The Rudolf Steiner Archive

Dear attendees! Anthroposophy is currently regarded by many people who initially deal with it from the outside as a more or less fantastic attempt to penetrate into areas of the world through knowledge that serious science should not concern itself with.

Now, anthroposophy does indeed want to penetrate into those regions that are usually, more or less justifiably, referred to as supersensible regions, and in which the human being is rooted with his or her own deeper, eternal being. There are, of course, already scientific researchers today who are to be taken very seriously and who turn to all kinds of abnormal human abilities that point to the fact that the human being is subject to other laws and is connected to the world in other ways than can be determined by the usual scientific studies.

However, precisely those who turn to such abnormal human abilities, which they then, quite justifiably, only register scientifically and research according to their laws, often see the path that anthroposophy takes as a fantastical, nebulous, mystical one, one that must even lead to all kinds of superstitious beliefs and enthusiasm. Now, my dear ladies and gentlemen, one cannot say that in the long run, enthusiastic mystical natures can be satisfied by what anthroposophy actually is in its essence. Such natures, who, indeed, there are many such today, run everywhere where there is talk of anything occult, as they call it, such natures very soon find that Anthroposophy wants to be based on strict thinking, on that which can be described as a conscientious scientific method. And that is not really suitable for enthusiastic, nebulous and mystical natures. Of course, on the other hand, this does not prevent those who want to reject what is unfamiliar to them with a slight wave of the hand from finding that neurasthenic or hysterical natures and the like come to anthroposophy.

Now, dear ladies and gentlemen, in the face of this caricature, which is still very often presented of anthroposophy, it is not easy to characterize the essence of this research and this world view in a short lecture. I will try to do so this evening by first characterizing the paths by which anthroposophy seeks to penetrate into those areas that are not accessible to ordinary science. And then I will try to say something, at least in outline, about the results that are obtained in such ways.

One should not think that anthroposophy, as it is meant here, wants to oppose in any way what the unique scientific methods have achieved for human progress in the course of the last few centuries and especially in the nineteenth century. It must be accepted as a prerequisite that anthroposophy claims to be in full agreement with the scientific results of modern times, and that anthroposophy wants nothing to do with any abnormal human abilities, but only with an appropriate continuation of the completely normal human capacity for knowledge and soul. It is often believed that nothing of significance can be achieved through such a normal continuation and further development. Anthroposophy first has to fight against this prejudice. But here it encounters two formidable obstacles. And by becoming clear about these two obstacles to knowledge in a completely unbiased way, it wants to find a way to avoid them.

On the one hand, as I have already mentioned, we have the tremendous scientific research results of recent times with their great practical effects on life. Anthroposophy looks squarely at the views of those 'cautious' natural thinkers who are at the forefront of their science and who speak of the necessary limits of this knowledge of nature.

Initially, human knowledge is presented with that which comes from sense impressions, which is accessible to observation and experimentation, and which the human intellect can find in terms of laws within this sensory realm. Now, there is often an effort to go beyond this sensory realm through mere, self-directed thinking to realms that lie beyond the sensory world. These are the attempts that, through philosophical thinking, as it were, philosophical speculation, seek to go beyond the sensory realm. But anyone who approaches these subjects not as a layman or dilettante, but as a connoisseur of scientific methods, can also know, through the special way of handling thinking in natural science, how the thinking that our scientific conscientiousness has produced, how it does not only arbitrarily binds itself to the external facts of the sense world, but how, in more recent times, it has developed to its greatness precisely by adapting to the laws of the external sense world, by conscientiously following the facts that can be observed in the external sense world. And once one has gone through this process of seeing how scientific thinking follows the facts, then one also knows the uncertainties and subjective arbitrariness one encounters when one leaves the safe territory of sensory facts, the territory of observation and experiment, and surrenders to self-abandoned thinking.

This is why those who are approached by a world view that has come about through such thinking feel unsatisfied. They have to say to themselves: Yes, what one or another thinker, going beyond the sensory world, combines in his thoughts could have turned out differently if he had been differently predisposed. And it does turn out differently. The philosophical systems argue with each other, and the dispute between the philosophical systems justifies the very dissatisfaction that must immediately arise for the unbiased human mind when natural science crosses its borders in the manner just indicated. Now, anthroposophy is not at all inclined to think about nature in a different way than the strict natural scientist himself. And what it attempts to fathom about the supersensible worlds is only meant to be a genuine continuation of the unified scientific world view, not the discovery, in a dualistic sense, of some second world to the one in which we live as human beings. But today there are many natures that are much more deeply laid who feel themselves unsatisfied by what science can give about external nature, in which man with his physical corporeality is also integrated. Such deeper natures then turn away from all research, from all conscientious knowledge in the sense of science, and they turn to a certain mystical direction. This is very common today: people say to themselves that external observation and external experiment provide great things for practical life, but they cannot give the human soul, with its hopes for eternity and its longing to fathom its own deeper being. Such natures then seek ways to delve down into the deeper shafts of the soul, and then believe that they will find in these deeper soul shafts, through mystical contemplation, that which cannot be found through external observation.

And this brings me to the second obstacle that anthroposophy must avoid. It cannot remain with a limited knowledge of nature, just as it cannot remain with some kind of nebulous mysticism. For precisely the person who, through unbiased observation of the soul – and one must indeed penetrate ever more deeply to such observation through anthroposophy – the person who, through unbiased observation of the soul, penetrates into the inner self, knows how impressions that we may have absorbed into our souls decades ago, perhaps half unconsciously at the time, resurface after a long time , they do not just emerge as they were received at the time, but in the depths of the human mind they combine with all kinds of feelings and sensations, they are often interspersed with volitional impulses in such a way that the person is not even aware of this subconscious soul activity. And then, after years, they emerge from the soul of the mystic who is absorbed in contemplation. They do not know that these are only transformed external impressions; they consider them to be divine inspirations and believe that, in what they are bringing up in the way of transformed external perceptions, they are approaching the very sources of the existence of the world, in which the human soul is immersed with its eternal essence.

Anthroposophy does not turn to this side of the supposed knowledge of the eternal either, but says to itself: In the external knowledge of nature, the external facts and their laws arise; in inner contemplation, only that which is a direct or transformed memory of the impressions of the external sense world arises. And precisely because anthroposophy deals with these things in such detail, it comes to the conclusion that it is impossible to transcend the limits of natural phenomena on the one hand and to penetrate more deeply into the nature of the human soul itself on the other with the cognitive abilities that a person initially has for normal life and also for ordinary science. It is precisely for this reason, because Anthroposophy looks at both directions impartially, it seeks the path of further developing human soul abilities.

Now, my dear listeners, if you want to embark on this path, you need something that is admittedly difficult for human beings to achieve, and which I would call intellectual humility. You have to be able to say the following to yourself at a certain moment in your life: As a very small child, I was not at all equipped with the abilities that I have today. I was disoriented in the world, and from the depths of my humanity the abilities have developed that make knowledge possible for me today, that make practical orientation in life possible for me today. In ordinary life and also in ordinary science, one now draws a line with what has been acquired through education and what has been appropriated through life. But anyone who wants to do research in the anthroposophical sense must not stop there, but must realize that, in addition to these abilities of ordinary life and ordinary science, there are abilities slumbering in the soul that can be awakened through certain soul exercises, intimate soul exercises, and that through their development one comes to the contemplation of a completely different world than the one that otherwise surrounds one. The development of these abilities does not take place through external measures, but through intimate soul exercises. And it should be noted that these soul exercises are carried out in such a way that they are thoroughly and scientifically conscientious, which can be acquired in the currently legitimate field of science. Initially, however, what can be achieved through anthroposophy is directed towards the soul, but it is done so rigorously that it can be accounted for by the methods of conscientious science.

Now, the aim of these intimate soul exercises is to strengthen the entire human soul, on the one hand by strengthening the life of the imagination.

My dear audience, just as you strengthen a muscle when you need its power for work, so you can also strengthen the power of the imagination in man by simply translating it, by implementing it in a soul work that does not otherwise occur in life. I will describe the principle of this soul work, but the details — for it takes many years of practice to strengthen the life of the imagination — can be found in my books, for example in 'How to Know Higher Worlds' or in the second part of my 'Occult Science', or more briefly presented in the last chapter of my 'Riddles of Philosophy'. But, as I said, I would like to present the principles, the essentials of the matter this evening.

First of all, in order to strengthen the human faculty of imagination, easily comprehensible ideas or complexes of ideas are brought into the center of consciousness and then, turning away from everything else, the soul life is completely devoted to such a complex of ideas. It is good, indeed almost necessary, to either find such a complex of ideas by seeking it out – let us say – in a book that is completely unknown to you at first, or by simply turning to a page, taking some saying or sentence that you are quite certain that it has not yet passed through one's consciousness, through one's soul life, or one can also get some such content from someone who is experienced in these matters, on which one then concentrates one's soul life, to which one, as I have described in the books mentioned, devotes oneself in meditation. It is necessary to devote oneself to soul-content that was previously unknown in this way, because when one brings up any soul-content from the treasures of one's memories, it is bound up with all kinds of other areas of the soul life. One cannot know what one brings up from the subconscious depths of the soul and what then arises as reminiscences. You can only protect yourself from this if you have a readily comprehensible set of ideas that has been unknown to you until now. Then it is a matter of concentrating the soul on this set of ideas, while disregarding everything else, turning away from all the rest of life and the world, and concentrating it in such a way that the fully conscious will, the genuine reflection, never ceases, but rather the person surrenders to such concentration or meditation with complete inner arbitrariness, with the same inner arbitrariness with which one is also surrendered to an external, sensual perceptual content.

Because that, dear attendees, is the ideal of the anthroposophical method: not to plunge into all kinds of physical or other hidden human conditions, but to strive for the state of mind that one has when one is devoted to external sensory impressions. Anthroposophy is completely misunderstood when it is believed to strive for those areas that involve the visionary, hallucination, suggestion or the like. In all these things, the human being turns to a kind of soul activity that delves into depths that are only weakly active in relation to an external sense perception, an external sense impression. The anthroposophical method does not descend into this foggy darkness; it is the opposite of the visionary, the hallucinatory, the suggestive. This is the opposite of what the anthroposophical method strives for. It further develops the state of mind one has in relation to external sensory impressions, but it develops it in relation to a conceptual content that can be characterized in such a way as I have just described.

And then one must strive more and more to become as alive in one's consciousness when surrendering to such a content of thought as one is otherwise only when facing an external sense impression. You know, my dear audience, how much more alive a person is when they are devoted to an external sense impression than when pursuing ordinary thought life. It is indeed true that one speaks of pale thoughts in contrast to the intense, fully-lived outer sensory impressions. But the anthroposophical method must strive to achieve this liveliness and intensity in relation to the characterized thoughts, which otherwise can only be achieved in relation to outer sensory impressions. As I said, this requires a great deal of stamina and energy.

And the spiritual research we are talking about here is no easier than research in an observatory or in a physics or chemistry laboratory or in a clinic. A great deal of practice is needed in this direction. But when it does take place, then after some time the person does indeed feel an inner mobility of the imagination that he did not know before, and he finds himself in an experience that tells him through the experience: You become more and more free from physicality in your soul experience.

My dear audience, everything we have in our ordinary lives for knowledge, everything we have for the other expressions of the soul, is bound to the physical. The unbiased person knows how our memories are bound to bodily functions. He does not easily give in to the idea that one can be free of the body, that one — I want to use the quite unappealing word — that one can really live spiritually outside of one's body. But that is what one can achieve through a perpetual increase in such practice. One comes to be outside of one's body with one's soul life. But at the same time, one knows that in this kind of knowledge, which I have described as the first stage of higher knowledge in the books mentioned, the stage of imagination, one also knows that with this soul life, which lives in a living, intensified, strengthened thinking, only subjective, pictorial experiences can be had at first. This, in turn, distinguishes the anthroposophical researcher from the false mystic or even from the pathological nature. The one who, out of pathological states, devotes himself to a soul ability, never knows how to preserve what he has in his soul state in ordinary life. I would like to say: He slides with his whole consciousness into the visionary, into the hallucinatory. The person who, as an anthroposophical researcher, develops the soul abilities of which I have spoken, remains, even when developing these abilities, the level-headed person that he is in life, the person with strict self-criticism and world-criticism, who can control at every moment what is going on in the second personality to which he has risen as the imaginative-cognitive one. While for this reason the pathological person takes his hallucinations, his visions, as they are, for realities, the anthroposophical researcher knows that in the imaginations he has something pictorial, something subjective, but that the self-life is increased, that he has this self-life before him in a different way, spiritually, than is otherwise the case in the human soul.

One difference between this imaginative cognition and ordinary imagination is that it is not abstract, as are the concepts and ideas of ordinary cognition, but that it lives in fully saturated images. That is why I call it imaginative cognition. In this imaginative cognition, in which one's subjective awareness of one's own being has been heightened, in this imaginative cognition, the first result of anthroposophical research occurs at a certain stage in the development of these soul abilities. One comes to have before one, as in a large tableau, the inner soul forces that have been at work in one's own human being since birth. What else do we know about this inner human being? It is contained in the stream of memories, from which we can either arbitrarily select individual areas in images of what we have experienced, or images can arise freely. So it is not what you see now, but what you see first, is the sum of those forces that you now know have shaped your abilities, have given direction to your moral impulses. One sees how, in a unified tableau, one has become, and how one has shaped oneself from within through the years. That which otherwise has passed in time confronts one in a unified image, but one that has inner mobility.

This is the first new thing that one sees through such soul development. I have seen what one sees in this way and what one now knows directly: there is a second body, a spiritual body in man, which I have called the formative force body. Older, instinctive knowledge, which already knew something of these things, spoke of the etheric or life body. It is not something that can be drawn – at best in the way one paints a flash of lightning – one must know that one is dealing with something that is intrinsically mobile, that changes in every moment, that one can only capture just as it is in a moment. One is dealing with a – I would say – time body of the human being.

Now, my dear audience, through imaginative knowledge, one can first discover this inner, this inwardly mobile, this formative body of the human being, if I may express it in this way. But the soul developments that I have characterized so far must be continued. When one has first practiced concentrating on certain ideas, one is, in a certain way, nevertheless, one surrenders to these ideas with full inner willfulness, as only a mathematician surrenders to his combinations of thoughts. But in a certain way one is held fast by these ideas. But that should not really be the case. Therefore, from the very beginning – you will find a description in the books mentioned of the appropriate exercises that need to be done to achieve this – not only must this concentration on images be practiced from the very beginning, but a second thing must be practiced. Through the same free arbitrariness, the ideas to which one has just turned with the greatest strength, with increased soul strength, must be able to be suppressed again, completely suppressed, so that one learns to establish what one could call: empty consciousness, a consciousness that is empty, as otherwise only the consciousness is empty in sleep. But just as the soul's inner disposition sinks and is completely paralyzed in sleep, so it remains alert when meditation, as characterized by me, precedes it. One is then fully awake in the empty consciousness. And I will have to characterize to you how the possibility of living in such an empty consciousness is precisely what allows one to enter a spiritual world.

First of all, I would like to point out that anyone who has gained the ability not only to experience individual images that arise in the imagination devotedly, but also to remove them from consciousness so that they can live awake in an empty consciousness, gradually acquires the ability to suppress everything that I have now characterized as the formative forces body, as the great tableau of life that makes us inwardly comprehensible in the life of forces that has been shaping us since our birth. One arrives at this, this whole inner life, after first having fully looked at it, again from the consciousness. But when one arrives at creating an empty consciousness in relation to one's own inner life, then the second stage of human knowledge also arises with all clarity, which I have mentioned. I ask my dear audience not to be offended by expressions . They are only a way of expressing myself. I do not mean anything superstitious or traditional, but only what I myself characterize. I have mentioned the second stage in human knowledge: inspired knowledge. The first stage is imaginative knowledge, the second stage inspired knowledge.

By attaining this inspired knowledge through the empty consciousness, one is then able to expand consciousness beyond birth by suppressing the inner soul tableau of the body of formative forces. One now experiences the soul, the soul-spiritual of one's own being in the state in which it was before it united through birth - or let us say through conception - with the forces of inheritance, which are the forces of the body that man received from his ancestors, from his parents. One comes to understand the destinies that the soul and spirit, the eternal core of the human being, has gone through before uniting with a physical human body. You may ask, my dear audience, how does one know that what one sees really belongs to a soul experience before birth or before conception? Dear attendees, I would like to clarify what appears before the anthroposophical researcher by means of a comparison. When I have a memory of an experience from ten years ago, I know from the content of the memory itself that it is not something that arose in the consciousness at the time, but the content of the memory itself points me to the time ten years ago. Thus the content of what one experiences as spiritual-mental is that it indicates its own time in the relationship, that one knows these are experiences of the soul before it came into an earthly body.

However strange this may still seem to today's humanity, people will be convinced that soul abilities are developed with complete, convinced conscientiousness, not to speculate or to immerse themselves in mystic nebulae, but to come to a real insight into what the eternal-spiritual-soul core of the human being is. In this respect, Anthroposophy has a contribution to make to the further cultural development of humanity: it will show that experience itself must be further developed, that experiencing itself must be increased, so that in increased knowledge, man comes to the contemplation of that which is his eternal core of being. For this reason, Anthroposophy can proceed in the field of natural science in exactly the same way as the strictest natural scientist. It will not misuse the usual method of knowledge, it can, within the justified limits, be Haeckelian for the external physical field, profess Haeckel, because on the other hand it knows how to develop cognitive abilities that come close to an immediate insight into the eternal, spiritual-soul core of being in man. Then, my dear audience, when one has developed this spiritual-soul core, when one has attained inspired knowledge, one not only gets to know what the human soul itself is, but just as one gets to know the sensory environment through the human body, which the senses, one gets to know the sensual environment, in the same way one gets to know the spiritual environment through this knowledge of one's own soul-being when it was in a body-free state before it moved into the physical-earthly body through birth or conception.

But it is not enough to stop at this inspired knowledge. Only one aspect of the soul's abilities has been developed, namely the ability to imagine. The other aspect, the will, must also be developed in the human soul. Then, one might say, the life of feeling and emotion, which lies right in the middle between the life of imagination and the life of will, follows of its own accord. This life of feeling is the very own, most intimate element of the human soul life. It follows the inspired, imaginative knowledge and the one that I will now further characterize by showing how one can also lead the human will into the spiritual world, freeing it from the body.

From the wide range of exercises that I have outlined and explained in the books mentioned, I would like to highlight a few principles that show how this development of the will takes place.

First of all, I would like to point out a very simple exercise, but one that must be undertaken with perseverance and energy in order to achieve real positive results. It consists in starting from the realization that our ordinary thinking is already permeated by the will at all times. It is indeed the case that in abstract thinking we can distinguish the soul abilities according to imagining or thinking, according to feeling, according to willing. In reality, everything that is imagining, feeling and willing flows together in the soul. And even in the purest thinking, the will element is always present. Therefore, for the higher schooling of the spirit, the will element should first be developed in thinking. But ordinary thinking, and also the thinking that a person initially uses in his or her usual science, is in harmony with the external sequences of facts. The earlier is presented earlier, the later later. And even if we free thinking for ordinary life and ordinary science from external temporality and spatiality, we still need it in ordinary logic in such a way that we want to come to the conclusion that things are arranged in space and time. If we also detach thinking from reality, it is only a detour to get to the true reality through thinking. But what will training should be must tear this thinking away from the usual sequence of facts, and this can be done by presenting, if I may call it that, in reverse. Suppose we present a melody or a drama in reverse, a drama from the last events of the fifth act back to the first of the first act. When one presents in reverse in as small portions as possible, then one is forced to apply a stronger will to thinking than is otherwise the case. One can train one's thinking, or rather, the will that lives in thinking, in this direction particularly well by retracing one's own day experiences backwards every evening in as small portions as possible, starting from what one has experienced that evening, going to the afternoon, to the morning, and then really then into the most minute details — I would say —, into the atomization of the day's life, so that one imagines going up a staircase in such a way that, when one has reached the top, one then goes back in thought, going backwards from the last to the penultimate step and so on. You will see how this becomes more and more difficult the smaller the sections you take. But it is precisely through this that the will, which lives in thinking, is torn away from the external sequence of facts and you will gradually notice how you not only tear it away from the external sequence of facts, but how you tear it away from your own corporeality. You can support yourself with other exercises, for example, by developing a habit of observing yourself as a second personality alongside yourself in your own actions and in the expressions of your own life. If you practise such clear self-examination, if you, so to speak, observe every step, including every step of your soul life, as if from the outside, you will strengthen the will element.

When one then proceeds to go more into the depths of the soul, to say: You now have the intention of doing a very specific, concretely outlined action in some future time, you take self-observation so far that it becomes an activity, that you take your own inner life into your own hands, become master of your development, while otherwise you have left yourself to the stream of life. When one takes into one's own hands what the stream of life accomplishes for the soul's own development, one then also succeeds in tearing the will away from the ordinary physical body. Then one also comes with the will outside of one's body, and this willpower, which can be experienced outside of the body, unites with the power of imagination, which I have characterized.

But in this way one arrives at developing something in the human being that is rightly not regarded as an ability to perceive in ordinary life – and I know, esteemed attendees, how fully justified the reasons are for not regarding the soul abilities are not regarded as cognitive abilities — but when the soul nature of man is so elevated as I have characterized it, then the ability to love, devotion to something external, can indeed become an ability to cognize. And just as the body-free imagination, which is similar to memory but again quite different from it, presents us with pictures of a life that we cannot otherwise recognize, so too does this will, which has become body-free and now represents an increased ability to love, represent an increased living out into reality and, since it is body-free, into spiritual reality. We acquire the faculty which I have mentioned in the books referred to as intuitive knowledge; we acquire the faculty not only of allowing the revelations of a spiritual world to flow in, as in inspired knowledge, but we acquire the faculty of living over into the outer spiritual world with our own life. When I speak of intuitive knowledge, I naturally mean an intensification of that which is also called intuition in ordinary life, a knowledge that is not only based on abstract-logical thinking. What I mean, however, is an exact increase of what is otherwise called intuition, and represents a real cognitive survival of the human being into objective spirituality. And when a person has attained this intuition, then he also gets to know the other side of his being. Through what has been described so far, he reaches the moment of his birth, to that spiritual-soul that preceded the birth or conception. Now, by developing the will to intuitive knowledge, so that he can step out of himself with the will, now he also reaches the knowledge of that which steps out of the human body in reality when the human being passes through the gate of death. Only at that moment does man recognize the soul-spiritual that passes through the gate of death as something eternal, when, through a development of will, he has grasped this soul-spiritual in such a way that it can truly step out of itself, out of the ordinary human being, out of the bodily being, in intuitive knowledge. And now the human being beholds the nature of immortality on both sides, on the side of the unborn and on the side of what is usually called immortality. In this way, as I said before, the human being also gets to know the spiritual environment in which he lives before birth or conception and after death.

But once these two worlds have been grasped, once the sense world is really recognized in accordance with natural law, once the spiritual world is recognized through the cognitive faculties I have described, then there is still something within the human being that cannot be explained from either of these worlds. After becoming acquainted with the two worlds — I call them 'two worlds', although they only constitute a unified whole — we now stand before the mystery of the human soul. But we also acquire the ability to see through that in man which, through his development, unites both worlds in himself. And that is that in man which goes through repeated earth-lives, which thus goes through repeated earth-lives in such a way that it lives through the existence here in the physical body between birth and death, or let us say between conception and death, but then another existence between death and a new birth. And since one learns to recognize what the soul acquires through one life and the other, when one looks into what the results of development from both give, one arrives at the view of what underlies repeated earthly lives. And these repeated earthly lives themselves also become a view.

You see, my dear audience, that in speaking here in all seriousness about Anthroposophy, I cannot present these things of repeated earthly lives to you as fantastic creations. I must present to you everything that the human soul must do in order to cognitively arrive at these things. Today, I must of course briefly present this in an introductory lecture, and it could very easily be thought that only someone who has gone through everything I have described in principle in more detail in the books mentioned can see into these areas. Now these books are precisely there so that everyone can do the suggested exercises up to a certain level, and so that what the anthroposophical researcher says can be verified by actual observation. But the anthroposophical researcher uses ordinary common sense, ordinary thinking. And anyone who, uninfluenced by certain prejudices that are unfortunately so widespread today, simply asks themselves: “Is what is being presented reasonable or unreasonable?” does not need to become a researcher themselves, but can use their common sense to form an opinion about the value or lack of value of the anthroposophical results. Just as one does not need to be a painter to get a proper impression of a picture, one does not need to be an anthroposophical researcher to judge whether something that comes to light in anthroposophy is reasonable or unreasonable. Intuitive knowledge completes the stages of higher knowledge in a certain way.

Now, my dear audience, even in ordinary life, intuition points to a certain area. In my book, which was published a long time ago, I wrote it at the beginning of the nineties of the last century, in my “Philosophy of Freedom”, I pointed out how man's truly free actions are based on impulses of sensuality-free thinking, on moral ideals, which are created by the human being from a spiritual world quite free of the body, so that in this “Philosophy of Freedom” at the beginning of the nineties of the last century I spoke of the deepest impulses of the moral life of the human being as moral intuitions. And I tried to grasp the concept of freedom in a way that would guide today's natural science by showing that the question is completely wrong as to whether man is free or unfree, that the question must be formulated in such a way that one realizes that man is unfree for a large number of his actions, that they arise from his instincts, his drives, which are tied to the body. But the human being develops to the point of experiencing intuitive moral impulses, which are purely spiritual in nature and yet are impulsive for moral action. At this stage of development, in the way he grasps moral intuition, he is free. What I am characterizing today as the intuition of knowledge is only an expansion and deepening of what can actually be experienced by everyone who seeks out this moral world in its impulses through real self-knowledge.

What gives a person their true value and dignity here in this world, their moral nature, is what, when properly grasped, points to the end of all knowledge. And anthroposophy must then lead to the insertion of imagination and inspiration between intuition, which it expands into the cosmic and the human, and between this and ordinary knowledge, as I have characterized it today.

So, my dear audience, this is how one attains knowledge of one's own eternity in the human being. But if one develops the abilities of which I have spoken, then the world around us will also approach the human being in a different way. Man, so to speak, as a whole human being, becomes a sense organ for the outer world. And whereas before we only encountered the world, I would say, as a sensory tapestry, which the intellect then discerns its laws, the spiritual world enters human consciousness, imaginative, inspired and intuitive consciousness, in a new, metamorphosed form, but in such a way that the earlier, sensory one is fully preserved. And it enters in such a way that the contemplation of nature, which is otherwise present in the person who becomes an anthroposophist, is preserved. While the hallucinator, the visionary, turns away from nature and usually has no love for nature either, everything that is given by external natural science and ordinary love of nature remains fully intact for the one who becomes an anthroposophical researcher. It is only that the material world, which is the object of outer natural science, is permeated with the spiritual world, which is always around us, just as the physical is. Now the outer, physical world, if I may express myself comparatively, appears in a certain respect in sharp contours, in finished forms.

The spiritual view, which is gained in the way described, develops everything according to certain processes, according to an event, according to a becoming. This gives a completely new slant to natural and cosmic events. And I do not want to shrink from describing specific details as an example, despite the fact that such things are still not very well received today. We see the sun, for example, as a limited structure in the sky. We explore it with our science, with astronomy, astrophysics and so on. But what we encounter as the sun appears in a new form in the described supersensible knowledge. It now emerges not only tied to the place where it otherwise appears, but emerges as something solar, permeating and flowing through and permeating the whole cosmos. One learns to recognize the solar as permeating all spaces. And by relating it to the human, one learns to recognize the solar in its deeper meaning. I would like to express myself in the following way to make myself clear.

By having the outer world around us, which provides us with our experiences, we compare these experiences with what we form inside in our soul out of them in terms of ideas and feelings. And afterwards we still have the experiences in our memory, we can relive them. We can relive something that has long since passed and connect with the long-gone past. So there is a relationship between this — I would say — abstract soul-life and the outer concrete sense world. But there is also a relationship between the deeper part of one's own human existence and what is recognized through supersensible perception. We carry within us the effect of what is solar that the spiritual vision finds in us. This solar element enters into our human being, just as an external sensory experience enters into our memories, only it forms something deeper in the human being. This deeper aspect must first be recognized only through such a view as I have described. Then one learns to recognize that everything that is in us by virtue of growth, that is by virtue of youthfulness, that is even the force that converts our nutrients in our own human process, that this is the sunlike in us. We get to know the rising, sprouting, sprouting forces of the universe and the sprouting, sprouting forces, the rejuvenating forces in ourselves, in their interrelationships. We thus get to know a more intimate connection between the human inner being and the cosmos. Just as we learn to recognize the solar in this way, we learn to recognize the lunar.

In our sensory perception, we experience the moon as a closed, limited, contoured entity. For the spiritual perception that I have described, this moon-like quality becomes the dying forces in the cosmos that permeate all spaces and fill all of time. Everything that breaks down, everything that appears in the cosmos in a paralyzing way, everything that leads to death is moon power. And one would like to say: the solar and the lunar, as I am now describing them, are merely concentrated or consolidated in the bodies that we have given ourselves through external sensory perception. We get to know the world as processes, as becoming, and these processes, this becoming, continue within our own human inner being. We also get to know the outer natural kingdoms, how they are permeated by such cosmic forces. Just as we get to know the solar and lunar, we get to know other planetary or other forces of the universe without superstitious mysticism, through very exact observation that has been developed exactly. One gets to know the interplay of a cosmos that cannot be grasped merely mathematically or astrophysically, but spiritually and soulfully. One gets to know this interplay in human nature, and one recognizes the interplay of such cosmic forces in plant and animal nature. One learns to recognize the solar element that urges the plant towards flowering, and the lunar element that is revealed in the dying away of the plant world. One learns to recognize the forces right down to the mineral kingdom.

When one advances to this knowledge, the side of anthroposophical research also presents itself through which this anthroposophy has a fertilizing effect on all other areas of life. And that is the hope that the anthroposophical researcher devotes himself to, and which - at least in part - is already realized in its beginnings, that anthroposophy can become fruitful for the other sciences, for the practical areas of life.

We already have a medical-therapeutic institute in Dornach and Stuttgart that is based on anthroposophy. This medical-therapeutic institute is based on research that can be carried out on an anthroposophical basis into the relationship between humans and the surrounding universe. By appropriating the cosmic effects in this way — as I have only been able to hint at with the recognition of the solar and lunar — one does not merely gain the knowledge of human nature that ordinary physiology or biology gives us. You also get to know the whole human being, but in such a way that the sharply contoured merges — it remains, but at the same time merges, it shows itself from a different side as a process. While in ordinary biology, as one is accustomed to, one speaks of the lungs, heart, brain and so on, from the point of view of anthroposophy one must speak of the brain process, which is vividly there, not merely , or not merely shown in its parts by external physical experiments, but be observed; of the heart process, of the lung process, of all that makes up the human being, of processes, of a becoming. All this is, after all, only the inner continuation of the ascending solar becoming and the descending lunar becoming.

And if we pursue these things further, we not only get to know the healthy human being with his organs, but we also get to know the pathological [degenerative and] anabolic processes, the growths, the paralyses, the killing off of organs. One learns to recognize how processes can be held back in individual organs. One learns to recognize how processes can proliferate when one understands the connection between such internal anabolic and catabolic processes. With the anabolic and catabolic in the universe, with the solar and lunar, one can see how these forces are then present in the plant, mineral and animal kingdoms. And then the remedies for certain illnesses present themselves, in that we know: a catabolic process is taking place in this organ, so you have to counteract it with the catabolic process that is present outside in this plant or in that mineral. We learn to recognize the inner relationship between the human organism and the kingdoms of nature. One learns to recognize how medicine can advance from mere trial and error to a rational understanding of both the healthy and the diseased human condition, how pathology can become rational, how therapy can become rational, that the process of recovery and disease can be understood. This is what emerges as a development on an anthroposophical basis that is fruitful for medicine.

I am well aware, dear ladies and gentlemen, that to raise such matters is to stir up a hornet's nest. But the world has had to face many things that were unaccustomed in older times, and what was at first met with hostility has sometimes later become accepted practice. The anthroposophical researcher must console himself with such things. I will simply cite this example of the fertilization of medicine for the fertilization of the individual sciences. We also have a physiological, a physical, and a biological research institute in Stuttgart and are trying to introduce the anthroposophical method into the individual sciences in an anthroposophical way.

But anthroposophy can also have a fertilizing effect on other areas of life. We were – for anthroposophy has existed as a spiritual movement for quite some time now – we were faced with the task of building a home for the anthroposophical movement. Friends of the anthroposophical movement came together to create a home for this movement. This building, known as the Goetheanum, the School of Spiritual Science, was erected in Dornach near Basel. What would have happened, dear ladies and gentlemen, if some other spiritual or cultural movement had had to erect such a building? They would have turned to an architect who would have given it a framework in the Renaissance, Rococo or antique style, and then they would have done in it what stands as a present.

Anthroposophy could not proceed in this way. It does not want to be something that expresses itself one-sidedly through ideas, that is spread only in theory, as it were, but something that takes hold of the whole human being directly, and therefore reaches into all areas of life. If I may use a trivial comparison, it would be this: When you look at a nut, you say to yourself: the nut is formed by certain forces that work within it, but the shell is formed in the direction of the same forces. Basically, you cannot separate the lawfulness of the nutshell from the lawfulness of the nut kernel itself. Both are one! This is how anthroposophy wants to be. Therefore, it must build its shell, its framework, its house out of the same impulse with a new architectural style, with the architectural style that corresponds to its innermost impulses, just as the nut shell is formed out of the same natural forces and their directions, like the nut kernel itself.

And when, from the pulpit in Dornach, the language of ideas is used to speak of what can be seen in the spirit about man and the universe, then this expression of ideas through the language of thoughts should contain exactly the same life that the columns, the paintings and the sculptures of this Dornach Goetheanum contain. Art forms, without being allegory, without being straw-like allegory or abstract symbolism — neither that nor the other is found — but everything has flowed into real art forms. Everything should speak out of the same life, out of which the content of spiritual vision can be spoken in thought. On anthroposophical ground, one believes that one is approaching an artistic view that is truly in line with Goethe's thinking. Perhaps one can see most deeply into what Goethe strove for in the artistic field if one recalls such sayings of Goethe as these: Art is a manifestation of secret laws of nature that would never become apparent without it. And Goethe also says: When nature begins to reveal its secret to someone, that person feels the deepest longing for its most worthy interpreter, art.

Yes, my dear audience, one can express one's ideas about the secrets of nature in art forms without becoming inartistic, without becoming allegorical or symbolic, and by proceeding in this way, an architectural style that is still unfamiliar today is created. Anthroposophy could not turn to something else, which would have been a foreign framework. Anthroposophy does not want to be theory, anthroposophy wants to be life. Therefore, it also had to flow into the forms of the architectural style itself, which constitutes the building, which has shaped the building, in which anthroposophy is to live first.

With that, I have indicated a second area that can be fertilized by anthroposophy: the field of art. Anthroposophy also wants to have a fertilizing effect in other fields of art. A eurythmy performance is to be given here in a few days. On this occasion, it will be possible to hint at how Anthroposophy can be fruitful in the sense of such an art of movement.

In Stuttgart, Emil Molt founded the Waldorf School, which I run. This Waldorf School seeks to make fruitful use of what comes from anthroposophical sources in the field of pedagogy and didactics. How does real human knowledge arise from these sources? We come to know the human being in terms of his or her full nature, body, soul and spirit, not just through some abstractions, but through concrete observation. We learn to follow the child as it gradually shapes the outer physical body out of the spiritual and soul. We learn to revere the divine spiritual being in the child, and we learn a complete unity, a mutual formation of the physical and the spiritual. Anthroposophy does not want to found schools in the usual sense in the pedagogical and didactic fields. We go so far as to leave what religious worldviews are, for example, to the representatives of the individual religious fields for the time being. Catholic priests teach Catholic children in the Waldorf School, Protestant priests teach Protestant children. However, since a large number of dissident children were enrolled at the Waldorf School after it opened, it was necessary for us to set up a free religious education for them; however, this is run in the same way as the others, as a worldview lesson. The school itself does not want to graft any anthroposophical theories into the children, but it wants to allow what can flow from anthroposophical knowledge to flow into the pedagogical-didactic skill, into the practice of education. Anthroposophy does not want to oppose the achievements that have been made through the great pedagogy of the nineteenth century. Anthroposophy is aware of the significant maxims that exist in this regard, but it also knows that the means must first be acquired in order to fulfill the justified pedagogical demand. These means can only lie in a penetrating knowledge of the human being, and Anthroposophy would like to provide these means through the knowledge of the human being that can be attained through spiritualized vision, as I have described it today. In this way, anthroposophy can have a fruitful effect on the field of education.

My dear attendees, just how little knowledge of human nature there actually is in the present day, knowledge of human nature suitable for education, was demonstrated in a lecture given at the Anthroposophical Congress held in Stuttgart last summer. The individual topics discussed at this anthroposophical congress would have flooded out into the world and been widely discussed if they had not originated on anthroposophical soil, which is still so unpopular today. From the rich field of what was discussed, I want to emphasize the lecture by Dr. von Heydebrand, a teacher at the Waldorf School. In an extremely vivid way, it shows how experimental pedagogy, which is repeatedly being worked towards today, must be complemented by a direct insight into the soul and spirit of the child, as it can flow from anthroposophy. Anthroposophy does not oppose the legitimacy of experimental pedagogy and psychology, but this legitimacy attains its practical value precisely by being permeated by the spirit. Anthroposophy is never opposed to the legitimate findings of natural science. It seeks to bring out what can be found in these natural-scientific findings, everywhere, wherever it is possible to do so, and to do so in complete harmony with the legitimate demands of modern times with regard to natural science.

Dear attendees,

In today's world, it is particularly necessary to arrive at a deeper understanding in a field that is infinitely close to people, and whose proximity must be particularly evident to them in the present, which has emerged from the great, terrible global catastrophe. It was believed that the social life of man could also be mastered by the laws of nature, which are one-sidedly scientific. The social laws were imitated, and gradually, quite automatically, from the unconscious, the social forces were imitated from the natural laws, from what was naturally effective. Today, anyone who looks at life impartially can see the results. Many other things could be pointed out, besides Marxism, that can be gained from purely natural forces in terms of social insights; one need only point to the way in which this view is already devastating and destructive in Eastern Europe, because it is being put into practice. What began in the East hangs threateningly over Europe. And Europe – indeed, modern civilization – will only escape this impending doom if we once again immerse ourselves in the spiritual and psychological. If we can develop a conception of the whole, of the complete human being in body, soul and spirit, then we will also gain insights and perspectives for our social life, insights into how the moral impulses from the free, from the complete human being, can flow into social life. The one-sided economic view, although it can remain an economic view, will lead to an insight into a social structure that takes into account the whole, the fully human being. There was also a beginning to this in the lecture given by Emil Leinhas at the Stuttgart congress mentioned above, which has already been printed. In this lecture, Emil Leinhas showed in an excellent way how present-day national economy has reached a kind of bankruptcy, and how no social impulses can be found from it that are fruitful for life. Anthroposophy has set itself the task of transferring what is cognitively experienced in man into life, into the social and moral life.

And to mention one last thing – which is only mentioned as a last thing, but is by no means of least importance – I would like to draw attention to the fact that, while anthroposophy can invigorate the impulses of the social, it can also deepen religious experience, even when it is not working externally in human society, but rather in the deepest inner being of the human being. Anthroposophy – oh, it is misunderstood when characterized in this way – Anthroposophy does not want to be a sect of any kind, it certainly does not want to found a new religion, it wants to deepen what people can experience in their religious minds by illuminating it with the clarity of an understanding of spiritual life. Those who believe that religion or even Christianity is endangered by anthroposophy are labouring under a serious misunderstanding; firstly, the misunderstanding that what they present as an ideal in a blind faith can hold its own in the face of the growing knowledge of nature; and then they succumb to the blind judgment that clarity, clear insight into the spiritual world, could somehow be disturbing to the most profound piety. And this most profound piety can be strengthened if it can be attained on the basis of a true knowledge of the spirit. Anthroposophy does not want to found a new religion or a new sect, but wants to serve life as a spiritual science, and also wants to serve the innermost, most intimate, religious life of human beings.

And so, in conclusion, I would like to summarize what the essence of anthroposophy is. From my discussions this evening, it should have become clear how anthroposophy is by no means in opposition to modern, progressive worldviews, but how it is entirely in line with them. But just as the human being presents us with the physical, the bodily, and we experience from this physical, this bodily, its mobility, its physiognomic, and other revelations of the spiritual-soul, so too, when we survey the natural realm in strict natural science, we should also recognize that within the realm of nature with which the human being is connected to his eternal core, where he originates with that which is immortal in him, is one with the divine-spiritual essence of the world. And just as we can only fully recognize a person when we see their soul and spirit in their physical body, so we will only fully recognize the world, the cosmos, when we want to juxtapose the external knowledge of natural science with the spiritual knowledge of anthroposophy. But anthroposophy strives to do just that. It seeks to be in touch with nature and the world by taking the human being as its model, in whose corporeality the soul and spiritual reveal themselves.

So, dear attendees, while Anthroposophy would like to look at the knowledge of external nature with full recognition, it would also like to add something that can be there, the inspiration, the spiritualization of this external natural science.

Dear attendees! Anthroposophy is still accepted by many people today who are only able to look at it from the outside as a more or less fantastic attempt to penetrate into areas of the world through knowledge that a serious scientist should not concern himself with. And it is true that anthroposophy, by developing special powers of knowledge, wants to penetrate into areas of life that are important to people above all else, and to which science, with its great triumphs, which are fully recognized by anthroposophy, has no access. Above all, it must be said that there are already scientists today who take their work very seriously and who are concerned with all kinds of abnormal human soul-body forces. These scientists point out how human beings can develop effects that show that they are rooted in the world in other ways than mere natural science can determine. But it is precisely such serious scientists who find the path taken by anthroposophy fantastic. They see it as being open to enthusiasm or perhaps even superstition. In any case, they do not see it as a path that can be taken seriously scientifically.

Now it really must be said that those people who are prone to enthusiasm, to nebulous mysticism, and who are of the kind that today, as is so common, easily run to anything that somehow calls itself occult or the like, will by no means find any lasting satisfaction in anthroposophy. For this anthroposophy aims to work with the seriousness, the conscientiousness, and the methodology that is absolutely in line with the direction of more recent scientific development. And above all, the healthy, harmonious, human thinking must be applied in this anthroposophy. And so it is that the enthusiasts and the superstitious people soon give it a wide berth. Of course, this does not prevent those people who want to reject everything that is unfamiliar to them with a slight wave of the hand from saying: Only neurasthenics or hysterical people have an interest in anthroposophical research.

Now, my dear audience, it is difficult to explain the nature of anthroposophy in a short evening lecture in the face of this. But I will try to show the paths of this anthroposophy and at least hint at the results that this anthroposophy can arrive at, in order to characterize how this anthroposophy can be, although it is not for dreamers or superstitious people; but how it can be a soul food for all those who, with a healthy common sense in practical life, but who, precisely because of this, need support, security and direction for their soul life, in keeping with the spiritual development of our time, and also certain forces that can only be truly effective in the outer practical, social life if they are drawn from a spiritual, from a supersensible world and carry the human soul out of such a world.

Now, no spiritual research could possibly make any impression or exert any fruitful influence in the long term if it were to contradict the significant developments that have taken place over the last three to four centuries, and particularly in the nineteenth century, through natural science and its practical results. But that is certainly not what anthroposophy wants. It seeks to follow into the spiritual world the very paths that have led to significant results in natural science. It must therefore side with those natural scientists, the level-headed natural scientists, who, after thoroughly pursuing the paths of natural science, speak of the limitations of natural science. These limits soon become apparent when one considers that natural science can only observe the external sense world, can only combine the facts of the external sense world that arise from observation or experiment through the intellect, through the mind, and then can combine certain natural laws from these observations, from these experiments; natural laws in which, however, the human being with his physical corporeality is also harnessed. But the attempts made to go beyond the limits set by the sensory world by mere reason alone — as one also says, by philosophical thinking — always leave the unbiased person unsatisfied. The unbiased person feels: as soon as scientific thinking, as we are accustomed to it today, leaves the paths of sensory experience, experiment and observation, thinking left to its own devices enters into uncertainty. The dispute between philosophical systems testifies to the extent to which thinking left to its own devices enters into uncertainty. Anthroposophical research in particular makes it clear how this thinking, which we have in ordinary life and in ordinary, recognized science, not only binds itself to the sensory experience of the level-headed natural scientist out of habit or arbitrariness, but how it itself is dependent step by step on this sensory experience, so that it only has certainty when this external experience, this sensory experience, guides it.

In short, my dear audience, just when one cannot think in a lay and dilettante scientific way, one sees the inadequacy of this kind of thinking left to its own devices, which somehow wants to philosophically penetrate into the supersensible. Many people in our time therefore do not think much of satisfying their soul needs, their longings for the eternal in the human soul, through such self-abandoned thinking. And in our time, when the old traditions of religious life, of faith, as such are becoming increasingly shaky and shaky, people do need such new supports. Therefore, many deeper minds are found in our time, which understand: a philosophy of life that relies on reason alone cannot give the soul the necessary support and security. That is why such deeply-disposed natures today turn to certain mystical directions.

Particularly when one speaks seriously of what anthroposophy can be for today's human being, one must characterize these two pitfalls that one must avoid in one's research. The one pitfall is the purely intellectual world view that wants to go beyond the supersensible through thinking left to its own devices; the other is certain mystical directions. These seek to penetrate into deeper shafts of the human soul life by means of man, as it were, immersing himself in his own inner being. They seek to bring up from these deeper shafts that which is not present in ordinary life and which connects the eternal in the soul with the eternal world-ruling powers. Anthroposophy must draw attention to these two pitfalls because it must show that it is absolutely serious about not carelessly stopping at either side, when it cannot provide a sure basis for knowledge. Anyone who can observe the inner life of the human soul with an open mind – esteemed attendees – can no more remain with a more or less nebulous mysticism than he can go beyond the limits of knowledge of nature through self-abandoned thinking. We usually do not know how that which lives in the depths of the soul is connected with external sensory impressions. We usually do not know how the human memory works. Decades ago, someone may have unconsciously or subconsciously, without fully realizing it, received some impression from the outside world. It has descended into the soul life; there it has been transformed. He may have connected with human emotional life; connected with human sympathies and antipathies, with impulses of the will. He has become something quite different, but he is still only a transformed external impression. And then, as one says, it is brought up out of the soul through inner contemplation and is thought to come from eternal depths, not from some external world through an external impression. In this way, illusions upon illusions can arise in nebulous mysticism. That is why anthroposophy cannot stop at this mystical immersion in the human interior. If the human inner life is taken as it appears in ordinary life and as it is also used for research in ordinary science.

Precisely because Anthroposophy is fully aware that one cannot penetrate to anything that is not is not already present in some form in this ordinary life, anthroposophy must look for cognitive powers that have yet to be developed, that lie dormant in the human soul – one could also say, if one wants to use a scientific term – that lie latent in it and can be brought forth.

That there are such forces slumbering in the human soul, that they can be awakened, that they can become higher powers of knowledge than those of ordinary life and ordinary science, can only be proved by practice, which I want to talk to you about this evening. But to even arrive at seeking such powers of knowledge through one's own soul development requires something I would call intellectual modesty. At some point in life, this intellectual modesty must say to us: You were once a child with dream-like soul powers, soul powers that were without any orientation towards the outer world, with a soul state that was dull compared to the one you have today. External education and life have brought out of the soul what lay dormant in it. They have developed those powers of perception that are generally recognized today in a person who has had a corresponding education, whether in life or in some other field. Now, for once in your life, you have to say to yourself, with intellectual modesty: from the point of view that you have gained in this way through ordinary education, through ordinary life, you can now take your self-development into your own hands and get further than you were, you can bring further forces out of the soul that lie dormant in it. And it is with such forces, slumbering in the soul of every human being, and which in their development represent nothing other than a continuation of the normal human soul forces, that Anthroposophy seeks to do research. Research into that which lies behind the world of the senses, research into that which is hidden in the human soul as something eternal, and which is connected with the most important longings and life riddles of this human soul. I will not, however, speak to you about external measures that might be taken to develop such forces lying dormant in the soul. I must first speak to you of the intimate exercises of the human soul if I am to characterize the paths that Anthroposophy takes into the supersensible world.

In my book “How to Know Higher Worlds” and in the second part of my “Occult Science” and in other books, I have pointed out in detail everything that must be gone through in energetic and persistent soul exercises so that man can come to such supersensible knowledge. I will have to characterize the essence of what is written there in detail.

The first thing that is involved is the development of the soul in terms of [the powers of] presentation and thought. Just as you can strengthen a muscle by using it in work, so you can indeed strengthen the powers of thought of the human soul by using them in a certain way, using them again and again, indeed using them again and again in rhythmic succession, so that they become something quite different from what they initially are. To do this, it is necessary to bring a clearly defined idea or a clearly defined complex of ideas into the center of consciousness, and then to withdraw one's attention from everything else by strong inner volition and to concentrate the entire life of the human soul on this one idea or this one complex of ideas. In order to achieve what is necessary, however, this complex of ideas must be such that it is not taken from our ordinary memory life. I have already indicated how what we bring up from ordinary memory life can put us in illusion, it brings up reminiscences that lie dormant in the unconscious. One cannot know what will come up from the soul if one were to take an idea or a complex of ideas from one's ordinary memory life and make it the focus of one's soul life, and then concentrate on it. Therefore, one should take something that one finds, let us say – this is just an example – in some book by someone else, a saying, a sentence. What matters is not the content, but the fact that one is strengthening one's thinking by working with thoughts, and that one is taking some material that was previously unknown to one, that is newly entering one's soul life. We will see in a moment why. Or else, one can have some experienced person in this field compose such a spell. Because what matters is that what enters into the center of the soul life, and on which one then concentrates the whole soul life, on which one focuses all attention, that it approaches the human being as otherwise only any external sense impression, such as a color or a sound or any other external sense impression. What Anthroposophy strives for in this path of research is quite definitely the outer sensory perception. This outer sensory perception presents itself to us from the outside, compelling us to accept its content. Just as the human being faces external perception as something foreign, and is thus particularly alert to it, so too should the soul life face what I have been talking about here, which should be brought to the center of experience. For the human being should be as alert in their thinking as they are when they are facing an external sensory impression.

In this way, I am already drawing your attention, dear attendees, to the fact that what anthroposophy strives for as a path of knowledge must not be confused, as unfortunately still often happens today, with everything that tends towards the pathological, the diseased side of the soul life. For anyone who can look at human mental life with an open mind, it is clear that even ordinary memory – admittedly, it lies in the realm of the healthy, of course – is connected to the human physical organism, and that when the normal connection between the human soul and the physical organism develops in the direction of the abnormal in the process of remembering , when the soul life becomes more bound, more intimately bound to the physical organism, those pathological conditions arise which express themselves in hallucinations, in visions, in illusions, in easy suggestibility, and so on, and which lie at just the opposite pole from that to which anthroposophical paths of knowledge lead. Everything that presents itself to us pathologically leads the soul life deeper down into the bodily functions, deeper down than the ability to remember lies. What is developed through the described strengthening of thinking makes human thinking more and more similar to the behavior of the human soul when taking in an external sensory impression. Just as the human being is much more alive when absorbing an external sensory impression than in ordinary, more passive thinking, so too should thinking be energized so that it becomes as alive and intense as the experience of an external sensory impression would otherwise be. It is precisely in this coming to life of the world of thought that one notices more and more that one is penetrating into a soul life that is not the ordinary one. You know, my esteemed audience, how pale, rightly called pale, the ordinary thought life is compared to the life in sensual impressions and in external processes in general. Just as one usually lives in sensual impressions and external processes, so should the whole thought life become for those times when one wants to devote oneself to supersensible knowledge.

Now, in order to avoid being misunderstood, I must point out another difference between the abnormal states of mind I have just mentioned: the person who seeks anthroposophical knowledge develops such strength of thought while the ordinary personality continues to exist in its full, healthy state of mind. A second personality develops, so to speak. And the first, the personality with common sense, with healthy criticism, remains controlling next to the developed personality, the personality with the higher cognitive ability. When someone falls into hallucinations, visions, illusions, when they become a medium, when they are exposed to suggestions, then their entire ordinary, healthy personality enters into the state of hallucinating, of illusions, and so on. The radical difference of the thoroughly healthy anthroposophical path is that the ordinary personality always remains as healthy as it is in life, controlling, criticizing, alongside the developed other personality. On this condition, it may be said that – it takes years for some people, depending on their disposition, but only months for others; some can achieve it in a few weeks through meditation and by concentrating on a specific thought content, that is what I call it – it may be said that it can be achieved that a person feels similarly to how they feel during ordinary thinking. In ordinary thinking, he needs the physical organism. In this respect, one could say, anthroposophical spiritual science fully recognizes the validity of materialism.

In order to develop his soul abilities at all in ordinary life and in ordinary science, man needs the physical body. And he only becomes free of the physical body by strengthening his thinking, making it more intense, more alive. Thought becomes free from the physical body to the same degree that external sensory phenomena are free from the physical body. Consider how independent the physical apparatus of the eye is from the rest of the human organism. I cannot characterize it further now, I would just like to hint at it. What happens in the eye under the influence of the outside world is what, to a certain extent, makes man subject to an objective world in the sensory perceptions of the eye. By linking his thinking with this objective world, thinking itself is also introduced into an objective world. Through sensory perception, man comes out of himself in a certain way.

This is not the place for deep epistemological considerations, but what I am saying can be understood by any simple human mind. Man comes out of himself when he does meditation and concentration exercises as I have described them. But then man realizes how he is only now gradually learning to develop the soul life as such independently of the body. However grotesque and paradoxical it may still sound to a modern person, one learns through experience, through the practice of life, what it means to have thoughts outside of the human physical organism. These thoughts are, however, different from the usual pale thoughts, and also from those that deal with natural laws. These developed and strengthened thoughts are as pictorial as the outer sensory impressions themselves. What is fully clear to the anthroposophical researcher must not be missing at this stage of knowledge. In the writings mentioned and elsewhere, I have called this stage of knowledge the imaginative stage. Imaginative not because one imagines something, but because thinking passes completely from the abstract form into the pictorial, into the living, into the intensified form. But what is absolutely necessary for anyone embarking on anthroposophical research to be aware of within this imaginative thinking is that they know: you are now only carrying something with you in your thoughts that lives within your own human being.

You see how carefully the anthroposophical path of knowledge must be described. It must be emphasized that this first stage allows one to experience one's own inner being more intensely, but that one must realize that one is not yet experiencing an external world, but only this human inner being. But we do achieve a first result when we explore the inner being through such a more intensive, pictorial, imaginative process of imagining. For we gradually learn to have before our soul, as in a comprehensive tableau of life, everything that has formed us, that has affected us inwardly, spiritually, from birth to the present moment. We normally carry what we have in our soul only in the form of ordinary memory. The stream from which memories of this or that experience arise, whether voluntarily or involuntarily, essentially runs subconsciously. We know how abstract it is, how shadowy it is compared to the real experiences when we are immersed in these memory images. These memory images should not be confused with what now occurs before imaginative knowledge. It is not mere memories that arise, but rather something that suggests how one has become. Yes, right back to the first years of childhood, one sees the inner forces that have developed the ordinary abilities of life in one. One sees how the moral and intellectual faculties have developed, how they have been integrated into the forces of growth and nutrition. One really looks into the human interior.

You learn to recognize what I have called the formative forces of the human being. You really learn to recognize a second body. But if you want to characterize it precisely, you have to say: it is a temporal body. It is something that is constantly developing in a mobile way. You cannot draw it without realizing that you are drawing or painting it like a flash of lightning. That which is mobile in time can only be captured in a moment, and so it is with this human formative forces body. In truth, it is a unified organization in time, and it must be understood in that way. There have always been older intuitions for such higher insights, and what I call the formative forces body has also been called the etheric or life body. If one learns to recognize it in the suggested way, not through logical conclusions or otherwise, but through direct inner vision with the imaginative knowledge that has been acquired, then one knows once and for all: what is human organization is not only played out by the fact that there is a sum of chemical and physical forces constitute the human physical body, but because a spiritual soul has entered the physical organization at birth or conception, and that a second, a spiritual-soul, a supersensible body, which is not only spatial, which is temporal, which is always mobile, works in us. And one learns to recognize the inner relationship that exists between thinking, imagining and the forces of growth. As long as one only looks at the human being from a physiological and biological point of view, one finds the forces of growth on the one hand and, on the other, through inner observation, for example, the abstract powers of thinking. Through the imaginative contemplation of which I have just spoken, one learns to recognize how a gradual transition takes place between the ordinary forces of growth and the forces of thinking, how, by strengthening itself, imagining itself leads to that which at the same time brings about growth, the development of the inner organic power from stage to stage in the growing human being. Thus imaginative knowledge becomes a first result of anthroposophical inner research.

Now it is not enough to merely concentrate one's soul life on some idea or on a complex of ideas. Although everything I have described and what is explained in the books mentioned aims to enable the person to carry out such exercises in full arbitrariness, with complete inner composure, as one would otherwise only have in ordinary life , and also comes to such concentration, such directing of attention to a certain idea, it is nevertheless the case that one gradually feels surrendered to such ideas, feels too strongly surrendered, if other soul exercises are not undertaken in a different direction. Therefore, one must, just as faithfully as one concentrates on certain ideas, again do exercises so that these ideas in consciousness, whenever one wants, extinguish, are in turn put out of consciousness. Then one comes to establish what one can call the consciousness. Otherwise, empty consciousness is only present in people during the time from falling asleep to waking up. And if one has not gone through any school of practice, then there is a great temptation to fall into a kind of sleep when consciousness becomes empty of external impressions – or even when it is so strongly taken in by external impressions that it no longer distinguishes them. The ability to achieve an empty consciousness is essential for further progress in anthroposophical research. This does not mean that the person enters into some kind of sleep or dream state, but that they can remain fully conscious without introducing anything through their own inner strength, as they would otherwise do with external impressions or with a strongly developed life of thought or feeling or will. And then, when the life of thought has been strengthened in the way described, so strongly strengthened that one is, as it were, inwardly grasped in the direct experience of this memory tableau of which I have spoken, when one's entire previous life on earth stands before one's eyes like a huge tableau, if one's imaginative life is strong enough, then one can also manage, while being completely awake, to dampen, throw out of consciousness, and create an empty consciousness, the individual idea that one has brought to the center of consciousness in this way, or that has placed itself there. Once one has practiced this for a while (again, it varies from person to person depending on their disposition) one can determine whether it takes longer or shorter. I can only say that anthroposophical research is no easier than research in an observatory, laboratory or clinic; one must persistently and diligently undergo such exercises as I am describing now for a long time.

Once you have managed to expel individual ideas from your consciousness after they have been there, and to create an empty consciousness, then you can also remove from your consciousness that which has presented itself to the soul as a tableau of memories, which has appeared to you as a body of formative forces, as a temporal organism. It takes a strong inner soul power to do this. One must first acquire it by attenuating other images until one's consciousness is empty. But in the end one attains this power to attenuate the entire formative body so that it penetrates into the deeper layers of consciousness. Then the moment may come when imaginative knowledge first enters the second stage of supersensible knowledge for the comprehension of human self-life, the second stage of knowledge, inspired knowledge.

Do not be put off by the expression; one must have expressions everywhere. They do not mean anything traditional or superstitious in this case, but only what I am characterizing here. So, after one has first strengthened one's thinking, after one has strengthened one's soul to such an extent that an empty consciousness can be established, then the objective spiritual world can penetrate into this empty consciousness, just as breathing air penetrates into the lungs as something objective.

And now, through direct perception, the human being experiences what he has gone through spiritually and soulfully before he connected with the physical human body as a spiritual and soulful being. In this moment of inner soul-searching, the great and powerful occurs: the spiritual and soulful in itself, in its own essence, appears before the soul's vision; one sees the soul as it was in a purely spiritual-soul world before it united with the physical-bodily substances and forces through birth or conception, which are given to it through the hereditary powers of parents and ancestors.

The essence of anthroposophical research is that it advances to the perception of the real soul-spiritual not through mere thinking, not through mystical contemplation, but through the development of soul forces that otherwise lie dormant within people. Of course, when one hears something like this, it would be easy to say: Well, then only those who advance to such insights can speak with such conviction of the immortality of the human soul – or rather, when I speak of what I have spoken of so far – of the unborn nature of the human soul. Now, firstly, it is possible through books such as I have mentioned for every person to take the first steps towards such supersensory knowledge as I have described. And even if today they are still unusual paths for the soul, anyone who has entered them knows that they will increasingly become the paths of human development. Because they are only now entering the spiritual development of humanity for the first time, they may seem paradoxical to many. But just as little as one needs to be a painter to be enchanted with a good painting with full inner soul, to see through it in its essence, in what the painter wanted, just as little does one need to be an anthroposophical researcher to recognize as true what the anthroposophical researcher asserts. Common sense is quite sufficient, just as ordinary perception of an artistic achievement is sufficient to appreciate it. For there is an original disposition in the human soul for the perception of truth. Therefore, it cannot be said that only those who are spiritual researchers in the way described can recognize the results of spiritual research. It is only that over many centuries of human development, people have become accustomed to not accepting such things at all, which has gradually caused prejudices for the mind, for the intellect, which today still do not allow what characterizes anthroposophical research as its paths and its results to appear as reasonable for the common sense of a healthy person.

I have now described how the human being can come to his or her own immortality by developing in one direction, looking beyond birth or conception through imaginative and inspired knowledge. However, the paths of anthroposophical research must go further. Not only should the power of imagination and the power of thought be developed, but also the human willpower should be developed to a higher level. I will again state the principles of this. Admittedly, that which is the most intimate part of the human soul, human feeling, the content of the human mind, lies right in the middle between thinking and willing. But that which lies at the center of the soul as our emotional life develops into the higher worlds when, on the one hand, the life of thinking develops, as indicated, and on the other hand, the life of will develops.

If, on the one hand, a kind of ideal for anthroposophy is the experience of the soul in outer perception, then, on the other hand, for the development of the will forces slumbering in the soul, the ideal becomes that which takes place in the moral life, above all in the devoted life of love, in the human soul. I know, honored attendees, that when we speak of devoted love, we are mentioning something that many people want to keep far away from all real powers of knowledge. However, it is not the case that love, as it exists and is justified in ordinary life, should be considered any kind of power of knowledge. But just as thinking is developed on the one hand, so too is the ability to love devotedly developed on the other hand, in order to thereby free the will from the physical organism just as much as the life of thought can be freed from the physical organism in the way indicated. Apparently it is not at all exercises of the soul in the ability to love that come into question here. Nevertheless, they lead to an increased ability to love, to the point of insight. Again, I will only hint at the principle. The following exercise develops the will in particular and develops such an ability: Imagine something that you are accustomed to imagining only in a certain way from the earlier to the later, from the beginning to the end, now in reverse order. For example, one imagines a drama backwards from the last event of the fifth act to the first event of the first act. Or one imagines a melody backwards. Or one imagines only the evening after the usual daytime life backwards. But one must go into as much detail as possible, one must imagine in small portions backwards.

What is the point of this? Dear attendees, in our ordinary lives we develop our thinking through the external sequence of events. Thinking is passively devoted to the external sequence of events. In doing so, it also makes itself dependent on the laws of the physical human organism. The physical human organism is devoted to the external sequence of events through the physical senses. Thinking is dependent on this sequence of events. And by bringing up experiences in a pictorial way through memory, it nevertheless remains dependent on the external sequence of facts. Of course, one can object: with logical thinking, man makes himself independent of this sequence of facts. But what does he ultimately aim for when he makes himself independent? Precisely to recognize the external sequence of facts even better. We think logically so that we can see through the spatial and temporal sequence of facts even better. We are lifted out of this dependence on the external world of facts, but also out of the dependence of thinking, by developing thinking in this way, by thinking from back to front, thus in reverse order to the sequence of external facts. But in this way we now develop the will. In the life of the soul, thoughts, feelings and will interact. In abstract thinking we can separate the three; in the life of the soul, the will is present in every thought, connecting and separating the thoughts; and thoughts are active in the will, even if the connection between thoughts is as unclear to the ordinary consciousness as the state of consciousness during sleep at night. But it is precisely the will, when given over to thinking, that develops freely and independently of the world of facts and also of the human body through such reverse thinking.

If one adds to these exercises others that I would describe as intensified human introspection – all of which must be done with absolute inner composure and complete arbitrariness – one performs such introspection in such a way that one observes what one does, what one thinks and feels, the whole way , how if one were to stand beside oneself as another, as a second person, one becomes pensive with regard to the will, then the will gradually breaks away from the physical, if the exercises are only carried out long and energetically, especially if one also actively engages in one's own development. Just consider how people are helped in ordinary life by what life itself provides. Certainly, everyone today is different from what they were ten or twenty years ago in terms of certain finer nuances of the soul life. Life has done that. But if you take your self-development into your own hands, you set yourself the goal: you should incorporate this or that quality; if you work towards incorporating such qualities, you work particularly energetically towards getting rid of certain habits, then you develop that which tears the will away from physical corporeality. And now one arrives at having the will living in the soul, so to speak, only to the extent that it is completely permeated by thoughts everywhere; it is torn away from the body, it has become transparent. Consider how little transparent the will is when we form the thought, let us say, to raise our arm, to raise our hand. The thought, the intention, is clear, and afterwards, when the hand is raised, we see from the sense impression what has happened. The unfolding of the will that lies in between is as hidden from human consciousness as the processes of falling asleep themselves. But now we experience a will in which we are completely immersed, as we are otherwise only in thoughts, a will free of the body, which submits to the imaginative and inspired ideas, free of the body, that we have received before.

And now, honored attendees, as we experience how our will can become body-free, as we can, in a sense, step out of our bodies with our will, we are now experiencing the essence of human immortality on the other side. This stepping out of the body is nothing other than an image of the knowledge that occurs when a person steps through the gate of death. While man is outside of his body, he becomes aware of what he experiences through this strengthened will, through this will that has become deliberate, which I call the stage of intuitive knowledge. While he is outside of his body, it is immediately clear through his qualities as an image of what enters the spiritual-soul world as a spiritual-soul being when man leaves his physical body in physical corporeality. In this intuitive knowledge, one learns to recognize the other side of human eternity, which extends beyond death.

You see, dear attendees, the eternal part of the human soul does not come to light through anthroposophical research, but is pieced together from the prenatal and, if I may say so, the post-mortal existence, from unbornness and immortality. And by getting to know what is eternal, what is immortal in the human soul, one also learns to recognize the worlds that surround this human soul when it is in its pure spiritual-soul nature, by looking at what the soul was before birth or before conception. Of course, there is still another objection possible, the objection: Yes, how do you know that what you are looking at in your consciousness really lies in the time before birth or before conception? Now, just as with ordinary memory, when you remember an experience you had ten years ago, the memory itself contains the time, as you cannot believe that you have something in your consciousness that is only there in the present , just as the content of consciousness itself points to the time in which the experience took place, so that which we experience as spiritual and mental carries within it the time before birth or before conception. But we also become aware of the worlds that are not the sensual ones, because we only perceive them through the human senses between birth and death. But the worlds that we perceive through the soul senses, if I may use the expression, before birth and after death, they are now unlocked. We get to know them as concrete, essential worlds. And by getting to know these worlds, we also get to know the spiritual-supernatural world that always surrounds us, which we cannot penetrate through mere philosophical speculation. We can penetrate it only by developing more and more imaginative, inspired, intuitive knowledge.

This intuitive knowledge, which in a certain respect is the highest level of knowledge for looking at the external spiritual world, already comes to us in ordinary life, albeit in a different form. And I had to point this out as early as the beginning of the nineties — if I may make this personal remark — from my own soul development in my “Philosophy of Freedom” how the moral impulses of the human being — and the moral life gives the human being his actual value and his actual dignity — are drawn from a world that I also called an intuitive world back then, a world of spiritual substance. And I already said in this “Philosophy of Freedom”: The true moral impulses are drawn from a spiritual, supersensible world through pure, sensuality-free thinking. I established freedom in human life by pointing out that the question is usually asked wrongly. One asks: Is man free or unfree? He is just as free as he is unfree. Unfree in relation to everything that are the ordinary actions of life, which are bound to the physical organism, where they are impulsed by instincts, drives. But man develops more and more to freedom by coming to get his impulses for the moral, the ethical life from a spiritual world through pure thinking, even in ordinary life, even if more or less unconsciously. And man is free to the extent that his moral impulses come to him from a spiritual world. Therefore, what man grasps as moral intuitions becomes the model for what must now be asserted in anthroposophical research as the highest level of knowledge, as the intuitive level.

One might be tempted to say: we can learn in our moral life what the cognitive life must also achieve. However, in our ordinary consciousness we are given the opportunity to have such intuitions in our moral life. They are contained in what our conscience offers us. With regard to the knowledge of the supersensible world, to which the human soul with its supersensible part belongs, intuitive knowledge must first be sought after one has gone through imaginative and inspired knowledge. Inspired knowledge first offers the objective, the entry into an alien world. Intuitive knowledge is the complete surrender to the objective spiritual world. One only gets to know the latter objectivity sufficiently when one first admits that imaginative knowledge only leads into one's own subjective world. And when one gets to know a spiritual world in this way, then everything that is there as a sensual world is also revealed in the form of the spiritual. That is to say, one remains completely on the ground of natural science for the field of nature. One does not speak or fantasize about all kinds of spiritual, nebulous entities in nature. One ascends through real knowledge to that which is seen as spiritual entities when the objectively observed sensual things and entities metamorphose before the spiritual gaze in the way that I can only hint at for you today in a few cases.

You see, in the sensory view and in ordinary science, the sun is given with sensory contours. We see it that way for ordinary consciousness. It is given with sensory contours in space. Ordinary science calculates its correct, indisputable position through astronomy and astrophysics in relation to this sun. For the spiritual view that I have described to you, the sun changes. That is, of course, for the one personality, which remains fully intact, as it sees it. Otherwise one would become a hallucinator and not a spiritual researcher. But that which remains so fully intact shows itself at the same time in its supersensible essence. One learns to recognize that the sun is not only the being that stands spatially out there in space, but that a solar element, which is only consolidated and concentrated in the physical space of the sun, fills the entire space of the universe that is accessible to us, permeating all beings in the nature kingdoms and also permeating the human being himself. One gets to know the spiritual, supersensible power of the solar element.

And just as one becomes aware in one's ordinary consciousness that external facts live on in the human being as feelings, as thoughts, as triggers of will impulses, so one comes to recognize that in the depths of human nature the external spiritual-supernatural sun-like quality finds its continuation. One gets to know the sun-like quality in one's own human nature. One would like to say: everything transforms from a sharply contoured form into a becoming, into an ongoing life. And the human being's own internal organs metamorphose before the supersensible eye in such a way that they appear in the process of becoming. While the heart, lungs, brain and other human organs are sharply defined for the ordinary sensory view, so to speak representing things, it happens for the supersensible view that we can only speak of a heart process, a stomach process, a brain process, a lung process. Everything merges into life, comes to life. And as the sun-like essence pours itself into this life, we perceive, at a higher level, everything that is emerging life, that is connected with that which makes us young and keeps us young, what growing, sprouting, sprouting forces are in the human being, but also the sprouting, sprouting forces out there in the realms of nature, in the plant kingdom, in the animal kingdom and also in the mineral kingdom. One now learns to see through the realms of nature and one's own inner human being spiritually and soulfully. The peculiar thing is that otherwise the human being is faced as a whole; his individual organs are individual parts. Now one learns to recognize how the individual organs are assigned to the different areas, the different forces of the cosmos. One learns, for example, to recognize how the brain forces are assigned to the solar forces, in that they are in the first half of life, as other organs, namely the heart, are assigned to the solar forces.

But one also learns how to recognize the solar on the one hand, for example, the lunar on the other. Again, the moon is only sensually seen as a clearly defined cosmic body. A lunar quality flows through the whole of outer space, all the outer realms of nature and the human being itself. This includes all the forces of decline, all the forces of retrogressive development, all the forces through which we age, through which our organs become dulled, become dulled, somehow merge into descending development. One now gets to know this mechanism of the human organism and the external mechanism of nature from a new perspective, by being able to see the solar and the lunar together.

And in the same way, in relation to other celestial bodies, we learn about the force-giving, the sustaining, the process-sustaining, and the becoming. One learns to recognize it in its continued effect within the human being, in its effect outside in nature. But in doing so, one enters a field where it can be shown how anthroposophy can be thoroughly fruitful for other sciences, to which it does not stand in opposition, but which it would like to further develop by fully recognizing what they themselves can achieve, how spiritual science can have a fruitful effect on other areas of life.

By learning to see in this way, the becoming, the process of the human inner organism, one learns to recognize in a more intimate way the health of the human being, the illness of the human being. One gets to know the breakdown of some organic processes, as it occurs in disease processes. One also learns to recognize how one can contribute to recovery through opposing processes. Above all, one gets to know the connection between the outer nature and the human inner being. For example, one learns to recognize how certain degenerative, destructive forces of one organ or another can be balanced by the sun-like, constructive forces, say, in the plant or mineral kingdom. One gets to know the healing powers by following the supersensible in nature and in man. And that can emerge from anthroposophy that has already emerged precisely in relation to medicine.

Physicians have taken up the suggestions that can arise from this kind of anthroposophical research, and medical-therapeutic institutes have been established in Dornach near Basel and in Stuttgart, which are in the process of developing, in a thoroughly exact way, those healing methods and remedies that arise from the suggestions of anthroposophy. This is an example of the kind of cross-fertilization that anthroposophical research can provide for the individual sciences and practical areas of life. What can otherwise only be tried empirically, and only after trying can one say how it works in this or that direction in the human organism, can be understood because the natural process according to the sun and moon and according to the other cosmic processes, and the inner human natural process and soul process and spirit process can be understood. Rational medicine, a medicine of inner insight into the pathological and healing processes, can be substituted for the mere trial-and-error medicine. Similarly, a physics and a biology institute are being established in Stuttgart. That is all I want to mention. The individual sciences can certainly be fertilized by anthroposophy.

But what Anthroposophy provides in this way, by pointing to our own immortality in connection with the spiritualizing of the supersensible in the universe, can also have a fruitful effect on life in other ways. This should be shown by a particular example, the Dornach building, the Goetheanum, the School of Spiritual Science in Dornach near Basel. Anthroposophy has been practised for a long time now, and the time has come when a number of friends of Anthroposophy have given rise to the building of a home for Anthroposophy. The circumstances, which I do not have to describe here, brought this home for Anthroposophy, this Goetheanum, close to Basel.

If the necessity of building a spiritual movement its own home had been felt in any other field, then contact would have been made with this or that architect. Perhaps a Romanesque, Gothic or Renaissance building would have been constructed or something similar. Anthroposophy could not do that. No matter how much one may dispute the artistic side of what has been created, what some claim it is not in any case. But if one is imbued with what anthroposophy can give as an attitude of the soul, then one is a strict critic oneself and initially describes what one has to describe only as a beginning. The Goetheanum should also be described from this point of view. Because Anthroposophy does not strive for one-sidedness, but because it springs from the whole, full humanity, and in turn wants to place the whole, full human being in the world, it could not be a matter of building a randomly stylized building as a home.

I would like to use a trivial comparison: just as the individual forms of a nutshell are built according to exactly the same laws as the nut kernel – as you can see, the same forces act in the shell in their position and in their mutual relationship as they do inside the nut kernel – so, if anthroposophy is is to be understood not as a theory, not as a collection of dull ideas, but as real life appearing in ideas, then what appears as its framework, so to speak its structural shell, must be made of exactly the same spirit as the ideas in which the supersensible life is presented. Therefore, everything that has been realized in Dornach, whether architecturally, pictorially, sculpturally or in any other artistic way, must come from the same spirit as that which is spoken as the Word on the podium. This appearance of ideas and thought-forms cannot be other than the kernel of the nut to the shell, to that which speaks out of forms that are not straw-like allegories or symbols; there everything has flowed into the truly artistic. And yet, even if the whole is only a beginning, one may still refer with a certain certainty to Goethe and in particular to Goethe's view of art. One need only think of how Goethe put it: “When nature reveals her manifest secret to someone, that person feels a deep longing for her most worthy interpreter, art.” In another saying, Goethe expresses the same sentiment: “Art is a manifestation of secret natural laws that would never be revealed without it.

In that anthroposophy, in the way it has been characterized, really wants to penetrate into the deepest laws of nature, into the laws of the supersensible spiritual world, it also feels inspired for the artistic and knows how to incorporate the living, not the symbolic, into the material. She has just the right feeling for the material, so that she does not feel comfortable in some artistic, symbolizing cloud cuckoo land, but in the most eminent sense, she lets what is her spiritual life be revealed through the art form. In this way, without anything didactic occurring, what goes beyond all theory into the knowledge of the supersensible can at the same time be fruitful for the artistic field.

I can only give isolated examples of the practical effects of anthroposophy. Thirdly, I would like to mention the Waldorf School in Stuttgart, which has already found a certain following here too. This Waldorf School was founded by Emil Molt and is run by me. It is run in such a way that it is not intended to oppose the great achievements of pedagogy and didactics of the nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth century. It is mindful of the great pedagogical maxims that are there. But precisely those aspects that are often expressed today in the field of education as a longing for reform show that something is needed to implement the well-intentioned maxims of the great educators in practice in the individual. Anthroposophy does not want to replace old maxims with new theoretical ones in this field, but to serve their practical implementation. That is why the Waldorf School in Stuttgart is definitely not a school where Anthroposophy is to be grafted into children; that is far from our minds. We have therefore quietly entrusted Catholic religious education to the Catholic pastor and Protestant religious education to the Protestant pastor. Only for those children who would otherwise be dissidents have we provided a free religious education. The religious aspect of the world view is not what gives the Waldorf School its specific character. What it seeks to achieve is that anthroposophical knowledge teaches us to recognize the human being in terms of body, soul and spirit, to recognize this in the child; that, based on our knowledge of the human being, we can read the curriculum for each school year, for each month, for each week from the child; that it is only through a true knowledge of the human being that we can truly establish the art of education and the art of teaching. In the practical side of education and teaching, in the “how” of how to carry it out, we should let what anthroposophy can give have its effect. And if people were not so opposed to anthroposophy, purely out of misunderstanding, as they are, then far more consideration would be given to such things as occurred this summer during the anthroposophical congress in Stuttgart.

For example, a teacher at this Waldorf school showed how one-sided everything is that is supposed to be made fruitful for teaching through experimental pedagogy and experimental psychology, especially in recent times. Anthroposophy does not go against what is being done in these experiments either, but it can show that what is learned about the human being in this way can only bear fruit in the right way if one also enters into the soul through inner contemplation into the soul; when the lessons are not based merely on experimental results about memory, the development of the powers of mind and will, about fatigue and so on, which have been obtained externally, where one can stand far from the human soul. Rather, what can be gained from the soul itself will only bear fruit when one also gains the ability to look intimately into the human soul, into this wonderful, enigmatic human soul that develops from the first childlike day, from week to week, from month to month. Only when we have the right sense of insight are we capable of educating. And anthroposophy, because it does not just go to the surface but learns to recognize the whole, the full human being in body, soul and spirit, can create such a higher, inspired, spiritualized art of education.

The art of education is what anthroposophy seeks to practise in the Waldorf school. It is not some kind of world view that is imposed on the children. Now a teacher at the Waldorf school has discussed in a particularly intimate way – the lecture has now been published as a brochure – the significance of experimental psychology and what it could become through deepening. In my opinion, Dr. von Heydebrand has presented something extraordinarily significant here, with regard to the appreciation of a one-sided current of development in the present time. This would undoubtedly have been discussed much more in pedagogical circles if it had not grown precisely on the much-disliked soil of anthroposophy.

And anthroposophy can also have a living effect on the outer social life. Here too is an example, even if it is only a small beginning. Emil Leinhas also gave a lecture at the Stuttgart Anthroposophical Congress, which has also already been printed, and in it he gave a spirited critique of contemporary economics. The title is 'The Bankruptcy of National Economy'. Emil Leinhas shows how this national economy must remain unfruitful for real social life if it is only understood in the pattern of outer, natural scientific thinking, and not supplemented by the knowledge of spiritual, supersensible forces at work especially in human life.

We see, especially in the social sphere, the devastating effect of a way of thinking that would like to apply the one-sided natural science approach to social life as well. Let us look at the terrible devastation that is growing ever greater and greater and that ultimately poses a threat to the whole of Europe, indeed to the whole of the civilized Western world. Let us look at what is happening in the social sphere in Eastern Europe and become aware that the underlying reasons for the emergence of these destructive forces are nevertheless that we have not been able to permeate social life with what arises from a spirit-perceiving consciousness. If we look at people only as the economics teachers of the nineteenth and early twentieth century did, uninspired by spiritual-scientific knowledge, then destructive social forces must ultimately emerge, as they have in Eastern Europe, and must become a threat to the whole educated world in a much higher sense if a spiritual element is not introduced into our social order.

Now, dear ladies and gentlemen, I have only touched on a few areas in which anthroposophy can be fruitful, in scientific and other areas of practical life. Only at the end would I like to suggest something that must be mentioned last, although it is not the last: By leading to the direct beholding of the eternal in the human soul, by leading to the direct knowledge of that which lies beyond birth and death, to the unborn, to the immortal in the human soul, by leading to those worlds in which the human soul lives when it is not clothed with an external physical body. By becoming acquainted with these two worlds, it also becomes acquainted with what is in human nature, deeper than physical human nature, more comprehensive, more intense than that which the soul experiences when it is in the spiritual world before birth or after death. What is found in the human soul is not exhausted in the contemplation of the natural or supersensible world.

After getting to know the two worlds, which of course only appear to be two worlds and in truth interact according to the whole meaning of the presentation, so that one cannot speak of dualism versus monism in anthroposophy; when one learns to recognize something in the human soul which reveals itself as a synthesis of these two worlds, that is the innermost, human, eternal core of being, which goes through repeated earthly lives, so that human life is made up of such pieces that lie between birth and death and between death and a new birth. And by learning to recognize the outer cosmos in terms of its spiritual significance, one also learns to look in a different way at times when man was still more akin to the outer cosmic existence. There were no repeated lives on earth then. And in the future, when man will have found a more intimate union with the cosmos again, the repeated lives on earth will also cease. But for a long period of time we have to observe, through the same powers that I have described, what can be called the contemplation of repeated earthly lives. Through this one is led in a cognitive way to the spiritual world.

As I have already indicated, human feeling and perception are taken along by the development of the powers of thought and will. This human feeling, insofar as it lives and wants to live out in religious devotion, can only deepen when the human soul is also presented with knowledge of that which is eternal in the soul, which is spiritual and supersensible in the cosmos. Anthroposophy certainly does not want to found some kind of sect in the world. It does not want to found a new religion. Take the whole meaning of what I have tried to explain today: it is something that wants to strive scientifically, but which, due to its special kind of scientific striving, can never become a mere specialty because it concerns every human being. Therefore, one cannot say: Anthroposophy is something like botany or zoology or geometry, which in their higher parts can only be recognized by individual specialists. Anthroposophy is something that concerns every human being. And the development of the spirit will bring it about that it will concern more and more people. And every person, through what is in them in body, soul and spirit, can understand and receive what Anthroposophy, albeit as the result of arduous research, has to present to the world, provided they are open to it. But the fact that the supersensible world emerges as a result of research does not in fact take away a person's religious life, but deepens it. Religions have every reason to look to anthroposophy as something that can offer them help, that can give people exactly what they need to come to religious devotion again, after modern life has taken away much of this religious devotion, especially in the modern intellectual life. It is therefore a complete misunderstanding to believe that true, genuine religious devotion, true, genuine religious experience could somehow be endangered by anthroposophy. This is another area in which anthroposophy can be thoroughly fruitful.

Those who see through what is actually at stake may say that anthroposophy in particular accommodates the deepest human longings of the more active minds of modern humanity.

And if I am to briefly summarize in a few words what I have tried to describe as the essence of anthroposophy – although this can only be done insufficiently in a short lecture – I would like to say: the human being stands before us with his physical body. We look at him. His soul and spirit speak from the depths of his being. It speaks from his face, from each of his movements. We do not have the whole person before us if we do not see this spiritual-soul in the natural-physical. Natural science has brought it to a high level of perfection over the last three to four centuries, especially in the nineteenth century. Anthroposophy does not want to rely on laymanship or dilettantism, although it is for everyone. The anthroposophical researcher wants to exclude any laymanship or dilettantism in the field of natural science. He wants to see genuine science and genuine methodology developed in the field of natural science. But in doing so, he is particularly aware of how external natural science, which has rightly celebrated such triumphs and has made such a significant impact on practical life, how this natural science represents something external that can be compared to the physical body of the human being.

Wherever we look with the unprejudiced eyes of a whole human being, equipped with the insights of natural science, we encounter something like the way the soul and spirit appear in human physiognomy and human movements; we encounter something as science, as knowledge of the soul and spirit in the knowledge of nature. I would like to say: through its physiognomy, through the way it develops, the knowledge of nature can point to this spiritual-soul aspect of a particular knowledge. Just as the natural human being reveals the spirit and the soul in the way his body is formed, so true scientific knowledge reveals a higher, supersensible knowledge that goes to the spiritual-soul. What the human soul and human spirit are in the human body, that, ladies and gentlemen, is what the soul and spirit are in knowledge. For a true natural science, the anthroposophical paths and results are what the soul and spirit are in knowledge.

Today I should like to continue the theme which we have studied in the last two lectures. Firstly, it is a question of realising those impulses in evolution which have led to the spiritual life of our present age, so that we can see on the one side the Anthroposophical view of the world as a necessity, but on the other hand can fully understand that this Anthroposophical view of the world must find its enemies. Naturally I shall not now enter into the special characteristics of this or that opponent, perhaps that is comprehensible at the present time. Indeed, I want to deal with our theme as generally as possible because it is not essential for the moment to fix our minds on our opponents. Rather it is essential for us at present to understand that if the Anthroposophical Society is to exist as a Society, it must become fully aware of its position in the spiritual life of the day. Also, the Society itself must contribute something towards its own consolidation. Therefore, I am not going to say anything particularly new today. Only a few weeks ago I emphasised the fact that consolidation of the Anthroposophical Society is an absolute necessity.

So first of all, it has to become clear to us how Anthroposophy is placed in modern civilisation, a civilisation which, as regards Europe and America, really only goes back to the time which we have so often, discussed, the time of the 4th Post-Christian century. Now this 4th Post-Christian century lies right in the middle of the 4th Post-Atlantean epoch of time, and I have often pointed out that the spreading of Christianity,—the whole mood by which Christianity was grasped in the early years of the first three or four centuries of Christian evolution—was essentially different to the mood later on in time.

Today we think that following history backwards, we can study the previous epoch, that we can go back to the Middle Ages, then to the events we call the Wanderings of the Peoples. Further back we come to the Roman Empire, passing through that we come to Greece, and then we imagine that we can feel the same atmosphere in this Greece as we can feel in the time of the Roman Emperors or in later European history.

But that is not the case. In reality there lies a deep cleft between that which can still be placed with a certain vividness before the consciousness of modern man, namely, his journey back to Rome; but a deep cleft exists between this and that which took place as life in ancient Greece. Let us bring an outline of this before our souls. If we study the Greece of Pericles or Plato, or of Phidias, or even the Greece of Sophocles and Aeschylus, we find that their basic mood of soul goes back to a Mystery civilisation, to an ancient spirituality. And, above all things, this Greece had still much in itself of what I characterised yesterday as a living experience of absolutely real processes in man's inner being, and which I described as the salt, sulphur and mercury processes. We must be quite clear that Greek thought and Greek feeling came close to the feeling of man, whereas that later age,—from the 4th Post-Christian century onwards—already began to get ready for that which came about in the way described in my last two lectures, in which I showed how Man himself was lost for human nature, for human consciousness.

I also told you that these three personalities, Bruno, Jacob Boehme and, in a certain connection also Lord Bacon, struggled for a knowledge of man's nature, but that it was impossible for their striving really to approach the Being of Man. If, however, we go further back, from Rome to Greece, then this alienation of man's nature—any talk or an alienation of man's nature—ceased to have any sense, because the ancient Greek knew himself as a human being standing in the cosmos. The Greek had no idea of that concept of nature which came about later, that concept of nature which finally culminated in the seizing of the mechanism of nature. One might say of the ancient Greek:—That he saw the clouds, the rain falling, the clouds ascending and all that comes out of the world as fluid; then when with especial vividness looking into himself with his still sharply concrete vision, he saw the circulation of his blood, he did not feel a very great distinction between the rising and falling of water in Nature and the movement of his own blood. The Greek could still grasp something of `the world in man and man in the world.'

These things cannot be taken too deeply, because they lead into a mood of soul which only exists in fragments of the external history. One should not forget how, in the 4th Post-Christian century, evolution took the form of destroying everything which remained of the ancient clairvoyant civilisation. Certainly, modern humanity knows something of this, because of all the information which has been dug up, but one should not forget how that which later gave the impulse to Western civilisation really arose on the relics of ancient Hellenism, of that widespread Hellenism which not only existed in the South of Europe, but even passed over into Asia.

Again, one should not forget that between the middle of the 4th and middle of the 5th centuries after Christ, countless temples were burnt, having an infinitely significant pictorial content, a precious content with reference to everything developed by Hellenism. Our modern humanity, proceeding only according to external documents, does not realise this anymore. But one should recall the words of an author of that time, when he wrote in one of his letters:—“This age is passing to its downfall. All those holy places to be found in the open country, and for the sake of which the labourers worked in every field, are being destroyed. Where can the countrymen now find joy for their work?” One can hardly conceive today how much was destroyed between the middle of the 4th and the middle of the 5th century after Christ,

Now the destruction of those external monuments was part of the effort to exterminate spiritual life in Greece, and this, as you know, was given its most bitter blow by the closing of the Schools of Philosophy in Athens in the year 529. Yes, one can look back into ancient Rome, but one cannot look back into ancient Greece through external history. And it is indeed true that very many things in Western civilisation have come down to us, through the Benedictine Orders, but we must not forget that even the holy Benedict himself founded the Mother Church of the Benedictine Order on the site of an old heathen Temple which had been destroyed. All that had to disappear first, and it did disappear.

Now, with normal human feelings, it is difficult to understand why such an impulse for destruction passed over the whole of the South of Europe, Asia Minor and North Africa at that time. It only becomes comprehensible when one is convinced that the consciousness of mankind in that age was entirely different. I have often mentioned a sentence which is quite incorrect:—“Nature,—or one may say, the world, makes no leaps,” but in history such leaps do occur and the soul mood of civilised humanity in the 2^nd and 3^rd centuries after Christ was quite different to the soul mood of today.

But now I should like to draw your attention to something which may make it clearer to you as to how this transformation really occurred. You see, today we must say when we speak of the interchange between waking and sleeping, that the physical and etheric bodies remain in the bed, while the ego and astral bodies go outside. The soul and spirit go out of the physical and etheric bodies.

Now at a certain time in ancient India this was not true; just the opposite would have been correct. Then one would have said that in sleep the soul and spirit of man go deeper into his physical body, more into his physical body.

Now this fact is almost unnoticed, and I must point out to you how, for instance, when the Theosophical Society was founded, the people who founded it had heard some of the spiritual truths from India, and what they heard they made their own property. Now they heard this fact, of the ego and astral body going out. Of course, because the Indians said it then, (i.e. when the Theosophical Society was founded) naturally that was in the 19th century, and in India what is real can be often observed. But when these same people of the Theosophical Society tell us that this is primeval Indian wisdom, it is pure nonsense, because the ancient Indian would have said just the opposite: That the soul and spirit go deeper into the physical body when man sleeps. Which was the case in ancient times.

Now in a certain sense a consciousness of this was existing in Greece, a consciousness of the fact that in sleep the soul and spirit seize the physical body more than in waking, and that this lies in the evolution of mankind.

Now today, because we have to describe things out of our direct spiritual perception, we must describe the following as correct:—The ancient Wise Men, and even the people of Greece, had an instinctive dreamy clairvoyance. And we can describe it so from our modern standpoint, but for those people it was not dreamy. They felt in their condition of clairvoyance as if they were just waking up, they felt themselves especially awake. And so, their consciousness existed with a greater intensity when they perceived the world in those magnificent pictures which I described to you in my last lectures. But they knew that when they pressed down into the inner part of their being and at the same time saw that which occurs in man, that that which they beheld were world processes, because man is in the world. And they knew then that in their time man dived still deeper into his physical body, and in deep sleep their consciousness became dim twilight, even unconsciousness. And these people ascribed to the Influence of their physical body that which embraces the soul and leads it over into sin.

And it was just from this point of view that the ancient consciousness of sin arose. If we exclude the Jewish form of sin, the consciousness of sin leads back into heathendom, and it proceeded from the consciousness of the diving down into the physical body which does not leave the soul free enough to live in the spiritual world. But considering all that I am describing to you, it must be said:—that ancient humanity had a consciousness of the fact that he was a spiritual being, and as a spiritual being, lived in a physical body, but it never occurred to him. to call that MAN which he saw as physical body.

Why, the very word MAN itself leads back to some such meaning as “The Thinker.” Not to something which is to be seen with a more or less red or white face, with two arms and two legs. That was not a man! Man was a being who dwelt as a spiritual soul in that dwelling house of the physical body. And a consciousness of this spiritual psychic man, existing in the wonderful, plastic, artistic forms in Greece, passed over into the sphere of Art, and into the general Greek civilisation.

And even if the external temples, even if the cult became infinitely decadent in many connections, one must still say that in all the divine images and temples which were destroyed, much existed that points to this ancient soul mood. And I might add that the ancient spiritual psychic consciousness of humanity was shown with tremendous power in the form of everything destroyed in those centuries. Now if with that consciousness—not of the following incarnation when the consciousness was changed—but if a Mystery Initiate of that early Greek age came to us with the same consciousness which he then had, he would say:—”You modern human beings, you are all asleep,” Indeed he would say:—“You modern men are sleeping through everything. We were awake, we woke up in our bodies. We woke up as spiritual beings in our bodies; we knew that we were human beings, because in our bodies we could distinguish ourselves from the body. What you call waking, for us is sleeping, because whereas you wake up and direct your attention to the external world and explain something about the external world, all the time you are asleep with regard to your own human nature. You are asleep, we were awake.” That is what he would say, and from a certain point of view he should be quite right. We wake up from our moment of waking until we go to sleep, as we say, when we are in our physical bodies as spiritual human beings. But then we know nothing of ourselves, we are asleep with regard to ourselves. When, however, we are in the world outside us, we are asleep—and that is the time from sleeping to waking up. Thus, it is that we must learn to wake with the same intensity as that with which the ancient humanity were awake in their bodies. That is, modern man must learn to be awake outside his body when he is really in the external world.

From this you can see that we are dealing with a transition. As humanity, we have all gone to sleep compared with the ancient waking condition, but now we are in just that period when we have to be wakened up into a new waking state. What is the aim of Anthroposophy in this connection? Anthroposophy wants to be, Anthroposophy is nothing else than something which points out to you that man must learn to wake up outside of himself. And so, Anthroposophy comes along and shakes up modern humanity, the modern humanity which that ancient Initiate would have called a sleeping humanity, Anthroposophy shakes it up, hut they do not want to wake.

Anthroposophy often feels like Gallus beside the sleeper Stickl. (A reference to the Christmas Play just performed). Anthroposophy points out that the birds in the forest are singing. “Let them sing” says the present generation, “the birds have tiny heads and have soon had their ration of sleep.” Then Gallus goes on: “But the heavens are creaking,” Stickl (who is half asleep), “Let them go on creaking, they are old enough.” Of course, it is not said in the same words, but Anthroposophy says:—“The spiritual world wants to break through! Get up while the light of the spirit is shining.” The answer is:—“Let it go on shining, it is old enough.”

My dear friends, really it is so. Anthroposophy wants to awaken the sleepers, because that is just what is demanded of modern civilisation—an awakening—but humanity wants to sleep, and to go on sleeping!

I might say of Jacob Boehme—because he went right into the racial wisdom, and of Giordano Bruno, because he stands in a spiritual community which at that time had preserved so much from ancient times—that in them there lived a memory of the ancient waking condition.

In Lord Bacon there really lived the impulse for the justification of this new sleeping. That is, as I might put it, a still deeper explanation than we were able to give in the two preceding lectures and is the characteristic of our age.

Now with reference to the grasping of his own human nature, man of the present day cannot be awake as was humanity in ancient times, because man today does not press deep down into his physical body as ancient humanity did when asleep; because today when man goes to sleep he goes out of himself, but he must learn to come out of his physical body in a waking condition, for only thereby will he be in a position to realise himself again in his human nature.

But this impulse to continue asleep is still growing. “Stickl, the carters are cracking their whips in the street.” “Well, let them go on cracking, they have not far to go.”

It is du Bois Raymond, not Gallus, who says;—“Man has limits of knowledge, he cannot enter into the phenomena, the secrets of nature, he must limit himself.” But Anthroposophy says;—“We must strive yet further and further; the call for spirituality is already resounding.” “Well” says du Bois Raymond, “let it go on sounding, it won't be so very long before Natural Science will have come to the end of earthly days and therewith to the end of the discovery of all the secrets of nature.”

My dear friends, in many a relationship one thus finds a justification for the sleep of humanity today, because all talk of the limit of knowledge is a justification for sleep instead of a justification for a penetration into one's knowledge of human nature. And our present humanity can find ways enough of going to sleep. Even of this we have often spoken in our lectures. Today people only want to listen to things which can be put before them in images, in pictures. That is why the cinema is liked so much., but it is not popular when the listeners are asked to work with their heads. And so it is today that people want to go on dreaming of world secrets, but do not want to co-operate actively with those world secrets by means of energetic thinking. But that is just the path of awakening—one begins to wake up in one's thinking, because it is thought which first of all seeks to evolve into activity. That is the reason why in my “Philosophie der Freiheit” decades ago I pointed to this kind of thinking with such energy.

And now I should like to remind you of something else. I should like you to call to mind many a dream which you have had, and I should like to ask you whether you have never had a dream in which you have done something of which you would have been ashamed if you had done it in the daytime,—if you ever did by day what you did in the dream. Well, perhaps there are many sitting here who have never had such a dream, but at any rate they could let other people tell them of such an experience, because many people have dreamt of things they would never repeat in their waking lives, because they would be ashamed. My dear friends, apply that to our great sleep today—which we call the great sleep of present civilisation—where people really are letting themselves dream of all kinds of cosmic secrets, Anthroposophy comes along and says:—“Stickl, get up!” Anthroposophy wants to wake the people, they ought to wake! I can give you this assurance,—Many of the things that have been done in this civilisation would never have been done if humanity had been awake. That really is the case. You will say:—Who is going to believe that? Well, the dreamer pursuing his little business in his dreams, does not bother himself as to how that is really going to look when he is awake, but unconsciously the feeling exists somewhere in his soul that one really dare not do such things if one were awake. I do not mean this in a pedantic or a commonplace way, I just mean that many of the things which one considers today as being quite in order would look differently if one were really awake in one's soul.

And an unholy anxiety prevails in the soul because of this, especially in science. (If one were awake one could no longer comfortably dissect first a liver and next a brain.) One would be terribly ashamed of many methods of investigation if one were awake Anthroposophically. How can one ask people using such methods to wake up without any further reason? One notices many extraordinary apologies which exist for sleeping.

And now I want you to think of something else_. What an immense pleasure a dreamer has when he dreams something which actually happens, say a couple of days later. You must have noticed yourselves the tremendous joy of a superstitious dreamer when his dream actually happens; and it often happens, and they all have this tremendous joy. In our present civilisation dreamers calculate by Newton's laws of gravitation, by formulae which have been worked out by mathematicians, and they have calculated that Uranus has a definite path in the heavens. But that path does not agree with the formulae and therefore they go on dreaming; certain disturbances must exist owing to a planet as yet undiscovered. When this did happen, and when Dr. Gall really discovered Neptune, the vision was fulfilled. Now this is just what is so often brought forward today as a justification of the methods of Natural Science.

The existence of Neptune was calculated in a dream and later the dream really happened. It is just like a person dreaming of something which later on takes place. Then there is the case of Mendaleff, who even calculated elements out of his periodic system. But this dream of a curse is not quite so difficult, because when such a periodical system is discovered and one place in it is empty, then it is easy enough to fill up that place and to mention a few properties. Here we have the fulfilment of a vision by the same methods as when a sleeper dreams of something which actually takes place a couple of days later, and which, he then calls a verification of the fact. And today people say that in this way the affair can be proved.

One has to understand how radically our modern civilisation has become the civilisation of sleepers and how necessary an awakening is for humanity. At the same time this tendency to sleep in our present age has to be seen very clearly by those who have received an urge from Spiritual Science towards waking. Such a moment must occur as sometimes in a dream when the dreamer knows “I am dreaming,” and in the same way humanity ought to have a special feeling for a strong expression which was once used by that energetic philosopher J.G. Fichte. Fichte said “The world which is spread out before mankind is a dream and all that man thinks about the world is a dream about a dream,” Of course one must not fall into anything like the philosophy of Schopenhauer, because, after all you are not doing very much for a human being when you characterise everything in front of him as a dream. It is not one's task merely to say:—“one dreams,” that is not quite enough. But that is all that many people of the present want to prove:—Man dreams and cannot do anything else but dream. Then in one's dream one comes to the limit of one's dream. And beyond the dream is what Kant calls the “Thing in itself,” and one cannot approach the thing in its reality. Edouard von Hartmann, that acute thinker, often spoke of this kind of dreaming with relation to reality. And Edouard von Hartmann makes it clear that everything which man has in his consciousness is a dream by the side of the Thing in Itself, of which man knows nothing, but which lies at the basis of his dream. So that Hartmann, who drives everything to extremes, speaks of the `real' table, in contrast to the table which we have before us in our sensations. The table we have in our consciousness is a dream, and behind that stands the table in its reality. Hartmann distinguishes between the table as appearance and the table in itself; between the chair in appearance and the chair in itself. But he is not fully conscious that finally the chair of which he is speaking had something to do with the chair in itself, because if you take the chair as appearance one cannot very well sit down on it. Even a dreamer has to have a bed to lie on. And so all this talk of “the Thing in Itself” can only be a preparation for something else. For what? For waking up, my dear friends.

And so it is not a question of seeing the world as a dream, but, as soon as we have the idea:—That is a dream!—we must do something we must wake up; and this waking up already begins with an energetic grasping of one's own thinking. It begins with active thinking, and from that point one comes to other things.

Now you see, what I have characterised—this impulse for awakening—is a necessary impulse for the present time. Certainly that which as Anthroposophy can be presented to the world; but however, when an Anthroposophical Society becomes a Society, then that Society must represent a reality. Then every single person who lives in the Anthroposophical Society should feel it as a reality, and he must be deeply permeated by the will to awake, and not, as is so often the case, feel insulted if one says to him:—“Stickl, stand up.” This is very necessary. And it is something which I should like to repeat in a few words.

The misfortune (i.e. the burning of the Bau) which has met us should above all be an awakening call to the Anthroposophical Society to do something that is a reality. This real Being—which I have characterised at the end of the Christmas Congress—this real Being (Wesen) which one can feel since that time as “the living stream from man to man within the Anthroposophical Society” that must exist, a living stream from one to the other. A certain lack of love has often appeared in the newest phases of our Society instead of a mutual trust, and if this lack of love gets the upper hand then the Anthroposophical Society must crumble. You see, our building brought many wonderfully beautiful qualities in the different Anthroposophists to the surface, but side by side with them there had to be an invigoration of the Society itself. Many of these beautiful qualities were named during our course of lectures which were given during the building of the Bau, and on the night of the burning of the Bau, but those beautiful qualities require guidance, and above all things this is necessary:—That anyone who has anything to do within the Society should not carry into it those things, which today are so customary outside it. And above all things, that each one who does anything for the Society should do it with real personal interest and participation. It is this personal interest, this personal share that one misses when people do one thing or another for our Society.

My dear friends, no service for the Society—and that means anything done in the Society by one person for another—nothing can be trivial. The tiniest service rendered becomes valuable through its standing in the service of something great. That is so often forgotten, and the Society must really see this with the greatest and highest satisfaction, at a time when such a staggering blow demands the cultivation of these most beautiful qualities in the members. But at the same time, it should not be forgotten that in the industrious and patient accomplishment of everyday things, much which is necessary is overlooked. These are things which must not be undervalued when one sees Anthroposophy finding its enemies in the world around it. The fact that an enemy (Gegenschaft} is there, must not be overlooked, rather must it be grasped out of the very objective course of evolution itself. And I have often been astonished, and have said so publicly, at the lack of interest when opposition, taking its roots in objective untruth, develops around us. We must really place ourselves as positive defenders of Anthroposophy when it comes to a question of objective untruth. And at the same time, we must be able to raise ourselves to an understanding of the fact that Anthroposophy can only exist in an atmosphere of truth. We must develop a feeling of what it really means when so much untruth and so much objective calumny is brought against Anthroposophy. And for this we also need a real inner life. So you see, my dear friends we have a splendid opportunity for awakening ourselves. And if we can only reach the awakening in this sphere, then the impulse for awakening will spread itself out over other things.

But if we see everyone asleep while the flames of untruth are making themselves felt everywhere, then we must not be surprised when even Stickl goes on sleeping?

So that which I should like to characterise today, both in great things and also in tiny things is:—“Think, feel and meditate about this awakening.” So many today long for esotericism while these calumniations are hailing on our windows. Well, my dear friends, esotericism is there. Take hold of it. But, above all things, the will to awake is esoteric in our Society, and this will to awake must take its place within the Anthroposophical Society. Then the will to awake within the Society will be a point from which the awakening of the whole present civilisation will radiate.

A lecture given during the first general meeting of the Anthroposophical Society in Berlin

My dear theosophical friends! When in the year 1902, we were founding the German Section of the Theosophical Society, there were present, as most of our theosophical friends now assembled know, Annie Besant and other members of the Theosophical Society at that date – members who had been so for some time. Whilst the work of organization and the lectures were going on, I was obliged to be absent for a short time for a particular lecture of a course which I was at that time – more than ten years ago – delivering to an audience in no way belonging to the theosophical movement, and the members of which have, for the most part, not joined it. Side by side, so to say with the founding of the theosophical movement in Germany, I had during these days to deliver a particular lecture to a circle outside it; and because the course was a kind of beginning, I had used, in order to describe what I wished to say in it, a word which seemed to express this still better than the word ‘Theosophy’ – to be more in keeping with the whole circumstances and culture of our time. Thus, whilst we were founding the German Section, I said in my private lecture that what I had to impart could best be designated by the word ‘Anthroposophy’. This comes into my memory at the present moment, when all of us here assembled are going apart, and alongside of that which – justly of course – calls itself Theosophy are obliged to choose another name for our work, in the first place as an outer designation, but which at the same time may significantly express our aims, for we choose the name ‘Anthroposophy’.

If through spiritual contemplation we have gained a little insight into the inner spiritual connection of things – a connection in which necessity is often present, even if to outer observation it appears to be a matter of mere ‘chance’ – feeling may perhaps be allowed to wander back to the transition I was then obliged to make from the business of founding the German Section to my anthroposophical lecture. This may be specially permissible today when we have before us the Anthroposophical Society as a movement going apart from the Theosophical Society. In spite of the new name no change will take place with regard to what has constituted the spirit of our work, ever since that time. Our work will go on in the same spirit, for we have not to do with a change of cause, but only with a change of name, which has become a necessity for us. But perhaps the name is for all that rather suitable to our cause, and the mention of feeling with regard to the fact of ten years ago, may remind us that the new name may really suit us very well. The spirit of our work – will remain the same. It is really that which at bottom we must call the essence of our cause. This spirit of our work is also that which claims our best powers as human beings, so far as we feel ourselves urged to belong to this spiritual movement of ours. I say, “ours best power as human beings” because people at the present time are not yet very easily inclined to accept that which – be it as Theosophy or Anthroposophy – has to be introduced into the spiritual and mental life of progressive humanity.

We may say “has to be introduced” for the reason that one who knows the conditions of the progressive spiritual life of humanity, gains from the perception of them, the knowledge that this theosophical or anthroposophical spirit is necessary to healthy spiritual and mental life. But it is difficult to bring into men’s minds, in let us say a plain dry way, what the important point is. It is difficult and we can understand why. For people who come straight from the life of the present time, in which all their habits of thought are deeply connected with a more materialistic view of things, will at first naturally find it very difficult to feel themselves at home with the way in which the problems of the universe are grappled with by what may be called the theosophical or anthroposophical spirit. But it has always been the case that the majority of people have in a certain sense followed individuals who make themselves, in a very special way, vehicles of spiritual life. It is true the most various gradations are to be found within the conception of the world that now prevails; but one fact certainly stands out as the result of observing these ideas – that a large proportion of contemporary humanity follows – even when it does so unconsciously – on the one hand certain ideas engendered by the development of natural science in the last few centuries, or on the other hand a residuum of certain philosophical ideas. And on both sides – it may be called pride or may appear as something else – people think that there is something ‘certain’, something that seems to be built on good solid foundations, contained in what natural science has offered, or, if another kind of belief has been chosen, in what this or that philosophical school has imparted.

In what flows from the anthroposophical or theosophical spirit, people are apt to find something more or less uncertain, wavering – something which cannot be proved. In this connection the most various experiences may be made. For instance, it is quite a common experience that a theosophical or anthroposophical lecture may be held somewhere on a given subject. Let us suppose the very propitious case (which is comparatively rare) of a scientific or philosophical professor listening to the lecture. It might very easily happen that after listening to it he formed an opinion. In by far the greatest number of cases he would certainly believe that it was a well founded, solid opinion, indeed to a certain degree an opinion which was a matter of course. Now in other fields of mental life it is certainly not possible, after hearing a lecture of one hour on a subject, to be able to form an opinion about that subject. But in relation to what theosophy or anthroposophy has to offer, people are very apt to arrive at such a swift judgment, which deviates from all the ordinary usages of life. That is to say, they will feel they are entitled to such an opinion after a monologue addressed to themselves, perhaps unconsciously, of this kind, “You are really a very able fellow. All your life you have been striving to assimilate philosophical – or scientific – conceptions; therefore you are qualified to form an opinion about questions in general, and you have now heard what the man who was standing there, knows.” And then this listener (it is a psychological fact, and one who can observe life knows it to be so) makes a comparison and arrives at the conclusion, “It is really fine, the amount you know, and the little he knows.”

He actually forms an opinion, after a lecture of an hour’s length, not about what the lecturer knows, but very frequently about what the listener thinks he does not know, because it was not mentioned in the hour’s lecture. Innumerable objections would come to nothing, if this unconscious opinion were not formed. In the abstract, theoretically, it might seem quite absurd to say anything as foolish as I have just said – foolish not as an opinion, but as a fact. Yet although people do not know it, the fact is a very widely spread one with regard to what proceeds from theosophy or anthroposophy. In our time there is as yet little desire really to find out that what comes before the public as theosophy or anthroposophy, at least as far as it is described here, has nothing to fear from accurate, conscientious examination by all the learning of the age; but has everything to fear from science which is really only one-third science – I will not even say one-third – one-eighth, one-tenth, one-twelfth, and perhaps not even that. But it will take time before mankind is induced to judge that which is as wide as the world itself, by the knowledge which has been gained outwardly on the physical plane. In the course of time, it will be seen that the more it is tested with all the scientific means possible and by every individual science, the more fully will true theosophy, true anthroposophy be corroborated. And the fact will also be corroborated that anthroposophy comes into the world, not in any arbitrary way, but from the necessity of the historical consciousness.

One who really wishes to serve the progressive evolution of humanity, must draw what he has to give from the sources from which the progressive life of mankind itself flows. He may not follow an ideal arbitrarily set up, and steer for it just because he likes it; but in any given period, he must follow the ideal of which he can say, “It belongs especially to this time.” The essence of Anthroposophy is intimately bound up with the nature of our time; of course not with that of our immediate little present, but with the whole age in which we live. The next four lectures,¹ and all the lectures which I have to deliver in the next few days, will really deal with the ‘essence of Anthroposophy’. Everything which I shall have to say about the nature of the Eastern and Western Mysteries, will be an amplification of ‘essence of Anthroposophy’. At the present time I will point out the character of this ‘essence’, by speaking of the necessity through which Anthroposophy has to be established in our time. But once again I do not wish to start from definitions or abstractions, but from facts, and first of all from a very particular fact. I wish to start from the fact of a poem, once – at first I will only say ‘once’ – written by a poet. I will read this poem to you, at first only a few passages, so that I may lay stress on the point I wish to make.

The god of love speaks softly to my inmost heart
In deep words of yearning,
He speaks of marvellous things,
Which throw my thoughts into a whirl;
So flattering is everything he says.
And as I hearken and delude myself,
I strive to repeat what I hear;
It is but lost labour.
It is beyond my power.

After the poet has enlarged further on the difficulty of expressing what the god of love says to him, he describes the being he loves in the following words:

At the sight of her,
Breezes from Paradise seem gently to fan me.
Love itself gives her that smile,
And what her eyes say is no lie.

It appears to be quite obvious that the poet was writing a love-poem. And it is quite certain that if this poem were to be published somewhere anonymously now—it might easily be a modern poem by one of the better poets—people would say. “What a pearl he must have found, to describe his beloved in such wonderful verses”. For the beloved one might well congratulate herself on being addressed in the words:

At the sight of her,
Breezes from Paradise seem gently to fan me.
Love itself gives her that smile,
And what her eyes say is no lie.

The poem was not written in our time. If it had been and a critic came upon it, he would say: “How deeply felt is this direct, concrete living relation. How can a man, who writes poems as only the most modern poets can when they sing from the depths of their souls, how can such a man be able to say something in which no mere abstraction, but a direct, concrete presentment of the beloved being speaks to us, till she becomes almost a palpable reality.”

A modern critic would perhaps say this. But the poem did not originate in our time, it was written by Dante.²

Now a modern critic who takes it up will perhaps say: “The poem must have been written by Dante when he was passionately in love with Beatrice (or someone else), and here we have another example of the way in which a great personality enters into the life of actuality urged by direct feeling, far removed from all intellectual conceptions and ideas.”

Perhaps there might even be a modern critic who would say: “People should learn from Dante how it is possible to rise to the highest celestial spheres, as in the Divine Comedy, and nevertheless be able to feel such a direct living connection between one human being and another.” It seems a pity that Dante has himself given the explanation of this poem, and expressly says who the woman is of whom he writes the beautiful words:

At the sight of her,
Breezes from Paradise seem gently to fan me.
Love itself gives her that smile,
And what her eyes say is no lie.

Dante has told us – and I think no modern critic will deny that he knew what he wanted to say – that the ‘beloved one’, with whom he was in such direct personal relations, was none other than Philosophy.

And Dante himself says that when he speaks of her eyes, that what they say is no untruth, he means by them the evidence for truth; and by the ‘smile’, he means the art of expressing what truth communicates to the soul; and by ‘love’ or ‘amor’, he means scientific study, the love of truth. And he expressly says that when the beloved personality, Beatrice, was taken away from him and he was obliged to forego a personal relation, the woman Philosophy drew near his soul, full of compassion, and more human than anything else that is human. And of this woman Philosophy he could use these words:

At the sight of her,
Breezes from Paradise seem gently to fan me.
Love itself gives her that smile,
And what her eyes say is no lie.

—feeling in the depths of his soul that the eyes represent the evidence for truth, the smile is that which imparts truth to the soul, and love is scientific study.

One thing is obviously impossible in the present day. It is not possible that a modern poet should quite honestly and truly address philosophy in such directly human language. For if he did so, a critic would soon seize him by the collar and say. “You are giving us pedantic allegories.” Even Goethe had to endure having his allegories in the second part of Faust taken in very bad part in many quarters. People who do not know how times change, and that our souls grow into them with ever fresh vitality have no idea that Dante was just one of those who were able to feel as concrete, passionate, personal a relation, directly of a soul-nature, towards the lady Philosophy as a modern man can only feel towards a lady of flesh and blood. In this respect, Dante’s times are over, for the woman Philosophy no longer approaches the modern soul as a being of like nature with itself, as a being of flesh and blood, as Dante approached the lady Philosophy. Or would the whole honest truth be expressed (exceptions are of course out of the reckoning), if it were said today, deliberately that philosophy was something going about like a being of flesh and blood, to which such a relation was possible that its expression could really not be distinguished from ardent words of love addressed to a being of flesh and blood? One who enters into the whole relation in which Dante stood to philosophy, will know that that relation was a concrete one, such an one is only imagined nowadays as existing between man and woman.

Philosophy in the age of Dante appears as a being whom Dante says he loves. If we look round a little, we certainly find the word ‘philosophy’ coming to the surface of the mental and spiritual life of the Greeks, but we do not find there what we now call definitions or representations of philosophy. When the Greeks represent something, it is Sophia not Philosophia. And they represent her in such a way, that we feel her to be literally a living being. We feel the Sophia to be as literally a living being as Dante feels philosophy to be. But we feel her everywhere in such a way – and I ask you to go through the descriptions which are still existing – that we, so to say, feel her as an elemental force, as a being who acts, a being who interposes in existence through action. Then from about the fifth century after the foundation of Christianity onwards, we find that Philosophia begins to be represented, at first described by poets in the most various guises, as a nurse, as a benefactress, as a guide, and so on. Then somewhat later painters etc. begin to represent her, and then we may go on to the time called, the age of scholasticism in which many a philosopher of the Middle Ages, really felt it to be a directly human relation when he was aware of the fair and lofty lady Philosophia actually approaching him from the clouds; and many a philosopher of the Middle Ages would have been able to send just the same kind of deep and ardent feelings to the lady Philosophia floating towards him on clouds, as the feelings of which we have just heard from Dante. And one who is able to feel such things even finds a direct connection between the Sistine Madonna, floating on the clouds, and the exalted lady, Philosophia.

I have often described how in very ancient periods of human development, the spiritual conditions of the universe were still perceptible to the normal human faculty of cognition. I have tried to describe how there was a primeval clairvoyance, how in primeval times all normally developed people were able, owing to natural conditions, to look into the spiritual world. Slowly and gradually that primitive clairvoyance became lost to human evolution, and our present conditions of knowledge took their place. This happened by slow degrees, and the conditions in which we are now living – which as it were represent a temporary very deep entanglement in the material kind of perception – also come by slow degrees. For such a spirit as Dante, as we gather from the description he gives in the Divine Comedy, it was still possible to experience the last remnants of a direct relation of spiritual worlds – to experience them as it were in a natural way. To a man of the present day it is mere foolish nonsense to except him to believe that he might first, like Dante, be in love with a Beatrice, and might afterwards be involved in a second love-affair with Philosophy, and that these two were beings of quite similar nature, the Beatrice of flesh and blood, and Philosophy.

It is true I have heard that it was said that Kant was once in love, and someone became jealous because he loved Metaphysics, and asked “Meta what?” – but it is certainly difficult to introduce into the modern life of the spirit enough understanding to enable people to feel Dante’s Beatrice and Philosophy as equally real and actual. Why is this? Just because the direct connection of the human soul with the spiritual world has gradually passed over into our present condition. Those who have often heard me speak, know how highly I estimate the philosophy of the nineteenth century; but I will not even mention it as possible, that anyone could pour forth his feelings about Hegel’s Logic in the words:

At the sight of her,
Breezes from Paradise seem gently to fan me.
Love itself gives her that smile,
And what her eyes say is no lie.

I think it would be difficult to say this about Hegel’s Logic. It would even be difficult, although more possible, with regard to the intellectual manner in which Schopenhauer contemplates the world. It would certainly be easier in this case, but even then it would still be difficult to gain any concrete idea or feeling that philosophy approaches man as a concrete being in the way in which Dante here speaks of it. Times have changed. For Dante, life within the philosophic element, within the spiritual world, was a direct personal relation – as personal as any other which has to do with what is today the actual or material. And strange though it seems, because Dante’s time is not very far removed from our own, it is nevertheless true, that for one who is able to observe the spiritual life of humanity, it follows quite as a matter of course for him to say: “People are trying nowadays to know the world; but when they assume that all that man is, has remained the same throughout the ages, their outlook does not really extend much further than the end of their noses.” For even as late as Dante’s time, life in general, the whole relation of the human soul to spiritual world, was different. And if any philosopher is of opinion that the relation which he may have with the spiritual world through Hegel’s or Schopenhauer’s philosophy, is the only possible one, it means nothing more than that a man may still be really very ignorant.

Now let us consider what we have been describing – namely, that on the transition from the Graeco-Roman civilisation to our fifth period, that part of the collective being of man which we call the intellectual soul, or soul of the higher feelings, which was specially developed during the Graeco-Roman period, was evolved on into the self-conscious soul, during the development which has been going on up to the present. How then in this concrete case of philosophy does the transition from the Graeco-Roman to our modern period come before us – i.e., the transition from the period of the intellectual soul to that of the self-conscious soul? It appears in such a form that we clearly understand that during the development of the intellectual soul, or soul of the higher feelings, man obviously still stands in such a relation to the spiritual worlds connected with his origin, that a certain line of separation is still drawn between him and those spiritual worlds. Thus the Greek confronted his Sophia, i.e. pure wisdom, as if she were a being so to say standing in a particular place and he facing her. Two beings, Sophia and the Greek, facing each other, just as if she were quite an objective entity which he can look at, with all the objectivity of the Greek way of seeing things. But because he was still living in the intellectual soul, or soul of the higher feelings, he has to bring into expression the directly personal relation of his consciousness to that objective entity. This has to take place in order to prepare the way gradually for a new epoch, that of the self-conscious soul.

How will the self-conscious soul confront Sophia? In such a way that it brings the ego into a direct relation with Sophia, and expresses, not so much the objective being of Sophia, as the position of the ego in relation to the self-conscious soul, to this Sophia. “I love Sophia” was the natural feeling of an age which still had to confront the concrete being designated as Philosophy; but yet was the age which was preparing the way for the self-conscious soul, and which, out of the relation of the ego to the self-conscious soul, on which the greatest value had to be placed, was working towards representing Sophia as simply as everything else was represented. It was so natural that the age which represented the intellectual soul, or soul of the higher feelings, and which was preparing the self-conscious soul, should bring into expression the relation to philosophy. And because things are expressed only by slow degrees, they were prepared during the Graeco-Roman period. But we also see this relation of man to Philosophia developed externally up to a certain point, when we have before us pictorial representations of philosophy floating down on clouds, and later, in Philosophia’s expression (even if she bears another name), a look showing kindly feeling, once again expressing the relation to the self-conscious soul.

It is the plain truth that it was from a quite human personal relation, like that of a man to a woman, that the relation of man to philosophy started in the age when philosophy directly laid hold of the whole spiritual life of progressive human evolution. The relation has cooled: I must ask you not to take the words superficially, but to seek for the meaning behind what I am going to say. The relation has indeed cooled – sometimes it has grown icy cold. For if we take up many a book on philosophy at the present day, we can really say that the relation which was so ardent [passionate] in the days when people looked upon philosophy as a personal being, has grown quite cool, even in the case of those who are able to struggle through to the finest possible relation to philosophy. Philosophy is no longer the woman, as she was to Dante and other who lived in his times. Philosophy nowadays comes before us in a shape that we may say: “The very form in which it confronts us in the nineteenth century in its highest development, as a philosophy of ideas, conceptions, objects, shows us that part in the spiritual development of humanity has been played out.”

In reality it is deeply symbolic when we take up Hegel’s philosophy, especially the Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences, and find as the last thing in this nineteenth-century book, a statement of the way in which philosophy interprets itself. It has understood everything else; finally, it grasps itself. What is there left for it to understand now? It is the symptomatic expression of the fact that philosophy has come to an end, even if there are still many questions to be answered since Hegel’s days. A thorough-going thinker, Richard Wahle,³ has brought this forward in his book, The Sum-Total of Philosophy and Its Ends, and has very ably worked out the thesis that everything achieved by philosophy may be divided up amongst the various separate departments of physiology, biology, aesthetics, etc., and that when this is done, there is nothing left of philosophy. It is true that such books overshoot the mark but they contain a deep truth, i.e., that certain spiritual movements, have their day and period, and that, just as a day has its morning and evening, they have their morning and evening in the history of human evolution.

We know that we are living in an age when the Spirit-Self is being prepared, that although we are still deeply involved in the development of the self-conscious soul, the evolution of the Spirit-Self is preparing. We are living in the period of the self-conscious soul, and looking towards the preparation of the age of the Spirit-Self, in much the same way as the Greek lived in the epoch of the intellectual soul, or soul of the higher feelings, and looked towards the dawning of the self-conscious soul. And just as the Greek founded philosophy, which in spite of Paul Deussen⁴ and others first existed in Greeks, just as the Greek founded it during the unfolding of the intellectual soul, or soul of the higher feelings, when man was still directly experiencing the lingering influence of the objective Sophia, just as philosophy then arose and developed in such a way that Dante could look upon it as a real concrete, actual being, who brought him consolation after Beatrice had been torn from him by death, so we are living now in the midst of the age of the self-conscious soul, are looking for the dawn of the age of the Spirit-Self, and know that something is once more becoming objective to man, which however is carrying forward through the coming times that which man has won while passing through the epoch of the self-conscious soul.

What is it that has to be evolved? What has to come to development is the presence of a new Sophia. But man has learnt to relate this Sophia to his self-conscious soul, and to experience her as directly related to man’s being. This is taking place during the age of the self-conscious soul. Thereby this Sophia has become the being who directly enlightens human beings. After she has entered into man, she must go outside him taking with her his being, and representing it to him objectively once more. In this way did Sophia once enter the human soul and arrive at the point of being so intimately bound up with it that a beautiful love-poem, like that of Dante’s could be made about her; Sophia will again become objective, but she will take with her that which man is, and represent herself objectively in this form – now not merely as Sophia, but as Anthroposophia – as the Sophia who, after passing through the human soul, through the being of man, henceforth bears that being within her, and thus stands before enlightened man as once the objective being Sophia stood before the Greeks. This is the progress of the history of human evolution in relation to the spiritual facts under consideration.

And now I leave it to all those, who wish to examine the matter very minutely, to see how it may also be shown in detail from the destiny of Sophia, Philosophia and Anthroposophia, how humanity evolves progressively through the soul principles which we designate the intellectual soul (the soul of the higher feelings), the self-conscious soul and the Spirit-Self. People will learn how deeply established in the collective being of man is that which we have in view through our Anthroposophy. What we receive through anthroposophy is the essence of ourselves, which first floated towards man in the form of a celestial goddess with whom he was able to come into relation which lived on as Sophia and Philosophia, and which man will again bring forth out of himself, putting it before him as the fruit of true self-knowledge in Anthroposophy. We can wait patiently till the world is willing to prove how deeply founded down to the smallest details is what we have to say.

For it is the essence of Theosophy or Anthroposophy that its own being consists of what is man’s being, and the nature of its efficacy is that man receives and discovers from Theosophy or Anthroposophy what he himself is, and has to put it before himself because he must exercise self-knowledge.

• 1. The Mysteries of the East and of Christianity, Berlin, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 7th February 1913 [PC]
• 2. Poem number 61 in Dante’s Rime {note from the book Isis Mary Sophia}
• 3. Richard Wahle (1857-1935) was professor of philosophy at the Universities of Czernowitz (in Western Ukraine) and Vienna.
• 4. Paul Jakob Deussen (1845-1919) was a German professor of philosophy at University of Kiel and academic researcher of the history and cultures, languages, and literature of the Indian subcontinent.

[ 1 ] My dear friends! I sincerely thank Licentiate Bock for his welcoming words, and I promise you that I want to apply everything in my power to contribute at least partly, towards all you are looking for during your stay here.

[ 2 ] Today I would like to discuss some orientation details so that we may understand one another in the right way. It will be our particular task—also during the various hours of discussion we are going to have—to express exactly what lies particularly close to your heart for your future work. I hope that what I have to say to you will be said in the correct way, when during the coming discussion hour your wishes and tasks you ask about, will be heard.

[ 3 ] Anthroposophy, my dear friends, must certainly remain on the foundation of which I've often spoken, when I say: Anthroposophy as such can't represent religious education; anthroposophy as such must limit its task as a spiritual science to fructify present culture and civilization and it is not its purpose to represent religious education. Actually, it is quite far from such direct involvement in any way, in the evolutionary process of religious life. Nevertheless, it appears to me to be certainly justified in relation to the tasks you have just set yourselves, that for religious activity something can be extracted out of Anthroposophy. Indirectly it can not only be obtained through Anthroposophy, but it must be extracted, and this must be said; your experience is quite correct that religious life as such needs deepening, which can come out of the source of anthroposophical science.

[ 4 ] I presume, my dear friends, that you want to actively position yourself in this religious life and that you have looked for this Anthroposophic course because you have felt that religious activity has lead you increasingly towards a dead end, and that through the religious work today—with our traditions, with the historic development and others, which we will still discuss—elements are missing which actually should be within it. We notice how just today even important personalities are searching for a new foundation for religious activity, because they believe this is needed in order to progress in a certain direction. I would like to indicate it as a start, how even the most conscientious personalities ask themselves how one can reach a certain foundation of religious awareness, and how then these personalities actually search more or less for a kind of—one can also call it something else—a kind of philosophy. I remind you only how a home is sought for a kind of philosophic foundation for religious awareness. Obviously, one has to, through the current awareness, recognise something absolutely necessary and one should not ignore that an extraordinarily amount has been accomplished this way. However, one can't comprehend, with unprejudiced observation, what is strived for, and come face to face with this: such an effort, instead of leading into the religious life, actually leads out of the religious life.

Religious life, you will sense, must be something direct, it must be something elementary, entirely connected to human nature, which lives out of the elementary, most inward foundation of human nature. All philosophic thinking is a reflection and is distanced from this direct, elementary experience. If I might express a personal impression, it would be this: When someone philosophises about the religious life and believes that a philosophical foundation is necessary for a religious life, then it always seems to me to be similar to when one wants to turn to the physiology of nutrition in order to attain nourishment oneself. Isn't it true, one can determine the exact foundations of nutritional science but that means nothing for nutrition itself. Nutritional science elucidates nutrition, but nutrition must surely have a sound foundation, it must grow roots in reality; only then can one philosophise about nutrition. So also, the religious life must have roots in reality. It must come to existence out of reality, only when it is there can one philosophise about it. It is certainly not possible at all to substantiate or justify the religious life with some or other philosophic consideration.

[ 5 ] That's the one thing. The other one is something which I can best indicate—I always like referring to realities—through a book which had already came into existed several decades ago in Basle, with the title: The Christian Nature of our Theology Today. It is a book by Overbeck. In it he refers to evidence that the current theology is a kind of theology but that it is actually not Christian any longer. Now, when one takes Harnack's book The Being of Christianity and in its arguments everywhere simply exchanges the word "God" in every instance where he has "Christ," then one will not really change anything in the inner content of Harnack's book. This is already expressed in what Adolf Harnack says, that in the Gospels actually only the proclamation of the Father is needed and not those of Christ Jesus, while naturally during the earlier centuries the Christian development of the Gospels was above all regarded according to the proclamations of Christ Jesus. However, if the Gospels are really considered as the actual proclamations of Christ Jesus, then one has to, beside the Father-experience, that means beside the experience of the world in general being permeated by the Godhead, have the Christ-experience as something extra special. One must be able to have both of these experiences. A theology like Adolf Harnack's no longer has both of these experiences, but only a God-experience, and as a result it is necessary for him that what he finds in his imagination of God, he baptises it with the name of Christ; purely out of a historical foundation, because as he is even a representative of Christianity, he calls his God-experience by the name of Christ.

[ 6 ] These incisive, important things exist already. Certainly, they are not made properly clear but they are felt, and I presume that currently, where nearly everything is shaken up in people's minds, a young theology in particular needs to show itself, in how these things can't really be completed, as is seen to some extent today with theologians, without being permeated by the actual being of Christ. Out of this experience such a book as von Overbeck's was created regarding the current Christianity of theology, where basically the answer is given to why modern theology is no longer Christian because it deals with a general philosophising about a world permeated by God, and not in the real sense of the Christ experience creating the foundation for the entire treatment of religious problems. Religious problems are dealt with based only as Father-problems and not actually the Christ experience.

[ 7 ] Today we basically all have an education inculcated in us, derived from modern science, this science which actually only started in the middle of the 15th century but which has entered into all forms of modern people's thinking. One basically can't be different because one has been educated this way from the lowest primary classes, by forming thoughts according to modern science. This has resulted in theology of the 19th century wanting to orientate itself according to the research of modern science. I'd like to say they feel themselves responsible for the judge's chair of modern science and as a result have become what they are today. One can only find a basis of true religiosity today by, at the same time, considering the entire authorisation and also the complete meaning of the scientific element of life.

[ 8 ] To some of you I have possibly already referred to a man who needs to be taken seriously in relation to religious life, Gideon Spicker, who for a long time studied philosophy at the Münster university. He proceeded from a strict Christian conception of the world, which he gradually developed into his philosophy which was never considered a philosophy but more an instrument for the understanding of religious problems. Modern thinking didn't offer him the possibility to find a sure foundation. So we find in his booklet, entitled At the Turning Point of the Christian World Period the hopelessness of modern man which characterised him so clearly, because he says: "Today we have metaphysics without transcendental conviction, we have a theory of knowledge without objective meaning, we have psychology without a soul, logic without content, ethics without liability and the result is that we can't find some or other foundation for religious consciousness."—Gideon Spicker stood very close to the actual crux which lies at the basis of all religious dichotomies in modern mankind. One can take it like a symptom, to indicate where the actual crux, I could call it, lies. If modern man is discerning, if he tries to create an image through his imagination of the world, then at the same time he clearly has the feeling that this discernment doesn't penetrate the depths. Gideon Spicker expressed it like this: "We have a theory of knowledge without objective meaning", which means we have our insights without being in the position to find the power within us to create something really objective out of our assembled insights. So, the modern discerning man sickens because he fails to find the possibility of a guarantee for his knowledge of objectivity in the world, for existence as such. He finds it in what he experiences subjectively in the knowledge, not really out of the thing itself.

[ 9 ] All of this of course, because it is philosophy, has nothing to do with religious experience. Still, one can say that religious life today is certainly under an influence which heads in a similar direction. The kind of humanity which is not in the position to say about knowledge: "in this realization there exists objective existence for me"—such a type of humanity feels this same insecurity rise up at another point, and that is religious life. The insecurity is situated at the same pivotal point where actual religious life exists today. We will see how other problems will huddle around this pivot point. This pivotal point lies in prayer, in the meaning of prayer. The religious person must feel that prayer has real meaning; some or other reality must be connected to prayer. However, in a time epoch when the discerning person fails to come out of his subjective knowledge and fails to find reality in knowledge, in the same time epoch religious people won't find the possibility, during prayer, of becoming aware that prayer is no mere subjective deed, but that within prayer an objective experience takes place. For a person who is unable to realise that prayer is an objective experience, for him or her it would be impossible to find a real religious hold. Particularly in the nature of current humanity prayer must focus on the religious life. Various other areas must focus on prayer. However, a prayer which only has subjective meaning would make people religiously insecure.

[ 10 ] It is the same root which grows out of us on the one side for the insecurity of knowledge, the Ignorabimus, and on the other side in fear; worry, which do not live in prayer in divine objectivity, but which is involved in subjectivity.

[ 11 ] You see, the problem of faith and the problem of knowledge, all problems, which involve people from the theological side, are connected to the same characteristics. Everything which depresses people from the side of direct religious experience, which needs confirmation, which must be maintained, this all comes from the same source. You can hardly answer this question if you don't orientate yourself historically where it will quite clearly show how far we have actually become distanced with our sciences from what we can call Christian today, while on the other hand today there is the constant attempt to proceed by pushing anything Christian out with science. Take everything in the Gospels which is Christian tradition. You can't but say: in this, there is another conception of the human being than what modern science claims. In modern science the human being is traced back to some or other primitive archetypal creature—I absolutely don't want to say that mankind had perhaps developed out of an animal origin—we are referred back to a primitive Ur-human, which gradually developed itself and, in whose development, existed a progression, an advance. Modern humanity is satisfied to look back according to scientific foundations, to the primitive archetypal beings, who through some inherent power, it is said, they created an ever greater and bigger cultural accomplishment, and to behold the unexpected future of this perfection.

If one now places within this evolution, the development of the Christ, the Mystery of Golgotha, then one can in an honest way hold on to the Gospels and say nothing other than: into this He doesn't fit, what fits here is a historic conception which goes around the Mystery of Golgotha and leaves it out, but the Christ of the Gospels don't fit into this conception. The Christ of the Gospels can't be considered in any other way than if one somehow believes what happened in the 18th century especially among the most enlightened, the most spiritual people as a matter of course. Take for instance Saint Martin—I now want to look further from religious development and want to point out someone who was in the most imminent sense a scientist of the 18th century—and that was Saint Martin. He had a completely clear awareness that the human being at the start of his earthly development came from a certain height downwards, that he had been in another world milieu earlier, in another environment and through a mighty event, through a crisis was thrown down to a sphere which lay below the level of his previous existence, so that the human being is no longer what he once had been.

[ 12 ] While our modern natural science points back to a primitive archetypal being out of which we have developed; this observation of Saint Martin must refer back to the fallen mankind, to those human beings which had once been more elevated. This was something, like I said, which to Saint Martin appeared as a matter of course. Saint Martin experienced this fall of mankind as a feeling of shame. You see, if the Christ is placed in such a conception of human evolution, where the human being, by starting his earth existence through a descent and is now more humble than he was before, then the Christ becomes that Being who would save humanity from its previous fall, then the Christ bears mankind again up into those conditions where it had existed before.

[ 13 ] We will see in what modification this imagination must appear to our souls. In any case this involves a disproportion between our modern understanding of mankind's evolution and the understanding of the Gospels; there is always dishonesty when one goes hither and thither and does not confess that one is simultaneously a supporter of modern scientific thinking and also the Christ. This must actually be clear for every honest, particularly religiously honest sensitive person. Here is something where a bridge must be formed if the religious life is to be healthy once again. Without this bridging, religious life will never ever be healthy again. Actually, there are people who come along like David Friedrich Strauss, and to the question "Are we still Christians?" reply with a No, indicating that they are still more honest than some of the modern theologians, whoever and again overlook the radical differences between what the modern human being regards as pure science and the Gospel concept of the Christ. This is the characteristic of modern theology. It is basically the impotent attempt to treat the Christ conception of the Gospels in such a way that it can be validated in front of modern science. Here nothing originates which somehow can be held.

[ 14 ] Yet, theology still exists. The modern pastor is given very little support for his line of work in the kind of theology presented at his schooling currently, from the foundation which has been indicated already and about which we will still come to in the course of our observations. The modern pastor must of course be a theologian even though theology is not religion. However, in order to work, a theological education is needed, and this educational background suffers from all the defects which I've briefly indicated in our introduction today.

[ 15 ] You see, the Catholic Church knows quite well what it is doing, because it doesn't allow modern science to come into theology. Not as if the Catholic Church doesn't care for modern science, it takes care of it. The greatest scholars can certainly be found within the Catholic ecclesiastics. I'm reminded of Father Secchi, a great astrophysicist, I remember people such as Wasmann, a significant zoologist, and many others, above all one can remind oneself of the extraordinarily important scientific accomplishments, worldly scientific accomplishments of the Benedictine order and so on. But what role did modern science play in the Catholic Church? The Catholic Church wants to care for modern science, that there are real luminaries in it. However, people want this modern scientific way to be applied in connection with the outer sensory world, it wants to distance itself strongly from the conceptions of anything pertaining to spirituality, no statements should be made about this spirituality. Hence it is therefore forbidden to express something about the spiritual, because scientists must not enter into this mix when something is being said about the legitimacy of the spiritual life. So, Catholicism relegates science to its boundaries, it rejects science from all that is theology. That it, for instance in modernism, gradually came into it, has caused Catholicism to experience it as dispensable; hence the war against modernism. The Catholic Church knows precisely that in that moment when science penetrates theology, extraordinary dangers lie ahead, and it is impossible to cope with scientific research in theology.

It is basically quite hopeless if it is expressed in abstract terms: theology we must have but it will be scorched, burnt by modern science.—Where does this come from? That is the next big burning question. Where does this come from?

[ 16 ] Yes, my dear friends, theology as we have it now, is rooted in quite different conditions than those of modern mankind. Ultimately the foundation of theology—if it wants to be correctly understood—is precisely the same foundations as that of the Gospels themselves. I have just expressed a sentence and naturally in its being said, it is not immediately understood, but it has extraordinary importance for our discussions here. Theology as inherited tradition doesn't appear in the form in which modern science appears. Theology is mostly in a form of something handed down, as such it goes back to the earlier ways of understanding. Certainly, logic was later applied to modern theology, which changed the form of theology somewhat; theology no longer appeared as it had been once upon a time. On the other hand, it is Catholicism which actually has something in this relationship which works in an extraordinarily enchanting manner on the more intelligent people and which is firmly adhered to in many Catholic clerics upon studying theology, through what has been handed down as knowledge of the so-called Primordial Revelation (Uroffenbahrung).

[ 17 ] Primordial Revelation! You have to be aware that Catholicism does not merely have the revelation which we usually call the revelation of the New Testament, nor this being only the revelation spoken about in the Old Testament, but that Catholicism—as far as it is theology—speaks about a Primordial Revelation. This Primordial Revelation is usually characterised by saying: that which was revealed by the Christ had been experienced once before by mankind, at that time humanity acquired the revelation through another, a cosmic world milieu. This revelation was lost through the Fall, but an inheritance of this great revelation was still available through the Old Testament and through pagan teachings.—That is Catholic thinking. Once upon a time, before people became sinners, a revelation was made to them; had mankind not fallen into sin, so the entire act of salvation of Christ Jesus would not have become necessary. However, the primordial revelation had been tarnished through humanity falling into the sinful world and in the course of time up to the Mystery of Golgotha the human being increasingly forgot what the primordial revelation had been. To a certain extent in the beginning there still remained glimpses of this primordial revelation, then however, as the generation went further and further away, this primordial revelation darkened, and it had become totally dark in the time of the Mystery of Golgotha which came as a new revelation.

This is what Christianity looks like today—under theological instruction—in Old Testament teaching and above all in the pagan teaching it is seen as a corrupted Primordial Revelation. Catholicism has an insight into what I've often spoken about in Anthroposophy, namely the old Mysteries. In my book Christianity as Mystical Fact I pointed these things out, but, not quite, but only as far as possible because these things are as much unknown as possible in today's world and most people are not prepared for these things. Only, here we can speak about it, and about one point.

[ 18 ] Everywhere in the pagan-religious mysteries there are certain experiences which allowed people to learn more than those communicated outwardly, exoterically, to a large crowd. These experiences didn't happen under supervision but through asceticism, through practice, they happened by the person going through certain experiences; a kind of drama was experienced leading to a culmination, with a catharsis, until the person came to sense the lightening of the divine laws of the world. This is simply a fact and within esoteric Catholicism it engendered an awareness of what existed in the Mysteries. It is even said that modern times are filled with worldly science and that this worldly science must not enter theology with arguments; as a result, we'd rather protect our knowledge of the Mysteries so that worldly science doesn't come in to explain it, because explaining the Mysteries would be a great danger under any circumstances. Catholicism was afraid that scientific involvement would reveal what one could possibly know about such things.

[ 19 ] Now we come to the question: what did the Mysteries actually impart during these olden times? The Mysteries didn't produce a mere theoretical knowledge, it produced an evolution of consciousness, a real transformation of consciousness. A person who had gone through the Mysteries learnt to experience life differently to those people who hadn't gone through them. A person who stands fully awake in the world, experiences outside the sleep state, the outer sense world; he experiences memories, he can through these memories relive his life within himself when after various interruptions he comes to a certain point in his life which lies a couple of years after his birth. With an individual who has gone through hard exercises in the Mysteries, something quite different rises up in his awareness than what he usually can find in his consciousness. In the old Mysteries one expressed this experience as a "rebirth." Why does one call it a rebirth? Because in fact a person goes through a kind of embryonic experience in his consciousness; an awareness comes to the fore in the manner and way the person had lived through during his time as an embryo. During the time of being an embryo, our inner experience is namely of the same kind as are the experiences during thinking, because what is experienced in our senses is only done so through our mother's body. An embryonic experience is woken up, that's why we call it a "rebirth." A person goes back in his embryonic life up to the time of his birth, and so, just like memories rise up, so that what is being experienced also rises up. In this way a person feels himself coming out of a spiritual world, being partially connected to a spiritual world. These were the mysteries of birth, under which time one understood the blossoming of the Mysteries as something which human beings could go through during such an initiation. What he went through during such an initiation was considered a shadowed knowledge of such a state he was in, before he descended into the world of the senses. Thus, through the "rebirth" the human being re-places himself again to a certain extend back into a human form of existence free of sin.

In earlier times, knowledge which was not of this world was called "theology," and this knowledge could be acquired through the return to the wisdom that human beings had had before entering into this world, a wisdom which had been corrupted because people had dragged it into this world.

[ 20 ] I'm sketching these things for you and later we will naturally bring today's considerations to our awareness. Theology in olden times was a gift from the gods, which could only be achieved through such exercises which could lift people out of their senses and bring them at least back to the experience of motherly love, enabling them to take up this wisdom again, this uncorrupted wisdom. This cannot be taken up in the form or modern logical concepts. Within the Mysteries people could not be given logical concepts in the modern sense, they received images. All knowledge which is gained in this way is gained in pictures, images. The more a person actually entered into the real world of existence—not only associated himself with existence—the more he lives into this existence, like when he lives within the existence of motherly love, so much more will consciousness stop living in abstract concepts, so much more will he live in images. Thus, what was designated as "theology" in olden times, in pre-Christian times, visual science, was science living in images. For this reason, I could say: this theology certainly had a similar form of expression as the one living in the Gospels, because in the Gospels we find images, and the further we go back, the more we find that the Gospels are still being expressed in the attitude of the old theology; there is certainly no differentiation between religion and theology. Here theology itself is something which has been received from God, here in theology one looks upon a God, and sees how the theology is given through a communication with God. Here is something which is alive, in theology. Then it came about that theology was experienced differently, somewhat like the conditions in which one lives when you grow older. At that time therefore, in olden times, theology was nourished through the religious life. This particular way of living though-oneself in the world of religious experience, this actually was getting lost to humanity at the same time as the Mystery of Golgotha was occurring.

[ 21 ] So you see, when we look towards the East as it is connected historically to the source of our religious life, we have, we can say, the Indian religious life. What nourishes the Indian religious life? It is nourished through the observation of nature, but the observation of nature was something quite different then to what it is for modern humanity. Nature observation was for all Indians such that one can say: an Indian observed spiritually when looking at nature, but he only observed the spirit which lay beneath the actual being of humanity. The Indian observed the mineral world spiritually, likewise the plant world, animal world; he was aware of the divine spiritual foundation of these worlds; but when he wanted to attain the human world as well, it didn't reveal itself to him. By wanting to access the actual being of the human being in the world, which he had himself, there he found nothing: Nirvana, the entry in nothingness towards what could be perceived in relation to the human being. Thus, the fervour of the Indian's religious life, which certainly was still present at that time, where theology, religion and science were one, was Nirvana. We have an escape from what is perceived from the natural basis of the image-rich consciousness, an escape into Nirvana, where everything that is given to the senses is obliterated. This self-abandonment to Nirvana must be experienced religiously in order to find a possible form for the religious stream of experience for individuals.

[ 22 ] Now, when we consider this religious observation of the world further, with the Persians and later with the Chaldeans, we see how they turn their gaze outward, they don't experience the world like us, they live through a world permeated with spirit, everywhere the spiritual foundation permeates everything, but immobilises it. There is a different disposition with these peoples compared to the Indians. The Indian strived towards mankind and found nothing. The other peoples who lived to the north and west of the Indians didn't strive towards mankind but towards the world, towards the spiritual in the world. They couldn't understand the spiritual world in any other way than to avoid with all their might, what later human evolution could no longer avoid.

[ 23 ] It is unbelievably meaningful, my dear friends, to observe how, on the one hand the old Indian striving came from what he saw, while he, when he strived towards human beings, I might call it, fell into unconsciousness, into Nirvana, while the Old Persian remained in what he was looking at. The divine which is the basis of the mineral, the plant and animal worlds, was understood by the Old Persian and from this came his religious striving; but now he was overcome by fear that he might be urged to seek man, and this turned into abstract thoughts which turned into imagery. This is actually the basic feeling of the near-Asian peoples all the way to Africa. They saw the foundation of nature as being a spiritual world; they didn't see people, but they were afraid to search in people because then they would enter an abstract region, a region into which later, the Romans entered with their religion. Before the Roman time, in the second, third Century there was the aspiration everywhere to avoid entering into abstractions, hence the aspiration to capture what is presented in images. There was even the endeavour to express in images, what one understood, in image form. There was an effort to, in relation to the divine, which one perceives, not to search for it through abstract concepts but in actions made visible; this is the origin of ritual, sacramental action. In this religious area which I'm referring to, is the origin of ritual in worship.

[ 24 ] Now place yourself into this entire development of the old Hebraic peoples; the Judaism which strongly feels the urge for its people's development to enter into what one possesses in one's consciousness. Today I only want to make indications in my presentation in order for us to orientate ourselves. The members of the Hebrew people wanted above all to feel the God on which human nature is based. The Old Indian only sensed God, or the gods, who lay at the basis of sub human nature, and as he tried to penetrate with his consciousness into the human being, there he wanted to rise up into Nirvana. The other, the Persian, Chaldean and Egyptian peoples searched for the connection to the Divine in images and applied these according to their character dispositions, to get up to the human being. So we can see how this urge, as in Judaism, to draw the divine and the human together, to bring the divine in a relationship with the human being, lead to the divine appearing at the same time the foundation of humanity. There was not predisposition to that in the Indian when they sailed into Nirvana; there was no longer a conception that the human consciousness wanted to be reached. For the Indian this personal route to the human soul was to be avoided. This personal route of the human soul had even lead to gradually slipping out of existence into nonexistence, so to speak. The other, the Prussian route, came to a standstill with imagery, remaining in ritual only.

[ 25 ] We see how the Jewish peoples developed, within these strivings, their own special character and this resulted in the impossibility to reach God out of one's own life. One had to wait and see what God himself gave, and it was there that the actual concept of revelation came into being. One had to wait and see what God would give and on the other hand one had to be careful not to search through the route of imagery or symbolism (Bilderweg), which was to be feared. If the route of symbolism was sought, then one arrived at a subhuman God, not at a God who carries humanity. In Judaism the symbolic route was not to be followed, it would not be through ritual an also not through the content of knowledge that one would speak to God. The olden time Jew wanted to meet their god by Him revealing himself, and human beings would communicate in a human way, while from their side, not make outwardly fulfilled sacrifices, but what arises subjectively: the promise—revelation, promise and the contract between both; a judicial relationship one could call it, between the people and their God.

[ 26 ] So the Jewish religion positioned itself and thus the Jewish religion stood in the entire evolution of humanity. therefore, one can say: here already a relationship is the example which is performed in our modern time, where science wants to be beside religion but where science has nothing to say about religion, just like the olden time Jew removed everything which appeared as imagery. This is already performed in Judaism, and precisely in the modern differentiation between knowledge and faith, lies unbelievably much Judaism. In Harnack's The Being of Christianity everything is again based on Judaism. You have to see through this that we get sick with these things.

[ 27 ] Human evolution is penetrated by more and more things. Something is continuously developing which belongs to the Jews in particular: the awareness of personality, which is urged by ego development. With the Greeks there developed a mighty inner world beside the outer world of observed nature but this inner world could raise doubts, because it was observed merely as a world of mythology. Sensing the religious element rising in Hellenism, which lives in Greek mythology, through mythological fantasy, which people are searching for—because it was not to be found in nature—is what rises up in man. The Greek however didn't grasp the actual important point within the human inner life, resulting from mythological fantasy, which the Romans evolved into abstract thinking, which certainly already started with Aristotle, but which was developed particularly in Rome. This abstract way of thinking which is so powerful as to being people to the point of their I, bringing them to self-consciousness, to I-consciousness, this is something which we today still carry in us today and we carry it heavily in us, in the form of modern agnosticism.

[ 28 ] My dear friends, basically there is no spiritual teaching other than modern materialism. This sounds like an extraordinary paradox and yet it is so. What the modern materialistic thinker carries in his head is quite spiritualized, so spiritualised that it is quite abstract and has no connection to reality any more. That's Romanism in full swing. We actually have become unbelievably spiritual in the course of the 19th century, but we deny this spirituality because we maintain that through this spirituality, we can understand matter. In reality our souls are in a spiritualised content, right into our ideas are we spiritualised, but we maintain that through all of this we can only understand a material world. Thus, human beings have grasped their ego through this spiritualisation, but as a result they have become separated from the world. Today humanity must again look for its connection to the world, the search need to be for inner knowledge, there needs to be the possibility to not only have "knowledge without objective meaning" but knowledge with objective meaning, in order for knowledge to reveal the being of the world, and on the other hand to authenticate what is hidden within the human being as objective.

[ 29 ] You see, the Greeks had a great advantage compared to the oriental world, they could to draw together their innermost nature so to speak. From within themselves they could draw a content, but this content could first only attach as filled with fantasy, imagination. However, there was something the Greeks didn't know. They had brought the development of humanity to internalisation but didn't attach it to the inner life. The internalisation and the hardening continued in the Roman times and beyond, and man had to learn—today still we need to learn to understand—how one can attach what is within, what permeates this inner being. The Greeks could think about their gods in grandiose fantasy images but what the Greek could not do, was to pray. The prayer only cam about later and for prayer the possibility had to be found of connecting the one praying, to reality. To this we must connect those times in which prayer was not merely spoken, not merely thought or not merely felt, but in which prayer became one with the sacramental ritual. Then again Catholicism knows quite well why they don't separate themselves from ritual, from the sacrificial act, from the central sacrifice of the mass.

We'll talk more about these things.

If we really grasp Spiritual Science, it gives us strength and confidence in life. How can we introduce it into our life so that it may help us to advance? Many people think that when they acquire knowledge in this sphere and accumulate spiritual truths it is not a help but a hindrance in a sound human life. Why, they ask, do we need all this knowledge of the spirit, why should we have to learn so much about the development of the earth and of a whole planetary system? Why do we need this at all? We are true theosophists, they say, when we strive to find the higher self within us and are enabled thereby to advance as human beings. There are others whose minds are more theoretical and who enjoy hearing of the different members of man's being, of the development of mankind through the different epochs of culture, and of the regular, numerical periods. They wish to learn of all these things as quickly as possible, noting down the most important truths in a few words and circulating them in a catechetical form. But we must affirm that neither of these notions correspond in any way to what Spiritual Science can mean to us, and does mean to those who have adopted the right attitude to life through It.

It is true that we must begin by learning that man consists of a physical body, an etheric body, an astral body and an Ego. But it is a mistake to think that by enumerating them we know something of man's being for when we do this we merely schematise. We really know something about man only when this knowledge is applied to life. But this is impossible unless we realise that the essential thing is not only to know the names of these four members, but how they are connected within the human being. When we look upon a human being, it is essential to know how his etheric body is connected with his physical body, whether the etheric and astral body tend towards each other and seek a close connection, or whether they are loosely connected. A closer observation shows that the relationship between these members of the human being changes in the course of mankind's development on earth. In the past, this relationship was different and, in the future, it will be different from what it is to-day.

If we study the ancient Egyptian in the first thousand years of Egyptian culture, thus looking upon ourselves in past incarnations, we shall find in him a human being whose physical, etheric and astral bodies were loosely knit together. But when we consider a human being of the present time, we find instead a more intimate and a closer connection between his different members. And in future, this connection will become closer and closer. This explains why we have to pass through the different epochs of culture. When we say that man reincarnates so and so many times, we may also ask: Why does he reincarnate?—Because the connection between his enveloping members always changes, so that the human being whom we meet in the external world during the different epochs, also changes. When we were Chaldeans, we had a quite different bodily constitution from that of to-day, and in the future, we shall again be differently constituted. Because of these differences our experiences as human beings are different.

It is now essential to develop the right kind of thoughts regarding the true relation of man's inner nucleus passing from incarnation to incarnation, with its enveloping sheaths—the astral body, the etheric body and the physical body. In reality, ordinary science does not know anything about the deeper laws ruling from one incarnation to another. It deals only with what is external. It ignores even the deeper significance of the laws ruling the external sheath. We may convince ourselves of this by considering some of the connections accepted by ordinary science or rejected by it.

It is very interesting to note that for a long time science was inclined to ascribe free will to man. Yet I have pointed out to you that in many respects modern science denies the existence of free will. It refers us to external scientific research which tells us to observe the external course of life. For example, statistics can establish how many suicides occur in a particular place. A certain regularity may be ascertained in regard to these suicides. Statistics show that this occurs at certain regular intervals. A certain number of people is simply condemned to commit suicide. How is it possible then to speak of free will?—One might go still further by drawing attention to the technique of insurance calculations which formulate and reckon out how many of a certain number of people will still be alive after thirty years. This is expressed arithmetically. Death and birth are thus imprisoned within external laws of Nature. Ordinary science admits this. It will, however, be forced to admit very different things also, for it is already evident that certain facts are coming to the fore which will compel people to think in a spiritual-scientific way. Generally speaking, science is not readily inclined to accept new ideas. In this direction it follows a very strange habit. One can hear people declaiming that in the Middle Ages there were men who opposed Kepler's discoveries. The greatest efforts were needed before his teachings could assert themselves against the dark minds of his age. The very people who more than others now draw attention to this fact, are those who adopt the same attitude, not only towards Spiritual Science, but also towards scientific facts which force us in the present time to seek spiritual laws.

A physician in Berlin, for example, ascertained certain numerical connections which appear in the course of human life. This doctor, Fliess [Wilhelm Fließ (1858-1928)] by name, began to register the connections between births and deaths by following them up in different families. For example, a female member of a certain family died on a certain day. Her first grandchild was born 1428 days before her death, the second grandchild 1428 days after her death, so that in this case the grandmother's death lies symmetrically before and after the birth of a grandchild. In the space of 7 times 1428 days after her death, a great-grandchild was born. By following up this case, we come to definite numerical connections, which finally determine in a very wonderful way the relationship between cases of death and birth. Fliess ascertained this in many instances. But apparently modern science does not wish to recognise it, because it goes too much against its own direction.

Even improvements in health-conditions are based on numerical connections. When we compare the number of deaths through tuberculosis during a certain epoch, with the number of deaths of the preceding decades, we again find that this is regulated by certain numbers. Doctors say that by hygienic measures they have been able to diminish the cases of death through tuberculosis. But Fliess proved that this decrease can be reckoned out on the basis of arithmetical connections. This is most inconvenient to modern science, but in the end it will be forced to admit the existence of objective arithmetical laws. It will return to the sentence of Pythagoras: "Number is something which rules everything that weaves and lives". With our soul we calculate, but the higher Spirits made these calculations long ago and set into the course of life something that is in keeping with numbers. The Pythagorean saying, "In calling the world into being, God is a mathematician" seems to come into play. On the other hand, if this is so it would strengthen the attitude of ordinary science which denies that man's inner being has any share in the destiny of his life. For if birth and death are connected in such a way that the distance between them is equal to 7 times 1428 days, it is possible to calculate when we have to die and in that case our inner being really appears to be imprisoned within violent external conditions.

Apparently, we must renounce speaking of special laws which rule our inner being. External reasons may however be adduced which tell us that this isn't quite right after all. According to calculations, a certain number of suicides may indeed take place at a definite place, but is it possible to determine arithmetically what person will commit suicide? According to the theory of probability it is possible to calculate the probable duration of human life. But I do not think that anyone will admit that he will have to die on the day fixed by arithmetical calculation. These laws based on mathematical formulae are of no consequence to man's inner being.

But how do matters stand when Fliess proves that 1428 days lie between a case of death and two births? Does this prove anything in regard to the inner laws of our Ego? For it is impossible to recognise right away the connection between the inner nucleus of our being and the external course of life. How can we explain this with the fact that we follow Karma, that we must follow our inner Ego? This is not easy to grasp.

Let me explain this by an analogy—it is quite possible that two events, two strains, two facts connected with each other should follow completely different courses. Consider this: when you travel from Baste to Zurich you go by train. You consult the time-table to find out when your train leaves. You become, as it were, intimately connected with the figures. Your thoughts, your objectives and so on are dependent on them. (There are, of course, many other figures in the time-table). But is it not the case that alongside this sequence of facts there is another (sequence of facts) that has to do with the development of your soul: that you want to progress or "catch the train?" When you consult the time-table it tells you nothing about yourself—whether you are good or bad, wise or foolish and is of no importance for the soul's being. Similarly, the figures that result from the calculations of Fliess are of no importance for the Karma of our life. We catch a certain train in life, entering a definite stream controlled by laws which are connected with our inner being only through things that we ourselves bring about. We decide which train to catch. In the same way we have to decide, through the inner laws of our Karma, to enter a certain stream of life which is then determined by arithmetical laws.

I speak of these things because those who seek the spirit should more and more acquire a feeling that life is complicated; it is something that cannot be encompassed by slack, easy thoughts. Those who think that it is an easy matter to grasp the whole of life, and that a few sentences taken from Spiritual Science suffice for this, are very much mistaken. We must be willing to penetrate more and more into these connections. We should acquire a feeling which shows us that the thoughts that lie at the foundation of the world's structure, are also valid for the human being. If no connection whatever existed between external laws and human Karma, our whole life would fall asunder.

Two facts can prove this. In Spiritual Science we endeavour to make the best possible comparisons. In a certain way the numbers in the timetable are connected with practical life. Even though it does not concern the time-table whether or not you travel to Zurich, even though you do not see any connecting link with your journey, the time-table is nevertheless connected with human conditions. For men have compiled it in such a way as to correspond, not too awkwardly, to the conditions of life. It is adapted to human conditions of life in general. Something similar is the case with human Karma and the stream of life which it controls. The Beings of the Higher Hierarchies fixed the "time-table" in accordance with numerical conditions, which are then discovered in the regular numbers of statistics. Outwardly, these correspond to human conditions in general. When we reincarnate, we may have an easy or a difficult life. Not in every family do we come across the law according to which a grandchild is always born 1428 days before or after its grandmother's death. But when we consider that 1428 is divisible by 28, that it is equal to 51 times 28, then it is easier to understand this numerical connection. These calculations will not always give the number 1428, but as a rule we find a multiple of 28 between the death and the birth of any member of a family. The multiples may be 30, 17, 26 times 28, and so forth, but they will contain the number 28: this is included regularly.

In accordance with the time-table we have the possibility to catch different trains, and according to our Karma we may arrange life in an easy or a difficult way. I mention this to indicate how complicated these conditions really are.

I also wish to point out that a moral conclusion may be drawn from all these truths. This constitutes the immensely important element given by Spiritual Science. We may say: I live in this world and I find in it numerical connections which show me how external life is regulated. It required long periods of human cultural development before this was discovered. But how much do we really know of these regular laws? Here we must admit that we know very little indeed. Slowly and gradually we discovered something of this divine wisdom. But just as we discover the most beautiful and important facets of wisdom, the wisdom admonishes us to be humble; it shows us how little our thoughts are able to encompass life.

This will stimulate us to continue striving for the Light. This moral feeling, this reverence which we have for the wisdom contained in the universe, is what we may acquire, so that we become better human beings. We acquire this feeling towards wisdom, it takes hold of us, when we recognise how near it was to us during our life between death and a new birth. When we have to come down to a new earthly existence, we choose the train by which we travel, so that we may fulfil our Karma. It is then that we choose our family-ties. If someone were to ask us now which family would be the best for our present incarnation, we would have no idea. If we had to depend only on our own forces, we could not make the right choice.

Before our incarnation we are far wiser than afterwards for at that time we make the right choice. The feeling that now we are not cleverer than before we were born, cannot fill us with pride in regard to our own achievements. For during our existence between death and birth we were filled with other forces besides those we have the moment we step into physical existence.

When we enter physical life, the substances of the earth's realms pervade us and exist within our body. On laying aside the physical body when passing through the portal of death, the Beings of the Higher Hierarchies receive us and we share their substance during our existence between death and a new birth, even as here we share the physical substances of the earth. These physical substances assert themselves—for example, iron streams through our blood in accordance with external laws—and similarly the Beings of the Higher Hierarchies assert themselves between death and a new birth by working within us, and it is their wisdom which pushes us towards the right stream of life. The Beings of the Higher Hierarchies are filled with the wisdom which we need, even as we are filled with physical substance. Humility is therefore a justified feeling, it is the moral consequence of the knowledge that during our physical life we have absorbed only a very small portion of the mighty wisdom of those Spiritual Beings.

Between death and a new birth, we are embedded in the Beings of the Higher Hierarchies. If we do not submit to them, this would be the same as trying to live on earth without taking in certain physical substances, such as hydrogen, oxygen, and so forth. It would be absurd to live without complete submission to the Beings of the Higher Hierarchies. Those who bear in mind the fact that between death and birth we must completely surrender to the Beings of the Higher Hierarchies will ask themselves: What is the best preparation for that existence? And they will give themselves the following answer: The best preparation is to unfold, already during the present earthly life between birth and death, a feeling of devotion for the divine-spiritual world. If we are pervaded by the right feelings, the truths which we receive will change into feelings of devoted surrender. Humility and reverence for the spiritual world will then live in all our feelings.

If we begin to think and live in this way, we shall also discover the true balance in the environing world, for thoughts of this kind regulate and harmonize all our other feelings.

Many mistakes of the external world are brought into the spiritual-scientific movement; they are mistakes which do not come from Spiritual Science, but which are brought into it from outside. For example, a person may be diligent and active in the outside world, but his activity might be characterized by saying that he is ambitious and does too much; he ruins his forces and does not notice that he should observe certain limits in his work. When such a person enters Theosophy, he will come across quite different ideas from those which he had in the external world. But he also brings into Theosophy his own characteristic qualities. He may, for example, hear that a certain amount of study is needed for the soul's progress. He begins to study,—yet he should learn to notice how much he can really do in accordance with the forces allotted to him by his Karma; he should not pursue theosophical studies which surpass his strength. Also, if for example, he becomes a vegetarian he must ask himself whether it agrees with him or not. Otherwise he will ruin himself.

The disciple of Spiritual Science must maintain the right balance. He must know if he can really follow the strictest obligations. A calm and humble observation of his Karma, of his own capacities and forces, may be acquired by accepting in the right way what Spiritual Science can give us. Those who have advanced furthest in occultism, faithfully observe the rule of maintaining the right balance. Some people try to force matters, when external circumstances obstruct a real training; they strive with all their might towards the aim which they have in view, work spiritually like slaves to obtain an immediate answer to the problems which rise up. But those who have really progressed, never do this. First of all, the existence of a definite problem should be clearly envisaged, and then the disciple of Spiritual Science should ask himself: Are you at this moment capable of obtaining a full answer? Wait (he should say to himself) until the Beings of the spiritual world send 3ou this answer. A true disciple of the spirit if he has to strain and push at the outset will give up for the time being. He knows that he must wait, and he can wait because he is filled with the knowledge of the eternity of life and that Karma, which he never forgets, gives each man his due. Then comes a certain moment in which he obtains a strange inner hint ... it is then that the Powers of the spiritual world may give him an answer. Perhaps after many years, even after many incarnations. But it is characteristic of a right attitude to be able to wait, to practise patience, to unfold soul-harmony.

Those who allow themselves to be influenced in the right way by the teachings of Spiritual Science will learn to master their feelings and sensations, so that they are always able to maintain a harmonious balance. If we adopt this attitude, our Ego sends forces into the astral body, so that the astral body absorbs the truths which come from the spiritual world, in the same way in which a sponge absorbs the water into which it is dipped. Spiritual knowledge gradually passes over into the astral body, and the astral body is pervaded by it.

We live in an age in which it is necessary, and in which it will be more and more necessary, to pervade the astral body with spiritual wisdom. The times change more and more, and they change also in regard to the crossing of the threshold of death. In future epochs, when man again returns to the earth, his astral body if not imbued with spiritual knowledge will not find its way about the spiritual world and will be filled with darkness. But if it is filled with the truths which we now absorb, it will become a source of light and it will shed this light on its environment, thus perceiving the wisdom which we take in here on earth, in the light of the spiritual world.

If we now ask ourselves why this future light of the spiritual world does not yet exist, we may say: It has not yet come, because in the past a primordial wisdom existed which could be impressed on man without any effort on his part. It existed as an inheritance which man had received from the old Moon. With this inheritance he could penetrate into the spiritual world. This lasted until the Christian era, when man could no longer obtain spiritual wisdom in an immediate way. In the present time he must first fill his soul with spiritual-scientific truths, which will constitute the power enabling him to enter the spiritual world, guided by the light in his soul. Human conditions change from epoch to epoch.

Every form of occultism knows that a wisdom exists which came from the old Moon and was still active, in its last traces, during the 15th and 10th century A.D. When the human being entered the spiritual world, he could see the light, which shone without any effort on his part. But in the present time, the whole wisdom of the past, which existed as an old inheritance, may unite with the human soul, but the soul no longer shines when we cross the threshold of death. Only the wisdom which we take in through Christ, by saying, "Not I, but Christ in me", will become a shining light, when in future we cross the threshold of death. We therefore take in the Christianized Spiritual Science in order that our astral body may become a source of light and that we may lift it out, when we cross the threshold of death.

When we take in this Christianized Spiritual Science and fill our astral body with it, it does not remain mere wisdom, for it permeates our feelings. We then learn to know the life-conditions of the past planetary stages of Saturn, Sun, Moon, and finally of the earth.

If you penetrate livingly into the descriptions in my Occult Science, you will be able to feel that the description of Saturn has an entirely different note from that of other planetary conditions. In the description of Saturn, you will be able to feel that conditions there are described with a certain harshness. Your soul will feel it. And this is essential. The Sun-existence will be experienced as if it contained a blossoming, growing life, and in the description of the Moon you will feel a dark, melancholic note in the conceptions pertaining to it. A sensitive person will even be able to taste it, he will feel its flavour on his tongue.

Fools may object that there are discrepancies in the descriptions and that a uniform style was not maintained. But we should realise that these differences are essential, and why. We should know why a melody of three definite notes must re-echo in the words of these descriptions, and when we know this, we are able to transform this knowledge into feelings which we send out into the world. These feelings undergo a change. The wisdom absorbed by the astral body changes into a freely willed surrender to the conditions of the world, and this takes hold of our etheric body. If we are wise, we shall prepare the path for this. The forces which enable us to descend into our subsequent incarnations form the etheric body and pervade it. If during our earthly life we have filled our etheric body with genuinely devout feelings and it then dissolves in the universal All when we die, we hand over to the universe an etheric body filled with devoutness, an etheric body which may be of benefit to the whole world. If on the other hand we have not been devout, but materialistic, the etheric body which we lay aside after death will have a destructive and explosive effect when it dissolves in the universal ether. In the same measure in which we gain wisdom, we help not only ourselves, but indirectly the world also, by acquiring better forces. And in the same measure in which we unfold devout feelings, we help the world in a direct way, for devoutness is imparted to the whole world.

Spiritual Science is not only able to bestow wisdom and unfold devout feelings, but it also gives us confidence and makes us aware of the body's vital forces. The conscious connection with the spiritual world in itself gives us these vital forces.

Fichte was aware of this connection of forces. He, too, had this confidence in life, so that when speaking of man's being he was able to say: Because I know of my connection with the eternal and that my innermost being is rooted in the eternal, I have such confidence in life that I am able to say: I look up to you, ye rocks and mountains; fall down upon me, crush my physical body; clouds, cover up everything that constitutes my being; thunder, split up everything which pertains to me; I shall nevertheless defy your might! Life-confidence streams out of the consciousness that we are rooted in the spirit's eternal essence. Can a man thus rooted in the spirit's eternal essence ever grow weak? It is Spiritual Science which gives him his strength, constantly pouring into him something of this strength.

What happens with this life-confidence? Wisdom gives the astral body the power enabling us to overcome more and more the obstructing forces and gives the etheric body its right structure. But the force which streams into our body through the knowledge of our connection with the eternal, is confidence in life, which penetrates into the very forces of our physical body. Maya, illusion and deception withdraw from us, if we are equipped with these forces. It is an illusion to say that our physical body decays into dust when we die. No! The structure of our physical body, the way in which we formed it, is not an indifferent matter. If this confidence in all that is eternal lives in the physical body, we give back to the earth this confidence in life which we gained for ourselves. We strengthen the earth-planet with the forces acquired during our life. Through our physical body we give the world confidence in life. The decadent part of our physical body is only a Maya. When we trace the physical body beyond death, we see that the amount of confidence in life which we acquired during our earthly existence streams into the earth.

We thus strengthen our astral body, our etheric body and our physical body by wisdom, devoutness and in life-confidence, the best forces which we were able to develop as human beings for the whole evolution of the earth. In this way we work upon the planet earth and we acquire a feeling which shows us that man does not lead an isolated existence in the world, but that the forces which he unfolds within himself are of value to the whole world. Every speck of dust bears within it the laws of the universe; similarly every human being builds up or destroys the world by what he does or leaves undone. We may give something to the progressive process of the world, or deprive it of something, and we may crumble away from it by ignoring it, by failing to acquire confidence in life. These sins of omission contribute to the decay of our planet, whereas the wisdom, the devoutness and confidence in life which we acquired, help to build it up. We may thus gradually obtain an idea of the feelings which Spiritual Science can give us, when it takes hold of the whole human being.

Considering on this occasion the lectures which I am having to give just now in Zürich,¹ I am freshly reminded that one can hardly come into touch with the spiritual life of that city in any broad sense at present without giving some attention to what is now called analytical psychology, or psychoanalysis. And various considerations connected with this realization have decided me to introduce what I have to say today with a short enumeration of certain points in analytical psychology, in psychoanalysis. We shall link it then with further remarks.

We have often noted how important it is for the researcher in the field of anthroposophical spiritual science, to connect his considerations with what is offered by the moving forces of our own age. It may be said that all sorts of people who feel drawn to psychoanalysis today are earnestly searching for the spiritual foundations of existence, for the inner realities of the soul of man. And it may be called a curious characteristic of our own time that so many of our contemporaries are becoming aware of quite definite, and most peculiar forces in the human soul. The psychoanalysts belong to those who, simply through the impulses of the age, are forced to hit upon certain phenomena of soul life.

It is especially important also not to remain entirely oblivious of this movement, because the phenomena of which it takes cognizance are really present, and because in our own time they intrude themselves for various reasons upon the attention of human beings. Today they must become aware of such phenomena.

On the other hand it is a fact that the people who concern themselves with these things today lack the means of knowledge required for the discussion and, above all, for the understanding of them. So that we may say: psychoanalysis is a phenomenon of our time, which compels men to take account of certain soul processes, and yet causes them to undertake their consideration by inadequate methods of knowledge. This is particularly important because this investigation, by inadequate methods of knowledge, of a matter that quite obviously exists and challenges our present human cognition leads to a variety of serious errors, inimical to social life, to the further development of knowledge, and to the influence of this development of knowledge upon social life.

It may be said that even less than half-truths are, under certain circumstances, more harmful than complete errors. And what the psychoanalysts bring to light today can be regarded only as an assortment of quarter-truths.

Let us consider a few excerpts from the research magazine of the psychoanalysts. What is called psychoanalysis today had its origin in a medical case observed by a Vienna interne, a Dr. Breuer, in the eighteen-eighties. Dr. Breuer, with whom I was acquainted, was a man of extraordinarily delicate spirituality besides what he was as a physician. He was interested to a high degree in all sorts of aesthetic, and general human problems. With his intimate manner of handling disease, it was natural that one case, which came under his observation in the eighties, was particularly interesting to him.

He had to treat a woman who seemed to be suffering from a severe form of hysteria. Her hysterical symptoms consisted of an occasional paralysis of one arm, dreamy conditions of various kinds, reduction of consciousness, a deep degree of sleepiness, and besides all this, forgetfulness of the usual language of her every day life. She had always been able to speak German; it was her native language, but under the influence of her hysteria could no longer do so; she could speak and understand only English.

Breuer noticed that when this woman was in her dreamy condition she could be persuaded, by a more intimate medical treatment, to speak of a certain scene, a very trying past experience. Now I will make clear to you from the description of the case given by the Breuer school, how the woman in her half-conscious condition, sometimes artificially induced, gave the impression that her hysteria was connected with a severe illness of her father, through which he had passed a long time before. Breuer could easily hypnotize a patient, and when he had placed her under hypnosis and encouraged her to speak of it, she told of an experience she had had during her father's illness. She had helped with the nursing, and always came back to this definite experience. I will quote from the report: [The following quotations are translations of passages from C. G. Jung's Die Psychologie der unbewussten Prozesse. Ein Ueberblick über die moderne Theorie und Methode der analytischen Psychologie, Zürich, 1917.]

“On one occasion she was watching at night in great anxiety and tension, for the sick man had a high fever, and a surgeon was expected from Vienna to perform an operation. Her mother had left her for a time, and Anna (the patient) sat by the sickbed, her right arm across the back of the chair. She fell into a kind of waking dream, and saw, as if issuing from the wall, a black snake approaching, to bite her father. ...”

Men of the present day are always stricken by materialism, so we find in the report at this point the following suggestion, which is of no value whatever:

(“It is very probable that in the meadow behind the house there were a few snakes which had frightened the girl previously, and which now furnished material for the hallucination.”)

That is only an interpolated remark, to which you may attach importance, or not—it does not matter. The point is that the snake seemed to her to come out of the wall to bite her father.

“She wanted to fight off the creature, but was as if paralyzed; the right arm hanging over the back of the chair had gone to sleep and became anaesthetized and paralyzed and, as she looked at it, the fingers changed into little snakes tipped with skulls.”

All this was beside her father's sick bed.

“She probably tried to chase away the snake with the lamed right hand, and so associated the anaesthesia and lameness with the snake hallucination. When this had disappeared she wished, in her fright, to pray, but every language failed her. At last she remembered an English nursery rhyme, and could continue to think and pray in this language.”

The whole illness originated from this experience. From it there had remained the paralysis of one hand, reduction of consciousness in varying degrees, and inability to express herself in any language but English. Dr. Breuer then noticed that the condition was ameliorated whenever he had her tell this story, and he based his treatment upon this fact. By means of hypnosis he drew from her little by little all the details, and really succeeded in bringing about a marked improvement in her condition. The patient got rid of the matter, as it were, by uttering and communicating it to another.

Breuer and his collaborator Freud, in Vienna, who were both influenced, as was natural at this period, by the school of Charcot [Jean Martin Charcot, French M.D. (1825-1893).] in Paris, diagnosed this case as a psychic trauma, a psychic wound, what is called in England a “nervous shock.” The psychic shock was supposed to consist of this experience at her father's bedside, and to have had an effect upon the soul similar to that of a physical wound upon the body.

It must be noted that from the beginning Breuer conceived the whole affair as a soul illness, as a matter of the inner life. He was convinced from the beginning that no anatomical or physiological changes could have been shown, no causes, for example, such as changes in the nerves leading from the arm to the brain. He was convinced from the start that he was dealing with a fact within the soul.

They were inclined in these early days to regard these cases as induced by wounds of the soul, shocks, etc. Very soon, however, because of Dr. Freud's active interest, theories took on a different character. With Freud's further development of the subject Dr. Breuer was never fully in accord. Freud felt that the theory of soul wounds would not do, did not cover these cases, and thus far Breuer agreed with him. I will remark in parenthesis that Dr. Breuer was a very busy practicing physician, thoroughly grounded in science, an excellent pupil of Nothnagel [Hermann Nothnagel, M.D. (1841-1905).] and because of external circumstances alone never became a professor. We may well believe that if Breuer, instead of remaining one of the busiest physicians in Vienna, with little time for scientific research, had obtained a professorship and so been able to follow up this problem, it might have assumed a very different form!

But from then on Dr. Freud took especial interest in the matter. He said to himself: the theory of trauma does not explain these cases. We need to determine under what conditions such a soul wound develops. For it might be said with justice that many girls had sat beside a father's sickbed with equally deep feelings, but without producing the same results. The unscientific layman deals with such problems promptly by the extraordinarily profound explanation that one is predisposed to such symptoms while another is not. Although very “profound,” this is the most absurd solution that can be arrived at, is it not? For if you explain things that occur on the basis of predisposition, you can easily explain everything in the world. You need only say: the predisposition for a certain thing exists.

Of course serious thinkers did not concern themselves with such ideas, but sought the real conditions. And Freud believed that he had discovered them in cases like the following. You will find innumerable similar cases in the literature of the psychoanalysts today, and it may be admitted that an immense amount of material has been collected in order to decide this or that point within this field. I will describe this one case, making it as comprehensible as possible. Its absolute historical accuracy is not important to us.

There was a woman with other guests at an evening party, a gathering of friends to bid good-bye to the mistress of the house, who had become nervous and was about to leave for a health resort abroad. She was to leave on that evening, and after the party had broken up, and the hostess departed, the woman whose case we are describing was going with other supper guests along the street when a cab came around the corner behind them (not an automobile—a cab with horses), driven at a great pace. In the smaller cities people returning home at night often walk in the middle of the street instead of on the sidewalk. (I do not know if you have noticed this). As the cab rushed towards them the supper guests scattered to right and left on to the sidewalks, with the exception of this one woman whom we are considering. She ran along the street in front of the horses, and all the driver's cursing and swearing and the cracking of his whip could not deflect her. She ran until she came to a bridge where she tried to throw herself into the water in order to avoid being run over. She was rescued by passersby, and returned to her party, being thus preserved from a serious accident.

This performance was of course connected with the woman's general condition. It is due, undoubtedly, to hysteria if a person runs along the middle of the street in front of horses, and the cause of such an action had to be discovered. Freud, in this and similar cases, examined the previous life back to childhood. If, even at an early age, something happened that was not assimilated by the soul, it could create a tendency which might be released later by any sort of shock.

And in fact such an experience was found in the childhood of the woman in question. She was taken driving as a child, and the horses became frightened and ran away. The coachman could not control them, and when they reached the river bank he sprang off, ordering the child to jump too, which it did, just before the horses plunged into the river. Thus the shocking incident was there, and a certain association of horse with horse. At the moment when she realized her danger from the horses she lost control of herself, and ran frantically in front of them instead of turning aside—all this as an after-effect of the childhood experience. You see that the psychoanalysts have a scientific method, according to present-day scientific ideas. But are there not many who have some such experience in childhood without such a reaction, even with the association of horse with horse? To this single circumstance something must be added to produce a “predisposition” to run in front of horses, instead of avoiding them.

Freud continued his search, and actually found an interesting connection in this case. The woman was engaged to be married, but was in love with two men at the same time. One was the man to whom she was engaged, and she was sure that she loved him best; but she was not quite clear about that, only halfway so; she loved the other also, this other being the husband of her best friend, whose farewell supper had taken place that evening. The hostess, who was somewhat nervous, took her departure, and this woman left with the other guests, ran in front of the horses, was rescued, and brought back quite naturally into the house she had just left. Further inquiry elicited the fact that in the past there had existed a significant association between the lady and this other man, the husband of her best friend. The love affair had already taken on “certain dimensions,” let us say, which accounted for the nervousness of her friend, as you may easily imagine. The physician brought her to this point in the story, but had difficulty in persuading her to continue. She admitted at last that when she came to herself in her friend's house, and was again normal, the husband declared his love to her. Quite a “remarkable case,” as you see!

Dr. Freud went after similar cases, and his researches convinced him that the hysterical symptoms, which had been attributed to a psychic “trauma” or wound, were due instead to love, conscious or unconscious. His examination of life experiences showed that circumstances might greatly differ, indeed in the most characteristic cases, that these love stories might never have risen into the consciousness of the patient at any time.

So Freud completed what he called his neurosis theory or sexual theory. He considered that sexuality entered into all such cases. But such things are extraordinarily deceptive. To begin with, there is everywhere at the present time an inclination to call sex to your aid, for the solution of any human problem. Therefore we need not wonder that a doctor who found it to be a factor in a certain number of cases of hysteria set up such a theory.

But on the other hand, since analytical psychology is carrying on a research with inadequate tools, this is the point at which the greatest danger begins. The matter is dangerous first, because this longing for knowledge is so extremely tempting, tempting because of present circumstances, and because it may always be proved that the sex connection is more or less present. Yet the psychoanalyst Jung, who wrote Die Psychologie der unbewussten Prozesse (see the above quotations that are translations of passages from C. G. Jung's Die Psychologie der unbewussten Prozesse. Ein Ueberblick über die moderne Theorie und Methode der analytischen Psychologie, Zürich, 1917.), Professor Jung of Zürich does not share the opinion that Freud's sexual “neurosis theory” covers these cases. He has instead another theory.

Jung noted that Freud has his opponents. Among them is a certain Adler. This Adler takes a quite different viewpoint. Just as Freud tested large numbers of cases, and settled upon sex as the original cause (you can read it all in Jung's book), so Adler approached the problem from another side, and decided that this side is more important than the one that Freud has placed in the foreground.

Adler—I will only generalize—found that there was another urge that played quite as important a role in the human being as the sexual impulse emphasized by Freud. This was the desire for power, power over one's environment, the desire for power in general. The “will to power” is even regarded by Nietzsche as a philosophical principle, and as many cases may be found to support the power-impulse theory as Freud found for his sexual theory.

One need only begin “analyzing” hysterical women to find that such cases are not at all rare. Assume for example that a woman is hysterical and has spasms—heart spasms are a favorite in such cases—as well as all sorts of other conditions. The home is stirred up, the whole environment, everything possible is done, doctors are summoned, the patient greatly pitied. In short, she exercises a tyrannical power over her environment. A reasonable person knows that in such a case there is really nothing the matter, even though such patients are aware of their condition and suffered from it. They are in reality perfectly healthy—but ill when they wish to be. You may diagnose them as well and ill at the same time. They do of course fall down when they faint in a heart spasm, but they fall as a rule on the rug, not on the bare floor! These things may be observed.

Now this subconscious lust for power leads very easily to hysterical conditions. Adler investigated the cases at his disposal from this particular standpoint, and found everywhere when hysterical symptoms appeared that somehow the lust for power had been aroused and driven into unhealthy extremes. Jung said to himself: “Oh well, one cannot say that Freud is wrong; what he observed is there, and one cannot say that Adler is wrong; what he observed is also there. So it is probably sometimes one way, and sometimes the other!”

That is quite reasonable; it is sometimes one way and sometimes another. But Jung built upon this a special theory. This theory is not uninteresting if you do not take it abstractly, simply as a theory, but see in it instead the action of our present-day impulses, especially the feebleness of our present knowledge and its inadequacy. Jung says: there are two types of people. In one type feeling is more developed, in the other thinking.

Thus an “epoch-making” discovery was made by a great scholar. It was something that any reasonable man could make for himself within his own immediate environment, for the fact that men are divided into thinking men and feeling men is sufficiently obvious. But scholarship has a different task: it must not regard anything as a layman would, and simply say: in our environment there are two types of people, feeling people and intellectuals—it must add something to that. Scholarship says in such a case: the one who feels his way into things sends out his own force into objectivity; the other draws back from an object, or halts before it and considers. The first is called the extroverted type, the other the introverted. The first would be the feeling man, the second the intellectual one. This is a learned division, is it not? ingenious, brilliant, really descriptive up to a point—that is not to be denied!

Then Jung goes on to say; In the case of the extraverted type (that of the man who lives preferably in his feelings), there exist very frequently in the subconscious mind intellectual concepts, and he finds himself in a collision between what is in his consciousness and the intellectual concepts that float about subconsciously within him. And from this collision all sorts of conditions may arise, conditions mainly characteristic of the feeling type.

In the case of those who occupy themselves more with the mind, the men of reason, the feelings remain down below, swarm in the subconscious, and come into collision with the conscious life. The conscious life cannot understand what is surging up. It is the force of the subconscious feelings, and because man is never complete, but belongs to one of these two types, circumstances may arise that cause the subconscious mind to revolt against the conscious, and may frequently lead to hysterical conditions.

Now we must say that Jung's theory is simply a paraphrase of the trivial idea of the feeling and the reasoning man, and adds nothing to the facts. But from all this you needs must realize that men of the present are at least beginning to notice all sorts of psychic peculiarities, and so concern themselves that they ask what goes on within a man who shows such symptoms. And they are at least so far along that they say to themselves: These are not due to physiological or anatomical changes. They have already outgrown bare materialism, in that they speak of psychic phenomena. So this is certainly one way in which people try to emerge from materialism, and to reach some knowledge of the soul.

It is, however, very peculiar, when you look at the subject more closely, to see into what strange paths people are led by the general inadequacy of their means of cognition. But I must emphatically point out that men do not realize into what they are being driven, and neither do their supporters, readers, and contemporaries. Thus, rightly regarded, the matter has actually a very dangerous side, because so much is not taken into consideration. In the subconscious mind itself there is a commotion, it is the theories which agitate in the subconscious. It is really strange. People set up a theory in regard to the subconscious, but their own subconsciousness is agitated by it. Jung pursues the matter as a physician, and it is important that psychological questions should be handled from that standpoint, therapeutically, and that many should be striving to carry over the matter into pedagogy. We are no longer confronted by a limited theory, but by the effort to make it into a cultural fact.

It is interesting to see how someone like Jung, who handles this matter as a physician, and has observed, treated, and apparently even cured all sorts of cases, is driven further and further. He says to himself: when such abnormal psychological symptoms are found, a search must be made in order to discover any incidents of childhood which may have made such an impression on the human soul life as to produce after-effects. That is something especially sought for in this field: after-effects of something that happened in childhood. I have cited an example which plays quite a role in the literature of psychoanalysis: the association of horse and horse.

Later, however, Jung came upon the fact that in many of the cases of genuine illness it cannot be proved, even if you go back to his earliest childhood, that the patient as an individual is suffering from any such after-effects. If you take into consideration everything with which he has come in contact, you find the conflict within the individual, but no explanation of it. So Jung was led to distinguish two subconsciousnesses: first the individual subconsciousness, concealed within the human being. If in her childhood the young woman jumped out of a carriage and received a shock, the incident has long since vanished from her consciousness, but works subconsciously. If you consider this subconscious element (made up of innumerable details), you get the personal or individual subconsciousness. This is the first of Jung's differentiations.

But the second is the superpersonal subconsciousness. He says: There are things affecting the soul life which are neither in the personality nor in the matter of the outside world, and which must be assumed therefore as present in a soul world.

The aim of psychoanalysis is to bring such soul contents into consciousness. That is supposed to be the healing method: to bring everything into consciousness. Thus the physician must undertake to extract from the patient, not only what he has experienced individually from his birth on, but also something that was not in the outside world and is of a soul nature. This has driven the psychoanalysts to say that a man experiences, not only what he goes through after his physical birth, but also all sorts of things that preceded his birth—and that all this creates disorder within him. A man who is born today experiences thus subconsciously the Oedipus Saga. He not only learns it in school; he experiences it. He experiences the Greek gods, the whole past of mankind. The evil of this consists in the fact that he experiences it subconsciously. The psychoanalyst must therefore say—and he does go so far—that the Greek child also experienced this but, since he was told about it, he experienced it consciously. Man experiences it today, but it only stirs within him—in the thoughts of the extraverted man, in the subconscious feelings of the introverted type. It growls like demons.

Now consider the necessity that confronts the psychoanalyst if he is true to his theory. He would have to take these things seriously and say simply that when a man grows up and may be made ill by his relation to that which stirs within him—a relation of which he knows nothing—that this connection must become conscious, and it must be explained to him that there is a spiritual world inhabited by different gods. For the psychoanalyst goes so far as to say that the human soul has a connection with the gods, but it is a cause of illness in that the soul knows nothing of it.

The psychoanalyst seeks all sorts of expedients, sometimes quite grotesque. Let us assume that a patient comes and displays this or that hysterical symptom, because he is afraid of a demon—let us say—a fire demon. Men of earlier periods believed in fire demons, had visions of them, knew about them. Present-day people still have connections with them (the psychoanalyst admits that), but these connections are not conscious; no one explains that there are fire demons, so they become a cause of illness.

Jung however goes so far as to assert that the gods, to whom man is unconsciously related, become angry and revenge themselves, this revenge showing itself as hysteria. Very well, it amounts then to this: such a present-day man who is mistreated by a demon in his subconscious mind, does not know that there are demons, and cannot achieve any conscious relation with them because—that is superstition! What does the poor modern man do then, if he becomes ill from this cause? He projects it outwardly, that is to say he looks up some friend whom he had liked quite well, and says: This is the one who is persecuting and abusing me! He feels this to be true, which means that he has a demon which torments him, and so projects it into another man.

Often psychoanalysts, in treating such a case, deflect this projection upon themselves. Thus it often happens that patients, in a good or evil sense, make the doctor into a god or a devil.

So you see the physician of the present day is forced to say to himself: Men are tormented by spirits, and because they are taught nothing about them, cannot take possession of them in consciousness, they become therefore tormenting spirits among themselves, project their demons outwardly, persuade one another of all sorts of demoniacal nonsense, etc. And how disastrous this is assumed to be by the psychoanalysts is shown by the following case which Jung describes. He says: “Certain of my colleagues claim that the soul energies that spring from such torment, must be deflected into another channel.” Let us turn back then to one of the elementary cases of psychoanalysis. A patient comes, whose illness was caused, according to her psychoanalytical confession, by her having been in love, many years before, with a man whom she did not get. This had remained with her. Of course she might be annoyed by a demon, but in most cases observed by the doctors it turns out that something has happened in the individual subconsciousness, which they classify separately from the super-personal subconscious. The doctors try to divert this immature fantasy or to transform it. If a love-thirsty soul can be persuaded to make use of her accumulated affections in humanitarian services, perhaps as head of a charitable institution, it may turn out well. But Jung himself says: “It is not always possible thus to divert this energy. Energies so implanted in the soul have often a certain definite potential which cannot be directed.” Very well, I have no objection to this expression, but wish only to point out that it is a translation of what the layman often discusses, and the way in which he often expresses himself. But Jung describes a case which is interesting, and a good example of the fact that these potentials cannot always be directed.

An American, a typical man of today, a self-made man, the efficient head of a business that he had built up, having devoted himself to his work and achieved a great success, thought then: I shall soon be forty-five, and have done my bit! Now I will give myself a rest. So he decided to retire, bought himself an estate with autos and tennis courts, and everything else that belonged to it, intending to live in the country, and simply to draw his dividends from the business. But when he had been for a time on his estate he ceased to play tennis or to drive his car, or to go to the theater. He took no pleasure in the gardens that were laid out, but sat in his room alone, and brooded. It hurt him there, and there, everything hurt him. Actually his head hurt, then his chest, and then his legs. He could not endure himself, ceased from laughter, was tired, strung up, had continual headache—it was horrible. There was no illness that a doctor could diagnose! It is often that way with men of the present, is it not? They are perfectly healthy, and yet ill. The doctor said: "This trouble is psychic. You have adapted yourself to business conditions, and your energies will not readily take another course. Go back to business. That is the only suggestion that I can make.” The man in question grasped this, but found that he was no longer any good at business! He was just as ill there as at home.

From this Jung rightly concludes that you cannot easily deflect energy from one potential to another, nor even turn it back again when you have failed. This man came to him for treatment. (You know many people come to Switzerland bringing such illnesses and non-illnesses!) But he could not help this American. The trouble had taken too strong a hold; it should have been handled earlier.

You see from this that the therapy of deflection has also its difficulties, and Jung himself offers this example. Important facts are met everywhere which—I now may say—will be successfully dealt with only by spiritual science or Anthroposophy, in accordance with exact knowledge. But there they are, and people notice them. The questions are there. It will be discovered that the human being is complicated, and not the simple creature presented to us by the science of the 19th century. The psychoanalyst is confronted by a remarkable fact which is quite inexplicable by the science of today. In Anthroposophy, together with the information given in my lectures, you will easily find an explanation, but I can come back to the point in case you do not find it. It may happen, for example, that someone becomes hysterically blind, that is, his blindness is an hysterical symptom. This is possible. There are hysterically blind people, who could see, yet do not—who are psychically blind. Now such people are sometimes partially cured—partially; they begin to see again, but do not see everything. Sometimes such an hysterically blind man recovers sufficient sight to see people, all but their heads! Such a half-cured person goes along the streets, and sees everyone without a head. That really occurs, and there are even stranger symptoms.

All this may be dealt with by spiritual science—anthroposophically oriented spiritual science—and in a lecture that I gave here last year you may find an explanation of the inability to see the heads of people. [Lecture given at Dörnach, August 5, 1916.] But the present psychoanalyst is faced by all these phenomena. And so much confronts him that he says to himself: It may be quite disastrous for a man to be connected with the superpersonal unconscious; but for God's sake (the psychoanalyst does not say ‘for God's sake,’ but perhaps ‘for science's sake’) do not let us take the spiritual world seriously! It does not enter their minds to consider the spiritual world seriously. Thus something very peculiar happens. Very few notice what strange phenomena appear under the influence of these things. I will call to your attention something in Jung's book Die Psychologie der unbewussten Prozesse, [see the above quotations that are translations of passages from C. G. Jung's Die Psychologie der unbewussten Prozesse. Ein Ueberblick über die moderne Theorie und Methode der analytischen Psychologie, Zürich, 1917.] recently published, which will show you where the psychoanalyst lands today. I shall have to read you a passage.

“According to this example” (these are examples showing that a man has within him, not only the contents of his present personal life, but far-back connections with all sorts of demonic, divine, or spiritual forces, etc.)—“According to this example of the genesis of new ideas from the store of the primeval pictures”—(here he does not call them ‘gods’ but ‘primeval pictures’)—“we will take up the further description of the transference processes. We saw that the libido, in those apparently preposterous and curious fantasies, had seized upon its new object, namely the contents of the absolute unconscious.” (The absolute unconscious is the superpersonal unconscious, not the personal.) “As I have already said, the uncomprehended projection of the primeval pictures upon the physician involves a danger for the further treatment that must not be under-estimated.” (The patient transfers his demons to the doctor. That is one danger.) “The pictures contain not only the best and greatest of all that mankind has thought and felt, but also every infamous and devilish deed of which men have been capable.”

Just think! Jung has come so far as to perceive that a man has subconsciously within him all the most fiendish crimes, as well as the most beautiful of all that mankind has been able to think and feel. These people cannot be persuaded to speak of Lucifer and Ahriman, [Compare Rudolf Steiner, The Luciferic and Ahrimanic Influences in their Relation to Man, 1918, reprinted in Anthroposophie, Vol. 17, Book 2, p. 159.] but they agree upon the preceding statement, which I shall read to you once more:

“The pictures contain not only the best and greatest of all that mankind has thought and felt, but also every infamous and devilish deed of which men have been capable. If the patient cannot distinguish the personality of the physician from these projections, then every possibility of mutual understanding is lost, and the human relationship becomes hopeless. If, however, the patient avoids this Charybdis he falls into the Scylla of the introjection of these pictures, that is to say that he attributes their qualities not to the physician but to himself.” (Then he himself is the devil.) “This danger is equally serious. In projection he staggers between an extravagant and morbid adulation and a hateful contempt for his physician. In introjection he falls into a ridiculous self-deification, or a moral self-laceration. The mistake that he makes each time is in attributing to himself the contents of the absolute unconscious. So he makes himself into a god or a devil. Here lies the psychological reason why men have always needed demons, and were never able to live without gods—except a few particularly clever Western specimens of yesterday and the day before, supermen whose god being dead, have made gods of themselves, rationalistic pocket size gods with thick skulls and cold hearts.”

Thus you see, the psychoanalyst is driven to say: The human soul is so made that it needs gods, that gods are necessary to it, for it becomes ill without them. Therefore it has always had them. Men need gods. The psychoanalyst ridicules men, saying that when they lack other gods they make gods of themselves, but “rationalistic pocket size gods with thick skulls and cold hearts. The idea of God” (he says further), “is simply a necessary psychological function of an irrational nature. ...”

To describe the necessity of the God-concept in these terms is as far as one can go by the methods of natural science! Man must have a God; he needs him. The psychoanalyst knows that. But let us read to the end of the sentence:

“The idea of God is simply a necessary psychological function of an irrational nature, which has nothing to do with the question of the actual existence of God.”

When you read the complete sentence you run upon the great dilemma of the present day. The psychoanalyst proves to you that man becomes ill and useless without his God, but says that this need has nothing to do with the existence or non-existence of God. And he continues:

“For this latter question” (namely, of the existence of God,) “belongs to the most stupid questions that can be framed. Man knows well enough that he cannot conceive a God, much less imagine that he really exists, or that there can be any occurrence not conditioned by natural causes.”

Now I beg of you, here you find—here you are standing at the point where you may catch at things. The things are there, knocking upon the doors of knowledge. Seekers are also there. They admit an absolute necessity, but when that necessity is stated as a serious question they consider it one of the stupidest that can be suggested.

You see, you have there one of the points in the cultural life of today from which you may note exactly what is always avoided. I can assure you that, in their examination and knowledge of the soul, these psychoanalysts are far ahead of what is offered in current psychiatry by the universities. They are not only far beyond ordinary university psychiatry and psychology, but in a certain sense they are right to look down upon this dreadful so-called science. But one may catch them in any such passage, showing as it does what mankind is actually facing in the attitude of contemporary science.

Many do not recognize this. They do not realize the force of belief in authority. There has never been such faith in authority, nor has it ever reigned so absolutely as in the subconscious mind today. One asks again and again: Just what do you do as physicians when you handle hysterical cases? You seek something in the subconscious mind that is not solved within consciousness. Yes, but you find repeatedly just such a subconscious content in the case of the theorists. If you lift it into full consciousness it turns out to be exactly what has been murmuring in the subconsciousness of the modern doctors and their patients. And all our literature is so saturated with it that you are in daily and hourly danger of imbibing it. And since it is only through spiritual science that men may become aware of these things, many take them up unknowingly, draw them into their subconsciousness, where they remain.

This psychoanalysis has at least pointed out that the reality of the soul is to be accepted as such. They do that. But the devil is everywhere at their heels; I mean that they are neither able nor willing to approach spiritual reality. Therefore you find in all sorts of places the most incredible statements. But present humanity has not the degree of attention necessary to perceive them. We should naturally expect any reader of Jung's book to fall off his chair under the table at certain sentences, but men of the present do not do that; so only think how much of it must lie in the subconsciousness of modern humanity. Yet for this very reason, because these psychoanalysts see how much there is in the subconscious—and they do see it—they look upon many things differently from other people. In his Preface Jung says something, for example, part of which is not bad.

“The psychological processes which accompany the present war, above all the incredible depravity of public opinion, the mutual calumnies, the undreamed of fury of destruction, the flood of lies, and men's inability to halt the bloody demon, are all adapted to set before the eyes of thinking humanity the problem of the restlessly slumbering, chaotic realm of the subconscious. This war has shown pitilessly to the cultured man that he is still a barbarian, and at the same time what an iron rod of correction awaits him should it again occur to him to hold his neighbor responsible for his own bad character. The psychology of the single individual corresponds to the psychology of the nations.”

And now comes a sentence which makes you wonder what to do with it.

“What the nations do is done by each individual, and so long as the individual does it the nation will do it too. Only a change in the attitude of the individual can bring about a change in the psychology of the nation.”

These sentences, placed side by side, show how destructively this thinking works. I ask you if it is sensible to say: “What the nations do is done by each individual?” It would be equally reasonable to ask: Could an individual do it without nations doing it too? It is nonsense, is it not, to say things like that. The unfortunate thing is that even prominent thinkers are impressed by it. And this sort of thinking is not only to become therapy, but take the lead in pedagogy. This again is founded upon the justifiable longing to introduce into pedagogy a new soul and spiritual element. Are conclusions to be accepted which were reached by entirely inadequate methods of cognition? These are nowadays the important questions.

We shall return to the matter from the standpoint of anthroposophical orientation, and throw light upon it from a broader horizon. Then we shall see that one must set about it in a much bigger way, in order to succeed with these things at all. But they must be handled concretely. The problems which as yet have been investigated only by the old, inadequate methods, must be placed in the light of anthroposophical knowledge.

Take, for example, the problem of Nietzsche. Today I will only suggest it; tomorrow we shall consider such problems more thoroughly. We know already from former lectures: [Lectures given at Dörnach, October 14, 20, 21, 26, 27, 28; November 2, 3, 4, 1917.] from 1841 to 1879 battle of spirits above; from 1879 on, the fallen spirits in the human realm. In future such and similar things must of necessity play a role whenever a human life is studied. For Nietzsche was born in 1844. For three years before he descended to earth his soul was in the spiritual realm in the midst of the spirit battle. During his boyhood Schopenhauer was still living, but died in 1860, and only after his death did Nietzsche devote himself to the study of Schopenhauer's writings. The soul of Schopenhauer cooperated from above in the spiritual world. That was the real relationship. Nietzsche was reading Schopenhauer, and while he was absorbing his writings Schopenhauer was working upon his thoughts.

But how was Schopenhauer situated in the spiritual realm? From 1860 through the years when Nietzsche was reading his books, Schopenhauer was in the midst of the spiritual battle that was still being fought out on that plane. Therefore Schopenhauer's inspiration of Nietzsche was colored by what he himself gathered from the battle of spirits in which he was involved. In 1879 these spirits were cast down from heaven upon the earth. Up to 1879 Nietzsche's spiritual development had followed very curious paths. They will be explained in the future as due to the influence of Schopenhauer and of Wagner. In my book Friedrich Nietzsche, a Fighter against his Time, you may find many supporting details. Wagner had up to that time no particular influence except that he was active on earth. For Wagner was born in 1813; the battle of spirits only began in 1841. But Wagner died in 1883, and Nietzsche's spiritual development took its peculiar direction when Wagner's influence began. Wagner entered the spiritual world in 1883, when the battle of spirits was over, and the defeated spirits had been cast to earth. Nietzsche was in the midst of things when the spirits began to roam around here on earth. Wagner's post mortem influence upon Nietzsche had an entirely different object from that of Schopenhauer.

Here begin the super-personal but definite influences, not those abstract demonic ones, of which the psychoanalyst speaks. Humanity must resolve to enter this concrete spiritual world, in order to comprehend things which are obvious if only the facts are tested. In the future Nietzsche's biography will state that he was stimulated by that Richard Wagner who was born in 1813, and took part up to 1879 everything that led to the brilliant being whom I described in my book; that he had the influence of Schopenhauer from his sixteenth year, but that Schopenhauer was involved in the spiritual battle that was fought upon the super-physical plane before 1879; that he was exposed to Wagner's influence after Wagner had died and entered the spiritual world, while Nietzsche was still here below, where the spirits of darkness were ruling.

Jung considers this a fact: that Nietzsche found a demon, and projected it without upon Wagner. Oh well—projections, potentials, introverted or extraverted human types—all words for abstractions, but nothing about realities! These things are truly important. This is not agitation for an anthroposophical world-conception for which we are prejudiced. On the contrary, everything outside of anthroposophy shows how necessary this conception is for present-day humanity!

• 1. Anthroposophy and the Science of the Soul (Nov. 5), Anthroposophy and Spiritual Science (Nov. 7), Anthroposophy and Natural Science (Nov. 12), Anthroposophy and Social Science (Nov. 14).

I have designated what is called analytical psychology or psychoanalysis as an effort to gain knowledge in the soul realm by inadequate means of cognition. Perhaps nothing is so well adapted to show how, at the present time, everything urges the attainment of the anthroposophically orientated spiritual science, and how on the other side, subconscious prejudices lead men to oppose a spiritually scientific consideration of the facts. Yesterday I showed you by definite examples what grotesque leaps modern erudition is obliged to take when it ventures upon soul problems, and how to detect these leaps in the mental processes of modern scholars. It was pointed out that one of the better psychoanalysts—Jung—divided patients into two classes: the thinking type, and the feeling type. From this starting point he assumed that in cases of the thinking type, subconscious feelings force their way up into consciousness and produce soul conflicts—or in the opposite type, that thoughts in the subconscious mind arise and conflict with the life of feeling.

Now it might be suggested that these things will be fought out in scientific discussion, and that we might wait until people make up their minds to overcome the subconscious prejudice against anthroposophical spiritual science. But passive waiting becomes impossible in that such things do not confine themselves to the theoretical field, but encroach upon life practice and cultural development. And psychoanalysis is not content to occupy itself with therapy alone, which might be less dubious since there seems to be little difference—I said seems—between it and other therapeutical methods; but it is trying to extend itself to pedagogy, and to become the foundation of a teaching system. This forces us to point out the dangers residing in quarter-truths in a more serious manner than would be called for by mere theoretical discussion.

Much that relates to this matter can be decided only with the passage of time, but today we shall have to enlarge the scope of our examination in order to throw light upon one aspect or another. First of all I wish to call to your attention that the facts which lie before the psychoanalyst really point to an important spiritual sphere which present-day man does not wish to enter in an accurate and correct manner, but would prefer to leave as a sort of nebulous, subconscious region. For our present sickly, materialistically infected approach, even in this domain, likes nothing better than a vague, mystical drifting among all sorts of incomplete or unexecuted concepts. We find the most grotesque, the most repulsive mysticism right in the midst of materialism, if you take mysticism to mean a desire to swim about in all sorts of nebulous thinking, without working out your world-conception into clear, sharply outlined concepts. The domain into which recognized facts are pushing the psychoanalysts is the field of extra-conscious intelligence and reasoning activity. How often I have dealt with these matters—without going into details, but merely mentioning them, since they are taken for granted by students of spiritual science. How often I have reminded you that reasoning, intellectual activity, cleverness are not confined to the human consciousness, but are everywhere, that we are surrounded by effective mental activity as we are surrounded by air, interwoven with it, and the other beings as well.

The facts before the psychoanalyst might easily refer to this. I quoted to you yesterday the case described by Jung in his book, Die Psychologie der unbewussten Prosesse. It had to do with a woman who, having left an evening party with other guests, was frightened by horses, ran in front of them along the street to the river where she was rescued by passers-by, brought back to the house that she had left, where she had a love scene with her host. From the standpoint of Freud or Adler the case is easily explained on the basis of the love-drive or the power-drive, but this diagnosis does not reach the vital point. Its foundation is reached only by realizing that consciousness does not exhaust the cleverness, calculation, the artfulness of what penetrates man as intelligence, and by realizing that the laws of life are not limited by the laws of consciousness.

Consider this case. We can at least raise the question: What did the woman really want, after she had been one of the party, and had seen her friend depart for the health resort? She wanted the opportunity for what actually happened, she wanted a legitimate excuse to be alone with the master of the house. Of course this had nothing to do with what was in her consciousness, what she realized and admitted. It would not have been “proper,” as we say. Something had to be brought about that need not be avowed, and we shall reach the real explanation by allowing for her subconscious, designing intelligence, of which she was herself unaware. Throughout the entire evening she had wanted to bring about a conversation with her host. If one is less clever a poor choice is made of means, if more clever a better choice. In this case it may be said that in the woman's ordinary consciousness, which admitted scruples as to what was proper or improper, allowed or not allowed, the right means could not have been chosen for the end in view. But in that which was stored below the layer of the ordinary consciousness the thought was incessantly active: I must manage a meeting with the man. I must make use of the next opportunity that presents itself in order to return to the house.

We may be sure that if the opportunity with the horses had not offered itself, supported by association with the earlier accident, she would have found some other excuse. She needed only to faint in the street, and would have been brought back to the house at once, or she would have found some other expedient. The subconsciousness looked beyond all the scruples of the ordinary consciousness, taking the attitude that “the end justifies the means,” regardless of whether they would or would not harmonize with ideas of propriety and impropriety.

In such a case we are reminded of what Nietzsche, who surmised many of these things, called the great reason in contrast with the small reason, the all-inclusive reason that does not come into consciousness, that acts below the threshold of consciousness, leading men to do many things which they do not consciously confess to themselves. Through his ordinary outer consciousness the human being is in connection first with the world of the senses, but also with the whole physical world, and with all that lives within it. To the physical world belong all the concepts of propriety, of bourgeois morality, and so forth, with which man is equipped.

In his subconsciousness man is connected with an entirely different world, of which Jung says: the soul has need of it because it is related to it, but he also says that it is foolish to inquire about its real existence. Well, it is this way: as soon as the threshold of consciousness is crossed, man and his soul are no longer in merely material surroundings or relations, but in a realm where thoughts rule, thoughts which may be very artful.

Now Jung's view is quite correct when he says that modern man, the so-called man of culture, needs particularly to be mindful of these things. For present culture has this peculiarity, that it forces down numerous impulses into the subconsciousness, which then assert themselves in such a way that irrational acts—as they are called—and irrational general conduct result. When the “power-urge” or the “love urge” are mentioned, it is because in the moment that man and his soul enter the subconscious regions they come nearer to the realm where these instincts rule; not that they are in themselves causes, but that man with his subconscious intelligence plunges into regions where these impulses are effective.

That woman would not have gone to so much exertion for anything that interested her less than her love affair. It required an especial preoccupation for her subconscious cunning to be aroused. And that the love impulse so often plays an important role is due simply to the fact that the love interest is so very common. If the psychoanalysts would only turn more of their attention in other directions, cease to concentrate upon psychoanalytic sanatoriums, where the majority of the inmates seem to me to be women—(the same reproach is cast upon anthroposophical institutions but, I think, with less justice),—if they were more experienced in other fields, which is of course sometimes the case, if there were a greater variety of cases in the sanatoriums, a more extensive knowledge might be obtained.

Let us assume that a sanatorium was equipped for giving psychiatric treatment especially to people who had become nervous or hysterical from playing the stock market. Then the existence of other things in the subconscious mind could be established with as much reason as the love-urge, introduced by Freud. Then it would be seen with what detailed cunning, and artful subconscious processes, the man acts who plays the stock market. Then, through the usual methods of elimination, sexual love would be seen to play a very small part, yet the subtleties of subconscious acuteness, of subconscious slyness, could be studied at their height. Even the lust for power could not always be designated as being the primary impulse, but altogether different instincts would be found ruling those regions, in which man submerges himself with his soul. And if in addition a sanatorium could be equipped for learned men who had become hysterical—forgive me!—it would be found that their subconscious actions seldom lead back to the love-motive. For those with any thorough knowledge of facts in this field realize that, under present conditions, scholars are seldom driven to their chosen science by “love,” but by quite different forces which would show themselves if brought to the surface by psychoanalysis. The all-inclusive fact is that the soul is led from the conscious down into the subconscious regions where man's unconquered instincts rule. He can master these only by becoming aware of them, and spiritual research alone can lift them into consciousness.

Another inconvenient truth! For of course it forces the admission, to a point far beyond what the psychoanalyst is prepared to admit, that man in his subconscious mind may be a very sly creature, far more sly than in his full consciousness. Even in this field, and with ordinary science, we may have strange experiences. There is a chapter on this subject in my book Riddles of the Soul In it I deal with the strictures upon Anthroposophy, found in a book entitled Vom Jenseits der Seele,¹ and written by that academic individual Dessoir. This second chapter of my book Riddles of the Soul will be a nice contribution to thinking people who would like to form an opinion of present scholarly ethics. You will see when you read this chapter what kind of opposition must be encountered. I will mention, of all the points therein indicated, one or two only which are not unconnected with our present theme.

This man makes all sorts of objections to this and that, founded upon passages taken from my books. In a very neat connection he tells how I distinguish consecutive periods of culture: the Indian, the old Persian, the Chaldean-Egyptian, the Graeco-Latin, and now we live in the sixth, he says, “according to Steiner.”

This forces us to refute these misstatements in a schoolmasterly manner, for it shows us the only way to get at such an individual. How does Max Dessoir come to assert, in the midst of all his other nonsense, that I said we are living in the sixth postatlantean culture period? It may be easily explained if you have any practice in the technique of philological methods. I was connected for six years and a half with the Goethe Archives in Weimar, learned there a little about the usual procedure, and could easily show, according to philological methods, how Dessoir came to attribute to me this statement regarding the sixth culture period. He had been reading my book Occult Science, an Outline, in which there is a sentence leading to a description of our present fifth postatlantean culture period. In it I say that there are long preparations and, in one section, that events taking place in the 14th and 15th centuries were prepared in the fourth, fifth, and sixth centuries. About five lines further on I say that the sixth century was a preparation for the fifth culture period. Dessoir, reading superficially, turned back hastily as scholars do, to the place that he had noted in the margin, and confused what was said about the culture period with what had been stated further back about the fourth, fifth, and sixth centuries. Thus he says “sixth culture period” instead of fifth because his eye had moved backward a few lines.

You see with what a grand superficiality such a person works. Here we have an example of how such “scholarship” may be philologically shown up. In this literary creation such mistakes run through the entire chapter. And while Dessoir affirms that he has studied a whole row of my books, I could prove, again philologically, which ones of mine compose this “whole row.” He had read—and but slightly understood—The Philosophy of Spiritual Activity, for he devotes a sentence to it that is utter nonsense. And he read Occult Science, but in such a way as to bring out the kind of stuff that I have described. He read in addition the small work The Spiritual Guidance of Man, and the little pamphlets on Reincarnation and Karma, and Blood is Quite a Special Fluid. These are all that he read, as may be shown by his comments. He read nothing else. These are our present ethics of scholarship. It is important once in a way to expose, in such a connection, the erudition of the present day. Out of the long list of my books he chooses a very small number, and founds upon them, with quite perverted thinking, his whole statement. Many of our scientists today do exactly the same thing. When they write about animals, for example, they usually have for a foundation about as much material as Professor Dessoir extracted from my books.

Quite a pretty chapter could be written from observations of Dessoir's subconscious mind. He himself, however, in a special passage in his book, permits us to take account of his subconsciousness. He relates rather grotesquely that when he is lecturing it often happens that his thoughts go on without his full conscious direction, and that only by the reaction of his audience does he recognize that his thoughts have taken a line independent of his attention. He tells that quite naively. But only think! From this fact he embarks upon extended consideration of the many peculiarities of human consciousness. I have pointed out somewhat “gently” that Dessoir thus strangely reveals himself. I said at first: It cannot be possible that he means himself. In this case he must simply be identifying himself with certain clumsy lecturers, and speaking in the first person. It would be imputing to him a good deal to suppose that he is describing himself. But he really does exactly that. Well, in the discussion of such matters many odd things must be noted.

He disposed of The Philosophy of Spiritual Activity by one remark, with the addition of a sentence that is Dessoirish, but did not originate with me. The whole matter is crazy. He says at the same time “Steiner's first book, the The Philosophy of Spiritual Activity.” This forces me to point out that this book forms the close of a ten year period of authorship, and to offer this incident as an example of academic ignorance, and ethics. I know of course that although I have shown how incorrect his statements are, people will say again and again: “Well, Dessoir has refuted Steiner.”—I know it very well. I know that it is speaking against walls to try to break through what men imagine they have long since got rid of—belief in authority!

But this chapter alone will prove the difficulties against which spiritual science must struggle because it insists upon clear, sharply outlined concepts, and concrete spiritual experiences. There is no question of logic with such an individual as Dessoir, and a lack of logic characterizes in the broadest sense our present so-called scientific literature.

These are the reasons why official learning, and official spiritual trends, even if they work themselves away from such inferiority as the university psychiatry or psychology, are not in a position to make good because they lack the smallest equipment for a genuine observation of life. So long as it is not realized how far from genuine research and from a sense for reality that really is which poses as scientific literature—I do not say, as science, but as scientific literature—and often forms the content of university and especially of popular lectures—so long as this authoritative belief is not broken through, there can be no cure. These things must be said, and are compatible with the deepest respect for real scientific thinking, and for the great achievements of natural science. That these things are applied to life in such contradictory fashion must however be recognized.

After this digression let us return to our subject. Dessoir takes the opportunity to combine objective untruth with calumny in his remark regarding the little pamphlet Spiritual Guidance of Man. He feels it to be especially irritating that I have indicated important subconscious action of spiritual impulses by showing that a child while building its brain manifests greater wisdom than it is conscious of later. A healthy science ought to take its starting point from such normal effects of the subconscious, yet it needs something in addition. If you take up the book Knowledge of the Higher Worlds you will find mention of the Secret of the Threshold. In the explanation of this “secret” it is stated that in crossing the threshold into the spiritual world a kind of separation takes place, a sort of differentiation of the three fundamental powers of the soul: thinking, feeling, and willing. Remember in the part dealing with the Guardian of the Threshold, the explanation that these three forces, which act together in ordinary consciousness in such a way that they can hardly be separated, become independent of each other. If I sketch them, this narrow middle section (see drawing) is the boundary between the ordinary consciousness and that region in which the soul lives in the spiritual world. Thinking, feeling, and willing must be so drawn as to show this as the range of will (red), but bordering upon the realm of feeling (green), and this in turn borders upon the realm of thinking (yellow). But if I were to indicate their direction after crossing the threshold into the spiritual world, I should have to show how thinking (yellow) becomes independent upon the one hand; feeling (green, right) separates itself from thinking, will becomes independent too (red, right), as I sketch it here diagrammatically, so that thinking, feeling, and willing spread out from one another like a fan.

You will find this described in my book Knowledge of the Higher Worlds. That these three activities, which before passing the threshold border upon each other but work separately, interact in the right way and do not come into confusion is due to the fact that the threshold has, so to speak, a certain breadth in which our

ego itself lives. If our ego acts normally, has perfect soul health, then the interaction of thinking, feeling, and willing is so regulated that they do not collide with one another, but mutually influence each other. It is the essential secret of our ego that it holds thinking, feeling, and willing beside each other, so that they can affect each other in the right way, but do not mix in any accidental fashion. Once across the threshold into the spiritual world there is no danger of this since the three faculties then separate.

Certain philosophers (such as Wundt, for example), insist that the soul must not be described as threefold because it is a unity. Wundt, too, confuses everything. The facts are that in the spiritual world thinking, feeling, and willing originate in a threefold manner, yet in the soul on earth they act as a unity. That must be taken into consideration, and if it be claimed, as recently reported, that Anthroposophy recognizes three souls though there exists but one, and that Anthroposophy has therefore no reasonable argument—then the answer must be that the unity of man is not impaired by the fact that he has two hands.

But now we are considering the relation of the ego to the soul-forces that work within it, and their action beyond the threshold of consciousness in the spiritual world. (Drawing, middle and right). An opposite condition may be brought about if the ego has been weakened in any way. Then the threshold is crossed, as it were, in the opposite direction (See drawing, left). Then thinking swerves aside (yellow, left), mingles with feeling (green, left), and willing (red, left), and confusion results. This happens if thinking is exposed in any way to the danger of not being properly confined, so that it asserts itself unwarrantably in the consciousness. Then, because the ego is not working as it should, thinking slides into the sphere of feeling or of will. Instead of working side by side, thinking mixes itself with feeling, or will, the ego being for some reason unable to exert its normal power.

This is what has happened in the cases described by the psychoanalysts as hysterical or nervous. Thinking, feeling, and willing have swung to the opposite side, away from the healthy direction that would lead them into the spiritual world. If you have any gift for testing and proving you may easily see how it comes about. Take the case of the girl sitting by the sickbed. Her strong ego-consciousness was reduced by loss of sleep and anxiety. The slightest thing might cause thinking to leave its track alongside of feeling and to run over into it. Then thought would be at once submerged in the waves of feeling, which are far stronger than the waves of thought, and the result in such a case is that the whole organism is seized by the tumult of feeling. This happens in the instant that thinking ceases to be strong enough to hold itself apart from feeling.

It is seriously demanded of the human being that he learn more and more to hold his thinking apart from the waves of feeling and will. If thinking takes hold subconsciously of the waves of feeling something abnormal results. (See drawing: at the right is the superconscious, in the middle the conscious, at the left the subconscious). This is extremely important.

Now you may readily imagine that in this modern life, when people are brought into contact with so much that they do not properly understand and cannot appraise, thoughts continually run over into feelings. But it must be remembered that thinking alone is oriented upon the physical plane; feeling is no longer confined to the physical plane, but stands in connection, by its very nature, with the spiritual plane as well. Feeling has really a connection with all the spiritual beings who must be spoken of as real. So that if a man with inadequate concepts sinks into his feeling-life, he comes into collision with the gods—if you wish to express it thus—but also with evil gods. And all these collisions occur because a man is submerged with no reliable means of knowledge. He must so submerge if he spends more time in the sphere of feeling than in the ordinary sphere of reason. In the sphere of feeling man cannot emancipate himself from his connection with the spiritual world. Even if, in this materialistic age, he does free himself in the realm of the intellect, he always enters the region of feeling with inadequate concepts, and so he must become ill.

What then is the real remedy, and how are men to be restored to health? They must be guided to concepts that reach out to include the world of feelings; that is to say that modern man must again be told of the spiritual world, and in the most comprehensive terms. Not the individually adapted therapeutic instructions of the psychoanalysts are meant, but the spiritual science which is applicable to all humanity. If the concepts of spiritual science are really accepted—for not everyone takes them in who only listens to lectures, or reads about them—but if they are really absorbed there will be no further possibility of the chaotic intermingling, in the subconscious, of the three spheres of the soul: thinking, feeling, and willing, which is the basis of all the hysteria and nervousness noted by the psychoanalysts.

For this, however, a man needs the courage to approach a direct experience of the operation of spiritual worlds, the courage to recognize that we are living now in a crisis that is connected with another (the established date being 1879), another crisis with painful consequences from which we are still suffering. I told you yesterday that many things must be considered from standpoints other than the materialistic ones of our own time, and I chose Nietzsche as an illustration.

Nietzsche was born in 1844. In 1841 the battle began in the spiritual world, of which I have already spoken, and Nietzsche was for three years in the midst of it, absorbing from it all possible impulses, and bringing them down with him to earth. Richard Wagner, born in 1813, took at first no part in it. Read Nietzsche's early writings, and notice the combative tone, almost every sentence showing the after-effects of what he experienced spiritually from 1841 to 1844. It gave a definite coloring to all the writings of Nietzsche's first period.

It is further of importance—as I have also explained—that he was a lad of sixteen when Schopenhauer died, and started at that time to read his works. A real relation ensued between the soul of Schopenhauer in the spiritual world and that of Nietzsche on earth. Nietzsche read every phrase of Schopenhauer so receptively that he was penetrated by every corresponding impulse of their author. What was Schopenhauer's object? He had ascended into the spiritual world in 1860 when the battle was still raging, and wanted nothing so much as to have the power of his thoughts continued through his works. Nietzsche did carry forward Schopenhauer's thoughts, but in a peculiar way. Schopenhauer saw when he went through the gate of death that he had written his books in an epoch threatened by the oncoming spirits of darkness, and with the struggle before him of these spirits against the spirits of light, he longed to have the effects of his work continued, and formed in Nietzsche's soul the impulse to continue his thoughts. What Nietzsche received from the spiritual world at this period contrasted strikingly with what was happening upon the physical plane in his personal relations with Richard Wagner. Nietzsche's soul life was composed in this way, and his career as a writer.

The year 1879 arrived. The battle that had been going on in the spiritual realms began to be transferred to earth after the fall of the spirits of darkness. Nietzsche was exposed by his whole Karma (in which I include his relations with the spiritual world), to the danger of being driven by the spirits of darkness into evil paths. He had been inspired by the transcendent egoism of Schopenhauer to try to carry on his work. I do not mean to say that egoism is always bad. But when Wagner rose into the spiritual world in 1883 the spirits of darkness were below, so he came into an entirely different atmosphere, and he became Nietzsche's unselfish spiritual guide. He let him enter what was for him the proper channel, and allowed him to become mentally deranged at exactly the right moment, so that he never came consciously into dangerous regions. That sounds paradoxical, but it was really the unselfish way in which Wagner's soul affected Nietzsche from the purer realms above, rather than the manner in which Schopenhauer's soul acted, he being still in the midst of the battle, up in the spiritual world, between the spirits of darkness and the spirits of light. What Wagner wanted to do for Nietzsche was to protect him, so far as his Karma permitted, from the spirits of darkness, already descended upon earth.

And Nietzsche was protected to a great extent. If his last writings are read in the right spirit, eliminating the things that have sprung from strong oppositions, great thoughts will be discovered. I tried in my book Nietzsche, a Fighter against his Time, to show the mighty thought impulses, detached from all his resisting impulses.

Yes, “the world is deep.” There is really some truth in Nietzsche's own saying: “The world is deep, and deeper than the day divines.” So we must never try to criticize the wide regions of the spiritual life by means of our ordinary consciousness. The wise guidance of the worlds can be understood only if we can enter into that guidance, free from egoistic thoughts, even if we can fit the development of tragic happenings into the scheme of wisdom. If you wish to look into the heart of things you will come upon many uncomfortable places.

In future whoever wishes to evaluate a life like Nietzsche's will make no progress if he describes only what happened in Nietzsche's environment on earth. Our view of life will have to extend to the spiritual world, and we shall be pushed to this necessity by the kind of phenomena that the psychoanalyst today tries to master by such inadequate means of knowledge, but never will control. Therefore human society might be driven into regions of great difficulty if it yields to psychoanalysis, particularly in the field of pedagogy.

Why should this be? Consider the fact that thinking slips down into the sphere of feeling. Now as soon as a man lives with his soul in the sphere of feeling, he is no longer in the life that is bounded by birth and death or by conception and death, but lives in the whole world, the extended world. This represents the usual life span (See drawing, a); within the realm of feeling he lives also in the period from his last death to his birth into this present life (See drawing, b); and with his will he lives even in his previous incarnation (Drawing, c).

Think of the relation to pupil or patient of an instructor who wishes to proceed by the method of psychoanalysis. When he tries to deal with soul contents which have slipped down into the realm of feeling he lays hold, not only upon the man's individual life, but upon the all-inclusive life which extends far beyond the individual. For this all-encompassing life, however, there are between men no connections that may be handled by means of mere ideas. Such connections lead instead to genuine life-relationships. This is very important. Imagine the existence of such a connection between a psychoanalytic instructor and pupil. What takes place could not be confined to the realm of ideas which are conveyed to the pupil, but real karmic connections would have to be established because one is really encroaching upon life itself. It would be tearing the individual in question out of his karma, changing the course of his karma. It will not do to handle that which extends beyond the individual in a purely individual manner. It must be treated instead in a universally human way. We are all brought together in a definite epoch, so there must be a mutual element which acts as soon as we go beyond the individual. That is to say: a patient cannot be treated by psychoanalysis, either therapeutically or educationally, as between individuals. Something universal

must enter, must enter even the general culture of the period, something which directs the soul to that which would otherwise remain subconscious; and that which draws the subconsciousness upward must become the milieu—not a transaction between individuals.

Here, you see, lies the great mistake that is being made. It has a terrific range and is of immense importance. Instead of trying to lead them to the attainable knowledge of the spiritual world which is demanded by the times, the psychoanalysts shut all the souls who show any morbid symptoms into sanatoriums, and treat each one in the individual manner. It can lead only to the forming of confused karmic connections—what takes place does not bring to light the subconscious soul content, but simply forms a karmic tie between doctor and patient because it encroaches upon the individual.

You understand: we are dealing here with real, concrete life, with which it does not do to play, which can only be mastered if nothing is striven for in this field except what is humanly universal. These things must be learned by direct relations of human beings with the spiritual world. Therefore it would be useful if people were to stop talking abstractly as Jung does, saying that a man experiences subconsciously everything that mankind has been through, even all sorts of demons. He makes them into abstract demons, not realities, by saying that it is stupid to discuss their possible existence. He makes them into abstract demons, mere thought demons that could never make a man ill. They can exist only in consciousness, and can never be subconscious. That is the point: that people who give themselves up to such theories are themselves working with so many unconscious ideas that they can never happen upon the right thing. They come instead to regard certain concepts as absolute, infallible; and I must ever repeat that when ideas begin to become absolute, men get into a blind alley, or reach a pit into which they fall with their thinking.

A man like Dr. Freud is obliged to stretch the sexual domain over the entire human being in order to make it account for every soul phenomenon. I have said to various people with psychoanalytic tendencies, whom I have met: A theory, a world-concept must be able to hold its own when you turn it upon itself, otherwise it crumbles into nothingness. The simple fallacy, if you extend it far enough, is an example. A Cretan says: All Cretans are liars. If it is said by a Cretan, and it is true, then it would be a lie, which causes the saying to annul itself. It will not do for a Cretan to say “All Cretans are liars,” expecting the sentence to pass unchallenged. That is only a sample of absolutizing. But a theory should not crumble when turned upon itself. Just as the statement that all Cretans are liars would be a lie if made by a Cretan, so does the theory of universal sexuality crumble if you test it out by applying it to the subject itself. And it is the same with other things. You can understand such a principle for a long time without applying it vigorously, in accordance with reality. But it will be one of the particular achievements of anthroposophically oriented spiritual science, that it cannot be turned in this manner against itself.

• 1. Beyond the Limits of the Soul. (This book has not been translated into English. Ed.)

Die Menschenraetsel In Der Philosophie Und In Der Geistesforschung (Anthroposophie). (The Mystery of the Human Being. Lecture given at Zurich, Switzerland, October 9, 1916)

It is often said today that when man's spiritual life is in a confused, chaotic condition and human souls have lost their courage, their confidence, and their hope for the future, then all kinds of occult and mystical endeavors are likely to spring up. And in circles which are not inclined to make exact distinctions, Anthroposophy is often reckoned among such endeavors. This evening's subject, which concerns the nature of Anthroposophy, is intended to show you how little it is justified to confuse anthroposophical research with much else with which it is often confused today. Anthroposophy starts from that scientific seriousness and conscientious exactitude which have been developed particularly in the natural sciences in the course of recent centuries and especially in the nineteenth century. Anthroposophy, however, seeks to develop what can be achieved within certain limits by natural science, up to what can be called the supersensory worlds, up to the comprehension of those fundamental riddles with which the deepest longings of the human soul are concerned, the longing for the comprehension of the eternal in the human soul and of the relation of this soul to the divine, spiritual foundations of existence.

Although Anthroposophy begins from scientific foundations, it had to develop—since it is concerned with these comprehensive problems which concern all human beings—in such a way that it comes to meet the understanding of the simplest human heart, and the practical needs of human souls and spirits at the present time, when there is so much need for inner steadiness and certainty, for strength in action, and for faith in mankind and its destiny. Anthroposophy had to come to meet varied social and religious endeavors in the way that I will describe this evening, although having itself a thoroughly scientific origin. But Anthroposophy must take more seriously than do many who believe that they are standing on the firm basis of present-day scientific research, the possibilities which this research leaves open. Anthroposophy has to contemplate with particular attentiveness what are regarded by some careful thinkers today as the limits of science.

If we use the methods of scientific research, observation of the sense world, experiment, and thought, which combines the results of observation and experiment, and find in this way the laws of nature as we are accustomed to regard them, we easily come to the conviction that this research has its limits. It cannot reach beyond the world of the senses and its laws, and cannot comprehend more of the human being than that part of it which belongs to this sense world as the human physical, bodily nature. It has to accept that it has limits as far as the real value, dignity, and being of man are concerned, and that it cannot penetrate the real soul and spirit of man. Anthroposophy, if it seeks to be taken seriously, has to take conscientious account of these things. It has to see this danger seriously: one may not arbitrarily extend that thinking which has been acquired in natural science, beyond the sense world. It would be arbitrary to do so because this manner of thought has acquired its strength and its training through the use of the senses and at once becomes empty, vague and unsatisfactory if it attempts by itself to penetrate to regions which are beyond the sense world. You know that there are certain philosophical speculations, through which thought by itself attempts to go from the sense-given data to the supersensory. Such thinking, relying upon itself alone, attempts to make all sorts of logical inferences which lead from the temporal to the eternal. But anyone who in an unprejudiced way makes the attempt to satisfy the needs of his soul for a knowledge of the eternal through such logical inferences will soon be dissatisfied, for he will recognize that this thinking, which can observe the beings and phenomena of nature so confidently, must at once lose its confidence when it leaves the realms accessible to the senses. Hence the conflict of different philosophical systems; each chooses according to its subjective peculiarities the way in which it leads beyond the world of the senses and develops its own theory. No harmonious, satisfactory conception of the world can come about in this way. Anthroposophy has to see clearly how an unprejudiced mind must regard such ways of thought, which rely upon themselves alone. Here it sees one danger which must be overcome if the eternal in man and in the universe is to be truly known.

Thus Anthroposophy recognizes the limits set to our knowledge of nature, and it must recognize on the other hand how some more far-reaching minds look elsewhere for the help in answering the great riddles of existence, which natural science cannot give them. They turn to what is called mysticism or inner contemplation, where the soul seeks to turn and to descend into its own depths, and to discover there what cannot be found by science, or in the ordinary consciousness. But he who takes the search for the eternal as seriously as the anthroposophist must do, has to recognize in these other paths the illusions into which such mystics often fall. Anyone who can observe the life of the human soul without prejudice knows the meaning of the human memory in the whole life of the soul. Memories have their origin in the external perceptions of the senses; here we receive our impressions. We call up again the pictures of such impressions from our memories, often years later, and it may then happen that some external sense impression has been received by our soul, perhaps half unconsciously, without being observed with the necessary attentiveness. It has sunk into the furthest depths of the soul, and it comes up again, intentionally or unintentionally, years later. It may not reappear in its original form, but changed in such a way that it will only be recognized by someone with an exact knowledge of the soul's life. What was originally stirred in the soul by an outer impression has been received by all kinds of feelings and impulses of will, received indeed by the organic, bodily constitution; it may arise in the soul years later, entirely changed. He who has taken hold of it may believe that what is really only a transformed sense impression, which has passed through the most varied metamorphoses and has reappeared during mystical self-immersion, is the revelation of something that is eternal and does not originate from the external world of the senses. Anthroposophy has to see how mystics, who look for their revelations in this way, fall into the most grievous illusions; and it has to recognize that such mysticism is a second danger. It has to overcome the dangers which arise both at the limits of our knowledge of nature and at the limits of our own human soul life.

I had to say this first, in order that it can be seen how conscientiously Anthroposophy is alert to all the sources of error which can arise. For I will now describe the ways Anthroposophy itself adopts in order to reach the spiritual, supersensory worlds. I will have to describe much that is paradoxical, much that today is quite unusual.

It is easy to believe, and many people do believe, that Anthroposophy is nothing but a more or less fantastic attempt to acquire knowledge of worlds with which serious scientific research should have nothing to do. Anthroposophy sees clearly, in what ways knowledge about the spiritual is NOT to be achieved and in this way comes to a starting point for genuine research. Having learned about the ways which can lead to illusions and errors, it reaches a real preliminary answer to this question. It can say: With the ordinary powers of knowledge which we have in everyday life, and which are used by our recognized sciences, it is not possible to go further (because of the limits of our knowledge of nature and of mystical self-immersion) than external nature, and what is received by a man from this external nature into the life of his soul. If we are to reach further, we must call on powers in the soul's life which in our ordinary existence are still asleep, and of which man is ordinarily unconscious. Anthroposophy develops such sleeping powers in the soul in order that, when they are awakened, they can achieve knowledge of realms to which our ordinary powers cannot reach. Serious and exact researchers do indeed already speak today about all sorts of abnormal powers of the human soul, or of the human organism, through which they try to show that man is involved in other relationships than those recognized by ordinary biology or physiology. But Anthroposophy is not concerned with such abnormal powers of the soul either. It uses the normal powers of the human soul life, but develops these further. For this one thing is indeed necessary from the first which I would like to call intellectual modesty.

We must be able to say to ourselves: In early childhood we came into the world in a dreamlike condition, and could only use our own limbs very imperfectly, or were quite unable to orientate ourselves in the world. But through education and through life itself, powers which at first only slept in us developed out of the depths of our human constitution. And now that we possess the powers developed by education and by life we must be able to say to ourselves: Within our souls may sleep other powers also which could be unfolded from some starting point that life provides, just as the powers of the child have been developed up to the present time. That this is indeed the case can only be shown in practice, and this is what anthroposophical research does. First we have to consider the whole life of the human soul, in order that we can develop its powers further, from the condition in which we found them in ordinary life.

To begin with, we are concerned with the human power of thought on the one hand, and with the will on the. other. Between these two, between the thinking which has trained itself through the impressions of the senses, and also through the guidance given to us in life—between this power of thought and the power of will through which we can enter life as active human beings, lies the whole realm of our feelings. For anthroposophical research we shall be principally concerned in developing our powers of thought and will up to a higher level than they possess in ordinary life. For knowledge about the eternal cannot be achieved by outer measures, but only through an intimate education of the powers of the soul themselves. But when the power of thought on one side and the power of the will on the other, are developed further than in ordinary life, then the power of feeling, which is the deepest, most essential part of the human soul, will also be in some way transformed, as we shall see. To begin with, we are concerned with the question: How is the power of thought to be prepared for a higher stage of knowledge than that acquired in ordinary life?

Now in my book, “Knowledge of the Higher Worlds and its Attainment,” and in other books as well, I have described these methods and exercises. Today I will describe the development of the soul's capacities in principle, and must refer you to these books for the details. For an introductory lecture it must be sufficient to point out the fundamental principle, which makes clear the real purpose and essence of the matter.

The power of thought which we have in ordinary life depends upon the external impressions of the senses. These impressions are living ones. Before us stands the world of colors and tones, and from it we receive living impressions. There remain behind in our soul the thoughts formed through these impressions, and we regard these thoughts rightly as shadowy. We know that in ordinary life these thoughts have a lesser degree of intensity for the soul than the impressions of the senses. We know too that the ordinary thoughts connected with sense impressions are in a sense taken more passively by man than are the immediate sense impressions.

Now our first task is to take that very vitality with which the soul experiences the impressions of the senses as a standard for the enhanced and strengthened life of thought which is to be developed in Anthroposophy as an instrument of research. The life of thought is to be enhanced and intensified in the following way. What I have to describe will appear simple, though the science of the spirit as a whole, as it is intended here, is no simpler than research in an observatory, in chemical or physical laboratories, or in a clinic. What I am here describing in principle in a simple way demands in practice, according to a man's capacities, years, months, or weeks. There are many such exercises for the soul. I will choose a few characteristic ones.

First, we must observe how we really stand toward thought in ordinary life. Strange though it sounds, the unprejudiced observer of his own thought should really say: The expression, “I think” is not quite exact. Thought develops in contact with external things; we only become conscious because in a sense we look back on our own physical organism and regard ourselves in a way from outside, that this developing thought is bound to our physical organism. Hence we say, “I think.” For the ordinary consciousness this “I think” is by no means fully justified. Anthroposophical research works in a direction through which it can become fully justified. It takes for example a simple idea or a simple group of ideas, and puts it in the midst of the soul's whole conscious life. The whole conscious life of the soul is concentrated on this one idea or group of ideas. This can be achieved through practice; I have described particular exercises in the books I have mentioned.

These exercises can help one to guide one's attention in such a way that it disregards everything else which otherwise occupies the soul from outside or from within, and by one's own innermost decision, as otherwise happens only with tasks of a mathematical kind, one is exclusively concerned with a simple group of ideas or single idea. But it is best, and should really be so, that an idea of this kind is not taken from one's memory. In memory, all sorts of experiences are engaged in alteration and metamorphoses, as I have already indicated.

Therefore it is good to seek out the ideas upon which attention is to be directed, from a book, or something of the kind, which is quite new to one—like an entirely new sense impression to which the living attention of the soul can be directed, and which has its effects through itself alone. Or one can receive from a person, who has experience in these things, a group of ideas of this kind, in order to have something which is entirely new.

There is no need to fear that in this way another person acquires power over one's soul in an improper manner, for it is not a question of letting this group of ideas have an influence upon one, but of developing the soul's own strength through uttermost attentiveness. The result then is that just as the muscles of an arm can be strengthened by exercise, thinking as a power of the soul can be made stronger and more intensive by being concentrated with the uttermost attentiveness upon a definite group of ideas, and by the repetition of such exercises in a rhythmic sequence. In this way the life of thought itself, without being dependent upon the impressions of the senses, can be made as living and intensive as is otherwise the experience of an external sense impression. Before, we had only pale thoughts, as compared with the living sense impressions; now, through these exercises, which I call meditation or concentration, a thinking is to be developed which gains inner strength until it is just as vivid as are sense impressions.

Here you see at once, that anthroposophical research goes in the opposite direction from that followed in the development of certain pathological conditions. What comes about in visions and hallucinations, through medium-ship, or through suggestion under hypnosis and things of this sort, goes in a diametrically opposite direction from the extension of the normal power of thought in anthroposophical research. If a man develops anything which leads him to hallucinations or visions, through which he becomes susceptible to suggestion, the powers of his soul are diverted in a certain way from the sense impressions and stream down into his physical organism. A man who suffers from hallucinations and visions becomes more dependent upon his physical organism than he is upon external sense impressions.

But the anthroposophical path of knowledge aims at the kind of experience which the soul has with external sense impressions. One who practices meditation and concentration must devote himself by his own individual choice, with the attentiveness he develops by his own decision, to that content which he has placed in the midst of his consciousness. Something comes about in this way which is different in principle from all pathological conditions, which can only be confused with the anthroposophical path through misunderstanding. If a man becomes subject to hallucinations and visions, or if he becomes open to suggestions under hypnosis, his whole personality is submerged in this life of hallucinations and visions. Into this disappears his ordinary consciousness, with its power of healthy human judgment.

The opposite is the case when a kind of higher consciousness is developed through meditation and concentration, carried out in the way I have described. If a man really acquires a power of thought which is enhanced and strengthened in this way, he has indeed higher faculties of soul.

But the ordinary clear-minded human being as he is occupied otherwise in knowledge and the fulfillment of his duties, remains active, side by side with the new, in a sense, second personality. The everyday man stands beside this second personality, who possesses a higher power of knowledge; he stands beside him with the ordinary power of knowledge, actively testing and criticizing. That is a difference in principle, which cannot be emphasized enough, when anthroposophical knowledge is described. And then, when in this way, thinking has been strengthened by meditation and concentration, one becomes able to say at a certain point of development: Now I am really the one who thinks within me; now I have experienced in an increased measure my own I within the world of my thoughts. As I experience myself otherwise in the external life of the senses, I experience myself now in thought itself.

This thinking is transformed, however. It does not appear before the soul's gaze like the ordinary pale thinking which is developed for use in the sense world. It is an abstract thinking no longer; it is experienced as intensively as colors and tones and one feels oneself strongly within it. And at a certain point one knows that one is no longer thinking with the help of the bodily instrument. (For ordinary thought always uses the physical instrument; Anthroposophy acknowledges this completely.) Now thinking has detached itself from the nervous system. This is known through inner experience. One knows when the moment has come in which the soul can live independently in thoughts, which however are no longer abstract, but pictorial.

The soul now really experiences itself for the first time, and at a certain moment, when a man is sufficiently mature, the first result of anthroposophical research appears before the soul's gaze. The entire earthly life appears in a mighty single picture, stretching back from the present moment toward birth. Otherwise this earthly life can be reached by memory, but to begin with it is a subconscious or unconscious stream within the soul. With or without our own decision, a few memory pictures can be raised from time to time from this stream, which goes back into our early childhood; but the stream of memories living in the soul more or less unconsciously is not what is meant by the great picture of our lives described here, through which we have in a single moment the inner being of our human experience before us, insofar as this experience takes place on earth. It is not as if we had particular events before us as they appear in memory; we have what can be contemplated as those impulses, which give us our abilities, that which gives us, from within, our moral powers, and that too which from within guides the powers of our growth and our assimilation. We have before us what I have called in the books I have mentioned the body of formative forces, or if we make use of older names which have always existed for such things, the human etheric body or life body.

This is a second, supersensory organism. It cannot be reached on the paths of ordinary natural science, or on the paths of logical thought alone; one must have developed what I have described as an enhanced power of thought, which is called, in the books I have mentioned, “Imaginative knowledge”—not as something concerned with fantasy, but because this thinking lives in the soul in a pictorial form and is itself knowledge. And so one experiences in addition to the external physical body, with its spatial limits, what I would like to call a time body, which is in constant movement, which can be perceived by the soul all at once, like a mighty picture of our life, and which contains everything that has worked from within upon our form, as far back as we can see in our earthly lives.

This body of formative forces, which is the first element in the higher, supersensory man, cannot be immediately represented in a drawing. Anyone who wished to draw it would have to realize that this is like painting a flash of lightning of which only a single moment can be represented. Anything drawn or painted of the etheric body would be like a flash of lighting, held fast only for a moment of its unceasing movement.

Through this the knowledge has been acquired that man in his inner being does not contain only the result of chemical and physical processes in his physical body; it has been learned in direct perception that man bears within him something akin to the nature of thought, and which can be reached through concentrated and strengthened thought processes. It is the first result of anthroposophical development, that one comes to know in perception this first super-sensory member of man's nature, the body of formative forces, or etheric body.

In order to reach further it is now necessary not only to do exercises of concentration and meditation in the way that has been described. It is necessary to observe that although one can give one's attention to such meditation and concentration by one's own decision with absolute clarity like a mathematician making his calculations, one gradually becomes completely absorbed in the subject of this concentration. It becomes difficult to detach oneself from the object of this uttermost attentiveness. Thus side by side with these exercises in concentration, it is necessary to do others which are entirely different. These have the aim of making possible the dismissal from the soul of all that has been placed before one's consciousness through one's own decision, and upon which one has concentrated. This must be dismissed with exactly the same clarity and conscious choice. By doing for a long time, in rhythmic sequence, such exercises in the rejection of ideas which first have been placed in the center of our consciousness with all our strength, a particular faculty of soul is acquired which has great importance for further research. One becomes able to achieve what I would like to call “an empty consciousness in full wakefulness.”

What is meant by this can become clear when we consider how a man who receives no external impressions, or has impressions that are similar to none at all, because they are monotonous or continually repeated, has his power of attention weakened. Under such conditions a man's consciousness becomes sleepy and dull. To achieve an empty consciousness without regular practice is impossible. It can be done only through practicing first an awareness of strongly intensified thoughts which are then dismissed from consciousness. Our consciousness can then remain so intensive and wakeful that it can retain this wakefulness, even when it has at first no content. This empty consciousness has to be achieved if one wishes to reach beyond the first result of anthroposophical research, the power of perceiving in a single picture the soul's inner being since birth.

If such exercises in the dismissal of ideas have been practiced long enough, and a certain maturity in doing this has been achieved, one will be able to dismiss this whole picture of life, which I have described, after it has been present to the soul. A second stage of higher knowledge is achieved if one can dismiss from consciousness (without letting this consciousness then be filled by external impressions) this life picture, which consists of our entire inner human being as it reveals itself during this earthly life as something constantly mobile forming our body from within. This life picture is our inner, etheric, earthly manhood, our body of formative forces, which is to be dismissed from consciousness.

I have called the first stage by the name “Imaginative knowledge;” it gives us only our subjective inner being in a life picture, as I have described. One must be entirely clear that through this first stage of supersensory knowledge one has only this subjective inner being. Then one will not fall into illusions, and even less into visions or hallucinations. A spiritual researcher in the anthroposophical sense is completely clear about every step of his path of knowledge.

If an empty consciousness is achieved through the dismissal of this life picture, the second state of higher super-sensory knowledge begins. I have called it “Inspiration.” Nothing superstitious or traditional is meant by this, but simply what I myself describe.—A terminology is necessary. When this has happened—when an empty consciousness has arisen through the dismissal of the life picture, the body of formative forces—then there arises in the soul through Inspiration what the soul itself was as a being of pure soul and spirit before birth, or, more precisely, before conception, when it was within a world of soul and spirit. The great moment now comes in such research, where one comes to know in immediate contemplation what is eternal in man's nature.

You see, the one who speaks from anthroposophical points of view cannot point to abstract conceptions which prove through logical inference or in some way that immortality exists. Step by step, he has to show what the soul has to do in intimate inner exercises in order to reach that moment when it can perceive what lives as eternal being within our soul. It can perceive this eternal being in the soul at that moment when the soul united itself through conception with the physical, bodily forces which are derived from parents and grandparents.

You may ask: When through Inspiration something of soul and spirit can be perceived, how does one know that this is the spiritual entity of the soul before conception? I can only explain through a comparison what is experienced directly at this point: Anyone who remembers an earthly event has perhaps a picture of what he experienced ten years ago. The content of this picture tells him that he does not have something before his mind which is directly aroused by an event of the present. He knows that the content of the picture directs him to something which happened ten years earlier. What now is experienced through inspired consciousness shows through its own content that it is something utterly different from what is present in the physical, sensory nature, where the soul is within the body. Time itself is part of the experience, as with the memory of earthly events. The impression itself reveals that we are concerned with the life before birth, with the experience through which the soul passed in a pure world of soul and spirit, before it has entered through the mother's body into the physical, sensory nature, which clothes it during earthly life.

After this stage of inspired knowledge has been achieved, and the question of immortality opens out toward a certain solution in one direction, in the direction of unborn-ness,—through other exercises which again have the character of knowledge, the other direction of the problem of immortality can be pursued. This can only happen through certain exercises of the will. Again, you will find exact details in the books I have mentioned, but here I will describe the matter in principle.

Man's will does not think; it does not resemble ordinary thought. Ordinary thought is aroused through external impressions, while man's will originates from within his organism. But in ordinary life we experience what this will is, only in a peculiar way. Take the simplest decision of the will, for example, the movement of the arm or hand, which is carried out because of an impulse of will. What of this impulse of will is really present in consciousness? Ordinarily this is not considered. But methodical research must have a firm starting point. At first we have the thought: we intend to raise and move the arm or hand. How this thought then dives down into our organism, how it stimulates the muscles and takes holds of the bones, how will makes itself effective within our organism, is completely unknown to the ordinary consciousness. Only later through an external impression, with which he can connect a thought, is he aware of the arm or hand which has been raised; of what happens between the first thought and the last impression, it must be said by real knowledge of the soul: This is beyond the grasp of our consciousness just as our experience between falling asleep and waking is beyond our consciousness, with the exception of the chaotic dreams borne up out of the waves of sleep.

It can be said: Man is really entirely awake only insofar as his life of ideas and thought is concerned. Through the element of will, a kind of sleep is included in our waking life. Paradoxical as it sounds, it must be said: Between the thought, which aims at an impulse of will, and the executed action there is a transition which is entirely comparable with falling asleep and awaking. The thought falls asleep into the unknown realm of will and awakens again when we observe the executed action.

The more one penetrates into the mysteries of the will (I can only indicate this briefly) the more one realizes that between these two regions I have described, the thought of intention and the thought which takes account of the observed execution of the act, there is really a kind of sleep present in man's waking life. A great alteration in the nature of the will can then be achieved by exercises, by particular exercises of the will.

Of the many exercises for the will mentioned in my books, I will single out a few here.—The will can be exercised, for example, by the direct influence of thought. The capacities of thinking, feeling and willing, which we have to distinguish in abstract thought when we wish to describe anything about the soul, do not lie so far apart in the real life of the soul, but play into one another. Thus the will plays into our thinking, when we connect or distinguish thoughts.

Now one can perform an exercise of the will by thinking backwards by one's own decision, something which ordinarily is thought of forwards, in the sequence of the external facts. For example, one can think a play backwards, from the fifth act to the first, beginning with the last events of the fifth act and ending with the first events of the first act. Or one can feel in thought the last lines of a poem, or of a melody in reverse order.

An exercise which is particularly valuable is at evening to allow the experience of the day to pass in part vividly before the soul, beginning with the last event of evening and progressing toward the morning. Everything must be taken atomistically as possible; one must go so far as to imagine the ascent of a staircase in reverse, as if it were a descent from the top to the lowest step. The more one forms ideas in this way in an unaccustomed sequence which is not dependent on the external facts, the more one liberates the will, which is accustomed to abandon itself passively to the external facts, from these, and also from the physical body.

After doing such exercises, further support can be won through others which I would like to call “exercises in serious self contemplation and self education.” One must be able to judge one's own actions and impulses of will with the same objective detachment as one can judge the actions and impulses of will of another personality. One must become in a sense the objective observer of one's own resolves and actions.

And one must go further: If you observe life, you know how you have changed in the course of the years. Everyone knows how in the course of ten years he has changed in his whole mood and attitude.—But what has been made of us in the course of the years, has been achieved by life, by external reality. These things must be seen objectively; it must be recognized how passively man accepts this external reality.

But now a man can practice self-education actively, in order to find the way into higher worlds. He can take his self-education in hand, by deciding, for example: “You will overcome this habit.” He uses all his powers to overcome a particular habit, or to acquire some new quality. If through one's own training, one achieves what otherwise is attained only through the influence of life, one gradually acquires the detachment of the will from the physical bodily nature. Something now happens which again I can only describe in a paradoxical way.

These things sound paradoxical because present-day thought is unaccustomed to them, but they are absolutely secure results of the anthroposophical path of knowledge which can be followed in the way I am describing, in order to enter higher worlds.

Although it will sound strange, you can make a comparison between an eye in which the vitreous body is obscured, or which has some kind of cataract so that through some opacity it cannot serve for vision, and an eye which is entirely healthy and transparent. The eye, which does not draw attention through its own bodily nature but takes a selfless part in our whole organism, through this very fact serves for our seeing. In ordinary life, our whole physical organism is comparable to a great opaque eye. Through such exercises of the will, our entire organism is made transparent. This is not done in any unhealthy way but in a way that is thoroughly healthy for ordinary life.

Nothing which is abstract or unhealthy for ordinary life should be attempted for the sake of achieving an entry into higher worlds.—It is a spiritualization of the will. We penetrate into the realm lying between the two thoughts—the thought containing the purpose of an action, and the thought of the action after it has been perceived. By making our organism in a sense entirely transparent for the soul, we enter a spiritual world. This is our task!

Just as the eye is not in the organism for its own sake, the whole physical organism is no longer there when these exercises of the will are continued; in a sense it becomes transparent. And just as it is the physical organism which catches up our impulses of will and makes them opaque, put them to sleep, through its instincts and impulses, its emotions and its entire organic processes,—in the same way everything now becomes transparent, as through the transparent, vitreous body of the eye, what is material is transparent in the eye. Through thus forming our entire physical organism into a transparent sense organ, we have now raised to a higher level a power of the soul which many are unwilling to accept as a means of knowledge, as I well know. It should indeed not be regarded as a means of knowledge as it exists in ordinary life. But through its further development it becomes such a means. This is the power of love.

It is the power of love which in ordinary life gives men a value as social beings. Love is the best and noblest power in ordinary life, individually and socially. When it is enhanced, as it can be enhanced through these exercises of the will, and when these exercises of the will make our organism transparent in this way, love develops to a higher level.

We gain the power to pass over into objective spiritual reality and the third stage of knowledge begins, that of true Intuition,—what I have called “Intuitive knowledge.” The word intuition is used also in ordinary life, and I will return to this point. Not in the sense used in ordinary life, but in this developed form as I have explained it, am I using the phrase “Intuitive knowledge” here. This is a knowledge in which man stands within the spiritual after he has made his body in a sense transparent, has transformed it into a sense organ. Through this knowledge something fresh enters the consciousness of the soul; we now learn how man can live within the will which has become independent of the physical body.

Man lives with the thought, which he has strengthened and united with his will, outside his body; and this provides him with the reflection in knowledge of the process of death.

What happens at death in full reality: that the soul and spirit detach themselves from the physical body and, after the human being has passed through the gate of death, continue their own existence in the world of soul and spirit—this is perceived in a picture, in a reflection that is a basis for knowledge, through intuitive perception, when, through an exercise of the will, we have transformed our whole organism into a sense organ. Thus immortality consists of two sides; on the one hand, of Unbornness, and on the other side, of Immortality, in the exact sense,—the fact that the soul is not destroyed by physical death. The eternity of the human soul consists in Unbornness and Immortality. It can be perceived through real anthroposophical research. Thus man comes to know in direct perception his own eternal and immortal being.

But as man comes to know his own being of soul and spirit, he also comes to know the environment in its soul and spirit nature. Through Inspired and Intuitive knowledge he comes to know the world of soul and spirit, in which the human soul lives before conception and after death. It is a world of real spiritual beings. Just as the world which we perceive with our senses lies before us with all its beings, there lies before the soul which is learning to experience itself in its existence as soul and spirit, the world from which we came at conception and through birth, and into which we enter again at death.—And just as our own bodily nature falls away from us, there falls away the sensory, bodily element which related us to other human beings, and we find ourselves in company with other men through our existence in soul and spirit.

Thus immortality, and the period of our existence in the spiritual world, become real results of knowledge. And this world of soul and spirit which always surrounds us, and which cannot be investigated by thought relying on its own resources beyond the laws of nature—this world of soul and spirit which is hidden in the spiritual part of nature, as the colors and tones are hidden in the sensory world—appears before the perception which can be developed in the way that has been described. The whole of nature then becomes something different from which it was in sense perception. It is not as though external nature with its material qualities and substances were to disappear. Before supersensory knowledge all this remains in existence, just as the healthy human being with his sound human understanding remains side by side with the personality which develops as the possessor of higher power of knowledge. To external nature is added a supersensory, spiritual nature, if you will allow me the seeming contradiction.

I will give one example for this spiritual perception within nature: For our ordinary sight and scientific knowledge the sun with its definite outlines exists in cosmic space. Through astronomy and astrophysics we form a definite picture of the form of the sun as something present in physical space and having its effects there. However, the sun becomes something quite different for the kind of research which uses the higher faculties that I have described. Through this it can be learned that the physical body of the sun present in space is only the body for a spiritual reality—and that this spiritual reality fills the whole space accessible to us. What belongs to the nature of the sun fills all the space accessible to us, and passes as a stream of forces through minerals, plants and animals, and through our human organism as well. In a way it is consolidated or concentrated in the external, spatial body of the physical sun, but what belongs to the sun-nature is present everywhere.

Just as we learn about external nature by representing it in abstract thoughts, through which external nature lives on in pictures, in the same way the spiritual foundations of nature live on more deeply in our spiritual human being. If we observe our abstract thoughts within us, we recognize that they are pictures of external, perceptible nature. If we observe the spiritual element in the external world and perceive how what belongs to the sun-nature works on within our being, we really come to know our own organism. For we find what belongs to the sun's nature within our own human constitution, in all those forces which work particularly strongly while we are still growing; these are the forces permeating us in our youth and which have their point of departure particularly in our brain and work in a plastic and constructive way upon our physical organism especially during early childhood. We come to know what is akin to the sun-nature in our own organism. And we come to know our particular organs: heart, lungs, brain, and so on, with a characteristic development of the sun forces in each. We come to know each organ, as far as its constructive, formative forces are concerned by learning about its relationship with the sun-nature.

I do not hesitate to describe these things, which are assured results of anthroposophical research, although they still appear paradoxical and perhaps fantastic to man today.

Just as we come to know the sun-nature, we can come to know all that stands in relation to the moon. We know the physical outlines of the physical moon; but the moon-nature too fills the whole of cosmic space accessible to us, and has its effects in all realms of nature,—has its effects in plant, mineral and animal,—has its effects too in our physical organism. We come to know the moon-like forces in their work within the whole human being. These are the destructive powers, those powers which are particularly active as we grow old. But these destructive forces are always active, in youth as in old age, within the process of assimilation, side by side with the sun forces.

We come to know how the whole cosmos with its forces streams into man. We come to know all that is present in man as varied processes. We understand the connection of the universe with the human being. And as I could describe in principle what the sun-nature and moon-nature are, the same could be done for other forces in the universe as well. A more intimate relationship than that recognized by ordinary science becomes known in this manner between the human being and the spirit in the universe.

In this way I have reached the point where I can describe how Anthroposophy, although it has developed as knowledge of the supersensory in the way I have described, can come to meet practical life and every region of scientific study. First I must point out how man becomes transparent for knowledge in quite another way, when he is understood in his relationship to the universe. Even physical man becomes the sum of many processes; what appeared to us before as the separate organs of heart, lung and brain, is transformed in a way that we never imagined into processes, in their growth and change. We come to know how constructive and destructive forces are contained in every organ in a different way.

As spiritual physiology and biology can be built up, such knowledge proves itself fruitful, particularly in the field of medicine, for pathology and therapy. When the human organism becomes transparent in this way, abnormal constructive forces, processes of rampant growth, can be known for what they are in the human organism. The abnormal destructive forces, processes of inflammation for example, can be understood in their connections too. For example, one comes to know what exists as polar opposite to an abnormal construction, that is, a process of rampant growth, through understanding the cooperation of sun-nature and moon-nature. One comes to know the corresponding remedy in a plant or a mineral. One comes to know how a process of rampant growth in the human organism corresponds to a destructive process in a plant or a mineral, and similar things. In short, one can go on from mere experiment among remedies to clear knowledge of how everything in nature, through the constructive and destructive processes contained within it, and through the other cosmic processes at work in everything, has its effects in the human organism.

When this is worked out in detail, it proves so fruitful that quite a number of physicians have felt themselves called to take up a rational medicine of this kind. Already there exist clinics at Dörnach near Basle and in Stuttgart, led by trained physicians who have taken up in a fruitful way the results of anthroposophical research into the basic spiritual facts which can supplement all that external research into the human body and into remedies can discover.

It must be emphasized that neither in this field, or in any other, does Anthroposophy engage in any unjustified opposition against what is really justified as scientific in the present time. On the contrary, Anthroposophy, when it is rightly understood must build on exact scientific method. Recognized medicine is in no way to be attacked, but only to be developed further.

Another field is that of the arts. Anthroposophy has existed already for two decades. At a particular time, a number of friends of the anthroposophical conception of the world could feel the necessity of building of Anthroposophy its own home. For reasons which I cannot describe in detail here, this home was built near Basle.

How would this home have been built by a different spiritual movement? If something of the kind was necessary in another spiritual movement, an architect would have been chosen who would have erected a building in the Classical, Renaissance, Rococo, Romanesque or Gothic style, or in a mixture of these styles. This would have been an outer frame for what was done inside it.

Anthroposophy cannot act in this way. It does not desire to produce a theory—something only concerned with the intellect, with the head,—and which can be contained in any sort of building. Anthroposophy seeks to work upon the whole human being. Just as it makes use of the whole human being as a sense organ, so everything that comes into the world through it proceeds from the whole, the entire human being. One cannot imagine a nutshell being formed by any other laws than is the nut itself. It is the same when Anthroposophy has to build, paint or carve, in order to provide a surrounding for itself. Everything artistic then must in a sense proceed from the same laws from which proceed the ideas that are spoken from the rostrum, out of the perception of the spiritual world. Hence, an ordinary, existing style was formed. It may still be very imperfect—it is a first attempt, a first beginning.

What has to be attempted can be described in this way: The shape of every wall and column, all sculpture and painting at Dörnach had to manifest the same thing as do the words spoken from the rostrum when Anthroposophy expresses in ideas what can be discovered in higher words through immediate perception. The spoken word is only another form of all that should work in an artistic way as the surrounding; everything really has flowed into artistic form.

What did Goethe say, when he wished once to express his ideas of art in the most intimate way? He said “Art is a manifestation of secret laws of nature, which without it would never be revealed.” And he also said significantly, “The man to whom nature begins to reveal her most intimate mysteries, feels a deep longing for her most worthy interpretress, Art.” One feels this longing most of all when the spirit which works in nature reveals itself in one's soul through supersensory vision. For then one receives no abstract allegories, but a real spiritual formative power, which has a sense for the materials and which can be embodied in particular substances as true art. Anthroposophy thus has a fruitful effect upon the field of art in all its forms.

A third field where it is shown how Anthroposophy provides fertile new impulses for life, is education. This has often been described in detail in lectures and writings in connection with the foundation and rapid growth of the Waldorf School in Stuttgart. It is a question of transforming what Anthroposophy can give into immediate educational skills; it is not a question of imposing anthroposophical ideas upon the children in the school. Through the fact that Anthroposophy provides a real knowledge of man, it gives a spiritual foundation for carrying out in practice the good principles expressed by the great educators of the nineteenth century. In educational practice, a real knowledge of man is needed. When one has come to know the whole of the human being fully, in body, soul and spirit, it is possible to derive from the child's nature itself the curriculum and the aims of education for each year of the child's school life.

Finally, to mention a few other areas, I would like to point out that Anthroposophy can have a fruitful effect upon social life as well, since the knowledge it achieves is concerned with the whole human being. We have seen how the one-sided use of the way of thinking developed in natural science has its definite limits, and cannot reach the true being of man, so that this way of thinking, if it shapes social purposes, is bound to work destructively.

I do not think that today there is sufficient unprejudiced judgment in wide circles capable of realizing the destructive character, for all human culture, of what has become, in the east of Europe, practical reality—and realized illusions at the same time. Those social impulses are derived from taking into account external nature alone. Like a great threat, there hangs over our entire present-day civilization what has begun its destructive course in the east of Europe. [Steiner refers to the spread of Communism resulting from the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, October 1918.—Ed.]

If social impulses are deepened by considering not only in an external way what is instinctive and natural in man and reckoning free actions in a sense as more highly developed instincts, then the true freedom of man in the spirit can be recognized. I have attempted to do this in my “Philosophy of Spiritual Activity” [published at the beginning of the nineties] on the basis of such anthroposophical principles. In this way a sum of social impulses can arise which relate whole human beings to whole human beings, and which can correct and spiritualize what is hanging over human civilization in such a destructive way, as a threatening specter of the future.

These are a few examples which show how Anthroposophy can be fruitful for life. If one considers the ethical and moral life in an unprejudiced way, as I have attempted to consider it and to place it upon a secure basis in The Philosophy of Spiritual Activity, one comes upon the concept of Intuition of pure thinking, through an unconscious moral Intuition of pure thinking, through an unconscious moral Intuition. The true moral impulses which arise from the conscience are moral; their true source through Inspired and Intuitive knowledge as I have described these today from the anthroposophical point of view.

Thus with its knowledge Anthroposophy comes to meet the most intimate and important feelings and impulses of the human soul, above all, religious devotion. It would be utterly misleading if it were said that Anthroposophy sought to institute a new sect or found a new religion. Since Anthroposophy stands upon the basis of knowledge in the way I have described today, it cannot have about it, or desire anything of a sectarian nature. Nor can it institute a new religion. But if the supersensory reveals itself to knowledge, this can only be of benefit for the religions, and the religious needs of mankind.

One would believe that the representatives of religious faiths must feel deep satisfaction if a spiritual stream appears in our time, able to confirm from the side of knowledge what is sought by faith. Fundamentally it is incomprehensible that the official representatives of religious faiths do not see in Anthroposophy a confirmation of religious life, but often regard it as if it were something hostile. If they really grasped the fundamentals of Anthroposophy, and did not regard it superficially, they would see in it the firmest basis for real piety and real religious life.

For when the light of knowledge comes to meet the seeking soul, not only from the world of the senses but from supersensory worlds as well, then faith is not harmed, but strongly supported; and ethically too, the soul acquires powerful sources of goodness. For moral action it receives meaning, security, and purpose for life, since it comes to know itself as a member of a spiritual world as the external body is a member of a physical world. In this knowledge of himself as a member of a spiritual world, man can come to recognize again his true human dignity and a true ethics and morality worthy of his manhood.

I would like to sum up, as in a picture, what I have tried to describe as the nature of Anthroposophy. We have the human being before us; we see the form of his physical body. We only come to know his whole being when we see how his physiognomy is the expression of his soul and spirit. We have in natural science, which is fully recognized in its justified purposes by Anthroposophy, in a sense the knowledge of the external body of the world. In the natural science of the physical we have something that is itself a kind of intellectual body. Just as we have only the whole of man before us when his soul and spirit is revealed through his physical bodily nature, in the same way we have the knowledge of the world in its entirety, only when as if through a kind of wonderful physiognomy, through all that science offers us in its facts, its experiments, its hypotheses, its natural laws—a cosmic knowledge in soul and spirit comes to expression. For that body of knowledge, given in external natural science, Anthroposophy seeks to be the soul and spirit of a real and complete knowledge of man and of the world.

Since the earliest times, it has been felt that the study of the human being is the most worthy pursuit of human research. Anyone who allows themselves to be influenced by what has come to light over time as knowledge of the human being can easily become discouraged. A wealth of opinions presents itself as answers to the question: what is the human being, and what is his relationship to the universe? The most diverse differences between these opinions arise in contemplation. This can lead to the feeling that man is not called to such research and that he must refrain from achieving anything that can give satisfaction to the feeling mentioned.

Is such a feeling justified? It could only be so if the perception of different views on a subject were a testimony to man's inability to recognize anything true about the subject. Anyone who wanted to accept such a testimony would have to believe that the whole essence of a thing should suddenly reveal itself to man, if knowledge could be spoken of at all. But it is not the case with human knowledge that the essence of things can suddenly reveal itself to it. It is rather the case with it, as with the picture that one paints, for example, of a tree from a certain side or photographs. This picture gives the appearance of the tree, from a certain point of view, in full truth. If one chooses a different point of view, the picture will be quite different. And only a series of pictures, from the most diverse points of view, can give an overall idea of the tree through their interaction.

In this way, however, man can also only look at the things and entities of the world. Everything he can say about them, he must say as views that apply from different points of view. It is not only so with the sensory observation of things, it is also so in the spiritual. With regard to the latter, one should not be misled by the above comparison and imagine that the diversity of points of view has something to do with space. Each view can be a true one if it faithfully reflects what is observed. And it is only refuted when it is shown that it can legitimately be contradicted by another view given from the same point of view. A difference between one view and another given from a different point of view, on the other hand, is as a rule meaningless. Anyone who views the matter in this way is protected against the obvious objection that every opinion must appear justified when viewed in this way. Just as the image of a tree must have a very specific shape from one point of view, so must a mental view from one point of view. But it is clear that one can only prove an error in the view if one is clear about the point of view from which it is given.

We should get along much better in the world of human opinions than we often do if we always kept this in mind. One would then realize how the differences of opinion in many cases arise only from the diversity of points of view. And only through different true views can one approach the essence of things. The mistakes that are made in this direction do not arise from the fact that people form different views, but rather from the fact that each person wants to see his view as the only legitimate one.

An objection to all this presents itself easily. One could say that if man wants to present the truth, he should not give an opinion, but rise above possible opinions to an overall view of a corresponding thing. This demand may sound acceptable. But it is not realizable. For what a thing is must be characterized from different points of view. The chosen image of the tree being painted from different points of view seems appropriate. Anyone who wants to avoid looking at the different images in order to gain an overall picture might end up painting something very blurry and foggy; but there would be no truth in such a blurry picture. Nor can truth be gained by a knowledge that wants to encompass the object with a single glance, but only by combining the true views that are given from different points of view. This may not correspond to human impatience; but it corresponds to the facts that one learns to recognize when one develops a meaningful striving for knowledge.

Few things can lead so strongly to a genuine appreciation of truth as such a striving for knowledge. And this appreciation may be called genuine because it cannot be followed by faintheartedness. It does not lead to despair in the striving for truth, because it recognizes truth as such in limitation; but it protects against the empty arrogance that, in its possession of truth, believes it can encompass the comprehensive essence of things.

Those who take this sufficiently into account will find it understandable that, in particular, knowledge of man should be sought in such a way that one tries to approach his nature from different points of view. One such point of view shall be chosen for the following remarks. It shall be characterized as one that lies between two others, as it were, in the middle. And it is not to be asserted that there are not many other points of view besides the three considered here. But the three shall be chosen here as particularly characteristic.

The first aspect to be considered in this regard is anthropology. This science collects everything that can be observed about humans and seeks to gain insights into their nature from the results of its observations. For example, it considers the structure of the sensory organs, the shape of the bone structure, the conditions of the nervous system, the processes of muscle movement, etc. With her methods, she penetrates into the finer structure of the organs and seeks to learn about the conditions of feeling, of imagining, etc. She also investigates the similarity of the human being to the animal and seeks to gain an idea of the relationship between humans and other living beings. She goes further and examines the living conditions of primitive peoples, who appear to be lagging behind in their development compared to civilized peoples. From what she observes in such peoples, she forms ideas about what the more developed peoples were once like, which have progressed beyond the level of education at which those remained. She studies the remains of prehistoric people in the layers of the earth and forms concepts about how cultural development has progressed. She examines the influence of climate, the seas, and other geographical conditions on human life. It seeks to gain an understanding of the conditions of racial development, of the life of nations, of legal conditions, the development of writing, of languages, etc. The name anthropology is used here for the entire physical study of man; it includes not only what is often counted in the narrower sense, but also the morphology, biology, etc. of man.

At present, anthropology generally keeps within the limits that are now considered to be those of scientific methods. It has compiled an enormous amount of factual material. Despite the different types of representations in which this material is summarized, it contains something that can have the most beneficial effect on the knowledge of human nature. And this material is constantly growing. It corresponds to the views of the present time to place great hopes in what can be gained from this side in elucidating the human riddle. And it is quite natural that many consider the point of view of anthropology to be as certain as they must regard the next one to be characterized here as doubtful.

This other point of view is that of theosophy. Whether this term is fortunate or unfortunate is not to be examined here. It is only a second point of view in relation to the anthropological view of man that is to be characterized. Theosophy assumes that man is above all a spiritual being. And it seeks to recognize him as such. It bears in mind that the human soul not only reflects and processes things and events perceived by the senses, but that it is capable of leading a life of its own, which receives its stimuli and content from a source that can be called spiritual. It relies on the fact that man can penetrate into a spiritual realm just as he penetrates into a sensory one. In the latter, man's knowledge expands as he focuses his senses on more and more things and processes, and forms his ideas on the basis of these. In the spiritual realm, however, knowledge advances differently. The observations are made in inner experience. A sensual object presents itself to man; a spiritual experience arises within, as if rising from the center of the human being itself. As long as a person cherishes the belief that such an ascent can only be an inner matter of the soul, so long must Theosophy be highly doubtful to him. For such a belief is not far from the other, which assumes that such experiences are only further inner workings of what has been observed by the senses. It is only possible to persist in such a belief as long as one has not yet obtained the conviction through compelling reasons that from a certain point on, the inner experiences, like the sensory facts, are determined by something that is an external world to the human personality. Once one has obtained this conviction, then one must recognize a spiritual external world just as one recognizes a physical one. And then it will be clear to everyone that man is connected with a spiritual world in relation to his spiritual nature, just as he is rooted in a physical world through his physical nature. It will then also be understood that materials for the knowledge of man can be taken from this spiritual world, just as anthropology takes materials for the physical man from physical observation. Then the possibility of research in the spiritual world will no longer be doubted. The spiritual researcher transforms his soul experience in such a way that the spiritual world enters into his soul experiences. He shapes certain soul experiences in such a way that this spiritual world reveals itself in them. (How this happens is described by the writer of this sketch in his book: “How to Know Higher Worlds?” Berlin, Philosophisch-theosophischer Verlag.) This kind of inner life can be called “clairvoyant consciousness.” But one must keep far from this concept all the nonsense that is done in the present with the word “clairvoyance”.

To arrive at inner experience in such a way that these or those facts of the spiritual world reveal themselves directly to the soul requires long, arduous, and self-denying soul-searching. But it would be a fatal mistake to believe that only those who experience spiritual realities directly through such soul-searching can reap the fruits of their soul-searching. The case is quite different. When spiritual facts have been revealed through the appropriate soul-searching exercises, they are, as it were, conquered for the human soul. When the spiritual researcher communicates them after having found them, they can be understood by every person who listens to them with a healthy sense of truth and unprejudiced logic. One should not believe that only a clairvoyant consciousness can have a well-founded conviction of the facts of the spiritual world. Every soul is tuned to recognize the truth of what the spiritual researcher has found. If the spiritual researcher wants to assert something that is untrue, this will always be ascertainable through the rejection of the healthy sense of truth and unbiased logic.

The direct experience of spiritual knowledge requires complicated soul paths and soul activities; possession of such knowledge is necessary for every soul that wants to have a full consciousness of its humanity. And without such consciousness, a human life is no longer possible from a certain point of existence.

Even if Theosophy is able to provide knowledge that satisfies the most important needs of the human soul, and that can be recognized by the natural sense of truth and by sound logic, there will always be a certain gap between it and anthropology. It will always be possible to show the results of Theosophy regarding the spiritual essence of man and then be able to point out how anthropology confirms everything that Theosophy says. But there will be a long way from one field of knowledge to the other.

But it is possible to fill the gap. In a certain respect, this is done here by sketching an anthroposophy. If anthropology can be compared to the observations of a wanderer who walks from place to place and from house to house in the plain in order to gain an idea of the nature of a region; if theosophy resembles the overview that can be gained from the summit of a hill over the the same district: then anthroposophy is to be compared with the view that one can have from the slope of the hill, where the individual is still in front of one's eyes, but the manifold is already beginning to merge into a whole.

Anthroposophy will observe the human being as he presents himself to physical observation. But it will cultivate observation in such a way that the physical fact is used to seek out the reference to a spiritual background. In this way, anthroposophy can lead from anthropology to theosophy.

It should be noted that only a very brief sketch of anthroposophy is intended here. A detailed presentation would require a great deal. The sketch is intended to take into account only the physical body of man, insofar as this is a revelation of the spiritual. And within these limits, anthroposophy is meant in the narrower sense. It must then be followed by a psychosophy, which considers the soul, and a pneumatosophy, which deals with the spirit. In this way, anthroposophy leads into theosophy itself.