain way before one can form correct ideas of the higher, supersensory worlds. Since this—as we shall see in the next lectures—is particularly necessary for the characterization of the actual Christ-appearance, allow me today to speak a little about the necessary transformation and reshaping of the human life of imagination when one wishes to ascend to ideas about the supersensible worlds.

[ 2 ] One must first come to terms with the fact that in the supersensible worlds everything is different from what it is in the sensory realm, for an exact repetition of a worldly existence is actually found nowhere in the universe. If everything is different, why should we assume that human mental images and ideas are just as valid for the higher worlds as they are for the sensory realm? They simply are not. Anyone who has truly accomplished the practical ascent into those worlds opened up by initiation—that is, anyone with experience in the supersensible realm—knows, as we shall soon hear, that they must not only change many other aspects of themselves, I might as well say here: must leave behind with the Keeper of the Threshold, but must also lay aside many of his habits, mental images, and ideas there before he can enter the supersensible, higher worlds.

[ 3 ] Above all, let us start from certain mental images that must, after all, govern our entire sensibility. A pair of concepts, I would say—two conceptual systems—are particularly decisive here. They stand side by side in our sensory existence, running parallel to one another. One consists of all the mental images we form about the natural world, about the laws of nature and the forces of nature. Alongside all the mental images we form about these things, there stands, in our ordinary life of sensory perception, what we call the moral world order—the sum of our moral concepts, notions, and ideas. Upon proper self-reflection, a person will very soon realize that, for the sake of sensory perception, they must distinguish between these two conceptual systems—the natural order and the moral world order. When we explain a plant—let us suppose we have a poisonous plant before us—we explain it in terms of natural forces and natural laws. And I would like to say that we do not spoil our explanation of the plant by holding the plant morally responsible for being a poisonous plant. We maintain that, for healthy thinking within sensory existence when explaining natural existence, it is necessary to first emancipate ourselves from what we call moral concepts and ideas. We know, after all, that we must still practice this kind of emancipation ourselves if we wish to arrive at unbiased, objective mental images in the animal kingdom. It would make no sense, we feel and sense, to hold the lion just as responsible for its cruelty as we hold a human being responsible for his cruelty. And if many of today’s naturalists already find something like moral concepts in the animal kingdom—I would say, more out of preference than out of true necessity—then that may well be justified in a certain sense. But one can only speak of an echo of moral mental images in what animals do, in what happens in the animal kingdom. The explanation of nature, if we are to develop it purely, requires an emancipation from moral mental images and ideas, if we wish to remain directly within the realm of sensibility with our explanations. But then the moral world order enters our lives—one might say, majestically—with unconditional, absolute demands, as an unbiased self-observation and self-reflection would reveal. And we know that moral concepts are what determine the value of human beings; indeed, not only the value of human beings within human coexistence, but they determine it in such a way that one can even say: Even he who must accuse himself of immorality will, if he is or could be granted the grace to reflect calmly upon himself at a particular moment, determine his own value as a human being according to the moral mental images that shine into his consciousness. This must be emphasized again and again, so that one properly distinguishes these two systems of mental images from one another.

[ 4 ] Above all, let us start from certain mental images that must, after all, govern our entire sensibility. A pair of concepts, I would say—two conceptual systems—are particularly decisive here. They stand side by side in our sensory existence, running parallel to one another. One consists of all the mental images we form about the natural world, about the laws of nature and the forces of nature. Alongside all the mental images we form about these things, there stands, in our ordinary life of sensory perception, what we call the moral world order—the sum of our moral concepts, notions, and ideas. Upon proper self-reflection, a person will very soon realize that, for the sake of sensory perception, they must distinguish between these two conceptual systems—the natural order and the moral world order. When we explain a plant—let us suppose we have a poisonous plant before us—we explain it in terms of natural forces and natural laws. And I would like to say that we do not spoil our explanation of the plant by holding the plant morally responsible for being a poisonous plant. We maintain that, for healthy thinking within sensory existence when explaining natural existence, it is necessary to first emancipate ourselves from what we call moral concepts and ideas. We know, after all, that we must still practice this kind of emancipation ourselves if we wish to arrive at unbiased, objective mental images in the animal kingdom. It would make no sense, we feel and sense, to hold the lion just as responsible for its cruelty as we hold a human being responsible for his cruelty. And if many of today’s naturalists already find something like moral concepts in the animal kingdom—I would say, more out of preference than out of true necessity—then that may well be justified in a certain sense. But one can only speak of an echo of moral mental images in what animals do, in what happens in the animal kingdom. The explanation of nature, if we are to develop it purely, requires an emancipation from moral mental images and ideas, if we wish to remain directly within the realm of sensibility with our explanations. But then the moral world order enters our lives—one might say, majestically—with unconditional, absolute demands, as an unbiased self-observation and self-reflection would reveal. And we know that moral concepts are what determine the value of human beings; indeed, not only the value of human beings within human coexistence, but they determine it in such a way that one can even say: Even he who must accuse himself of immorality will, if he is or could be granted the grace to reflect calmly upon himself at a particular moment, determine his own value as a human being according to the moral mental images that shine into his consciousness. This must be emphasized again and again, so that one properly distinguishes these two systems of mental images from one another.

[ 5 ] This changes completely the moment one enters the higher worlds, where one comes to perceive, observe, experience, and learn outside of one’s physical body, thereby entering higher supersensible worlds.At first, when one truly begins to observe, one does so with that body I hinted at yesterday: the elemental or etheric body. Then one views the world—or rather, a second supersensible world—with one’s astral body.And the further one ascends into the higher worlds, the more the mental images and concepts one has developed and acquired in the ordinary physical world lose their meaning. They must transform so that we can correctly describe and understand what we encounter in the higher supersensible worlds.In the ordinary world of sensory existence, we have only one thing that can remind us of a fundamental fact known to every clairvoyant person: we speak in images, in symbols, so that the words in turn resonate with what is only experienced in its reality, in its truth, in the higher worlds.When someone uses the word “burn” in connection with greed, envy, or hatred, such a word actually contains something that belongs to those many wondrous mysteries of linguistic creativity, where what is present in reality only in the higher worlds shines into primitive, elemental human consciousness.For everyone knows that when they speak of burning hatred, they do not mean a burning such as the natural burning of a fire out there in the natural world; they know that they are speaking, so to speak, in a figurative sense, and that it would be of no help to them if they sought to explain things and processes of nature by invoking moral mental images.As soon as one speaks of processes in the higher worlds, one does not speak figuratively or in an allusive sense when using such expressions. — I may well remind you that twice in the drama The Guardian of the Threshold the expression is used that certain soul processes, feelings, and desires “burn” in the higher worlds.This does not mean something like a symbol, but something entirely real, actual, and truly spiritual. Lucifer, for example, would never say in the same sense: this or that burns within him, as a human being in the realm of the senses might say of hatred that it burns within him; rather, Lucifer would say it in a true, entirely real sense.For what in the supersensible worlds could be compared to the natural order, to the natural processes of the sensory world, stands in these supersensible worlds in a much more intimate connection with what one might in turn call the moral worlds of these realms than these two lines of thought stand in relation to one another here in the sensory world.

[ 6 ] Thus we see that what, as it were, runs parallel to the sensory realm—the natural order and the moral order—is interwoven in the supersensible worlds, so that when we speak of an elemental limb, we can quite rightly say: this or that form is brought about by hatred. Hatred expresses itself differently in the relevant elemental body part than love does. It makes perfect sense to use such a term for the supersensible worlds; it makes no sense if one wishes to remain within sensory existence in a mere natural explanation. This necessity of a shift in terminology for the higher worlds is particularly evident, for example, in what is counted among the desires and wishes in ordinary sensory existence, in ordinary life. How do desires, wishes, and emotions arise in sensory existence? They arise in such a way that we see them, as it were, emerging from the innermost being of the human soul. When we find a particular desire aroused in a person, we recognize from this how their inner being is disposed, how this inner being drives this desire forth from within itself, and that above all the inner soul is decisive for the nature of the desires this person has. For we know very well that, for example, in the face of a piece of veal, one person develops entirely different desires than another; this does not depend on the veal, but on what the person has within their inner being in their sensory life. Faced with a Raphael Madonna, one person may remain completely unmoved, while another experiences a whole world of feelings. We can therefore say: the world of desires is kindled within the human being.

[ 7 ] This changes when we enter the supersensory worlds. What one might call desires, cravings, and emotions in these worlds—it would be mere empty talk to say that one cannot speak of such things in these worlds, for desires, cravings, and so on do exist there—are, in the vast majority of cases, always brought about by external factors, by what the being actually sees, by what it looks at. Therefore, in the supersensible worlds, it is far less natural for the clairvoyant to look into the inner being of the being before him in order to observe its wishes, desires, and so on; rather, he will observe the surroundings of this being in the supersensible world. So when he sees: there is a being in the supersensible world, and it has desires, cravings, emotions—then he does not look at the being itself as he would here in the physical world, but rather he looks at the surroundings; he examines: what other beings are present there in the surroundings of this being? And he will always see that, depending on what kind of beings are present in that environment, the desires, wishes, and emotions of the being that is there will also be shaped accordingly. Desires, cravings, and emotions are always triggered by external factors. How this works can be made particularly clear to you through a specific example.

[ 8 ] Let us suppose that a person enters the supersensible worlds, either by undergoing the first stages of initiation and thereby penetrating into the higher worlds, or by passing through the gate of death and thus entering the higher worlds. The clairvoyant now observes them in the supersensible worlds. Let us assume that this person has brought with them from the sensory world—because it is part of their nature—some imperfection, something they are unable to do, or a moral imperfection, or something they have committed in the physical world and which is now a gnawing memory in the supersensible worlds. To investigate this, it is not so much a matter for the clairvoyant to look into the inner soul of this person now, but rather to observe the surroundings. Why? Because such a content of the soul, such a characteristic in the soul that one has carried with oneself as an imperfection, as a moral defect, brings about something real, something tangible. This guides the person, leads them, brings them to a certain place in the supersensible world. To what place? To the place where there is a being who, in a perfect state, possesses what one, upon arriving there, possesses in an imperfect state. This moral defect, this awareness of a lack of ability, thus brings about something real, leads one down a path, places one before a being who possesses in a perfect way what one oneself possesses imperfectly—precisely what matters. And now, because this being is set before you, you are compelled to look at it constantly. In the supersensible worlds, through real processes—not through what we call desires in the sensory realm—you come into the presence of beings who possess everything you lack, who constantly show you what you are missing. So when the clairvoyant looks at the beings present in a person’s surroundings, he knows from objective observation what the person lacks, what is deficient in him. What one is condemned to gaze upon constantly, those in whose presence one finds oneself—this stands, one might say, as a constant reproach. And this reproach, which thus stands outside, causes something to arise within the being that one might describe in the supersensible worlds as a desire—the wish to become different—and which generates the activity, the power, to truly work through oneself in such a way that one sheds the imperfection, the fault. Do not say, then, that the supersensible worlds would have to show the perfect being for everything in us that is flawed. This supersensible world is truly so rich that it can set the perfect beings before us for all our flaws; it is far richer than one might imagine based on sensory perception. Oh, this world is such that it can place a person before any being who possesses in perfection what the person himself possesses in imperfection. This gives us an idea of how desires and longings are real forces that shape our paths in the supersensible worlds—not as if we could stand still before our desires as if they were something objective, but rather, depending on who we are, we are guided along our path and placed where what we lack appears to us as a reality or as a genuine reproach.

[ 9 ] One might very easily say: if that is the case, then human beings would be completely unfree in the supersensible worlds, for they would be confronted with the external world and would have to work on themselves in the way that the external world influences them. But when one observes the supersensible worlds, it turns out that one being feels the reproach and begins to work toward perfection; the other being, however, leaves things as they are and resists imitating what is presented to it as a reproach in the form of a mental image. This resistance, however, has a completely different effect in the supersensible worlds than it does in the physical world. If a being resists truly undertaking this following, it is pushed away and driven into entirely different worlds that are unfamiliar to it, in which it is not at home, and for which it lacks the conditions of life; that is to say, such a being condemns itself to a kind of process of destruction within itself. One can certainly choose between what is fruitful and supportive—which is shown to one—and behave accordingly, or one can become permeated with destructive forces by resisting it. One has freedom. But the interplay between the moral and what takes place in the supersensible realm certainly occurs.

[ 10 ] Another example of this is that our concepts of beauty and ugliness—which we rightly apply to the sensory world—can no longer be applied once we ascend into the supersensible worlds, and this is due to several reasons. When we perceive in the supersensible worlds, we first notice a significant difference with regard to the beings we encounter there. Of one such being—by virtue of the intuitive knowledge one can have there—one will be able to say: This being you are looking at is capable of, and has the will to, truly live out everything it possesses within itself in its outward appearance. Let us assume that such a being has an elemental light body, that it belongs to the beings who do not incarnate in the sensory world but only assume a light body or the like in the higher worlds. This light body can be the expression of what it is within. It is not like a human being in the sensory realm, who appears before us in a specific form and who can conceal within themselves the most manifold feelings, sensations, and so on, so that they can say: My feelings are for myself; what is shown on the outside is my physical form; I can well conceal what is revealed in my soul.” It is not so for certain beings of the supersensible world; they reveal in their form the most immediate expression of what they carry within themselves. What they are on the inside is clearly evident in their outward features. There are other beings who cannot do this—that is, bring their true inner self directly into manifestation, into revelation, through their outer supersensible appearance. In the presence of these beings, the clairvoyant consciousness has a feeling of something repulsive, of something from which it wishes to turn away, of something that presses upon it, that can even be quite repugnant. Thus one can distinguish between two kinds of beings: those who are full of the will to display their inner self—if I may use the expression—to live out their inner self, and those beings toward whom one has the feeling: what they display is quite stunted, for what lies within them is hidden; it does not come to the fore. In the case of human sentience, one cannot say to the same degree whether one person can hide something while everything is already on the tip of another’s tongue: they differ by nature. They differ in their appearance, but not by nature. For the supersensible worlds, these are two radically different classes of beings: those who reveal everything they have within them, and, in contrast, those who cannot reveal this. If we wish to use the terms beautiful and ugly in a manner similar to the expression we have in the sensory world, we must apply them to these two classes of beings. In the supersensible worlds, one can only make sense of things by calling the beings who reveal everything “beautiful,” for one perceives them just as one would a beautiful image. And one perceives as “ugly” those beings who do not reveal their inner nature in their outer form. Beautiful and ugly, if one may use the term, are connected to the natural foundation of these entities. What does this entail?

[ 11 ] When clairvoyant consciousness enters a world where it must perceive beauty and ugliness in this way, it must fundamentally change many aspects of its entire mode of perception. It is quite natural for the clairvoyant to say that a being who reveals everything within is beautiful. But immediately another mental image imposes itself: in order to be beautiful, it must be sincere, honest! It is beautiful because it hides nothing, because it bears on its face what it has within. Truth and beauty are one and the same when one enters the supersensible worlds. And a being that does not reveal its inner self is ugly; one senses this immediately in clairvoyant consciousness. But one senses something else as well: it lies to you, it does not show what it ought to show! The ugly is at the same time the deceitful! The true, sincere, and honest is at the same time the beautiful, and the ugly the deceitful. And in the supersensible worlds, one comes to realize that the separation of the concepts of true and beautiful on the one hand, and ugly and deceitful on the other, loses all meaning. Thus, one must use the term “beautiful” in reference to a being when one has the feeling that there is something sincere toward one; and if one has the opposite feeling, one must call it ugly.

[ 12 ] This shows how moral and aesthetic concepts become intertwined as one ascends into the higher worlds. This is, in fact, the peculiarity of ascending into the supersensible worlds: that concepts converge, that fusions and amalgamations arise with regard to what must be distinguished separately in the physical-sensory world. Therefore, one must acquire different modes of perception when using terms from the sensory world to describe supersensible beings. One is almost always compelled to present these things in an even simpler way and to bring them even closer to sensory consciousness than is actually consistent with a completely accurate representation, for the matters become very complex. Having just explained how the concepts of true, sincere, and beautiful on the one hand, and of ugly and deceitful on the other, are linked, we must add something else.

[ 13 ] When one enters the supersensible worlds, one may encounter a being whom, by all the concepts one has acquired in the sensory realm, one must describe as a beautiful being—perhaps even a magnificent one: beautiful, radiant, magnificent. Now one has it before one. But the fact that it appears to you in this way is no proof that it is also a good being; it may be a thoroughly evil one, appearing to you in the most sublime angelic form. For according to the concept of beauty that one has formed in the sensory world, one calls such a being beautiful in supersensory perception. And how could one not! If one were to find it depicted in the sensory world, one would rightly call it beautiful. Such a being may be the ugliest that exists; nevertheless, it can be described as beautiful if one sticks to the terms of the sensory world. It may be a thoroughly evil being, retaining the malice, wickedness, and untruth that deceives one; it may be a devil in the form of an angel. This is entirely possible in the supersensory worlds. Now, through various means, which we will discuss later, it may turn out that one gradually gets to the bottom of the matter when one confronts it with clairvoyant consciousness. So one has an angelic form before one, and one can now say to oneself, if one has reached the point of being able to remain thinking while gazing into the supersensible: The fact that you now see an angel or some magnificent form must not deceive you; all of this is possible—it may be an angel, but it may also be a devil. Now one can begin with what one so often must do when ascending into the higher worlds: with a proper self-examination. One can consult within oneself and examine how many traits of self-will, of egoism, one possesses. Then the soul is permeated with various kinds of bitterness; then various kinds of sorrow enter the soul. But this bitterness and torment can lead precisely to a brief period of purification, to a cleansing of one’s self-centeredness and egoism. And when one thereby comes to the realization of how little one is actually free from self-centeredness and that one must strive to become free, then the entire process unfolding within the soul becomes illuminated. When one has reached the point where, upon engaging in such self-reflection, what one is observing does not fade away—for this usually happens in the early stages—then, under certain circumstances, the angel may cease to be an angel at all and instead take on quite hideous forms, and one may gradually come to realize that one is saying to oneself: To the being you have confronted as an evil one, you have given the opportunity to express its malice by first allowing it to deceive you with a completely different form; but you have forced it to show you its true form by imbuing yourself with purer feelings.

[ 14 ] Thus, a mental process in the supersensible world has a compelling, a compelling force; in this way, one makes it possible for the beings themselves to lie to one, or one compels them to reveal their true form. How one enters the supersensible world, and with what qualities, determines how it presents itself to one. As for what is called the source of illusions, one must approach it quite differently than is usually done. Someone may enter the supersensible worlds and describe all manner of wonderful things. If you were to tell him he had been mistaken, that would not be true; for he has seen it. But he has not seen what he would have seen had he done what I have just described. Had he done so, he would have seen the truth at the same time. For it is beautiful when a devil presents himself as a devil, whereas it is ugly when he takes on the form of an angel. One cannot help but adopt such concepts. Thus, above all else, when entering the supersensible worlds, one must break the habit of describing things with the mental images one has acquired in the sensory world. If one were to retain what one has acquired in the sensory realm, one would first say of the figure that appears before one: “It is a beautiful angel”—and afterward: “It is an ugly devil!” — But the clairvoyant consciousness cannot express it this way if one wishes to characterize things correctly; rather, regarding the ugly devil, one must say: “It is a beautiful devil”—even though, by sensory standards, it is utterly ugly. However, one does not arrive at this simply by turning all the concepts one has from sensory existence upside down. That would be an easy way out. Then, for example, one could describe the Devachan plane by saying that everything that is ugly in the sensory world is beautiful, everything beautiful is ugly, green is red, black is white, and so on. But one cannot do it that way; rather, the concepts must be acquired through experience of the supersensory worlds. One acquires them in the same way that a maturing child acquires perceptions of the sensory world—not through theories, but through experience—and then finds it completely unnatural to call a devil ugly who presents himself as a devil, when one is conscious that one is speaking the language of the supersensible worlds. But one must acquire such a way of feeling if one truly wishes to find one’s bearings in the supersensible worlds, if one wishes to be familiar with them and move about in them. Therefore, you can now easily form a mental image of what is meant when, for the sake of simplicity, one says: On the one hand is the sensory world, on the other hand are the supersensible worlds; there one crosses the corresponding boundary from sensory existence into supersensory existence. If one enters there with everything one has gained in sensory existence, applying what one has gained in terms of mental images, concepts, and ideas from the sensory world, then everything is inaccurate; then one speaks nothing but nonsense. One must thoroughly relearn at the boundary, and not theoretically, but in a living way. One has absolutely no use for the mental images one has acquired in the sensory world; one must leave them behind. You see that one must leave behind many things with which one is quite intimately connected in the world of sensory existence, and I would now like to describe the matter to you in a concrete and vivid way, not based on theories.

[ 15 ] Let us suppose that, after acquiring the ability to cross the marked boundary, someone passes from the sensory world into the supersensory world. At the boundary, they might ask themselves: What must I now leave behind if I am to find my way in the supersensible world? I must leave behind—as they might say to themselves with clear self-reflection—actually everything I have experienced, learned, and acquired on Earth in the various incarnations from the very beginning of the Earth until the present time. I must lay that aside here, for I am entering a world in which what one can learn within incarnations no longer has any meaning. It is easy, I would say, to speak of such a thing; it is easy to hear such a thing; it is easy to grasp it in abstract concepts. But it is a whole inner world to perceive, to feel, to experience such a thing: to lay down there, like clothes, everything one has acquired in all those incarnations while in the realm of the senses, in order to enter a world within which all that no longer makes sense. If one has this perception alive, then one also has a living experience—truly nothing connected to any theory—such as one has when, in the real world, one encounters a real human being whom one gets to know as he speaks to one, behaves toward one, whom one does not get to know by constructing concepts about him, but by his living with one. Thus, standing at the threshold between the sensory and the spiritual, one faces not a conceptual system but a reality that appears only as a supersensory reality, yet is as concrete and as alive as a human being: this is the Guardian of the Threshold. He is there as a concrete, real being. And when one gets to know him, one also comes to know him as a being who belongs to the category of beings who, in a certain way, have participated in life from the very beginning of the Earth, but who have not participated in what is experienced as a soul being. This is the being who was to be dramatized in the Mystery Play “The Guardian of the Threshold” with the words:

You know, O guardian of this realm’s threshold
Since the dawn of time,
What beings need to enter it,
Those of your time and your kind.

[ 16 ] This “of your time and your kind” is something that follows from the very nature of the matter. People have other times and other kinds—and other kinds and other times have the beings who, in a certain sense, have gone their own way, separate from the paths of humanity, since the dawn of time. Here we encounter a being about whom one says: I have before me a being who experiences and goes through much in the world; but this being does not concern itself with what can be experienced on Earth in terms of love, pain, and suffering, but also in terms of faults and immorality; it knows nothing and wants to know nothing of what has taken place in the fundamental human nature up to now. Christian tradition expresses this fact by saying: Before the mystery of the Incarnation, these beings veiled their faces. A whole world is expressed in the difference between these beings and human beings.

[ 17 ] And now there arises a sensation that one experiences immediately, one that arises just as when, looking at a person with blond hair, one has the immediate sensation: that person has blond hair. This is how the sensation arises: Because you have passed through the earthly cultures, you have necessarily acquired imperfections, but you must return to the original state, must find your way back on Earth, and this being can show you this because it has not taken on your faults. Now one stands before a being like a real rebuke, great and magnificent, like an incentive toward what one is not. This being shows one this in the most vivid way, and there one can feel completely filled before the being with the knowledge of what one is or is not. There one stands before the living rebuke. This being belongs to the class of the Archangels, the Archangeloi, as we say. It is a very real encounter, and it causes one to suddenly see before one’s eyes what one has become as an earthly human being in the realm of the senses. At the same time, it is self-knowledge in the truest, most comprehensive sense. One sees oneself as one is, and one sees oneself as one is now to become!

[ 18 ] Human beings are not always suited to this kind of seeing. Today I have spoken only of the world of concepts and ideas that must be laid aside. Much else must likewise be laid aside. When one reaches the Guardian of the Threshold, one must actually shed everything one knows about oneself. One must retain only what is necessary to carry through. That is what matters! The fact that one must leave everything behind at the threshold is brought about by an inner experience that one must be able to handle, and the preparation for this stage of clairvoyance must consist—and in proper training does consist—in learning to endure what would otherwise be terrifying terrifying. One must come to endure through preparation, for that is the fundamental strength for all further experience. In ordinary life, a person is not capable of enduring all that one must endure when standing before the Guardian of the Threshold. For the Guardian of the Threshold is compelled to do something most peculiar, which must be judged from the perspective of the supersensible world if it is not to be misunderstood. Human beings are always such that the activities of the supersensible world take place within them; they are simply unaware of it. While we think, feel, and will, an activity of the astral body and a connection with the astral world are always running parallel. But human beings know nothing of this, because if they were to know what their own bodies are, they could not bear it and would be numbed by it. Therefore, if a human being encounters this being without sufficient preparation, the being must veil all of this from him and veil itself; it must draw a veil over the supersensible world. It must do so for the protection of the human being, who, being in the sensory realm, could not bear the sight. Here we truly see a concept that we can only judge morally in the sensory realm as the most immediate natural order. The protection of human beings from seeing the supersensible world is the function of the Guardian of the Threshold: to keep human beings in the state in which they are before they have sufficiently prepared themselves for the supersensible worlds.

[ 19 ] We have thus attempted to bring together a number of mental images that might lead us to an understanding of the Keeper of the Threshold. I have sought to compile such mental images, ideas, and experiences into a small book, which will be presented to you here in the coming days and which, alongside the lectures themselves, can serve as an important aid to you. It will be divided into a series of eight meditations and will be presented in such a way that the reader, upon going through these meditations, will gain something for their inner life. Today I have attempted to characterize some of the mental images that can lead us to the Keeper of the Threshold. Starting from this, we will attempt to characterize some insights and perspectives as we pass by the Keeper of the Threshold, in order to then be able to understand the Christ-being and the Christ-initiation even more deeply.