Human Knowledge and Its Significance for Man and the Cosmos I
GA 170
7 August 1916, Dornach
Translator Unknown
Many of the things that have to be said on the subject of the connection of man's being with the universe must necessarily seem difficult and complicated. People may ask themselves: Whatever more is there to be said about the being of man? But the fact remains that the birth of the human being from the cosmos is an exceedingly complicated process and must in some way become intelligible to us.
In the present age above all, light must be thrown on this fact, because otherwise it would be too late. This is a grave statement but it must be made. At the present time human beings are living through incarnations in which they can get along without actually knowing very much about the complexities of the being of man. They can manage now without this knowledge but times will come when their souls will be incarnated again and when knowledge of these things will be absolutely essential. It will be a vital necessity for souls incarnated upon the earth to know in what sense the being of man is connected with the universe. Let me put it in this way: We ourselves are still living in an age when it is not as yet left entirely to the human being to hold together certain members of his being. In our time these members are held together without our intervention. Nowadays, easy-going minds can still speak with irritation about the complicated nature of anthroposophical wisdom. They can still keep reiterating that truth is always simple and that what is not simple is not the real ‘truth.’
On all sides we hear people saying this. But they say it under the influence of the Luciferic temptation and have no inkling of the fact that when they speak of this ‘simplicity of Truth’ they are clouding their minds and are altogether labouring under a delusion. Times will come when knowledge, and knowledge alone will enable man to hold together certain of the inner principles and members of his being. But the future has always to be prepared and it is the task of anthroposophical thought to prepare earthly culture and civilisation for that age in the future when the human being will have to know how to maintain the cohesion of the different parts of his being himself.
And now let us think of a fundamental truth to which reference has been made in recent lectures, namely, that man's being is essentially twofold. Man is a twofold being inasmuch as the structure and nature of his head differs essentially from the structure and nature of the rest of his organism. The head of a human being living at the present time is, in essentials, the product of the metaporphosis of the body of the preceding incarnation. The body of the present incarnation, that is to say, the body with the exclusion of the head, will become the head of the next incarnation, after we have lived through the period stretching from death to a new birth. We can therefore picture man's progress through incarnation as follows: He has his head, and the other part of his organism. After death we may say that the head disappears, and the rest of the body is then transformed into the head of the next incarnation. Once again he will receive the body of the next incarnation from the Earth. The head disappears, but when I say this, you must remember that it is the forces connected with the head that disappear. The substance of the head and of the rest of the body too also disappear, but the physical substance itself is not the essential. The substance is Maya in the real sense. The forces are the reality. The forces contained in the body of man, with the exclusion of those of the head, are transformed during the period between death and a new birth into the forces underlying the head of the new incarnation. In our present incarnation we have, in our head, the forces that were connected with our body in the previous incarnation. It is this basic idea which we have been considering in detail in recent lectures.
And now we will turn to certain other thoughts in order to understand these matters more fully.
To begin with, let us ask ourselves: By what means are the forces contained in our present body transformed in such a way that they can become a head in the next incarnation? At the outset it is difficult to conceive of the body being transformed into a head. What is it, exactly, that makes this transformation possible? That is the question we must ask ourselves.
In order to answer this question we must think about what has been said in many lectures on the subject of the nature of cognition, of knowledge, of truth, of wisdom. In the ordinary way we imagine that the only purpose of the knowledge we acquire is to enable us to have mental pictures of the external world, to know something about the external world. There are philosophical psychologists who are constantly bringing forward theories about the mysterious connection that exists between the nature of a concept or an idea and the object that is pictured by the idea. These theories all suffer from one common error. I can only make this error clear to you by means of a picture. Suppose a botanist or an horticulturist wished to make investigations into the nature of a grain of wheat. He would probably say to himself: ‘I will use chemistry and investigate the grain of wheat from the point of view of the food-value of wheatmeal. I will try to find out the constituents that are required for man's nourishment.’ He would, in other words, be investigating the nature of the grain of wheat from the point of view of wheat as a means of nourishment. He would be trying to discover the reason why certain constituents are contained in the wheat. Anyone who imagines that it is possible to find out something about the real nature of wheat by investigating to what extent it is valuable as a foodstuff, would be making a curious mistake. A grain of wheat comes into existence in the whole sphere of plant life as the fruit of the wheat-plant and we can only discover why the nature of the grain is as it is, by studying the process of the growth of a new wheat-plant out of the grain. The fact that a grain of wheat contains constituents of nutritive value for the human being, is an entirely secondary consideration so far as the real nature of the grain is concerned. Those who look at everything merely from the utilitarian standpoint and want to make this the essential aim of science will investigate the grain of wheat from the chemical point of view and find that here we have in Nature something that is of value as a foodstuff. But this has nothing whatever to do with the innermost purpose of the grain of wheat. If it were possible to ask the grain of wheat what its innermost and primary purpose is, it would not answer that it is there in order to nourish human beings but rather in order to make it possible for a new wheat plant to come into existence.
To those who have real knowledge of these things, the philosophers and theorists are exactly like men who investigate a grain of wheat from the point of view of its value in the nourishment of human beings. There is a fundamental error here. The primary purpose of what lives within us in the form of knowledge, idea, truth, wisdom, is not that of enabling us to form mental pictures of the things of the external world. The process of forming mental pictures of the external world is just as secondary a purpose of knowledge as it is a secondary purpose of the grain of wheat to nourish human beings. Knowledge lives within us for another purpose altogether. It is there primarily in order that it may work and weave in our being. During our life between birth and death we accumulate wisdom, little by little. And at the same time we apply the wisdom thus accumulated in such a way that it can mirror the external world, just as we use grains of wheat for the purpose of nourishment. But remember, every time we use grains of wheat for food, we are depriving them of their essential and original purpose, namely that of bringing forth a new plant. In the same way, the wisdom we apply to the grasping of the world outside is a deviation from the real task of wisdom. It is a deviation because the forces of the True, the forces of Knowledge are not primarily there for this purpose.
What, then, is the function and purpose of what we call the True?—I mean, in the sense in which the primary purpose of the grain of wheat is to bring a new plant into being? The primary purpose of the forces of Knowledge within us, of our efforts to get hold of truth, is to develop forces within us between birth and death whereby our organism will be transformed after death—that is to say, the forces underlying the body in this incarnation, for it is these forces that will be transformed into the head of the next incarnation. This is the remarkable connection which becomes clear to us when we study the existence of the human being on the one side between birth and death and on the other side between death and a new birth. The knowledge we acquire serves to make it possible for the body to be transformed into the head of the next incarnation. You will say: ‘Yes, but there are so many who acquire no knowledge at all, who remain simpletons all their life, only a very few have really learnt anything.’ And those who make this remark generally include themselves among these few! But remember, several thinkers have rightly said, quite independently of each other, that during the first three or four years of life the human being learns more, assimilates more wisdom than in the three years spent in later life at the university. This is literally true. In the first three years of life we learn a very great deal; we learn what can only be learnt on Earth, namely the knowledge that is essential in order to be able to speak, to understand what is spoken, and a great deal more besides. In those first three years we learn very much, and what we thus learn forms part of what is known as the substance or content of wisdom.
This wisdom that is innate in man and in respect to which human beings do not differ so very much from one another—this wisdom is the weaving force which transforms our organism into a head during the period lying between death and a new birth. It is, as a matter of fact, an exceedingly intricate complex of forces that we take into our being in our life of knowledge and cognition. It is only now and then in dreams that human beings have a fleeting vision of what is weaving and surging between the ideal and inner pictures of which they are fully conscious. The forces that are weaving and working in us in this realm of our being will begin to manifest in their essential form after death and to transform our organism. Everything that is acquired in the way of knowledge accumulates for the purpose of transforming our organism—everything, that is to say, with the exception of the knowledge we apply in order to grasp the external world. The forces of knowledge we apply in order to grasp and comprehend the external world are lost, in a certain respect, so far as our own evolution is concerned. They are diverted from the onward stream of evolution. Just as the grains of wheat that are used as food for human beings are diverted from the stream of wheat-development taken as a whole, so, during our present epoch of civilisation, when knowledge is so universally applied for the purpose of grasping the phenomena of the outer world, we divert from the stream of our evolution, many more forces than we retain.
And now think of the days of antiquity, when man's knowledge was acquired through faculties of inner clairvoyance. Man did not then expend his forces upon the outer world to anything like the same extent. The people of ancient Egypt and ancient Chaldea acquired their knowledge through atavistic clairvoyance and not nearly so much by observation of the external world. Our own age is, in a sense, exactly the opposite in this respect. Nowadays a very great deal of knowledge is absorbed from the world outside and very little is added from the inner being of man. The Greeks were the outstanding example of the ‘golden mean’ in this respect. That they were able to hold this ‘golden mean’ was not due alone to their special qualities. They did, of course, possess these special qualities, but the self-contained glory of their civilisation was also due to the fact that the area of the Earth inhabited by the Greek people was relatively small. Moreover they had comparatively little knowledge of the rest of the world. What knowledge had the Greeks of countries other than Asia Minor and a little further Eastwards into Asia? They knew little of Africa and of America, and of the rest of the Earth they knew absolutely nothing at all. Plato's knowledge concerning the inner nature of the Good and the function of certain inner parts of the human organism was very largely due to the limited area of the world to which Greek knowledge could be applied. For this reason it was possible in Greece to preserve man's spiritual forces for the purpose of his inner development. But even the Greeks applied less of their powers for the purpose of inner development than the ancient Egyptian and Chaldean peoples—not to speak of the ancient Persians and Indians. In our age, when practically the whole Earth has been explored, everyone is bent upon acquiring as much knowledge of the external world as he possibly can! If all this knowledge of the external world were as intensive as it extensive then people would have very few powers left over for the work of transforming the physical body into the head of the next incarnation. And the most learned would have far fewer powers than the simple peasants! One can only be thankful that when the majority of people travel about the world today, they are content with simply turning over the pages of Baedeker or some other book of travel, and really do not take in very much! So you see, they are not, after all, depriving themselves of very much inner power; If it were otherwise, those human beings who are always hunting for sensation, who only want to get their knowledge from the outside world, would be facing a grave danger. The danger would be that in their next incarnation they would return with a head produced from a body that had undergone very little transformation. The head would be exceedingly animal-like in appearance. This is bound to happen, when, in the previous incarnation, comparatively few formative forces were preserved for the work of transformation.
Analogies which are taken from the realm of Imagination, my dear friends, can be multiplied over and over again. And now let us ask ourselves a question. we have heard that the powers we apply in order to build up a science of the outer world, are diverted from their primary, original purpose—just as the grain of wheat that is used as substance for nourishment is diverted from its primary purpose as wheat. What analogy is there between the acquisition of knowledge of the outer world and the use of wheat as a foodstuff for human beings? There is an inner analogy here which we must try to discover.
Consider once more the curious fact that numbers and numbers of grains of wheat do not go to the producing of new wheat plants but are given over to the purpose of supplying human beings with food. These grains of wheat, as we have heard, are diverted from their direct line of evolution as grains of wheat. Some grains of wheat, on the other hand, bring forth other grains of wheat, and these again others. But numberless grains of wheat are split off, as it were, and diverted to another sphere of activity altogether. They are used for the purpose of food for human beings and this has nothing directly to do with the onward course of their own stream of evolution.
Nature herself will help us here to understand something which it is most essential to bear in mind if we wish to unfold a true picture of the world. Modern science has little by little instilled into us the dreadful maxim that the later is invariably to be regarded as a product of what has preceded it. Effect follows directly upon cause—so it is said. There is nothing more foolish than to generalise in this way about things in the world, saying that effect directly follows cause, and that cause gives rise to effect. There are always subsequent effects which have no direct connection whatever with a preceding cause. For how can it possibly be said that the cause of wheat being used as a foodstuff lies in the grain of wheat itself? It is true that during the 18th century a loose kind of thinking led people to explain the presence of certain cork-like substances for the ultimate purpose of producing corks for champagne bottles! It is impossible to imagine a more erroneous line of reasoning. The truth is that when wheat is used as a foodstuff, the grains of wheat pass over into another sphere of working altogether.
Now it is exactly the same with the knowledge we acquire about the things of the outer world, of outer Nature. The knowledge we thus acquire passes over into a different sphere of working. I beg you to take this truth in the deepest earnestness. In our efforts to understand the outer world it is possible for us to deprive ourselves of many of the forces that are necessary to the process of the transformation of our present body into the head of the next incarnation. As we acquire knowledge of the outer world, we deprive our being of a very great deal, and an adjustment must be brought about by providing that this knowledge passes over into another sphere. Just as the grains of wheat receive in a sense a nobler function when they are used as foodstuff for human beings, just as they receive compensation in this way for having been diverted from their original evolution, so too, knowledge of the outer world must be given over to a nobler purpose as compensation for having been deprived of its primary function. All the truth that a human being makes his own, all the knowledge he acquired of the outer world must be given into the hands of the Gods. We ought always to be inwardly conscious that the knowledge thus diverted from the onward stream of evolution must be placed in the service of the Gods, must, as it were, become an act of divine worship. All the knowledge we acquire without making it a holy offering to the evolutionary process of humanity, without consciously offering it to those Higher Spirits who receive their nourishment from it—all the knowledge we receive without thought of giving it over to this higher purpose, is like the grains of wheat which fall into the soil and decay—fulfilling neither their original purpose nor the other purpose of serving as nourishment for human beings.
At this point, my dear friends, we must surely realise how essential it is that a definite and absolutely practical result shall emerge from our strivings in the domain of Spiritual Science. It is not a question merely of learning the teachings of Spiritual Science, nor of making them into a body of knowledge, but of receiving them in such a way that a fundamental feeling is laid into the soul. We must associate with the acquisition of knowledge the realisation that this knowledge must be an act of divine worship and that it is a transgression against the divine purpose of evolution to profane knowledge, to divert it from its divine mission.
As I have said, the possibility of amassing a great deal of knowledge of the external world has arisen for the first time in the modern age. Among the Egyptians it was nearly all an inner and not an external form of knowledge. During the Graeco-Latin epoch of civilisation it became possible to acquire more knowledge of the outer world and at that very time it was also made possible for man to discover how they might place their knowledge in the service of the Divine, by the coming of Christ with His message to the Earth.
Here again is a connection which history makes clear to us. At the very moment in the evolution of humanity when knowledge became preeminently a knowledge of the external world—at that very moment the Christ came down from the spiritual world and enabled those men who directed their knowledge to Him in the true sense, to place it in the service of the Divine. It is quite true that this feeling has not as yet developed in humanity to any great extent, but as human beings begin to understand the sense in which Christ has made the Earth holy, they will also learn how to place their knowledge in the service of the Divine.
And so a small store of the forces connected with the head is preserved in order that our body may be transformed into the head of the next incarnation. And if the remaining forces are accompanied by the right kind of feeling, they can become the means of nourishing higher Spiritual Beings. Our concepts become food for these higher Spiritual Beings. In other words, we must try to acquire knowledge for the sake of the Gods, just as wheat also grows in order that human beings may find nourishment.
The substance which man receives as nourishment, however, must be for him. And in the same way, our knowledge must be rendered fit for the Gods by our attitude towards it. Indeed the healthy evolution of mankind depends very largely upon whether this kind of feeling is developed.
In the ancient Mysteries and Mystery Schools, knowledge was kept holy as a matter of course. One of the main reasons why everyone was not admitted to the Mysteries was that whoever sought admittance must prove that to him knowledge was really a holy thing, conceived as an offering to the Gods. Moreover this feeling was actually present. It was born from an atavistic instinct in man. In our own day this feeling is something that we must acquire once again. For good reason, human beings have been living through an age during which they have grown into materialism. But they must heal themselves of this materialism by associating their knowledge once again with the feelings that it must be offered up to the Gods. In the future ahead of us, however, this attitude will have to be acquired consciously and the only possibility of fulfillment will be if Spiritual Science grows and spreads among humanity. Knowledge must not be like a grain of wheat which falls into the Earth and decays. Knowledge that is placed only in the service of outer utility, in the service of mechanical, utilitarian purposes in the outer world—such knowledge is like the seeds which decay. Knowledge that is not placed in the service of the Divine, disappears and is lost. It can be used neither for the purpose of helping us in our next incarnation, nor for the nourishment of higher Spiritual Beings. The decay of a grain of wheat is a very real process. The dissipation of knowledge that is not made into an offering to the Gods is also a real process. It would lead too far afield to-day if I were to tell you what is really signified by the decay of the numberless grains of wheat that are sown in the soil. But Knowledge that is not placed in the service of the Divine is seized by Ahriman. It passes into his service and constitutes his power. Through the Spiritual Beings who are his servants, Ahriman then incorporates it into the world-process and sets up more hindrances to this world process than are justifiably and of necessity there. For Ahriman is the God of hindrances.
In this way, then, I have given you some idea of the significance of all that lives in our being in the form of knowledge and of truth.
Sechster Vortrag
Es mag manchem kompliziert vorkommen, was gesagt werden muß, wenn man immer wieder auf die menschliche Wesenheit und ihren Zusammenhang mit dem Weltenall zu sprechen kommt. Was ist da alles an dem Menschen! — könnte mancher sagen. Allein die Tatsache, daß der Mensch in einer komplizierten Weise aus dem Weltenall heraus gebildet ist, liegt nun einmal vor, und man muß sich damit abfinden. Man muß insbesondere in der gegenwärtigen Zeit sich mit dieser Tatsache abfinden aus dem Grunde, weil es sonst - es muß das schon gesagt werden — zu spät werden könnte. Die Menschen leben gegenwärtig in Inkarnationen, in denen es gerade noch geht, nicht viel zu wissen von der komplizierten Menschennatur; aber es werden Zeiten kommen — die Menschenseelen werden in diesen Zeiten wieder inkarniert sein -, da wird es nicht gehen. Da werden die Seelen beginnen müssen, endlich zu wissen, wie der Mensch zusammenhängt mit dem Weltenall. Man kann sagen, gegenwärtig durchschreiten wir gerade noch jenes Zeitalter, in dem es dem Menschen noch nicht selbst überlassen ist, die verschiedenen Glieder seiner Natur, die wir gestern von einem gewissen Gesichtspunkte aus aufzeichnen konnten, zusammenzuhalten, wir leben in einer Zeitepoche, in der diese verschiedenen Glieder noch zusammengehalten werden ohne unser Zutun, wo der Bequemling kommen kann und sagen: Ach, wie kompliziert ist diese anthroposophische Weisheit; Wahrheit aber ist einfach, und was nicht einfach ist, das ist nicht die wirkliche Wahrheit! - Heute kann man diesen Ausspruch noch vielfach hören. Diejenigen, die diesen Ausspruch unter der luziferischen Verführung tun, haben keine Ahnung davon, wie sie sich gerade mit solchem Ausspruch von der sogenannten Einfachheit der Wahrheit benebeln, wie sie sich damit etwas vormachen. Denn es werden eben Zeiten kommen, in denen der Mensch sich durch Erfahrung recht kompliziert finden wird, und in denen er sich nur aus der Erkenntnis heraus wird zusammenhalten können. AlleZukunft aber muß vorbereitet werden, und vorbereiten die Erdenkultur-Entwickelung für jenes Zeitalter, in dem der Mensch wird wissen müssen, wie er sich zusammenzuhalten hat aus seinen verschiedenen Teilen, das ist die Aufgabe der geisteswissenschaftlichen Weltanschauungsströmung. Erinnern wir uns nun an diese Grundwahrheit, die wir in diesen Tagen im einzelnen etwas weiter ausgeführt haben, daß der Mensch im wesentlichen eine Doppelnatur genannt werden kann, und daß schon sein Äußeres zeigt, daß er eine Doppelnatur ist, indem der Kopf, das Haupt des Menschen, man möchte sagen, von einem ganz anderen Gesichtspunkte aus gebaut ist als der übrige Organismus. Wenn wir das Haupt eines Menschen betrachten, wie er es heute hat, so ist es im wesentlichen das Ergebnis dessen, was aus dem Leibe der vorhergehenden Inkarnation geworden ist. Und aus unserem jetzigen Leibe, mit Ausschluß des Hauptes, wird, wenn wir durchgegangen sein werden durch den Zeitraum zwischen Tod und neuer Geburt, unser Haupt der nächsten Inkarnation. So daß wir also schematisch den Fortgang des Menschen durch die Inkarnationen so zeichnen könnten: Der Mensch hat sein Haupt, er hat seinen übrigen Leib. Dasjenige, was jetzt sein Haupt ist, verliert er im wesentlichen; was sein übriger Leib ist, das wird in der nächsten Inkarnation umgewandelt erscheinen als sein Haupt, und seinen Leib wird er wiederum von der Erde bekommen. Dieser Leib wird dann wieder Haupt in der nächsten Inkarnation, und seinen Leib bekommt er dann wiederum von den Vorfahren, von der Erde, Das Haupt geht immer verloren. Natürlich handelt es sich dabei um die Kräfte. Die Materie des übrigen Leibes geht selbstverständlich auch verloren. Aber nicht um diese äußere Materie handelt es sich — die ist eigentlich im wirklichsten Sinne eine Maja -, sondern um all die Kräfte, die in dem Leib mit Ausschluß des Kopfes sitzen; die werden umgewandelt während unseres Durchgangs durch die Zeit zwischen Tod und neuer Geburt in die Kräfte des Hauptes. Und jetzt haben wir wahrhaft in unserem Haupte diejenigen Kräfte, die in unserer vorhergehenden Inkarnation an unseren Leib gebunden waren. Das war die Grundvorstellung, die wir im einzelnen mehr ausgearbeitet haben.
Nun wollen wir andere Vorstellungen, die wir gewonnen haben, zu Hilfe nehmen, um diese Dinge immer besser und besser zu verstehen, Wodurch, fragen wir uns zunächst, wird denn eigentlich unser Leib von jetzt, werden die Kräfte unseres Leibes von jetzt umgewandelt, so daß er ein Kopf werden kann in der nächsten Inkarnation? Das ist ja schon immerhin etwas, was zunächst schwer zu denken ist, daß unser Leib umgewandelt werde in einen Kopf. Was macht diese Umwandlung möglich? — so müssen wir fragen.
Um uns diese Frage zu beantworten, müssen wir einmal unseren Seelenblick werfen auf das, was wir über das Vorstellungsmäßige, Erkenntnismäßige in der menschlichen Seele, das nun an das Haupt gebunden ist, über das Wahrheitsmäßige, Weisheitsmäßige gesagt haben. Gewöhnlich glaubt der heutige Mensch, das, was wir in der Erkenntnis erwerben, sei nur dazu da, um uns Bilder von der Außenwelt zu machen, um von der Außenwelt etwas wissen zu lernen. Es gibt philosophische Erkenntnistheoretiker, die immer und immer wieder theoretisieren, wie eigentlich Begriffe oder Vorstellungen zusammenhängen, welche geheimnisvolle Beziehung besteht zwischen der Natur des Begriffs und der Sache, die durch den Begriff abgebildet wird. Solche Theorien kranken alle an einem gemeinsamen Fehler. Ich kann Ihnen diesen Fehler zunächst nur klarmachen, indem ich mich bildhaft ausdrücke. Denken Sie sich einmal, ein Botaniker, ein Gärtner, wollte die Natur des Weizenkorns untersuchen, und er würde das so anstellen, daß er sagt: Ich nehme die Chemie zu Hilfe und untersuche das Weizenkorn,inwiefern es die Bestandteile enthält, die der Mensch braucht, um sich durch Weizenkorn, Weizenmehl oder dergleichen zu nähren. Und in dieser Beziehung, die das Weizenkorn zur menschlichen Ernährung hat, würde der Botaniker das Wesen des Weizenkorns suchen, das heißt die Gründe, warum es aus gewissen Bestandteilen besteht. In einem recht kuriosen Irrtum wäre ein solcher Mensch, der glaubte, dadurch über die Wesenheit des Weizenkorns etwas zu erfahren, daß er untersucht, inwieferne es ein gutes Nahrungsmittel für den Menschen ist. Das Weizenkorn entsteht innerhalb der ganzen Weizenpflanze als die Frucht der Weizenpflanze, und nur derjenige kann erfahren, warum das Weizenkorn seiner Wesenheit nach ist, wie es ist, der es daraufhin untersucht, inwiefern aus dem Weizenkorn wiederum eine neue Weizenpflanze sich herausentwickelt. Und es ist eine vollständige Nebenströmung, die hinzukommt zum Wesen des Weizenkorns, daß es die Bestandteile für die menschliche Ernährung enthält; das hat mit der inneren Natur des Weizenkorns gar nichts zu tun. Wer alles nur nach seiner Utilität betrachtet und die Utilitätserkenntnisse zu der eigentlichsten Wissenschaft machen möchte, der wird eben das Weizenkorn chemisch untersuchen und finden: da entsteht etwas in der Natur, das zur menschlichen Nahrung dienen kann. — Das hat aber gar nichts zu tun mit dem Innenwesen des Weizenkorns, daß der Mensch sich davon nährt. Mit dem Innenwesen hat es, wie gesagt, zu tun, daß aus dem Weizenkorn eine neue Weizenpflanze entstehen kann.
Für den, der die Dinge mit der Erkenntnis, mit dem Vorstellungsmäßigen durchschaut, für den nehmen sich die verschiedenen philosophischen Erkenntnistheoretiker ebenso aus wie die Leute, die das Weizenkorn untersuchen nach seiner Fähigkeit, den Menschen zu ernähren. Denn wenn man das Weizenkorn nach seiner ursprünglichen Aufgabe fragen würde, wozu es da ist, so würde es nicht antworten: um den Menschen zu ernähren, sondern um eine neue Weizenpflanze entstehen zu lassen. Die das Erkenntnismäßige, das Vorstellungsmäßige durchschauen, die erblicken einen solchen Fehler, wie ich ihn jetzt charakterisiert habe, bei den philosophischen Erkenntnistheoretikern. Denn das, was wir das Erkenntnismäßige nennen, was als Vorstellung, als Wahrheit, als Weisheit in uns lebt, das ist ursprünglich gar nicht dazu da, die Dinge draußen abzubilden. Dieses Abbilden der Dinge draußen, das ist ebenso ein Nebenstrom, wie es ein Nebenstrom ist für die Weizenkörner, den Menschen zu ernähren. Die Erkenntnis ist gar nicht dazu da, um Abbilder nur zu schaffen von den äußeren Dingen, sondern sie ist zu etwas anderem da. Sie ist dazu da, daß sie im Menschen in einer gewissen Weise wirkt und webt und lebt. Indem wir hier in dem Dasein zwischen Geburt und Tod leben, häufen wir uns nach und nach Weisheit an, und wir verwenden die Weisheit zu gleicher Zeit so, daß sie Abbild sein kann für die äußere Welt, so wie wir das Weizenkorn anwenden als Nahrungsmittel. Aber das Weizenkorn, das wir als Nahrungsmittel anwenden, entziehen wir seiner ihm innewohnenden Bestimmung, eine neue Pflanze zu bilden. So entziehen wir der eigentlichen Aufgabe der Weisheit alles das, was wir verwenden, um die äußere Welt zu erfassen. Denn das Vorstellungsmäßige, das Wahrheitsgemäße ist zunächst gar nicht dazu bestimmt. Wozu ist dieses Wahrheitsgemäße bestimmt — ich meine in dem Sinne, wie das Weizenkorn bestimmt ist, eine neue Weizenpflanze herbeizuführen? Bestimmt ist nämlich unsere erkenntnismäßige Betätigung, unser wahrheitsmäßiges Arbeiten dazu, Kräfte in uns zu entwickeln zwischen Geburt und Tod, welche umwandeln unseren Organismus nach dem Tode, das heißt seine Kraftgestalt, in die Kraftgestalt des Kopfes! Das ist der merkwürdige Zusammenhang, den man entdeckt, wenn man den Durchgang des Menschen einerseits zwischen Geburt und Tod, andererseits zwischen dem Tod und einer neuen Geburt ins Auge faßt. Was der Mensch an Erkenntnissen erwirbt, dient zunächst dazu, daß umgestaltet werden kann sein Organismus außer dem Kopf in einen Kopf, der dann der Kopf der nächsten Inkarnation ist. Sie werden sagen: Es gibt doch so viele Menschen, die erwerben sich gar keine Erkenntnisse, und die bleiben so furchtbar dumm; nur wenige werden gescheit — zu denen man sich gewöhnlich selbst rechnet. — Aber es haben schon diejenigen ein bißchen recht, die da gesagt haben — und es haben es mehrere Menschen gesagt, unabhängig voneinander —, daß der Mensch in seinen drei, vier ersten Lebensjahren mehr lernt, mehr an Weisheit aufnimmt, als - jedenfalls in den drei akademischen Jahren. In den drei ersten Lebensjahren lernen wir wirklich recht viel, was wir nur durch unser Haupt auf der Erde lernen können. Wir erwerben uns diejenigen Kenntnisse, die notwendig sind, um zu sprechen, das Gesprochene zu verstehen, und vieles, vieles andere. Wir lernen wirklich da sehr viel. Und das gehört zu dem, was man Weisheitsinhalt zu nennen hat.
Durch dieses, was der Mensch als seine Weisheit erwirbt, und worin die Menschen eigentlich gar nicht so sehr verschieden sind, wallt und webt eben als Kraft dasjenige, was unseren Organismus umwandelt in einen Kopf beim Durchgang durch die Zeit zwischen dem Tod und einer neuen Geburt. Es ist im Grunde ein recht kompliziertes Gebilde, was wir da in uns aufnehmen mit unserem Vorstellungsmäßigen, mit unserem Erkenntnismäßigen. Und dem Menschen wird nur zuweilen in solchen Träumen, wie ich es Ihnen gestern am Schlusse von einem polnischen Dichter angeführt habe, leise etwas gezeigt von dem, was wallt und webt gewissermaßen zwischen den Vorstellungen, derer wir uns vollständig bewußt werden. Aber das, was da wallt und webt, das wirkt eben in uns, um nach dem Tode in Aktualität überzutreten und unseren Organismus umzuwandeln. Es sammelt sich alles, was durch Erkenntnis gewonnen wird, an, um unseren Organismus umzuwandeln, mit Ausnahme dessen, was wir verwenden, um die äußere Welt aufzufassen. Was wir verwenden, um im gewöhnlichen Sinne die äußere Welt aufzufassen, das geht in einer gewissen Weise verloren für unsere Entwickelung, das entziehen wir unserer Entwickelung. Geradeso, wie wir dem totalen Fortentwickelungsprozeß des Weizens alle die Weizenkörner entziehen — es sind viel mehr als diejenigen, die wieder in die Erde gestreut werden -, die wir als Nahrungsmittel verwenden, so entziehen wir uns tatsächlich auch recht viel mehr, namentlich in der gegenwärtigen Entwickelungsperiode der Menschheit, als wir behalten, indem wir Äußeres uns aneignen. Denken wir zurück an ältere Zeiten, in denen die Menschen noch mehr durch innere hellseherische Wissenschaft das wußten, was sie eben wußten. Die gaben sich nicht so aus nach der äußeren Welt. Solch eine Bevölkerung wie die alte ägyptische, die alte chaldäische, hat das, was sie gewußt hat, durch atavistisches Hellsehen gewußt, und wenig nur durch die äußere Entwickelung. Heute leben wir in einer Zeit, die gewissermaßen in dieser Beziehung entgegengesetzt ist. Heute wird viel von außen herein aufgenommen und wenig vom Innern der Entwickelung hinzugefügt. Die Griechen hielten jene wunderschöne Mitte einer gewissen Kulturentwickelung, die nicht allein dadurch bedingt war, daß diese Griechen so besonders veranlagt waren. Das waren sie ja gewiß, aber damit allein ist es nicht getan. Sie verdanken diese Geschlossenheit ihrer ganzen Kultur auch dem Umstande, daß die Erdenfläche, die das griechische Volk einnahm, eine verhältnismäßig kleine war, auch in bezug auf die Kenntnisse der übrigen Erde. Was wußten die Griechen viel von anderem als von Kleinasien, nach Asien hin, was wußten sie viel von Afrika, von Amerika schon gar nichts; von einem großen Teil von Europa wußten sie auch nichts. Daß Plato noch ein Wissen haben konnte von der Moralität, von der Sophrosyne, der Dikaiosyne, das ist vielfach dem Umstande zu verdanken, daß der Schauplatz, den die griechische Erkenntnis äußerlich umspannte, ein kleiner war. Daher war es noch möglich, viele von den Weisheits-Geisteskräften für die innere Entwickelung zu behalten. Aber sie verwendeten schon weniger für die innere Entwickelung als etwa die alten Ägypter oder Chaldäer, oder gar die alten Perser oder die alten Inder. In unserer Zeit, wo nach und nach die ganze Erde erforscht und zugänglich geworden ist, da suchen die Menschen möglichst viel an äußeren Erkenntnissen zu erwerben. Wie hat das zugenommen! Wenn es so intensiv wäre, wie es extensiv ist, dann würden die Menschen unendlich wenig, und gerade die Gebildetsten viel, viel weniger als irgendein Bauer mitnehmen, um den physischen Leib umzuwandeln in den physischen Kopf der nächsten Inkarnation. Aber Gott sei Dank, die meisten sind ja so gereist, daß sie nicht viel angeschaut haben, sondern daß sie fein nach dem Baedeker oder anderen Reisebüchern gegangen sind, und trotz des großen Umkreises doch nicht viel kennengelernt haben; so entziehen sie sich doch nicht alles. Sonst würde gerade bei denen, die überall nach Sensationen haschen, die nur alles, was sie wissen, von außen wissen wollen, die Gefahr vorliegen, daß sie in der nächsten Inkarnation mit einem Kopf zur Welt kämen, der recht wenig umgestalteter übriger Leib sein wird, das heißt, der sehr tierisch aussehen würde; denn das würde das Schicksal sein, wenn wenig Bildekräfte angesammelt würden.
Aber nun, Vergleiche, die aus der Imagination genommen sind, können auch ausgedehnt werden. Wir können uns fragen: Wenn es sich so verhält, daß das, was wir nach außen hin zur Erkenntnis, zur Erwerbung des äußeren Wissens verwenden, seiner eigentlichen inneren Wesenheit entzogen wird — wie das Weizenkorn, das zum Nahrungsmittel gemacht wird, der inneren Natur des Weizenkorns —, welche Ähnlichkeit besteht denn nun in bezug auf das, was äußerliches Wissen ist, äußeres Wissen wird, und der Tatsache, daß Weizenkörner auch als Nahrungsmittel verwendet werden? Es besteht eine innere Ähnlichkeit, die aber herbeigeführt werden muß.
Wenden wir noch einmal den Blick hin auf diese eigentümliche Tatsache, daß eine große Anzahl von Weizenkörnern nicht wieder zur Hervorbringung von Weizenpflanzen verwendet wird, sondern als menschliches Nahrungsmittel hingegeben wird! Dann können wir sagen: Es wird da das Weizenkorn entzogen seiner geradlinig fortschreitenden Entwickelung. Nicht wahr, wir haben ein Weizenkorn, das bringt ein Korn hervor, von dem kommt wiederum ein Korn und so weiter. Aber da splittern sich zahlreiche Weizenkörner ab; die gehen eigentlich in einen ganz anderen Bereich über, in den Bereich der Menschennahrungsmittel, der gar nichts zu tun hat mit der fortlaufenden Strömung.
Da haben Sie an der Natur die Möglichkeit, einen Begriff zu bilden von etwas, das sehr, sehr berücksichtigt werden muß, wenn man wirkliche Weltanschauung erwerben will. Unsere äußere Wissenschaft hat es nach und nach zu dem Schrecklichen gebracht, daß man alles so erklären will, daß sich immer das Folgende als ein Ergebnis des Früheren herausstellen soll, Wirkung immer auf Ursache. Es gibt nichts Törichteres als dieses Uniformieren der Welt in der Vorstellung, als ob immer aus der Wirkung auf die Ursache, und von der Ursache auf die Wirkung gegangen werden soll. Es entstehen spätere Wirkungen, die gar keinen direkten ursächlichen Zusammenhang mit einer vorhergehenden Ursache haben; denn wie sollte denn im Weizenkorn die Ursache liegen, daß es menschliches Nahrungsmittel werden wird? Höchstens nach der billigen Teleologie, die im achtzehnten Jahrhundert zum Teil noch gang und gäbe war, wonach man das Vorhandensein gewisser korkartiger Stoffe in der Natur damit erklärt hat, daß geheimnisvolle Geister diese Dinge geschaffen haben, damit man Champagnerpfropfen machen könnte. Nein, es geht wirklich da die Weizenfrucht über in eine andere Sphäre.
Und so ist es auch, wenn wir Erkenntnisse der äußeren Natur, der äußeren Dinge erwerben. Die Dinge gehen da in eine andere Sphäre über. Und ich bitte Sie, diese Wahrheit recht, recht tief zu nehmen. Wir Menschen können uns eine ganz große Summe dessen entziehen, was wahrheitsgemäß in uns ist, was wir verwenden müssen, um übergehen zu lassen unseren Leib der gegenwärtigen Inkarnation in den Kopf der nächsten Inkarnation. Wir können uns viel entziehen, um gegenwärtige Kenntnisse zu erwerben, aber wir müssen beachten, daß diese Kenntnisse zu etwas anderem da sein müssen. Wie die Weizenkörner gewissermaßen geadelt werden dadurch, daß sie zur menschlichen Nahrung verwendet werden - es wird ihnen da etwas Angemessenes gegeben dafür, daß sie ihrer ursprünglichen Wesenheit entzogen werden -, so muß es auch mit der menschlichen äußeren Erkenntnis sein, die ganz wider die Natur des Vorstellungsmäßigen, des Wahrheitsmäßigen entwickelt wird. Alles das, was der Mensch als Wahrheit erwirbt, die in Bildern der Außenwelt besteht, das soll er in seiner Gemütsempfindung den Göttern übergeben. Er soll das Bewußtsein immer in sich tragen: Erwirbst du Erkenntnisse, die du dem fortlaufenden Strom entziehst, so sei dir klar, daß Erkenntnis-Erwerben ein Götterdienst sein muß. Was an Erkenntnis erworben wird, ohne daß wir uns bewußt sind, daß das ein heiliger Dienst in der Entwickelung der Menschheit ist, ohne daß wir das, was wir uns aneignen von der Außenwelt, den höheren Geistern übergeben, die sich davon nähren, die das in sich aufnehmen - was wir an solcher Erkenntnis erwerben, die wir nicht mit dieser Empfindung begleiten, die wir einfach gedankenlos erwerben, das ist wie Weizenkörner, die in die Erde fallen und verfaulen, das heißt, die keine Ziele erreichen, nicht die ihren und nicht die anderen, die zur menschlichen Nahrung dienen.
Hier sehen Sie einen Punkt, wo Sie fühlen müssen, wie notwendig es ist, daß ein ganz bestimmtes praktisches Resultat aus unseren geisteswissenschaftlichen Bestrebungen hervorgeht, daß wir nicht nur etwas lernend aufnehmen, nicht nur etwas zum Wissen machen, sondern daß durch die Aufnahme des Geisteswissenschaftlichen eine Gesamtempfindung in unsere Seele gelegt wird. Wir verbinden mit dem Begriff des Wissens die Empfindung, daß das Wissen ein göttlicher Dienst sein soll, und daß es im Grunde eine Versündigung ist gegen den göttlichen Sinn der Evolution, wenn man das Wissen profaniert, wenn man das Wissen herabzieht von seiner göttlichen Bestimmung.
Ich sagte: Eigentlich ist erst in der neueren Zeit die Möglichkeit eingetreten, viel äußeres Wissen zu erwerben. Bei den Ägyptern ist noch fast alles inneres Wissen gewesen, wenig äußeres Wissen; die nächsten Dinge nur bildeten das äußere Wissen. Während der griechisch-lateinischen Kulturepoche entstand für den Menschen die Möglichkeit, immer mehr und mehr äußeres Wissen zu erwerben. Das ist gar nicht so lange her. Da entstand aber auch die Möglichkeit, den Weg zu finden, das Wissen zum göttlichen Dienste umzuwandeln, indem der Christus mit seiner Verkündigung auf die Erde kam.
Hier haben Sie wiederum einen Zusammenhang, der das Geschichtliche uns klarmacht. In dem Augenblick der Menschheitsentwickelung, in dem das Wissen vorzugsweise Wissen von der Außenwelt wird, in demselben Augenblick erscheint der Christus als hervorgehend aus der geistigen Welt, um die Möglichkeit herbeizuführen, daß der Mensch in seiner Empfindung der göttlichen Führung des Christus, aus dem Wissen, indem er es hinordnet zu dem Christus, einen Götterdienst macht. Wenn auch die Menschheit heute noch nicht sehr weit ist in der Entwickelung dieser Empfindung, aus dem Wissen einen Götterdienst zu machen, in dem Maße, wie die Menschheit mehr und mehr verstehen wird, wie Christus das Erdenleben vergottet, wird sie auch lernen, aus dem Wissen einen Götterdienst zu machen.
So leben wir durch alles das, wofür unser Haupt das äußere Zeichen ist, so, daß wir gewissermaßen einen kleinen Grundstock verwenden, um unseren Leib zum Haupte umzuwandeln. Und das andere, wenn wir es mit dem richtigen Gefühle begleiten, wie ich es eben charakterisiert habe, verwenden wir dazu, daß höhere geistige Wesenheiten eine bestimmte Nahrung durch unsere gefaßten Begriffe empfangen. Wir suchen ein Wissen zu erwerben für die Götter, so wie der Weizen auch für die Nahrung der Menschen wächst. Es ist schon so; aber diese Bestimmung muß ihm erst angemessen werden. So muß unserem Wissen durch unser Fühlen erst die Bestimmung, von der eben gesprochen worden ist, angemessen werden. Viel, viel wird davon abhängen, wenn die Entwickelung der Menschheit gesunden soll, daß solche Empfindungen, solche Gefühle entfaltet werden können.
In den alten Mysterien und Mysterienschulen war es noch wie eine Selbstverständlichkeit, daß derjenige, der das Wissen erlangen durfte, dieses Wissen auch heilig gehalten hat. Denn das war ja doch mit einer der Hauptgründe, warum man nicht jeden zugelassen hat in die Mysterien. Die, welche in die Mysterien zugelassen werden sollten, mußten Garantie dafür bieten, daß sie das Wissen wirklich heilig halten, es als einen Götterdienst auffassen. Das war auch durch ein atavistisches Hellfühlen noch vorhanden. Jetzt muß es sich die Menschheit wieder erwerben. Die Menschheit hat durchgemacht eine Zeit — wir wissen, daß das begründet ist -, in der sie sich nach dem Materialismus hin entwickelt hat. Sie muß aus diesem Materialismus heraus wieder gesunden, und sie wird nur gesunden, wenn mit dem Wissen wiederum solche Gefühle eines heiligen Dienstes verbunden werden, wie sie einstmals verbunden wurden. Aber aus der Bewußtheit heraus muß das in der Zukunft geschehen. Und das wird nur geschehen können, wenn die Geisteswissenschaft sich immer weiter in der Menschheit verbreitet. Das Wissen sollte nicht dem Samenkorn gleichen, das in der Erde verfault. Was nur in den Dienst der äußeren Nützlichkeit, der äußeren mechanischen Einrichtung gestellt wird, das alles gleicht dem Samenkorn, das verfault. Was nicht gestellt wird in den göttlichen Dienst, es geht verloren. Es wird weder verwendet, um uns in der nächsten Inkarnation zu helfen, noch wird es verwendet zur Nahrung höherer geistiger Wesenheiten. Verfaulen des Samenkorns ist ein realer Prozeß; es geschieht ja etwas. Verschwendung des Wissens, ohne daß man daraus einen göttlichen Prozeß, einen Götterdienst macht, ist schon auch ein realer Prozeß. Es würde heute zu weit führen, wollte ich Ihnen ausführen, was ein Verfaulen des Weizenkorns bedeutet, aber ein wertloses Verfaulen, weil es nicht aufgehen kann, weil es zugrunde gehen muß. Das Wissen aber, das nicht in den göttlichen Dienst gestellt wird, das wird von Ahriman ergriffen, das geht in Ahrimans Dienst über und bildet Ahrimans Macht, der es durch seine geistigen Diener dem Weltenprozesse einfügt und dadurch dem Weltenprozesse mehr Hindernisse einfügt — denn Ahriman ist ja zugleich der Gott der Hindernisse —, als gerechterweise da sein dürfen, da sein müssen.
So bekommen Sie eine Ansicht von der ganzen Bedeutung dessen, was vorstellungsmäßig, wahrheitsgemäß in uns lebt. Ich werde nun in den nächsten zwei Vorträgen Ausführungen über das Schöne und über die Moralität machen, um dann die drei Dinge zusammenzufassen, um dadurch wiederum eine Möglichkeit zu erwecken, die menschliche Wesenheit noch tiefer zu erfassen.
Sixth Lecture
It may seem complicated to some what must be said when one repeatedly comes to speak about the human being and its connection with the universe. What is it all about, this human being? — some might say. But the fact that human beings are formed in a complicated way out of the universe is simply there, and we have to accept it. We have to accept this fact, especially in the present time, because otherwise — it must be said — it could be too late. Human beings currently live in incarnations in which it is still possible to know little about the complex nature of the human being; but times will come — human souls will be incarnated again in these times — when this will no longer be possible. Then souls will have to begin to finally know how the human being is connected to the universe. One can say that we are currently passing through an age in which it is not yet up to human beings themselves to hold together the various members of their nature, which we were able to describe yesterday from a certain point of view. We are living in an epoch in which these various members are still held together without our intervention, where the complacent can come along and say: Oh, how complicated this anthroposophical wisdom is; but truth is simple, and what is not simple is not the real truth! Today, one can still hear this statement many times. Those who make this statement under Luciferic seduction have no idea how they are clouding themselves with such a statement about the so-called simplicity of truth, how they are deceiving themselves with it. For there will come times when human beings will find themselves quite complicated through experience, and when they will only be able to hold themselves together through knowledge. But all the future must be prepared, and it is the task of the spiritual scientific worldview to prepare the development of the Earth's culture for that age in which human beings will have to know how to hold themselves together from their various parts. Let us now remember this fundamental truth, which we have elaborated in some detail in recent days, that human beings can essentially be called dual in nature, and that their outward appearance already shows that they are dual in nature, in that the head, the upper part of the human being, is, one might say, constructed from a completely different point of view than the rest of the organism. When we look at the head of a human being as it is today, it is essentially the result of what has become of the body of the previous incarnation. And from our present body, excluding the head, our head of the next incarnation will emerge when we have passed through the period between death and new birth. Thus, we could schematically draw the progress of the human being through the incarnations as follows: The human being has his head, he has the rest of his body. What is now his head he essentially loses; what is the rest of his body will appear transformed in the next incarnation as his head, and he will receive his body again from the earth. This body will then become the head again in the next incarnation, and he will receive his body again from his ancestors, from the earth. The head is always lost. Of course, this refers to the forces. The matter of the rest of the body is also lost, of course. But it is not this outer matter that is important—in the truest sense, it is actually a maya—but all the forces that reside in the body with the exception of the head; these are transformed during our passage through the time between death and new birth into the forces of the head. And now we truly have in our head those forces that were bound to our body in our previous incarnation. That was the basic idea, which we have elaborated in more detail.
Now let us take other ideas that we have gained to help us understand these things better and better. We ask ourselves first of all, how is it that our body of the present, the forces of our body of the present, are transformed so that it can become a head in the next incarnation? This is something that is difficult to conceive at first, that our body should be transformed into a head. What makes this transformation possible? — we must ask.
To answer this question, we must first turn our soul's gaze to what we have said about the conceptual and cognitive aspects of the human soul, which are now bound to the head, about truth and wisdom. Usually, people today believe that what we acquire through knowledge is only there to enable us to form images of the external world, to learn something about the external world. There are philosophical epistemologists who theorize over and over again about how concepts or ideas are actually connected, what mysterious relationship exists between the nature of the concept and the thing that is represented by the concept. Such theories all suffer from a common flaw. I can only explain this flaw to you by using a metaphor. Imagine that a botanist, a gardener, wanted to investigate the nature of the grain of wheat, and he would go about it by saying: I will use chemistry to investigate the grain of wheat to determine the extent to which it contains the components that humans need to nourish themselves through wheat grain, wheat flour, or the like. And in this relationship that the wheat grain has to human nutrition, the botanist would seek the essence of the wheat grain, that is, the reasons why it consists of certain components. Such a person would be quite mistaken in believing that he could learn something about the essence of the wheat grain by investigating the extent to which it is a good food for humans. The grain of wheat arises within the whole wheat plant as the fruit of the wheat plant, and only those who investigate how a new wheat plant develops from the grain of wheat can learn why the grain of wheat is what it is in its essence. And it is a completely secondary factor that wheat grains contain the components necessary for human nutrition; this has nothing to do with the inner nature of wheat grains. Anyone who looks at everything only in terms of its usefulness and wants to make the knowledge of usefulness into the most genuine science will examine the grain of wheat chemically and find that something arises in nature that can serve as human food. But this has nothing to do with the inner nature of the grain of wheat that man feeds on it. As I said, it has to do with the inner nature of the wheat grain that a new wheat plant can develop from it.
For those who see things with insight, with imagination, the various philosophical epistemologists are just like people who examine the wheat grain for its ability to feed humans. For if one were to ask the grain of wheat about its original purpose, what it is there for, it would not answer: to feed people, but to give rise to a new wheat plant. Those who see through the cognitive, the conceptual, see the same mistake that I have just described in philosophical epistemologists. For what we call the cognitive, what lives in us as concept, as truth, as wisdom, is not originally intended to represent things outside ourselves. This representation of things outside is just as much a side stream as it is a side stream for wheat grains to feed humans. Knowledge is not there just to create images of external things, but it is there for something else. It is there to work and weave and live in humans in a certain way. By living here in existence between birth and death, we gradually accumulate wisdom, and at the same time we use wisdom in such a way that it can be a reflection of the external world, just as we use the grain of wheat as food. But the grain of wheat that we use as food is deprived of its inherent purpose of forming a new plant. In the same way, we deprive wisdom of its actual task by using it to grasp the external world. For the conceptual, the true, is not intended for this purpose in the first place. What is the purpose of this truth—I mean in the same sense as the wheat grain is intended to produce a new wheat plant? Our cognitive activity, our truthful work, is destined to develop forces within us between birth and death which transform our organism after death, that is, its form of energy, into the form of energy of the head! This is the remarkable connection that one discovers when one considers the passage of human beings between birth and death on the one hand, and between death and a new birth on the other. What human beings acquire in terms of knowledge serves first of all to transform their organism, except for the head, into a head that is then the head of the next incarnation. You will say: There are so many people who acquire no knowledge at all and remain terribly stupid; only a few become intelligent — among whom we usually count ourselves. But those who have said — and several people have said this independently of one another — that human beings learn more in their first three or four years of life, absorb more wisdom, than in the three years of academic education, are not entirely wrong. In the first three years of life, we really do learn a great deal that we can only learn through our heads on earth. We acquire the knowledge necessary to speak, to understand what is spoken, and much, much more. We really learn a great deal during this time. And this belongs to what we call wisdom.
Through what human beings acquire as their wisdom, and in which human beings are actually not so different, there surges and weaves as a force that transforms our organism into a head as it passes through the time between death and a new birth. It is basically a very complicated structure that we take in with our imagination and our knowledge. And only occasionally, in dreams such as I mentioned to you yesterday at the end of a Polish poet, is something quietly revealed to human beings of what surges and weaves, as it were, between the ideas of which we are fully conscious. But what surges and weaves there works within us to pass into actuality after death and transform our organism. Everything that is gained through knowledge accumulates to transform our organism, with the exception of what we use to perceive the external world. What we use to perceive the external world in the ordinary sense is lost in a certain sense for our development; we withdraw it from our development. Just as we withdraw all the wheat grains from the total process of wheat development — there are many more than those that are scattered back into the earth — which we use as food, so we actually withdraw much more, especially in the present period of human development, than we retain by appropriating the external world. Let us think back to earlier times, when people knew even more through inner clairvoyant knowledge. They did not concern themselves so much with the outer world. A population such as the ancient Egyptians or the ancient Chaldeans knew what they knew through atavistic clairvoyance and only a little through outer development. Today we live in a time that is, in a sense, the opposite in this respect. Today, much is taken in from outside and little is added from within development. The Greeks held that beautiful middle ground of a certain cultural development, which was not solely due to the fact that these Greeks were so particularly gifted. They certainly were, but that alone is not enough. They also owe the unity of their entire culture to the fact that the area of land occupied by the Greek people was relatively small, even in relation to the knowledge of the rest of the world. What did the Greeks know about anything other than Asia Minor, about Asia, what did they know about Africa, about America they knew nothing at all; they also knew nothing about a large part of Europe. The fact that Plato was still able to have knowledge of morality, of sophrosyne and dikaiosyne, is largely due to the fact that the arena in which Greek knowledge was outwardly expressed was small. Therefore, it was still possible to retain many of the intellectual powers of wisdom for inner development. But they used less of these forces for inner development than, for example, the ancient Egyptians or Chaldeans, or even the ancient Persians or Indians. In our time, when little by little the whole earth has been explored and made accessible, people seek to acquire as much external knowledge as possible. How this has increased! If it were as intensive as it is extensive, then people would take infinitely little, and even the most educated would take much, much less than any farmer, to transform the physical body into the physical head of the next incarnation. But thank God, most people have traveled in such a way that they have not seen much, but have followed the Baedeker or other travel guides, and despite their wide travels have not learned much; thus they do not deprive themselves of everything. Otherwise, precisely those who are constantly seeking sensations, who want to know everything from outside, would be in danger of coming into the next incarnation with a head that would be very little transformed from the rest of the body, that is, it would look very animalistic; for that would be their fate if few formative forces had been accumulated.
But now, comparisons taken from the imagination can also be extended. We can ask ourselves: If it is the case that what we use outwardly for knowledge, for the acquisition of external knowledge, is deprived of its actual inner essence — like the grain of wheat that is made into food, the inner nature of the grain of wheat — what similarity is there between what is external knowledge, becomes external knowledge, and the fact that wheat grains are also used as food? There is an inner similarity, but it must be brought out.
Let us turn our attention once more to this peculiar fact that a large number of wheat grains are not used to produce wheat plants, but are given as human food! Then we can say: the wheat grain is deprived of its straightforward development. Isn't it true that we have a grain of wheat that produces a grain, which in turn produces another grain, and so on? But numerous grains of wheat split off; they actually pass into a completely different realm, the realm of human food, which has nothing to do with the ongoing flow.
Here, in nature, you have the opportunity to form a concept of something that must be taken into account very, very carefully if you want to acquire a true worldview. Our external science has gradually brought us to the terrible point where we want to explain everything in such a way that what follows must always be the result of what went before, effect always following cause. There is nothing more foolish than this uniformity of the world in our imagination, as if we must always proceed from effect to cause, and from cause to effect. Later effects arise that have no direct causal connection with a previous cause; for how could the cause lie in the grain of wheat that it will become human food? At most, according to the cheap teleology that was still common in the eighteenth century, according to which the existence of certain cork-like substances in nature was explained by mysterious spirits who created these things so that champagne corks could be made. No, the wheat fruit really passes into another sphere.
And so it is when we acquire knowledge of external nature, of external things. Things pass into another sphere. And I ask you to take this truth very, very deeply. We humans can deprive ourselves of a great deal of what is truly within us, what we must use to allow our body of the present incarnation to pass into the head of the next incarnation. We can deprive ourselves of much in order to acquire present knowledge, but we must bear in mind that this knowledge must be there for something else. Just as wheat grains are ennobled, so to speak, by being used for human nourishment—they are given something appropriate in return for being removed from their original essence—so must it be with human external knowledge, which is developed completely contrary to the nature of the imaginative and the true. Everything that man acquires as truth, which consists in images of the outer world, he should surrender to the gods in his feelings. He should always bear this awareness within himself: if you acquire knowledge that you draw from the continuous stream, then be clear that the acquisition of knowledge must be a service to the gods. Whatever knowledge is acquired without our being aware that it is a sacred service in the development of humanity, without our surrendering to the higher spirits what we acquire from the external world, which nourish themselves on it, which take it into themselves—whatever knowledge we acquire that we do not accompany with this feeling, which we simply acquire thoughtlessly, is like grains of wheat that fall into the earth and rot, that is, they achieve no goals, neither their own nor those of others, which serve as human nourishment.
Here you see a point where you must feel how necessary it is that a very specific practical result emerge from our spiritual scientific endeavors, that we do not just absorb something by learning, do not just turn something into knowledge, but that through the absorption of spiritual science, a total feeling is placed in our soul. We associate with the concept of knowledge the feeling that knowledge should be a divine service, and that it is fundamentally a sin against the divine meaning of evolution to profane knowledge, to drag knowledge down from its divine destiny.
I said: Actually, it is only in recent times that the possibility of acquiring a great deal of external knowledge has arisen. With the Egyptians, almost all knowledge was still internal, with little external knowledge; only the next things formed the external knowledge. During the Greco-Latin cultural epoch, people gained the opportunity to acquire more and more external knowledge. That was not so long ago. But then the opportunity also arose to find the way to transform knowledge into divine service when Christ came to earth with his proclamation.
Here again you have a connection that makes history clear to us. At the moment in human development when knowledge becomes primarily knowledge of the external world, at that very moment Christ appears as emerging from the spiritual world in order to bring about the possibility that human beings, in their perception of Christ's divine guidance, may turn their knowledge into divine service by directing it toward Christ. Even if humanity today is not yet very far in the development of this feeling of turning knowledge into worship, as humanity comes to understand more and more how Christ deifies earthly life, it will also learn to turn knowledge into worship.
Thus we live through everything of which our head is the outward sign, in such a way that we use, as it were, a small foundation to transform our body into a head. And the rest, when we accompany it with the right feeling, as I have just characterized it, we use to enable higher spiritual beings to receive a certain nourishment through our grasped concepts. We seek to acquire knowledge for the gods, just as wheat grows for the nourishment of human beings. This is indeed so, but this purpose must first become appropriate to it. Thus, through our feelings, our knowledge must first become appropriate to the purpose just mentioned. Much, much will depend on whether such feelings can be developed if the development of humanity is to be healthy.
In the ancient mysteries and mystery schools, it was still taken for granted that those who were allowed to acquire knowledge also held this knowledge sacred. For that was one of the main reasons why not everyone was admitted to the mysteries. Those who were to be admitted to the mysteries had to guarantee that they would truly hold the knowledge sacred, that they would regard it as a service to the gods. This was still present through an atavistic clairvoyance. Now humanity must acquire it again. Humanity has gone through a period — we know that this is justified — in which it has developed toward materialism. It must recover from this materialism, and it will only recover if the knowledge is once again connected with feelings of sacred service, as it was in the past. But in the future, this must happen out of consciousness. And this will only be possible if spiritual science continues to spread throughout humanity. Knowledge should not be like a seed that rots in the ground. Everything that is placed in the service of external usefulness, of external mechanical devices, is like a seed that rots. What is not placed in the service of God is lost. It is neither used to help us in our next incarnation, nor is it used as nourishment for higher spiritual beings. The rotting of the seed is a real process; something is happening. The waste of knowledge without making it a divine process, a service to the gods, is also a real process. It would take us too far today to explain what the rotting of a grain of wheat means, but it is worthless rotting because it cannot sprout, because it must perish. But knowledge that is not placed in the service of God is seized by Ahriman, passes into Ahriman's service, and forms Ahriman's power, which he inserts into the world process through his spiritual servants, thereby introducing more obstacles into the world process than are justly allowed to be there, than must be there.
This gives you an idea of the whole meaning of what lives in us in a true, imaginative way. In the next two lectures, I will now discuss beauty and morality, and then summarize the three things in order to awaken a possibility of understanding the human being even more deeply.