Karmic Relationships VII
GA 239
11 June 1924, Breslau
Lecture V
As our studies continue we shall, gradually come to understand what karma may signify in the individual life of man, although I shall constantly be drawing attention to certain karmic connections of personalities known in history. For if we observe the manifestations of karma across the wide perspective of history, light will also be shed upon details of our own karma which cannot fail to interest us. At the very outset let it be said that clairvoyant insight is not essential to the perception, the feeling, of the working of karma. It is quite true that in order to survey the whole range of karmic laws such insight is necessary; and much that I have been telling you during the last few days can, of course, be discovered only by means of clairvoyance. But the feeling, the clear and distinct feeling for karma is a preparation for clairvoyant insight. This feeling and perception can play a part in the life of every individual provided that he is not exclusively concerned with superficialities and outwardly sensational happenings, but unfolds a sensitive understanding of the more intimate experiences of existence and an inkling of certain connections of destiny which by their very nature show that they cannot possibly be rooted in the one earthly life between birth and death.
Let us think of how we meet and become acquainted with other human beings. By far the greatest part of our destiny depends upon these meetings. We meet one person or another and the experiences we share with him have an effect upon our life. And precisely the experiences we share with others in different circumstances of life will make it evident to attentive observation that karma is not irreconcilable with the ingrained feeling of the extent to which our actions are the outcome of free decision. After all, we are sent into existence in an epoch of life when as far as earthly impulses are concerned there can be no question of freedom. A very great deal depends upon how we are placed in existence as children. The faculties that are drawn out of us, the paths along which we are directed—all this is of infinite significance in the destiny of our whole life. Later on, as independent human beings, we can of course take a hand in directing our own existence but even then the place assigned to us in childhood is determinative. And so if we observe closely we shall certainly be able to perceive how destiny plays into our free actions, our free deeds and activities.
Think of the following.—We meet other human beings and there is clearly a difference between one kind of acquaintanceship and another. We may meet someone for the first time and feel at once that there is a bridge leading over from our soul to his. We may well be strongly drawn to him but not nearly as interested in the details of his outward appearance, whether he is handsome or ugly, whether he looks friendly or ill-disposed. What draws us to him is something that wells up from within us; we feel sympathy towards him. In the case of another person we may actually feel antipathy simply when we are near him and conscious of his presence. Our feeling for him does not depend upon the impression he makes through his actions or what he actually says to us. Such experiences stand in earthly existence like question-marks, like far-reaching problems set us by reality. With both these kinds of acquaintanceship we feel no urge at all to ask: what is the individual really like? What does he actually do? Everything that attracts us to him gathers into an aggregate of feelings arising from experiences and components of our soul-life, feelings which there is no need to justify by what he actually does.
But there are acquaintanceships of a different kind, where no such experiences occur. Although there is no feeling of deep-seated sympathy or antipathy, such individuals interest us. We feel an urge to discover whether their attitude is friendly or unfriendly, whether they are gifted or not gifted. Having made such an acquaintanceship it may happen that we meet someone who also knows the person in question and we feel we want to talk about him, to ask about his position in life, who he is, and so forth; we are interested in what he is outwardly. But in connection with an acquaintance of the other category we may find it extremely embarrassing to meet someone who knows him and begins to speak about him. We simply do not want to talk about this person. Now when Spiritual Science endeavours to get to the root of an occurrence of this nature, it turns out that if an inexplicable feeling of affection or dislike wells up in us when we meet a particular person, then we have had some karmic tie with him in the past and this has really guided our whole path in such a way that at a certain moment in life we come across him. Experiences shared in past ages shape and determine the feelings we have about him. And it is these feelings that count—not whether he is good-looking or ugly, kindly or ill-disposed. When such feelings are emphatic and distinct and it is possible for spiritual-scientific investigation to shed light upon them, their explanation is forthcoming from what such investigation has to say about karma that was formed in the past. Moreover we shall find this confirmed in many other ways.
During sleep, when we are outside our physical and etheric bodies, living a spiritual existence in the ‘I’ and astral body, dreams occur. But with rigorous self-observation let us ask ourselves whether it is not the case, when certain acquaintanceships are accompanied by these uprising feelings and experiences, that we at once begin to dream about these people. We dream so readily about certain acquaintances. This indicates that there is a connection between the person in question and our own soul-and-spirit which has shared experiences with him either in many lives or maybe in one life only; our ‘I’ and astral body in which we live during sleep, are connected in some way with this individual. Others whom we may encounter in our profession, business or the like, interest us in the different way I described. It may well happen that we have a great deal to do with them; life throws us together, but we simply cannot dream about them. In such cases the connection belongs only to the present earthly life and the link is made by what binds the soul-and-spiritual part of man to the physical and the etheric. Now it is paramountly the physical and etheric bodies which are involved in interests connected with external activities, outward appearances, and the reason why we cannot dream about these particular people is that the physical and etheric bodies lie there in the bed and the being of soul-and-spirit is not within them. Spiritual Science reveals that although karma is certainly at work here it is only now beginning to form and that not until we look back from spiritual existence upon this earthly life will it be possible to say that karmic connections began in that life. In this case, karma is in process of coming into being.
We have heard how karma takes shape, how all that we experience in communion with spiritual Beings between death and a new birth works for long ages at the weaving of karma. But if you reflect upon what has here been said about the laws of karma, you will say to yourselves: earthly life brings human beings together and a karmic link is formed between them; they pass together through the life between death and rebirth and in cooperation with higher Beings shape their karma for the next earthly life. What, then, is the consequence in the earthly life of man? Broadly speaking this: that individuals who have been together in an earthly life where karma begins to form, will endeavour in the next earthly life to find their way to one another again. Once again they will establish karmic links, will again pass through the life between death and rebirth where a still stronger link is forged between them, and again seek for a common earthly existence. And here the remarkable fact comes to light that as Earth-evolution runs its course, human beings live together in groups. Time flows on: a certain group of human beings living as contemporaries in a particular epoch and karmically connected with one another, appears again on the Earth after the life spent between death and rebirth. A different group of human beings linked together by karmic ties appears on the Earth in a common existence; a third group likewise. As the periods between death and rebirth are by far the longer, it follows that the majority of human beings only meet in the life after death and before birth and that those specially connected with one another by karma pass through evolution in groups, coming together again and again on the Earth. That is the general rule. As a rule it is the case that on Earth we do not encounter those who formerly were not incarnated at the same time as ourselves.
We learn that this is so when with spiritual insight we ponder upon the facts and consequences of human relationships. Provided we reflect without prejudices or preconceptions, spiritual observation will certainly confirm what has here been said.—As you know, for a considerable time in my early life I was engrossed in the study of Goethe. I had this spiritual preoccupation with Goethe so much at heart that I often asked myself: What if I had been a contemporary of Goethe? Outwardly, the prospect would have been entrancing! For when one is strongly drawn to Goethe, loves to steep oneself in his works and devotes part of one's life to elucidating and interpreting him, how could one fail to think of how delightful it would have been to have lived in Weimar at the same time, to have seen him, perhaps even to have been able to converse with him. But that, after all, is a superficial point of view which deeper insight immediately corrects. At all events I realised that the very thought of living as a contemporary of Goethe would be quite unbearable. For one treasured Goethe so highly just because the creations he bequeathed had worked in one for a time and it was then possible to draw it all forth again from spiritual depths of world-existence. To have lived as a contemporary of Goethe would have been unbearable! When it is clear that the relationship was the result of having been born at a later time, when the subtler connections of the life of soul are taken into account in a case like this where one is drawn to a personality with whom karma did not bring one into direct contact, where the karmic relationships are more complicated, it becomes clear to spiritual insight that had one lived at the same time as this personality, he would have acted like poison upon the soul. I know that this is a strong statement, but it is a fact, nevertheless. To have been a contemporary of Goethe would have made it impossible to keep one's own disposition and configuration of soul firmly knit.
From the wider point of view such circumstances sharpen our perception of the inner truths, the inner relationships, of human life. We no longer talk out of the blue nor shall we be tempted to come out with the hackneyed exclamation: ‘Oh, if only I had been alive then!’ When karma is interpreted rightly, it becomes a source of strength in the circumstances of our life, establishes us in earthly existence at the place where we truly belong. That karma is in truth destiny becomes plain when we begin to reflect upon why we were born at a particular time. We come into earthly existence just when we do, because together with other souls who are karmically connected with us we have prepared our karma for the time when we are to descend to physical existence on Earth.
What I have been telling you is the general rule—but in the spiritual world everything is individual. Rules have their significance but this must not be taken to imply that they are to be regarded as principles. A man who is a stickler for rules, who insists that they can have no exceptions, will never find his way into the spiritual world. For in the spiritual world nothing is the same as it is in the physical world. What could be more obvious to a man living in the physical world than the mathematical axiom: the whole is greater than any of its parts—or the straight way is the shortest distance between two points? Only a lunatic would contend that the whole is not greater than any of its parts. Such things are called ‘axioms’ because they are self-evident truths and, as it is said, cannot and need not be proved. The same applies to the formula: the straight way is the shortest distance between any two points. But neither formula holds good in the spiritual world. What actually holds good in the spiritual world is the formula: the whole is always smaller than any one of its parts. And we find confirmation of this in the very being of man. Observed in the spiritual world, the spiritual counterpart of your physical being is about the size—a trifle larger but approximately the same size as it is in the physical world. When, however, you see your lungs or your liver in the spiritual world, they are of gigantic magnitude, and yet they are parts of something small. We have to learn to change our thinking entirely. In the spiritual world the straight way is by no means the shortest but on the contrary the very longest, because in that world to move from one point to another is a different matter altogether. In the physical world it is pedantically correct to say: that way is long, this longer, this—the straight—the shortest. But in the spiritual world the straight way presents such enormous difficulties that any of the winding ways is the shorter. Hence there is no sense in saying: the straight way is the shortest between any two points—because in actual fact it is the longest of all.
We have to recognise that in the spiritual world nothing is the same as in the physical world. The reason why people find it so difficult to reach the spiritual world with the exercises they practise quite faithfully is that they cling to preconceptions such as: the whole is greater than any of its parts, or, the straight way is the shortest between two points. So much for the axioms.
But we must also give up clinging to all other truths which hold good in the physical world if we are to penetrate into the spiritual world. In the spiritual world there can be no all-embracing principles, for everything there is individual. Each fact must be approached as something entirely individual. In the spiritual world there is none of this dreadful, logical assembling of facts, this basing of everything upon general rules. And so the truth of which I have spoken, namely, that human beings pass through their earthly evolution in groups—although it is indeed a truth and holds good in the broad sense—is sometimes broken through. And precisely from those cases where it is broken through we can realise its significance. Let me give an example.
You must forgive these examples being taken from my own life. After all, how can there be closer knowledge of examples of these things than when they are drawn from one's own life? In recounting the story of my life I have mentioned a geometry teacher of mine. Not only had I great affection for this teacher while I was actually his pupil, but afterwards too, and it was interesting for me to investigate his karma and the whole setting of his life. I myself had a personal weakness, as the saying goes, for geometry. Even at the age of nine, a geometry book that fell into my hands brought me sheer delight; it was written by this teacher who thought me far too immature for anything of the kind. To learn that the three angles of a triangle total 180° was sheer joy to me when I was a boy of nine. But later on, when I was about twelve, and for some years after, this man was my geometry teacher. He was a most remarkable and interesting personality, for he was, so to say, the very embodiment of geometry—but of a particular kind: descriptive, constructive geometry. In the higher classes I was obliged to learn analytical geometry—as it is called—from others, because my former teacher simply did not understand it. He was a first-rate constructor and in that branch he was wonderfully impressive. I myself made remarkable progress in geometry just because I loved him so deeply. It was always a happy hour for me when this teacher came into the class and demonstrated geometry in his own characteristic way. Later on—because my interest in him never waned—I realised that it was only natural to investigate the karmic setting of his life. Now when it is a matter of investigating karma, one can get nowhere by focusing attention upon what, at first sight, makes the most striking impression. If I had paid attention only to his excellence as a teacher of geometry, I should certainly never have discovered the threads of his karma. But what made a deep impression upon me in connection with his life was the fact that he had a club-foot. One leg was shorter than the other. These are details which in the ordinary way are thought to have no bearing upon the actual life. The things of really deep interest, however, are those which lead to the karmic connections. They need not necessarily be very striking. One may actually be led to a man's karmic connection by some repeated habit. A trifling habit may form itself into a picture and lead one to the karmic connections in earlier lives of the person concerned. And so in the case of another teacher for whom I had great affection, I was guided to certain karmic connections—of which I do not now propose to speak—through the fact that whenever this teacher came to his class, the first thing he did was to take out his handkerchief and blow his nose! He never by any chance began a lesson without doing this, and the picture into which this habit shaped itself led me back to his earlier earthly lives. And it was the same with the other teacher, the one with the clubfoot. In point of fact it was this club-foot which gave me the first clue to his particular talent. It is usually thought that the ability to construct figures from geometrical lines comes from the head. But that is simply not the case. Man does not experience geometry through his head. You would never be able to think of an angle if you did not walk. It is because you experience the angle in your legs that you know something about it. The head merely looks on, perceives how the arms or the legs form angles. In geometry we actually experience our own will weaving through our limbs. Our limbs teach us geometry. It is only because we have become such creatures of abstraction that we are unaware of this and firmly believe that all geometrising goes on in the head. The head looks on. perceives how we walk, or dance, or whatever it may be. and then evolves the geometrical figures. And now the whole connection, the reason for this characteristic way of presenting geometry, was clear to me as I studied the inner constitution of this man who was obliged to walk about with a club-foot and who because of the deep effect it had upon him became such an excellent geometrician—but in one direction only. Such things belong to the more intimate concatenations of life.
But what led me to further insight? Coupled with this teacher there arose before me the picture of another man, also with a club-foot, namely, the English poet, Lord Byron. The two men with this physical similarity came in a picture before me, side by side, and many things that had played over from earlier karma into the moral and ethical connections of Byron's life but had also come to expression in his club-foot, became clear to me. When perception of karma has reached this point, its range widens and I was now able to discover that these two men had lived as companions in Eastern Europe at a certain time during the Middle Ages; they had shared a similar destiny and the content of their lives at that time was revealed to me.
Neither the earlier life of Byron nor that of my teacher resembled their lives in the nineteenth century. But the two had been associated in destiny of a very intimate kind. During their lives in Eastern Europe they came to know of the significant legend concerning the palladium—the treasure endowed with magical power upon which the might of Troy depended. The palladium had been buried in Troy and was an object of veneration there. Then it was taken across Africa to Rome where it remained for long ages. When he founded Constantinople, the Emperor Constantine caused this palladium—upon which the power, first of Troy and then of Rome was said to depend—to be removed at the cost of great hardships and with tremendous pomp, to Constantinople, where it was sunk in the ground, in order that the power of Constantinople should replace that of Rome. It is said—and with considerable truth—that the Emperor's arrogance had caused him to transfer the palladium from Rome to Constantinople where he erected a massive column over the spot at which it had been sunk and had a statue of Apollo placed upon this column. The task of bringing the column to Constantinople was one of enormous difficulty, entailing the construction of a special road. The column had originally been brought from Egypt to Rome and its weight was so enormous that every road to Constantinople subsided and became dangerous. The column was erected and the palladium safely protected. The Emperor ordered the statue of Apollo to be set in place but let it be known that this statue was a representation of himself. Then, having caused wood and nails from the Cross of Christ to be brought from the East, he had the wood inserted into the statue and the nails moulded into rays around the head of Apollo. Constantine pictured himself standing there aloft, surrounded by rays of glory fashioned from the wood and the nails of the Cross of Christ. Later on, another legend came to be associated with the palladium, a legend which still played a part in the Testament of Peter the Great, to the effect that the palladium would be carried off by men of the East to their capital, that in time to come the power of the Slavs would be founded on its magical power; through the palladium, so it was said, power would pass to the Slavs just as it had passed to Troy, to Rome, to Constantinople. Such things contain deep truths, even though they are presented in the form of legend.
But this much is certain: anyone who understands the history of the palladium will understand very much of the course taken by European history. This legend came to the knowledge of the two men of whom I have spoken—Byron and his contemporary in the early Middle Ages—and they resolved to seize the palladium and take it to the North, to Russia. They did not succeed; the project failed, as indeed it was bound to do. But something of it remained in the two men; in karmic connections, something remained in them in a strange and remarkable way. At a later time, Byron sought for the palladium in a different fashion; he allied himself with the movement for liberty in Greece—it was the search for a spiritual palladium. This was the urge that had remained in him from the time of which I spoke. And it was clear to anyone who observed my teacher closely, that in spite of his relatively unimportant position, in whatever situation he might be, he evinced an inflexible sense for freedom which was deeply connected in his inmost being with the bodily defect—just as in the case of the one who was his earlier contemporary.
What, then, had happened to these two men? Their paths had separated and they did not find one another again. One of them was Lord Byron, the famous poet; the other, who lived at a slightly later time, was the unknown geometry teacher. In that case the rule of which I have spoken was broken through. But in a curious way, life itself brought me confirmation of this. The teacher I loved so deeply, eagerly awaiting him whenever he came to give his geometry lesson, never once gave me an opportunity of a private conversation with him during the whole of the time he was my teacher. He was like a personality of whom I had only read in history. He did not really fit into the times; one got the impression that he was misplaced in his epoch. Later on, when for the purpose of an anthroposophical lecture I visited the town where he was living in retirement, I looked for his name in the directory. I felt that he must be there and now, after such a lapse of time—thirty years or so—I had a desire to talk to him personally, as a friend. By this time he was quite elderly and lived in Graz, the Austrian home of many University pensioners. I went to Graz for the lecture, found his name in the directory and made up my mind to call on him. But visits from others prevented me, even then, from any private talk with him. Although I loved him so dearly, he remained a shadow-personality in my life. When I went to Graz a second time, I again wanted to visit him, but he had since died. And so here I was confronted with a personality who although I felt so near to him, seemed to be like someone I had merely read about, someone who belonged to a quite different epoch. The circumstances were something like this: I was a contemporary of his but had no karmic connection with him. In none of his earlier incarnations had he been a contemporary of mine. This last life was plainly outside the sequence of the karmic groups to which he really belonged. This was also confirmed by the other case. There had been a departure from the sequence of incarnations to which my teacher belonged because in this earthly life he was not connected with the individual with whom he had formerly been associated. Byron and he did not meet. I am telling you these things in order to show you how karma works and how, by deeper observation, precisely through experiences which, to begin with, are bound to be riddles—and life, after all, is full of riddles—one can really perceive the mysterious weaving of karma. But just as certain contemporaries seem to be only pictures because they have moved out of their own karmic sequence, on the other hand one is fully aware that by far the greater majority of human beings are placed in their epoch by strong, inner necessity. This is often very clear in the case of historical personalities.
Here again, let me give an example. Garibaldi, the champion of liberty in Italy, is a well-known figure. His was in truth a remarkable life. As a personality, Garibaldi attracted me as little as the one I mentioned yesterday, whose karma I investigated. It was in the course of research, and not until then, that I began to be more drawn to Garibaldi. Before I had investigated his karmic connections a great deal about him had seemed to me to be unnatural, hollow—which he most certainly was not. This personality, in spite of being intensely active in politics and practical affairs, seems, when one observes him closely, to stand in a strange way outside life—as if he were living in a purely imagined world, as if he were hovering a little above the Earth. Practical as he was, Garibaldi was also an idealist, as is clear even from his external life. We need only think of a few characteristic episodes in Garibaldi's life and this is at once obvious.—I will speak briefly because time is getting on.—It was by no means an everyday occurrence for a young man to sail around the Adriatic Sea in the first half of the nineteenth century—Garibaldi was born in 1807—at a time when its waters were so fraught with danger. He fell more than once into the hands of pirates and freed himself again after perilous adventures. Occasionally, of course, something of the kind may also happen to others, but it certainly does not occur often, as it did to Garibaldi, that when a man has been for a time beyond the reach of newspapers and finally gets hold of one, he reads in it the announcement of his own death sentence! That was what happened to Garibaldi. He had returned from some maritime adventure and without knowing it had been accused of participating in certain political conspiracies. Sentence of death had been passed upon him in his absence and he read this in the newspaper. He seemed through his destiny to stand a little above actual life.
But other events in his life are even more unusual. Thus, for example, it happened that as the ship in which he had sailed to a foreign country in order to share in certain struggles for freedom, was nearing the coast, he looked through a telescope at the land. There he saw a young, attractive girl and forthwith fell in love with her—through the telescope! It is certainly not the normal way of falling in love. People who are firmly grounded in life do not fall in love through a telescope! But Garibaldi fell head over heels in love and brought his ship with all speed to the spot where he had caught sight of the girl. When he arrived she had vanished, but a man standing there took such a liking to him that he invited him to a meal—it turned out that he was the father of the very girl with whom Garibaldi had fallen in love through the telescope! Thus Garibaldi was able to partake of the meal in the girl's company. He could speak only Italian, she only Portuguese, but both of them understood the language of the heart and they became betrothed. Their life together demanded great valiance on the part of the woman. She accompanied him on his campaigns, acting throughout with great heroism. The circumstances are by no means usual! The first child is born while the husband is many leagues distant and while the wife searches for him on the battlefield she has to strap the child round her neck with a rope in order to keep it warm. She hears that her husband has been killed, faces every imaginable danger in search of him, but finally finds him alive. In spite of everything it was a marriage altogether to be admired. Those familiar with Garibaldi's biography will be aware that the wife predeceased him by a long time and a year after her death, as not infrequently happens, he again became betrothed and married another woman, just like any conventional citizen. This marriage, which was an accomplished fact, lasted only one day and the two separated. Quite obviously, Garibaldi's connection with earthly existence was different from that of other men, and it interested me to investigate a life such as this.
The research led me once again to the Irish Mysteries. Garibaldi too was an individuality who had passed through the Mysteries of Hibernia. Having reached a certain degree of Initiation, he journeyed eastwards, actually working together with others, in the Rhineland. But in respect of karma, what interested me particularly in the life of Garibaldi was that here was a personality whose activities are really difficult to explain. For in a certain sense Garibaldi was the very personification of sincerity. In the deepest fibres of his being, in his whole attitude of soul, he was a Republican—yet in spite of this it was actually through him that Victor Emanuel came to sit on the Throne of Italy. Garibaldi championed the Monarchy in the person of Victor Emanuel. To begin with it all seems incredible. What induced this Republican to make Victor Emanuel King of Italy? Look it up in history and you will find that without Garibaldi there would have been no Italian Monarchy. And then again, Garibaldi is associated with other personalities—Cavour, Mazzini—whose outlooks and leanings are poles apart from his own inner attitude. Cavour and Mazzini are men of utterly different mentality. Mazzini, the idealist who takes no part in practical affairs; Garibaldi, invariably the practical, militaristic statesman but for all that seeming to hover a little above the earthly; Cavour, the shrewd, astute politician—how do these men fit together? That was the problem. And precisely here something comes to light that I will put before you as a characteristic feature in karma. It turns out that these other three men had been followers of Garibaldi when he had been an Initiate in Hibernia; they were his pupils. Now it was an essential principle of the old Irish Mysteries that a vital link should be formed between pupil and teacher. They cannot separate from one another, at all events not in certain incarnations. A karmic tie is forged and there can be no separating. In this particular case we find very singular circumstances: about the year 1807, these four men are born again, one in Genoa, two in Turin, the fourth in Nice—that is to say in the same corner of the globe and also approximately at the same time. They are born together—in the same epoch and in the same region. This is a case where men who belong together are brought together again, in spite of their personal leanings. A fervent Republican such as Garibaldi is tied to Victor Emmanuel—a man with such different persuasions and convictions—and the human relationship counts for far more than all the rest. I give this example to show you what human relationships that are based on karma, really signify. The one may believe this, the other that—but the karmic connection is by far the stronger bond. It is these human relationships that take effect in life, not so much the abstract things mediated by the intellect. But it is only by examining karma in characteristic cases that we discover how human beings are connected with one another, and how, if they have shifted away from the stream to which their own karma really belongs, they may pass through life like shadows.
So much for to-day. We shall continue these studies tomorrow.
Zwölfter Vortrag
Wir werden im Verlaufe unserer Betrachtungen nach und nach übergehen zu demjenigen, was Karma im einzelnen Menschenleben bedeuten kann, obwohl ich auch da immer wieder den Blick hinwenden werde auf gewisse karmische Zusammenhänge, welche durch Persönlichkeiten aufgetreten sind, die in der Geschichte sichtbar geworden sind. Denn auch das Einzelnste, was uns in unserem eigenen Karma interessieren, was uns nahe gehen muß, wird beleuchtet in der Weise, wie wir es brauchen, wenn wir auf die umfassenden geschichtlichen Karma-Erscheinungen hinblicken. Zunächst sei darauf aufmerksam gemacht, daß es durchaus nicht notwendig ist, um sich der Empfindung, dem Gefühl von einem Vorhandensein des Karma zu nähern, irgendwelche hellseherischen Einsichten gerade zu haben. Gewiß, um zu überblicken alle Zusammenhänge der karmischen Gesetzmäßigkeiten, sind solche Einblicke notwendig, und manches von demjenigen, was ich in den verflossenen Tagen hier beigebracht habe, ist natürlich nur durch solche Einsichten zu gewinnen. Aber den Weg zu solchen Einsichten bahnt, ich möchte sagen, die Empfindung, die deutliche Empfindung von dem Karma, die eingreifen kann in jedes einzelne Menschenleben, wenn dieses Menschenleben nur nicht oberflächlich an den Dingen vorbeigeht und den Blick nur auf die äußerlich sensationsreichen Ereignisse richtet, sondern wenn dieses Menschenleben etwas sich abgewinnen kann nach der Richtung, die intimeren Erlebnisse des Daseins zu überblicken, gefühlsmäßig zu durchdringen und dadurch sich selber eine Art von Ahnung davon zu verschaffen, wie gewisse schicksalsmäßige Zusammenhänge eben im Leben dastehen, die schon durch ihr eigenes Wesen zeigen, daß sie nicht bloß begründet sein können im einmaligen Erdenleben zwischen Geburt und Tod.
Sehen wir doch einmal hin auf die Art, wie wir Menschen im Leben begegnen können. Von unserer Begegnung mit Menschen im Leben hängt ja der weitaus größte Teil unserer Schicksale im Leben ab. Wir begegnen dem einen, wir begegnen dem anderen Menschen. Dasjenige, was wir mit ihm zusammen erleben, das greift in unser Dasein ein. Und gerade in diesem gemeinsamen Erleben mit Menschen in .diesen oder jenen Lebensverhältnissen wird sich der aufmerksamen Beobachtung so recht zeigen, daß das Karma durchaus nicht dem widerspricht, was wir als unsere freie Empfindung in uns tragen, als die Empfindung dessen, was in unserem Handeln freien Entschlüssen unterliegt. Wir werden ja zunächst als Kind hineingestellt in das Dasein in einer solchen Lebensepoche, in der von Freiheit eben noch nicht die Rede sein kann, so weit der irdische Impuls in Betracht kommt. Und wie vieles hängt doch von der Art und Weise ab, wie wir als Kind in das Dasein hineingestellt werden! Welche Fähigkeiten da aus unserem Inneren herausgeholt werden, welche Wege uns zugewiesen werden, das ist von einer unendlich großen, schicksalsmäßigen Bedeutung in unserem ganzen Erdenleben. Gewiß, wir können dann später mehr oder weniger als selbständige Menschen in unser eigenes Leben eingreifen, aber wir können das doch nur an dem Platze, den uns die Kindheit angewiesen hat. Und so werden wir schon sehen, wenn wir genau betrachten, was in unser freies Handeln schicksalsmäßig deutlich, klar hineinspielt.
Nun nehmen wir einmal den Fall: Wir begegnen im Leben Menschen. Da stellt sich ja ein deutlicher Unterschied heraus zwischen der einen Art von Begegnungen, die wir mit Menschen haben, und der anderen Art. Es kann sein, daß wir einem Menschen in diesem Erdenleben durchaus zum ersten Male gegenübertreten, und wir haben sogleich das Gefühl, daß eine Brücke hinübergeht von unserer Seele nach der Seele dieses Menschen. Und es kann durchaus sein, daß wir für diesen Menschen intensiv empfinden, aber uns vielleicht durchaus nicht ebenso stark gleich des näheren interessieren, wie er ausschaut, ob er schön oder häßlich ist, ob er freundlich oder unfreundlich schaut. Dasjenige, was uns zu diesem Menschen hinzieht, steigt aus unserem Inneren auf, wir entwickeln sympathische Gefühle. Ja, in dem einen oder anderen Falle kann es sein, daß wir antipathische Gefühle entwickeln, die eigentlich nur davon abhängen, daß wir in dieses Menschen Nähe gekommen sind und uns bewußt geworden sind, daß er da ist; aber was wir von ihm empfinden, das hängt nicht ab von dem Eindruck, den er durch sein Handeln oder durch die Worte macht, die er zunächst zu uns sagt. Solche Erlebnisse stellen sich ja hinein in das Erdendasein wie die großen Fragezeichen, wie die umfassenden Lebensprobleme, die uns die Wirklichkeit aufgibt. Und dann ist es wohl so, daß wir uns gar nicht gedrängt fühlen. nun nachzudenken, wenn wir eine solche Bekanntschaft gemacht haben: Wie ist der Mensch, was tut der Mensch? Alles, was uns zu ihm hinzieht, zieht sich gewissermaßen zusammen zu einer Summe von Gefühlen, in eine Summe von inneren Erlebnissen und Ausfüllungen unserer Seelenverfassung, denen gegenüber wir gar nicht das Bedürfnis haben, sie zu rechtfertigen an dem, was er tut.
Aber es gibt Begegnungen anderer Art mit Menschen, da steigt keine solche Empfindung auf. Aber diese Menschen beginnen uns zu interessieren, ohne daß wir eigentlich fühlen, dieser oder jener tief in die Seele gehende Zug von Sympathie und Antipathie ist da. Die Menschen interessieren uns. Wir fühlen uns gedrängt, nachzugehen, ob sie gut, böse, wohlwollend, mißwollend sind, ob sie Fähigkeiten haben oder keine Fähigkeiten haben. Und in der Zeit, die dann auf solche Bekanntschaft folgt, zeigt es sich - sagen wit, wenn wir jemand gerade treffen, der auch einen solchen Menschen kennt, den wir getroffen haben und mit dem wir nun über den gleichen Menschen sprechen -, daß wir uns angeregt fühlen, uns über den Menschen zu unterhalten. Wir erkundigen uns gerne über ihn, wer er ist, worinnen er steckt im Leben und so weiter, wir interessieren uns für dasjenige, was äußerlich an ihm ist. Bei den Menschen der ersten Art kann es sogar vorkommen, daß es uns höchst unangenehm ist, wenn wir einen anderen Menschen treffen, der ihn auch kennt und der gleich anfängt, über ihn zu plaudern. Wir wollen gar nicht über diesen Menschen reden. Wenn nun so etwas auftritt im Leben - und die geisteswissenschaftlichen Methoden versuchen, hinter derlei Geheimnisse zu kommen -, da stellt sich ja dieses heraus, wenn wir im gewissen Sinne uns liebwerdendes oder verhaßtwerdendes unerklärliches Empfinden bei der Begegnung mit einem Menschen aufsteigen haben, daß wir dann mit diesem Menschen durch die Vergangenheit hindurch irgendwie karmisch verbunden waren, und daß uns dasjenige, was wir mit ihm gemeinsam hatten, eigentlich schon das ganze Erdenleben die Wege geführt hat, um ihn in einem gewissen Moment im Leben zu treffen. Und dasjenige, was wir mit ihm gemeinsam gehabt haben in vergangenen Zeiten, das formt unsere Gefühle, das formt unsere Empfindungen ihm gegenüber. Und diese Empfindungen, diese Gefühle sind maßgebend, nicht, ob er schön oder häßlich ist, oder ob er ein wohlwollender oder übelwollender Mensch ist. Gerade wenn man ganz deutlich und klar so etwas empfindet, so wird man durch diese Empfindung dann, wenn es sein kann, daß geisteswissenschaftliche Forschung in eine solche Sache hineinleuchtet, die Empfindung gerechtfertigt finden durch dasjenige, was geisteswissenschaftliche Forschung über ein in der Vergangenheit geformtes Karma zu sagen hat. Und wir werden noch durch mancherlei andere Dinge das, was ich da sage, bestätigt finden.
Wenn wir schlafen, aus unserem physischen und Ätherleibe heraus sind, nur im Ich und im astralischen Leibe geistig in der Welt vorhanden sind, unser physischer und unser Ätherleib im Bette liegen geblieben ist, getrennt von der eigentlichen geistig-seelischen Wesenheit, da steigen ja für das gewöhnliche Bewußtsein die Träume auf. Aber ist es denn nicht so - fragen Sie sich einmal in einer intensiven Selbstbeobachtung -, daß wir bei gewissen Begegnungen, die gerade so geartet sind, daß im Inneren die Empfindungen und Gefühle aufsteigen, sogleich alle möglichen Träume von diesem Menschen haben? Wir können so leicht träumen von dem einen oder dem anderen Menschen. Das zeigt, daß dieser Mensch mit unserem Geistig-Seelischen, das mit ihm gemeinsam durch viele Erdenleben, oder durch mehrere Erdenleben, oder durch ein Erdenleben gegangen ist, zusammenhängt, daß dieses Geistig-Seelische, in dem allein wir jetzt sind, Ich und astralischer Leib, etwas zu tun hat mit diesem Menschen. Anderen Menschen begegnen wir, irgend etwas Berufsmäßiges oder dergleichen führt uns mit ihnen zusammen. Sie interessieren uns in der Art, wie ich es angeführt habe. Ja, es kommt sogar vor, daß wir mit ihnen vielleicht sehr viel zu tun haben; das Leben stellt uns zunächst neben sie hin, aber wir können nicht von ihnen träumen. Wir können es nicht, Träume kommen nicht. Wir sind dann nur in diesem Erdenleben mit ihnen verbunden, und die Verbindung wird zunächst hergestellt durch dasjenige, was das Seelisch-Geistige des Menschen an das Physische und das Ätherische bindet. Und weil der physische Leib und der Ätherleib an diesem Interesse, das wir haben, das an äußere Handlungen und an äußeres Aussehen sich knüpft, vorzugsweise beteiligt sind, und dieser physische und Ätherleib im Bette liegen bleiben und unser geistig-seelisches Wesen fort ist, so können wir von solchen Menschen nicht träumen. Da zeigt uns wiederum die Geisteswissenschaft, daß da allerdings das Karma wirkt, aber es wirkt so, daß sich das Karma jetzt erst anspinnt, daß man erst vom geistigen Erleben nach dem Tode zurückschauen wird auf dieses Erdenleben und wird sagen können: da haben sich karmische Zusammenhänge angeknüpft. Da tritt man ein in ein werdendes Karma.
Wir haben gesehen, wie dieses Karma gewoben wird, wie eine lange Zeit an dem Weben dieses Karma dasjenige arbeitet, was wir gemeinsam erleben mit höheren geistigen Wesenheiten zwischen dem Tod und einer neuen Geburt. Aber wenn Sie sich überlegen, was da in Anlehnung an die Gesetzmäßigkeit des Karma gesagt worden ist, dann werden Sie sich sagen müssen: Menschen werden ja durch das Erdenleben zusammengeführt; dasjenige, was sie im Erdenleben zusammenführt, bindet sie auch karmisch. Sie gehen dann miteinander durch das Leben zwischen Tod und einer neuen Geburt, sie gestalten gerade da mit den höheren Wesenheiten ihr Karma für das nächste Erdenleben aus. Was folgt denn daraus für das Erdenleben des Menschen im groBen ganzen? Im großen ganzen folgt doch daraus, daß die Menschen, die für ein Erdenleben zusammen sind, weil sich ja gerade da das Karma anspinnt, auch wiederum für das nächste Erdenleben zueinander streben werden. Da werden sie wiederum karmische Zusammenhänge begründen, werden wiederum gehen durch das Leben zwischen Tod und neuer Geburt — aber dieses schmiedet sie ja nun stärker zusammen -, um ein gemeinsames Erdenleben wiederum aufzusuchen. Und da kommt ja das Merkwürdige heraus, daß die Menschen im Verlaufe der Erdenentwickelung eigentlich gruppenweise miteinander leben. So ist es auch. Wenn wir uns schematisch diese Sache vor Augen führen, so ist dies ja so: Die Zeit verläuft; eine gewisse Menschengruppe, die in irgendeinem Zeitpunkte miteinander lebt und karmisch miteinander verbunden wird, erscheint wiederum auf Erden, nachdem sie durchgegangen ist durch das Leben zwischen dem Tode und einer neuen Geburt. Eine andere Menschengruppe, die wiederum karmisch sich miteinander verbindet, erscheint wiederum gemeinsam auf der Erde; eine dritte ebenso. Und da die Zeiten zwischen dem Tod und einer neuen Geburt die weitaus längeren sind, so folgt ja daraus, daß sich die meisten Erdenmenschen eigentlich nur begegnen zwischen dem Tode und einer neuen Geburt, und daß die karmisch besonders mit- . einander verbundenen Menschen gruppenweise durch die Entwickelung der Menschheit gehen und immer wieder und wieder auf Erden zusammentreffen. Das ist auch die Regel. In der Regel ist es so, daß wir nicht mit Menschen zusammentreffen auf der Erde, die in einer anderen Zeit als der unsrigen in der Vorzeit inkarniert waren.
Sehen Sie, man erfährt dieses, wenn man in geistiger Betrachtung der Welt wirklich auf die Ereignisse der menschlichen Zusammenhänge eingeht. Wenn man nur unbefangen über das Leben nachdenkt, dann kommt man schon dazu, diese Dinge, die da gesagt werden aus einer geistigen Beobachtung heraus, bestätigt zu finden. Ich habe mich, wie Sie ja wissen, eine lange Zeit in meiner Jugend mit Goethe beschäftigt. Ich habe mich oftmals fragen müssen, da mir die geistige Beschäftigung mit Goethe ganz tief zu Herzen ging: Ja, was wäre denn, wenn ich ein Zeitgenosse Goethes geworden wäre? — Äußerlich betrachtet müßte einem so etwas entzückend vorkommen! Wenn man Goethe gerne hat, wenn man gerade ungeheuer gern eingeht auf dasjenige, was er geschaffen hat, wenn man einen Teil seines Lebens dazu verwendet, ihn zu erklären, zu interpretieren, sollte einem da nicht der Gedanke kommen, es müßte entzückend sein, in Weimar, als Goethe herumgewandelt ist, auch gelebt zu haben und ihn gesehen zu haben, vielleicht ihn haben sprechen zu können? Aber das ist doch nur eine oberflächliche Betrachtung, die sich sofort korrigiert, wenn man genauer auf die Sache eingeht. Wenigstens ich sagte mir: Der Gedanke, mit Goethe gleichzeitig gelebt zu haben, wäre doch eigentlich ganz unerträglich. Denn Goethe ist mir gerade dadurch besonders wert geworden, daß alles da war, was er hinterlassen hat, daß das eine Zeit hindurch gewirkt hat, daß man es wiederum heraussuchen konnte aus den geistigen Urtiefen des Weltenwerdens. Und es ist so: Es wäre gar nicht erträglich gewesen, mit Goethe gleichzeitig zu leben! Nur wenn man das konkrete Verhältnis zu ihm, das man dann hat als Nachgeborener, ins Auge faßt, und wenn man dann übergeht auf die feineren Zusammenhänge des Seelischen gerade in einem solchen Falle, wo man an eine Persönlichkeit herankommt, mit der man nicht gleichzeitig lebt, mit der einen also ein Lebenskarma nicht unmittelbar zusammenführen kann, sondern wo verwickeltere karmische Verhältnisse vorliegen, da zeigt dann die geistige Betrachtung: Hätte man mit einer solchen Persönlichkeit gleichzeitig gelebt, so würde sie auf die Seele wie Gift gewirkt haben. - Ich weiß, es ist damit viel gesagt, aber es ist so. Man würde gar nicht sich in seiner inneren Seelenverfassung zusammenhalten können, wenn man Zeitgenosse dieser Persönlichkeit gewesen wäre.
Auch im ganzen und großen wird ja gerade durch eine solche Betrachtung der Blick für das Menschenleben, für die innere Wahrheit und für die inneren Zusammenhänge des Menschenlebens geschärft. Man redet nicht mehr unbestimmt herum. Man wird gar nicht versucht sein, in die allgemeine phrasenhafte Redensart auszubrechen: «Ach, hätte ich doch damals gelebt!» Das Karma befestigt einen sozusagen, wenn man es richtig erklärt, in seinen Lebensverhältnissen, stellt einen auch an den Ort hin, wo man lebt mit seinem Erdendasein. Damit aber schon zeigt sich der echt schicksalsmäßige Charakter des Karma. Der tritt hervor, wenn wir anfangen nachzusinnen darüber, warum wir gerade in einer bestimmten Zeit ins Erdenleben hereingetreten sind. Es hat uns zu dieser Zeit hereingebracht eben der Umstand, daß wir mit anderen Seelen, mit denen wir karmisch zusammenhängen, unser Karma vorbereitet haben, so für die Zeit vorbereitet, wo wir hineinsteigen in dieses physische Erdendasein.
Nun ist das, was ich auseinandergesetzt habe, die Regel, aber im Geiste ist alles individuell. Regeln haben ihre Bedeutung, aber nicht so, daß wir sie als Prinzipien ansehen dürfen. Wer ein Prinzipienreiter ist, wer Regeln nimmt so, daß sie gar keine Ausnahme haben dürfen, der kann eigentlich niemals in die geistige Welt hereinkommen. Denn in der geistigen Welt ist einmal alles anders als in der physischen Welt. Selbst die einfachsten Sachen sind in der geistigen Welt anders als in der physischen Welt. Ich möchte Ihnen davon ein Beispiel geben. Was könnte klarer sein für einen Menschen, der in der physischen Welt lebt, als der allgemeine mathematische Grundsatz: Das Ganze ist gröBer als jeder seiner Teile, oder: Die Gerade ist der kürzeste Weg zwischen zwei Punkten. Nun, es muß doch einer wirklich verrückt sein, wenn er bestreiten wollte, das Ganze wäre nicht größer als jedes seiner Teile. Man nennt solche Dinge Axiome, weil sie durch sich selbst wahr sind und eines Beweises, wie man so schön sagt, weder fähig noch bedürftig sind. So heißt die Formel. So ist es auch mit dem Satze: Die Gerade ist der kürzeste Weg zwischen zwei Punkten. Aber beide Sätze gelten nicht mehr in der geistigen Welt. In der geistigen Welt gilt sogar der Satz: Das Ganze ist immer kleiner als jedes seiner Teile. Und schon im Menschenwesen finden wir das bekräftigt und bewahrheitet. Wenn Sie nämlich das Geistige von Ihrem physischen Menschen in der geistigen Welt betrachten, so ist es ungefähr so groß — etwas gröBer, aber ungefähr so groß, wie Sie selbst auch in der physischen Welt sind. Wenn Sie aber Ihre Lungen oder Leber in der geistigen Welt betrachten, so sind die riesengroß, und dennoch, sie sind die Teile eines Kleinen. Da müssen wir umdenken lernen. In der geistigen Welt ist die Gerade gar nicht der kürzeste Weg, sondern der allerlängste, weil es in der geistigen Welt, wenn wir von einem Punkte zum anderen kommen, ganz anders hergeht. In der physischen Welt, da geht es pedantisch zu: dieser Weg ist lang, dieser Weg ist länger, jener Weg ist der kürzeste: die Gerade. - In der geistigen Welt ist es nicht so, sondern da bietet, «gerade» herzukommen, so große Schwierigkeiten, daß jeder der krummen Wege kürzer ist als der gerade. Und es hat auch keinen Sinn zu sagen: Die Gerade ist der kürzeste Weg zwischen zwei Punkten -, weil sie in der Tat der längste ist.
Man muß sich durchaus bekanntmachen damit, daß in der geistigen Welt alles anders ist als in der physischen Welt. Deshalb kommen die Menschen so schwer mit ihren Übungen, die sie treulich machen, in die geistige Welt herein, weil sie mit ihrem Urteil haften an solchen Vorurteilen, daß das Ganze größer sei als seine Teile, oder die Gerade der kürzeste Weg sei zwischen zwei Punkten. So ist es mit den Axiomen. Aber alle anderen Wahrheiten für die physische Welt müssen auch abgewöhnt werden, sobald man in die geistige Welt eindringen will. Und so ist es nämlich, daß es in der geistigen Welt keine Prinzipien geben kann, sondern alles ist individuell. Man muß jedes Ding für sich einzeln kennenlernen. Dieses schreckliche logische Zusammenfassen, dieses Ausgeben allgemeiner Regeln gibt es gar nicht in der geistigen Welt. Und so ist natürlich auch diese Wahrheit, obzwar sie eine Wahrheit ist und im großen und ganzen gilt: daß die Menschen gruppenweise die Entwickelung des Erdenlebens absolvieren — sie ist durchbrochen. Und gerade dann, wenn sie durchbrochen ist, lernt man ihre Bedeutung so recht kennen. Auch davon ein Beispiel.
Sie müssen schon verzeihen, daß das Beispiele sind aus dem eigenen Leben. Denn wie sollte man Beispiele genauer kennenlernen, die sich auf solche Dinge beziehen, als wenn sie gerade die Beispiele des eigenen Lebens sind? Da steckt man mit der Individualität drinnen. Ich habe ja bei der Beschreibung meines Lebensganges hingewiesen auf einen Geometrielehrer, den ich hatte. Dieser Geometrielehrer war mir nicht nur außerordentlich nahegestanden, während ich sein Schüler war, sondern auch nachher noch. Und es war mir schon interessant, seinem Karma, seinen Lebenszusammenhängen nachzugehen. Ich hatte ja gerade für Geometrie eine außerordentliche, wie man sagt, Schwäche. Schon mit neun Jahren bildete ein Geometriebuch, das ich so gerade in die Hände bekam von meinem Lehrer, der mich noch lange nicht für reif hielt, so etwas kennenzulernen, sozusagen mein Glück. Wissen zu lernen, daß die drei Winkel eines Dreiecks 180 Grad sind, erschien mir als außerordentlich beglückend im neunten Jahre. Aber dann bekam ich diesen Geometrielehrer, der wirklich eine merkwürdige Persönlichkeit war. Ich war so etwa zwölf Jahre alt, als ich ihn bekam, hatte ihn dann sieben Jahre hindurch. Wirklich, er war eine interessante Persönlichkeit, denn er war eigentlich ganz Geometrie, aber auf eine ganz eigentümliche Art: deskriptive, konstruktive Geometrie. Als ich in die höheren Klassen hinaufkam, zu der sogenannten analytischen Geometrie, da mußte man alles, was man über analytische Geometrie erfuhr, von anderen kennenlernen, denn davon verstand er gar nichts. Er war ein ausgezeichneter Konstrukteur, er konstruierte alles, und er machte einen großartigen Eindruck. Und ich machte eigentlich ganz bedeutsame Fortschritte gerade in der Geometrie, weil ich ihn so außerordentlich liebte. Es war mir immer eine liebe Stunde, wenn gerade dieser Lehrer in die Klasse kam und auf seine Art seine Geometrie entwickelte.
Später sah ich — weil er mich mit dem Interesse festhielt -, daß ich eigentlich gar nicht anders konnte, als über seine Lebenszusammenhänge nachzudenken. Nun ist es, wenn man Karma erforschen will, wirklich so, daß man es gar nicht erforschen kann, wenn man auf die zunächst auffälligen Lebensverhältnisse hinschaut. Hätte ich bloß hingeschaut auf das, daß er ein ausgezeichneter Geometrielehrer war, auf alles das, was er vorzubringen wußte, ich wäre sicher niemals auf die Zusammenhänge seines Karma gekommen. Aber es machte einen tiefen Eindruck auf mich im Zusammenhang mit seinem ganzen Leben, daß dieser Lehrer einen Klumpfuß hatte. Ein Bein war kürzer als das andere.
Sehen Sie, das sind solche Dinge, die eigentlich gewöhnlich als außerhalb des Lebens stehend betrachtet werden. Was einen tief interessiert, das sind solche Dinge, die, wenn man sich darauf einläßt, in die karmischen Zusammenhänge hineinführen. Es muß nicht immer etwas so Auffälliges sein; man kann es erleben, daß man in die karmischen Zusammenhänge hineingeführt wird dadurch, daß jemand eine Gewohnheit hat, die man immer wieder sieht an ihm und die sich zum Bilde formt. Eine kleine Gewohnheit kann sich da zum Bilde formen und einführen karmisch in frühere Leben des betreffenden Menschen. So wurde ich bei einem anderen Lehrer, den ich hatte, den ich ungeheuer gern hatte, tief eingeführt in gewisse karmische Zusammenhänge - über die ich jetzt nicht sprechen möchte - aus der Tatsache heraus, daß jedesmal, wenn dieser Lehrer vor uns hintrat, sein erstes dieses war, daß er sein Taschentuch herausnahm und sich die Nase putzte. Nie hat er eine Stunde anders begonnen. Gerade dieses, das sich immer wiederholte, das formte sich mir zum Bilde, indem es sozusagen karmisch zurückführte in die früheren Erdenleben dieses Menschen. Und so war es bei dem anderen, der den Klumpfuß hatte. Und siehe da, jetzt erst wurde mir aus diesem Klumpfuß heraus ein Licht aufgesteckt über die ganze geistige Kapazität dieses Menschen. Die Menschen glauben nämlich gewöhnlich, Linien zu geometrischen Figuren zu formen, das käme aus dem Kopf. Aber das kommt gar nicht aus dem Kopf, es ist gar nicht wahr, daß der Mensch die Geometrie mit dem Kopf erlebt. Sie würden nicht auf einen Winkel kommen, wenn Sie nicht gehen würden. Daß Sie den Winkel in Ihren Beinen erleben, das macht, daß Sie vom Winkel etwas wissen. Der Kopf schaut bloß zu, wie der Arm oder die Beine Winkel machen und so weiter. Wir erleben in der Geometrie tatsächlich unseren durch unsere Gliedmaßen webenden Willen. Unsere Gliedmaßen lehren uns die Geometrie. Nur weil wir solche Abstraktlinge schon geworden sind, wissen wir das nicht, glauben wir, daß wir die Geometrie aus dem Kopfe herausspinnen. Der Kopf schaut zu, wie wir in der Geometrie gehen, tanzen und so weiter, und dann bildet der Kopf die Formen, die er im Geometrischen hat. Er schaut zu. Und dieser ganze Zusammenhang, diese eigentümliche Art, die Geometrie zu betonen, die wurde mir klar, als ich in das Innere gerade dieses Menschen hineinschaute, der mit einem Klumpfuß gehen mußte, und dadurch, daß er diesen Klumpfuß besonders empfand, eben einseitig ein so ausgezeichneter Geometer wurde. Das sind so die intimeren Zusammenhänge des Lebens.
Aber wodurch kam ich weiter? Es stellte sich mir nun dieser Lehrer neben einen anderen Menschen mit einem ähnlichen Bein, nämlich neben den englischen Dichter Lord Byron. Diese zwei Menschen, die äußerlich der Persönlichkeit nach gleich geartet waren, stellten sich mir nebeneinander, und jetzt erschien mir manches, was im Leben Byrons auftrat, zusammenhängend mit alledem, was sich aus einem früheren Karma in seine moralisch-ethischen Lebensverhältnisse hineingeschlichen hat, was aber auch in seinem Klumpfuß zum Ausdruck gekommen ist. Und dann, wenn man einmal das Karma an einem solchen Zipfel hat, dann bildet es sich einem weiter aus. Und nun konnte ich finden, wie diese zwei Menschen in einer gewissen Zeit des Mittelalters im Osten von Europa miteinander gelebt haben, wie sie da gemeinsam miteinander ein gleiches Schicksal durchgemacht haben. Ich kam auf den Inhalt ihres damaligen Lebens.
Das frühere Leben des Byron war nicht ähnlich dem Leben des Byron des neunzehnten Jahrhunderts; das frühere Leben meines Lehrers ist nicht Ähnlich seinem Leben im neunzehnten Jahrhundert, aber beide haben ein sehr intim geartetes gleichzeitiges Schicksal. Sie erfuhren, als sie Bewohner des europäischen Ostens waren, von jener bedeutungsvollen Legende, daß einstmals das Kleinod des Palladiums, das in Troja — als behaftet mit der Zauberkraft für die Macht Trojas — eingegraben war und verehrt wurde, dann herübergebracht wurde über Afrika nach’ Rom, lange in Rom war, daß dann, als der Kaiser Konstantin Konstantinopel begründete, er unter großen Opfern, mit einem Aufwand, der ungeheuer war, das Palladium, an dem hängen sollte die Macht zuerst Trojas, dann Roms, nach Konstantinopel bringen und es dann in Konstantinopel versenken ließ, um die Macht Konstantinopels an die Stelle der Macht Roms zu setzen. Es wird ja erzählt und ist sogar bis zu einem hohen Grade richtig, daß der Hochmut des Kaisers Konstantin das Palladium von Rom nach Konstantinopel hat bringen lassen, daß er eine mächtige, schwere Säule auf dem Platz aufgerichtet hat, auf dem er das Palladium versenken ließ, daß er dann eine Art Apollo-Statue aufgegriffen hat und diese auf die Säule hinaufstellen ließ. Nun, es war schon sehr schwer, die Säule nach Konstantinopel zu bringen an den Platz, an den sie gebracht wurde, denn man mußte dafür einen eisernen Schienenweg bauen. Die Säule, die einstmals von Ägypten nach Rom gebracht worden war, sie war so schwer, daß jeder Weg, auf dem sie gefahren wurde, sich senkte und es da gefährlich wurde. Dann wurde die Säule aufgerichtet, das Palladium war in der Basis gut verwahrt. Darüber, auf der Spitze der Säule, ließ er nun die Apollo-Statue aufrichten, aber verbreiten, daß die Statue ihn, den Kaiser Konstantin, darstelle. Dann ließ er von dem Kreuze Christi im Orient Holz bringen, das er in der ehernen Statue verbarg, und Nägel aus dem Kreuze Christi, die er zu Strahlen formen ließ; damit ließ er das Haupt des Apollo umgeben. So daß dort oben nach seiner Ansicht der Konstantin stand und in Strahlen erglänzte, die von den Nägeln des Kreuzes Christi selbst genommen waren. Aber es schloß sich eine Legende an dieses Palladium an in der späteren Zeit, und es spielte sogar diese Legende selbst noch in das Testament Peters des Großen hinein: daß dieses Palladium geholt werden würde von Menschen des Ostens nach der Hauptstadt des Ostens, und daß sich einstmals die Slawenmacht des Ostens ebenso begründen werde auf die Zaubermacht dieses Palladiums, wenn es versenkt werden würde mehr im Osten oder im Norden von Konstantinopel, und daß dadurch die Macht auf die Slawen übergehen würde, so wie einstmals an dieses Palladium geknüpft war die Macht Trojas, die Macht Roms, die Macht Konstantinopels. In solchen Dingen liegen ja auch tiefe Wahrheiten verborgen, wenn sie auch legendenhaft auftreten.
Aber schließlich, derjenige, der die Geschichte des Palladiums durchschauen kann, durchschaut ja recht viel von dem Werdegang der europäischen Geschichte. Und diese beiden Menschen, von denen ich gesprochen, Byron und derjenige, der damals sein Genosse war im frühen Mittelalter, die hörten von dieser Legende, und die nahmen sich das einmal vor, daß sie das Palladium holen und hinbringen wollten nach dem Norden, nach Rußland. Es gelang ihnen nicht; sie scheiterten, wie es ja selbstverständlich scheitern mußte. Aber es blieb ihnen etwas davon. In karmischen Zusammenhängen bleibt den Menschen etwas auf die merkwürdigste Weise. Byron suchte später das Palladium auf andere Art, er schloß sich der Freiheitsbewegung Griechenlands an, er wollte ein geistiges Palladium holen. Und das war der Drang, der ihm aus jener Zeit geblieben ist, von der ich erzählte. Und mein Lehrer zeigte für jeden, der ihn intim betrachten konnte, daß er an jedem Platze, an welchem er auch stand, wenn er auch ein verhältnismäßig unbedeutender Mensch war, einen unbändigen Freiheitssinn hatte, der im Inneren einen tiefen Zusammenhang hatte mit dem körperlichen Fehler, ebenso wie sein Genosse.
Nun, was war denn da eigentlich geschehen? Sehen Sie, diese beiden Menschen waren ja auseinandergekommen, die fanden sich nicht wieder: der eine ist der berühmte Dichter Byron, der andere der etwas später lebende, der unbedeutende Geometrielehrer. Da ist die Regel, von der ich gesprochen habe, durchbrochen gewesen. Aber das Leben bestätigte mir diese Durchbrechung in seltsamer Weise. Sehen Sie, jener Geometrielehrer, den ich so innig liebte, auf den ich wartete jedesmal, wenn er zur Stunde hereinkam, jener Geometrielehrer gab mir niemals, während er mein Lehrer war, die Gelegenheit, auch nur ein einziges privates Wort mit ihm zu sprechen. Er lebte sich so dar, wie wenn er eine Persönlichkeit wäre, von der ich bloß gelesen hätte in der Geschichte. Er paßte in die Zeit nicht hinein, er kam einem vor wie deplaciert in der Zeit. Und das ging so weiter: Als ich später zu einem anthroposophischen Vortrag in die Stadt kam, in der er in Pension lebte, suchte ich mir im Adreßbuch seinen Namen auf. Ich hatte doch eine Ahnung, daß er da sein müßte, und ich wollte jetzt sozusagen einfach mit dem alten Lehrer, weil ich ihn liebte, einmal wenigstens nach langen Jahren - es waren nun dreißig Jahre vergangen - privat reden. Er war mittlerweile alt geworden und lebte in der allgemeinen Universitätspensionsstadt Österreichs, in Graz. Ich kam nach Graz zu dem anthroposophischen Vortrag, nahm das Adreßbuch, nahm mir ganz bestimmt vor, ihn aufzusuchen: es kam nicht dazu, fortwährend kamen Besuche, ich war abgehalten und konnte ihn auch da nicht privat sprechen. Er blieb für mich eine Persönlichkeit, die schattenhaft in mein Leben hineingestellt ist, trotzdem ich sie so ungeheuer liebte. Als ich wieder nach Graz kam, wollte ich ihn wieder besuchen: da war er schon gestorben. Also es blieb dabei, daß ich hier einer Persönlichkeit gegenüberstand, die eigentlich, trotzdem sie mir so nahestand, sich für mich so ausnahm, als ob ich von ihr irgendwo lesen würde wie von einer ganz anderen Zeiten angehörenden Persönlichkeit. So etwas lag vor: Ich war sein Zeitgenosse, aber durchaus nicht karmisch mit ihm verbunden. Er war in keiner seiner früheren Inkarnationen mein Zeitgenosse gewesen. Er stand also im letzten Leben ganz offenbar außerhalb der fortlaufenden karmischen Gruppen, in denen er eigentlich stehen sollte. Aber auch der andere zeigte mir, daß er nicht anders stand zu diesen Gruppen, denn er war abgekommen von der Inkarnationenfolge, in der er drinnengestanden hatte, da er gerade mit dieser Individualität, an die er zuerst gebunden gewesen war, in diesem Erdenleben eben nicht verbunden war, so daß sie sich nicht trafen, Byron und er. Ich erzähle Ihnen solche Dinge, damit Sie sehen, wie eigentlich Karma wirkt, und wie man, wenn man tiefer auf das Leben eingeht, gerade an Erlebnissen, die aber erst zum Rätsel werden müssen - und das Leben wird überall zum Rätsel - schon wirklich auf das geheimnisvolle, wunderbare Weben des Karma hinschauen kann. Aber ebenso, wie man Zeitgenossen haben kann, die einem erscheinen wie Bilder, weil sie eben hinausgestellt sind aus ihrer karmischen Folge, so wird man auch auf der anderen Seite durchaus gewahr, wie doch weitaus die meisten Menschen mit einer gewissen starken inneren Notwendigkeit in ihre Zeit hineingestellt sind. Gerade das zeigt sich einem oftmals bei historischen Persönlichkeiten.
Ich möchte auch da auf ein Beispiel hinweisen. Genügend bekannt geworden ist ja der italienische Freiheitsheld Garibaldi: ein merkwürdiges Leben. Garibaldi war mir als Persönlichkeit gerade ebenso wenig sympathisch wie diejenige, die ich gestern erwähnt habe und der ich karmisch nachgegangen bin. Er ist mir eigentlich erst im Verlaufe der karmischen Forschung über ihn sympathischer geworden, denn mir erschien, bevor ich die karmischen Zusammenhänge über ihn erforschte, manches unnatürlich, phrasenhaft bei ihm, was er denn gar nicht war. Aber jedenfalls erscheint diese Persönlichkeit als eine solche, welche, trotzdem sie so praktisch, so radikal-politisch-praktisch ins Leben hineingewirkt hat, sich wiederum, wenn man sie betrachtet, so merkwürdig aus dem Leben herausstellt - wie in einer bloß gedachten Welt lebend, wie ein Stück über dem Erdboden schwebend. So praktisch Garibaldi war, so idealistisch war er auch. Das zeigt schon sein äußeres Leben. Man braucht nur wenige charakteristische Züge aus dem Garibaldi-Leben anzuschauen, so zeigt sich das sogleich. Ich will, weil die Zeit schon drängt, nur ein weniges anführen. Es ist nicht gewöhnlich bei einem Menschen, daß er in einer so couragierten, waghalsigen Weise in der damaligen Zeit, der ersten Hälfte des neunzehnten Jahrhunderts, wo die Adria so unsicher war — Garibaldi ist 1807 geboren -, wiederholt als junger Mensch die Adria durchschifft, wiederholt in die Hände von Seeräubern fällt, die größten Abenteuer durchmacht, sich wieder befreit; aber das mag noch angehen, das passiert anderen auch. Aber das passiert doch nicht jedem: daß er in Lebensverhältnissen ist, wo er außerhalb der Welt steht, keine Zeitungen liest, und als er dazu kam, sozusagen zum ersten Mal ordentlich eine Zeitung zu lesen, da las er in der Zeitung sein eigenes Todesurteil! Das war so gekommen: Er war von irgendeinem Abenteuer auf dem Meere zurückgekehrt, und ohne es zu wissen, war er beschuldigt worden, teilgenommen zu haben an gewissen politischen Verschwörungen. Er war in absentia zum Tode verurteilt worden und las das in der Zeitung. Er schien schicksalsmäßig über dem Leben zu stehen.
Aber andere Züge in seinem Leben sind noch merkwürdiger. So zum Beispiel geschah es, daß, als er gerade, um teilzunehmen an Kämpfen freiheitlicher Bewegungen in fremdem Lande, auf dem Meere draußen sich der Küste näherte, durch das Fernrohr nach der Küste hinschaute. Dasjenige, was er sah, war eine sehr liebe, junge Dame, und siehe da, Garibaldi verliebte sich in diese Dame durchs Fernrohr! Das ist doch nicht die alltägliche Art, sich zu verlieben! Menschen, die ganz im Leben drinnen stehen, verlieben sich ja nicht durchs Fernrohr. Nun aber, er verliebte sich wirklich Hals über Kopf, er schiffte mit aller Gewalt jetzt in die Richtung hin, nach der er sich verliebt hatte. Als er ankam, war allerdings die Geliebte fort, aber ein Mann stand da; dem gefiel er so, daß er ihn zum Mittagessen einlud, und siehe da, das war der Vater der Dame, in die er sich durchs Fernrohr verliebt hatte! Und so konnte er gleich am Diner teilnehmen, an dem auch die Dame zugegen war. Er konnte nur Italienisch, sie nur Portugiesisch, aber durch die Sprache des Herzens verstanden sie sich: sie verlobten sich. Es war ein gemeinsames Leben, das Heldenhaftigkeit von der Frau forderte. Sie hat ihn in seinen Kriegszügen in wirklicher Heldenhaftigkeit begleitet. Auch das kommt nicht gerade oftmals vor, daß in Abwesenheit des Mannes, entfernt durch viele Meilen, das erste Kind geboren wird, die Frau durch furchtbare Abenteuer erst den Mann auf dem Schlachtfeld suchen muß, das Kind aber an einem Seile sich um den Hals bindet, damit es an der eigenen Brust erwärmt werde. Und so nun eilt sie durch alles Mögliche hindurch, um den Mann zu finden, von dem sie gehört hatte, daß er getötet worden wäre; sie fand ihn aber dann noch lebendig. - Es war dennoch eine großartige Ehe. Sie starb ja, wie denen, welche die Biographie Garibaldis kennen, bekannt sein wird, bevor er starb. Und siehe da, nach zehn Jahren, wie es das Leben eben so bringt, verlobte er sich und verheiratete sich auf ganz gewöhnliche, bürgerliche Art, wie man es sonst auch meistens macht unter den Philistern, mit einer anderen Dame. Diese Ehe, die nun richtig geschlossen war, die dauerte nur einen Tag, dann trennten sie sich. Er war schon, sehen Sie, anders gerade mit dem Erdenleben verbunden als andere Menschen. Es interessierte mich, einem solchen Leben nachzugehen.
Da wurde ich wiederum, als ich diesem Leben nachging, in die Gegend der irischen Mysterien geführt. Auch dieser Garibaldi ist eine Seele, in welcher eine Individualität steckt, die durch die Mysterien Hybernias gegangen war und die, während sie bis zu einem gewissen Grade eine Art irischer Eingeweihter war, nach Osten zog, sogar in der Gegend des Rheins mit anderen zusammengewirkt hat. Aber mich interessierte an dem Leben Garibaldis insbesondere das karmisch, daß in ihm eine Persönlichkeit da ist, bei der einem ihr Leben schwer erklärlich ist. Denn Garibaldi ist in einem gewissen Sinne die Wahrheit selbst. Nun war er seinem ganzen tiefsten Inneren, seiner seelischen Gesinnung nach Republikaner. Und doch war er es, der, trotz seiner republikanischen Gesinnung, den Victor Emanuel zum König von Italien beförderte. Er förderte das Königtum in der Person des Victor Emanuel. Es erscheint einem zunächst unglaublich. Wie kommt dieser Republikaner dazu, Victor Emanuel zum König von Italien zu machen? Und lesen Sie das in der Geschichte nach. Ohne Garibaldi hätte es nie das italienische Königreich gegeben. Man kann weiter gehen, man findet dann, daß Garibaldi mit anderen Persönlichkeiten verbunden ist, die ihm eigentlich seiner inneren Verfassung nach ferne stehen: Cavour, Mazzini. Ganz anders geartete Naturen: Mazzini, der Idealist, der nicht ins Praktische eingreift, Garibaldi, überall der praktisch-militärische Staatsmann, und doch auch wie schwebend über dem Irdischen, Cavour, der schlaue, gescheite Politiker. Wie passen diese Menschen zusammen? Das wurde die Frage. Gerade da zeigte sich etwas, was ich Ihnen hervorheben möchte als ein dem Karma Eigentümliches. Da zeigte sich, daß diese drei anderen Menschen der Individualität des Garibaldi, während er ein irischer Eingeweihter war, als Schüler gefolgt waren, seine Schüler waren. Nun ist es gerade in irischen Mysterien etwas Eigentümliches, daß sich ein lebensnotwendiges Band ergibt zwischen dem Schüler und dem Lehrer. Diese können sich nicht wieder trennen, wenigstens nicht durch gewisse Inkarnationen. Da wird ein karmisches Band gebunden, man kann sich nicht wieder trennen. Nun tritt das Eigentümliche ein: Um das Jahr 1807 herum werden diese vier wiedergeboren, der eine in Genua, zwei in Turin, der dritte zu Nizza, also an ein und demselben Erdenflecke und auch ungefähr in derselben Zeit. Sie werden miteinander in derselben Zeit, in derselben Gegend Italiens geboren. Und da zeigt es sich, daß allerdings diejenigen, welche zusammengehören, wieder zusammengebracht werden, selbst gegen ihre Neigung zusammenkommen. So daß ein so starrer Republikaner wie Garibaldi den ganz anders gearteten Victor Emanuel an sich gekettet hat und die menschliche Zusammengehörigkeit mehr bedeutet als die sogenannte Überzeugung. Ich führe dieses Beispiel an, damit Sie sehen, was menschliche Zusammengehörigkeiten, die karmisch begründet sind, bedeuten. Da mag der eine das, der andere jenes für wahr halten: die karmische Zusammengehörigkeit ist stärker bindend. Menschliche Zusammengehörigkeiten sind es, die da wirksam sind im Leben, nicht so sehr das Abstrakte, was wir durch den Verstand haben. Aber wie Menschen zusammenhängen im Leben und wie Menschen schattenhaft durch das Leben gehen können, wenn sie herausgestellt werden aus ihrem Karma, das zeigt sich eben erst, wenn wir das Karma gerade in charakteristischen Fällen verfolgen.
Das wollte ich Ihnen heute noch sagen. Morgen werden wir diese Betrachtung fortsetzen.
Twelfth Lecture
In the course of our observations, we will gradually move on to what karma can mean in individual human lives, although here too I will always turn my attention to certain karmic connections that have arisen through personalities who have become visible in history. For even the most individual things which interest us in our own karma, which must concern us, will be illuminated in the way we need them when we look at the comprehensive historical phenomena of karma. First of all, it should be pointed out that it is not at all necessary to have any clairvoyant insights in order to approach the sensation, the feeling of the existence of karma. Certainly, in order to gain an overview of all the connections of karmic laws, such insights are necessary, and much of what I have taught here in the past few days can of course only be gained through such insights. But the path to such insights is paved, I would like to say, by the perception, the clear perception of karma, which can intervene in each individual human life, if this human life does not merely pass by things superficially and direct its gaze only to the outwardly sensational events, but if this human life can gain something from the direction, to survey the more intimate experiences of existence, to penetrate them emotionally and thereby to gain a kind of idea of how certain fateful connections stand in life, which already show by their very nature that they cannot be based merely on the one-time life on earth between birth and death.
Let's take a look at the way we can encounter people in life. The vast majority of our destinies in life depend on our encounters with people in life. We meet one person, we meet another. What we experience together with them affects our existence. And it is precisely in this shared experience with people in these or those living conditions that attentive observation will reveal that karma does not at all contradict what we carry within us as our free perception, as the perception of what is subject to free decisions in our actions. We are initially placed as children in an epoch of life in which there can be no question of freedom as far as the earthly impulse is concerned. And how much depends on the way we are placed into existence as a child! Which abilities are drawn out of our inner being, which paths are assigned to us, that is of infinitely great, fateful significance in our entire life on earth. Certainly, we can then later intervene in our own lives more or less as independent human beings, but we can only do so in the place that childhood has assigned to us. And so we will see, if we look closely, what clearly, clearly plays into our free actions in terms of destiny.
Now let's take the case that we meet people in life. There is a clear difference between the one kind of encounter we have with people and the other kind. It may well be that we meet a person for the first time in this earthly life, and we immediately have the feeling that a bridge passes from our soul to the soul of this person. And it may well be that we feel intensely for this person, but are perhaps not equally interested in how he looks, whether he is beautiful or ugly, whether he looks friendly or unfriendly. What attracts us to this person arises from within us, we develop sympathetic feelings. Yes, in one case or another we may develop antipathetic feelings, which actually only depend on the fact that we have come close to this person and have become aware that he is there; but what we feel about him does not depend on the impression he makes through his actions or through the words he first says to us. Such experiences enter into our earthly existence like the great question marks, like the comprehensive problems of life that reality presents us with. And then it is probably the case that we do not feel at all compelled to reflect when we have made such an acquaintance: What is man like, what does man do? Everything that draws us to him draws together, as it were, into a sum of feelings, into a sum of inner experiences and fillings of our soul's constitution, to which we have no need to justify them by what he does.
But there are encounters of a different kind with people where no such feeling arises. But these people begin to interest us without us actually feeling this or that deep-seated trait of sympathy and antipathy. People interest us. We feel compelled to find out whether they are good, bad, benevolent or ill-disposed, whether they have abilities or no abilities. And in the time that follows such an acquaintance, it turns out - let's say when we meet someone who also knows such a person whom we have met and with whom we are now talking about the same person - that we feel inspired to talk about the person. We like to find out about him, who he is, where he is in life and so on, we are interested in what is outwardly about him. With people of the first kind it can even happen that we find it extremely unpleasant when we meet another person who also knows him and who immediately starts chatting about him. We don't want to talk about this person at all. Now when something like this occurs in life - and the spiritual-scientific methods try to get behind such secrets - it turns out that when we have inexplicable feelings of love or hatred rising up in a certain sense when we meet a person, that we were somehow karmically connected with this person in the past, and that what we had in common with him has actually led us the whole of our earthly life to meet him at a certain moment in life. And that which we have had in common with him in past times forms our feelings, forms our feelings towards him. And these feelings, these emotions are decisive, not whether he is beautiful or ugly, or whether he is a benevolent or malevolent person. It is precisely when one feels something like this very clearly and distinctly that one will find this feeling justified by what spiritual scientific research has to say about a karma formed in the past, if it is possible for spiritual scientific research to shed light on such a matter. And we will find what I am saying confirmed by many other things.
When we are asleep, out of our physical and etheric bodies, spiritually present in the world only in the ego and the astral body, with our physical and etheric bodies lying in bed, separated from the actual spiritual-soul entity, that is when dreams arise for the ordinary consciousness. But is it not the case - ask yourself in an intensive self-observation - that in certain encounters, which are of such a nature that the sensations and feelings arise within us, we immediately have all kinds of dreams about this person? We can so easily dream of one person or another. This shows that this person is connected with our spirit-soul, which has gone together with him through many earth lives, or through several earth lives, or through one earth life, that this spirit-soul, in which alone we are now, ego and astral body, has something to do with this person. We meet other people, something professional or the like brings us together with them. They interest us in the way I have mentioned. Yes, it even happens that we may have a great deal to do with them; life puts us next to them at first, but we cannot dream of them. We cannot, dreams do not come. We are then only connected with them in this earthly life, and the connection is first established through that which binds the soul-spiritual of man to the physical and the etheric. And because the physical body and the etheric body are preferentially involved in this interest that we have, which is linked to external actions and external appearance, and this physical and etheric body remain in bed and our spiritual-soul being is gone, we cannot dream of such people. Spiritual science again shows us that karma is indeed at work, but it works in such a way that karma is only now beginning to be woven, that one will only look back from the spiritual experience after death to this earthly life and will be able to say: karmic connections have been established there. We have seen how this karma is woven, how that which we experience together with higher spiritual beings between death and a new birth works for a long time on the weaving of this karma. But if you think about what has been said in reference to the laws of karma, then you will have to say to yourself: People are brought together through earthly life; that which brings them together in earthly life also binds them karmically. They then go through life together between death and a new birth, they work out their karma with the higher beings for the next life on earth. What then follows from this for man's life on earth as a whole? On the whole, it follows that people who are together for one earth life, because that is where the karma is spun, will also strive towards each other for the next earth life. There they will again establish karmic connections, will again go through the life between death and new birth - but this will now forge them more strongly together - in order to again seek a common earth life. And that is where the strange thing comes out, that people actually live together in groups in the course of their earthly development. And so it is. If we visualize this schematically, it is like this: Time passes; a certain group of people who live together at some point in time and are karmically connected with each other, reappear on earth after they have passed through the life between death and a new birth. Another group of human beings, again karmically connected with each other, appears again together on earth; a third likewise. And since the times between death and a new birth are by far the longer, it follows that most people on earth actually only meet between death and a new birth, and that the people who are particularly connected to each other karmically go through the development of humanity in groups and meet again and again on earth. This is also the rule. As a rule, we do not meet people on earth who were incarnated in a time other than ours in the past.
You see, you learn this when you really look at the events of human relationships in spiritual contemplation of the world. If you just think about life in an unbiased way, then you will find that these things, which are said on the basis of spiritual observation, are confirmed. As you know, I studied Goethe for a long time in my youth. I often had to ask myself, because my intellectual preoccupation with Goethe went very deep into my heart: Yes, what would have happened if I had become a contemporary of Goethe? - On the face of it, such a thing would seem delightful! If you like Goethe, if you are particularly fond of what he created, if you spend part of your life explaining and interpreting him, shouldn't the thought occur to you that it must be delightful to have lived in Weimar when Goethe was walking around and to have seen him, perhaps to have been able to speak to him? But that is only a superficial observation, which is immediately corrected when you take a closer look. At least I said to myself: the thought of having lived with Goethe at the same time would actually be quite unbearable. For Goethe has become particularly valuable to me precisely because everything he left behind was there, that it had an effect for a time, that one could pick it out again from the spiritual primal depths of the world. And the fact is that it would have been unbearable to live with Goethe at the same time! Only when one considers the concrete relationship to him, which one then has as a later-born person, and when one then passes over to the finer connections of the soul, especially in such a case, where one comes up against a personality with whom one does not live at the same time, with whom one cannot therefore be brought together directly by a life karma, but where more intricate karmic relationships are present, then spiritual contemplation shows: If one had lived with such a personality at the same time, it would have had an effect on the soul like poison. - I know that is saying a lot, but it is true. One would not be able to hold oneself together in one's inner state of soul if one had been a contemporary of this personality.
Also, on the whole and on a large scale, it is precisely through such contemplation that one's view of human life, of the inner truth and of the inner connections of human life is sharpened. One no longer talks around indeterminately. You won't be tempted to break out into the common phrase: “Oh, if only I had lived then!” If you explain it correctly, karma fixes you in your life circumstances, so to speak, and also places you in the place where you live with your earthly existence. But this already reveals the truly fateful character of karma. This emerges when we begin to reflect on why we entered earthly life at a particular time. It has brought us to this time precisely because we have prepared our karma with other souls with whom we are karmically connected, thus preparing us for the time when we enter this physical earthly existence.
Now what I have set out is the rule, but in spirit everything is individual. Rules have their meaning, but not in such a way that we can regard them as principles. Anyone who is a rider of principles, who takes rules in such a way that they cannot have any exceptions, can actually never enter the spiritual world. For in the spiritual world everything is different from the physical world. Even the simplest things are different in the spiritual world than in the physical world. I would like to give you an example of this. What could be clearer for a person living in the physical world than the general mathematical principle: The whole is greater than each of its parts, or: The straight line is the shortest path between two points. Well, someone would have to be really crazy to deny that the whole is not greater than each of its parts. Such things are called axioms because they are true in themselves and, as the saying goes, are neither capable of nor in need of proof. This is the name of the formula. It is the same with the theorem: The straight line is the shortest path between two points. But both theorems no longer apply in the spiritual world. In the spiritual world even the sentence applies: The whole is always smaller than each of its parts. And we find this confirmed and proven in the human being. If you look at the spiritual of your physical human being in the spiritual world, it is about as big - a little bigger, but about as big as you are in the physical world. But if you look at your lungs or liver in the spiritual world, they are huge, and yet they are the parts of a small person. We have to learn to think differently. In the spiritual world, the straight line is not the shortest way, but the very longest, because in the spiritual world, when we move from one point to another, it is quite different. In the physical world, things are pedantic: this way is long, that way is longer, that way is the shortest: the straight line. - In the spiritual world it is not like that, but there it is so difficult to get here “straight” that each of the crooked paths is shorter than the straight one. And it also makes no sense to say: The straight line is the shortest path between two points - because it is in fact the longest.
You have to familiarize yourself with the fact that everything is different in the spiritual world than in the physical world. That is why it is so difficult for people to enter the spiritual world with the exercises they faithfully do, because their judgment clings to such prejudices as that the whole is greater than its parts, or that the straight line is the shortest path between two points. So it is with the axioms. But all other truths for the physical world must also be discarded as soon as one wishes to penetrate into the spiritual world. And so it is that in the spiritual world there can be no principles, but everything is individual. You have to get to know each thing individually. This terrible logical summarizing, this issuing of general rules does not exist in the spiritual world. And so of course this truth, even though it is a truth and applies on the whole: that people complete the development of earthly life in groups - it is broken through. And it is precisely when it is broken that you really get to know its significance. An example of this too.
You must forgive the fact that these are examples from your own life. After all, how can you get to know examples that relate to such things better than if they are examples from your own life? That's where your individuality comes in. When describing the course of my life, I referred to a geometry teacher I had. This geometry teacher was not only extremely close to me while I was his pupil, but also afterwards. And it was interesting for me to trace his karma, his life connections. I had an extraordinary weakness, as they say, for geometry. Even at the age of nine, a geometry book that I had just got my hands on from my teacher, who didn't think I was ready to learn anything like that, was my good fortune, so to speak. Learning that the three angles of a triangle are 180 degrees seemed to me to be extraordinarily gratifying in the ninth year. But then I got this geometry teacher who was a really strange person. I was about twelve years old when I got him and I had him for seven years. He really was an interesting personality, because he was actually all about geometry, but in a very peculiar way: descriptive, constructive geometry. When I got to the higher classes, to the so-called analytical geometry, you had to learn everything you learned about analytical geometry from others, because he didn't know anything about it. He was an excellent constructor, he constructed everything, and he made a great impression. And I actually made significant progress in geometry because I loved him so much. It was always a lovely moment for me when this teacher came into the classroom and developed his geometry in his own way.
Later I saw - because he kept me interested - that I couldn't help but think about his life connections. Now, if you want to explore karma, it really is the case that you can't explore it at all if you look at the initially conspicuous life circumstances. If I had only looked at the fact that he was an excellent teacher of geometry, at everything he knew how to put forward, I would certainly never have discovered the connections of his karma. But it made a deep impression on me in the context of his whole life that this teacher had a club foot. One leg was shorter than the other.
You see, these are things that are usually considered to be outside of life. What interests you deeply are things that, if you get involved, lead you into the karmic connections. It does not always have to be something so conspicuous; you can experience that you are led into the karmic connections by the fact that someone has a habit which you see in him again and again and which forms itself into an image. A small habit can form itself into an image and lead karmically into the earlier lives of the person concerned. Thus, with another teacher I had, whom I liked immensely, I was deeply introduced to certain karmic connections - which I don't want to talk about now - from the fact that every time this teacher came before us, the first thing he did was to take out his handkerchief and blow his nose. He never started a lesson in any other way. It was precisely this, which was always repeated, that formed an image for me, as it led back karmically, so to speak, to this person's earlier life on earth. And so it was with the other person who had the clubfoot. And lo and behold, only now did this clubfoot shed light on the whole spiritual capacity of this person. People usually believe that forming lines into geometric figures comes from the mind. But it does not come from the head at all, it is not true that people experience geometry with their heads. You wouldn't arrive at an angle if you didn't walk. The fact that you experience the angle in your legs means that you know something about the angle. The head merely watches how the arm or the legs make angles and so on. In geometry we actually experience our will weaving through our limbs. Our limbs teach us geometry. Only because we have already become such abstract beings do we not know this, do we believe that we spin geometry out of our heads. The head watches how we walk in geometry, dance and so on, and then the head forms the shapes it has in geometry. It watches. And this whole connection, this peculiar way of emphasizing geometry, became clear to me when I looked inside this particular person who had to walk with a clubfoot, and who became such an excellent geometrician because he felt this clubfoot in a special way. These are the more intimate connections of life.
But how did I get further? This teacher stood next to another person with a similar leg, namely the English poet Lord Byron. These two people, who were outwardly similar in personality, stood side by side, and now many things that occurred in Byron's life seemed to me to be connected with everything that had crept into his moral and ethical living conditions from an earlier karma, but which was also expressed in his clubfoot. And then, once you have the karma at such a point, it continues to develop. And now I was able to find out how these two people lived together in a certain period of the Middle Ages in Eastern Europe, how they went through the same fate together. I came to the content of their lives at that time.
The earlier life of Byron was not similar to the life of Byron in the nineteenth century; the earlier life of my teacher is not similar to his life in the nineteenth century, but both have a very intimate kind of simultaneous destiny. They learned, when they were inhabitants of the European East, of that significant legend, that once the jewel of the Palladium, which was buried and worshipped in Troy - as invested with the magic power for the might of Troy - was then brought across Africa to' Rome, was long in Rome, that then, when the Emperor Constantine founded Constantinople, he made great sacrifices, at enormous expense, to bring the Palladium, on which the power of first Troy and then Rome was to hang, to Constantinople and then had it sunk in Constantinople in order to replace the power of Rome with the power of Constantinople. It is said, and is even true to a high degree, that the arrogance of Emperor Constantine had the Palladium brought from Rome to Constantinople, that he erected a mighty, heavy column in the place where he had the Palladium sunk, that he then picked up a kind of statue of Apollo and had it placed on top of the column. Well, it was very difficult to get the column to Constantinople to the place where it was brought, because an iron railroad had to be built for it. The column, which had once been brought from Egypt to Rome, was so heavy that every way it was driven it sank and it became dangerous. Then the column was erected, the palladium was well kept in the base. Above it, at the top of the column, he had the statue of Apollo erected, but spread the word that the statue represented him, the Emperor Constantine. Then he had wood brought from the cross of Christ in the Orient, which he hid in the bronze statue, and nails from the cross of Christ, which he had shaped into rays; with these he had the head of Apollo surrounded. So that, in his view, Constantine stood up there, shining with rays taken from the nails of the cross of Christ himself. But there was a legend attached to this palladium in later times, and this legend even played a part in the will of Peter the Great: that this Palladium would be fetched by men of the East to the capital of the East, and that one day the Slav power of the East would also be based on the magic power of this Palladium, when it would be sunk more in the East or in the North of Constantinople, and that thereby the power would pass to the Slavs, just as once the power of Troy, the power of Rome, the power of Constantinople was tied to this Palladium. There are deep truths hidden in such things, even if they appear legendary.
But after all, those who can see through the history of the Palladium can see through quite a lot of the development of European history. And these two people I spoke of, Byron and the man who was his comrade in the early Middle Ages, heard of this legend, and they decided to get the palladium and take it to the north, to Russia. They didn't succeed; they failed, as of course they had to fail. But some of it remained with them. In karmic contexts, something remains for people in the strangest way. Byron later sought the palladium in a different way, he joined the Greek freedom movement, he wanted to get a spiritual palladium. And that was the urge that remained with him from the time I mentioned. And my teacher showed to anyone who could look at him intimately that in every place where he stood, even if he was a relatively insignificant person, he had an irrepressible sense of freedom, which had a deep inner connection with the physical defect, just like his comrade.
Now, what had actually happened there? You see, these two people had drifted apart, they didn't find each other again: one was the famous poet Byron, the other the somewhat later living, insignificant geometry teacher. The rule I was talking about was broken. But life confirmed this breach to me in a strange way. You see, that geometry teacher whom I loved so dearly, whom I waited for every time he came in for a lesson, that geometry teacher never, while he was my teacher, gave me the opportunity to speak even a single private word with him. He presented himself as if he were a personality I had only read about in history. He didn't fit in with the times, he seemed out of place. And it went on like this: when I later came to an anthroposophical lecture in the town where he lived in retirement, I looked up his name in the address book. I had an idea that he must be there, and I simply wanted to talk to the old teacher privately, because I loved him, at least once after many years - thirty years had passed. He had grown old in the meantime and lived in Graz, the general university retirement town in Austria. I came to Graz for the anthroposophical lecture, took the address book, made a definite plan to go and see him: it didn't happen, visits kept coming, I was kept away and couldn't speak to him privately there either. For me, he remained a personality who was a shadow in my life, even though I loved him so much. When I came back to Graz, I wanted to visit him again: he had already died. So the fact remained that I was confronted with a personality who, despite being so close to me, seemed to me as if I were reading about him somewhere as if he were a personality from a completely different era. It was something like that: I was his contemporary, but not at all karmically connected to him. He had never been my contemporary in any of his earlier incarnations. So in his last life he was quite obviously outside the continuous karmic groups in which he was supposed to be. But the other one also showed me that he was no different from these groups, for he had strayed from the sequence of incarnations in which he had stood, since he was not connected in this life on earth with the very individuality to which he had first been bound, so that they did not meet, Byron and he. I am telling you such things so that you may see how karma actually works, and how, if you go deeper into life, especially in experiences which must first become a riddle - and life becomes a riddle everywhere - you can already really look at the mysterious, wonderful weaving of karma. But just as you can have contemporaries who appear to you like pictures because they are set apart from their karmic sequence, so on the other hand you also become aware of how most people are placed in their time with a certain strong inner necessity. This can often be seen in historical personalities.
I would also like to point out an example here. The Italian freedom fighter Garibaldi has become sufficiently well known: a strange life. As a personality, Garibaldi was just as unlikeable to me as the one I mentioned yesterday and whom I pursued karmically. He actually only became more likeable to me in the course of the karmic research about him, because before I researched the karmic connections about him, many things seemed unnatural, phrase-like about him, which he was not at all. But in any case, this personality appears to be one who, despite having had such a practical, radical-political-practical impact on life, appears so strangely removed from life when you look at him - as if living in a merely imaginary world, as if floating above the ground. As practical as Garibaldi was, he was also idealistic. His outer life already shows this. You only need to look at a few characteristic features of Garibaldi's life to see this immediately. As time is already pressing, I will only mention a few. It is not usual for a man to sail the Adriatic as a young man in such a courageous, daring manner in those days, the first half of the nineteenth century, when the Adriatic was so unsafe - Garibaldi was born in 1807 -, to fall repeatedly into the hands of pirates, to go through the greatest adventures, and to free himself again; but that may be all right, it happens to others too. But it doesn't happen to everyone: that he is in living conditions where he is outside the world, doesn't read newspapers, and when he came to read a newspaper properly for the first time, so to speak, he read his own death sentence in the newspaper! That's how it happened: He had returned from some adventure at sea, and without knowing it, he had been accused of having taken part in certain political conspiracies. He had been sentenced to death in absentia and read about it in the newspaper. He seemed fated to be above life.
But other traits in his life are even stranger. It happened, for example, that just as he was out at sea approaching the coast to take part in the struggles of liberal movements in a foreign land, he looked through the telescope towards the coast. What he saw was a very lovely young lady, and lo and behold, Garibaldi fell in love with this lady through the telescope! That's not the everyday way to fall in love! People who are fully immersed in life don't fall in love through a telescope. But now, he really did fall head over heels in love, he set off with all his might in the direction he had fallen in love with. When he arrived, his beloved was gone, but a man was standing there; he liked him so much that he invited him to lunch, and lo and behold, it was the father of the lady he had fallen in love with through the telescope! And so he was able to attend the dinner, where the lady was also present. He could only speak Italian, she only Portuguese, but they understood each other through the language of the heart: they became engaged. It was a life together that demanded heroism from the woman. She accompanied him on his military campaigns with real heroism. It is not often that the first child is born in the absence of the husband, many miles away, and that the wife must first seek her husband on the battlefield through terrible adventures, but ties the child to a rope around her neck so that it may be warmed on her own breast. And so she hurried through all sorts of things to find the man she had heard had been killed, but she found him still alive. - Nevertheless, it was a great marriage. She died, as those who know Garibaldi's biography will know, before he died. And lo and behold, after ten years, as life would have it, he became engaged and married another lady in the ordinary, bourgeois way, as is usually done among the Philistines. This marriage, which was now properly concluded, lasted only one day, then they separated. He was already, you see, differently connected to life on earth than other people. I was interested in pursuing such a life.
When I pursued this life, I was again led into the realm of the Irish mysteries. This Garibaldi, too, is a soul in which there is an individuality that had passed through the mysteries of Hybernia and which, while it was to a certain extent a kind of Irish initiate, moved eastwards, even working with others in the region of the Rhine. But what particularly interested me about Garibaldi's life was the karmic aspect, that there is a personality in him whose life is difficult to explain. For Garibaldi is, in a certain sense, the truth itself. Now he was a republican to the core of his soul. And yet it was he who, despite his republican sentiments, promoted Victor Emmanuel to King of Italy. He promoted kingship in the person of Victor Emmanuel. It seems incredible at first. How did this republican come to make Victor Emmanuel King of Italy? And look it up in history. Without Garibaldi, there would never have been an Italian kingdom. You can go further and you will find that Garibaldi is connected to other personalities who are actually distant from him in terms of his inner constitution: Cavour, Mazzini. Quite different natures: Mazzini, the idealist who does not intervene in practical matters, Garibaldi, everywhere the practical-military statesman, and yet also hovering above the earthly, Cavour, the clever, shrewd politician. How do these people fit together? That became the question. It was precisely there that something emerged which I would like to emphasize to you as something peculiar to karma. It showed that these three other people had followed the individuality of Garibaldi as disciples, as his disciples, while he was an Irish initiate. Now it is a peculiar feature of Irish mysteries that a vital bond is formed between the disciple and the teacher. They cannot separate again, at least not through certain incarnations. A karmic bond is bound there, one cannot separate again. Now the peculiar thing happens: Around the year 1807, these four are reborn, one in Genoa, two in Turin, the third in Nice, thus in one and the same place on earth and also at about the same time. They were born together at the same time, in the same region of Italy. And there it appears that those who belong together are brought together again, even against their inclination. So that such a rigid republican as Garibaldi chained Victor Emanuel, who was quite different, to himself, and human togetherness meant more than so-called conviction. I cite this example so that you can see what human affiliations, which are based on karma, mean. One person may think this is true, another may think that it is true: karmic affiliations are more binding. It is human affiliations that are effective in life, not so much the abstract that we have through the mind. But how people are connected in life and how people can go through life in shadows when they are exposed from their karma only becomes apparent when we follow the karma in characteristic cases.
That's what I wanted to tell you today. Tomorrow we will continue this reflection.