Toward Imagination
GA 169
20 June 1916, Berlin
3. The Twelve Human Senses
Before coming to the topic of today's talk, I would like to say a few words about the great and grievous loss on the physical plane we have suffered in recent days. You will undoubtedly know what I mean: the day before yesterday, Herr von Moltke's soul passed through the gate of death.1Helmuth Johannes Ludwig von Moltke, 1848–1916, German soldier Chief of general staff (from 1906) and director of German strategy at beginning of World War I (1914). Lost the first battle of the Marne (Sept. 1914) and was relieved of his command (Nov. 1914).
What this man was to his country, the outstanding part he played in the great and fateful events of our time, the significant, deep impulses growing out of human connections that formed the basis of his actions and his work—to appreciate and pay tribute to all this will be the task of others, primarily of future historians. In our age it is impossible to give an entirely comprehensive picture of everything that concerns our time. As I said, we will not speak of what others and history will have to say, but I am absolutely convinced that future historians will have very much to say about von Moltke. However, I would like to say something that is now in my soul, even if I have to express it at first symbolically; what I mean will be understood only gradually. This man and his soul stand before my soul as a symbol of the present and the immediate future, a symbol born out of the evolution of our time, in the true sense of the word a symbol of what should come to pass and must come to pass.
As we have repeatedly emphasized, we are not trying to integrate spiritual science into contemporary culture out of somebody's arbitrary impulses, but because it is needed in these times. There will not be a lasting future if the substance of this spiritual science does not flow into human development. This is the point, my dear friends, where you can see the greatness and significance we find when we think of Herr von Moltke's soul. He participated most actively in the busy life of our era, the life that developed out of the past and led to the greatest crisis humanity ever had to go through in its history. He was one of the leaders of the army and was right in the middle of the events that inaugurated our fateful present and future. Here was a soul, a personality, who did all this and, at the same time, also was one of us, seeking knowledge and truth with the most holy, fervent thirst for knowledge that ever inspired a soul in our day and age.
That is what we should think of. For the soul of this personality, who has just died, is more than anything else an outstanding historical symbol. It is profoundly symbolic that he was one of the leading figures of the outer life, which he served, and yet found the bridge to the life of the spirit we seek in spiritual science. We can only wish with all our soul that more and more people in similar positions do as he has done. This is not just a personal wish, but one born out of the need of our times. You should feel how significant an example this personality can be. It does not matter how little other people speak about the spiritual side of his life; in fact, it is best for it not to be talked about. But what von Moltke did is a reality and the effects are what is important, not whether it is discussed. Herr von Moltke's life can lead us to realize that he interpreted the meaning of the signs of the times correctly. May many follow this soul who are still distant from our spiritual science.
It is true, and we should not forget it, that this soul has given as much to what flows and pulsates through our spiritual science as we have been able to give him. Now souls are entering the spiritual world bearing within them what they have received from spiritual science. What spiritual science strives for has united with the soul of a person, who has died after a very active life. This then works as a deeply significant, powerful force in the realm we want to explore with the help of our spiritual science. And the souls now present here who understand me will never forget what I have just said about how significant it is that souls now take what has flowed for many years through our spiritual science into the spiritual world, where it will become strength and power.
I am not telling you this to assuage in a trivial way the pain we feel about our loss on the physical plane. Pain and sorrow are justified in a case like Herr von Moltke's death. But only when pain and sorrow are permeated by a sound understanding of what underlies them can they become great and momentous active forces. Take, therefore, what I have said as the expression of sorrow over the loss the German people and all humanity have experienced on the physical plane.
Let us stand up, my dear friends, and recite this verse:
Spirit of your soul, ever working Guardian!
May your wings carry
Our souls' imploring love
To the son in the spheres entrusted to your care!
United with your power,
May our prayer be a shining help
To the soul it lovingly seeks.
My dear friends, as I have often said, the occult substance that flows through our whole evolution has found its outer expression or manifestation in all kinds of more or less occult and symbolic brotherhoods and societies. In my recent talks I have characterized them in more detail as really quite superficial. We are now living in an age when the occult knowledge from the spiritual world must be given to people in a new way, as we have been trying to do for many years now, because the previous ways are obsolete. Granted, they will continue to exist for a time, but they are quite obsolete, and it is important that we understand this in the right way.
As you know, I like to call our spiritual science anthroposophy, and a few years ago when I gave lectures here, I called them lectures on anthroposophy. Last time, I referred to these lectures on anthroposophy, particularly to my emphasis on the fact that human beings actually have twelve senses. I explained that, as far as our senses are concerned, what is spread out over our nerve substance is organized according to the number twelve because the human being is in this most profound sense a microcosm and mirrors the macrocosm.
In the macrocosm the sun moves through twelve signs of the zodiac in the course of a year, and the human I lives here on the physical plane in the twelve senses. Things are certainly rather different out there in the macrocosm, especially in regard to their sequence in time. The sun moves from Aries through Taurus, and so on, and back again through Pisces to Aries as it makes its yearly course through the twelve signs of the zodiac. Everything we have in us, even everything we experience in our soul, is related to the outer world through our twelve senses. These are the senses of touch, life, movement, balance, smell, taste, sight, warmth, hearing, speech, thinking, and the sense of the I.
Our inner life moves through this circle of the twelve senses just as the sun moves through the circle of the twelve signs of the zodiac. But we can take this external analogy even further. In the course of a year, the sun has to move through all the signs of the zodiac from Aries to Libra; it moves through the upper signs during the day and through the lower ones at night. The sun's passage through these lower signs is hidden from outer light. It is the same with the life of our soul and the twelve senses. Half of the twelve are day senses, just as half of the signs of the zodiac are day signs; the others are night senses.
You see, our sense of touch pushes us into the night life of our soul, so to speak, for with the sense of touch, one of our coarser senses, we bump into the world around us. The sense of touch is barely connected with the day life of our soul, that is, with the really conscious life of the soul. You can see for yourself that this is true when you consider how easily we can store the impressions of our other senses in our memory and how difficult it is to remember the impressions of the sense of touch. Just try it and you'll see how difficult it is to remember, for example, the feel of a piece of fabric you touched a few years ago. Indeed you'll find you have little need or desire to remember it. The impression sinks down in the same way as the light fades into twilight when the sun descends into the sign of Libra at night, into the region of the night signs. And thus other senses are also completely hidden from our waking, conscious soul life.
As for the sense of life, conventional psychological studies hardly mention it at all. They usually list only five senses, the day senses or senses of waking consciousness. But that need not concern us further. The sense of life enables us to feel our life in us, but only when that life has been disturbed, when it is sick, when something causes us pain or hurts us. Then the sense of life tells us we are hurting here or there. When we are healthy, we are not aware of the life in us; it sinks into the depths, just as there is no light when the sun is in the sign of Scorpio or in any other night sign.
The same applies to the sense of movement. It allows us to perceive what is happening in us when we have set some part of our body in motion. Conventional science is only now beginning to pay attention to this sense of movement. It is only just beginning to find out that the way joints impact on one another—for example, when I bend my finger, this joint impacts on that one—tells us about the movements our body is carrying out. We walk, but we walk unconsciously. The sense underlying our ability to walk, namely, the perception of our mobility, is cast into the night of consciousness.
Let us now look at the sense of balance. We acquire this sense only gradually in life; we just don't think about it because it also remains in the night of consciousness. Infants have not yet acquired this sense, and therefore they can only crawl. It was only in the last decade that science discovered the organ for the sense of balance. I have mentioned the three canals in our ears before; they are shaped like semicircles and are vertical to each other in the three dimensions of space. If these canals are damaged, we get dizzy; we lose our balance. We have the outer ears for our sense of hearing, the eyes for the sense of sight, and for the sense of balance we have these three semicircular canals.
Their connection with the ears and the sense of hearing is a vestige of the kinship between sound and balance. The canals, located in the cavity in the petrosal bone, consist of three semicircles of tiny, very minute, bones. If they are the least bit injured, we can no longer keep our balance. We acquire our receptivity for the sense of balance in early childhood, but it remains submerged in the night of consciousness; we are not conscious of this sense.
Then comes the dawn and casts its rays into consciousness. But just think how little the other hidden senses, those of smell and taste, actually have to do with our inner life in a higher sense. We have to delve deeply into the life of our body to be able to get a sense for smell. The sense of taste already brings us a growing half-light; day begins to dawn in our consciousness. But you can still make the same experiment I mentioned before concerning the sense of touch, and you will find it very difficult to remember the perceptions of the senses of smell and of taste. Only when we enter more deeply into our unconscious with our soul does the latter consciously perceive the sense of smell. As you may know, certain composers were especially inspired when surrounded by a pleasant fragrance they had smelled previously while creating music. It is not the fragrance that rises up out of memory, but the soul processes connected with the sense of smell emerge into consciousness.
The sense of taste, however, is for most people almost in the light of consciousness, though not quite; it is still partly in the night of consciousness for most of us. After all, very few people will be satisfied with the soul impression of taste alone. Otherwise we should be just as pleased with remembering something that tasted good as we are when we eat it again. As you know, this is not the case. People want to eat again what tasted good to them and are not satisfied with just remembering it.
The sense of sight, on the other hand, is the sense where the sun of consciousness rises, and we reach full waking consciousness. The sun rises higher and higher. It rises to the sense of warmth, to the sense of hearing, and from there to the sense of speech and then reaches its zenith. The zenith of our inner life lies between the senses of hearing and speech. Then we have the sense of thinking, and the I sense, which is not the sense for perceiving our own I but that of others. After all, it is an organ of perception, a sense. Our awareness of our own I is something quite different, as I explained in my early lectures on anthroposophy. What is important here is not so much knowing about our own I, but meeting other people who reveal their I to us. Perception of the other person's I, not of our own, that is the function of the I sense.
Our soul has the same relationship to these twelve senses as the sun does to the twelve signs of the zodiac. You can see from this that the human being is in the truest sense of the word a microcosm. Modern science is completely ignorant of these things; while it does acknowledge the sense of hearing, it denies the existence of the sense of speech although we could never understand the higher meaning of spoken words with the sense of hearing alone. To understand, we need the sense of speech, the sense for the meaning of what is expressed in the words. This sense of speech must not be confused with the sense of thinking, which in turn is not identical with the ego sense.
I would like to give you an example of how people can go wrong in our time in this matter of the senses. Eduard von Hartmann, who was a most sincere seeker, begins his book Basic Psychology with the following words as though he were stating a self-evident truth: “Psychological phenomena are the point of departure for psychology; indeed, for each person the starting point has to be his or her own phenomena, for these alone are given to each of us directly. After all, nobody can look into another's consciousness.”2Eduard von Hartmann, 1842–1906, German philosopher. Grundriss der Psychologie (“Basic Psychology”), Bad Sachsa, 1908. The opening sentence of a psychology book by one of the foremost philosophers of our time starts by denying the existence of the senses of speech, thinking, and the I. He knows nothing about them. Imagine, here we have a case where absurdity and utter nonsense must be called science just so these senses can be denied.
If we do not let this science confuse us, we can easily see its mistakes. For this psychology claims we do not see into the soul of another person but can only guess at it by interpreting what that person says. In other words, we are supposed to interpret the state of another's soul based on his or her utterances. When someone speaks kindly to you, you are supposed to interpret it! Can this be true? No, indeed it is not true!
The kind words spoken to us have a direct effect on us, just as color affects our eyes directly. The love living in the other's soul is borne into your soul on the wings of the words. This is direct perception; there can be no question here of interpretation. Through nonsense such as Hartmann's, science confines us within the limits of our own personality to keep us from realizing that living with the other people around us means living with their souls. We live with the souls of others just as we live with colors and sounds. Anyone who does not realize this knows absolutely nothing of our inner life. It is very important to understand these things. Elaborate theories are propagated nowadays, claiming that all impressions we have of other people are only symbolic and inferred from their utterances. But there is no truth in this.
Now picture the rising sun, the emergence of the light, the setting sun. This is the macrocosmic picture of our microcosmic inner life. Though it does not move in a circle, our inner life nevertheless proceeds through the twelve signs of the zodiac of the soul, that is, through the twelve senses. Every time we perceive the I of someone else, we are on the day side of our soul-sun. When we turn inward into ourselves and perceive our inner balance and our movements, we are on the night side of our inner life.
Now you will not think it so improbable when I tell you that in the time between death and rebirth the senses that have sunk deeply into our soul's night side will be of special importance for us because they will then be spiritualized. At the same time, the senses that have risen to the day side of our inner life will sink down deeper after death. Just as the sun rises, so does our soul rise, figuratively speaking, between the sense of taste and the sense of sight, and in death it sets again. When we encounter another soul between death and a new birth, we find it inwardly united with us. We perceive that soul not by looking at it from the outside and receiving the impression of its I from the outside; we perceive it by uniting with it. You can read about this in the lecture cycles, where I have described it, and also in An Outline Of Occult Science.3Rudolf Steiner, An Outline of Occult Science, 3rd ed., repr., (Spring Valley, NY: Anthroposophic Press, 1989).
In the life between death and rebirth, the sense of touch becomes completely spiritual. What is now subconscious and belongs to the night side of our inner life, namely, the senses of balance and movement, will then become spiritualized and play the most important part in our life after death.
It is indeed true that we move through life as the sun moves through the twelve signs of the zodiac. When we begin our life here, our consciousness for the senses rises, so to speak, at one pillar of the world and sets again at the other. We pass these pillars when we move in the starry heavens, as it were, from the night side to the day side. Occult and symbolic societies have always tried to indicate this by calling the pillar of birth, which we pass on the way into the life of the day side, Jakim.4Jakim and Boaz are the words inscribed on the two columns at the front of Solomon's Temple. See the Old Testament, I Kings, Chapter 7, II Chronicles, Chapter 3. See also Rudolf Sterner, Bilder Okkulter Siegel und Säulen (“Pictures of Occult Seals and Pillars”), vol. 284/285 in the Collected Works (Dornach, Switzerland. Rudolf Steiner Verlag, 1977).
Our outer world during the life between death and rebirth consists of the perceptions of the sense of touch spread out over the whole universe, where we do not touch but are touched. We feel that we are touched by spiritual beings everywhere, while in physical life it is we who touch others. Between death and rebirth we live within movement and feel it the same way a blood cell or a muscle in us would feel its own movement. We perceive ourselves moving in the macrocosm, and we feel balance and feel ourselves part of the life of the whole. Here on earth our life is enclosed in our skin, but there we feel ourselves part of the life of the universe, of the cosmic life, and we feel that we give ourselves our own balance in every position. Here, gravity and the constitution of our body give us balance, and usually we are not aware of this. During life between death and a new birth, however, we feel balance all the time. We have a direct experience of the other side of our inner life.
We enter earthly life through Jakim, assured that what is there outside in the macrocosm now lives in us, that we are a microcosm, for the word Jakim means, “The divine poured out over the world is in you.”
The other pillar, Boaz, is the entrance into the spiritual world through death. What is contained in the word Boaz is roughly this, “What I have hitherto sought within myself, namely strength, I shall find poured out over the whole world; in it I shall live.” But we can only understand such things when we penetrate them by means of spiritual knowledge. In the symbolic brotherhoods, the pillars are referred to symbolically. In our fifth post-Atlantean epoch they will be mentioned more often to keep humanity from losing them altogether and to help later generations to understand what has been preserved in these words.
You see, everything in the world around us is a reflection of what lives in the macrocosm. As our inner life is a microcosm in the sense I have indicated, so humanity's inner life is built up out of the macrocosm. In our time, it is very important that we have the image of the two pillars I mentioned handed down to us through history. These pillars each represent life one-sidedly; for life is only to be found in the balance between the two. Jakim is not life for it is the transition from the spiritual to the body; nor is Boaz life for that is the transition from body to spirit. Balance is what is essential.
And that is what people find so difficult to understand. They always seek one side only, extremes rather than equilibrium. Therefore two pillars are erected for our times also, and we must pass between them if we understand our times rightly. We must not imagine either the one pillar or the other to be a basic force for humanity, but we must go through between the two. Indeed, we have to grasp what is there in reality and not go through life brooding without really thinking, as modern materialism does. If you seek the Jakim pillar today, you will find it. The Jakim pillar exists; you will find it in a very important man, who is no longer alive, but the pillar still exists—it exists in Tolstoyism.
Remember that Tolstoy basically wanted to turn all people away from the outer life and lead them to the inner.5Leo Nikolayevich Tolstoy, Count, 1828–1910. Russian novelist and moral philosopher. As I said when I spoke about Tolstoy in the early days of our movement, he wanted to focus our attention exclusively on what goes on in our inner life. He did not see the spirit working in the outer world—a one-sided view characteristic of him, as I said in that early lecture. One of our friends showed Tolstoy a transcript of that lecture. He understood the first two-thirds of it, but not the last third because reincarnation and karma were mentioned there, which he did not understand. He represented a one-sided view, the absolute suppression of outer life. It is painful to see him show this one-sidedness. Just think of the tremendous contrast between Tolstoy's views, which predominate among a considerable number of Russia's intellectuals, and what is coming from there these days. It is one of the most awful contrasts you can imagine. So much for one-sidedness.
The other pillar, the Boaz pillar, also finds historical expression in our age. It too represents one-sidedness. We find it in the exclusive search for the spiritual in the outer world. Some years ago, this phenomenon appeared in America with the emergence of the polar opposite to Tolstoy, namely, Keely.6John Ernst Worrell Keely, 1827–1898. Claimed invention of a perpetual-motion system (1873). After his death, his apparatus was proven a fraud. Keely harbored the ideal of building a motor that would not run on steam or electricity, but on the waves we create when we make sounds, when we speak. Just imagine that! A motor that runs on the waves we set in motion when we speak, or indeed with our inner life in general! Of course, this was only an ideal, and we can thank God it was just an ideal at that time, for what would this war be like if Keely's ideal had been realized? If it is ever realized, then we will see what the harmony of vibrations in external motor power really means. This, then, is the other one-sidedness, the Boaz pillar. It is between these two pillars we must pass through.
There is much, indeed very much, contained in symbols that have been preserved. Our age is called upon to understand these things, to penetrate them. Someday people will perceive the contrast between all true spirituality and what will come from the West if the Keely motor ever becomes a reality. It will be quite a different contrast from the one between Tolstoy's views and what is approaching from the East. Well, we cannot say more about this.
We need to gradually deepen our understanding of the mysteries of human evolution and to realize that what will some day become reality in various stages has been expressed symbolically or otherwise in human wisdom throughout millennia. Today we are only at the stage of mere groping toward this reality. In one of our recent talks I told you that Hermann Bahr, a man I often met with in my youth, is seeking now—at the age of fifty-three and after having written much—to understand Goethe. Groping his way through Goethe's works, he admits that he is only just beginning to really understand Goethe. At the same time, he admits that he is beginning to realize that there is such a thing as spiritual science in addition to the physical sciences. I have explained that Franz, the protagonist of Bahr's recently published novel Himmelfahrt (“Ascension”), represents the author's own path of development, his path through the physical sciences.7Hermann Bahr, Himmelfahrt (“Ascension”), Berlin, 1916.
Bahr studied with the botanist Wiessner in Vienna, then with Ostwald in the chemical laboratory in Leipzig, then with Schmoller at the seminar for political economy in Berlin, and then he studied psychology and psychiatry with Richet in France. Of course, he also went to Freud in Vienna—as a man following up on all the various scientific sensations of the day would naturally have to do—and then he went to the theosophists in London, and so forth. Remember, I read you the passage in question, “And so he scoured the sciences, first botany with Wiessner, then chemistry with Ostwald, then Schmoller's seminar, Richet's clinic, Freud in Vienna, then directly to the theoso- phists. And so in art he went to the painters, the etchers, and so on.”8Hermann Bahr, Himmelfahrt and see Lecture One, notes 13-17.
But what faith does this Franz attain, who is really one of the urgently seeking people of the present age? Interestingly enough, he wanders and gropes, and then something dawns on him that is described as follows:
He was no longer in a state of spiritual innocence. But wasn't there perhaps a kind of second innocence, an innocence regained? Was there not a piety of the intellect, humbled by the recognition of its own limits, wasn't there a faith for those who know, a hope born out of despair? Weren't there throughout history wise men, living in solitude and seclusion from the world, yet connected with each other through secret signs, and working wonderfully and quietly with an almost magical power in a region beyond nationalities and creeds, in the infinite, in the sphere of a purer humanity, a humanity nearer to God? Were there not even today, scattered all over the world and hidden in secret, knights of the Holy Grail? Were there not disciples of a white lodge, a lodge invisible and perhaps not to be entered but merely felt, yet working and predominating everywhere and determining human destiny? Hasn't there always been an anonymous community of holy men on earth, who do not know each other nor anything of each other and yet are working together and on one another through the very power of their prayers? Such thoughts had already much occupied him in his theosophical days, but he had obviously gotten to know only false theosophists; maybe genuine, true theosophists did not allow themselves to be known ...
These thoughts occur to Franz after he has hurried through the world and has been everywhere, as I have told you, and has at last returned to his home, presumably Salzburg. That's where these thoughts occur to him, in his Salzburg home. I would like to mention in all modesty that he did not come to us; and we can get an idea of why Franz did not come to us. In his quest for people who are striving for the spirit, Franz remembers an Englishman he had once met in Rome and whom he describes as follows:
He was a clever man in his mature years, of good family, a rich, independent bachelor, and a proper Englishman—sober, practical, unsentimental, lacking any musical or artistic sense; in short, a robust, cheerful, sensuous person. He loved fishing, rowing, sailing, eating and drinking heartily, he was a playboy disturbed in his complacency only by one single passion, the curiosity to see everything, to get to know everything, to have been everywhere—with no other ambition than to be able to say with satisfaction, regardless of what place was being talked about, that he knew this or that hotel, where Cook's had found accommodations for him, had seen the sights, and associated with notable people of rank and fame. To be able to travel more comfortably and to have access everywhere, he had been advised to become a freemason. He praised the usefulness of this association until he thought he had discovered a similar but better organized and more powerful association of a higher kind, which he now wanted to join by all means, just as he would have made travel arrangements with another better firm than Cook s if one could have been found.
He was not to be dissuaded from his conviction that the world was governed by a small group of secret leaders, that so-called history was made by these men who were as unknown to their closest servants as those in turn were to theirs. He claimed to have followed the traces of this secret world government, of this real freemasonry of which the other was merely a most foolish copy, made by inadequate means. He thought he had found its center in Rome among the Monsignors, most of whom, of course, only played a minor role as unsuspecting pawns, whose jostling provided the cover for the four or five true leaders of the world. And, looking back, Franz still had to laugh at the funny desperation of this Englishman, who had the misfortune never to meet the real leaders but always only their pawns. However, this did not deter the man in his attempts but only served to increase his respect for this very well-guarded and impenetrable association, which he was willing to bet he would be allowed to enter some day—even if he had to stay in Rome until the end of his life and become a monk or even if he had to be circumcised.
For since he was tracking everywhere the invisible threads of a power covering the whole world like a spider web, he was not averse to hold Jews in very high esteem. And occasionally he expressed his serious suspicion that in the ultimate, innermost circle of this concealed worldwide web, Rabbis and Monsignors might be sitting together in utmost harmony, which would have been alright with him as long as they would allow him to take part in their magic.
There you have a caricature of what I have told you, namely, that there is, as it were, a kingdom within a kingdom, a small circle whose power radiates into others. But the Englishman, and Franz with him, imagined this circle to be a community of Rabbis and Monsignors; as a matter of fact, they are precisely the ones who are not in it. But you see that Franz just gropes his way here. And why? Well, he remembers once again the eccentric whims of the Englishman:
It was only much later that it occurred to him to wonder whether perhaps someone who had not been born with such capacities could acquire them, whether one could train oneself to such powers, whether they could be learned. But the theosophical exercises soon disappointed him.
Those he had given up! You see, there is such a groping and fumbling in our time. People like Bahr reach their old age before they understand anything spiritual, and then they have such grotesque ideas as we see here. This Franz is then invited to the house of a canon. This Salzburg canon is a very mysterious personality, and of great importance in Salzburg—the town Salzburg is not named, but we can nevertheless recognize it. He is of even greater importance than the cardinal, for the whole city no longer talks about the cardinal but about the canon although there are a dozen canons there. And so Franz gets the idea that maybe this very man is one of the white lodge. You know how easy it is to get such ideas.
Well, Franz is invited to lunch at the canon's house. There are many guests, and the canon is really a very tolerant man; imagine, he is a Catholic canon, and yet he has invited a Jewish banker together with a Jesuit, Franz, and others, including a Franciscan monk. It is a very cheerful luncheon party. The Jesuit and the Jewish banker are soon talking—nota bene, the banker is one to whom practically everybody is indebted but who is really most unselfish in what he does and as a rule does not ask for repayment of what he apparently lends but instead only wants the pleasure of being invited to the house of a gentleman such as the canon once a year. The eager conversation between the Jesuit and this Jewish banker is altogether too much for Franz. He leaves them and goes into the library to escape their scandalous jokes, and the canon follows him.
The library, though not big, was very select. On theology there were only the most essential works, the Bollandist writings and a good deal of Franciscan literature, Meister Eckhart, writings on the spiritual exercises, Catherine of Genoa, the mysticism of Gorres and Mohler's symbolism. On philosophy there were more books: all of Kant's works, including the collected volumes of the Kant Society, also Deussen's Upanishads and his history of philosophy, Vaihinger's philosophy of the As if, and very many books on epistemology. Then the Greek and Latin classics, Shakespeare, Calderon, Cervantes, Dante, Macchiavelli, and Balzac in the original, but of German literature only the works of Novalis and Goethe, the latter in various editions and his scientific writings in the Weimar edition. Franz took down a volume of these and found a number of marginal notes made by the canon, who at this moment left the young monk and the Jesuit and joined Franz, saying, “Yes, no one knows the scientific writings of Goethe.”
Now what the canon finds in Goethe's scientific writings is characteristic, on the one hand, of what is actually contained there and can be understood by the canon and, on the other hand, of what the canon can understand by virtue of being a Catholic canon.
“Yes, no one knows the scientific writings of Goethe. It is a pity! In these writings, the old heathen that Goethe is supposed to have been suddenly appears in a different light, and only after reading them does one understand the end of Faust.”
There the canon is right. We cannot understand the end of Faust if we don't know Goethe's scientific views.
“I have never been able to believe that Goethe pretended there [in Faust] to be a Catholic just for artistic effect. [You see, the canon in him cannot be denied, but never mind.] After all, my respect for the poet, for all poets, is too great to believe that at the moment he utters his last words, he is putting on a mask.”
That is what most people believe, that Goethe really was only pretending when he wrote the magnificent, grandiose final scene of Faust. “But the scientific writings reveal on every page how much of a Catholic Goethe was.” Yes, well, the canon calls everything he can understand, everything he likes, Catholic. We don't need to feel embarrassed about that.
“... how much of a Catholic Goethe was, perhaps unknowingly and in any case without the courage of his convictions. These writings read as though the writer, on the whole nothing crucial, necessary, and essential is lacking, not even the dash of superstition, magic, or whatever you want to call it, that makes confirmed Protestants so suspicious of our sacred doctrine. Often I could hardly believe my own eyes. But once you are on the trail of the hidden Catholic in Goethe, you soon see him everywhere. His trust in the Holy Spirit (of course, Goethe prefers to call him ‘Genius’), his deep feeling for the sacraments, which he thought were too few, his sense for penitence, his gift for reverence, and even more so the fact that in totally un-Protestant fashion he is not content with faith but always insists on the acknowledgment of God in the living deed, the pious work this rare and most difficult realization that human beings cannot be approached by God if they do not first approach God themselves, the realization of this awesome human freedom to choose either to accept or reject the grace offered, this freedom through which alone God's grace will be deserved by those who decide to accept it—all this, even in his exaggerations and distortions, is still Catholic to the core.”
For us, it would be particularly interesting to know what the canon calls “exaggerations.” Well, in any case, he calls them Catholic and goes on to say:
“Therefore, as you see, I have often written in the margin the passages from the Council of Trent where the same content is expressed, sometimes even in almost the same words.”
Imagine, a Catholic canon writing the resolutions of the Council of Trent next to the words of Goethe!9Council of Trent, council of the Roman Catholic Church, 15451563. In this juxtaposition you have what permeates all humanity and what we may call the core of spiritual life common to all people. This should not be taken as just so much empty rhetoric; instead it must he understood as it was meant. The canon continues:
“And when Zacharias Werner tells us that a sentence in Goethe's Elective Affinities has made him a Catholic, I believe him implicitly. Of course, this is not to deny [here the canon comes through again] there is also a heathen, a Protestant, and even an almost Jewish Goethe; I don't want to claim him as an ideal Catholic.”
What the canon adds to this we can be pleased to hear; well, I don't want to press my opinion on you; at least I am pleased to hear the following:
“If Goethe had indeed been Catholic, which on the whole he was more likely to have been than the shallow and complacent run-of-the-mill monist the neo-German senior professors parade under his name ...”
Of course, the canon here refers to Richard M. Meyer, Albert Bielschowsky, Engel—neo-German senior professors who have written neo-German works on Goethe.10Richard M. Meyer, 1860–1914, German philologist.
You see, we are already doing what our times secretly and darkly long for, something that is indeed inevitable—this is a very serious matter.
Now please remember some of the first lectures I gave to our groups in these fateful times, where I spoke of a shattering occult experience, namely the perception that the soul of Franz Ferdinand, who was assassinated in Sarajevo, plays a special part in the spiritual world.11Franz Ferdinand, 1863–1914, Archduke of Austria. Nephew of Emperor Franz Joseph and heir to crown. Was assassinated with his wife on June 28, 1914, by a Serbian nationalist at Sarajevo, Bosnia. This assassination led to World War I. As most of you will remember, I told you his soul has attained cosmic significance, as it were. And now Bahr's novel has been published and people have been buying it for weeks. In it the Archduke Franz Ferdinand is described by a man who had hired himself out, under the guise of a simpleton, as a farmhand by a Salzburg landowner who is the brother of the protagonist Franz. Now this man disguised as a simpleton is so stubborn he has to be whipped to work. At the time of the assassination in Sarajevo, this poor fool behaves in such a way that he gets another thrashing; and imagine, when he reads the news of Franz Ferdinand's assassination in an announcement posted on the church door, this fellow says: “He had to end like this; it could not have been otherwise!”
Well, people can't help assuming he was part of the conspiracy even though the murder took place in Sarajevo while the simpleton was in Salzburg. However, such discrepancies don't trouble the people who investigate the matter: Obviously this fellow is one of the Sarajevo conspirators. And since they find books written in Spanish among his possessions, he is evidently a Spanish anarchist. Well, these Spanish books are seized and taken to the district judge, or whatever he is. He, of course, cannot read a word of Spanish but wants to get the case off his docket as quickly as possible after the poor simpleton has been arrested and brought before him. The district judge wants to push this case off on the superior court in Vienna; the people there are to figure out what to do with this Spanish anarchist. After all, the district judge does not want to make a fool of himself; he is an enthusiastic mountain climber and this is perhaps the last fine day of the season, so he wants to get things settled quickly and get going! He understands nothing of the matter. Nevertheless, he is certain of one thing: he is dealing with a Spanish anarchist.
Then he remembers that Franz had been in Spain (I told you Bahr himself was there too) and could read Spanish. Franz is to read the book and summarize it for the judge. And so Franz takes the manuscript—and what does he discover? The deepest mysticism. Absolutely nothing to do with anarchism—only profound mysticism! There is actually a great deal that is wonderful and beautiful in the manuscript. Well, according to Franz this simpleton wrote it himself because his very mysticism led him to want to die to the world. Naturally, I do not want to defend this way of proceeding. The simpleton then turns out to be in reality a Spanish infante, a crown prince, and his description fits that of the Archduke Johann who had left the imperial house of Austria to see the world. Franz could not discern the simpleton's Austrian character, but his true identity shines through the disguise, and Franz hits on the idea to say the fellow is a Spanish infante. You can imagine what this means in poor old Salzburg! The people believed they had caught an anarchist and put him into chains—now he turns out to be a Spanish infante! But this man, who knew the heir to the throne, Archduke Ferdinand, what does he say about the latter now after he himself has been unmasked as an infante and a mystic?
The enchanted but now disenchanted prince, still in his old clothes and otherwise still the same old fellow, yet different since Franz knew the old clothes were a disguise, said with a smile, “Forgive me this deception, which, for my feeling, wasn't really one. I have long since stopped being the infante Don Tadeo. If circumstances force me now to play his role again, the part has become much more difficult for me. To myself I was really the old simpleton, and if I ever lied at all, I lied to myself, not to you. I could not know I would inconvenience you, and I am sorry enough for that. Naturally it was all the silliest misunderstanding.”
“I have known the successor to the throne well, without having actually met him; he was very dear to me, and we have been in touch albeit not in the ‘local’ way. [He means here in a way not on the physical plane.] He had long overstepped the limits of his earthly work and had already one foot in the realm of purely spiritual activity. He had to go over completely, I knew. In order to fulfill his work he could no longer stay here. It is only from there that his deed will be done. I only wonder why destiny hesitated so long with him. And that Sunday, as I came out of the church where in my prayers I had been assured again, when I saw the anxious crowd, I knew right away he had at last been freed. What is to happen through him, he can carry out only from the other side. Here he could only promise it; his life was only a preliminary announcement of what is to come. Only now can the deed come about. I have never been able to think of him as a constitutional monarch, with parliamentarianism and all that other humbug. He was a man of too much stature for that. But now he has seized the reins of action all at once. Only now in his death will this man live, really live. This is what I felt when I heard the news, and this is what I meant by the words I said at the time.”
“It had to end like this,” that's what he said at the time of the assassination. I have to admit that I was strangely and deeply moved when I read these words a few days ago in Bahr's Himmelfahrt. Just compare what we find in this novel with what has been said here out of the reality of the spiritual world! Try to understand from this how deeply spiritual science is rooted in reality. Try to see that those who are seeking for knowledge, albeit at first only in a groping, tentative way, are really on the same path, that they want to follow this path and that they also arrive at what we are developing here, even down to the details. After all, it is hardly likely that what I said back then could have been divulged to Hermann Bahr by one of our members. But even if that had been the case, he did at any rate not reject it, but accepted it.
We do not want to put into practice what is really only some hobby or other. We want to put into practice what is a necessity of our age and a very clear and urgent one at that. And now certain really slanderous things are making themselves felt, and we see that people nowadays are inclined to turn their sympathy to those who spread slander. It is much rarer these days for people to show sympathy for the side that is justified. Instead, precisely where injustice occurs we find people think those who have been wronged must appease and cajole the party who committed the injustice. We find this again and again. Even in our Society we find it again and again. My dear friends, today I do not feel in the mood to go into these things, and in any case that is not the point of my talk. I never mention such things except when it is necessary. But let me conclude by mentioning one more point.
In my recently published booklet, I have pointed out that what we are seeking in our spiritual science has been uniform and consistent since the beginning of our work.12Rudolf Steiner, Die Aufgabe der Geisteswissenschaft und deien Bau in Dornach (“The Mission of Spiritual Science and its Building in Dornach”), Berlin, 1916. I have also explained that it is indeed slander to talk of any kind of changing sides, of any contradictions to what we did in the early days of our movement. On page 49 you will find the following:
In a lecture I gave in 1902 to the Giordano Bruno Society, I referred to these statements by I. H. Fichte [which seemed to me the expression of a modern intellectual movement and not merely the opinion of an individual]; “that was when we made a beginning with what reveals itself now as the anthroposophical way of thinking ...”13Immanuel Hermann von Fichte, 1796–1879, son of Johann Gottlieb. Philosopher, exponent of an ethical or speculative theism.
I was referring there to a lecture held in Berlin before the German Section of the Theosophical Society was founded. Continuing along the lines of Goethe, I wanted to create in that lecture the starting point for this new movement not on the basis of Blavatsky and Besant, but based on modern spiritual life, which is independent of those two.14Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, 1831–1891, American theosophist. Organized Theosophical Society in 1875 with Henry Steel Olcott.
Annie Besant, 1847–1933, English theosophist and Indian political leader. Yet there are people today who dare to say the name “anthroposophy” was only invented when, as they say, we wanted to break away from the Theosophical Society. As I explained in my book:
This shows what we had in mind was an expansion of the modern striving for a world view to an actual observation of spiritual reality. Our aim was not to take any old views from the publications then (and even still today) called “theosophical,” but to continue the striving that began with modern philosophy but then got stuck in the abstract and therefore did not gain access to the real spiritual world.
Circumstances sometimes bring about favorable situations in karma. Thus, what I wrote a few weeks ago so you can now read it no longer needs rely only on the memory of the few individuals who heard my talk to the Giordano Bruno Society back in 1902, that is, before the German Section was founded. Today I can present documentary evidence. Well, life's funny like that; due to the kindness of one of our members, Fraulein Hübbe-Schleiden, I have recently received the letters I wrote to Dr. Hübbe-Schleiden back then, just before and on the occasion of the founding of the German Section. Now, after his death, those letters were returned to me.
The German Section of the Theosophical Society was not founded until October 1902. This particular letter is dated September 16, 1902. There are a few words in this letter I would like to read to you. Forgive me, but I must begin somewhere. There was a lot of talk at that time about connecting with the theosophist Franz Hartmann, who was just then holding a kind of congress.15Franz Hartmann, 1838–1912, doctor and theosophist. Founded his own movement within theosophy. I have no intention of saying anything against Franz Hartmann today, but I have to read what I wrote in those days:
Friedenau-Berlin, September 16, 1902. Let Hartmann continue to tell his rubbish to his people; in the meantime I want to take our theosophy where I will find people of sound judgment. Once we have a connection to the students [so far we have had only mediocre success with this], we will have gained much. I want to build anew, not patch up old ruins. [That is how the theosophical movement appeared to me then.] This coming winter I hope to teach a course on elementary theosophy in the Theosophical Library. [I did indeed hold this course, and one of the lectures was given during the actual founding of the German Section. The course title is mentioned here, too.] In addition, I plan to teach elsewhere an ongoing course entitled “Anthroposophy or the Connection between Morality, Religion, and Science.” I also hope to be able to present a lecture to the Bruno Society on Bruno's monism and anthroposophy. At this point, these are only plans. In my opinion, that is how we must proceed.
That was written on September 16, 1902. Here is the document, my dear friends, that can prove to you these things are not simply claims made after the fact, but they have really happened in this way. It is favorable karma that we are able to show who is right at this moment when so much slander is spread, and will increasingly be spread, about our cause.
Die zwölf Sinne des Menschen
Bevor ich heute zu dem Gegenstand unserer Betrachtungen zu kommen habe, drängt es mich, ein Wort zu sagen über jenen großen, schmerzlichen Verlust, den wir für den physischen Plan in diesen Tagen erfahren haben. Sie wissen es ja, Herrn von Moltkes Seele ist am vorgestrigen Tage durch die Todespforte gegangen. Dasjenige, was der Mann seinem Volke war, die überragende Rolle, die er gespielt hat innerhalb der großen schicksaltragenden Ereignisse unserer Zeit, und die bedeutsamen, tiefen Impulse aus dem Menschengeschehen heraus, von denen sein Tun, sein Wirken getragen war, das alles zu würdigen, wird zunächst die Aufgabe anderer sein, wird sein die Aufgabe der kommenden Geschichte. In unseren Tagen ist es ja unmöglich, über alle Dinge, die gerade diese unsere Tage betreffen, ein vollständig erschöpfendes Bild zu geben. Aber wie gesagt, in bezug auf dasjenige, was andere und die Geschichte sagen werden, soll heute hier nicht gesprochen werden, obwohl es die innigste Überzeugung desjenigen ist, der zu Ihnen hier spricht, daß die kommende Geschichte sehr viel gerade über diesen Mann zu sagen haben wird. Aber einiges von dem, was vor meiner Seele in diesem Augenblicke steht, das darf und soll hier gesagt werden, wenn es auch nötig ist, daß ich das eine oder das andere Wort so sage, daß es mehr sinnbildlich klingt als im eigentlichen Sinne, der ja erst nach und nach verständlich werden wird. Es steht vor meiner Seele dieser Mann und dieses Mannes Seele wie ein aus der Entwickelung unserer Zeit herausgeborenes Symbolum unserer Gegenwart und der nächsten Zukunft selber, wahrhaftig ein Symbolum für dasjenige, was geschehen soll und geschehen muß in einem sehr, sehr wirklichen, sehr wahren Sinne des Wortes.
Wir betonen es immer wieder und wiederum, daß es wahrhaftig nicht eine Willkür dieser oder jener Menschen ist, das der Gegenwarts- und nächsten Zukunftskultur einzuverleiben, was wir die Geisteswissenschaft nennen, daß diese Geisteswissenschaft eine Notwendigkeit der Zeit ist, daß die Zukunft nicht wird bestehen können, wenn nicht die Substanz dieser Geisteswissenschaft in das Menschenwerden hineinfließt. Und hier, meine lieben Freunde, haben Sie das Große, Bedeutsame, das uns jetzt vor Augen treten soll, indem wir gedenken der Seele Herrn von Moltkes. Wir hatten mit ihm einen Mann, eine Persönlichkeit unter uns, welche im allerwirksamsten, im alleräußerlich-tätigsten Leben der Gegenwart stand, demjenigen Leben, das sich aus der Vergangenheit heraus entwickelt hat und in unserer Zeit zu einer der allergrößten Krisen gekommen ist, welche die Menschheit im Verlaufe ihrer bewußten Geschichte zu durchleben hat, einen Mann, der mit die Heere führte, mitten in den Ereignissen stand, die den Ausgangspunkt bilden unserer schicksaltragenden Gegenwart und Zukunft. Und zugleich haben wir in ihm eine Seele, einen Mann, eine Persönlichkeit, die das alles war, und Erkenntnis suchend, Wahrheit suchend hier unter uns gesessen hat mit dem heiligst-heißesten Erkenntnisdrang, der nur irgendeine Seele der Gegenwart durchseelen kann.
Das ist dasjenige, was vor unsere Seele treten soll. Denn damit ist diese Seele der eben durch die Todespforte geschrittenen Persönlichkeit neben allem anderen, was sie geschichtlich ist, ein überragendes geschichtliches Symbolum. Daß er unter denjenigen war, die im äußeren Leben unter den Ersten stehen, daß er diesem äußeren Leben diente und doch die Brücke fand zu dem Geistesleben, das durch diese Geisteswissenschaft gesucht wird, das ist ein tiefgehend bedeutsames historisches Symbolum; das ist das, was die Empfindung eines Wunsches in unsere Seele legen kann, der aber nicht ein persönlicher Wunsch ist, sondern der herausgeboren ist aus dem Drange der Zeit, der die Empfindung, die wünschende Empfindung in unsere Seele legen kann: Mögen viele und immer mehr, die in seiner Lage sind, es so machen wie er! Darinnen liegt das bedeutsam Vorbildliche, das Sie fühlen sollen, das Sie empfinden sollen. Wie wenig auch im äußeren Leben von dieser Tatsache gesprochen werden mag, darauf kommt es nicht an, am besten, wenn gar nichts davon gesprochen wird; aber eine Realität ist sie, und auf die Wirkungen kommt es an, nicht auf dasjenige, was gesprochen wird. Eine Realität des geistigen Lebens ist diese Tatsache. Denn diese Tatsache führt uns dazu, einzusehen: Diese Seele hatte in sich die Empfindung der richtigen Deutung der Zeichen der Zeit. Mögen viele dieser Seele folgen, die vielleicht heute in der einen oder in der anderen Richtung noch sehr fern stehen demjenigen, was wir hier Geisteswissenschaft nennen.
Deshalb ist es wahr, daß dasjenige, was fließt und pulsiert durch diese unsere geisteswissenschaftliche Strömung, von dieser Seele ebensoviel empfangen hat, als wir ihr geben konnten. Und das sollten wir gut im Gedächtnis behalten, denn oftmals habe ich hier gesprochen davon. Es bedeutet, daß jetzt in unserer Zeit in die geistige Welt Seelen gehen, die dasjenige in sich tragen, was sie hier in der Geisteswissenschaft aufgenommen haben. Wenn nun eine im tätigsten Leben stehende Seele durch die Todespforte zieht und nunmehr oben ist in der lichten Welt, die uns durch unsere Erkenntnis ermittelt werden soll, wenn wir sie da oben wissen, wenn mit anderen Worten dasjenige, was wir suchen, durch eine solche Seele durch die Todespforte getragen wird, dann ist es durch die Vereinigung, die es eingegangen ist gerade mit einer solchen Seele, eine tief bedeutsame, wirkende Macht in der Geisteswelt. Und diejenigen Seelen, die hier sind und mich verstehen in diesem Augenblick, werden niemals wieder vergessen dasjenige, was ich hier in diesem Augenblicke gemeint habe über die Bedeutung der Tatsache, daß diese Seele dasjenige, was durch Jahre durch unsere Geisteswissenschaft geflossen ist, nun mit hinaufnimmt in die geistige Welt, daß das in ihr Kraft und Wirksamkeit wird.
Das alles kann ja selbstverständlich nicht dazu da sein, den Schmerz, den wir empfinden über einen solchen Verlust auf dem physischen Plane, in trivialem Sinne hinwegzudämpfen. Leid und Schmerz sind in solchem Falle berechtigt. Aber Leid und Schmerz werden erst groß und gewichtig und selber wirksame Kräfte, wenn sie durchzogen sind von vernünftigem Begreifen desjenigen, was dem Schmerz und dem Leide zugrunde liegt. Und so nehmen Sie dasjenige, was ich gesprochen habe, als den Ausdruck des Schmerzes über den Verlust auf dem physischen Plane, den das deutsche Volk und die Menschheit erfahren hat.
Noch einmal, meine lieben Freunde, erheben wir uns:
Geist Deiner Seele, wirkender Wächter!
Deine Schwingen mögen bringen
Unserer Seelen bittende Liebe
Deiner Hut vertrautem Sphärensohn,
Daß, mit Deiner Macht geeint
Unsre Bitte helfend strahle
Der Seele, die sie liebend sucht.
Meine lieben Freunde, in den letzten Zeiten habe ich öfter zu Ihnen gesprochen davon, wie dasjenige, was als okkulte Substanz gewissermaßen durch das Menschenwerden, durch die Menschenentwickelung fließt, einen äußeren Ausdruck gefunden hat — und ich habe ja diesen äußeren Ausdruck genauer charakterisiert in den letzten Betrachtungen -, einen Ausdruck, der heute schon vielfach recht äußerlich ist in allerlei mehr oder weniger okkulten oder symbolischen Verbrüderungen und Vereinigungen. Wir leben nun in der Zeit, in welcher dasjenige, was an okkulter Erkenntnis aus der geistigen Welt gewonnen werden kann, in einer anderen Weise, in der Weise, die wir zu betätigen versuchen seit Jahren, an die Menschheit herangebracht werden muß, in welcher die anderen Wege gewissermaßen veraltet sind. Gewiß, sie werden sich eine Zeitlang noch fortpflanzen, aber sie sind in einer gewissen Beziehung veraltet. Es kommt viel darauf an, daß man gerade diese Tatsache in der richtigen Weise versteht.
Nun erinnern Sie sich, daß einer derjenigen Namen, die ich unserer Geisteswissenschaft gern gebe, dieser ist: Anthroposophie, und daß ich Ja vor Jahren hier schon gerade von diesem Orte aus Vorträge gehalten habe, die ich dazumal Vorträge über Anthroposophie nannte. Bei unserer letzten Betrachtung habe ich bei einer gewissen Gelegenheit wiederum angespielt auf diese Vorträge über Anthroposophie, namentlich darauf, daß ich dazumal betont habe, der Mensch habe eigentlich zwölf Sinne. Und ich habe ja das letztemal ausgeführt, daß dasjenige, was verbreitet ist über die Nervensubstanz des Menschen im Zusammenhange mit seinen Sinnen, nach der Zwölfzahl geordnet ist, weil der Mensch einmal in diesem tiefsten Sinne ein Mikrokosmos ist und den Makrokosmos abbildet. Zwölf Sternbilder, durch die der Sonne Kreislauf im Jahre geht, draußen im Makrokosmos — zwölf Sinne, in denen das Ich des Menschen eigentlich lebt hier auf dem physischen Plan! Gewiß, die Dinge sind draußen, in der Zeit aufeinanderfolgend etwas anders: Die Sonne bewegt sich vom Widder durch den Stier und so weiter bis wieder zurück durch die Fische zum Widder. Der jährliche Sonnenkreislauf geht durch diese zwölf Sternbilder. Alles, auch was wir in uns tragen, was wir in uns seelisch erleben, steht im Verhältnis zur Außenwelt durch unsere zwölf Sinne. Diese zwölf Sinne habe ich dazumal aufgezählt: der Tastsinn, der Lebenssinn, der Bewegungssinn, der Gleichgewichtssinn, der Geruchssinn, der Geschmackssinn, der Sehsinn, der Wärmesinn, der Gehörsinn, der Sprachsinn, der Denksinn, der Ichsinn. Im Umkreise gleichsam dieser zwölf Sinne bewegt sich unser ganzes Seelenleben, gerade so, wie die Sonne sich im Umkreis der zwölf Sternbilder bewegt. Aber der äußere Vergleich schon geht auch noch viel weiter. Bedenken Sie, daß die Sonne während des Jahres durch die Sternbilder vom Widder gehen muß bis hin gegen die Waage, daß die Sonne gleichsam im Lichte des Tages durch die oberen Sternbilder, während der Nacht durch die unteren Sternbilder geht, und daß dieses Gehen der Sonne durch die unteren Sternbilder zunächst dem äußeren Lichte verborgen ist. So ist es auch mit dem Leben der Menschenseele in diesen zwölf Sinnen. Tagessinne sind eigentlich nur annähernd die eine Hälfte davon, wie die eine Hälfte der Sternbilder nur Tag-Sternbilder sind, die anderen Nacht-Sternbilder.
Sehen Sie, der Tastsinn ist wirklich etwas, wovon wir sagen können, er drängt den Menschen schon hinein in das Nachtleben des Seelischen; denn mit dem Tastsinn tappen wir grobsinnlich an die äußere Welt an. Und versuchen Sie nur einmal, sich zu erklären, wie wenig der Tastsinn im Grunde genommen mit dem Tages-, das heißt mit dem wirklichen bewußten Seelenleben zusammenhängt. Das können Sie daraus sehen, daß Sie die Eindrücke der anderen Sinne leicht werden im Gedächtnisse aufbewahren können, aber versuchen Sie selbst, wie wenig Sie die Erfahrungen des Tastsinnes im Gedächtnisse aufbewahren können. Versuchen Sie, wie wenig Sie sich erinnern, wie irgendein Stoff sich angefühlt hat, den Sie vor Jahren anfühlten, ja, wie wenig Sie sogar das Bedürfnis haben, sich daran zu erinnern. Das taucht schon hinunter, so wie das Licht aufhört und in die Dämmerung versinkt, wenn die Sonne in dem Sternbild der Waage hinuntergeht in die Nacht, in die Region der NachtSternbilder hinein. Und völlig verborgen, möchte ich sagen, für das wache, offene Seelenleben sind dann die anderen Sinne.
Der Lebenssinn: In den wenigsten Seelenbetrachtungen der äußeren Wissenschaft finden Sie überhaupt von diesem Lebenssinn gesprochen. Gewöhnlich redet man ja nur von den fünf Sinnen, den Sinnen des Tages, des wachen Bewußtseins. Aber das braucht uns ja nicht weiter anzugehen. Es ist dieser Lebenssinn der Sinn, durch den wir unser Leben in uns fühlen, aber eigentlich nur, wenn es gestört wird, wenn es krank wird, wenn uns dies oder jenes schmerzt oder gerade weh tut; dann kommt der Lebenssinn und zeigt uns an: Dir tut es da oder dort weh. Wenn das Leben gesund ist, ist es getaucht in die Untergründe, so wie das Licht nicht da ist, wenn die Sonne im Skorpion steht, überhaupt in einem NachtSternbild steht.
Ebenso ist es beim Bewegungssinn. Dieser Bewegungssinn ist ja dasjenige, wodurch wir wahrnehmen, wie in uns die Tatsachen verlaufen dadurch, daß wir irgend etwas in Bewegung bringen. Jetzt erst spricht die äußere Wissenschaft etwas von diesem Bewegungssinn. Sie weiß jetzt erst, daß von der Art und Weise, wie die Gelenke aufeinander drücken — dadurch, daß ich zum Beispiel den Finger beuge, drückt diese Gelenkfläche auf die andere -, die Bewegung, die unser Körper ausführt, wahrgenommen wird. Wir gehen, aber wir gehen unbewußt. Dem liegt ein Sinn zugrunde: die Wahrnehmung der Bewegungsfähigkeit, wiederum in Nacht des Bewußstseins gegossen.
Nehmen Sie weiter den Gleichgewichtssinn. Wir erringen ihn uns ja eigentlich im Leben erst allmählich. Aber wir denken nicht daran, weil er in der Nacht des Bewußstseins liegt. Das Kind hat ihn noch nicht, es kriecht auf dem Boden. Der Gleichgewichtssinn wird erst erworben. Die Wissenschaft hat erst in den letzten Jahrzehnten das Sinnesorgan für den Gleichgewichtssinn entdeckt. Ich habe davon gesprochen, daß im Ohre die drei halbzirkelförmigen Kanäle sind, die in den drei Richtungen des Raumes aufeinander senkrecht stehen. Wenn diese beschädigt sind in uns, dann bekommen wir Schwindel, das heißt, wir haben das Gleichgewicht nicht mehr. So wie wir für das Gehör das äußere Ohr haben, für das Sehen das Auge, so haben wir für das Gleichgewicht die drei halbzirkelförmigen Kanäle, die nur durch einen besonderen Verwandtschaftsrest von Ton und Gleichgewicht an das Ohr gebunden sind. Aber sie sind da drinnen in der Felsenbein-Höhle des Ohres. Es sind drei Halbkreise aus kleinen, winzigkleinen Knöchelchen gebildet. Aber sie brauchen nur beschädigt zu sein, und die Möglichkeit, das Gleichgewicht zu halten, ist dahin. Wir erwerben uns die Empfänglichkeit für diesen Gleichgewichtssinn erst im Laufe unserer ersten Kindheit; aber er ist in Nacht des Bewußtseins getaucht. Wir merken ihn nicht.
Dann kommt die Dämmerung und dämmert herauf ins Bewußtsein. Denken Sie aber, wie wenig eigentlich diejenigen Sinne, die nun auch noch etwas verborgen sind — Geruchssinn und Geschmackssinn - mit unserem Seelenleben in höherem Sinne zu tun haben. Wir müssen schon untertauchen in das Körperleben, um so recht uns hineinleben zu können in den Geruch. Geschmackssinn ist ja nun schon eine starke Dämmerung für die Menschen, da dämmert es schon herauf ins Bewußtsein. Aber Sie können noch immer gleichsam das Seelenexperiment machen, das ich vorhin angeführt habe für den Tastsinn: Sie werden sich sehr schwer erinnern an die Wahrnehmungen des Geruchs- und des Geschmackssinnes. Und nur dann, wenn das Seelenleben mehr ins Unbewußte hinuntertaucht, kommt gewissermaßen der Geruchssinn für das bewußte Seelenleben ein wenig zur Geltung. So wissen Sie ja vielleicht, daß es Tonkünstler gegeben hat, die besonders inspiriert wurden dadurch, daß sie in die Nähe desselben Wohlgeruchs kamen, den sie einmal bei einer anderen Tonschöpfung erlebt haben. Es dämmert gar nicht der Wohlgeruch im Gedächtnis herauf, aber dieselben Seelenvorgänge dämmern herauf ins volle Bewußtsein, die mit dem Geruchssinn zusammenhängen. Geschmackssinn, nun, das ist ja schon für die meisten Menschen starke Dämmerung. Aber es zeigen doch die meisten Menschen, daß der Geschmackssinn doch noch mindestens in der Dämmerung des Seelenlebens, noch nicht im vollen Tag des Seelenlebens liegt; denn die wenigsten Menschen geben sich zufrieden mit dem rein seelischen Eindruck des Geschmackssinnes, sonst müßten wir, wenn uns etwas recht geschmeckt hat, ebenso froh sein, wenn wir uns daran erinnern, wie wenn wir es wieder zu schmecken kriegen. Und das ist Ja, wie Sie wissen, für die meisten Menschen nicht so. Sie wollen es wieder haben, sind nicht zufrieden damit, sich nur zu erinnern an dasjenige, was ihnen gut geschmeckt hat.
Dann aber kommen wir mit dem Gesichtssinn da herauf, wo die Sonne des Bewußtseins aufgeht, wir kommen in das volle Wachbewußtsein mit dem Gesichtssinn. Die Sonne geht immer höher und höher. Zum Wärmesinn kommt sie, zum Tonsinn, vom Tonsinn in den Sprachsinn. Die Sonne steht am Mittag. Zwischen Tonsinn und Sprachsinn ist die Mittagszeit des Seelenlebens. Nun kommen Denksinn, Ichsinn. Der Ichsinn ist nicht der Sinn für das eigene Ich, sondern für die Wahrnehmung des Ich im andern, natürlich es ist ja Wahrnehmung, es ist ja Sinn! Das Bewußtsein vom Ich, vom eigenen Ich, ist etwas ganz anderes. Das habe ich dazumal in den Anthroposophie-Vorträgen auseinandergelegt. Es kommt hierbei nicht darauf an, daß man von seinem eigenen Ich weiß, sondern daß man dem anderen Menschen gegenübersteht und daß er einem sein Ich öffnet. Die Wahrnehmung für das Ich des anderen, das ist der Ichsinn, nicht das eigene Ich-Wahrnehmen.
Das sind die zwölf Sinne, vor denen sozusagen das Seelenleben des Menschen erscheint wie die Sonne vor je einem der zwölf Sternbilder. Das bezeugt Ihnen, wie der Mensch im wahrsten Sinne des Wortes wirklich ein Mikrokosmos ist. Gegenüber solchen Dingen ist unsere gegenwärtige Wissenschaft vielfach noch ganz und gar unwissend. Unsere gegenwärtige Wissenschaft wird noch den Tonsinn gelten lassen, aber nicht mehr den Sprachsinn, obwohl niemals das gesprochene Wort in seiner höheren Bedeutung durch den bloßen Tonsinn erfaßt werden könnte. Dazu muß der Sprachsinn kommen, der Sinn für die Bedeutung desjenigen, was im Worte sich ausdrückt. Und der Sprachsinn wiederum ist nicht einerlei mit dem Denksinn, und der Denksinn nicht mit dem Ichsinn. Wie unsere Zeit sich irrt in bezug darauf, dafür möchte ich Ihnen ein Beispiel anführen. Eduard von Hartmann, der wirklich sehr, sehr stark gesucht hat, beginnt sein Buch «Grundriß der Psychologie» gleich mit den folgenden Worten — wie mit Selbstverständlichkeit setzt er diese Worte hin -: «Der Ausgangspunkt der Psychologie sind die psychischen Phänomene, und zwar für jeden die eigenen, da nur diese ihm unmittelbar gegeben sind, und niemand in das Bewußtsein eines anderen hineinzuschauen vermag.» Die ersten Sätze einer Seelenkunde eines der bedeutendsten Philosophen der unmittelbaren Gegenwart gehen davon aus, daß man ableugnet die Sinne: Sprachsinn, Denksinn, Ichsinn. Man weiß nichts davon. Und denken Sie doch, daß hier ein Fall vorliegt, wo geradezu die Absurdität, der absoluteste Unsinn wissenschaftlich werden muß, damit man die Dinge ableugnen kann! Gerade wenn man nicht verworren gemacht ist durch diese Wissenschaft, kann man sehr leicht die Fehler einsehen, die diese Wissenschaft macht. Denn diese Seelenkunde sagt: In die Seele des anderen siehst du nicht hinein, die deutest du dir nur aus ihren Äußerungen. Also denken Sie einmal, die Seele des anderen soll man sich deuten durch ihre Äußerungen! Wenn jemand einem ein liebes Wort sagt, das soll man erst deuten! Ist das wahr? Nein, es ist nicht wahr! Das liebe Wort wirkt unmittelbar, wie die Farbe, die auf Ihr Auge wirkt! Und dasjenige, was als Liebe in der Seele lebt, wird auf den Flügeln des Wortes in Ihre Seele getragen, so wie die Farbe in Ihr Auge getragen wird. Unmittelbare Wahrnehmung ist es, von einer Deutung ist da nicht die Rede. Die Wissenschaft muß uns erst in unserer Egoität abschließen durch ihren Unsinn, um nicht aufmerksam darauf zu machen, daß wir, indem wir mit unseren Mitmenschen leben - und ich habe gesagt: beim Ichsinn, Denksinn, Sprachsinn kommt es darauf an -, wir unmittelbar mit ihren Seelen leben. Wir leben mit den Seelen der anderen, wie wir mit den Farben und mit den Tönen leben, und wer das nicht einsieht, weiß überhaupt nichts vom seelischen Leben. Das ist das Wichtigste, daß man gerade solche Dinge durchschaut. Es werden heute ausführliche Theorien verbreitet darüber, daß eigentlich alle Eindrücke, die wir von anderen Menschen bekommen, nur symbolisch seien und gedeutet würden aus den Äußerungen. Es ist aber gar nichts wahr daran.
Aber nun formen Sie das Bild vor Ihrer Seele: Aufgang der Sonne, Erscheinen des Lichtes, wiederum Untergang der Sonne. Es ist das makrokosmische Bild für das Mikrokosmische des Seelenlebens des Menschen, das sich bewegt, allerdings jetzt nicht im Kreislauf, sondern so, wie es Bedürfnis ist für das menschliche Seelenleben, innerhalb der zwölf Sternbilder des Seelenlebens, das heißt der zwölf Sinne. Jedesmal, wenn wir das Ich eines anderen wahrnehmen, sind wir auf der Tagesseite der Seelensonne. Wenn wir in uns selbst eintauchen, unser inneres Gleichgewicht, unsere Bewegung wahrnehmen würden — wir nehmen sie nicht wahr, weil es die Nachtseite ist -, sind wir eben auf der Nachtseite des Seelenlebens. Und jetzt wird es Ihnen nicht mehr so unwahrscheinlich scheinen, wenn ich Ihnen sage: Indem der Mensch geht durch die Zeit zwischen dem Tode und einer neuen Geburt, werden für ihn besonders diejenigen Sinne von einer großen Bedeutung - weil sie sich dann vergeistigen —, die hier in sein Inneres hineinziehen, die hier untergehen, und die Sinne gehen mehr unter, die hier aufgehen. So wie die Sonne heraufkommt, so kommt die Menschenseele herauf, ich möchte sagen, zwischen dem Geschmackssinn und dem Sehsinn, und geht wiederum im Tode unter. Wenn wir, das können Sie aus verschiedenen Beschreibungen, die ich früher gegeben habe, die Sie ja nachlesen können in den Zyklen, ersehen, in der Zeit zwischen dem Tode und einer neuen Geburt eine Seele drüben finden, so finden wir sie — sogar in der «Geheimwissenschaft» finden Sie das schon angedeutet — wie innerlich mit uns vereint. Nicht indem wir ihr äußerlich gegenüberstehen und den Eindruck ihres Ich von außen her empfangen, sondern durch Vereinigung nehmen wir sie wahr. Da wird der Tastsinn ganz geistig. Und was jetzt unterbewußt, nachthaft könnte ich sagen, bleibt: Gleichgewichtssinn, Bewegungssinn, das alles spielt vergeistigt die größte Rolle in dem Leben zwischen dem Tod und einer neuen Geburt.
Es ist wirklich so, daß wir uns bewegen durch das Gesamtleben, wie die Sonne sich bewegt durch die zwölf Sternbilder. Wir treten in unser Leben ein, indem unser Bewußtsein für die Sinne gewissermaRen aufgeht bei der einen Weltensäule und untergeht bei der anderen Weltensäule. An diesen Säulen gehen wir vorüber, wenn wir am Sternenhimmel gewissermaßen von der Nachtseite in die Tagseite hineingehen. Darauf suchten denn nun auch diese okkulten oder symbolischen Gesellschaften immer hinzuweisen, indem sie die Säule der Geburt, die der Mensch passiert, wenn er eintritt in das Leben der Tagseite, Jakim nannten. Sie müssen diese Säule letzten Endes am Himmel suchen Und dasjenige, was während des Lebens zwischen dem Tod und einer neuen Geburt Außenwelt ist, sind die Wahrnehmungen des über die ganze Welt verbreiteten Tastsinnes, wo wir nicht tasten, sondern getastet werden, wo wir fühlen, wie uns die geistigen Wesen überall berühren, während wir hier das andere berühren. Während des Lebens zwischen Tod und neuer Geburt leben wir in der Bewegung darinnen, so daß wir diese Bewegung so fühlen, wie wenn hier in uns ein Blutkörperchen oder ein Muskel seine Eigenbewegung fühlen würde. Im Makrokosmos fühlen wir uns uns bewegend zwischen dem Tod und einer neuen Geburt, das Gleichgewicht fühlen wir, und im Leben des Ganzen fühlen wir uns darinnen. Hier ist unser Leben in unserer Haut abgeschlossen, dort aber fühlen wir uns im Gesamt-, im All-Leben drinnen und fühlen uns in jeder Lage uns selbst unser Gleichgewicht gebend. Hier gibt uns die Schwerkraft der Erde und unsere besondere Körperkonstitution das Gleichgewicht, und wir wissen eigentlich in der Regel nichts davon. Jederzeit fühlen wir das Gleichgewicht in dem Leben zwischen dem Tod und einer neuen Geburt. Das ist eine unmittelbare Empfindung, die andere Seite des Seelenlebens. Der Mensch tritt durch Jakim in das Erdenleben ein, versichernd durch Jakim: Dasjenige, was draußen im Makrokosmos ist, das lebt jetzt in dir, du bist jetzt ein Mikrokosmos, denn das heißt das Wort «Jakim»: In dir das über die Welt ausgegossene Göttliche.
Boas, die andere Säule: der Eintritt durch den Tod in die geistige Welt. Dasjenige, was mit dem Worte Boas zusammengefaßt ist, bedeutet ungefähr: Das, was ich bisher in mir gesucht habe, die Stärke, die werde ich ausgegossen finden über die ganze Welt, in ihr werde ich leben. - Aber man kann solche Dinge nur verstehen, wenn man durch geistige Erkenntnis in sie eindringt. In den symbolischen Brüderschaften werden sie symbolisch angedeutet. Mehr werden sie angedeutet in unserem fünften nachatlantischen Zeitraum aus dem Grunde, damit sie nicht der Menschheit ganz verloren gehen, damit später wiederum Menschen kommen können, die dasjenige, was dem Wort nach aufbewahrt ist, auch verstehen werden.
Aber sehen Sie, alles dasjenige, was sich äußerlich in unserer Welt darlebt, das ist auch wiederum ein Abbild desjenigen, was im Makrokosmos draußen vorhanden ist. Wie unser Seelenleben ein Mikrokosmos ist in dem Sinne, wie ich es Ihnen angedeutet habe, so ist auch das Seelenleben der Menschheit gewissermaßen aus dem Makrokosmos hereingebildet. Und für unsere Zeit ist es sehr bedeutsam, gewissermaßen die zwei Abbilder der beiden Säulen, von denen ich gesprochen habe, in unserer Geschichte geliefert zu bekommen. Diese Säulen stellen das Leben einseitig dar, denn nur im Gleichgewichtszustand zwischen den beiden ist das Leben. Weder ist Jakim das Leben - denn es ist der Übergang von dem Geistigen zum Leibe -, noch ist Boas das Leben, denn es ist der Übergang vom Leibe zu dem Geist. Das Gleichgewicht ist dasjenige, worauf es ankommt. Und das verstehen die Menschen so schwer. Die Menschen suchen immer die eine Seite, immer das Extrem, sie suchen nicht das Gleichgewicht. Deshalb stehen gewissermaßen zwei Säulen wirklich auch für unsere Zeit aufgerichtet, aber wir müssen, wenn wir unsere Zeit richtig verstehen, mitten durchgehen, uns weder die eine Säule, noch die andere Säule gewissermaßen zu der Grundkraft der Menschheit zurechtphantasieren, sondern mitten durchgehen! Wir müssen schon wirklich dasjenige, was in der Realität vorhanden ist, auffassen, nicht in jenem gedankenlosen Leben hinbrüten, in dem der heutige Materialismus hinbrütet. Suchen Sie die Jakim-Säule heute, so haben Sie sie in unserer Gegenwart, die Jakim-Säule ist vorhanden in einem sehr bedeutenden Mann, der jetzt nicht mehr lebt, der schon gestorben ist, aber sie ist vorhanden: Sie ist vorhanden im Tolstoiismus.
Bedenken Sie, daß in Tolstoi ein Mann aufgetreten ist, der im Grunde genommen alle Menschen ablenken wollte von dem äußeren Leben, ganz auf das Innere verweisen wollte - ich habe in den ersten Zeiten unserer anthroposophischen Bewegung über Tolstoi gesprochen -, der ganz verweisen wollte auf dasjenige, was im Innern des Menschen nur vorgeht. Also den Geist in dem äußeren Wirken sah Tolstoi nicht, eine Einseitigkeit, die sich mir insbesondere charakteristisch ausgesprochen hat, als ich dazumal - es war einer der allerersten Vorträge der allerersten Jahre, die hier gehalten worden sind über Tolstoi sprach. Dieser Vortrag konnte Tolstoi dazumal noch durch eine uns befreundete Seite gezeigt werden. Tolstoi verstand die ersten zwei Drittel, das letzte Drittel nicht mehr, weil da gesprochen war über Reinkarnation und Karma; das verstand er nicht. - Er stellte die Einseitigkeit dar, das vollständige Abdämpfen des äußeren Lebens. Und wie unendlich schmerzlich empfindet man es, daß er eine solche Einseitigkeit darstellt! Man denke sich den ungeheuren Kontrast, der da besteht zwischen den Tolstoischen Anschauungen, von denen ein großer Teil der Intellektuellen Rußlands beherrscht ist, und demjenigen, was sich jetzt in diesen Tagen wiederum von dort herüberwälzt. Oh, es ist einer der furchtbarsten Kontraste, die nur zu denken sind! Das ist Einseitigkeit.
Die andere, die Boas-Säule, kommt auch geschichtlich zum Ausdruck in unserer Zeit. Sie stellt ebenso eine Einseitigkeit dar. Es ist das Suchen der Geistigkeit allein in der äußeren Welt. Vor einigen Jahrzehnten trat es auf in Amerika drüben, wo, ich möchte sagen, der Antipode Tolstois zum Vorschein kam in Keely, vor dessen Seele das Ideal stand, einen Motor zu konstruieren, der nicht durch Dampf, nicht durch Elektrizität, sondern durch jene Wellen bewegt wird, die der Mensch selbst erregt in seinem Ton, in seiner Sprache. Denken Sie sich einen Motor, der so eingerichtet ist, daß er durch jene Wellen, die man erregt im Sprechen etwa, oder überhaupt als Mensch erregen kann mit seinem seelischen Leben, in Bewegung gesetzt wird. Es war noch ein Ideal, Gott sei Dank, daß es damals ein Ideal war, denn was wäre dieser Krieg geworden, wenn wirklich dieses Keelysche Ideal sich dazumal verwirklicht hätte! Verwirklicht sich das einmal, dann wird man erst sehen, was das Zusammenstimmen der Schwingungen an äußerer motorischer Kraft bedeutet. Das ist die andere Einseitigkeit. Das ist die BoasSäule. Zwischen beiden muß durchgegangen werden.
In den Symbolen, die aufbewahrt sind, ist viel, viel enthalten. Unsere Zeit ist dazu berufen, diese Dinge zu verstehen, in diese Dinge einzudringen. Der Kontrast, der einmal empfunden werden wird zwischen allem wahrhaft Geistigen und demjenigen, was sich heranwälzen wird, wenn der Keelysche Motor Realität sein wird, vom Westen, das wird noch ein ganz anderer Kontrast sein als derjenige, der da besteht zwischen Tolstois Anschauungen und dem, was sich vom Östen heranwälzt. Oh, darüber kann nicht weiter gesprochen werden!
Aber es ist notwendig, daß wir uns nach und nach ein wenig in die Geheimnisse des Werdeganges der Menschheit vertiefen, daß wir einsehen, wie wirklich in der Menschenweisheit durch die Jahrtausende hindurch symbolisch oder sonst dasjenige ausgedrückt ist, was einmal in verschiedenen Stufen Realität wird. Heute ist man bloß bei einem Tasten, und ich habe Sie in einer der letzten Betrachtungen aufmerksam gemacht darauf, wie ein Mensch wie Hermann Bahr, mit dem ich in der Jugend vielfach zusammenwar, jetzt, nachdem er dreiundfünfzig Jahre alt geworden ist und so viele Schriften geschrieben hat, auf der einen Seite in Goethe tappend, tastend sucht und gesteht, daß er jetzt erst anfängt, an Goethe heranzukommen, und auf der anderen Seite anfängt etwas davon zu begreifen, daß es noch so etwas wie eine Geisteswissenschaft neben den äußeren Wissenschaften gibt. Ich habe Ihnen angeführt, wie die Persönlichkeit des Franz in seinem Roman «Himmelfahrt», den er eben jetzt hat erscheinen lassen, gewissermaßen Bahrs eigenen Entwickelungsgang darstellt, darstellt, wie er durchgegangen ist durch die äußere Wissenschaft. Er war bei dem Botaniker Wiesner in Wien, war bei Ostwald im chemischen Laboratorium in Leipzig, war bei Schmoller im nationalökonomischen Seminar in Berlin, war bei Richet in Frankreich, um Psychologie und Psychiatrie zu studieren, war bei Freud in Wien — selbstverständlich, ein Mensch der Gegenwart ist auch bei Freud in Wien gewesen, wenn er durch die verschiedenen wissenschaftlichen Sensationen durchgeht -, war bei den Theosophen in London und so weiter. Sie wissen, ich habe Ihnen die betreffende Stelle ja vorgelesen: «So hat er die Wissenschaften abgesucht, erst Botaniker bei Wiesner, dann Chemiker bei Ostwald, in Schmollers Seminar, auf Richets Klinik, bei Freud in Wien, gleich darauf bei den Theosophen in London; und so die Kunst, als Maler, Radierer ...» und so weiter. Ja, aber nun sehen Sie, zu welchem Glauben ringt sich dieser Franz durch, der wirklich einer der tastenden Menschen der Gegenwart ist? Es ist sehr interessant, er tappt und tastet, da dämmert ihm so etwas auf, was dann mit den Worten ausgedrückt wird:
«Er war nicht mehr im Stande der geistigen Unschuld. Aber gab es nicht vielleicht eine Art zweiter Unschuld, wiedergewonnener Unschuld? Gab es nicht eine Frömmigkeit des seine Grenzen erkennenden, des gedemütigten Verstandes, einen Glauben der Wissenden, eine Hoffnung aus Verzweiflung? Lebten nicht in allen Zeiten einsame verborgene weise Männer, der Welt abgewendet, einander durch geheime Zeichen verbunden, im Stillen wunderbar wirkend mit einer fast magischen Kraft, in einer höheren Region über den Völkern, über den Bekenntnissen, im Grenzenlosen, im Raum einer reineren, Gott näheren Menschlichkeit? Gab es nicht auch heute noch, überall in der Welt zerstreut und versteckt, eine Ritterschaft des heiligen Grals? Gab es nicht Jünger einer vielleicht unsichtbaren, nicht zu betretenden, bloß empfundenen, aber überall wirkenden, alles beherrschenden, schicksalbestimmenden weißen Loge? Gab es nicht immer auf Erden eine sozusagen anonyme Gemeinschaft der Heiligen, die einander nicht kennen, nichts voneinander wissen und doch aufeinander, ja miteinander wirken, bloß durch die Strahlen ihrer Gebete? Schon in seiner theosophischen Zeit hatten ihn solche Gedanken viel beschäftigt, aber er hatte offenbar immer nur falsche Theosophen kennengelernt, vielleicht ließen sich die wahren nicht kennenlernen», und so weiter.
Diese Gedanken kommen dem Franz, nachdem er die Welt durchsaust hat, er überall war, wovon ich Ihnen gesagt habe, und dann wiederum zurückgekommen ist in seine Heimat - es ist wahrscheinlich Salzburg, um das es sich handelt. Also in seiner salzburgischen Heimat, da kommen ihm diese Gedanken. Es ist vielleicht nicht unbescheiden und soll nicht unbescheiden sein: Bei uns war er nicht, der Franz; aber man kann so ein bißchen die Gründe finden, warum er nicht bei uns war. Indem er so suchte nach Menschen, welche streben nach dem Geistesgut, erinnerte er sich eines Engländers, den er einmal kennengelernt hat in Rom. Er schildert auch diesen Engländer, den er in Rom kennengelernt hat:
«Es war ein kluger Mann in reifen Jahren, von guter Familie, reich, unabhängig, Junggeselle und ein richtiger Engländer, nüchtern, praktisch, unsentimental, ganz unmusikalisch, unkünstlerisch, ein derber, vergnügter Sinnenmensch, Angler, Ruderer, Segler, starker Esser, fester Zecher, ein Lebemann, den in seinem Behagen nur eine einzige Leidenschaft störte, die Neugierde, alles zu sehen, alles kennenzulernen, überall einmal gewesen zu sein, eigentlich in keiner anderen Absicht, als um schließlich, von welchem Ort immer man sprach, befriedigt sagen zu können: O ja!, das Hotel zu wissen, in dem ihn dort Cook untergebracht, und die Sehenswürdigkeiten, die er aufgesucht, die Menschen von Rang oder Ruhm, mit denen er verkehrt hatte. Um bequemer zu reisen und überall Zutritt zu haben, war ihm geraten worden, Freimaurer zu werden. Fr lobte die Nützlichkeit dieser Verbindung, bis er entdeckt zu haben glaubte, es müsse noch eine ähnliche, doch besser geleitete, mächtigere Verbindung höherer Art geben, der er nun durchaus beitreten wollte, wie er ja, wenn irgendwo noch ein anderer, besserer Cook aufzufinden gewesen wäre, sich natürlich an diesen gewendet hätte. Er ließ sich nicht ausreden, die Welt werde von einer ganz kleinen Gruppe geheimer Führer beherrscht, die sogenannte Geschichte von diesen verborgenen Männern gemacht, die selbst ihren nächsten Dienern unbekannt seien, wie diese wieder den ihren, und er behauptete, den Spuren dieser geheimen Weltregierung, dieser wahren Freimaurerei, von der die andere bloß eine höchst törichte Kopie mit unzulänglichen Mitteln, folgend, ihren Sitz in Rom gefunden zu haben, eben bei den Monsignori, von denen aber freilich auch wieder die meisten ahnungslose Statisten wären, deren Gedränge bloß die vier oder fünf wirklichen Herren der Welt zu verbergen hätte. Und Franz mußte heute noch über die komische Verzweiflung seines Engländers lachen, der nun das Pech hatte, niemals an den richtigen zu kommen, sondern immer wieder bloß an Statisten, aber sich dadurch nicht irremachen ließ, sondern immer nur noch mehr Respekt vor einer so wohlbehüteten, undurchdringlichen Verbindung bekam, in die er schließlich doch noch eingelassen zu werden wettete, und wenn er bis ans Ende seines Lebens in Rom bleiben und wenn er die Kutte nehmen oder etwa gar sich beschneiden lassen müßte, denn da er überall den unsichtbaren Fäden einer über die ganze Welt gesponnenen Macht nachgespürt hatte, war er nicht abgeneigt, auch die Juden sehr zu schätzen, und er sprach gelegentlich stockernst den Verdacht aus, ob nicht vielleicht im letzten, innersten Kreise dieses verborgenen Weltgewebes Rabbiner und Monsignori höchst einträchtig beisammen säßen, was ihm übrigens gleichgültig gewesen wäre, wenn sie nur auch ihn mitzaubern ließen.»
Da haben Sie eine Karikatur von dem, was ich Ihnen ja gesagt habe, wie es gleichsam ein Imperium in Imperio gibt, einen kleinen Kreis, der in die anderen seine Macht ausstrahlt. Nur stellt sich ihn der Engländer vor, und der Franz mit ihm, als eine Gemeinschaft der Rabbiner und Monsignori; das sind nun gerade diejenigen, die nicht darinnen sind! Aber Sie sehen, er tappt sich nur so durch. Warum tappt er denn eigentlich? Ja, er erinnert sich einmal wieder der schwärmerischen Schrullen des Engländers:
«Und viel später erst war er auf den Gedanken gekommen, ob denn nicht vielleicht auch jemand, dem derlei Fähigkeiten nicht angeboren wären, ihrer teilhaftig werden, ob man sich zu solchen Kräften erziehen, ob man sie durch Training erlernen könnte. Aber die theosophischen Übungen hatten ihn bald enttäuscht ...»
Die hat er aufgegeben! Sehen Sie, es gibt in unserer Gegenwart ein solches Tappen, Tasten. Menschen wie Bahr, sie kommen ins höhere Alter, da kommen sie darauf, und dann machen sie sich groteske Vorstellungen. Eine solche groteske Vorstellung ist da noch enthalten. Ja, sehen Sie, da ist nun dieser Franz eingeladen in seiner Heimat bei einem Domherrn. Dieser Domherr ist eine ganz geheimnisvolle Persönlichkeit, Salzburger Domherr, der in Salzburg eine große Wichtigkeit hat - die Stadt Salzburg ist nicht genannt, man erkennt sie nur -, eine größere Wichtigkeit als der Kardinal; denn die ganze Stadt spricht nicht mehr von dem Kardinal, aber von dem Domherrn: Der Dombherr, obwohl es dort ein Dutzend Domherren gibt, aber von dem Domherrn spricht man, so daß der Franz manchmal so die Idee hat, ob der nicht selber so einer ist von der weißen Loge. Sie wissen ja, man kann leicht zu solchen Anschauungen kommen. Nun, da ist er einmal in eine Gesellschaft beim Domherrn eingeladen, der Franz. Da sind manche Leute, und der Domherr ist wirklich ein sehr toleranter Mann, denn denken Sie, er ist katholischer Domherr und hat sich den jüdischen Bankier mit einem Jesuiten, dem Franz und einigen anderen und mit einem Franziskanermönch zusammen eingeladen. Es ist ein lustiges Mittagsmahl. Der jüdische Bankier ist notabene ein Bankier, dem fast alle Leute zu irgendwelchem klingenden Dank verpflichtet sind, der das aber wirklich alles selbstlos tut, denn er fordert in der Regel gar nicht, daß man ihm das wieder zurückgibt, was man sich scheinbar ausleiht von ihm, sondern er will nur alle Jahre bei so einem Herrn, wie der Domherr ist, eingeladen sein; das macht ihm Freude. Und bald sind der Jesuit und dieser jüdische Bankier in einem Gespräch darinnen, daß es dem Franz zu stark wird. Er geht weg, weil sie nun wirklich schon schändliche Witze machen, geht an die Bibliothek, und der Domherr geht ihm nach.
«Sie» - die Bibliothek - «war nicht groß, aber gewählt. Von Theologie nur gerade das Nötigste, die Bollandisten, viel Franziskanisches, Meister Eckhart, die geistlichen Übungen, Katharina von Genua, die Mystik von Görres und Möhlers Symbolik. Philosophie schon mehr: der ganze Kant, samt den Schriften der Kantgesellschaft, Deussens Upanischaden und seine Geschichte der Philosophie, Vaihingers Philosophie des Als Ob, und sehr viel Erkenntniskritisches. Dann die griechischen und römischen Klassiker, Shakespeare, Calderon, Cervantes, Dante, Macchiavell und Balzac im Original, aber von Deutschen nur Novalis und Goethe, dieser in verschiedenen Ausgaben, seine naturwissenschaftlichen Schriften in der Weimarer. Einen Band davon nahm Franz und fand viele Randbemerkungen von der Hand des Domherrn, der in diesem Augenblick den jungen Mönch und den Jesuiten verließ und zu ihm trat. Er sagte: «Ja die naturwissenschaftlichen Schriften Goethes kennt niemand>.»
Nun ist es charakteristisch, was der Domherr an den naturwissenschaftlichen Schriften Goethes findet, charakteristisch sowohl nach der einen Seite, nach dem, was nun wirklich drinnen ist und dem Domherrn nun auch davon aufleuchtet, wie demjenigen, was dem Domherrn nun aufleuchtet, weil er wirklich ein katholischer Domherr ist.
«Ja die naturwissenschaftlichen Schriften Goethes kennt niemand. Leider! Da sieht der alte Heide, der er doch durchaus gewesen sein soll, auf einmal ganz anders aus und dann versteht man doch auch den Schluß des Faust erst.»
Da hat er recht, der Domherr. Man kann den Schluß des «Faust» nicht verstehen, wenn man nicht die naturwissenschaftlichen Anschauungen Goethes kennt!
«Ich habe mir ja nie vorstellen können, Goethe tue da bloß auf einmal katholisch, nur zur malerischen Wirkung.»
Also der Domherr schlägt ihm natürlich immer ins Genick, aber das macht ja nichts.
«Dazu ist doch mein Respekt vor dem Dichter zu groß, vor jedem Dichter, um zu glauben, daß einer, gerade wenn er sein letztes Wort sagt, ein Kostüm anlegen sollte.»
Das glauben nämlich wirklich die meisten Leute, daß Goethe nun wirklich nur ein Kostüm anlegte, wie er die großartige, grandiose Schlußszene seines «Faust» geschrieben hat! «Aber in den naturwissenschaftlichen Schriften steht ja auf jeder Seite, wie katholisch Goethe war ...»
Nun, der Domherr nennt alles dasjenige, was er versteht und ihm liegt - das braucht uns ja nicht weiter zu genieren - katholisch.
«... wie katholisch Goethe war, unwissentlich vielleicht und jedenfalls ohne den rechten Mut dazu. Es liest sich, als hätte da jemand, mit den katholischen Wahrheiten unbekannt, sie sozusagen unversehens auf eigene Faust aus sich selber entdeckt, wobei es freilich ohne manche Gewaltsamkeiten und Wunderlichkeiten nicht abgeht, aber doch im großen Ganzen nichts Entscheidendes, Notwendiges und Wesentliches fehlt, selbst der Schuß von Aberglauben, Magie oder wie man das nennen will, was den richtigen geborenen Protestanten an unserer heiligen Lehre stets so verdächtig bleibt, selbst das nicht! Ich habe ja oft meinen eigenen Augen kaum getraut! Ist man aber bei Goethe dem kryptogamen Katholiken nur erst einmal auf der Spur, so sieht man ihn bald überall. Sein Vertrauen zum Heiligen Geiste, den er freilich lieber «Genius> nennt, sein tiefes Gefühl für die Sakramente, deren ihm nur noch zu wenige sind, sein Sinn für das «Ahndevolle, seine Begabung zur Ehrfurcht, gar aber, daß er, ganz unprotestantisch, sich niemals mit dem Glauben begnügt, sondern überall auf die Anerkennung Gottes durch die lebendige Tat, durch das fromme Werk dringt, gar dieses so seltene, höchste, schwierigste Begreifen, daß der Mensch nicht von Gott geholt werden kann, wenn er nicht selbst sich Gott holt, das Begreifen dieser furchtbaren menschlichen Freiheit, selber wählen zu müssen und die dargebotene Gnade nehmen, aber auch ausschlagen zu können, durch welche Freiheit allein die Gnade Gottes dem Menschen, der sich für sie entscheidet, der sie sich nimmt, erst zum eigenen Verdienste wird, das alles ist auch in seinen Übertreibungen, auch in seinen Verzerrungen noch so stockkatholisch ...»
Uns würde insbesondere das, was der Domherr Übertreibung nennt, interessieren; aber der Domherr nennt das katholisch.
«... das alles ist auch in seinen Übertreibungen, auch in seinen Verzerrungen noch so stockkatholisch, daß ich, wie du siehst,» — der Domherr duzt nämlich alle Leute, die er gern hat - «oft genug an den Rand die Stellen aus dem Tridentinum schreiben konnte, wo zuweilen fast mit denselben Worten dasselbe steht.»
Denken Sie sich einen katholischen Domherrn, der Beschlüsse aus dem Tridentinischen Konzil neben die Worte Goethes schreibt! Da haben Sie dasjenige, was durch die Menschheit geht, und was man nennen kann den Kern des geistigen Lebens, der allen Menschen gemeinschaftlich ist. Man darf das nur nicht als Phrase nehmen, sondern man muß es nehmen, wie die Sache gemeint sein kann. Und dann sagt der Domherr weiter:
«Und wenn Zacharias Werner erzählt hat, er sei durch einen Satz in den Wahlverwandtschaften katholisch gemacht worden, so glaube ich ihm das aufs Wort. Womit ich natürlich nicht leugnen will,» - jetzt schlägt der Domherr wieder durch! - «daß es daneben auch einen heidnischen, einen protestantischen, ja sogar einen beinahe jüdischen Goethe gibt,» — uns geniert das gar nicht, uns ist das gerade recht - «und ihn durchaus nicht als das Muster eines Katholiken reklamieren will ...»
Aber was jetzt der Domherr noch dazu sagt, kann uns schon ganz angenehm sein, wenigstens — ich will es niemand anderem aufdrängen, aber mir ist es ganz sympathisch -: Wenn er selbst katholisch wäre, «was er übrigens immer noch eher war, als der plattvergnügte Wald- und Wiesenmonist, den die neudeutschen Oberlehrer unter seinem Namen paradieren lassen ...»
Damit sind selbstverständlich Richard M. Meyer, Albert Bielschowsky, Engel, die neudeutschen Oberlehrer, die ihre neudeutschen Werke über Goethe geschrieben haben, gemeint.
Also Sie sehen, daß wir im Grunde genommien schon etwas treiben, wohin das geheime dunkle Sehnen der Zeit geht, und wohin es im Grunde gehen muß - eine ernste Sache.
Und nun erinnern Sie sich an etwas anderes noch. Erinnern Sie sich an einige der ersten Vorträge, die ich während dieser schicksaltragenden Zeit in unseren Zweigen gehalten habe, wo ich von einem erschütternden okkulten Erlebnis gesprochen habe, von jenem Erlebnis, daß die Seele des in Serajewo ermordeten Franz Ferdinand eine besondere Rolle spielt in der geistigen Welt. Die meisten von Ihnen werden sich erinnern, wie ich erzählt habe, daß sie dort gleichsam eine kosmische Bedeutung erlangt hat. Und jetzt erscheint dieser Roman, in diesen Wochen kauft man ihn, und da steht dieser Erzherzog Franz Ferdinand charakterisiert von einem Mann, der sich unter der Maske eines Blödlings als Knecht verdingt hat bei einem salzburgischen Gutsbesitzer, bei dem Bruder des Franz, der störrisch dort war und geprügelt werden mußte zur Arbeit. Als der Mord in Serajewo geschieht, da führt er sich so auf, daß ihn die Leute wiederum verprügeln, diesen Blasl, diesen Blödling. Denken Sie, er sagt, als er die Ermordung des Franz Ferdinand an der Kirchentüre angeschlagen findet: «Ja, so mußte er enden, anders kann’s nicht sein!» Na, was konnten die Leute anderes annehmen, als daß er mit in der Verschwörung ist, trotzdem der Mord in Serajewo stattgefunden hat, und der Blasl in Salzburg ist; aber das stört ja solche Leute nicht weiter, die in der Sache nachsuchen: Selbstverständlich ist er mit in der Serajewoer Verschwörung. Und da man spanisch geschriebene Bücher bei ihm findet, ist er selbstverständlich ein spanischer Anarchist! Nun kriegt dieses spanische Heft der Landesgerichtsrat oder was er ist, der natürlich kein Spanisch kann und der so schnell wie möglich, nachdem der Blasl gefesselt und ihm zugebracht worden ist, die ganze Sache loshaben will. Er soll nach Wien, dort sollen sie ausmachen, was zu geschehen hat mit diesem spanischen Anarchisten - er kann sich doch nicht blamieren! Er ist auch ein eifriger Almgänger und es ist vielleicht der letzte schöne Tag: also nur geschwind los! Er versteht nichts davon. Sicher ist es ja doch, daß es ein spanischer Anarchist ist. - Da erinnert er sich, daß ja der Franz in Spanien war - ich habe Ihnen erzählt, Bahr war ja auch in Spanien -, der kann das lesen, der soll ihm einen Auszug daraus machen. Nun nimmt der Franz dieses Manuskript, und was entdeckt er? Tiefste Mystik! Ganz und gar nichts Anarchistisches - tiefste Mystik. Es ist wirklich sehr viel Wunderschönes in diesem Manuskript. Also dieser Blasl, der Blödling, hat das geschrieben, weil er nämlich durch seine Mystik selber so geführt worden ist, daß er der Welt absterben wollte. Ich will diesen Weg selbstverständlich nicht verteidigen. Der Blasl ist eigentlich ein spanischer Infant. Da fließt nun zusammen diese Charakteristik des spanischen Infanten mit derjenigen des Erzherzogs Johann, der einmal vom österreichischen Kaiserhause weggegangen und in die Welt gegangen ist. Er konnte nicht den Österreicher charakterisieren, aber man sieht da die Gestalt durch; da kommt er darauf zu sagen, es ist ein spanischer Infant. Sie können sich denken, was das in Salzburg ist, Sie können sich den Umstand denken im armen Salzburg! Sie hatten einen Anarchisten eingefangen, in Fesseln gelegt gehabt — und jetzt ist es ein spanischer Infant! Aber der Mann, der den Thronfolger kannte, was sagt er nun vom Thronfolger, als er jetzt schon als Infant auftrat und als Mystiker?
«Der verwunschene, jetzt entzauberte Prinz, noch in seinen alten Kleidern und auch sonst ganz der alte, dennoch aber ein anderer, seit Franz wußte, daß es eine Verkleidung war, sagte lächelnd: «Vergeben Sie mir den Betrug, der ja für mein Gefühl eigentlich keiner war. Der Infant Don Tadeo bin ich längst nicht mehr. Wenn mich Umstände nötigen, ihn jetzt wieder eine Zeit vorzustellen, so fällt mir diese Rolle viel schwerer. Für mich war ich der alte Blasl wirklich, und wenn ich überhaupt log, so hätte ich mich belogen, nicht Sie. Daß ich Ihnen Ungelegenheiten bereiten würde, konnte ich nicht wissen. Es tut mir leid genug. Natürlich war’s das albernste Mißverständnis. Ich habe den Thronfolger, ohne freilich ihm je begegnet zu sein, genau gekannt, er ist mir sehr wert gewesen, wir waren in Verbindung, wenn auch nicht auf die hiesige Art.» — «Hiesige» meint er in bezug auf die Verbindung auf dem physischen Plan. — «Er hatte längst die Grenzen der irdischen Wirksamkeit überschritten und stand mit einem Fuß schon in dem anderen Raum des rein geistigen Tuns. Er mußte nun ganz hinüber, das wußte ich: um in Erfüllung zu gehen, hat er nicht mehr bleiben können. Von dort aus erst wird seine Tat geschehen. Ich wunderte mich nur, daß das Schicksal so lange mit ihm zögerte. Und als ich an jenem Sonntag aus der Kirche tretend, wo ich eben im Gebet wieder von neuem versichert worden war, die beklommene Menge fand, wußte ich gleich, daß er endlich befreit war. Was durch ihn zu geschehen hat, kann er von drüben erst verrichten. Hier hat er es nur versprechen können, sein Leben war nur eine Voranzeige. Jetzt erst kann es sich begeben. Ich habe mir ihn nie als einen konstitutionellen Monarchen denken können, mit Parlamentarismus und dem ganzen Humbug. Dafür war sein Format zu groß. Aber so hat er nun mit einem Schlag die Tat an sich gerissen. Dieser Tote wird jetzt erst leben, und von Grund auf. Das empfand ich bei der Nachricht, das meinten meine Worte.
«So mußte er einmal enden!» hat er gesagt bei dem Anschlag.
Ich muß sagen, ich war außerordentlich merkwürdig berührt, als ich vor einigen Tagen diese Sache hier in Bahrs «Himmelfahrt» las. Vergleichen Sie das, was uns jetzt im Roman entgegentritt, mit dem, was hier aus der Realität der geistigen Welt heraus gesagt worden ist! Versuchen Sie damit zu erkennen, wie tief in der Realität man mit der Geisteswissenschaft drinnensteckt! Wie diejenigen, die nach Erkenntnis suchen, wenn auch erst tappend, tapsend, doch auf diesen Wegen gehen, wie sie, die auf diese Wege kommen wollen, bis auf Einzelheiten hin an dasjenige herankommen, was hier entwickelt wird. Denn es ist kaum anzunehmen, daß nun auch das, was damals gesagt worden ist, durch irgendeines unserer Mitglieder dem Hermann Bahr verraten worden sein könnte. Aber selbst wenn das geschehen wäre, so ist es immerhin nicht zurückgewiesen, sondern angenommen worden.
Wir wollen nichts in Wirklichkeit umsetzen, was nur irgendeiner Liebhaberei entspricht. Wir wollen in Wirklichkeit umsetzen, was eine Notwendigkeit der Zeit ist und als eine Notwendigkeit sich aufs deutlichste ausprägt. Und wenn sich in der jüngsten Zeit so manches geltend macht, was Verleumdung ist, so ist man ja in unserer Zeit sehr geneigt, gerade sein Mitleid dorthin zu wenden, wo verleumdet wird. Viel weniger wendet man heute nach den berechtigten Seiten sein Mitgefühl hin, sondern gerade dort, wo Unrechtes getan wird, findet man, daß eigentlich diejenigen, die das Rechte getan hatten, zunächst die Hand zu reichen haben und denjenigen, die das Unrecht getan haben, zu kajoliieren ist. Wir erfahren es immer wieder und wiederum. Gerade innerhalb unserer Gemeinschaft erfahren wir das immer wieder. Meine lieben Freunde, heute ist nicht die Stimmung, und es ist mir auch nicht zu tun darum, auf derlei Dinge einzugehen. Ich gehe ja immer nur auf diese Dinge ein, wenn eine gewisse Notwendigkeit vorliegt. Aber mit einem lassen Sie mich noch schließen.
Ich habe in dem Büchelchen, das erschienen ist, aufmerksam darauf gemacht, wie einheitlich dasjenige ist, was in unserer Geisteswissenschaft gesucht wird vom Anfange unseres Wirkens an. Und ich habe darauf aufmerksam gemacht, welch starke Verleumdung es ist, wenn von irgendeiner Schwenkung die Rede ist, von irgend etwas, was im Widerspruch stünde mit dem, was im Anfange unserer Bewegung von uns geschehen ist. Sie finden da auf Seite 37 charakterisiert:
«Auf diese Aussprüche ]J. H. Fichtes» — die mir der Ausdruck einer neuzeitlichen Geistesströmung schienen, nicht bloß eines Einzelnen Meinung - «wies ich in einem Vortrage hin, den ich 1902 im Giordano Bruno-Bund hielt; damals, als der Anfang gemacht wurde mit dem, was gegenwärtig als anthroposophische Vorstellungsart sich darstellt,» und so weiter.
Da führe ich an, wie ich, bevor die Deutsche Sektion der Theosophical Society begründet worden ist, in Berlin einen Vortrag gehalten habe, in dem ich nicht aus Blavatsky und Besant, sondern aus dem neueren Geistesleben heraus, das unabhängig ist von Blavatsky und Besant, im Giordano Bruno-Bund in Anknüpfung an Goethe dieser Bewegung den Ausgangspunkt geben wollte. Und da wagen es heute Leute, zu sagen, daß der Name «Anthroposophie» bloß erfunden worden wäre, als wir uns, wie sie sagen, trennen wollten von der Theosophischen Gesellschaft!
«Man sieht daraus, daß eine Erweiterung des neuzeitlichen Weltanschauungsstrebens zu einer wahrhaften Betrachtung der geistigen Wirklichkeit ins Auge gefaßt war. Nicht ein Herausholen irgend welcher Anschauungen aus den Veröffentlichungen, die man damals aheosophische nannte (auch gegenwärtig noch so nennt) ward angestrebt, sondern eine Fortsetzung des Strebens, das bei den neueren Philosophen seinen Anfang genommen; aber bei diesen im Begrifflichen stecken geblieben war, und dadurch den Zugang in die wirkliche geistige Welt nicht erreicht hat» und so weiter. Es bringen die Dinge doch auch günstige Verhältnisse des Karmas. Und so brauche ich heute dasjenige, was ich vor einigen Wochen geschrieben habe, so daß Sie es jetzt gedruckt lesen können, nicht mehr bloß auf das Gedächtnis der einzelnen Wenigen zu stützen, die dazumal im Jahre 1902 noch meinen Vortrag im Giordano Bruno-Bund gehört haben, bevor die Deutsche Sektion begründet worden ist, sondern heute kann ich Ihnen das dokumentarisch nachweisen. Wie so die Dinge gehen, in diesen Tagen sind mir durch die Freundlichkeit eines lieben Mitgliedes, Fräulein HübbeSchleidens, die Briefe zugegangen, die ich dazumal vor und bei der Begründung der Deutschen Sektion an Dr. Hübbe-Schleiden geschickt habe. Jetzt nach seinem Tode sind mir diese Briefe zugegangen.
Im Oktober 1902 ist die Deutsche Sektion erst begründet worden. Dieser Brief ist vom 16. September 1902. In diesem Brief finden sich einige Worte, die ich Ihnen gern vorlesen würde. Verzeihen Sie, aber ich muß irgendwo meinen Ausgangspunkt nehmen. Es war ja damals vielfach die Rede davon, daß man sich verbinden soll mit dem Theosophen Franz Hartmann, und der hat dazumal gerade so etwas wie einen Kongreß abgehalten. Es soll wirklich nichts gegen Franz Hartmann heute gesagt werden, aber ich muß schon das vorlesen, was ich dazumal geschrieben habe:
«Friedenau-Berlin, 16. September 1902.
... Mag Hartmann sein Blech seinen Leuten erzählen; ich will einstweilen unsere Theosophie dorthin tragen, wo ich Leute zu finden glaube, die urteilsfähig sind. Haben wir erst die Verbindung mit der akademischen Jugend» - das ist ja natürlich noch mäßig erreicht! — «dann haben wir viel. Ich möchte bauen, nicht Ruinen ausflicken.» - So erschien mir diese theosophische Bewegung dazumal. — «Im Winter hoffe ich dann in der Theosophischen Bibliothek einen Kursus zu halten: «Elementare Theosophie.» - Diesen habe ich auch gehalten, und einer der Vorträge war gerade während der Begründung der Deutschen Sektion, und dieser Kursus, der Titel dieses Kursus, ist hier angeführt. - «Außerdem werde ich noch irgendwo einen fortlaufenden Kursus halten: ‹Anthroposophie oder die Verbindung von Moral, Religion und Wissenschaft›. Im Bruno-Bund hoffe ich ebenfalls einen Vortrag zu halten über ‹Brunos Monismus und die Anthroposophie›, Das ist nur so vorläufig Projektiertes. So müssen wir, nach meiner Ansicht, durchdringen.»
Das am 16. September 1902. Hier haben Sie das Dokument, meine lieben Freunde, das Ihnen beweisen kann, daß die Dinge nicht bloß hinterher behauptet werden, sondern daß sie wirklich so geschehen sind. Das ist auch immerhin ein günstiges Karma, daß in dieser Zeit, wo sich so viele Verleumdung gerade an unsere Sache knüpfte und immer mehr und mehr knüpfen wird, man wird zeigen können, wo das Recht ist.
The twelve senses of human beings
Before I come to the subject of our reflections today, I feel compelled to say a few words about the great and painful loss we have suffered on the physical plane in recent days. As you know, Mr. von Moltke's soul passed through the gates of death the day before yesterday. What this man meant to his people, the outstanding role he played in the great fateful events of our time, and the significant, profound impulses from human experience that inspired his actions and his work—it will be the task of others, and of history itself, to honor all of this. In our times, it is impossible to give a completely exhaustive picture of all the things that concern us today. But as I said, what others and history will say should not be discussed here today, although it is the deepest conviction of the person speaking to you here that future history will have a great deal to say about this man. But some of what is in my soul at this moment can and should be said here, even if it is necessary for me to say one or two things in a way that sounds more symbolic than literal, the literal meaning of which will only gradually become clear. This man and this man's soul stand before my soul like a symbol of our present and the immediate future, born out of the development of our time, truly a symbol of what is to happen and must happen in a very, very real, very true sense of the word.
We emphasize again and again that it is truly not the arbitrary decision of this or that individual to incorporate what we call spiritual science into the culture of the present and the near future, that this spiritual science is a necessity of the times, that the future cannot exist unless the substance of this spiritual science flows into human development. And here, my dear friends, you have the great and significant thing that should now come before our eyes as we remember the soul of Herr von Moltke. In him we had among us a man, a personality who stood at the forefront of the most effective, the most outwardly active life of the present, the life that has developed out of the past and has come to one of the greatest crises in our time, which humanity has had to live through in the course of its conscious history, a man who led the armies, stood at the center of the events that form the starting point of our fateful present and future. And at the same time, we have in him a soul, a man, a personality who was all of that and who sat here among us seeking knowledge, seeking truth, with the most sacred and ardent thirst for knowledge that can fill any soul of the present day.That is what should come before our souls. For with this, the soul of the personality who has just passed through the gates of death is, above all else that it is historically, an outstanding historical symbol. That he was among those who stood at the forefront of external life, that he served this external life and yet found the bridge to the spiritual life sought by this spiritual science, is a deeply significant historical symbol; it is what can place a feeling of desire in our soul, but not a personal desire, rather one born of the urge of the times, which can place the feeling, the desiring feeling, in our soul: May many and more and more who are in his situation do as he did! Therein lies the significant example that you should feel, that you should sense. How little this fact may be spoken of in outer life is of no importance; it is best if nothing at all is said about it; but it is a reality, and it is the effects that matter, not what is said. This fact is a reality of spiritual life. For this fact leads us to realize that this soul had within itself the feeling for the correct interpretation of the signs of the times. May many who today are perhaps still very far removed in one direction or another from what we here call spiritual science follow this soul.
That is why it is true that what flows and pulsates through our spiritual scientific stream has received from this soul as much as we could give it. And we should keep this well in mind, for I have often spoken of it here. It means that souls are now passing into the spiritual world who carry within them what they have absorbed here in spiritual science. When a soul in the midst of an active life passes through the gates of death and is now above in the light world, which is to be determined for us through our knowledge, when we know it is there above, when, in other words, what we are seeking is carried through the gates of death by such a soul, then it is through the union that it has entered into with such a soul that a deeply significant power in the spiritual world. And those souls who are here and understand me at this moment will never forget what I have meant here at this moment about the significance of the fact that this soul now takes with it into the spiritual world what has flowed through our spiritual science over the years, that it becomes power and effectiveness in it.
All this cannot, of course, be intended to trivialize the pain we feel at such a loss on the physical plane. Suffering and pain are justified in such cases. But suffering and pain only become great and powerful forces when they are permeated by a rational understanding of what lies at the root of the pain and suffering. And so take what I have said as an expression of the pain over the loss on the physical plane that the German people and humanity have experienced.
Once again, my dear friends, let us rise:
Spirit of your soul, active guardian!
May your wings bring
The pleading love of our souls
Your protection, trusted son of the spheres,
That, united with your power
Our plea may shine helpfully
Upon the soul that seeks it lovingly.
My dear friends, in recent times I have often spoken to you about how that which flows as occult substance, so to speak, through human becoming, through human evolution, has found external expression — and I have characterized this external expression more precisely in my recent reflections — an expression that is already quite external in many ways today in all kinds of more or less occult or symbolic fraternizations and associations. We now live in a time when what can be gained in occult knowledge from the spiritual world must be brought to humanity in a different way, in the way we have been trying to do for years, because the other ways have become obsolete, so to speak. Certainly, they will continue for a while, but in a certain sense they are obsolete. It is very important to understand this fact in the right way.
Now remember that one of the names I like to give to our spiritual science is anthroposophy, and that years ago I gave lectures here, in this very place, which I called lectures on anthroposophy. During our last discussion, I again alluded to these lectures on anthroposophy, namely that I emphasized at that time that human beings actually have twelve senses. And I explained last time that what is commonly believed about the nerve substance of the human being in connection with the senses is arranged according to the number twelve, because the human being is, in the deepest sense, a microcosm and reflects the macrocosm. Twelve constellations through which the sun passes in its annual cycle, out there in the macrocosm — twelve senses in which the human ego actually lives here on the physical plane! Certainly, things are somewhat different outside, in the succession of time: the sun moves from Aries through Taurus and so on until it returns through Pisces to Aries. The annual cycle of the sun passes through these twelve constellations. Everything, including what we carry within us, what we experience in our souls, is related to the outside world through our twelve senses. I listed these twelve senses at the time: the sense of touch, the sense of life, the sense of movement, the sense of balance, the sense of smell, the sense of taste, the sense of sight, the sense of warmth, the sense of hearing, the sense of speech, the sense of thinking, and the sense of the I. Our entire soul life moves around these twelve senses, just as the sun moves around the twelve constellations. But the external comparison goes even further. Consider that during the year the sun must pass through the constellations from Aries to Libra, that the sun passes, as it were, through the upper constellations during the day and through the lower constellations during the night, and that this passage of the sun through the lower constellations is initially hidden from the outer light. So it is with the life of the human soul in these twelve senses. The daytime senses are actually only approximately half of this, just as half of the constellations are daytime constellations and the other half are nighttime constellations.
You see, the sense of touch is really something we can say pushes people into the night life of the soul; for with the sense of touch we grope our way roughly through the outer world. And just try to explain to yourself how little the sense of touch has to do with daytime life, that is, with real conscious soul life. You can see this from the fact that you can easily store the impressions of the other senses in your memory, but try for yourself how little you can store the experiences of the sense of touch in your memory. Try how little you remember how some material felt when you touched it years ago, indeed, how little you even feel the need to remember it. It sinks down, just as the light fades and sinks into twilight when the sun goes down in the constellation of Libra and enters the region of the night constellations. And completely hidden, I would say, from the awake, open soul life are then the other senses.
The meaning of life: In very few soul-searching reflections of external science will you find any mention of this meaning of life. Usually, people only talk about the five senses, the senses of the day, of waking consciousness. But that need not concern us further. It is this meaning of life that is the sense through which we feel our life within us, but actually only when it is disturbed, when it becomes ill, when this or that hurts us or causes us pain; then the meaning of life comes and shows us: You are hurting here or there. When life is healthy, it is immersed in the background, just as light is not there when the sun is in Scorpio, or in any night constellation.
The same is true of the sense of movement. This sense of movement is what enables us to perceive how facts unfold within us when we set something in motion. Only now is external science beginning to speak of this sense of movement. Only now does it know that the way in which the joints press against each other—for example, when I bend my finger, this joint surface presses against the other—is how the movement our body performs is perceived. We walk, but we walk unconsciously. This is based on a sense: the perception of the ability to move, which is in turn cast into the night of consciousness.
Take the sense of balance, for example. We actually only acquire it gradually in life. But we do not think about it because it lies in the night of consciousness. The child does not yet have it; it crawls on the floor. The sense of balance is only acquired. Science has only discovered the sensory organ for the sense of balance in the last few decades. I have spoken of the three semicircular canals in the ear, which are perpendicular to each other in the three directions of space. If these are damaged in us, we become dizzy, that is, we lose our balance. Just as we have the outer ear for hearing and the eye for seeing, we have the three semicircular canals for balance, which are connected to the ear only by a special remnant of the relationship between sound and balance. But they are there inside the rock bone cavity of the ear. They are three semicircles formed by tiny little bones. But they only need to be damaged, and the ability to maintain balance is gone. We only acquire the receptivity for this sense of balance during our early childhood, but it is submerged in the night of consciousness. We do not notice it.
Then twilight comes and dawns upon our consciousness. But think how little those senses that are still somewhat hidden—the senses of smell and taste—actually have to do with our soul life in a higher sense. We have to immerse ourselves in physical life in order to really live into smell. The sense of taste is already a strong twilight for human beings, as it is already dawning on our consciousness. But you can still perform the soul experiment I mentioned earlier for the sense of touch: you will find it very difficult to remember the perceptions of the senses of smell and taste. And only when the soul life sinks deeper into the unconscious does the sense of smell come into play a little for the conscious soul life. You may know that there have been composers who were particularly inspired by coming into contact with the same pleasant smell that they had once experienced while creating a piece of music. The pleasant smell does not dawn on the memory, but the same soul processes that are connected with the sense of smell dawn on the full consciousness. The sense of taste is already a strong twilight for most people. But most people show that the sense of taste still lies at least in the twilight of the soul life, not yet in the full light of the soul life; for very few people are satisfied with the purely soul impression of the sense of taste, otherwise we would have to be just as happy when we remember something that tasted good to us as when we taste it again. And that is not the case for most people, as you know. They want to have it again; they are not satisfied with just remembering what tasted good to them.
But then we come up with the sense of sight, where the sun of consciousness rises; we come into full waking consciousness with the sense of sight. The sun rises higher and higher. It comes to the sense of warmth, to the sense of sound, from the sense of sound to the sense of speech. The sun is at its zenith. Between the sense of sound and the sense of speech is the midday of the soul life. Now come the sense of thinking and the sense of the I. The sense of the I is not the sense of one's own I, but the perception of the I in others; of course it is perception, it is sense! The consciousness of the I, of one's own I, is something completely different. I explained this in detail in the Anthroposophy lectures. It is not important here that one knows one's own I, but that one stands face to face with another human being and that he opens his I to one. The perception of the I of another is the sense of I, not the perception of one's own I.
These are the twelve senses before which the soul life of the human being appears, so to speak, like the sun before each of the twelve constellations. This testifies to you that the human being is truly a microcosm in the truest sense of the word. Our present science is still largely ignorant of such things. Our present science still accepts the sense of sound, but no longer the sense of speech, although the spoken word in its higher meaning could never be grasped by the mere sense of sound. To this must be added the sense of language, the sense of the meaning of what is expressed in words. And the sense of language is not the same as the sense of thought, and the sense of thought is not the same as the sense of the I. I would like to give you an example of how our age is mistaken in this regard. Eduard von Hartmann, who really searched very, very hard, begins his book “Grundriß der Psychologie” (Outline of Psychology) with the following words — he puts these words down as if they were self-evident: “The starting point of psychology is the psychic phenomena, and for each person his own, since only these are immediately given to him, and no one can look into the consciousness of another.” The first sentences of a treatise on psychology by one of the most important philosophers of the immediate present assume that one denies the senses: the sense of language, the sense of thought, the sense of the self. One knows nothing about them. And just think that here we have a case where absurdity, the most absolute nonsense, must become scientific in order to deny things! Precisely when one is not confused by this science, one can very easily see the errors it makes. For this psychology says: You cannot see into the soul of another; you can only interpret it from its expressions. So think about it: one is supposed to interpret the soul of another from its expressions! If someone says a kind word to you, you have to interpret it first! Is that true? No, it is not true! The kind word has an immediate effect, like the color that affects your eye! And that which lives as love in the soul is carried on the wings of the word into your soul, just as the color is carried into your eye. It is immediate perception; there is no question of interpretation. Science must first lock us into our egoism with its nonsense in order to prevent us from noticing that, by living with our fellow human beings—and I have said that this depends on the sense of the I, the sense of thinking, and the sense of language—we live directly with their souls. We live with the souls of others as we live with colors and sounds, and anyone who does not understand this knows nothing at all about spiritual life. It is most important to see through such things. Today, detailed theories are being spread that all impressions we receive from other people are actually only symbolic and are interpreted from their expressions. But there is nothing true in this.
But now form the image before your soul: the rising of the sun, the appearance of light, and then the setting of the sun. This is the macrocosmic image of the microcosmic soul life of human beings, which moves, but not in a cycle, rather as required by the human soul life, within the twelve constellations of the soul life, that is, the twelve senses. Every time we perceive the ego of another person, we are on the day side of the soul sun. If we were to dive into ourselves, perceive our inner balance, our movement — we do not perceive it because it is the night side — we would be on the night side of the soul life. And now it will no longer seem so unlikely to you when I tell you that as human beings pass through the time between death and a new birth, those senses that draw inward here, that sink here, become particularly important to them because they become spiritualized, while the senses that rise here sink more. Just as the sun rises, so the human soul rises, I would say, between the sense of taste and the sense of sight, and sinks again in death. If, as you can see from various descriptions I have given earlier, which you can read in the cycles, we find a soul over there in the time between death and a new birth, we find it — even in The Secret Science you will find this already hinted at — as if it were inwardly united with us. We do not perceive it by standing outside it and receiving the impression of its ego from outside, but through union. There the sense of touch becomes entirely spiritual. And what now remains subconscious, nocturnal, I might say: the sense of balance, the sense of movement, all of this plays a spiritualized role in the life between death and a new birth.
It is really true that we move through life as a whole, just as the sun moves through the twelve constellations. We enter our life when our consciousness for the senses rises, as it were, at one world pillar and sets at the other world pillar. We pass these pillars when we enter the starry sky, as it were, from the night side to the day side. This is what these occult or symbolic societies always sought to point out by calling the pillar of birth, which man passes through when he enters the life of the day side, Jakim. Ultimately, you must look for this pillar in the sky. And what is the outer world during the life between death and a new birth are the perceptions of the sense of touch spread throughout the whole world, where we do not touch, but are touched, where we feel how spiritual beings touch us everywhere, while we touch the other here. During the life between death and rebirth, we live in the movement within it, so that we feel this movement as if a blood cell or a muscle within us were feeling its own movement. In the macrocosm, we feel ourselves moving between death and rebirth, we feel the balance, and in the life of the whole, we feel ourselves within it. Here, our life is confined to our skin, but there we feel ourselves within the whole, within all life, and in every situation we feel ourselves giving ourselves balance. Here, the earth's gravity and our particular physical constitution give us balance, and we are generally unaware of this. At all times we feel balance in the life between death and rebirth. This is an immediate sensation, the other side of soul life. Man enters earthly life through Jakim, assured by Jakim: That which is outside in the macrocosm now lives within you; you are now a microcosm, for that is what the word “Jakim” means: within you is the divine poured out over the world.
Boaz, the other pillar: entry into the spiritual world through death. What is summarized in the word Boaz means approximately: What I have sought within myself until now, the strength, I will find poured out over the whole world, and in it I will live. But one can only understand such things if one penetrates them through spiritual knowledge. They are symbolically hinted at in the symbolic brotherhoods. They are hinted at more in our fifth post-Atlantean period so that they are not completely lost to humanity, so that later people may come who will also understand what has been preserved in words.
But you see, everything that lives outwardly in our world is also a reflection of what exists in the macrocosm outside. Just as our soul life is a microcosm in the sense I have indicated to you, so too is the soul life of humanity, in a sense, formed from the macrocosm. And for our time, it is very significant to have, in a sense, the two images of the two pillars I have spoken of provided in our history. These pillars represent life in a one-sided way, because life only exists in a state of balance between the two. Neither is Jachin life—because it is the transition from the spiritual to the physical—nor is Boaz life, because it is the transition from the physical to the spiritual. Balance is what matters. And this is so difficult for people to understand. People always seek one side, always the extreme; they do not seek balance. That is why, in a sense, two pillars are truly erected for our time, but if we understand our time correctly, we must walk through the middle, neither fantasizing about one pillar nor the other as the fundamental force of humanity, but walking through the middle! We really have to grasp what is actually there in reality, not brood over it in that thoughtless life in which today's materialism broods. If you look for the pillar of Jachin today, you will find it in our present time. The pillar of Jachin is present in a very important man who is no longer alive, who has already died, but it is there: it exists in Tolstoyism.
Consider that in Tolstoy there appeared a man who basically wanted to distract all people from outer life and point them entirely to the inner life — I spoke about Tolstoy in the early days of our anthroposophical movement — who wanted to point entirely to what goes on within the human being. Tolstoy did not see the spirit in external activity, a one-sidedness that struck me as particularly characteristic when I spoke about Tolstoy at that time—it was one of the very first lectures on Tolstoy that were given here in the early years. At that time, this lecture could still be shown to Tolstoy through a friend of ours. Tolstoy understood the first two-thirds, but not the last third, because it spoke of reincarnation and karma, which he did not understand. He portrayed one-sidedness, the complete suppression of external life. And how infinitely painful it is to see him portray such one-sidedness! Just think of the tremendous contrast that exists between the Tolstoyan views, which dominate a large part of Russia's intellectuals, and what is now rolling over from there again in these days. Oh, it is one of the most terrible contrasts imaginable! That is one-sidedness.
The other, the Boaz pillar, is also expressed historically in our time. It also represents one-sidedness. It is the search for spirituality solely in the external world. A few decades ago, it appeared in America, where, I would say, Tolstoy's antipode emerged in Keely, whose soul was driven by the ideal of constructing a motor that was not powered by steam or electricity, but by the waves that humans themselves generate in their sound, in their speech. Imagine a motor that is designed in such a way that it is set in motion by those waves that are excited, for example, when we speak, or that we can excite as human beings with our soul life. It was still an ideal, thank God it was an ideal at that time, for what would this war have become if Keely's ideal had really been realized back then! Once that happens, we will see what the harmonization of vibrations in external motor power really means. That is the other one-sidedness. That is the Boas column. We must pass through both.
The symbols that have been preserved contain a great deal. Our time is called upon to understand these things, to penetrate them. The contrast that will one day be felt between everything that is truly spiritual and that which will come rolling in when Keely's motor becomes reality in the West will be quite different from the contrast that exists between Tolstoy's views and that which is coming rolling in from the East. Oh, we cannot speak further about this!
But it is necessary that we gradually delve a little deeper into the mysteries of the development of humanity, that we understand how truly human wisdom throughout the millennia has symbolically or otherwise expressed that which will one day become reality in various stages. Today we are merely groping, and in one of my recent reflections I drew your attention to how a man like Hermann Bahr, with whom I spent much time in my youth, now that he has reached the age of fifty-three and has written so many works, is on the one hand groping and searching in Goethe and admitting that he is only now beginning to approach Goethe, and on the other hand is beginning to understand that there is still such a thing as a spiritual science alongside the external sciences. I have shown you how the personality of Franz in his novel Himmelfahrt (Ascension), which he has just published, represents, in a sense, Bahr's own development, how he went through external science. He was with the botanist Wiesner in Vienna, with Ostwald in the chemical laboratory in Leipzig, with Schmoller in the national economics seminar in Berlin, with Richet in France to study psychology and psychiatry, with Freud in Vienna—of course, a person of the present day would also have been to see Freud in Vienna if he were going through the various scientific sensations—with the Theosophists in London, and so on. You know, I read you the relevant passage: “So he explored the sciences, first as a botanist with Wiesner, then as a chemist with Ostwald, in Schmoller's seminar, at Richet's clinic, with Freud in Vienna, and immediately afterwards with the theosophists in London; and then art, as a painter, engraver...” and so on. Yes, but now you see what belief this Franz, who is truly one of the groping people of the present, struggles to arrive at? It is very interesting, he gropes and feels his way, and then something dawns on him, which is then expressed in the words:
“He was no longer in a state of spiritual innocence. But was there not perhaps a kind of second innocence, a regained innocence? Was there not a piety of the humble mind that recognized its limits, a faith of the knowledgeable, a hope born of despair? Did not lonely, hidden wise men live in all ages, turned away from the world, connected to each other by secret signs, working silently and wonderfully with an almost magical power, in a higher region above the peoples, above the creeds, in the boundless, in the space of a purer humanity closer to God? Is there not still today, scattered and hidden throughout the world, a knighthood of the Holy Grail? Were there not disciples of a perhaps invisible, inaccessible, merely sensed, but everywhere active, all-powerful, destiny-determining white lodge? Had there not always been on earth a kind of anonymous community of saints who did not know each other, knew nothing about each other, and yet worked on each other, indeed with each other, merely through the rays of their prayers? Such thoughts had already occupied him greatly during his theosophical period, but he had apparently always met only false theosophists; perhaps the true ones could not be known, and so on.
These thoughts come to Franz after he has traveled the world, been everywhere I have told you about, and then returned to his homeland—it is probably Salzburg. So, in his Salzburg homeland, these thoughts come to him. It is perhaps not immodest, and is not meant to be immodest: He wasn't with us, Franz; but one can find some reasons why he wasn't with us. In his search for people who strive for intellectual enrichment, he remembered an Englishman he once met in Rome. He also describes this Englishman he met in Rome:
“He was a clever man in his mature years, from a good family, rich, independent, a bachelor, and a true Englishman, sober, practical, unsentimental, completely unmusical, unartistic, a coarse, cheerful sensualist, an angler, a rower, a sailor, a hearty eater, a heavy drinker, a bon vivant, whose comfort was disturbed by only one passion, a curiosity to see everything, to know everything, to have been everywhere, with no other purpose than to be able to say, with satisfaction, of whatever place one spoke: Oh yes, to know the hotel where Cook had put him up, and the sights he had visited, the people of rank or fame with whom he had associated. In order to travel more comfortably and have access everywhere, he had been advised to become a Freemason. Fr praised the usefulness of this connection until he believed he had discovered that there must be a similar, but better managed, more powerful connection of a higher order, which he now wanted to join, just as he would naturally have turned to another, better Cook if he had been able to find one. He would not be dissuaded from his belief that the world was ruled by a very small group of secret leaders, that so-called history was made by these hidden men, who were unknown even to their closest servants, who in turn were unknown to theirs, And he claimed to have found the traces of this secret world government, this true Freemasonry, of which the other was merely a highly foolish copy with inadequate means, which had found its seat in Rome, precisely among the Monsignori, most of whom, however, were also unsuspecting extras, whose crowds merely served to conceal the four or five real masters of the world. And Franz still had to laugh today at the comical desperation of his Englishman, who now had the misfortune of never getting to the right person, but always ending up with mere extras, yet he did not allow himself to be misled, but only gained more respect for such a well-protected, impenetrable connection, into which he finally bet that he would be admitted, and if he had to stay in Rome until the end of his life and take the cowl or even be circumcised, because, having traced the invisible threads of a power spun across the whole world, he was not averse to holding the Jews in high esteem, and he occasionally expressed the suspicion, with a straight face, that perhaps in the innermost circles of this hidden web of the world, rabbis and monsignors sat together in perfect harmony, which, incidentally, would have been of no consequence to him if they had only let him be part of it. innermost circles of this hidden world network, rabbis and monsignors sat together in perfect harmony, which, incidentally, would have been of no concern to him if they had only let him join in their magic."
There you have a caricature of what I told you, how there is, as it were, an empire within an empire, a small circle that radiates its power into the others. Only the Englishman, and the Frenchman with him, imagine it as a community of rabbis and monsignors; those are precisely the ones who are not in it! But you see, he is just groping his way through. Why is he groping his way? Yes, he remembers once again the enthusiastic whims of the Englishman:
"And much later it occurred to him that perhaps someone who was not born with such abilities could acquire them, that one could train oneself to such powers, that one could learn them through practice. But the theosophical exercises soon disappointed him..."
He gave them up! You see, there is such groping and feeling around in our present time. People like Bahr, they reach an advanced age, they come up with these ideas, and then they form grotesque notions. Such a grotesque notion is still contained there. Yes, you see, Franz is invited to his home by a canon. This canon is a very mysterious personality, a canon of Salzburg, who is very important in Salzburg — the city of Salzburg is not named, but you can recognize it — more important than the cardinal; for the whole city no longer talks about the cardinal, but about the canon: The cathedral canon, although there are a dozen cathedral canons there, but people talk about the cathedral canon, so that Franz sometimes has the idea that he himself is one of the white lodge. You know, it's easy to come to such conclusions. Now Franz is invited to a party at the canon's house. There are quite a few people there, and the canon is a very tolerant man, because, just think, he is a Catholic canon and has invited the Jewish banker, a Jesuit, Franz, and a few others, including a Franciscan monk. It is a merry lunch. The Jewish banker is, incidentally, a banker to whom almost everyone owes some kind of gratitude, but he does everything selflessly, because he doesn't usually demand that people pay him back what they seem to borrow from him; he just wants to be invited every year by a gentleman like the canon; that gives him pleasure. Soon the Jesuit and the Jewish banker are deep in conversation, and Franz finds it too much. He leaves because they are now making truly scandalous jokes, goes to the library, and the canon follows him.
“It” — the library — ”was not large, but well chosen. In theology, only the bare essentials, the Bollandists, a lot of Franciscan works, Meister Eckhart, the spiritual exercises, Catherine of Genoa, the mysticism of Görres and Möhlers symbolism. In philosophy, there was more: the complete works of Kant, including the writings of the Kant Society, Deussen's Upanishads and his history of philosophy, Vaihinger's philosophy of “as if,” and a great deal of epistemological criticism. Then the Greek and Roman classics, Shakespeare, Calderon, Cervantes, Dante, Machiavelli, and Balzac in the original, but of the Germans only Novalis and Goethe, the latter in various editions, his scientific writings in the Weimar edition. Franz took one volume and found many marginal notes in the hand of the canon, who at that moment left the young monk and the Jesuit and came over to him. He said, “Yes, no one knows Goethe's scientific writings.”
Now it is characteristic what the canon finds in Goethe's scientific writings, characteristic both in terms of what is actually in them and what now dawns on the canon, as well as in terms of what dawns on the canon because he is truly a Catholic canon.
“Yes, no one knows Goethe's scientific writings. Unfortunately! Then the old heathen, which he is said to have been, suddenly looks quite different, and then one understands the conclusion of Faust.”
The canon is right. You can't understand the ending of Faust if you don't know Goethe's scientific views!
“I could never imagine that Goethe was just pretending to be Catholic for the sake of a picturesque effect.”
Of course, the canon always hits him on the back of the neck, but that doesn't matter.
"My respect for the poet, for every poet, is too great to believe that someone, especially when he is saying his last words, should put on a costume.”
Most people really believe that Goethe was just putting on a costume when he wrote the magnificent, grandiose final scene of his “Faust”! “But in the scientific writings, every page says how Catholic Goethe was...”
Well, the canon calls everything he understands and likes Catholic—that need not embarrass us any further.
”... how Catholic Goethe was, perhaps unknowingly and in any case without the right courage. It reads as if someone unfamiliar with Catholic truths had, so to speak, discovered them on his own, admittedly not without some violence and oddities, but on the whole nothing decisive, necessary, or essential is missing, not even the touch of superstition, magic, or whatever you want to call it, which always remains so suspicious to true-born Protestants in our holy doctrine, not even that! I often could hardly believe my own eyes! But once you are on the trail of Goethe, the cryptogamous Catholic, you soon see him everywhere. His trust in the Holy Spirit, whom he prefers to call “Genius,” his deep feeling for the sacraments, of which he considers there are too few, his sense of the “ominous,” his gift for reverence, and even the fact that, quite un-Protestant, never content with faith, but everywhere pressing for the recognition of God through living deeds, through pious works, even this rare, supreme, most difficult understanding that man cannot be brought to God unless he brings himself to God, the understanding of this terrible human freedom of having to choose for oneself and to be able to accept the grace offered, but also to reject it, through which freedom alone the grace of God becomes the merit of the person who chooses it and takes it, all this is still, even in its exaggerations and distortions, so staunchly Catholic ..."
We would be particularly interested in what the canon calls exaggeration; but the canon calls it Catholic.
“... all this, even in its exaggerations and distortions, is still so staunchly Catholic that, as you can see,” — the canon addresses everyone he likes informally — “I could often write in the margins the passages from the Council of Trent where the same thing is said in almost the same words.”
Imagine a Catholic canon writing decisions from the Council of Trent next to Goethe's words! There you have what is passing through humanity and what can be called the core of spiritual life that is common to all people. One must not take this as mere rhetoric, but take it as it is meant. And then the canon continues:
“And when Zacharias Werner said that he was made a Catholic by a sentence in Elective Affinities, I believe him to the letter. By which I do not mean to deny,” — now the canon shows his true colors again! — “that there is also a pagan, a Protestant, even an almost Jewish Goethe,” — that doesn't bother us at all, it suits us just fine — “and I certainly don't want to claim him as a model Catholic...”
But what the canon adds to this is quite agreeable to us, at least — I won't impose it on anyone else, but I find it quite appealing —: If he himself were Catholic, “which, incidentally, he still was more than the shallow, pleasure-seeking monist that the New German schoolmasters parade under his name...”
This refers, of course, to Richard M. Meyer, Albert Bielschowsky, Engel, the New German schoolmasters who wrote their New German works on Goethe.
So you see that, basically, we are already moving in the direction of the secret, dark longing of the times, and in the direction in which it must go – a serious matter.
And now remember something else. Remember some of the first lectures I gave during that fateful time in our branches, where I spoke of a shocking occult experience, of the experience that the soul of Franz Ferdinand, who was assassinated in Sarajevo, plays a special role in the spiritual world. Most of you will remember how I told you that it had, as it were, acquired a cosmic significance there. And now this novel appears, people are buying it in these weeks, and there is Archduke Franz Ferdinand, characterized by a man who, under the guise of a fool, has hired himself out as a servant to a Salzburg landowner, the brother of Franz, who was stubborn there and had to be beaten to work. When the murder in Sarajevo happens, he behaves in such a way that the people beat him up again, this Blasl, this fool. Imagine, when he finds the news of Franz Ferdinand's assassination posted on the church door, he says: “Yes, that's how he had to end, it couldn't be any other way!” Well, what else could people assume but that he was involved in the conspiracy, even though the assassination took place in Sarajevo and Blasl is in Salzburg? But that doesn't bother people who are investigating the matter: of course he was involved in the Sarajevo conspiracy. And since Spanish books are found in his possession, he is obviously a Spanish anarchist! Now this Spanish booklet is handed over to the district court judge, or whatever he is, who of course doesn't know Spanish and wants to get rid of the whole thing as quickly as possible after Blasl has been handcuffed and brought to him. He is to go to Vienna, where they will decide what to do with this Spanish anarchist—he can't embarrass himself! He is also an avid alpine hiker, and it is perhaps the last beautiful day, so hurry up! He doesn't understand any of it. Surely it's obvious that it's a Spanish anarchist. Then he remembers that Franz was in Spain—I told you, Bahr was in Spain too—he can read it, he should make him an excerpt. Now Franz takes this manuscript, and what does he discover? Profound mysticism! Nothing anarchist at all—deep mysticism. There is really a great deal of beauty in this manuscript. So this Blasl, this fool, wrote it because he was so led by his mysticism that he wanted to die and leave the world. I do not, of course, want to defend this way of life. Blasl is actually a Spanish infant. This characteristic of the Spanish infant now merges with that of Archduke Johann, who once left the Austrian imperial house and went out into the world. He couldn't characterize the Austrian, but you can see the figure through it; he comes to say that it is a Spanish infant. You can imagine what that means in Salzburg, you can imagine the circumstances in poor Salzburg! They had captured an anarchist, put him in chains—and now he is a Spanish infant! But what does the man who knew the heir to the throne say about him now that he appears as an infant and a mystic?
“The enchanted prince, now disenchanted, still in his old clothes and otherwise quite the same, yet different since Franz knew that it was a disguise, said with a smile: 'Forgive me for the deception, which I did not really consider to be such. I am no longer the Infante Don Tadeo. If circumstances now compel me to introduce him again for a time, this role is much more difficult for me. For me, I was really the old Blasl, and if I lied at all, I lied to myself, not to you. I could not have known that I would cause you inconvenience. I am sorry enough. Of course, it was the most ridiculous misunderstanding. I knew the heir to the throne very well, without ever having met him, of course. He was very dear to me, we were in contact, though not in the local sense.” ‘Local’ he means in reference to contact on the physical plane. ”He had long since crossed the boundaries of earthly activity and already had one foot in the other realm of purely spiritual activity. He had to cross over completely, I knew that: in order to fulfill his destiny, he could not remain any longer. Only from there would his deed be accomplished. I was only surprised that fate had hesitated so long with him. And when I left the church that Sunday, where I had just been reassured in prayer, and found the anxious crowd, I knew immediately that he was finally free. What must happen through him can only be accomplished from the other side. Here he could only promise it; his life was only a foretaste. Only now can it happen. I could never imagine him as a constitutional monarch, with parliamentarianism and all that humbug. He was too great for that. But now he has seized the deed in one fell swoop. This dead man will now live, and from the ground up. That was my feeling when I heard the news, that was what my words meant.
“This is how it had to end!” he said at the time of the attack.
I must say, I was extremely moved when I read this passage in Bahr's “Ascension” a few days ago. Compare what we now encounter in the novel with what has been said here from the reality of the spiritual world! Try to recognize how deeply one is immersed in reality with spiritual science! How those who seek knowledge, even if only groping, stumbling, yet walking on these paths, how they who want to come to these paths, approach, down to the details, what is being developed here. For it is hardly conceivable that what was said at that time could have been betrayed to Hermann Bahr by any of our members. But even if that had happened, it was not rejected, but accepted.
We do not want to implement anything in reality that is merely a hobby. We want to implement in reality what is a necessity of the times and what is clearly emerging as a necessity. And if, in recent times, many things have been asserted that are slanderous, then in our time we are very inclined to turn our sympathy precisely to those who are being slandered. Today, people are much less inclined to turn their sympathy toward the justified side; rather, when injustice is done, they feel that those who have done what is right should be the first to extend a hand and appease those who have done wrong. We experience this again and again. We experience this again and again within our community. My dear friends, today is not the time, and it is not my intention to go into such matters. I only ever address these issues when there is a certain necessity to do so. But let me conclude with one more point.
In the little book that has been published, I pointed out how consistent what we have been seeking in our spiritual science has been from the very beginning of our work. And I pointed out what a strong slander it is to speak of any kind of shift, of anything that would contradict what we did at the beginning of our movement. You will find the following characterization on page 37:
“I pointed out these statements by J. H. Fichte” — which seemed to me to be the expression of a modern spiritual current, not merely the opinion of an individual — “in a lecture I gave in 1902 at the Giordano Bruno Society, at the time when the beginnings were being made of what is now known as the anthroposophical way of thinking,” and so on.
I mention how, before the German Section of the Theosophical Society was founded, I gave a lecture in Berlin in which I sought to give this movement its starting point not in Blavatsky and Besant, but in the newer spiritual life that is independent of Blavatsky and Besant, in the Giordano Bruno League, in connection with Goethe. And today people dare to say that the name “anthroposophy” was merely invented when we wanted to separate ourselves from the Theosophical Society, as they say!
"It can be seen from this that an expansion of the modern worldview toward a true contemplation of spiritual reality was envisaged. The aim was not to extract any particular views from the publications that were then called antheosophical (and are still called that today), but to continue the striving that had begun with the newer philosophers, but which had remained stuck in the conceptual realm and thus had not gained access to the real spiritual world,” and so on. Things also bring favorable conditions of karma. And so today I no longer need to rely solely on the memory of the few individuals who heard my lecture in the Giordano Bruno Association in 1902, before the German Section was founded, in order to present what I wrote a few weeks ago, which you can now read in print. Today I can provide you with documentary evidence. As things happen, in recent days, through the kindness of a dear member, Miss Hübbe-Schleiden, I have received the letters that I sent to Dr. Hübbe-Schleiden before and at the time of the founding of the German Section. Now, after his death, these letters have come to me.
The German Section was only founded in October 1902. This letter is dated September 16, 1902. In this letter there are a few words that I would like to read to you. Forgive me, but I must begin somewhere. At that time, there was much talk of joining forces with the theosophist Franz Hartmann, who had just held something like a congress. I really do not wish to say anything against Franz Hartmann today, but I must read aloud what I wrote at the time:
Friedenau-Berlin, September 16, 1902....
Let Hartmann tell his people his nonsense; for the time being, I want to take our Theosophy to where I believe I can find people who are capable of judgment. Once we have established contact with the academic youth” — which, of course, has only been achieved to a limited extent! — ”then we will have a lot. I want to build, not patch up ruins.” That is how this theosophical movement appeared to me at the time. ‘In the winter, I hope to hold a course in the Theosophical Library: ’Elementary Theosophy.' I did hold this course, and one of the lectures was given just as the German Section was being founded, and this course, the title of this course, is listed here. - “In addition, I will hold a continuing course somewhere: ‘Anthroposophy or the Connection between Morality, Religion, and Science.’ I also hope to give a lecture in the Bruno League on ‘Bruno's Monism and Anthroposophy.’ These are only preliminary plans. In my opinion, this is how we must proceed.”
That was on September 16, 1902. Here you have the document, my dear friends, which can prove to you that these things are not merely asserted after the fact, but that they really happened. It is also fortunate karma that at this time, when so much slander is being attached to our cause and will continue to be attached to it more and more, we will be able to show where the truth lies.