The Michael Revelation
GA 194
7 December 1919, Dornach
My dear friends,
You see, what I have said in these weeks culminates in the fact that we are facing the breaking-in of a spiritual world into our present world, which is the result of that cultural development which began about the middle of the 15th century. About that time everything became different in the civilised world. That which men before that time, had brought into their consciousness, dealt more with the inner being of man’s organism. You can find in old writings, in so far as they are to be had today, expressions which are very similar to our physical, chemical expressions, as I mentioned in the last lecture. But modern chemists and physicists will not really understand the things written in such books, for the simple reason that they believe that these terms refer to external processes. These external processes are not therein described, but inner processes of man’s physical or other bodies only. Only since the time of Galileo or Giordano Bruno has man begin to turn his attention more to the external world, and today we are so far advanced that we have a natural science, which has already influenced popular thinking, and even now popular feeling. We have a natural science which speaks of man, things in the mineral, plant and animal kingdoms, but can in no way give explanations of the being of man himself; not even as regards his physical, bodily nature. Today man must already put this question: “How am I, as a human being, related to what is in the external kingdoms around me, to that which surrounds me in the animal, plant, mineral, in the external physical human kingdom, in the kingdom of air and water, fire, of clouds, sun, moon and stars, how am I, as man related to all that?” Now we cannot rationally answer this, unless we recapitulate some things which we have had to observe concerning man. When we consider man as he stands before us, as a being of sense and intellect we can say: “We perceive through our eyes, through our ears, through the other sense organs which, although scattered over the rest of the body, are really Head-organs; through these senses we perceive the external world. We then elaborate our perceptions of the external world through those ideas and concepts which are united with our brain as an instrument. We retain something of what we thus experience through our senses, and this is necessary to us, to our inner integrity as human beings; we retain something of what we have conceived through our so-called reasoning intelligence, we keep back our Memory-concept.”
That, my dear friends, is in short, what we have taken out of the external world; something which was brought about in us by the external world through our senses; that which we have made out of this external reception through our intelligence we retain as our Memory-concept. What then are we, with reference to the way we as human beings face the world in the manner described?
Let us start from the simple phenomenon connected with the susceptibility of our senses, which I have already pointed out a few days ago. First of all you look at a flame, then shut your eyes, and you have an after image of the flame. This after image of the flame which you carry in your eye, disappears gradually. Goethe, who always utters these things imaginatively, says that the after-image re-echoes. It re-instates the original constitution of the eye and the nerves bound up therewith, after they have been changed through the light-impression which has fallen on the eye. What transpires in this way in your sense-organs is only a simplified form of what transpires in your memory when you receive external impressions in general, when you think them over and they remain in you as Memory-concepts. The difference is only this: If you see an impression with your eyes, let us say a flame — then you have an idea, a concept of the flame, and that resounds in you, but does not last very long. But now, if you take up something with the whole man, and think it over, you can always recall it later; and this greater after-image, this memory, lasts much longer; under certain conditions it lasts throughout your whole life. Now what is the cause of that? You see, if you keep that simple after-image which you have in the eye, and which only lasts perhaps a couple of minutes or perhaps even for only part of a minute, and then sinks down into nothingness, that is only because it does not travel through your entire organism, but simply remains in one part of it. That which becomes a memory-concept, goes through a far greater part — I will tell you in a minute what part — of your total organism; it then comes into contact with your etheric body, and passes through the etheric body into the surrounding cosmic ether. When a picture not only remains as a sense image, in a single organ, but goes through a great part of your entire organism, when it inserts itself into the etheric body, going outwards into the cosmic ether, you can retain it as a memory for the entire life. It is only a question of whether the impression goes deep enough, and grasps the etheric body, which does not retain it, but carries it out into the cosmic ether, inscribes it there, engraves it therein. Do not think that when you remember a thing that this is merely a process in your inner being. When you experience something, you cannot simply write it, as it were, in your notebook, although many people do this with their experiences today, and then simply take the notebook and read them off. But that which you remember, that you inscribe in the cosmic ether; and it is the cosmic ether which evokes it again in you, like the impression of a seal on sealing-wax, when you ought to remember it. Recollection is no mere personal affair, my dear friends, it implies an understanding with the cosmos. You cannot be alone when, as an inwardly collected man, you seek to recall your experiences; for remembering or failing to remember one’s experiences creates a disturbance in the being of man.
I have often given you the following example, just think what it signifies. A man whom I knew very well and who held an important position, suddenly got the impulse to go to a railway station without any reason, and buy a ticket to distant places unknown to him, in which he had nothing whatever to do. He did all this in quite a different condition of consciousness. During that time he knew nothing of what he really was, and only came back to himself when he was in Berlin, in a workhouse. The whole intermediate time was blotted out of his consciousness, from the moment he got into the train in Darmstadt, till he found himself in Berlin. It was afterwards discovered, from the accounts of different people, that he had been in Budapest and Lemberg; and from Lemberg had travelled to Berlin, where he came back to consciousness in a workhouse. Remember his mind was in perfect order, nothing was wrong there; he knew perfectly well during the time from his start in Darmstadt to his reception in Berlin, all that has to be done, to buy railway tickets, and how to look after himself in the intervening time, and so on. But, all the time he did these things, he had no recollection of his former life; and afterwards he had no memory of his experience after leaving Darmstadt; and no recollection of the whole journey. What happened during that time could only be ascertained by outside information.
That is one instance; I could give you many such. This is merely to draw your attention to what our life would be if there were not a continuous stream of memory going through all your experiences. Just think, if there were any time, (excluding that spent in sleep which you naturally do not remember) when you as human beings would have to think of your ego as if no memory were there. That which belongs to our sense-receptivity, to our intellect, is our own personal affair; but as soon as a thing becomes memory, it is something which, although a man experiences it in his soul-life, it is also an affair of the universe, it is an arrangement with the cosmos.
Now, present day man does not know, as intensely as he should, what I have just explained as a fact; but it will have to be one of the constituent parts of the future education of man; not to regard as a personal matter thoughts which in the etheric man lead to memory, but as something for which he is responsible to the whole cosmos.
My dear friends, when I began this series of lectures (GA 194), I told you there was once a time, to which we can go back is history when, as for instance with the Greeks, there was a land-consciousness, which did not go very far. This consciousness was then transformed into an Earth-consciousness in modern times; but in the future there must enter into humanity a cosmic and universal consciousness, where man must again realise himself as a citizen of the entire cosmos, as was the case in pre-historic times. The way to this cosmic consciousness, will be to feel quite clearly and distinctly within one, the personal responsibility for the thought which can lead to recollection, to memory.
What I have described to you so far belongs, as I have told you to a great part of man’s organism, but not actually to the entire man. Now in order to characterise to you what is here the case, I must indicate it in diagram [see below].

Suppose this to be the region of the senses [white], in which I include all the senses; this is also the region of the intellect. We should then come to that part of the human organism [red] which reflects — throws back the thoughts we cherish [red arrows], so that they can become memories; that part of man which contacts the objectivity of the cosmos. I have already indicated to you the parts of the human body in which man comes thus into contact with the cosmos. For instance if you follow a nerve which starts from any part of the body and goes to the spinal cord — I will draw this diagrammatically — you will find that for each such nerve there is another also (or approximately so), which again comes back, and leads somewhere else. I have often told you that the idea of there being sensory and motor nerves is nonsense.

But the important thing is this: — that, in reality, the course of each nerve springs from the circumference, and goes back to it again. But that nerve-path is somewhere broken, just like an electric wire when a spark bridges the gap. There is a kind of springing-over, a sensitive fluid from the so-called sensory nerve to the so-called motor-nerve. Now there are many such places in our spine, for instance, and other parts of the human body; and they are the places in space where man does not simply belong to himself, but belongs to the cosmos. If you connect all those places together, taking the ganglia of the sympathetic nerve-system as well, you reach the boundary. You can say that if, as it were, you divide man into halves — (this is more than the half, but let us suppose it to be) — you can halve man and observe him as a great sense-organ; regarding the taking in through the senses as a sense-receptivity, and the working-over through the intellect as a further, finer sense-activity. Further, you may consider the arising of Memory-Pictures as after-images which, however, remain permanently during the life between birth and death because memory is created by contact with the cosmic ether. Our own ether comes in contact with the cosmic ether and so there occurs transactions between us and the cosmic ether. (That is the one half of man).
The other half of man, is that which, in a sense, has the limbs as its end-organs; everything which comprises the limb-system. And as the one half ends in the sphere of the senses [plate 13, white], so the other half ends in the limbs, to which of course the feet, hands, and arms are attached. This is naturally a very rough sketch.
Now, just as I have drawn as belonging to the senses, everything which is of the nature of intelligence, so I have now to add the inner aspect of the limb-system, and that is of the nature of Will. This Will-nature is the other pole of man’s being [orange]; and between those two lie the inner boundaries which you get if you unite all the nerve-endings, and all the ganglia as I have described. Now you go somewhat beyond this boundary on the one side, regarding it as a sieve through the holes of which on the one side presses the Will, on the other the intelligence [yellow], then in the middle you get the sphere of feeling; because everything which belongs to feeling is, in reality, half Will and half intelligence. The Will wells up from below, the intelligence descends from above, and the result is feeling. In feeling there is always existing dreamily, on the one side intelligence and sleeping on the other side Will.
After we have prepared ourselves in this way, when we have seen on the one side the pole of intelligence and on the other the pole of Will, after we have seen that the physical organs above are the expression of intelligence, we can now ask: “With what in the external world does that which is now man agree?” We have learnt to know two poles, two aspects of the human being — what is there in the external world with which that harmonises; which is there in man? The answer is — nothing, nothing at all in reality. We have in the outer world a mineral, plant and animal kingdom. With none of these kingdoms does that which we find in man inwardly, and which also pertains to the body harmonise.
Now, my dear friends, you will be able here to raise a mighty objection, which is naturally very pertinent to the matter, you will say: We must consist of the same substance as this external world, for we eat these substances and thus unite ourselves with the substances of the mineral kingdom, while we salt our food, and take to ourselves other substances, in eating plants. There are also meat eaters, as you know; and they unite themselves with the substances of animals, and so on. You see, my dear friends, the belief that we really have something to do with the substances of the external world in our own body, is a terrible error. That which our body, our corporeality really does is this. It has continually to arm itself against those influences from the outer world, even against those which come through the food we eat. Of course it is terribly difficult to make this fact comprehensible to our fellowmen, for the important part of our body does not lie in our consuming nourishing foods, but in excreting them. Many things we excrete quickly, but others only in the course of seven, eight years. But nothing of what you have eaten today will be within you in eight years time. By that time everything will have been transmuted; the activity of your body consists in throwing off and not in taking in.
The fact that you have to take in food has in reality no more significance for your body, than the ground for your walking; if you had no ground under your feet you could not walk, but you, as human beings have nothing to do with the ground; it is only there to support you. Your bodily activity must encounter resistance, it must constantly push against something, and so you must continually eat, so that your bodily activity should meet resistance. Just as we would sink into the soil if the ground did not support us, so would the body’s activity sink into nothingness unless it were met by that basis which is prepared and which permeates the whole body. You do not eat in order to unite yourself with the food, but in order to be able to mediate that activity which is necessary in the excretion of the food. For our human life consists in this activity, of excreting the nourishment; and just as little as you may reckon the soil as belonging to the sole of your foot, so little should you reckon as belonging to your human nature what exists in your food, in so far as it exists in the external world — that is, if you want to think the truth. Man in his entirety is nothing but a reaction against his environment, because fundamentally he is activity through and through.
Of course, what I have now explained takes place in an altogether different way for the organs of the Senses and the Intellect, to what it does for the organs of the Will-sphere. To this extent man is a polaric being; but what exists in the outer world has not much to do with what transpires in these two poles of man’s polaric being.
We have in the outer world the plant and mineral kingdoms. Well, this mineral and plant kingdom is not in strong relationship with our own being. If we want to investigate with what this Mineral and Plant kingdom is allied, we must look into that world which we pass through before birth, before conception; that spiritual world through which we descend into the physical. If we let our gaze roam over the Plants and Minerals, we must really say: “Before my birth I was in the spiritual world. I cannot see this spiritual world through my senses; I cannot think it through my physical intellect; but this spiritual world which conceals itself from me through a kind of veil as long as I am a sense-being, reveals itself externally to me in the Plant-world and in the basis of the latter, the mineral world.” That Mineral and Plant world have far more to do with our life in the spiritual world than with our life between birth and death. Of course, not those Plants we see in our environment through our senses, which reveal themselves to us; they are the effects of those forces with which we are connected between death and rebirth. The Animal world, too, has not much to do with what we are as human beings, but has more to do with the time immediately following death, of which it manifests as external polar-opposite.
So we can say: We do not know what exists in man if we only learn the environment of man in natural science. That Science which our present-day possesses, and which it especially values, is a Science which contains nothing of man’s nature in reality. You may thoroughly know everything which is investigated according to scientific methods, yet thereby learn nothing about the being of man, because in natural science today there is contained nothing of the being of man.
Since the last four centuries popular ideas have sprung up from the popularising of the methods of natural science. Even the peasant on the land thinks along the lines of natural science, although he may clothe his thoughts in his own words. Catholicism with its dogmatic materialism today thinks in the sense of natural science; natural scientific thought dominates everything. But we have now reached the point when it has become necessary to build up the social order. Over a great part of the civilised world today — which part will grow gradually until finally it embraces the whole world — there forces its way up the desire for the construction of a new social order. Men think of a new social reconstruction.
Where do the social demands that live today in civilised humanity spring from? From the absolutely subconscious impulses of human nature. What is there to satisfy them? The results of Natural scientific thought! Today in the widest circles, this is called “social thinking”, because these results are applied to the social life of man.
So it has come about that in the East of Europe, from the result of a purely scientific materialistic thinking, a new social order is to be erected by the state. Those men whom Dr. Helphand, who calls himself Parvus,2Alexander Helphand (1867-1924), who called himself Parvus-Helphand, was a Russian socialist and Marxist theoretician, publicist, and controversial activist in the Social Democratic Party of Germany. After World War I he played an important part in the Bolshevik revolution and in bringing about the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk (1918). has — following the instructions of Ludendorf and Hindenburg 3Erich Friedrich Wilhelm Ludendorff (1865-1937) was a German general, politician and military theorist. Paul von Hindenburg (1847-1934) was a German field marshal and statesman who led the Imperial German Army during World War I. He later became President of Germany from 1925 until his death. — imported into Russia, so that they could form Bolshevism there, are the incarnation of these scientific methods. We may even say that the practical proof of what these natural scientific methods will become if put into the heads of certain social revolutionaries through the services of Helphand — for it was he who conducted that sealed wagon through Germany, under the protection of Ludendorf and Hindenburg to take these men to Bolshevism in Russia — is the incarnated method of natural science which is at home today in Russia.
My dear friends, one should not overlook the scope of these methods, I have already pointed out certain facts. There are two philosophers – very common, ordinary philosophers. The one, Avenarius,4Richard Avenarius (1843-1896) was a German-Swiss philosopher. He formulated the radical positivist doctrine of ‘empirical criticism’. taught at the University of Zurich, a man who certainly developed an extraordinarily narrow-minded thought. The other is Ernest Mach 5Ernst Mach (1838 -1916) was an Austrian physicist and philosopher, who contributed to the physics of shock waves. As a philosopher of science, he was a major influence on logical positivism and American pragmatism. who taught in Prague and Vienna. I myself heard him lecture at Vienna in 1882 in the Academy of Science. He always appeared to me as the very incarnation of narrow-mindedness and rectitude. If you ask today concerning the “state philosophy” of Bolshevism, it is not an accident but an inner necessity that it should be that of Avenarius and Mach, for these things belong together; the most extreme consequences of Natural scientific methods transformed into social thinking. Therefore one must take the matter earnestly. The scientific thought first blossomed as a social flower in the East, and it will blossom further, unless the root of the matter is attacked, in the scientific materialistic life itself.
The question is this, my dear friends. A certain wave of Thinking and feeling goes through the world; this wave is stimulated by the social scientific materialistic Thinking. While this wave spreads today, it lays hold of the necessary social thinking, but there it becomes a destructive power for humanity, an absolutely destructive force in humanity. The guiding, leading circles have not had the force and power to push into human thinking a real productive spiritual wave; and therefore the materialistic wave has arisen in the social thinking of the great masses of the proletariat. And Marxism which has expressed itself so grotesquely in the last four to five years, is the social blossom and fruit of a materialistic, scientific method in social Thought. We must not fail to recognise that this is the configuration of the present civilised world, otherwise we shall sleep through the most important phenomena and symptoms of life. One is not a full human being at the present time, if one sleeps through this phenomenon.
Certain humans beings, here and there, transcend the general judgment; they already feel today to a certain extent that, if we go Thinking and feeling as we have done we cannot progress, but shall only come more and more into Chaos. Therefore cries of the following kind though they are indeed rare today, do exist. Permit me to read to you one of these appeals.
In the 31st number of the socialistic weekly paper: The New Earth in Vienna there appears an interesting article under the title Crisis in World Views by Karl Polanyi.6Karl Paul Polanyi (1886-1964), was an Austro-Hungarian economic anthropologist, economic sociologist, and politician, best known for his book The Great Transformation, which questions the conceptual validity of self-regulating markets. Therein it is said that a general opposition has arisen against the capitalist economic order, together with a deviation from Marxian socialism. There still prevails today an amalgamation of socialism, and Marxism which is the vexation of all modern thinking, each step in the intellectual solution of the most burning social problems of the times is shipwrecked in the swamp of this spiritual decay. The outbreak of the World-War was the turning point for all capitalistic and therewith Marxian thought.
“The leaders of men felt clearly and the masses felt dimly, that no longer do the so-called life-interests dominate the world, but forces of quite a different kind. The general economic interests, which the imperialists followed and against which the socialists fought wind-mill battles, really showed themselves not merely as unreal, and abstract and even to empty phraseology, but also as mere economic superstition, and empty brain-spinning. It appeared clearly that it was not the actual situation itself, but the mere idea of the situation which is the real power — no matter how false an idea is — it is that and not the situation which dominates the masses. Even the concepts of material interests, however concrete and real, will only become historically effective, when raised into a belief, when the sacrifices made are not counted, and in all the irrational things done in its name the personal value alone serves as a standard for reward and justification. Our time of incredible paradoxes believes in egoism. This is to longer denied, nor whitewashed in an idealistic way. On the contrary, humanity is entering on its death in the holy name of economic life interests, which it surrounds with a halo of glory, and of a sacred egoism which it has elevated to Heaven itself. The material is elevated to the rank of the sole ideal, and therewith the materialistic world has ended its course. The capitalists have already called this idealism of the material — as the sole reality and essential — the fatherland; and the Marxists have openly called it: Socialism!”
“Utilitarian ethics, materialistic understanding of history, positivistic theory of knowledge, deterministic philosophy, in our modern atmosphere are no longer capable of life. And Marxism, as a view of life, is built upon these pillars; but its time is past!”
This is, you see, the cry of a soul, who can only see the negative side, of what is leading our time into chaos. And now comes the question, the terrible fateful question: “What is to appear in its place?” That question is put but the author quoted, and he goes on to say: “The answer to this question is not clear as regards the fate of Marxism. To upright spirits striving towards clearness, this is a disorganised Thinking. If the Sun is extinguished, one would rather find oneself in darkness than regard a will-of-the-wisp as the Sun.
“Now what is darkening the Sun for our race is a new Sun, a more radiant Sun, rising on the horizon. Freed from the nightmare of the theory of evolution, in the treadmill of which we were condemned to eternal compulsory labour, without rest or home, to pass our senseless existence in the hallucination of a distorted apprehension of history which sees in world-events not even the echo of a town-crier grown out of the idea of a clown-like determination which regards our free-will as the chance-play of force, working behind the scenes; until finally reborn from the belief in a dead mass to a belief in ourselves, we will at last find the force in ourselves to found a socialism according to ‘Justice, Freedom and Love’, and to make this a reality for mankind”.
Indeed, my dear friends, a yearning soul who realises:”We are steering towards chaos”, who even puts that fateful question: “What is to appear in its place?” and who then continues with the answer by dishing up the old phrases Justice, Freedom, Love that have become word-husks. Long enough indeed have these been preached; but the concrete path is not contained in these phrases.
“The Marxian socialism merely darkens that question of fate before which humanity stands today. It binds down the free forces of a radical solution, holds thought in the half-darkness of an out-lived world of Dogma, confuses one’s actions with dim prophecies, obscure authorities and mystic symbols. It takes away from man his free outlook.”
Agreed, “It does take away from man his free outlook,” but this is not made free through phrases. The author proceeds:
“The Church has outlived its calling by a thousand years. Marxism might outlive us, but the new spirit which is to be born to humanity out of the sorrows of this World-War, will outlive Marxism”.
“But where is this new spirit?” asks the author, who, it seems has a feeling for the nullity of our time, for that which leads to chaos. Only one of our friends, one of those who has been in our world-view for years, adds to what I have just read, a few lines. What I have just read to you comes from one who sees something new must come, but concludes by remaining with the old phrases. But our friend adds: “Herewith we see a view of the world which perceives that Marxism, as it appears today in its most logical form as Bolshevism, belongs to an old Thinking. It is only the reflection of the old Capitalistic world; it suffers just as much in its spiritual life. If it is an opponent to the latter in economic life, yet in its spiritual basis it is one with it. But in its place and in place of the modern natural scientific view, there must appear a new concept of the world, which proceeds from an Anthroposophical view of a Philosophy of Freedom.”
These are, of course, a few lines which a friend of our movement has added but it is clear to one who looks with the affairs of modern man that because things are as they are, this Anthroposophical spiritual science will seek its way, and unless one admits that the process of the disease which is going though our present life can only be healed by anthroposophical spiritual investigation, nothing can come out of the chaos. In all humility we must therefore say:”If only a few persons could be found who, to the question: What must appear in its place?” would give the answer Dr. Kolisko gave in Vienna to this Karl Polany. As long as people believe the health of our movement is to be sought in any sectarianism, they will never realise the meaning of our movement. They must first see we have to do with something which concerns the World, a cosmic affair, then they will understand the sense of our movement. Only he can be a real bearer of this World-View, who in this way not only realises its meaning but can make it the innermost impulse of his own will.
I do not want to adorn with many words what I have said in these lectures. We have not long to wait before we can continue similar discussions, but I must just say that it would satisfy a deep need of my heart, if only many of you would take those words which I said at the beginning of this lecture, in which I wanted to indicate one of the most important things of our present world-position, and during the next few weeks would lay them to heart.
We have spoken of many of the evil influences coming from the elementary world at the present time. You know that an old true perception which we can only understand aright through anthroposophy, says that at the end of the ordinary year, when Christmas time draws near, these days come in which the spiritual influences which work on man within the earthly sphere are most intense in their working. Let us seek, just at this time — a time which for centuries was so important and essential to human beings, but which in our age is only a time for bestowing suitable gifts — let us seek something corresponding to the old psychic custom. Let us seek refuge in those good spiritual powers, who still seek to gain influence on our human destiny, but can only do so if we allow the full earnestness to work in our souls, which consists of the relationship of the spiritual world with the world of man.
Achter Vortrag
Was ich Ihnen in diesen Wochen zu sagen hatte, gipfelt ja in der Tatsache, daß wir wirklich gegenüberstehen dem Hereinbrechen einer geistigen Welt in unsere gegenwärtige Welt, welche im wesentlichen das Ergebnis jener Kulturentwickelung ist, die begonnen hat um die Mitte des 15. Jahrhunderts. Um die Mitte des 15. Jahrhunderts wird alles anders in der als zivilisiert bekannten Welt. Dasjenige, was sich die Menschen vor dieser Mitte des 15. Jahrhunderts in ihr Bewußtsein hereinbrachten, handelte mehr über das Innere der menschlichen Organisation. Sie können in alten Schriften, soweit sie heute überhaupt noch zu haben sind - ich sprach davon schon gestern -, in Ausdrücken geredet finden, die sehr ähnlich sind unseren chemischen, physikalischen Ausdrücken und so weiter. Aber der heutige Chemiker oder Physiker wird die Dinge wirklich nicht verstehen, die in diesen Büchern stehen, aus dem einfachen Grunde, weil er glaubt, mit diesen Dingen seien äußere Prozesse geschildert. Diese äußeren Prozesse sind da nicht geschildert, innere Prozesse sind geschildert, Vorgänge im Inneren des menschlichen physischen oder ätherischen Leibes. Erst seit der Galilei-, Giordano Bruno-Zeit beginnt die Menschheit die Aufmerksamkeit mehr auf die äußere Welt zu lenken, und heute sind wir so weit, daß wir eine Naturerkenntnis haben, welche aber schon alles Denken, namentlich auch das populäre Denken und Empfinden beeinflußt hat, daß wir eine Naturerkenntnis haben, die von vielem spricht im mineralischen, pflanzlichen, tierischen Reiche, die aber in gar keiner Weise Aufklärung geben kann über das Wesen des Menschen selbst, auch nicht über das physisch-leibliche Wesen des Menschen. Heute muß bereits der Mensch aber die Frage aufwerfen: Wie verhalte ich mich selber als Mensch zu dem, was die äußeren Naturreiche sind, zu dem, was mich umgibt als Tier-, Pflanzen-, Mineralreich, als äußeres physisches Menschenreich, als das Reich von Luft und Wasser, von Feuer und Wolken, von Sonne und Mond und Sternen? Wie verhalte ich mich als Mensch dazu?
Nun können wir diese Frage nicht gründlich beantworten, wenn wir nicht auf mancherlei von dem wiederholentlich eingehen, was wir über den Menschen betrachtet haben. Nehmen wir zunächst den Menschen, wie er als Sinnes-, Verstandeswesen vor uns steht, so können wir sagen: Wir nehmen durch unsere Augen, durch unsere Ohren, durch die anderen Sinnesorgane, die dennoch, wenn sie für den übrigen Leib da sind, Hauptesorgane, Kopfesorgane sind, die äußere Welt wahr. Wir verarbeiten dann diese äußere Welt durch diejenigen Ideen und Begriffe, die an unser Gehirn als Werkzeug gebunden sind. Wir behalten — denn das ist zu unserer inneren Integrität als Mensch notwendig — von dem, was wir so erlebt haben durch unsere Sinne, was wir durchdacht haben durch unsere sogenannte verständige Intelligenz, unsere Erinnerungsvorstellung zurück. Und es ist schließlich das, was wir zunächst aufnehmend aus der Außenwelt haben, was durch unsere Sinne von der Außenwelt in uns geschieht, was wir durch unsere Intelligenz aus diesem äußerlich Aufgenommenen machen, dasjenige, was wir als Erinnerungsvorstellung zurückbehalten. Was sind wir denn eigentlich mit Bezug auf das, daß wir als Menschen, so wie ich es jetzt geschildert habe, der Welt gegenübertreten?
Gehen Sie von einem einfachen Phänomen der Sinnesempfänglichkeit aus. Ich habe schon einmal auf dies Phänomen in den letzten Tagen hingewiesen. Gehen Sie aus davon, daß Sie mit Ihren Augen eine Flamme sehen. Sie machen das Auge zu: Sie haben ein Nachbild dieser Flamme. Dieses Nachbild der Flamme, das Sie in Ihrem Auge mittragen, verschwindet nach und nach. Goethe, der sich immer anschaulich über diese Dinge ausspricht, sagt: Es tönt das Nachbild ab. — Es stellt sich die ursprüngliche Konstitution des Auges und des damit verbundenen Nervenapparates wiederum her, nachdem diese verändert worden sind durch den Lichteindruck, der auf das Auge gemacht worden ist. Das, was da in Ihrem Sinnesorgan sich abspielt, das ist nur der einfachere Vorgang für dasjenige, was sich mit Ihrem Gedächtnis, mit Ihrer Erinnerung abspielt, wenn Sie äußere Eindrücke im allgemeinen empfangen, sie überdenken und sie Ihnen bleiben als Erinnerungsvorstellungen. Der Unterschied ist nur der, wenn Sie mit Ihrem Auge einen Eindruck aufnehmen, ich will sagen also eine Flamme, dann die Vorstellung der Flamme haben, und das wiederum abklingt, so dauert das nur kurz. Wenn Sie mit dem ganzen Menschen etwas aufnehmen, es überdenken, sich später immer wieder erinnern können, wenn dieses große Nachbild der Erinnerung kommt, so dauert das lange, dauert unter Umständen für diese Erlebnisse Ihr ganzes Leben hindurch. Worauf beruht das? Ja, wenn Sie das einfache Abbild, das Sie im Auge haben, das vielleicht nur ein paar Minuten oder vielleicht nur Teile von einer Minute nachklingt, wiederum zum Versinken bringen, so ist es nur deshalb, weil das nicht durch Ihren ganzen Organismus weiter durchgeht, sondern in einem Teil, in einer Partie Ihres Organismus bleibt. Dasjenige, was Erinnerungsvorstellung wird, das geht zunächst durch einen großen Teil — ich werde ihn gleich näher bezeichnen — Ihrer Gesamtorganisation, stößt von da aus in den Ätherleib hinein, durch den Ätherleib in den umliegenden Weltenäther. Und in dem Augenblicke, wo nicht nur ein Bild als Sinnesbild im einzelnen Organ hängen bleibt, sondern durch einen großen Teil des Gesamtmenschen geht, sich in den Ätherleib hineinschiebt, nach außen geht, nach außen stößt, da kann es für das ganze Leben als Nachbild bleiben. Es handelt sich nur darum, daß der Eindruck tief genug ist, und daß er den Ätherleib ergreift, und der Ätherleib ihn nicht behält, sondern ihn an den äußeren Ather der Welt überträgt, ihn dort einschreibt, ihn dort einzeichnet. Glauben Sie nicht, daß wenn Sie sich an Sachen erinnern, dies bloß ein Vorgang Ihres Inneren ist. Sie können zwar nicht, wenn Sie ein Erlebnis haben, dieses immer, obzwar es heute schon viele Menschen mit sehr vielen Erlebnissen tun, in Ihr Notizbuch einschreiben und dann wieder herausnehmen, es wieder ablesen. Aber das, woran Sie sich erinnern, schreiben Sie in den Weltenäther ein, und der Weltenäther ruft es in Ihnen, wenn Sie sich erinnern sollen, wiederum als einen Siegelabdruck hervor. Das Erinnern ist keine bloße persönliche Angelegenheit, das Erinnern ist ein Auseinandersetzen mit dem Weltenall. Sie können nicht allein sein, wenn Sie sich als innerlich sich haltender Mensch an Ihre Erlebnisse erinnern wollen. Sich nicht erinnern an Erlebnisse, das zerstört die Wesenheit des Menschen.
Bedenken Sie nur einmal, was es heißt, ich habe das Beispiel öfter angeführt: ein Mann, den ich sehr gut kannte, der eine bedeutsame Stellung einnahm, der bekam plötzlich einmal den Drang, zur Eisenbahn zu gehen, ohne Grund, und sich dort ein Billett zu kaufen, um in ihm unbekannte Fernen, in denen er gar nichts zu tun hatte, zu fahren. Das alles tat er in einem ganz anderen Bewußtseinszustande. Aber in der Zeit, während er da fuhr, wußte er nichts von dem, worin er sonst war und er kam erst wieder zu sich, als er sich in Berlin in der Kurfürstenstraße in einem Armenasyl angenommen fand. Die ganze Zeit war ausgelöscht aus seinem Bewußtsein von der Zeit an, als er in Darmstadt eingestiegen war. Man hat nachher aus Angaben verschiedener Leute herausfinden können, daß er in Budapest war, in Lemberg war, und von Lemberg wiederum nach Berlin gefahren ist, und er kam wiederum zum Bewußtsein, als er in einem Armenasyl in Berlin war. Bedenken Sie, der Verstand war vollständig in Ordnung, nichts war in Unordnung von dem Verstande. Er wußte ganz genau in der Zeit von seinem Einsteigen in Darmstadt bis zu seiner Annahme in Berlin im Armenasyl, was man tut, um sich Fahrkarten zu lösen, was man tut, um sich in der Zwischenzeit zu verpflegen und so weiter. Aber in der Zeit, als er das ausführte, hatte er von seinem übrigen Leben keine Erinnerung. Und nachher hatte er zwar wieder die Erinnerung seines früheren Lebens bis zur Abfahrt in Darmstadt, aber keine Erinnerung an die ganze Reise. Was da geschehen war, konnte man nur aus äußeren Mitteilungen feststellen. Das ist ein Beispiel. Ich könnte viele ähnliche Beispiele erzählen. Es soll dieses Beispiel nur darauf aufmerksam machen, wie unser Leben wäre, wenn nicht eine kontinuserlich fortlaufende Erinnerung durchginge durch alle unsere Erlebnisse. Denken Sie sich, wenn für irgendeine Zeit außerhalb derjenigen, die Sie verschlafen haben - an die erinnern Sie sich ja natürlich nicht —, aber denken Sie sich, wenn für irgendeine Zeit außerhalb derjenigen, die Sie verschlafen haben, keine Erinnerung da sein würde, was Sie da über Ihr Ich als Mensch denken müßten. Dasjenige, was zu unserer Sinnesempfänglichkeit gehört, zu unserer Intelligenz gehört, es ist unsere persönliche Angelegenheit. In dem Augenblicke, wo die Sache anfängt, erinnerungsmäßig zu werden, ist dasjenige, was der Mensch in seinem Seelenleben erlebt, eine Auseinandersetzung mit dem Universum, eine Auseinandersetzung mit der Welt. In der Intensität, in der es notwendig ist, weiß die gegenwärtige Menschheit noch nicht, daß dies, was ich auseinandergesetzt habe, eine Tatsache ist. Aber es wird zu den Bestandteilen der Zukunftsbildung der Menschheit gehören, die beim ätherischen Menschen zur Erinnerung führen, nicht als eine bloß persönliche Angelegenheit sie zu betrachten, sondern als etwas, wodurch der Mensch der Welt verantwortlich ist.
Ich habe Ihnen, als ich diese Vortragsserie hier begann, davon gesprochen, wie zunächst einmal vorhanden war in der Zeit, in die wir gewöhnlich in der Geschichte zurückgehen, zum Beispiel noch bei den Griechen, ein Landbewußtsein, das nicht weit ging. Wie dann dieses Bewußtsein sich umwandelte in ein Erdbewußtsein, aber erst in der neueren Zeit eintreten muß für die Zukunft der Menschheit ein kosmisches, ein Weltbewußtsein, wie sich der Mensch wiederum wissen muß — das war ja auch in Urzeiten der Fall - als ein Bürger des ganzen Kosmos. Der Weg dazu wird sein, klar und deutlich in sich die Verantwortlichkeit zu fühlen für das Gedachte, das zur Erinnerung führen kann.
Dasjenige aber, was ich Ihnen bis jetzt geschildert habe, gehört, wie ich Ihnen sagte, einem großen Teile des Menschen an, nicht aber eigentlich dem ganzen Menschen. Und um Ihnen zu charakterisieren, was hier der Fall ist, muß ich es Ihnen schematisch andeuten. Nehmen wir an, das wäre die Sinnesregion (weiß), wobei ich alle Sinne zusammenfasse, auch die Verstandesregion, dann kämen wir bis gewissermaßen zu demjenigen im menschlichen Organismus (rot), das die Gedanken, die wir hegen, zurückwirft (Pfeile, rot), so daß sie Erinnerungen werden können, dasjenige, was im Menschen zusammenstößt mit der Objektivität des Kosmos. Ich habe Ihnen schon einmal auf die Stellen im Menschenleib hingedeutet, in denen der Mensch zusammenstößt mit dem Kosmos.

Wenn Sie verfolgen, sagen wir zum Beispiel einen Nerv, der von irgendeiner Stelle des Leibes nach dem Rückenmark geht — ich zeichne schematisch -, so finden Sie für jeden solchen Nerv auch einen anderen, oder wenigstens annähernd für jeden solchen Nerv auch einen anderen, der irgendwoher wiederum zurückführt irgendwohin. Die Sinnesphysiologen nennen das eine einen sensitiven Nerv, das andere einen motorischen Nerv.

Nun, über diesen Unsinn, daß es sensitive und motorische Nerven gäbe, habe ich ja des öfteren schon gesprochen. Aber das Wichtige ist, daß eigentlich jede ganze Nervenbahn an dem Umfang des Menschen entspringt und wiederum zum Umfang zurückgeht, aber irgendwo unterbrochen ist; wie ein elektrischer Draht, wenn er einen Funken überspringen läßt, so ist eine Art Überspringen, ein sensitives Fluidum von dem sogenannten sensitiven bis zu dem sogenannten motorischen Nervenanfang. Und an der Stelle - also solche Stellen sind unzählige, wenigstens sehr viele, in unserem Rückenmark zum Beispiel, in anderen Partien unseres Leibes — an diesen Stellen sind auch die Raumssstellen, wo der Mensch sich nicht allein selber angehört, wo er dem Weltenall angehört. Wenn Sie alle diese Orte miteinander verbinden, dazu auch die Ganglien des Sympathikus nehmen, dann bekommen Sie diese Grenze, auch leiblich-physiologisch diese Grenze. So daß Sie sagen können: Sie halbieren gewissermaßen den Menschen - es ist dieses mehr als die Hälfte, aber nehmen wir an, wir halbieren den Menschen - und betrachten ihn wie ein großes Sinnesorgan, betrachten das Aufnehmen durch die Sinne überhaupt als die Sinnesempfänglichkeit, das Verarbeiten durch den Verstand als eine weitere feinere Sinnestätigkeit, das Entstehen der Erinnerungsbilder als Nachbilder, die aber bleibend sind für das Leben zwischen Geburt und Tod, weil aufgestoßen wird, wenn die Erinnerung sich bildet, an dem Weltenäther. Unser eigener Äther stößt an den Weltenäther auf, und es finden Auseinandersetzungen zwischen uns und dem Weltenäther statt. Der andere Teil des Menschen, der ist der, welcher gewissermaßen zu seinem Endorgan die Gliedmaßen hat, alles, was Gliedmaßen sind. So wie dieser eine Teil die Sinnessphäre zum Endorgan hat (das Wort «Sinnessphäre» wird angeschrieben), so hat der andere Teil des Menschen die anwachsenden Gliedmaßen (es wird an der ersten Zeichnung S. 143 weitergezeichnet): die Füße wachsen an, die Arme wachsen an. Es ist natürlich grob und schematisch gezeichnet.
Das ist dasjenige, wovon ich ebenso alles, was willensartig ist, nach innen zeichnen müßte, wie ich von den Sinnen aus gezeichnet habe alles, was intelligenzartig ist, und das schließt sich an den anderen Teil des Menschen an. Dieses Willensartige ist der andere Pol des menschlichen Wesens. Zwischen beiden liegt eben die Grenze, die innere Grenze, die Sie bekommen, wenn Sie alle Nervenendigungen und alle Ganglien verbinden. Da bekommen Sie, wenn Sie diese Grenze von der einen Seite etwas überschreiten, so daß Sie sich denken, diese Grenze wäre ein Sieb und auf der einen Seite drängte durch die Löcher dieses Siebes der Wille (siehe Zeichnung Seite 143, orange), auf der anderen Seite drängte Intelligenz durch die Löcher dieses Siebes (gelb) - dann bekommen Sie in der Mitte das Gemüt, die Fühlsphäre. Denn alles das, was zum Fühlen gehört, ist eigentlich halb Wille und halb Intelligenz. Der Wille drängt von unten, die Intelligenz von oben: das gibt das Fühlen. Im Fühlen ist immer traumhaft auf der einen Seite die Intelligenz, auf der anderen Seite schlafend der Wille darinnen.
Nachdem wir so gewissermaßen den Menschen geisteswissenschaftlich präpariert haben — auf der einen Seite den Intelligenzpol, auf der anderen Seite den Willenspol -, nachdem wir gesehen haben, daß die physischen Organe nach oben der Ausdruck des Intelligenzpoles sind, können Sie nun fragen: Mit was in der Außenwelt stimmt dasjenige, was da im Menschen drinnen ist — wir haben jetzt die zwei Pole, die zwei Seiten des Menschenwesens kennengelernt — eigentlich überein? Mit nichts, mit gar nichts in Wirklichkeit. Wir haben in der Außenwelt ein mineralisches, ein pflanzliches, ein tierisches Reich. Mit keinem dieser Reiche stimmt dasjenige, was der Mensch im Inneren ist, auch leiblich ist, irgendwie wahrhaftig überein.
Sie werden jetzt einen gewichtigen Einwand machen können, einen Einwand, der selbstverständlich furchtbar nahe liegt. Sie werden sagen: Nun ja, wir bestehen doch aus denselben Stoffen wie die Außenwelt, denn wir essen diese Stoffe und vereinigen uns also mit den Stoffen des mineralischen Reiches, indem wir uns unsere Speisen salzen, andere mineralische Stoffe zu uns nehmen, ebenso Pflanzen. Es gibt ja auch Fleischesser, nicht wahr, die vereinigen sich auch mit den Substanzen der Tiere und so weiter. Es ist aber so, daß in diesem Glauben, wir hätten nun wirklich in der eigenen Leiblichkeit etwas zu tun mit den Stoffen der Außenwelt, ein furchtbarer Irrtum steckt. Das was unsere Leiblichkeit eigentlich tut, ist, daß sie sich fortwährend wehren muß gegen die Einflüsse der Außenwelt, auch gegen die Einflüsse, die mit den Nahrungsmitteln in uns kommen. Diese Tatsache ist sogar unseren Mitmenschen heute noch sehr schwer verständlich zu machen, denn das Wesentliche unseres Leibes besteht nicht darinnen, daß wir die Nahrungsstoffe aufnehmen, sondern daß wir sie wieder herausschaffen. Manches schaffen wir sehr rasch heraus, manches aber erst im Laufe von sieben, acht Jahren. Aber nichts von dem, was Sie heute gegessen haben, tragen Sie nach acht Jahren noch in sich. Denn das ist alles ausgetauscht, und die Tätigkeit Ihres Leibes besteht im Herausschaffen, nicht im Aufnehmen.
Daß Sie aufnehmen müssen, das hat nämlich für Ihren Leib im Grunde keine andere Bedeutung, als was der Boden für Ihr Gehen ist. Wenn Sie keinen Boden unter den Füßen hätten, könnten Sie nicht gehen, aber Sie haben mit dem Boden als Mensch nichts zu tun, er muß Sie nur halten. So muß bloß Ihre Leibestätigkeit eine Widerlage haben, sie muß fortwährend auf etwas aufstoßen, daher muß man fortwährend essen, damit die Leibestätigkeit auf etwas aufstößt. Gerade wie Sie versinken würden in den Boden, so würde die Leibestätigkeit versinken in die Nullität, wenn sie nicht fortwährend an dem Boden, der bereitet wird — aber jetzt durchdringt er eben den ganzen Leib -, aufstoßen würde. Sie essen nicht, um die Nahrungsmittel mit sich zu vereinigen, sondern Sie essen, um die Tätigkeit vermitteln zu können, die zum Herausschaffen der Nahrungsmittel notwendig ist. Denn in der Tätigkeit des Herausschaffens der Nahrungsmittel besteht Ihre Menschenwesenheit. Und so wenig, wie Sie den Fußboden zu der Sohle Ihres Fußes rechnen dürfen, so wenig dürfen Sie dasjenige, was in dem Nahrungsmittel ist, soweit es irgendwie in der Außenwelt vorhanden ist, zu Ihrer Menschlichkeit rechnen, wenn Sie die Wahrheit denken wollen. Der Mensch ist im ganzen nichts weiter als eine Reaktion gegen dasjenige, was seine Umwelt ist. Eine Reaktion ist der Mensch, durchaus eine Reaktion. Denn der Mensch ist im Grunde genommen durch und durch Tätigkeit.
Das, was ich jetzt auseinandergesetzt habe, findet ja in sehr verschiedener Weise statt für die Organe der Sinnes- und Intelligenzsphäre, ganz anders für die Organe der Willenssphäre. Gewiß, insofern ist der Mensch eine polarische Wesenheit. Aber mit dem, was in der Außenwelt ist, hat dasjenige, was da in diesen zwei Polen der menschlichen polarischen Wesenheit vor sich geht, nicht viel zu tun.
Wir haben in der Außenwelt das mineralische, das pflanzliche Reich. Dieses mineralische, dieses pflanzliche Reich, das ist nicht innerlich stark verwandt mit unserem eigenen Wesen. Wollen wir etwas aufsuchen, womit dieses Mineral- und pflanzliche Reich verwandt ist, dann müssen wir in die Welt schauen, die wir durchleben vor unserer Geburt, die wir durchmachen, bevor wir durch Geburt beziehungsweise Konzeption aus der geistigen Welt in die physische Welt herabsteigen. Wenn wir den Blick über die Pflanzenwelt und über die mineralische Welt werfen, dann müssen wir uns eigentlich sagen: Ich war vor meiner Geburt in einer geistigen Welt. Diese geistige Welt schaue ich nicht durch meine physischen Sinne, denke sie nicht durch meinen physischen Verstand. Aber diese Welt, die mir also wie durch einen Schleier verhüllt ist, wenn ich Sinnesmensch bin, diese Welt offenbart sich äußerlich in der Pflanzenwelt und in ihrer Grundlage, der mineralischen Welt. Viel mehr mit unserem außerweltlichen Leben hat mineralische und pflanzliche Welt zu tun, als mit unserem Leben zwischen Geburt und Tod. Natürlich nicht diejenigen Pflanzen, die wir durch unsere Sinne in der Umgebung sehen, die sich uns hier offenbaren: die sind die Wirkungen derjenigen Kräfte, mit denen wir zwischen Tod und neuer Geburt zusammenhängen. Und das Tierreich hat auch nicht sehr viel mit demjenigen zu tun, was wir als Menschenwesenheit sind, hat eher zu tun mit der Zeit unmittelbar nach dem 'Tode, von der es eine äußerliche, polarisch entgegengesetzte Offenbarung ist. So daß wir sagen können: Was im Menschen ist, lernen wir nicht kennen, wenn wir die Umgebung des Menschen naturwissenschaftlich kennenlernen. Und so ist es denn der Fall, daß diejenige Wissenschaft, welche die Gegenwart hat, welche die Gegenwart besonders schätzt, eine Wissenschaft ist, die nichts vom Menschenwesen eigentlich in Wirklichkeit enthält. Sie können alles dasjenige, was nach naturwissenschaftlicher Methode heute erforscht wird, von Grund aus kennen, und Sie lernen dadurch gar nichts kennen über die Wesenheit des Menschen, denn in dem naturwissenschaftlichen Erkennen ist die Wesenheit des Menschen nicht enthalten.
Nun sind aber seit den letzten vier Jahrhunderten alle unsere populären Vorstellungen entsprungen aus der Popularisierung der naturwissenschaftlichen Methode. Naturwissenschaftlich denkt im Grunde genommen heute schon selbst der Bauer auf dem Lande draußen, wenn er das auch noch in seine eigenen Worte kleidet. Naturwissenschaftlich denkt im Grunde genommen selbst der Katholizismus mit seinem dogmatischen Materialismus. Naturwissenschaftliches Denken beherrscht im Grunde genommen alles. Aber wir sind ja heute in dem Zeitpunkte angelangt, in dem es notwendig geworden ist, die soziale Ordnung aufzubauen. Einen großen Teil der heute zivilisierten Welt — und dieser Teil wird immer größer und größer und schließlich zur ganzen zivilisierten Welt werden — drängt es heute, einen sozialen Neuaufbau zu errichten. Die Menschen denken nach über den sozialen Aufbau. Soziale Forderungen leben heute in der zivilisierten Menschheit. Woraus sind sie entsprungen? Sie sind aus sehr unterbewußten Impulsen in der Menschennatur entsprungen. Womit will man sie befriedigen? Mit Ergebnissen naturwissenschaftlichen Denkens. Und die naturwissenschaftlichen Ergebnisse nennt man heute im weitesten Umkreise «soziales Denken», weil man diese Ergebnisse anwendet auf das soziale Leben der Menschen.
So ist es geschehen, daß im Osten Europas aus rein naturwissenschaftlich-materialistischem Denken eine neue Staats-Sozial-Ordnung aufgerichtet werden soll. Die Männer, die Dr. Helphand, der sich Parvus nennt, nach der Anleitung von Ludendorff und Hindenburg nach Rußland importiert hat, damit sie dort den Bolschewismus machen, diese Männer sind die verkörperten naturwissenschaftlichen Methoden. Man kann sogar sagen: Die praktische Probe, was die naturwissenschaftliche Methode wird, wenn sie in den Köpfen gewisser Sozialrevolutionäre Wurzel faßt, zeigen uns die Männer des Bolschewismus. Die verkörperte naturwissenschaftliche Methode haust heute in Rußland durch Helphands Schaffnerdienste, denn er hat den plombierten Wagen geführt durch Deutschland durch, um die Männer des Bolschewismus unter der Ägide von Ludendorff und Hindenburg nach Rußland zu führen.
Man soll die Tragweite dieser verkörperten naturwissenschaftlichen Methode nicht übersehen! Ich habe Sie auf einige Tatsachen aufmerksam gemacht. Es gibt zwei Philosophen, höchst bürgerlich spießige Philosophen waren es. Der eine hat gelehrt an der Zürcher Universität, Avenarius, ein Mensch, der ganz gewiß darauf gehalten hat, ein bürgerlich-spießiges Denken zu entwickeln. Der andere ist Ernst Mach, der in Prag, in Wien gelehrt hat. Ich habe ihn selbst 1882 in der Wiener Akademie der Wissenschaften vortragen hören. Er ist mir immer so etwas wie die Inkarnation bürgerlicher Spießigkeit und Rechtschaffenheit erschienen, dieser Ernst Mach. Wenn Sie heute nach der «Staatsphilosophie» des Bolschewismus fragen, so ist es nicht ein Zufall, sondern eine innere Notwendigkeit, daß die Avenariussche und Machsche Philosophie die Staatsphilosophie ist, denn diese Dinge gehören zusammen: äußerste Konsequenz naturwissenschaftlicher Methode umgewandelt in Metamorphose auf soziales Denken. Deshalb muß man die Sache auch ernst nehmen. Zuerst blühte das naturwissenschaftliche Denken als soziale Blüte im Osten auf. Es wird schon weiter aufblühen, wenn man nicht die Sache an der Wurzel anpackt, am naturwissenschaftlich-materialistischen Leben selber.
Es handelt sich darum, daß heute eine gewisse Welle des Denkens und Empfindens durch die Welt geht. Erregt wird diese Welle durch das sozialwissenschaftliche materialistische Denken. Indem diese Welle sich ausbreitet, ergreift sie heute das notwendig soziale Denken, wird da zur zerstörerischen Gewalt der Menschheit, zur absoluten zerstörerischen Gewalt der Menschheit. Die leitenden, führenden Kreise haben nicht die Macht und Kraft gehabt, hineinzugießen in das menschliche Denken eine wirklich tragende geistige Welle. Deshalb ist aufgegangen in den breiten Massen des Proletariats die materialistische Welle, im sozialen Denken der breiten Masse des Proletariats. Und der Marxismus, der wiederum so grotesk aufgelebt ist in den letzten vier bis fünf Jahren, das ist die soziale Blüte und Frucht der materialistisch naturwissenschaftlichen Methode im sozialen Denken. Man sollte nicht verkennen, daß das die Konfiguration der gegenwärtigen zivilisierten Welt ist. Sieht man sie nicht, so verschläft man die wichtigsten Erscheinungen und Symptome dieses Lebens. Man ist nicht voll Mensch in der Gegenwart, wenn man diese Erscheinungen verschläft.
Einzelne Menschen ragen heraus aus dem allgemeinen Urteil. Diese einzelnen Menschen fühlen heute schon bis zu einem gewissen Grade: Wenn wir so fortdenken und fortempfinden, wie wir es getan haben, können wir nicht weiter, es geht nicht. Wir kommen in das Chaos immer weiter hinein. Darum sind Weckrufe von der Art wie der Folgende heute zwar selten, aber sie sind schon da, diese Weckrufe. Einen solchen Weckruf lassen Sie mich Ihnen vorlesen.
Im 31./32. Heft der kultursozialistischen Wochenschrift «NeueErde» in Wien erschien ein interessanter Aufsatz unter dem Titel «Weltanschauungskrise» von Karl Polanyi. Darin wird gesagt, daß ein allgemeiner Widerwille gegen die kapitalistische Wirtschaftsordnung eingesetzt habe, zugleich mit einer Abkehr vom marzistischen Sozialismus.
«Es herrscht heute noch eine Verquickung von Marxismus und Sozialismus, die das Ärgernis alles modernen Denkens ist. Jeder Anlauf zur intellektuellen Förderung der brennendsten sozialen Probleme der Zeit scheitert in dem Sumpfe dieser geistigen Niederung... »
«...Der Ausbruch des Weltkrieges war die Wende für alles kapitalistische und damit marxistische Denken. Die Führer der Menschheit erkannten es klar und die Massen fühlten es dumpf, daß nimmermehr die sogenannten Lebensinteressen die Welt beherrschen, sondern Kräfte ganz anderer Art und anderen Wesens. Erwiesen sich doch die allgegenwärtigen wirtschaftlichen Interessen, denen die Imperialisten nachjagten und gegen die die Sozialisten im Windmühlenkampf ankämpften, nicht bloß als irreal und abstrakt bis zur Phrasenhaftigkeit, sondern auch als bloßer ökonomischer Aberglaube und leeres Hirngespinst. Klar trat es vor Augen, daß nicht das Materielle, sondern die Vorstellung von diesem Materiellen die Triebkraft ist, und wäre diese Vorstellung noch so falsch und noch so irrig, — daß es mithin die Vorstellungen und nicht das Materielle ist, was die Massen lenkt. Ja, auch die Vorstellung des materiellen Interesses, dieses angeblich Konkretesten und Wirklichsten, wird erst historisch wirksam, sobald sie zum Glauben erhöht wird, wenn erst die Opfer nicht mehr gezählt werden, die man ihr darbringt, und ihr Selbstwert allein für alles Irrationelle, das in ihrem Namen verübt wird, zur Entschädigung und zur Rechtfertigung dient. Diese Zeit allerungeheuerlichster Paradoxe glaubte an den Egoismus. Er wurde nicht mehr abgeleugnet, nicht mehr idealistisch übertüncht; im Gegenteil! Die Menschheit zog in den Tod im geheiligten Namen von wirtschaftlichen Lebensinteressen, die sie mit einem Glorienschein umgab, und des Sacro Egoismo, der sich selbst zum Himmel erhoben hatte. Das Materielle hatte sich selbst zum einzigen Ideellen erklärt und damit vollendete die materialistische Welt ihre Bahn. Hatten doch diese Idealisierung des Materiellen als des einzig Wirklichen und Wesenhaften die Kapitalisten schon Vaterland genannt, die Marxisten aber offen: Sozialismus!»
«Utilitaristische Ethik, materialistische Geschichtsauffassung, positivistische Erkenntnislehre, deterministische Philosophie: sie sind in der neuen Atmosphäre nicht mehr lebensfähig. Der Marxismus aber als Weltanschauung ist auf diese Pfeiler aufgebaut. Seine Zeit ist um.»
So sehen Sie den Weckruf einer Seele, die immerhin das Negative, in das Chaos unserer Zeit Hineinführende sieht. Und jetzt kommt die Frage, eine furchtbare Schicksalsfrage. Diese ist: «Was soll an seine Stelle treten?»
Diese Frage wirft derselbe auf, der alles das geschrieben hat, was ich Ihnen eben vorgelesen habe. Er sagt weiter: «Die Beantwortung dieser Frage ist für das Schicksal des Marxismus nicht bestimmend. Für aufrichtige und nach Klarheit strebende Geister ist dies ein untergeordnetes Bedenken. Erlösche auch die Sonne, man müßte sich eher im Dunkeln zurechtfinden, als ein Irrlicht für die Sonne auszugeben.»
«Was aber unserem Geschlechte die Sonne verdunkelt, ist eine neue, noch hellere und strahlendere, die am Horizont aufgeht. Vom Alpdruck einer Entwickelungslehre befreit, in deren Tretmühle wir zur ewigen Zusammenarbeit verurteilt, ruhelos und heimatlos, unser sinnloses Dasein fristeten, aus der Halluzination einer verkehrten Geschichtsauffassung erwacht, die im Weltgeschehen nicht das Echo der Rufer im Streite, sondern in ihrem Rufe das bloße Echo des Weltgeschehens zu hören wähnte, der Zwangsvorstellung eines clownhaften Determinismus entwachsen, die unsere Willensfreiheit als Zufallsspiel hinter der Szene wirkender Kräfte hinstellte, von dem Glauben an der toten Menge endlich zum Glauben an uns selbst geboren, werden wir die Kraft und die Berufung in uns finden, die Forderungen des Sozialismus nach Gerechtigkeit, nach Freiheit und nach Liebe auch zur Wirklichkeit der Menschheit zu machen.»
Ja, eine sehnsüchtige Seele, die sieht: wir steuern dem Chaos entgegen, die sogar die schicksalsschwere Frage aufwirft: Was soll an seine Stelle treten? — und die dann fortsetzt mit der Antwort, und die alten Phrasen nur aufzutischen hat, die eben zu Worthülsen geworden sind: Gerechtigkeit, Freiheit und Liebe. Lange genug sind sie gepredigt worden. Der konkrete Weg ist in dieser Phrase wahrhaftig nicht enthalten.
«Der marxistische Sozialismus verdunkelt heute bloß die Schicksalsfrage, vor der die Menschheit steht, er unterbindet die freien Kräfte einer radikalen Lösung, hält das Denken im Halbdunkel einer überlebten Dogmenwelt, versagt das Handeln durch dunkle Weissagungen, obskure Autoritäten und mystische Symbole. Er verstellt der Menschheit die freie Aussicht.»
Richtig: «Er verstellt der Menschheit die freie Aussicht» — aber durch Phrasen wird diese Aussicht nicht frei gemacht! Und dann fährt der Verfasser weiter fort: «Die Kirche hat ihren Beruf um tausend Jahre überlebt. Der Marxismus mag uns überleben, aber der neue Geist, der aus dem Jammer dieses Weltkrieges der Menschheit geboren wurde, wird ihn gewiß überdauern.»
Aber wo ist der neue Geist? So sagt der Verfasser, der, wie es scheint, eine Empfindung hat für die Nullität unserer Zeit, für dasjenige, was in das Chaos hineinführt. Nun, ein Freund von uns, der lang schon innerhalb unserer Weltanschauung steht, fügt zu dem, was ich Ihnen eben vorgelesen habe, einige Zeilen hinzu. Das, was ich Ihnen bisher vorgelesen habe, ist eben von demjenigen, der sieht, daß etwas Neues kommen müsse, der aber schließlich bei den alten Phrasen bleibt. Unser Freund fügt hinzu: «Hier sehen wir eine Weltauffassung, die einsieht, daß der Marxismus, wie er heute in seiner konsequentesten Form im Bolschewismus auftritt, zum alten Denken gehört. Er ist nur das Widerspiel der alten kapitalistischen Welt. Er krankt ebenso wie diese am Geistesleben. Ist er im Wirtschaftlichen ihr Gegner, so ist er mit ihr in der geistigen Grundlage eins. An seine Stelle und an die der modernen naturwissenschaftlichen Weltanschauung soll treten eine neue, die aus einer «Philosophie der Freiheit» hervorgegangene anthroposophische Weltanschauung.»
Das sind allerdings wenige Zeilen, von einem Freunde unserer Bewegung hinzugefügt, aber klar ist es dem, der hineinschaut in das Getriebe des heutigen Menschtums, daß ja, weil die Dinge so sind, diese anthroposophische Geisteswissenschaft auftreten will. Und ehe man nicht zugeben wird, daß der Krankheitsprozeß unseres gegenwärtigen Lebens nur geheilt werden kann durch anthroposophisch orientierte Geistesforschung, wird aus dem Chaos nicht herauszukommen sein.
Man kann deshalb ohne Unbescheidenheit sagen: Wenn sich nur recht viele fänden, welche auf die Frage: «Was soll an seine Stelle treten?» — dieselbe Antwort geben würden wie der Dr. Kolisko in Wien sie diesem Karl Polanyi gegeben hat. Solange man glauben wird, daß das Heil unserer Bewegung in irgendeiner Sektiererei zu suchen ist, wird man niemals den Sinn dieser Bewegung erkennen. Erst wenn man einsehen wird, daß wir es zu tun haben mit einer Weltangelegenheit, wird man den Sinn dieser Bewegung erkennen.
Nur derjenige kann ein wirklicher Träger dieser Weltanschauung sein, der in dieser Weise ihren Sinn nicht nur erkennt, sondern zum innersten Impuls des eigenen Willens macht. Ich möchte nicht durch viele Worte verbrämen dasjenige, was ich in diesem Vortrage Ihnen sagen wollte. Wir werden uns ja in nicht allzulanger Zeit hier zu ähnlichen Besprechungen wieder sehen. Wir brauchen gar nicht einmal Abschied zu nehmen, denn es wird diesmal nicht so lange dauern.
Aber ich muß doch sagen, daß es einem tiefen Bedürfnis meines Herzens entsprechen würde, wenn recht viele von Ihnen die Worte, durch die ich hinweisen wollte auf ein Wichtigstes in unserer jetzigen Weltenlage, gerade in den nächsten Wochen recht stark beherzigen würden.
Wir haben von mancherlei schädigenden Einflüssen aus der elementarischen Welt in dieser unserer jetzigen Zeit gesprochen. Sie wissen, daß eine alte, wahre Anschauung, die man nur richtig verstehen muß, davon spricht, daß mit dem Ende des bürgerlichen Jahres, wenn die Weihnachtszeit heranrückt, jene Tage kommen, in denen der geistigste Einfluß, der innerhalb der Erdensphäre auf den Menschen geschehen kann, am intensivsten ist.
Suchen wir vielleicht gerade in dieser Zeit, die durch Jahrhunderte hindurch Menschen so wichtig und wesentlich war — die in unserer Zeit nicht viel mehr ist als eine Zeit, «passende Geschenke» zu geben -, suchen wir in dieser Zeit vielleicht doch, einem alten Seelengebrauche entsprechend, unsere Zuflucht bei jenen auch alten geistigen Mächten, die immerhin noch auf unser Menschenschicksal Einfluß gewinnen können, wenn wir den ganzen Ernst auf unsere Seele wirken lassen, der in der Beziehung der geistigen Welt zur menschlichen Welt besteht!
Das ist dasjenige, was ich heute zu Ihnen sprechen wollte.
Wenn ich wiederum hier vortragen werde, wird es Ihnen ja bekanntgegeben werden.
Eighth Lecture
What I have had to say to you in recent weeks culminates in the fact that we are truly facing the irruption of a spiritual world into our present world, which is essentially the result of the cultural development that began around the middle of the 15th century. Around the middle of the 15th century, everything changed in the world known as civilized. What people brought into their consciousness before the middle of the 15th century had more to do with the inner workings of the human organism. In ancient writings, insofar as they are still available today – I spoke about this yesterday – you can find expressions that are very similar to our chemical and physical expressions and so on. But today's chemists and physicists will not really understand the things written in these books, for the simple reason that they believe these things describe external processes. These external processes are not described there; internal processes are described, processes within the human physical or etheric body. It is only since the time of Galileo and Giordano Bruno that humanity has begun to turn its attention more to the external world, and today we have reached the point where we have a knowledge of nature which has already influenced all thinking, especially popular thinking and feeling, We have a knowledge of nature that speaks of many things in the mineral, plant, and animal kingdoms, but which cannot in any way shed light on the nature of the human being itself, not even on the physical-bodily nature of the human being. Today, however, human beings must already ask the question: How do I, as a human being, relate to the external realms of nature, to what surrounds me as the animal, plant, and mineral kingdoms, as the external physical realm of human beings, as the realm of air and water, of fire and clouds, of sun and moon and stars? How do I, as a human being, relate to this?
Now, we cannot answer this question thoroughly unless we return to some of the things we have already considered about human beings. Let us first consider the human being as he stands before us as a sensory and intellectual being. We can say that we perceive the external world through our eyes, our ears, and our other sense organs, which, although they are organs of the head, are nevertheless organs of the rest of the body. We then process this external world through the ideas and concepts that are bound to our brain as a tool. We retain — because this is necessary for our inner integrity as human beings — what we have experienced through our senses, what we have thought through with our so-called rational intelligence, our memory. And it is ultimately what we initially take in from the outside world, what happens to us through our senses from the outside world, what we make of this external input through our intelligence, that we retain as memory. What are we, then, in relation to the fact that we, as human beings, face the world in the way I have just described?
Start with a simple phenomenon of sensory perception. I have already referred to this phenomenon in recent days. Suppose you see a flame with your eyes. You close your eyes: you have an afterimage of this flame. This afterimage of the flame that you carry in your eye gradually disappears. Goethe, who always speaks vividly about these things, says: The afterimage fades away. — The original constitution of the eye and the associated nervous system is restored after it has been altered by the impression of light that has been made on the eye. What happens in your sensory organ is only the simpler process of what happens with your memory, with your recollection, when you receive external impressions in general, reflect on them, and they remain with you as memories. The only difference is that when you take in an impression with your eye, let's say a flame, and then have the image of the flame, and that in turn fades away, it only lasts for a short time. When you take something in with your whole being, think it over, and can remember it again and again later, when this large afterimage of the memory comes, it lasts a long time, possibly for your entire life for these experiences. What is the basis for this? Yes, if you allow the simple image you have in your eye, which perhaps lingers for only a few minutes or perhaps only parts of a minute, to sink back into oblivion, it is only because it does not pass through your entire organism, but remains in one part, in one section of your organism. What becomes a memory image first passes through a large part — I will describe it in more detail in a moment — of your overall organization, from there it enters the etheric body, and through the etheric body into the surrounding world ether. And at the moment when an image does not remain as a sensory image in a single organ, but passes through a large part of the whole human being, pushes its way into the etheric body, goes outward, pushes outward, it can remain as an afterimage for the whole life. It is only a matter of the impression being deep enough and grasping the etheric body, and the etheric body not retaining it, but transmitting it to the outer ether of the world, inscribing it there, recording it there. Do not believe that when you remember things, this is merely an internal process. When you have an experience, you cannot always write it down in your notebook and then take it out again and read it back, even though many people with a great deal of experience do this today. But what you remember is written in the world ether, and the world ether calls it forth in you when you are to remember it, again as a seal impression. Remembering is not merely a personal matter; remembering is an engagement with the universe. You cannot be alone if you want to remember your experiences as an inwardly stable person. Not remembering experiences destroys the essence of the human being.
Just consider what it means. I have often cited this example: a man whom I knew very well, who held an important position, suddenly felt the urge to go to the railway station for no reason and buy a ticket to travel to distant places unknown to him, where he had nothing to do. He did all this in a completely different state of consciousness. But during the time he was traveling, he knew nothing of his former life and only came to his senses again when he found himself in a poorhouse in Kurfürstenstraße in Berlin. The entire period from the time he boarded the train in Darmstadt was erased from his consciousness. From information provided by various people, it was later determined that he had been in Budapest, in Lemberg, and had traveled from Lemberg to Berlin, regaining consciousness when he found himself in a poorhouse in Berlin. Bear in mind that his mind was completely intact, nothing was disordered in his mind. He knew exactly what to do to buy tickets, what to do to feed himself in the meantime, and so on, from the time he boarded the train in Darmstadt until he was taken into the poorhouse in Berlin. But during the time he was doing this, he had no memory of the rest of his life. And afterwards, he did regain his memory of his former life up to his departure in Darmstadt, but he had no memory of the entire journey. What had happened could only be determined from external reports. That is one example. I could tell you many similar examples. This example is only intended to draw attention to what our life would be like if there were no continuous memory running through all our experiences. Imagine if, for some period of time outside of the time you slept—which you naturally do not remember—but imagine if, for some period of time outside of the time you slept, there were no memories, what you would have to think about your self as a human being. That which belongs to our sensory perception, to our intelligence, is our personal business. At the moment when something begins to become a memory, what a person experiences in their soul life is an encounter with the universe, an encounter with the world. In the intensity in which it is necessary, present-day humanity does not yet know that what I have described is a fact. But it will be part of the future development of humanity, which will lead the etheric human being to remember that this is not merely a personal matter, but something for which human beings are responsible to the world.
When I began this series of lectures here, I spoke to you about how, in the period of history to which we usually go back, for example to the Greeks, there was initially a sense of country that did not go very far. How this consciousness then transformed into an earth consciousness, but only in more recent times must a cosmic, a world consciousness emerge for the future of humanity, in which human beings must once again recognize themselves — as was also the case in primeval times — as citizens of the entire cosmos. The way to achieve this will be to feel clearly and distinctly within oneself the responsibility for one's thoughts, which can lead to remembrance.
But what I have described to you so far belongs, as I have said, to a large part of the human being, but not actually to the whole human being. And in order to characterize what is the case here, I must indicate it schematically. Let us assume that this is the sensory region (white), in which I summarize all the senses, including the region of the intellect, then we would arrive, as it were, at that part of the human organism (red) which reflects back the thoughts we entertain (arrows, red), so that they can become memories, that which in the human being collides with the objectivity of the cosmos. I have already pointed out to you the places in the human body where the human being collides with the cosmos.

If you follow, say, a nerve that goes from some part of the body to the spinal cord — I'll draw a diagram — you will find that for every such nerve there is another, or at least approximately another, that leads back somewhere else. Sensory physiologists call one a sensory nerve and the other a motor nerve.

Now, I have often spoken about this nonsense that there are sensitive and motor nerves. But the important thing is that every nerve pathway actually originates at the periphery of the human body and returns to the periphery, but is interrupted somewhere; like an electric wire when it causes a spark to jump across, there is a kind of jumping, a sensitive fluid from the so-called sensitive to the so-called motor nerve beginning. And at that point—there are countless such points, at least very many, in our spinal cord, for example, in other parts of our body—at these points are also the spatial points where the human being does not belong to himself alone, where he belongs to the universe. If you connect all these places with each other, including the ganglia of the sympathetic nervous system, then you get this boundary, also physically and physiologically. So you can say: you divide the human being in half, so to speak — it is more than half, but let's assume we divide the human being in half — and consider it as a large sensory organ, consider the reception through the senses as sensory receptivity, the processing by the mind as a further, more refined sensory activity, the emergence of memory images as afterimages, but which remain for the life between birth and death because they are brought up when memory forms, in the world ether. Our own ether encounters the world ether, and conflicts take place between us and the world ether. The other part of the human being is that which, in a sense, has the limbs as its end organ, everything that is limbs. Just as this part has the sensory sphere as its end organ (the word “sensory sphere” is written down), so the other part of the human being has the growing limbs (the drawing on the first page, p. 143, is continued): the feet grow, the arms grow. It is, of course, drawn in a rough and schematic way.
This is what I would have to draw inwardly for everything that is volitional, just as I have drawn everything that is intelligent from the senses, and this connects to the other part of the human being. This volitional aspect is the other pole of the human being. Between the two lies the boundary, the inner boundary that you get when you connect all the nerve endings and all the ganglia. If you cross this boundary slightly from one side, so that you imagine this boundary to be a sieve, with the will pushing through the holes of this sieve on one side (see drawing on page 143, orange), and intelligence pushing through the holes of this sieve on the other side (yellow), then you get the mind, the sphere of feeling, in the middle. For everything that belongs to feeling is actually half will and half intelligence. The will pushes from below, the intelligence from above: this gives rise to feeling. In feeling, intelligence is always dreamlike on one side, and the will is asleep on the other.
Now that we have, so to speak, prepared the human being spiritually — with the pole of intelligence on one side and the pole of will on the other — and now that we have seen that the physical organs are the upward expression of the pole of intelligence, you may ask: What in the external world corresponds to what is inside the human being — we have now become acquainted with the two poles, the two sides of the human being? Nothing, absolutely nothing in reality. In the outer world, we have a mineral, a plant, and an animal kingdom. Nothing in these kingdoms corresponds in any real way to what is inside the human being, to what is physically present in the human being.
You will now be able to raise a weighty objection, an objection that is, of course, terribly obvious. You will say: Well, we are made of the same substances as the outside world, because we eat these substances and thus unite ourselves with the substances of the mineral kingdom by salting our food, consuming other mineral substances, and eating plants. There are also meat eaters, aren't there, who unite themselves with the substances of animals and so on. But the fact is that this belief that we really have something to do with the substances of the outside world in our own physicality is a terrible mistake. What our physicality actually does is to constantly defend itself against the influences of the outside world, including the influences that come into us with food. This fact is still very difficult to make our fellow human beings understand today, because the essence of our body does not consist in taking in nutrients, but in expelling them again. We expel some things very quickly, but others only over the course of seven or eight years. But after eight years, nothing that you have eaten today is still inside you. For it has all been exchanged, and the activity of your body consists in expelling, not in absorbing.
The fact that you have to absorb has basically no other meaning for your body than what the ground has for your walking. If you had no ground beneath your feet, you could not walk, but as a human being you have nothing to do with the ground; it only has to hold you up. In the same way, your bodily activity must have a counterforce; it must constantly encounter something, which is why you have to eat constantly so that your bodily activity encounters something. Just as you would sink into the ground, so would your bodily activity sink into nothingness if it did not continually encounter the ground that is prepared—but now it permeates your entire body. You do not eat in order to unite food with yourself, but you eat in order to be able to carry out the activity that is necessary to extract food. For your humanity consists in the activity of bringing out the food. And just as little as you can count the floor as part of the sole of your foot, so little can you count what is in the food, insofar as it is somehow present in the external world, as part of your humanity, if you want to think the truth. Man is, on the whole, nothing more than a reaction to his environment. Man is a reaction, thoroughly and completely a reaction. For man is, in essence, activity through and through.
What I have now explained takes place in very different ways for the organs of the sensory and intellectual spheres, and quite differently for the organs of the sphere of the will. Certainly, in this respect, human beings are polar beings. But what goes on in these two poles of the human polar being has little to do with what is in the outer world.
In the outer world, we have the mineral and plant kingdoms. These mineral and plant kingdoms are not closely related to our own being. If we want to find something related to this mineral and plant kingdom, we must look into the world we live in before we are born, the world we go through before we descend from the spiritual world into the physical world through birth or conception. When we look at the plant world and the mineral world, we must actually say to ourselves: Before I was born, I was in a spiritual world. I do not see this spiritual world through my physical senses, nor do I think about it with my physical mind. But this world, which is veiled from me when I am a sensory being, reveals itself outwardly in the plant world and in its foundation, the mineral world. The mineral and plant worlds have much more to do with our extra-worldly life than with our life between birth and death. Of course, this does not apply to the plants that we see with our senses in our surroundings, which reveal themselves to us here: these are the effects of the forces with which we are connected between death and new birth. And the animal kingdom also has very little to do with what we are as human beings; it has more to do with the time immediately after death, of which it is an external, polar opposite revelation. So we can say that we do not learn about what is in human beings by studying the natural environment of human beings. And so it is the case that the science that has the present, that particularly values the present, is a science that contains nothing of human nature in reality. You can know everything that is being researched today using scientific methods, and you will learn nothing about the essence of human beings, because the essence of human beings is not contained in scientific knowledge.
Now, however, since the last four centuries, all our popular ideas have sprung from the popularization of the scientific method. Even the farmer in the countryside today thinks scientifically, even if he still expresses it in his own words. Even Catholicism, with its dogmatic materialism, thinks scientifically. Scientific thinking basically dominates everything. But we have now reached the point where it has become necessary to build a social order. A large part of the civilized world today—and this part is growing larger and larger and will eventually become the entire civilized world—is urgently seeking to establish a new social order. People are thinking about social structure. Social demands are alive in civilized humanity today. Where did they come from? They arose from very subconscious impulses in human nature. How can they be satisfied? With the results of scientific thinking. And today, the results of scientific thinking are widely referred to as “social thinking” because these results are applied to the social life of human beings.
This is how it came about that in Eastern Europe, a new state and social order is to be established on the basis of purely scientific-materialistic thinking. The men whom Dr. Helphand, who calls himself Parvus, imported to Russia under the guidance of Ludendorff and Hindenburg to establish Bolshevism there, these men are the embodiment of scientific methods. One could even say that the men of Bolshevism show us the practical test of what the scientific method becomes when it takes root in the minds of certain social revolutionaries. The embodied scientific method is at work in Russia today through Helphand's conductors, for he drove the sealed train through Germany to bring the men of Bolshevism to Russia under the aegis of Ludendorff and Hindenburg.
One should not overlook the significance of this embodied scientific method! I have drawn your attention to a few facts. There are two philosophers, both of them highly bourgeois and narrow-minded. One taught at the University of Zurich, Avenarius, a man who was determined to develop bourgeois, narrow-minded thinking. The other is Ernst Mach, who taught in Prague and Vienna. I heard him speak myself in 1882 at the Vienna Academy of Sciences. He always struck me as something like the incarnation of bourgeois narrow-mindedness and righteousness, this Ernst Mach. If you ask today about the “state philosophy” of Bolshevism, it is no coincidence but an inner necessity that the philosophy of Avenarius and Mach is the state philosophy, because these things belong together: the extreme consistency of the scientific method transformed into a metamorphosis of social thinking. That is why one must take the matter seriously. First, scientific thinking flourished as a social blossoming in the East. It will continue to flourish if we do not tackle the matter at its root, in scientific-materialistic life itself.
The point is that today a certain wave of thought and feeling is sweeping through the world. This wave is being stirred up by social-scientific materialistic thinking. As this wave spreads, it seizes the necessary social thinking of today and becomes a destructive force for humanity, an absolutely destructive force for humanity. The ruling circles have not had the power or strength to pour a truly sustaining spiritual wave into human thinking. That is why the materialistic wave has arisen among the broad masses of the proletariat, in the social thinking of the broad masses of the proletariat. And Marxism, which has in turn experienced such a grotesque revival in the last four to five years, is the social blossoming and fruit of the materialistic scientific method in social thinking. One should not fail to recognize that this is the configuration of the present civilized world. If you do not see it, you will miss the most important phenomena and symptoms of this life. You are not fully human in the present if you miss these phenomena.
Individual people stand out from the general judgment. These individual people already feel to a certain extent today: if we continue to think and feel as we have done, we cannot go on, it is not possible. We are sinking deeper and deeper into chaos. That is why wake-up calls of the kind described below are rare today, but they are already there. Let me read you one such wake-up call.
In the 31st/32nd issue of the cultural-socialist weekly magazine “Neue Erde” in Vienna, an interesting essay by Karl Polanyi appeared under the title “Weltanschauungskrise” (Worldview Crisis). It states that a general aversion to the capitalist economic order has set in, along with a turning away from Marxist socialism.
“Today, there is still a conflation of Marxism and socialism that is the bane of all modern thinking. Every attempt at intellectual advancement of the most pressing social problems of our time fails in the morass of this intellectual lowland...”
”...The outbreak of the World War was the turning point for all capitalist and therefore Marxist thinking. The leaders of humanity recognized it clearly, and the masses felt it dimly, that never again would the so-called interests of life rule the world, but forces of a completely different kind and nature. The omnipresent economic interests pursued by the imperialists and fought against by the socialists in a futile struggle proved to be not only unreal and abstract to the point of being mere phrases, but also mere economic superstition and empty fantasies. It became clear that it is not material things but the idea of these material things that is the driving force, and that, however false and erroneous this idea may be, it is therefore ideas and not material things that guide the masses. Yes, even the idea of material interest, this supposedly most concrete and real thing, only becomes historically effective once it is elevated to a belief, once the sacrifices made to it are no longer counted, and its intrinsic value alone serves as compensation and justification for all the irrational acts committed in its name. This era of the most monstrous paradoxes believed in egoism. It was no longer denied, no longer idealistically whitewashed; on the contrary! Humanity marched to its death in the sacred name of economic interests, which it surrounded with a halo of glory, and of sacro egoismo, which had elevated itself to heaven. The material had declared itself the only ideal, and thus the materialistic world completed its course. The capitalists had already called this idealization of the material as the only real and essential thing their fatherland, but the Marxists called it openly: socialism!
“Utilitarian ethics, materialistic conception of history, positivistic epistemology, deterministic philosophy: these are no longer viable in the new atmosphere. But Marxism as a worldview is built on these pillars. Its time is up.”
This is the wake-up call of a soul that at least sees the negative forces leading to the chaos of our time. And now comes the question, a terrible question of fate. It is this: “What should take its place?”
This question is raised by the same person who wrote everything I have just read to you. He goes on to say: “The answer to this question is not decisive for the fate of Marxism. For sincere minds striving for clarity, this is a secondary consideration. Even if the sun were to go out, we would rather find our way in the dark than pretend to be a will-o'-the-wisp for the sun.“
”But what darkens the sun for our generation is a new, even brighter and more radiant sun rising on the horizon. Freed from the nightmare of a theory of evolution, in whose treadmill we were condemned to eternal cooperation, restless and homeless, eking out our meaningless existence, awakened from the hallucination of a perverted view of history, which imagined that world events were not the echo of those who cried out in strife, but that their cries were merely the echo of world events, having outgrown the delusion of a clownish determinism that portrayed our free will as a game of chance played by forces behind the scenes, finally born from the belief in the dead masses to the belief in ourselves, we will find within ourselves the strength and the calling to make the demands of socialism for justice, freedom, and love a reality for humanity.”
Yes, a longing soul that sees: we are heading toward chaos, that even raises the fateful question: What should take its place? — and then continues with the answer, which is nothing more than serving up old phrases that have become empty words: justice, freedom, and love. They have been preached long enough. This phrase truly contains no concrete path forward.
“Marxist socialism today merely obscures the question of destiny facing humanity, it suppresses the free forces of a radical solution, keeps thinking in the semi-darkness of a world of outdated dogmas, and prevents action through dark prophecies, obscure authorities, and mystical symbols. It obscures humanity's free view.”
Correct: “It obscures humanity's free view” — but phrases do not make this view free! And then the author continues: “The Church has outlived its vocation by a thousand years. Marxism may outlive us, but the new spirit born out of the misery of this world war of humanity will certainly outlive it.”
But where is the new spirit? So says the author, who seems to have a sense of the nullity of our time, of that which leads to chaos. Well, a friend of ours, who has long held our worldview, adds a few lines to what I have just read to you. What I have read to you so far is from someone who sees that something new must come, but who ultimately sticks to the old phrases. Our friend adds: “Here we see a worldview that recognizes that Marxism, as it appears today in its most consistent form in Bolshevism, belongs to the old way of thinking. It is merely the antithesis of the old capitalist world. Like the latter, it is sick in its spiritual life. While it is its opponent in economic terms, it is one with it in its spiritual foundation. It must be replaced by a new worldview, an anthroposophical worldview that has emerged from a “philosophy of freedom.”
These are just a few lines added by a friend of our movement, but it is clear to anyone who looks into the workings of humanity today that, because things are as they are, this anthroposophical spiritual science wants to emerge. And until we admit that the disease process of our present life can only be healed by anthroposophically oriented spiritual research, there will be no way out of the chaos.
One can therefore say without immodesty: If only there were enough people who would give the same answer to the question, “What should take its place?” as Dr. Kolisko gave to Karl Polanyi in Vienna. As long as people believe that the salvation of our movement is to be found in some kind of sectarianism, they will never recognize the meaning of this movement. Only when people realize that we are dealing with a world issue will they recognize the meaning of this movement.
Only those who not only recognize the meaning of this worldview in this way, but also make it the innermost impulse of their own will, can be true bearers of this worldview. I do not want to embellish with many words what I wanted to say to you in this lecture. We will see each other again here in the not too distant future for similar discussions. We do not even need to say goodbye, because it will not take so long this time.
But I must say that it would be a deep desire of my heart if many of you would take to heart the words with which I have sought to point out something most important in our present world situation, especially in the coming weeks.
We have spoken of various harmful influences from the elemental world in our present time. You know that an ancient, true view, which must be properly understood, speaks of the fact that with the end of the civil year, when the Christmas season approaches, there come days when the most spiritual influence that can be exerted on human beings within the sphere of the earth is at its most intense.
Perhaps it is precisely at this time, which has been so important and essential to people for centuries — but which in our time is little more than a time for giving “appropriate gifts” — are we perhaps seeking, in accordance with an old custom of the soul, to take refuge in those ancient spiritual powers which can still influence our human destiny if we allow the whole seriousness of the relationship between the spiritual world and the human world to sink into our souls?
That is what I wanted to say to you today.
When I come here again to speak, you will be informed.