Donate books to help fund our work. Learn more→

The Rudolf Steiner Archive

a project of Steiner Online Library, a public charity

The New Spirituality
and the Christ Experience of the Twentieth Century
GA 200

29 October 1920, Dornach

Lecture V

The subject about which I shall have to speak today, tomorrow and the day after tomorrow, and which was already referred to some time ago,1 See Das Ereignis der Christus-Erscheinung in der atherischen Welt (The Event of the Reappearance of Christ in the Etheric World), sixteen lectures given in different cities in 1910, (GA 118). is the special way in which, in the first half of the twentieth century, a kind of renewed manifestation of the Christ-Event is to take place. This will need a certain amount of preparation, and today, to begin with, I shall try to characterize again from a certain point of view the spiritual complexion of the civilized world and, from this point of view, draw attention to the challenges that are placed before us with regard to the evolution of humanity—the education of humanity as a whole in the near future-by the facts of this human evolution itself.

We know that a new age in the development of civilized humanity began around the beginning of the fifteenth century. People today no longer form an exact idea of what the constitution of soul was like in the people who lived before this great turning-point of modern history. People do not consider this. But one could easily imagine how different the soul-constitution in Europe must have been which, over large areas, inclined people to undertake the Crusades to Asia, to the Orient; especially when one bears in mind how impossible an event like this, resting as it did on an idealistic spiritual background, has become since the beginning of the fifteenth century. People do not consider the completely different nature of humanity's interests before this historical turning-point, nor the interests which, since that time, have become particularly important. But if, from the many characteristics which can be attributed to this more recent time, one wishes to single out the most significant one, then this must be the increasing ascendancy, the increasing intensity of the human power of intellect.

But in the depths of the human soul there is always another force, whether as a sense of longing or as a more or less clear facet of consciousness. It is the longing for knowledge. Now, when one looks back into former times, even into the eleventh, twelfth, thirteenth and fourteenth centuries of European development, it is possible to speak of a definite longing for knowledge in as much as the human being at that time had faculties in his soul which enabled him to achieve a relationship to nature—a relationship to what was revealed in nature as spirit—and thereby also to achieve a relationship to the spirit world itself. Certainly, longing for knowledge has been spoken about a good deal since then; but it is impossible, when one looks completely without prejudice at the development of humanity, to compare the longing for knowledge which holds sway today with the intensity of the longing for knowledge that held sway before the middle of the fifteenth century. Striving for knowledge was an intense affair of the human soul; for knowledge that had an inner glow, an inner warmth, for the human being, and which was also significant for the human being when it came to what moved him to perform his work in the world, and so on. Everything that lived there as a longing for knowledge has become less and less comparable with what has been emerging since the middle of the fifteenth century. And even when we consider the great philosophers of the first half of the nineteenth century, we are presented with ingenious elaborations of the human system of ideas; but only, if I can put it so, artistic elaborations of it. In neither Fichte, nor Schelling, nor Hegel—particularly not in Hegel—do we find a proper idea of what had previously existed as a longing for knowledge.

Then, in the second half of the nineteenth century, the striving for knowledge, even though pursued in isolation as was still the custom, enters more and more into the service of outer life. It enters into the service of technological science and thus also takes on the configuration of this technology. What then is the cause of this? It comes from the fact that it is just in this time that we find the particular development and elaboration of the intellect. This, of course, did not happen all at once. The intellect was gradually prepared for. The last traces of the old clairvoyance had long since become extremely dim. But one can nevertheless say that, to a certain degree, the last effects of the old clairvoyance—though not the old clairvoyance itself—were still present even in the fifteenth century. All human beings, or at least those who strove for knowledge, had some idea of the faculties rising up out of the human soul that are higher than the faculties concerned with daily life. Although in olden times these faculties arose from the soul in a dreamlike way, they were nevertheless faculties different from those of everyday life and it was by means of these other [higher] faculties that people tried to probe to the depths of the world-being—and did, in fact, penetrate to its spirituality. Thus was knowledge attained. People experienced it as knowing when, from the phenomena of nature, from the being of nature, they sensed, they perceived, how spiritual elemental beings worked in the individual phenomena of nature; how the divine spiritual being as a whole worked through the totality of nature. People felt themselves to be in the realm of knowledge when gods spoke through the phenomena of nature; when gods spoke through the appearance and movements of the stars. This is what people understood as knowledge.

The moment humanity renounced perception of the spiritual in the manifestations of nature, the concept of knowledge itself also fell more or less into a deterioration. And it is this decline of real intensity in the pursuit of knowledge that marks the latest period of human evolution.

What then is needed here? It is that which exists at present only in the small circle of anthroposophically-striving human beings but which must become more and more general. Nature's manifestations spoke to ancient human beings in such a way that they revealed the spirit to them. The spiritual spoke out of every spring, every cloud, every plant. In the way people came to know the manifestations and beings of nature they also came to know the spiritual. This is no longer the case. But the condition of intellectualism is only a transitional condition. For what is the deepest characteristic of this intellect? It is that it is impossible to grasp and know anything at all with the pure intellect. The intellect is not just there for knowing. This is the greatest error to which the human being can give himself: the belief that the intellect is there for gaining knowledge. People will attain to true knowledge again only when they concern themselves with what lies at the basis of spiritual-scientific research; which, at the least, can be given by Imagination. People will only know truly again when they say: In ancient times divine-spiritual beings spoke from the manifestations of nature. For the intellect they are silent. For higher, super-sensible knowledge it will not be the phenomena of nature that will speak directly—for nature, as such, works silently. But beings will speak to the human being—beings who will appeal, to him in Imaginations, will inspire him, with whom he will become united intuitively and whom he will then be able to relate again to the phenomena of nature. Thus one can say: In ancient times the spiritual appeared to the human being through nature. In our transitional condition we have the intellect. Nature remains spiritless. The human being will lift himself up to a condition where he can again truly know; where, indeed, nature will no longer speak to him of divine-spiritual beings but where he will o take hold of the divine-spiritual in supersensible knowledge and will, in turn, be able to relate this to nature.

It was a particular characteristic of oriental spiritual life, of oriental knowledge—which, as we know, lived on as a heritage in occidental civilization—that the orientals, at the time of the blossoming of the knowledge of their culture, perceived a spiritual element in all the manifestations of nature; that the divine-spiritual spoke through nature, whether through the lower elemental beings in individual things and phenomena or in the whole of nature, as the all-encompassing divine-spiritual. Later on there developed in the central regions of the earth that which came under the dialectical-legal spirit. It is out of this that intellectuality was born. Spiritual culture was retained as a heritage from the ancient Orient. And when people still had this last longing to experience something from the Orient—people did experience something of this in the Crusades and brought it back to Europe—and after they had stilled this longing through the Crusades, the Orient became effectively closed off. On the one hand, by what was established by Peter the Great who destroyed the remains of the oriental constitution of soul on the European side and, on the other hand, by the blockade set up by the Turks who, just at the beginning of this age which we call the fifth post-Atlantean epoch, established their rule in Europe. European thought and culture was, as it were, closed off from access to the Orient. But it had to develop further and could only do so under the influence of the dialectical-legal life, under the influence of the economic life arising from the West, and in the decadent continuation of the spiritual life which had been received from the Orient, to which the doors were now closed as I described. The condition was thereby prepared in which we are now living, where it is up to us, out of ourselves, to open the doors again to the spiritual world; to come to a perception of it through Imagination, Inspiration, Intuition.

This is all connected with the fact that, in those ancient times in which the oriental rose to the attainment of wisdom, what was of particular importance were the abilities, the forces, brought by the human being into physical existence through birth. In the time of oriental wisdom, everything—despite the civilization which took its course there and was shone through with wisdom—everything, fundamentally, depended on the blood. But, at the same time, what was in the blood was also spiritually recognized. It was determined by the Mysteries as to who, through his line of blood, was called by destiny to the leadership of the people. There could be no questioning this: whoever was called to the leadership of the people by the Mysteries was brought to this position because his bloodline, his descent, was. the outer sign that this was how it should be. There could be no question of any kind of legal proof as to whether anyone was rightly in this position or not because, against the verdict of the gods, according to which people were allotted their place, there could be no contradiction. Jurisprudence was unknown in the mission here in the world of the senses was given by Orient. One knew theocracy, the 'rule of cosmic order', One's mission here in the world of the senses was given by the spiritual world above. The feeling that said that someone was in the in the right place because the gods had directed his bloodline in such a way that he could be brought to this place was replaced with another in a dialectical-legal dress, on the basis of which one that he could dispute on legal grounds whether someone was entitled to his position, or to do this or that, and so on.

The nature of the soul-constitution, prepared already in Greece but then particularly also in Rome, by which Central Europeans were beginning to use concepts, dialectics, to decide what justice was, was quite unknown and alien to the Orient. I have described this from different aspects. In the Orient it was a matter of fathoming the will of the gods. And there were no dialectics for deciding what the gods willed.

But we are again at a turning-point. It is becoming necessary now for humanity to also take a closer look at this dialectical-legal element. For the economic element, which from the West has conquered the world with the aid of technology, is already completely entangled in the state of affairs that has arisen through the dialectical-legal aspect. The economy was a minor element in the ancient theocratic cultures which were permeated by the divine-spiritual. People did there in the economic life what arose as a matter of course according to the place and rank into which the gods had placed them through the proclamations of the Mysteries. And then the economic life, which began again only primitively, became caught up, as it were, in the threads of the dialectical-legal life. For, at the beginning of the so-called Middle Ages, the Romans above all had no money. Economics based on money was gradually lost and the dialectical-legal culture spread in Europe as a kind of economy based on nature-produce. The early part of the Middle Ages was, basically, short of money; and this brought about all those forms of military service which were necessary because there was no money to pay the troops. The Romans paid their troops with money. In the Middle Ages feudalism developed, and with it a particular type of professional soldiery. All this came about because, tied to the soil under the influence of an economy based on the exchange of nature-produce, a man could no longer take part himself in distant campaigns of war. Thus this dialectical-legal element grew up in a kind of agricultural economy based on barter, and it was only when technology from the West permeated this economic life that the new age arose. The life of this new civilization, which has become so fragile, has arisen in the fifth post-Atlantean epoch entirely as a result of technology. I have already described this in different ways. I have described how, according to the official census, world population at the end of the nineteenth century was 1,400 million but that as much work was being accomplished as though there were 2,000 million. This is because such a phenomenally large amount of work is done by machines. The machine technology with its stupendous transformation of the economic life and the social life has arrived.

What has not yet arrived—because everything is still engulfed in the intellectual life—is precisely what must now carry this machine-technological economy into modern civilization. One experiences the strangest things today with regard to the prospects facing humanity. There are already many people today, particularly among those who pride themselves on being practical, who, for example, go into governmental positions with their practical experience where it then usually evaporates. The little practical experience people have usually evaporates as soon as they take it into a government department. Such `governing practicians', such 'practical men in government'—one has to put it in inverted commas—get the strangest ideas these days. Someone said to me recently: 'yes, the new age has brought us machines, and with them urban life; we must take life back to the land.' As though one could just remove the machine-age from the world! The machine would simply follow us into the country, I said to him. Everything, I said, could be forgotten; spiritual culture could be forgotten, but machines would remain. They would simply be taken out to the land. What has arisen in the cities will transplant itself into the country.

In fact, people become reactionaries in a grand style—when they no longer feel inclined—and this is the characteristic of people generally today: that they have no will—to form ideas concerning true progress. They would prefer to bring back the old conditions of the countryside. They imagine that this can be done. They believe that one can shut out what the centuries have brought. That is nonsense! But people today love this nonsense so tremendously because they are too complacent to grasp the new and prefer to get along with the old. The machine age has arrived. Machines themselves show how much human labour they save. It is simply that 500 million people would have to do the work machines do if their work on the earth were to be done by people.

And all this work by machines began, primarily, in Western civilization. It arose in the West and spread to the Orient very late where it did not establish itself at all in the same way as it did in occidental civilization. But that is a time of transition. And now try and grasp a thought which, however strange it may seem to you, must be taken seriously.

Let us suppose the human being in ancient times had before him a cloud, or perhaps a river, or all kinds of vegetation and so on. He did not see in these the dead nature seen by the human being of today—he saw spiritual elemental beings, up to the divine-spiritual beings of the higher Hierarchies. He saw all this, as it were, through nature. But nature no longer speaks of these divine-spiritual beings. We have to grasp them as spiritual reality beyond nature and then relate them again back to nature. The period of transition came. Man created machines as an addition to nature. These he regards for the time being quite abstractly. He works with them in an entirely abstract way. He has his mathematics, geometry, mechanics. With these he constructs his machines and regards them altogether in the abstract. But he will very soon make a certain discovery. Strange though it may still seem to the human being of the present that such a discovery will be made, people will nevertheless discover that (in this mechanistic element which they have incorporated into the economic life) those spirits are again working which in earlier times were perceived by the human being in nature. In his technical machines of the economic sphere the human being will perceive that, although he constructed and made them, they nevertheless gradually take on a life of their own—a life certainly which he can still deny because they manifest themselves to begin with only in the economic sphere. But he will notice more and more in what he himself creates that it gains a life of its own and that, despite the fact that he brought it forth from the intellect, the intellect itself can no longer comprehend it. Perhaps people today can barely form a clear idea of this, but it will be so nevertheless. People will discover, in fact, how the objects of their industry (Wirtschaft) become the bearers of demons.

Let us look at it from another side. Out of the naked intellect, out of the most desolate intellect, there has arisen the Lenin-Trotsky system that is trying to build an economic life in Russia. Despite Lunacharsky,2 Anatol Vasilevich Lunacharsky (1875–1933), Russian writer and politician. From 1917 he was the Commisar for the education of the masses. these people are not interested in the spiritual life. For them the spiritual life must be an ideology arising from the economic life. It can hardly be said that there is a very strong dialectical-legal element in the Trotsky-Leninist system—everything is to be geared towards the economic. The desire is, in a certain sense, to embody the intellect in the economic life. If one could do this for a time—this initial experiment will not work, but let us suppose that it were possible—the economic life would grow over peoples' heads. It would bring forth everywhere destructive, demonic forces out of itself. It would not work because the intellect would not be able to cope with all the economic demands that would surge up! Just as the human being in ancient times beheld nature and the manifestations of nature and saw in them demonic beings; so, too, must the human being of present times learn to see demonic beings in what he himself produces in the economic life. For the time being these demons, which human beings have not diverted into machines, are still in human beings themselves and manifest as the destructive beings (die zerstarenden) in social revolutions. These destructive social revolutions are nothing other than the result of not recognizing the demonic element in our economic life. Elemental spirits (elementarische Geistigkeit) must be looked for in the economic life just as in ancient times elemental beings (elementarische Geistigkeit) were sought in nature. And the purely intellectual life is only an intermediary stage which has no significance at all for nature or for what man produces, but only for human beings themselves.

Human beings have developed the intellect so that they can become free. They have to develop a faculty that has absolutely nothing to do with nature or with machines but only with the human being himself. When the human being develops faculties that stand in a relationship to nature, he is not free. If he tries to flee into the economic life he is also not free because the machines only overwhelm him. But when he develops faculties that have nothing to do with either knowledge or practical life, like pure intelligence, he can appropriate freedom to himself in the course of cultural development. It is precisely through a faculty like the intellect, which does not stand in a relationship to the world, that freedom can arise. But in order that the human being does not tear away from nature, in order that he can again work into nature, Imagination must be added to this intellect; everything must be added to it which supersensible research is seeking to find.

There is something else involved here. I related how, for the ancient oriental, the relationships of the blood line were of very particular importance, for the wise men of the Mysteries were guided by these as though by signs from the gods when they placed the human being into his appropriate [social] position. And all these things reach over then like after-effects, like ghosts, into later times. Then came the dialectical-legal element. The official stamp became the most important thing. The diploma, examination results or, rather, what was on the piece of paper that was the examination certificate—this became the important thing. Whereas in ancient theocratic times blood was the decisive factor, it was now the piece of paper. Those times drew near for which many things are characteristic. A lawyer once said to me during a discussion I had with him: The fact that you were born, that you exist, is not what matters!' This did not interest him. It was the birth certificate or the christening certificate that had to exist; that was the important thing. The paper substitute! So the dialectical-legal arose. This, at the same time, is also the expression for the unreal (das Scheinhafte) in relation to the world, for the unreal element of the intellect. But precisely in the human being himself there could develop, as the counterpart of this maya element (Scheinhafte) in the world, what gave the human being freedom.

But now there develops, out of what is signified in paper—which in earlier times was signified in the blood—out of what is signified in the letter-patent of nobility or similar documents, something that is already showing itself today and which will—continue if things go on as now. And they will continue! Descent by blood will no longer be of importance. The letter-patent of nobility and similar papers will have no more importance. At most, only what a man manages to salvage of what he possesses from the past will count. To ask 'why' was not possible when the gods still determined an individual's place in the world. In the dialectical-legal age it was possible to dispute this 'why'. Now all discussion ceases, for only the factual is left, the actuality of what an individual has salvaged. The moment people lose faith in the paper-regime there will be no more discussions. The things an individual has saved for himself will simply be taken away. There is no other way to bring humanity forward, now that nature no longer reveals the spiritual, than to turn to the spiritual itself and, on the other hand, to find in the economic element what people in earlier times found in nature.

This, however, can only be found through association. What a human being alone can no longer find can be found by an association which will again develop a kind of group-soul, taking in hand what the individual at present cannot decide alone. In the Middle Ages, in the age of the intellect, it was the individual that ruled in economics. In the future it will be the association. And people must stand together in an association. And then, when it is recognized that a spiritual element has to be kept in check in the economic life, something will be able to arise which can replace the blood-line and the patent. For, the economic life would grow above the human being's head if he did not show himself equal to it, if he did not bring a spiritual insight with him to guide it. No one would associate with someone who did not bring qualities that made him effective in the economic life and which qualified him really to control the spirits which assert themselves in the economic life. An entirely new spirit will arise. And why will this be so?

In the ancient times, in which people judged according to the blood, what had taken place before birth or before conception was of importance for human beings, for this is what they brought into the physical world through the blood. And when existence before birth had been forgotten a recognition of the life before birth still lived on in the recognition of the blood-line. And then came the dialectical-legal element. The human being was only recognized in relation to what he was as a physical being. Now the other element comes in—an economic life that is growing demonic. And the human being must also now be recognized again in his inmost soul-and-spirit being. And just as one will see the demonic element in economic life, so one will also have to begin to see that which the human being bears through repeated lives on earth. One will have to be aware of what a human being brings when he enters this life. This will have to be taken care of in the spiritual limb of the social organism.

When one judges according to the blood, one really does not need a pedagogy; one only needs a knowledge of the symbols through which the gods express where it is a human being is to be placed. As long as one judges in a purely dialectical-legal way one only needs an abstract pedagogy which speaks of the human child in a generalized way. But when a human being is to be placed in an associative life in such a way that he is fit and capable one has to take account of the following. One must realize that the first seven years in which the human being develops the physical body, are not significant for what he will be able to do later in the social life -—he must only be made fit and capable in a general way valid for all human beings. In the years between seven and fourteen, in which the etheric body is developed, the human being must first of all be recognized. What has to be recognized is what then emerges as the astral body at the age of fourteen or fifteen and which comes into consideration when the real soul-and-spiritual core of the human being is to bring him to the place he is meant to be. Here the educational factor becomes a specifically social one. It is a matter here of gaining a true understanding of the child one is educating so that one can see that a certain quality in the child is good for this, and another quality is good for that. But this does not show itself clearly until after the child leaves primary school and it will belong to an artistic pedagogy and didactics to be able to discern that one child is suited for this and another is suited for that. It is according to this that those decisions will be made that are the challenge in Towards Social Renewal for the circulation of capital; that is to say the means of production. A completely new spiritual concept must arise which, on the one hand, is capable of perceiving the economic life in its inner spiritual vitality and, on the other, can perceive what role must be played by cultural life; how cultural life must give economic life its configuration. This can only happen if the cultural life is independent, when nothing is forced upon it by the economic life. It is when one inwardly grasps the whole course of humanity's evolution that one recognizes how this evolution requires the threefolding of the social organism.

Thus, because we have been closed off from the Orient in more recent times by the Petrinism of Peter the Great on the one hand and Turkey on the other, we therefore need an independent spiritual life; a spiritual life that really recognizes the spiritual world in a new form and not in the way in which, in ancient times, nature spoke to man. One will then be able to relate this spiritual life back to nature. But once one has found it, one will also be able to develop this spiritual life in such a way in the human being that it becomes the content of his skills; that he will be able through this spiritual life to satisfy, in associative cooperation, an economic life that becomes more and more dynamic. Such thoughts as these really must exist in an anthroposophically-oriented spiritual science. For this reason such a spiritual science can only be born from a knowledge of the course of human evolution.

The first thing is to steer towards a real knowledge of the spirit. Talk of the spirit in general terms—in empty, abstract words in the way that is accepted practice today among official philosophers and in other circles and which has become generally popular—is of no use for the future. The spiritual world is not the same as the physical world. Thus it is not possible to gain a perception of the spiritual world by abstracting from the physical but only by direct spiritual investigation. These perceptions naturally then appear as something completely different from what the human being can know when he knows only the physical world. People who, out of complacency, wish only to know of the physical world call it fantastic to talk about Old Moon, Old Sun and Old Saturn. They find that, when one speaks about these former embodiments of the earth, it strikes no chord in them. Things are described there of which they do not have the foggiest notion. The fact is of course that they have no notion of them because they do not want to know about the spiritual world. Things are related to them about the spiritual world and they say: But it doesn't concur with anything we already know. But that is the whole point: worlds are found that do not concur with what one knows already. This is the way, is it not, that, for example, Arthur Drews, the philosophy professor, judges spiritual science. It does not concur with what he has already imagined. Indeed, when the railway from Berlin to Potsdam was to be built, the post master of Berlin3 Karl Ferdinand Friedrich von Nagler (1770–1846). said: And now I'm supposed to send trains to Potsdam! I already send four post coaches a week and no one travels in them. If people really want to throw their money out of the window why don't they do it directly! Of course, the railways looked different from the post-coaches of the 1830s of the honest post-master of Berlin. But, of course, the descriptions of the spiritual world also look different from what nests in heads like Arthur Drews'. He, however, is only characteristic of many others. He is even one of the better ones, strange as it may seem. Not because he is good, but because the others are worse.

It was first of all necessary to show how, on a strict scientific basis, one can truly penetrate into the spiritual worlds. This is what, in the first place, our lecture course this autumn has been striving towards. And even if this is only at its beginnings, it has at least been shown how, in certain areas of the sciences, knowledge can be raised to a knowledge of the spiritual as such and how this spiritual element can in turn permeate what is gained by sense-knowledge.

But what can thus be gained in the field of knowledge and what will be achieved in contrast to the accepted knowledge in the schools—for it is in this area that fine beginnings are apparent—would remain incomplete. One could in fact already show how psychology, and, indeed, even mathematics, point towards spiritual realms. But it would only be something incomplete and therefore unable to aid our declining civilization if a truly elemental and intensive will does not arise from the area of practical economic life. It is necessary that old usages, old habits, be truly dropped and that everyday life be permeated with spirituality. It must come about as a flower of the Anthroposophical Movement that, with the help of the mood of soul that can arise out of spiritual science, a perceptive understanding of practical life is brought to bear—especially of the practical economic life—and that it may be shown how the downfall can be averted if a consciousness of creating something alive is carried into this economic life.

Every day one should keep an ever-watchful eye on the so blatantly visible signs of our declining economic life. This old economic life cannot be galvanized. For just as today no one should be proud of what he gains from ordinary science—for that would definitely lead humanity into the future prophesied by Oswald Spengler—so, too, no one should be proud of what he can gain from the old economic life by way of abilities that correspond to this old form. Today no one can be proud of being a physicist, a mathematician, a biologist in the usual sense. But also no one can be proud of being a merchant, an industrialist in the old sense. But this 'old sense' is the only thing we have today. Nowhere today do we see anything arising like a true association. What is really needed, as a kind of second event of this Goetheanum, is to have something on the lines of this lecture-course, which could provide something tangible out of the realm of practical life itself, and which could stand side by side with the sciences. We will not get any further with what is contained in just one stream but only when this other side of human striving also has its place.

This today is still the characteristic feature of our present human evolution: on the one side the traditional bearers of the old spiritual life who calumniate and slander one when, working out of the modern scientific approach, one tries to achieve a spiritualization. They already do this today quite consciously because they have no interest in the progress of human development and because, for the time being, they only think to hold back this evolution of humanity. Sometimes they do so in a truly grotesque manner, like that strange academic4 It has not been possible to establish who this was. who recently spoke in Zurich about Anthroposophy and went to such extremes that even his colleagues were shocked; so that, as it seems, this attack against Anthroposophy has actually acted as mild propaganda for it. These representatives of a redundant spiritual life persist, however, and will do so far more, for they will dose ranks with formidable slanders. Here one sees what one is up against, arising in the form of slanders and so on, in regard to untruth.

On the other side one can notice another strong resistance; which, however, occurs in the unconscious. And this is a painful experience. In this area one can definitely speak of an inner opposition, sometimes quite unintentional, against what must lie in the direction of spiritual-scientific endeavour. It will be a matter of having to learn, particularly in this area, to identify with the aims that spiritual science can set here. For to judge, in the subjective way that has been usual up to now, what must be willed from spiritual science, would be to do the same as the priests and others in other areas do when they declare spiritual science a heresy. This is what makes difficulties for our Anthroposophical Movement—the fact that precisely in this area a kind of inner opposition is clearly noticeable. One can say that it is particularly in this area that what sheds light in such a strange way on certain accusations which come from many sides, shows itself most clearly. They say: 'In this Anthroposophical Society everyone only repeats what one man has said. But in reality they do not repeat at all; everyone just says what he thinks so that the one man can approve it.' We have experienced this many times, have we not? A person talks frequently about what he may want, saying that I said so, even though from me he actually heard the exact opposite. Now this is the real rule of blind faith in authority. A strange faith in authority! This has been evident in many cases. But it would be particularly damaging if this strange kind of opposition—there has actually always been more opposition than faith in authority and, therefore, an indictment of faith in authority is really unjust—it would be far more fatal if what I refer to here as inner opposition were, particularly in the sphere of practical life, to take on wider dimensions. For then the opponents of anthroposophical striving would, as long as they could, of course say: `Aha, a sectarian, fantastic movement which cannot be practical.' Of course it cannot be practical if people do not engage themselves in it; just as, after all, no matter how good one is at sewing, one cannot sew without a needle.

With this I only wished to draw attention to something that needs watching. It is by no means intended as a criticism or as a reference to the past but is something necessary for the future. Nevertheless, I would of course not have referred to it if I did not see all sorts of smoke-clouds rising. But I am really only pointing out what has, as it were, to be a challenge to really cooperate on all sides and not to shelter behind reactionary practices and, behind the bulwark of these reactionary practices, destroy Anthroposophy even though one is perhaps trying to help it. So I am not referring to something that has already happened but to something that is necessary for the future. It is necessary to think about these things.

With these comments I shall have to let it rest for today. Tomorrow and the following day we shall have to link up this prelude which, as you will see, is in fact an introduction to a study of the Christ-experience in the twentieth century.

Fünfter Vortrag

Ich werde in diesen Tagen, heute, morgen und übermorgen, zu sprechen haben von dem, worauf ja vor längerer Zeit schon hingewiesen worden ist, auf die besondere Art, wie in der ersten Hälfte des 20. Jahrhunderts gewissermaßen eine Art von Wiederoffenbarung des Christus-Ereignisses stattfinden soll. Dazu wird einiges vorzubereiten sein, zunächst heute dadurch, daß ich versuchen werde, die Geistesverfassung der zivilisierten Welt noch einmal von einem gewissen Gesichtspunkte aus zu charakterisieren, und von diesem Gesichtspunkte aus darauf aufmerksam zu machen, welche Forderungen in bezug auf die Menschheitsentwickelung, die Menschheitserziehung im großen in der nächsten Zukunft durch die Tatsache dieser Menschheitsentwickelung selber gestellt werden.

Wir wissen ja, ein neues Zeitalter in der Entwickelung der zivilisierten Menschheit hat begonnen um die Mitte des 15. Jahrhunderts. Seit jener Zeit haben wir es zu tun mit einer besonderen Ausbildung des menschlichen Intellekts. Man macht sich heute nicht mehr genaue Vorstellungen von der Seelenverfassung, welche vorhanden war bei den Menschen, die vor diesem großen Wendepunkt der neueren Geschichte gelebt haben. Man bedenkt nicht, was es für eine andere Seelenverfassung gewesen sein muß, und man könnte es doch leicht bedenken, wie anders in Europa die Seelenverfassung gewesen sein muß, welche über weite Territorien hin die Menschen geneigt gemacht hat, die Kreuzzüge nach Asien hinüber, nach dem Orient zu unternehmen, wenn man sich vorstellt, wie unmöglich ein solches, auf ideal-spirituellen Hintergründen stehendes Ereignis seit der Mitte des 15. Jahrhunderts geworden ist. Man bedenkt nicht, welche ganz andersartigen Interessen die Menschheit vor diesem geschichtlichen Wendepunkt gehabt hat, und welche Interessen seit jener Zeit ganz besonders groß geworden sind. Aber wenn man unter den mancherlei Charakteristiken, die man geben kann von diesem neueren Zeitabschnitte, eine als die bedeutsamste hervorheben will, so ist es eben das Überhandnehmen, das immer Intensiverwerden der intellektuellen Kraft des Menschen.

Nun steht ja im Menschen immer eine andere Kraft, sei es als Sehnsucht, sei es als mehr oder weniger klare Bewußtseinstatsache, in dem Untergrunde der Seele. Es ist die Erkenntnissehnsucht. Man kann nun, wenn man zurückblickt in ältere Zeiten, selbst wenn man zurückblickt in das 11., 12., 13., 14. Jahrhundert europäischer Entwickelung, von einer deutlichen Erkenntnissehnsucht sprechen, insofern als dazumal der Mensch in seiner Seele Fähigkeiten hatte, welche ihn dazu brachten, ein Verhältnis zu gewinnen zu der Natur, zu dem, was die Natur an Geist offenbarte, und dadurch ein Verhältnis zur geistigen Welt selber. Gewiß, von Erkenntnissehnsuchten spricht man auch seither viel. Aber man kann, wenn man ganz unbefangen die Menschheitsentwickelung betrachtet, jene Erkenntnissehnsucht, die etwa heute herrscht, gar nicht vergleichen an Intensität mit der Erkenntnissehnsucht, die vor der Mitte des 15. Jahrhunderts herrschte. Es war eine intensive Angelegenheit der menschlichen Seele, nach Erkenntnis zu streben, nach einer solchen Erkenntnis, die auch etwas bedeutete an Glut, an innerer Wärme für den Menschen, die für diesen Menschen auch etwas bedeutete in bezug auf die Antriebe, die ihn dazu brachten, seine Arbeit in der Welt zu verrichten und so weiter. Mit alledem, was da an Erkenntnissehnsucht vorhanden war, läßt sich eben immer weniger und weniger vergleichen, was seit der Mitte des 15. Jahrhunderts heraufzieht. Und selbst wenn wir die großen Philosophen der ersten Hälfte des 19. Jahrhunderts in Betracht ziehen, geniale Ausgestaltungen des menschlichen Ideensystems bieten sie dar, aber eigentlich nur, ich möchte sagen, künstlerische Ausgestaltungen dieses Ideensystems; nicht eigentlich kommt bei ihnen, nicht bei Fichte, nicht bei Schelling, nicht bei Hegel — bei Hegel schon gar nicht — ein rechter Begriff vor von dem, was vorher an Erkenntnissehnsucht da war. Und dann in der zweiten Hälfte des 19. Jahrhunderts tritt die Erkenntnis, wenn sie auch noch nach alter Gewohnheit abgesondert gepflegt wird, mehr oder weniger in den Dienst des äußeren Lebens. Sie tritt in den Dienst der Technik und bekommt auch die Konfiguration dieser Technik. Woher kommt denn das alles? Ja, gerade davon rührt es her, daß wir in dieser neuesten Zeit die besondere Ausbildung des Intellektes zu verzeichnen haben. Gewiß ist das nicht auf einmal gekommen. Dieser Intellekt hat sich langsam vorbereitet. Die Nachklänge des alten hellseherischen Zustandes waren ja schon lange nur mehr höchst undeutliche. Aber man kann doch sagen: Bis zu einem gewissen Grade waren, wenn auch nicht der alte hellseherische Zustand selbst, so doch seine Nachklänge bis in das 15. Jahrhundert schon noch vorhanden. Die Menschen hatten alle, wenigstens diejenigen, die nach Erkenntnis strebten, eine Vorstellung von dem, was sich aus der menschlichen Seele heraushebt an höheren Fähigkeiten, als es die des alltäglichen Lebens sind. Wenn sich diese Fähigkeiten in alten Zeiten nur traumhaft herausgehoben haben aus der Seele, sie waren eben doch andere Fähigkeiten als die des gewöhnlichen Lebens, und man hat durch solche andere Fähigkeiten eindringen wollen in die Tiefe des Weltenwesens und ist gedrungen bis zur Geistigkeit dieses Weltenwesens. Und das gab dann die Erkenntnis. Als Erkenntnis empfand man es, wenn man aus den Naturerscheinungen, aus den Naturwesen heraus empfand, wahrnahm, wie geistig-elementare Wesenheiten durch die einzelnen Erscheinungen der Natur wirkten, wie da wirkte die göttlich-geistige Wesenheit im großen und ganzen durch die Totalität der Natur. Das empfand man als Erkenntnis, wenn Götter sprachen durch die Naturerscheinungen, wenn Götter sprachen durch die Wanderungen der Gestirne, im Erscheinen der Gestirne. Das verstand man unter Erkenntnis.

In dem Augenblick, in dem die Menschheit darauf verzichtete, das Geistige zu vernehmen aus den Erscheinungen der Welt, kam auch der Erkenntnisbegriff mehr oder weniger in einen Niedergang hinein. Und das Abnehmen der eigentlichen Erkenntnisintensität, das müssen wir verzeichnen für den neuesten Zeitraum der Menschheitsentwickelung.

Was ist da notwendig geworden? Das, was jetzt nur in dem kleinen Kreise anthroposophisch strebender Menschen vorhanden ist, was aber immer allgemeiner und allgemeiner werden muß. Ja, zu den alten Menschen haben die Naturerscheinungen so gesprochen, daß sie ihnen Geistiges offenbart haben. Aus jeder Quelle, aus jeder Wolke, aus jeder Pflanze hat Geistiges gesprochen. Die Menschen haben dadurch, daß sie in ihrer Art die Naturerscheinungen und Naturwesen kennenlernten, das Geistige kennengelernt. Das ist nun nicht mehr der Fall. Ein Zwischenzustand ist nur der Zustand des Intellektualismus. Denn dieser Intellektualismus, was hat er denn als seine tiefste Eigentümlichkeit? Daß man mit ihm, mit der reinen Intellektualität, überhaupt nichts erkennen kann. Der Intellekt ist nämlich gar nicht zum Erkennen da. Das ist der große Irrtum, dem sich der Mensch hingeben kann, daß der Intellekt zum Erkennen da sei. Erkennen werden die Menschen erst wiederum, wenn sie eingehen auf dasjenige, was der geisteswissenschaftlichen Forschung zugrunde liegt, was zum mindesten durch Imagination vermittelt wird. Erkennen werden die Menschen erst wiederum, wenn sie sich sagen: In alten Zeiten haben aus den Naturerscheinungen geistig-göttliche Wesenheiten gesprochen. Für den Intellekt sprechen sie nicht. Für die höheren, für die übersinnlichen Erkenntnisse werden zwar nicht die Naturerscheinungen unmittelbar sprechen, denn die Natur wirkt als solche stumm, aber es werden zu dem Menschen Wesenheiten sprechen, die ihm in Imaginationen erscheinen werden, die ihn inspirieren werden, mit denen er intuitiv vereinigt wird, und die er wiederum wird auf die Naturerscheinungen beziehen können. — So kann man sagen: In alten Zeiten ist dem Menschen durch die Natur das Geistige erschienen. In unserem Zwischenzustande hat der Mensch den Intellekt. Die Natur bleibt geistlos. Der Mensch wird sich hinaufschwingen zu einem Zustande, wo er wieder erkennen kann, wo ihm zwar die Natur nicht mehr vom GöttlichGeistigen sprechen wird, wo er aber das Göttlich-Geistige in übersinnlicher Erkenntnis ergreifen wird, und wo er dadurch wiederum dieses Geistige auf die Natur wird beziehen können.

Das ist das Eigentümliche des alten orientalischen Geisteslebens, der alten orientalischen Erkenntnis, von der wir wissen, daß sie als Erbschaft weiterlebte in der abendländischen Zivilisation, daß die Orientalen in der Zeit ihrer Erkenntnisblüte in allen Naturerscheinungen zu gleicher Zeit ein Geistiges wahrgenommen haben, daß das GöttlichGeistige eben durch die Natur gesprochen hat, sei es durch die niederen elementaren Wesenheiten in den einzelnen Dingen und einzelnen Erscheinungen, oder sei es, daß durch die ganze Natur das umfassende Göttlich-Geistige gesprochen hat. Innerhalb der Erdenmitte hat sich dann später ausgebildet dasjenige, was unter dem juristisch-dialektischen Geiste stand. Aus dem heraus wurde ja die Intellektualität geboren. Der Mensch behielt die geistige Kultur als Erbschaft aus dem alten Orient. Und als man noch die letzte Sehnsucht hatte, aus dem Orient etwas zu erfahren — man hat auch etwas erfahren durch die Kreuzzüge, hat es nach Europa gebracht -, und nachdem man diese letzte Sehnsucht durch die Kreuzzüge gestillt hatte, da lagerte sich vor den Orient auf der einen Seite dasjenige vor, was Peter der Große stiftete, der die Reste der orientalischen Seelenverfassung gegen die europäische Seite hin vernichtete; auf der anderen Seite lagerten die Türken sich vor, die ja gerade in dem Beginne des Zeitabschnittes, den wir den fünften nachatlantischen nennen, in Europa ihre Herrschaft festsetzten. Es wurde gewissermaßen die europäische Bildung nach dem Orient hin abgeschlossen. Sie mußte sich weiter entwickeln. Sie konnte sich nur entwickeln unter dem Einflusse des juristisch-dialektischen Lebens, unter dem Einflusse des von Westen heraufkommenden Wirtschaftslebens und in dem dekadenten Fortgehen dessen, was man an Geistesleben vom Orient erhalten hatte, gegen den aber die Tore auf die Weise zugemacht worden waren, wie ich das charakterisiert habe. Damit ist ja auch vorbereitet worden der Zustand, in dem wir jetzt leben, wo wir darauf angewiesen sind, aus uns selbst heraus wiederum die Tore zur geistigen Welt zu eröffnen, durch Imagination und Inspiration und Intuition zur Anschauung der geistigen Welt zu kommen.

Die ganze Sache hängt damit zusammen, daß in jenen alten Zeiten, in denen der orientalische Mensch zu seinen Erkenntnissen aufstieg, dasjenige besonders wichtig war, was an Fähigkeiten, an Kräften der Mensch durch die Geburt in das physische Dasein hereintrug. Im Grunde genommen lag in diesen Zeiten der orientalischen Weisheit, trotz dem, was da als Zivilisation sich abspielte, weisheitdurchleuchtet war, es lag in diesen orientalischen Zeiten alles im Blute; aber das, was im Blute lag, war zu gleicher Zeit geistig anerkannt. Aus den Mysterien heraus wurde bestimmt, wer durch seine Blutsabstammung zur Menschenführerschaft berufen war. Da gab es keinen Widerspruch. Derjenige, der zur Menschenführerschaft aus den Mysterien heraus berufen war, war gewissermaßen dadurch auf seinen Platz gestellt, daß seine Blutsabstammung das äußere Zeichen war. Da gab es keinen irgendwie gearteten juristischen Nachweis, ob irgend jemand richtig an seinen Platz gestellt sei, denn gegen den Götterausspruch, nach welchem die Leute da an ihre Plätze gestellt wurden, gab es keinen Einspruch. Die Jurisprudenz kannte man nicht im Orient. Theokratie, gewiß, Weltenregiment kannte man. Von der geistigen Welt herunter war dem Menschen seine Mission hier in der Sinneswelt angewiesen. An die Stelle dessen, was man empfand, indem man sich sagte: Ein Mensch, der an seinen Platz gestellt ist, dessen Blutsabstammung die Götter so dirigiert haben, daß er an seinen richtigen Platz gestellt werden konnte -, an die Stelle dieser Empfindung trat die andere, die ein juristisch-dialektisches Kleid trug, aus der heraus man disputieren konnte aus Rechtsgründen heraus, ob irgend jemandem es zukam, an seiner Stelle zu stehen, das oder jenes zu tun und so weiter.

Die Art und Weise der Seelenverfassung — das bereitete sich schon aus dem Griechentum heraus vor, besonders aber aus dem Römertum heraus —, durch die man anfing in Mitteleuropa aus Begriffen, aus Dialektik heraus zu nehmen, was Rechtens ist, diese Seelenverfassung, ich habe es von den verschiedensten Gesichtspunkten schon ausgesprochen, die kannte allerdings der Orient nicht, die war ihm ganz fremd. Bei ihm handelte es sich darum, den Willen der Götter zu ergründen. Und da gab es keine Dialektik, darüber zu entscheiden, was die Götter wollten.

Aber jetzt stehen wir wiederum an einer Wende. Jetzt tritt in die Menschheit die Notwendigkeit herein, auch dieses Dialektisch- Juristische genauer ins Auge zu fassen. Denn ganz verstrickt mit diesem Zustande, der herausgekommen ist durch das Dialektisch- Juristische, ist schon das Wirtschaftliche, das wirtschaftliche Element, das vom Westen aus die Welt mit Hilfe der Technik erobert hat. Das Wirtschaftliche bildete ein untergeordnetes Element in den alten Kulturen, die ganz theokratisch waren, ganz Gott-Geistdurchdrungen waren. Da tat eben im wirtschaftlichen Leben der Mensch das, was sich von selbst ergab nach der Stellung und Würde, in die ihn die Götter hineingestellt hatten durch die Aussprüche der Mysterienweisen. Gewissermaßen eingefaßt in die Fäden des dialektisch-juristischen Lebens war nun das Wirtschaftsleben, das ja auch primitiv wieder anfing; denn als das Mittelalter, das sogenannte Mittelalter begann, hatten vor allen Dingen die Römer kein Geld mehr. Die Geldwirtschaft verlor sich allmählich, und in Europa breitete sich die dialektisch-juristische Kultur im Grunde genommen unter einer Art Naturalwirtschaft aus. Der erste Teil des Mittelalters war im Grunde genommen geldarm; daher kamen alle diejenigen Formen des Heereswesens herauf, die notwendig waren, weil man den Truppen kein Geld bezahlen konnte. Die Römer hatten ihre Truppen mit Geld entlöhnt. Im Mittelalter bildete sich das Lehenswesen aus, ein besonderer Soldatenstand bildete sich aus. Das alles, weil der selbst an die Scholle gebundene Mensch unter dem Einfluß der Naturalwirtschaft nicht weite Kriegszüge unternehmen konnte. Also in eine Art Naturalwirtschaft wuchs dieses Dialektisch- Juristische hinein, und erst als von Westen her die Technik dieses Wirtschaftsleben durchdrang, kam die neuere Zeit herauf. Dieses neuere Zivilisationsleben, das jetzt so brüchig wird, ist im Grunde genommen ganz und gar entstanden im fünften nachatlantischen Zeitraume durch die Technik. Ich habe das ja schon in der verschiedensten Weise ausgeführt. Ich habe ausgeführt, wie der äußeren Zählung nach auf unserer Erde am Ende des 19. Jahrhunderts eintausendvierhundert Millionen Menschen wohnten, daß aber eigentlich so viel Arbeit verrichtet wurde, als ob zweitausend Millionen Menschen da wohnten. Das ist aus dem Grunde, weil so ungeheuer viel Arbeit von Maschinen verrichtet wird. Die Maschinentechnik mit ihrer kolossalen Umgestaltung des Wirtschaftslebens, auch mit ihrer kolossalen Umgestaltung des sozialen Lebens ist heraufgezogen.

Noch nicht angekommen - eben weil das intellektuelle Leben noch alles überflutet -, ist dasjenige, was nun gerade die maschinelle Wirtschaftstechnik in die moderne Zivilisation hereintragen muß. Man kann in bezug auf das, was ja der Menschheit in Aussicht steht, heute die merkwürdigsten Erfahrungen machen. Es gibt heute schon viele Menschen, insbesondere auf dem Boden, wo sich die Leute Praktiker nennen, die zum Beispiel ihre Praxis in die Regierungsstellen hineintragen, wo dann diese Praxis gewöhnlich verduftet; das bißchen Praxis, das noch vorhanden ist, verduftet gewöhnlich, wenn die Leute ihre Praxis in die Regierungsstellen hineintragen. Bei solchen «regierenden Praktikern» oder «praktischen Regierern» — man muß das unter Gänsefüßchen heute sagen — entstehen heute sonderbare Ideen. So äußerte sich mir jemand vor kurzem: Ja, das neuere Zeitalter hat uns die Maschinen und damit das städtische Leben gebracht; wir müssen das Leben wiederum auf das Land hinausbringen. — Als ob man das Maschinenzeitalter aus der Welt schaffen könnte! Es werden einfach die Maschinen mit auf das Land hinausgehen, sagte ich dem Manne. Ich sagte ihm: Alles kann vergessen werden, die Geistkultur kann vergessen werden, aber die Maschinen werden bleiben, man wird einfach die Maschinen mit aufs Land hinausnehmen. Dasjenige, was in den Städten aufgegangen ist, wird sich aufs Land hinaus verpflanzen.

Die Leute werden eben im großen Stil Reaktionäre, wenn sie keine Neigungen mehr haben - und das ist überhaupt heute das Charakteristikum der Menschen, daß sie keinen Willen haben -, sich Ideen über den wahren Fortschritt zu machen. So möchten sie am liebsten alte Zustände wieder herbeiführen auf dem Lande draußen. Sie stellen sich vor, daß man das so machen kann. Sie glauben, daß man ausschalten kann, was die Jahrhunderte gebracht haben. Unsinn ist das! Aber diesen Unsinn lieben die Menschen heute ganz ungeheuer, weil sie zu bequem sind, das Neue zu erfassen, und sich mit dem Alten mehr zu helfen wissen. Das maschinelle Zeitalter ist heraufgezogen. Das zeigen zunächst die Maschinen, daß mit ihnen Menschenkraft erspart worden ist. Es müßten heute einfach fünfhundert Millionen Menschen das leisten, was die Maschinen leisten, wenn es durch Menschen geleistet werden sollte auf der Erde.

Und im Grunde genommen ist all dieses maschinelle Arbeiten in der abendländischen Zivilisation entstanden. Es ist in der abendländischen Zivilisation heraufgekommen, hat sich erst ganz spät nach dem Orient hingezogen, und ist da eben durchaus nicht in derselben Weise eingewöhnt, wie es in der abendländischen Zivilisation eingewöhnt ist. Aber das ist eine Übergangszeit. Und jetzt fassen Sie einen Gedanken, aber so sonderbar Ihnen der Gedanke erscheinen wird, fassen Sie ihn ernst: Nehmen wir an, der alte Mensch hatte eine Wolke, er hatte vielleicht einen Fluß, allerlei Gewächse und so weiter vor sich. Er sah darinnen nicht bloß dasjenige, was der heutige Mensch sieht, tote Natur; er sah darinnen geistige Elementarwesen, bis hinauf zu den göttlich-geistigen Wesenheiten der höheren Hierarchien. Das sah er gewissermaßen durch die Natur hindurch. Die Natur spricht eben nicht mehr von diesen göttlich-geistigen Wesen. Wir müssen sie als Geistiges erfassen, jenseits von der Natur, dann können wir es wiederum auf die Natur beziehen. Die Übergangszeit kam. Der Mensch schuf zu der Natur hinzu die Maschinen. Diese sieht der Mensch zunächst in aller Abstraktion an. Er wirtschaftet mit ihnen in aller Abstraktion. Er hat seine Mathematik, er hat seine Geometrie, seine Mechanik. Er konstruiert damit seine Maschinen und sieht sie so in aller Abstraktion an. Aber er wird sehr bald eine gewisse Entdeckung machen. So sonderbar es dem heutigen Menschen noch erscheinen mag, daß diese Entdeckung gemacht wird, der Mensch wird die Entdeckung machen, daß bei all dem Maschinellen, das er dem Wirtschaftsleben einverleibt, die Geister wieder wirken werden, die er früher in der Natur wahrgenommen hat. In seinen technischen Wirtschaftsmechanismen wird er wahrnehmen: er hat sie fabriziert, er hat sie gemacht, aber sie gewinnen ein eigenes Leben nach und nach, zunächst allerdings nur ein Leben, das er noch ableugnen kann, weil es sich im Wirtschaftlichen kundgibt. Aber er wird es immer mehr und mehr bemerken durch das, was er da selber schafft, wie das ein eigenes Leben gewinnt, wie er es, trotzdem er es aus dem Intellekt heraus geboren hat, mit dem Intellekt nicht mehr erfassen kann. Vielleicht kann man sich heute noch nicht einmal eine gute Vorstellung davon machen, dennoch wird es so sein. Die Menschen werden nämlich entdecken, wie ihre Wirtschaftsobjekte durchaus die Träger von Dämonen werden.

Sehen wir dieselbe Sache von einer anderen Seite her an. Aus dem bloßen Intellekt, aus dem ödesten Verstande heraus ist das LeninTrotzkijsche System entstanden, das ein Wirtschaftsleben in Rußland bauen will. Geistesleben, trotz Lunatscharskij, interessiert die Leute nicht. Das soll ja nur Ideologie aus dem Wirtschaftsleben sein. Daß gerade das Dialektisch-Juristische sehr stark ist im Trotzkij-LeninSystem, wird man ja nicht behaupten können. Aber auf das Wirtschaftliche soll alles hinorientiert sein. Man will den Intellekt gewissermaßen verkörpern im Wirtschaftsleben. Würde man es können eine Zeitlang — dieses erste Experiment wird gar nicht gehen -, aber nehmen wir an, man würde es können, dann würde einem das Wirtschaftsleben über den Kopf wachsen, dann würde das Wirtschaftsleben überall zerstörerische, dämonische Kräfte aus sich hervorbringen. Es würde nicht gehen, weil der Intellekt das nicht handhaben kann, was überall hervordringen würde an wirtschaftlichen Forderungen! So wie der alte Mensch auf die Natur und die Naturerscheinungen hingesehen hat und in ihnen Dämonisches gesehen hat, so muß der neuere Mensch lernen, bei dem, was er selber hervorbringt im Wirtschaftsleben, auf Dämonisches zu sehen. Vorläufig sind diese Dämonen, die die Leute nicht in die Maschinen abgeleitet haben, noch in die Menschen gefahren und machen sich als die zerstörenden in sozialen Revolutionen geltend. Nichts anderes sind diese zerstörenden sozialen Revolutionen als das Ergebnis der Nichtanerkennung des Dämonischen in unserem Wirtschaftsleben. Elementarische Geistigkeit muß im Wirtschaftsleben gesucht werden, wie in der Natur in alten Zeiten elementarische Geistigkeit gesucht worden ist, Und das bloße intellektuelle Leben ist nur ein Zwischenzustand, der überhaupt für die Natur und das, was der Mensch hervorbringt, keine Bedeutung hat, sondern nur für den Menschen selbst. Die Menschen haben den Intellekt ausgebildet, damit sie frei werden können. Die Menschen müssen gerade eine Fähigkeit ausbilden, die gar nichts zu tun hat weder mit der Natur noch mit der Maschine, sondern die nur mit dem Menschen selbst zu tun hat. Wenn der Mensch Fähigkeiten ausbildet, die zu der Natur in einem Verhältnis stehen, ist er ja nicht frei. Will er ins Wirtschaftsleben fliehen, ist er auch nicht frei, denn die Maschinen überwältigen ihn nur. Wenn er aber Fähigkeiten ausbildet, die weder mit der Erkenntnis noch mit dem praktischen Leben etwas zu tun haben, wie die reine Intelligenz, kann er sich die Freiheit im Laufe der Kulturentwickelung anerziehen. Gerade durch eine ohne in Beziehung zur Welt stehende Fähigkeit, wie der Intellekt es ist, könnte die Freiheit heraufkommen. Aber zu diesem Intellekt muß, damit der Mensch nicht abreißt von der Natur, damit er in die Natur wiederum herauswirken kann, wiederum die Imagination, muß alles dasjenige hinzukommen, was geisteswissenschaftliche Forschung finden will.

Dazu kommt noch ein anderes. Ich sagte schon, für den alten Orientalen waren von ganz besonderer Wichtigkeit die Blutsabstammungsverhältnisse; denn danach richteten sich als nach göttlichen Zeichen die Mysterienweisen, wenn sie den Menschen ihre Stellen anwiesen. Diese Dinge alle, die ragen dann noch wie Nachzügler, wie Gespenster in spätere Zeiten herein. Dann kam das dialektisch-juristische Element. Die Staatsabstempelung wurde das Wesentliche. Das Diplom, das Examensergebnis beziehungsweise das, was auf dem Papier vom Examensergebnis stand, das wurde das Wesentliche; während das Blut in den alten Zeiten der Theokratie das Ausschlaggebende war, wurde nun das Papier das Ausschlaggebende. Jene Zeiten rückten heran, welche man ja durch mancherlei gekennzeichnet findet; mir sagte einmal ein Rechtsanwalt bei einer Diskussion, die ich mit ihm hatte: Ja, darauf kommt es nicht an, daß Sie geboren sind, daß Sie da sind! - Das interessierte ihn nicht, sondern der Taufschein oder der Geburtsschein muß da sein; da muß es daraufstehen. Also das stellvertretende Papier! Das Dialektisch-Juristische, nicht wahr, das kam dann herauf. Das ist auch zugleich der Ausdruck für das Scheinhafte in bezug auf die Welt, für das Scheinhafte des Intellekts. Aber gerade im Menschen selbst konnte sich als das Gegenspiel dieses Scheinhaften für die Welt dasjenige entwickeln, was dem Menschen die Freiheit gab.

Nun aber entwickelt sich heraus aus dem, was ja das Papier bedeutet — was früher das Blut bedeutet hat -, was Adelsbrief oder sonst dergleichen Papier bedeutet, aus dem bildet sich das heraus, was heute schon sich zeigt, was aber bleiben wird, wenn die Dinge weitergehen, und sie werden weitergehen. Die Blutsabstammung wird keine Bedeutung mehr haben, der Adelsbrief oder etwas Ähnliches wird keine Bedeutung mehr haben, sondern höchstens noch das, was der Mensch nun sich an Besitz gerettet hat aus den alten Zeiten. Ein Warum war nicht möglich, als die Götter noch des Menschen Platz auf der Welt bestimmten. Über das Warum konnte man diskutieren im juristisch-dialektischen Zeitalter. Nun hört alles Diskutieren auf, denn das rein Faktische liegt nur noch da, das Tatsächliche, das, was sich der Mensch noch gerettet hat. In dem Augenblicke, wo man gar nicht mehr an das Papier glauben wird, wird man auch nicht mehr diskutieren, sondern wird die Sachen einfach wegnehmen, die sich der Mensch gerettet hat. Da gibt es nichts anderes, da die Natur nicht mehr das Geistige offenbart, um die Menschheit überhaupt weiterzubringen, als eine Umkehrung zu vollziehen zum Geistigen selbst hin. Und auf der anderen Seite in dem Wirtschaftlichen selber dasjenige zu finden, was man früher in der Natur gefunden hat.

Das aber läßt sich nur finden durch die Assoziation. Was der einzelne Mensch nicht mehr finden kann, kann die Assoziation finden, die wiederum eine Art Gruppenseele entwickeln wird, die auf dasjenige gehen wird, was jetzt nicht der einzelne entscheidet. Im mittleren Zeitalter, im Zeitalter des Intellektes war der einzelne der Wirtschafter, in der Zukunft wird es die Assoziation sein. Und in der Assoziation müssen die Menschen zusammenstehen. Da kann dann wiederum, wenn man anerkennt, daß ein Geistiges gebändigt werden muß im Wirtschaftsleben, etwas herauskommen, was Blutsabstammung und Patent ersetzen kann. Denn dem Menschen würde das Wirtschaftsleben über den Kopf wachsen, wenn er ihm nicht gewachsen wäre, wenn er nicht Geistiges mitbrächte, um dieses Wirtschaftsleben zu leiten. Keiner wird sich mit einem anderen assoziieren, wenn der andere nichts mitbringt, was ihn tüchtig macht im Wirtschaftsleben, was ihn berechtigt, die Geister wirklich zu bändigen, die sich im Wirtschaftsleben geltend machen. Ein ganz neuer Geist wird heraufziehen. Und warum wird das sein?

Ja, in jenen alten Zeiten, in denen man nach dem Blute geurteilt hat, da war wichtig für die Menschen dasjenige, was vor der Geburt beziehungsweise vor der Empfängnis sich abgespielt hatte, denn das brachten sie durch das Blut herein in die physische Welt; wenn auch vergessen worden war das vorgeburtliche Leben, in der Anerkennung der Blutsabstammung lebte noch fort diese Anerkennung des vorgeburtlichen Lebens. Dann kam das Dialektisch- Juristische. Der Mensch wurde nur anerkannt in bezug auf das, was er als physischer Mensch auslebte. Jetzt ragt herein das andere, das dämonisch werdende Wirtschaftsleben. Jetzt muß auch wiederum anerkannt werden der Mensch nach seinem geistig-seelischen Kern, und ebenso, wie man hinsehen wird auf das Dämonische des Wirtschaftslebens, wird man anfangen müssen, hinzusehen auf das, was der Mensch durch die wiederholten Erdenleben trägt. Man wird hinzusehen haben auf das, womit er hereinkommt in dieses Leben. Das wird man in dem geistigen Teil des sozialen Organismus zu lösen haben. Wenn man nach dem Blute urteilt, braucht man im Grunde genommen gar keine Pädagogik, sondern nur eine Erkenntnis eben des Symbolischen, durch das die Götter ausdrükken, wo sie einen Menschen hingestellt sein lassen. Solang man bloß juristisch-dialektisch urteilt, braucht man eine abstrakte Pädagogik, eine Pädagogik, die im Allgemeinen von dem Menschenkinde spricht. Wenn man aber den Menschen hineinstellen soll in das assoziative Leben, so daß er drinnen tüchtig ist, dann muß man das Folgende berücksichtigen, dann muß man sich zunächst klar sein: Die ersten sieben Jahre, in denen der Mensch seine physische Leiblichkeit entwickelt, die sind nicht bedeutsam für das, was er später im sozialen Leben leisten kann; er muß nur im allgemein-menschlichen Sinne tüchtig gemacht werden. In der Zeit vom siebenten bis vierzehnten Jahre, in der eigentlich der Ätherleib seine Ausbildung erlangt, da muß zunächst der Mensch erkannt werden; es muß das erkannt werden, was dann mit dem vierzehnten, fünfzehnten Jahre herauskommt als astralischer Leib, und was in Betracht kommt, wenn der eigentliche geistig-seelische Wesenskern des Menschen ihn hinstellen soll an den Platz, an dem er stehen soll. Da wird der Erziehungsfaktor ein besonderer sozialer Faktor. Da handelt es sich darum, daß nun wirklich aus der Erkenntnis des Kindes, das man heranerzieht, sich ergeben kann: Das taugt für das, dies taugt für jenes, und das zeigt sich klar nicht früher als gerade in dem Momente, wo das Kind aus der Volksschule entlassen wird. Und es wird hinzugehören zur künstlerischen Pädagogik und Didaktik, die Entscheidung treffen zu können: Der eine ist zu dem, der andere ist zu jenem geeignet. Darnach werden jene Entscheidungen getroffen werden, welche in den «Kernpunkten der sozialen Frage» gefordert werden für die Zirkulation des Kapitals, das heißt der Produktionsmittel. Eine ganz neue geistige Anschauung muß heraufkommen, die erstens das Wirtschaftsleben in seiner inneren geistigen Lebendigkeit durchschaut und auf der anderen Seite weiß, welche Rolle das Geistesleben spielen muß, wie das Geistesleben das Wirtschaftsleben konfigurieren muß. Das kann nur sein, wenn das Geistesleben selbständig ist, wenn das Wirtschaftsleben ihm nicht irgend etwas aufdrängt. Gerade wenn man innerlich erfaßt den ganzen Gang der Menschheitsentwickelung, dann erkennt man, wie diese Menschheitsentwickelung die Dreigliederung des sozialen Organismus fordert.

Also wir brauchen wiederum, weil uns auf der einen Seite die Türkei, auf der anderen Seite der Petrinismus Peters des Großen durch die neuere Zeit abgeschlossen haben von dem Orient, wir brauchen ein selbständiges Geistesleben, ein Geistesleben, das wirklich die geistige Welt erkennt in einer neuen Form, nicht so, wie es in alten Zeiten der Fall war, wo man die Natur zu sich sprechen ließ. Man wird dann dieses Geistesleben auf die Natur beziehen können. Man wird aber auch dieses Geistesleben, nachdem man es gefunden hat, so in dem Menschen heranbilden können, daß es zum Inhalt seiner Geschicklichkeiten wird, daß er durch dieses Geistesleben im assoziativen Zusammenwirken das immer lebendiger und lebendiger werdende Wirtschaftsleben befriedigt. Diese Gedanken, die müssen eigentlich sein in einer anthroposophisch orientierten Geisteswissenschaft. Daher kann eine solche Geisteswissenschaft nur herausgeboren sein aus einer Erkenntnis des Ganges der Menschheitsentwickelung.

Das erste ist, daß hingesteuert werden muß zu einem wirklichen Wissen von dem Geiste. Jenes allgemeine Reden von dem Geiste in leeren, abstrakten Worten, wie es heute die offiziellen Philosophen und andere Kreise beherrscht, und wie es auch populär geworden ist, das wird für die Zukunft nichts taugen. Die geistige Welt ist anders als die physische. Daher kann man nicht durch Abstraktion von der physischen Anschauung über die geistige Welt etwas gewinnen, sondern man muß durch unmittelbare Geistesforschung Anschauungen über die geistige Welt gewinnen. Die erscheinen selbstverständlich dann als etwas ganz anderes als das, was der Mensch wissen kann, wenn er nur von der physischen Welt weiß. Die Menschen, die nur von der physischen Welt wissen wollen aus Bequemlichkeit, die mögen es heute phantastisch nennen, wenn man von der Mondenzeit, von der Sonnenzeit, von der Saturnzeit spricht. Sie finden, da äußert man Ideen, wenn man von diesen vorhergehenden Verkörperungen der Erde spricht, die an nichts bei ihnen anschlagen. Da beschreibt man Dinge, von denen sie keinen Dunst haben. Es ist natürlich, daß sie keinen Dunst haben, denn sie wollen ja von der geistigen Welt nichts wissen. Nun wird ihnen von der geistigen Welt erzählt, und da finden sie: Ja, es stimmt mit nichts überein von dem, was wir schon wissen! — Darauf kommt es ja gerade an, daß Welten gefunden werden, die mit nichts stimmen, was man schon weiß. Nicht wahr, so ungefähr urteilt jener Philosophieprofessor wie zum Beispiel Arthur Drews über Geisteswissenschaft; das stimmt mit nichts von dem zusammen, was er sich schon vorgestellt hat. Ja, der Postmeister von Berlin hat auch, als die Eisenbahn von Berlin nach Potsdam gebaut werden sollte, gesagt: Nun soll ich noch nach Potsdam heraus Eisenbahnen fahren lassen! Ich lasse in der Woche vier Postkutschen hinausfahren, und da sitzt niemand drinnen. Wenn die Leute ihr Geld zum Fenster hinauswerfen wollen, so mögen sie es gleich direkt machen! — Natürlich haben die Eisenbahnen dann anders ausgeschaut als die Postkutschen des biederen Postmeisters von Berlin aus den dreißiger Jahren. Aber so sieht natürlich auch die Beschreibung der geistigen Welt anders aus als dasjenige, was in solchen Köpfen drinnen nistet, wie der Arthur Drews einer ist. Aber er ist nur charakteristisch für alle anderen, er ist sogar noch immer einer der Besseren, das muß man kurioserweise schon sagen, nicht weil er gut ist, sondern weil die anderen nämlich noch schlechter sind.

Es war zunächst eine Notwendigkeit, zu zeigen, wie man wirklich, ganz auf strengem Boden des Wissenschaftlichen stehenbleibend, in die geistige Welt vordringen kann. Das war ja zunächst, was unser Hochschulkursus in diesem Herbste angestrebt hat. Und es ist, wenn auch alles das im Anfange ist, doch zum mindesten gezeigt worden, wie auf gewissen Gebieten aus den Wissenschaften selbst hinaufgehoben werden kann das Erkennen zu dem Erkennen des Geistigen als solchem, und wie wiederum das Geistige dann durchdringen kann das, was die Sinneserkenntnis gewinnt.

Aber unvollständig würde bleiben, was so nach der Erkenntnisseite hin gewonnen werden kann, und was gegen die landläufigen Bestrebungen der Schulwissenschaft doch errungen werden wird - denn darinnen zeigen sich die schönsten Anfänge; man konnte immerhin schon zeigen, wie Psychologie, ja selbst Mathematik hinaufweist in geistige Gebiete —, aber es würde etwas unvollständig getan werden, und deshalb doch nicht unserer zugrunde gehenden Zivilisation aufgeholfen werden können, wenn nicht ein wirklich elementares, ein wirklich intensives Wollen auch aus dem Gebiete herkommen würde, das man das Gebiet des praktischen wirtschaftlichen Lebens nennt. Das ist notwendig, daß wirklich die alten Usancen, die alten Gewohnheiten verlassen werden, und daß auch da durchdrungen werde das unmittelbare Leben mit der Geistigkeit. Das ist etwas, was eben als eine Blüte der anthroposophischen Bewegung kommen muß, daß herangetragen werde mit Hilfe jener Seelengesinnung, die aus Geisteswissenschaft hervorgehen kann, ein Durchschauen des praktischen Lebens, namentlich des praktischen wirtschaftlichen Lebens, und daß gezeigt werde, wie der Niedergang abgewendet werden kann, wenn man hineinträgt in dieses Wirtschaftsleben das Bewußtsein davon, daß man eigentlich etwas Lebendiges schafft.

Man sollte jeden Tag, möchte ich sagen, aufs neue hinblicken auf die so kraß hervortretenden Zeichen unseres niedergehenden Wirtschaftslebens. Galvanisieren läßt sich dieses alte Wirtschaftsleben nicht. Es läßt sich die Menschheit nur weiterbringen durch Schaffen neuer Wirtschaftszentren. Denn wie heute niemand stolz sein sollte auf das, was er aus der usuellen Wissenschaft heraus gewinnt — denn das würde die Menschheit durchaus in die von Oswald Spengler prophezeite Zukunft hineinbringen -, so sollte aber auch nicht jemand stolz sein auf das, was er aus dem alten Wirtschaftsleben heraus an einer diesem Wirtschaftsleben entsprechenden Tüchtigkeit gewinnen kann. Niemand kann heute stolz darauf sein, ein Physiker, ein Mathematiker, ein Biologe im usuellen Sinne zu sein. Aber niemand kann auch darauf stolz sein, ein Kaufmann, ein Industrieller im alten Sinne zu sein. Und dieser alte Sinn ist heute doch einzig und allein noch da. Wir sehen heute noch nirgends irgendwie etwas aufgehen, was wahrhaftige Assoziationen schon darstellen würde. Das wäre notwendig, daß, wenn wir wiederum, gewissermaßen als eine zweite Veranstaltung dieses Goetheanums, hier so etwas hätten, wie dieser Kursus jetzt gewesen ist, daß dann gesehen werden könnte etwas, was konkret ergriffen werden kann aus dem praktischen Leben heraus selber, neben den Wissenschaften stehend. Nicht durch dasjenige, was die eine Strömung bloß enthält, kommen wir weiter, sondern einzig und allein dadurch kommen wir weiter, daß nun wirklich auch diese andere Seite des Strebens sich zeigt.

Das ist heute noch das besonders charakteristische Kennzeichen unserer gegenwärtigen Menschheitsentwickelung: Auf der einen Seite die traditionellen Träger des alten Geisteslebens, die einen verketzern, verleumden, wenn man aus der modernen Wissenschaftlichkeit heraus eine Durchgeistigung anstrebt. Sie tun es heute schon ganz bewußt, weil sie kein Interesse haben für den Fortgang der Menschheitsentwickelung, und weil sie zunächst nur daran denken, diese Menschheitsentwickelung zurückzuhalten. Sie tun es manchmal in so grotesker Weise wie jener sonderbare Gelehrte, der neulich auch über Anthroposophie in Zürich gesprochen hat, und der so kraß geredet hat, daß es selbst seinen Amtsgenossen zu toll geworden ist, so daß, wie es scheint, eine Art kleiner Reklame gerade aus dieser Bekämpfung der Anthroposophie geworden ist. Aber sie tun es; sie werden es noch viel mehr tun, denn sie werden mit ganz großen Verleumdungen aufrücken. Da sieht man eben das, um was es sich handelt, in Form von Verleumdungen und so weiter auftreten, in Form des Unwahren.

Auf der anderen Seite ist heute noch ein starker Widerstand zu bemerken, der aber im Grunde im Unbewußten spielt. Und das ist ein schmerzliches Erlebnis; da, auf diesem Gebiete, ist durchaus zu sprechen von einer inneren Opposition, die zuweilen gar nicht so gemeint ist, gegen das, was eigentlich in der Richtung des geisteswissenschaftlichen Strebens liegen muß. Es wird sich darum handeln, daß gerade auf diesem Gebiete gelernt werden muß ein volles Mitgehen mit dem, was Geisteswissenschaft da wollen kann. Denn die Beurteilung dessen, was aus dem Geisteswissenschaftlichen heraus gewollt werden muß, nach dem bisher üblichen Subjektiven, das würde ja auf diesem Gebiete genau dasselbe sein, was die Pfarrer und die anderen tun auf anderen Gebieten, indem sie Geisteswissenschaft verketzern. Das ist, was unsere anthroposophische Bewegung schwierig macht, daß im Grunde genommen gerade auf diesem Gebiete deutlich bemerkbar ist eine Art innerer Opposition. Man kann schon sagen, gerade auf diesem Gebiete zeigt sich am klarsten, was in so merkwürdiger Weise gewisse Anschuldigungen beleuchtet, die von mancher Seite kommen. Da wird gesagt: In dieser Anthroposophischen Gesellschaft, da sprechen ja alle doch nur dem einen nach, — und in Wirklichkeit sprechen sie gar nicht nach, sondern das, was jeder selber meint, das sagt er, daß der eine es möchte. Das haben wir ja so vielfach erfahren, nicht wahr? Was einer gerade möchte, davon sagt er sehr häufig, daß ich es ihm gesagt habe, wenn er auch genau das Gegenteil von mir gehört hat. Das ist der nun wirklich herrschende Autoritätsglaube. Sonderbarer Autoritätsglaube! Es hat sich ja das in vielen Fällen gezeigt. Aber von einer besonderen Schädlichkeit wäre, wenn dieses, was ja eine merkwürdige Art von Opposition ist - Opposition hat es ja eigentlich in Wirklichkeit immer mehr gegeben als Autoritätsglaube, und daher ist die Beschuldigung des Autoritätsglaubens wirklich eine recht ungerechte -, noch verhängnisvoller wäre es, wenn das, was ich hier andeute als innere Opposition, gerade auf dem Gebiete des praktischen Lebens weitere Dimensionen annehmen würde. Denn dann würden, solange es noch geht, selbstverständlich die Gegner des anthroposophischen Strebens sagen: Na ja, eine sektiererisch phantastische Bewegung, die doch nicht praktisch sein kann. — Sie kann natürlich nicht praktisch sein, wenn die Praktiker sich nicht auf sie einlassen, geradesowenig wie man schließlich nähen kann, wenn man keine Nadel hat, wenn man es noch so gut versteht, das Nähen.

Ich möchte dadurch nur auf etwas hindeuten, was notwendig zu beachten ist. Ich spreche damit nicht eine Kritik aus, deute überhaupt auf nichts Vergangenes hin, sondern ich deute auf etwas hin, was für die Zukunft notwendig ist. Allerdings, ich würde selbstverständlich nicht hindeuten, wenn ich nicht allerlei Rauchwolken heraufsteigen sehen würde. Aber ich deute wirklich nur auf etwas hin, was gewissermaßen als eine Aufforderung zu gelten hat, nun wirklich von allen Seiten mitzuarbeiten und ja nicht hinter die reaktionäre Praxis sich zu verschanzen und hinter den Schanzen der reaktionären Praxis Anthroposophie, trotzdem man ihr vielleicht aufhelfen will, im Grunde genommen zu vernichten. Also nicht auf irgend etwas, was schon geschehen ist, deute ich hin, sondern auf dasjenige deute ich hin, was für die Zukunft notwendig ist. Es ist schon notwendig, daß man über diese Dinge nachdenkt.

Ich werde es heute bei diesen Bemerkungen müssen bewenden lassen. Wir werden dann an diese Vorrede, von der Sie schon sehen werden, daß sie doch eine Einleitung ist zu der Christus-Betrachtung für das 20. Jahrhundert, morgen und übermorgen anzuknüpfen haben.

Fifth Lecture

Over the next few days, today, tomorrow, and the day after tomorrow, I will speak about something that has already been mentioned some time ago, namely the special way in which a kind of re-revelation of the Christ event is to take place in the first half of the 20th century. There is much to prepare for this, beginning today, when I will attempt to characterize the spiritual state of the civilized world once again from a certain point of view, and from this point of view draw attention to the demands that will be made on human evolution and human education in general in the near future by the very fact of this human evolution.

We know that a new era in the development of civilized humanity began around the middle of the 15th century. Since that time, we have been dealing with a special development of the human intellect. Today, we no longer have a precise idea of the state of mind that prevailed among people who lived before this great turning point in recent history. We do not consider what a different state of mind it must have been, and yet it is easy to imagine how different the state of mind in Europe must have been that made people across vast territories inclined to to undertake the Crusades to Asia, to the Orient, when one imagines how impossible such an event, based on ideal-spiritual foundations, had become since the middle of the 15th century. We do not consider what completely different interests humanity had before this historical turning point, and what interests have become particularly important since that time. But if one wants to highlight one of the most significant characteristics of this more recent period, it is precisely the predominance and ever-increasing intensity of human intellectual power.

Now, there is always another force within human beings, whether as a longing or as a more or less clear fact of consciousness, in the depths of the soul. It is the longing for knowledge. Looking back to earlier times, even to the 11th, 12th, and 13th centuries 14th centuries of European development, one can speak of a distinct longing for knowledge, inasmuch as human beings at that time had abilities in their souls that led them to gain a relationship with nature, with what nature revealed of the spirit, and thereby a relationship with the spiritual world itself. Certainly, there has been much talk of a thirst for knowledge ever since. But if one looks at human development with an unbiased eye, one cannot compare the thirst for knowledge that prevails today in terms of intensity with the thirst for knowledge that prevailed before the middle of the 15th century. It was an intense matter for the human soul to strive for knowledge, for a kind of knowledge that also meant something in terms of passion, of inner warmth for human beings, that also meant something for these human beings in relation to the impulses that drove them to do their work in the world and so on. With all that thirst for knowledge that existed, it is increasingly difficult to compare what has been emerging since the middle of the 15th century. And even if we consider the great philosophers of the first half of the 19th century, they offer ingenious elaborations of the human system of ideas, but actually, I would say, only artistic elaborations of this system of ideas; they do not really have, neither Fichte, nor Schelling, nor Hegel — certainly not Hegel — a correct concept of what previously existed in the form of a thirst for knowledge. And then, in the second half of the 19th century, knowledge, even if it is still cultivated separately according to old habits, more or less enters the service of external life. It enters the service of technology and also acquires the configuration of this technology. Where does all this come from? Yes, it stems precisely from the fact that in this latest period we have witnessed the special development of the intellect. Certainly, this did not happen all at once. This intellect has been slowly preparing itself. The echoes of the old clairvoyant state had long since become extremely vague. But one can still say that, to a certain extent, if not the old clairvoyant state itself, then at least its echoes were still present until the 15th century. All people, at least those who strove for knowledge, had an idea of what rises out of the human soul in higher abilities than those of everyday life. In ancient times, these abilities may have emerged from the soul only in dreams, but they were nevertheless abilities different from those of ordinary life, and people sought to penetrate the depths of the world's being through these different abilities, and they penetrated to the spirituality of this world's being. And that gave them knowledge. It was perceived as knowledge when one felt and perceived from natural phenomena, from natural beings, how spiritual-elemental beings worked through the individual phenomena of nature, how the divine-spiritual being worked on the whole through the totality of nature. This was perceived as knowledge when gods spoke through natural phenomena, when gods spoke through the movements of the stars, in the appearance of the stars. This was understood as knowledge.

At the moment when humanity renounced hearing the spiritual in the phenomena of the world, the concept of knowledge also fell into decline to a greater or lesser extent. And we must note the decline in the actual intensity of knowledge in the most recent period of human development.

What has become necessary? That which now exists only in the small circle of people striving for anthroposophy, but which must become more and more widespread. Yes, natural phenomena spoke to the people of old in such a way that they revealed the spiritual to them. The spiritual spoke from every source, from every cloud, from every plant. By getting to know the phenomena of nature and the beings of nature in their own way, people got to know the spiritual. That is no longer the case. The state of intellectualism is only an intermediate state. For what is the deepest characteristic of this intellectualism? That with it, with pure intellectualism, one cannot recognize anything at all. For the intellect is not at all meant for recognition. That is the great error to which human beings can succumb, that the intellect is meant for recognition. Human beings will only recognize again when they enter into what lies at the basis of spiritual scientific research, what is conveyed at least through imagination. People will only gain knowledge again when they say to themselves: In ancient times, spiritual-divine beings spoke through natural phenomena. They do not speak to the intellect. Natural phenomena will not speak directly to higher, supersensible knowledge, for nature as such is silent, but beings will speak to human beings who will appear to them in imaginations, who will inspire them, with whom they will be intuitively united, and whom they will in turn be able to relate to natural phenomena. Thus, one can say that in ancient times, the spiritual appeared to human beings through nature. In our intermediate state, human beings have the intellect. Nature remains spiritless. Human beings will rise to a state where they can recognize again, where nature will no longer speak to them of the divine-spiritual, but where they will grasp the divine-spiritual in supersensible knowledge, and where they will thereby be able to relate this spiritual to nature again.

This is the peculiarity of the ancient Oriental spiritual life, of the ancient Oriental knowledge, which we know lived on as a legacy in Western civilization, that the Orientals, in the period when their knowledge flourished, perceived a spiritual element in all natural phenomena at the same time, that the divine-spiritual spoke through nature, whether through the lower elemental beings in individual things and individual phenomena, or whether through the whole of nature, the all-encompassing divine-spiritual spoke. Later, within the middle of the earth, that which stood under the legal-dialectical spirit developed. Intellectuality was born out of this. Human beings retained spiritual culture as a legacy from the ancient Orient. And when people still had a last longing to learn something from the Orient—they also learned something through the Crusades and brought it to Europe—and after this last longing had been satisfied by the Crusades, what Peter the Great had established on one side of the Orient, destroying the remnants of the Oriental soul against the European side, and on the other side the Turks, who had just established their rule in Europe at the beginning of the period we call the fifth post-Atlantean. In a sense, European education was closed off from the Orient. It had to develop further. It could only develop under the influence of legal-dialectical life, under the influence of economic life coming up from the West, and in the decadent decline of what had been received from the Orient in terms of spiritual life, but to which the gates had been closed in the manner I have described. This also prepared the way for the state in which we now live, where we are dependent on opening the gates to the spiritual world from within ourselves, through imagination, inspiration, and intuition, in order to gain insight into the spiritual world.

The whole thing is connected with the fact that in those ancient times, when the Oriental human being rose to his insights, what was particularly important was what human beings brought with them in terms of abilities and powers through their birth into physical existence. Basically, in those times of Eastern wisdom, despite what was happening in terms of civilization, everything was imbued with wisdom; in those Eastern times, everything was in the blood, but what was in the blood was at the same time spiritually recognized. The mysteries determined who was called to leadership through their bloodline. There was no contradiction. Those who were called to leadership by the mysteries were, in a sense, placed in their position by the fact that their bloodline was the outward sign. There was no legal proof of any kind that anyone was correctly placed in their position, for there was no objection to the decree of the gods according to which people were placed in their positions. Jurisprudence was unknown in the Orient. Theocracy, certainly, world government was known. From the spiritual world, man was assigned his mission here in the sensory world. In place of what one felt when one said to oneself: A person who is in his place, whose bloodline has been directed by the gods so that he could be placed in his rightful place — in place of this feeling came another, clothed in a legal-dialectical garb, from which one could argue on legal grounds whether anyone was entitled to be in his place, to do this or that, and so on.

The state of mind—which had already been developing in Greek culture, but especially in Roman culture—through which people in Central Europe began to derive what was right from concepts and dialectics, this state of mind, which I have already described from various points of view, was completely unknown to the Orient. For the Orient, it was a matter of fathoming the will of the gods. And there was no dialectic to decide what the gods wanted.

But now we are once again at a turning point. Now humanity is faced with the necessity of taking a closer look at this dialectical-legal aspect. For the economic element, which has conquered the world from the West with the help of technology, is already completely entangled in this state of affairs that has arisen through the dialectical-legal aspect. The economic sphere was a subordinate element in the ancient cultures, which were entirely theocratic, entirely imbued with God and spirit. In economic life, people did what came naturally according to the position and dignity in which the gods had placed them through the pronouncements of the mystery priests. Economic life was now, in a sense, embedded in the threads of dialectical-legal life, which was also beginning again in a primitive form; for when the Middle Ages, the so-called Middle Ages, began, the Romans, above all, had no more money. The monetary economy gradually disappeared, and in Europe the dialectical-legal culture spread, basically under a kind of natural economy. The first part of the Middle Ages was basically poor in money; hence all those forms of military organization arose that were necessary because the troops could not be paid. The Romans had paid their troops with money. In the Middle Ages, the feudal system developed and a special class of soldiers emerged. All this was because people, who were tied to the land under the influence of the natural economy, could not undertake long military campaigns. So this dialectical-legal system grew out of a kind of natural economy, and it was only when technology from the West penetrated this economic life that the modern era dawned. This modern civilized life, which is now becoming so fragile, arose entirely in the fifth post-Atlantean epoch through technology. I have already explained this in various ways. I have explained how, according to external calculations, there were 1,400 million people living on our earth at the end of the 19th century, but that actually as much work was done as if 2,000 million people were living there. This is because so much work is done by machines. Machine technology, with its colossal transformation of economic life and also with its colossal transformation of social life, has come to the fore.

What has not yet arrived – precisely because intellectual life still floods everything – is what mechanical economic technology must now bring into modern civilization. In relation to what lies ahead for humanity, we can have the most remarkable experiences today. There are already many people today, especially in fields where people call themselves practitioners, who carry their practice into government offices, where it usually evaporates; what little practice still exists usually evaporates when people carry their practice into government offices. Such “practical rulers” or “practical government officials” — one has to put that in quotation marks today — are coming up with strange ideas. Someone said to me recently: “Yes, the modern age has brought us machines and with them urban life; we must now take life back to the countryside.” As if it were possible to abolish the machine age! The machines will simply go out to the countryside, I said to the man. I told him: Everything can be forgotten, intellectual culture can be forgotten, but the machines will remain; people will simply take the machines out to the countryside. What has developed in the cities will be transplanted to the countryside.

People become reactionaries on a grand scale when they no longer have any inclinations—and that is the characteristic of people today, that they have no will—to form ideas about true progress. So they would like nothing better than to restore the old conditions in the countryside. They imagine that this can be done. They believe that you can eliminate what centuries have brought about. That is nonsense! But people today love this nonsense immensely because they are too comfortable to grasp the new and know better how to help themselves with the old. The machine age has dawned. This is evident first and foremost in the machines, which have saved human labor. Today, five hundred million people would have to do what machines do if it were to be done by humans on Earth.

And basically, all this machine work originated in Western civilization. It arose in Western civilization, spread to the Orient quite late, and has not become established there in the same way as it has in Western civilization. But this is a transitional period. And now consider an idea, however strange it may seem to you, but consider it seriously: Let us suppose that the ancient man had a cloud, he had perhaps a river, all kinds of plants and so on before him. He did not see in it merely what modern man sees, dead nature; he saw in it spiritual elemental beings, up to the divine-spiritual beings of the higher hierarchies. He saw this, as it were, through nature. Nature no longer speaks of these divine-spiritual beings. We must grasp them as spiritual, beyond nature, and then we can relate them back to nature. The transition period came. Man added machines to nature. At first, man views these in all their abstraction. He works with them in all abstraction. He has his mathematics, his geometry, his mechanics. He uses them to construct his machines and thus sees them in all their abstraction. But he will very soon make a certain discovery. As strange as it may seem to people today that this discovery will be made, man will discover that in all the machinery he incorporates into economic life, the spirits he once perceived in nature will again be at work. In his technical economic mechanisms, he will perceive that he has fabricated them, he has made them, but they gradually take on a life of their own, initially, however, only a life that he can still deny because it manifests itself in economic terms. But he will notice this more and more through what he himself creates, how it gains a life of its own, how, even though he has brought it forth from his intellect, he can no longer grasp it with his intellect. Perhaps we cannot even imagine this today, but it will nevertheless be so. For people will discover how their economic objects become the carriers of demons.

Let us look at the same thing from another angle. The Lenin-Trotsky system, which seeks to build an economic life in Russia, arose from pure intellect, from the most barren mind. Despite Lunacharsky, people are not interested in intellectual life. That is supposed to be nothing more than ideology derived from economic life. One cannot claim that dialectical-legal thinking is particularly strong in the Trotsky-Lenin system. But everything is supposed to be oriented toward the economy. They want to embody the intellect in economic life, so to speak. If it were possible for a while—this first experiment will not work at all—but let us assume that it were possible, then economic life would grow over our heads, and economic life would give rise to destructive, demonic forces everywhere. It would not work because the intellect cannot handle what would emerge everywhere in terms of economic demands! Just as the old man looked at nature and natural phenomena and saw something demonic in them, so must the new man learn to see something demonic in what he himself produces in economic life. For the time being, these demons, which people have not attributed to machines, are still driving people and asserting themselves as destructive forces in social revolutions. These destructive social revolutions are nothing other than the result of not recognizing the demonic in our economic life. Elementary spirituality must be sought in economic life, just as elementary spirituality was sought in nature in ancient times. And mere intellectual life is only an intermediate state that has no meaning at all for nature and what humans produce, but only for humans themselves. Humans have developed the intellect so that they can become free. Humans must develop a capacity that has nothing to do with nature or machines, but only with humans themselves. If humans develop capacities that are related to nature, they are not free. If they want to escape into economic life, they are not free either, because machines will only overwhelm them. But if they develop abilities that have nothing to do with knowledge or practical life, such as pure intelligence, they can acquire freedom in the course of cultural development. It is precisely through an ability that has no relation to the world, such as the intellect, that freedom can arise. But in order for man not to break away from nature, in order for him to be able to work back into nature, imagination must be added to this intellect, along with everything that spiritual scientific research seeks to discover.

There is something else. I have already said that bloodlines were of particular importance to the ancient Orientals, because the mystery teachers used them as divine signs when assigning people their places. All these things still linger like stragglers, like ghosts, in later times. Then came the dialectical-legal element. State certification became essential. The diploma, the exam results, or rather what was written on the exam results, became essential; whereas in the old days of theocracy, blood was the decisive factor, now paper became the decisive factor. Those times were approaching, which can be characterized by many things; a lawyer once said to me during a discussion we had: Yes, it doesn't matter that you were born, that you are here! He wasn't interested in that, but in the baptismal certificate or birth certificate; it had to be there. In other words, the substitute paper! The dialectical-legal aspect, you see, came to the fore. This is also an expression of the illusory nature of the world, of the illusory nature of the intellect. But it was precisely in human beings themselves that the opposite of this illusory nature could develop, giving human beings their freedom.

But now, out of what the paper means—what blood used to mean—out of what a letter of nobility or other such paper means, there is developing what is already apparent today, but what will remain if things continue, and they will continue. Blood descent will no longer have any meaning, letters of nobility or anything similar will no longer have any meaning, but at most only what people have now saved for themselves from the old days. A why was not possible when the gods still determined man's place in the world. The why could be discussed in the legal-dialectical age. Now all discussion ceases, because only the purely factual remains, the actual, that which man has saved for himself. At the moment when people no longer believe in paper, they will no longer discuss, but will simply take away the things that man has saved for himself. There is nothing else, because nature no longer reveals the spiritual to humanity in order to advance it, other than to bring about a reversal toward the spiritual itself. And on the other hand, to find in the economic sphere itself what was once found in nature.

But this can only be found through association. What the individual can no longer find, association can find, which in turn will develop a kind of group soul that will move toward what is not now decided by the individual. In the Middle Ages, the age of the intellect, the individual was the economist; in the future, it will be association. And in association, people must stand together. Then, if one recognizes that something spiritual must be tamed in economic life, something can emerge that can replace blood descent and patents. For economic life would be too much for people if they were not up to it, if they did not bring with them something spiritual to guide this economic life. No one will associate with another if the other brings nothing with them that makes them capable in economic life, that entitles them to truly tame the spirits that assert themselves in economic life. A completely new spirit will arise. And why will that be?

Yes, in those ancient times when people judged by blood, what was important to them was what had happened before birth or before conception, because that was what they brought into the physical world through their blood; even if the pre-birth life had been forgotten, this recognition of the pre-birth life still lived on in the recognition of blood descent. Then came the dialectical-legal system. People were only recognized in relation to what they lived out as physical beings. Now the other aspect, the demonic economic life, is coming to the fore. Now, once again, human beings must be recognized according to their spiritual-soul core, and just as one will look at the demonic aspect of economic life, one will have to begin to look at what human beings carry with them through their repeated lives on earth. One will have to look at what they bring with them into this life. This will have to be resolved in the spiritual part of the social organism. If one judges according to blood, one does not really need any pedagogy at all, but only an understanding of the symbolic means through which the gods express where they have placed a human being. As long as one judges purely in legal-dialectical terms, one needs an abstract pedagogy, a pedagogy that speaks in general terms about the human child. But if we are to place the human being in associative life so that he is capable of functioning within it, then we must take the following into account. We must first be clear that the first seven years, during which the human being develops his physical body, are not significant for what he will later be able to achieve in social life. He must only be made capable of functioning in a general human sense. In the period from the seventh to the fourteenth year, when the etheric body actually develops, the human being must first be recognized; what emerges at the age of fourteen or fifteen as the astral body must be recognized, and what comes into consideration when the actual spiritual-soul core of the human being is to place him in the position where he belongs. Here the factor of education becomes a special social factor. It is now a matter of ensuring that the knowledge of the child being brought up really leads to the conclusion: this is suitable for that, and that is suitable for the other, and this becomes clear no earlier than at the moment when the child leaves elementary school. And it will be part of artistic pedagogy and didactics to be able to decide: one is suited to this, the other to that. Decisions will then be made in accordance with what is demanded in the “key points of the social question” for the circulation of capital, that is, the means of production. A completely new spiritual outlook must emerge, one that, on the one hand, sees through economic life in its inner spiritual vitality and, on the other hand, knows what role spiritual life must play, how spiritual life must shape economic life. This can only be achieved if spiritual life is independent, if economic life does not impose anything on it. It is precisely when one grasps the whole course of human development inwardly that one recognizes how this human development demands the threefold social organism.

So, because on the one hand Turkey and on the other hand Peter the Great's Petrineism have cut us off from the Orient in modern times, we need an independent spiritual life, a spiritual life that truly recognizes the spiritual world in a new form, not as it was in ancient times, when people let nature speak to them. We will then be able to relate this spiritual life to nature. But once we have found this spiritual life, we will also be able to develop it in human beings in such a way that it becomes the content of their skills, so that through this spiritual life, in associative cooperation, they satisfy the ever more vibrant economic life. These thoughts must actually be part of an anthroposophically oriented spiritual science. Therefore, such a spiritual science can only be born out of an understanding of the course of human evolution.

The first thing is that we must strive for a real knowledge of the spirit. The general talk about the spirit in empty, abstract words, as it is prevalent today among official philosophers and other circles, and as it has also become popular, will be of no use for the future. The spiritual world is different from the physical world. Therefore, one cannot gain anything about the spiritual world by abstracting from physical perception, but must gain perceptions of the spiritual world through direct spiritual research. These then appear, of course, as something completely different from what human beings can know if they know only the physical world. People who, out of convenience, want to know only about the physical world, may today call it fantastic when one speaks of the lunar time, the solar time, or the Saturn time. They think that one is expressing ideas when one speaks of these previous incarnations of the earth, which mean nothing to them. They describe things they have no clue about. It's natural that they have no clue, because they don't want to know anything about the spiritual world. Now they're told about the spiritual world, and they think, “Yeah, none of this matches what we already know!” But that's exactly the point: to find worlds that don't match anything we already know. Isn't that more or less how a philosophy professor such as Arthur Drews judges spiritual science? It doesn't correspond to anything he has already imagined. Yes, when the railroad was to be built from Berlin to Potsdam, the postmaster of Berlin also said: Now I am supposed to run railroads to Potsdam! I send out four stagecoaches a week, and there is no one sitting in them. If people want to throw their money out the window, they might as well do it directly!" Of course, the railroads looked different then than the stagecoaches of the staid postmaster of Berlin in the 1930s. But of course, the description of the spiritual world also looks different from what nestles in minds like Arthur Drews'. But he is only characteristic of all the others; he is even still one of the better ones, curiously enough, not because he is good, but because the others are even worse.

It was initially a necessity to show how one can really penetrate the spiritual world while remaining strictly on scientific ground. That was initially what our university course aimed to achieve this fall. And even though everything is still in its infancy, it has at least been shown how, in certain fields, the sciences themselves can elevate knowledge to the recognition of the spiritual as such, and how the spiritual can then penetrate what is gained through sensory perception.

But what can be gained in terms of knowledge, and what will be achieved against the prevailing tendencies of academic science, would remain incomplete—for therein lie the most beautiful beginnings; it has already been shown how psychology, even mathematics, points to spiritual realms—but something would remain incomplete, and therefore it would not be possible to help our civilization, which is in decline, unless a truly elementary, truly intense will also came from the realm that is called the realm of practical economic life. It is necessary that the old customs and habits be truly abandoned and that immediate life be permeated with spirituality. This is something that must come as a blossoming of the anthroposophical movement, that with the help of the soul attitude that can arise from spiritual science, a insight into practical life, especially practical economic life, be brought about, and that it be shown how decline can be averted if one brings into this economic life the consciousness that that one is actually creating something living.

I would say that we should look anew every day at the stark signs of our declining economic life. This old economic life cannot be galvanized. Humanity can only be advanced by creating new economic centers. For just as no one today should be proud of what they gain from conventional science—because that would lead humanity straight into the future predicted by Oswald Spengler—so no one should be proud of what they can gain from the old economic life through efficiency appropriate to that economic life. No one today can be proud of being a physicist, a mathematician, or a biologist in the usual sense. But no one can be proud of being a merchant or an industrialist in the old sense either. And this old sense is the only one that still exists today. We still do not see anything emerging anywhere that would represent true associations. It would be necessary that, if we were to have something here again, as a kind of second event of this Goetheanum, something like this course has been, then something could be seen that can be grasped concretely from practical life itself, standing alongside the sciences. It is not through what one current merely contains that we make progress, but solely through the fact that this other side of striving now really shows itself.

This is still the particularly characteristic feature of our present human development: On the one hand, there are the traditional bearers of the old spiritual life, who denounce and slander anyone who strives for spiritualization out of modern scientific thinking. They do this quite consciously today because they have no interest in the progress of human development and because their primary concern is to hold back this human development. They sometimes do this in such a grotesque manner as that strange scholar who recently spoke about anthroposophy in Zurich and who spoke so crudely that even his colleagues found it too much, so that, as it seems, a kind of small advertisement has come out of this attack on anthroposophy. But they do it; they will do it even more, because they will come forward with very serious slander. There you see what it is all about, appearing in the form of slander and so on, in the form of untruths.

On the other hand, there is still strong resistance today, but it is basically unconscious. And that is a painful experience; in this field, there is definitely an inner opposition, which is sometimes not even meant that way, against what must actually be the direction of spiritual scientific striving. It will be a matter of learning, precisely in this field, to go along fully with what spiritual science can want there. For to judge what must be desired from spiritual science according to the subjective standards that have been customary up to now would be exactly the same thing in this field as what pastors and others do in other fields when they denounce spiritual science. This is what makes our anthroposophical movement difficult, that in this field, in particular, a kind of inner opposition is clearly noticeable. One can say that it is precisely in this field that what is so strange about certain accusations made from some quarters becomes most clearly apparent. It is said: In this Anthroposophical Society, everyone just parrots what someone else says — and in reality they are not parroting at all, but saying what they themselves think, that someone else wants them to say. We have experienced this so often, haven't we? People often say that I told them what they want to hear, even though they heard exactly the opposite from me. This is the prevailing belief in authority. A strange belief in authority! It has been demonstrated in many cases. But it would be particularly harmful if this which is a strange kind of opposition — opposition has actually always been more prevalent than belief in authority, and therefore the accusation of belief in authority is really quite unfair — were to take on further dimensions in the realm of practical life. For then, as long as it is still possible, the opponents of anthroposophical endeavour would naturally say: Well, it is a sectarian, fantastical movement that cannot be practical. Of course it cannot be practical if practitioners do not engage with it, just as one cannot sew if one does not have a needle, no matter how well one understands sewing.

I would just like to point out something that needs to be taken into account. I am not expressing criticism, nor am I referring to anything that has happened in the past, but rather pointing out something that is necessary for the future. Of course, I would not be pointing this out if I did not see all kinds of smoke clouds rising. But I am really only pointing out something that should be seen as a call to really work together from all sides and not to hide behind reactionary practices and behind the ramparts of reactionary anthroposophy, even if you want to help it, because ultimately you are destroying it. So I am not pointing to something that has already happened, but to what is necessary for the future. It is already necessary to think about these things.

I will have to leave it at that for today. We will then continue tomorrow and the day after tomorrow with this preface, which, as you will see, is an introduction to the contemplation of Christ for the 20th century.