Polarities in the Evolution of Mankind
GA 197
5 March 1920, Stuttgart
Lecture I
The challenges presented by our age really have to be faced by every individual human being today. I have made it quite clear on a number of occasions that to understand the way individuals need to face those challenges we must be aware of how human evolution progresses all over the globe. The whole course of human evolution can only be clearly understood if we gain more profound insight into the powers that intervene in the course of earth evolution as a whole and also in human lives.
I have used a number of different approaches to show that as human beings we are part of an ongoing evolution that may be said to be taking its normal course. Spiritual science enables us to follow its progress over extended periods of time. I have also pointed out that there are certain powers that have different goals for mankind than the powers who desire to guide humankind in the normal course of evolution, a course during which the earth repeatedly comes to physical manifestation. Some of those powers we would call luciferic, others ahrimanic. I have spoken of this a number of times. It is necessary to take a very serious view of these things today, but our hearts and minds cannot really achieve this serious mood unless we pay proper attention to the way these luciferic and ahrimanic powers intervene directly in human lives.
As you know, a new era in human evolution started during the 15th century, very different from anything that went before. Thinking of this you will want to be aware of the many ways in which life is different in the present age, which had its beginning in the 15th century, if we compare it to the preceding age. We may say that one particular feature of the present age is that intellectual thinking has developed since the middle of the 15th century. Humankind has to undergo a major process of education in the course of Earth evolution. Part of it is this training of the intellect. Human beings had to find out, as it were, how human life can be lived when the emphasis is on intellectual thinking. They could never have been raised to be truly free individuals if the intellectual principle had not become part of them. We have no clear idea today of the extent to which people differed from us before the middle of the 15th century, particularly in this respect. We tend to take the things we are given for granted, without giving them much thought. We are now generally dealing with the peoples of civilized countries who are inclined to think with the intellect, and we have come to believe that people have always been thinking like this. That is not the case, however, Before the middle of the 15th century people were thinking in a different way. They simply did not think in the abstract terms in which we think today. Their thinking was very much more vivid and concrete, immediately bound up with the objects of the world around them. They were much more bound up with the feelings and will impulses that can be experienced in the human soul. We are living very much in our thoughts, though we are not sufficiently aware of this. We are not even aware of the source from which this way of thinking, the intellectual approach which we take so much for granted, has evolved. We shall have to go a long way back in human evolution to get a real understanding of the origins of this way of thinking, this intellectualism. Another question we must ask ourselves is whether anything still remains of the human activity out of which our thinking has evolved.
You know that older evolutionary forces persist into later ages and continue to be present side by side with those that are normal to the age in question. This also applies to our thinking. Reminders, echoes of thinking, of an activity similar to our thinking are experienced in our dreams, when a whole world of images emerges from our night time sleep. Experience teaches us to distinguish between the world of thoughts we evolve between waking up and going to sleep and the world of dream images which we experience in an entirely passive way. If we go back to earlier times in human evolution we find that the further back we go the more does the life of the soul during waking hours come to resemble the mental activity we know in our dreams today. Present-day thinking is the fruit of later stages of evolution. During earlier stages along this path the human soul developed activities more akin to dreaming. If we follow this dreamlike activity of the human soul a long way back we find ourselves going beyond Earth evolution as we know it. We come to a time when the earth had taken a physical form in the cosmos that preceded the present one. We have got used to calling it the Old Moon evolution. Human beings were part of this as well, but in an entirely different form. During that Moon evolution, i.e. the time when the earth materialized in a form that preceded the present one, the human being, the true ancestor of modern man, was still completely etheric. His soul became active in a way that was definitely dreamlike, consisting of dream images. The peculiar thing about this was that it related to the outer world in a way that is quite different from the soul activity we know as thinking. I would say that when our soul is active in thought we find ourselves rather isolated within the world. The world is outside us, it has its own processes. We reflect on those processes in our minds, but just when we think we are reflecting most profoundly on those external processes we actually feel ourselves entirely outside them. Indeed we often feel that we are best able to think about those external processes if we keep ourselves well isolated from them, withdrawing into ourselves. The human ancestor who was dreamy in his thinking, if I may put it like this, did not have that feeling. Developing in his way in his dreams what we develop in our way when we are thinking, he knew himself to be intimately bound up in everything he experienced with what went on in the world. We see the clouds, we think about them, but we do not feel that the powers alive in the clouds are also alive in our thinking. Our human ancestor did have the feeling that the powers alive in a cloud were also alive in his thinking. This ancestor said—and I must translate what he said into our language, for his language was a silent one compared to ours: The powers that are alive and active in the cloud out there produce images in my mind. He saw himself no more isolated from the great universe in which the cloud revealed its essential nature than my little finger is able to think itself isolated from the rest of me. If I were to cut it off it would wither; it would no longer be my finger. The human ancestor felt that he could not exist apart from the universe that belonged to him. My little finger might well say: The blood which pulses through the whole of the body also pulses within me; the whole of my organic life is governed by the same laws as the organic life of the rest of the body. The human ancestor said: I am part of the universe; the power that pulses within me as I evolve images is the same as the power that is alive and active in the forming of clouds. That is how the human ancestor felt himself to be closely related, intimately bound up, with the whole world.
We need to feel isolated from everything that goes on outside us in our thinking, as though the umbilical cord has been cut and we are separate from the essential origins and causes of the existing world. In ordinary life we are not aware of the pulses beating throughout the universe. Our thinking has grown abstract. Our thinking tells us nothing, as it were, of what is alive and active within it. This provides the actual potential for the freedom of human beings, a freedom where we do not feel that something is thinking in us but that we ourselves do the thinking.
The human ancestor was unable to form ideas independently of the universe as a whole. The human ancestor felt himself to be bound up with the existing world; he knew that this existing world contained more than just abstract forces of nature. He knew that power was also wielded by entities that differed from human beings, entities that did not have a physical body such as the human body, though human beings might feel that they had citizenry of the universe in common with them. The ancestor was not aware of ‘forces of nature’; he felt himself to be in communion with nature spirits. Today we may say that everything that happens in nature follows the laws of nature, and we are part of that nature. For the human ancestor who lived in a far distant past it was natural to say that everything that happened in nature outside himself happened out of will impulses of the spirits of nature. We say the earth attracts the bodies that are on it due to gravity, and according to the law of gravity the gravitational pull decreases at a rate that is proportional to the square of the distance between the two objects. We call this a special case of a law of nature. When we speak of nature we base ourselves on such abstract notions. The human ancestor knew that an essential spiritual element was present in the phenomenon we have made into an abstract gravitational force.
Certain spiritual powers who may be said to be involved in human evolution thus developed a relationship to human beings. This would normally cease the moment Earth evolution proper began for the human being. At that point human beings would be released from the tutelage of those spiritual powers, powers they had felt to be flowing and floating into them during the Old Moon stage. So we must ask ourselves what it was that made human beings grow independent of the guidance of spirits with whom they had felt at one, however dimly. It happened when the mineral kingdom became part of human nature. In those far distant times of which I have just spoken, human beings did not yet have the mineral kingdom within them. Their organization would not have been perceptible to our present-day sense organs, for it did not yet include mineral elements.
To grasp this without getting caught up in preconceived notions we need to consider what it truly means when an organism includes the mineral kingdom. People tend to be superficial in their thinking about such things. We look at a mineral, a stone, and quite rightly consider it to be the way it presents itself to our observation. Then, however, we look at a plant in exactly the same way we look at a stone. In reality it is not the actual plant we see. A plant is really something entirely beyond sensory perception. Consider a system of forces that in a sense has the qualities of an image. Its relationship to the mineral kingdom is that this otherwise invisible organization soaks up the mineral kingdom and the forces that are active between individual component elements in the kingdom. I have a plant before me. It is an invisible system of forces that absorbs mineral principles from the mineral kingdom. The result is that the mineral aspect occupies the space also occupied by the invisible system of forces. I see this mineral aspect, though it is merely something the plant, which is not perceptible to the senses, has absorbed. That is how it is even with a plant. When we talk about plants today we are really talking only of the minerals contained within them and not about the plants themselves. It is important that we clearly understand this in the case of a plant, for it also applies to animals and humans, only more so.
During the Old Moon stage, then, human beings did not have this mineral inclusion. Human beings living on the present earth have been made in such a way that they need the mineral kingdom, having absorbed the mineral kingdom and its forces into them, as it were. What significance does this have for human nature? In the first place human beings acquired a mineral body for thinking in images the way they did at the earlier stage. As evolution progressed the mineral human body provided the basis for intellectual thinking. This happened at a relatively late state, from the middle of the 15th century onwards, having been a long time in preparation.
Modern intellectual thinking is based on the fact that human beings have received a mineral body into them. As human beings we need a mineral body first and foremost to be able to think. The older form of thinking in images had been based on what we call the third elemental kingdom. The mineral kingdom had the function to transform this pre-earthly form of thinking into our earthly way of forming ideas on the basis of thought. Within the great scheme of things the spirits with whom human beings had to feel themselves connected, in forming those ideas that were images in the distant past, were then relieved of their function. We will have to picture those spirits rather differently from the way we are accustomed to picture non-human entities. People, even people of good will who may admit that there is more to life than is apparent to the senses, tend to stick too close to the human form. This anthropomorphism takes over whenever people try and create an image in their minds of anything that is above the human sphere. It is easy to accuse Feuerbach and Buechner1 Ludwig Andreas Feuerbach, German philosopher. Referring to Feuerbach's anthropomorphism, Rudolf Steiner repeatedly quoted from his book Das Wesen des Christentums (1841), e.g. in a lecture given in Dornach on 15 October 1921 (Anthroposophie als Kosmosophie, GA 207, English title Cosmosophy).
Ludwig Buechner, German physician and materialist philosopher. of being anthropomorphists. We have seen more than enough of this kind of thing. We have seen the legal way of thinking evolve in the Western world, with earthly misdeeds and crimes judged by earthly judges who impose penalties, and so on. The rewards and punishment meted out for sins, i.e. for something belonging to a sphere beyond this earth and seen more as imperfections in the Christian faith, have gradually come to look more like the proceedings in an earthly court of law. The religious ideas of the West have a great deal of human jurisprudence in them. We let the gods mete out punishments of the kind we know earthly courts of law impose. If we truly wish to get beyond the merely human we must firmly decide not to think in entirely human terms. We must think beyond anything anthropomorphic, and that indeed is what really matters in human life. That is the approach we must use if we want to see clearly that the spirits who influenced the thinking in images which human beings had at the time of the Old Moon lost that function in the normal progress of human evolution but are not prepared to accept this with good grace. We might ask why they do not submit to the will of the gods who guide normal progress. They simply do not. We have to accept that as a fact. The original intention was that they should only influence dreams within the human sphere and everything related to dreaming. In the context of today's lecture we refer to them as luciferic spirits. Their proper sphere would be everything that has to do with dreaming and anything related to this. They are not satisfied with this, however. They haunt the human way of thinking that has evolved out of their own sphere, human thinking now bound to the mineral sphere. When we allow anything that normally rules our dreams, the life of the imagination, to enter into our thinking we fall prey in our thinking to luciferic nature, to the influence of spirits that should only have influenced the old form of thinking in images that belonged to the human ancestors. They have retained their power and instead of limiting themselves to our dreaming, our life of the imagination, our creative artistic work, they are constantly trying to influence our thoughts and make them dependent on impulses similar to those that existed in pre-earthly times. Our thinking is still greatly influenced by elements coming from this source, by the luciferic principle.
It is justifiable to ask in all seriousness what powers are these that have such an influence on our thinking. These influences arise from the sphere where we human beings are still rightfully dreaming and rightfully asleep above all else. They come from the sphere of our feelings and emotions. We experience our feelings the way we normally experience dreams and we experience our will the way we experience sleep. There we are still rightly cocooned in a world which becomes a luciferic world as soon as it evolves in our thinking. We therefore will not manage our evolution as human beings properly unless we make the effort to evolve other thoughts as well, thoughts increasingly independent of mere feelings and emotions, of anything arising in us out of dreamlike inner experience even when we are fully awake. Theoretical principles will not help us achieve this, only life itself can do so. We find, however, that the mental habits humankind has acquired put up great resistance to the cultivation of mind and soul that is needed. We must be on the lookout for this resistance. We find that in the present time in particular people are not prepared to listen to anything that does not arise from their own inner prejudices, their feeling of how things should go, their personal preferences. They are not in the habit of listening to anything which in a way has been decided independently of human beings, requiring merely their consent. I should like to give you a brief example which I used on one occasion to explain to someone that there is an important difference with regard to what human beings are thinking.
Many years ago I gave a lecture in a town in southern Germany—today it is no longer in southern Germany—on the wisdom taught in the Christian faith.2 ‘Die Weisheitslehren des Christentums in Lichte der Theosophie’ (The wisdom taught in the Christian faith in the light of Theosophy),Colmar, 21 November 1905 (no written record in existence).—As you know, it is always necessary to limit the subject matter presented in a particular lecture and one can only speak within that context. When people hear just a single lecture, such a single lecture will impress one person in one way and another in a different way, particularly if one has been objective and dispassionate in presenting the subject. It certainly would not be possible for anyone to get an idea concerning the total philosophy that lies behind a single lecture if they just listened to that one lecture. If the wisdom taught within the Christian faith is the subject for example, it will of course be impossible to conclude from the contents of the lecture what the speaker thinks about the connection between light and electricity, say. It is therefore possible for something to happen the way it did on that occasion. I spoke about the wisdom taught within the Christian faith and two Roman Catholic priests were in the audience. They came up to me afterwards and said: ‘No objection can be raised to what you have been saying’—this by the way was many years ago now—‘but we have to say that whilst it is true that we say the same thing we do say it in such a way the everybody can understand it’. My reply was: ‘Reverend fathers, surely it is like this: You or I may have some kind of inner feeling that we are speaking for everybody, but that is not the point, for that is a subjective feeling. After all it is perfectly natural—if we go entirely by our feeling I, too, must believe that I am speaking for everybody, just as you think you do; that is self-evident; otherwise we would do it differently. But we are now living in an age when our belief that something is justifiable does not count. We need to let the facts speak for themselves. We must learn to look to the facts. Subjectively you believe you are speaking for everybody. But now let me ask you about the facts. Does everybody still come to your church? That would show that you are speaking for everybody. You see, I speak to those who do not come to your church to hear you speak. My words are for those who also have the right to hear of the wisdom taught in Christianity.’ That is how we must take our orientation from what the facts have to tell.
It is necessary for us to tear ourselves away from our subjective feelings. If we do not do so the luciferic element will enter into our thinking. We would not have gone through the truly dreadful campaign of untruthfulness that has gone around the world in the last five years, the final consequence of something that has long been in preparation, if people had learned to pay rightful attention to what the facts have to tell and not to their emotions, with nationalists the worst in stirring up such emotions.
On the one hand there is the absolute necessity today to do something about our thinking and to comply even if something goes against the grain. On the other hand people dislike having to be so true to reality that one looks to the facts for guidance.
We shall not be able to attain to the higher worlds and the knowledge to be gained there if we do no train ourselves in rigid adherence to the facts of the external world. Once you have got at least to some extent into the habit of liking to hear the facts you will often suffer tortures when people of the present age want to tell you something. Very often the kind of thing you hear people say is: ‘Oh, someone said something and that was frightful, quite terrible!’ Terrible in what way? You say is was terrible but that only tells me how you felt about it. I really want to hear exactly what it was. ‘Well, it really was terrible what was said there…’ And these people simply do not understand. All the time they want to describe their subjective feelings concerning the matter, whilst you want to hear an objective report of what they actually saw. It is especially when people tell you something someone else has told them, that it is quite impossible to tell if they are simply passing on what they have heard or if they have actually looked into the matter they are talking about. This is an area where one has to remind people again and again that truthfulness concerning the knowledge to be found in supersensible spheres can only be achieved if we train ourselves as far as possible to adhere closely to the facts in the sense-perceptible world. That is the only way in which human beings can overcome the luciferic elements that stream into their thoughts—by learning to base ourselves on the facts.
On the one hand mankind is open to luciferic influences, on the other to ahrimanic influences. It had to be said that thinking here on earth evolved from earlier stages of human soul life when human beings absorbed a mineral body, as it were. This mineral body is indeed the organ for the earthly way of thinking. It does however bring it predominantly into the sphere of the powers we call ahrimanic.
We can of course become aware of the need to base ourselves on the facts, on a real world that will get us out of the habit of being swayed by our subjective emotions. We must not, however, fall prey to the kind of thinking that is nothing but an inner activity arising from the mineral body. Here we come upon a truth that many people find highly unpalatable.
You know how some are idealists or spiritualists and others are materialists. There is plenty of discussion in the world as to which is the right approach, spiritualism or materialism. All these debates are of no value whatsoever for certain regions of the human organization. Human beings can develop in two ways. We can use the mineral body we have absorbed into ourselves as the instrument for our thinking, and indeed we have to use it, otherwise we would merely be dreaming. But we can also rise beyond this instrument in our thoughts; we can develop a spiritual point of view, spiritual vision. If we do this we will of course have been thinking with the aid of our material organization, but we will have used this to reach a further stage of human development, ascending to the world of the spirit as a result. On the other hand we can stop at the point where as earth beings we let our mineral body do the thinking. It is perfectly able to do so. That in fact is the danger, and materialism cannot be said to be wrong in its views, particularly where thinking is concerned. This mineral body is no mere photographic print. It is able to think for itself, though its thinking is subject to the limits of life on earth. We need to raise the experience our mineral body is able to give us into the spheres that lie beyond sensory perception.
It is therefore possible to say that it may indeed be true that human thoughts are merely something exuded by the human mineral organization. That may indeed be right, but human beings must first do it right.
Human beings have the freedom to develop on earth in such a way that they are merely the product of matter. Animals cannot do this; they do not get to the point where mineral inclusion leads to the development of thinking activity. Animals cannot choose to prove the truth of the materialistic point of view. Human beings are at liberty to prove the truth of the materialistic point of view; all it needs is the will to do so out of a materialistic attitude to life.
Human freedom is such that people are indeed free to make materialism come true for the human kingdom, that is, they can take a course that will lead to human beings on earth concerning themselves only with material things. Fundamentally speaking, therefore, it is a matter of choice if we become materialists. If we are strong enough to bring to realization what people are told is a materialistic attitude then this attitude will be made to come true by human beings.
This influence on human beings comes from ahrimanic powers. They want to keep everything connected with Earth evolution at the point which has been reached for human beings by that very Earth evolution—that is the point of having a mineral organization. They want to make human beings perfect, but only as far as their mineral organization is concerned. The luciferic powers want to keep human beings, who now have acquired a mineral organization, at the earlier stage that was right for them before they acquired a mineral organization. So we have two powers pulling at the traces, luciferic and ahrimanic powers. The luciferic spirits want to get human beings to a point where they finally cast off their mineralized bodies and go through an evolution that has no relevance in earth life and has merely been an episode in earth life. The luciferic spirits aim for the gradual elimination of everything relating to the earth from the whole evolution of mankind. The ahrimanic spirits aim to take firm hold of this earthly, mineral aspect of human beings, isolate it from progressive evolution and let it stand on its own. That is how luciferic and ahrimanic spirits are pulling in different directions.
It is absolutely vital that having presented the large outline we now come to apply this to ordinary everyday life. We do not consider a U-shaped bar of iron to be a horse-shoe when it is in fact a magnet. In the same way we really should not consider human life to be entirely the way it may appear on the outside. If you shoe a horse with magnets you fail to realize that a magnet has more to it than a horse-shoe. Yet it happens quite often nowadays that people speak of human life exactly like someone who shoes his horse with magnets rather than with horse-shoes. People have no hesitation in speaking of positive and negative electricity in the inorganic sphere, or of positive and negative magnetism, yet they hesitate to speak of luciferic and ahrimanic elements in human life. These are just as effective in human life as positive and negative magnetism are in the inorganic sphere. It is just that the idea of positive and negative magnetism is more easily understood. It does not take as much effort to grasp it as it does to grasp the idea that there are luciferic and ahrimanic elements. That is also the reason why we shall only learn to deal with the empty talk one hears today, empty talk that turns into lies, by knowing that it is luciferic by nature.
Similarly we shall only learn to deal with everything that shows itself here and there as the materialistic point of view by knowing that it is ahrimanic by nature. In future mere external characterization will not get us anywhere when we want to understand human life; all we would be doing is talk around the subject and commit the most stupid of errors when we try and apply such ideas to real life. One thing we would not be doing is to see human life in such a way that social impulses can be gained from our knowledge of human institutions. This has a very much to do with the utter seriousness required when looking at everything connected with evolutionary trends where humankind is concerned. We cannot gain understanding of the life we are now living unless we raise our vision from earthly concerns to spheres beyond this earth. There is a particular point to this.
Looking back into earlier stages of human evolution—though not as far back as those I have spoken of earlier—people generally base themselves on such historical documents as are available. There are historians—well-known names—who say that the history of humankind is made up of everything to be found in the written records. If you start from such a definition of history, like the historian Leopold von Ranke, you will obviously arrive at a particular kind of history. The art of writing is itself part of history, however, it has evolved from something else, and in real terms one cannot do anything with this kind of definition.
We need only go back as far as Chaldean-Babylonian times, to ancient Egyptian times, and we shall find that at that period of human evolution human beings still related to the cosmos in a very different way. People today have no real idea of what it meant to connect one's life to the course of the stars, the planets, and their position relative to the fixed stars of the zodiac. These things have become an empty abstraction nowadays. Do you think a modern astrologer delving into ancient astrological writings to compile his horoscopes—if at least he does search through the old writings, and does not produce new ones; the new ones are terrible!—has even the slightest idea of the living connection which the ancient Egyptians and Chaldeans felt to exist between human beings and the movements and positions of the stars viewed from the earth? Everything is different today. It has to be said that an important part of human evolution since those times has been the narrowing down of human awareness to the physical world. What did those Egyptians know of the earth? It was the ground under their feet. They knew more about the heavens. They moved in the vertical in gaining their experience. The ancient Greeks did not yet go into the horizontal either; they, too, gained their experience by going vertically. The vertical came to be reduced as the horizontal started to spread. The maximum limitation human beings experienced in their knowledge of the heavens came with the great increase in knowledge of the earth that came when men sailed around the globe and found that having sailed away to the west they would return from the east. It was necessary for human understanding in the vertical direction to become obscured. Human beings had to be isolated from the universe so that they could find within themselves the only power that can lead to human freedom. Moral impulses will arise out of this human freedom in their turn.
Human beings therefore no longer relate to the spheres beyond the earth in the vertical fashion the ancient Greeks and Chaldeans did. We have had the training that only a horizontal surface can give and must now ascend again in moral, ethical terms. We must learn how human life is influenced by powers that do not show themselves in the course taken by the world that exists outside us. Those are the luciferic and ahrimanic powers.
People tend to put their minds to other things, however, and sometimes I also have to tell you something relating to our spiritual movement that takes its orientation in anthroposophy. This has accepted the task of working out of the full seriousness the time demands and listening to the language spoken from the cosmos beyond this earth, as it were, a language which tells us that we must once again come to see the way the human being is connected with the whole cosmos. Again and again, however, things make themselves heard in this work—please forgive the abrupt change of subject—which even today draw attention to some very peculiar points of view taken by people who oppose our aims of furthering the progress of mankind. Let me read you a passage from a letter that is really typical. As I said, please forgive the abrupt change of subject but we are obliged to inform you of all kinds of things that are going on at the present time with the purpose of undermining and destroying this movement which endeavours to take up the challenge of the present age.
There is someone in Norway 3 Details not known. who had made it his task to destroy our movement. To assure himself that he has a right to do so, this man is writing to leading figures—that is how one does these things nowadays. He wrote to a publication called Politisch-anthropologische Monatsschrift [Political Anthropological Monthly]. This journal sent him the following information: ‘Dr Steiner is a Jew of the purest water. He is connected with the Zionists, indeed associated with them, and works for the Entente.’ The editor added that they—i.e. people of this kind—'have had their eye on him for some time.’
I just wanted to tell you this in conclusion, as yet another case among the many one gets today, with a new one coming up almost daily. That is the attitude anthropologists are now taking to the efforts being made in the anthroposophical field.
Erster Vortrag
Ich habe es öfter betont, wie notwendig es ist zum Hereinstellen des Menschen in die großen Aufgaben der Gegenwart, die heute eigentlich jedem Menschen zufallen, sich ein Bewußtsein zu verschaffen von dem Gang der Menschheitsentwickelung über die Erde hin. Dieser Gang der Menschheitsentwickelung kann ja nur verstanden werden, wenn man die tieferen Kräfte jener Wesenheiten sich vor die Seele führt, die in den ganzen Gang der Erdenentwickelung und auch in das Menschenleben als solches eingreifen.
Nun habe ich von den verschiedensten Gesichtspunkten aus gezeigt, wie wir Menschen drinnenleben in einer gewissermaßen normal fortlaufenden Entwickelung, und wie wir diese überblicken können gerade durch geisteswissenschaftliche Untersuchung über langandauernde Zeiträume hin. Ich habe Sie aber auch darauf aufmerksam gemacht, wie in diese gewissermaßen normale menschliche Entwickelung eingreifen von der einen Seite gewisse Wesenheiten, die ein anderes Ziel mit den Menschen verfolgen als diejenigen Wesenheiten, welche den Menschen die normale Entwickelung durch die verschiedenen Verkörperungen der Erde geleiten möchten, Wesenheiten, die wir als luziferische haben auffassen müssen, und daß von der andern Seite her Wesenheiten eingreifen, die wir als ahrimanische bezeichnen. Über diese Dinge haben wir wiederholt gesprochen. Allein der Ernst, der heute dem Menschen so notwendig ist, kann eigentlich gar nicht in unser Gemüt einziehen, wenn wir nicht das unmittelbare Eingreifen dieser luziferischen und ahrimanischen Wesenheiten in das Menschenleben ins Auge fassen.
Wenn Sie sich erinnern, wie, scharf abgetrennt von dem, was früher geschehen ist, im 15. Jahrhundert ein neuer Zeitraum der Menschheitsentwickelung beginnt, so werden Sie veranlaßt werden, sich nach den verschiedensten Unterschieden im Menschenleben unseres jetzigen Zeitraumes, der eben mit dem 15. Jahrhundert begonnen hat, zu dem früheren, zu fragen. Wir können sagen, zu den mancherlei Eigentümlichkeiten des gegenwärtigen Zeitraumes gehört es, daß vor allen Dingen das Denken, der Intellektualismus seit der Mitte des 15. Jahrhunderts sich entwickelt hat. Die Menschheit mußte einmal in der großen Erziehung, die sie durchmacht durch die ganze Erdenentwickelung, auch durch diese Erziehung des Intellektualismus hindurchgehen. Sie mußte gewissermaßen probieren, wie sich das Menschenleben leben läßt, wenn vorzugsweise das intellektualistische Prinzip des Denkens ausgebildet wird. Zur wahren Freiheit hätte der Mensch niemals erzogen werden können ohne den Eintritt des intellektuellen Prinzips in sein Wesen. Man macht sich heute gar keine genaue Vorstellung darüber, wie verschieden von den Menschen der Gegenwart die Menschen vor der Mitte des 15. Jahrhunderts gerade in dieser Beziehung waren. Man nimmt ja dasjenige, was den Menschen einmal gegeben ist, wie etwas Selbstverständliches hin; man denkt nicht weiter darüber nach. Und so glaubt man heute auch, weil hauptsächlich die Menschen der zivilisierten Länder, mit denen wir es zu tun haben, im Intellektualistischen leben, es wäre immer so gewesen, die Menschen hätten immer so gedacht. Das ist aber nicht der Fall. Die Art des Denkens ist eine andere gewesen bei den Menschen vor der Mitte des 15. Jahrhunderts. Es ist gar nicht ein solch abstraktes Denken bei diesen Menschen vorhanden gewesen wie bei den heutigen Menschen. Ihr Denken war viel, viel mehr anschaulich mit den Dingen der Außenwelt selber verknüpft. Sie waren viel mehr verknüpft mit dem, was im Inneren des Menschen gefühlsmäßig und willensmäßig erlebt werden kann. Wir leben sehr stark in Gedanken, nur sind wir nicht genügend darauf aufmerksam. Wir sind nicht einmal aufmerksam darauf, woraus sich dieses Denken, dieser Intellektualismus, den wir heute als etwas Selbstverständliches hinnehmen, eigentlich entwickelt hat. Und wir müssen weit und immer weiter zurückgehen in der Menschheitsentwickelung, wenn wir so recht verstehen wollen, woraus sich dieses Denken, dieses Intellektualistische entwickelt hat. Wir müssen uns auch fragen: Gibt es heute noch irgendwelche Überreste derjenigen menschlichen Betätigung, aus der heraus sich das Denken ergeben hat?
Sie wissen ja, es erhalten sich alte Entwickelungskräfte in spätere Zeiten hinein neben denen, die sich für spätere Zeiten normalerweise ergeben. Und so ist es doch auch bei unserem Denken. Wir erleben Reminiszenzen, Nachklänge des Denkens, eine dem Denken ähnliche Tätigkeit im Traum, in jener Bilderwelt, die auftaucht aus dem nächtlichen Schlaf. Wir lernen durch die Erfahrung unterscheiden, wie diese Denkwelt, die wir vom Aufwachen bis zum Einschlafen in uns entwickeln, sich verhält zu der Welt der ganz passiv erlebten Traumbilder. Wenn wir aber zurückgehen in der menschlichen Entwickelung, dann finden wir immer mehr und mehr, daß auch das wache Seelenleben sehr ähnlich war dem, wie heute der Mensch im Traum seine Seelentätigkeit erlebt. Das heutige Denken ist ein späteres Entwickelungsprodukt auf dem Wege, auf dessen früheren Stadien die menschliche Seele eine mehr traumhafte Tätigkeit entfaltete. Und wenn wir diese traumhafte Tätigkeit der menschlichen Seele ganz, ganz weit zurückverfolgen, dann kommen wir über all das hinaus, was Erdenentwickelung ist; dann kommen wir zu der vorhergehenden kosmischen Verkörperung der Erde, die wir gewohnt worden sind, die «alte Mondenentwickelung» zu nennen, innerhalb welcher der Mensch auch schon gelebt hat, aber in einer ganz andern Form als heute. Und während dieser Mondenentwickelung, also während der vorhergehenden Verkörperung unserer Erde, da hat jenes noch ganz ätherische Menschenwesen, das der wirkliche Vorfahr des gegenwärtigen Menschen ist, tatsächlich eine traumhafte, eine bildhaft-traumhafte Seelentätigkeit entwickelt. Diese bildhaft-traumhafte Seelentätigkeit hatte aber das Eigentümliche, daß sie in einer ganz andern Beziehung stand zur Außenwelt als unsere denkerische Seelentätigkeit. Ich möchte sagen, mit unserer denkerischen Seelentätigkeit stehen wir doch recht isoliert da in der Welt. Die Welt ist da draußen, sie hat ihre Vorgänge. Wir denken in unserem Inneren diese Vorgänge nach, aber wir fühlen uns gerade dann, wenn wir im allertiefsten vermeinen nachzudenken über die äußeren Vorgänge, doch gar nicht drinnen in diesen äußeren Vorgängen. Wir fühlen oftmals sogar, daß wir am besten über die äußeren Vorgänge denken können, wenn wir uns recht von ihnen isolieren, wenn wir uns ganz auf uns selbst zurückziehen. Solch ein Gefühl hatte der Menschenvorfahr, der noch, wenn ich den Ausdruck gebrauchen darf, träumerisch dachte, nicht. Wenn er auf diese Art das in seinen Träumen entwickelte, was wir auf unsere Art seelisch in unserem Denken entwickeln, dann wußte er, daß er innig verbunden war in seinem Erleben mit dem Geschehen der Welt. Wir sehen die Wolken, wir denken über die Wolken, allein wir haben nicht das Gefühl, daß dieselben Kräfte, die in der Wolke walten, auch in unserem Denken walten. Das Gefühl aber, daß die gleichen Kräfte, die in der Wolke walten, auch in seinem traumhaften Denken walten, das hatte der Menschenvorfahr. Der Menschenvorfahr sagte — wenn ich in unsere Sprache übersetzen will, was er in seiner, gegen die unsere eigentlich stummen Sprache sagte: Die Kräfte, die draußen in der Wolke weben und leben, die bewirken in mir Bilder. — Er dachte sich ebensowenig isoliert von jenem Weltenall, in dem die Wolke ihr Wesen entfaltet, wie mein kleiner Finger sich isoliert denken kann von mir selbst. Schneide ich ihn ab, so verdorrt er, ist nicht mehr mein Finger. Der Menschenvorfahr fühlte, daß auch er nicht bestehen kann anders, denn als ein Glied des Weltenalls, das zu ihm gehört. Der kleine Finger müßte sagen: Das Blut, das im ganzen Körper pulsiert, das pulsiert in mir, und mein ganzes organisches Dasein ist von denselben Gesetzen beherrscht, von denen das organische Dasein des ganzen übrigen Körpers beherrscht ist. Der Menschenvorfahr sagte: Ich bin ein Glied des Weltenalls, und das, was in mir pulsiert, indem ich Bilder entwickle, das ist dasselbe wie dasjenige, worauf diese Bilder weisen, ist dieselbe Kraft, die in der Wolkenbildung webt und lebt. Also innig verwandt, intim verbunden fühlte sich dieser Menschenvorfahr mit der ganzen Welt.
Wir aber sind dadurch, daß wir in unserem Denken uns so isoliert fühlen müssen von dem äußeren Geschehen, gewissermaßen abgeschnürt von den wirklich wesenhaften Ursachen des Weltendaseins. Wir verspüren im gewöhnlichen Leben nicht, was eigentlich durch das Weltenall hindurchpulsiert. Unser Denken hat einen abstrakten Charakter angenommen. Unser Denken verrät gewissermaßen gar nichts von dem, was in ihm lebt und webt. Darauf beruht gerade die Möglichkeit, freie Menschen zu werden, daß wir in unseren Gedanken nicht fühlen: Etwas anderes denkt in uns -, sondern: Wir selber sind es, die denken. - Der Menschenvorfahr aber, der konnte sich nicht so isoliert vorstellen von dem Weltganzen. Der Menschenvorfahr wußte, da er sich verbunden fühlte mit dem Weltendasein, daß nicht allein abstrakte Naturkräfte draußen in diesem Weltendasein da sind, sondern daß waltend sind Wesenheiten, wenn auch Wesenheiten, die anders sind als der Mensch, Wesenheiten, die nicht einen physischen Leib haben wie der Mensch, mit denen sich aber der Mensch als in einem Weltbürgertum zusammen begriffen denken konnte. Er fühlte nicht etwas wie . «Naturkräfte», er fühlte Gemeinschaft mit Naturwesenheiten. Geradeso wie wir heute sagen: Dasjenige, was vorgeht in der Natur, in das wir selbst einbegriffen sind, vollzieht sich nach Naturgesetzen -, so war es naturgemäß für den Menschenvorfahren einer uralten Zeit, daß er sagte: Dasjenige, was draußen in der Natur vorgeht, das vollzieht sich nach den Willensimpulsen der Naturwesenheiten. — Wir sagen: Die Erde zieht die auf ihr befindlichen Körper an durch ihre Schwere gemäß einem Gesetz, wonach diese Schwerkraft mit dem Quadrat der Entfernung abnimmt, und nennen das den Spezialfall eines Naturgesetzes. - Wir beziehen uns, wenn wir von der Natur reden, auf eine solche Abstraktion. Der Menschenvorfahr war sich dessen bewußt, daß in dem, was wir heute abstrakt Schwerkraft nennen, Wesenhaftes enthalten war.
Aber diese Beziehung zum Menschen, die da entfaltet wurde von besonderen Wesenheiten, die gewissermaßen zur menschlichen Entwickelung gehörten, die hörte normalerweise auf in dem Moment, in dem eben für den Menschen die eigentliche Erdenentwickelung begann. Da wurde der Mensch gewissermaßen entlassen aus der Leitung jener übersinnlichen Wesenheiten, die er in seinem Bilderdenken während der alten Mondenzeit als etwas wie in ihn Hereinfließendes und Hereinschwebendes erfühlte. Und fragen müssen wir uns: Welches war denn eigentlich das Wirksame, das den Menschen abbrachte von der Leitung dieser Wesenheiten, mit denen er, wenn auch nur seinem dunklen Bewußtsein nach, zusammengehörte? -Es war die Eingliederung des mineralischen Reiches in die Menschenwesenheit. Denn in jenen alten Zeiten, von denen ich Ihnen eben gesprochen habe, trug der Mensch noch nicht das Mineralreich in sich. Er hatte eine Organisation, die allerdings nicht für die heutigen Sinnesorgane wahrnehmbar gewesen wäre, eine Organisation, die noch nicht mineralische Einschlüsse in sich enthielt. Will man dies verstehen, will man einer solchen Sache nicht mit Vorurteil begegnen, dann muß man schon ein wenig sich klarmachen, was das eigentlich heißt: Ein Wesen schließt das Mineralreich in sich ein. In dieser Beziehung denken ja die Menschen heute außerordentlich oberflächlich. Man sieht ein Mineral an, einen Stein, und betrachtet ihn mit Recht als dasjenige, als was er sich von außen her präsentiert. Aber man sieht eine Pflanze heute genau so an, wie man einen Stein ansieht, während das, was man sieht, in Wirklichkeit gar nicht die Pflanze ist. Die Pflanze ist in Wirklichkeit etwas ganz Übersinnliches. Man stelle sich vor eine Organisation von Kräften, die einen gewissen Bildcharakter hätte, und die zum Mineralreich in der Beziehung steht, daß sie sich, während sie sonst unsichtbar ist, vollsaugt mit dem Mineralreich und auch mit den Kräften, die zwischen den einzelnen Gliedern des Mineralreiches spielen. Ich habe die Pflanze vor mir: sie ist eine unsichtbare Struktur von Kräften, sie saugt sich nur aus dem Mineralreich voll. Dadurch steht in dem Raumteil, der eine unsichtbare Struktur von Kräften ist, vor meinen Augen auch das Mineralische. Dieses Mineralische schaue ich an, aber es ist nur dasjenige, wovon sich die übersinnliche Pflanze vollgesogen hat. Die übersinnliche Pflanze muß ich erst finden auf eine ganz andere Art, als die ist, auf der mir das erscheint, womit sie sich vollgesogen hat. Das ist schon bei der Pflanze der Fall. Wir reden überhaupt, wenn wir heute von Pflanzen reden, nur von dem mineralischen Einschluß der Pflanze, gar nicht von der Pflanze selbst.
Worauf es ankommt, ist, daß wir bei der Pflanze das schon einsehen, was in noch höherem Maße bei Tier und Mensch der Fall ist. Der Mensch war also in der alten Mondenzeit ohne diesen mineralischen Einschluß. Er ist auf der Erde so gemacht worden, daß er ihn braucht, daß er sich gewissermaßen vollsog mit dem Mineralreich und seinen Kräften. Was hat er dadurch für sein gesamtes Menschenwesen bekommen? Er hat vor allen Dingen einen mineralischen Körper bekommen für sein früheres bildhaftes Vorstellen. Das ist in seiner weiteren Entwickelung dann durch den mineralischen Körper zu dem intellektualistischen Denken geworden, und zwar erst verhältnismäßig spät, seit der Mitte des 15. Jahrhunderts, nachdem es sich lange vorbereitet hatte.
Daß der Mensch heute intellektualistisch denkt, das beruht darauf, daß er einen mineralischen Körper als Einschluß bekommen hat. Wir brauchen als Mensch diesen mineralischen Körper zu nichts notwendiger als zu unserem Denken. Aber gerade durch die Aufgabe des Mineralreiches im Irdischen hat sich das alte bildhafte Denken, das sich nicht durch das Mineralreich, sondern durch das Reich, das man das dritte Elementarreich nennt, ausgebildet hatte, umgewandelt. Dadurch hat sich umgewandelt dieses vorirdische Vorstellen in das irdische, denkerische Vorstellen. Dadurch aber sind im Weltenzusammenhange gewissermaßen auch diejenigen Wesen abgesetzt, mit denen sich der Mensch verbunden denken mußte für sein bildhaftes Vorstellen in jener alten Vorzeit, von der ich gesprochen habe. Aber diese Wesenheiten müssen wir uns doch etwas anders vorstellen, als wir gewohnt sind, uns außermenschliche Wesenheiten vorzustellen. Da werden ja die Menschen, sobald sie überhaupt anfangen, noch aus gutem Willen ein Übersinnliches zuzugeben, vielleicht zu sehr anthropomorphisierend. Der Anthropomorphismus ergreift dann das Menschenwesen, wenn die Menschen sich alles, was über ihrer Sphäre liegt, in ihrem Sinn vorstellen. Dann ist es leicht, Feuerbach und Büchner Anthropomorphismus vorzuwerfen. Wir haben ja wahrhaftig vieles von dieser Art erlebt. Wir haben erlebt, daß sich im Abendlande die juristische Denkweise ausgebildet hat, nach der irdische Vergehen und Verbrechen von irdischen Richtern beurteilt und mit Strafen belegt werden und so weiter. Es ist nach und nach das überirdische, im Sinne eines unvollkommenen Christentums gedachte Belohnen und Bestrafen der Sünde, gar sehr nach dem Muster eines irdischen Gerichtshofes gedacht worden. Wir haben in unseren religiösen Vorstellungen des Abendlandes viel menschliche Juristerei drinnen. Wir lassen die Götter solche Strafen vollziehen, wie wir sie von irdischen Gerichtshöfen gewohnt sind. Aber wir müssen uns entschließen, wenn wir wirklich über das Menschliche hinauskommen wollen, nicht bloß anthropomorphistisch vorzustellen, sondern, was ja gerade im Menschenleben das Wesentliche ist, tatsächlich dann auch wirklich über das Anthropomorphistische hinauszudenken. So etwas müssen wir schon anwenden, wenn wir uns klarwerden wollen, daß diejenigen Wesenheiten, die in der alten Mondenzeit auf das menschliche Bilddenken Einfluß gewonnen haben, im normalen Fortgang der Menschheitsentwickelung abgesetzt worden sind, aber das nicht guten Willens hinnehmen. Man könnte ja sagen: Warum fügen sie sich nicht dem Willen der normal führenden Götter? — Sie tun es nicht - das muß man als Tatsache hinnehmen. Sie waren eigentlich bestimmt, im Menschenzusammenhang nur einen Einfluß zu haben auf das Träumen und auf alles dasjenige, was mit dem Traum verwandt ist. Wir nennen diese Wesenheiten in unserem Zusammenhang luziferische Wesenheiten. Ihr Gebiet wäre erstens alles dasjenige, was Traum ist, und zweitens das, was mit dem Traum verwandt ist. Aber sie begnügen sich nicht damit. Sie treiben ihr Wesen in dasjenige hinein, was sich aus ihrem Gebiet herausentwickelt hat: in das an das Mineralische gebundene menschliche Denken. Und in demselben Maße, in dem wir Eingang gewähren in unserem Denken alledem, was sonst nur unseren Traum, unser Phantasieren beherrschen sollte, in dem Maße verfallen wir in unserem Denken dem luziferischen Wesen, dem Einfluß derjenigen Wesenheiten, die nur während der Menschenvorfahrenzeit einwirken sollten in das alte bildhafte menschliche Denken, die aber zurückgehalten haben ihre Macht und die jetzt, während sie nur sich beschränken sollten auf unser Träumen, unser Phantasieren, unser Kunstschaffen, fortwährend Einfluß suchen auf unsere Gedanken, und diese Gedanken abhängig machen von ähnlichen Impulsen, wie sie vorhanden waren in der menschlichen Vorzeit. Es fließt vieles noch ein in unser Denken, das von dieser Seite herkommt, von dieser luziferischen Seite.
Daher ist gerade gegenüber der Menschheitsentwickelung die ernste Frage berechtigt: Aus welchen Kräften kommen denn diese Einflüsse in unser Denken? - Ja, sie kommen aus dem Gebiete her, in dem wir Menschen heute noch mit Recht träumen und mit Recht schlafen vor allen Dingen; sie kommen aus dem Gebiet des Fühlens, des Empfindens, aus dem Gebiet der Emotionen. Wir erleben ja unsere Gefühle nur so, wie wir sonst die Träume erleben, und wir erleben unseren Willen, wie wir sonst das Schlafen erleben. Da sind wir mit Recht noch eingesponnen in die Welt, die in dem Augenblick, wo sie für unser Denken sich entwickelt, die luziferische Welt ist. Daher kommen wir mit unserer menschlichen Entwickelung nicht zurecht, wenn wir nicht uns anhalten dazu, auch solche Gedanken zu entwickeln, welche unabhängig und immer unabhängiger werden von unseren bloßen Gefühlen, unseren bloßen Emotionen, von dem, was gewissermaßen innerlich aufsteigt aus dem traumhaften inneren Erleben auch des wachen Tageslebens. Das kann man nicht durch theoretische Grundsätze und Prinzipien erreichen, sondern nur durch das Leben selbst. Aber da sieht man, wie die Seelengewohnheiten der gegenwärtigen Menschheit einer auf diesem Gebiet notwendigen Seelenkultur gerade recht widerstreben, so daß man hier auf dieses Widerstreben sehr aufmerksam sein muß. Wir erleben es gerade in unserer Zeit, daß die Menschen sich nicht gewöhnen wollen, hinzuhören auf dasjenige, was nicht aus ihren inneren Vorurteilen, aus ihrem Vorempfinden, ihrer inneren Vorliebe herauskommt, sondern was gewissermaßen unabhängig vom Menschen entschieden wird, so daß sich der Mensch ihm nur zu fügen hat. Ein _ kleines Beispiel möchte ich anführen, durch das ich einmal jemandem klarzumachen versuchte, wie in bezug auf das, was der Mensch denkt, ein wichtiger Unterschied waltet.
Ich habe einmal vor vielen Jahren in einer süddeutschen Stadt, die heute keine süddeutsche Stadt mehr ist, einen Vortrag gehalten über die Weisheitslehren des Christentums. Sie wissen, daß jeder Vortrag sein begrenztes Thema haben muß und man im Sinne dieses Themas zu reden hat. So macht, wenn jemand nur einen einzigen Vortrag hört, ein solch einziger Vortrag, gerade wenn er sachlich gehalten ist, manchmal auf den einen diesen, auf den andern jenen Eindruck. Jedenfalls kann niemand eigentlich aus einem einzigen Vortrag irgend etwas entnehmen über die ganze Weltanschauung, aus der dieser Vortrag hervorgeht. Denn selbstverständlich wird man nicht, wenn man zum Beispiel über die Weisheitslehren des Christentums zu sprechen hat, aus dem Inhalt des Vortrages schließen können, wie der Mensch, der den Vortrag hält, nun denkt über, sagen wir, die Beziehungen des Lichtes zur Elektrizität, so daß also auch der Fall eintreten könnte, der damals eingetreten ist. Ich habe also über die Weisheitslehren des Christentums gesprochen, und zwei katholische Pfarrer waren dort. Die kamen nachher zu mir und sagten: Es ist eigentlich nichts einzuwenden gegen das, was Sie heute gesagt haben - es ist aber jetzt schon viele Jahre her -, aber wir müssen doch sagen, wenn wir auch dasselbe sagen, so sagen wir es doch auf die Art, daß es jeder verstehen kann. Sie sagen es auf die Art, daß es nur für vorbereitete Menschen gelten kann. — Ich sagte dazumal: Ja, Hochwürden, die Sache ist doch so: Ob Sie oder ich aus innerlichem Gefühl heraus empfinden, daß wir für alle Menschen reden, darauf kommt es nicht an, denn das entspringt aus einem subjektiven Gefühl. Es ist doch ganz natürlich: Wenn wir bloß nach unserem Gefühl uns richten, so muß ich ja auch denken, ich rede für alle Menschen, gerade wie Sie es denken; das ist ja selbstverständlich, sonst würden wir es ja anders machen. Aber wir leben heute in einer Zeit, wo es auf das, was wir glauben, daß es berechtigt sei, nicht ankommt. Wir müssen uns erziehen an der Sprache der Tatsachen. Wir müssen lernen, die Tatsachen zu befragen. Also nach Ihrem subjektiven Gefühl denken Sie, Sie reden für alle Leute. Aber ich frage Sie jetzt nach einer Tatsache: Gehen heute noch alle Leute zu Ihnen in die Kirche? Daran würde sich dann zeigen, ob Sie für alle Leute reden. Nun, sehen Sie, für diejenigen, die nicht in die Kirche gehen, wenn Sie reden, für die rede ich! Für diejenigen, die auch ein Recht haben, über die Weisheitslehren des Christentums etwas zu hören, für die rede eben ich. - Das ist Gefolgschaft leisten der Sprache der Tatsachen.
Es ist notwendig, daß wir uns losreißen von den subjektiven Gefühlen, denn wenn wir das nicht tun, dann kommt gerade das Luziferische in unser Denken herein. Wir würden den ganzen furchtbaren Feldzug der Unwahrhaftigkeit, der in den letzten fünf Jahren durch die Welt gegangen ist, als äußerste Konsequenz von etwas, was sich lange vorbereitet hat, nicht haben erleben können, wenn die Menschen gelernt hätten, in einem nötigen Ausmaß sich nach der Sprache der 'Tatsachen zu richten, und nicht nach der Sprache der Emotionen, wobei die Nationalisten die furchtbarsten Anreger von solchen Emotionen sind.
Auf der einen Seite steht heute die unbedingte Notwendigkeit, daß wir uns in unserem Denken erziehen so, daß wir uns fügen auch dem, was nicht in uns selber liegt. Und auf der andern Seite liegt die Abneigung der Menschen vor dieser Wahrhaftigkeit, die an den Tatsachen ihre Richtschnur sucht.
Nur derjenige kann in die höheren Welten mit ihren Erkenntnissen aufsteigen, der sich streng erzieht an der äußeren Tatsachenwelt. Wer ein bißchen sich gewöhnt hat, die Darstellung nach den Tatsachen lieb zu gewinnen, der leidet oftmals furchtbare Qualen, wenn ihm die Menschen der Gegenwart etwas mitteilen wollen. Denn er hört sehr häufig Dinge von der Art, daß jemand ihm sagt: Es hat einer etwas gesagt, das war furchtbar, das war entsetzlich! — Ja, wie war es denn eigentlich? Daß es so entsetzlich war, zeigt mir ja nur an, wie Sie es empfunden haben. Ich möchte aber gern hören, was es denn eigentlich war. — Ja, es war eben etwas Schreckliches, das da gekommen ist... — Und so verstehen einen die Leute gar nicht, wenn sie immerfort subjektiv schildern ihre Empfindungen über eine Sache, während man doch eine objektive Darstellung desjenigen hören möchte, was sie äußerlich gesehen haben. Insbesondere, wenn einem die Leute etwas mitteilen, was ihnen jemand gesagt hat, dann kann man heute meistens nicht unterscheiden, ob es sich um etwas handelt, was sie einfach weitersagen, oder ob sie geprüft haben, was sie einem mitteilen. Auf diesem Gebiet muß schon immer wiederum darauf hingewiesen werden, daß man Wahrhaftigkeit im Übersinnlichen für die Erkenntnis nur erzielen kann, wenn man sich erzieht, hier in der gewöhnlichen Sinneswelt möglichst nur dasjenige darzustellen, was unmittelbare Tatsache ist. Und nur auf diesem Wege, indem er sich zur Tatsachenanschauung erzieht, kann der Mensch die luziferischen Einflüsse überwinden, die in sein Denken hereinfließen.
Diese luziferischen Einflüsse sind dasjenige, dem die Menschheit der Gegenwart auf der einen Seite ausgesetzt ist. Auf der andern Seite sind die ahrimanischen Einflüsse. Wir haben ja sagen müssen: Dieses Erdendenken hat sich eigentlich aus früheren Stadien des menschlichen Seelenlebens nur herausentwickelt dadurch, daß der Mensch gewissermaßen sich vollgesogen hat mit einem mineralischen Körper. Dieser mineralische Körper ist schon das Organ des Erdendenkens. Aber dadurch ist er vornehmlich in das Gebiet derjenigen Wesen geraten, die man die ahrimanischen nennt.
Der Mensch kann ja allerdings sich bewußt werden, daß er sich zu erziehen hat an jener 'Tatsachenwelt, die ihm abgewöhnt, sich bloß nach seinen subjektiven Emotionen zu richten. Aber er sollte nicht verfallen demjenigen Denken, das nun weiter nichts ist als eine innere menschliche Tätigkeit, wie sie nun wiederum aus dem mineralischen Leibe hervorgeht. Auf diesem Gebiete liegt eine für viele Menschen höchst unangenehme Wahrheit.
Nicht wahr, die einen sind Idealisten oder Spiritualisten, die andern sind Materialisten. In der Welt wird viel gestritten darüber, ob nun der Spiritualismus oder der Materialismus das richtige ist. All dieses Streiten hat für gewisse Gebiete der menschlichen Organisation gar nicht den geringsten Wert. Denn der Mensch kann in der Tat zweierlei entfalten. Er kann seinen mineralischen Körper, mit dem er sich vollgesogen hat, als das Instrument benutzen zu seinem Denken, wie er es muß als Erdenmensch, sonst würde er ja nur träumen. Aber er kann sich dann dazu erheben, mit seinen Gedanken über das Instrument wieder hinauszukommen, er kann sich zu einer geistigen Auffassung, zu einer Geistesschau erheben. Tut er das letztere, so hat er zwar mit der materiellen Organisation gedacht, aber er hat sie benutzt, um zu einer weiteren Entwickelungsstufe der Menschheit zu kommen, indem er mit dem Resultat hinaufgeht in die geistige Welt. Er kann aber auch dabei stehenbleiben als Erdenmensch, seinen mineralischen Körper denken zu lassen; denn der kann denken! Das ist gerade das Gefährliche, daß der Materialismus nicht unrecht hat, gerade gegenüber dem Denken nicht. Dieser mineralische Körper ist nicht eine bloße Photographie. Er ist etwas, was für sich denken kann, nur bleibt er mit seinem Denken im Bereich des irdischen Lebens. Der Mensch muß das, was er mit seinem mineralischen Körper erlebt, erst erheben in die Reiche des Übersinnlichen.
So daß man sagen kann: Gewiß, es könnte richtig sein, daß dasjenige, was menschliche Gedanken sind, nur eine Ausschwitzung der menschlichen mineralischen Organisation ist. Das könnte richtig sein, nur muß es der Mensch erst richtig machen. Der Mensch kann aus seiner eigenen Freiheit heraus auf der Erde sich so entwickeln, daß er nur das Produkt der Materie ist. Die Tiere können das nicht; sie kommen nicht so weit, daß sie durch mineralischen Einschluß das Denken entwickeln. Dem Tier steht es nicht frei, die materialistische Anschauung zu bewahrheiten. Dem Menschen steht es frei, die materialistische Ansicht zu bewahrheiten; er braucht nur aus materialistischer Gesinnung heraus zu wollen.
Es ist so mit der menschlichen Freiheit beschaffen, daß es sogar dem Menschen frei steht, den Materialismus zu verwirklichen für das Menschenreich, das heißt, diesen Erdenmenschen so zu gestalten, daß er in der Materie aufgeht. Es ist daher im Grunde genommen eine Sache des Beliebens, Materialist zu sein. Wenn man stark genug ist, das auch zu verwirklichen, was man dem Menschen vorsagt als materialistische Gesinnung, dann wird diese Gesinnung durch die Menschen erst wahr.
Was in dieser Form auf den Menschen wirkt, das kommt durch die ahrimanischen Wesen. Die wollen alles dasjenige, was Erdenentwickelung ist, auf der Stufe erhalten, die erst durch die Erdenentwickelung an den Menschen herangekommen ist: bei der mineralischen Organisation. Sie wollen den Menschen vollkommen machen, aber nur als mineralische Organisation, während die luziferischen Wesen den Menschen, auch nachdem er die mineralische Organisation in sein Wesen hereinbekommen hat, doch auf der früheren Stufe, die angemessen war dem Zustand, bevor er die mineralische Organisation bekommen hat, erhalten wollen. Das ist dieses An-zwei-Strängen-Ziehen des luziferischen und des ahrimanischen Wesens. Die luziferischen Wesen möchten den Menschen so entwickeln, daß er zuletzt seinen mineralischen Körper abwirft und eine Entwickelung durchmacht, für die das Irdische uneigentlich bleibt, für die das Irdische gewissermaßen nur eine episodische Erfahrung war. Die luziferischen Wesen haben die Absicht, das Irdische allmählich auszustreichen aus der ganzen Entwickelung der Menschheit. Die ahrimanischen Wesen haben die Absicht, dieses irdische, mineralische Wesen des Menschen so recht zu ergreifen, es dann herauszureißen aus der fortgehenden Entwickelung und es isoliert für sich hinzustellen. Auf diese Weise ziehen die luziferischen und ahrimanischen Wesenheiten an verschiedenen Strängen.
Aber es kommt nun sehr darauf an, daß wir das, was wir so im Großen charakterisieren können, anwenden lernen auf das alleralltäglichste Leben, daß wir wirklich, geradeso wie wir ein halbkreisförmig gebogenes Eisen nicht als ein gewöhnliches Hufeisen ansehen, wenn es doch ein Magnet ist, daß wir das menschliche Leben nicht so ansehen, als ob es nur nach seiner Außenseite zu charakterisieren wäre. Derjenige, der Pferdehufe beschlägt mit Magneten, der berücksichtigt nicht, daß im Magneten etwas anderes lebt als im Hufeisen. Derjenige, der das Menschenleben so charakterisiert, wie es heute oftmals geschieht, der handelt aber ganz genau so wie der, der sein Pferd beschlägt mit Magneten anstatt mit Hufeisen. Man geniert sich nicht, von positiver und negativer Elektrizität zu sprechen, wenn man vom Unorganischen spricht, oder von positivem und negativem Magnetismus, aber man geniert sich, vom Luziferischen und Ahrimanischen zu sprechen für das Menschenleben, trotzdem dieses im Menschenleben auf einer höheren Stufe ebenso wirksame Kräfte sind wie positiver und negativer Magnetismus auf dem Gebiete des Leblosen. Nur sind positiver und negativer Magnetismus einfachere Begriffe. Man braucht sich nicht so viel Mühe zu geben, zu ihnen aufzurücken, wie man braucht, wenn man aufrücken will zum Luziferischen und Ahrimanischen. Daher wird man auch nur zurechtkommen in bezug auf dasjenige, was sich heute als Phrase geltend macht und aus der Phrase heraus zur Lüge wird, wenn man weiß: Da wirkt das luziferische Wesen. — Und man wird nur zurechtkommen mit alledem, was als materialistische Gesinnung da und dort auftritt, wenn man weiß: Da wirkt das ahrimanische Wesen. — Denn mit der bloß äußeren Charakteristik wird man für das Verständnis des Menschenlebens in der Zukunft nichts mehr gewinnen können; man wird nur herumreden und die größten Torheiten begehen, wenn man sie dann auf die Wirklichkeit anwenden will; aber man wird das menschliche Leben nicht so verstehen, daß man auch für menschliche Einrichtungen, für menschliche Institutionen aus seinen Erkenntnissen heraus soziale Impulse gewinnen kann. Das ist etwas, was innig zusammenhängt mit dem ganzen Ernste, der einen überkommen muß, wenn man alles dasjenige ansieht, was heute in der Entwickelungstendenz der Menschheit liegt. Wir können heute nicht zu einem Verständnis des Lebens, in dem wir drinnenstehen, kommen, wenn wir nicht den Blick aufwärts werfen vom Irdischen zum Außerirdischen. Da liegt etwas Eigentümliches vor.
Wenn wir zurückblicken in ältere, jetzt weniger alte als die früher charakterisierten Zeiten der Menschheitsentwickelung, so urteilen ja die heutigen Menschen zumeist nur nach äußeren geschichtlichen Dokumenten. Es gibt sogar Historiker mit ganz berühmten Namen, die sagen: Die Geschichte der Menschheit hat alles dasjenige zum Inhalt, was man aus dem Geschriebenen entnehmen kann. Wenn man die Geschichte von vornherein so wie Ranke definiert, so ist es ja selbstverständlich, daß man dann zu einer sonderbaren Geschichtsdarstellung kommt. Aber das Schreiben gehört ja selbst der Geschichte an, es entwickelte sich erst wiederum aus etwas anderem heraus, und man kann mit solchen Definitionen eigentlich in Wirklichkeit doch nichts anfangen. Aber geht man zurück nur bis in die chaldäisch-babylonische, in die ägyptische Zeit, so sieht man, daß innerhalb dieser Entwickelungsepoche der Menschheit die ganze Stellung des Menschen auch noch zum Kosmos eine andere war. Man versteht ja heute gar nicht, was eigentlich gemeint war, wenn der Mensch in dieser Zeit sein Leben anknüpfte an den Gang der Sterne, der Planeten, oder deren Verhältnis zu den Fixsternen, zum Tierkreis; das alles ist ja heute die leerste Abstraktion geworden. Glauben Sie denn, daß der Astrologe, der heute die alten astrologischen Werke durchstöbert — und es ist noch gut, wenn er sie durchsucht und keine neuen macht, denn die neuen sind schrecklich —, und da die Horoskope zusammenstellt, daß er in seiner Abstraktion, in seiner abstrakten Denkweise noch eine Ahnung hat von jenem lebendigen Zusammenhang, in dem sich noch der alte Ägypter und Chaldäer wußte als Mensch mit dem äußeren irdischen Gang, der Stellung der Sterne? Es ist ja alles anders geworden heute. Man muß sagen: Etwas Wichtiges in der Menschheitsentwickelung seit jenen Zeiten besteht gerade darin, daß dieses ganze Menschenbewußtsein eingeengt worden ist auf das Physische. Wieviel hat solch ein Ägypter von der Erde gewußt? Sie war für ihn ein Stück Land. Vom Himmel hat er mehr gewußt. Ins Senkrechte hinauf ging seine Erfahrung. Der Grieche hatte auch noch nicht eine horizontale Erkenntnis; ins Senkrechte ging auch noch seine Erfahrung. Diese senkrechte Erfahrung schränkte sich ein in dem Maße, als sich die horizontale ausdehnte, und das Maximum der Einschränkung der menschlichen Erkenntnis vom Himmel ist die Ausbreitung der menschlichen Erkenntnis von der Erde, als man lernte, die Erde zu umschiffen, um sich zu überzeugen: Wenn man nach Westen fährt, kommt man vom Osten wieder zurück. Aber dieses Verfinstern der menschlichen Erkenntnis in vertikaler Richtung mußte eintreten. Der Mensch mußte einmal abgeschnürt werden vom Weltenall, um in sich die Kraft zu suchen, die ihn allein zu seiner menschlichen Freiheit führen konnte. Denn aus dieser menschlichen Freiheit kann nun wiederum das Moralische hervorgehen.
Nun müssen wir, nachdem die Menschen aufgehört haben, so wie die Griechen oder die Chaldäer in vertikaler Hinsicht im Außerirdischen Erfahrungen zu haben, nachdem wir die Erziehung genossen haben, die wir eben haben können durch die bloß horizontale Fläche, wir müssen wiederum auf moralisch-ethischem Gebiet aufsteigen und kennenlernen das Menschenleben, wie es beeinflußt ist von denjenigen Kräften, die nicht im Verlaufe des äußeren Daseins zu bemerken sind. Solche sind eben die luziferischen und ahrimanischen Kräfte.
Die Menschen machen sich allerdings heute mit andern Dingen zu schaffen, und ich habe ihnen manchmal auch etwas mitzuteilen von unserer anthroposophisch orientierten Geistesbewegung, die gerade sich zur Aufgabe macht, ihre Arbeit aus diesem ganzen Ernst der Zeit zu leisten, und die Sprache zu hören, die gewissermaßen vom außerirdischen Kosmos gesprochen wird, die uns sagt, daß wir wieder erkennen lernen müssen den Zusammenhang des Menschen mit dem ganzen Kosmos. Dahinein tönen dann immer - verzeihen Sie den schroffen Übergang - die Dinge, die heute schon auf die merkwürdigsten Gesichtspunkte hinweisen, von denen aus die Gegnerschaften gegen solchen gewollten Menschheitsfortschritt sich geltend machen. Da kann ich Ihnen eine Stelle aus einem Briefe vorlesen, die recht charakteristisch ist. Wie gesagt, verzeihen Sie den schroffen Übergang, aber wir haben schon die Verpflichtung, Sie bekanntzumachen mit allerlei, was in der Gegenwart geschieht, um zu untergraben, zu vernichten diese Bewegung, die gerade die' Aufgabe der Zeit zu erfassen bestrebt ist.
In Norwegen macht sich ein Mensch geltend, der sich die Aufgabe gesetzt hat, unsere Bewegung zu vernichten. Dieser Mann schreibt, um sich zu vergewissern, daß er dazu das Recht hat, an Autoritäten — wie man das so heute macht -; er wendet sich an dasjenige, was sich nennt: «Politisch-anthropologische Monatsschrift.» Von dieser Monatsschrift wurde ihm nun die folgende Auskunft gegeben: «Dr. Steiner ist Jude reinsten Wassers. Er ist mit den Zionisten verbunden, eigentlich an sie geknüpft, und steht im Dienste der Entente.» Und der Redakteur fügt hinzu, «daß sie» — nämlich die Leute dieser Art - «schon lange ihre Aufmerksamkeit auf ihn gerichtet halten».
Ich wollte Ihnen das nur am Schlusse erzählen, wiederum als einen Fall, wie sie sich jetzt so mehren, daß man fast jeden Tag einen zu Gesicht bekommt. So also verhalten sich die Anthropologen heute zu dem, was von anthroposophischer Seite angestrebt wird.
First Lecture
I have often emphasized how necessary it is, in order to enable human beings to take up the great tasks of the present, which actually fall to every human being today, to gain an awareness of the course of human evolution on Earth. This course of human evolution can only be understood if one brings before one's soul the deeper forces of those beings that intervene in the entire course of Earth's evolution and also in human life as such.
I have now shown from various points of view how we humans live within a kind of normal, continuous development, and how we can gain an overview of this through spiritual scientific investigation over long periods of time. But I have also drawn your attention to how, on the one hand, certain beings intervene in this normal human development, beings who pursue a different goal with human beings than those beings who want to guide human beings through normal development through the various incarnations on Earth, beings whom we must understand as Luciferic beings, and that, on the other hand, there are beings intervening whom we describe as Ahrimanic. We have spoken repeatedly about these things. But the seriousness that is so necessary for human beings today cannot really enter our minds unless we take into account the direct intervention of these Luciferic and Ahrimanic beings in human life.
If you remember how, sharply separated from what happened earlier, a new period of human development began in the 15th century, you will be led to ask yourself about the most diverse differences in human life in our present period, which began precisely with the 15th century, compared to earlier times. We can say that one of the peculiarities of the present period is that, above all, thinking and intellectualism have developed since the middle of the 15th century. Humanity had to go through this education of intellectualism as part of the great education it is undergoing throughout the entire evolution of the earth. It had to try out, as it were, how human life can be lived when the intellectual principle of thinking is developed to a high degree. Human beings could never have been educated to true freedom without the introduction of the intellectual principle into their nature. Today, we have no clear idea of how different people before the middle of the 15th century were from people today in this respect. We take what is given to us as something self-evident; we do not think about it further. And so today we believe, because the people we deal with, mainly those in civilized countries, live in an intellectualistic way, that it has always been so, that people have always thought this way. But that is not the case. The way of thinking was different for people before the middle of the 15th century. These people did not have such abstract thinking as people do today. Their thinking was much, much more vividly connected with the things of the outer world itself. They were much more connected with what can be experienced emotionally and volitionally within the human being. We live very much in our thoughts, but we are not sufficiently aware of this. We are not even aware of how this thinking, this intellectualism, which we take for granted today, actually developed. And we have to go back further and further in human evolution if we want to really understand how this thinking, this intellectualism, developed. We must also ask ourselves: Are there still any remnants today of the human activity from which thinking arose?
You know, old forces of development are preserved into later times alongside those that normally arise for later times. And this is also the case with our thinking. We experience reminiscences, echoes of thinking, an activity similar to thinking in dreams, in the world of images that emerges from our nightly sleep. Through experience, we learn to distinguish how this world of thinking, which we develop within ourselves from the moment we wake up to the moment we fall asleep, relates to the world of dream images, which we experience completely passively. But if we go back in human development, we find more and more that the waking soul life was also very similar to how humans experience their soul activity in dreams today. Today's thinking is a later product of development, on the path to which the human soul unfolded a more dreamlike activity in its earlier stages. And if we trace this dreamlike activity of the human soul back very, very far, we come beyond all that is earthly evolution; we come to the previous cosmic embodiment of the earth, which we have become accustomed to calling the “old lunar evolution,” within which human beings already lived, but in a completely different form than today. And during this lunar evolution, that is, during the previous embodiment of our Earth, that still completely ethereal human being, who is the real ancestor of the present human being, actually developed a dreamlike, pictorially dreamlike soul activity. This pictorial, dreamlike soul activity had the peculiarity, however, that it stood in a completely different relationship to the external world than our thinking soul activity. I would say that with our thinking soul activity we stand quite isolated in the world. The world is out there, it has its processes. We think these processes through in our inner lives, but precisely when we believe we are thinking most deeply about external processes, we do not feel ourselves to be inside these external processes at all. We often even feel that we can think best about external processes when we isolate ourselves from them, when we withdraw completely into ourselves. The ancestors of humankind, who still thought in a dreamlike way, if I may use the expression, did not have such a feeling. When they developed in their dreams what we develop in our thinking, they knew that they were intimately connected in their experience with the events of the world. We see the clouds, we think about the clouds, but we do not have the feeling that the same forces that are at work in the clouds are also at work in our thinking. But our human ancestors had the feeling that the same forces that were at work in the clouds were also at work in their dreamlike thinking. The human ancestor said—if I want to translate into our language what he said in his, which is actually silent compared to ours: The forces that weave and live outside in the cloud cause images within me. He thought of himself as no more isolated from the universe in which the cloud unfolds its essence than my little finger can think of itself as isolated from me. If I cut it off, it withers and is no longer my finger. The ancestors of humankind felt that they too could not exist other than as a member of the universe to which they belonged. The little finger would have to say: The blood that pulsates throughout the body pulsates in me, and my entire organic existence is governed by the same laws that govern the organic existence of the rest of the body. The human ancestor said: I am a member of the universe, and what pulsates in me as I develop images is the same as what these images point to; it is the same force that weaves and lives in the formation of clouds. Thus, this human ancestor felt intimately related and connected to the whole world.
But we, because we must feel so isolated in our thinking from external events, are in a sense cut off from the truly essential causes of world existence. In ordinary life, we do not feel what actually pulsates through the universe. Our thinking has taken on an abstract character. Our thinking reveals nothing of what lives and weaves within it. It is precisely on this that the possibility of becoming free human beings is based, that we do not feel in our thoughts: something else is thinking in us—but rather: it is we ourselves who are thinking. But the ancestors of humankind could not imagine themselves so isolated from the whole world. The ancestors of humankind knew, because they felt connected to the world's existence, that there were not only abstract forces of nature out there in the world, but that there were also beings at work, even if these beings were different from humans, beings that did not have a physical body like humans, but with whom humans could conceive of themselves as belonging to a global community. They did not feel something like “forces of nature”; they felt a community with natural beings. Just as we say today that what happens in nature, in which we ourselves are included, takes place according to natural laws, so it was natural for the ancestors of humankind in ancient times to say: What happens outside in nature takes place according to the will impulses of natural beings. We say: The earth attracts the bodies on it through its gravity according to a law whereby this gravitational force decreases with the square of the distance, and we call this the special case of a natural law. When we speak of nature, we refer to such an abstraction. The ancestors of human beings were aware that what we now call gravity in the abstract contained something essential.
But this relationship to human beings, which was developed by special beings that belonged, so to speak, to human development, normally ceased at the moment when the actual development of the Earth began for human beings. Human beings were, in a sense, released from the guidance of those supersensible beings whom they had sensed in their imagination during the ancient lunar period as something flowing and floating into them. And we must ask ourselves: What was it that actually separated human beings from the guidance of these beings with whom they belonged, even if only in their dark consciousness? It was the incorporation of the mineral kingdom into human beings. For in those ancient times of which I have just spoken, human beings did not yet carry the mineral kingdom within themselves. They had an organization that was not perceptible to the present-day sense organs, an organization that did not yet contain mineral inclusions. If one wants to understand this, if one does not want to approach such a thing with prejudice, then one must make oneself clear what this actually means: a being contains the mineral kingdom within itself. In this respect, people today think extremely superficially. They look at a mineral, a stone, and rightly regard it as what it presents itself to be from the outside. But today they look at a plant in exactly the same way as they look at a stone, whereas what they see is not really the plant at all. The plant is in reality something completely supersensible. Imagine an organization of forces that has a certain pictorial character and is related to the mineral kingdom in such a way that, while otherwise invisible, it is saturated with the mineral kingdom and also with the forces that play between the individual members of the mineral kingdom. I have the plant before me: it is an invisible structure of forces, it only draws itself full from the mineral kingdom. As a result, in the part of space that is an invisible structure of forces, the mineral also stands before my eyes. I look at this mineral, but it is only that from which the supersensible plant has absorbed itself. I must first find the supersensible plant in a completely different way than that in which it appears to me with that from which it has absorbed itself. This is already the case with plants. When we speak of plants today, we speak only of the mineral element within the plant, not of the plant itself.
What is important is that we recognize in plants what is even more evident in animals and humans. In the ancient lunar period, human beings did not have this mineral element. They were made on Earth in such a way that they need it, that they are, so to speak, saturated with the mineral kingdom and its forces. What did this give them for their entire human nature? Above all, it gave them a mineral body for their earlier pictorial imagination. In his further development, this then became intellectual thinking through the mineral body, and only relatively late, since the middle of the 15th century, after a long period of preparation.
The fact that humans today think intellectually is based on the fact that they have received a mineral body as an inclusion. As human beings, we need this mineral body for nothing more than for our thinking. But it is precisely through the abandonment of the mineral kingdom in the earthly realm that the old pictorial thinking, which had developed not through the mineral kingdom but through the kingdom called the third elemental kingdom, has been transformed. Through this, this pre-earthly imagination has been transformed into earthly, thinking imagination. But this also means that, in the world context, those beings with whom human beings had to think themselves connected for their pictorial thinking in that ancient past I have spoken of have been separated, so to speak. But we must imagine these beings somewhat differently than we are accustomed to imagining non-human beings. As soon as people begin to admit the supernatural out of good will, they perhaps become too anthropomorphic. Anthropomorphism takes hold of human beings when they imagine everything that lies beyond their sphere in their minds. It is then easy to accuse Feuerbach and Büchner of anthropomorphism. We have indeed experienced much of this kind. We have seen that in the West a legal way of thinking has developed according to which earthly crimes and offenses are judged by earthly judges and punished, and so on. Gradually, the supernatural, in the sense of an imperfect Christianity, has come to be thought of as rewarding and punishing sin, very much according to the pattern of an earthly court of law. There is a great deal of human jurisprudence in our Western religious ideas. We allow the gods to carry out punishments as we are accustomed to seeing in earthly courts. But if we really want to go beyond the human, we must decide not merely to imagine anthropomorphically, but to actually think beyond anthropomorphism, which is precisely what is essential in human life. We must apply this if we want to realize that those beings who gained influence on human thinking in the ancient lunar period have been removed in the normal course of human development, but do not accept this of their own free will. One might ask: Why do they not submit to the will of the normally ruling gods? They do not do so — that must be accepted as a fact. They were actually destined to have an influence in human affairs only on dreaming and on everything related to dreaming. We call these beings Luciferic beings in our context. Their domain would be, first, everything that is dream, and second, everything related to dreams. But they are not satisfied with that. They drive their nature into that which has developed out of their domain: into human thinking bound to the mineral world. And to the same extent that we allow into our thinking everything that should otherwise only dominate our dreams and our fantasies, to that extent we fall in our thinking to the Luciferic being, to the influence of those beings that should only have been active during the time of our human ancestors in the old pictorial human thinking, but which held back their power and now, while they should limit themselves to our dreams, our fantasies, our artistic creations, continually seek to influence our thoughts and make these thoughts dependent on impulses similar to those that existed in human prehistory. Much still flows into our thinking that comes from this side, from this Luciferic side.
Therefore, especially in relation to human development, the serious question is justified: From what forces do these influences come into our thinking? Yes, they come from the realm in which we humans today still rightly dream and, above all, rightly sleep; they come from the realm of feeling, of sensation, from the realm of emotions. We experience our feelings only as we otherwise experience dreams, and we experience our will as we otherwise experience sleep. We are rightly still enveloped in the world which, at the moment when it develops for our thinking, is the Luciferic world. That is why we cannot cope with our human development unless we make a point of developing thoughts that become independent and increasingly independent of our mere feelings, our mere emotions, of what rises up, as it were, from the dreamlike inner experience of our waking life. This cannot be achieved through theoretical principles, but only through life itself. But here we see how the soul habits of the present human race are precisely opposed to the soul culture that is necessary in this area, so that we must be very attentive to this opposition. We are experiencing this in our time, that people do not want to get used to listening to what does not come from their inner prejudices, from their preconceptions, from their inner preferences, but rather to what is decided independently of human beings, so that human beings have no choice but to submit to it. I would like to give a small example through which I once tried to explain to someone how an important difference prevails in relation to what people think.
Many years ago, in a city in southern Germany that is no longer a southern German city, I gave a lecture on the wisdom teachings of Christianity. You know that every lecture must have a limited topic and that one must speak in accordance with this topic. Thus, if someone hears only a single lecture, such a single lecture, especially if it is factual, sometimes makes one impression on one person and another impression on another. In any case, no one can actually learn anything about the entire worldview from which this lecture arises from a single lecture. For it goes without saying that if, for example, one has to speak about the wisdom teachings of Christianity, one cannot conclude from the content of the lecture what the person giving the lecture thinks about, say, the relationship between light and electricity, so that the case that occurred at that time could also occur. So I spoke about the wisdom teachings of Christianity, and two Catholic priests were there. They came up to me afterwards and said: There is actually nothing wrong with what you said today — it was many years ago now — but we have to say that even if we say the same thing, we say it in such a way that everyone can understand. You say it in such a way that it can only apply to people who are prepared for it.” I said at the time: ”Yes, Reverend, the thing is this: whether you or I feel from our innermost being that we are speaking for all people is irrelevant, because that springs from a subjective feeling. It is quite natural: if we are guided solely by our feelings, then I must also think that I am speaking for all people, just as you think; that is self-evident, otherwise we would do otherwise. But we live in a time when what we believe to be right does not matter. We must educate ourselves in the language of facts. We must learn to question the facts. So, according to your subjective feeling, you think you speak for all people. But I now ask you for a fact: Do all people still go to your church today? That would show whether you speak for all people. Well, you see, for those who do not go to church when you speak, I speak for them! For those who also have a right to hear about the wisdom teachings of Christianity, I speak for them. That is following the language of facts.
It is necessary that we break away from subjective feelings, because if we do not, then the Luciferic will enter into our thinking. We would not have experienced the whole terrible campaign of untruthfulness that has swept through the world in the last five years as the ultimate consequence of something that has been in preparation for a long time, if people had learned to the necessary extent to follow the language of facts and not the language of emotions, whereby nationalists are the most terrible instigators of such emotions.
On the one hand, there is today an absolute necessity for us to educate ourselves in our thinking so that we also submit to what is not within ourselves. And on the other hand, there is people's aversion to this truthfulness, which seeks its guiding principle in facts.
Only those who strictly educate themselves in the external world of facts can ascend to the higher worlds with their insights. Anyone who has become accustomed to appreciating representations based on facts often suffers terrible torment when people of the present day try to communicate something to them. For they very often hear things like this: “Someone said something that was terrible, that was awful!” — “Yes, but what was it actually? The fact that it was so awful only shows me how you felt about it. I would like to hear what it actually was.” — “Yes, it was just something terrible that happened...” — And so people don't understand you at all when you constantly describe your feelings about something subjectively, when what you want to hear is an objective description of what they saw externally. Especially when people tell you something that someone else has told them, it is usually impossible to distinguish whether they are simply passing on what they have heard or whether they have checked what they are telling you. In this area, it must always be pointed out that truthfulness in the supersensible realm can only be achieved for the sake of knowledge if one trains oneself to represent as far as possible only what is an immediate fact in the ordinary sensory world. And only in this way, by training oneself to view facts as they are, can human beings overcome the Luciferic influences that flow into their thinking.
These Luciferic influences are what humanity is exposed to on the one hand. On the other hand are the Ahrimanic influences. We have had to say that this earthly thinking actually developed out of earlier stages of human soul life only because human beings, so to speak, became saturated with a mineral body. This mineral body is already the organ of earthly thinking. But through this it has fallen primarily into the realm of those beings who are called Ahrimanic.
Human beings can indeed become conscious that they must educate themselves in the world of facts, which weans them from following merely their subjective emotions. But they should not fall into the trap of thinking that is nothing more than an inner human activity, which in turn arises from the mineral body. In this realm lies a truth that is highly unpleasant for many people.
It is true that some are idealists or spiritualists, while others are materialists. There is much debate in the world about whether spiritualism or materialism is correct. All this debate is of no value whatsoever for certain areas of human organization. For man can indeed develop two things. He can use his mineral body, with which he has saturated himself, as an instrument for his thinking, as he must do as an earthly human being, otherwise he would only dream. But he can then rise above this and, with his thoughts, go beyond the instrument; he can rise to a spiritual perception, to a spiritual vision. If he does the latter, he has indeed thought with his material organization, but he has used it to reach a further stage of human development by ascending with the result into the spiritual world. But he can also remain as an earthly human being, allowing his mineral body to think, for it can think! This is precisely the danger, that materialism is not wrong, especially with regard to thinking. This mineral body is not a mere photograph. It is something that can think for itself, but its thinking remains within the realm of earthly life. Human beings must first raise what they experience with their mineral body into the realms of the supersensible.
So that one can say: Certainly, it could be true that human thoughts are only an exudation of the human mineral organization. That could be true, but human beings must first make it true. Human beings can develop on earth out of their own freedom in such a way that they are only the product of matter. Animals cannot do this; they do not develop thinking through mineral enclosure. Animals are not free to prove the materialistic view. Human beings are free to prove the materialistic view; they only need to want to do so out of a materialistic attitude.
Human freedom is such that it is even up to humans to realize materialism for the human realm, that is, to shape these earthly humans in such a way that they are absorbed into matter. It is therefore basically a matter of choice to be a materialist. If one is strong enough to realize what is prescribed to humans as a materialistic attitude, then this attitude becomes true through humans.
What affects humans in this way comes through the Ahrimanic beings. They want to preserve everything that is part of Earth's development at the level that has only been reached by humans through Earth's development: at the level of the mineral organization. They want to make human beings perfect, but only as a mineral organization, while the Luciferic beings want to keep human beings, even after they have received the mineral organization into their being, at the earlier stage that was appropriate to the state before they received the mineral organization. This is the pulling in two directions of the Luciferic and Ahrimanic beings. The Luciferic beings want to develop human beings in such a way that they ultimately cast off their mineral bodies and undergo a development for which the earthly remains inauthentic, for which the earthly was, so to speak, only an episodic experience. The Luciferic beings intend to gradually eliminate the earthly from the entire development of humanity. The Ahrimanic beings intend to seize this earthly, mineral nature of human beings, tear it out of the ongoing development, and isolate it for itself. In this way, the Luciferic and Ahrimanic beings pull on different strings.
But it is now very important that we learn to apply what we can characterize in this grand way to our everyday lives, that we really do not regard a semicircular piece of iron as an ordinary horseshoe when it is in fact a magnet, that we do not regard human life as if it could be characterized solely by its outward appearance. The person who shoes horses with magnets does not take into account that something else lives in the magnet than in the horseshoe. The person who characterizes human life as it is often done today acts exactly like the person who shoes his horse with magnets instead of horseshoes. People are not embarrassed to speak of positive and negative electricity when they speak of inorganic matter, or of positive and negative magnetism, but they are embarrassed to speak of the Luciferic and Ahrimanic forces in human life, even though these forces are just as effective in human life at a higher level as positive and negative magnetism are in the realm of inanimate matter. It is simply that positive and negative magnetism are simpler concepts. One does not need to make as much effort to ascend to them as one does to ascend to the Luciferic and Ahrimanic. Therefore, one can only cope with what is now regarded as a phrase and becomes a lie out of the phrase if one knows: the Luciferic being is at work here. And one can only cope with all that appears here and there as a materialistic attitude if one knows: the Ahrimanic being is at work here. For with mere external characteristics, we will gain nothing more for our understanding of human life in the future; we will only talk around the issue and commit the greatest follies when we try to apply them to reality; but we will not understand human life in such a way that we can gain social impulses for human institutions from our insights. This is something that is intimately connected with the whole seriousness that must overcome us when we look at everything that lies in the evolutionary tendency of humanity today. We cannot come to an understanding of the life in which we stand today unless we raise our gaze from the earthly to the extraterrestrial. There is something peculiar about this.
When we look back to earlier times in human development, which are now less ancient than those characterized earlier, we find that people today judge mostly on the basis of external historical documents. There are even historians of very famous names who say that the history of humanity consists of everything that can be gleaned from written sources. If one defines history from the outset in the way Ranke did, it is only natural that one arrives at a peculiar representation of history. But writing itself is part of history; it developed out of something else, and such definitions are actually useless. But if we go back only to the Chaldean-Babylonian and Egyptian periods, we see that during this epoch of human development, the entire position of man in relation to the cosmos was different. Today, we cannot understand what was actually meant when people in those days linked their lives to the movements of the stars and planets or their relationship to the fixed stars and the zodiac; today, all this has become the emptiest abstraction. Do you believe that the astrologer who today rummages through the old astrological works — and it is good if he searches through them and does not create new ones, for the new ones are terrible — and compiles horoscopes, that in his abstraction, in his abstract way of thinking, he still has an inkling of that living connection in which the ancient Egyptians and Chaldeans still knew themselves as human beings with an external earthly existence and the position of the stars? Everything has changed today. It must be said that something important in the development of humanity since those times is precisely that this entire human consciousness has been restricted to the physical. How much did such an Egyptian know about the earth? For him, it was a piece of land. He knew more about the sky. His experience went vertically upward. The Greek did not yet have horizontal knowledge; his experience also went vertically. This vertical experience limited itself to the extent that the horizontal expanded, and the maximum limitation of human knowledge of the sky is the expansion of human knowledge of the earth, when people learned to sail around the earth in order to convince themselves that if you sail west, you come back from the east. But this darkening of human knowledge in the vertical direction had to happen. Man had to be cut off from the universe in order to find within himself the power that alone could lead him to human freedom. For it is from this human freedom that morality can now emerge.
Now that humans have ceased to have vertical experiences in the extraterrestrial realm, as the Greeks or the Chaldeans did, now that we have enjoyed the education which we can only have through the horizontal plane, we must again ascend into the moral-ethical realm and learn about human life as it is influenced by forces that cannot be perceived in the course of external existence. These are precisely the Luciferic and Ahrimanic forces.
People today are preoccupied with other things, and I sometimes have something to tell them about our anthroposophically oriented spiritual movement, which has set itself the task of carrying out its work with all the seriousness of the times and of listening to the language that is spoken, as it were, by the extraterrestrial cosmos, which tells us that we must learn to recognize once again the connection between human beings and the entire cosmos. Then, forgive the abrupt transition, there are always things that point to the strangest aspects from which opposition to such deliberate human progress asserts itself. I can read you a passage from a letter that is quite characteristic. As I said, forgive the abrupt transition, but we have a duty to make you aware of everything that is happening at present to undermine and destroy this movement, which is striving to grasp the task of the times.
In Norway, a man has come forward who has set himself the task of destroying our movement. This man writes to assure himself that he has the right to do so, as is customary today, by turning to what is called the “Political-Anthropological Monthly.” This monthly magazine gave him the following information: “Dr. Steiner is a Jew of the purest water. He is connected with the Zionists, actually tied to them, and is in the service of the Entente.” And the editor adds “that they” — namely, people of this kind — “have long since turned their attention to him.”
I just wanted to tell you this at the end, as another example of how these cases are now multiplying, so that one encounters one almost every day. This, then, is how anthropologists today behave toward what anthroposophists are striving for.