Three Streams of Human Evolution
GA 184
4 October 1918, Dornach
Lecture One
To-day and in the next few days I should like to draw from our recent studies some conclusions about human life itself. I will first mention certain thoughts which are brought against Anthroposophy from outside, and will then show how with regard to these ideas we should lay hold of and emphasise certain conceptions.
Now in the life of nature, in the natural order, everyone to-day recognises—in terms of the natural order, certainly—the same kind of thing that we want to establish through Spiritual Science for the spiritual life, the spiritual order. The anthroposophical outlook would be wrongly interpreted if it were to infuse modern Spiritual Science with any kind of old errors or mystical ideas, bordering on superstition. We must accustom ourselves to use such terms as Ahrimanic, Luciferic—now familiar to us—for the spiritual order, in the same way, though certainly on a higher level, that a natural scientist speaks of positive and negative electricity, positive and negative magnetism, and so on. In contradistinction to the prejudices of present-day natural science, however, we must be clear that directly we rise to consideration of the spiritual order of the world, those concepts which in natural science have a fixed and highly abstract content, must be grasped in a more concrete and spiritual sense.
Now we know that during the life between birth and death man has what we are accustomed to call his physical body; beyond this is the etheric body or—to use the more workable expression I am trying to introduce—the body of formative forces; then comes the astral body which has a conscious character, but not yet that of our present-day consciousness. What many people to-day call the subconscious appertains to the astral body. Then comes what is called our ordinary consciousness, which alternates between the states of sleeping and waking. In the sleeping state it is represented only by chaotic dreams. In the waking state, not content with perceptions only, it has recourse to abstract judgments and concepts.
All these aspects of consciousness belong to the part of man's being we call the “I,” or ego. At the present time it is only in this last member of the human organism, in the ego itself, that man can find his bearings. The ego is mirrored for him in his consciousness. It is in this ego that are really enacted all the thinking, feeling and willing of the soul. Everything else—astral body, etheric body, and the physical body in its true form—lies outside his consciousness and also outside the ego. For all that is stated about the physical body in ordinary science, in anatomy, physiology and so forth, refers only to its outer aspect—to as much of it as enters our consciousness in the same way as other external objects are perceived. What we consciously perceive is an external picture of the physical body, not the physical body itself.
Thus the three members of man's being which, in accordance with their evolution, we call pre-earthly—you know about this evolution from my Occult Science—these three members are outside the field of normal human consciousness. Now you know that with regard to the spiritual order we speak of Beings who, as members of the various Hierarchies, are ranged above man, just as below him are ranged the three kingdoms of nature—the animal, plant and mineral kingdoms. As soon as we consider man in a spiritual sense, we can no longer speak only of those contents of the astral, etheric and physical bodies of which ordinary science or even Anthroposophy speak when they are concerned only with human life in the sense-perceptible world. Therefore in our earlier studies this autumn I mentioned that if we look at these lower members of man's nature (let us call them that) as they truly are, we find that Spirits of the individual Hierarchies are essentially connected with them.
In the sense of my recent remarks on Goethe's world-conception, we may say: In so far as through these three members man develops himself in the course of time, in so far as he goes through the evolution open to him between birth and death, he is connected with certain spiritual forces which lie behind his evolution. I tried to make this clear to you by saying: If we look upon this as man's present-day being

(diagram), we have to think of it as connected from its evolutionary past with the spiritual Powers whom we have recognised as belonging to the higher Hierarchies. As you know, in a normal man these spiritual Powers, with the exception of the Spirits of Form, the Exusiai, do not work directly within the ego. Thus, except for the Spirits of Form, the Powers who endow man with his original form, the remaining spiritual Powers do not work into his present consciousness.
We can get some idea of the Spirits of Form—a very meagre idea but in some degree relevant—if we look at one aspect of the human bodily form which is acquired during the earliest period of physical life. We are all born as more or less crawling beings, with no power to stand vertically. Now a great deal in the whole being of man is connected with his upright posture, or rather with the force which makes this posture the true one for him. And when we consider the merely outward features which distinguish man from the animals, we should not look at the things usually seen, the bones, muscles, and so on, which in essentials are common to both man and animal; we should focus our attention on this force of uprightness which gives the growing human being his form. It is only part of the difference, but it is an essential part. This force of uprightness that intervenes in our physical development is of the same nature as all the forces that bestow on earthly man his form. It is only forces of this kind that penetrate into our ego.
But there are also the forces of cosmic movement, cosmic wisdom, cosmic will—Dynamis, Kyriotetes and Thrones, if we use their ancient names while approaching them in a modern spirit. These forces intervene in the unconscious parts of man's being—those therefore that appertain to his astral body, his body of formative forces or etheric body, and his physical body. And so, when these members of man's nature are observed without the spiritual content to which I have referred, we are concerned with mere illusions, mere phantoms. In truth, we are not to be found in our outward appearance; our real being is in the aforesaid spiritual forces.
Now—as I said recently in connection with Goethe's world-conception—there are forces which work upon man for a time, without being directly involved in his evolution. These two forces we call the Luciferic and the Ahrimanic, the Luciferic working more spiritually (see red in diagram), the Ahrimanic more in the subconscious (lilac in diagram).
Hence we have a threefold cosmic intervention in human life. We can say: In man's nature there are certain spiritual

forces connected directly with the course of his evolution. And there are two other kinds of forces, the Luciferic and the Ahrimanic, not directly connected with his evolution; they work upon him for a time and are thus an addition to his inherent constitution.
Let us now consider life. When we consider life, we do not see only the stream of forces that actually belongs to us; we always see something flowing together out of the three streams. Whatever we survey, the outer world of the senses, or the historical life of man taking its course between pleasure and pain, joy and sorrow, action and inaction, we see it in such a way that the three streams are flowing into one another. In ordinary life we do not go in for what the chemist does when, instead of leaving water as the simple liquid it appears to be, he analyses it into hydrogen and oxygen. Spiritual science must undertake this analysis. Spiritual science must go in for spiritual chemistry; otherwise it will never be possible thoroughly to understand human life.
From various points of view we have described the special characteristics of the type of being we call Luciferic, and those of the type of being we call Ahrimanic. Our task now is to go into these things from yet another point of view, so as to relate them directly to human life. Where in man's life is the point at which Luciferic forces acquire particular influence, and where the point at which particular influence is acquired by the Ahrimanic forces?
Now if man could give himself up to the quiet development proper to his original being (you know from earlier studies that he would then be able to acquire self-knowledge only in the second half of life) he would not have been exposed to the periodic ingress of Luciferic and Ahrimanic powers. But in real life, as we have to live it, man is exposed to the periodic ingress of these powers—yes, he must indeed reckon with the Luciferic and the Ahrimanic. Now in all that belongs more to the sphere of the conscious in man, but in such a way that he does not strive after this consciousness through nature but by going beyond nature (we go beyond nature when, for example, we acquire self-knowledge during the first half of life)—in everything he strives for through consciousness there lies something we can describe only as super-consciousness. But for this element of super-consciousness, our consciousness would appear quite different. It is super-consciousness that enables man to introduce into historical life more than he could do if he had to depend solely on his physical development. At the present juncture in man's earthly evolution we should have a very different form of culture if this super-consciousness had not flowed in. With this super-consciousness, however, the possibility of ingress is quite definitely given to Luciferic powers.
We must recognise in the right way how these powers work into human consciousness. Without them, man would never be induced to develop a form of thinking different from that which I recently described to you as the ideal of the Goethean world-conception. With the aid of Luciferic powers, he forms hypotheses, builds imaginative pictures that transcend reality. He does not simply seize upon reality; with his consciousness he unites super-consciousness. He forms all manner of ideas about reality—ideas that enable him to come to closer grips with reality than he otherwise would do. And if we turn our gaze to the whole sphere of art, where the super-conscious plays so large a part, we must emphasise that if art is not to degenerate into mere naturalism, the highest possible degree of Luciferic activity must come in. It is no use saying—I have emphasised this again and again—that man should keep the Luciferic away from his life. If he could do so, he would be unable to lead a real life; he would have to become an arch-philistine. It is the Luciferic activity which like a leaven saves him over and over again—spurs him on to struggle out of Philistinism.
This Luciferic activity, however, is at the same time the cause of man's tendency to look at the world from the airy viewpoint of a bird, as it were. All that arises in the course of history as wonderful programmes, marvellously beautiful ideas, by which it is always believed that in some way or other a return can be made to the Golden Age—all this has its origin in the Luciferic tendencies which flow into man. Everything by which he tries to loosen his connection with reality, to soar above his actual circumstances—all this points to the Luciferic. So, too, does the impulse that is always tending to diminish the interest we take in our fellow-men. Were we to follow our original nature, in accordance with the evolutionary forces that truly belong to us, we should feel an interest in our fellow-men far beyond the usual measure. The Luciferic element in our nature produces a certain lack of interest in other people. And if we study the real being of man, we ought to lay great emphasis on the following point—that a great deal in the world would be different if we were to recognise in its reality this urge of ours towards an excessive interest in our own concoctions and a much too meagre interest in what other people think and feel and will. Knowledge of man in the right sense is acquired only if we permeate our approach with the question: What is it that impels me to lose interest in other people? It must be a future task of human culture to develop this knowledge of man. To-day, knowledge of man is often said to consist in what anyone may say about people in accordance with his own idea of what they are or what they should be. Taking people as they are and being quite clear that everyone is as he is, even the criminal—we must go as far as that—tells us more important things about the world than any personal fancies we may have about the being of man, however beautiful they may be. To say this to ourselves is to set up a counterpoise to the Luciferic element within us.
An endeavour to gain a knowledge of man in this way would reveal an endless amount. And a genuine interest in the real nature of man has never been further off than it is to-day. But what is meant here is not to be confused with a lack of critical attitude towards human beings. Anyone who starts out with the idea that all men must be looked upon as good and have to be given equal affection is dealing with the matter in a most comfortably Luciferic way, for all that is pure fantasy. This notion of regarding all men as equal is sheer Luciferic fantasy; the point is not to cherish a general idea but to penetrate to the actual character of every individual man and to develop for it a loving—or, perhaps better, an interested—undemanding.
Now you may ask: What is the object of the presence of this Luciferic force in us, if it prevents us from being tolerant towards human nature in a wise sense and from developing interest in it? What is this Luciferic force in us meant for? In the household of the spirit it is thoroughly justified. The Luciferic force has to be there because if we were only in the progressive stream of cosmic influence and were to develop a tendency to know each individual man in accordance with his nature and spirit, then we should be drowned in ail our knowledge about man. We should go under and never be able to find ourselves properly. A fact connected with many of the secrets of existence is that there is truly nothing in life which, if carried to an extreme conclusion, does not turn into something bad or unfortunate. That which rightly draws us to other people, and enables us to find the other man in ourselves, would have the effect of drowning us in our knowledge of man if the Luciferic goad were not always there, ready again and again to save us from drowning, to raise us to the surface, bringing us back to ourselves and kindling interest in our own being. It is just in our human relations that we live in a continuous fluctuation between our own original force and the Luciferic force. And anyone who says: Would it not show more intelligence if man were to follow his own original force without being touched by the Luciferic force?—anyone who maintains this ought also to maintain that if he had scales with two pans he would prefer to dispense with one pan and weigh simply with the other. Life runs its course in states of balance, not in absolutely fixed conditions. This is what can first of all be said of the Luciferic grip upon human life. It lays hold of human consciousness, but in such a way that super-consciousness intermingles with consciousness.
The Ahrimanic element, on the other hand, exerts its influence chiefly in the subconscious. In all the subconscious impulses in man's nature, often subtle impulses, the Ahrimanic fortes mingle. If we want to characterise Ahriman and Lucifer we might say: Lucifer is a proud Spirit who likes to soar away into the heights where lofty visions open out. Ahriman is a morally lonely Spirit who does not readily make his presence known; he sets his nature to work in man's subconscious, works upon man's subconscious, conjures judgments out of it. People then believe that they judge out of their own consciousness, whereas they often derive an opinion from subconscious instincts, out of subtle subconscious impulses, or they even allow it to be conjured forth by the Ahrimanic forces themselves.
Religious descriptions have, as we know, often sprung from old conceptions which have now been taken over by Spiritual Science. And Peter was not far wrong in calling Ahriman a “prowling lion seeking whom he might devour.” For Ahriman really does prowl in the hidden parts of man's nature, in his subconscious; he strives to reach his earthly goal by diverting man's subconscious force to himself, so as spiritually to attain different ends in world-evolution from those lying in the direct human stream.
Where historical life is concerned it is always Luciferic forces that lead us to hatch out far-reaching world-dreams which fail to reckon with the nature of man. In the course of human thought what a vast number of ideas have been devised for making the world happy! And in the firm opinion of those who devise them, the world can become happy only through these particular ideas. This is because such Luciferic thinking is of an airy kind, soaring aloft and taking no account of all that is swarming around below, and believing that the world can be organised on the lines of these airy notions. Such ideas of how to make the world happy, resting always upon a defective knowledge of man, are of a Luciferic nature; dreams of world power derived from particular realms of human activity are of an Ahrimanic kind. For these dreams are developed out of the subconscious. It is Ahrimanic to take a certain realm of human activity and to wish to bring the whole world under its aegis. All that is connected with man's lust for ruling over his fellows, all that is in opposition to healthy social impulses, is of an Ahrimanic nature. The man of whom it could be said—not in a superstitious way but in our own sense—that he is possessed by Lucifer, loses interest in his fellow-men. The man possessed by Ahriman would like to have as many men as possible in his power and then to proceed—if he is clever—to make use of human frailty in order to rule over men. It is Ahrimanic to seek in the sub-earthly, in the subconscious, for human weaknesses as a means of ruling men.
Now we must ask: Where does all this come from? That above all is the question which must interest us: Where does it all come from? We have to ask: Of what nature are such forces as the Ahrimanic and Luciferic in their true being? Now we know that our Earth is—to use a Goethean expression—a metamorphosis of previous cosmic world-bodies, the fourth metamorphosis. And in order to have names for them, we have said: The Earth was first incorporated as Saturn, then as Sun, then as Moon, and is now incorporated as Earth.1Op. cit. Chapter IV of Occult Science—an Outline. Thus we know that this Earth is the fourth incorporation of its cosmic being, the fourth metamorphosis; and it will go through further metamorphoses. We must take this into consideration if we now go on to ask: In the whole cosmic framework which embraces man, what significance have the forces of the Luciferic and Ahrimanic Beings? We know that with the formation assumed by that part of the cosmos most nearly concerning us—our Earth—the Spirits of Form are connected. And if we examine a particularly characteristic feature of this Earth-formation, we find it—as I said before—to be identical, though only in a limited respect, with the way in which we overcome gravity through our own power of standing upright. These Spirits of Form are in a certain sense the ruling forces in earthly existence—that is, in the present metamorphosis of our planet. As we know, however, these Spirits of Form work through other Spirits whom we call Archai, Archangeloi, Angeloi, using old names in a modern connotation.
Now, with regard to these Beings, we are interested above all in the Archai, the Primal Forces, Primal Beginnings. We know that in the ranks of spiritual Beings, the Spirits of Form come immediately above the Archai. Hence we find that in the course of man's original evolution the forces of the Archai are to a certain extent in the service of the Spirits of Form. Into the being of man there work Archai and Exusiai—the Spirits we also call Primal Forces and those we call Spirits of Form. Besides this, however, there are also certain Spirits of Form who are disguised as Archai. They can be Exusiai, but they act only as Archai; they take on that rôle. This is an essential fact we discover—how spiritual Beings can take on a certain rôle which differs from the actual stage of their own evolution.
This has a quite definite consequence. Earthly form can be just as dependent on those Primal Forces who are really Spirits of Form, as it is upon the ordinary Spirits of Form. But the important thing is that everything in our earthly existence which is connected with space through taking shape in space is shaped out of the non-spatial. We comprehend the spatial only if we trace it back in its picture-nature to primal pictures that are outside space. Naturally, one of the difficulties for Western thinking is to form a conception of the spaceless. Yet it is true that everything connected with our primeval manhood, everything proceeding from the Spirits of Form, when it takes shape in space, is an effect of the spaceless. To speak concretely, when as individual human beings, who first crawl on all-fours, we learn to stand upright and thus overcome gravity in our upright posture, we place ourselves into space. But the force that is fundamentally responsible for this makes its way into space out of the spaceless.
If therefore as men we were subject only to the Spirits of Form proper to us, we should in every way place ourselves into space, bring the spaceless to realisation in space, for the Spirits of Form do not live in space. Anyone who seeks the Divine in space will not find it ... that goes without saying. Anything which arises as form in space is a realisation of the spaceless.
Those Beings who are Spirits of Form but act as Archai, as Primal Forces, should really, according to their essential nature, belong to the spaceless. But they enter space, they work in space. And this is characteristic of the Ahrimanic—that spiritual Beings who in their true nature are intended to be spaceless have preferred to work in space. This enables forms to arise in space that do not ray in directly out of the spaceless. Thus the spatial is portrayed in the spatial, so that one spatial form reflects another.
Perhaps I may take a concrete case. We men are all different from one another because we are placed here out of the spaceless. Our archetypes are in the spaceless. Everything is different from everything else. You have heard the famous story of how, at the instigation of Leibniz, certain princesses—for sometimes princesses have nothing better to do—searched the garden for two leaves absolutely alike and did not find them, for there are no two identical leaves. We also are forms created out of the spaceless, in so far as we do not resemble each other. But from another aspect we are alike—especially when we are blood relations. We resemble one another because there are spiritual Beings who form the spatial according to the spatial, not merely the spatial according to the spaceless. We resemble each other because we are permeated by Ahrimanic forces. This must be recognised, or we shall merely inveigh against Ahrimanic and Luciferic forces without any wish to understand them.
This example illustrates very clearly how Ahriman plays into our life. In so far as you can venture to say to yourself, “According to my form I am individual man, different from any other,” you are in the direct line of evolution. And were this the only fact valid in the world, and if there were no Ahrimanic side-streams to it, a mother would not be able to rejoice that her little daughter resembles her so wonderfully, for it would strike her that each individual human being is a spatial image of something outside space, that nothing spatial is a replica of anything in space. The entry into space of certain Spirits of Form gives the Ahrimanic its opportunity. Naturally this Ahrimanic element is not confined to similarity among human beings—it extends to many other things; we have simply taken one example of it.
Now I will ask you to call to mind what I added—not for your comfort but as arising out of our subject—after having told you that man really becomes apt for self-knowledge only in the second half of life. I said: In so far as our life takes this course in time, and if nothing else worked upon us, we could, in fact, arrive at self-knowledge only in the second half of life. But—so I said at the time—in the first half of life Luciferic forces work on us and produce a self-knowledge that is not the result of our own original human nature. In contrast to human life as it would be if it followed its original pattern, I set what I have called the realm of duration. In regard to everything that belongs to our original human nature we are different persons at fifty from what we were at twenty; we develop. In regard to everything in us that we do not develop, we belong not to our bodily nature but to the realm of soul and spirit and are connected with the realm of duration, with that realm in which time plays no part. Just as the spaceless lies at the basis of everything spatial, so at the basis of everything temporal there is duration.
We should be quite different human beings if we were not connected with the realm of duration. As I said a short while ago, we should wake out of a certain life of dreams only at twenty-eight or twenty-nine years old. We live, however, in the realm of duration, and this gives balance to our dozing through the first half of life and the terrible intellectual brightness of the second half.
Now to this realm of duration belong, as we know, all the spiritual Beings of the higher Hierarchies, with the single exception of the Spirits of Form. They play into the kingdom of evolution in time. But because they live both spatially and spacelessly, because they pass their life between space and the spaceless, they call spatial forms into existence out of the spaceless. This admits of a time-process; their life plays into time. The other Beings, however, of a higher rank than the Spirits of Form among the Hierarchies, belong entirely to duration. It is only by way of comparison that they can be spoken of as Beings of time; if this is meant to correspond to reality, it is nonsense. It is most difficult to talk about these things for the simple reason that, at the present stage of evolution, so very few men have any lively sense of concepts and ideas developed outside space and outside time. Most people would explain away the spaceless as sheer fantasy; and it is the same with the timeless, the enduring, the imperishable, and even the immutable.
Beings above the rank of the Exusiai, accordingly, belong only to the realm of duration. But there are those among them who take on the role of Beings in time, who enter time. Just as those other Beings, the Ahrimanic Beings I have described, enter space, so there are Beings who enter time. These are Luciferic Beings, who really belong to the ranks of Spirits of Wisdom, but because they work in time they do so in the character of Spirits of Form. And that which would otherwise work timelessly in man's soul during life is brought into time by these Spirits. Hence it comes about that certain things which could always be in existence for us were we allowed to take our course according only to the realm of duration, succumb to time. For instance, we may forget them, or remember them either more or less well, and so on, and this remembrance depends only upon our bodily-soul nature, not upon our soul-spiritual nature.
Spirits of Duration, therefore, who act as Spirits of Time—they are Luciferic powers; in the cosmic order they are really of a much higher rank than those Powers of whom many clergymen, however highly educated in theology they may think themselves, speak when they talk of the divine. ... In reality they are referring to much less exalted Powers, as I have indeed said before.
These Luciferic Beings are able to transfer into time what would otherwise appear to our human perception as purely spiritual and timeless—they give it the semblance of running its course in time. And this temporal semblance, imparted to certain phenomena in ourselves, is the sole reason why people maintain that their spiritual activity has a material origin. Were we not permeated in our souls by Luciferic Beings, our spiritual activity would appear to us as coming directly from the spiritual. We should never imagine that spiritual activity could depend on the material. We should see that the image I often use is the only right one—that whoever believes his spiritual activity arises from the material is like a man who goes up to a mirror and thinks that the reflection arises from a being behind it. Certainly the image depends upon how the mirror is constructed, and so is our thinking dependent upon our bodily nature. The body, however, does nothing more than the mirror does; if the Luciferic semblance were absent, the mirror would directly reveal to human perception that spiritual activity is merely given its form by the material. In so far as Lucifer is implicated in our super-consciousness, he calls forth the semblance that leads us by the nose in the same way as if we were to go up to a mirror and break it in order to find out how whoever was behind it had managed to get a hold there.
This illusion that the spiritual can originate in the material is essentially Luciferic. And anyone who maintains that the spiritual is a product of the material is in fact declaring—though he may not say so—that Lucifer is his God. The assertion that the spiritual comes forth from the material, which is exactly the same as saying that a mirror produces a reflection, as if there were beings behind the mirror ... this assertion that the material produces the spiritual, the spiritual in man, is identical with declaring, even if not in words: Lucifer is God.
Now we can also seek knowledge about the opposite pole. A Luciferic misrepresentation is that the mirror, the material, drives out the spiritual from itself. The opposite pole is this—the illusion also exists among men that the content of the physical world of the senses has power to work upon the inner being of man. If the Ahrimanic illusion, which arises through forces entering space out of the spaceless were not present, man would perceive how no influence could ever be exercised upon his inner being by forces anchored in the material. The assertion that in the material there are forces, energies, which are able to work on further in man, is an entirely Ahrimanic assertion; whoever makes it, even without words, is declaring Ahriman to be his God.
Nevertheless man sways between these two illusions. First, the illusion that repeatedly deceives him—that the mirror itself produces pictures of real beings, as if the material were able to bring forth spiritual activities. And the other illusion—that in the external existence of the senses energies are contained which are somehow transformed so as to bring about human activities. The first is the Luciferic illusion; the other, the Ahrimanic.
What is so characteristic of our present time is that it has no inclination to go into the spiritual in the same way that it goes into the natural order. It is certainly easier to speak about the spirit from the standpoint of a nebulous mysticism, or in terms of abstract ideas, than to enter concretely into spiritual processes and spiritual impulses in a truly scientific way, as is done in the case of nature itself.
We live now in an age when man must consciously begin to make clear to himself what is working in his soul. We know why the time is past when man could draw from an unconscious source the impulses he needed to guide him further. To-day he must begin consciously to enter the realm in which lives his soul-nature, and this soul-nature is generated by consciousness.
Thus we are able to say that if man were to follow in his evolution only his original nature and the good spiritual forces in the world, he would be a very different being from what he now is, when he pursues this age-old development in conjunction with the Luciferic and the Ahrimanic forces working upon him in time.
The question now is this: How is a balance set up between these three forces? In order to set up this balance, or at least to recognise how it can be done, we must look at the following.
External natural science is quite content to judge in certain realms according to this principle: a knife has to do with eating, so one goes to the razor-case for a razor and cuts up the food. That is how many judgments in natural science are formed nowadays—for example, about death. Modern natural science does not go much further with its ready-made ideas about the phenomenon of death than to call it the cessation of an organism. That is easy, for then—as is done in a grotesque way to-day by many so-called scientists—we can speak of plant death, animal death, human death, all in the same sense. That, however, is really no different from speaking of a knife and putting a table-knife and a razor in the same category. In truth, what can be called death is different in plants, different in the animal, different in the case of human beings. But because in all three a cessation of organic functions is seen, people generalise.
When we study human death—and we have very often talked of it—then we find that it can be looked upon in a certain sense as the counterpoise for the Luciferic forces. Death, as you know, is not just a once-only phenomenon, for a man actually begins to die the moment he is born. The impulses of death are already laid in him and death itself comes about at a certain point of time. Everything in the way of impulses leading to death is at the same time a force which sets up a counterpoise to the Luciferic forces. For through death man is led out beyond the temporal into the realm of duration.
Now we know that the Luciferic forces really belong by nature to the realm of duration, and that what they are meant to do in the realm of duration they carry into the temporal. This would not be balanced if death, which leads man out of the temporal into the realm of duration, were not introduced into the kingdom of the temporal. Death balances the Luciferic. The Luciferic force carries duration into time; death carries time out into duration. There we have it in abstract words—but in this abstraction there is a very great amount of the concrete.
And what have we had to say of Ahriman? He is responsible for similarity. I have given you a concrete case of human similarity which is connected with Ahriman. And here, too, a counterpoise must be set up. But strangely enough, similarity is often related to this counterpoise through one of those confused concepts that arise when one does not enter into the deeper connections. The counterpoise to human similarity is the force of heredity; we are not alike merely in the shaping of our outward form, but we bear inner forces of heredity within us. Through these forces we actually work against similarity of form. It is only a confused science that identifies similarity with heredity. We look like our parents, but at the same time in our inner man we have certain forces inherited from them which strive to recapture the original image of the human being. These inherited forces do actually fight against similarity. A more subtle observation of man's life can show us this, without any supersensible powers, but solely through external observation. Just try to ask the question of life in the right way; try to observe men who in some outward characteristic particularly resemble their parents, grandparents and so on; and then look at the inherited moral impulses. You will soon see that these inherited moral impulses are, as a rule, working against similarity of outward appearance.
If in the case of distinguished personalities mentioned in history you are impressed by how much their pictures make them look like their forefathers, you will always notice that their biographies bring out attributes of soul—and these are precisely the inherited attributes—which are opposed to those from which the similarities of form have come. This is essentially one of the mysteries of life. Forebears would understand their descendants far better, and parents their children, if they were able to look this fact in the face completely without prejudice. If, for example, a mother has a little son who is very much like her, she can be pleased; but when it comes to education it might be useful for her to say: “What will happen if my son develops those qualities which are like the qualities that make for quarrels between my husband and me?” These concrete impulses have a tremendous importance in life and should be noticed. To know of them will be particularly necessary for the task of education, for the evolution of human beings in the future. For it will not be possible in the future to derive our education from abstract principles; we shall have to educate on an empirical, concrete basis. And we do not discover these empirical, concrete bases if we have no power to read life. We must be able to read life; but for that we must learn its alphabet. As you know, there is much more to it than that, but the most necessary alphabet that will suffice for the immediate future is to know three letters—normal evolution, Ahrimanic evolution, Luciferic evolution. Just as no-one can read a book without knowing his ABC, so anyone who is ignorant of these three letters cannot read—they are simply the letters through which one learns how to read life. Only by our learning to read life will the Utopian spirit so widespread among men be overcome. And people will then have to embark on a study of those forces which play into life.
Now naturally someone may say: “You have been talking here about the original being of man, but it is nowhere to be found.” That goes without saying; but as an objection it is no different from this: “You have been telling me here of how in the flowing water of a river there is hydrogen and oxygen, but I see nothing of all that.” It is indeed necessary to go into these things, above all to have a correct concept of what form is. I have previously used a comparison which I should now like to repeat.
One can arrive at Coblenz, or some other place, even at Basle, and admire the Rhine, perhaps feeling impelled to say: “This Rhine, it flows on, we don't know for how long it has done so but certainly for centuries, perhaps for an incalculable time. How old this Rhine is!”—What part of it is actually old? The water you look at will be at a quite different place in a few days; it will be far away; so it is certainly not old, for a few days ago it was not yet there, but somewhere quite else. What you see there is definitely not old; you have no right to call it centuries old. And when you speak of the Rhine, you probably do not mean its bed, the channel where its waters flow. In reality you are speaking of something not present before you. When you speak of reality, you cannot indeed refer to what you have before your eyes, for that is a confluence of forces working through the world and is merely a state of equilibrium. In whatever direction you may look, there is merely a state of equilibrium. You have to work through to the realities. And only by working through to the realities is it possible to learn the alphabet of life.
To-morrow I shall be speaking of the connection of the Luciferic and Ahrimanic impulses with the Christ-Jahve impulse, so that you may see how, in reality, the Christ-Jahve impulse flows into these streams.
Zehnter Vortrag
Heute und in den nächsten Tagen möchte ich einige Folgerungen aus den Betrachtungen der letzten Zeit, die hier gepflogen worden sind, für das menschliche Leben selber ziehen. Ich bemerke im voraus, namentlich mit Bezug auf gewisse Gedanken, welche der Anthroposophie als solcher entgegengebracht werden von der Außenwelt, wie hinsichtlich dieser Gedanken gewisse Anschauungen eigentlich gewonnen werden sollten und von uns betont werden sollten. Im Leben der Natur, in der Ordnung der Natur erkennt heute jeder Mensch genau dasselbe an, allerdings abgestimmt für die Ordnung der Natur, was wir durch die anthroposophische Geisteswissenschaft für das geistige Leben, für die geistige Ordnung geltend machen wollen. Allerdings muß anthroposophische Anschauung mißverstanden werden, wenn sie sich irgendwie darauf einläßt, moderne Geisteswissenschaft zu verquicken mit irgendwelchem althergebrachtem, an Aberglauben grenzenden Irrtum oder Mystizismus. Wir müssen uns gewöhnen, solche Bezeichnungen wie ahrimanisch, luziferisch, die uns geläufig geworden sind für die geistige Ordnung, so zu gebrauchen, allerdings dann auf einer höheren Stufe des Daseins, wie der Naturforscher auf seinem Gebiete, sagen wir, positive und negative Elektrizität, positiven und negativen Magnetismus oder Ähnliches gebraucht. Wir müssen uns nur wiederum im Unterschied von der landläufigen und vorurteilsvollen Naturwissenschaft klar darüber sein, daß natürlich in dem Augenblick, wo man heraufkommt zur Betrachtung der geistigen Ordnung der Welt, solche Begriffe, die für die Naturwissenschaft einen gewissen bestimmten, man kann sagen, sogar stark abstrakten Inhalt haben, konkreter, eben geistiger gefaßt werden müssen.
Nun wissen wir, daß das Menschenwesen, so wie es uns zunächst im Leben zwischen Geburt und Tod entgegentritt, uns darbietet dasjenige, was wir gewohnt worden sind, den physischen Leib zu nennen, dann darüber hinaus dasjenige, was wir Ätherleib nennen, oder was ich versuche, um gewissermaßen einen gangbareren Ausdruck zu gewinnen, Bildekräfteleib zu nennen, dann dasjenige, was schon Bewußtseinscharakter hat, was wir gewohnt worden sind, den astralischen Leib zu nennen, was aber noch nicht jenen Bewußtseinscharakter hat, der unser uns zunächststehendes heutiges Bewußtsein durchzieht. Dasjenige, was wir heute das Unterbewußte nach dem Brauch vieler Leute nennen, das würde dem astralischen Leib angehören. Dann das, was wir als unser gewöhnliches Bewußtsein bezeichnen, welches wechselt zwischen Schlaf- und Wachzuständen, welches in die Schlafzustände hinein nur die chaotischen Träume sendet, welches in den Wachzuständen sich nicht mit Anschauungen begnügt, sondern zu Urteilen und Begriffen, die abstrakt sind, Zuflucht nimmt, das alles bezeichnen wir als jenes Glied der menschlichen Wesenheit, welches wir das Ich nennen. Nur in diesem letzten Gliede der menschlichen Wesenheit, im eigentlichen Ich, könnte man sagen, kennt sich der Mensch der Gegenwart aus. Dieses Ich wird ihm gespiegelt von seinem Bewußtsein. Dieses Ich ist dasjenige, in dem sich alles Denken, Fühlen und Wollen der Seele eigentlich abspielt. Alles übrige, astralischer Leib, Ätherleib und der physische Leib in seiner wahren Gestalt, liegt unterhalb des Bewußtseins und auch unterhalb des Ich. Denn dasjenige, was die gewöhnliche Wissenschaft, Anatomie, Physiologie und so weiter, vom physischen Leib konstatieren kann, das ist ja nur seine Außenseite; das ist im Grunde genommen auch nichts anderes als unser Bewußtseinsinhalt von dem menschlichen physischen Leib, den wir geradeso gewinnen, wie wir einen andern sinnenfälligen Inhalt gewinnen. Das ist das äußere Bild des physischen Leibes für unser Bewußtsein, das ist aber nicht der physische Leib selber.
Also, die drei Glieder der menschlichen Wesenheit, die wir nach der Entwickelung als vorirdisch bezeichnen — Sie kennen diese Entwickelung aus meiner «Geheimwissenschaft im Umriß» -, diese drei Glieder sind zunächst außerhalb des Feldes menschlicher Bewußtheit gelegen. Nun wissen Sie, daß wir bezüglich der geistigen Ordnung hinweisen auf Wesenheiten, die sich nach oben hin als Hierarchien, als Mitglieder der Hierarchien so anschließen an den Menschen, wie sich nach unten hin die drei Naturreiche, das tierische, pflanzliche, mineralische Reich anschließen. In dem Augenblicke, wo wir nun geistig den Menschen betrachten, können wir nicht mehr nur von denjenigen Inhalten des astralischen, des ätherischen, des physischen Leibes sprechen, von denen die gewöhnliche Wissenschaft oder auch die Anthroposophie spricht, wenn sie nur Rücksicht nimmt auf dasjenige Leben des Menschen, das in der sinnenfälligen Welt offenbar wird. Und ich habe deshalb schon in früheren Betrachtungen dieses Herbstes erwähnt, daß mit diesen, nennen wir sie nun untere Glieder der menschlichen Natur, daß mit diesen unteren Gliedern der menschlichen Natur, wenn wir sie ihrer Wahrheit nach betrachten, im wesentlichen verbunden sind die Geister der einzelnen Hierarchien.

Nun können wir, im Sinne dessen, was ich Ihnen gerade in Anknüpfung an Goethes Weltanschauung neulich vorbrachte, sagen: Insofern sich der Mensch durch diese seine drei Glieder in der Zeit entwickelt, insofern er jene Entwickelung durchmacht, welche man verfolgen kann von seiner Geburt bis zu seinem Tode, insofern hängt er zusammen mit gewissen geistigen Kräften, die hinter seiner Entwickelung liegen. Ich habe es Ihnen dadurch klarzumachen versucht, daß ich sagte: Wenn wir dieses (siehe Zeichnung) als Wesenheit des heutigen Menschen betrachten, so müssen wir rückgängig in der Entwickelung mit dieser seiner Wesenheit verbunden denken die geistigen Kräfte, die wir als die Glieder der höheren Hierarchien erkannt haben. Diese geistigen Kräfte wirken ja nun, wie Sie wissen, unmittelbar in sein Ich beim normalen Menschen nicht herein, außer den Geistern der Form, denjenigen, die man Exusiai nennt. Also außer diesen Geistern der Form, jenen Kräften, welche dem Menschen seine ihm ureigene Form geben, wirken in das gegenwärtige Bewußtsein des Menschen die andern geistigen Kräfte nicht herein. Wir bekommen einen zwar spärlichen, aber doch immerhin einigermaßen möglichen Begriff von den Geistern der Form, wenn wir den Blick wenden auf diejenige Formung des Menschen - es ist nur ein Teil, ein Glied seiner allgemeinen Formung -, die er noch während der Zeit seines physischen Lebens annimmt. Wir werden alle geboren als mehr oder weniger kriechende Wesen. Wir haben die Vertikale nicht in unserer Gewalt. Nun hängt mit dem Aufrechten des Menschen - nicht gerade mit dem mathematisch Aufrechten, aber mit der Kraft, die aufrechte Lage als seine Lage zu haben — ungeheuer viel in der Gesamtwesenheit des Menschen zusammen. Und wenn man den Unterschied des Menschen vom Tiere betrachtet nach rein äußeren Merkmalen, so sollte man nicht auf diejenigen Dinge sehen, auf die gewöhnlich gesehen wird, auf die Zahl der Knochen und der Muskeln und so weiter, die ja der Mensch im wesentlichen mit dem Tiere gemein hat, sondern man sollte gerade auf diese Aufrichtekraft, die dem werdenden Menschen seine Formung gibt, achten. Es ist nur ein Teil dessen, was in Betracht kommt, aber es ist ein wesentlicher Teil. Dieselbe Kraft, die da als Aufrichtekraft in unser physisches Werden eingreift, sie ist von der Art wie alle die Kräfte, die uns als Menschen, als Erdenmenschen unsere Form geben. Und nur diese Kräfte, die von solcher Art sind, greifen in unser Ich ein.
Dagegen greifen andere Kräfte, wir nennen sie die Kräfte der kosmischen Bewegung, der kosmischen Weisheit, des kosmischen Willens, bezeichnen sie als Dynamis, Kyriotetes, Throne, alte Namen gebrauchend für diese im modernen Geiste gesehenen Dinge, ein in dasjenige, was nicht ins Bewußtsein des Menschen hereinfällt, was also angehört seinem astralischen Leibe, seinem Bildekräfteleib oder Ätherleib und seinem physischen Leib. So daß man, wenn man diese Glieder der Menschennatur ohne diesen geistigen Inhalt betrachtet, den ich eben angeführt habe, dann eigentlich von einer bloßen Illusion, von einem bloßen Scheingebilde redet. In Wahrheit stecken wir nicht in dem, was sich als äußerer Schein darbietet, sondern in den angedeuteten geistigen Kräften darinnen.
Nun wirken aber auf den Menschen gewissermaßen zeitlich wie ich neulich in Anknüpfung an Goethes Weltanschauung gesagt habe -, ohne daß sie mit seiner Entwickelung unmittelbar zusammenhängen, jene beiden Kräftearten herein, die wir als luziferische oder ahrimanische bezeichnen. Wir können sagen: mehr geistig die luziferischen Kräfte (siehe Zeichnung, rot), mehr vom Unterbewußten her die ahrimanischen Kräfte (lila). Daher haben wir eine Dreigliedrigkeit im kosmischen Hineingestelltsein des Menschen in das Dasein. So daß wir sagen: Es gibt in der Menschennatur gewisse geistige Kräfte, die unmittelbar mit seiner Entwickelungsströmung zusammenhängen. Es gibt zwei andere Kräfteströmungen, die luziferische und die ahrimanische, die nicht mit seiner unmittelbaren Entwickelungsströmung zusammenhängen, sondern zeitlich auf ihn einwirken, die also hinzukommen zu dem, was eigentlich zum Menschen gehört.

Betrachten wir nun das Leben. Wenn wir das Leben betrachten denken Sie doch, wir sehen nicht nur den Kräftestrom, der eigentlich zu uns gehört, wir sehen immer etwas, was aus den drei Kräfteströmen zusammengeflossen ist. Was immer wir überschauen, sei es die äußere Sinneswelt, sei es das zwischen Lust und Leid, Freude und Schmerz, Tat und Trägheit verlaufende menschliche geschichtliche Leben, wir sehen es so, daß die drei Strömungen ineinandergeflossen sind. Wir unternehmen im gewöhnlichen Leben nicht dasjenige, was zum Beispiel der Chemiker unternimmt, wenn er Wasser nicht einfach als die Flüssigkeit hinnimmt, als die sie sich im Äußeren darbietet, sondern es zerlegt in Wasserstoff und Sauerstoff. Geisteswissenschaft muß diese Zerlegung unternehmen. Geisteswissenschaft muß sich einlassen auf diese geistige Chemie, sonst wird niemals das menschliche Leben durchdrungen werden können.
Nun haben wir ja von den verschiedensten Gesichtspunkten aus hingewiesen auf die besondere Eigenart jener Wesenheit, die wir als luziferisch bezeichnen, und die besondere Eigenart jener Wesenheit, die wir als ahrimanisch bezeichnen. Es handelt sich nun darum, noch von einem andern Gesichtspunkte, von dem Gesichtspunkte des unmittelbaren Menschenlebens auch einmal auf diese Dinge einzugehen. Wir können dann fragen: Wo ist denn eigentlich im Menschenleben der Punkt, wo die luziferischen Kräfte besonderen Einfluß gewinnen, und wo ist wiederum der Punkt, wo die ahrimanischen Kräfte besonderen Einfluß gewinnen?
Ja, wenn sich der Mensch überlassen könnte seiner ruhigen, in seinem ureigenen Wesen gelegenen Entwickelung - er kann es aber nicht, Sie wissen es aus früheren Betrachtungen, er würde erst in der zweiten Lebenshälfte zu einiger Selbsterkenntnis kommen können -, dann würde er nicht ausgesetzt sein dem zeitlichen Eingreifen der luziferischen und ahrimanischen Mächte. Aber im wirklichen Leben, so wie wir es zu durchleben haben, ist der Mensch eben diesem zeitlichen Eingreifen der luziferischen und ahrimanischen Mächte ausgesetzt, ja, er muß sogar mit den luziferischen und ahrimanischen Mächten rechnen. In alldem nun, was beim Menschen mehr in das Gebiet des Bewußten gehört, aber so, daß der Mensch diese Bewußtheit nicht durch Natur bloß anstrebt, sondern über diese Natur hinausgeht - wir gehen über die Natur hinaus, wenn wir zum Beispiel in der ersten Lebenshälfte schon Selbsterkenntnis haben -, in alldem, was der Mensch durch sein Bewußtsein anstrebt, liegt etwas, was wir nicht anders nennen können als Überbewußtes. Unser Bewußtsein würde ganz anders aussehen, wenn nicht in diesem Bewußtsein eben Überbewußtes liegen würde. Überbewußtheit ist es, was den Menschen dazu veranlaßt, mehr hereinzutragen in das geschichtliche Leben, als er hereintragen würde, wenn er sich nur seiner bloßen physischen Entwickelung überließe. Wir wären heute in diesem Zeitpunkte der menschlichen Erdenentwickelung in einer ganz andersgearteten Kultur darinnen, wenn nicht eingeflossen wäre in dasjenige, was sich nur durch die Menschheit an Bewußtheit entwickelt hat, Überbewußtes. Aber mit diesem Überbewußten ist schon durchaus gegeben die Möglichkeit des Eingriffes luziferischer Mächte. Man muß nur in der richtigen Weise erkennen, wie luziferische Mächte ins Bewußtsein hereinwirken. Der Mensch würde niemals veranlaßt sein, ein anderes Denken zu entwickeln als ein solches, welches ich Ihnen als das Ideal der Goetheschen Weltanschauung neulich charakterisiert habe, wenn nicht luziferische Mächte hereinspielten. Durch die luziferischen Mächte bildet der Mensch Hypothesen, durch die luziferischen Mächte bildet der Mensch Phantasien über die Wirklichkeit. Er ergreift nicht bloß die Wirklichkeit, er vereint mit dem Bewußten das Überbewußte. Er macht sich allerlei Ideen über die Wirklichkeit, Ideen, die ihn dann wiederum befähigen, gründlicher mit dieser Wirklichkeit zusammenzuwachsen, als er sonst zusammenwachsen würde. Und wenn wir erst das ganze Gebiet der Kunst ins Auge fassen, müssen wir ja betonen, daß innerhalb der Kunst, in der das Überbewußte eine so große Rolle spielt, wenn die Kunst nicht ausarten will in reinen Naturalismus, das luziferische Element im höchsten Grade sich wirksam erweisen muß. Es geht nicht an — das habe ich immer wieder und wiederum betont -, einfach zu sagen, der Mensch soll in seinem Leben sich dem Luziferischen fernhalten. Wenn er sich dem Luziferischen fernhielte, würde der Mensch nicht ein wirkliches Leben führen können, sondern er würde zum Urphilister werden müssen. Dasjenige, was immer wieder und wiederum wie ein Sauerteig wirkt und die Menschheit rettet, sie aus dem Philistertum herauszustreben anspornt, das ist schon die luziferische Regsamkeit.
Aber diese ganze luziferische Regsamkeit, sie verursacht zu gleicher Zeit, daß der Mensch in einer gewissen Weise, man kann sagen, die Welt aus der Vogelperspektive zu betrachten geneigt ist. Alles das, was im Laufe der Zeit auftritt als Programme, als schr schöne Ideen, mit denen man immer glaubt, das goldene Zeitalter in der einen oder in der andern Weise herbeiführen zu können, alles das rührt von den in den Menschen einströmenden luziferischen Neigungen her. Alles das, wodurch der Mensch aus dem Zusammengewachsensein mit der Wirklichkeit herausstrebt, durch das er gewissermaßen seine Schwingen höher heben würde, als es der Zusammenhang ist, in den er als Mensch hineingestellt ist, alles das weist auf Luziferisches. Luziferisch in der Menschennatur ist derjenige Trieb, der uns immerfort veranlaßt, unser Interesse gegenüber unseren Mitmenschen zu verringern. Wenn wir unserer ureigenen Menschennatur folgen würden, also denjenigen Entwickelungskräften, die in des Menschen eigener Strömung liegen, würden wir ein weit über das Maß dessen hinausgehendes Interesse für unsere Mitmenschen haben, als wir es in Wirklichkeit haben. Die luziferische Wesenheit in der Natur des Menschen, die bewirkt eine gewisse Interesselosigkeit gegenüber den andern Menschen. Und man sollte, wenn man den Menschen in seiner Wesenheit studiert, gerade auf diesen Punkt einen großen Wert legen. Vieles in der Welt würde anders sein, wenn wir seiner Realität nach anerkennen würden diesen unseren Drang, ein viel zu großes Interesse für dasjenige zu haben, was wir selber auskochen, und ein viel zu geringes Interesse für dasjenige, was andere Menschen denken und fühlen und wollen. Menschenkenntnis in rechtem Sinne erlangt man nur, wenn man seine Menschenanschauung durchstrahlt mit der Frage: Was treibt mich hinweg von dem Interesse, das ich an andern Menschen entwickeln kann? Und es muß eine Aufgabe der Menschenkultur in der Zukunft sein, gerade diese Menschenkenntnis zu entwickeln. Heute nennt man vielfach noch Menschenkenntnis dasjenige, was einer sagt über die Menschen, je nachdem er sich einbildet, sie seien so oder so, oder sie sollten so oder so sein. Die Menschen nehmen, wie sie sind, und sich klar darüber sein, daß jeder, wie er ist, selbst der Verbrecher - auch das muß gesagt werden -, noch immer etwas Wichtigeres uns sagt über die Welt, als es die Einbildungen sind, die wir uns über die Menschenwesenheit machen, wenn wir uns noch so schöne Gedanken aushecken: dieses sich sagen, das heißt, dem Luziferischen die richtige Gleichheitslage in uns geben. Es würde ein solches Streben nach Menschenkenntnis unendlich viel offenbaren. Und aus der Natur der menschlichen Erdenentwickelung war eigentlich keine Zeit weiter entfernt von dem wirklichen, echten Interesse an der unmittelbaren Menschennatur als die heutige Zeit. Man verwechsle dasjenige, was hier gemeint ist, nicht mit einer Kritiklosigkeit gegenüber dem Menschen. Wer freilich wiederum von der Idee ausgeht: Alle Menschen mußt du als gut ansehen und alle Menschen gleich lieben -, der macht sich die Sache ja allerdings recht luziferisch bequem, denn er geht erst recht von seinen Phantasien aus. Alle Menschen gleich zu betrachten, das ist erst recht eine luziferische Phantasie. Es handelt sich nicht darum, eine allgemeine Idee zu pflegen, sondern gerade darum, auf das Konkrete jedes einzelnen Menschen einzugehen und dafür ein liebevolles, vielleicht besser gesagt, interessevolles Verständnis zu entwickeln.
Nun können Sie fragen: Was soll denn dann eigentlich diese ganze luziferische Kraft in uns, wenn sie uns abhält davon, gegen die Menschennatur im weisheitsvollen Sinne tolerant zu sein und Interesse zu entwickeln? Sie hat ihre gute Berechtigung im Haushalte des Geistes, wenn ich mich des philiströsen Ausdruckes bedienen darf. Diese luziferische Kraft muß schon auch da sein, weil wir, wenn wir nur in der fortlaufenden Strömung wären und die natur- und geistgemäße Hinneigung zur Erkenntnis eines jeden Menschen entwickeln würden, in unserer Menschenkenntnis — verzeihen Sie den harten Ausdruck ersaufen würden. Wir würden ertrinken, wir würden nicht recht zu uns kommen können. Gerade das ist zusammenhängend mit vielen Geheimnissen des Daseins, daß in diesem Dasein nichts eigentlich ist, was nicht, wenn es in der Konsequenz verfolgt wird, bis in seine Extreme in der Konsequenz verfolgt wird, dann zum Bösen wird, zum Unglück. Dasjenige, was uns so recht mit Menschen zusammenbringt, was uns finden läßt den andern Menschen in uns selbst, das würde bewirken, daß wir ertrinken in unserer Menschenkenntnis, wenn nicht fortwährend der luziferische Stachel da wäre, der uns immer wieder und wiederum hinweghebt vom Ertrinken, der uns immer wieder und wiederum an die Oberfläche heraufhebt und zu uns bringt und das Interesse nachher an uns selbst erweckt. Gerade in unseren Beziehungen zu den Menschen leben wir in einem fortwährenden Wechselspiel zwischen unserer ureigenen Kraft und der luziferischen Kraft. Und derjenige, der da sagt, es wäre gescheiter, wenn die Menschen nur ihrer ureigenen Kraft folgen und gar nicht vom Luziferischen berührt würden -, der soll auch gleich behaupten, wenn er eine Waage hat mit dem Waagebalken und zwei Waagschalen, er nehme lieber die eine Waagschale weg und wiege bloß mit der andern, mit einer Waagschale also. Das Leben geht eben in Gleichgewichtszuständen ab, nicht in absoluten dinglichen Verhältnissen. Das ist dasjenige, was man zunächst mit Bezug auf das menschliche Leben vom luziferischen Einschlag sagen kann: Er ergreift das Bewußtsein, aber so, daß sich Überbewußtes in das Bewußtsein hereinmischt.
Der ahrimanische Einschlag ergreift zunächst hauptsächlich das Unterbewußte im menschlichen Leben. In all dasjenige, was die unterbewußten, oftmals so raffinierten Triebe der Menschennatur sind, da hinein mischen sich die ahrimanischen Kräfte. In all das, was im Menschenleben spielt aus dem Unterbewußten heraus, da mischen sich hinein die ahrimanischen Kräfte. Will man, ich möchte sagen, persönlich Ahriman und Luzifer charakterisieren, so kann man sagen: Luzifer ist ein hochmütiger Geist, der am liebsten in die Vogelperspektive hinauf enteilt und vieles überblickt; Ahriman ist ein moralisch einsamer Geist, der sich nicht leicht sehen läßt, der im Unterbewußten des Menschen sein Wesen treibt, auf das Unterbewußte des Menschen wirkt, Urteile heraufzaubert aus diesem Unterbewußten. Die Menschen glauben dann, daß sie aus ihrem Bewußtsein urteilen, während sie nur aus ihren unterbewußten Trieben und aus ihren unterbewußten, raffinierten Impulsen oftmals das Urteil heraufzaubern, oder auch heraufzaubern lassen eben durch die ahrimanischen Kräfte.
Religiöse Darstellungen sind ja, wie wir wissen, oftmals aus alten, heute überholten geisteswissenschaftlichen Anschauungen hervorgegangen. Und Petrus nennt nicht mit Unrecht gerade Ahriman den herumschleichenden Löwen, der zu verschlingen sucht, wen er nur erhaschen kann. Aus diesem Grund nennt Petrus den Ahriman so, weil in der Tat Ahriman im Verborgenen, das heißt, im Unterbewußten der menschlichen Natur herumschleicht und dadurch sein Weltenziel zu erreichen strebt, daß er die unterbewußte Kraft des Menschen an sich heranlotst, um mit ihr in der Weltenentwickelung geistig andere Ziele zu erreichen, als sie in der geradlinigen Menschenströmung selbst liegen.
In bezug auf das geschichtliche Leben sind es immer luziferische Kräfte, die uns große, aber mit der Menschennatur nicht rechnende Weltenträume aushecken lassen. Wieviel ist ausgeheckt worden im Laufe des menschlichen Denkens an Weltbeglückungsideen! Und nach der Überzeugung derjenigen, die solche Weltbeglückungsideen aushecken, kann die Welt eben nur glücklich werden durch diese Ideen. Es rührt das davon her, daß solches luziferisches Denken perspektivischer Art ist, sich in die Vogelperspektive erhebt und all dasjenige, was da drunten herumwimmelt, unberücksichtigt läßt und glaubt, nach den Linien der Gedanken, die in der Vogelperspektive gefaßt werden, ließe sich die Welt einrichten. Solche Weltbeglückungsideen, die eben immer auf mangelnder Menschenkenntnis beruhen, sind luziferischer Art. Weltmachtsträume, die aus gesonderten menschlichen Gebieten herkommen, sind ahrimanischer Art. Denn aus dem Unterbewußten herauf entwickeln sich diese Weltmachtsträume. Ahrimanisch ist es, ein gewisses Gebiet des menschlichen Daseins zu umfassen und in diesem einzelnen Gebiet eigentlich die ganze Welt umspannen und umfassen zu wollen. Alles, was mit Herrschaftsgelüsten des Menschen über andere Menschen zusammenhängt, alles, was einem gesunden sozialen Wollen widerstrebt, ist ahrimanischer Natur. Derjenige Mensch, von dem man sagen könnte aber jetzt nicht im abergläubischen, sondern in unserem Sinne -, daß er von Luzifer besessen ist, verliert das Interesse für seine Mitmenschen. Derjenige Mensch, der von Ahriman besessen ist, möchte möglichst viele Menschen beherrschen, geht dann darauf aus, wenn er klug ist, die menschliche Schwäche zu benützen, um gerade durch die menschliche Schwäche die Menschen zu beherrschen. Denn das ist ahrimanisch: im Unterirdischen, im Unterbewußten menschliche Schwächen aufzusuchen, um die Menschen zu beherrschen.
Nun müssen wir fragen: Woher kommt denn das alles? Das ist ja vor allem die Frage, die uns interessieren muß: Woher kommt denn das alles? Welcher Art sind denn solche Wesenskräfte wie die ahrimanischen und die luziferischen? Nicht wahr, wir wissen, unsere Erde ist die Metamorphose - um diesen Goetheschen Ausdruck zu gebrauchen — vorhergehender kosmischer Weltenkörper, die vierte Metamorphose. Und um Ausdrücke zu haben, haben wir gesagt: Die Erde war zuerst verkörpert als Saturn, dann als Sonne, dann als Mond und ist jetzt als Erde verkörpert. Also wir wissen, diese Erde ist die vierte Verkörperung ihrer kosmischen Wesenheit, die vierte Metamorphose. Sie wird weitere Metamorphosen durchmachen. Das alles müssen wir in Erwägung ziehen, wenn wir nun weiter fragen wollen: Welche Bedeutung im ganzen kosmischen Zusammenhange, in dem der Mensch drinnensteht, haben die ahrimanischen und die luziferischen Kräftewesenheiten? - Wir wissen, mit der Gestaltung, welche der uns zunächst berührende Teil des Kosmos, unsere Erde, angenommen hat, hängen die Geister der Form zusammen. Und wenn man das ganz besonders Charakteristische der Erdenbildung ins Auge faßt, so ist es identisch mit dem Wesenhaften, was - wie ich vorhin sagte — allerdings nur zum kleinsten Teile, aber doch in dem liegt, wie wir die Schwerkraft überwinden in unserer eigenen Aufrichtekraft. Diese Geister der Form sind gewissermaßen die regierenden Kräfte des irdischen Daseins, der gegenwärtigen Metamorphose unseres Planeten. Diese Geister der Form, sie wirken aber, wie wir wissen, durch andere Geister, die wir Archai, Archangeloi, Angeloi nach alten Benennungen in unserer modernen Weise benennen.
Nun interessieren uns von diesen Wesenheiten zunächst die Archai oder Urkräfte, die Urbeginne. Wir wissen, in der Rangordnung der geistigen Wesenheiten stehen gewissermaßen die Geister der Form unmittelbar über den Urkräften. Dadurch ist in dem Entwickelungsgange, der des Menschen ureigener ist - den ich hier weiß schematisiert habe mit einfachen Kreidestrichen (siehe Zeichnungen $. 198 und 200) -, die Sache so, daß die Kräfte der Archai gewissermaßen dienende Kräfte sind der Geister der Form. In unserer menschlichen Wesenheit wirken Archai, wirken Exusiai: Geister, die wir als Urkräfte bezeichnen, Geister, die wir als Geister der Form bezeichnen. Aber außerdem ist immer noch das Folgende vorhanden: Da sind gewisse geistige Kräfte der Form, Formgeister vorhanden, die sich maskieren als Urkräfte, als Archai. Die könnten also Exusiai sein, machen sich aber nicht als Exusiai geltend, sondern machen sich als Archai geltend; sie maskieren sich. Das ist das Wesentliche, daß wir dahinterkommen, wie in der Welteneinrichtung geistige Wesenheiten, die eigentlich auf einer andern Stufe der Entwickelung stehen, sich maskieren.
Das hat aber eine ganz bestimmte Folge. Diese Urkräfte, die eigentlich nicht Urkräfte sind, sondern Geister der Form, von denen kann nun ebenso abhängig sein dasjenige, was in der äußeren Erdenform lebt, wie es abhängig ist von den eigentlichen Geistern der Form. Aber das Bedeutsame ist, daß in unserem irdischen Dasein alles das, was mit dem Raume zusammenhängt, indem es im Raum sich gestaltet, aus dem Raumlosen heraus sich gestaltet. Das Räumliche begreifen wir nur vollständig, wenn wir es in seiner Bildhaftigkeit auf Urbilder zurückführen, die raumlos sind. Das ist ja natürlich das Schwierige für das abendländische Denken, daß es sich das Raumlose so schwer vorstellen kann. Aber dennoch ist es so, daß sich alles dasjenige, was mit unserem ureigenen Menschentum zusammenhängt, was hervorgeht aus den Geistern der Form, indem es Gestaltung im Raume annimmt, die Wirkung ist des Raumlosen. Konkret gesprochen, indem wir uns als einzelner Mensch, der wir zuerst auf allen vieren kriechen, aufrichten, die Schwerkraft im aufrechten Gestalten überwinden, stellen wir uns in den Raum hinein; aber die Kraft, die dem zugrunde liegt, die strebt aus dem Raumlosen in den Raum hinein. Also wenn wir als Menschen nur unterworfen wären den zu uns gehörigen Geistern der Form, so würden wir in aller Art, uns in den Raum hineinzustellen, verwirklichen das Raumlose im Raume; denn die Geister der Form leben nicht im Raume. Wer das Göttliche im Raume sucht, findet es nicht; selbstverständlich findet er es nicht. Dasjenige, was im Raume als Gestaltung auftritt, ist eine Verwirklichung des Raumlosen.
Diejenigen Wesenheiten, welche eigentlich Geister der Form sind, aber sich als Archai, als Urkräfte maskieren, die wären also eigentlich nach ihrer Wesenheit bestimmt für das Raumlose. Aber sie treten in den Raum ein, sie wirken im Raume. Und das ist der eigentliche ahrimanische Charakter, daß geistige Wesenheiten, die durch ihre Wesenheit bestimmt sind, raumlos zu sein, vorgezogen haben, im Raume zu wirken. Dadurch entsteht im Raume die Möglichkeit, so zu gestalten, daß die Gestaltung nicht aus dem Raumlosen direkt hereinstrahlt, sondern daß das Räumliche im Räumlichen wieder abgebildet wird, das eine durch das andere im Raume.
Wenn ich einen konkreten Fall sagen darf: Wir Menschen sind alle voneinander verschieden, weil wir alle aus dem Raumlosen ins Leben hereingestellt sind. Unsere Urbilder sind im Raumlosen. Alles ist überhaupt verschieden. Sie kennen die berühmte Erzählung, wie unter der Anleitung Leibnizens — Prinzessinnen haben manchmal nichts anderes zu tun - Prinzessinnen gesucht haben im Garten nach zwei vollständig sich gleichenden Baumblättern und keine gefunden haben, weil es wirklich nicht einmal zwei gleiche Blätter gibt. Wir alle also sind in gewisser Beziehung Gestalten aus dem Raumlosen heraus, insofern wir uns nicht gleichen. Aber dennoch gleichen wir uns; namentlich wenn wir blutsverwandt sind, gleichen wir uns. Wir gleichen uns, weil es auch geistige Wesenheiten gibt, die das Räumliche nach dem Räumlichen bilden, die nicht bloß das Räumliche nach dem Raumlosen bilden, sondern das Räumliche nach dem Räumlichen bilden. Wir gleichen uns, indem ahrimanische Kräfte uns durchziehen. Das muß schon der Mensch sich gestehen, sonst wird er immer bloß über ahrimanische und luziferische Kräfte schimpfen, aber sie nicht verstehen wollen.
An diesem Beispiel sehen Sie am anschaulichsten, wie Ahriman ins Leben hereinspielt. Sofern Sie sich getrauen, sich zu sagen: Ich bin ein Mensch für sich meiner Gestalt nach, und ich gleiche keinem andern -, insofern liegen Sie in der geraden Entwickelungslinie. Und wenn nur die geltend wäre in der Welt, wenn nicht die ahrimanische Seitenströmung ankommen würde, dann könnte keine Mutter sich freuen darüber, daß ihr das Töchterchen so furchtbar ähnlich sieht, denn es würde ihr auffallen, wie jeder einzelne Mensch ein räumliches Abbild eines Raumlosen ist, und kein Räumliches einem andern Räumlichen gleicht. Das Eintreten von gewissen Geistern der Form in den Raum gibt Veranlassung zum Ahrimanischen. Natürlich beschränkt sich dieses Ahrimanische nicht bloß auf das Gleiche der Menschen, sondern es erstreckt sich auf vieles; aber wir konnten das aus einem Beispiele anführen.
Nun bitte ich Sie, sich an diejenige Betrachtung zu erinnern, die ich angeknüpft habe, nicht zu Ihrem Troste, sondern aus der Sache heraus, nachdem ich ausgeführt habe, daß der Mensch eigentlich zur Selbsterkenntnis erst gescheit wird in der zweiten Hälfte seines Lebens. Ich habe gesagt: Insofern unser Leben einen solchen zeitlichen Verlauf hat, und wenn es nur diesen zeitlichen Verlauf hätte und nichts anderes auf uns wirkte, so könnten wir in der Tat zur Selbsterkenntnis erst kommen in unserer zweiten Lebenshälfte. Aber nun wirken, sagte ich dazumal, in der ersten Lebenshälfte luziferische Kräfte und erzeugen eine Selbsterkenntnis, die nicht aus unserer ureigenen Menschennatur folgt. Ich habe aber entgegengestellt dem, was das menschliche Leben wäre, wenn es nur seiner ureigenen Natur folgte, dasjenige, was ich genannt habe das Reich der Dauer. In bezug auf alles dasjenige, was zu der ureigenen Menschennatur gehört, sind wir als Fünfzigjähriger ein anderer Mensch, als wir als Zwanzigjähriger sind; wir entwickeln uns. Mit Bezug auf alles dasjenige, in dem wir uns nicht entwickeln, gehören wir nicht unserer Leiblichkeit, sondern dem Geistig-Seelischen an und hängen zusammen mit dem Reich der Dauer, mit jenem Reich, in dem die Zeit keine Rolle spielt. So wie zugrunde liegt allem Räumlichen ein Raumloses, so liegt zugrunde allem Zeitlichen ein Dauerndes. Wir wären ganz andere Menschen, wenn wir nicht zusammenhingen mit dem Reich der Dauer. Wir würden gewissermaßen mit dem achtundzwanzigsten oder neunundzwanzigsten Jahre erst, wie ich vor einiger Zeit sagte, aus einer gewissen Lebensträumerei heraus aufwachen. Aber wir leben im Reich der Dauer, und so wird ausgeglichen das Hindösen der ersten Lebenshälfte und das furchtbare Gescheitsein in der zweiten Lebenshälfte durch das Reich der Dauer.
Diesem Reich der Dauer gehören nun an alle geistigen Wesenskräfte der höheren Hierarchien, die wir kennen, mit einziger Ausnahme der Geister der Form. Die spielen herein in das Reich der zeitlichen Entwickelung. Aber sie schaffen herein - indem sie raumlos-räumlich leben, indem sie gewissermaßen ihr Leben zwischen der Raumlosigkeit und Räumlichkeit zubringen - die Gestalten aus dem Raumlosen ins Räumliche. Das unterliegt einem Zeitprozesse, es spielt ihr Leben in die Zeit hinein. Aber die andern Wesenheiten, die in der Hierarchienordnung höher hinauf liegen als die Geister der Form, die sind rein der Dauer angehörige Wesenheiten. Von ihnen als Zeitwesenheiten zu sprechen, kann nur vergleichsweise geschehen; meint man es der Wirklichkeit nach, so ist es ein Unsinn. Es ist eben schwierig, über diese Dinge zu reden, aus dem einfachen Grunde, weil in der gegenwärtigen Zeitentwickelung die wenigsten Menschen eine regsame Empfindung haben für Begriffe und Ideen, die man entwickelt, indem man aus dem Raum und aus der Zeit hinausgeht. Raumloses werden die meisten Menschen heute überhaupt nur für Phantasie erklären, ebenso Zeitloses, Dauerndes, Unvergängliches, aber dann auch Unwandelbares.
Nun gibt es also über den Wesenheiten der Exusiaiordnung hinauf nur Wesenheiten, die dem Reich der Dauer angehören. Aber es gibt solche unter ihnen, die sich als Zeitenwesen maskieren, die in die Zeit eintreten. So wie die andern Wesen, die ahrimanischen, die ich charakterisiert habe, in den Raum eintreten, so gibt es Wesenheiten, die in die Zeit eintreten. Das sind luziferische Wesenheiten, Wesenheiten, die eigentlich in der Hierarchienordnung zu den Geistern der Weisheit gehören, aber als Geister der Form wirken, weil sie in der Zeit wirken. Und dasjenige, was sonst im Leben zeitlos in der Menschenseele wirken würde, das wird durch diese Geister in die Zeit hereingerückt. Daher kommt es, daß zum Beispiel gewisse Dinge, die für uns immer da sein könnten, wenn wir nur dem Reich der Dauer folgen dürften, auch der Zeit unterliegen; zum Beispiel von uns vergessen werden können, oder besser oder schlechter erinnert werden können und dergleichen, was ja nur mit unserer leiblich-seelischen Natur zusammenhängt, nicht mit unserer geistig-seelischen Natur; das Erinnern, das Gedächtnis.
Also Geister der Dauer, die sich als Geister der Zeit maskieren, sind die luziferischen Kräfte; eigentlich Wesenheiten, Wesenskräfte in der kosmischen Ordnung von einer schr hohen Natur, höhere Kräfte als diejenigen, von denen, wenn sie auch noch so theologisch durchgebildet zu sein glauben, manche Pastoren reden, wenn sie vom Göttlichen sprechen. Nun, das, wovon die Pastoren sprechen, sind in Wirklichkeit viel geringere Kräfte, wie wir ja schon gerade auch hier an diesem Orte erwähnt haben.
Diese luziferischen Kräfte haben in sich die Möglichkeit, dasjenige, was sonst für unsere menschliche Anschauung uns rein geistig dauerhaft erscheinen würde, gewissermaßen in die Zeit zu übersetzen, ihm den Schein des zeitlichen Verlaufes zu geben. Und durch diesen Schein des zeitlichen Verlaufes gewisser Erscheinungen in uns selbst kommt einzig und allein die Behauptung des Menschen, daß seine geistige Betätigung zusammenhinge mit stofflichen Vorgängen. Würden wir nicht in unserer Seele gewissermaßen durchsetzt sein von luziferischer Wesenheit, dann würde uns unsere geistige Betätigung als Geistiges unmittelbar erscheinen. Wir würden gar nicht auf die Idee kommen, daß dasjenige, was geistige Betätigung ist, am Stoffe hängen könnte. Wir würden uns bewußt werden, daß das einzige Bild, welches ich oftmals gebrauche, auch das einzig richtige ist: daß der, welcher glaubt, seine geistige Betätigung gehe aus dem Stoffe hervor, einem Menschen gleicht, der sich vor einen Spiegel hinstellt und glaubt, daß das Spiegelbild von einer Wesenheit hinter dem Spiegel herrührt. Gewiß, das Bild ist davon abhängig, wie der Spiegel geformt ist; so ist unser Denken abhängig von unserer Leiblichkeit. Aber der Leib wirkt nicht anders als ein Spiegel. Das würde dem Menschen in der Anschauung selbst unmittelbar sich offenbaren, wenn nicht der luziferische Schein da wäre, daß aus dem Stofflichen heraus die geistige Betätigung gestaltet wird. So sehr Luzifer sich hineinmischt ins Überbewußte, so sehr ruft er wieder den Schein hervor, der uns in ähnlicher Weise nasführt, wie wenn wir einem Spiegel entgegengehen und den Spiegel zerschlagen, um zu sehen, wie sich der angreift, der dahinter ist.
Dieser Schein, daß Geistiges aus dem Stofflichen stammen könne, das ist im wesentlichen ein luziferischer Schein. Und man kann sagen: Der, welcher behauptet, Geistiges sei stoffliches Produkt, erklärt, wenn er es auch nicht ausspricht, Luzifer zu seinem Gott. - Die Behauptung, Geistiges gehe hervor aus Stofflichem, die ganz identisch ist mit der Behauptung, der Spiegel bringt die Spiegelbilder hervor in dem Sinne, als ob die Wesenheiten hinter dem Spiegel wären, diese Behauptung, Stoff bringt Geistiges hervor, menschliches Geistiges, die ist ganz identisch mit der Erklärung, wenn sie auch nicht ausgesprochen wird: Luzifer ist Gott.
Wir können auch nach dem Gegenpol fragen. Eine luziferische Vorspiegelung ist diese, daß der Spiegel, das Stoffliche, ein Geistiges aus sich herausströmen lasse. Der Gegenpol ist der, daß auch die Täuschung beim Menschen vorhanden ist, als ob das, was in der sinnenfälligen Welt ist, jemals auf das menschliche Innere wirklich wirken könnte. Wäre nicht die ahrimanische Illusion da, die durch Kräfte entsteht, welche aus dem Raumlosen in das Räumliche eintreten, dann würde der Mensch durchschauen, wie niemals auf seine Wesenheit die Kräfte Einfluß gewinnen können, die im Stofflichen verankert sind. Die Behauptung, daß im Stofflichen Kräfte verankert sind, Energien verankert sind, die im Menschen weiterwirken können, diese Behauptung ist eine rein ahrimanische, und der sie tut, erklärt Ahriman zu seinem Gotte, auch wenn er es nicht ausspricht.
Dennoch, der Mensch schwebt zwischen diesen beiden Illusionen; der Mensch schwebt zwischen der einen Illusion, die ihm immer wieder und wiederum vorgaukelt, daß der Spiegel die Bilder als Wesenheiten aus sich herausströmen läßt, als ob der Stoff geistige Betätigungen hervorbringen könnte. Die andere Illusion ist diese, daß in dem äußeren sinnenfälligen Dasein Energien enthalten sind, die irgendwie umgesetzt zu der menschlichen Betätigung führen können. Das eine ist die luziferische, das andere ist die ahrimanische Illusion.
Dasjenige, was unsere heutige Zeit so charakterisiert, ist, daß sie keine Neigung hat, auf das Geistige ebenso einzugehen, wie sie auf die Naturordnung eingeht. Es ist ja allerdings leichter, so über den Geist vom Standpunkt eines nebulosen Mystizismus oder vom Standpunkt abstrakter Naturbegriffe zu reden, als sich in wirklich wissenschaftlicher Weise, so wie man das für die Natur selber tut, auf die geistigen Vorgänge und geistigen Impulse konkret einzulassen. Wir leben nun einmal in dem Zeitalter, in dem der Mensch anfangen muß, bewußt sich über das aufzuklären, was in seinem Seelischen wirkt. Wir kennen die Gründe, warum die Zeit abgelaufen ist, in welcher der Mensch im Unbewußten die Impulse finden konnte, die ihn weiter lenkten; heute muß der Mensch beginnen, bewußt einzutreten in das Feld, in dem eben sein Seelisches lebt, und dieses Seelische die Bewußtheit erzeugt.
Wir können also sagen, daß der Mensch eigentlich ein ganz anderes Wesen wäre, wenn er nur seiner ureigenen Natur und den guten geistigen Kräften in der Welt folgen würde in seiner Entwickelung, als er jetzt ist, da er in Wirklichkeit dieser urzeitlichen Entwickelung folgt im Zusammenwirken mit den zeitlich auf ihn wirkenden luziferischen und ahrimanischen Kräften. Die Frage ist nun diese: Wie stellt sich ein Gleichgewichtszustand her zwischen diesen drei Kräften? Um diesen Gleichgewichtszustand herzustellen, oder wenigstens, um zu erkennen, wie er herzustellen ist, muß man auf folgendes sehen.
Die äußere Naturwissenschaft macht es sich sehr bequem, indem sie für gewisse Gebiete so nach dem Prinzip urteilt: Ein Messer gehört zum Essen, also nimmt man, indem man zum Rasieretui geht, ein Rasiermesser heraus und schneidet sich damit dasjenige, was auf den Tisch kommt. So sind sehr viele heutige naturwissenschaftliche Urteile gebildet, zum Beispiel das über den Tod. Nicht viel mehr verwendet die heutige Naturwissenschaft von zunächstliegenden Begriffen für die Erscheinung des Todes, als das Aufhören eines Organismus. Das ist bequem, denn man kann dann, wie das ja heute manche, die sich Forscher nennen, in grotesker Weise machen, vom Pflanzentode, vom Tiertod und Menschentod im gleichen Sinne sprechen. Aber das ist wirklich nichts anderes, als wenn man sprechen würde vom Messer und meinte das Tischmesser und das Rasiermesser in einer Kategorie. In Wahrheit ist dasjenige, was Tod genannt werden kann, etwas anderes bei der Pflanze, etwas anderes beim Tier, etwas anderes beim Menschen. Nur weil man bei allen dreien das Aufhören der organischen Funktionen sieht, generalisiert man.
Wenn man den Tod in der Menschennatur studiert - und wir haben ja öfter von der Erscheinung des Menschentodes gesprochen -, dann zeigt innerhalb der Menschennatur dieser Tod ein solches Wesen, daß man ihn als die Ausgleichskraft für die luziferischen Kräfte in einer gewissen Weise ansehen kann. Nicht wahr, der Tod ist ja nicht nur die einmalige Erscheinung, denn der Mensch beginnt eigentlich zu sterben, indem er geboren wird; indem die Impulse des Sterbens schon in ihm liegen, vollzieht der Tod sich in einem gewissen Zeitpunkte. Alles was an Kräfteimpulsen zum Tode führt, das sind zugleich diejenigen Kräfte, welche das Gleichgewicht herstellen mit den luziferischen Kräften. Denn durch den Tod wird der Mensch aus dem Zeitlichen hinausgeführt in das Reich der Dauer.
Nun wissen wir, daß die luziferischen Kräfte gerade darinnen ihr Wesen haben, daß sie eigentlich dem Reich der Dauer angehören und das, was sie im Reich der Dauer machen sollten, ins Reich der Zeitlichkeit hereintragen. Das würde keinen Ausgleich haben, wenn nicht dem Reich der Zeitlichkeit der T'od eingefügt wäre, der den Menschen wiederum herausführt aus dem Reich der Zeitlichkeit in das Reich der Dauer. Der Tod ist der Ausgleicher gegenüber dem Luziferischen. Das Luziferische trägt die Dauer in die Zeit herein; der Tod trägt die Zeit in die Dauer hinaus. So ist es abstrakt ausgesprochen, allein in dieser Abstraktion liegt eben eine Unsumme von Konkretem.
Was haben wir sagen müssen von Ahriman? Er macht ähnlich das Ähnliche. Ich habe Ihnen den konkreten Fall des Ähnlichen in der Menschennatur angeführt, das mit dem Ahrimanischen zusammenhängt. Diesem Ähnlichen, dem muß ebenso ein Gegengewicht geschaffen werden oder geschaffen sein - man kann natürlich nicht teleologisch sprechen, also geschaffen sein -, es muß da sein dieses Gegengewicht, welches eigentlich gegen die Ähnlichkeit wirkt. Nur führt man sonderbarerweise vielfach die Ähnlichkeit zurück auf dieses Gegengewicht durch einen der verworrenen Begriffe, die da kommen, wenn man sich nicht einläßt auf tiefere Zusammenhänge. Das Gegengewicht für die Ähnlichkeit ist die Vererbungskraft: wir sind nicht nur ähnlich in der Form, die auf unsere Gestaltung führt, sondern wir tragen in uns innere Vererbungskräfte. Durch diese Vererbungskräfte, die wir in uns tragen, wirken wir eigentlich der Ähnlichkeit der Form entgegen. Nur eine verworrene Wissenschaft schiebt Ähnlichkeit und Vererbung zusammen. Wir sehen unseren Eltern ähnlich, bekommen aber zu gleicher Zeit von unseren Eltern in unserem inneren Menschen gewisse Kräfte mitvererbt, die danach streben, uns wiederum zum Urbilde des Menschen zurückzuführen. Eigentlich ist das, was wir vererbt bekommen, im Kampfe gegen die Ähnlichkeit. Eine feinere Betrachtung des Menschenlebens kann schon darauf kommen, selbst ohne übersinnliche Betrachtung, ganz durch äußerliche Betrachtung. Versuchen Sie einmal, das Leben in der rechten Weise zu fragen, versuchen Sie einmal, Menschen zu betrachten, die ihren Eltern, Großeltern und so weiter nach dieser oder jener Formeigenschaft besonders ähnlich sehen, und sehen Sie dann auf die vererbten moralischen Impulse: dann werden Sie sehen, daß die vererbten moralischen Impulse in der Regel entgegengesetzt wirken den gleichen Formgestaltungen.
Wenn Sie gerade bei den von der Geschichte verzeichneten hervorragenderen Persönlichkeiten sich die Bilder ansehen, welche deren Formgestaltung als ähnlich dem Vorfahren erscheinen lassen, so werden Sie überall sehen, daß zu gleicher Zeit in der Biographie seelische Eigenschaften verzeichnet sind — und die gerade vererbte Eigenschaften sind -, die sich auflehnen gegen diejenigen, von denen diese Formähnlichkeiten hergekommen sind. Dies ist wesentlich eines der Geheimnisse des Lebens. Und es würden Vorfahren ihre Nachkommen, es würden Eltern ihre Kinder viel, viel besser verstehen, wenn sie in völliger Vorurteilslosigkeit solch ein Faktum ins Auge fassen könnten. Wenn zum Beispiel - verzeihen Sie, daß ich solche Dinge sage, aber wir sind ja nicht in einer Philistergesellschaft - eine Mutter ein Söhnchen hat, das ihr ganz besonders ähnlich ist, so kann sie sich darüber freuen, daß ihr das Söhnchen ähnlich ist; aber für die Erziehung könnte es sehr nützlich sein, wenn sie sich nun sagt: Was wollen sich da in diesem Söhnchen für Eigenschaften entwickeln, die ähnlich denen sind, weswegen ich mich mit meinem Manne so oft zanken muß? — Auf solche konkreten Impulse, die im Leben eine ungeheure Bedeutung haben, sollte man den Blick richten. Man wird die Erkenntnis solcher Impulse für die Erziehungsaufgabe der Zukunft, der zukünftigen menschlichen Entwickelung, ganz besonders nötig haben. Denn man wird nicht aus abstrakten Grundsätzen heraus in der Zukunft erziehen können, sondern man wird nach Unterlagen, nach empirischen, konkreten Unterlagen erziehen müssen. Und diese konkreten, empirischen Unterlagen ergeben sich nicht, wenn man das Leben nicht lesen kann. Man muß es lesen können; aber dazu muß man die Buchstaben kennen. Im Konkreten sind es ja, wie Sie wissen, viel mehr, aber zum notwendigsten Buchstabieren für die nächste Zukunft genügt schon, wenn man die drei Buchstaben: die normale Entwickelung, das Ahrimanische und das Luziferische kennt. Aber wer sie nicht kennt, kann nicht lesen, so wie derjenige, der nicht das Abc kennt, kein Buch lesen kann. Das sind einfach die Buchstaben, durch die man das Leben kennen, das Leben lesen lernt. Und der Geist des Utopischen, der in der Menschheit so vielfach verbreitet ist, er wird sich nur besiegen lassen dadurch, daß man das Leben wird lesen lernen. Dann muß man sich aber einlassen darauf, die im Leben spielenden Kräfte zu studieren.
Nun kann natürlich jemand sagen: Du erklärst uns hier etwas als die ureigene Menschenwesenheit, was man aber nirgends findet. — Das ist ja selbstverständlich; aber das ist kein anderer Einwand, als den derjenige macht, welcher sagt: Du erklärst mir hier, daß in dem dahinfließenden Flußwasser Wasserstoff und Sauerstoff darinnen ist; ich finde nichts davon. - Es ist eben nötig, auf diese Dinge einzugehen, vor allen Dingen sich einen richtigen Begriff von dem zu machen, was Form ist. Ich habe früher einmal folgenden Vergleich gebraucht, den ich wiederholen möchte.
Man kann in Koblenz oder irgendwo ankommen, auch in Basel, und kann den Rhein bewundern und kann sich veranlaßt fühlen zu dem Ausdruck: Dieser Rhein, nun fließt er, man weiß nicht wie lange, gewiß seit Jahrhunderten, vielleicht aber seit unvordenklichen Zeiten dahin. Wie alt ist dieser Rhein! - Was ist denn da eigentlich alt? Das Wasser, das Sie anschauen, das wird in einigen Tagen ganz woanders sein, das wird weg sein: das ist sicher nicht alt, denn es war vor einigen Tagen noch gar nicht da, sondern ganz woanders. Was Sie da sehen, ist sicher nicht alt, das dürfen Sie nicht für jahrhundertealt halten. Und wenn Sie vom Rhein sprechen, sprechen Sie wahrscheinlich auch nicht von der Rinne in der Erde, die da ist, wo das Wasser drinnen fließt; Sie sprechen wirklich von etwas, das Sie eigentlich gar nicht vor sich haben. Sie können nämlich nicht, wenn Sie von der Wirklichkeit sprechen, von demjenigen sprechen, was Sie vor sich haben, denn das, was Sie vor sich haben, ist ein Zusammenfluß von durch die Welt wirkenden Strömungen, und ist nur der Gleichgewichtszustand. Und überall, wo Sie hinsehen, sehen Sie nur Gleichgewichtszustände. Die Wirklichkeiten, in die müssen Sie erst eindringen. Aber nur durch das Eindringen in die Wirklichkeiten ist auch ein Buchstabieren des Lebens möglich.
Morgen werde ich nun sprechen von dem Zusammenhang des luziferischen und ahrimanischen Impulses mit dem Christus-JahveImpuls, damit Sie sehen, wie sich dieser Christus- Jahve-Impuls in Wirklichkeit in diese Strömungen hineinstellt.
Tenth Lecture
Today and in the coming days, I would like to draw some conclusions for human life itself from the considerations that have been made here recently. I would like to note in advance, particularly with regard to certain ideas that are presented to anthroposophy as such by the outside world, how certain views should actually be gained with regard to these ideas and how they should be emphasized by us. In the life of nature, in the order of nature, every human being today recognizes exactly the same thing, albeit attuned to the order of nature, which we want to assert through anthroposophical spiritual science for spiritual life, for the spiritual order. However, the anthroposophical view must be misunderstood if it in any way allows itself to be confused with modern spiritual science and with any kind of traditional error or mysticism bordering on superstition. We must accustom ourselves to using terms such as “Ahrimanic” and “Luciferic,” which have become familiar to us in relation to the spiritual order, but then on a higher level of existence, just as natural scientists use terms such as positive and negative electricity, positive and negative magnetism, or similar terms in their field. We must simply be clear, in contrast to conventional and prejudiced natural science, that when we rise to the level of contemplating the spiritual order of the world, such concepts, which have a certain definite, one might even say highly abstract, content for natural science, must be understood in a more concrete, indeed more spiritual sense.
Now we know that the human being, as it first appears to us in life between birth and death, presents us with what we have become accustomed to calling the physical body, then beyond that what we call the etheric body, or what I attempt to call, in order to obtain a more acceptable expression, the formative body, then that which already has the character of consciousness, which we have been accustomed to calling the astral body, but which does not yet have the character of consciousness that pervades our immediate present consciousness. What we today call the subconscious, according to the custom of many people, would belong to the astral body. Then there is what we call our ordinary consciousness, which alternates between states of sleep and wakefulness, which sends only chaotic dreams into the states of sleep, which in the states of wakefulness is not satisfied with perceptions but resorts to judgments and concepts that are abstract, we designate as that member of the human being which we call the I. Only in this last member of the human being, in the actual I, can one say that the present human being knows himself. This I is reflected to him by his consciousness. This I is that in which all thinking, feeling, and willing of the soul actually takes place. Everything else, the astral body, the etheric body, and the physical body in its true form, lies below consciousness and also below the I. For what ordinary science, anatomy, physiology, and so on, can ascertain about the physical body is only its outer side; it is basically nothing more than the content of our consciousness of the human physical body, which we gain in the same way as we gain other content that is accessible to the senses. This is the outer image of the physical body for our consciousness, but it is not the physical body itself.
So, the three members of the human being, which we describe as pre-earthly according to the development — you know this development from my “Outline of Secret Science” — these three members are initially located outside the field of human consciousness. Now you know that, with regard to the spiritual order, we refer to beings that are connected to human beings above as hierarchies, as members of hierarchies, just as the three natural kingdoms — the animal, plant, and mineral kingdoms — are connected to human beings below. At the moment when we now consider the human being spiritually, we can no longer speak only of the contents of the astral, etheric, and physical bodies, of which ordinary science or even anthroposophy speaks when it considers only that part of human life which is revealed in the world of the senses. And that is why I mentioned in earlier reflections this fall that these, let us call them the lower members of human nature, that these lower members of human nature, when we consider them in their truth, are essentially connected with the spirits of the individual hierarchies.

Now, in accordance with what I recently presented to you in connection with Goethe's worldview, we can say: Insofar as human beings develop through these three members of their nature in time, insofar as they undergo the development that can be traced from birth to death, they are connected with certain spiritual forces that lie behind their development. I have tried to make this clear to you by saying that if we consider this (see drawing) as the essence of the present-day human being, we must think back in the course of evolution and connect with this essence the spiritual forces that we have recognized as the members of the higher hierarchies. As you know, these spiritual forces do not directly influence the normal human being's ego, except for the spirits of form, those called exusiai. So apart from these spirits of form, these forces that give human beings their unique form, no other spiritual forces influence the present consciousness of human beings. We gain a sparse but nevertheless reasonably possible conception of the spirits of form when we turn our gaze to that form of the human being — it is only a part, a member of his general form — which he still assumes during his physical life. We are all born as more or less crawling beings. We do not have control over the vertical. Now, the upright position of the human being — not exactly the mathematically upright position, but the power to have the upright position as his position — has an enormous connection with the whole being of the human being. And when one considers the difference between humans and animals in terms of purely external characteristics, one should not look at the things that are usually looked at, such as the number of bones and muscles and so on, which humans essentially have in common with animals, but one should pay attention precisely to this power of uprightness that gives the developing human being its form. This is only part of what comes into consideration, but it is an essential part. The same force that intervenes in our physical development as an upright force is of the same kind as all the forces that give us our form as human beings, as earthly human beings. And only these forces of this kind intervene in our I.
On the other hand, other forces intervene, which we call the forces of cosmic movement, cosmic wisdom, cosmic will, describe them as dynamis, kyriotetes, thrones, using old names for these things seen in the modern spirit, into that which does not fall into human consciousness, that which therefore belongs to the astral body, the image-forming body or etheric body, and the physical body. So that if one considers these members of human nature without the spiritual content I have just mentioned, one is actually speaking of a mere illusion, of a mere apparition. In truth, we are not stuck in what presents itself as an outer appearance, but in the spiritual forces indicated within it.
Now, however, as I said recently in connection with Goethe's worldview, these two types of forces, which we call Luciferic and Ahrimanic, have a temporal effect on human beings without being directly connected with their development. We can say: the Luciferic forces are more spiritual (see drawing, red), while the Ahrimanic forces come more from the subconscious (purple). This is why we have a threefold structure in the cosmic placement of the human being in existence. So we can say: there are certain spiritual forces in human nature that are directly connected with the flow of human development. There are two other currents of forces, the Luciferic and the Ahrimanic, which are not directly connected with his immediate stream of development, but which act upon him in time, and thus are added to what actually belongs to the human being.

Let us now consider life. When we consider life, think about it: we do not see only the stream of forces that actually belongs to us; we always see something that has flowed together from the three streams of forces. Whatever we look at, be it the external sensory world, be it human historical life with its alternation between pleasure and suffering, joy and pain, action and inertia, we see that the three currents have flowed together. In ordinary life, we do not do what, for example, a chemist does when he does not simply accept water as the liquid it appears to be on the outside, but breaks it down into hydrogen and oxygen. Spiritual science must undertake this breakdown. Spiritual science must engage in this spiritual chemistry, otherwise human life will never be penetrated.
We have now pointed out from various points of view the special nature of the entity we call Luciferic and the special nature of the entity we call Ahrimanic. It is now a matter of approaching these things from another point of view, from the point of view of immediate human life. We can then ask: Where in human life is the point at which the Luciferic forces gain particular influence, and where is the point at which the Ahrimanic forces gain particular influence?
Yes, if human beings could be left to their own quiet development, which lies in their very nature — but they cannot, as you know from earlier considerations, for they would only be able to attain some self-knowledge in the second half of life — then they would not be exposed to the temporal intervention of the Luciferic and Ahrimanic forces. But in real life, as we have to live it, human beings are exposed to the temporal intervention of the Luciferic and Ahrimanic forces; indeed, they must even reckon with the Luciferic and Ahrimanic forces. In everything that belongs more to the realm of consciousness in human beings, but in such a way that human beings do not merely strive for this consciousness through nature, but go beyond nature—we go beyond nature when, for example, we already have self-knowledge in the first half of life—in everything that human beings strive for through their consciousness, there is something we cannot call anything other than superconsciousness. Our consciousness would look completely different if it were not for this superconsciousness. Superconsciousness is what causes human beings to contribute more to historical life than they would if they were left to their mere physical development. At this point in human evolution, we would be living in a completely different culture if the superconscious had not flowed into what has developed in consciousness through humanity alone. But with this superconscious, the possibility of intervention by Luciferic forces is already present. One only needs to recognize in the right way how Luciferic forces work into consciousness. Human beings would never be led to develop any other way of thinking than that which I recently characterized for you as the ideal of Goethe's worldview, if Luciferic forces did not come into play. Through the Luciferic forces, human beings form hypotheses; through the Luciferic forces, human beings form fantasies about reality. They do not merely grasp reality; they unite the superconscious with the conscious. They form all kinds of ideas about reality, ideas which then enable them to grow together more thoroughly with this reality than they would otherwise. And when we consider the whole field of art, we must emphasize that within art, where the superconscious plays such a large role, the Luciferic element must prove to be highly effective if art is not to degenerate into pure naturalism. It is not possible — I have emphasized this again and again — to simply say that human beings should keep away from the Luciferic in their lives. If he kept away from the Luciferic, man would not be able to lead a real life, but would have to become a philistine. That which again and again acts like leaven and saves humanity, spurring it on to strive out of philistinism, is precisely the Luciferic activity.
But all this Luciferic activity also causes human beings to be inclined, in a certain sense, to view the world from a bird's-eye perspective. Everything that arises over time as programs, as beautiful ideas with which one always believes one can bring about the golden age in one way or another, all of this stems from the Luciferic tendencies flowing into human beings. Everything that causes human beings to strive out of their unity with reality, through which they would, as it were, raise their wings higher than the context in which they are placed as human beings, all of this points to the Luciferic. Luciferic in human nature is the impulse that constantly causes us to diminish our interest in our fellow human beings. If we were to follow our very own human nature, that is, the forces of development that lie in the human being's own stream, we would have a far greater interest in our fellow human beings than we actually have. The Luciferic entity in human nature causes a certain indifference toward other people. And when studying human beings in their essence, one should attach great importance to this point. Much in the world would be different if we recognized the reality of our urge to take far too much interest in what we ourselves are up to and far too little interest in what other people think, feel, and want. You can only really get to know people if you ask yourself: What's keeping me from being interested in other people? And it must be a task of human culture in the future to develop precisely this knowledge of human nature. Today, knowledge of human nature is often still understood as what one says about people, depending on how one imagines them to be or how one thinks they should be. People take others as they are and are clear that everyone, even criminals — this must also be said — still tells us something more important about the world than the ideas we form about human beings, no matter how beautiful those ideas may be. To say this to oneself means giving the Luciferic element within us its rightful place of equality. Such a striving for knowledge of human nature would reveal an infinite amount. And from the nature of human evolution on Earth, there has actually never been a time further removed from a real, genuine interest in immediate human nature than the present. Do not confuse what is meant here with an uncritical attitude toward human beings. Anyone who starts from the idea that all people must be regarded as good and loved equally is indeed making things very comfortable for themselves in a Luciferian way, because they are starting from their own fantasies. To regard all people as equal is indeed a Luciferian fantasy. It is not a matter of cultivating a general idea, but rather of responding to the concrete reality of each individual human being and developing a loving, or perhaps better said, interested understanding of them.
Now you may ask: What is the point of all this Luciferic power within us if it prevents us from being tolerant of human nature in the wise sense and from developing interest? It has its justification in the economy of the spirit, if I may use the philistine expression. This Luciferic force must also be there because, if we were only in the continuous flow and developed the natural and spiritual inclination toward knowledge in every human being, we would drown in our knowledge of human nature — forgive the harsh expression. We would drown, we would not be able to find ourselves. This is precisely what is connected with many mysteries of existence, that in this existence there is nothing that, if pursued to its logical conclusion, to its extreme, does not become evil, does not become unhappiness. That which brings us together with other people, which allows us to find other people within ourselves, would cause us to drown in our knowledge of human nature if it were not for the constant Luciferic stimulus that repeatedly lifts us up from drowning, that repeatedly lifts us up to the surface and brings us back to ourselves, and that subsequently awakens our interest in ourselves. It is precisely in our relationships with other people that we live in a constant interplay between our own inner strength and the Luciferic force. And anyone who says that it would be better if people just followed their own power and weren't touched by Lucifer at all—they might as well say that if they have a scale with a beam and two pans, they'd rather take one pan away and weigh things with just the other one. Life proceeds in states of equilibrium, not in absolute material conditions. This is what can initially be said about the Luciferic influence in relation to human life: it seizes consciousness, but in such a way that the superconscious intrudes into consciousness.
The Ahrimanic influence initially seizes mainly the subconscious in human life. The Ahrimanic forces interfere with all the subconscious, often very subtle impulses of human nature. The Ahrimanic forces interfere with everything that arises from the subconscious in human life. If one wants to characterize Ahriman and Lucifer personally, one might say: Lucifer is a haughty spirit who loves to soar up to a bird's-eye view and survey everything; Ahriman is a morally lonely spirit who is not easily seen, who drives his nature in the subconscious of human beings, who works on the subconscious of human beings, conjuring up judgments from this subconscious. People then believe that they are judging from their consciousness, when in fact they are often conjuring up judgments from their subconscious drives and their subconscious, sophisticated impulses, or allowing them to be conjured up by the Ahrimanic forces.
Religious representations, as we know, have often emerged from ancient spiritual-scientific views that are now outdated. And Peter is not wrong in calling Ahriman the prowling lion who seeks to devour anyone he can catch. Peter calls Ahriman this because Ahriman does indeed prowl in secret, that is, in the subconscious of human nature, striving to achieve his world goal by drawing the subconscious power of human beings to himself in order to use it in world evolution to achieve spiritual goals other than those that lie in the straightforward human stream itself.
In relation to historical life, it is always Luciferic forces that cause us to concoct great world dreams that do not take human nature into account. How much has been concocted in the course of human thinking in the way of ideas for making the world happy! And according to the conviction of those who concoct such ideas for making the world happy, the world can only become happy through these ideas. This stems from the fact that such Luciferic thinking is of a perspectival nature, rising to a bird's-eye view and disregarding everything that swarms around below, believing that the world can be arranged according to the lines of thought conceived from a bird's-eye view. Such ideas for making the world happy, which are always based on a lack of knowledge of human nature, are of a Luciferic nature. Dreams of world power that come from separate areas of human life are of an Ahrimanic nature. For these dreams of world power develop from the subconscious. It is Ahrimanic to encompass a certain area of human existence and to want to span and encompass the whole world in this single area. Everything that has to do with man's desire to rule over other people, everything that is contrary to healthy social will, is of an Ahrimanic nature. A person who could be said to be possessed by Lucifer – not in a superstitious sense, but in our sense – loses interest in his fellow human beings. A person who is possessed by Ahriman wants to dominate as many people as possible and, if he is clever, seeks to exploit human weakness in order to dominate people precisely through human weakness. For that is what is Ahrimanic: to seek out human weaknesses in the underground, in the subconscious, in order to dominate people.
Now we must ask: Where does all this come from? That is, above all, the question that must interest us: Where does all this come from? What kind of forces are these, such as the Ahrimanic and Luciferic forces? We know that our Earth is the metamorphosis — to use Goethe's expression — of previous cosmic world bodies, the fourth metamorphosis. And in order to have expressions, we have said: The Earth was first embodied as Saturn, then as the Sun, then as the Moon, and is now embodied as the Earth. So we know that this Earth is the fourth embodiment of its cosmic being, the fourth metamorphosis. It will undergo further metamorphoses. We must take all this into consideration if we now want to ask further: What significance do the Ahrimanic and Luciferic forces have in the whole cosmic context in which human beings stand? We know that the spirits of form are connected with the form that the part of the cosmos that first touches us, our Earth, has taken on. And if we consider the most characteristic feature of the formation of the Earth, it is identical with the essence that—as I said earlier—lies only in the smallest part, but nevertheless lies in the way we overcome gravity in our own power of rising upright. These spirits of form are, in a sense, the governing forces of earthly existence, of the present metamorphosis of our planet. However, as we know, these spirits of form work through other spirits, which we call Archai, Archangeloi, Angeloi, according to ancient names in our modern way.
Now, of these beings, we are initially interested in the archai or primal forces, the primal beginnings. We know that in the hierarchy of spiritual beings, the spirits of form stand, so to speak, directly above the primal forces. As a result, in the process of development that is most intrinsic to human beings — which I have schematized here with simple chalk lines (see drawings $. 198 and 200) — the forces of the Archai are, in a sense, serving forces of the spirits of form. In our human being, archai and exusiai are at work: spirits that we call primal forces, spirits that we call spirits of form. But in addition, the following is still present: there are certain spiritual forces of form, form spirits, which mask themselves as primal forces, as archai. They could therefore be Exusiai, but they do not assert themselves as Exusiai, but as Archai; they mask themselves. It is essential that we understand how, in the structure of the world, spiritual beings that are actually at a different stage of development mask themselves.
But this has a very specific consequence. These primal forces, which are not actually primal forces but spirits of form, can now be just as dependent on what lives in the outer earth form as it is dependent on the actual spirits of form. But the important thing is that in our earthly existence, everything that is connected with space, in that it takes shape in space, takes shape out of the non-spatial. We can only fully comprehend the spatial if we trace it back in its imagery to archetypes that are non-spatial. This is, of course, the difficulty for Western thinking, which finds it so hard to imagine the non-spatial. Nevertheless, everything that is connected with our very humanity, everything that emerges from the spirits of form as it takes shape in space, is the effect of the non-spatial. Concretely speaking, as individual human beings, we first crawl on all fours, then stand up, overcome gravity in our upright posture, and place ourselves in space; but the force underlying this strives from the non-spatial into space. So if we as human beings were only subject to the spirits of form that belong to us, we would realize the formless in space in every way we placed ourselves in space; for the spirits of form do not live in space. Those who seek the divine in space will not find it; of course they will not find it. That which appears in space as form is a realization of the formless.
Those beings which are actually spirits of form but mask themselves as archetypes, as primal forces, would therefore actually be destined for the non-spatial according to their nature. But they enter into space, they work in space. And that is the actual Ahrimanic character, that spiritual beings, which are determined by their nature to be non-spatial, have chosen to work in space. This creates the possibility in space to shape things in such a way that the shaping does not radiate directly from the formless, but that the spatial is reflected in the spatial, one through the other in space.
If I may give a concrete example: We humans are all different from one another because we have all been placed into life from the formless. Our archetypes are in the non-spatial. Everything is different. You know the famous story, as told by Leibniz—princesses sometimes have nothing else to do—princesses searched the garden for two completely identical tree leaves and found none, because there really are not even two identical leaves. So we are all, in a certain sense, figures from the non-spatial, insofar as we are not alike. But nevertheless we are alike; especially when we are related by blood, we are alike. We are alike because there are also spiritual beings who form the spatial according to the spatial, who do not merely form the spatial according to the non-spatial, but form the spatial according to the spatial. We resemble each other in that Ahrimanic forces flow through us. Human beings must admit this to themselves, otherwise they will always merely rail against Ahrimanic and Luciferic forces without wanting to understand them.
This example shows most clearly how Ahriman plays into life. If you dare to say to yourself, “I am a human being in my own right, and I am like no other,” then you are on the straight path of development. And if only this were true in the world, if the Ahrimanic side current did not arrive, then no mother could rejoice that her little daughter looks so terribly like her, for she would notice how every single human being is a spatial image of something spaceless, and no spatial thing resembles another spatial thing. The entry of certain spirits of form into space gives rise to the Ahrimanic. Of course, this Ahrimanic is not limited to the sameness of human beings, but extends to many things; but we could illustrate this with an example.
Now I ask you to recall the observation I made, not for your comfort, but because it is relevant to the matter at hand, after I explained that human beings only become capable of self-knowledge in the second half of their lives. I said: Insofar as our life has such a temporal course, and if it had only this temporal course and nothing else affected us, we could indeed only come to self-knowledge in the second half of our life. But now, I said at the time, Luciferic forces are at work in the first half of life and produce a self-knowledge that does not follow from our own human nature. But I contrasted what human life would be if it followed only its own nature with what I have called the realm of duration. In relation to everything that belongs to our own human nature, we are different people at the age of fifty than we are at the age of twenty; we develop. With regard to everything in which we do not develop, we do not belong to our physicality, but to the spiritual-soul realm and are connected with the realm of duration, with that realm in which time plays no role. Just as everything spatial is based on something spaceless, everything temporal is based on something lasting. We would be completely different people if we were not connected with the realm of duration. We would, in a sense, only wake up at the age of twenty-eight or twenty-nine, as I said some time ago, from a kind of dreamlike state of life. But we live in the realm of duration, and so the dawdling of the first half of life and the terrible cleverness of the second half are balanced out by the realm of duration.
All the spiritual forces of the higher hierarchies that we know belong to this realm of duration, with the sole exception of the spirits of form. They play a role in the realm of temporal development. But by living in a space-less-spatial way, by spending their lives, as it were, between space-lessness and spatiality, they create forms from the space-less into the spatial. This is subject to a process of time; it plays out its life in time. But the other beings that are higher up in the hierarchical order than the spirits of form are beings that belong purely to duration. To speak of them as beings of time can only be done comparatively; if one means it literally, it is nonsense. It is difficult to talk about these things for the simple reason that in the present stage of development, very few people have a lively sense of concepts and ideas that are developed by going beyond space and time. Most people today would consider anything without space to be mere fantasy, as well as anything timeless, eternal, imperishable, but also unchangeable.
Now, above the beings of the Exusiai order, there are only beings that belong to the realm of eternity. But there are some among them who mask themselves as beings of time, who enter into time. Just as the other beings, the Ahrimanic beings, which I have characterized, enter into space, so there are beings who enter into time. These are Luciferic beings, beings that actually belong to the hierarchy of the spirits of wisdom, but act as spirits of form because they act in time. And that which would otherwise act timelessly in the human soul during life is brought into time by these spirits. This is why, for example, certain things that could always be there for us if we were only allowed to follow the realm of permanence are also subject to time; for example, they can be forgotten by us, or remembered better or worse, and the like, which is only related to our physical-soul nature, not to our spiritual-soul nature; remembering, memory.
So spirits of permanence that mask themselves as spirits of time are the Luciferic forces; actually beings, forces of being in the cosmic order of a very high nature, higher forces than those of which some pastors speak, even if they believe themselves to be theologically well-educated, when they speak of the divine. Now, what pastors speak of are in reality much lesser forces, as we have already mentioned here in this very place.
These Luciferic forces have within themselves the ability to translate into time, so to speak, that which would otherwise appear to our human perception as purely spiritual and permanent, giving it the appearance of temporal progression. And it is solely through this appearance of the temporal progression of certain phenomena within ourselves that human beings claim that their spiritual activity is connected with material processes. If we were not, in a sense, permeated by Luciferic beings in our souls, our spiritual activity would appear to us immediately as spiritual. We would not even think that spiritual activity could be connected with matter. We would become aware that the only image I often use is also the only correct one: that those who believe their mental activity arises from matter are like people who stand in front of a mirror and believe that the reflection comes from a being behind the mirror. Certainly, the image depends on the shape of the mirror; in the same way, our thinking depends on our physicality. But the body acts no differently than a mirror. This would be immediately apparent to human beings if it were not for the Luciferic illusion that spiritual activity is formed out of matter. The more Lucifer interferes with the superconscious, the more he evokes the illusion that deceives us in a similar way to when we walk toward a mirror and smash it in order to see how the person behind it reacts.
This illusion that the spiritual can originate from the material is essentially a Luciferic illusion. And one can say: whoever asserts that the spiritual is a product of matter, even if he does not say so, declares Lucifer to be his god. The assertion that the spiritual arises from the material is identical with the assertion that the mirror produces the mirror images in the sense that the beings are behind the mirror. This assertion that matter produces the spiritual, the human spiritual, is identical with the declaration, even if it is not spoken: Lucifer is God.
We can also ask about the opposite pole. A Luciferic deception is that the mirror, the material, allows something spiritual to flow out of itself. The opposite pole is that deception also exists in human beings, as if what is in the sensory world could ever really affect the human inner being. If it were not for the Ahrimanic illusion, which arises through forces entering from the non-spatial into the spatial, human beings would see through the fact that forces anchored in the material world can never influence their essence. The assertion that forces are anchored in matter, that energies are anchored that can continue to work in human beings, is a purely Ahrimanic assertion, and whoever makes it declares Ahriman to be his god, even if he does not say so.
Nevertheless, human beings hover between these two illusions; they hover between the one illusion that repeatedly deludes them into believing that the mirror allows images to flow out of itself as entities, as if matter could produce spiritual activities. The other illusion is that the external, sense-perceptible existence contains energies that can somehow be transformed into human activity. One is the Luciferic illusion, the other is the Ahrimanic illusion.
What characterizes our present age is that it has no inclination to respond to the spiritual in the same way that it responds to the natural order. It is, of course, easier to talk about the spirit from the standpoint of a nebulous mysticism or from the standpoint of abstract concepts of nature than to engage in a truly scientific way with spiritual processes and spiritual impulses, as one does with nature itself. We live in an age in which human beings must begin to consciously enlighten themselves about what is at work in their souls. We know the reasons why the time has passed when human beings could find the impulses that guided them further in the unconscious; today, human beings must begin to consciously enter the field in which their soul lives and which produces consciousness.
We can therefore say that human beings would actually be completely different beings if they followed only their own nature and the good spiritual forces in the world in their development, rather than following this primeval development in cooperation with the Luciferic and Ahrimanic forces acting upon them in time. The question is now this: How is a state of equilibrium established between these three forces? In order to establish this state of equilibrium, or at least to recognize how it can be established, we must consider the following.
External natural science makes things very convenient for itself by judging certain areas according to the following principle: a knife belongs to eating, so when you go to your shaving kit, you take out a razor and cut what is on the table with it. Many of today's scientific judgments are formed in this way, for example, the judgment about death. Modern natural science uses the most obvious concepts for the phenomenon of death, such as the cessation of an organism. This is convenient because it allows people, as some who call themselves researchers do today in a grotesque manner, to speak of plant death, animal death, and human death in the same sense. But this is really no different than if one were to speak of a knife and mean both a table knife and a razor in the same category. In truth, what can be called death is something different in plants, something different in animals, and something different in humans. It is only because one sees the cessation of organic functions in all three that one generalizes.
If we study death in human nature — and we have often spoken of the phenomenon of human death — then within human nature this death reveals such a nature that we can regard it in a certain way as the balancing force for the Luciferic forces. Isn't it true that death is not just a one-time occurrence, because human beings actually begin to die when they are born; because the impulses of dying are already within them, death takes place at a certain point in time. All the forces that lead to death are at the same time the forces that create balance with the Luciferic forces. For through death, man is led out of the temporal into the realm of eternity.
Now we know that the Luciferic forces have their essence precisely in the fact that they actually belong to the realm of eternity and carry into the realm of temporality what they should do in the realm of eternity. This would have no balance if death were not inserted into the realm of temporality, which in turn leads human beings out of the realm of temporality into the realm of eternity. Death is the counterbalance to the Luciferic. The Luciferic brings eternity into time; death carries time out into eternity. This is expressed in abstract terms, but this abstraction alone contains a vast amount of concrete reality.
What must we say about Ahriman? He does the same with similar things. I have given you a concrete example of similarity in human nature that is connected with the Ahrimanic. This similarity must be counterbalanced by something else—of course, one cannot speak teleologically, i.e., say that it must have been created—this counterbalance must exist, which actually works against the similarity. Strangely enough, however, similarity is often traced back to this counterbalance through one of the confused concepts that arise when one does not engage with deeper connections. The counterweight to similarity is the power of heredity: we are not only similar in the form that leads to our constitution, but we also carry within us inner powers of heredity. Through these powers of heredity that we carry within us, we actually counteract the similarity of form. Only a confused science pushes similarity and heredity together. We look like our parents, but at the same time we inherit certain forces from our parents in our inner being that strive to lead us back to the archetype of the human being. Actually, what we inherit is in conflict with similarity. A more subtle observation of human life can lead to this conclusion even without supernatural observation, simply through external observation. Try to question life in the right way, try to observe people who look particularly similar to their parents, grandparents, and so on in terms of this or that formative characteristic, and then look at the inherited moral impulses: you will see that the inherited moral impulses usually have the opposite effect to the same formative characteristics.
If you look at the images of the more outstanding personalities recorded in history, which make their form appear similar to that of their ancestors, you will see everywhere that at the same time their biographies record spiritual characteristics — and these are precisely the inherited characteristics — which rebel against those from which these formal similarities have come. This is essentially one of the secrets of life. And ancestors would understand their descendants, parents would understand their children much, much better if they could contemplate such a fact with complete impartiality. If, for example — forgive me for saying such things, but we are not in a philistine society — a mother has a little son who is very much like her, she can rejoice that her little son is like her; but it could be very useful for his upbringing if she now said to herself: What characteristics are developing in this son that are similar to those that cause me to quarrel so often with my husband? — We should focus our attention on such concrete impulses, which have enormous significance in life. The recognition of such impulses will be particularly necessary for the task of education in the future, for the future development of humanity. For in the future it will not be possible to educate on the basis of abstract principles, but one will have to educate on the basis of empirical, concrete evidence. And this concrete, empirical evidence cannot be obtained unless one can read life. One must be able to read it, but to do so one must know the letters. In concrete terms, as you know, there are many more, but for the most essential spelling for the immediate future, it is sufficient to know the three letters: normal development, the Ahrimanic, and the Luciferic. But those who do not know them cannot read, just as those who do not know the ABC cannot read a book. These are simply the letters through which one learns to know life, to read life. And the spirit of utopianism, which is so widespread in humanity, can only be overcome by learning to read life. But then one must engage in studying the forces at work in life.
Now, of course, someone may say: You are explaining to us something as the very essence of human nature, but it cannot be found anywhere. — That is self-evident; but this is no different from the objection of someone who says: You are explaining to me that the water flowing in the river contains hydrogen and oxygen; I cannot find any of that. It is necessary to go into these things, above all to form a correct concept of what form is. I once used the following comparison, which I would like to repeat.
You can arrive in Koblenz or anywhere else, even in Basel, and admire the Rhine and feel compelled to say: This Rhine, it flows, who knows for how long, certainly for centuries, perhaps since time immemorial. How old is this Rhine! - But what is actually old here? The water you are looking at will be somewhere else entirely in a few days, it will be gone: it is certainly not old, because a few days ago it was not there at all, but somewhere else entirely. What you see there is certainly not old, you must not think of it as centuries old. And when you talk about the Rhine, you are probably not talking about the channel in the earth where the water flows; you are really talking about something that is not actually in front of you. For when you speak of reality, you cannot speak of what you have before you, because what you have before you is a confluence of currents working through the world, and is only a state of equilibrium. And everywhere you look, you see only states of equilibrium. You must first penetrate the realities. But only by penetrating into realities is it possible to spell out life.
Tomorrow I will speak about the connection between the Luciferic and Ahrimanic impulses and the Christ-Yahweh impulse, so that you may see how this Christ-Yahweh impulse actually fits into these currents.