Nine Lectures on Bees
GA 351
1 December 1923, Dornach
Lecture IV
Herr MÜLLER has handed me another number of the “Swiss Bee-keeper's Journal” with an article dealing with the results of certain experiments with honey-cures—(“Our further Experiences with Honey-cures in the Frauenfeld Children's Home, Amden,” by Dr. Paula Emrich. Weeson.) (No III of the “Schweizerische Bienenzeitung” March 1923). (Certain passages from this article were read aloud).
Dr. Steiner:
It will be quite interesting, gentlemen, to add today a few remarks on this article. In this Children's Home an attempt was made to give honey treatments to children found to be suffering from some form or other of mal-nutrition. As described here, the treatment was to dissolve the honey and stir it well into moderately warmed milk, not brought to boiling point but kept just below it. This mixture was given to the children.
Excellent results were thus attained. The author, Dr. Paula Emrich, mentions the satisfactory result that the percentage of red corpuscles in the blood of these children increased to an extraordinarily high degree. For instance, two children were admitted belonging to the same family. On arrival the younger child had only 53% of red blood-corpuscles. On leaving, after a honey-treatment, the percentage had risen to 82%. The elder child had at first 70%, and on leaving this had risen to 78%. In this case there was thus less improvement, but still some improvement.
The elder child had milk only, and benefited by it, but the percentage rose only from 70% to 78%; it was therefore, to begin with, not so weakly, but did not get stronger in the same proportion.
There are still quite a number of very interesting experiments. As I shall refer to them, I should like to ask you to note carefully the ages of the children concerned. If one is to observe the effects of some special substance on a person, it is no use simply to make experiments in the laboratory; one has always first to find out the age of every patient; one must always note the age in any experiments in nutrition, or in healing.
Here we have a boy aged 11; he went through a honey-cure lasting 8 weeks, with the result of a very considerable improvement in his glands. A case of catarrh of the upper parts of the lungs also improved, the red corpuscles—those really significant elements—increasing from 55% to 75%.
Then again we have a boy aged 11. He shows a rise from 50% to 74%. Then a girl aged 11, with a rise from 70% to 88%. The rise is throughout, significant. She then gives the increase in weight also, which shows that the children became stronger. I will not read the further details.
Mention is also made of a girl aged 10, of another of the same age; then a boy aged 13, a girl of 7, a boy aged 11, a boy aged 8, a boy of 12, a boy of 9 and a boy of 7.
The experiments show that children of these ages, let us say roughly, the school-age, derive great benefit from a honey-cure.
Now, this doctor tries to discover why the children benefited so remarkably from this treatment with honey. And here, gentlemen, he mentions something very interesting, something which in a most remarkable way condemns what is so largely applied in science today.
For what does science do now-a-days when it tests food-stuffs in respect to their nutritive value? Science analyses certain food-substances to discover how many components of one or another chemical substance are to be found in it. This is what science does.
Now the following thing happened—a pupil of the famous Bunge, the Professor of Physiology—(you very probably know him by name, he was at one time in Basel)—made experiments in feeding mice with milk. These mice had a good time of it, they throve extremely well when they were fed on milk. So now he made the experiment in another way. He said:—milk consists of casein—i.e. cheese-substance, fat, sugar and salts. He said to himself:—the mice throve splendidly on milk; milk consists of casein, fat, sugar and salts; consequently, I shall give some mice casein, fat, sugar and salts. This is exactly what is contained in milk. And behold! when he gave the mice casein, fat, sugar and salts, they died within a few days! They got the same things, but they all died.
You see, gentlemen, the composition of the substance is not the whole matter. Those gentlemen ought to have said to themselves: something else must be in question here. But what did they say? They said: “substance is everything: substance must be everywhere where anything happens.”
Well, yes, but the substances that are there in casein, fat, sugar and salts—well, they do not make milk. So the gentlemen said, evidently there must be a new substance here, in such minute quantities that it cannot be found by chemical analysis. This substance is what people now call—vitamin. Vita means life; min is connected with “make”; therefore, vitamin “makes life.”
Once, gentlemen, when Heine wanted to mock at something, he said: “There are people who wish, for instance, to explain poverty, the cause of poverty. Well, the simplest way is to say—‘poverty comes from being Poor!’” One has found another term, but one has not explained anything! I was once in a society where people discussed the question where what is “comic” came from. Some of them had arrived at quite interesting ideas as to the source of the “comic”—of what one laughs at. Then however, someone got up and went to the platform in a way that one knew at once—“he has the feeling he has a great deal to say.” So then he brought forward his ideas of “comic” and said:—“The ‘comic’ originates solely from the fact that man possesses a ‘vis-comica.’ ‘Vis’ is force—‘comica’ is comic. Man has the ‘comic force.’ This is where what is ‘comic’ originates.”
This is just as though one should say in economics:—where does money come from? Money comes from the money-making force. Nothing is explained in this way. Well—in economics one would at once remark that anyone saying that money comes from the money-making-force was a queer fellow! But in science people do not notice it when someone asks:—where does the life-giving property of milk come from? and then answers:—from the vitamin! That is the same as saying that poverty comes from being poor! But it is not noticed. People think they have said something wonderful, but in truth nothing at all has been said. And that, you see, is what I should like to call the disturbing element in modern scientific methods. People claim to have something to say; they announce it in gigantic words, and everybody believes what is said. But if this continues further in the history of the world, things will come to a point where everything will dry up and perish. For the world depends on the fact that something can be done, not that things are merely discussed and many words made about them. Words must signify what is there in reality.
And truly, gentlemen, in earlier times a kind of knowledge existed that was directly connected with practise. Today there is a science which no longer knows anything about practical matters. Often it merely spins out words. This has naturally come about because a new authority has superseded an old authority.
You need only consider how short a time ago it is that we did not have so many journals on special subjects as we have today. Communications which were to be made on various subjects—let us say for instance bee-keeping—were given out at special bee-keepers' meetings. This was still so in my youth. At such a gathering of bee-keepers one could learn how things were being dealt with. One would tell the other what he knew from his own experience, and one felt at once whether a man was merely a wind-bag, or whether he had real practical knowledge behind him, which is a very different matter. When you hear someone speak, you know at once whether he knows something, or whether you can find it all in print somewhere. For printer's ink has come as a new authority in addition to all the rest. If anything is printed people believe there must be something in it!
But there is something further to be considered in this article. This doctor has indeed achieved something of great value with her honey treatments. What she has done in her practical work is really admirable. But when she begins to think it all over on scientific lines, the result is really nil. Further she says this:—“It is much to be desired that these results of our experiments should be made known as widely as possible, and that more honey should be given, especially to the young ... For the moment our communications only give the results of our practical experiences; but we do not doubt that with the further development of the theory of vitamins the pharmacologists and physiologists will give their attention to the problem of the working of honey on the human organism.”
The author also says at the beginning: “I feel obliged to give this account of the effects of honey-cures from the medical point of view. Our good results encourage us to seek their deeper connections, as I am well aware that I am far from having penetrated their innermost nature.”
It is evident from her own words that this doctor is modest enough to admit that the whole theory of vitamins does not enable her to reach the real heart of the matter.
And now let us consider very exactly the following question. Let us see on what these effects of honey-treatments really rest. You see, these experiments show us something; they show that the effect of honey is an especially strong one, and that further experiments will increasingly show this, not in the case of very young children, but with those who have reached the change of teeth, or with those who are well beyond it. This is shown by the actual experiments, and it is extremely important to take this into account.
But the experiments indicate something further. They indicate that honey is most effective when one gives it in moderately heated milk. It is this admixture of milk and honey that has such especially favourable results with children. If one went a little further one would discover that honey is important even in the case of the younger children. One must then put only a little honey in the milk—more milk and less honey. With old people it is the honey without any milk that is good. Excellent results can be obtained with really old people if one persuades them to take honey without milk. We must say that milk and honey have very great importance in human life; these experiences make it evident.
You see, the old wisdom, as I have often told you, was not so stupid as modern learning thinks. This old wisdom is sometimes expressed in very simple words, but it was really wise. In the ancient saying:—“This is a land where milk and honey flow,” the meaning is that it is a land of health, a country where men can live healthily. Thus, of old, men knew that milk and honey have a tremendously strong relation to human life.
Nature often speaks in a very reasonable way. One observes her utterances if only one takes simple matters sufficiently simply.
If one knows that Nature works with great wisdom, one does not need much proof of the fact that milk is good for little children, for were it not so, honey would flow from the breasts of women and not milk. This would by no means be beyond the sphere of Nature's possibilities, for the plants produce honey and it certainly might be possible that the glands of the female breast secreted honey. One must only take things simply enough. One must not say:—Nature is a bungler, she makes only milk to flow from the woman's breast and not honey, but one must say:—Behind this lies the knowledge that for the small child, milk above all else is necessary; one can add the honey as the child grows older.
Well, then, surely we should not form such an idea as the above, which is nothing but mere words, and say to ourselves; “poverty comes from being poor; the comical from the vis-comica, and the life-giving power of honey from the vitamin!” One must look for what has reality in this connection.
We will now, gentlemen, gather together some of the things we have long learnt to know from these lectures, for the important thing is that one should always observe things in the right way.
When you go into the mountains you find, just where the rocks are hardest, where so to speak, the very hardest earthly substance pours in—there you find the quartz-crystals. They are very beautiful. You find many kinds of crystals. You will remember I drew these quartz crystals for you; they look like this:—(Diagram 10). When they are entire, they are formed below just as they are above, but usually, they are not perfect. They come out of the rock; they grow, as it were, out of the rock in the form I have just drawn for you here. What does this signify?
It signifies that the earth permits crystals to grow out of itself which are hexagonal, growing to a point. Within the earth there is thus the power to build up this six-angled form.
As I have so often explained to you, the forces that are within the earth and in the universe, are also in man. The earth in her turn receives this force from the universe; man has it from the earth. Man has the same force within him which, in the earth, drives out the crystal. How is it then within him? Truly, gentlemen, the human body is full of quartz.
Quartz as you find it in the mountains is one of the very hardest of substances, But substances are not everywhere just as they present themselves to us here or there. In man there is something quite similar to quartz, but it is in a more fluid form. Why?
You see, if one observes—and one must really observe in the right way, and with a true inner vision—what flows continually from man's head into his limbs (see Diagram 11), and this is most interesting, there streams incessantly downwards from the head what the earth once upon a time caused to flow from within outwards, and which became hard up above there, and settled down, for instance, as quartz crystals. It streamed out from the interior of the earth. In man it flows from his head through the whole of his body. It is quartz, or silicic acid. But the human body does not permit the quartz to become a crystal. That would indeed be a fine business if we were all to be filled up inside with quartz crystals!
Only to a point where the quartz is about to become hexagonal does man allow the thing to go; there he stops it; he does not allow it to go any further. Thus we have only the beginnings of the quartz formation in our body, and then it is arrested; it must come to an end.
Our whole life rests on this—that we are perpetually on the point of forming hexagonal crystals from the head downwards, but we do not permit it actually to come about. These hexagonal crystals always wish to take form in us, but in reality they do not do so. They are interrupted, arrested, and then we have, so to speak, the quartz fluid in the highest possible state of solution within us.
If we had not this quartz-fluid within us, we could for example, eat ever so much sugar and we should never have a sweet taste in our mouth. This tasting of the sugar is brought about by the quartz we have within us, not by its substantiality, but by what is the will within it to become hexagonal like a crystal. That is what causes it; that is the essential.
You see, in the interior of the earth this crystallising process is continued. Man arrests the silicic acid when it wants to grow spiky up above inside him. The earth allows it to become spiky up above.
But man needs this force, this silicic acid force—i.e., this power to bring forth hexagonal forms—man has need of it.
I imagine that you are not all of you good geometricians. Geometry is not exactly familiar to you all; you could perhaps not straight away, draw a quartz crystal, or model one in clay. But your body is a very good geometrician, and wants always to be forming such crystals. We are prevented from doing this. All life consists in the holding back of death, and when we can no longer hold death back, we die.
Now let us look at the bees. The bee flies out and gathers nectar. This it works upon in its own body, and in so doing provides its own life-forces. Further the bee prepares the wax. What does it do with the wax? It makes hexagonal cells. You see, the earth makes hexagonal silicic-acid crystals. The bee makes hexagonal cells, and this is extremely interesting. If I could draw the bees' cells for you—or if you remember Herr Müller showing them to you—then they look just like quartz crystals, only they are hollow. But in their form they are the same.
You see, these cells are hollow (Diagram 12), but what is put in them? The bees' eggs are laid there. Where there is silicic acid in the quartz, here in the cell is a hollow, and there the bee places its eggs. The bee is shaped by the same force that is within the earth and forms the quartz. Here the finely dissolved silicic acid (Diagram 13) is at work. A force is at work there, though this cannot be physically proved. The nectar works in the body of the bee so that it can shape the wax in a form which man really needs, for man must have those six-cornered spaces within him. Man needs the same thing. Inasmuch as the bee is the creature best able to give form to this hexagonal force, the bee is the creature that everywhere collects that particular food which can best be transformed in the body into this hexagonal force.
You need only eat some honey and you receive an immensely strengthening force. If you are too weak to develop this hexagonal force in yourself which has to pass from the head into the whole body, if you no longer have the power to give the blood so much firmness that this force is always present in it, then honey must intervene—or milk in the case of the child. The child has not yet got this hexagonal force; therefore, it must receive it from what is prepared in the human being as milk.
Now you see, gentlemen, that you can give as much casein, fat, sugar and salts to the mice as you please—and they will die. Why? Because the animal also needs this hexagonally-working force. If one only mixes together chemically casein, fat, sugar, and salts, then the force present in the hexagon is not there. When you give the mice milk then it is there. Only in milk it is not so strongly present that when the milk is turning sour it crystallises hexagonally. If this hexagonally-working force were a little stronger in milk, one could drink sour milk and it would form little silicic-acid crystals on the tongue. This would taste as though the milk were full of tiny little hairs. But it does not go so far, because milk comes from the human or animal body, and there it remains fluid. This is sufficient for the child but not for the grown man. But to become adult is something that already begins in childhood, so we must give the child the more powerfully-working hexagonal force that honey contains.
You see, gentlemen, it is very interesting that when you take milk, even if it comes from the human being, it is still something belonging to the animal-nature in man. In man it is animal. If you take honey, it comes from the plant kingdom—indirectly through the bee. But it comes from the plant world and has a plant nature. If you take silicic acid—quartz—then this has a mineral-nature; it has quite a definite hexagonal form. The wax which is produced within the bee itself through the food which is its nourishment, the wax has received its form; it does not originate it, it receives the form as developed in the hexagonal cell. In milk this form is dissolved again; only a shadow-picture of the hexagonal crystal remains in the milk (see Diagram 14). Thus, one can say that honey is a substance most suitable and health-giving for man.
One might however, be inclined to think that it would be just as good if man were to take some silicic acid instead of honey, for then he would also obtain this hexagonal force. But the silicic acid which has been driven as far as the hexagonal form, as far as to evolve this silicic acid form, contains too powerful a crystallising force; it would work much too strongly in man.
Now let us imagine the following. Picture to yourselves some poor child not so fortunate as to be given this honey-cure (as described in the article), at the age of 16 or 17, or at 13 or 14, when it is most suitable. This child has not had this good fortune and the iron-corpuscles in the blood get weaker and weaker.
The percentage in the blood gets less and less. The child grows up, let us say to the age of 30, and has grown up into a weak man. The writer of this article describes this also when she says, “they collapse.” When the man is 30 years of age it may often be a very good thing to give him a honey-treatment, but he is already too much exhausted; he would have to eat so much honey to get any real benefit from it that his digestion would be ruined. Honey teaches man moderation; if you eat too much honey you ruin your stomach.
This rests on quite a simple fact. Honey is sweet; it contains a great deal of sugar. The stomach especially needs acids, and when you put too much sugar into the stomach you hinder the working of the acids. Thus, briefly put, honey must only be eaten in moderate quantities, and when a man is already exhausted at the age of 30, one would have to give him so much honey, if a honey-treatment was to help him (and this it would doubtless do), that he would first get bad stomach disturbances and then intestinal troubles. Thus, one cannot do this, but one can do something else. One can at first give the man very highly diluted, pulverised quartz, that is, silicic acid as a remedy. When you have given him this highly diluted silicic acid as a medicine for a time, then after a time he will be able to benefit by small quantities of honey. The strongly diluted silicic acid will have called forth in him the power to make use of the hexagonal force, and then a small amount of honey can follow. The silicic acid has prepared the way for the honey.
One might also help a man with whom the content of the blood in regard to hæmoglobin has become exhausted, by adding to the honey, suitable to an adult, some highly diluted silicic acid the honey can then take effect. In the case of a child one should give plenty of milk.
You see, it is necessary to know these connections. One might ask: what then is it that works through the honey into man? It is the formative forces of the hexagonal principle. This is within the bees themselves. One can see it in the waxen cells of the comb, and it is this that makes honey so beneficial. It was for this reason that I said just now that it is primarily the force of milk that works in the child, and this can be further enhanced by the addition of honey, whereas in the adult person the forces of the honey are more especially active.
Nevertheless, when a man has grown older this honey force must be strengthened by that of silicic acid, as I told you. Also, a milk and honey cure can be of use because the forces of early childhood still exist in the older man; this is beyond contradiction the good effect of a honey-cure remains undoubted.
In practise, this is well-known, and one should really insist on making these things so clear to people, that a right amount of good honey should be available. On this matter people are very readily deceived. I do not mean this in a bad sense; I might say people are easily mislead by the conditions of present day civilisation. If you have ever asked for honey in hotels when travelling, it was certainly not honey that you were given there, it was sugar-honey, artificially produced.
If people realised that this is by no means the same thing, for there can be no question of any hexagonal force being in such honey, they would never claim that imitation-honey could have the same effect as pure bee-honey. One could very well feed mice with pure honey, they would like it very well. But if you were to feed them on this artificial honey, they would die, though not perhaps in a few days. I have now added what I wished to say about this article on milk and honey cures.
Now another interesting question has been put to me about which I would like to speak, and also to hear what you yourselves have to say about it; also what Herr Müller has to say to you. You see, there are so many matters to be considered that it will really be worth our while to discuss these things further next time. You will then be able to ask your questions, and Herr Mailer or I will answer them.
I want first to touch quite briefly on two other points. They may seem rather strange to you, but I am really eager to know what you will have to say about them.
Written Question:
Among old-fashioned bee-masters there is a conviction that a certain soul-relationship exists between the bee-master and his bees. It is said that when the bee-father dies, then his death must be at once announced to all the bees. If this is not done, then the whole stock will die out in the course of the following year. That a certain relationship of soul does exist between the two is again indicated by the fact that one gets far more stung when one approaches one's work in the hive in an angry or irritable mood, then when one does the same work in a peaceful and harmonious one. Is there any objective reality at the base of this old idea of the bee-masters?
DR. STEINER:
It would be interesting if Herr Müller would tell us quite simply whether he believes such things to be quite in the air or no? Such things are customary among the peasant bee-keepers; they announce a death to the bees. But this soul-relationship, this connection between the bee-father and his bees, is what I now have in mind. Perhaps Herr Müller can tell us more.
HERR MÜLLER:
Two cases were cited which had occurred in Basel and in Zurich. In one family a woman who had helped a good deal with the bees had died, and in the course of a year all the bees were dead. In the other case, at Basel, it was also a woman who died who had given much care to the bees; the same thing happened. It was a very large apiary; in a year's time twenty-eight stocks were reduced to six. One cannot explain this by anything connected with the general conditions, or with the bees themselves. One could trace no disease that the bees may have had. It may have been a “soul” connection.
DR. STEINER:
Let us remember what I once told you about the relation between man and the animals. You may perhaps have heard, gentlemen (I have spoken of it before), that some time ago people talked a great deal about the so-called “counting” horses, horses which, for instance, were asked the question: “How much is four and five?” Then one counted—1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9—and the horse stamped its foot at nine. Really remarkable and not inconsiderable sums were done in this way—by the horses. You may perhaps have heard of these “Elberfeld counting horses;” they were very celebrated. Whole delegations went to investigate the matter.
I did not myself see these horses, but I saw another horse belonging to Herr von Osten that could count equally well. One could form an exact judgment of the whole matter. People simply racked their brains over these “counting horses,” for it is naturally something fundamentally terrible that horses should suddenly begin to count. Science itself was put to shame by such a thing! Naturally one was quite aware, for it is an obvious conclusion to reach, that a horse cannot count; one had to find out how it was that the horse stamped its foot at a correct number. In reality, it cannot count; it would be quite idiotic to think a horse could count. Even a University lecturer knew this who scientifically investigated the matter, but he constructed a theory. He said: “Herr von Osten makes a slight facial movement when he counts; the horse observes the lines in his face, and in response to those it stamps its foot.” But he himself then made the following objection: “Yes,” he said, “but in that case the horse should be standing in front of Herr von Osten, and be looking at him, observing his face so that it knows when to stamp.” So he then took this position himself and saw nothing. Still, he did not give up his theory, he merely said: “The change of face is so minute that I cannot perceive it, but the horse can!”
Well gentlemen, it then follows that a horse can see more than a University lecturer! Nothing else can be inferred!
The matter was naturally otherwise. If one is trained by spiritual science and then observes the facts, one does not then lay much stress on some small facial change, for it happened in this way: there on the one side stood the horse; there stood Herr von Osten, very lightly holding the bridle. In his right hand waistcoat pocket Herr von Osten had plenty of sugar. Now Herr von Osten perpetually gave the horse little lumps of sugar. The horse licked them, found them sweet, and loved Herr von Osten very dearly. It loved him ever more and more through these little lumps of sugar, and thus an affectionate relation was set up between the horse and Herr von Osten. The latter had no need to make faces, he had merely to think—nine is the correct number; then the horse could sense it, for animals have a most delicate perception for what is going on around them. They sense what is going on there inside man's head even if he indulges in no small grimaces which a horse might be able to see but not a man. The horse senses what is happening when the brain thinks—nine—and then it stamps. But if the horse had not had any sugar its love would be a little changed into hate, and it would not have stamped with its foot any more.
Thus, you see, the animal has a very delicate perception of things; not of little grimaces, but of things actually not visible; for instance, with the horse, this sensing of what is going on in the brain of Herr von Osten. One has only to observe the facts, and then one knows how wonderful a sensitiveness the animals have.
Just imagine for a moment that you go near a number of bees, and are very much afraid of them. The bees will feel this fear in you, that is undeniable. Well, what does it mean when one is afraid? When one is afraid of something or other one grows pale, fear makes people pale. When one turns pale the blood flows inwards, it does not go outwards into the skin. When the bee comes near a man who is afraid, it senses more than it normally does when the blood is in the skin. It senses the hexagonal force of the blood, and stings into it; it would like to get honey or wax from you. On the other hand, when a man works quietly and his blood is flowing evenly in his veins, then the bee senses something quite different.
And now think of a man who is angry, and in his anger he goes to the bees. Anger makes a man red, and a great deal of blood flows into the skin, for the blood would absorb the hexagonal force. This, too, the bee senses in its delicate feeling and believes you would deprive it of this force—and it stings you. So fine are the subtle sensibilities of the forces of nature at work here.
And now we come to the question of habit. Think of the bee-father, the bees do not see his approach as men would do, the bee “senses”—if I may use this expression—everything that emanates from him—how all this is constituted. The bees get used to this, and should the bee-father die they must re-adjust themselves, and this means a great deal to them.
And now, for a moment, think what one finds even with dogs when the master dies. It has been known to happen that the dog will go to the grave and die there, because it cannot adjust itself to a new master. Why should one suppose that the bee with its fine sensitiveness should not be aware of what happens, why should one not think that the bee also, accustomed as it is to the bee-master cannot at once adapt itself to a new one? Indeed something very significant lies at the root of all this.
But you may say: “Is it then the same with these tiny little creatures as with dogs and horses?” Well, perhaps you may not have noticed, but it is nevertheless true, that one finds men who have, as the saying is, a specially lucky hand in the cultivation of plants. Even when they sow plants, or grow flowers in a pot, everything thrives with them, while another person may take equal care of the plants, but none will thrive; he is not successful. This is due to the “emanations” man has, and which work favourably on the plants in the one case, and unfavourably in the other. It is quite impossible for some people to cultivate plants. They have an unfavourable reaction which above all affects the forces in the flower that produce nectar, the forces that sweeten the flower. So we can say, Man works even on the flowers, and in a much more pre-eminent way upon the bees.
One need not wonder at this, but one must bring the facts before one as they appear; then one begins to understand that things really are so, and can bring them to bear in practical life.
QUESTION:
According to an old peasant rule it is held that if it rains on the third of May, the Day of the Finding of the Holy Cross, the honey is washed out of all the flowers and trees, and there will be no good honey harvest that year. My observations of the last four years seem to confirm that there is some truth in this rule. Is such a thing at all possible?
DR. STEINER:
This question leads us very deeply into the great processes of Nature. You see, it is just this day of the Finding of the Holy Cross, this third of May which is of less importance; it is of much greater importance that it is just this season of the year. What does it actually mean when it rains at the beginning of May? It means this. You know that on March 23, the Sun enters the Sign of the Fishes. I have told you before that the spring equinox is now in this Sign of the Fishes. The Sun remains in this Sign till April 20, then it passes on into the Sign of the Ram. Thus the rays of the Sun come at the beginning of May from an entirely different corner of the Universe than at other times.
Suppose now that it is fine weather in the beginning of May—on the third of May—what does this signify? It signifies that on the third of May the Sun has a powerful influence on all that is earthly. Whatever happens on the earth is under the influence of the Sun when the weather is fine.
What then does is mean when it rains on May the third—that is in the beginning of May? It means that the earth has the strongest forces, and hinders the influences of the Sun. This is immensely significant for the whole plant kingdom, for when the rays of the Sun come from the direction of the Ram, they can so work that their whole power is directed to the plants. Then the flowers can develop the sweet substance which is present in honey. Then the bees can make honey.
When, however, the earth has the greater power, when it rains at this season, the flowers cannot develop in the rays of the Sun which come from the Ram, but must await later events, or maybe even be altogether interrupted in what they have already developed. Then the flowers do not mature the nectar rightly and the bees find none.
A matter such as this only becomes comprehensible when we know that everything that happens on this earth is, as I have repeatedly told you, under the influence of the Cosmos, of all that is outside and beyond the earth. Rain means that the influences of the Sun are chased away. Fair weather means that the Sun forces can unfold in all their power. The question here is not that the power of the Sun comes only in a general way, from where we look up to it, but that it comes definitely from that part of the heavens where the Ram is. The forces of the Sun differ according to the particular corner of the heavens from which they come. This is not due to the Sun alone, but because as the Sun shines down upon the earth, behind it, in this instance, in the Cosmos stands the constellation of the Ram. What the Ram gives, the Sun first absorbs and then pours it forth again with its rays. Thus, it is quite different if the Sun sends its rays to the earth at the beginning of May, or at the end of May. In the beginning of May the full force of the Ram is working; by the end of the month the Sun is already in the Sign of the Bull. These forces of the Bull cannot work with the same strength on the plants, they tend to harden and dry up the plant, and this means above all that the plant is no longer able to mature the forces for honey-production.
Thus something has really come to light from these old peasant rules that has sound reason, and one should take note of it. Naturally, as I have previously said—the consciousness of these things has been lost, and we have fallen into superstitions, for when one is no longer able to distinguish things one may easily become superstitious. Then these old peasant rules are of about the same value as the saying: “If the cock crows on the dunghill the weather will change, or will remain as it was before!”
This does not apply however, to all these old rules, for many of them are based on deep wisdom, and this we should once more study. The peasants who have applied these rules have sometimes done very well! A deeper wisdom will also lead us to the point where we can once more make use of them.
Zehnter Vortrag
Meine Herren! Herr Müller hat mir noch eine Nummer der «Schweizerischen Bienen-Zeitung» gegeben, worin ein Artikel ist, der über die Erfahrungen mit Honigkuren handelt: «Unsere weiteren Erfahrungen mit Honigkuren im Kinderheim Frauenfelder, Amden.» Von Dr. Paula Emrich, Weesen, Nummer 3 der «Schweizerischen Bienen-Zeitung», März 1923.
Einige Stellen daraus werden verlesen.
Es ist ganz interessant, an diesen Artikel heute ein paar Bemerkungen anzuknüpfen. Es handelt sich darum, daß in diesem Kinderheim der Versuch gemacht worden ist, die Kinder, die in irgendeiner Richtung sich als schwach ernährt erwiesen, mit Honig zu behandeln und zwar in der Weise, wie man es beschreibt, daß man Honig in einer mäßig warmen Milch auflöst, fein verteilt und dann den Kindern diesen Honig in der nicht überhitzten Milch, in Milch, die nicht bis zum Sieden gekommen ist, die unter der Siedetemperatur geblieben ist, gibt.
Sie verzeichnet da ausgezeichnete Resultate. Namentlich kann die Artikelschreiberin das erfreuliche Resultat bringen, daß der Gehalt an roten Blutkörperchen bei den Kindern in ganz außerordentlicher Weise zunimmt. So hatte sie zum Beispiel zwei Kinder, die Geschwister waren. Da hatte das kleinere, als es in die Anstalt aufgenommen wurde, nur 53 Prozent rote Blutkörperchen. Bei der Entlassung, also nachdem es die Honigkur durchgemacht hatte, waren die roten Blutkörperchen bis auf 82 Prozent hinaufgegangen. Das größere Kind hatte 70 Prozent rote Blutkörperchen, und wie es abgeholt worden ist, 78 Prozent. Das hat also weniger zugenommen, aber eben immerhin auch zugenommen. Das größere Kind hatte nur Milchkur gemacht und hatte unter der auch zugenommen, aber nur von 70 auf 78 Prozent, war also von vornherein nicht so schwach, aber es ist auch nicht in demselben Verhältnis stärker geworden.
Nun gibt sie noch eine ganze Anzahl von sehr interessanten Versuchen an. Und da bitte ich Sie, wenn ich diese Versuche erwähne, achtzugeben darauf, was für ein Alter die Kinder haben. Wenn man überhaupt die Wirkung irgendeiner Substanz auf den Menschen untersuchen will, so hilft es einem gar nichts, wenn man diese Versuche einfach im Laboratorium macht, sondern man muß immer auch, wie man bei jedem Kranken als erstes das Alter feststellen muß, wenn man irgendwelche Ernährungs- oder Heilversuche macht, sogleich das Alter feststellen.
Wir haben also einen elfjährigen Knaben; der hat acht Wochen eine Honigkur durchgemacht und hat dadurch eine sehr bedeutsame Verbesserung seiner Drüsen erlangt. Auch ein Lungenspitzenkatarrh ist besser geworden, und die roten Blutkörperchen, die eigentlich bedeutsamen Teile, sind von 53 Prozent auf 75 Prozent gestiegen. Dann als zweites wiederum einen elfjährigen Knaben. Er hat eine Steigerung von 55 Prozent auf 74 Prozent. Dann ein vierzehnjähriges Mädchen hat eine Steigerung von 70 Prozent auf 88 Prozent. Die weiteren Steigerungen werde ich Ihnen nicht mehr vorlesen, denn sie sind überall bedeutsam. Sie gibt dann auch noch die Gewichtszunahme an, die ebenso dafür zeugt, daß die Kinder kräftiger geworden sind. Sie gibt dann an ein zehnjähriges Mädchen, ein weiteres zehnjähriges Mädchen, einen dreizehnjährigen Knaben, ein siebenjähriges Mädchen, einen elfjährigen Knaben, einen achtjährigen Knaben, einen zwölfjährigen Knaben, einen neunjährigen Knaben und einen siebenjährigen Knaben. Die Versuche zeigen, daß Kinder in diesem Alter, also sagen wir ungefähr im schulpflichtigen Alter, von der Honigkur außerordentlich viel haben.
Nun studiert die Verfasserin noch darüber, was die Ursache sein könnte, daß diese Kinder von der Honigkur außerordentlich viel haben. Da gibt sie etwas sehr Interessantes an. Da gibt sie etwas an, was in der alleräußersten Weise verurteilt das, was heute ja noch so vielfach in der Wissenschaft angewendet wird.
Was tut heute die Wissenschaft, wenn sie Nahrungsmittel auf ihre Ernährungskraft prüfen will? Die Wissenschaft, die zerlegt diese bestimmten Ernährungsmittel, Nahrungsmittel, und sucht, wieviel Bestandteile von dem einen oder anderen sogenannten chemischen Stoff drinnen sind. Das tut diese Wissenschaft.
Nun ist folgendes geschehen: Ein Schüler - sagt die Verfasserin - des berühmten Physiologieprofessors Bunge, den Sie ja dem Namen nach kennen, war in Basel und machte Versuche, indem er Mäuse mit Milch fütterte. Diese Mäuse, die hatten es gut; sie entwickelten sich ganz ausgezeichnet. Sie wurden also mit Milch gefüttert. Nun aber machte er den Versuch noch auf eine andere Weise. Er sagte sich: Milch besteht aus Kasein, also Käsestoff, Fett, Zucker und Salzen. Und nun sagte er sich: Bei Milch sind die Mäuse vorzüglich gediehen; die Milch besteht aus Kasein, Fett, Zucker und Salzen; also gebe ich einer solchen Gruppe von Mäusen Kasein, Fett, Zucker und Salze. Das ist ja dasselbe, was in der Milch drinnen ist. - Und siehe da, die Mäuse, denen er Kasein, Fett und so weiter gegeben hatte, die krepierten nach ein paar Tagen! Sie haben dasselbe gekriegt, aber sie krepierten. Sie sehen: Die Zusammensetzung des Stoffes macht es nicht aus. Da muß irgend etwas anderes mitspielen — so hätten sich die Herren sagen sollen.
Aber was haben sich die Herren gesagt? Die Herren sagten sich: Stoff, das ist überhaupt alles, Stoff muß überall sein. Und wo überhaupt etwas geschieht, da muß ein Stoff da sein. - Aber die Stoffe, die da drinnen sind im Kasein, in Fett, Zucker und Salzen, ja, die machen es nicht! Da sagten sich die Herren: Es muß halt ein neuer Stoff drinnen sein, in so kleinen Mengen, daß man ihn gar nicht findet durch die chemische Untersuchung. — Und diesen Stoff nennen nun die Leute Vitamin. Vita ist Leben, also Vitamin = macht das Leben.
Heine hat einmal etwas verspotten wollen; da sagte er: Es gibt Leute, die wollen zum Beispiel erklären, woher die Armut komme. Nun, das einfachste ist ja, wenn man sagt: Die Armut kommt von der Pauvrete. — Da hat man dann ein anderes Wort, aber man hat damit nichts erklärt.
Ich war einmal in einer Gesellschaft, da wurde gesprochen davon, woher das Komische kommt, und da haben sich eine Reihe von Leuten recht schöne Gedanken darüber gemacht, woher das Komische kommt, worüber man lacht. Dann ist aber einer aufgestanden und ist schon so hingegangen zum Podium, daß man gewußt hat, der hat das Gefühl, recht viel zu sagen! Und nun hat er seine Ansicht über das Komische vorgebracht und hat gesagt: Das Komische, das kommt lediglich davon, daß der Mensch die vis comica hat. - Vis comica: vis ist Kraft, comica ist komisch. Der Mensch hat die komische Kraft, daher kommt das Komische. — Das ist gerade so, als wenn einer in der Volkswirtschaft sagt: Woher kommt das Geld? Das Geld kommt von der geldmachenden Kraft. - Man hat damit gar nichts erklärt.
Nun, in der Volkswirtschaft wird man sogleich bemerken, daß einer ein kurioser Kerl ist, wenn er sagt: Das Geld kommt von der geldwirkenden Kraft. Aber in der Naturwissenschaft bemerkt man das nicht, wenn einer sagt: Woher kommt die belebende Kraft in der Milch? und darauf antwortet: Vom Vitamin. — Das ist geradeso wie: Die Armut kommt von der Pauvrete. - Aber man merkt nichts. Man meint, man habe eine große Sache gesagt, aber man hat gar nichts damit gesagt.
Und das ist es, was, ich möchte sagen, das Aufregende im heutigen Wissenschaftsbetrieb ist. Die Leute glauben etwas zu sagen, verkündigen das mit riesigen Worten, und die anderen Menschen glauben ihnen auch alles. Aber wenn das noch lange in der Weltgeschichte so fortgeht, so wird es dazu kommen, daß überhaupt alles verkimmern und verkommen muß. Denn die Welt hängt davon ab, daß man etwas machen kann, nicht davon, daß man über die Sachen bloß reden und Worte machen kann. Die Worte müssen dasjenige bedeuten, was wirklich da ist. Und da gab es früher wirklich eine Art von Wissenschaft, die unmittelbar mit der Praxis zusammenhing. Und heute gibt es eine Wissenschaft, die überhaupt nichts mehr von der Praxis weiß. Sie spinnt bloß noch Worte aus. Und das ist eben natürlich mit dadurch gekommen, daß eine neue Autorität zu den alten Autoritäten dazugekommen ist.
Sie müssen nur bedenken, wie kurze Zeit es erst her ist, daß es für solche speziellen Sachen nicht so viele Zeitschriften gegeben hat wie heute. Da sind eigentlich die Mitteilungen, die über so etwas gekommen sind, wie, sagen wir, die Bienenzucht, auf Bienenzüchtertagungen abgemacht worden. Das geht noch in meine Jugend zurück. Da konnte man erfahren, wie diese Dinge auf so einer Bienenzüchtertagung abgemacht worden sind. Da hat einer dem anderen das gesagt, was er aus seinen Erfahrungen wußte, und da erahnte man gleich, ob einer ein Windbeutel ist, oder ob er wirkliche Erfahrungen hinter sich hat. Denn das ist etwas ganz anderes, wenn man einen reden hört. Da merkt man, ob er etwas weiß, oder ob er bloß etwas nachredet. Denn die Druckerschwärze ist als eine neue Autorität vielfach zu den anderen hinzugekommen. Und wenn etwas gedruckt ist, dann glauben die Leute, damuß etwas dahinter sein.
Aber bei diesem Artikel kommt noch etwas dazu. Diese Ärztin hat tatsächlich Segensreiches gewirkt durch ihre Honigkuren. Und dasjenige, was sie in der Praxis gemacht hat, ist etwas Ausgezeichnetes. Nun denkt sie im Sinne der Wissenschaft darüber nach, und da kommt im Grunde gar nichts darüber heraus. Und sie sagt es auch:
«Es wäre sehr wünschenswert, wenn die Ergebnisse unserer Versuche weitesten Kreisen bekannt würden, und wenn besonders unserer heranwachsenden Jugend wieder mehr Honig verabreicht würde.»
«Vorläufig stellen unsere Mitteilungen nur die Ergebnisse unserer praktischen Erfahrungen dar; aber wir zweifeln nicht, daß mit dem weiteren Ausbau der Vitaminlehre auch die Pharmakologen und Physiologen sich mit dem Problem der Honigwirkung auf den Organismus befassen werden.»
Ebenso sagt die Artikelschreiberin gleich am Anfang:
«Es drängt mich, auch einmal vom ärztlichen Standpunkte aus über die Wirkungen der Honigkuren zu berichten. ... Unsere guten Erfolge muntern direkt dazu auf, den tieferen Zusammenhängen nachzuspüren. Wenn schon ich mir bewußt bin, noch lange nicht in das innerste Wesen derselben eingedrungen zu sein, möchte ich doch jetzt schon auf Grund unserer Erfahrungen und Untersuchungsergebnisse die Punkte beleuchten, an denen meines Erachtens die weitere Forschung anzusetzen hätte.»
Also, da geht doch aus ihren eigenen Worten klar hervor, daß sie die Bescheidenheit hat, diese Ärztin, daß sie sagt: Mit der ganzen Vitaminlehre ist doch eigentlich nicht in das Wesen der Sache hineinzukommen.
Nun wollen Sie sich einmal folgendes genau überlegen. Wir wollen jetzt einmal sehen, worauf eigentlich die Wirkung der Honigkuren beruht. Sie sehen, auch diese Versuche zeigen uns etwas. Sie zeigen uns, daß die Wirkung des Honigs ganz besonders stark ist - und das werden die Versuche immer mehr und mehr zeigen -, nicht bei ganz kleinen Kindern, sondern bei denjenigen Kindern, die entweder schon beim Zahnwechsel angekommen sind oder sehr stark über den Zahnwechsel hinaus sind. Das ist also etwas, was die Versuche selber zeigen. Das ist außerordentlich wichtig, daß man das in Betracht zieht. Aber die Versuche zeigen nämlich noch weiteres. Sie zeigen, daß bei Kindern der Honig am besten dann wirkt, wenn man ihn in eine mäßig heiße Milch gibt. Also wenn man ein Gemisch von Honig und Milch hervorruft, dann wirkt das besonders bei Kindern.
Und wenn man nun noch weitergehen würde, so würde man nämlich folgendes finden. Man würde finden, daß der Honig auch bei kleineren Kindern eine Bedeutung schon haben kann. Dann muß man aber wenig Honig in die Milch hineingeben; mehr Milch, wenig Honig. Bei alten Leuten hilft der Honig hauptsächlich, nicht die Milch. Günstige Resultate kann man für Greise dadurch erzielen, daß man sie den Honig überhaupt ohne Milch verspeisen läßt.
Dasjenige, was man sagen muß, ist, daß Milch und Honig etwas sind, was für das menschliche Leben eine außerordentlich große Bedeutung hat. Das geht gerade aus diesen Erfahrungen hervor.
Und sehen Sie, meine Herren, alte Wissenschaften, das habe ich Ihnen oftmals gesagt, waren nicht so dumm, als die heutige Gelehrsamkeit meint. Alte Wissenschaften kommen manchmal in einer einfachen Weise heraus, aber sie waren eigentlich sehr gescheit, sehr weise. Und nun wissen Sie, in der alten Redensart: Das ist ein Land, wo Milch und Honig fließt - liegt ja das ausgedrückt, daß es ein gesundes Land ist, wo man gesund leben kann. Also es wußten die Menschen der alten Zeiten, daß Milch und Honig etwas ist, was mit dem Leben ungeheuer stark zusammenhängt.
Die Natur redet manchmal auf eine sehr verständige Weise. Dasjenige, was sie ausspricht, das merkt man, wenn man nur die einfachen Sachen einfach genug nimmt. Wer weiß, daß die Natur überhaupt sehr weise wirkt, der braucht nicht viel Beweis dafür, daß die Milch mehr das ist, was für die kleinen Kinder gut ist und den Heranwachsenden. Sonst würde aus den Brüsten der Frauen Honig fließen und nicht Milch, was durchaus nicht im Bereich der Naturunmöglichkeit läge, denn die Pflanzen bringen den Honig hervor, und es könnte schon durchaus die Möglichkeit sein, daß in der Drüsenabsonderung der Frauenbrust Honig wäre. Man muß nur die Dinge einfach genug nehmen. Man muß nicht sagen: Die Natur ist eine Stümperin, und sie macht in der Frauenbrust bloß Milch und nicht Honig -, sondern man muß sagen: Dahinter liegt eben schon die Erkenntnis, daß für das kleine Kind vor allen Dingen die Milch in Betracht kommt, und daß man den Honig nehmen kann, je mehr das Kind heranwächst.
Ja, aber wir können uns doch nicht bloß eine solche Vorstellung machen, die eine bloße Wortvorstellung ist, und uns sagen, die Armut kommt von der Pauvrete, das Komische von der Vis comica und die Belebungskraft des Honigs kommt von dem Vitamin, das drinnen ist, sondern man muß hinschauen auf das, was Wirklichkeit in dieser Beziehung ist. Und da werde ich Ihnen das Folgende sagen - wir wollen etwas zusammenstellen, was wir längst aus diesen Vorträgen schon wissen, aber es handelt sich darum, daß man die Dinge immer richtig anschauen kann.
Sehen Sie, meine Herren, wenn Sie ins Hochgebirge gehen, finden Sie gerade da, wo das Hochgebirge am härtesten ist, wo gewissermaßen das härteste Erdige herausschießt, Quarzkristalle. Die sind sehr schön. Sie finden überhaupt allerlei Kristalle. Erinnern Sie sich, ich habe Ihnen diese Quarzkristalle aufgezeichnet; die schauen so aus (siehe Zeichnung).
Wenn sie ganz sind, so sind sie auch da unten abgeschlossen geradeso wie oben; aber meistens sind sie nicht ganz. Sie kommen also aus dem Gestein heraus, wachsen gewissermaßen aus dem Gestein heraus in einer solchen Form, wie ich es Ihnen da aufgezeichnet habe, wie ich es schon oft aufgezeichnet habe. Was heißt denn das? Das heißt, die Erde läßt solche Kristalle aus sich herauswachsen, die sechseckig sind und spitz zulaufen. Also in der Erde drinnen ist die Kraft, so etwas sechseckig zu gestalten.
Sehen Sie, im Menschen sind alle Kräfte, wie ich Ihnen immer wiederum auseinandergesetzt habe, die in der Erde und die auch im Weltenall sind. Die Erde hat diese Kraft wiederum vom Weltenall. Der Mensch hat sie von der Erde. In dem Menschen ist diese Kraft drinnen, die bei der Erde diesen Quarzkristall heraustreibt. Wie ist das da drinnen? Ja, der menschliche Körper ist nämlich voll von Quarz.
Jetzt werden Sie sagen: Donnerwetter noch einmal, was der uns da vorredet! - Der Quarz, wie man ihn oben im Gebirge bekommt, das ist einer der härtesten Körper. Daran kann man sich den Schädel anschlagen. Der Quarz bricht nie, aber der menschliche Kopf bricht natürlich dabei, wenn man das probiert und den Schädel furchtbar an Quarz anschlägt. Also die Härte, die ist dasjenige, was das am meisten Auffallende beim Quarz ist. Aber die Körper sind nicht überall so, wie sie da oder dort uns entgegentreten. Im Menschen ist ganz dasselbe, was der Quarz ist, aber in einer mehr flüssigen Form. Warum?
Sehen Sie, man kann beobachten - und da muß man nur richtig beobachten durch richtiges inneres Schauen -, wie da fortwährend etwas herunterströmt vom Kopf in die Glieder des Menschen (siehe Zeichnung). Das ist sehr interessant: Wenn Sie da den menschlichen Kopf haben, dann strömt fortwährend vom Kopf herunter dasselbe, was die Erde einmal von innen nach außen hat strömen lassen, und was da oben hart geworden ist und zum Beispiel als Quarzkristalle sich absetzte. Das strömte da vom Inneren der Erde heraus; und beim Menschen strömt es vom Kopf nach dem ganzen Körper. Es ist das Quarz oder Kieselsäure. Nur läßt der menschliche Körper den Quarz nicht Kristall werden. Das wäre auch eine schöne Geschichte, wenn wir da innerlich ganz ausgefüllt wären mit lauter Quarzkristall. Das täte uns gehörig weh! Bis zu dem Punkt, wo der Quarz gerade so sechseckig werden will, läßt es der Mensch kommen. Und da, da stoppt er. Da läßt er es nicht weiter dazukommen. So daß bei uns im Körper nur der Anfang der Quarzbildung ist, und dann wird es gestoppt; aufhören muß es. Und darauf beruht ja unser Leben, daß wir fortwährend vom Kopf nach unten sechseckige Kristalle bilden wollen, es aber nicht dazu kommen lassen, sondern aufhören. Da drinnen wollen fortwährend solche Kristalle entstehen. Sie entstehen aber nicht wirklich, sie werden aufgehalten, und wir haben dann sozusagen in ganz starker Verdünnung den Quarzsaft in uns.
Hätten wir nicht den Quarzsaft in uns, dann könnten wir zum Beispiel noch soviel Zucker essen — wir hätten niemals einen süßen Geschmack im Mund. Das macht der Quarz, den wir in uns haben, aber nicht durch seine Stofflichkeit, sondern durch das, daß der Wille in ihm ist, sechseckig zu werden als Kristall. Das macht es. Darauf kommt es an.
Sie sehen also, in der Erde ist dasselbe drinnen, was nur weitergeführt wird. Der Mensch hört auf mit der Kieselsäure, wenn die anfangen will, da in ihm spießig zu werden. Die Erde läßt es bis zu der Spießigkeit nach oben kommen. Aber der Mensch braucht diese Kraft, diese Kieselsäurekraft, die die Kraft ist, sechseckige Gestaltungen hervorzubringen. Diese Kraft, sechseckige Gestaltungen hervorzubringen, die braucht der Mensch.
Ich denke mir, es sind nicht alle unter Ihnen gute Geometer. Die Geometrie ist nicht allen unter Ihnen jetzt gleich geläufig. Sie könnten vielleicht nicht jetzt gleich solch einen Quarzkristall selbst zeichnen oder aus Plastilin gestalten. Aber Ihr Körper, der ist ein guter Geometer, der will fortwährend solche Kristalle machen. Wir werden daran gehindert. Aber alles Leben besteht darinnen, daß wir das Sterben aufhalten, und wenn wir es nicht mehr aufhalten, so sterben wir eben wirklich.
Jetzt schauen wir wieder die Biene an. Die Biene fliegt aus, sammelt den Honig. Den Honig verarbeitet sie dann im eigenen Körper und macht daraus dasjenige, was ihre eigenen Lebenskräfte sind. Sie erzeugt aber ferner das Wachs. Was macht sie denn mit dem Wachs? Daraus macht sie sechseckige Zellen. Sehen Sie, die Erde macht sechseckige Kieselsäurekristalle. Die Biene macht sechseckige Zellen.
Das ist furchtbar interessant. Wenn ich Ihnen die Zellen der Biene aufzeichnen würde oder wenn Sie sich erinnern, wie sie Ihnen der Herr Müller gezeigt hat, so schauen sie so aus wie die Quarzkristalle, nur daß sie hohl sind. Der Quarz, der ist nicht hohl. Aber in der Form sind sie ganz gleich.
Ja, sehen Sie, meine Herren, diese Zellen sind hohl (siehe Zeichnung). Aber was kommt denn da hinein? Da kommt das Bienenei hinein. Wo beim Quarz die Kieselsäure drinnen ist, ist es hohl bei der Zelle, und da kommt gerade das Bienenei hinein. Die Biene wird durch dieselbe Kraft ausgebildet, die in der Erde ist und den Quarz bildet. Da wirkt die fein verteilte Kieselsäure. Da ist eine Kraft drinnen; sie kann physisch nicht nachgewiesen werden. Da wirkt durch den Bienenkörper der Honig so, daß er das Wachs in der Gestalt bilden kann, die gerade der Mensch braucht, denn der Mensch muß diese sechseckigen Räume in sich haben. Der Mensch braucht das gleiche. Und indem die Biene dasjenige Tier ist, das am besten zunächst diese sechseckig wirkende Kraft bilden kann, ist die Biene das Tier, das aus allem, was da ist, dasjenige Nahrungsmittel sammelt, das im Leibe am besten in diese sechseckig wirkende Kraft übergeführt werden kann.
Sehen Sie, meine Herren, essen Sie nun Bienenhonig, dann bekommen Sie in sich eine ungeheuer stärkende Kraft. Denn wenn Sie zu schwach geworden sind, um diese Sechseckkraft, die vom Kopfe nach
dem ganzen Leibe gehen muß, in sich zu entwickeln, wenn Sie nicht mehr die Kraft haben, dem Blut so viel Festigkeit zu geben, daß diese Sechseckkraft fortwährend da ist, dann muß der Honig eintreten, oder beim Kinde die Milch. Das Kind hat noch nicht diese Sechseckkraft; daher muß es sie noch durch das bekommen, was im Menschen selber noch zubereitet ist an Milch.
Deshalb ist es, daß Sie noch so viel Kasein, Fett, Zucker und Salze den Mäusen zu fressen geben können - sie krepieren. Warum? Weil auch das Tier diese sechseckig wirkende Kraft braucht. Wenn man bloß Kasein, Fett, Zucker und Salze zusammenmischt, so ist diese Kraft, die in dem Sechseckigen wirkt, nicht drinnen. Wenn man den Mäusen Milch gibt, da ist sie drinnen. Nur ist sie nicht so stark drinnen, daß die Milch, wenn sie sauer wird, sechseckig kristallisiert. Wenn diese sechseckig wirkende Kraft in der Milch ein bißchen stärker wäre, dann könnten Sie nämlich saure Milch trinken, die auf der Zunge kleine Kieselsäuresalze bilden würde. Das würde so schmecken, wie wenn Sie lauter kleine Härchen in der Milch drinnen hätten. Aber bei der Milch kommt es nicht so weit, weil die Milch aus dem Menschenkörper oder Tierkörper selber stammt, und da bleibt sie flüssig. Bei dem Kind reicht es noch aus, aber bei dem erwachsenen Menschen reicht es eben nicht mehr aus. Und das Erwachsenwerden fängt ja schon in der Kindheit an. Da muß man schon mit dieser stärkeren sechseckig wirkenden Kraft kommen, die in dem Honig steckt.
Das ist sehr interessant: Wenn Sie Milch nehmen, so ist die Milch, wenn sie auch aus dem Menschen kommt, doch eigentlich animalisch, im Tierischen des Menschen. Da ist sie tierisch. Wenn Sie den Honig nehmen, so kommt der aus dem Pflanzenreich, nur auf dem Umweg durch die Biene. Er kommt aus dem Pflanzenreich, ist pflanzlich. Wenn Sie die Kieselsäure nehmen, also den Quarz, so ist der mineralisch. Der hat ganz deutlich sechseckige Gestalt. Das Wachs, das da entsteht unter dem Einfluß der Bienennahrung in der Biene selber, das hat also Form bekommen — es ist nicht daraus entstanden, hat aber daraus seine Form bekommen -, das bildet sich aus in der sechseckigen Zelle. Die Milch, die löst die Gestalt schon wiederum auf. Da drinnen in der Milch bildet sich nur ein Schattenbild von sechseckigen Kristallen. Und so kann man sagen: Der Honig ist dasjenige, was dem Menschen am allerwillkommensten sein muß.
Nicht wahr, man könnte sich denken, daß es auch gut wäre, wenn der Mensch, statt daß er Honig ißt, Kieselsäure essen würde, denn da würde er diese Sechseckkraft auch in sich bekommen. Aber die Kieselsäure hat dadurch, daß sie so weit getrieben worden ist, zur sechseckigen Gestalt zu kommen, diese Kieselsäuregestalt in sich zu formen, eine zu starke Wirkung auf den Menschen. Aber sie ist trotzdem etwas Wohltätiges.
Nehmen Sie jetzt folgendes an. Denken Sie sich, ein armes Kind hat es nicht so gut, daß es eine solche Honigkur kriegt, wie sie hier beschrieben ist in dem Artikel, mit sechzehn oder siebzehn Jahren, oder mit dreizehn oder vierzehn Jahren, wo es am besten ist; es hat es nicht so gut, bekommt seine Eisenkörperchen im Blute immer schwächer und schwächer. Der Prozentgehalt im Blute geht immer mehr und mehr herunter. Das Kind wächst heran, wird, sagen wir, dreißig Jahre alt, ist arm und ist ein sehr schwacher Mensch geworden. Die Artikelschreiberin schildert ja das auch, indem sie sagt: sie klappen zusammen. Jetzt hat man es zu tun mit einem Menschen, der inzwischen dreißig Jahre alt geworden ist. Da könnte man ja ganz gut eine Honigkur anwenden, aber der Mensch ist schon zu ausgemergelt. Er müßte so viel Honig genießen, wenn es ihm helfen sollte, daß ihm wiederum durch den Honig der Magen verdorben würde. Denn der Honig ist nämlich zu gleicher Zeit etwas, was den Menschen zur Mäßigkeit anstiftet. Wenn man zuviel Honig ißt, dann verdirbt man sich den Magen.
Das beruht auf einer einfachen Sache. Der Honig ist süß, enthält sehr viel Zucker. Der Magen braucht aber vorzugsweise Säure, und wenn Sie in den Magen zuviel Süßes hineinbringen, so verderben Sie die Säurewirkung. Also kurz, der Honig, der will nur in einer bescheidenen Menge aufgenommen werden. So daß, wenn ein Mensch schon so ausgemergelt ist im dreißigsten Jahre, man ihm so viel Honig geben müßte, wenn ihm die Honigkur helfen sollte - das würde sie ohne weiteres -, er zugleich zunächst Magenverstimmungen kriegen würde und er dann darmkrank werden würde. Das kann man also nicht.
Aber man kann etwas anderes tun. Man kann dem Menschen zuerst stark verdünnten, gepulverten Quarz, das ist Kieselsäure, als Heilmittel geben. Und wenn man ihm als Heilmittel stark verdünnte Kieselsäure gibt, dann wird er dadurch fähig, nach einiger Zeit die Wohltat von kleinen Honigmengen haben zu können. Die stark verdünnte Kieselsäure hat in ihm dann die Kraft hervorgerufen, sechseckig zu wirken, und dann kann eine geringere Menge von Honig nachkommen. Die Kieselsäure kann der Wegmacher für den Honig sein.
Man kann es auch so machen, daß man für einen solchen Menschen, der dreißig Jahre alt geworden und ausgemergelt worden ist in bezug auf den Hämoglobingehalt, in den Honig hinein, beim erwachsenen Menschen also - während man bei den Kindern gut tut, viel Milch zu geben -, etwas ganz stark verdünnte Kieselsäure gibt. Dann wirkt der Honig auf den Menschen.
Sie sehen, meine Herren, alle diese Zusammenhänge muß man wissen. So daß man sagen kann: Was wirkt denn eigentlich vom Honig aus auf den Menschen? Vom Honig aus wirkt auf den Menschen diese sechsekkig bildende Kraft. Die ist in der Biene drinnen. Das kann man an ihren Wachszellen anschauen. Und dadurch ist der Honig eben von solcher Wohltat. Deshalb ist es richtig, was ich Ihnen erwähnt habe: daß beim Kinde vorzugsweise die Milchkraft wirkt, aber man kann sie verstärken durch den Honig, und daß beim Erwachsenen vorzugsweise die Honigkraft wirkt. Aber wenn der Mensch schon älter geworden ist, muß man diese Honigkraft durch die Quarzkraft verstärken, wie ich es Ihnen gesagt habe. Es kann aber immer noch helfen, weil ja die Kräfte der ersten Kindheit noch in ihm sind, eine Honig-Milchkur. Eine bloße Honigkur kann ihm auch helfen. Die Wohltat der Honigkur bleibt ganz unbestritten.
Das weiß die Praxis nämlich sehr gut, und man müßte sich nur dadurch, daß man diese Dinge den Leuten recht klar macht, darauf verlegen, eben gerade immer die richtigen Honigmengen im Handel zu haben. Und da sind die Menschen nun sehr geneigt, sich betrügen zu lassen, ich meine jetzt nicht im gewöhnlichen kriminellen Sinne, sondern, ich möchte sagen, durch die Kulturverhältnisse sich betrügen zu lassen. Wenn Sie irgendwo hingegangen sind auf Reisen in die Hotels und haben Honig verlangt, da war das dann oftmals kein Honig, dann war das Zuckerhonig, also doch etwas, was künstlich erzeugt war! Ja, hätten die
Leute gewußt, daß das nicht dasselbe ist, daß da keine Rede davon ist, daß diese sechseckig wirkende Kraft da ist, dann hätten sie sich nicht vorgemacht, daß dieser nachgemachte Honig ebenso wirkt wie der Bienenhonig. Mit Bienenhonig könnten Sie natürlich auch die Mäuse füttern. Er würde ihnen sehr gut schmecken. Aber von diesem künstlichen Honig würden sie auch sehr bald zugrunde gehen, wenn auch nicht in ein paar Tagen.
Das ist etwas, was ich in bezug auf den Artikel über Honig-Milchkuren sagen möchte.
Nun ist mir noch eine interessante Sache zugekommen, über die ich auch sprechen und hören möchte, was Sie selber dazu zu sagen haben, und was Ihnen auch Herr Müller dazu zu sagen hat. Sie werden sehen, es kommen so viele Fragen in Betracht, daß es schon der Mühe wert ist, daß wir das nächste Mal noch einmal darüber diskutieren. Sie können dann Ihre Fragen stellen und Herr Müller oder ich selber werden antworten. Ich will jetzt nur noch kurz auf zwei Dinge eingehen. Es wird Ihnen etwas sonderbar vorkommen, aber ich bin eigentlich gespannt darauf, was Sie dazu sagen werden.
Schriftliche Frage: In altbäuerischen Imkerkreisen ist man davon überzeugt, daß zwischen dem Bienenvater und seinen Pfleglingen gewisse seelische Bezichungen bestehen. So sagt man: Wenn der Bienenvater stirbt, so muß sein Tod sofort jedem Bienenvolk angezeigt werden. Unterbleibt diese Anzeige, so sterben sämtliche Völker im Laufe des nächsten Jahres. Daß ein gewisser Seelenrapport zwischen beiden besteht, deutet die Erfahrungstatsache an, daß, wenn man in einer ärgerlichen oder zornigen Seelenstimmung eine Arbeit an den Bienen vornehmen will, man viel mehr von den Bienen verstochen wird, als wenn man dieselbe Arbeit in einer ruhigen, harmonischen Seelenstimmung ausführt. Kann der vorangeführten Ansicht alter Imker etwas Tatsächliches zugrunde liegen?
Dr. Steiner: Nun wäre es ja interessant, wenn uns Herr Müller in einfacher Weise sagen würde, ob er solche Sachen für ganz aus der Luft gegriffen hält. Solche Dinge sind bei den bäuerlichen Bienenzüchtern im Gebrauche, daß sie den Tod anzeigen, nicht wahr. Aber diesen Seelenrapport, diese Beziehung zwischen dem Bienenvater und den Bienen, den meine ich jetzt. Darüber könnte Herr Müller vielleicht etwas sagen.
Herr Müller erzählt von zwei Fällen in Basel und Zürich in bezug auf solche Dinge. In einer Familie war die Frau gestorben, die sehr viel an den Bienen mitgearbeitet hatte, und in der Zeit von einem Jahre sind sämtliche Bienenvölker eingegangen. Ein anderer Fall, der in Basel eingetreten ist, wo auch eine Frau gestorben ist, die sich sehr viel der Bienen angenommen hatte, zeigte genau dasselbe. Es war ein großer Stand; in der Zeit von einem Jahre war der Stand von achtundzwanzig Völkern auf sechs Völker reduziert. Wie das mit der Zeit an und für sich zusammenhängt oder auch mit den Bienen, das kann man sich nicht erklären. Man kann in dem einen Fall nicht nachweisen, daß die Bienen irgendeine Krankheit gehabt haben; vielleicht war es eine seelische Beziehung.
Dr. Steiner: Wollen wir uns einmal an etwas erinnern, was ich Ihnen von der Beziehung des Menschen zu den Tieren auch einmal gesagt habe. Sie werden vielleicht gehört haben, ich habe es Ihnen auch schon erwähnt: Vor einiger Zeit war viel die Rede von sogenannten rechnenden Pferden, Pferden, welche also die Frage gekriegt haben zum Beispiel: Wieviel ist vier und fünf. Dann zählte man: eins, zwei, drei, vier, fünf, sechs, sieben, acht, neun - das Pferd stampfte auf mit dem Fuß. Nicht unbeträchtliche solcher Rechnungen haben die Pferde gemacht. Sie haben vielleicht gehört, daß ganz besonders die Elberfelder rechnenden Pferde berühmt geworden sind. Kommissionen sind da hingereist und haben die Sache untersucht und so weiter. Ich habe die Elberfelder Pferde nicht selbst gesehen, aber ich habe ein anderes Pferd, das sogenannte rechnende Pferd des Herrn von Osten gesehen, das ebensogut rechnen konnte. Und daran konnte man sich eine ganz genaue Ansicht bilden, was da eigentlich zugrunde liegt.
Die Menschen haben sich ja sehr den Kopf zerbrochen über diese rechnenden Pferde. Es ist ja auch etwas ganz Schreckliches im Grunde genommen, daß da plötzlich die Pferde anfangen sollten zu rechnen. Und sie rechneten so fix, daß die Rechenmaschine wirklich schon fast zuschanden kam dabei. Nun, meine Herren, wenn das in die Pädagogik überginge und man da die Pferde rechnen lehren könnte, das könnte eine wilde Konkurrenz werden für die Buchhalter und für die Leute, die zum Rechnen angestellt werden! Es ist also natürlich eine schlimme Geschichte mit den rechnenden Pferden.
Aber gerade die Wissenschaft hat sich bei diesen rechnenden Pferden in einer unglaublichen Weise blamiert. Darauf kann man ja leicht kommen: Wirklich rechnen kann ja natürlich das Pferd nicht, und man muß suchen, wie es kommt, daß das Pferd bei neun stampft. Es ist natürlich eine vollständige Idiotie, zu glauben, das Pferd könne rechnen. Das hat auch der Privatdozent Pfungst, der sich gelehrt mit der Sache beschäftigt hat, gewußt, daß das Pferd nicht rechnen kann. Aber er hat eine Theorie aufgestellt. Er sagte: Dieser Herr von Osten macht jedesmal, wenn er zählt, eine kleine Miene im Gesicht, und die Linien im Gesicht, diese Miene, beobachtet das Pferd. Und auf die Miene hin stampft es. - Nun hat er sich gleich den Einwand gemacht: Ja, aber dann müßte er sich ja eigentlich hinstellen und den Herrn von Osten ansehen und auf die Miene aufpassen, die das Pferd bemerkt, um zu stampfen. Da hat er sich auch hingestellt, aber nichts gesehen. Da wurde er nicht irre an seiner Theorie, sondern da sagte er: Die Miene ist so kleinwinzig, daß ich sie nicht sehen kann, aber das Pferd kann sie sehen. - Nun, meine Herren, daraus folgt, daß ein Roß mehr sehen kann als ein Privatdozent. Sonst folgt gar nichts daraus.
Aber so lag die Sache nicht. Wenn man nun geisteswissenschaftlich geschult ist und sich die Sache anschaute, dann legte man nicht den Wert auf irgendeine kleine Miene, sondern die Sache verlief so: Da stand auf der einen Seite das Pferd, da stand der Herr von Osten und hatte ein bißchen das Pferd am Zügel. Und in der rechten Rocktasche hatte der Herr von Osten lauter kleine Zuckerstückchen. Und nun gab der Herr von Osten dem Pferd fortwährend kleine Zuckerstückchen. Das leckte daran und fand es süß und liebte den Herrn von Osten sehr. Immer mehr liebte es ihn mit den Zuckerstückchen dann, und dadurch bildete sich eine herzliche Beziehung zwischen dem Pferd und dem Herrn von Osten. Und Herr von Osten brauchte nicht eine kleine Miene zu machen, sondern brauchte bloß zu denken: Bei neun stimmt die Sache dann spürte das das Pferd, weil die Tiere eine viel feinere Empfindung haben für das, was um sie herum vorgeht. Sie spüren, was da im Kopfe vorgeht, wenn es auch gar nicht zu einer kleinen Miene kommt, die ein Roß sehen könnte und ein Mensch nicht; das Pferd spürt, was vorgeht im Gehirn, wenn er denkt: neun; dabei stampft das Pferd. Hätte das Pferd nicht den Zucker bekommen, dann hätte sich die Liebe beim Pferd ein bißchen in Haß verwandelt, und da hätte es nicht mehr gestampft.
Also sehen Sie, beim Tier ist eine feine, feine Empfindung vorhanden für Dinge, aber nicht für kleine Mienen, sondern für Dinge, die tatsächlich nicht sichtbar sind, also bei dem Pferd Hans für das, was im Inneren des Gehirnes des Herrn von Osten vorgeht. Solche Dinge muß man eben beobachten; dann weiß man, daß in der Tat die Tiere wunderbar fühlen.
Denken Sie sich einmal, Sie gehen in einen Bienenschwarm hinein und haben eine heillose Angst. Ja, das fühlen die Bienen, daß Sie Angst haben; das ist nicht zu leugnen. Was heißt denn das: Sie haben Angst? — Sie wissen: Wenn man Angst hat, dann wird man blaß. Bei der Angst wird man blaß. Und wenn man blaß wird, geht das Blut zurück. Es geht nicht nach außen in die Haut herein. Wenn die Biene nun herankommt an einen Menschen, der Angst hat, dann spürt die Biene im Menschen mehr als sonst, wenn das Blut drinnen wäre in der Haut, diese sechseckig wirkende Kraft und möchte gerade den Honig oder Wachs gewinnen von Ihnen. Währenddem, wenn der Mensch gleichmütig vorgeht und sein Blut gleichmäßig durch die Adern fließen hat, da merkt die Biene etwas ganz anderes. Da merkt sie, daß das Blut diese selbe sechseckig wirkende Kraft hat.
Nun denken Sie sich, wenn der Mensch zornig ist, im Zorn unter die Bienen geht: Ja, der Zorn macht Sie rot. Da kommt gerade viel Blut hin; das Blut will die sechseckig wirkende Kraft aufnehmen. Die Biene merkt das in ihrem feinen Gefühl und glaubt, Sie wollen sie ihr wegnehmen, diese Kraft, und sticht Sie. Das sind eben feine Empfindungen für Naturkräfte, die da spielen, die da drinnen sind.
Und dazu kommt dann die Gewöhnung. Denken Sie sich: Ein Bienenvater, der geht ja für die Bienen nicht bloß so wie sonst ein Mensch zum Bienenstock hin, sondern die Bienen fühlen - wenn ich mich des Ausdrucks bedienen darf - die ganze Ausdünstung, sie fühlen, wie der beschaffen ist. Daran gewöhnen sich die Bienen. Stirbt er, so müssen sie sich umgewöhnen. Und das bedeutet für die Bienen außerordentlich viel. Denken Sie doch nur einmal, was Sie selbst bei Hunden finden: Wenn der Herr starb - das hat es schon gegeben -, sind sie aufs Grab gegangen und dort gestorben, weil sie sich nicht an einen anderen Herrn gewöhnen konnten. Also warum soll man bei den Bienen, die doch einen solchen feinen chemischen Sinn haben, nicht voraussetzen können, daß sie alles wahrnehmen, daß sie sich an den Bienenvater so gewöhnen, daß sie sich nicht gleich wieder umgewöhnen können an einen anderen? Es liegt also durchaus etwas Bedeutsames zugrunde.
Aber Sie können sagen: Ist denn das bei Hunden und Pferden ebenso wie bei diesen kleinen winzigen Tieren, den Insekten? - Nun, Sie werden vielleicht dieses nicht beobachtet haben, aber es ist dennoch wahr: Man findet Menschen, die haben, wie man sagt, eine besonders glückliche Hand im Blumenaufziehen. Alles gedeiht ihnen, wenn sie einen Blumenstock haben und Pflanzen und so weiter. Ein anderer pflegt ihn ebenso es wird nichts. Das ist die Ausdünstung, die der Mensch hat, die von dem einen Menschen günstig auf die Blumen wirkt, bei anderen ungünstig. Bei manchen geht es gar nicht, daß sie Blumen ziehen. Und das Ungünstig-Wirken geschieht vorzugsweise gerade auf die Kraft in der Blume, die den Honig erzeugt, auf die Kraft, die die Blume versüßt. Und so kann man sagen: Sogar auf die Blumen wirkt der Mensch, und er wirkt im eminentesten Sinne gerade auf die Bienen.
Man braucht sich also darüber nicht zu wundern, sondern man muß nur die Tatsachen, die sich ergeben, zusammenhalten; dann wird man schon sehen, daß die Sachen wirklich so sein können. Man wird auch in der Praxis darauf Rücksicht nehmen können.
Zweite Frage: Nach einer alten Bauernregel heißt es: Wenn es am 3. Mai, der Kreuzauffindung, regnet, so wasche es den Honig aus den Blüten und von den Bäumen, so daß es in dem betreffenden Jahre keinen Honigertrag gibt. Meine Beobachtungen während der letzten vier Jahre scheinen darzutun, daß an dieser Regel etwas Wahres ist. Ist so etwas überhaupt möglich?
Dr. Steiner: Ja, meine Herren, das ist etwas, was uns ganz tief in Naturwirkungen hineinführt. Sehen Sie, daß es just der Kreuzauffindungstag ist, daß es just der 3. Mai ist,.das ist von einer geringeren Bedeutung. Aber es kommt darauf an, daß es diese Jahreszeit ist, die vorzugsweise in diesen Tagen tätig ist. Was bedeutet denn das, daß es in dieser Zeit, Anfang Mai, regnet? Ich habe Ihnen einmal gesagt, daß der Frühlingsanfangspunkt jetzt im Sternbild der Fische ist. Im Sternbild der Fische bleibt die Sonne bis ungefähr zum 23. April. Dann kommt die Sonne beim Umgang in das Sternbild des Widders. Die Sonnenstrahlen kommen also anfangs Mai aus einer ganz anderen Weltecke heraus als zu anderen Zeiten. Nehmen Sie also an, anfangs Mai, also am 3. Mai, ist es schön, sagen wir. Was bedeutet das? Das bedeutet: Am 3. Mai hat die Sonne eine starke Kraft über alles Irdische. Alles, was auf der Erde vor sich geht, geht unter der Sonnenkraft vor sich, wenn es schön ist. Was bedeutet es nun, wenn es am 3. Mai, also anfangs Mai, regnet? Das bedeutet: Die Erde hat die höchste Kraft und vertreibt die Sonnenwirkung.
Das alles hat aber eine ungeheure Bedeutung für das ganze Pflanzenwachstum. Wenn die Sonnenkraft gerade dann, wenn die Sonnenstrahlen aus der Widdergegend herkommen, so wirken kann, daß sie ihre ganze Gewalt auf die Blumen verlegen kann, dann entwickeln die Blumen diese süße Substanz, die im Honig zum Vorschein kommt. Dann finden die Bienen Honig. Wenn aber die Erde die höhere Gewalt hat, wenn Regen ist zu dieser Zeit, dann können die Blumen sich nicht unter den Sonnenstrahlen entwickeln, die vom Widder hereinkommen, sondern müssen auf Späteres warten oder werden überhaupt unterbrochen in dem, was sie schon entwickelt haben. Da entwickeln die Blumen nicht ordentlich Honig und dann finden die Bienen keinen Honig.
Gerade so etwas wird einem erklärlich, wenn man weiß, daß alles dasjenige, was auf Erden vorgeht, wie ich es Ihnen immer wieder gesagt habe, unter dem Einfluß des Weltenalls steht, desjenigen, was außerhalb der Erde ist. Regen bedeutet eben, daß die Sonnenkraft vertrieben wird. Schönes Wetter bedeutet, daß die Sonnenkraft ihre volle Gewalt entfalten kann. Und es kommt darauf an, nicht daß die Sonnenkraft im allgemeinen kommt, sondern daß die Sonnenkraft gerade just aus der Ecke heraus kommt, nicht wo wir jetzt hinschauen, sondern gerade da vom Widder her. Aus jeder Ecke kommt die Sonnenkraft wieder anders. Die Sonne allein macht es nicht, sondern das macht es, daß die Sonne von vorne scheint auf die Erde und da hinten im Weltenall der Widder steht. Das, was der Widder der Sonne gibt, das nimmt sie erst auf, und dann gibt sie es weiter als Sonnenstrahlen. Das ist etwas ganz anderes, ob im Anfang des Mai oder am Ende des Mai die Sonne ihre Strahlen auf die Erde schickt. Zu Anfang Mai wirkt eben noch die volle Kraft des Widders. Am Ende des Mai wirkt schon die Stierkraft. Da kommt dann dasjenige, was nicht mehr mit derselben Kraft auf die Pflanzen wirken kann, was die Pflanzen verhärtet, vertrocknet, was namentlich bewirkt, daß sich nicht mehr diese Kraft der Honigbildung in den Pflanzen bilden kann.
So ist etwas in den alten Bauernregeln zum Vorschein gekommen, was schon seine Gründe hat, und man sollte sie daher wohl beachten. Natürlich, ich habe es schon einmal gesagt, das Bewußtsein von solchen Dingen ist verlorengegangen und dadurch sind wir in Aberglauben verfallen. Und man kann natürlich, wenn man nicht mehr unterscheiden kann, in Aberglauben verfallen. Dann haben Bauernregeln ungefähr denselben Wert wie: Kräht der Hahn auf dem Mist, ändert sich das Wetter oder es bleibt, wie es ist. - Aber das ist nicht bei allen Regeln der Fall, sondern manches beruht auf einer tiefen Weisheit, die man dann erforschen muß. Die Bauern, die die Bauernregeln verwendet haben, sind manchmal ganz gut damit gefahren! Sie sehen also, eine tiefere Anschauung führt auch wieder dazu, daß man die Bauernregeln wieder verwenden kann.
Nächsten Mittwoch weiter.
Tenth Lecture
Gentlemen! Mr. Müller gave me another issue of the “Schweizerische Bienen-Zeitung” (Swiss Bee Journal), which contains an article about experiences with honey cures: “Our further experiences with honey cures at the Frauenfelder children's home in Amden.” By Dr. Paula Emrich, Weesen, issue 3 of the “Schweizerische Bienen-Zeitung,” March 1923.
Some excerpts from it will be read aloud.
It is quite interesting to add a few comments to this article today. The point is that in this children's home, an attempt was made to treat children who were found to be malnourished in some way by treating them with honey in the manner described, namely by dissolving honey in moderately warm milk, distributing it finely, and then giving the children this honey in milk that is not overheated, milk that has not been brought to the boil, milk that has remained below boiling point.
She reports excellent results. In particular, the author of the article can report the gratifying result that the red blood cell count in the children increases in an extraordinary way. For example, she had two children who were siblings. When the younger one was admitted to the institution, he had only 53 percent red blood cells. Upon discharge, after undergoing the honey treatment, the red blood cells had risen to 82 percent. The older child had 70 percent red blood cells, and when he was picked up, he had 78 percent. So the increase was smaller, but it was still an increase. The older child had only undergone the milk cure and had also gained weight, but only from 70 to 78 percent, so it was not as weak to begin with, but it did not become stronger in the same proportion.
Now she cites a number of very interesting experiments. And when I mention these experiments, I ask you to pay attention to the age of the children. If you want to investigate the effect of any substance on humans, it is of no use to simply carry out these experiments in the laboratory. Instead, you must always determine the age of the patient first, as you would with any patient, when conducting any nutritional or therapeutic experiments.
So we have an eleven-year-old boy; who has undergone an eight-week honey cure and has thereby achieved a very significant improvement in his glands. His pulmonary catarrh has also improved, and his red blood cells, which are actually the important ones, have risen from 53 percent to 75 percent. Then, secondly, another eleven-year-old boy. He has an increase from 55 percent to 74 percent. Then a fourteen-year-old girl had an increase from 70 percent to 88 percent. I will not read out the other increases to you, because they are all significant. She also mentions the weight gain, which also shows that the children have become stronger. She then mentions a ten-year-old girl, another ten-year-old girl, a thirteen-year-old boy, a seven-year-old girl, an eleven-year-old boy, an eight-year-old boy, a twelve-year-old boy, a nine-year-old boy, and a seven-year-old boy. The experiments show that children of this age, i.e., roughly school age, benefit greatly from the honey cure.
The author is now studying what could be the reason why these children benefit so much from the honey cure. She makes a very interesting point. She makes a point that strongly condemns what is still so widely used in science today.
What does science do today when it wants to test food for its nutritional value? Science breaks down these specific foods and looks for how many components of one or another so-called chemical substance are in them. That is what science does.
Now the following happened: A student—says the author—of the famous physiology professor Bunge, whom you know by name, was in Basel and conducted experiments by feeding mice milk. These mice had it good; they developed very well. So they were fed milk. But then he conducted the experiment in another way. He said to himself: Milk consists of casein, i.e., cheese substance, fat, sugar, and salts. And then he said to himself: The mice thrived excellently on milk; milk consists of casein, fat, sugar, and salts; so I will give a group of mice casein, fat, sugar, and salts. That's the same thing that's in milk. And lo and behold, the mice he gave casein, fat, and so on to died after a few days! They got the same thing, but they died. You see, the composition of the substance doesn't matter. Something else must be at play — that's what the gentlemen should have said to themselves.
But what did the gentlemen say to themselves? They said: Substance, that's everything, substance must be everywhere. And wherever anything happens, there must be a substance. - But the substances that are in casein, in fat, sugar, and salts, yes, they don't do it! So the gentlemen said to themselves: There must be a new substance in there, in such small quantities that it cannot be found by chemical analysis. — And now people call this substance a vitamin. Vita is life, so vitamin = gives life.
Heine once wanted to mock something; he said: There are people who want to explain, for example, where poverty comes from. Well, the simplest thing to say is: Poverty comes from pauvreté. — Then you have another word, but you haven't explained anything.
I was once in a group where people were talking about where comedy comes from, and a number of people had some really nice thoughts about where comedy comes from, what makes us laugh. But then one person stood up and walked over to the podium in such a way that you knew he felt he had a lot to say! And now he presented his view on humor and said: Humor comes solely from the fact that humans have vis comica. - Vis comica: vis is power, comica is funny. Humans have the power of humor, which is where humor comes from. — It's just like when someone in economics says: Where does money come from? Money comes from the power to make money. - That explains nothing at all.
Well, in economics, people would immediately notice that someone is a strange fellow if he said: Money comes from the money-making power. But in science, people don't notice when someone asks: Where does the invigorating power in milk come from? and answers: From vitamins. — It's just like saying: Poverty comes from pauvreté. - But you don't notice anything. You think you've said something important, but you haven't said anything at all.
And that, I would say, is what is so exciting about science today. People believe they are saying something, proclaim it with grandiose words, and other people believe everything they say. But if this continues in world history for much longer, it will lead to everything becoming stunted and degenerate. For the world depends on being able to do something, not on merely talking about things and making words. Words must mean what is really there. And in the past, there really was a kind of science that was directly related to practice. And today there is a science that knows nothing about practice anymore. It just spins words. And that has come about, of course, because a new authority has been added to the old authorities.
You only have to consider how little time ago it was that there were not as many magazines for such special subjects as there are today. Actually, the information that came about such things as, say, beekeeping, was agreed upon at beekeepers' conferences. That goes back to my youth. There you could find out how these things had been agreed upon at such a beekeeping conference. One person told another what he knew from his own experience, and you could immediately tell whether someone was a windbag or whether he had real experience behind him. Because it's quite different when you hear someone talk. You can tell whether they know something or whether they are just parroting something. Because printing ink has often been added to the others as a new authority. And when something is printed, people believe there must be something behind it.
But there is something else to this article. This doctor has actually done a lot of good with her honey cures. And what she has done in her practice is something excellent. Now she is thinking about it in terms of science, and basically nothing is coming of it. And she says so herself:
“It would be very desirable if the results of our experiments were made known to the widest possible audience, and if our growing youth in particular were given more honey again.”
“For the time being, our reports only represent the results of our practical experience; but we have no doubt that with the further development of vitamin science, pharmacologists and physiologists will also address the problem of the effect of honey on the organism.”
Similarly, the author of the article says right at the beginning:
"I feel compelled to report on the effects of honey cures from a medical point of view. ... Our positive results directly encourage us to investigate the deeper connections. Although I am aware that I am still far from understanding the innermost nature of these connections, I would like to highlight the points where, in my opinion, further research should be conducted, based on our experiences and research results."
So, it is clear from her own words that this doctor has the modesty to say that the whole theory of vitamins does not actually get to the heart of the matter.
Now, let's consider the following carefully. Let's see what the effect of honey treatments is actually based on. You see, these experiments also show us something. They show us that the effect of honey is particularly strong—and the experiments will show this more and more—not in very young children, but in children who have either already reached the stage of tooth replacement or are well beyond it. This is something that the experiments themselves show. It is extremely important to take this into account. But the experiments show even more. They show that honey works best in children when it is added to moderately hot milk. So when you make a mixture of honey and milk, it is particularly effective in children.
And if we were to go further, we would find the following. We would find that honey can also be important for younger children. But then you have to add a little honey to the milk; more milk, less honey. For elderly people, it is mainly the honey that helps, not the milk. Favorable results can be achieved for the elderly by having them eat the honey without any milk at all.
What must be said is that milk and honey are something of extraordinary importance for human life. This is evident from these experiences.
And you see, gentlemen, ancient sciences, as I have often told you, were not as stupid as today's scholarship thinks. Ancient sciences sometimes come across as simple, but they were actually very clever, very wise. And now you know, in the old saying: “This is a land flowing with milk and honey” – this expresses that it is a healthy land where one can live healthily. So the people of ancient times knew that milk and honey are something that is very strongly connected with life.
Nature sometimes speaks in a very intelligible way. You can see what it is saying if you just take simple things simply enough. Anyone who knows that nature is very wise in general does not need much proof that milk is good for small children and adolescents. Otherwise, honey would flow from women's breasts instead of milk, which would not be impossible in nature, because plants produce honey, and it could well be possible that the glands in women's breasts could secrete honey. One must simply take things as they are. One must not say: Nature is incompetent, and it only produces milk in women's breasts and not honey – but one must say: Behind this lies the realization that milk is best for small children, and that honey can be consumed as the child grows older.
Yes, but we cannot just form an idea that is merely a verbal concept and say to ourselves that poverty comes from pauvreté, humor from vis comica, and the invigorating power of honey from the vitamins it contains. Instead, we must look at what is real in this regard. And here I will tell you the following: let us put together something that we already know from these lectures, but the point is that one can always look at things correctly.
You see, gentlemen, when you go into the high mountains, you find quartz crystals precisely where the high mountains are hardest, where, so to speak, the hardest earth shoots out. They are very beautiful. You find all kinds of crystals. Remember, I have drawn these quartz crystals for you; they look like this (see drawing).
When they are whole, they are closed at the bottom just as they are at the top; but most of the time they are not whole. So they come out of the rock, grow out of the rock, so to speak, in the form I have drawn for you, as I have often drawn before. What does that mean? It means that the earth allows such crystals to grow out of itself, crystals that are hexagonal and taper to a point. So within the earth is the power to form something hexagonal.
You see, as I have explained to you time and again, all the forces that are in the earth and also in the universe are present in human beings. The earth, in turn, has this power from the universe. Human beings have it from the earth. This power is within human beings, which drives this quartz crystal out of the earth. How is that possible? Well, the human body is full of quartz.
Now you will say: Good heavens, what is he talking about! Quartz, as found high up in the mountains, is one of the hardest substances. You can crack your skull on it. Quartz never breaks, but of course the human head breaks if you try that and smash your skull horribly against quartz. So hardness is what is most striking about quartz. But bodies are not everywhere as they appear to us here or there. In humans, it is exactly the same as quartz, but in a more fluid form. Why?
You see, one can observe – and one only has to observe correctly through proper inner seeing – how something is constantly flowing down from the head into the limbs of the human being (see drawing). This is very interesting: if you have the human head, then the same thing that once flowed from the inside of the earth to the outside, and which hardened up there and settled as quartz crystals, for example, flows continuously from the head. That flowed out from the inside of the earth; and in humans it flows from the head to the whole body. It is quartz or silicic acid. Only the human body does not allow the quartz to become crystal. It would also be a beautiful story if we were completely filled with quartz crystals inside. That would hurt us considerably! The human being allows it to come to the point where the quartz is just about to become hexagonal. And there, it stops. They don't let it go any further. So that in our bodies, only the beginning of quartz formation takes place, and then it is stopped; it has to stop. And our life is based on the fact that we constantly want to form hexagonal crystals from our head downwards, but we don't let it happen, we stop it. Inside, such crystals want to form constantly. But they don't really form, they are stopped, and we then have, so to speak, the quartz juice in us in a very strong dilution.
If we did not have the quartz juice within us, we could eat as much sugar as we wanted, for example, and we would never have a sweet taste in our mouths. This is what the quartz within us does, not through its materiality, but through the will within it to become hexagonal as a crystal. That is what it does. That is what matters.
So you see, the earth contains the same thing, which is simply carried on. Human beings stop with the silicic acid when it starts to become narrow-minded within them. The earth allows it to rise to the surface. But human beings need this power, this silicic acid power, which is the power to produce hexagonal formations. Human beings need this power to produce hexagonal formations.
I imagine that not all of you are good geometers. Geometry is not familiar to all of you right now. You might not be able to draw such a quartz crystal yourself or shape it out of plasticine right now. But your body is a good geometer; it wants to make such crystals all the time. We are prevented from doing so. But all life consists in the fact that we stop dying, and when we no longer stop it, we really die.
Now let's look at the bee again. The bee flies out and collects honey. It then processes the honey in its own body and turns it into its own life force. But it also produces wax. What does it do with the wax? It makes hexagonal cells out of it. You see, the earth makes hexagonal silica crystals. The bee makes hexagonal cells.
That is terribly interesting. If I were to draw the cells of the bee for you, or if you remember how Mr. Müller showed them to you, they look like quartz crystals, except that they are hollow. Quartz is not hollow. But in shape they are exactly the same.
Yes, you see, gentlemen, these cells are hollow (see drawing). But what goes inside them? The bee's egg goes inside. Where quartz contains silicic acid, the cell is hollow, and that is where the bee's egg goes. The bee is formed by the same force that is in the earth and forms quartz. The finely distributed silica has an effect there. There is a force inside; it cannot be physically proven. Through the bee's body, the honey has such an effect that it can form the wax into the shape that humans need, because humans must have these hexagonal spaces within themselves. Humans need the same thing. And since the bee is the animal that can best form this hexagonal force, the bee is the animal that collects from all that is available the food that can best be transformed in the body into this hexagonal force.
You see, gentlemen, if you eat bee honey, you will gain an enormous strengthening power within yourselves. For if you have become too weak to develop this hexagonal power, which must flow from the head to
throughout the body, if you no longer have the strength to give the blood enough firmness that this hexagonal power is constantly present, then honey must come in, or milk in the case of children. Children do not yet have this hexagonal power; therefore, they must still obtain it through what is still prepared in humans themselves in the form of milk.
That is why you can feed mice as much casein, fat, sugar, and salts as you like — they will die. Why? Because animals also need this hexagonal force. If you simply mix casein, fat, sugar, and salts together, this force that acts in the hexagon is not present. When you give mice milk, it is present. However, it is not strong enough to cause the milk to crystallize into hexagons when it turns sour. If this hexagonal force in milk were a little stronger, you could drink sour milk, which would form small silicic acid salts on your tongue. It would taste as if you had lots of tiny hairs in the milk. But this does not happen with milk because milk comes from the human or animal body itself, and there it remains liquid. This is sufficient for children, but it is no longer sufficient for adults. And growing up begins in childhood. That's when you need to start using the stronger hexagonal force that is contained in honey.
This is very interesting: when you drink milk, even though it comes from humans, it is actually animalistic, part of the animal nature of humans. It is animalistic. If you take honey, it comes from the plant kingdom, only via the detour through the bee. It comes from the plant kingdom, it is plant-based. If you take silicic acid, i.e., quartz, it is mineral. It has a very clear hexagonal shape. The wax that is produced under the influence of the bees' food in the bee itself has thus taken shape — it did not originate from it, but took its shape from it — it forms in the hexagonal cell. Milk, on the other hand, dissolves the shape. Inside the milk, only a shadow image of hexagonal crystals is formed. And so one can say: honey is what must be most welcome to humans.
Isn't it true that one might think it would also be good if, instead of eating honey, humans ate silicic acid, because then they would also receive this hexagonal power within themselves? But silicic acid, having been pushed so far as to take on a hexagonal shape, to form this silicic acid shape within itself, has too strong an effect on humans. Nevertheless, it is still something beneficial.
Now consider the following. Imagine a poor child who is not fortunate enough to receive the honey treatment described in this article at the age of sixteen or seventeen, or at the age of thirteen or fourteen, when it is most beneficial; the child is not so fortunate and the iron particles in its blood become weaker and weaker. The percentage in the blood is going down more and more. The child grows up, becomes, let's say, thirty years old, is poor and has become a very weak person. The author of the article also describes this by saying: they collapse. Now we are dealing with a person who has meanwhile reached the age of thirty. A honey cure could be quite effective, but the person is already too emaciated. They would have to consume so much honey for it to help that the honey would ruin their stomach. This is because honey is also something that encourages people to exercise moderation. If you eat too much honey, you ruin your stomach.
This is based on a simple fact. Honey is sweet and contains a lot of sugar. However, the stomach needs acid, and if you put too much sweetness into the stomach, you spoil the acid's effect. In short, honey should only be consumed in modest quantities. So if a person is already so emaciated at the age of thirty, you would have to give them so much honey for the honey cure to help them – which it would, without question – that they would first get stomach upset and then become ill with intestinal problems. So that's not an option.
But there is something else you can do. You can first give the person a highly diluted powdered quartz, which is silicic acid, as a remedy. And if you give him highly diluted silicic acid as a remedy, after a while he will be able to benefit from small amounts of honey. The highly diluted silicic acid will then have given him the strength to function hexagonally, and then a smaller amount of honey can follow. Silicic acid can pave the way for honey.
Another approach is to give a person who has reached the age of thirty and is emaciated in terms of hemoglobin content, i.e., an adult—while it is good to give children plenty of milk—some very strongly diluted silicic acid in the honey. Then the honey will have an effect on the person.
You see, gentlemen, one must be aware of all these connections. So that one can say: What effect does honey actually have on people? Honey has a hexagonal-forming power that affects people. This power is inside the bee. You can see it in their wax cells. And that is why honey is so beneficial. That is why what I mentioned to you is correct: that the power of milk has a particular effect on children, but it can be strengthened by honey, and that the power of honey has a particular effect on adults. But when a person has grown older, this honey power must be strengthened by quartz power, as I have told you. However, a honey-milk cure can still help, because the powers of early childhood are still within them. A honey cure alone can also help them. The benefits of a honey cure remain undisputed.
Practice knows this very well, and one would only have to make these things clear to people in order to ensure that the right amounts of honey are always available in stores. And people are now very inclined to allow themselves to be deceived, not in the usual criminal sense, but, I would say, by cultural circumstances. If you went somewhere on a trip and asked for honey in a hotel, it was often not honey, but sugar honey, something that was artificially produced! Yes, if people had known that it was not the same thing, that there was no question of this hexagonal force being present, then they would not have pretended that this imitation honey was the real thing.
If people had known that it wasn't the same thing, that there was no question of this hexagonal force being present, then they wouldn't have pretended that this imitation honey had the same effect as bee honey. Of course, you could also feed bee honey to mice. They would enjoy it very much. But this artificial honey would kill them very quickly, even if not in a few days.
That is something I would like to say in relation to the article on honey-milk cures.
Now I have come across another interesting thing that I would like to talk about and hear what you yourself have to say about it, and what Mr. Müller has to say about it. You will see that there are so many questions to consider that it is worth discussing it again next time. You can then ask your questions and Mr. Müller or I myself will answer them. I would now like to briefly address two things. It may seem a little strange to you, but I am actually curious to hear what you have to say about it.
Written question: In traditional beekeeping circles, it is believed that there is a certain spiritual connection between the beekeeper and his bees. It is said that when the beekeeper dies, his death must be immediately reported to every bee colony. If this notification is not made, all the colonies will die within the next year. The fact that there is a certain spiritual connection between the two is indicated by the empirical observation that if you want to do work on the bees when you are in an angry or irritable mood, you will be stung by the bees much more than if you do the same work when you are in a calm, harmonious mood. Could there be any truth in the above view of old beekeepers?
Dr. Steiner: Now it would be interesting if Mr. Müller would tell us in simple terms whether he considers such things to be completely unfounded. Such things are common among rural beekeepers, who use them to indicate death, don't they? But this spiritual connection, this relationship between the bee father and the bees, I mean. Perhaps Mr. Müller could say something about that.
Mr. Müller tells of two cases in Basel and Zurich relating to such things. In one family, the woman who had worked a great deal with the bees had died, and within a year all the bee colonies had died. Another case that occurred in Basel, where a woman who had also taken great care of the bees died, showed exactly the same thing. It was a large apiary; within a year, the number of colonies had been reduced from twenty-eight to six. How this is related to time itself or to the bees cannot be explained. In one case, it cannot be proven that the bees had any disease; perhaps it was a spiritual connection.
Dr. Steiner: Let us recall something I once told you about the relationship between humans and animals. You may have heard, I have already mentioned it to you: some time ago there was a lot of talk about so-called calculating horses, horses that were asked questions such as: How much is four and five? Then they counted: one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine – and the horse stamped its foot. The horses performed quite a few such calculations. You may have heard that the calculating horses of Elberfeld in particular became famous. Commissions traveled there and investigated the matter and so on. I have not seen the Elberfeld horses myself, but I have seen another horse, the so-called calculating horse of Mr. von Osten, which could calculate just as well. And from that, one could form a very accurate opinion of what actually lies behind it.
People have racked their brains over these calculating horses. It is, after all, quite a terrible thing that horses should suddenly start calculating. And they calculated so quickly that the calculating machine was almost ruined in the process. Well, gentlemen, if this were to be incorporated into education and horses could be taught to calculate, it could become fierce competition for accountants and people who are employed to do calculations! So, of course, it's a terrible story with these calculating horses.
But science in particular has embarrassed itself in an unbelievable way with these calculating horses. It's easy to see why: of course, horses can't really calculate, and we have to find out why the horse stamps its foot at nine. It is, of course, completely idiotic to believe that horses can calculate. Private lecturer Pfungst, who has studied the matter in depth, also knew that horses cannot calculate. But he put forward a theory. He said: Every time Mr. von Osten counts, he makes a small facial expression, and the horse observes the lines on his face, this expression. And it stamps its hoof in response to the expression. Now he immediately raised the objection: Yes, but then he would actually have to stand there and look at Mr. von Osten and watch for the expression that the horse notices in order to stamp. So he stood there, but saw nothing. He did not abandon his theory, but said: The expression is so tiny that I cannot see it, but the horse can see it. - Well, gentlemen, it follows that a horse can see more than a private lecturer. Otherwise, nothing follows from this.
But that was not the case. If you were trained in the humanities and looked at the matter, you would not place any value on some small expression, but rather the matter would proceed as follows: On one side stood the horse, on the other stood Mr. von Osten, holding the horse's reins a little. And in the right pocket of his coat, Mr. von Osten had lots of little sugar cubes. And now Mr. von Osten kept giving the horse little sugar cubes. The horse licked them and found them sweet and loved Mr. von Osten very much. It loved him more and more with the sugar cubes, and this created a warm relationship between the horse and Mr. von Osten. And Mr. von Osten didn't need to make a little face, he just needed to think: At nine, the thing is right, and the horse sensed that, because animals have a much finer sense of what is going on around them. They sense what is going on in the mind, even if there is no slight change in expression that a horse could see but a human could not; the horse senses what is going on in the brain when he thinks: nine; and the horse stamps its foot. If the horse had not received the sugar, the horse's love would have turned a little into hatred, and it would no longer have stamped its foot.
So you see, animals have a very fine sensitivity to things, but not to small expressions, rather to things that are actually invisible, as in the case of Hans the horse and what is going on inside Mr. von Osten's brain. You have to observe such things; then you know that animals do indeed feel wonderfully.
Imagine you walk into a swarm of bees and are terrified. Yes, the bees sense that you are afraid; there is no denying it. What does it mean to be afraid? You know that when you are afraid, you turn pale. Fear makes you pale. And when you turn pale, the blood recedes. It does not flow outwards into the skin. When a bee approaches a person who is afraid, the bee senses more than usual in that person, if the blood were inside the skin, this hexagonal force, and wants to extract honey or wax from them. Meanwhile, if the person remains calm and their blood flows evenly through their veins, the bee notices something completely different. It notices that the blood has the same hexagonal force.
Now imagine that a person is angry and goes among the bees in a state of anger: yes, anger makes you red. A lot of blood flows there; the blood wants to absorb the hexagonal force. The bee senses this with its fine sensitivity and believes that you want to take this force away from it, and stings you. These are fine sensations for the forces of nature that are at play, that are inside.
And then there is the matter of habituation. Think about it: a bee father does not just go to the beehive like a human being would, but the bees feel – if I may use the expression – his whole aura, they feel what he is like. The bees get used to that. When he dies, they have to get used to something new. And that means a great deal to the bees. Just think about what you see with dogs: when their owner died—it has happened—they went to the grave and died there because they couldn't get used to another owner. So why should we not assume that bees, which have such a fine chemical sense, perceive everything, that they become so accustomed to the father bee that they cannot immediately get used to another? There is therefore something significant underlying this.
But you may say: Is this the same with dogs and horses as with these tiny little animals, the insects? Well, you may not have observed this, but it is nevertheless true: there are people who, as they say, have a particularly lucky hand in growing flowers. Everything thrives when they have a flower bed and plants and so on. Another person tends to them in the same way, but nothing grows. It is the exhalation that humans have, which has a favorable effect on flowers in some people and an unfavorable effect in others. Some people are completely unable to grow flowers. And the unfavorable effect occurs primarily on the force in the flower that produces honey, on the force that sweetens the flower. And so one can say: humans even have an effect on flowers, and in the most eminent sense they have an effect on bees.
So there is no need to be surprised about this, one only has to hold together the facts that arise; then one will see that things can really be this way. One will also be able to take this into account in practice.
Second question: According to an old farmer's rule, if it rains on May 3, the day of the Finding of the Cross, it washes the honey out of the flowers and trees, so that there is no honey yield in that year. My observations over the last four years seem to show that there is some truth in this rule. Is such a thing even possible?
Dr. Steiner: Yes, gentlemen, this is something that takes us deep into the workings of nature. You see, the fact that it is the Feast of the Finding of the Cross, that it is May 3, is of lesser importance. What matters is that it is this time of year that is particularly active during these days. What does it mean that it rains at this time, at the beginning of May? I once told you that the beginning of spring is now in the constellation of Pisces. The sun remains in the constellation of Pisces until about April 23. Then the sun enters the constellation of Aries. So at the beginning of May, the sun's rays come from a completely different corner of the world than at other times. So suppose it is beautiful at the beginning of May, say on May 3. What does that mean? It means that on May 3, the sun has a strong power over everything earthly. Everything that happens on earth happens under the power of the sun when the weather is beautiful. What does it mean when it rains on May 3, at the beginning of May? It means that the earth has the greatest power and drives away the sun's influence.
All of this has tremendous significance for the growth of all plants. When the sun's power can act in such a way that it can transfer all its power to the flowers, especially when the sun's rays come from the Aries region, then the flowers develop this sweet substance that appears in honey. Then the bees find honey. But if the earth has the upper hand, if it rains at this time, then the flowers cannot develop under the sun's rays coming in from Aries, but must wait until later or are even interrupted in what they have already developed. Then the flowers do not develop honey properly and the bees cannot find any honey.
This becomes understandable when you know that everything that happens on earth, as I have told you again and again, is under the influence of the universe, of that which is outside the earth. Rain means that the sun's power is driven away. Fine weather means that the sun's energy can unfold its full power. And it is not a question of the sun's energy coming in general, but of the sun's energy coming from that particular corner, not where we are looking now, but precisely from Aries. The sun's energy comes differently from every corner. It is not the sun alone that does this, but the fact that the sun shines on the earth from the front and Aries stands behind it in the universe. The sun first absorbs what Aries gives it and then passes it on as sunbeams. It makes a big difference whether the sun sends its rays to the earth at the beginning of May or at the end of May. At the beginning of May, the full power of Aries is still at work. At the end of May, the power of Taurus is already at work. Then comes that which can no longer act on the plants with the same power, which hardens and dries them out, which in particular means that this power of honey formation can no longer be formed in the plants.
Thus, something has come to light in the old farmers' rules that has its reasons, and one should therefore pay attention to them. Of course, as I have said before, awareness of such things has been lost, and as a result we have fallen into superstition. And of course, when you can no longer distinguish between fact and fiction, you can fall into superstition. Then farmers' rules have about the same value as: if the rooster crows on the dung heap, the weather will change or remain as it is. But this is not the case with all rules; some are based on a deep wisdom that must be explored. The farmers who used the farmers' rules sometimes did quite well with them! So you see, a deeper understanding also leads to the farmers' rules being used again.
To be continued next Wednesday.
