Donate books to help fund our work. Learn more→

The Rudolf Steiner Archive

a project of Steiner Online Library, a public charity

Reincarnation and Karma
Their Significance in Modern Culture
GA 135

20 February 1912, Stuttgart

3. Knowledge of reincarnation and karma through thought-exercises

When we observe how life takes its course around us, how it throws its waves into our inner life, into everything we are destined to feel, to suffer or to delight in during our present existence on the earth, we can think of several groups or kinds of experiences.

As regards our own faculties and talents, we find, to begin with, that when we succeed in something or other, we may say: being what we are, it is quite natural and understandable that we should succeed in this or that case. But certain failures, perhaps just those that must be called misfortune and calamity,—may also become intelligible when viewed in the whole setting of our nature.

In such cases we may not, perhaps, always be able to prove exactly how this or that failure is connected with our own shortcomings in one direction or another. But when we are obliged to say of ourselves in a general way: In many respects you were a superficial character in your present life, so it is understandable that in certain circumstances you were bound to fail—then we may not immediately perceive the connection between the failure and the shortcomings, but generally speaking we shall realise that if we have been frivolous and superficial, success cannot always be at our finger-tips.

From what has been said you may think that some kind of causal connection could have been evident between what inevitably happened and your faculties or incompetencies. But there are many things in life where, however conscientiously we set to work, we are not able at once to connect success or failure with these faculties or shortcomings; how we ourselves were at fault or why we deserved success, remains a mystery. In short, when thinking more of our inner life we shall be able to distinguish two groups of experiences: in the case of the one group we are aware of the causes of our successes and failures; in the case of the second group we shall not be able to detect any such connection, and that we failed in one particular instance and succeeded in another will seem to be more or less chance. To begin with, we will bear in mind that there is ample evidence in life of this latter group of facts and experiences, and will return to it later.

In contrast to what has just been said, we can think more about our destiny in outer life. There again, two groups of facts will have to be kept in mind. There are cases where it is inwardly clear to us that in connection with events that befall us—not, therefore, those we ourselves initiated—we did certain things and consequently are to blame for these happenings. But of another group of experiences we shall be very liable to say that we can see no connection whatever with what we resolved, what we intended. These are events of which it is usually said that they broke in upon our life as if by chance; they seem to have no connection whatever with anything we ourselves have brought about.

It is this second group of experiences in their relation to our inner life that we shall now consider, that is to say, those happenings where we are unable to perceive any direct or immediate connection with our faculties and shortcomings—outer events, therefore, which we call chance events, of which we cannot at the outset perceive how they could have been brought about by any preceding factor. By way of test, a kind of experiment can be made with these two groups of experiences. The experiment entails no obligations; it is a question merely of putting to the test what will now be characterised.

The experiment can take the following form.—We ask ourselves: How would it be if we were to build up in thought a kind of imaginary human being, saying of him just those things between which we can see no connection by means of our own faculties; we endow this imaginary man with the qualities and faculties which have led, in our own case, to these incomprehensible happenings. We there imagine a man possessing faculties of such a kind that he will inevitably succeed or fail in matters where we cannot say the same in connection with our own shortcomings or faculties. We imagine him as one who has quite deliberately brought about the events which seem to have come into our life by chance.

Simple examples can serve as the starting-point here. Suppose a tile from a roof has fallen upon and injured our shoulders. We shall be inclined to attribute this to chance. But to begin with as an experiment, we now build up in thought an imaginary man who acts in the following strange way. He climbs on a roof, quickly loosens a tile, but only to the point where it still has a certain hold; then he runs quickly to the ground so that when the tile has become quite detached, it falls on his shoulders. The same can be done in the case of all events which seem to have come into our life by chance. We build up an imaginary man who is guilty of or brings about all those things of which in ordinary life we cannot see how they are connected with us.

Such procedure may seem at first to be nothing but a play of fancy. No obligation is incurred by it, but one remarkable thing emerges. When we have imagined such a man with the qualities referred to, he makes a very memorable impression upon us. We cannot get rid of the picture we have thus created in thought; although the picture seems so artificial, it fascinates us, gives the impression that it must, after all, have something to do with ourselves. The feeling we have of this imaginary thought-man accounts for this. If we steep ourselves in this picture it will most certainly not leave us free. A remarkable process then takes shape within our soul, an inner process that is enacted in human beings all the time. We may think of something, make a resolution; for this we need something we once knew, and we use all sorts of artificial means for recalling it. This effort to call up into memory something that has escaped us is, of course, a process in the life of soul—“recollection” as it is usually called. All the thoughts we summon up to help us to remember something are auxiliary thoughts. Just try for once to realise how many and how often such thoughts have to be used and dropped again, in order to get at what we want to know. The purpose of these auxiliary thoughts is to open the way to the recollection needed at the moment.

In exactly the same, but in a far more comprehensive sense, the ‘thought-man’ described represents an auxiliary process. He never leaves us alone; he is astir in us in such a way that we realise: he lives in us as a thought, as something that goes on working, that is actually transformed within us into the idea, the thought, which now flashes up suddenly into our soul in the ordinary process of recollection; it is something that overwhelms us. It is as though something says to us: this being cannot remain as he is, he transforms something within you, he becomes alive, he changes! This forces itself upon us in such a way that the imaginary man whispers to us: This is something that has to do with another earth-existence, not with the present one. A kind of recollection of another earth-existence—that is the thought which quite definitely arises. It is really more a feeling than a thought, a sentient experience, but of such a kind that we feel as though what arises in the soul is what we ourselves once were in an earlier incarnation on this earth.

Anthroposophy, regarded in its entirety, is by no means merely a sum-total of theories, of presentations of facts, but it gives us directives and indications for achieving our aspirations. Anthroposophy says: If you carry out certain exercises you will be led nearer to the point where recollection is easier for you. It can also be said—and this is drawn from the sphere of actual experience: If you adopt this procedure you get an inner impression, a sentient impression, of the person you were in an earlier life. We there achieve what may be called an extension of memory. What discloses itself to us is, to begin with, a thought-reality only, as long as we are building up the imaginary man described. But this imaginary man does not remain a thought-being. He transforms himself into sentient impressions, impressions in the life of soul, and while this is going on we realise that this experience has something to do with our earlier incarnation. Our memory extends to this earlier incarnation.

In this present incarnation we remember those things in which our thoughts participated. But in ordinary life, what has played into our life of feeling does not so easily remain vivid and alive. If you try to think back to something that caused you great pain ten or twenty years ago, you will be able to recall the mental picture of it without difficulty; you will be able to cast your thoughts back to what then took place; but you cannot recapture the actual, immediate experience of the pain felt at the time. The pain fades, the remembrance of it streams into the life of ideation. What has here been described is a memory in the soul, a memory belonging to the life of feeling. And as such we actually feel our earlier incarnation. There does, in fact, arise what may be called a remembrance of earlier incarnations. It is not possible immediately to perceive what is playing over into the present incarnation, what is actually the bearer of the remembrance of earlier incarnations. Consider how intimately our thoughts are united with what gives expression to them, with our speech and language. Language is the embodiment of the world of thoughts and ideas. In each life, every human being has to learn the language anew. A child of the very greatest philologist or linguist has to learn his mother-tongue by dint of effort. There has yet to be a case of a grammar-school boy learning Greek with ease because he rapidly remembered the Greek he had spoken in earlier incarnations!

The poet Hebbel jotted down one or two thoughts for the plan of a drama he intended to write. It is a pity that he did not actually carry out this project, for it would have been an extremely interesting drama. The theme was to have been that Plato, reincarnated as a school-boy, received the very lowest marks for his understanding of the Plato of old! We need not remind ourselves that some teachers are severe, or pedantic. We realise that what Hebbel jotted down is due to the fact that the element of thought, which is also in play in the mental pictures of immediate experiences, is limited more or less to the present incarnation. As we have now heard, the first impression of the earlier incarnation comes as a direct memory in the life of feeling, as a new kind of memory. The impression we get when this memory arises from the imaginary man we have created in thought, is more like a feeling, but of such a kind that we realise: the impression comes from some being who once existed and who you yourself were. Something that is like a feeling arising in an act of remembrance is what comes to us as a first impression of the earlier incarnation.

The creation of an imaginary man in thought is simply a means of proving to us that this means is something that transforms itself into an impression in the life of soul, or the life of feeling. Everyone who comes to Anthroposophy has the opportunity of carrying out what has now been described. And if he does so he will actually receive an inner impression of which—to use a different illustration—he might speak as follows. I once saw a landscape; I have forgotten what it actually looked like, but I know it delighted me! If this happened during the present life, the landscape will no longer make a very vivid impression of feeling; but if the impression of the landscape came from an earlier incarnation the impression will be particularly vivid. In the form of a feeling we can obtain a very vivid impression of our earlier incarnation. And if we then observe such impressions objectively, we may at times experience something like a feeling of bitterness, bitter-sweetness or acidity from what emerges as the transformation of the imaginary thought-man. This bitter-sweet or some such feeling is the impression made upon us by our earlier incarnation; it is an impression of feeling, an impression in the life of soul.

The endeavour has now been made to draw attention to something that can ultimately promote in every human being a kind of certainty of having existed in an earlier life—certainty through having engendered a feeling of inner impressions which he knows were most definitely not received in this present life. Such an impression, however, arises the same way as a recollection arises in ordinary life. We may now ask: How can one know that the impression is actually a recollection? There it can only be said that to ‘prove’ such a thing is not possible. But the process is the same as it is elsewhere in life, when we remember something and are in a sound state of mind. We know there that what arises within us in thought is actually related to something we have experienced. The experience itself gives the certainty. What we picture in the way indicated gives us the certainty that the impression which arises in the soul is not related to anything that had to do with us in the present life but to something in the earlier life.

We have there called forth in ourselves by artificial means, something that brings us into connection with our earlier life. We can also use many different kinds of experiences as tests, and eventually awaken in ourselves feelings of earlier lives.

Here again, from a different aspect, the experiences we have in life can be divided into groups. In the one group may be included the sufferings, sorrows and obstacles we have encountered; in a second group may be included the joys, happinesses and advantages in our life. Again as a test, we can take the following standpoint, and say: Yes, we have had these sorrows, these sufferings. Being what we are in this incarnation, with normal life running its course, our sorrows and sufferings are dire misfortunes, something that we would gladly avoid. By way of a test, let us not take this attitude but assume that for a certain reason we ourselves brought about these sorrows, sufferings and obstacles, realising that owing to our earlier lives—if there have actually been such lives—we have become in a sense more imperfect because of what we have done. After all, we do not only become more perfect through the successive incarnations but also, in a certain respect, more imperfect. When we have affronted or injured some human being, are we not more imperfect than we were before? We have not only affronted him, we have taken something away from ourself; as a personality taken as a whole, our worth would be greater if we had not done this thing. Many such actions are marked on our score and our imperfection remains because of them. If we have affronted some human being and desire to regain our previous worth, what must happen? We must make compensation for the affront, we must place into the world a counterbalancing deed, we must discover some means of compelling ourselves to overcome something. And if we think in this way about our sufferings and sorrows, we shall be able in many instances to say: These sufferings and sorrows, if we surmount them, give us strength to overcome our imperfections. Through suffering we can make progress.

In normal life we do not think in this way; we set our face against suffering. But we can also say the following: Every sorrow, every suffering, every obstacle in life should be an indication of the fact that we have within us a man who is cleverer than we ourselves are. Although the man we ourselves are is the one of whom we are conscious, we regard him for a time as being the less clever; within us we have a cleverer man who slumbers in the depths of our soul. With our ordinary consciousness we resist sorrows and sufferings but the cleverer man leads us towards these sufferings in defiance of our consciousness because by overcoming them we can strip off something. He guides us to the sorrows and sufferings, directs us to undergo them. This may, to begin with, be an oppressive thought but it carries with it no obligation; we can, if we so wish, use it once only, by way of trial. We can say: Within us there is a cleverer man who guides us to sufferings and sorrows, to something that in our conscious life we should like most of all to have avoided. We think of him as the cleverer man. In this way we are led to the realisation which many find disturbing, namely that this cleverer man guides us always towards what we do not like. This, then, we will take as an assumption: There is a cleverer man within us who guides us to what we do not like in order that we may make progress.

But let us still do something else. Let us take our joys, our advantages, our happinesses, and say to ourselves, again by way of trial: How would it be if you were to conceive the idea—irrespectively of how it tallies with the actual reality—that you have simply not deserved these happinesses, these advantages; they have come to you through the Grace of higher, spiritual Powers. It need not be so in every case, but we will assume, by way of test, that all our sorrows and sufferings were brought about because the cleverer man within us guided us to them, because we recognise that in consequence of our imperfections they were necessary for us and that we can overcome them only through such experiences. And then we assume the opposite: That our happinesses are not due to our own merit but have been vouchsafed to us by spiritual Powers.

Again this thought may be a bitter pill for the vain to swallow, but if, as a test, a man is capable of forming such a thought with all intensity, he will be led to the feeling—because again it undergoes a transformation and in so far as it lacks effectiveness, rectifies itself:—In you there lives something that has nothing to do with your ordinary consciousness, that lies deeper than anything you have experienced consciously in this life; there is a cleverer man within you who gladly turns to the eternal, divine-spiritual Powers pervading the world. Then it becomes an inner certainty that behind the outer there is an inner, higher individuality. Through such thought-exercises we grow to be conscious of the eternal, spiritual core of our being, and this is of extraordinary importance. So there again we have something which it lies in our power to carry out.

In every respect Anthroposophy can be a guide, not only towards knowledge of the existence of another world, but towards feeling oneself as a citizen of another world, as an individuality who passes through many incarnations.

There are experiences of still a third kind. Admittedly it will be more difficult to make use of these experiences for the purpose of gaining an inner knowledge of karma and reincarnation. But even if what will now be said is difficult, it can again be used again by way of trial. And if it is honestly applied to external life it will dawn upon us clearly—as a probability to begin with, but then as an ever-growing certainty—that our present life is connected with an earlier one.

Let us assume that in our present life between birth and death we have already reached or passed our thirtieth year. (Those below that age may also have corresponding experiences). We reflect about the fact that somewhere near our thirtieth year we were brought into contact with some person in the outside world, that between the ages of thirty and forty many different connections have been established with human beings in the outside world. These connections seem to have been made during the most mature stage of our life so that our whole being was involved in them. Reflection discloses that it is indeed so. But reflection based on the principles and knowledge of Spiritual Science can lead us to realise the truth of what will now be said—not as the outcome of mere reflection but of spiritual-scientific investigation. What I am saying has not been discovered merely through logical thinking; it has been established by spiritual-scientific research, but logical thinking can confirm the facts and find them reasonable. We know how the several members of man's constitution unfold in the course of life: in the seventh year, the ether-body; in the fourteenth year, the astral body; in the twenty-first year the sentient-soul, in the twenty-eighth year the intellectual or mind-soul and in the thirty-fifth year the consciousness-soul (spiritual soul). Reflecting on this, we can say: In the period from the thirtieth year to the fortieth year we are concerned with the unfolding of the mind-soul and the spiritual soul.

The mind-soul and the spiritual soul are those forces in our nature which bring us into the closest contact of all with the outer physical world, for they unfold at the very age in life when our intercourse with that world is more active than at any other time. In earliest childhood, the forces belonging to our physical body are directed, determined, activated, by what is still entirely enclosed within us. The causal element engendered in previous incarnations, whatever went with us through the Gate of Death, the spiritual forces we have garnered—everything we bring with us from the earlier life works and weaves in the upbuilding of our physical body. It is at work unceasingly and invisibly from within outwards; as the years go by, this influence diminishes and the period of life approaches when the old forces have produced the body and we confront the world with a finished organism; what we bear within us has come to expression in our external body. At about the thirtieth year—it may be somewhat earlier or somewhat later—we confront the world in the most strongly physical sense; in our intercourse with the world we are connected more closely with the physical plane than during any other period of life. We may think that the relationships in life into which we now enter are more physically intelligible than any others, but the fact is that such relationships are least of all connected with the forces which work and weave in us from birth onwards. Nevertheless we may take it for granted that at about the age of thirty we are not led by chance to people who are destined, precisely then, to appear in our environment. We must far rather assume that there too our karma is at work, that these people too have something to do with one of our earlier incarnations.

Facts of Spiritual Science investigated at various times show that very often the people with whom we come into contact somewhere around our thirtieth year are related to us in such a way that in most cases we were connected with them at the beginning of the immediately preceding incarnation—or it may have been earlier still—as parents, or brothers or sisters. At first this seems a strange and astonishing fact. Although it need not inevitably be so, many cases indicate to spiritual-scientific investigation that in very truth our parents, or those who were by our side at the beginning of our previous life, who gave us our place in the physical world but from whom in later life we grew away, are karmically connected with us in such a way that in our new life we are not again guided to them in early childhood but only when we have come most completely on to the physical plane. It need not always be exactly like this, for spiritual-scientific research shows very frequently that it is not until a subsequent incarnation that those who are then our parents, brothers or sisters, or blood-relations in general, are the people we found around us in the present incarnation at about the time of our thirtieth year. So the acquaintances we make somewhere about the age of thirty in any one incarnation may have been, or will be, persons related to us by blood in a previous or subsequent incarnation. It is therefore useful to say to oneself: The personalities with whom life brings you in contact in your thirties were once around you as parents or brothers and sisters or you can anticipate that in one of your next incarnations they will have this relationship with you.

The reverse also holds good. If we think of those personalities whom we choose least of all voluntarily through forces suitable for application on the physical plane—that is to say, our parents, our brothers and sisters who were around us at the beginning of life—if we think of these personalities we shall very often find that precisely those who accompany us into life from childhood onwards were deliberately chosen by us in another incarnation to be near us while we were in the thirties. In other words, in the middle of the preceding life we ourselves chose out those who in the present life have become our parents, brothers or sisters.

So the remarkable and very interesting fact emerges that our relationships with the personalities with whom we come to be associated are not the same in the successive incarnations; also that we do not encounter these people at the same age in life as previously. Neither can it be said that exactly the opposite holds good. Furthermore it is not the personalities who were with us at the end of an earlier life who are connected, in a different incarnation, with the beginning of our life, but those with whom we were associated in the middle period of life. So neither those personalities with whom we are together at the beginning of life, nor those with us at its end, but those with whom we come into contact in the middle of life, were around us as blood-relations at the beginning of an earlier incarnation. Those who were around us then, when our life was beginning, appear in the middle of our present life; and of those who were around us at the beginning of our present life we can anticipate that we shall find ourselves together with them in the middle of one of our subsequent incarnations, that they will then come into connection with us as freely chosen companions in life. Karmic relationships are indeed mysterious.

What I have now said is the outcome of spiritual-scientific investigation. But I repeat: if, in the way opened up by this investigation, we reflect about the inner connections between the beginning of life in one of our incarnations and the middle of life in another, we shall realise that this is not void of sense or usefulness. The other aspect is that when such things are brought to our notice and we adopt an intelligent attitude to them, they bring clarity and illumination. Life is clarified if we do not simply accept such things passively—not to say dull-wittedly; it is clarified if we try to grasp, to understand, what comes to us in life in such a way that the relationships which are bound to remain elusive as long as karma is only spoken of in the abstract, become concretely perceptible.

It is useful to reflect about the question: Why is it that in the middle of our life we are actually driven by karma, seemingly with complete mental awareness, to form some acquaintanceship which does not appear to have been made quite independently and objectively? The reason is that such persons were related to us by blood in the earlier life and our karma leads them to us now because we have some connection with them.

Whenever we reflect in this way about the course of our own life, we shall see that light is shed upon it. Although we may be mistaken in some particular instance, and even if we err in our conclusions ten times over, nevertheless we may well hit upon the truth in regard to someone who comes into our ken. And when such reflections lead us to say: Somewhere or other I have met this person—thus thought is like a signpost pointing the way to other things which in different circumstances would not have occurred to us and which, taken in their whole setting, give us ever-growing certainty of the correctness of particular facts.

Karmic connections are not of such a nature that they can be discerned in one sudden flash. The highest, most important facts of knowledge regarding life, those that really do shed light upon it, must be acquired slowly and by degrees. This is not a welcome thought. It is easier to believe that some flash of illumination might enable it to be said: “In an earlier life I was associated with this or that person,” or “I myself was this or that individual.” It may be tiresome to think that all this must be a matter of knowledge slowly acquired, but that is the case nevertheless. Even if we merely cherish the belief that it might possibly be so, investigation must be repeated time and time again before the belief will become certainty. Even in cases where probability grows constantly stronger, investigation leads us farther. We erect barricades against the spiritual world if we allow ourselves to form instantaneous judgments in these matters.

Try to ponder over what has been said to-day about the acquaintanceships made in the middle period of life and their connection with individuals who were near to us in a preceding incarnation. This will lead to very fruitful thoughts, especially if taken together with what is said in the book, The Education of the Child in the light of Anthroposophy. It will then be unambiguously clear that the outcome of your reflection tallies with what is set forth in that book.

But an earnest warning must be added to what has been said to-day. The genuine investigator guards against drawing conclusions; he lets the things come to him of themselves. Once they are there, he first puts them to the test of ordinary logic. Repetition will then be impossible of something that recently happened to me, not for the first time, and is very characteristic of the attitude adopted to Anthroposophy to-day. A very clever man—I say this without irony, fully recognising that he has a brilliant mind—said the following to me: “When I read what is contained in your book, An Outline of Occult Science, I am bound to admit that it seems so logical, to tally so completely with other manifest facts in the world, that I cannot help coming to the conclusion that these things could also be discovered through pure reflection; they need not necessarily be the outcome of super-sensible investigation. The things said in this book are in no way questionable or dubious; they tally with the reality.” I was able to assure this gentleman of my conviction that it would not have been possible for me to discover them through mere reflection, nor that with great respect for his cleverness, could I believe he would have discovered them by that means alone. It is absolutely true that whatever in the domain of Spiritual Science is capable of being logically comprehended simply cannot be discovered by mere reflection! The fact that some matter can be put to the test of logic and then grasped, should be no ground for doubting its spiritual-scientific origin. On the contrary, I am sure it must be reassuring to know that the communications made by Spiritual Science can be recognised through logical reflection as being unquestionably correct; it cannot possibly be the ambition of the spiritual investigator to make illogical statements for the sake of inspiring belief! As you see, the spiritual investigator himself cannot take the standpoint that he discovers such things through reflection. But if we reflect about things that have been discovered by the methods of Spiritual Science, they may seem so logical, even too logical to allow us to believe any longer that they actually come from spiritual-scientific sources. And this applies to everything said to have been the outcome of genuine spiritual-scientific investigation.

If, to begin with, the things that have been said to-day seem grotesque, try for once to apply logical thinking to them. Truly, if spiritual facts had not led me to these things, I should not have deduced them from ordinary, logical thinking; but once they have been discovered they can be put to the test of logic. And then it will be found that the more meticulously and conscientiously we set about testing them, the more clearly it will emerge that everything tallies. Even in the case of matters where accuracy cannot really be tested, from the very way in which the various factors fit into their settings, it will be found that they give the impression of being not only in the highest degree probable, but bordering on certainty—as in the case, for example, of what has been said about parents and brothers and sisters in one life and acquaintances made in the middle of another life. Moreover such certainty proves to be well-founded when things are put to the test of life itself. In many cases we shall view our own behaviour and that of others in a quite different light if we confront someone we meet in the middle period of life, as if, in the preceding life, the relationship between us had been that of parent, brother or sister. The whole relationship will thereby become much more fruitful than if we go through life with drowsy inattentiveness.

And so we can say: More and more, Anthroposophy becomes something that does not merely give us knowledge of life but directives as to how to conceive of life's relationships in such a way that light will be shed upon them not only for our own satisfaction, but also for our conduct and tasks in life. It is important to discard the thought that in this way we impair a spontaneous response to life. Only the timid, those who lack a really earnest purpose in life, can believe such a thing. We, however, must realise that by gaining closer knowledge of life we make it more fruitful, inwardly richer. What comes to us in life should be carried, through Anthroposophy, into horizons where all our forces become more fertile, more full of confidence, a greater stimulus to hope, than they were before.

Erster Vortrag

Wenn wir das Leben in Betracht ziehen, wie es sich um uns herum abspielt, wie es sozusagen seine Wogen hereinwirft in unser Inneres, in all das, was wir selber während unseres physischen Erdendaseins zu empfinden und zu leiden haben, oder worüber wir uns zu freuen haben, so können wir mehrere besondere Gruppen oder Arten von Erleben ins Auge fassen.

Wir finden zunächst, wenn wir mehr auf uns selbst schauen, auf dasjenige, was in unseren Fähigkeiten, in unseren Talenten liegt, wir finden, wenn uns dieses oder jenes gelingt, daß wir uns sagen können: Nun, nachdem wir schon einmal dieser oder jener Mensch sind, ist es ganz natürlich und begreiflich, daß uns dieses oder jenes gelingen mußte. - Wir können aber auch gewisse Mißerfolge, die uns betroffen haben, vielleicht gerade das, was wir als Mißgeschick und Unglück bezeichnen müssen, weil es uns nicht gelungen ist, im ganzen Zusammenhang unseres Wesens begreiflich finden.

Vielleicht gelingt es uns nicht immer in solchen Fällen, genau nachzuweisen, wie dieser oder jener Mißerfolg, dieses oder jenes, was uns nicht gelungen ist, zusammenhängt mit unserer Unfähigkeit nach dieser oder jener Richtung. Aber wenn wir uns dann im allgemeinen sagen müssen: Du warst ja in vielen Beziehungen im jetzigen Erdendasein ein leichtsinniges Subjekt, da kannst du begreifen, daß du unter Umständen verdientermaßen diesen oder jenen Mißerfolg haben mußt -, dann können wir vielleicht nicht ganz unmittelbar den Zusammenhang einsehen zwischen Mißerfolg und Unfähigkeit, aber im allgemeinen doch begreiflich finden, daß, wenn wir leichtsinnig waren, nicht alles am Schnürchen gelingen konnte.

Von dem, was jetzt besprochen worden ist, können Sie sich denken, daß wir gewissermaßen eine Art ursächlichen Zusammenhanges einsehen könnten zwischen dem, was geschehen mußte aus unseren Fähigkeiten und unseren Unfähigkeiten heraus. Es gibt aber viele Dinge im Leben, bei denen wir, auch wenn wir noch so genau zu Werke gehen, nicht erreichen, das, was uns gelingt oder mißlingt, ohne weiteres in Zusammenhang zu bringen mit unseren Fähigkeiten oder Unfähigkeiten, bei denen uns gewissermaßen undurchsichtig bleibt, wie wir dieses oder jenes verschuldet haben, oder wie wir es verdient haben. Kurz, wenn wir mehr unser Innenleben ins Auge fassen, werden wir unterscheiden können zwischen zwei Gruppen von Erlebnissen. Die eine Gruppe ist die, bei der wir uns bewußt sind, wie es mit den Ursachen unseres Gelingens und Mißlingens bestellt ist; bei der anderen Gruppe werden wir einen solchen Zusammenhang nicht überschauen können. Bei dieser letzteren Gruppe wird es uns mehr oder weniger als Zufall erscheinen, daß gerade dieses uns mißlungen, ein anderes uns gelungen ist. Wir wollen uns zunächst merken, daß es im Leben diese letztere Gruppe von Tatsachen und Erfahrungen hinlänglich gibt, und wollen später einmal das Augenmerk auf diese Gruppe lenken.

Wir können dann, entgegen dem, was jetzt besprochen worden ist, unser äußeres Schicksal mehr ins Auge fassen. Da werden wir eigentlich wiederum zwei Gruppen von Tatsachen in bezug auf unser äußeres Geschick ins Auge fassen müssen. Wir können solche Fälle ins Auge fassen, bei denen wir innerlich einsehen, daß wir in bezug auf diese Ereignisse, die uns treffen — also nicht, was wir selber unternommen haben -, gewisse Dinge sozusagen selber herbeigeführt haben, schuld sind an solchen Dingen. Aber von einer anderen Gruppe werden wir sehr geneigt sein zu sagen: Wir können den Zusammenhang nicht einsehen mit dem, was wir gewollt, was wir beabsichtigt haben. Es sind diejenigen Ereignisse, bei denen man im gewöhnlichen Leben davon spricht, daß sie wie ein Zufall, der anscheinend mit nichts, was wir selber herbeigeführt haben, zusammenhängt, in unser Leben hereingebrochen sind.

Diese zweite Gruppe ist es, die wir jetzt ins Auge fassen wollen mit Bezug auf das innere Leben, also diejenigen Ereignisse, von denen wir nicht einsehen können, daß sie als etwas Direktes, Unmittelbares mit unseren Fähigkeiten und Unfähigkeiten zu tun haben; äußere Ereignisse also, das, was wir Zufallsereignisse nennen, von denen wir von vorneherein nicht die Einsicht gewinnen können, daß sie durch irgend etwas Vorhergehendes herbeigeführt worden sind.

Nun kann man einmal probeweise sozusagen mit diesen beiden Gruppen von Erlebnissen eine Art Experiment machen. Das Experiment verpflichtet einen ja zunächst zu nichts. Man probiere sozusagen nur einmal dasjenige, was jetzt gesagt, was jetzt charakterisiert werden soll.

Wir können das Experiment machen, indem wir uns vorstellen: Wie wäre es denn, wenn wir einmal eine Art von künstlichem Menschen konstruieren würden, so einen künstlichen Menschen uns ausdenken würden, daß wir von diesem künstlichen Gedankenmenschen, den wir uns ausgedacht haben, sagen würden, gerade diejenigen Dinge, von denen wir keinen Zusammenhang wissen mit unseren Fähigkeiten, die seien so, daß wir den künstlichen Menschen, den wir uns ausdenken, begaben mit den Eigenschaften und Fähigkeiten, welche diese bei uns unbegreiflichen Dinge herbeigeführt haben. Also ein Mensch, der solche Fähigkeiten hat, daß ihm das gelingen oder mißlingen muß, wovon wir uns nicht zuschreiben können, daß es uns nach unseren Fähigkeiten oder Unfähigkeiten gelinge oder mißlinge. Wir stellen ihn uns also vor als einen solchen Menschen, welcher künstlich, ganz absichtlich herbeigeführt hätte die Dinge, welche zufällig in unserem Leben eingetreten zu sein scheinen.

Man kann von einfachen Beispielen ausgehen, um das zu erläutern. Nehmen wir an, ein Ziegelstein wäre auf unsere Schulter gefallen und hätte uns an der Schulter verletzt. Da werden wir zunächst geneigt sein zu sagen: Das ist ein Zufall. -— Aber konstruieren wir einen künstlichen Menschen probeweise zunächst wie ein Experiment, der folgende sonderbare Sache machen würde. Wir konstruieren einen Menschen, der auf das Dach steigt und dort rasch einen Ziegelstein loslöst, aber nur so weit, daß der Stein noch einen gewissen Halt behält; dann läuft der künstliche Mensch schnell wieder hinunter, so daß, wenn der Stein sich loslöst, er gerade auf seine Schultern fällt. So machen wir es in bezug auf alle Ereignisse, von denen uns einfällt, daß sie zufällig in unserem Leben eingetreten sind. Einen künstlichen Menschen konstruieren wir, der alles verschuldet oder herbeiführt, wovon wir im gewöhnlichen Leben nicht einsehen können, wie es mit uns zusammenhängt.

Wenn man das tut, so könnte es zunächst ausschauen wie ein bloßes Gedankenspiel. Und es verpflichtet zu nichts, wenn man das tut. Aber eine Merkwürdigkeit stellt sich heraus, wenn man das tut. Wenn man einen solchen Menschen ausgedacht hat und ihn begabt hat mit den geschilderten Eigenschaften, dann macht dieser künstliche Gedankenmensch einen ganz merkwürdigen Eindruck auf uns. Wir kommen nämlich von dem Bilde eines Menschen, das wir uns da gemacht haben, obwohl es scheinbar so künstlich konstruiert ist, nicht mehr los; es fasziniert uns, es macht den Eindruck, als ob es doch irgend etwas mit uns zu tun haben müßte. Dafür sorgt schon die Empfindung, die man gegenüber dem künstlichen Gedankenmenschen hat. Wenn man sich recht sehr hineinvertieft in dieses Bild, so läßt es einen ganz sicher nicht mehr los. Ein merkwürdiger Prozeß bildet sich in unserem Gemüt; ein Prozeß, den man vergleichen kann mit folgendem: Wir kommen zu einem inneren Gemütsprozeß, den der Mensch alle Augenblicke durchmacht. Wir können irgend etwas denken, können einen Entschluß fassen; wir brauchen dazu etwas, was wir einmal gewußt haben, und wir wenden alle möglichen künstlichen Mittel an, um uns auf das zu besinnen, was wir gewußt haben. Bei diesem Anstrengen, in das Gedächtnis etwas heraufzurufen, was uns entfallen ist, machen wir natürlich einen Gemütsprozeß durch, das Uns-Besinnen, wie wir es im gewöhnlichen Leben nennen. Und alle die Gedanken, die wir zu Hilfe nehmen, um uns auf etwas zu besinnen, sind Hilfsgedanken. Versuchen Sie nur einmal, darauf zu kommen, wieviel solcher Hilfsgedanken Sie oftmals aufwenden müssen, die Sie dann wieder fallen lassen, um auf das zu kommen, was Sie wissen wollen. Solche Hilfsgedanken sind dazu da, daß sie den Weg eröffnen auf das zu Besinnende, was wir eigentlich gegenwärtig brauchen,

Gerade so, nur wie etwas weit Uimfassenderes, ist jener Gedankenmensch, den wir geschildert haben, ein Hilfsprozeß. Er läßt uns nicht mehr los; er arbeitet in uns so, daß wir sagen, er ist etwas, was als Gedanke in uns wohnt, etwas, was da fortwirkt, was sich umwandelt in uns; was tatsächlich sich umwandelt zu der Idee, zu dem Gedanken, der nun auftritt wie etwas, was uns einfällt, wenn wir uns im gewöhnlichen Erinnerungsprozeß besinnen, der auftritt wie etwas, was uns überwältigt. Wie wenn etwas sagen würde: So kann er nicht bleiben, er ändert sich um in dir, er entfaltet Leben, er wird zu etwas anderem! Das drängt sich uns auf — machen Sie das Experiment! -, es drängt sich uns so auf, daß es uns sagt: Ja, das ist etwas, was mit einem anderen als deinem jetzigen Erdendasein einiges zu tun hat. Eine ArtBesinnung auf ein anderes Erdendasein, der Gedanke tritt ganz bestimmt auf. Es ist mehr ein Gefühl als ein Gedanke, eine Empfindung, aber eine solche, wie wenn wir das, was im Gemüt auftritt, so fühlen wie das, was wir selber einmal in einer früheren Inkarnation auf dieser Erde waren.

Anthroposophie ist eben durchaus, wenn wir sie als etwas Ganzes betrachten, nicht bloß eine Summe von Theorien, von Mitteilungen von Tatsachen, die da bestehen, sondern sie gibt uns Vorschriften und Anweisungen, wie man dies oder jenes erreichen kann. Die Anthroposophie sagt: Du wirst mehr und mehr dahin geführt, daß du dich leichter besinnen kannst, wenn du dies oder jenes machst. — Man kann auch sagen, und das ist durchaus aus dem Gebiet der Erfahrung geschöpft: Wenn du so vorgehst, bekommst du einen Gemütseindruck, einen Gefühlseindruck von dem Menschen, der du früher warst. - Wir kommen da zu dem, was man nennen könnte: eine Erweiterung unseres Gedächtnisses. Nun ist dies, was sich uns da eröffnet, wirklich zunächst nur eine Gedankentatsache, solange wir den geschilderten Gedankenmenschen konstruieren. Aber der Gedankenmensch bleibt nicht Gedankenmensch. Er verwandelt sich in Empfindungs-, in Gemütseindrücke, und indem er dies tut, wissen wir: In dem, was wir empfinden, haben wir etwas, was zu tun hat mit unserer vorhergehenden Inkarnation. Unser Gedächtnis erweitert sich auf unsere frühere Inkarnation.

In dieser Inkarnation erinnern wir uns an die Dinge, bei denen wir mit unseren Gedanken zugegen sind. Sie alle wissen, daß man sich verhältnismäßig leicht erinnert an die Dinge, in welche unsere Gedanken hereingespielt haben. Im gewöhnlichen Leben bleibt aber nicht so leicht lebendig dasjenige, was in unser Gefühl hereingespielt hat. Wenn Sie versuchen, zurückzudenken an das, was Ihnen großen Schmerz gemacht hat vor zehn, zwanzig Jahren, so werden Sie sich leicht an die Vorstellung erinnern; Sie werden sich an das, was sich da abgespielt hat, in Ihren Vorstellungen zurückversetzen; aber zu einer lebendigen Empfindung des damals empfundenen Schmerzes können Sie nicht gelangen. Der Schmerz verblaßt, die Erinnerung an ihn ergießt sich in unsere Vorstellung. Was jetzt geschildert worden ist, ist ein Gemütsgedächtnis, ein Gefühlsgedächtnis. Und in der Tat, als solches fühlen wir unsere frühere Inkarnation. In der Tat tritt das auf, was wir nennen können: eine Erinnerung an frühere Inkarnationen. Es kann ja nicht so ohne weiteres angesehen werden wie das, was in die gegenwärtige Inkarnation hereinspielt, was Träger der Erinnerung ist an frühere Inkarnationen. Bedenken Sie nur einmal, wie innig verwachsen unsere Vorstellungen mit dem Ausdruck der Vorstellungen sind, mit unserer Sprache. Die Sprache ist die verkörperte Vorstellungswelt. Und die Sprache muß ein jeder Mensch in den einzelnen Leben wieder lernen. Der größte Sprachforscher oder Sprachkenner muß als Kind mit Mühe seine Muttersprache erlernen. Es ist noch nicht der Fall vorgekommen, daß ein Gymnasiast das Griechische deshalb leicht lernte, weil er sich rasch erinnert hätte an das Griechisch, das er in früheren Inkarnationen gesprochen hat!

Der Dichter Hebbel hat mit einigen Gedanken den Plan eines Dramas aufgezeichnet, das er schreiben wollte. Schade, daß er es nicht getan hat, es wäre ein sehr interessantes Drama geworden. Die Handlung war so gedacht, daß der wiederverkörperte Plato als Gymnasiast bei der Erklärung des alten Plato die allerschlechteste Zensur bekäme! Leider ist der Plan Hebbels nicht zur Ausführung gekommen. Wir brauchen nicht bloß daran zu denken, daß die Lehrer zum Teil pedantisch sind und so weiter. Wir wissen, daß das, was Hebbel aufzeichnete, darauf beruht, daß das Vorstellungsmäßige, was sich in den unmittelbaren Erfahrungsvorstellungen abspielt, mehr oder weniger unmittelbar beschränkt ist auf die gegenwärtige Inkarnation. Und es ist so, wie jetzt angedeutet worden ist, daß die erste Impression, der erste Eindruck von der vorhergehenden Inkarnation unmittelbar auftritt als Gefühlsgedächtnis, als eine neue Art von Gedächtnis. Was wir als Eindruck haben, wenn dieses Gedächtnis von dem Gedankenmenschen her entsteht, den wir konstruiert haben, ist mehr ein Gefühl, aber ein solches Gefühl, daß man versteht: Der Eindruck rührt von einem Kerl her, der einmal existiert hat und der du selber warst! - Man bekommt etwas wie ein Erinnerungsgefühl als ersten Eindruck an die vorhergehende Inkarnation.

Was da geschildert worden ist als Konstruktion eines Gedankenmenschen, das ist nur ein Mittel. Dieses Mittel wandelt sich um in einen solchen Gemüts- oder Gefühlseindruck. Jeder Mensch, der an die Anthroposophie herantritt, hat eigentlich mehr oder weniger Gelegenheit, leicht dasjenige auszuführen, was jetzt geschildert worden ist. Und wenn er dieses ausführt, wird er schon sehen, daß er wirklich in seinem Inneren einen Eindruck erhält, sagen wir — um ein anderes Beispiel zu gebrauchen — einen Eindruck, den er so schildern könnte: Ich habe einmal eine Landschaft gesehen, ich habe vergessen, wie sie aussieht, sie hat mir aber gefallen! - Nun wird, wenn es in diesem Leben war, die Landschaft keinen sehr lebendigen Gefühlseindruck mehr machen; aber wenn der Eindruck aus einer vorhergehenden Inkarnation stammte, so wird er einen besonders lebendigen Gefühlseindruck machen. Wir können uns so einen besonders lebendigen Eindruck als Gefühlseindruck von unserer früheren Inkarnation machen. Und wenn wir dann objektiv die geschilderten Eindrücke beobachten, werden wir zuweilen etwas wie ein bitteres oder ein bittersüßes oder ein saures Gefühl haben aus dem, was sich ergibt als Umwandlung des Gedankenmenschen. Dieses sauersüße oder sonstige Gefühl ist der Eindruck, den unsere frühere Inkarnation auf uns macht; es ist eine Art von Gefühls- oder Gemütseindruck.

Damit wurde versucht, Sie aufmerksam zu machen auf etwas, was dazu führen kann, bei jedem Menschen eine Art unmittelbarer Gewißheit hervorzurufen, daß er in früheren Leben existiert hat; Gewißheit dadurch, daß er sich ein Gefühl verschafft, daß er Gemüts- oder Gefühlseindrücke hat, von denen er weiß: Das hast du gewiß nicht in diesem Leben irgendwo erworben. — Ein solcher Eindruck tritt aber so auf, wie für das gewöhnliche Leben eine Erinnerungsvorstellung auftritt. Nun kann man fragen: Wie kann man wissen, daß der Eindruck, den man hat, eine Erinnerung ist? — Sehen Sie, da kann man nur sagen, beweisen läßt sich so etwas nicht. Aber es liegt derselbe Tatbestand vor, der auch sonst im Leben vorliegt, wenn wir uns an etwas erinnern und bei gesunden Sinnen sind. Da können wir wissen, daß das, was in uns auftritt in Gedanken, sich wirklich bezieht auf etwas, was wir erlebt haben. Die Erfahrung selber gibt die Gewißheit. Was wir uns in der angegebenen Art vorstellen, gibt uns die Gewißheit davon, daß der Eindruck, der im Gemüt auftaucht, sich nicht auf etwas bezieht, was mit uns zu tun hatte im gegenwärtigen Leben, sondern auf etwas, was mit uns zu tun hatte im vorhergehenden Leben.

Da haben wir auf künstliche Weise in uns hervorgerufen etwas, was uns mit unserem vorhergehenden Leben in Zusammenhang bringt. Wir können noch mancherlei andere Arten von innerlichen probeweisen Erfahrungen und Erlebnissen hernehmen und können dadurch wieder weitergehen und in uns wachrufen so etwas wie Empfindungen von früheren Leben. Da können wir wiederum in anderer Hinsicht die Erlebnisse dessen, was wir im Leben durchmachen, teilen; wir können sie in anderer Weise in Gruppen teilen. Wir können auf der einen Seite in eine Gruppe fassen, was wir an Leiden, an Schmerzen, an Hemmnissen im Leben durchgemacht haben; auf der anderen Seite, was uns bewußt geworden ist als Förderungen, als Freude, Lust und so weiter.

Nun können wir wiederum probeweise uns auf folgenden Standpunkt stellen. Wir können einmal sagen: Ja, wir haben diese Schmerzen, diese Leiden erfahren. So wie wir in dieser Inkarnation einmal sind, wie das normale Leben nun einmal abläuft, sind uns unsere Schmerzen, unsere Leiden etwas Fatales, etwas, was wir in gewisser Beziehung gern von uns hinwegstoßen würden. Tun wir dies einmal probeweise nicht. Nehmen wir probeweise an, wir würden aus einem gewissen Grunde diese Schmerzen, diese Leiden und Hemmnisse selber herbeigeführt haben, denn durch diese früheren Leben, wenn sie wirklich da sind, sind wir in gewisser Weise durch das, was wir getan haben, unvollkommener geworden. Wir werden ja durch die Inkarnationenfolge nicht nur vollkommener, sondern wir werden in einer gewissen Weise auch unvollkommener. Oder sind wir etwa nicht unvollkommener, als wir vorher waren, wenn wir einem Menschen eine Beleidigung, ein Ungemach zugefügt haben? Nicht nur diesem Menschen haben wir etwas zugefügt, wir haben uns selber etwas genommen; wir wären als Gesamtpersönlichkeit mehr wert, wenn wir das nicht getan hätten. Solche Dinge haben wir viele auf unser Kerbholz geschrieben, die wir getan haben, und die, weil wir sie getan haben, unsere Unvollkommenheit begründen. Wenn wir einem Menschen ein Ungemach zugefügt haben und den Wert, den wir vorher gehabt haben, wieder haben wollen, was muß da geschehen? Wir müssen das Ungemach ausgleichen, wir müssen eine ausgleichende Tat in die Welt setzen, müssen irgend etwas erfinden, was sozusagen uns zwingt, etwas zu überwinden. Und wenn wir in dieser Richtung nachdenken über unsere Leiden und Schmerzen, so können wir vielfach sagen: Unsere Leiden, unsere Schmerzen sind geeignet, wenn wir sie überwinden, uns Kraft anzueignen in der Überwindung unserer Unvollkommenheiten. Vollkommener können wir werden durch die Leiden. - Im normalen Menschenleben denken wir ja nicht so; da verhalten wir uns ablehnend gegen die Leiden. Wir können aber sagen: Jeder Schmerz, jedes Leid, jedes Hemmnis im Leben soll eine Andeutung dafür sein, daß wir einen gescheiteren Menschen in uns haben, als wir selber sind. Den Menschen, der wir selber sind, betrachten wir für eine Weile, trotzdem er derjenige ist, der unser Bewußtsein umfaßt, als den weniger gescheiten; aber einen gescheiteren haben wir, der in den Untergründen unserer Seele schlummert. Wir, mit unserem gewöhnlichen Bewußtsein, verhalten uns gegen Schmerzen und Leiden ablehnend, aber der Gescheitere führt uns gegen unser Bewußtsein zu diesen Schmerzen hin, weil wir durch Überwindung dieser Schmerzen etwas abstreifen können. Er führt uns hin zu dem Schmerz und Leid, er weist uns an, das durchzumachen. — Mag sein, daß es zunächst ein harter Gedanke ist, aber er verpflichtet uns ja zu nichts, wir können ihn janureinmal probeweisemachen. Wir können sagen: Dadrinnen in uns ist ein gescheiterer Mensch, der uns zu Leiden und Schmerzen hinführt, zu etwas, was wir im Bewußtsein am liebsten vermeiden möchten. Davon denken wir, daß es der Gescheitere in uns ist. Auf diese Weise kommen wir zu dem für manchen störenden inneren Ergebnis, daß der Gescheitere uns immer zu dem uns Unsympathischen hinführt!

Wir wollen also einmal annehmen, es sei solch ein Gescheiterer in uns, der uns zu dem uns Unsympathischen hinführt, damit wir vorwärtskommen.

Wir machen aber noch etwas anderes. Nehmen wir unsere Freuden, unsere Förderungen, unsere Lust und sagen wir von diesen wiederum probeweise: Wie wäre es, wenn du dir die Vorstellung bildetest, gleichgültig, wie es in Wahrheit sich verhält: Du hast deine Lust, deine Freude, deine Förderungen gar nicht verdient, sie sind dir durch Gnade der höheren geistigen Mächte zugekommen. — Es braucht dies nicht für alles der Fall zu sein, aber probeweise wollen wir annehmen, wir hätten alle Schmerzen und Leiden so herbeigeführt, daß der Gescheitere in uns zu ihnen uns hingeführt hätte, weil wir anerkennen, daß wir sie infolge unserer Unvollkommenheiten notwendig haben und doch nur durch Schmerzen und Leiden hinauskommen können über unsere Unvollkommenheiten. Und dann wollen wir probeweise das Gegenteilige annehmen: wir schreiben uns unsere Freuden so zu, als ob sie nicht unser Verdienst wären, sondern als ob sie uns von geistigen Mächten gegeben worden wären.

Es mag wiederum für manchen eitlen Menschen eine bittere Pille sein, so zu denken. Aber probeweise das durchzumachen, ist durchaus etwas, das, wenn der Mensch in seinem Gemüt ganz intensiv solcher Vorstellung fähig ist, zu der Grundempfindung führt, weil es sich wiederum verwandelt und insofern es unrichtig ist, sich von selber rektifiziert: In dir lebt etwas, was nichts zu tun hat mit dem gewöhnlichen Bewußtsein, was tatsächlich tiefer ist, als was du in diesem Leben bewußt erfahren hast; es ist also etwas in dir, was ein gescheiterer Mensch in dir ist, der sich gern an die ewigen göttlich-geistigen Mächte wendet, die die Welt durchleben. - Da wird dann im inneren Leben selber zur Gewißheit, daß hinter der äußeren eine innere, höhere Individualität liegt. Wir werden uns des ewigen geistigen Wesenskernes durch solche Gedankenübungen bewußt. Das ist außerordentlich bedeutsam. Damit haben wir wiederum etwas, von dem wir sagen können, wir können es ausführen.

Anthroposophie kann eben in jeder Beziehung eine Anweisung sein, um nicht nur irgend etwas zu wissen über das Dasein einer anderen Welt, sondern um in sich selber sich als einen Angehörigen einer anderen Welt zu fühlen, um sich als eine solche Individualität zu fühlen, die durch die aufeinanderfolgenden Inkarnationen hindurchgeht.

Es gibt noch eine dritte Art von Erlebnissen. Bei dieser dritten Art wird es allerdings schon schwieriger sein, sie sozusagen zu benützen, um wirklich zu einer Art von innerer Erfahrung von Karma und Reinkarnation zu kommen. Aber wenn es auch schwierig und langwierig ist, das, was jetzt gesagt werden soll, es kann wiederum so benützt werden, daß es probeweise genommen wird. Und im redlichen Anwenden auf das äußere Leben wird sich schon herausstellen — zunächst die Wahrscheinlichkeit, wenn man es glauben kann, dann aber die immer grössere Gewißheit —, daß wirklich in dieser Weise unser gegenwärtiges Leben mit dem vorhergehenden zusammenhängt.

Wir wollen einmal annehmen, wir durchleben unser gegenwärtiges Leben zwischen Geburt und Tod, und wir machen uns einmal klar, wenn wir, sagen wir, schon so weit sind, daß wir die Dreißigerjahre erreicht oder überschritten haben — wir werden schon sehen, daß auch für diejenigen, die jetzt noch nicht so weit sind, es später entsprechende Erlebnisse geben wird -, wir besinnen uns darauf, wie wir gerade um die Dreißigerjahre mit diesen oder jenen Menschen in der Außenwelt zusammengeführt worden sind; wir sind in den Dreißigerjahren bis zum vierzigsten Jahr in den verschiedenen Lebensverbindungen zusammengeführt worden mit Menschen der äußeren Welt. Da stellt sich für uns heraus, daß uns die Verbindungen, die wir da geschlossen haben, so erscheinen, als ob wir sie, man möchte sagen, in unserem lebensreifsten Zustande gemacht hätten, so daß wir wirklich ganz als reife Menschen am allermeisten dabei waren. Das kann sich uns durch Überlegung ergeben. Eine Überlegung, die aber aus den Grundsätzen, den Erkenntnissen der Geisteswissenschaft heraus gewonnen worden ist, kann uns doch darauf führen, daß das richtig ist, was jetzt von mir nicht bloß aus solcher Erwägung heraus gesprochen, sondern aus der geisteswissenschaftlichen Forschung heraus mitgeteilt wird. Also, was ich jetzt sage, ist nicht bloß aus Gedanken logisch gefunden, sondern durch die geisteswissenschaftliche Forschung festgestellt worden, aber logisches Denken kann die Tatsache erhärten und vernünftig finden. Wenn man so nachdenkt über mancherlei, was wir gelernt haben zum Beispiel über die Art, wie die verschiedenen einzelnen menschlichen Glieder herauskommen im Verlaufe des Lebens - wir wissen, daß im siebenten Jahre der Ätherleib, im vierzehnten Jahre der Astralleib, im einundzwanzigsten Jahre die Empfindungsseele, im achtundzwanzigsten Jahre die Verstandes- und im fünfunddreißigsten Jahre die Bewußtseinsseele herauskommt -, wenn wir dieses überdenken, dann können wir sagen: In der Zeit vom dreißigsten bis zum vierzigsten Jahre haben wir es zu tun mit der Ausbildung der Verstandes- und der Bewußtseinsseele.

Die Verstandes- und die Bewußtseinsseele, sie sind diejenigen Kräfte in der menschlichen Natur, welche uns am allermeisten zusammenführen mit der äußeren physischen Welt, denn sie sind dazu da, daß sie gerade in demjenigen Lebensalter besonders herauskommen, in dem wir am allermeisten im Wechselverkehr mit der äußeren physischen Welt stehen. Im ersten Kindheitsalter werden die Kräfte unseres physischen Leibes herausdirigiert, herausbestimmt, verursacht aus dem, was noch im Inneren unmittelbar verschlossen ist. Was der Mensch sich als Ursachen angeeignet hat in vorhergehenden Inkarnationen, was durchgegangen ist mit uns durch die Pforte des Todes, was wir an geistigen Kräften gesammelt haben, was wir aus dem früheren Leben mitbringen, das wirkt und webt am Aufbau unseres physischen Leibes. Es wirkt fortwährend unsichtbar vom Inneren heraus in den Leib hinein. Mit dem fortschreitenden Lebensalter wird diese Einwirkung immer geringer; immer mehr rückt die Lebenszeit heran, da die alten Kräfte den Leib so hergestellt haben. Und dann kommt die Zeit, wo wir der Welt mit einem fertigen Organismus gegenüberstehen. Was wir im Inneren tragen, hat seine Ausprägung erfahren in unserem äußeren Leibe. Wir treten um das dreißigste Jahr herum - es kann auch etwas früher oder etwas später sein -— der Welt am allerphysischsten entgegen, wir stehen da mit der Welt so in Beziehung, daß wir am allerverwandtesten sind mit dem physischen Plan. Wenn wir nun da glauben, am allermeisten Klarheit, äußere physische Klarheit zu haben über die Lebensverhältnisse, die wir da anknüpfen, so müssen wir sagen: diese Lebensverhältnisse, die wir da anknüpfen, sind diejenigen, die für diese Inkarnation eigentlich am wenigsten zusammenhängen mit dem, was im Innersten in uns wirkt und webt von unserer Geburt aus. Dennoch können wir annehmen, daß wir durchaus nicht aus Zufall um das dreißigste Jahr herum mit Menschen zusammengeführt werden, welche gerade dann in unserer Umgebung auftreten müssen. Wir können vielmehr annehmen, daß auch da unser Karma am Werk ist, daß auch diese Personen etwas mit einer unserer früheren Inkarnationen zu tun haben.

Und da zeigen die geisteswissenschaftlichen Tatsachen, die verschiedentlich erforscht sind, daß sehr häufig die Personen, mit denen wir zusammenkommen um das dreißigste Jahr herum, in früheren Inkarnationen so mit uns verwoben sind, daß wir mit ihnen zusammenhängen können, meistens am Anfang der unmittelbar vorhergehenden Inkarnation oder auch noch früher, als Eltern oder Geschwister. Das ist zunächst eine merkwürdige, überraschende Tatsache. Es muß nicht so sein, aber viele Fälle zeigen der geisteswissenschaftlichen Forschung, daß es so ist, daß tatsächlich unsere Eltern, die Personen, die beim Ausgangspunkt unseres vorhergehenden Lebens uns zur Seite gestanden haben, die uns in den physischen Plan hineingestellt haben, denen wir später entwachsen sind, daß die mit uns karmisch so verwoben sind, daß sie in unserem neuen Leben nicht in unserer Kindheit wieder mit uns zusammengeführt werden, sondern erst dann, wenn wir am meisten auf den physischen Plan herausgetreten sind. Es muß nicht so sein, denn die geisteswissenschaftliche Forschung zeigt sehr häufig, daß wir erst in einer nächsten Inkarnation zusammengeführt werden mit solchen als Eltern, als Geschwister, überhaupt als Blutsverwandte in Frage Kommenden, mit denen wir in dieser Inkarnation um die Dreißigerjahre herum uns zusammenfanden. Also die Bekanntschaften um die Dreißigerjahre herum in irgendeiner Inkarnation können sich so stellen, daß die Personen, die in Betracht kommen, mit uns selber blutsverwandt sind in vorhergehender oder nachfolgender Inkarnation. Wir können also sagen: Mit den Persönlichkeiten, mit denen dich das Leben zusammenführt in den Dreißigerjahren, mit denen warst du entweder wie mit Eltern und Geschwistern zusammen in einer vorhergehenden Inkarnation, oder du kannst voraussetzen, daß sie in einer der nächsten Inkarnationen mit dir in solcher Eigenschaft zusammenhängen.

Auch das Umgekehrte gilt. Wenn wir diejenigen Persönlichkeiten betrachten, die wir uns willkürlich durch äußere Kräfte, die für den physischen Plan geeignet sind, am wenigsten wählen, also unsere Eltern und Geschwister, mit denen wir am Anfang unseres Lebens zusammentrafen, wenn wir diese ins Auge fassen, kommen wir sehr häufig darauf, daß wir gerade die Personen, die uns hereingeleiten von der Kindheit an ins Leben, um die Dreißigerjahre herum in einer anderen Inkarnation wie willkürlich mit unseren Kräften selber ausgewählt haben; mit anderen Worten, daß wir in der Mitte des vorhergehenden Lebens die ausgewählt haben, die jetzt unsere Eltern und Geschwister geworden sind.

Besonders interessant ist also die Tatsache, die sich merkwürdigerweise herausstellt, daß die Sache nicht so liegt, daß wir in aufeinanderfolgenden Inkarnationen in den gleichen Verhältnissen sind mit den Persönlichkeiten, mit denen wir zusammenkommen; auch daß wir nicht in den entsprechenden Lebensaltern wie vorher mit ihnen zusammentreffen. Auch nicht gerade das Umgekehrte ist der Fall: nicht die Persönlichkeiten, mit denen wir am Lebensende zusammentrafen, stehen in einer anderen Inkarnation in Beziehung zu unserem Lebensanfang, sondern die Persönlichkeiten, mit denen wir in der Lebensmitte zusammentreffen. Also weder die jetzt am Lebensanfang noch die am Lebensende mit uns zusammenkommenden Persönlichkeiten, sondern die jetzt in der Mitte des Lebens mit uns in Berührung kommenden Persönlichkeiten waren am Anfang einer vorhergehenden Inkarnation als unsere Blutsverwandten um uns. Die damals im Lebensanfang mit uns zusammen waren, die treten jetzt in der Mitte unseres Lebens auf; und die jetzt am Anfang unseres Lebens um uns sind, von denen können wir voraussetzen, daß wir uns mit ihnen in der Mitte einer der nächsten Inkarnationen zusammenfinden, daß sie als unsere frei gewählten, irgendwo gewählten Lebensgenossen mit uns in Zusammenhang kommen werden. So merkwürdig sind die karmischen Zusammenhänge.

Was ich jetzt gesagt habe, das sind Dinge, welche die geisteswissenschaftliche Forschung ergibt. Aber ich habe schon darauf aufmerksam gemacht, daß, wenn man auf die Art und Weise, wie das die geisteswissenschaftliche Forschung zeigt, die inneren Zusammenhänge zwischen Lebensanfang unserer einen und Lebensmitte unserer anderen Inkarnation betrachtet, man begreift, daß das nicht etwas Unsinniges oder Unnützes ist. Die andere Seite ist eben die, daß durch solche Dinge, wenn sie an uns herangebracht werden und wenn wir uns vernünftig dazu stellen, das Leben hell und klar wird. Es wird hell und klar, wenn wir nicht alles einfach hinnehmen, man möchte sagen dumpf, um nicht zu sagen dumm; es wird hell und klar, wenn man versucht, das, was uns im Leben trifft, irgendwie so zu begreifen, so auffassen zu wollen, daß wir die Beziehungen zu konkreten machen, die ja doch noch nicht ganz verständlich sind, so lange man nur ganz abstrakt im allgemeinen von Karma spricht.

Es ist nützlich, darüber nachzudenken: Woher kommt es, daß wir in der Mitte unseres Lebens förmlich durch Karma getrieben werden, scheinbar mit aller Verstandeskraft diese oder jene Bekanntschaft zu machen, von der wir sagen können: scheint es nicht, als ob sie unabhängig, objektiv geschlossen wäre? — Das liegt eben daran, daß solche Persönlichkeiten im früheren Leben blutsverwandt mit uns waren und durch unser Karma jetzt mit uns zusammengeführt werden, weil wir etwas mit ihnen zu tun haben.

Wenn wir jedesmal solche Erwägungen anstellen gegenüber dem Verlauf des eigenen Lebens, werden wir sehen, daß wirklich Licht in unser Leben hineinkommt. Wenn wir uns auch einmal irren, und selbst wenn es zehnmal unrichtig ist: bei irgendeinem Menschen, den wir im Leben treffen, können wir doch auf das Richtige verfallen. Und wenn wir aus solchen Erwägungen heraus sagen: Diesen Menschen haben wir da oder dort getroffen -, so ist ein solcher Gedanke etwas, das uns wie ein Wegweiser zu anderen Dingen führt, die uns sonst nicht aufgefallen wären und die uns durch ihr Zusammenfallen immer mehr und mehr Gewißheit verschaffen von der Richtigkeit der einzelnen Tatsachen.

Die karmischen Zusammenhänge sind eben nicht solche, die sich durch einen Schlag gewinnen lassen. Wir müssen die höchsten Erkenntnisse des Lebens, die wichtigsten unser Leben erhellenden Erkenntnisse langsam und allmählich erwerben. Daran wollen allerdings die Menschen nicht gern glauben. Es ist leichter zu glauben, daß man durch irgendeinen Lichtblitz finden könnte: Mit diesen und jenen Persönlichkeiten war ich in einem früheren Leben zusammen, oder dieser oder jener war ich selber. — Daß das alles langsam erworbene Erkenntnisse sein müssen, ist vielleicht unbequem zu denken, aber dennoch ist es so. Selbst wenn wir schon den Glauben hegen, daß es so sein könnte, müssen wir noch immer weiterforschen, und unser Glaube wird dann Gewißheit annehmen. Selbst für das, was schon mehr und mehr Wahrscheinlichkeit erweckt auf diesem Gebiete, kommen wir durch Forschen weiter. Wir vermauern uns die geistige Welt, wenn wir uns auf solchen Gebieten auf rasches Urteilen einlassen.

Versuchen Sie einmal nachzudenken über das, was heute gesagt worden ist über die Bekanntschaften in der Mitte unseres Lebens und ihren Zusammenhang mit uns näherstehenden Persönlichkeiten in einer vorhergehenden Inkarnation. Sie werden dabei auf sehr fruchtbare Gedanken kommen; namentlich wenn man das gerade noch in Betracht zieht, was gesagt ist in der Schrift über «Die Erziehung des Kindes vom Gesichtspunkte der Geisteswissenschaft». Dann zeigt sich klar und deutlich, daß das Ergebnis Ihres Nachdenkens mit dem in dieser Schrift Gesagten in Einklang steht.

An das heute Gesagte muß aber noch eine ernstliche Mahnung geknüpft werden: Der wirkliche Geistesforscher hütet sich davor, Schlüsse zu ziehen; er läßt die Dinge an sich herankommen. Wenn sie da sind, prüft er sie erst mit der gewöhnlichen Logik. Dann kann etwas nicht passieren, was mir vor kurzem erst wieder einmal gegenübertrat und was recht charakteristisch ist für die Art, wie man sich heute der Anthroposophie entgegenstellen möchte. Da sagte mir ein sehr gescheiter Herr - ich sage das ohne alle Ironie, mit vollständigem Bekenntnis, daß er wirklich ein gescheiter Herr ist -: Wenn ich lese, was in Ihrem Buch «Geheimwissenschaft im Umriß» steht, so muß ich sagen, es erscheint das so logisch, so im Zusammenhang mit dem, was die Welt sonst noch an Tatsachen zeigt, daß ich gestehen muß, man könnte auf diese Dinge auch durch bloßes Nachdenken kommen. Diese Dinge brauchen nicht das Ergebnis übersinnlicher Forschung zu sein. Was in diesem Buch gesagt ist, sind gar keine zweifelhaften Sachen; sie stimmen mit der Wirklichkeit überein. — Ich konnte diesem Herrn die Versicherung geben, daß ich nicht glaube, daß ich durch bloßes Nachdenken darauf gekommen wäre, und daß ich bei allem Respekt vor seiner Gescheitheit auch nicht glaube, daß er durch bloßes Nachdenken diese Tatsachen gefunden hätte. Es ist schon wirklich so, daß alles, was logisch eingesehen werden kann auf geisteswissenschaftlichem Gebiet, wirklich nicht durch bloßes Nachdenken gefunden werden könnte! Daß man eine Sache logisch prüfen und begreifen kann, sollte doch noch kein Grund sein, an ihrem geisteswissenschaftlichen Ursprung zu zweifeln! Ich meine im Gegenteil, daß es eine Art von Beruhigung sein müßte, daß geisteswissenschaftliche Mitteilungen durch logisches Nachdenken als unzweifelhaft richtig erkannt werden können. Es kann schon nicht der Ehrgeiz des Geistesforschers sein, lauter unlogische Dinge zu sagen, damit er Glauben finde. Sie sehen, daß der Geistesforscher selber nicht auf dem Boden stehen kann, er finde diese Dinge durch Nachdenken. Aber wenn man nachdenkt über die auf geisteswissenschaftlichem Wege gefundenen Dinge, können sie so logisch erscheinen, daß sie zu logisch scheinen, so daß man gar keinen Glauben mehr an die geisteswissenschaftlichen Quellen findet, aus denen die Dinge stammen. So ist es tatsächlich bei allen Dingen, von denen gesagt ist, daß sie auf dem Boden reiner geisteswissenschaftlicher Forschung entstanden sind.

Wenn Ihnen auch zunächst das, was heute hier gesagt worden ist, grotesk erscheint, so versuchen Sie jetzt doch einmal, über die Dinge logisch nachzudenken. Ich würde wahrhaftig nicht, wenn mich nicht geistige Tatsachen dazu geführt hätten, aus dem gewöhnlichen logischen Denken es abgeleitet haben, aber nachdem es einmal da ist, kann man es logisch prüfen. Und da wird man sehen: je subtiler, je gewissenhafter man mit der Prüfung zu Werke geht, desto mehr wird sich herausstellen, daß alles stimmt. Selbst von solchen Dingen, bei denen man nicht prüfen kann, ob sie richtig sind, wie das, was heute gesagt worden ist über Eltern und Geschwister des einen Lebens und die Bekanntschaften in der Mitte des anderen Lebens, wird man schon aus der Art, wie die verschiedenen Glieder in den Zusammenhängen sich verhalten, finden müssen, daß sie einen im höchsten Grad nicht nur wahrscheinlichen, sondern einen bis an die Gewißheit grenzenden Eindruck machen. Und namentlich stellt sich eine Gewißheit als begründet heraus, wenn man die Dinge am Leben prüft. Man wird bei so manchen Persönlichkeiten, die man trifft, das eigene Verhalten und das der anderen in einem ganz anderen Lichte sehen, wenn man gleichsam jemandem, den man in der Mitte des Lebens findet, so gegenübersteht, als ob man im vorhergehenden Leben zusammen Geschwister gewesen wäre. Und dadurch wird das ganze Verhältnis viel fruchtbarer werden, als wenn man nur dumpf durchs Leben schreitet.

So können wir sagen: Anthroposophie wird immer mehr nicht nur etwas, was Wissen und Erkenntnis gibt vom Leben, sondern was uns auch Anweisung gibt, wie wir die Verhältnisse des Lebens auffassen und lichtvoll nicht nur für uns selber, sondern auch für unser Verhalten gegenüber dem Leben und für unsere Lebensaufgabe machen können. Es ist das wichtig, daß wir nicht glauben, wir verderben uns das unmittelbare Drauflosleben. Nur ängstliche Menschen, die es nicht ganz ernst meinen mit dem Leben, können das glauben. Wir aber sollen uns klar sein, daß dadurch, daß wir das Leben genauer kennenlernen, wir das Leben auch fruchtbarer, inhaltsreicher machen. Was im Leben an uns herantritt, das soll durch Anthroposophie in einen Gesichtskreis gerückt werden, durch den alle Kräfte reicher, zuversichtlicher, hoffnungserweckender werden, als sie waren, bevor sie in diesen Gesichtskreis gerückt worden sind.

First Lecture

When we consider life as it unfolds around us, how it throws its waves, so to speak, into our inner being, into everything we ourselves have to feel and suffer during our physical existence on earth, or into everything we have to rejoice about, we can discern several distinct groups or types of experience.

First of all, when we look more closely at ourselves, at what lies within our abilities and talents, we find that when we succeed in this or that, we can say to ourselves: Well, since we are this or that person, it is quite natural and understandable that we had to succeed in this or that. However, we can also find certain failures that have affected us, perhaps precisely those things that we must call misfortune and bad luck because we did not succeed, understandable in the overall context of our being.

Perhaps in such cases we do not always succeed in proving exactly how this or that failure, this or that thing we did not succeed in, is connected with our inability in this or that direction. But if we then have to say to ourselves in general: You have been a reckless person in many respects in your present earthly existence, so you can understand that under certain circumstances you deserve this or that failure—then we may not be able to see the connection between failure and inability immediately, but we can generally understand that if we were reckless, not everything could go smoothly.

From what has now been discussed, you can imagine that we could, in a sense, see a kind of causal connection between what had to happen based on our abilities and our inabilities. However, there are many things in life where, even if we work with the utmost precision, we cannot readily connect our successes or failures with our abilities or inabilities, where it remains somewhat unclear to us how we caused this or that, or how we deserved it. In short, if we look more closely at our inner life, we will be able to distinguish between two groups of experiences. One group is where we are aware of the causes of our successes and failures; in the other group, we cannot see such a connection. In the latter group, it will seem more or less coincidental to us that we failed in one thing and succeeded in another. Let us first note that there are plenty of facts and experiences of this latter kind in life, and let us turn our attention to this group later on.

Contrary to what has been discussed so far, we can then take a closer look at our external fate. Here we will actually have to consider two groups of facts in relation to our external fate. We can consider cases in which we inwardly realize that, in relation to the events that befall us—that is, not what we ourselves have undertaken—we have, so to speak, brought certain things about ourselves, are to blame for such things. But of another group we will be very inclined to say: We cannot see the connection with what we wanted, what we intended. These are events that in ordinary life we speak of as having broken into our lives like a coincidence that seems to have no connection with anything we ourselves have brought about.

It is this second group we now want to consider in relation to our inner life, i.e., those events that we cannot see as having anything direct or immediate to do with our abilities and incapacities; external events, in other words, what we call chance events, which we cannot understand from the outset as having been brought about by anything that preceded them.

Now, as a trial, we can conduct a kind of experiment with these two groups of experiences. The experiment does not commit us to anything at first. We are simply trying out what has been said and what is to be characterized.

We can conduct the experiment by imagining: What would it be like if we were to construct a kind of artificial human being such an artificial human being that we would say of this artificial thought-human being that we have invented that precisely those things about which we know of no connection with our abilities are such that we endowed the artificial human being that we have invented with the characteristics and abilities that brought about these things that are incomprehensible to us. In other words, a human being who has such abilities that he must succeed or fail in things that we cannot attribute to our own abilities or inabilities. We imagine him as a human being who has artificially and deliberately brought about the things that seem to have happened by chance in our lives.

We can use simple examples to explain this. Let us assume that a brick fell on our shoulder and injured us. Our first inclination would be to say: That is a coincidence. — But let us construct an artificial human being, initially as an experiment, who would do the following strange thing. We construct a human being who climbs onto the roof and quickly loosens a brick, but only so far that the brick still has some hold; then the artificial human quickly runs back down so that when the brick comes loose, it falls straight onto his shoulders. We do this with all events that we can think of that happened by chance in our lives. We construct an artificial human being who is responsible for or causes everything that we cannot understand in our ordinary lives.

When you do this, it may at first seem like a mere thought experiment. And there is no obligation to do so. But something strange emerges when you do it. Once we have conceived such a person and endowed him with the characteristics described, this artificial thought-person makes a very strange impression on us. For we cannot shake off the image of a person we have created, even though it seems so artificially constructed; it fascinates us, it gives the impression that it must have something to do with us after all. This is ensured by the feeling we have toward the artificial thought-person. If we immerse ourselves deeply in this image, it will certainly not let us go. A strange process takes place in our mind, a process that can be compared to the following: We arrive at an inner mental process that human beings go through every moment. We can think something, we can make a decision; to do this we need something we once knew, and we use all kinds of artificial means to remember what we knew. In this effort to recall something that has slipped our mind, we naturally go through a mental process, which we call reflection in everyday life. And all the thoughts we use to help us remember something are auxiliary thoughts. Just try to think of how many such auxiliary thoughts you often have to use, which you then discard in order to arrive at what you want to know. Such auxiliary thoughts serve to open the way to what we actually need to remember at the moment.

In the same way, only as something far more comprehensive, the thinking person we have described is an auxiliary process. He does not let us go; he works in us in such a way that we say he is something that dwells in us as a thought, something that continues to work, that transforms itself in us; that actually transforms itself into the idea, into the thought that now appears as something that occurs to us when we reflect in the ordinary process of memory, that appears as something that overwhelms us. It is as if something were saying: He cannot remain as he is, he is changing within you, he is developing life, he is becoming something else! This imposes itself on us—try the experiment!—it imposes itself on us so much that it tells us: Yes, this is something that has something to do with an existence other than your present earthly existence. A kind of reflection on another earthly existence, the thought arises quite definitely. It is more a feeling than a thought, a sensation, but one like when we feel what arises in our mind as what we ourselves once were in a previous incarnation on this earth.

Anthroposophy, when viewed as a whole, is not merely a sum of theories or statements of facts that exist, but rather gives us rules and instructions on how to achieve this or that. Anthroposophy says: You will be led more and more to be able to reflect more easily when you do this or that. — One can also say, and this is drawn entirely from experience: If you proceed in this way, you will receive a mental impression, an emotional impression of the human being you once were. This brings us to what we might call an expansion of our memory. Now, what opens up to us here is really only a thought fact as long as we construct the thought-being described above. But the thought-person does not remain a thought-person. It transforms into sensations, into impressions of the mind, and in doing so, we know that in what we feel, we have something that has to do with our previous incarnation. Our memory expands to include our previous incarnation.

In this incarnation, we remember the things we are present with in our thoughts. You all know that it is relatively easy to remember things that our thoughts have played a part in. In ordinary life, however, what has played a part in our feelings does not remain so vividly alive. If you try to think back to something that caused you great pain ten or twenty years ago, you will easily remember the idea; you will transport yourself back in your imagination to what happened then; but you cannot attain a living sensation of the pain you felt at that time. The pain fades, the memory of it pours into our imagination. What has just been described is a mental memory, an emotional memory. And indeed, this is how we feel our previous incarnation. In fact, what we can call a memory of previous incarnations does occur. It cannot simply be regarded as something that plays into the present incarnation, as something that carries the memory of previous incarnations. Just consider how intimately our ideas are intertwined with the expression of those ideas, with our language. Language is the embodied world of ideas. And every human being must relearn language in each individual life. Even the greatest linguist or language expert must learn their mother tongue with effort as a child. There has never been a case of a high school student learning Greek easily because they quickly remembered the Greek they spoke in previous incarnations!

The poet Hebbel sketched out a plan for a drama he wanted to write. It is a pity that he did not do so, for it would have been a very interesting drama. The plot was conceived in such a way that Plato, reincarnated as a high school student, would receive the worst possible grade when explaining the ancient Plato! Unfortunately, Hebbel's plan was never carried out. We need not merely think of the fact that teachers are sometimes pedantic and so on. We know that what Hebbel wrote down is based on the fact that the imaginative, which takes place in the immediate experiences, is more or less directly limited to the present incarnation. And it is as has now been indicated that the first impression of the previous incarnation arises immediately as emotional memory, as a new kind of memory. What we have as an impression when this memory arises from the thought-man we have constructed is more of a feeling, but a feeling such that one understands: The impression comes from a fellow who once existed and who was you yourself! — One gets something like a feeling of remembrance as the first impression of the previous incarnation.

What has been described as the construction of a thought-man is only a means. This means is transformed into a mental or emotional impression. Every person who approaches anthroposophy actually has more or less opportunity to easily carry out what has now been described. And when they do so, they will see that they really do receive an impression within themselves, let us say — to use another example — an impression that they could describe as follows: I once saw a landscape; I have forgotten what it looked like, but I liked it! Now, if it was in this life, the landscape will no longer make a very vivid impression on the feelings; but if the impression came from a previous incarnation, it will make a particularly vivid impression on the feelings. We can thus form a particularly vivid impression as a feeling impression from our previous incarnation. And when we then objectively observe the impressions described, we will sometimes have something like a bitter or bittersweet or sour feeling from what emerges as the transformation of the thinking human being. This sour-sweet or other feeling is the impression that our previous incarnation makes on us; it is a kind of emotional or mental impression.

This was an attempt to draw your attention to something that can lead to a kind of immediate certainty in every human being that they have existed in previous lives; certainty through the fact that they have a feeling that they have impressions of the mind or feelings that they know they have not acquired anywhere in this life. — But such an impression arises in the same way as a memory arises in ordinary life. Now one may ask: How can one know that the impression one has is a memory? — You see, one can only say that such a thing cannot be proven. But the same fact exists as in other areas of life when we remember something and are in possession of our senses. We can know that what arises in our minds really refers to something we have experienced. Experience itself provides certainty. What we imagine in the manner described gives us the certainty that the impression that arises in our mind does not refer to something that had to do with us in our present life, but to something that had to do with us in a previous life.

We have artificially evoked something within ourselves that connects us to our previous life. We can use many other kinds of inner trial experiences and can thereby continue further and awaken within ourselves something like feelings from previous lives. In this way, we can share the experiences of what we go through in life in a different way; we can share them in groups in a different way. On the one hand, we can gather together in a group what we have gone through in terms of suffering, pain, and obstacles in life; on the other hand, we can gather together what we have become aware of as encouragement, joy, pleasure, and so on.

Now we can try to take the following point of view. We can say: Yes, we have experienced this pain, this suffering. As we are in this incarnation, as normal life happens, our pain and suffering are something fatal, something we would like to push away from ourselves in a certain sense. Let us try not to do this. Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that we ourselves brought about this pain, this suffering, and these obstacles for a certain reason, because through these previous lives, if they really exist, we have become more imperfect in a certain way through what we have done. Through the sequence of incarnations, we not only become more perfect, but in a certain sense we also become more imperfect. Or are we not more imperfect than we were before when we have caused someone an insult or a misfortune? We have not only done something to this person, we have also taken something from ourselves; we would be worth more as a whole personality if we had not done so. We have done many such things that we have done and that, because we have done them, constitute our imperfection. If we have caused someone harm and want to regain the value we had before, what must happen? We must compensate for the harm, we must perform a compensatory act in the world, we must invent something that forces us, so to speak, to overcome something. And when we think about our suffering and pain in this way, we can often say: our suffering and pain are suitable, if we overcome them, for enabling us to gain strength in overcoming our imperfections. We can become more perfect through suffering. In normal human life, we do not think this way; we reject suffering. But we can say that every pain, every suffering, every obstacle in life should be a hint that we have a more intelligent person within us than we ourselves are. We consider the person we are for a while, even though he is the one who encompasses our consciousness, to be the less intelligent one; but we have a more intelligent one slumbering in the depths of our soul. We, with our ordinary consciousness, react to pain and suffering with rejection, but the more intelligent being leads us against our consciousness toward this pain, because by overcoming this pain we can shed something. He leads us toward pain and suffering, he instructs us to go through it. — It may be a hard thought at first, but it does not oblige us to do anything; we can try it out, just for the sake of experiment. We can say: Inside us there is a more intelligent person who leads us toward suffering and pain, toward something we would prefer to avoid in our consciousness. We think that this is the smarter part of ourselves. In this way, we come to the disturbing conclusion that the smarter part of ourselves always leads us to what we dislike!

So let's assume that there is such a smarter part of ourselves that leads us to what we dislike so that we can move forward.

But we do something else as well. Let us take our joys, our successes, our pleasures, and say of them, again as an experiment: How would it be if you imagined, regardless of how things really are, that you did not deserve your pleasures, your joys, your successes, but that they came to you through the grace of higher spiritual powers? This need not be the case for everything, but let us assume, as an experiment, that we have brought all our pain and suffering upon ourselves in such a way that the wiser part of ourselves has led us to them, because we recognize that we need them as a result of our imperfections and that we can only overcome our imperfections through pain and suffering. And then, as an experiment, let us assume the opposite: we attribute our joys to ourselves as if they were not our own merit, but as if they had been given to us by spiritual powers.

It may again be a bitter pill for some vain people to think this way. But to try this out is definitely something that, if a person is capable of such intense imagination in their mind, leads to a fundamental feeling, because it transforms itself and, insofar as it is incorrect, rectifies itself: There is something living within you that has nothing to do with ordinary consciousness, something that is actually deeper than what you have consciously experienced in this life; there is therefore something within you that is a more intelligent human being who likes to turn to the eternal divine spiritual powers that permeate the world. - Then it becomes certain in your inner life that behind the outer individuality there is an inner, higher individuality. We become aware of the eternal spiritual core of our being through such exercises in thinking. This is extremely significant. With this, we again have something about which we can say that we can carry it out.

Anthroposophy can be an instruction in every respect, not only to know something about the existence of another world, but to feel within oneself that one belongs to another world, to feel oneself as an individuality that passes through successive incarnations.

There is a third kind of experience. With this third kind, however, it will be more difficult to use it, so to speak, to really arrive at a kind of inner experience of karma and reincarnation. But even if it is difficult and time-consuming, what is about to be said can be used in such a way that it can be tried out. And in honest application to external life, it will become apparent — first as a probability, if one can believe it, but then with ever greater certainty — that our present life is indeed connected in this way with our previous life.

Let us assume that we live our present life between birth and death, and let us realize that when we have reached, say, the age of thirty or older — we will see that even those who are not yet that far along will have corresponding experiences later — we reflect on how, around the age of thirty, we were brought together with this or that person in the outer world; in our thirties, up to the age of forty, we were brought together with people from the outer world in various life connections. It becomes clear to us that the connections we made then seem as if we had made them, one might say, in our most mature state, so that we were truly present as mature human beings. This can be deduced through reflection. However, a reflection that has been gained from the principles and insights of spiritual science can lead us to the conclusion that what I am now saying is correct, not merely on the basis of such considerations, but on the basis of spiritual scientific research. So what I am saying now is not merely a logical conclusion based on thought, but has been established through spiritual scientific research, although logical thinking can confirm the fact and find it reasonable. If we think about some of the things we have learned, for example, about the way in which the various individual human members emerge in the course of life—we know that in the seventh year the etheric body emerges, in the fourteenth year the astral body, in the twenty-first year the sentient soul, the intellectual soul emerges in the twenty-eighth year, and the consciousness soul in the thirty-fifth year — when we think about this, we can say that in the period from the thirtieth to the fortieth year, we are dealing with the formation of the intellectual soul and the consciousness soul.

The intellectual soul and the conscious soul are the forces in human nature that bring us closest to the outer physical world, for they are designed to emerge particularly at the age when we are most in contact with the outer physical world. In early childhood, the forces of our physical body are directed outwards, determined and caused by what is still immediately enclosed within us. What human beings have acquired as causes in previous incarnations, what has passed through the gate of death with us, what we have gathered in spiritual forces, what we bring with us from previous lives, all this works and weaves in the building of our physical body. It works continuously, invisibly, from within into the body. With advancing age, this influence becomes less and less; the time approaches when the old forces have shaped the body. And then comes the time when we face the world with a finished organism. What we carry within us has found expression in our outer body. Around the age of thirty—it may be a little earlier or a little later—we face the world in its most physical form, and we stand in such a relationship to the world that we are most closely related to the physical plane. If we now believe that we have the greatest clarity, external physical clarity, about the life circumstances we are entering into, then we must say: these life circumstances we are entering into are those that, for this incarnation, are actually least connected with what has been working and weaving within us since our birth. Nevertheless, we can assume that it is by no means a coincidence that around the age of thirty we are brought together with people who happen to appear in our environment at that particular time. We can rather assume that our karma is at work here too, that these people also have something to do with one of our previous incarnations.

And here the spiritual scientific facts, which have been researched in various ways, show that very often the people we meet around the age of thirty are so interwoven with us in previous incarnations that we can be connected to them, usually at the beginning of the immediately preceding incarnation or even earlier, as parents or siblings. At first, this is a strange and surprising fact. It does not have to be this way, but many cases in spiritual scientific research show that it is indeed the case that our parents, the people who stood by us at the beginning of our previous life, who brought us into the physical plane, whom we later outgrew, are so interwoven with us karmically that they are not reunited with us in our new life during our childhood, but only when we have emerged most fully onto the physical plane. This does not have to be the case, because spiritual scientific research very often shows that we are only reunited in a subsequent incarnation with those who are potential parents, siblings, or blood relatives with whom we came together in this incarnation around the age of thirty. So acquaintances around the age of thirty in any incarnation may turn out to be people who are related to us by blood in a previous or subsequent incarnation. We can therefore say: The personalities with whom life brings you together in your thirties are either people with whom you were together as parents and siblings in a previous incarnation, or you can assume that they will be connected to you in this capacity in one of your next incarnations.

The reverse is also true. When we consider those personalities whom we arbitrarily choose least through external forces suitable for the physical plane, i.e., our parents and siblings whom we encountered at the beginning of our lives, we very often come to the conclusion that we ourselves, in the middle of our previous life, arbitrarily chose precisely those persons who lead us into life from childhood, around the age of thirty in another incarnation, as if arbitrarily with our own powers; in other words, that in the middle of our previous life we chose those who have now become our parents and siblings.

Particularly interesting is the fact that, strangely enough, we do not find ourselves in the same circumstances with the personalities we encounter in successive incarnations, nor do we meet them at the same age as before. Nor is the opposite the case: it is not the personalities we met at the end of our lives who are related to the beginning of our lives in another incarnation, but the personalities we meet in the middle of our lives. So it is neither the personalities we encounter at the beginning of life nor those we encounter at the end of life, but rather the personalities we encounter in the middle of life who were our blood relatives at the beginning of a previous incarnation. Those who were with us at the beginning of our lives now appear in the middle of our lives; and those who are around us now at the beginning of our lives, we can assume that we will meet again in the middle of one of our next incarnations, that they will come into contact with us as our freely chosen life companions, chosen somewhere. So strange are the karmic connections.

What I have just said are things that spiritual scientific research has revealed. But I have already pointed out that when one considers the inner connections between the beginning of one incarnation and the middle of another in the way that spiritual scientific research shows, one understands that this is not something nonsensical or useless. The other side is that when such things are brought to us and we approach them sensibly, life becomes bright and clear. It becomes bright and clear when we do not simply accept everything, one might say dully, not to say stupidly; it becomes bright and clear when we try to understand what happens to us in life in such a way that we make the connections concrete, which are not yet fully understandable as long as we speak only in abstract terms about karma in general.

It is useful to think about this: Why is it that in the middle of our lives we are literally driven by karma, seemingly with all our intellectual power, to make this or that acquaintance, of whom we can say: Doesn't it seem as if it were independent, objectively concluded? — This is precisely because such personalities were blood relatives of ours in a previous life and are now brought together with us through our karma because we have something to do with them.

If we make such considerations every time we look at the course of our own lives, we will see that light really does enter our lives. Even if we are wrong once, or even ten times, we can still arrive at the right conclusion with regard to some person we meet in life. And when we say, based on such considerations, “We met this person here or there,” such a thought is something that guides us to other things that we would not otherwise have noticed and that, through their coincidence, give us more and more certainty about the correctness of the individual facts.

Karmic connections are not something that can be gained in a single stroke. We must acquire the highest insights of life, the most important insights that illuminate our lives, slowly and gradually. However, people do not like to believe this. It is easier to believe that one can find the truth through some flash of insight: I was with these or those personalities in a previous life, or I myself was this or that person. It may be uncomfortable to think that all this must be knowledge acquired slowly, but nevertheless it is so. Even if we already have the belief that it could be so, we must still continue to investigate, and our belief will then become certainty. Even for what is already becoming more and more probable in this field, we can make progress through research. We wall ourselves off from the spiritual world when we allow ourselves to make quick judgments in such areas.

Try to think about what has been said today about the acquaintances in the middle of our lives and their connection with personalities closer to us in a previous incarnation. You will come up with some very fruitful thoughts, especially if you consider what is said in the book “The Education of the Child from the Point of View of Spiritual Science.” Then it will become clear that the result of your reflection is in harmony with what is said in this book.

However, what has been said today must be accompanied by a serious warning: the true spiritual researcher is careful not to draw conclusions; he allows things to come to him. When they are there, he first examines them with ordinary logic. Then something cannot happen that I encountered again recently and that is quite characteristic of the way in which people today want to oppose anthroposophy. A very intelligent gentleman said to me—and I say this without any irony, with complete conviction that he really is an intelligent gentleman—: When I read what is written in your book “An Outline of Esoteric Science,” I must say that it seems so logical, so connected with what else the world shows us as facts, that I must confess that one could arrive at these things simply by thinking. These things do not need to be the result of supersensible research. What is said in this book is not at all doubtful; it corresponds to reality. — I was able to assure this gentleman that I did not believe I would have arrived at these conclusions through mere reflection, and that, with all due respect for his intelligence, I did not believe that he had arrived at these facts through mere reflection either. It is indeed true that everything that can be understood logically in the field of spiritual science cannot really be found through mere reflection! The fact that something can be examined and understood logically should not be a reason to doubt its spiritual origin! On the contrary, I believe that it should be reassuring that spiritual scientific information can be recognized as undoubtedly correct through logical thinking. It cannot be the ambition of the spiritual researcher to say illogical things in order to gain belief. You see that the spiritual researcher himself cannot stand on solid ground if he finds these things through thinking. But when one thinks about the things found through spiritual science, they can appear so logical that they seem too logical, so that one can no longer find any faith in the spiritual scientific sources from which they originate. This is indeed the case with all things that are said to have arisen on the basis of pure spiritual scientific research.

Even if what has been said here today seems grotesque to you at first, try to think about these things logically. I would not have done so if spiritual facts had not led me to derive it from ordinary logical thinking, but once it is there, it can be tested logically. And then you will see: the more subtly and conscientiously you examine it, the more you will find that everything is true. Even in the case of things that cannot be tested to see if they are correct, such as what has been said today about parents and siblings in one life and acquaintances in the middle of another life, one will find, simply from the way the various links in the chain of events behave, that they make an impression that is not only highly probable but borders on certainty. And certainty proves to be well-founded when one tests things in life. With many of the personalities one encounters, one will see one's own behavior and that of others in a completely different light when one stands before someone one meets in the middle of life as if one had been siblings in a previous life. And this makes the whole relationship much more fruitful than if one were to go through life in a dull manner.

So we can say: Anthroposophy is increasingly becoming not only something that gives knowledge and insight into life, but also something that gives us instructions on how to understand the circumstances of life and make them light-filled, not only for ourselves, but also for our behavior toward life and for our life task. It is important that we do not believe that we are spoiling our immediate, uninhibited life. Only fearful people who are not entirely serious about life can believe that. But we should be clear that by getting to know life more closely, we also make life more fruitful and meaningful. Everything that comes our way in life should be brought into our field of vision through anthroposophy, so that all forces become richer, more confident, and more hopeful than they were before they entered this field of vision.