Matter Incidental to the Question of Destiny
GA 172
18 November 1916, Dornach
Translator Unknown
You will have seen how intricate are the deeper problems of destiny in human life. The fact is brought home to us when we attempt to approach them by the paths which spiritual science opens out.
Many another thing will yet be necessary to enable the man of the present time to enter rightly into these questions, and thus to lead him to a fruitful grasp, a really practical hold on life. Considering the complicated problems into which we are now trying to find our way, we must explore many a side-track so as to understand the difficulties which confront us here especially. In a certain sense we are all of us a product of the thinking of the present time. So many of us believe ourselves to be unbiased in our thought; but it is always well to be unsparing in self-knowledge and self-criticism, and most of all with respect to the virtue of ‘unbiased thought.’
It is often very difficult to discuss these matters, for language itself is obstinate when we try to elaborate ideas according to reality. A concept, elaborated—drawn forth, as it were,—from the rich store of occult science, may easily appear to lead in quite a different direction from what is really meant. In this way many a misunderstanding can arise. Nowadays one may often make a certain observation, especially when people are discussing the biography, the human life, of great or outstanding personalities. Let me give one example. A booklet has just been published here in Switzerland about Friedrich Theodor Vischer, author of Auch Einer and of a large treatise of Æsthetics, of whom we spoke the other day in a different connection. This book describes the life of the distinguished Swabian with genuine interest and real devotion. ‘Vischer with a V’ as he is nicknamed was indeed a man of sterling qualities and of a good spirit—diligent and productive withal. I give him here as an example of certain things which we will now consider, as to the problems of human destiny. We might equally well have chosen some other example.
‘Vischer with a V’ was a true Swabian, living and thriving in the 19th century. In the recently published biography we are told how he grew out of straitened circumstances,—how through the poverty of his family he had to be educated in the charity school at Tübingen, and so on. And at the very outset we are told how even the grammar school education which he thus received was limited and narrow-minded. The boys learned Latin thoroughly and were afterwards introduced to the Greek authors too. But at a late age they were still quite ignorant of their home country—for instance, Into what river does the Neckar flow? They had never even seen a map ... and so on. Many such faults in the educational system are cited.
Now let us consider the matter well. ‘Vischer with a V’ grew up to be a great man in some respects, and he achieved great work. He grew to be a famous man. We want to understand, therefore, how he became what he was. How did he become the specific individuality who stands there in history as Friedrich Theodor Vischer? The fact that he had not seen a map until he reached a certain age was indeed not without importance; for if he had, a certain trait in his character would have been absent. And many another thing which is sharply criticised in this book was equally necessary. Look at it from a larger aspect and in the long run we shall say, The soul of Friedrich Theodor Vischer, descending from the spiritual worlds, hit upon this milieu and no other—by an unfailing choice. He wanted to have an education which would make it possible for him not to see a map for so and so long. He wanted to have the Neckar—the little river of his home country—for a long time before him, and yet not know into what river it flows. Study Friedrich Theodore Vischer and you will see: All his queer cranks and eccentricities—and he had plenty of them—are an integral part of his greatness. Thus it is quite unsuitable, in writing his biography, to blame the schools which made him what he was.
Some one may say at this point, Now he is trying to tell us that schools which fail to show their children any maps are after all excellent schools. No, that is not the point. Such a retort would be unjust. But for ‘Vischer with a V’ it was good so; it had to be.
We have experienced this sort of thing often enough in the 19th century, and on a larger and larger scale in our own days. Famous natural scientists have arisen to protest against the existing system of education, demanding the introduction of far more science into the schools. And when one asked these gentlemen, ‘Well, but you yourselves went through the existing system, is it so bad after all?’—one generally got no answer. Let us make no mistake about it. Everything has at least two aspects,—indeed it has often many more than two.
What does it mean when a biographer—in this case it is a woman—sets to work and forms her ideas in such a way as to write down what I have just cited. It can contribute nothing to an understanding of the personality in question. Forming ideas like that, one simply cuts as with a knife—only one does it in the mind—cuts into the living being one is treating. If one had not this impulse to ‘cut’ with one's ideas, one would describe with loving interest what the school was like,—in all its narrowness—how it brought forth this individuality. But no, one cuts and criticises. To criticise is indeed very largely to ‘cut.’ What is the origin of this?
It is due to a specific human quality—a quality very widely spread, especially in the thought-system of the present time, and that is cruelty. Only it is rooted in the subconscious life and people are unaware that they possess it. Because the people of our time have no courage to practise cruelty externally, they practise it in their concepts and ideas. In many a work of our time we can feel this latent cruelty in the whole manner of exposition. In much that is done and said in our time we can perceive it. It is far more widespread in the foundations of human souls than we imagine.
I have told you how they are wont, in certain schools of so-called ‘black magic,’ to acquire the black-magical qualities they need by causing their pupils, to begin with, to cut into the living flesh of animals. Certain qualities of the soul are thereby developed. Not everyone can do that in the present time; but many a one finds satisfaction for the same craving in his system of thoughts and concepts, where it produces—not indeed black magic, but the civilization of our time. Let us make no mistake about it. Much in our time is permeated with this quality. Only by observing such things as this can we gain a really unprejudiced grasp of the world in which we find ourselves ... Only so, and not otherwise—not by any means.
Now in the present time certain beginnings have decidedly been made towards a true perspective of the conditions of the fifth post-Atlantean age. We cannot understand this age if we merely criticise it, giving ourselves up to an abstract idealism; ... if we fail to bear in mind, for instance, how all that appears in our time as mechanism, mechanical civilization, belongs with absolute necessity to the 5th post-Atlantean age. Merely to criticise and denounce the mechanical qualities of our age, is senseless.
Certain beginnings, as I said, have indeed been made, towards a human understanding—however limited—of what inspires the fifth post-Atlantean age already now, and will do so increasingly. Hitherto, however, few concepts and ideas have been found, adequate to the realities of this fifth post-Atlantean age. Moreover, people are too little inclined to study the works of those who have made a real attempt to grasp the conditions of the age. They will have to be studied; and in many respects, these efforts especially will have to be followed up by a true and vigorous spiritual-scientific movement.
There is, for instance, a distinguished poet of the fifth post-Atlantean age, whose poems are truly vibrant with the life of the age. I refer to Max Eyth—a man who ought to be well known. He is a true poet of our age. He, too, was a Swabian—son of a Swabian schoolmaster, who wanted his son also to be a schoolmaster. Karma, however, had a different intention, and at an early age Max Eyth turned to a technical career. So he became a thoroughgoing engineer, and subsequently went abroad—to England, where he devoted himself to the manufacture of steam ploughs. Indeed, he became the poet of the steam plough. The warm and loving heart with which he sings the praise of this strange beast of modern time—the steam plough—that is the true poetry of our age. Strange things are interwoven in his heart. On the one hand Max Eyth is a man absolutely devoted to the technics and machinery of modern time. On the other hand, he is receptive to all that a modern man's intelligence will understand if he finds his way with open mind into those things which can be opened out, if this intelligence is trained in the mechanical and materialistic concepts of the fifth post-Atlantean age. For instance there is one of the novels of Max Eyth, where—for the rest—he deals with the purely modern life of Egypt. (He worked a lot in Egypt, whither the English Society, in whose employ he was, exported their steam ploughs, which he had to test and put into action on the spot.) In one of his novels on this subject, he describes how the pyramids are built after a certain system. If we calculate certain relationships (we find this in the appendix to the novel) we discover the number Ï€, with which the double radius of a circle must be multiplied to get the circumference. We find it, true to at least thirty places of decimals! You know how it is—3.14159 and so on. But it goes on ad infinitum—many, many decimals. Now one might easily imagine this number Ï€ to be the result of comparatively recent discoveries. Max Eyth, however, finds that the Egyptian priests must have known it in very ancient times, even to the thirtieth or fortieth place of decimals. For they thereby determined the proportions according to which they built the pyramids. Engineer that he was, there was revealed to Max Eyth much that lies deeply hidden in the old pyramid-construction. And this enabled him to point out that our civilization has in reality a twofold origin. There is its origin in ancient times, when people based themselves on quite another science—a science connected with the old atavistic clairvoyance which subsequently disappeared and must be found anew in our own time. But another thing, too, you will find in Max Eyth; and—inconspicuous as it may seem—this is the great importance. Among his poems, some of which are collected in the volume Hinter Pflug und Schraubstock (‘Behind the Plough and the Lathe’) there is one which raises a great riddle, as it were, of life and fate. He describes an engineer—a builder of bridges. Magnificently he describes the faculties he has,—how he is able to build his bridges. This engineer, however, is—as we might say—a rather flighty man of genius. He builds a certain bridge. Once more, it is magnificently described. He himself is in the first train to cross it. But he made one slip in the construction, and when the first train goes over, the bridge collapses and he is killed. There we have a tremendous Karmic question—not of course answered, but thrown up. We see how the modern man approaches these great questions of destiny. Here we have a man, brilliant in his profession, losing his life at a comparatively early age even through his profession—ruined by the very work which he himself created. This poem, I would say, stands before us with a mighty question; and these are the very questions to which spiritual science will seek the answers.
Of course, such things occur in life in manifold variations. Here we have described a case which shows us the fulfilment of Karma, as it were, with the greatest acceleration—with the greatest speed. But let us assume (it is of course only an hypothesis, for when such a thing occurs, Karma works itself out with necessity)—let us assume as an hypothesis what might have happened in another case. Suppose the man had not been in the first train, but had been sitting quietly at home at his fireside. Well, he might have got two years imprisonment, but scarcely any more would have happened to him in this life between birth and death. How would it then have been?
That, you see, is the great question. The same thing which would have brought death into his Karma—death which he suffered by his own work—must find its way into his Karma inevitably, whatever happens. The man who does not get it here, will get it in his life between death and a new birth. Somehow, the experience must be undergone. Such an experience may be undergone with acceleration, as in the case Max Eyth describes, or on the other hand it may extend over long spaces of time. Thus will the fifth post-Atlantean age engender great and important questions of fate, out of the immediate reality of life. The very conditions of life in this age will bring it home to many individuals. Riddles are being set by life in a new way; it was not so at all in former epochs.
We can well observe it, if we consider those individuals of our time who are gifted, in a way, with clear, light-filled intelligence. In their artistic creations they are looking already now for quite other complications of life than were looked for in former epochs. Moreover, it is often just the ones who stand in the practical vocations of today, who discover these significant complications of life. In a certain respect the books of Max Eyth are most instructive. In the first place, he is a really great and gifted poet. And secondly, being an altogether modern man, he creates right out of the requirements of modern life.
It is not without interest (let me make this remark, once more, in parenthesis)—those who read Max Eyth can learn by purely external reading many a fact which theosophists in their turn might find it important to know—all manner of things, for instance, connected with the life of the first President of the Theosophical Society, Colonel Olcott. All this is hidden in Max Eyth's descriptions. For he was in America at a time when Olcott was up to all manner of things over there. In short, social Karma too is brought home to us if we do not scorn to make ourselves to some extent acquainted with this very modern spirit.
All in all, it is a peculiar fact. Eyth was a man of genius; sometimes, however, people who are not exactly ‘men of genius,’ but whom the fifth post-Atlantean age—with its mechanisms of life—has moulded and produced, perceive with astounding clarity the intricacies of this modern life, through the peculiar form of their intelligence.
For instance, there is a modern lawyer, known to myself and to others. At least he was a lawyer in his youth—at a period of life when this profession is generally un-remunerative. He was a gifted thinker, observing the things around him without prejudice, and his outstanding ability made no little impression on his superiors,—as I suppose you would call them—not so much for his real clarity of vision, but because he was useful to them, being a good and expeditious worker. Well, having done excellent service as an ‘actuary’ or ‘assessor’—whatever they call these official posts—he was promoted to a ministry of state. Here, too, he proved an excellent worker, albeit one who observed everything with open eyes. And so on one occasion he was given an important commission. He was to prepare a Report on school and educational matters, and his instruction was: the gist of the report should be to recommend the transition to a kind of ‘Liberal’ system. This idea pleased him, and—clear thinker that he was, seeing through the facts,—he produced a very good report, a really excellent plan of reform. Scholastic affairs were to be ‘liberalised’ and given a more modern form. Meanwhile, however, while he was making the report, the Government policy had changed and they now wanted a reactionary report. So his superior said, Your report is so excellent, I doubt not you could make an equally good reactionary one. Will you not now prepare me a reactionary Report? To which he answered, No, I cannot.—Cannot, how so? No, this represents my conviction! What,—your conviction? ... The superior, in short, was very angry. After all, he realised, this man is no good. (For surely we can have no use for a man who, not content to be a good worker, even has his own convictions!) Nevertheless, he was an excellent jurist and a first-class worker. What does one do in such a case? He has proved his ability in all directions and is well known as a good jurist. Well, one tries somehow to promote him. When people prove their ability so well, one must somehow keep them quiet and content. And so, with a little wire-pulling behind the scenes (as the saying goes), one day—I think it was at a game of skittles—as if by chance, a secretary of a big Theatre met him. The secretary said, You know the post of Director in the Theatre is vacant? Well, the said man—being a lawyer by profession and hitherto a civil servant in a ministry of state—naturally had no suspicions when he was told this interesting piece of news. But when they had finished their game, the other said to him: Come with me now to the Cafe, and I will explain the matter more in detail. Would you not like the job yourself? At the moment we are without a Director at the Theatre. No doubt we could choose some man or other, but we cannot tell whether he will want the post under the prevailing conditions. The other, being well-informed and very much on the spot in such matters of administration, answered: He must accept! He must be willing, and if he is not—you simply commandeer him.
The end of the matter was, the post was offered to himself. But there was one difficulty. There was a very famous actress at the theatre, whose favour the Director must, of course, enjoy. Well, said the secretary, cannot you somehow earn her favour? ‘Oh, well, if that is all! ... True, I have only been to the theatre seven times in my whole life. But while I am about it, if I do undertake to become a theatrical Director, I shall somehow manage to earn the favour of this actress. Can you not tell me what she likes to eat?’ Well, the secretary happened to know. It was Mohnbeugerl—some kind of poppy-seed cakes. That was a fine solution. ‘We will drive to the confectioner's at once,’ he said, ‘and order a large consignment of poppy-seed cakes.’ Sure enough, early the next morning they were delivered at the actress's house. In the afternoon the secretary had to call on her—to sound her, as the saying goes. ‘We would like to make this man Director,’ he said, ‘What do you think about it?’ He knew that she was very influential. ‘Well,’ she said, ‘True, I know nothing of him, but hitherto nothing but good has come to me from him.’ Now, therefore, things were so far arranged that he could become Director of the Theatre. But there was also the critic to be considered—the most famous critic of the town. He too must be won over. And he always wrote the most dreadful stuff ... till one fine day he too was changed in his attitude, so that at least he no longer wrote about him quite unfavourably, albeit not exactly with good will. How was it brought about? I am telling you no fairy tales; this actually happened. I will only characterize it briefly. The important personage of the Theatre—he who was even higher than the Director—did not know what to do. The Director was there; nay, more, he was making good, for he proved just as efficient as Director of the Theatre as he had been in his other jobs. But the head personage was at his wits' end. We cannot dismiss the Director who has only just been appointed; and yet, the critic is constantly running him down. What did he do? He invited them both to dinner (not letting either of them know that the other was coming) and served them with excellent (wines. The Director was able to drink and drink and drink. So was the critic, but only to a certain extent. His capacity was less than the Director's. And so it came about that one fine morning very early—I think it was at five o'clock—the Director rings the front-door bell at the critic's flat and insists that he must speak to the critic's wife in person,—he has something most important to deliver, which he has left at the bottom of the stairs. Well, she put on her dressing gown and thereupon he brought her husband as a ‘pretty pile of woe,’—handed him over in a rather limp condition. From that day onward, the criticisms were a little better. Afterwards, having been just a little too bold as Director of the theatre (in the view of his superiors once more) he was ‘promoted’ again into the sphere of jurisprudence.
Now this man has written an excellent description of all that he saw in his work. I only wished to point out how such people especially, who come out of the immediate life of the present, are often able to characterise it very significantly.
There is another interesting case—a man not unlike the one of whom I have just told you, though, if I may say so, he was a little superior to him in style. He wrote many things during his life. But shortly before his death (all these men are dead by now!) he wrote an interesting narrative, a short story, a typical work of art of the present time. How does one write short stories nowadays, according to the prevalent taste? On no account must anything really ‘spiritual’ be contained; or if it is, it must emerge with the utmost clarity that the reader may believe it or not, as he pleases, and at any rate—he will do better to treat it as a fairy tale. I will describe the subject matter, which this man chose out of life of the present.
The hero is, once more, a lawyer by training and profession. He advances comparatively far in the circles in which the man of whom I spoke just now was living for so long. All this can, of course, be described. We describe how he goes through the several stages in the career of jurisprudence, experiencing this and that, such and such complications. Then again—for needless to say, this too is modern and correct,—we can weave a love-story into the plot. We can describe how some exotic maid arrives, accompanied by her mother. The high official of the law falls in love with her. And now, some story of espionage forms part of the plot, which he himself—as judge or public prosecutor—has to treat. And the affair is somehow connected with the girl with whom he has fallen in love, and this brings him into dire conflict. In the end you can describe, quite realistically, how he comes to commit suicide.
But the author to whom I now refer did not do it so. He wove the following very significant theme into his story. Outwardly, the plot is almost exactly like the one I just related. But in addition he describes how this official of the law read Schopenhauer and other Philosophers. And he read Philosophy so as to unite it—if I may say so—with his own individual being, right down into his nervous system. Now he is a first-class lawyer. What does it mean to be a first-class lawyer, as judge (or public prosecutor)? It means, to devise all manner of clever points, completely to entangle the accused. (And as defender? Then he must be well up in all the clever points and cute devices of defenders.) This lawyer, in a word, is extraordinarily clever; and he condemns a man in circumstances similar to those I just described. But the accused, during the proceedings, behaves in an extraordinary way—demonically, one might say. Especially his look remains quite unforgettable to those who witnessed it. In the end, needless to say, he is locked up. And the whole affair somehow involves the girl with whom the ‘judge’ in question falls in love. The man is condemned to 20 years' penal servitude. And he is ailing ...
The ‘judge’ is very well described in this short story. One night after the case is over (which in the general opinion he conducted brilliantly),—meanwhile, he has not given the convict another thought—one night at twelve o'clock, he awakens (this will no doubt be more or less correct) and remains in a half-sleeping state. About two there is a knock at the door of his bedroom. In comes the convict himself. Imagine the judge's situation. But he falls again into a half-slumbering condition, and when he awakens it is day. Now he is dreadfully afraid. He goes into the law-courts. He hears nothing; only once, as he is walking along the corridor, he hears the name of the convict called. It gives him an awful fright. He resolves once more to study the records of the case. He has them given to him; but for three weeks he leaves them on one side. Till finally the fact emerges in a conversation: On a certain night at two o'clock the convict died in prison. It was at the very minute—the judge is afterwards able to ascertain,—at the very minute when he visited him in his bedroom.
Such is the plot of the short story. Hofrat Eisenhardt is the title. Eventually he dies by suicide. Hofrat Eisenhardt, by Berger,—an altogether modern story, showing by other descriptions also, which occur in it, how well the author was acquainted with many attempts of recent times to penetrate into the secrets of occult life. From this point of view alone, the story is excellently written. And now there is a strange thing. This Berger is not the same man whom I described to you before. I gave him only as an instance of a man who looks around him with clear and open vision, and well describes what is the very nerve of the fifth post-Atlantean epoch. But as his colleague, as it were, in the same profession, I wanted to cite the instance of this Berger—Alfred, Baron von Berger, is his full name—who wrote the brilliant story, Hofrat Eisenhardt. From the whole way in which it is written, one can see: The man is well acquainted with the many efforts of modern times to enter into the spiritual world. Throughout his life, Alfred Baron von Berger was an author; he wrote many things. But he did not publish this story till he had reached a post from which no further advancement was possible. Indeed, ‘by chance’ as one would say, he published it very shortly before his death. All this is significant. For it shows us how the men of our time—if they want to ‘get anywhere,’ as they say, in outer life,—do not do well to tamper with such questionable matters. On the other hand, it also shows us how it is the real striving of the men of our time to penetrate into the mysterious aspects of existence, which will indeed impress themselves upon us more and more, for they confront us with great and important riddles.
If we wish to study the problems of destiny without prejudice, we must above all acquire free and open vision. We must try—if you will forgive the hard saying—not to sleep our way through life, but to look about us. Let me tell you, as it were symbolically, what is the point. Suppose this is one stream of life, this the second and this the third. Life, as you know, consists of many streams, crossing one another in the most manifold directions,—the life of the individual, the life of human groups, even the life of all humanity on Earth. The concepts which predominate to-day are generally too easy-going to unravel the tangled threads of life. Very often it is necessary to focus our gaze on one point and then again on quite another, so as to bring precisely these two points into relation—looking at them both together.
We must envisage the right facts. Then and then only do we find the searchlights which illumine life's situations. Now you will ask me, How can such a thing be done? Yes, that is just the question. Study spiritual science in the right way, and you will discover by Imagination those points in life which you must see together, in order that life may be revealed to you. Otherwise you will be trying to study life, observing event after event and understanding nothing of it, like the present-day historians, who draw the threads from event to event, but fail to understand. For the real point is to study the world on a symptomatic basis. This, above all, will be more and more needful, to study the world symptomatically, that is to say, to turn our vision in the right directions and draw the connecting links. Especially when it is a question of concretely studying Karma, especially then is it necessary to be able to see things symptomatically. In the study of Karma there is very much to confuse us, for in effect there is so much that allures us.
This symptomatic study, certain occult societies of our time have tried to keep as far as possible away from mankind. I have already told you how there have remained over, from very ancient institutions, certain brotherhoods which call themselves occult,—notably in the West of Europe. Within these occult societies the study of human character has been pursued, with the definite object of using human characters in the right way—with the object of being able to get hold of them properly. And many means have been adopted to withhold from the remainder of mankind this knowledge, which has been studiously cultivated—if I may put it so—within the walls or within the gates of such societies. It will be one of the most interesting things when the connection is exposed between the occult endeavours of certain societies of our time and the events of public life; when the threads are revealed which pass from certain occult communities to the events of our time, and when their methods are unveiled. For those who worked out of such occult societies knew how to reckon with human characters, taking the threads of their Karmas in hand and guiding them—without the knowledge of those concerned. In the Theosophical Society many attempts were made but they were mere attempts; they did not get beyond the amateurish stage. For they were not so skilled as in these other societies. Of course it is difficult to speak about these things, especially to-day, when an objective characterization is not only accused of prejudice, but is even forbidden by the law. It is difficult—nay, in certain respects quite impossible, to speak about these things. Nevertheless they must be hinted at, in one way or another. For it will not do for people simply to go on living in their time, playing their part in all that enters from the Karma of the age into the unconscious life of human souls, and then—while they go on living in this vague and nebulous conditions which prevails—claiming at the same time to cultivate spiritual science, which requires a clear and unprejudiced mind. In certain matters, Truth must prevail when it becomes a question of the real things of the occult world. The point is, there must be the real Will to Truth. This Will to Truth finds much resistance, in our time above all, for the sense of Truth has gradually become lost to men. Think only of this: in the public life of our time it is generally not a question of getting at the Truth, but rather, of repeating what will suit one side or another, according to the prevailing group-prejudices.
Again and again, we come up against the subjects of which it is impossible to speak. And yet, it would be so necessary to do so. This very fact I beg you clearly to envisage. Here, too, we must make no mistake about it; it is so. You may ask, What have these things to do with the question of Karma which we are now treating? They have very much indeed to do with it, and we must try to enter still more into some of these things if we desire at length to reach the goal which we are seeking in this course of lectures.
Sechster Vortrag
Sie haben gesehen, wie verwickelt die tieferen Schicksalsfragen des menschlichen Lebens sind; wir erkennen das, wenn wir uns ihnen zu nähern versuchen auf den Wegen, die uns die Geisteswissenschaft möglich macht. Allein es wird mancherlei notwendig sein für den Menschen der Gegenwart, damit er sich in richtiger Weise in dasjenige hineinversetze, was wirklich zu einer fruchtbaren Auffassung des Lebens führen kann. Und wir müssen schon, wenn wir die verwickelten Probleme betrachten, an denen wir jetzt versuchen uns zurechtzufinden, ich möchte sagen, manche Seitenwege gehen, um die Schwierigkeiten ins Auge zu fassen, die dem Verständnis sich gerade in solchen Gebieten entgegensetzen. Wir sind ja in gewissem Sinne alle herausgewachsen aus dem Denken der Gegenwart, und wenn auch mancher glaubt, daß er vorurteilsloses Denken hat, so ist es immer gut, sich gerade mit Bezug auf die Vorurteilslosigkeit des Denkens recht sehr die Selbstprüfung, die Selbsterkenntnis nicht zu ersparen. Daher sei, bevor wir weiterschreiten, auf einzelnes aufmerksam gemacht.
Es ist oftmals recht schwierig, diese Dinge zu besprechen, weil schon die Sprache widerspenstig ist, wenn man wirklichkeitsgemäße Begriffe ausarbeiten will.Man kann sehr leicht glauben, daß ein Begriff, der ausgearbeitet wird, der gewissermaßen herausgeholt wird aus der Summe der okkulten Wissenschaft, auf ganz anderes hinziele als auf das, was eigentlich gemeint ist, und dadurch entstehen dann die mannigfaltigsten Mißverständnisse. Man kann heute sehr häufig eine gewisse Beobachtung machen, wenn menschliche Lebensläufe besprochen werden, welche sich auf große, bedeutende Persönlichkeiten beziehen. Ich will ein Beispiel anführen. Es ist jetzt eben hier in der Schweiz eine kleine Schrift erschienen über den ja neulich in anderem Zusammenhange erwähnten V-Vischer, den Verfasser des «Auch Einer» und der großen «Ästhetik». Mit einer gewissen liebevollen Hingabe wird das Leben dieses gesinnungstüchtigen und außerordentlich arbeitsreichen Schwaben, des V-Vischer, beschrieben. Er sei hier nur als Beispiel angeführt für gewisse Dinge, die wir betrachten wollen in bezug auf die menschliche Schicksalsfrage; man könnte ja ebensogut ein anderes Beispiel herauswählen.
Eine richtige Schwabennatur war V-Vischer, eine Natur, die herangedieh im 19. Jahrhundert. Nun wird in der Lebensbeschreibung,. die eben jetzt erschienen ist, gezeigt, wie er aus armen Verhältnissen herausgewachsen ist, der Friedrich Theodor Vischer, wie er durch die ärmlichen Verhältnisse seiner Familie gezwungen worden ist, die Stiftserziehung im Tübinger Stift durchzumachen und so weiter. Nun das, worauf es mir ankommt, ist das Folgende: Es wird gleich anfangs darauf hingewiesen, wie schon die Gymnasialerziehung dieses V-Vischer eine gewisse engherzige war, wie die Buben wohl gelernt haben, sich zurechtzufinden im Latein, später in griechischen Schriftstellern, wie sie aber eigentlich bis zu einem sehr späten Alter nicht gewußt haben, in welchen Hauptfluß der Neckar sich ergießt, wie sie überhaupt bis in ein verhältnismäßig spätes Alter niemals eine Landkarte gesehen haben und so weiter. Viele solche Fehler des Erziehungssystems werden angeführt.
Nun bedenken wir einmal die Sache recht. Der V-Vischer ist in gewisser Beziehung ein großer Mann geworden und hat Bedeutendes geleistet, ist ein berühmter Mann geworden. Wir müssen uns klar sein darüber, wodurch er das geworden ist, wodurch er gerade diese spezifische Individualität geworden ist, als die er dasteht in der Geschichte. Dazu gehört auch, daß er bis zu einem gewissen Lebensjahre keine Landkarte gesehen hatte; hätte er eine Landkarte gesehen bis zu einem bestimmten Lebensjahre, so wäre ein bestimmter Charakterzug nicht in seiner Seele gewesen. Und manches andere, was da scharf getadelt wird, das mußte sein. Und wenn wir es schließlich von größerem Gesichtspunkte überschauen, so werden wir uns sagen: Die Seele dieses V-Vischer stieg herunter aus den geistigen Welten und hat sich gerade dieses Milieu ausgesucht, wollte gerade eine Erziehung haben, welche ihr ermöglichte, soundso lange bewahrt davor zu bleiben, eine Landkarte zu sehen, wollte gerade lange Zeit zwar den Neckar immer vor sich haben, das Heimatflüßchen, aber wollte nicht wissen, in welchen Hauptstrom sich der Neckar ergießt. Und gerade, wenn man diesen V-Vischer studiert, so sieht man, wie alle seine Schrullen, alle seine Eigenheiten, die er ja hinlänglich hatte, richtige integrierende Bestandteile seiner Größe sind, so daß es sich ziemlich deplaciert ausnimmt, wenn man versucht, seine Biographie zu schreiben und dann die Schulen tadelt, die eigentlich dasjenige gemacht haben, was er geworden ist.
Seien wir uns nur klar darüber, daß jetzt nicht einer sagen darf: Nun hat er einmal wiederum sagen wollen, daß die Schulen, die den Kindern keine Landkarten zeigen, ganz die rechten Schulen seien. — Aber für den V-Vischer war das doch ganz gut und mußte so sein. Wir haben ja das vielfach dann im 19. Jahrhundert und bis in unsere Tage herein ins Große erlebt. Wenn namentlich gewisse dann berühmt gewordene Naturforscher aufgetreten sind und sich gegen die Erziehung gewandt haben, gegen das Erziehungssystem, und gefordert haben, daß man viel mehr Naturwissenschaft hineintragen soll in die Schulen, und wenn man die Herren gefragt hat: Und nun, ihr selber, ihr seid ja durch diese Verhältnisse gegangen; findet ihr, daß sie so schlecht waren? - so hat man in der Regel keine Antwort bekommen. Man muß sich schon klar darüber sein, daß ein jegliches Ding mindestens zwei, aber unter Umständen recht viel mehr Seiten har. Was ist denn das nur eigentlich, wenn sich der Biograph - in diesem Falle war es eine Biographin - hinsetzt und nun so Begriffe, Vorstellungen formt, daß das hingeschrieben wird, was ich Ihnen gesagt habe? Aus dem Hinschreiben einer solchen Sache kann man ja natürlich zum Verständnis der betreffenden Persönlichkeit nichts beitragen. Wenn man solche Begriffe formt, schneidet man eigentlich, geistig nur, in das Wesen hinein, das man behandelt. Würde man nicht hineinschneiden wollen mit seinen Begriffen, so würde man gerade liebevoll charakterisieren müssen, wie die Schule war inall ihrer Engherzigkeit und wie sie diese Individualität hervorgebracht hat. Aber man schneidet, man kritisiert, und Kritisieren ist ja in vieler Beziehung Schneiden. Woher kommt das?
Nun, das kommt von einer ganz bestimmten menschlichen Eigenschaft, die namentlich im Gedankensystem der Gegenwart weit, weit verbreitet ist, die im Unterbewußten wurzelt, deren sich die Menschen also nicht bewußt sind: das ist die Grausamkeit. Und weil die Menschen in der Gegenwart nicht gerade den Mut haben, diese Grausamkeit äußerlich zu betreiben, sind sie grausam in Begriffen und Ideen. Und vielen Werken der Gegenwart merkt man die Grausamkeit an in der Art der Schilderung, in der Art der Darstellung, und vielem, was getan wird und gesagt wird in der Gegenwart, merkt man die Grausamkeit an, die auf dem Grund der menschlichen Seele in viel weiterer Verbreitung vorhanden ist, als man denkt. Ich habe Ihnen gesagt, daß in gewissen sogenannten schwarzmagischen Schulen die Gepflogenheit besteht, sich die Eigenschaften, die man braucht zu schwarzer Magie, dadurch anzueignen, daß man den Zögling in lebendiges Fleisch von Tieren zunächst schneiden läßt. Dadurch werden gewisse Eigenschaften der Seele anerzogen. Das kann nicht jeder machen in der Gegenwart. Aber dieselbe Lust befriedigt mancher einfach in seinem Begriffssystem, wo es zwar nicht zur schwarzen Magie führt, aber zur Zivilisation der Gegenwart. Und von dieser Eigenschaft ist vieles, vieles in der Gegenwart durchsetzt, dessen müssen wir uns klar sein. Nur dadurch, daß man auf solche Dinge wirklich achtet, kommt man zu einem vorurteilsfreien Auffassen der Welt, in die man hineingestellt ist, sonst nicht, sonst auf keinen Fall.
Und es sind in der Gegenwart durchaus Anfänge vorhanden, die dahin streben, einen gewissen Ausblick in die Verhältnisse des fünften nachatlantischen Zeitraums zu erringen. Denn man kommt diesem fünften nachatlantischen Zeitraum verständnisvoll nicht bei,wenn man ihn nur kritisiert, wenn man nur gewissermaßen einem abstrakten Idealismus sich hingibt, ohne in Erwägung zu ziehen, daß das, was zum Beispiel als Mechanismus und mechanistische Kultur in der Gegenwart auftritt, ganz notwendig zu diesem fünften nachatlantischen Zeitraum gehört. Bloß abkritisieren das Maschinenmäßige in unserer Zeit, das hat keinen Sinn. Nun sind wirklich Anfänge aufgetreten dahingehend, ein wenig Verständnis zu gewinnen, menschliches Verständnis zu gewinnen für dasjenige, was unsern fünften nachatlantischen Zeitraum schon jetzt belebt und immer mehr beleben wird. Allein es sind noch wenig wirklichkeitsgemäße Begriffe für unseren fünften nachatlantischen Zeitraum gefunden, und man hat auch nicht viel Neigung, sich mit denjenigen Leuten zu beschäftigen, welche versucht haben, diesen Zustand des fünften nachatlantischen Zeitraums zu fassen. Man wird sich mit diesen Leuten beschäftigen müssen, denn an ihre Bestrebung wird sich gerade wahre, energische geisteswissenschaftliche Bestrebung in vielfacher Weise anschließen müssen.
So gibt es einen bedeutenden Dichter des fünften nachatlantischen Zeitraums, der in seinen Dichtungen ganz durchpulst ist von dem Leben dieses fünften nachatlantischen Zeitraums; das ist Max Eyth, der bekannt sein sollte. Denn Max Eyth ist richtig ein Dichter unseres Zeitalters. Er ist auch ein Schwabe, der Sohn eines schwäbischen Schulmeisters, der wollte, daß er, der Sohn, auch Schulmeister werde. Aber das Karma wollte es anders. Er hat frühzeitig sich dem technischen Berufe zugewendet, ist ganz Techniker geworden, ging dann in die Fremde, nach England, und widmete sich namentlich der Herstellung von Dampfpflügen und wurde auch der Dichter der Dampfpflüge. Und die Art, wie er diese merkwürdigen Tiere der Neuzeit, die Dampfpflüge, mit warmem, innigem Herzen besungen hat, das ist recht Dichtung der Gegenwart. Merkwürdige Dinge spielen gerade in diesem Herzen ineinander. Auf der einen Seite ist Max Eyth ein absolut der Technik der neueren Zeit ergebener Mann, auf der anderen Seite empfänglich für alles dasjenige, was der Verstand wird begreifen können, wenn er vorurteilslos sich hineinfindet in das, was eröffnet werden kann gerade, wenn dieser Verstand geschult wird an den mechanisch-materialistischen Begriffen der fünften nachatlantischen Periode.
So findet sich in einem Roman des Max Eyth, der im übrigen das rein moderne Leben Ägyptens behandelt, wo er vielfach tätig war, als die englische Gesellschaft, bei der er angestellt war, dort die Dampfpflüge hingeliefert hat und er sie ausproben mußte an Ort und Stelle, so findet sich in einem dieser Romane, der diesen Stoff behandelt, ausgeführt, wie die Pyramiden nach einem gewissen System gebaut sind. Und wenn man gewisse Verhältnisse ausrechnet — das rechnete Max Eyth aus, und das steht in dem Anhange eines Romans von ihm -, so findet man bis in weite, weite Dezimalen hinein, jedenfalls bis zu 30 Dezimalen hinein die sogenannte Ludolfsche Zahl, das x, mit dem man multiplizieren muß den doppelten Halbmesser eines Kreises, um den Umfang zu bekommen. Sie wissen, 3,14159 und so weiter; aber das geht ins Unendliche, das sind viele Dezimalen. Man könnte leicht glauben, diese Ludolfsche Zahl, die sogenannte Ludolfsche Zahl, sei erst ein Ergebnis späterer Errungenschaft. Max Eyth kam darauf, daß die alten ägyptischen Tempelpriester in uralten Zeiten bis in die 30.,40. Dezimalstelle hinein dieses x gekannt haben müssen, weil sie danach die Verhältnisse, nach denen sie die Pyramiden gebaut haben, bestimmt haben. Also es hat sich ihm erschlossen, diesem Max Eyth, gerade weil er Techniker war, etwas, was tief verborgen ist in der Natur des alten Pyramidenbaues. Damit konnte er zugleich darauf hinweisen, daß im Grunde genommen unsere Kultur zweierlei Ursprung hat: auch den der alten Zeiten, in denen die Leute auf anderer Wissenschaft gefußt haben als später, auf einer mehr mit dem Hellsehertum atavistischer Art verbundenen Wissenschaft, die dann verschwunden ist und die wieder gefunden werden muß in unserer Zeit.
Aber auch anderes findet sich bei Max Eyth, und das ist, so unscheinbar es aussieht, außerordentlich bedeutsam. In seinen Erzählungen — «Hinter Pflug und Schraubstock» heißt eine Sammlung - findet sich eine Dichtung, die, ich möchte sagen, ein Lebensrätsel aufwirft, ein Schicksalsrätsel aufwirft. Da wird ein Techniker, ein Ingenieur geschildert, der Brücken baut. In großartiger Weise wird geschildert, welche Fähigkeiten er hat, wie er Brücken bauen kann. Nur ist er etwas, nun, sagen wir genial, leichtfertig könnte man auch sagen. Und so baut er eine Brücke, die nun wiederum großartig geschildert wird. Er befindet sich selbst in einem Zug, der über diese Brücke geht. Da sitzt er drinnen. Aber er hat etwas versehen bei dem Brückenbau. Als der Zug, in dem er selbst darin ist, über die Brücke geht, stürzt sie ein und er geht dabei zugrunde. Es ist eine großartige karmische Frage, natürlich nicht beantwortet, aber aufgeworfen. Man sieht, wie der moderne _ Mensch herankommt an die großen karmischen, an die großen Schicksalsfragen. Wir haben einen Menschen, der durch seinen Beruf glänzend wirkt und der durch diesen Beruf in verhältnismäßig frühem Lebensalter zugrunde geht, zugrunde geht bei dem Werke, das er selbst geschaffen hat. Ich möchte sagen: Diese Dichtung steht wie eine große Frage da. Geisteswissenschaft wird gerade auf solche Fragen Antwort suchen. Diese Dinge kommen natürlich vor in den mannigfaltigsten Variationen des Lebens. Denn wir haben ja den Fall geschildert, der, ich möchte sagen, mit größter Akzeleration, mit größter Beschleunigung uns die Erfüllung des Karmas zeigt. Nehmen wir an — was ja nur eine Hypothese ist, denn natürlich macht es, wenn so etwas eintritt, das Karma notwendig -, aber nehmen wir hypothetisch an, was in einem anderen Falle eintreten könnte: der Betreffende wäre nicht in jenem Eisenbahnzug, der über die Brücke fuhr, gewesen, sondern er wäre eben damals zu Hause beim Ofen gesessen, so würde er vielleicht zwei Jahre eingesperrt worden sein, aber viel mehr dürfte ihm nicht passiert sein in diesem Leben zwischen Geburt und Tod. Wie wäre es dann gewesen?
Ja, sehen Sie, das ist das Bedeutsame: Dasjenige, was in das Karma dieses Menschen hineingebracht hätte der Tod, den der andere erleidet bei seinem eigenen Werk, das muß unter allen Umständen in das Karma hineinkommen, und derjenige, der es hier nicht hineinbekommt, der muß es dann in dem Leben zwischen dem Tod und einer neuen Geburt hineinbekommen. Diese Erfahrung, die muß gemacht werden. Solch eine Erfahrung kann also, ich möchte sagen, beschleunigt gemacht werden, wie in dem Fall, den Max Eyth schildert, oder aber sie kann sich über weite Zeiträume ausdehnen. Gerade wichtige Schicksalsfragen wird aus dem unmittelbaren Leben heraus der fünfte nachatlantische Zeitraum dadurch erzeugen, daß aus den Lebensverhältnissen dieses Zeitraumes heraus einzelne Menschen sehen werden, wie die Rätsel durch das Leben in neuer Weise aufgegeben werden, in einer Weise, wie sie in früheren Zeiträumen gar nicht aufgegeben worden sind.
Daher kann man schon auch bemerken, wenn man bei Menschen, die in einer gewissen Weise wirklich mit hellem Verstande begabt sind, nachsieht, wie sie heute schon andere Verwickelungen des Lebens suchen, wenn sie künstlerisch schaffen, als man in früheren Zeitläuften gesucht hat, und wie oftmals gerade diejenigen Menschen, die signifikante Verwickelungen des Lebens finden, heute in praktischen Berufen drinnenstehen. Des Max Eyth Bücher sind also in dieser Beziehung außerordentlich lehrreich, erstens, weil er wirklich ein großer, begabter Dichter ist, und zweitens, weil er, als ganz moderner Mensch, ganz aus den Anforderungen des modernen Lebens heraus schafft. Es ist gerade interessant — lassen Sie mich, ich möchte sagen, diese Bemerkung in Parenthese machen -, daß diejenigen Menschen, die Max Eyth lesen, durch äußere Lektüre auch etwas erfahren über mancherlei, was nun wiederum Theosophen wichtig sein könnte zu wissen, zum Beispiel über allerlei Dinge, die zusammenhängen mit dem Leben des ersten Präsidenten der Theosophical Society, des Olcott. Man findet das gerade bei Eyth, der in Amerika war in einer Zeit, in der Olcott dort allerlei Zeug getrieben hat, ein bißchen hineingeheimnißt in die Dinge. Kurz, sogar soziales Karma kann an einen herandringen, wenn man es nicht verschmäht, sich mit diesem modernen Geiste ein bißchen bekanntzumachen. Aber überhaupt, das ist das Eigentümliche, daß manchmal nicht gerade geniale Naturen — Eyth war ein genialer Mensch -, sondern solche, die eben der fünfte nachatlantische Zeitraum mit seinen Lebensmechanismen gebildet hat, durch die besondere Formung ihres Verstandes die Verwickelungen des modernen Lebens mit besonderer Klarheit schauen.
So ist zum Beispiel mir und anderen auch ein moderner Jurist bekannt — Jurist war er zunächst in seiner Jugend -, aber als Jurist schon von der Zeit an, wo man Jurist ist, ohne daß man von der Juristerei klingenden Gewinn hat, ein heller Kopf, der die Dinge ringsherum vorurteilslos angesehen hat, der durch seine Begabung aufgefallen ist seinen Vorgesetzten — so sagt man ja wohl -, nicht so sehr wegen seiner Helligkeit, aber weil sie ihn gut brauchen konnten, weil das ein guter, ein flinker Arbeiter war. Nun, da kam er, da er sich als Aktuar oder Assessor ganz besonders bewährt hatte, in ein Ministerium. In dem Ministerium war er auch ein ausgezeichneter Arbeiter, aber ein solcher, der sich alles mit offenen Augen anschaute. Da bekam er einmal einen hohen, bedeutsamen Auftrag. Er sollte nämlich über Schul- und Erziehungsangelegenheiten ein Referat machen. Und zwar bekam er die Weisung, es sollte dieses Referat in der Weise gehalten werden, daß man zu einer Art liberalem System übergehen solle. Das gefiel ihm ganz gut, und da er ein heller Kopf war und die Verhältnisse durchschaute, so kam ein sehr gutes Referat zustande, wirklich ein guter Reformplan, gewisse Schulverhältnisse zu liberalisieren und etwas modern zu gestalten. Aber nun, während er das Referat ausarbeitete, hatte sich, wie man so sagt, der Kurs geändert, und man brauchte jetzt ein reaktionäres Referat. Da sagte ihm der Vorgesetzte: Das Referat ist so ausgezeichnet, daß Sie auch schon ein ausgezeichnetes reaktionäres Referatmachen werden; können Sie mir jetzt nicht auch ein reaktionäres machen? Da sagte der: Nein, das kann ich nicht! - Ja, wieso nicht? — Nein, denn das hier ist ja meine Überzeugung! — Was? So, das ist Ihre Überzeugung? — Da war der Vorgesetzte sehr böse und war sich klar darüber, daß er den Mann nun doch nicht gebrauchen konnte; einen Menschen, der nicht bloß tüchtig ist, sondern sogar eine Überzeugung hat, den kann man doch nicht brauchen!
Aber er ist ein ausgezeichneter Jurist, ein ausgezeichneter Arbeiter. Was tut man da? Er hat sich überall bewährt, und man weiß, er ist ein tüchtiger Jurist. Nun, man versucht, ihn hinaufzubefördern! Menschen, die sich so bewähren, die muß man versuchen zufriedenzustellen. Da wurde dann so ein bißchen hintenherum die Sache gedeichselt, wie man es nennt, und eines Tages — beim Kegelschieben glaube ich, war es -, da traf wie vom Zufall geführt den betreffenden Menschen ein Theatersekretär. Der Theatersekretär erzählte ihm: Ja, der Posten des Theaterdirektors eines großen Theaters ist leer! — Nun, der Betreffende, der Jurist war, bisher Ministerialbeamter, konnte doch da nicht irgend etwas Böses denken, als ihm diese Mitteilung gemacht wurde. Aber nachdem sie mit dem Kegelschieben zu Ende waren, sagte der Theatersekretär zu ihm: Wollen Sie nicht mit mir jetzt ins Kaffeehaus gehen, daß ich Ihnen die Sache näher auseinandersetze? Möchten Sie denn nicht selber Theaterdirektor werden? Wir haben keinen Theaterdirektor. Wir können ja auch nicht wissen, wenn wir einen Herrn auswählen, ob er unter den jetzigen Verhältnissen das Amt will. - Da sagte der Betreffende, der in juristischen und Verwaltungsdingen doch hell war und bekannt war: Ach, das muß jeder annehmen. Er muß auch willig sein, und wenn er nicht willig ist, verhaftet man ihn einfach. - Nun, es kam zum Schlusse dahin, daß ihm der Posten des Theaterdirektors angetragen wurde. Nur eine Schwierigkeit gab es: Es war eine sehr berühmte Schauspielerin bei dem betreffenden Theater, deren Gunst der Direktor haben mußte. Ja, sagte der Betreffende zu ihm, können Sie aber auch die Gunst dieser Schauspielerin erringen? — Nun, wenn es auf das nur ankommt! Ich war zwar in meinem ganzen Leben nur siebenmal im Theater, aber wenn ich es schon unternehme, Theaterdirektor zu werden, so werde ich doch auch die Gunst dieser Schauspielerin er i9n werben können. Können Sie mir nicht sagen, was die Schauspielerin gern ißt? — Das wußte der nun: «Mohnbeugerl» waren es. Da war er fein heraus. Er sagte: Da fahren wir jetzt gleich in die Konditorei und bestellen eine große Portion «Mohnbeugerl». — Die wurden gleich des Morgens ganz früh abgeliefert bei der Schauspielerin. Am Nachmittag mußte dann der betreffende Theatersekretär vorfahren bei der Schauspielerin, um — nun, halt um zu sondieren, wie man sagt. Er sagte zu ihr: Wir möchten gern diesen Herrn zum Direktor machen; was denken Sie darüber? — Er wußte, daß die Person sehr einflußreich war. Nun, sagte sie, ich weiß zwar gar nichts von diesem Herrn, aber bisher ist mir nur Gutes von ihm gekommen. — Jetzt war es so weit, daß er Theaterdirektor werden konnte,
Nun war noch der Kritiker da, der berühmteste Kritiker der betreffenden Stadt; der war noch zu gewinnen. Und der schrieb halt immer schreckliches Zeug, der Mann, bis eines Tages auch dieser Kritiker umgestimmt worden ist, wenigstens so, daß er, wenn auch nicht wohlwollend, so doch einigermaßen nicht abfällig über ihn geschrieben hat. Das ist auf folgende Weise zustande gekommen - ich erzähle Ihnen kein Märchen, sondern es ist vorgekommen; ich will nur ein wenig charakterisieren: Die oberste Persönlichkeit des betreffenden Theaters, die noch über dem Direktor stand, wußte sich nicht zu helfen - der Direktor war nun einmal da, bewährte sich sogar, weil er ebenso tüchtig war als Theaterdirektor, wie er sich früher als Jurist tüchtig erwiesen hatte -, aber die oberste Persönlichkeit, die wußte sich nun nicht recht zu helfen: den Direktor konnte man nicht gleich wieder fortschicken; der Kritiker zeterte immer. Was tat er? Er lud sie beide ein, so daß keiner etwas von dem andern wußte, und gab ihnen gute Weine. Der Theaterdirektor konnte trinken und trinken und trinken. Der andere konnte es auch, aber nur bis zu einem gewissen Grade, der geringer war als der des Theaterdirektors. Und so kam es denn, daß eines schönen Morgens der Theaterdirektor sehr früh am Morgen - ich glaube um fünf Uhr klingelte bei der Frau des’ Theaterkritikers und sagte, er müsse sie durchaus persönlich sprechen, denn er hätte etwas sehr Wichtiges abzugeben, das er unten auf der Treppe niedergelegt hätte. Nun, sie warf sich in den Schlafrock. Da brachte er ihr denn ihren Herrn Gemahl als ein rechtes Häuflein Unglück und lieferte ihn ab. Von der Stunde an ging es etwas besser mit der Kritik. Später wurde der Betreffende, nachdem er es so als Theaterdirektor zu toll getrieben hatte nach Ansicht dieser Vorgesetzten, zur Juristerei wiederum weiter hinaufbefördert.
Nun hat dieser Mann ausgezeichnet dasjenige beschrieben, charakterisiert, was er gesehen hat in seiner Praxis, und ich will nur eben damit andeuten, daß gerade solche Menschen, die aus dem unmittelbaren Leben der Gegenwart heraus sind, so recht bedeutsam hinweisen können auf dieses Leben der Gegenwart.
Noch interessanter ist, daß ein ähnlicher Mann, der allerdings, ich möchte sagen, um einen Grad vornehmer aufgetreten ist als der, von dem ich Ihnen erzählt habe, Verschiedenes geschrieben hat während seines Lebens, aber kurz vor seinem Tode — diese Menschen, von denen da die Rede ist, sind ja alle schon tot - eine sehr interessante Novelle geschrieben hat, so ein richtiges Kunstwerk der Gegenwart. Sehen Sie, wie kann man heute eine Novelle schreiben? Man kann heute eine Novelle schreiben nach dem Geschmack der Zeit: da darf ja nichts Spirituelles drinnen sein, oder wenn etwas Spirituelles darinnen ist, so muß möglichst deutlich darauf hingewiesen sein, daß man die Geschichte glauben kann und auch nicht glauben kann, aber daß man jedenfalls besser tut, sie nur für ein Märchen zu halten. Nun, ich nehme den Stoff, den sich der betreffende Schilderer aus der Gegenwart genommen hat. Solch ein Mensch aus der Umgebung, in die gerade der Mann, den ich vorhin beschrieben habe, hineinversetzt war lange Zeit, eine Person des Juristenstandes, bringt es verhältnismäßig sehr weit. Das kann man schildern. Man kann schildern, wie er so die Etappen der Jurisprudenz durchmacht, wie er dies oder jenes erlebt, Verwickelungen dieser und jener Art. Dann kann man — nun ja, selbstverständlich ist das auch modern - eine Liebesgeschichte hineinflechten in solch eine Sache. Man kann also, wenn man diesen Stoff vor sich hat, schildern, wie irgendein exotisches Mädchen in der Begleitung ihrer Mutter kommt, wie sich der betreffende höhere juristische Beamte nun verliebt, und wie gerade dadurch, daß vielleicht eine Spionagegeschichte hineinspielt, die er zu behandeln hat als Richter, diese wiederum ihn in Verbindung führt zu dem Mädchen, in das er sich verliebt hat, wie ihn das in Konflikte hineinbringt und so weiter. Man kann dann ganz realistisch schildern, wie er zum Selbstmord gekommen ist.
Das hat nun der Betreffende nicht getan, sondern er hat folgende bedeutsame Sache in seine Novelle hineinverwoben. Er schildert also einen Vorgang, der äußerlich fast so ist, wie ich ihn eben erzählt habe. Aber er schildert außerdem noch, daß der betreffende Justizbeamte Schopenhauer liest, andere Philosophen liest, aber sie so liest, daß er dies, ich möchte sagen, bis zu seinem Nervensystem mit seinem individuellen Wesen verbindet. Nun ist er ein tüchtiger Jurist. Was heißt das, ein tüchtiger Jurist als Richter zu sein? Das heißt, alle Spitzfindigkeiten herauszukriegen, um einen ganz hereinzulegen. Verteidigen, nun ja, dazu muß er ja wieder die Spitzfindigkeiten der Verteidiger herausfinden. Also er ist furchtbar tüchtig, und verurteilt einen Menschen aus ähnlichen Zusammenhängen heraus, wie ich sie eben dargelegt habe. Aber dieser Mensch zeigt sich in einer ganz merkwürdigen Weise bei der Verhandlung, wie dämonisch, und namentlich die Art, wie er geblickt hat, die bleibt den Leuten, die bei der Verhandlung waren, unvergeßlich. Nun, der Betreffende wird selbstverständlich eingesperrt. Die ganze Sache hängt dann zusammen mit jenem Mädchen, in das sich der betreffende Richter verliebt. Der Verurteilte bekommt zwanzig Jahre Zuchthaus; aber er ist leidend.
Nun, der Richter wird sehr gut geschildert in der betreffenden Novelle. Eines Nachts - er hat seit der Verhandlung, die er nach Ansicht der Leute glänzend geführt hat, nicht wieder an den Sträfling gedacht wird er wach um zwölf Uhr, sagen wir -— es wird auch ungefähr stimmen -, ist in einem Zustand des Halbschlafes; um zwei Uhr klopft es an seiner Türe in seinem Zimmer, in dem er schläft. Herein kommt jener Sträfling. — Sie können sich des Richters Situation ausmalen! Aber er kommt wiederum in einen Halbschlummer, und als er aufwacht, ist es Tag. Er ist nun in einer heillosen Angst. Er geht ins Gerichtsgebäude; da hört er nichts, als, indem er auf dem Gang so hingeht, einmal den Namen jenes Sträflings rufen. Das erschreckt ihn furchtbar. Er nimmt sich vor, die Akten wieder zu studieren, läßt sie sich auch geben; drei Wochen Jang läßt er sie liegen. Dann endlich ergibt sich einmal aus einem Gespräch das Folgende: In einer bestimmten Nacht um zwei Uhr ist der Betreffende im Zuchthaus gestorben. Es war genau auf die Minute, wie der Richter dann feststellen konnte, damals, als er ihn besucht hatte in seinem Schlafzimmer!
Das ist die Verwickelung der Novelle. «Hofrat Eysenhardt» heißt sie. Er stirbt dann durch Selbstmord. «Hofrat Eysenhardt» von Berger, eine ganz moderne Novelle, die zeigt, auch durch die anderen Schilderungen, die drinnen sind, daß der Verfasser ganz gut bekannt war mit den verschiedensten Versuchen der neuesten Zeit, in die Geheimnisse des okkulten Daseins einzudringen; denn einfach von diesem Gesichtspunkte aus ist die Novelle glänzend geschrieben.
Ein Merk würdiges liegt nun vor. Jener Berger ist nicht derselbe wie der, den ich vorhin beschrieben habe; den vorhin Beschriebenen wollte ich nur als das Beispiel eines Menschen, der mit hellem Blick sich umschaut und gut das schildert, was Nerv des fünften nachatlantischen Zeitraums ist, anführen. Aber als einen Amtsgenossen sozusagen wollte ich den Berger anführen, Alfred Freiherr von Berger, der die Novelle geschrieben hat, diese ausgezeichnete Novelle «Hofrat Eysenhardt», die ganz so geschrieben ist, daß man sieht: der Mann kennt die verschiedenen Anstrengungen der neueren Zeit, hineinzukommen in die geistige Welt. Er hat sein ganzes Leben viel geschrieben, der betreffende Alfred Freiherr von Berger. Erst als er diejenige Stelle erlangt hatte, über die hinauf es kein Aufrücken mehr gab, hat er diese Novelle veröffentlicht. Es ist auch, sagen wir «zufällig», kurz vor seinem Tode gewesen. Sehr bezeichnend ist das, weil es uns zugleich zeigt, daß die Menschen der Gegenwart, die, wie man das im äußeren Leben nennt, etwas erreichen wollen, nicht gut tun, sich mit solchen Dingen die Finger zu verbrennen. Aber es zeigt uns zugleich auf der anderen Seite, wie das Streben der Menschen in der Gegenwart dahin geht, einzudringen in die geheimnisvollen Seiten des Daseins, die sich immer mehr und mehr aufdrängen werden, weil sie den Menschen wichtige Rätsel aufgeben.
Wenn man die Frage des Schicksals vorurteilslos betrachten will, dann handelt es sich darum, daß man vor allen Dingen sich einen freien Blick aneignet, daß man versucht, das Leben - verzeihen Sie den harten Ausdruck — nicht zu verschlafen, sondern sich im Leben umzuschauen. Denn sehen Sie, lassen Sie mich Ihnen gleichsam symbolisch ausdrükken das, worauf es ankommt: Sagen wir, da hätten wir eine Strömung des Lebens (es wird gezeichnet), da eine zweite, da eine dritte. Das Leben besteht ja aus vielen Strömungen, die sich in der mannigfaltigsten Weise kreuzen, das Leben des einzelnen Menschen und das Leben von Menschengruppen, auch das Leben der ganzen Erdenmenschheit. Dasjenige, was heute als Begriffe herrscht, ist vielfach zu bequem, um auseinanderzuwirren die verschlungenen Fäden des Lebens, denn es kommt sehr häufig darauf an, daß man den Blick nach einem Punkte richtet, und dann den Blick wieder nach einem anderen Punkte, und daß man gerade diese beiden Punkte in ein Verhältnis bringt, daß man diese Punkte anschaut. Wenn man die richtigen Tatsachen ins Auge faßt, so findet man Lichter, die die Situation aufhellen.
Nun werden Sie mich fragen: Ja, wie macht man solche Dinge? Sehen Sie, darauf kommt es eben an. Wenn Sie Geisteswissenschaft in der richtigen Art treiben, dann finden Sie durch Imagination die Punkte im Leben heraus, die Sie zusammenschauen müssen, damit sich Ihnen das Leben enthüllt, während Sie sonst das Leben verfolgen können, Ereignis nach Ereignis betrachten und nichts verstehen können vom Leben, wie es etwa die Historiker der Gegenwart machen, die von Ereignis zu Ereignis ihre Fäden ziehen, aber nichts verstehen vom Leben, weil es darauf ankommt, symptomatisch die Welt zu betrachten. Und das wird immer mehr und mehr notwendig werden, die Welt symptomatisch zu betrachten, das heißt so zu betrachten, daß man den Blick an die richtigen Stellen hinwendet und von den richtigen Stellen aus die Verbindungslinien zieht zu anderen Dingen. Gerade wenn es sich darum handelt, Karma konkret zu studieren, menschliches Schicksal konkret ins Auge zu fassen — ein Studium, bei dem es so viel Verwirrendes, weil so viel Versucherisches gibt dabei -, gerade da handelt es sich darum, symptomatisch die Dinge ins Auge fassen zu können.
Dieses symptomatische Studium, das haben nun gerade gewisse okkulte Verbindungen der Gegenwart, auf die ich Ihren Blick schon hingelenkt habe, versucht, von den Menschen so fern wie möglich zu halten. Und ich habe Sie aufmerksam gemacht darauf, wie von älteren Einrichtungen gewisse okkult sich nennende Verbindungen geblieben sind, namentlich im Westen Europas. Innerhalb dieser okkulten Verbindungen hat man wohl gerade menschliches Charakterstudium getrieben, um menschliche Charaktere in der richtigen Weise gebrauchen zu können, in der richtigen Weise fassen zu können, und man hat mancherlei Mittel eingeschlagen, um von der übrigen Menschheit diese Erkenntnis abzuhalten, die man gerade, ich möchte sagen, innerhalb seiner Mauern oder innerhalb seiner Tore gepflogen hat. Es wird einmal zu dem Allerinteressantesten gehören, wenn bloßgelegt werden wird der Zusammenhang zwischen den Bestrebungen gewisser moderner okkulter Gemeinschaften und den öffentlichen Ereignissen, wenn die Fäden gezeigt werden, die von gewissen okkulten Gemeinschaften nach den modernen Ereignissen hereingehen, und wenn die Methoden enthüllt werden. Denn man wußte von solchen okkulten Gemeinschaften aus mit den menschlichen Charakteren zu rechnen, indem man gewissermaßen die Fäden ihres Karmas in die Hand nahm und sie lenkte und leitete, ohne daß die Leute es wußten. In der Theosophischen Gesellschaft hat man vielfach bloß Versuche gemacht, aber diese Versuche sind zumeist dilettantisch geblieben, weil man da nicht so geschickt war wie in anderen okkulten Gesellschaften. Natürlich ist es schwierig, über diese Dinge zu sprechen, insbesondere heute, wo ja objektive Charakteristik nicht nur mit Vorurteil belegt ist, sondern sogar durch die Gesetze verboten ist. Es ist schwierig, über diese Dinge zu sprechen, ja in gewisser Beziehung sogar ganz unmöglich. Aber darauf hingedeutet werden muß doch in der einen oder in der anderen Weise, weil es nicht angeht, daß die Menschen einfach in ihrer Zeit drinnen leben und mitmachen all dasjenige, was aus dem Zeitenkarma heraus in das Unbewußte der Menschenseelen hineinspielt, und dann, trotzdem sie in diesem allgemeinen Nebulosen drinnen leben, nun wiederum Geisteswissenschaft, die klaren, vorurteilslosen Geist fordert, treiben wollen. In gewissen Dingen muß Wahrheit herrschen, und es läßt sich nicht die Wahrheit bloß, ich möchte sagen, in abstrakter Weise erheucheln, sobald es sich um Dinge der wirklichen okkulten Welt handelt. Da handelt es sich darum, daß wirklich der Wille zur Wahrheit vorhanden ist. Nun, dieser Wille zur Wahrheit findet ja in der Gegenwart ganz besonders so viele Widerstände, weil den Menschen allmählich der Sinn für die Wahrheit abhanden gekommen ist. Denken Sie doch nur einmal, daß es heute sich vielfach im öffentlichen Leben gar nicht darum handelt, die Wahrheit zu ergründen, sondern dasjenige zu sagen, was dem einen oder dem anderen paßt aus gewissen Gruppenvorteilen heraus.
Man kommt überall heute auf Gebiete, über die es unmöglich ist zu sprechen, trotzdem es gerade so notwendig wäre, über diese Gebiete zu sprechen. Aber schon diese Tatsache bitte ich Sie recht sehr ins Auge zu fassen, denn auch darinnen muß man sich völlig klar sein, daß das so ist, Sie können die Frage aufwerfen: Was haben gerade diese Dinge mit der Karmafrage zu tun, die wir jetzt behandeln? — Sie haben in der Tat sehr viel damit zu tun, und wir werden auf einiges von diesen Dingen dann noch versuchen einzugehen, um endlich gipfeln zu können in den Zielen, die wir eigentlich verfolgen.
Sixth Lecture
You have seen how complicated the deeper questions of human destiny are; we recognize this when we try to approach them along the paths that spiritual science makes possible for us. However, many things will be necessary for people today to be able to put themselves in the right position to arrive at a fruitful understanding of life. And when we consider the complex problems we are now trying to find our way through, we must, I would say, take some side paths in order to grasp the difficulties that stand in the way of understanding in such areas. In a certain sense, we have all outgrown contemporary thinking, and even if some believe that they think without prejudice, it is always good, precisely with regard to the absence of prejudice in thinking, not to spare oneself self-examination and self-knowledge. Therefore, before we proceed further, attention should be drawn to a few points.
It is often quite difficult to discuss these things because language itself is uncooperative when one wants to develop realistic concepts. It is very easy to believe that a term that is elaborated, that is, in a sense, extracted from the sum of occult science, aims at something completely different from what is actually meant, and this then gives rise to the most varied misunderstandings. Today, when discussing the lives of great and important personalities, one very often makes a certain observation. Let me give you an example. A small book has just been published here in Switzerland about V-Vischer, the author of “Auch Einer” and the great “Ästhetik,” who was mentioned recently in another context. The life of this ideologically committed and extraordinarily hard-working Swabian, V-Vischer, is described with a certain loving devotion. He is cited here only as an example of certain things we want to consider in relation to the question of human destiny; one could just as well choose another example.
V-Vischer was a true Swabian character, a character that flourished in the 19th century. Now, the biography that has just been published shows how Friedrich Theodor Vischer grew out of poor circumstances, how he was forced by his family's poverty to undergo seminary education in Tübingen, and so on. Now, what is important to me is the following: It is pointed out right at the beginning how the secondary school education of this V-Vischer was somewhat narrow-minded, how the boys learned well to find their way around Latin and later Greek writers, but how they did not actually know until a very late age into which main river the Neckar flows, how they had never seen a map until a relatively late age, and so on. Many such flaws in the education system are cited.
Now let us consider the matter carefully. In a certain sense, V-Vischer became a great man and achieved great things; he became a famous man. We must be clear about what made him what he was, what made him the specific individual that he is in history. This includes the fact that he had never seen a map until a certain age; if he had seen a map before a certain age, a certain character trait would not have been in his soul. And many other things that are sharply criticized had to be so. And when we finally look at it from a broader perspective, we will say to ourselves: The soul of this V-Vischer descended from the spiritual worlds and chose precisely this milieu, wanted precisely this education, which enabled it to remain protected from seeing a map for so long, wanted precisely to have the Neckar, the river of his homeland, in front of him for a long time, but did not want to know into which main stream the Neckar flows. And when you study this V-Vischer, you see how all his quirks, all his idiosyncrasies, which he had in abundance, are actually integral parts of his greatness, so that it seems quite out of place to try to write his biography and then criticize the schools that actually made him what he became.
Let us be clear that no one should now say: Now he wanted to say once again that schools that do not show children maps are the right schools. — But for V-Vischer, that was quite good and had to be so. We have experienced this many times in the 19th century and up to the present day. When certain natural scientists, who later became famous, appeared and turned against education, against the education system, and demanded that much more natural science be taught in schools, and when people asked them, “And now, you yourselves have gone through these circumstances; do you think they were so bad?” — as a rule, no answer was given. One must be clear that every thing has at least two sides, but under certain circumstances many more. What is it, really, when the biographer—in this case it was a female biographer—sits down and forms concepts and ideas that are then written down as I have told you? Writing down such things naturally contributes nothing to an understanding of the personality in question. When you form such concepts, you are actually cutting into the essence of the person you are dealing with, albeit only mentally. If you did not want to cut into it with your concepts, you would have to lovingly describe what school was like in all its narrow-mindedness and how it brought out this individuality. But you cut, you criticize, and criticism is, in many ways, cutting. Where does that come from?
Well, it comes from a very specific human characteristic that is widespread, especially in the contemporary system of thought, that is rooted in the subconscious, and of which people are therefore not aware: cruelty. And because people today do not have the courage to express this cruelty outwardly, they are cruel in their concepts and ideas. And in many contemporary works, cruelty is evident in the manner of description, in the manner of presentation, and in much of what is done and said today, one can sense the cruelty that is present at the bottom of the human soul in much greater extent than one might think. I have told you that in certain so-called black magic schools, it is customary to acquire the qualities needed for black magic by first allowing the pupil to cut into the living flesh of animals. This instills certain qualities in the soul. Not everyone can do this in the present day. But some people simply satisfy the same desire in their conceptual system, where it does not lead to black magic, but to the civilization of the present. And we must be clear that much, much of the present is permeated by this quality. Only by really paying attention to such things can one arrive at an unprejudiced understanding of the world in which one finds oneself; otherwise, it is impossible.
And there are certainly beginnings in the present that strive to gain a certain insight into the conditions of the fifth post-Atlantean period. For one cannot understand this fifth post-Atlantean period if one merely criticizes it, if one merely indulges in a kind of abstract idealism without considering that what appears today as mechanism and mechanistic culture, for example, is quite necessary to this fifth post-Atlantean period. Merely criticizing the mechanistic aspects of our time makes no sense. Now, there are indeed signs of a beginning of a little understanding, of human understanding of what is already animating our fifth post-Atlantean period and will increasingly animate it. However, few realistic concepts have been found for our fifth post-Atlantic period, and there is little inclination to engage with those who have attempted to grasp this state of the fifth post-Atlantic period. We will have to engage with these people, because their efforts will have to be followed in many ways by true, energetic spiritual scientific endeavors.
There is a significant poet of the fifth post-Atlantean period whose poems are completely imbued with the life of this fifth post-Atlantean period; this is Max Eyth, who should be well known. For Max Eyth is truly a poet of our age. He is also a Swabian, the son of a Swabian schoolmaster who wanted his son to become a schoolmaster too. But karma had other plans. He turned to a technical profession at an early age, became a technician, then went abroad to England, where he devoted himself to the manufacture of steam plows and became the poet of steam plows. And the way he sang about these strange animals of the modern age, the steam plows, with a warm, heartfelt heart, is truly contemporary poetry. Strange things interact in this heart. On the one hand, Max Eyth is a man absolutely devoted to modern technology; on the other hand, he is receptive to everything that the mind can comprehend when it enters without prejudice into what can be revealed when this mind is trained in the mechanical-materialistic concepts of the fifth post-Atlantean period.
Thus, in a novel by Max Eyth, which incidentally deals with purely modern life in Egypt, where he was active in many ways, when the English company he worked for delivered steam plows there and he had to test them on the spot, one finds in one of these novels dealing with this subject an explanation of how the pyramids were built according to a certain system. And if you calculate certain ratios—Max Eyth calculated them, and they are in the appendix of one of his novels—you find, to many, many decimal places, at least to 30 decimal places, the so-called Ludolf number, the x that you have to multiply by twice the radius of a circle to get the circumference. You know, 3.14159 and so on; but it goes on forever, there are many decimal places. One could easily believe that this Ludolf number, the so-called Ludolf number, is only a result of later achievements. Max Eyth came to the conclusion that the ancient Egyptian temple priests in ancient times must have known this x down to the 30th or 40th decimal place, because they used it to determine the proportions according to which they built the pyramids. So it dawned on him, Max Eyth, precisely because he was a technician, something that is deeply hidden in the nature of ancient pyramid construction. This enabled him to point out that, fundamentally, our culture has two origins: one in ancient times, when people relied on a different kind of science than later, a science more closely related to atavistic clairvoyance, which then disappeared and must be rediscovered in our time.
But there is something else in Max Eyth's work that, as inconspicuous as it may seem, is extremely significant. In his stories — a collection entitled “Hinter Pflug und Schraubstock” (Behind the Plow and the Vise) — there is a poem that, I would say, raises a riddle about life, a riddle about fate. It describes a technician, an engineer who builds bridges. His abilities and his skill in building bridges are described in magnificent detail. But he is somewhat, well, let's say ingenious, or reckless, one might also say. And so he builds a bridge, which is again described in magnificent detail. He finds himself in a train traveling over this bridge. He is sitting inside. But he made a mistake when building the bridge. When the train he is on crosses the bridge, it collapses and he is killed. It is a great karmic question, unanswered, of course, but raised nonetheless. We see how modern man approaches the great karmic questions, the great questions of fate. We have a person who shines in his profession and who, because of this profession, perishes at a relatively early age, perishing in the work he himself has created. I would say that this poem stands as a great question. Spiritual science will seek answers to such questions. These things occur naturally in the most varied variations of life. For we have described a case which, I would say, shows us the fulfillment of karma with the greatest acceleration, with the greatest speed. Let us assume — and this is only a hypothesis, for of course when something like this happens, karma makes it necessary — but let us hypothetically assume what might happen in another case: the person concerned had not been on the train that was crossing the bridge, but had been sitting at home by the stove at that moment, he would perhaps have been imprisoned for two years, but not much more would have happened to him in this life between birth and death. What would have happened then?
Yes, you see, that is the important thing: what would have been brought into this person's karma by the death suffered by the other person in his own work must enter into the karma under all circumstances, and the person who does not get it in here must then get it in the life between death and a new birth. This experience must be made. Such an experience can therefore, I would say, be made in an accelerated form, as in the case described by Max Eyth, or it can extend over long periods of time. The fifth post-Atlantean epoch will bring forth important questions of destiny from immediate life itself, in that individual human beings will see, out of the conditions of life in this epoch, how the riddles of life are being posed in a new way, in a way that they were not posed at all in earlier epochs.
Therefore, one can already notice, when observing people who are truly gifted with a clear mind, how they are already seeking different complications in life today when they create art, compared to what was sought in earlier times, and how often it is precisely those people who find significant complications in life who are now engaged in practical professions. Max Eyth's books are therefore extremely instructive in this respect, firstly because he is truly a great, gifted poet, and secondly because, as a thoroughly modern man, he creates entirely from the demands of modern life. It is particularly interesting — let me make this remark in parentheses — that those who read Max Eyth also learn something through their reading about various things that might be important for theosophists to know, for example, all kinds of things related to the life of the first president of the Theosophical Society, Olcott. One finds this especially in Eyth, who was in America at a time when Olcott was doing all sorts of things there, a little bit of a secretive character. In short, even social karma can come to you if you do not spurn the opportunity to become a little acquainted with this modern spirit. But in general, it is peculiar that sometimes it is not exactly brilliant minds—Eyth was a brilliant man—but rather those who were shaped by the fifth post-Atlantean epoch with its life mechanisms, who, through the special formation of their minds, see the entanglements of modern life with particular clarity.
For example, I and others know a modern lawyer—he was a lawyer in his youth—but as a lawyer from the time when one is a lawyer without deriving any profit from the legal profession, he was a bright mind who looked at things around him without prejudice and who, thanks to his talent, attracted the attention of his superiors—as one might say— not so much because of his intelligence, but because they could use him well, because he was a good, quick worker. Now, having proven himself particularly well as an actuary or assessor, he came to a ministry. In the ministry, he was also an excellent worker, but one who looked at everything with open eyes. Then he was given an important assignment. He was to give a presentation on school and educational matters. He was instructed to give this presentation in such a way that it would lead to a transition to a kind of liberal system. He liked this very much, and since he was a bright man and understood the circumstances, he produced a very good presentation, a really good reform plan to liberalize certain school conditions and make them a little more modern. But then, while he was working on the presentation, the course changed, as they say, and now they needed a reactionary presentation. His superior said to him: “The presentation is so excellent that you will also be able to write an excellent reactionary presentation; can't you write a reactionary one for me now?” He replied, “No, I can't do that!” “Why not?” “Because this is what I believe!” “What? That's what you believe?” His boss was very angry and realized that he couldn't use this man after all; you can't use someone who is not only competent but also has convictions!
But he's an excellent lawyer, an excellent worker. What do you do? He's proven himself everywhere, and everyone knows he's a capable lawyer. Well, you try to promote him! People who prove themselves like that, you have to try to keep them happy. So the matter was dealt with behind the scenes, as they say, and one day—I think it was during a game of skittles—the person in question happened to meet a theater secretary. The theater secretary told him: Yes, the position of theater director at a large theater is vacant! — Well, the person in question, who was a lawyer and had previously been a civil servant, couldn't think anything bad of it when he was told this. But after they had finished bowling, the theater secretary said to him, “Would you like to go to a coffee house with me so I can explain the matter to you in more detail? Would you like to become a theater director yourself? We don't have a theater director. We can't know when we select someone whether he wants the job under the current circumstances. The man in question, who was well versed in legal and administrative matters and well known, replied, “Oh, everyone has to accept it. He must also be willing, and if he is not willing, he will simply be arrested.” Well, in the end, he was offered the position of theater director. There was only one difficulty: there was a very famous actress at the theater in question, whose favor the director had to have. Yes, said the person in question to him, but can you also win the favor of this actress? — Well, if that's all it takes! I've only been to the theater seven times in my entire life, but if I'm going to become a theater director, I'll be able to win the favor of this actress. Can you tell me what the actress likes to eat? He knew: it was poppy seed pastries. That was easy. He said, “Let's go to the bakery right now and order a large portion of poppy seed rolls.” They were delivered to the actress early in the morning. In the afternoon, the theater secretary had to go to the actress to—well, to sound her out, as they say. He said to her, “We would like to make this gentleman the director; what do you think?” “He knew that the person was very influential. “Well,” she said, “I don't know anything about this gentleman, but so far he has only done me good.” Now the time had come for him to become theater director.
Now there was still the critic, the most famous critic in the city; he still had to be won over. And he always wrote terrible things, until one day this critic was also persuaded to change his mind, at least to the extent that, although he was not favorable, he did not write disparagingly about him. This came about in the following way—I am not telling you a fairy tale, it really happened; I will just describe it briefly: The most senior figure at the theater in question, who was above the director, didn't know what to do—the director was there, after all, and had even proven himself, because he was as capable as a theater director as he had previously been as a lawyer—but the most senior figure didn't really know what to do: they couldn't just send the director away again; the critic was always complaining. What did he do? He invited them both, so that neither knew of the other, and served them fine wines. The theater director could drink and drink and drink. The other could too, but only to a certain extent, which was less than that of the theater director. And so it came to pass that one fine morning, very early in the morning—I believe it was around five o'clock—the theater director rang the doorbell of the theater critic's wife and said he must speak to her personally, for he had something very important to give her, which he had left downstairs on the stairs. Well, she threw on her dressing gown. Then he brought her her husband, a sorry sight indeed, and handed him over to her. From that moment on, the reviews improved somewhat. Later, after he had gone too far as a theater director in the opinion of his superiors, the man in question was promoted to the legal profession.
Now, this man has excellently described and characterized what he has seen in his practice, and I just want to point out that it is precisely such people, who are drawn from the immediate life of the present, who can point so meaningfully to this life of the present.
Even more interesting is that a similar man, who, I would say, was a degree more distinguished than the one I have told you about, wrote various things during his life, but shortly before his death—these people I am talking about are all dead now—he wrote a very interesting novella, a real work of art of the present day. You see, how can one write a novella today? One can write a novella today in keeping with the taste of the times: there must be nothing spiritual in it, or if there is something spiritual in it, it must be made as clear as possible that one can believe the story and also not believe it, but that in any case one is better off considering it only a fairy tale. Well, I take the material that the writer in question has taken from the present day. Such a person from the environment into which the man I described earlier was placed for a long time, a member of the legal profession, gets relatively far. That can be described. One can describe how he goes through the stages of jurisprudence, how he experiences this or that, entanglements of this and that kind. Then one can—well, of course, this is also modern—weave a love story into such a thing. So, if one has this material in front of one, one can describe how some exotic girl comes in accompanied by her mother, how the senior legal official in question falls in love, and how, precisely because of a spy story that he has to deal with as a judge, this in turn brings him into contact with the girl he has fallen in love with, how this leads him into conflicts, and so on. One can then describe in a very realistic way how he came to commit suicide.
The author did not do this, but instead wove the following significant element into his novella. He describes an event that is outwardly almost identical to the one I have just recounted. But he also describes how the judicial official in question reads Schopenhauer and other philosophers, but reads them in such a way that he connects them, I would say, to his nervous system and his individual nature. Now he is a capable lawyer. What does it mean to be a capable lawyer as a judge? It means finding all the technicalities in order to completely deceive someone. Defending, well, to do that he has to find the technicalities of the defense lawyers. So he is terribly capable, and he condemns a person based on similar circumstances as I have just described. But this man behaves in a very strange way during the trial, almost demonic, and the way he looks at people is unforgettable to those who were present at the trial. Well, the person in question is, of course, imprisoned. The whole thing is connected with the girl with whom the judge in question has fallen in love. The convicted man is sentenced to twenty years in prison, but he is suffering.
Well, the judge is very well portrayed in the novella in question. One night—he hasn't thought about the convict since the trial, which he believes he conducted brilliantly—he wakes up at midnight, let's say—that's about right—in a state of semi-sleep; at two o'clock, there's a knock at the door of the room where he is sleeping. In comes the convict. You can imagine the judge's situation! But he falls back into a half-sleep, and when he wakes up, it is daylight. He is now in a state of utter terror. He goes to the courthouse; there he hears nothing but, as he walks down the corridor, the name of that convict being called out once. This frightens him terribly. He decides to study the files again and has them brought to him, but leaves them lying there for three weeks. Then finally, in a conversation, he learns the following: On a certain night at two o'clock, the man in question died in prison. It was exactly the same time, as the judge was able to determine, when he had visited him in his bedroom!
That is the plot of the novella. It is called “Hofrat Eysenhardt.” He then dies by suicide. “Hofrat Eysenhardt” by Berger is a very modern novella which, through the other descriptions it contains, shows that the author was very familiar with the various attempts of recent times to penetrate the secrets of occult existence; for it is simply from this point of view that the novella is brilliantly written.
There is now something noteworthy. That Berger is not the same as the one I described earlier; I only wanted to cite the one described earlier as an example of a person who looks around with a clear view and describes well what is the spirit of the fifth post-Atlantean period. But as a colleague, so to speak, I wanted to cite Berger, Alfred Freiherr von Berger, who wrote the novella, this excellent novella “Hofrat Eysenhardt,” which is written in such a way that one can see that the man knows the various efforts of modern times to enter the spiritual world. The Alfred Freiherr von Berger in question wrote a great deal throughout his life. It was only when he had reached a position from which there was no further advancement that he published this novella. It was also, let us say “by chance,” shortly before his death. This is very significant because it shows us at the same time that people of the present day who, as they say in everyday life, want to achieve something, do not do well to burn their fingers with such things. But at the same time, it shows us how people today strive to penetrate the mysterious aspects of existence, which will become increasingly important because they pose important questions for humanity.
If one wants to consider the question of fate without prejudice, then it is a matter of acquiring a free view, of trying not to sleep through life — forgive the harsh expression — but to look around in life. For let me express symbolically what is important: Let us say that we have a current of life (it is drawn), then a second, then a third. Life consists of many currents that intersect in the most diverse ways, the life of the individual human being and the life of groups of people, even the life of the entire human race. The concepts that prevail today are often too convenient to untangle the intricate threads of life, because it is very often necessary to focus one's gaze on one point and then on another, and to bring these two points into relation with each other, to look at these points. When you look at the right facts, you find lights that illuminate the situation.
Now you will ask me: Yes, how do you do such things? You see, that is precisely the point. If you pursue spiritual science in the right way, then through imagination you will discover the points in life that you need to look at together so that life reveals itself to you, whereas otherwise you can follow life, look at event after event, and understand nothing about life, as contemporary historians do, who pull the strings from event to event but understand nothing about life, because what matters is to look at the world symptomatically. And it will become more and more necessary to look at the world symptomatically, that is, to look at it in such a way that one turns one's gaze to the right places and draws the connecting lines to other things from the right places. Especially when it comes to studying karma in concrete terms, to looking concretely at human destiny — a study in which there is so much that is confusing because there is so much that is tempting — it is precisely then that it is important to be able to look at things symptomatically.
This symptomatic study is precisely what certain occult connections of the present, to which I have already drawn your attention, have tried to keep as far away from people as possible. And I have drawn your attention to how certain occult connections have remained from older institutions, particularly in Western Europe. Within these occult connections, the study of human character has been pursued precisely in order to be able to use human characters in the right way, to be able to grasp them in the right way, and various means have been employed to prevent the rest of humanity from gaining this knowledge, which has been cultivated, I would say, within its walls or within its gates. It will one day be among the most interesting things when the connection between the endeavors of certain modern occult communities and public events is revealed, when the threads that lead from certain occult communities to modern events are shown, and when the methods are disclosed. For one knew that such occult communities could be counted on to influence human characters by taking the threads of their karma into their hands, so to speak, and directing and guiding them without people knowing it. In the Theosophical Society, many attempts have been made, but these attempts have mostly remained amateurish because they were not as skilled as in other occult societies. Of course, it is difficult to talk about these things, especially today, when objective characterization is not only prejudiced but even prohibited by law. It is difficult to talk about these things, and in a certain sense even impossible. But it must be pointed out in one way or another, because it is not acceptable that people simply live in their time and participate in everything that plays into the unconscious of human souls from the karma of the times, and then, despite living in this general fog, want to pursue spiritual science, which demands a clear, unprejudiced mind. In certain things, truth must prevail, and truth cannot be merely feigned, I would say, in an abstract way, when it comes to things of the real occult world. What is important here is that the will to truth really exists. Now, this will to truth encounters so much resistance in the present because people have gradually lost their sense of truth. Just think how, in public life today, it is often not a question of seeking the truth, but of saying what suits one or the other person out of certain group advantages.
Today, everywhere you go, you come across areas that are impossible to talk about, even though it is precisely necessary to talk about them. But I ask you to take this fact very seriously, because you must be completely clear that this is the case. You may ask: What do these things have to do with the question of karma that we are now dealing with? — They do indeed have a great deal to do with it, and we will try to go into some of these things later, so that we can finally culminate in the goals we are actually pursuing.