The Rudolf Steiner Archive

During our last meeting here some time ago we spoke of the deeper currents of Christianity with particular reference to the Gospel of St. John and of the great images and ideas accessible to man when he reflects deeply upon this unique text.¹ More than once it has been emphasized that the very depths of Christianity are illuminated by that Gospel and some of those who have heard lecture-courses on the same subject might feel inclined to ask: If the viewpoint reached through studying the Gospel of St. John may truly be called the most profound, can it be widened or enriched in any way by study of the other three Gospels of St. Luke, St. Matthew and St. Mark? Again, those who tend to be mentally lazy might ask: If the deepest depths of Christianity are to be found in the Gospel of St. John, is it still necessary to study Christianity as presented in the other Gospels, especially in the apparently less profound Gospel of St. Luke?

Anyone who might put this question believing such an attitude to be worthy of consideration would be labouring under a complete misapprehension. The scope of Christianity itself is infinite and light can be shed upon it from the most diverse standpoints. Furthermore, as the present course of lectures will show, although the Gospel of St. John is a document of untold profundity, there are facts which can be learnt from the Gospel of St. Luke and not from that of St. John. The ideas which in the lectures on the Gospel of St. John we came to recognize as among the most profound in Christianity, do not by any means comprise all its depths. It is possible to penetrate these depths from another starting-point altogether, basing our studies on the Gospel of St. Luke viewed in the light of Anthroposophy.

Let us once again recall facts in support of the statement that there is something to be gained from the Gospel of St. Luke even if the depths of the Gospel of St. John have been exhaustively studied. A fact revealed to the student of Anthroposophy by every line of the Gospel of St. John is that records such as the Gospels were composed by individuals who, as initiates and clairvoyants, possessed deeper insight than other men into the nature of existence. In everyday parlance the terms ‘initiate’ and ‘clairvoyant’ may be synonymous. But if our studies of Anthroposophy are to lead us into the deeper strata of spiritual life, we must distinguish between one who is an ‘initiate’ and one who is a ‘clairvoyant’, for they represent two distinct categories of human beings who have found their way into the spheres of super-sensible existence. There is a difference between an initiate and a clairvoyant, although an initiate may at the same time be a clairvoyant, and a clairvoyant an initiate of a certain grade. To distinguish with exactitude between these two categories of human beings you must recall the facts described in my book Knowledge of the Higher Worlds and its Attainment,² remembering that strictly speaking there are three stages on the path leading beyond ordinary perception of the world.

The first kind of knowledge accessible to man can be described by saying: he beholds the world through his senses and assimilates what he perceives by means of his intellect and the other faculties of his soul. Beyond this, there are three further stages of knowledge, of cognition: the first is the stage of Imagination, Imaginative Cognition, the second is the stage of Inspiration, and the third is the stage of Intuition—but the term ‘Intuition’ must be understood in its true sense.

The faculty of Imaginative Cognition is possessed by one before whose eye of spirit all that lies behind the world of the senses is unfolded in mighty, cosmic pictures—but these pictures do not in the least resemble anything we call by this name in everyday life. Apart from the difference that the pictures revealed by Imaginative Cognition are independent of the laws of three-dimensional space, other characteristics make it impossible for them to be compared with anything in the world of the senses.

An idea of the world of Imagination may be gained in the following way. Suppose someone were able to extract from a plant in front of him everything perceptible to the sense of sight as ‘colour’, so that this hovered freely in the air. If he were to do nothing more than draw out the colour from the plant, a lifeless colour-form would hover before him. But to the clairvoyant such a colour-form is anything but a lifeless picture, for when he extracts the colour from the objects, then, through the preparation he has undergone and the exercises he has practised, this colour-picture begins to be animated by spirit just as in the physical world it was filled by the living substance of the plant. He then has before him, not a lifeless colour-form but freely moving coloured light, glistening, sparkling, full of inner life; each colour is the expression of the particular nature of a spiritual being imperceptible in the world of the physical senses. That is to say, the colour in the physical plant becomes for the clairvoyant the expression of spiritual beings. Now imagine a world filled with such colour-forms, reflected in manifold ways and in perpetual metamorphosis; your vision must not be confined to the colours, as it might be when confronting a painting of glimmering colour-reflections, but you must imagine it all as the expression of beings of soul-and-spirit, so that you can say to yourselves: ‘When a green colour-picture flashes up it expresses to me the fact that an intellectual being is behind it; or when a reddish colour-picture flashes up it is to me the expression of a being with a fiery, violent nature.’ Now imagine this whole sea of interweaving colours I might equally well say a sea of interplaying sensations of tone, taste, or smell, for all these are the expressions of beings of soul-and-spirit behind them—and you have what is called the ‘Imaginative’ world, the world of Imagination. It is nothing to which the word ‘imagination’ (fancy) in its ordinary sense could be applied; it is a real world, requiring a mode of comprehension different from that derived from the senses.

Within this world of Imagination you encounter everything that is behind the sense-world and is imperceptible to the physical senses—for instance, the etheric and astral bodies. A man whose knowledge of the world is derived from this clairvoyant, Imaginative perception, becomes acquainted with the outward aspect of higher beings, just as you become acquainted with the outward, physical aspect of a man in the physical world who, let us say, passes in front of you in the street. You know more about him when there is an opportunity of talking with him. His words then give you an impression differing from the one he makes upon you when you look at him in the street. In the case of many a man whom you pass by (to mention this one example only) you cannot observe whether his soul is moved by inner joy or grief, sorrow or delight. But you can discover this if you converse with him. In the one case his outward aspect is conveyed to you through everything you can perceive without his assistance; in the other case he expresses his very self to you. The same applies to the beings of the super-sensible world. A clairvoyant who comes to recognize these beings through Imaginative Cognition knows only their outward aspect. But he hears them give expression to their very selves when he rises from Imaginative Knowledge to Knowledge through Inspiration. He then has actual intercourse with these beings. They communicate to him from their inmost selves what and who they are. Inspiration is therefore a higher stage of knowledge than Imagination, and more is learnt about the beings of the world of soul-and-spirit at the stage of Inspiration than can be learnt through Imagination.

A still higher stage of knowledge is that of Intuition—but the word must be taken in its spiritual-scientific sense, not in that of day-to-day parlance, when anything that occurs to one, however hazy and nebulous, may be called ‘intuition’. In our sense, Intuition is a form of knowledge thanks to which we not only listen spiritually to what the beings communicate to us, but we become one with the very beings themselves. This is a very lofty stage of spiritual knowledge for it requires, at the outset, that there shall be in the human being that quality of universal love which causes him to make no distinction between himself and the other beings in his spiritual environment, but to pour forth his very self into the environment; thus he no longer remains outside but lives within the beings with whom he has spiritual communion. Because this can take place only in a spiritual world, the expression ‘Intuition’, i.e. ‘to dwell in the God’ is entirely appropriate. Thus there are three stages of knowledge of the super-sensible worlds: Imagination, Inspiration and Intuition.

It is possible, of course, to attain all these three stages of super-sensible knowledge, but it may also be that in some one incarnation the stage of Imagination only is reached. Then the spheres of the spiritual world attainable through Inspiration and Intuition remain hidden from the clairvoyant concerned. In our present age it is not usual for a person to be led to the higher stages of spiritual experience before having passed through the stage of Imagination; it is hardly possible for anyone to omit the stage of Imagination and be led at once to the stages of Inspiration and Intuition. But what would not be appropriate to-day, could happen and actually did happen in certain other periods of the evolution of man.

There were times when Imagination on the one hand and Inspiration and Intuition on the other were apportioned to different individuals. In certain Mystery-centres there were men whose eyes of spirit were open in such a way that they were clairvoyant in the sphere of Imagination and that world of symbolical pictures was accessible to them. Because with this grade of clairvoyance, such men said: ‘For this incarnation I renounce the attainment of the higher stages of Inspiration and Intuition’, they made themselves capable of seeing clearly and with exactitude in the world of Imagination. They underwent much training in order to develop vision of that world. But one thing was essential for them. Anyone who wants to confine his vision to the world of Imagination and gives up any attempt to advance to Inspiration and Intuition, lives in a world of uncertainty. This world of flowing Imaginations is, so to say, boundless, and if left to its own resources the soul floats hither and thither without being really aware of its direction or goal. In those times, therefore, and among peoples where certain human beings renounced the higher stages of knowledge, it was necessary for those whose clairvoyance had reached the stage of Imagination to attach themselves with utter devotion to leaders whose capacities of spiritual perception were open to Inspiration and Intuition. For Inspiration and Intuition alone can give such certainty in regard to the spiritual world that a man knows with full assurance: Thither leads the path—towards a definite goal! Without Inspiration it is not possible to say: There is the path; I must follow it in order to reach a goal! Whoever, therefore, cannot say this must entrust himself to the wise guidance of someone who says it to him. Hence in so many quarters it is constantly emphasized, and rightly so, that whoever rises, to begin with, to the stage of Imagination, must attach himself inwardly to a Guru—a leader who gives both direction and aim to his experiences. It was also advisable in certain epochs—but this is no longer the case to-day—to allow other individuals to omit the stage of Imagination and to lead them at once to Inspiration or, if possible, to Intuition. Such men renounced the possibility of perceiving the Imaginative pictures of the spiritual world around them; they lent themselves only to such impressions from the spiritual world as issue from the inner life of the beings there. They listened with their ears of spirit to the utterances of the beings of the spiritual world. Suppose there is a screen between you and another man whom you do not see but only hear him speaking behind the screen. It is certainly possible to renounce pictorial vision of the spiritual world in order to be led more quickly to the stage of hearing the utterances of the spiritual beings. No matter whether a person sees the pictures of the world of Imagination or not—if he is able to apprehend with spiritual ears what the beings in the spiritual world communicate regarding themselves, we say of him that he is endowed with the power to hear the ‘inner word’—in contrast to the outer word used in the physical world between man and man.

We can thus conceive that there are people who, without beholding the world of Imaginations, are endowed with the power to apprehend the inner word and can hear and communicate the utterances of spiritual beings. There were periods in the evolution of humanity when, within the Mysteries, these two forms of super-sensible cognition worked in co-operation. Each individual who had renounced the faculty of perception possessed by another, could develop greater clarity and definition in his own faculty and at certain periods this resulted in a truly wonderful co-operation within the Mysteries. There were clairvoyants who had specially trained themselves to see the world of Imaginative pictures, and there were others who, having passed over the world of Imagination, had trained themselves to receive the inner word into their souls through Inspiration. And so the one could communicate to the other the experiences made possible by his particular training. This was possible in times when some degree of confidence reigned between one man and another; to-day it is out of the question, simply because of the character of our age. Nowadays one man has not such strong belief in another that he would listen to his descriptions of the pictures of the world of Imagination and then, honestly believing those descriptions to be accurate, supplement them with what he himself knows through Inspiration. Nowadays, everyone wants to see it all himself—and that is natural in our age. Very few people would be satisfied with a one-sided development of Imagination such as was taken for granted in certain epochs. In our present time, therefore, it is necessary for a man to be led through the three stages of higher knowledge without omitting any one of them.

At each stage of super-sensible knowledge we encounter the great mysteries connected with the Christ Event, about which all three forms of cognition—Imaginative, Inspirational, Intuitive—have infinitely much to say.

If with this in mind we turn our attention to the four Gospels, we may say that the Gospel of St. John is written from the vantage-point of one who in the fullest sense was an Initiate, cognisant at the stage of Intuition of the mysteries of the super-sensible world, and who therefore describes the Christ Event as revealed by the vision of Intuition. But if close attention is paid to the distinctive characteristics of St. John's Gospel it will have to be admitted that the features standing out most clearly are presented from the standpoint of Inspiration and Intuition, while everything originating from the pictures of Imagination is shadowy and lacks definition. Thus if we disregard what was still revealed to him through Imagination, we may call the writer of St. John's Gospel the messenger of everything relating to the Christ Event that is vouchsafed to one endowed with the power of apprehending the inner word at the stage of Intuition. Hence he describes the mysteries of Christ's Kingdom as receiving their character through the inner Word, or Logos. Knowledge through Inspiration and Intuition is the source of the Gospel of St. John.

It is different in the case of the other three Gospels, and not one of their writers expressed his message as clearly as did the writer of the Gospel of St. Luke. In a short but remarkable preface it is said, in effect, that many others had previously attempted to collect and set forth the stories in circulation concerning the events in Palestine; but that for the sake of accuracy and order the writer of this Gospel is now undertaking to present the things which ... and now come significant words ... could be understood by those who from the beginning were ‘eye-witnesses and servants (ministers) of the Word’—that is the usual rendering. The aim of the writer of this Gospel is therefore to communicate what eye-witnesses—it would be better to say ‘seers’ (Selbstseher)—and servants of the Word had to say. In the sense of St. Luke's Gospel, ‘seers’ are men who through Imaginative Cognition can penetrate into the world of pictures and there behold the Christ Event; people specially trained to perceive these Imaginations are seers with accurate and clear vision at the same time as being ‘servants of the Word’—a significant phrase—and the writer of St. Luke's Gospel uses their communications as a foundation. He does not say ‘possessors’ of the Word, because such persons would have reached the stage of Inspiration in the fullest sense; he says ‘servants’ of the Word—people who could count less upon Inspirations than upon Imaginations in their own knowledge but for whom communications from the world of Inspiration were nevertheless available. The results of Inspirational Cognition were communicated to them and they could proclaim what their inspired teachers had made known to them. They were ‘servants’, not ‘possessors’ of the Word.

Thus the Gospel of St. Luke is founded upon the communications of seers, themselves knowers of the world of Imagination; they are those who, having learnt to express their visions of that world through means made possible by their inspired teachers, had themselves become ‘servants of the Word’.

Here again is an example of the exactitude of the Gospel records and of the need to understand the words in the strictly literal sense. In texts based upon spiritual knowledge, everything is exact to a degree often undreamed of by modern man.

But we must now again remember—as always when such matters are considered from the anthroposophical standpoint—that, for spiritual science, the Gospels themselves are not original sources of knowledge in the actual sense. One who stands strictly on the ground of spiritual science will not necessarily take a statement to be the truth simply because it stands in the Gospels. The spiritual scientist does not draw his knowledge from written documents but from the yields of spiritual investigation. Communications made by beings of the spiritual world to the initiate and the clairvoyant in the present age—these are the sources of knowledge for spiritual science. And in a certain respect these sources are the same in our age as in the times just described to you. Hence in our age too, those who have insight into the world of Imagination may be called clairvoyants, but only those who can rise to the stages of Inspiration and Intuition can be called ‘Initiates’. In our present age the expressions ‘clairvoyant’ and ‘initiate’ are not necessarily synonymous.

The content of the Gospel of St. John could be based only upon knowledge possessed by an Initiate capable of rising to the stages of Inspiration and Intuition. The contents of the other three Gospels could be based upon the communications of persons endowed with Imaginative clairvoyance but not yet able themselves to rise to the stages of Inspiration and Intuition. If therefore we adhere strictly to this distinction, St. John's Gospel is based upon Initiation, and the other three, especially that of St. Luke—according to what the writer himself says—upon Clairvoyance. Because this is the case, and because everything that is revealed to the vision of a highly trained clairvoyant is introduced, this Gospel gives us well-defined pictures of what is contained in the Gospel of St. John in faint impressions only. In order to make the difference even more obvious, let me say the following.

Although it would hardly ever be the case to-day, let us suppose a man were initiated in such a way that the worlds of Inspiration and of Intuition were open to him but that he was not clairvoyant in the world of Imagination. Suppose such a man met another, perhaps not initiated but to whom the whole world of Imaginations was open. This man would be able to communicate a great deal to the first who might possibly only be able to explain it through Inspiration but could not himself see it, having no faculty of clairvoyance. There are many to-day who are clairvoyant without being initiates; the reverse is hardly ever the case. Nevertheless it might conceivably happen that someone who had been initiated, could not, although possessing the gift of clairvoyance, for some reason or other perceive the Imaginations in a particular instance. A clairvoyant would then be able to tell such a man a great deal as yet unknown to him.

It must be strongly emphasized that Anthroposophy relies upon no other source than that of the Initiates, and that the texts of the Gospels are not the actual sources of its knowledge. The fount of anthroposophical knowledge is investigated to-day independently of any historical records. But then we turn to the records and compare the findings of spiritual-scientific research with them. What Anthroposophy can at all times discover about the Christ Event without the help of any documentary record is found again in the Gospel of St. John, presented in a most sublime way. Hence its supreme value, for it shows us that at the time when it was composed a man was living who wrote as one initiated into the spiritual world can write to-day. The same voice, as it were, that can be heard to-day, sounds across to us from the depths of the centuries.

The same can be said of the other Gospels, including that of St. Luke. It is not the pictures delineated by the writer of the Gospel of St. Luke that are for us the source of knowledge of the higher worlds; the source for us lies in the results of ascent into the super-sensible world. When we speak of the Christ Event, a source for us is also that great tableau of pictures and Imaginations appearing when we direct our gaze to the beginning of our era. We compare what thus reveals itself with the pictures and Imaginations described in the Gospel of St. Luke; and this course of lectures will show how the Imaginative pictures accessible to man to-day compare with the descriptions given in that Gospel.

The truth is that there is only one source for spiritual investigation when directed to the events of the past. This source does not lie in external records; no stones dug out of the earth, no documents preserved in archives, no treatises written by historians either with or without insight—none of these things is the source of spiritual science. What we are able to read in the imperishable Akashic Chronicle—that is the source of spiritual science. The possibility exists of knowing what has happened in the past without reference to external records. Modern man has thus two ways of acquiring information about the past. He can take the documents and the historical records when he wants to learn something about outer events, or the religious scripts when he wants to learn something about the conditions of spiritual life. Or else he can ask: What have those men to say before whose spiritual vision lies that imperishable Chronicle known as the ‘Akashic Chronicle’—that mighty tableau in which there is registered whatever has at any time come to pass in the evolution of the world, of the earth and of humanity?

Whoever raises his consciousness into the spiritual world learns gradually to read this chronicle. It is no ordinary script. Think of the course of events, just as they happened, presented to your spiritual vision; think, let us say, of the Emperor Augustus and all his deeds standing before you in a cloud-like picture. The picture stands there before the spiritual-scientific investigator and he can at any time evoke the experience anew. He requires no external evidence. He need only direct his gaze to a definite point in cosmic or human happenings and the events will present themselves to him in a spiritual picture. In this way the spiritual gaze can survey the ages of the past, and what is there perceived is recorded as the findings of spiritual investigation.

What happened at the beginning of our era can be perceived by spiritual vision and compared, for example, with what is related in the Gospel of St. Luke. Then the spiritual investigator recognizes that at that time too there were seers able to behold the past; and moreover the accounts they give of happenings in their own times can be compared with what is revealed to-day by spiritual investigation of the Akashic Chronicle.

Again and again it must be realized that we do not have recourse to outer records but to the actual findings of spiritual investigation and that we then try to rediscover these results in the outer records. The value of the records themselves is thereby enhanced and we can come to a decision about the truth of their contents on the strength of our own investigations. They lie before us as, even more faithful expression of the truth because we ourselves are able to recognize the truth. But a statement such as this must not be made without at the same time affirming that this ‘reading in the Akashic Chronicle’ is by no means as easy as observation of events in the physical world! With the help of an example I should like to give you an idea of certain difficulties that may arise.

We know from elementary Anthroposophy that man consists of physical body, etheric body, astral body and Ego. The moment we are no longer observing man on the physical plane but rise into the spiritual world, the difficulties begin. When we have a human being physically before us, we see a unity formed by physical body, etheric body, astral body and Ego. Whoever observes a human being during waking life has all this before him as unity, but if it is necessary for some reason to rise into the higher worlds in order to observe a human being, the difficulties at once begin. Suppose, for example, we wish to observe a human being in his totality while he is asleep during the night, and rise into the world of Imagination in order, let us say, to perceive his astral body—which is now outside the physical body. The human being is now divided into two. What I am describing will seldom occur in this particular form, for observation of the human being is comparatively easy, but it will help to convey an idea of the difficulties in question.

Suppose someone goes into a room where a number of people are asleep. He sees their physical bodies lying there and, if he is clairvoyant, their etheric bodies too; at a higher stage of clairvoyance he sees their astral bodies. But in the astral world everything interpenetrates—including, of course, the astral bodies of human beings. Although it would not often happen to a trained clairvoyant, when looking at a number of sleeping people he might mistake which astral body belonged to some particular physical body below. As I said, it is an unlikely occurrence because this is one of the first stages of actual vision and because anyone who attains it is well trained in how to distinguish in such a case. But the difficulties become very considerable when spiritual beings—not human beings—are observed in the spiritual world. As a matter of fact the difficulties are already great if a human being is to be observed, not as he is at present, but in his totality, as he passes through incarnations. Thus if you observe a human being now living and ask yourself: Where was his Ego in his previous incarnation? you have to go through the Devachanic world to reach his former incarnation. You must be able to establish which Ego has always belonged to the preceding incarnations of the person in question. You must hold together, in an intricate way, the continuous Ego and the various stages down on the Earth. Mistakes are very possible here and error can very easily occur when looking for an Ego in its earlier bodies. In the higher worlds, therefore, it is not easy to maintain the connection between everything belonging to a human personality and his former incarnations as inscribed in the Akashic Chronicle.

Suppose someone has before him a man—let us call him John Smith—and as a clairvoyant or initiate he asks: ‘Who were the physical ancestors of this man?’—Let us assume that all external records have been lost and there is only the Akashic Chronicle upon which to rely. It would be a matter of having to discover from the Akashic Chronicle the physical ancestors of the man—the father, mother, grandfather, and so on, in order to see how the physical body evolved in the line of physical descent. But then there might be the further question: ‘What were the earlier incarnations of this man?’ To answer that question an entirely different path must be taken than when looking for the physical ancestors. It may be necessary to go back through long, long ages in order to arrive at the previous incarnations of the Ego.

Already you have two streams: the physical body as it stands before you is not a completely new creation, for it springs from the ancestors in the line of physical heredity; nor is the Ego a completely new creation, for it is linked with its previous incarnations. The same holds good for the intermediate members, the etheric and astral bodies. Most of you know that the etheric body is not a completely new creation but that it too may have taken a path leading through the most diverse forms. The etheric body of Zarathustra reappeared in Moses.³ It was the same etheric body. If we were to seek out the physical ancestors of Moses this would give us one line; if we were to seek out the ancestors of the etheric body of Moses we should get another, quite different line; here we should come to the etheric body of Zarathustra and to other etheric bodies. Just as we have to trace quite different lines for the physical body and the etheric body, the same applies to the astral body. Each separate member of the human being might lead to very diverse streams. Thus the etheric body may be the etheric re-embodiment of an etheric body that belonged to a different individuality altogether—not by any means the same in which the Ego was formerly incarnated. And the same can be said of the astral body.

When we rise into the higher worlds in order to investigate the several members of a human being, the individual streams all take different directions, and in following them we come to very intricate processes in the spiritual world. Whoever wishes to understand a human being from the vantage-point of spiritual investigation, must describe him not merely as a descendant of his ancestors, not merely as having derived his etheric body or his astral body from this or that being, but he must describe the paths taken by all these four members until they unite in the present individual. This cannot be done all at once. For instance, we may trace the path followed by the etheric body and reach important conclusions. Someone else may trace the path of the astral body. The one may lay more stress on the etheric body, the other on the astral body, and frame his descriptions accordingly. To those who do not notice everything said about an individual by men who are clairvoyant, it will make no difference whether one says this and another that; it will seem to them that the same entity is being described. In their eyes the one who describes the physical personality only and the other who describes the etheric body are both speaking of the same being—John Smith.

All this can give you an idea of the complexity of circumstances and conditions encountered when it is a question of describing the nature of any phenomenon in the world—whether a human or any other being—from the standpoint of clairvoyant research or Initiation-knowledge. I was obliged to say the foregoing because it will help you to understand that only the most extensive investigation in the Akashic Chronicle can present any being in full clarity to the eyes of spirit.

The Being who stands before us as the Gospel of St. John describes Him—no matter whether we speak of Him as Jesus of Nazareth before the Baptism by John or as Christ after the Baptism—that Being stands before us with an Ego, an astral body, an etheric body and physical body. To give a full description according to the Akashic Chronicle of the Being who was Christ Jesus, we must trace the paths traversed by the four members of His nature in the course of the evolution of humanity. Only then can we rightly understand Him. It is here a question of grasping the meaning of the information regarding the Christ Event given by modern spiritual-scientific investigation, for light must be shed on apparent contradictions in the four Gospels.

I have often pointed out why purely materialistic research cannot recognize the supreme value and profundity of the Gospel of St. John: it is because those who carry out this research cannot understand that a higher Initiate sees differently, more deeply, than the others. Those who have doubts about the Gospel of St. John attempt to establish a kind of conformity between the three synoptic Gospels. But conformity will be difficult to establish and sustain if it is based only upon the external, material happenings. What will be of particular importance in tomorrow's lecture, namely the life of Jesus of Nazareth before the Baptism by John, is described by two Evangelists, by the writers of the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Luke, and external, materialistic observation will find differences there that are in no way less than those which must be assumed to exist between the Gospel of St. John and the other three Gospels.

Let us take the facts: The writer of the Gospel of St. Matthew relates how the birth of the Creator of Christianity was announced beforehand, how the birth took place, how Magi, having seen the ‘star’, came from the East, being led by the star to the place where the Redeemer was born; he describes how Herod's attention was aroused and how, in order to escape the massacre of the babes in Bethlehem, the parents of the Redeemer fled with the child to Egypt; when Herod was dead it was made known to Joseph, the father of Jesus, that they might return, but for fear of Herod's successor they went to Nazareth instead of returning to Bethlehem.

To-day I will leave aside the Baptist's proclamation, but I want to draw attention to the fact that if we compare the Gospels of St. Luke and St. Matthew we find the annunciation of Jesus of Nazareth described quite differently; the one Gospel relates that it was made to Mary, the other that it was made to Joseph. From the Gospel of St. Luke we learn that the parents of Jesus of Nazareth lived at that place and went to Bethlehem on the occasion of the enrolling. While they were there, Jesus was born. Then came the circumcision, after eight days—nothing is said about a flight into Egypt—and a short time afterwards the child was presented in the temple; the customary offering having been made, the parents returned with the child to Nazareth. A remarkable incident is then described—how on the occasion of a visit with his parents to Jerusalem the twelve-year-old Jesus remained behind in the temple, how his parents sought and found him there among those who expounded the scriptures, how among the learned doctors of the Law he gave evidence of profound knowledge of the scriptures. Then it is related how the parents took the child home with them again, how he grew up ... and we hear nothing particular about him from that time until the Baptism by John.

Here we have two accounts of Jesus of Nazareth before the Christ descended into him. Whoever wishes to reconcile the accounts must consider how, according to the ordinary materialistic view, he can reconcile the story in the Gospel of St. Matthew that directly after the birth of Jesus his parents, Joseph and Mary, fled with the child into Egypt and subsequently returned, with the other story of the presentation in the temple narrated by St. Luke.

In these lectures we shall find that what seems a complete contradiction to the ordinary mind will be revealed as truth in the light of spiritual investigation. Both accounts are true!—although presented as accounts of events in the physical world they are in apparent contradiction. Precisely the three synoptic Gospels of St. Matthew, St. Mark and St. Luke ought to compel people to adopt a spiritual conception of events in the history of humanity. For it is surely obvious that nothing is attained by ignoring apparent contradictions in such records or by speaking of ‘fiction’ when realities prove too great an obstacle.

We shall have opportunity here to speak of things of which there was no occasion to speak in detail when we were studying the Gospel of St. John namely, the events that took place before the Baptism by John and the descent of the Christ into the three bodies of Jesus of Nazareth. Many riddles of vital significance concerning the essence of Christianity will find their solution when—as the outcome of research into the Akashic Chronicle—we hear of the being and nature of Jesus of Nazareth before the Christ took possession of his three bodies.

Tomorrow we shall begin by considering the nature and the life of Jesus of Nazareth as revealed in the Akashic Chronicle, and then ask ourselves: How does the knowledge of Jesus of Nazareth compare with what is described in the Gospel of St. Luke as imparted by those who at that time were ‘seers’ or ‘servants’ of the Word, of the Logos?

• 1. This lecture-course was given by Dr. Steiner in Basle, November 1907. It has not been published in English. Other lecture-courses on the same subject, published in English, were given by him in Hamburg, May 1908, and in Cassel, June–July 1909. (See list of publications at the end of this volume.)
• 2. Revised edition, 1963. (Rudolf Steiner Press, London.)
• 3. See also Lectures Four and Five.

Good morning, gentlemen! Does anyone have any further questions?

A question is asked regarding cataracts. The questioner says that he was in hospital in Basel in 1916 because of an inflammation of the iris, and that he received injections into the head. Now he would like to ask whether these injections could have had a harmful effect.

Dr. Steiner: Have you noticed anything in yourself? Of course, it is out of the question that these injections could have caused a disease. These so-called flies, these phenomena you speak of, do not have to indicate any kind of serious illness, but come from something else. The injections have the peculiarity that they sometimes weaken the nearby muscles a little, and then you can no longer move the muscle as freely; the eye becomes a little stiff. When you focus on something, it doesn't come into focus properly, and that's where these 'gnats and flies' come from. So this often comes from a slight weakness in the adjustment, I would say. Why did you have the iris injections?

Questioner: It was thought to be the vitreous humor.

Dr. Steiner: It is always better to fight such things with other means, as long as possible, through inner means. Some things cannot be fought through inner means; then one tries to inject. But you don't need to worry about that. It's not necessary.

Is there perhaps another question we can answer?

Questioner: I would like to come back to the turning. I and also my colleagues noticed that when we talk about the heart, there is some ambiguity. I thought about how Doctor once drew for us how the Earth is connected to the moon and the fluid - I don't know if I'm expressing myself correctly =, the sun is around it. The heart is on the left side of the body. I would now like to ask whether the heart is actually connected to the whole world mechanism?

Dr. Steiner: Here we have to recall various things that we have already discussed. I once said: In science today, people have completely wrong ideas about the heart. They think the heart is a kind of pump, and that the heart pumps blood all over the body. So they think: the heart contracts. When the heart contracts, it becomes smaller, holding less blood in itself. This pushes the blood through the veins, it is pushed into the body, and because the heart is elastic, it is thought to expand again. This brings the blood back again. — So today we attribute to the heart that it behaves like a pump, that it pumps blood throughout the body.

You see, that is a completely wrong view. It is a view that stems from the materialistic age, which attributes everything to the mechanical, when one thinks that the heart should be a real mechanical pumping device that pumps blood throughout the body. In doing so, no consideration is given to how all of life takes place in a living being. I would like to draw your attention to one thing in this regard.

There is a very small, lowly animal that actually consists only of a kind of tube. If I wanted to draw this animal, I would have to draw it something like this (see drawing): There would be a skin. Such a tube is the animal. Inside it is hollow, and there it is simply like a small harbor, a small cup. It still has little cilia, tiny hairs, with which it can move. This little animal lives in the water. It is called Hydra because it lives in the water. This little animal, Hydra, has the peculiarity that, when compared to higher animals or to humans, it is nothing more than a mere stomach. And this tube actually does nothing other than absorb all kinds of granules, that is, all kinds of food, that come near it and then digests them inside. So the little animal lives in the water; all kinds of nutrients swim in the water. The animal swims around, swims up to the nutrients, absorbs these nutrients, just like our stomach does; it also absorbs. Of course, this little animal does not have a pharynx or a mouth that prepares the nutrients. The Hydra simply absorbs these nutrients and digests them. The strange thing, however, is that it has the excretory organ, the anus, in the mouth at the same time. It also secretes through the mouth again immediately. So, everything is together in this little animal.

Now it is natural: if something wants to be a living being, especially an animal, it must not only eat – it must eat – but it must also breathe. And this little animal breathes with the outside of its skin. There are tiny holes all over it. These holes are found wherever there is organic matter, living matter. And it draws in the air it needs from the water through these holes. So you can say that this little animal, the Hydra, has an inside, a cavity with which it eats. On the outside, it has its respiratory organs. So the animal draws in the air, and the air also enters in the middle into this hollow space. The animal can eat and breathe. It is always busy with this. The animal swims around everywhere in the water, eats and breathes in the air from the water, which is also contained in the water.

What will the materialistic person say? He will say: Well, this little animal simply consists of this skin. This skin, which has grown inside in such a way that it is a nutritional apparatus on the inside, and on the outside it is a respiratory apparatus. — That is what the materialist says. But we cannot say so, because we must consider that to be a highly superficial view and must say: No, this little animal also has an etheric body, in which it is enclosed, and also an astral body, in which it is also enclosed. It still has that, these are the invisible limbs,

Now, gentlemen, can you prove by any means that the animal is also something invisible besides the visible? The materialist says: I take care of the visible, I do not take care of the invisible. The visible, that shows me a kind of stomach inside, on the outside it is a kind of lung, and I am satisfied with that.

Now you can do something special with this animal. Not true, gentlemen, we don't wear gloves, but we still remember what it looks like. If you have a glove, you can turn it inside out. So imagine that the glove is brown on the outside for my sake and has a gray lining on the inside. If you now turn it around so that the gray is on the outside and the brown is on the inside, you have turned it over correctly; now the inside is on the outside and the outside is on the inside. You can cut off a finger and do the same with the individual finger. Then, when you cut off the finger and turn it around, you have something like this hydra. The hydra looks like a single finger. And the strange thing is: just as you can turn this fingerling around so that the inside is outside and the outside is inside, you can also turn this Hydra around. You can do that, you can really turn it around. And then what I have drawn here (in the drawing, $. 53) in red is on the outside and what I have drawn in blue-violet is now on the inside. But the hollow space is now also outside, and what used to be outside is now inside. And the strange thing about it is that now the Hydra suddenly starts swimming around again. It doesn't mind at all. It swims around in the water again, eating and breathing. She now eats the granules in this newly formed cavity and breathes through what used to be the stomach wall. So it doesn't bother Hydra at all. It doesn't harm her at all. She starts to eat with what she used to breathe with, and to breathe with what she used to eat with.

Yes, gentlemen, if it were the case that it had only grown like this, and there was only a stomach inside and respiratory organs on the outside, the Hydra could do nothing but breathe in from the inside and start eating from the outside. But it doesn't do that. Instead, when it is turned around, it turns its stomach into lungs and its lungs into a stomach. Yes, now I would like to know how that would happen if there were nothing but a stomach and lungs! If you have a tool, a glove or whatever it is, you can turn it around if it is something external. If it is something internal, you cannot just turn it around, of course. So what is left of the etheric and astral body, the invisible, remains. And because that is there, the body of the hydra can simply be turned around. So you see: if you just look with a clear eye at what is actually going on in nature, you will immediately find out that the materialistic view must be absolutely wrong. So that one can say: That which actually eats and breathes is something invisible. And because the body of the Hydra is not constructed like ours, it does not have bones and muscles, but everything is one and the same substance, that is why the Hydra can use this one substance for everything.

It is not true that we cannot turn our stomachs inside out because it is so specially formed, because we do not consist of the same material as the Hydra, but our materials are different. But inside our stomach must also breathe, and the air that we have in it, it draws in from the outside as well. So our stomach is already a kind of Hydra.

From all these things, to which much more could be added, it is clear that even in the smallest animal we can prove that there is something invisible that underlies this animal.

Now, gentlemen, from this you can see that when we speak of what actually moves our whole being, we come to the conclusion that it is something invisible. If you take the external movement when we walk, you will not come to the conclusion that it is your big toe that takes the step, but you will say: I walk, it is my will that causes me to walk. When the organs move within – and it is not only the heart that moves, for example, the intestines are constantly moving; the intestines move in waves, otherwise the chyme could not be digested; so within the human being everything is in motion, there are constant movements within. So when the organs move within, these movements are not caused by the material part within us, but they are caused by that which is invisible within us. So we have to say: the heart is not a pump, but the heart is moved by our astral body. - So we have an astral body, and it moves the heart, or rather because our real self is also in the astral body, we also move our heart with our self, and we move it in a very special way.

If you look at the heart, as Mr. Burle quite rightly said, it is located on the left side of a normal person, not as strongly as one usually thinks, but it is located on the left side. And then the large veins come out of the heart here. The large artery and the other veins actually come out of the heart.

Now it is like this: when I breathe in, for example, I nourish myself with oxygen, so to speak. When I breathe out, I breathe out carbon dioxide. When I have breathed out the carbon dioxide, I immediately feel an oxygen hunger. I want to breathe in again. Yes, that has nothing to do with my heart at first, but with my whole body. My whole body gets the oxygen hunger. When it gets oxygen hunger, it drives all its blood to move, because the blood must have oxygen. Through its astral body, the body sends the blood to where it can get the oxygen.

Or suppose I am walking or working. Then the food burns up in me. I have already explained this to you. As a result, the blood becomes poor in nourishment. When one is working, the blood always becomes poor in nourishment. Now, what does the blood want? The blood wants to get nourishment again. The blood, as it were, seizes the nourishment that the stomach and intestines have absorbed. All of this, this hunger for air and food, sets the blood in motion. It is the blood that moves first, and the blood carries the heart with it. So it is not the heart that pumps the blood through the body, but the blood moves through the hunger for air and food, and this moves the heart. So we have to say that it is our invisible self that moves the heart.

Now, gentlemen, when you hear this, you may raise a question. You see, with our anthroposophy, it is always the case that our opponents think they are making the objections. But you know the objections long before. You make them yourself beforehand. That is why I always draw your attention to the objections. You may object: Yes, what use is our heart if it does not pump blood through the body? If the blood moves, we might not need the heart, which is supposed to be carried along.

Yes, you see, that is what people say who have no real understanding of the human body as a whole. There is a big difference between the human head and the rest of the human being. I have told you something about this difference before. Suppose you are walking or working. Yes, the head is not involved in that. The head sits with the rest of the body, like you sit in a carriage. You sit very still. The carriage has to move its wheels, the horses have to pull. But our hands and feet have to work, and the head sits inside as the one that does not work, right? Otherwise, we would somehow have to have ropes on our ears and use them to set the wheels on the machines in motion. We don't do that. The head doesn't work. Imagine if you could attach ropes to your hair – most people today could no longer do this because they are bald. That would be very bad for you. The head does not actually work, it sits quietly on the rest of our organism. But why is that? Yes, you see, the head is something completely different from the rest of the human being. The rest of the human being is a movement apparatus. The head is only to that extent a movement apparatus, as it participates in the movements and so forth; the movements work up into our head. But the head is not that which itself makes the movements.

The head has sensory organs on the outside. That is where it perceives what is outside. But the head also perceives what is going on inside, only unconsciously in most people. If I want to look outside so that I know what is going on outside, I need my eyes. If I want to look inside, at the blood circulation, I need my heart. The heart is not just there to pump blood through the body, but is a sensory organ that perceives everything, like the whole head. We would know nothing about our blood circulation – of course, with our upper floors we know nothing about it either, but there must be knowledge in the head – if the head did not perceive our whole blood circulation through the heart.

I have already told you how the liver is a perception organ. The lower movements, for example, are perceived by the liver. But the heart perceives all the movements of the whole person. This sets the heart in motion. Through the movements caused by the hunger for breathing and the hunger for food, the heart is set in motion. And from the movements of the heart, one can tell whether something in the body is in order or in disorder.

Now, imagine that someone has drunk an awful lot of alcohol on a particular evening and is, as they say, thoroughly drunk. This disrupts the entire blood circulation. The next day, the head notices through the heart: the entire blood circulation is out of order. The result is a hangover, a familiar headache. Yes, why is there a buzzing in the head? You see, when it's a nice day and I look around with my eyes, I have a nice impression. If it's awful weather out there, I have a bad impression. Yes, gentlemen, when everything is moving properly in the blood, the head has a good impression, everything is in order in the head. But when there is a storm in the blood – that is what happens when someone has been drunk in the evening – then the head has a stormy impression through the heart, everything is mixed up.

So we only understand what the heart is when we know that the heart is actually the inner sense organ through which the head perceives everything that is going on in the body.

If we look around us in the world, it turns out that the human being stands in relation to the whole world through his invisible part, through that which I have called his astral body. The most important stars in relation to which the human being stands are the sun and the moon. Now, the human head is mainly in relation to the sun, but the rest of the human being is actually in relation to the moon. And one can say that it is, of course, an awful superstition to think that something can be done with the current phases of the moon. But there is a rhythm in the human being that is also expressed in the blood and is similar to the lunar rhythm. Man orients himself to the whole world. And so it is also the case that the movement of the blood does not depend on food alone. When a person is completely healthy – after all, in a sense he is a free being – then in a sense he makes himself independent of the external forces of nature, and in a sense he also makes himself independent of the whole world. But the moment a person begins to feel a little ill, he becomes dependent on the whole world.

Let us suppose that someone is ill and you can tell from their pulse. There is a huge difference for the person who can perceive it between the pulse in the morning and the pulse in the evening. You can tell a lot from the difference between the morning pulse and the evening pulse. But for certain sick people, there is also a big difference between the pulse at the full moon and the pulse at the new moon. Human beings are dependent. Even if they can make themselves independent when they are healthy, a certain dependency remains, and this is particularly evident when they are ill. So we have to say: in terms of what makes an impression on our hearts, we are already related to the movement of the heavenly bodies, namely the moon. We are related to the movement of the moon. — In this respect, a great deal of observation still needs to be done.

I told you earlier that in a normal person, the heart is slightly shifted to the left. But just as there are left-handed people and most people are right-handed, doing everything with their right hand, there are also, curiously enough, right-handed people. There are people who do not have their heart on the left, but on the right side. Most of the time this is not noticed at all, because the difference is, of course, an internal one. If someone is left-handed, you notice it very quickly, but if their heart is shifted a little to the right instead of to the left, you don't notice it so quickly. But it would be interesting to examine precisely such people, who have their heart on the right side, to see how they are somewhat different in life than those who have their heart on the left side. A person whose heart is on the right side, that is, shifted to the right, is someone who actually always has to do certain things at a certain time of year or at a certain time of day. The right-heart person is much more dependent on the external environment than the left-heart person. And if the heart has only moved a little bit to the right – after all, it is not in the same place for everyone, but a little bit different for each person – if it is still on the left, but has moved a little bit to the right, then he immediately has the desire to align himself more with his surroundings. He immediately wants to do something special in spring, let's say, and something special in autumn. Of course, you can't always do that and then ruin yourself. People have no idea how they can ruin themselves.

For example, in the case of children who have their hearts a little to the right, you have to proceed differently at school – it doesn't need to be noticed – than with those children who have their hearts in the right place. When a person's heart is to the right, they are then led to make much more use of their astral body.

You see, gentlemen, that is the story: if someone works at a machine for a long time, you can say that in general the work becomes mechanical. It becomes more unpleasant because you yourself become a piece of the machine, but if you work at a machine for a long time, you do the movements and so on mechanically. Imagine that you are quite normally a real left-handed person. The father was also a left-handed person, the grandfather too, the great-grandfather too. It has slowly crept in. And when you are born as a son, you naturally make the same movement internally that your father and grandfather and great-grandfather have already made. It's as easy as if you've been working on a machine for a long time.

If you are a right-hearted person, the position of your heart is not inherited from your father. As a rule, the father is not also a right-hearted person. That is not inherited. In that case, you have to start things over and over again from your astral body, so to speak. You don't have the whole inheritance in you. And the consequence of this is that such a person, who is a right-hearted person, has to apply much more inner strength to keep the whole blood circulation in order. And that is why such a right-hearted person is much more concerned with the external.

The following is even possible. Suppose you are not a right-heart person at all, but a perfectly normal left-heart person. But if you become a ballet dancer – it happens to men too, but even more so to women – then ballet dancing also affects the heart. Now, ballet dancing is also very materialistic. But in ancient times, when people were encouraged to dance, for example in ancient Greece, the fact that they then incorporated movements that imitated the stars even pushed the heart a little to the right during their lifetime. Even today, dance still has a strong effect on the heart of a dancer, even though it has become materialistic, because it moves the heart a little to the right. And if one paid more attention to these things, one would see, when one dissects the human being after death, how the heart has stretched certain vessels apart. The fact that the person in question was a dancer is why the heart has been pushed a little to the right - you can still see that after death.

This answers the question that Mr. Burle asked. It is answered by seeing that when man is more devoted to his astral body, he actually does not want to follow his usual blood circulation, but he wants to control it even more, and in doing so he indulges in movements that are more like the movements outside the earth, towards the moon. Can you understand that? (Answer: Yes!)

So what you asked today, that it is very easy to see that a person has a certain longing to do this, is precisely because man's whole heart movement is controlled by the invisible part, that he then, I might say, slips a little over to the invisible and that he then actually directs himself according to the external and not merely according to the inner blood movement, which is directed towards breathing and nourishment. All these things can be explained if one really understands the human being.

And now I would like to tell you something that is still a little bit related to what we discussed last time. Last time we saw: there inside the eye, there is this small lens (it is drawn). If a person has normal vision, then this small lens is transparent. If a person gets cataracts, then the lens becomes opaque. Salts are deposited. So we can say: In a healthy person, here in the eye – if that is the front of the eye – is the lens; it is transparent. In a person who is seriously ill, we have the lens in which salts have been deposited, making it opaque. Because the lens is transparent, the human being's astral body can see the world through the transparent lens. He sees everything in the world.

When you get used to very, very intense thinking through things like the ones I have described in the booklet: “How to Attain Knowledge of the Higher Worlds”, there comes a moment when you can do something very special. But getting used to very intense thinking is not something people today want to do easily. Because people today do not withdraw completely into their own thinking, because they say: everything must be given to us from the outside; we must explore the secrets of the world from the outside. Of course, it is also uncomfortable, because you have to be very careful with this thinking. If you think very vividly, you have to be terribly careful, of course. But there comes a moment in life when you can do something very special.

Not that I can lift a chair with my hand, everyone understands that because it happens all the time. But I can also leave my hand alone, not use it for what it usually does. What the lens of the eye does is not so much in the power of people. If you have an impression from the outside, well, then you look through your lens of the eye towards this impression. If you have no impression, then the lens of the eye remains still.

But, gentlemen, just imagine someone who has really made an effort to think very hard. He is completely absorbed in his inner thoughts. He is not looking outwards, he is leaving his eye lens alone, just as you leave your hand alone when you are not using it. Yes, then the whole starry sky is reflected at the point where you would otherwise have the transparent lens with which you would otherwise see. That is, I would like to say, the downright wonderful thing about this method, which you develop in the way I have described in 'How to Know Higher Worlds', is that you learn to use the individual organs not only for the earth, but also for the other world. When salts have naturally deposited, the lens becomes thick and automatically opaque. When one reflects deeply, it remains transparent, but the person does not see through the lens, he does not look outwards. And from there it begins to illuminate the whole world from the lens. But then one sees the spiritual. And you see the whole starry sky in its true, inner meaning. This small place in man, where the lens is located, can teach you about everything you dare to say about stars and so on. You see, it is actually so wonderful with man that at the smallest point is the seat of knowledge that is tremendous.

Those who are very healthy – of course, one does not need to wish this for any human being – even have this whole story easier, they do not have to exert themselves so much with their thinking. They only need to concentrate very little to be able to see inwardly when they have forgotten how to see outwardly. But this is what must always be emphasized when speaking of such higher knowledge: when speaking of such higher knowledge, it is always so obvious that one can, of course, exert oneself too much, and then, instead of higher knowledge, something can occur, such as, let us say, the disturbance of the lens. The lens can then become somewhat opaque due to this strong inner concentration, even if one does not become strong-minded, but something opaque. Therefore, in my book “How to Know Higher Worlds,” everything is described in such a way that a person can achieve what is discussed there, but without becoming ill as a result. No exercise should be described in such a way that it can make one ill. But this lens is the place in the human being that can actually reveal the entire spiritual world to us at the very back of the eye. And so we can say: you can see outwardly when everything is transparent in the eye. You can see inwardly when something is deliberately made opaque.

Yes, gentlemen, this is something that can make it clear to you how knowledge of spiritual worlds actually arises. Knowledge of spiritual worlds arises precisely from the fact that one first finds in one's head the individual points that are not needed for ordinary activity, because they are at rest. Through the lens, one first gets to know the outer world. But one can train the whole body so that all possible uses of the senses are suspended for a moment. If, for example, one does not use the heart – blood circulation can continue, but one switches off the heart as a sense organ – then one begins to perceive the whole blood circulation. But then one does not just perceive the blood circulation. When you make your heart so that you can see through your body to the blood circulation, when you do not feel your heart inwardly and do not feel the pulse beat, but see through it, as you learn through the lens to see out into the world with your head, when you learn to see through yourself, then, gentlemen, you see not only the blood circulation, but you see the whole movement of the moon, everything that the moon does, and you see how the moon relates to the sun. And then you see the relationship of the heart to the sun and moon.

You see, in the old days, all this was easier for people. They were not yet schooled to learn only from the outside world. They did not want to see everything in front of them. If you had taken a Greek, a person who had lived twenty-seven or twenty-eight hundred years ago, to the movies, he would not have watched the movie for long because he would have fainted. at the moment when the old Greek would have looked at it, inside him, but not just in one limb, but in the whole person, what you get when a limb falls asleep, when something presses on it. Not a real sleep would have come to the person, but this falling asleep of the whole person would have arisen if you had sat the old Greek in a cinema. He would have fainted from it, of course. The ancient Greek would not have been able to watch it at all, because at that moment his head would have received such a disturbance in the whole blood system through the heart that his whole body, not just individual limbs, would have fallen asleep, and the head would no longer have been able to control anything. He would have fainted. Man has become quite different from what he was in ancient times. Today, modern culture has caused such a disorderly blood circulation that people no longer faint in cinemas.

If you have really studied spiritual science a little bit and then go to the movies, you have to pull yourself together very hard, otherwise you can still faint today. But it's not true, we are all human, and one takes on the characteristics of the other. And it is the case that people no longer have the blood circulation system of ancient times, like the ancient man. That is why the ancients could see more clearly into the circulatory system and could speak more easily of the sun and the moon than we can. We are cut off from it and must first reconnect to it through exercises. We must first properly restore the organs so that we can see.

You see, the ancient Greeks could still understand when older people told them something about how things actually are on earth. We must not believe that everything handed down from ancient times is always superstition; it is just that in many cases later generations have transformed it to such an extent that it has become superstition. It is indeed strange how things that are quite reasonable at first simply become superstitions later on. When people no longer know how things should actually be done, then these things become superstitions. For example, the ancient Jews did not eat pork. Yes, they knew that, because of their race and the area in which they lived, pork made them weak. Then it later became superstition. The things that later become superstition always go back to earlier reasonable things. So we don't have to believe that what was previously available as old knowledge is always nonsense, but you can't always rely on the old because the old things have been falsified many times. That is why you have to research everything anew.

That is why it is so nonsensical when people say of anthroposophy that it merely collects together what already existed. Nothing is collected together, but everything is newly investigated! And to those of you, gentlemen, who say: In Anthroposophy they only collect all kinds of old Gnostic stuff — just ask them where they can prove that the story of the eye lens is found as I told you last time and today, where you can find it in any book. You cannot find it because the story has been completely forgotten. Therefore, you can answer anyone who says that the things have been collected together: You are lying because you do not even know what is said there – that the whole view of the heart and so on is renewed.

It is the case that everything is originally explored here and then comes to the whole person. And from such simple things as the fact that a person moves while dancing and turning, which I touched on last time and today, prompted by Herm Burle's question, one can see a lot. It can be understood.

But, gentlemen, then something else will come out, which is what humanity fears most. Because, you see, once anthroposophy gets through – today you can't do anything; if you want to do something practically, all hell breaks loose; even if you just say things, the opposition arises immediately, as you are well aware – but once anthroposophy gets so far that it penetrates into our schools, that it asserts things everywhere, something else will come. Then people will know which movements are right for their health and their entire metabolic development and which are wrong. Then the time will come when work will be organized around the human being. Today, work is organized around machines. Today, people have to move in a way that those who discovered the machine find appropriate. Later, people will realize that what comes from the machines is not the main thing; the human being is the main thing. Therefore, there must only be such machines that are designed for man. This will only be possible once anthroposophy has been fully accepted. Then it will be possible to say: everything mechanical must be geared to man.

But something is needed for this. First, one must understand that the heart is not a machine, but is directed towards the human being. Then one will also be able to find the basis for the outer machine that shapes it in such a way that it is directed towards the human being. But a science that has made itself so comfortable that it describes the heart as if the human being had only a pump in his blood circulation makes no conscience of making the machine so that the human being must adapt to it. Our whole false social situation is connected with this false view in science. And therefore one must understand that only a correct thinking about man must come first; only then can a correct social life begin. As long as one believes that the heart is a pump, one will not be able to adjust correctly in the outer life either. Only then, when one knows that the invisible man is higher than his heart, it is he who moves his heart, then one will also adjust the machines according to man. We must begin to realize this.

Today people make it much too comfortable for themselves. They make it much too comfortable for themselves. What is most international today? The football game! I explained it to you the other day. But what is spiritual is always pushed together into small circles and so on. It fragments. Right, in Norway you can hear: Long live him! or you hear a German song sung when footballers (from Germany) are up. But otherwise people separate.

What must be grasped is the spirit, but in such a way that it is grasped in the particular. Not that one speaks in general terms of spirit, spirit, but it must be grasped in the particular.

We will continue the discussion next Saturday.

Let us now continue to try to elaborate on the things we have discussed in recent times. I told you more or less in general terms how the spiritual and soul life of man actually relates to the sensory and physical life. Now today I will elaborate on this further. I have already pointed out to you that if you want to know something about these things, you cannot say: Yes, the intellect that I have once and for all must decide everything, and what it cannot decide does not exist. One must always bear in mind that one has also undergone a development in ordinary life. Just imagine what it would be like if we had remained at the level of a three-year-old child! We would look at the world quite differently. A three-year-old child sees the world quite differently than an adult. The three-year-old child can be taught all kinds of things. After all, in terms of life, he is still asleep. The three-year-old child cannot even speak properly; he can be taught language. In any case, the three-year-old child is modest and not snooty. It is willing to be taught. It would probably not be so modest if it were not half asleep and said: Why should one learn? We already know everything! But today's man says: We already know everything; and since we cannot understand the spiritual soul with our minds, there is no such thing as a spiritual soul.

Now, if I were to say as a three-year-old child: I don't want to learn anything more; if I say: Dad, Mom, and a few other things, like apples and so on, that's enough – that would be a child's point of view. But once you have acquired the common sense of an ordinary person, you can really develop something within yourself. And if you now further develop the ordinary powers of cognition that you have, then it comes about that you undergo just such a leap, I would say, as the one from a small child to an adult human being. All this depends, of course, on gaining insight and on incorporating it into the whole process of human development. Today, people cannot help but be snobbish in this regard and say: I already know everything, and what I don't know is none of my business. Today, people cannot help but say this because they have been educated from elementary school on to ascribe everything to reason, and to say of the other: Well, yes, one can believe in that, but one cannot recognize it.

You see, you just have to be very clear about the fact that there really is such an awakening from ordinary everyday life to real knowledge, just as there is an awakening from sleeping and dreaming to ordinary life. You just have to realize that you can only really know something about the world when you see through what is happening from a higher point of view, just as you have to see through the dream from a waking point of view. One only realizes that a dream is not reality, that a dream is something that depends on waking life, when one can wake up. I told you the other day that if one could never wake up, one would consider what one dreams to be the only reality.

But now let us see what a dream actually is. You see, gentlemen, people have thought an awful lot about dreams. But actually, everything that is said about dreams is basically just drivel. It really is drivel, because people can say: well, if the brain just vibrates a little, then the person is dreaming. Yes, but why does the brain only vibrate a little? — Well, what is said about dreams is actually a kind of proof. But if you are clear about the fact that the human being not only has this physical body, which you can see and touch in life, but that he also has the other aspects of his nature that I have drawn to your attention, that the human being also has an etheric body, an astral body and an ego, and if you then say to yourself: this very ego and this astral body are outside the physical body and the etheric body when you are asleep, then you can first of all explain to yourself why a person does not walk when they are asleep. They do not walk because the ego is not inside the physical body. You can also explain to yourself why a small child does not walk. Because the ego has not yet awakened in a small child. So you can explain to yourself why a person walks: he walks because the I slips into his physical body. You can also explain to yourself why a person does not think when asleep. He does not think because the astral body is not within his physical body.

Doesn't that show you that you have to distinguish, so to speak, between the physical body and the etheric body, which are in bed, and the I and the astral body, which are outside during sleep.

Now imagine what it is like when you wake up or fall asleep. When you fall asleep, it is the case that the I and the astral body are just going out. So there is also a state where they are half inside, half on their way out. Only later does the state come when the I and the astral body are completely outside. So there is also such a state where they are still half inside and already half outside. That is when you dream.

Otherwise, you only believe that you are dreaming during the night. Actually, you only dream when you are falling asleep and when you are waking up. And what do you dream about then? Yes, you see, gentlemen, people believe that you dream because you use your brain when you are awake – so today's scholars say – but when you are asleep you only use your spinal cord. That's what people think.

But these people are not able to observe at all! Take a real dream, for example. Take the dream of a fire. You dream of a whole fire; you dream of all kinds of things. And you wake up – someone yells outside: “Fire!” In reality, you perceived nothing else – you didn't know anything about fire and so on – so you heard this “Feurio!” half and half because your ear was open. Because you are accustomed to it, you associate this with fire, but it is half and half obscure. And what you dream about fire can be something completely different than what you see. For example, you may dream that the fire is coming from a volcanic eruption. You may dream something completely different. And when you dream about something that happened many years ago, you will know how confused the dream is. Perhaps as a small boy you had a small quarrel with someone. Now, years later, you dream about this quarrel. But you dream about it as if you had been beaten to death, or as if you had beaten the other person to death. The dream confuses everything. And you can perceive this confusion everywhere in the dream.

Now, when we dream while falling asleep, the story remains confused. When we dream while waking up, it corrects itself because we really see what is there. We dreamt that someone is murdering us. He puts a ball in our mouth; afterwards he comes and works on us with some instrument – we wake up and unfortunately have a corner of the bedspread in our mouth.

You see, the dream takes a small cause, adds a lot to it and confuses the story. For example, if the air is bad in the room where you sleep, you will experience what is known as the Alpdrücken. But you do not say to yourself in the dream: “The air is bad there, I can't get a good night's sleep there,” but you get the impression that an evil spirit is sitting on your chest and pressing down on you. You all know the legend of the Trut. This is based on the fact that one has got bad air into the lungs. The nightmare is based on this.

What, then, is dreaming based on?

Well, gentlemen, now let us take the waking dream. It is the case that the ego and the astral body are just slipping in and are not yet completely inside. These are the dreams of which we know the most. When you are completely inside your physical body, you look out of your eyes. But when you are not completely inside, you do not look out of your eyes. You have to imagine that when you enter your physical body, you turn around, as it were, and look out of your eyes. But if you are still half outside, you pass through your eyes, slipping through your eyes, and you see everything indistinctly. You then attach all kinds of confused fantasies to them. But when we enter our body during the night's sleep, we have nothing but these confused fantasies. And how do we sort them out? We can't sort them out. Only our body sorts them out for us. Otherwise, we would see the fire-breathing volcano Vesuvius every time we heard the word 'Feu' (fire) outside. Our eyes are so wonderfully constructed that we can only see the right thing through them. That is to say, we would only devote ourselves to all kinds of fantastic things throughout our lives if we were our body for the whole of life. It is the body that makes it possible for us to see life properly.

So you see, when we look at ourselves outside of our body, we are actually inside our ego and our soul; we are fantasists who have all kinds of confused ideas in our minds, and all we need to do is realign ourselves in our body every morning when we wake up. It is thanks to our body that we see things in order. Actually, we are fantasists in our earthly lives. The dream shows us how we really are in our earthly lives.

If you then come to really understand things, in the sense that you have awakened in a certain way with regard to your knowledge, you see even more clearly: in his life on earth, man is what he dreams. He is actually a fantasist, and he must always allow the body to correct him. And when he is completely asleep, he is actually quite unconscious. He cannot perceive anything of the world at all. Only when he has a piece of his body does he perceive the world fantastically.

But just when you know that, you say to yourself: What is the dream then actually? What does the dream actually show us? The dream shows us that we actually know nothing about our body; because if we knew something, we could also see properly what is outside. We could recreate the eyes in our thoughts and in our spirit. But we cannot do that; we are dependent on our body giving us the power of the eyes. So the dream shows us how little we know about our body.

But now you remember that I said the other day that we have to make this body ourselves. Inheritance is nothing. What is present when a person begins his existence on earth is, as I have explained to you, matter ground down to dust. First the soul-spiritual must enter into it. Man must first build up all his matter himself. When he understands the dream, he knows that he cannot do that. And when one comes to understand the dream, one learns something else.

Think about how difficult it is to put yourself back in the first years of your childhood. Suddenly you remember an event that you know your mother didn't tell you about, but that you saw for yourself. For one person it falls in the third year, for another in the fourth year, and so on. Yes, gentlemen, before that you were really asleep, really asleep. But when you look at a three-year-old child who can actually still sleep properly – because you don't remember it, just as you don't remember ordinary sleep – when you look at this three-year-old child in relation to life, you can do something that you can't do later.

I have already told you that the brain continues to develop until the permanent teeth have come through, until the seventh year. Look at the brain of a child who has just been born and the brain of a seven-year-old child. Something has happened to this seven-year-old child, something has worked on this brain. The brain itself cannot do anything. The brain is like a dynamo. A dynamo develops magnetism, and the whole factory movement depends on it. But the electric current must flow through it, otherwise the dynamo stands still. The brain stands still if the current of soul-life does not flow through it. In childhood the current of soul-life flows through the brain with much greater power, for the child works out the whole brain until the second change of teeth, and most of all in the very earliest years of life. That is why I told you that Jean Paul, who was a very clever man, said: A person learns much more in his first three years than in his three years at university. It is much more artful than what one ever has to work on externally later.

We say to ourselves: Yes, we had that; we have lost that. Just when we became conscious, we lost this inner soul work. We no longer have that. And the one who comes to this realization notices that he can do it less and less. When you later gain the gift of looking back on life, it makes you feel quite dizzy about what has happened. Because when you were a fourteen-year-old boy, you might still have been able to do some of the things you did in abundance when you were a three-year-old child or even just when you were born. You could do the most when you were a three-year-old child; at fourteen you could do a lot less of it. When you turn thirty, you can still digest enough, but you can no longer work out anything. When you turn fifty or sixty, you have become a real donkey when it comes to the work of working out the human body. You only realize how big an ass you become in the course of your life! It is necessary to realize that you lose some of your wisdom during the twenty to thirty years of your lifetime. If you go through the period of thirty to forty years, you lose a lot more. And afterwards, you are already a terrible donkey in relation to everything you have to process internally.

But when you start to realize this, when you acquire the ability to look back on your life, you are actually filled with respect for what a clever being you were as a very young child. You were once terribly ugly; but you can change everything if you were an ugly fellow. At fifteen, you can no longer make yourself beautiful. As a small child, you can do just that. All small children can do that.

So it is important to realize what kind of donkey you have become in the course of your life. That is an important side of life. You don't become immodest, but a terribly modest person. You realize when you see it correctly: when you were a little child, you actually sat on the donkey and drove the donkey yourself. Now that you have become an old man, you have turned into a donkey yourself. — You see, you have to put it so drastically, otherwise nothing comes of it.

In this way you also arrive at the meaning of the dream. You will have experienced it yourself; in a dream you can even think that you are the Emperor of China or something else. There are many other dreams. You can dream anything. But what does the dream show us? You just have to follow the dream to see how it changes in the course of your life.

Infant dreams are quite wonderful. Infant dreams still show you that the child still has the powers within itself to shape its body. They are truly cosmic. The child dreams of what it has experienced before descending to earth, because these powers are still within it. It needs them to develop its brain. When you have this wonderfully designed brain, which is located in the upper skull (see drawing on page 152), then it has the eye, but here are the nerves that are needed to see. All this must be worked out in detail. It must be worked out in detail. Yes, gentlemen, you cannot work that out with earthly knowledge. With earthly knowledge you can work out machines here and there; but with earthly knowledge you cannot work out the brain. In the dreams of small children you can still see exactly: in their dreams they work out how their brain functions. Later on, dreams also become very strange if a person does not lead an orderly life; they become increasingly disorderly. And the fact that the dream is confused actually stems from the fact that one knows so little about one's physical body because one is not inside it.

So that is the reason why we know so little about our physical body: because we have lost, transformed into foolishness, what we have received as wisdom when we descended into earthly life. When you wake up and say to yourself, “Well, if you believe everything you've dreamt now – that you're the emperor of China – then of course you're an ass.” But we ourselves can't do anything other than develop ass-like behavior because we don't have the body. Not being inside, we can't help but be confused by the dream. We have completely lost the ability that we had as small children to build up our body properly. It has to come to us from outside. When we wake up, it comes to us from outside. But when we come back down to earth, it doesn't come to us from outside. Then we encounter destroyed matter in the egg from outside. We have to build it up piece by piece.

Yes, gentlemen, we have to learn all this between two earth lives. Between two earth lives we have to learn what the dreaming human being cannot do. You see, there are enemies and opponents of anthroposophy who say: Oh, they are just people who want to dream; they make all kinds of fantastic things up about the world. Yes, but anthroposophy consists precisely in the fact that we no longer rely on dreams, because dreams show that we cannot do what we can do when we enter into earthly life, when we enter with this dark, unconscious knowledge that we have as a small child. There we are clear about the fact that we have acquired this in a world that is not the world on earth, because in the world on earth we can only educate ourselves to become fantasists with regard to our actual self. However beautiful this world is, we can only educate ourselves to become fantasists with regard to our actual selves. We have to acquire our relationship to our body, our whole relationship to our body, in another world.

Now I want to tell you that the one who sees through the whole thing and thus also sees how becoming an ass advances further and further knows: it is easy to lose this knowledge. Well, it is not much different than when someone takes an exam. When someone takes an exam, it often takes two years to pass it. But they forget it quickly, terribly quickly. This is also the case with the knowledge we need to build our body: we can forget it quickly. Only here the “quick” is somewhat different than with an exam or a test. The “quick” is our whole life on earth. When we have died, we have forgotten approximately what we brought down into physical life at our birth. Our lifetime is approximately the forgetting time.

Now imagine that one of you has an experience of which he is aware: you are growing up as a child; you first remember something that happened, let's say, when I was four years old. Suppose he has already turned sixty and he remembers an event from when he was just four years old. Now it took him fifty-six years after those four years to forget, to forget inwardly. For fifty-six years, the forgetting became stronger and stronger. For fifty-six years, he became more and more of an ass. So how much more time did he need to forget what he still had until the age of four? Well, it took him so much more time than 4 in 56 contains: he needed fourteen times his first childhood to forget. When he reaches the age of sixty, it takes him fourteen times as long again to regain in the spiritual world what he has forgotten there. So he needs 60 times 14 years, 840 years. Then, in the spiritual world, he has acquired the ability to have something similar to what the small child had in its first four years, in order to build up. That means that after 840 years he can come to earth again.

You can only calculate this with full responsibility, as I have written it on the board for you now, if you are really clear about it, if you can examine what lies in dreams, how dreams distance you more and more from the spiritual world.

And you see, if someone walks around and at a certain time cannot enter his physical body at all, then he is a medium. If someone enters his physical body at the right time and uses it again, well, then he is a normal person. But if a person goes around in this state all the time, without the ego having entered the physical body – you can even walk around as a sleepwalker; you can even speak as a sleepwalker, or when you are lying in bed – then you need not be surprised; because if you, let us say, throw a ball, and everything is flat, it will roll on by itself. So under certain circumstances, when a person is not quite healthy, when everything goes easily for him, when his body is not quite firm, the activity that is otherwise conscious can still have an effect. But then the person is an automaton. A sleepwalker is not a human being, but an automaton. And one who speaks from sleep does not speak humanly either. Just try it: when someone speaks from sleep, you can hear the most stupid things, because he becomes an automaton and his ego and soul are not in his body.

But if this is only half the case, if a person is only half an automaton – the inward movement happens from behind, so that the person moves in from the back of the brain to the front – if a person only moves in halfway, then he can close his eyes, and then, because the optic nerves are at the back (on the right), he perceives something, but it is fantastic. And then he can also talk you into all kinds of fantasies, because, right, he doesn't see, but he gets images there. The sense of hearing is located there (center). And the sense of language is located there (left). He can talk you into anything there. The mediums speak from there, but they are not in the world. Therefore, nothing that the mediums say can be trusted, because they are half inside their physical body. Nothing at all is to be given to it. What the media say is just what man in his - I must use the expression again and again - in his donkey-like behavior perceives.

Yes, gentlemen, but I have also heard of mediums who say really wonderful things. That is also true, the mediums also say wonderful things; but that is no wonder at all. Because, you see, when, for example, a strong earthquake strikes somewhere, the animals are the first to leave; the people stay and are destroyed by the earthquake. Animals are prophetic from the very beginning because the intellect is everywhere; they have not yet choked the intellect into themselves. So the medium is something that descends to the animal. It can do wonderful things, it can even say verses that are more beautiful than Goethe's verses — well, because it descends to the animal intellect.

For someone who is to attain knowledge in the anthroposophical way, the opposite is the case. He must not only enter halfway, as in his dreams, but he must know everything as the other person knows it, and in addition, what one can know when one wakes up a second time. When one wakes up a second time, one gets an idea of what it is like. You say to yourself: Yes, if you have spent a little time getting to know people during your life on earth, it will help you after death. Then it will be easier for you after death to get to know the human body again. But what you have to get to know between death and a new birth is the inside of the human body. And here you must be clear about one thing: getting to know the world is a lot of work. Students sweat profusely when they have to get to know the external world, when they have to learn to calculate how the stars revolve and so on; when they have to learn to calculate what the Earth looked like when there were no present-day crabs and so on. There is a lot to learn. But, gentlemen, what has to be learned on earth about what lies outside of man is nothing compared to what has to be learned within man.

Now you will say: Yes, but you do learn inwardly from the human being when the human being is dead; you learn everything from the human being. You cut up the human being and you learn from the corpse what the human being looks like internally. — But there is a big difference. With all the knowledge you gain from the corpse, you can never create a living human being. Of course, in order to create a living human being, conception is necessary. But at the moment of conception, the human being who has only just learned in the spiritual world between death and a new birth is also involved. One can only acquire knowledge on earth about that which is dead. One cannot acquire knowledge about that which is alive, or even about that which feels and thinks.

And I would not have dared to write these figures down for you if it had not been for the higher knowledge that one can see how man during his life on earth moves further and further away from the spiritual world. When he grows old, he has gone furthest away. When he is still a child – let us assume that he dies at the age of sixteen – yes, then it is different when he remembers back to the age of four. He may die at the age of sixteen, remembering back twelve years, that is three times four, and if he has reached the age of sixteen, he actually only needs forty-eight years to reappear. It is true that you can do that in the calculation!

But now we come across something very strange, gentlemen. This is this: you know, since ancient times, the patriarchal age has always been counted as about 72 years. When a person has reached the age of 72, the years beyond that are actually considered a gift. Isn't that right, that is the patriarchal age, 72 years. Now let us assume that such a patriarch was an excellent person, as there were some in ancient times. We, who are so inattentive today, remember very little from our childhood. But these people remembered things from the age of three or two. And then they had 70 years to forget their childhood wisdom, their extrasensory wisdom. That includes 35 times 2. So they go through a period in the spiritual world when they are 72 years old, remembering much further back than they can now, which is 35 times 72 years, or over 2000 years.

You see, gentlemen, if you observe the sun in spring, it rises in the constellation of Pisces. Once upon a time, it rose in the constellation of Aries. The calendar still shows Aries as the point of sunrise. But that is not correct. The sun rose in the constellation of Aries until the 15th century. Then it was correctly stated that the sun rises in the constellation of Aries. And since then, astronomers have become lazy and they continue to do so, even though the sun no longer rises in the constellation of Aries, but in the constellation of Pisces.

Let's assume that the constellation of Pisces has a certain size. There are twelve such constellations. When the sun rises next year, as I said, it will be somewhere in the constellation of Pisces on March 21. And when you observe it next year, it will have moved a little further, no longer coming up in the same place, and last year it was a little further back, also not coming up in the same place as this year. The sun takes a certain amount of time to pass through the constellation. At first it was at the very beginning of Pisces, and later, in the future, it will be at the end of Pisces. Then it will have advanced so far that it will no longer come out at Pisces, but at Aquarius. So now it passes through the constellation of Pisces, then later through the constellation of Aquarius, and even later through the constellation of Capricorn, and so on. For the sun to pass through such a constellation takes about as long as it takes a person, on average, when they have become very old, to come back.

This means a great deal that the sun advances once from one constellation to another. I have explained in my “Occult Science” that this is connected with the way the sun behaves when man returns. And we may therefore assume that knowledge shows us that when a person dies now, he receives what he has to learn to rebuild his body from the effects of Pisces. And then he comes again when he can no longer learn from Pisces, but must learn from Aquarius. And then he comes again when he must learn from Capricorn. Then again from Sagittarius. And then again he comes when he must learn from Scorpio. And then again, when he has to learn from Libra; then Virgo, then Leo, then Cancer, then Gemini, then Taurus, then Aries. Then he comes back to the beginning. But of course he has learned a lot by then. He has gone around once in 25,815 years and has gone through about twelve earth lives, eleven to twelve earth lives. Someone might say: Yes, you are telling us that a person always learns what he needs on earth from a different constellation, a constellation that looks quite different. If you look up at the constellation of Pisces, it looks quite different from Aquarius or Capricorn and so on.

Yes, but, gentlemen, imagine you were there, say, 800, 1000, 1500, 2000 years ago. It was quite different on Earth then. You would have led a completely different life. Perhaps you would have been some small, contented farmer, fattening up a paunch and becoming a very contented fellow. Now you are in the industrial labor movement. That is what you learned from the fish. Back then, when you would have fattened up your tummy and been a contented farmer, you would have learned that from the ram. So man learns what he goes through on earth precisely from the constellations.

You see, now we are getting to the point where we can say that people gradually come around. So if you had been there in 825 AD, for example, in the 9th century, you would have been that little farmer with the big belly; now you have returned under the influence of Pisces. But if you go around, you will arrive at Pisces again after 25,815 years. But now you have learned so much that you no longer need to become what you were before, but you are now at a much higher level as a human being. You have to realize that after 25,815 years, when we want to go back to Earth, we will no longer have to go down to Earth like that, because we have learned everything in a corresponding constellation.

And you see, this is where what I have already pointed out to you comes into consideration. Those who have learned geology in a very scholarly way today tell you: 25 million years ago, it was like this on Earth. Now, how do people come to the conclusion that 25 million years ago the Earth was a hot liquid body? I have also spoken to you about similar things, but not about such long periods of time. How do people come to this conclusion?

They examine Niagara Falls, for example. The waterfall rushes down. Now they take the stone over which it has rolled and calculate how much of it is washed away in a year, and then they calculate how much of the stone has been washed away in a year, when the water was not yet bottled but was still present as vapor. And from that they get these 25 million years.

It's just like when I examine a person's heart. Today is April 9. Let's examine the heart today, then again in a month, it will have changed a little bit; then again in a month, it will have changed a little bit again. And from these small changes, we calculate and come up with what the heart was like 300 years ago. But it hadn't existed yet. The calculation is correct. That is often the case with scientific calculations: the calculation is correct, but the things were not yet there. And so it is with what the earth looked like 25 million years ago. The calculation is exactly right, but the earth was not yet there. And so one then also calculates what the earth will be like after 25 million years. One just calculates in the other direction. But the earth will no longer exist then. Just as with the heart, which gets a little worse and worse every day, you can calculate what it will be like in 300 years, except that you will no longer be there as a physical person in 300 years. The calculations are quite correct. That is precisely the dazzling, the deceptive thing, that the calculations are terribly correct; but the human being does not last as long as the calculations indicate. When you reappear after 25,815 years, the Earth will have disintegrated in the meantime, and you will have had to find your way into the Earth in your successive lives anyway. The Earth is no longer there; you are freed from the Earth. You have ascended to a higher life.

And so, if you really get to the bottom of it, you can scientifically penetrate the time when old legends still tell that man goes through a series of earthly lives, but then no longer needs to return to earth. Then he must have learned so much that he can now endure it without a physical body. But then man must gradually have come to no longer have such crazy dreams as today, and must no longer have distanced himself so far from the spiritual world.

But you have come up with a very important result, gentlemen. You have to say to yourself: those people who resist becoming acquainted with the spiritual world do not want to let knowledge approach humanity. They want man to remain an ass on earth and not be able to return. Because he has already acquired something about man on earth, and something living at that, not just knowledge attached to dead matter, he is increasingly able to see through consciously after death what he has to go through.

Then, when a person, as certain dark forces want, because he must become a donkey on earth, should also remain a donkey, then these dark forces tempt him to lose his spiritual existence altogether. They persuade him to believe in eternal bliss. But just as they persuade him to believe in bliss, they take away from him what is allotted to him. That is how one has to talk; it is something terrible!

Therefore, anthroposophy must show man how he really is according to knowledge, so that he may gradually become able to enter the spiritual world again. You see, that is it, that anthroposophy is already a great human task and has a great social significance. Because all understanding will indeed go away. And because the intellect only wants to remain within, because human wisdom serves up what comes from the corpse, that is actually how it came about – not from something else – that humanity lives in such darkness and has no idea what to do. For example, in order to get out of the eternal congress image and so on, in order to get to something again, you have to really wake people up. But people hate to wake up. Because, when people sit down at meeting tables, it is not just about sitting down together, but about talking about something sensible; whereas people today are such that they do not even admit that they first have to wake up, have to make something of their minds flexible, so that they can also get a feeling for the social question again. Therefore, everything else is basically just a sticking plaster. But what is necessary is that people really come to an understanding of their inner being already on this earth, that they are prepared for what they have to do in the spiritual world. That is already so.

It does not occur to anthroposophy to convert individuals. Individuals cannot achieve anything, but many people can; and anthroposophy only wants to help many people acquire the right knowledge. Then it will be possible to bring about better times on this earth.

I wanted to tell you this too, gentlemen. Now I have to go to Zurich, St. Gallen and Winterthur. When I come back, I will continue with these lectures. Perhaps you can think of some questions you would like to ask.

Yesterday I tried to point out to you ideas which should really be clear to people who are truly striving for progress in the present day. In particular, I tried to point out ideas that are suitable for bringing real new life into the cultivation of intellectual life and especially into the cultivation of the educational and school system. And among the hindrances that stand in the way of real clear-sightedness in this field, we have found above all the modern tendency to use empty phrases and meaningless words. For as soon as a thought is expressed in words, the words lead to action, for action follows. For there is an abyss between the word and the deed. This is always the case because the word lacks the thought. And our spiritual science, which, since it has existed as such, has wanted to serve the real spiritual and thus also the social progress of the present, has always endeavored to infuse new spirit into words that have gradually become mere phrases, that have become empty of content.

In view of what has just been said, it is necessary for you to grasp something quite correctly. We speak of many forces in the universe, which we then designate with certain names, that is, with certain words. It goes without saying that something new should be consciously expressed in such words. But for this to happen, it is necessary to slowly develop this newness. Our spiritual science movement has existed for a long time. What was to be laid down in it has been laid down in a series of books and in a series of lecture cycles. These books and cycles are intended to fill us with such a spirit that we can think our way into certain words in which we then have to express what is actually the content of the whole anthroposophical world view. It is essential that we do this. And for that we must fully realize: if we do not make an effort to evoke an understanding of this spiritual content through one or the other way, then the words we use for our spiritual content must, of course, sound like an empty phrase to the outside world. This must be particularly well observed today because we have to put ourselves in a position to properly influence the spiritual and the teaching and educational spheres. If the teaching and education system continues to develop as it has done so far, it will put the social life of humanity in a terrible position. Then, precisely because of this teaching and education system, the anti-social spirit will take root ever more deeply in our modern humanity to an extreme degree. There is also external evidence for this, which, I might say, can be found at every turn in the street, but which, strangely enough, only leads people to stop halfway. I would like to point out a very telling example in this regard, which could, however, be multiplied a hundredfold or a thousandfold.

As early as the last decade of the last century, Theobald Ziegler, a philosopher teaching in Strasbourg, gave lectures in Hamburg on general education. These lectures have been republished time and again, and they contain much of what should actually be of particular concern to today's humanity, that is, to those who actually reflect on such things, on education, from today's point of view. I will single out one question, the question of the state's supervision of schools. Theobald Ziegler discusses how the difficulty in this area of school supervision arose from the fact that this school supervision was still entirely in the hands of the clergy relatively recently, and that the teaching profession struggled with the help of the state to wrest this school supervision from the clergy. As a result, the teaching profession also turned to the all-protective state and found that it is better for the state to protect us than for the clergy to do so. And people like Theobald Ziegler, who deal with such questions from the point of view of our current higher education, say the following to themselves. I will read his words to you: “If, however, the sovereignty of the state over the school is both right and duty,” - that is, right and duty at the same time - “then we must not close our eyes to the dangers of this nationalization of education, as they have often emerged in the field of higher education in particular. The spirit of bureaucracy weighs heavily on schools as well. Above all, it hinders the freedom of movement that is so necessary, as it would be granted to the municipalities and school institutions according to the various local needs, but also according to other differences that may exist in the teaching staff; it works towards an intellectual uniformity that is very detrimental to our education; this already suffers enough from templates and uniformity. The formalistic lawyer at the head of most German school administrations also hinders pedagogical progress; because he himself is sterile – never has a director of legal studies had a pedagogical idea that would have made a mark in the field under his supervision! It is important to resist this bureaucratic school regime and to demand far-reaching freedom for the schools of larger and more intelligent communities, which are often superior to the state in their understanding of socio-political demands and usually also ahead of it in their realization.

A man of this kind sees all this. Yet he introduces this sentence with the words: “But the supremacy of the state over the school is both a right and a duty.” Now, should not the thought arise in some souls: how little courage such people have to draw the consequences from what they actually understand. The question must arise in our minds: How is it actually that when a plight of the worst kind is recognized, people only come to the conclusion: But we have to leave it, we have to let the state have this supervision of the school; it has a right to do so and it has a duty to do so? This question should at least be raised today by some courageous souls. For our university professors recognize the evil, but they do not want to cure it. This question should be raised. And if it is raised, it cannot be answered at first. Look for answers to this question – you cannot say that the good will is not there. Why can't it be answered at first? Yes, because there is only one answer. However paradoxical it may still sound today, there is only one answer to this question in the present: our education, our entire spiritual life will never again acquire a cultural physiognomy if it is not imbued with a world view that belongs in our present time, but which is born out of the modern, not the traditional human being. Spiritual science has sought such a world view and is still seeking it. It is therefore called upon above all to provide the answer to this question. There is an inner connection here, and all social striving in the present time will not get beyond this connection. But it is up to us to make this connection clear and distinct and intensely present to our souls.

It is truly not for any agitational reasons, such as wanting to stand up for one's own, but it is the realization that out of necessity, it is to be brought into this present time what this present time particularly needs for a renewal of spiritual life. But spiritual science can only be brought into the present in a truly liberated spiritual life. This spiritual science itself brings to light truths that are unfamiliar to today's humanity. And when these truths are clothed in the words that today's humanity is accustomed to, then this humanity becomes furious. For it is indeed a characteristic manifestation that today's humanity rages over everything that has some kind of spiritual-scientific background. It is not aware of the reasons for its rage, but it becomes all the more furious the more it clings to the old. It simply becomes furious when it feels instinctively: There is something underlying that we just do not want to have, there is something spiritual-scientific underlying. That was also the case with the Appeal. People do not admit to themselves that they are angry, but say: It is incomprehensible to us. But the fact is that they are angry because something is coming from a side that they would actually like to perhorteszieren. We should not deceive ourselves about this fact either, for this spiritual science must one day, in all seriousness and with all its strength, bring truths to light that today's humanity simply does not like, but without which the further development of today's humanity cannot happen. That is why we are rushing into decadence, because humanity rejects what it actually needs for progress from the old habits of thinking.

I would like to start today's reflection with two truths. To do so, I would like to return to something I said yesterday. You know that we summarize certain forces that play a role in world evolution and also have an influence on human beings as, on the one hand, Luciferic forces and, on the other, Ahrimanic forces. With such words, it takes years to grasp what lies within them, otherwise they remain mere phrases. But once one has grasped their content, then in these words one has something one must have, just as the electrician has two impulses in his positive and negative electricity, which he must have in order to be able to speak of the things.

The aim is to take the scientific spirit that prevails in inorganic natural science and carry it up into the life of the spirit, but not in the sense of becoming a monist in the popular sense. Rather, it is about actually metamorphosing the way of thinking that prevails there for the higher branches of the life of the spirit, and expressing it in these higher branches. If someone were to speak of positive and negative soul forces in relation to the soul and spiritual life, they would lapse into the most extreme abstraction. Yet the very same way of thinking that correctly speaks of positive and negative in an inorganic field speaks of Luciferic and Ahrimanic in the soul-spiritual field. We can also define what Luciferic and Ahrimanic are in the abstract. We can say: the human being as we actually see him, as we ourselves are, is a state of equilibrium; he is actually always only something that is a balance between two poles, between the Luciferic pole and the Ahrimanic pole. Everything in us tends on the one hand towards the fantastic, the enthusiastic, the one-sided, and, if it degenerates, towards the illusory. That is the one extreme towards which we tend. If we did not carry this Luciferic extreme within us, we would never be able to become artists. It can never be a matter of our saying, in a false ascetic way: Let us flee the Luciferic! But then we flee everything in us that gives us artistic impulses. But if we want to be human beings who can fulfill their tasks here on earth in the fullest sense of the word, we must bring this Luciferic element into balance with what is at the other pole in us. This other pole is the ossified, the intellectual, the sober. Physiologically speaking, the Ahrimanic in us is everything that develops the forces in us that make us bony people; the skeleton characterizes the Ahriman. The Luciferic in us is everything that develops the forces that organize us towards muscles and blood. Between these two poles, between the life of blood and the life of bone, we are stuck as human beings and, if we are fully human, we must strive for a state of equilibrium between the life of blood and the life of bone, between what the blood always wants to push us towards, which is the illusory, and what the human being of bone always wants to push us towards, which is the sober, dry, philistine. We are in between, and man is never truly at rest, but inwardly moved between these two extremes, and he can only be understood if he is inwardly moved between these two extremes.

Consider that we human beings actually have the task of experiencing within ourselves what the balance beam experiences when it constantly sways and only has a state of equilibrium between left and right, swaying back and forth. Thus, as human beings, we must really sway between the Luciferic and the Ahrimanic. The Ahrimanic element is always present in thought that is based only on the external sense world. This abstract thought, which is based only on the sense world, tends to represent an Ahrimanic element in us. And the will, which draws on the experiences of our body and rises in the egoistic impulses of our body, constantly tends towards Luciferic character.

Thus the soul is also interwoven with the Luciferic and the Ahrimanic. My task in Dornach was to place the main group, which represents the representative of humanity between the Luciferic and the Ahrimanic, in the context of the School of Spiritual Science. The attempt has been made to depict the figure of Christ in this central figure of the representative of humanity, who stands in the middle. This Christ-figure is surrounded by two Luciferic figures, that is, two such figures that would emerge if only the blood-muscular were to develop in man. And below, the figure is subjected to two Ahrimanic figures, that is, two such figures that would arise if only those forces were to develop in man that strive towards ossification. Thus, the Christ is related above to everything that leads to illusion, and below to what leads to the sober, pedantic, philistine. — I do not have any examples of the Luciferic and Ahrimanic figures here, but I do have a few replicas of the central figure, which I would like you to see here afterwards. In woodcarving, an attempt has been made to express in material form what I have only briefly touched on in abstract terms. But I would ask you to consider these things not as symbols but from an artistic point of view, which must be the opposite of anything abstractly symbolic.

Yesterday I presented you with something that may not be entirely clear to you; but I would ask you to accept it simply as a result of spiritual science. I have often pointed out the underlying fact. Yesterday I said that our physiological science is based on a terrible fallacy, namely, that there are two kinds of nerves, motor and sensitive, whereas in truth everything is sensitive and there is no difference between motor and sensitive nerves. The so-called motor nerves are only there so that we can perceive our movements internally, that is, so that we are sensitive to what we ourselves do as human beings. Just as the human being perceives color through the sensitive optic nerve, so he perceives his own leg movement through the “motor” nerves, which are not there to set the leg in motion, but to perceive that the movement of the leg is being carried out. The wrong interpretation has even led present-day science into a fatal error with regard to the tabes phenomena. While it is precisely these tabes phenomena that fully prove what I have just briefly discussed and already presented yesterday.

But what deeper fact is actually at the root of this? One always goes wrong if one simply puts forward the judgment: something is wrong, something is incorrect. For the incorrect thing, which has a particular essential meaning, is real. On the one hand, there is the physiological school of thought that there are motory and sensitive nerves, and on the other hand, it exists in numerous minds, which are by no means always stupid, but only biased in the world view of the present. Where does the whole thing come from? One must not only gain the opinion of something being wrong, but one must also investigate the underlying facts to find out why such an inaccuracy could arise. Only spiritual science can provide a real answer.

Nowadays, when a physiologist arrives at his science, he is, if you will excuse the harsh word, not really a human being. Through the particular development of this science in modern times, he has lost his sense of equilibrium. He does not describe the equilibrium between the Luciferic and the Ahrimanic, but has slid down into Ahrimanism. He is actually possessed by the Ahrimanic and describes with an Ahrimanic attitude. And because one always fails to see the state one is in, one sees the other instead. If one has an Ahrimanic attitude and describes something in the human being, one describes the Luciferic. In fact, today's physiology, which prattles on about the difference between the motor and sensitive nerves, has come about because Ahriman describes Lucifer in man, and what comes about under this description is actually the nature of Lucifer, who is now so constituted that in a certain respect one can speak of him — but then they are spiritual, on a different plane — of sensitive and motor elements. It is extraordinarily interesting to see how, under the influence of present-day world views, man has slipped from a certain state of equilibrium, which he had in Greek, into the Ahrimanic. And one describes the progress of our culture correctly if one describes it as I did some time ago in 'The Reich', if one identifies it with an increase of the Ahrimanic. The interesting thing is that in relation to all these things, a state of equilibrium was reached in Greek culture for a short period of time, and that today we are actually inciting all the damage to which I have to draw attention with regard to the Greek element in us by seeing Greek, which was in a state of equilibrium, through our Ahrimanic spectacles. I am not opposed to Greek as such, but to Greek interpreted in an Ahrimanic way. So we have rushed down into the Ahrimanic, and today we have the impulse within us to describe, view and also do everything actually from Ahrimanic motives.

Before the Greek period, things were different. There was an ancient science, and in Egyptian culture one can still study it externally. Today people do not understand this science at all, because it is the opposite of what is called science today. Today we have descended into the Ahrimanic. Those who developed towards Greek culture and reached their decadence in Egyptian culture were still in the Luciferic above. They were at the other extreme. They had a physiology in which Lucifer describes Ahriman, while we have a physiology in which Ahriman describes Lucifer.

It is not enough to understand these things theoretically; one must realize that when one is immersed in social life – for a certain social life is always around man – then these things become real. For the social structure is, after all, man's creation. Everything that is in man goes into the social structure, and we have things in our social structure that we do not pay attention to, but that must be paid attention to today, otherwise we will not get out of certain damages of our time. Not only do we carry within us the two poles of the Ahrimanic and the Luciferic, between which we are to maintain balance, but we also carry the Luciferic and the Ahrimanic into the states of the soul. I have repeatedly spoken about this from the most diverse points of view, and again and again I have drawn attention to the false asceticism that says: I will hold myself back from Lucifer and Ahriman so that I may become a good person. But the moment you put money into your pocket, you are in the objectified Ahrimanic in its most extreme consequence. For everything that permeates the social order from the monetary side is Ahrimanic, and the rule of money is an Ahrimanic rule. And everything that we have brought into the outer structure of life, into the social structure, in terms of Luciferianism – yes, don't be too much affected by a shock – everything that we bring into the structure of life from the side of Lucifer, that is all what office and dignity is. By taking up an office in the outer structure of life, we are drawing ourselves to Lucifer. It is no different. The privy councillor belongs to Lucifer, and the money he has in his purse belongs to Ahriman.

This is a fact – not something to laugh about! This is a fact, a very real, indeed the most real truth for our time. And the real aspiration of our time is to find our way back into balance within these things, the balance that we have lost historically by rushing into the Ahrimanic. If we go back to the time before the Greeks, when, I might say, equilibrium was attained for a moment in the world, we find that under the domination of the spiritual there was only ossification, covered over with theology and militarism. (Theology and militarism actually belong together; there is an inner affinity between them.) Under the domination of the theological and the military, Lucifer in particular came into his own. Then Greek culture attained a state of equilibrium for world development, which, however, every human being should actually strive for. And then begins the descent on the sloping plane into the Ahrimanic, beginning with the uninspired Romanism, and then encountering that mighty wave that comes from the north as Germanic culture, but which is once again drowned out. And we are caught up in this drowning out and today we have to save ourselves from this drowning out. For what the physiologists, the more theoretical scientists, have done by letting Ahriman represent Lucifer, that wants to be realized more and more outwardly. Man is on the way to absorbing more and more of the Ahrimanic, and what the physiologists have only talked about — for the description we have of man in the physiological textbooks today is not a description of man, but a description of Lucifer. Many people would like to do what the physiologists only talk about, not out of ill will, but because they do not yet know where the real path must lead. The moment we were to satisfy the socialist demand and reduce the social organism to a mere economic body, we would be Ahrimanizing the whole social order. A purely Ahrimanic programme would demand only the so-called economic foundation, on which the spiritual superstructure would then arise by itself. It is so grotesque when the extreme Left says what was really possible to say: We fully agree with Steiner's criticism of capitalism; we agree with the threefold social organism, but we must vigorously fight Steiner, because we want nothing but the class struggle, and the threefold social organism must arise by itself.

There you have an example of eminently Ahrimanic striving and will, which wants nothing to do with the state of equilibrium and rushes headlong into an Ahrimanic culture. That is today's difficulty. Yesterday I pointed this out from a different angle. If you go with those people who stand on the right — you will not do this, of course, if you are reasonable — then you will preserve the remnants of an old luciferic culture; go with the people of the left, then you expose yourself to the danger of collaborating in a world structure that is purely ahrimanic. The bourgeoisie has indeed succeeded in handing over such a culture to the proletariat that this proletariat regards bourgeois thinking as an ideal – the ideal of a purely Ahrimanic state on earth, where everything is bureaucratized, where, at the thought of a change, for example in the field of education, even naive souls like Theobald Ziegler shrink back. And in the Ahrimanic economic state, you can be sure, it will look bad for spiritual life! The proletarian impulse is forward, but humanity will only escape disaster if it is spiritualized, if it is permeated by that which makes half-reality into whole reality. That is the task. But this other reality can only be the spiritual one, and that makes people angry. This anger must be withstood. True venom is already being spat; but this venom against the spirit breaks out of the real powers of anger, which today hide everywhere, treacherously, as the ahrimanic powers in our world order.

Truly, it is not without reason and not without reference to the great problem that is now emerging that anthroposophists were offered the opportunity to see the Ahrimanic and the Luciferic as the two poles of humanity, and to see more deeply the problem that is emerging today as a social one than it can be seen without spiritual science. Particularly in the sphere of reform, of revolutionizing spiritual life, the social problem can only be seen in the light of spiritual science, because only there does it appear in the right sense. And this imposes a certain obligation on anthroposophists to look at how culture has always swung back and forth in a kind of pendulum swing. If we go back to old oriental social structures, we find the pendulum swinging in the direction of theology on the one hand, and in the direction of militarism on the other. We carry theology and militarism in the oriental sense as our heritage, and today is the time when we must see these things clearly. Later, another took the place of theology and militarism. For just as theology and militarism are related, namely, they vibrate in a Luciferic and Ahrimanic way, so are related: metaphysics in the medieval scholastic sense, also as it has the Kantians, even if half-rejecting it, and the jurisprudence that rests entirely in the metaphysical spirit, as Roman jurisprudence does. This is again connected with the civil service. Just as theology is connected with militarism, so jurisprudence is connected with metaphysics, with officialdom and the good bourgeoisie, while theology and militarism are connected with the aristocracy. These things, theology as the Luciferic on the one hand, militarism, which lives out itself aristocratically, on the other hand as the Ahrimanic, oscillated in the pre-Greek period. We carry the heritage within us. Jurisprudence and the metaphysics that stands above it developed in Romanism. They had the bureaucracy and the bourgeoisie, which was brought into the world by Romanism, as their followers. Anyone who sees the transition between Greek and Roman culture can grasp with their hands how the real spiritual entities of Greek culture became metaphysical in Roman culture. Compare the Greek gods in their liveliness as imaginations with the abstract concept of a Jupiter, a Juno or a Minerva in Romanism: everything has become abstract, a shadowy concept. And so the state institutions of Greek life are also alive, working from person to person, even if they are no longer suitable for our time. In Romanism the whole State is cast as a concept in a system of juridical concepts. These juridical concepts educated the newer bourgeoisie, and now we have entered, for a long time already, the realm of world views that have emerged from the theological-juridical-metaphysical sphere; now we have entering the sphere of so-called positivism, which only recognizes the real as perceived by the senses and has the proletariat as its companion phenomenon, with all that is good and all that is wrong with the proletariat today.

But with that, we have also arrived at the lowest point, and we have to go up again, otherwise we will fall into the abyss. When people were theologically minded, they could descend, descend to the legal-metaphysical sphere. If we do not begin to ascend again today, we will sink into the abyss. This means that now, when we have arrived at the extreme end of materialism and are just about to make materialism practical, we must grasp the spiritual with all our energy, which alone can restore the materialistic attitude. That is the fundamental duty of our time. But that is also what makes the work so difficult. For it is not the striving that has been brought out of human class or status prejudices, or that which has been brought out of party phenomena, but the striving that has been brought out of world-historical development itself, that people are not yet willing to approach, because basically it affects people at a time when they are most badly fragmented in terms of selfishness and when they feel most comfortable being as unspiritual as possible.

The whole thing is connected with a real, physiological-physical development of the human being. I have often pointed out this physiological-physical development of the human being. Do you think we still have the same bodies as the Greeks? Our bodies are different. The human physique also undergoes metamorphoses. The Greeks, in their equilibrium, had a keen observation for such things. We must appropriate them from the depths of our soul, from our spiritual striving. Anyone who looks at Greek sculpture finds a wonderful trinity expressed in it. This is not observed enough. Compare the head of Hermes with that of Zeus or Athena in its entire physiognomy. And compare the head of a satyr with the head of Hermes on the one hand, with the head of Athena or Hera on the other. Then you will discover the remarkable fact that the Greeks sensed something by introducing these differences into their sculpture. The distances between the ears and the position of the nose are things that speak clearly. Anyone who really studies a head of Hermes knows, or at least can know, that the Greeks wanted to represent in the head of Hermes the humanity from which the Greeks felt they had grown, the past humanity that still had abilities and powers that came more from the animal world. The Greeks themselves wanted to represent themselves in the Zeus type, which for them was the only beautiful type. Compare the position of the ears and the nose of a head of Hermes with those of a head of Zeus: the special way in which the Greeks saw themselves, formally, artistically – and the whole Greek world view was basically an artistic one – they wanted to express this in the three types of their sculpture.

These things have been lost to a great extent by modern humanity. They must be re-conquered, re-acquired. But what the Greeks were able to achieve from their unconsciously assumed state of equilibrium, we must achieve consciously, by consciously gaining the point of view that enables us to say something like: You physiologists, you are describing Lucifer from the point of view of Ahriman. And why do we do it today? Because the physical body has changed since Greek times. We are more thoroughly rooted in the physical plane than the ancient Greeks, who had a presentiment of this and wonderfully expressed such great intuitions in their mythology. The Greek foresaw us modern people. But he foresaw us as Prometheus, chained to the rocks of the bone system, chained to the Ahrimanic. He foresaw us imaginatively. And that which wants to rush into the Ahrimanic will chain us ever more strongly to the rocks of ossification.

We must free ourselves by grasping the spiritual and loosening the fetters of Prometheus. We can only do this if we seriously reflect on ourselves. The Orient can never do this to us, because it is itself too Luciferian; the Occident can never do this to us, because it is too Ahrimanic for itself. That is the task we must set ourselves. And if we set it ourselves, then we have given Central European culture a real goal, a goal similar to that which lived in the forces of Greece, which poured out into the forms of Greek art, into the artistic creation of Greek dramas, into the thoughts of Plato pointing to heaven. But we must seek these things for ourselves. We must not be imitators of Greek culture. We will best understand Greek culture if we grasp it in its uniqueness and if we learn from it to grasp the tasks of our time.

We must look without illusions at the social structure of the present, we must look at how money has become a commodity out of Ahrimanic thinking. For the value of our money has the pure character of a commodity, the value of silver or gold. And people should reflect on how something that functions as a “commodity money” does not correspond to any original human need, but is something for which the need must first be created in the greed of people. To put it trivially: we cannot eat or drink gold and silver. That is the Ahrimanic, in which the present-day human being is placed, and from which our economic life must be freed by having only the production, circulation and consumption of goods in it. And money must become nothing more than a large bookkeeping entry, the respective instruction for the goods. What is issued as a banknote is merely the commodity written on the credit side, which one has given in return for it. One has a credit balance in society until one has exchanged the other commodity for it. Money must lose its Ahrimanic character.

And so, on the other side, on the side of spiritual life, there is the terrible Luciferian aspect that the spiritual person is pushed into offices, that the human side of the person perishes in office and dignity. Because every office puts on a Luciferian uniform. Anyone who can see through these things in reality will see especially when he sees tenured teachers and professors walking along, poor people who are stuck in Luciferic clothing and who have to fight as human beings against their Luciferic clothes. This fight demands in the present that man be de-Luciferized in the spiritual realm, that he be given back to humanity as a whole. This can only be achieved in a liberated spiritual life. The issues run deeper than is usually admitted. They run so deep that they impose certain obligations on anyone who penetrates into their depths. These obligations must not be misunderstood in their true form. We are called upon, in the middle of Europe, to find our way out of misfortune, misery and need, from matter to spirit. For decades, in narrower circles of Western peoples, the Anglo-American peoples, it was always pointed out that a world conflagration would and must arise, and that Eastern Europe would take on a shape from this world conflagration, so that socialist experiments would have to be carried out within this Eastern Europe, experiments which we in the West and in the English-speaking areas would never want to carry out ourselves. This had become a tradition, and it can be traced back to the 1980s, that the opposing but generous Anglo-American policy foresaw what this Central European policy of nullity was unfortunately blind and deaf to: that a world conflagration would come, and that Eastern Europe would be ripe for socialist experiments.

It must never be allowed to happen that the Western nations are left alone to carry out socialist experiments in Central and Eastern Europe. But this can only be avoided if we take up our task and set a goal for Central European intellectual life. That is our task. Let us not look at it in a small-minded way! We have had to experience time and again that anthroposophical intentions have been translated into selfish pettiness due to a certain lack of courage in the face of the big picture. Those who professed anthroposophy were only too willing to seek their own way, saying – to take just one example – that orthodox medicine was on the wrong track, so they took all kinds of devious routes in order to avoid being cured in the way that orthodox medicine does, and to be cured differently. You are familiar with these things. Devious routes were sought for this or that. But they always failed when it came to presenting the matter in public. It is not a matter of reaching those who are branded as “quacks” in public by secret routes, but of incorporating into the public structure, into the social structure, those who can then rightly practice medicine out of the spirit. Let us summon up the real courage! Let us not say in our little room: we do not want to be cured by the doctor who has been stamped at the university, but we will go to the one who cures without public law, because we do not dare to represent our attitude before the whole of public and demand that such a medicine should not be there, which we do not consider to be the right one. Today it is no longer possible to take the back roads. Today, public life is pulsating with what must come: a courageous forward thrust that only needs to be shown the right paths. My dear friends, this is what we must now keep in mind again and again: that anthroposophy was not intended for the selfishness of individual sectarians, but as a cultural impulse for the present time. Those who have misunderstood Anthroposophy are those who believe that they are serving it by shutting themselves away in the back room and doing something sectarian. Of course, the things that are to have a public effect must first be known, and for my part they must first be done in the back room; but it must not remain there. What lies within the anthroposophical impulse belongs to the world, not to any sect. And anyone who applies anthroposophical ideas in a sectarian way sins against anthroposophy itself. Therefore, now that the great question of the times, the social question, has arisen, anthroposophy must put its trust in this social question. That is its task. And it must, as it were, pass over all sectarian tendencies, which unfortunately have become so prevalent in the Anthroposophical Society itself. In this respect, we will have to look within ourselves in order to elevate all sectarian tendencies in our soul to cultural tendencies. For it is only from this field of spiritual science, from the tendency to make spiritual life alive in our materialistic time, that a real transformation of spiritual life, of the school and teaching system, can come about.

Everything is of course needed within a cultural council. But without a real soul, which should come from a new world view, this cultural council can only gradually — however well it is applied now — become cultural rubbish. We must bear in mind that today the paths are very, very much divided, and that it takes courage to choose, but that if we are to avoid disaster for the development of humanity, we must choose. Of course we cannot turn the whole world anthroposophical overnight, bless it with a new world view. But if we work ourselves, we must remain aware that we have truly not attained anthroposophy in order to now either hide it in an Ahrimanic or a Luciferic way, but to seek the state of equilibrium between the Ahrimanic and the Luciferic so that we can counter the rush into the Ahrimanic with what this equilibrium brings forth, which today's humanity so urgently needs.

The best way to make ourselves familiar with ideas which can lead us, as men, into the spiritual world,is to try to obtain information through comparison of different facts which face us in the world.

What I would like to speak about today will be best explained if I start with such a comparison, i.e.—if I compare the consciousness which our present humanity should in accordance with the mission of our epoch, attain with earlier stages of consciousness attained by evolving humanity.

Just think yourselves back to the consciousness of the Greeks, to the ordinary consciousness which the Greeks had of Space. (Naturally I mean the consciousness of Space in a wide sense). You will realise without difficulty that in the consciousness of Space which the Greeks possessed only a portion of Europe was comprised—namely his own land and what bordered on it, a part of Asia and a portion of Africa, and that beyond this definitely limited region, the world was a kind of vague, indefinite quantity It might be said that what formed the horizon of the Greek's consciousness was the boundary of a something which was a vague infinity, at least to his consciousness. And this consciousness of the ancient Greek can be called (although the expression is naturally rather rough and ready, as such expressions always are because the consciousness of language is not adapted to express such things)—this consciousness which the Greek possessed may be called a land, or territorial consciousness. Now you know that the essential feature about the consciousness of humanity in the forward evolution of modern times has been that this territorial consciousness as it were, has developed into an Earth consciousness, that the surface of the Earth as it were, has shut itself off within definite boundaries. As a result of the disclosures of modern history man has imagined the surface of the Earth to be of a spherical shape. Speaking for the moment from the point of view of universal history, it may be said that simultaneously with the emergence of this Earth consciousness as a development out of a territorial consciousness, a panorama of what was outside and beyond the Earth came to be built up, a mathematical-geometrical panorama. The Copernican world-conception arose, and men have conceived of that which is outside and beyond the Earth in Space, in terms of mathematics, of geometry and of mechanics. The Copernican-Newtonian world-conception is, in its essential feature is a mathematical-mechanical picture of the world. Now, for every really thinking man, the question must naturally arise as to whether this mathematical-mechanical picture includes all that there is to be said about that which is beyond the Earth and can be perceived b by men in Space? It obviously does not include it all,,any more than the case when the old Greek confined himself as it were within the land or territory bounded by the horizon of his consciousness, and constructed what was beyond this, in phantasies. Of course the modern man does not clothe that which is beyond the Earth in such poetic phantasy as was the case with the ancient Greek with reference to what lay outside the territorial region comprised with in his consciousness, but the modern man encloses it in mathematical phantasy. Phantasy it is, none the leer for being mathematical. The essential feature in the attitude adapted by humanity in general of the present day is this; to conceive of the Earth as s great sphere in universal space, and to embrace what is beyond the Earth by mathematical and mechanical concepts, which for men who think very accurately, are merely mathematical and nothing else. The concepts which have been invented about all kinds of gravitational forces have been to-day abandoned by more thoughtful men and the world picture of what is beyond the Earth, is really only conceived of in terms of mathematics.

If we take all that we have been considering, during the course of many years, from the standpoint of spiritual science, the question must arise as to whether the time is ripe for this super-terrestrial concept of space, this mathematical and mechanical concept of space, to be ensouled by something else, by something empirical, something that can be experienced. For this mathematical-mechanical concept of Space is not empirical in any sense; the space-concept of Copernicus, Kepler, Newton, is something that has been invented, devised, built up from a comparatively small number of observations. And you will realise since there is no possibility of investigating what is beyond the Earth with physical means that such an investigation can only come to pass by means of spiritual science And that it can do to-day. The mathematical-mechanical conception yields no really human factor in this picture; it simply says something to us in abstractions, which do not touch the substantial reality which we postulate. Everything that physics an astrophysics have to tell us today about the super-terrestrial universe, is cold, barren and without any real content. As a matter of fact we are just at that point of time when it is impossible for human evolution to advance any further if we do not progress beyond a concept of the world that is merely mathematical and mechanical. Just as the old Greek had a territorial, or a land consciousness, and man since the beginning of what is called the modern historical epoch, has developed an Earth consciousness, so from now onwards, there must be an expansion to a universal or cosmic consciousness. And today I would like to devote the hour during which we can consider these things, to certain brief, aphoristical suggestions, as to the nature of this world or cosmic consciousness, which must take the place of a consciousness which merely embraces the Earth. Of course a very great deal will have to be done in the future if we are to collect in more exact detail proofs and verifications of that which I am going to put before you today in a kind of aphoristical outline.

You know that the investigations of Spiritual Science are based up-an perceptions of the soul,and in my book An Outline of Occult Science a considerable amount of knowledge gained in that way,is given out. In that Look I gave as mush as is necessary for the general consciousness of humanity at the present time, but it must be extended; what is to be found in that book must be deepened and widened.

Now with reference to the coming cosmic or universal consciousness, we are, if I may make a comparison, in the position of someone who is travelling in a railway train. He looks out through the window of the carriage and gets accustomed to the idea that he sitting still an his seat. He forgets that the train is itself moving forward. The forward movement which he himself makes with the train, is something that he forgets. He only takes into consideration the movements which he makes, when he gets up, for instance, and in relation to other men who are likewise sitting in the train, changes his position. Now, what such a traveller experiences is something that is very limited in scope, and restricted, and it can be extended by the fact of a break in the journey at some town or other. What he has experienced in the train is not, of course, changed, but the content of his consciousness is increased every time he gets out of the train at some town and experiences what is possible in just that particular place. This is all summed up, as it were, into the content of his journey, and something concrete emerges out of the abstract idea of the journey. The travellers' inner knowledge of the experiences he has had in the different towns is a guarantee that he has gone some distance and has entered into a different set of circumstances. Through the experiences which he has had, he knows that he was not standing still and that he was only able to maintain the illusion of being at rest so long as he remained in the train itself.

Now this is something entirely different from what is often said in discussions on the Copernican world-conception. Of course on such occasions mention is made of all kinds of illusions under which man labours, for example, the illusion that he believes to be standing still on the earth, whereas as a matter of fact, he moves together with it, since it is itself moving. But what I mean here is not that. I want to point out something else, namely that man can acquire certain inner knowledge in the course of his life, and especially in the course of experiences which follow one upon each other which are comparable to the experiences which a man has in towns when he gets out of a train and into it again, and so in a certain sense pulls himself up in the inner experiences of his soul, and enters the full content of inner experience at that point. Therein can be found a guarantee, a proof, that while a man is in the world, he travels through space and experiences something which says to him; You, as man, are not at rest, you are in process of taking a real world journey! I want you to be clear in your minds that something like that which is suggested by this parallelism, is the case. The proof of it can of course only be found in the actual experience. Make it clear to yourselves that there can be in the life of the soul, different experiences, in consecutive periods of time which are a guarantee of the fact that one passes on to different points in universal, in cosmic space. We shall afterwards see that this is all said by way of comparison. We shall see too that the difference between the consecutive experiences indicate an element of space which is of much more qualitative a nature than the merely quantitative element which is usually in the mind when Space is spoken of. Anyone who has real inner experience, and not merely the abstract experiences which are frequently brought forward in so external a sense when mystical matters are being talked about, knows quite well that there is something in what I have just mentioned. Whoever has inner experiences is able to notice in the course of his earth life, differences in the content of his soul life at the ages of, say, 30, 40, or 50 years. If he thinks about these inner souls experiences, he knows that he has moved on the world, that he has sought out other places and that his inner, mystical (if I like to use that term) experiences have changed their character. I am here speaking of experiences which are only taken into account by those who do not look upon mysticism in an external, abstract way, but who look upon it as something concrete in inner experiences. The abstract mystic may talk from the age of 25 years, right up to the end of his life, of the “God within him”. But a man who knows how to understand inner experiences as a concrete reality, knows that these inner experiences change their nature and content, as if on a world journey, which is not the same as a tour around the earth. If I may again express myself mystically, we traverse universal space consciously through our inner experiences. But we only do it as it ought to be done, when we reflect upon our relation to the surrounding world in a much more definite fashion than is usually the case.

It is quite possible to look upon our relation to the surrounding world in such a way that on the one side we have only our sense perceptions in mind, and on the other our desires, our willing, our deeds, our acts. The fact of holding our sense perceptions in the mind, sets us in definite relationship with the outer world; we perceive through eyes and ears, certain facts of the external world—we are in living intercourse with the outer world. What happens—happens as it were, at the margin of our corporeality. To-day I will not go into certain physiological objections, or those of theories of cognition which could seemingly be brought against what I am saying, because what I want to do is to outline the nature of the consciousness which must be attained in contradistinction to the earth and the territorial consciousness already described.

Our sense perceptions then, place us in a certain relationship to external events. And again, when we act, we stand but from the standpoint of another pole of our being in a certain relationship to external events and occurrences. We are involved in them, involved in a real sense, for we have ourselves partly brought them about. Between these two extremes of our life as human beings, is to be found everything which goes on in the field of our consciousness; on the one side there is the relationship to the outer world given us by the senses, and on the other side, by our desires and acts.

In that we develop feelings and conceptions of what our senses perceive, we live an inner life. And willing is fashioned from feeling and perceptions which have either deepened or condensed, as it were, into faculties. So that between perception and willing lies that which we psychically experience. But now, what is present in sense perception, is only seemingly a unity. In sense perception we look at the world and it appears to us as something uniform, a unity perceived through the senses. But as a matter of fact within this apparent unity, a duality is contained. For anyone who is capable of real perception, a duality is contained within what seemingly is a unity; there is a continual dying and uprising again. The world without us is in a state of perpetual dying and again coming to birth. In every moment in the world, we live in something that faces death, and out of that death, life continually comes forth again. If you look at a cloud, or anything else in the outer world it appears to you as a unity; but that it is not, The fact is that something is dying in the cloud, and out of this death something is again being born. Out of what comes from the past, there develops something which goes forward into the future. In all that we perceive there is ever contained fuel that is burning away and dying out; and fire that is arising, newly created, passing over as living form into the future. Then through such a training as is given in The Way of Initiation and Initiation and its Result, we learn how to separate these two poles of sense perception from each other, and to perceive actually the phenomena of death and coming to birth, then for the first time the world takes on a real aspect for us. When a man who is trained in the right way observes another man through the senses, he sees in that other man something that is continually dying and something that is continually arising again. Dying—coming to birth; dying—coming to birth, that is what we see when we have trained our powers of observation to some degree.

When this continual dying and coming to birth becomes objective to us, when we really see it and do not merely imagine it in an abstract way—when we see continually in a man, a corpse and a child coming into being (and it can be actually seen in this picture)—in that moment we have within our range of vision, the three hierarchies of of the Angels, Archangels and Archai. The world is full of real substance. It is no longer a unity such as we used to see when we look at nature. We cannot observe this dying and coming to birth, this Prana and Shiva of nature, without finding the whole of nature transformed and resolved as it were, into the activities of the spiritual beings of the three Hierarchies immediately above man. And so it is at the other pole of our being. In our deeds and acts there is again a continual dying and arising. But at this pole it is much more difficult to perceive it. A long and arduous training is necessary, but it can be done. And we then are within range of wisdom of the Seraphim, Cherubim and Thrones. Through meditation then, we perceive what is between the two poles: we are able to contemplate that Being Whom, as I have told you, is to be found midway between these two poles. Everything becomes more vital, more living in our epoch as we gradually acquire this way of thinking.

But by rising to this height of contemplation, our soul life changes considerably. 'hen we really have got to the point where we see in our surroundings the activities of spiritual beings, then, at the same time we get to a point where we are able concretely to observe the differences in the soul life of the different epochs of which I have already spoken. And then when we have learnt (it is difficult to learn, but it is possible)—to take account of these inner changes in concrete inner experiences—then we see ourselves to be travelling through universal, or cosmic space. And then we know, not by means of external mathematical considerations, not by the sequence of inner experiences, that we together with the earth have changed our position in cosmic space. And then cosmic space becomes a very different thing to the mathematical-mechanical space conceived of by Copernicus, Kepler, and Newton. It becomes something that is inwardly vital and living, We learn to distinguish movement which we make as men in universal space. We learn too, to distinguish a movement which is made from left to right—that is an actual movement which we make with the Earth from another movement which is an ascending one as it were; we realise that in turning, we also ascend in space. Yet a third movement—a “forward” movement I might call it—an onward movement. This is not the same thing as moving an the Earth but is something which is done together with the Earth which can be proved by inner experience. We can prove to ourselves that when we turn from left to right, we ascend and at the same time go forward. So, by inner experience, we observe a threefold movement made, not in relation to some other heavenly body but a movement in an absolute sense in space.

Now of course you will say that the present consciousness of humanity is very far away from the conception that man in this sense is a world traveller and that he can quite well prove to himself the reality of this world journey. Yet there is a means whereby such consciousness can be acquired, however far away from these things human consciousness nowadays may be. What I have described is a reality, even if men to-day know nothing about it. Their ignorance can be compared to the belief which may be held by a man in a railway train who imagines that he is sitting still, whereas he is moving forward with the whole train. Now why is this belief general? In the first place the purely mathematical and mechanical Copernican world conception has for the last three or four hundred years had a more lulling to sleep than an enlightening influence an men. I have often said that this purely mathematical-mechanical world conception is really based upon a mistake which is quite fairly obvious. It presents a convenient picture of space but really no more that that. In the well known work of Copernicus about the revolutions of the heavenly bodies in space, three tenets are to be found, but modern science bases itself only an the first two, and takes no account of the third. Copernicus knew something more than what is admitted by modern astronomical science. And this “more” he concealed in his third tenet -but no account is ever taken of that third tenet. The observations made do not agree with the Copernican system, but modern science disregards this. Today when under certain conditions a man investigates empirically where some star or other ought, according to the correct reckoning set forth in the Copernican system to be found at a particular point of time it is not there. But then there is the so-called Beseel correction, and it is applied in order to obtain the right result. The application of this “correction” is only necessary because the third tenet of Copernicus has not been taken into account. Because of this, a kind of convenient mathematical-mechanical world conception or world picture has come into existence during the last three to four hundred years. It is not in accord with many things, but of course today anyone who mentions this fact is put down as a fool! It is scientific to believe that the various facts are quite in accord with each other. Humanity has been lulled to sleep by the Copernican conception of the world with reference to certain facts—facts which are nevertheless substantiated by inner experience. Human consciousness is dulled and in the future men will have to see to it that this state of things does not continue.

I have often remarked that men do not wish to understand spiritual science with their own “healthy” sense. This is really only a result of certain educational prejudices which hold sway at the present time. It is very frequently the case nowadays that when the occultist gives out his experiences people say: Oh well, it may be so, but the only people who can know that are those who have gone through a certain “mystical” training as they describe it. Now that is right to a certain degree, but not entirely right. I have repeatedly said that up to a certain point, everyone today can recognise as fact, through his own consciousness what is, for example given in my Outline of Occult Science. There is no need to take it merely an authority. Everyone can understand it by means of an ordinary healthy human intelligence But How? It could be understood by anyone who had been sent to the Waldorf School from his seventh to his fifteenth year. In that school the forces of his soul would have been healthily developed through methods which correspond to reality, and then, if he had gone to a more advanced school, the elasticity of' his soul forces would have enabled him to absorb what people ordinarily begin to learn after the age of fifteen. That would be one way of getting men who would realise that reality is only given by what is substantiated by spiritual science—and that everything else is nonsense. The fact that men will not admit this, does not originate from any impossibility to understand spiritual science without training, but arises because our school education between the seventh and fifteenth years is of such a kind as to kill out and stultify certain forces instead of waking them into activity. It follows that men resist the acceptance of facts given by spiritual science, although they would readily accept many of them if their psychic powers were developed in a healthy way. Powers of the soul which have been developed in a healthy way are not dead and benumbed as appears to be the case in the majority of men of our modern times; they are mobile, fluidic, elastic, and anyone in whom they had been rightly developed between the ages of seven and fifteen would be irritated at the modern way of learning things. Today people are satisfied with many things because certain incorrect theories have made the illusions far greater than they really need be.

I have often quoted a characteristic example. Children in their 12th, 13th, and 14th years are told that lightning comes from friction in the clouds and it is admitted at the same time that the clouds are wet. Of course they are; but then when it is a matter of producing the electric spark which is the earthly replica of the lightning, it is found necessary to keep the electrical apparatus and everything belonging to it perfectly dry in order that no water of any kind is present; so that it comes to this—the only thing that is present when the lightning originates, is removed and yet the lightning is the same phenomena as the electric spark! Children and grown up people are quite satisfied to be lulled to sleep with all kinds of hypotheses of this kind. There are innumerable examples of the same kind where people will accept obvious nonsense simply on authority and yet in our days there is much talk of the laying aside of all authority—people say that they are no longer credulous of' authority. Yet as a matter of fact if they had been so credulous it would have been quite impossible for the Marxian-Socialistic world conception to arise in our epoch, for it is far more credulous of authority even than ancient Catholicism!

It is today one of the most essential cultural tasks,to overcome that which in so retardative a way interferes with men's powers of understanding—and to substitute for the present system a healthy educational organisation. It is one of the most important social talks to work for the removal of impediments to human understanding. And then men will not be so obstinate and perverse about accepting what spiritual science has to say; they will rather be irritated by much that orthodox science has to say today, that is if their development has been a healthy one. They will very soon learn to see through all the contradictions. There is instinctive opposition nowadays to the establishment of healthy educational conditions, for it is felt that if they were to be established the authority of modern science would be undermined in a drastic way. It is essential that fluidic soul forces should again be produced in humanity and they will emerge quite naturally as a result of the knowledge which Spiritual Science is able to impart. As a result of these elastic soul forces humanity would be able to understand what is meant when it is said that man is within a movement which is absolute; men would furthermore understand how a world consciousness can grow out of an earth consciousness.

To speak in pictures for a moment, but the picture is really a good one—it is as if a man learns to feel himself as a traveller through universal space—a traveller whose movement consists of a rotation combined with a forward movement and a movement from below upwards, If we sketch the result of these movements—moving upwards in rotation, moving forward in this upward spiral movement—the curve will represent the path of the earth through cosmic space, not mathematically and dynamically as it is built up through the Copernican- Newtonian world conception—but as a result of inner observation. This is the way in which it ought to be arrived at for then we get something that is not abstract like the Copernican-Newtonian world conception, but very concrete—something that is actually super-sensible experienced empirically, if one may be allowed to use this tautology. The importance of this kind of cosmic consciousness does not lie in the fact that through it a man begins to feel things more in accordance with the truth than is now the case when he believes the Copernican world conception and the path of the earth as conceived of by it, to be correct, but very much else is dependent upon it. I makes on inwardly a different man. A man learns to feel himself not merely a citizen of the Earth but of the Universe, of the Cosmos. The world expands,as it were, for anyone who comes near the forces which are actually operative in these movements. In the rotary movement from left to right are to be perceived the activities of the Angels; in the ascent from below upwards the activities of the Archangels; and by the advance in universal space forward are to be seen to movement of the Archai, the forces of the Time Spirits. By taking up into his consciousness this absolute movement through the cosmos man turns his gaze into a spiritual space and becomes aware of the fact that physical space is only an abstract image of this concrete, spiritual space, in which the activities of the higher Hierarchies are to be found.

It follows from what I have just said that such a consciousness is connected with something else. Anyone who has an idea that there is something of this kind bound up with the real being of man must necessarily realise what terrible harm is performed by modern education in that it allows certain forces to be paralysed in our children up to their fifteenth year and they then as students develop into something that is a natural result of these paralysed forces. It follows that young people between the ages of 15 and 21 absorb things that are not at all what the present time demands. And in their souls there exists things that are very different from what they ought to be. I assure you that by giving unctuous exhortations to children up to fifteen years old and then again later at an age when people used to have ideals as young men and girls of 20 years of age—you will attain absolutely nothing at all; or at least only that the young people at our Universities and High Schools become what they are today—which there is no need for me to describe any further! The only way to obtain real results is by giving free play to forces which should be active during student days, which nowadays are simply paralysed. Education today is a problem touching the whole of humanity. It is a problem not for arbitrary ideals, but for the whole of humanity, a problem which must be understood in the light of the very deepest demands of the present time. At most today men have a presentiment that muck ought to be different—let us say, for example, in medicine, possibly also in the realm of law and judicial matters, but that feeling when it arises is promptly squashed by the lawyers! Men have a kind of feeling that many things are not what they ought to be, but that they cannot be changed. The aim of mankind must be directed at the right period of life to the awakening and not to the paralysing of forces within them. The life period between the seventh and fifteenth years is not there for nothing. During this period, perfectly definite forces out of human nature which must be reckoned with when it is a question of education or giving instruction at this time of life. When anyone has this in view in education it is a very different thing to working arbitrarily: without any such aim. Certain things will be observed which today pass by entirely unnoticed.

I have called attention to these matters in the article which will appear in the next number of the Waldorf magazine treating them from several different points of view. I have intimated that we can no longer today be satisfied with pedagogics modelled as they often are in perfectly good faith and with the best will in the world. Certain methods and principles and standards are drawn up—in good will perhaps, but without any real insight—and it is believed that these standards of pedagogics can be learnt. Herbart and his followers have this belief to-day that just by “learning” pedagogy it is possible to become a good teacher. Now even in the case where a set of standard rules is the most perfect imaginable—the rules are almost as worthless for teaching as a well-written book on aesthetics is worthless to the artist. It is quite certain that well written books on aesthetics do not make a man into an artist—and a science never makes a true teacher. It is not necessary to learn physiology in order to be able to feed oneself; a man can feed himself by a science that is quite different from physiology. Physiology is there for another purpose and if it is brought into the question of correct feeding, it comes in as a makeshift. It was always a horror to me to meet men at table who had scales near them in order to measure out and weigh every morsel that they put into their mouths and eat at a meal. That is am example of where the science of physiology interferes in a most destructive way in the process of feeding. Ah yes, you may well laugh at that; but those who because of their scientific prejudices feel such a thing to be justifiable, would laugh for quite another reason considering what I have said to you today to be the most god-forsaken dilettantism. He may laugh at these things from diametrically opposite points of view.

Well now, a cut and dried system of Pedagogics can never produce real teachers. And why? It is drawn up in such a way that its fundamental rules have to be accepted and then education is of no benefit at all. What is desirable is to forget pedagogics altogether when one goes into a classroom; to forget everything that may be known about academic pedagogics! Every time it should grow naturally out of a wide knowledge of what man and humanity is. Nobody can be trained to be a teacher by the mere fact of learning pedagogy; pedagogy can only be stimulated in men when they have acquired a knowledge of the nature of man. We should disregard pedagogics as a science as it were, and at most regard it as artists regard aesthetics, being quite conscious of the fact that aesthetics and its laws can never teach how to paint. An artist in Munich once said to me when I was speaking to him about aesthetics and Carriere—who was a celebrated authority on the subject: “When we were in the Art School we used to call Carriere ‘an old grunter on aesthetic rhapsodies!’”(Wonnegrunzer). Now it has not occurred to students as yet to give the same kind of appellation to theoretical pedagogics, for the general idea is that in pedagogics it is possible to make use of things which cannot be used in art. But as a matter of fact, the two things are the same. Into pedagogic training there should be brought that element which is to be found in our spiritual teachings—knowledge of Man, insight into the nature of humanity and that is able to stimulate a living relationship with the human being which is developing out of the child. Pedagogy should be born afresh every moment in the teacher; the impulse to teach and instruct in a certain way arises as the immediate result of having any particular child in front of one. This will produce quite a different kind of atmosphere from what prevails in the school room today, just because it is created not by cut and dried rules of education, but because it flows of itself out of life—living life as it were! If education were to arise out of life in this way, then those forces which ought to be present at the age of fifteen will not be paralysed, and a man will enter upon his later life with forces that are fluidic in his soul-forces of a kind which are necessary in order that something similar to what happened at the transition of the Middle Ages to modern times—when territorial consciousness was transformed into an Earth consciousness, may come to pass in our epoch—in order that out of an Earth consciousness there may grow a world consciousness, a cosmic consciousness. Outer experiences will not produce this; it will only come through the development of susceptibility for inner consecutive experiences of the soul. Today man has not the faintest consciousness of the dissimilarity of there souls experiences.

Now what is the position to-day? Men are children; they act like children influenced by their environment. Then the child becomes an adult; the concepts become more abstract, the experiences richer; that is the case with everybody. But with the soul it is not the same as is the case with regard to the external bodily part of us. We get a more sharply defined countenance when we reach a certain age; we have no longer the round curves of childhood; we get white hair and wrinkles, and we very often get bald! In short, the external bodily part changes. We cannot, however, say that the inner soul nature changes in this way—at most it gets more and more crammed full—but it does not grow in such a way that it changes from the point of view of thee external world. Old age and childhood have a wrong relationship to each other. Man today has no consciousness of things of which I have often spoken to you; for instance that an old man can bless and that the blessing of an old man has a special significance—a significance which is not there in the case of a middle aged man. Men of today have no consciousness of such things—simply because it is not known in our days that if one is to be able to bless rightly in old age, one must have learnt in childhood how to fold the hands (in prayer or veneration) For the power to bless in old age arises out of the folding of the hands in prayer in childhood. The soul element has the same relationship to blessing and the folding of the hands in prayer as grey hair has to the the hair of childhood. This inner change enters the sphere of knowledge of modern humanity in a very limited sense; but it must do so again to a greater degree. Men must again come to a point where they can understand life in its different metamorphoses. Otherwise we shall never get out of the terrible state of things which, for instance, makes it possible for anyone who is 18 or 19 years old and has a little talent, to become at that age, a Feuilletonist. [A journalist responsible for the critical and literary articles which sometimes appear in a newspaper below the leading articles. The feuilletons are usually divided from the rest of the newspaper by a line.] People who read the feuilletons produced by these men have no idea that they have been written by someone only 18 years old—and take them quite authoritative utterances. But if a man writes feuilletons at the age of 18 he does not develop any further. It also comes about that men when they are only 20 or 21 years old are considered mature enough to go into Parliament, or to become a town councilor! They are supposed to be capable to do this kind of thing. It is in these cases considered to be unnecessary at the age of 40 years to try to be a more accomplished person than was the case at their age of 20, for everything that the world can offer and what can be offered to the world, has already been attained! At the age of 20 one chooses or is chosen and the thing is finished! But men will first understand the wor1d in a concrete sense when they again realise that life is something which undergoes concrete transformation. Then that abstract socialism of which we hear so much today, will disappear and something concrete will take its place.

So you see that the growth of a cosmic consciousness out of an earth consciousness will be of great significance, especially because of what is produced in men by their feelings; for the important thing in such matters is not what a man knows but how he feels. There are certain things associated with life which can be understood only when this cosmic or universal consciousness is reached.

There is a great deal of abstract talking today about the ages or generations as they follow each other in life. We think something in this way—I mean those of us who have reached a certain age, for I except young people from this; a man has capabilities of a certain kind; he lives in such and such a way; his childhood was spent in such and such a way. People are really very short-lived, for they get angry with children when they do the same things as they did at the same age; they do not understand that children of to-day do the same kind of things as they themselves used to do; they expect those who are now children to be as well behaved as they are as grown up people, and do not realise that good manners and behavious have first to be acquired. But apart from this, there is something else. Men generally imagine that children now must be just the same as they were when they were children—a generation ago; children, who are born now must be just the same as I was in the year 1860! Now that is nonsense. For we are in an absolute sense, further on in cosmic space and those who are babies now are born at a different point of space. Suppose you travel from Stuttgart to another town today—you will have had something to eat in Stuttgart today and tomorrow somewhere else. You cannot have a meal in Stuttgart when you travel. And the children who are born in our time, cannot have the same psychic constitution as those of us who have reached a respectable age had when we were children. We must realise that childhood itself changes. This is connected with our absolute movement in universal space—of which mathematical space is only a schematic image. There is a tendency today to take ever thing in an absolute sense and it is a matter for rejoicing when this is not so. I was recently very pleased in Berlin when a man came to see me who had read—well,what shall I say the “discussions” of the Threefold Commonwealth which appeared under the title of A False Prophet in the paper called Die Hilfe. I do not know whether any of you read that effusion. This man was an American and he said to himself that there was something interesting about it. And he came to see me with Herr Pfarrer Rittlelmayer and explained that in spite of the feeble style, he had realised that it was a matter of interest. Among the questions which he—all of which were quite understandable—was the following, which specially pleased me; “One can see that the Threefold State is necessary for modern times and that it must be put in the place of the old uniform State; is it your opinion that the Threefold Commonwealth is the final and conclusive solution of the social question?” I answered him: “Most assuredly not; but in the course of historical development it has come about that in past centuries the State as a unity has been more in evidence and now the times demand a threefold Commonwealth, a time will come when the Threefold Commonwealth will have to be replaced by something different. That will not however, be for about three or four hundred years and then it will be necessary again to consider what should take place of the Threefold Commonwealth”. Now that is the opposite of chiliastic thought, the opposite to the thought that imagines the kind of empire which has lasted for a thousand years to be right for all time. It is the opposite of thinking which imagines that once a blessed existence is obtained for humanity it must remain for all time. Life in the world is not so easy as that. What is essential is that what is right for a particular epoch should be brought about and then substituted at the right time by what the following epoch demands, That is the essential point, that is organic thinking in contradistinction to mechanical thinking—and mechanical thinking is what holds sway at the present time; men really imagine that there is one absolute right for all time. One thing is right for Stuttgart, another for New York, another for Australia, One thing is right for 1919, another for 2530. I assure you that the evolution of humanity is not so simple as to possess one absolute Right. Things are always right for particular places and for particular times; there must be concrete thinking which arises from the facts and relationships. And that will happed when humanity is conscious of its absolute movement in universal space. a consciousness which, however, can only be induced through inner experiences, through inner life.

I have again to-day called your attention to something which should indicate to you how things must be looked at with reference to the penetration by spiritual science of our modern culture. Anyone who understands such matters,will see that humanity's love of ease resists spiritual science, for everything else is far more convenient, far easier, Spiritual science is terribly inconvenient! Spiritual science does not permit of our thinking out a certain condition of things which can remain for ever; it forces us to think out what is good and right for the centuries immediately following, perhaps even for a still shorter period of time. But this cannot be thought out by abstract concepts of the intellect about humanity, but only when a real effort is made to understand the special characteristics of the particular epoch, and to realise thereby what it demands. That may be inconvenient, but that is the reality. Men today like the settle down comfortably into cultural evolution, especially those men whose aim it is to be leaders in it!

I will give you an example of the understanding which persons of authority at the present time have of' spiritual science. I won't relate the story in detail in case someone might get offended, but in a certain town a man had occasion to lecture about Anthroposophy in a private High School. He was lecturing about modern world conceptions and he wanted to include an address about Anthroposophy because he considered it historically necessary—you see people try nowadays to be really “all round”. Now how did this man set about it? The plan of the lectures, the programme,was drawn up at the beginning of the tem and a certain hour was allotted to “Anthroposophy” just as in certain hours the subject was Darwinism, a particular hour was set aside for “Steiner's Anthroposophy”. This was all drawn up at the beginning of the term. Now this man, when he put Anthroposophy into the programme, had not the very least idea of what was to be found in a book about Anthroposophy. When the evening for this particular lecture came round, this man went to someone who had my books, and in the morning selected the most important of them in order to get information, in order to be in a position to give his lecture an Anthroposophy in the evening. It is very convenient to familiarize oneself in such a way about a world-conception, and then to give it our authoritatively. Such a thing as this is by no means rare in our modern days, and it deserves to be mentioned. For very, very much of what is said and lectured about and written about in the present day has no greater “depth” than this and it is accepted credulously. Then out of this credulous acceptance it built up what people have in their heads and in their souls about the different world conceptions. We must not close our eyes to facts like this which show the most terrible superficiality, we must be quite clear that to-day it is essential first of all to consider who the person is who is speaking “authoritatively” an certain matters.

The stimulation of this consciousness in the present time is more important, my friends, than all the substance of what I am able to tell you; it is a consciousness which makes us realise how terribly necessary it is to consider what degree of depth there is behind that which is given us, and told us. If one speaks of these things of course many people are hurt. And particularly it is said about Anthroposophists and Theosophists that they ought to have more forbearance, to judge with greater kindliness and not to be so critical, because to be so critical hurts people. But one asks oneself whether it is real charity to ignore the fact that such men who acquaint themselves in the morning with what they have to lecture upon in the evening should be let loose in the sphere of education. In questions that arise out of actual life, the important thing is how they are put. It is important to put the questions in the right way, for then only can the right point of view result.

I have tried to bring home to you today that earth consciousness must change into a cosmic or universal consciousness just as a territorial consciousness changed into an earth consciousness; but I did this in order to indicate much that in the realm of feeling is essential for the bringing about of healthy relationships in our civilisation of today.

And Oh! this must come about. If one could only shake sleepy humanity of modern times into a realisation of this! But it isn't by any means easy nowadays. Much may be said in this direction but men avoid making themselves fundamentally familiar with such a point of view. It is not enough merely to bring forward anthroposophical theories. It is absolutely essential to make one's penetration sharp for what is necessary for our time and not shut oneself up in preconceived ideas, We must open ourselves out toward that which has to be wrestled with, in order that from the point of view of a true charity one may be able to strike actively at the present time. If something is done in this direction by stimulating the souls and hearts of men, more is attained than by the most comprehensive theories imaginable.

It makes one's heart bleed to realise the truth of what was said by Herr Molt recently, that there are people today who say: “We would rather be a province of the Allies before we will think of anything like the Threefold Social Organisation”. This attitude is unfortunately widely spread. And a great many other things are connected with this kind of attitude because as a matter of fact another attitude can only arise from a spiritual deepening. Our modern time can only grow to be healthy through such spiritual deepening.

Yesterday, when we were discussing the threefold order of the social organism from morning till night, the latest issue of the journal Das Reich arrived, in the middle of our deliberations. Under the general title of “Knowledge and Opinion” it contains material that I have never read before and that I have never seen before. These statements, however, stimulated a whole series of thoughts in me, thoughts, however, that are often stimulated in me anyway.

It is in Lower Austria, in a place from which, if you look south, you have a particularly beautiful view of the mountains in the evening glow, the Lower Austrian Schneeberg, the Wechsel, those mountains that form the northern edge of Styria, a small, very inconspicuous house. Above the entrance door was written: “In God's blessing all is included”. I myself was in this cottage only once during my youth. But there lived a man who was outwardly very inconspicuous. When you came into his cottage, it was full of medicinal herbs everywhere. He was a herbalist. And these herbs he packed in a knapsack on a certain day of the week, and with this knapsack on his back he then traveled the same route to Vienna that I also had to take to school back then, and we always traveled together, then walked a bit together through the road that leads from the South Station to the city center, “auf der Wieden” in Vienna. This man was, so to speak, the embodiment of the spirit that prevailed in the area, in everything he said, but how he, as that spirit, had survived from the first half of the nineteenth century, which was not that long ago at the time. This man actually spoke a language that sounded quite different from the language of other people. When he spoke of the tree leaves, when he spoke of the trees themselves, but especially when he spoke of the wonderful essence of his medicinal herbs, one realized how this man's soul was connected with all that made up the spirit of nature in that particular area, but also what formed the spirit of nature in the wider area. This man was a sage in his own way, through his own inner being, and from this inner being spoke much more than the inner being of a human being often reveals. This man, Felix was his first name, had a spiritual bond between his soul and nature, he also spoke a lot from all kinds of reading. For in addition to the medicinal herbs that, so to speak, stuffed his little house, he had a whole library of all kinds of meaningful works, but which were basically all related in their basic nature, in their basic character to that which was the basic character, the basic trait of his own soul. The man was a poor fellow. For one earned very little, extremely little, from the trade in medicinal herbs, which one laboriously gathered in the mountains. But this man had an extraordinarily contented face and was extraordinarily wise inside. He often spoke of the German mystic Ennemoser, who was his favorite reading, and who indeed contains much in his writings of what had passed through the German mind, but precisely through the German mind in the great times when the thought impulses of Lessing, Herder, Schiller, Goethe and those who stood in the background were still alive. For behind these minds there stood the spiritual world, which they allowed to flow over into what they revealed to the world in their writings. But what was printed in the issue of “Reich” that came to me yesterday from the estate of Ennemoser was completely unknown to me until yesterday. It contains the final section of Joseph Ennemoser's “Horoscope of World History” - I note in addition: Ennemoser died in 1854 and this is the first of his works to be published from his estate. I would like to read a little from this work by Ennemoser to introduce today's discussion:

”...The winter that covers the German regions with snow and ice may last a long time before the real spring comes, but it will come, the seed of freedom has been sown and it will grow, the law of nature will not be repealed by either cunning or military power. Just as the idea of Christianity was implanted in the rough trunk of the Germanic nation and absorbed into its life, so will this vigorous trunk unfold green branches into fresh flowers; just as the body of the church in the German architectural style is already complete in its outlines, wherein the finished dogma of faith , the towers that are still missing almost everywhere will also rise to the sky with the incense of true devotion, and the ever-spiritual life and the organization of personal relationships with the divine will only mature into self-aware understanding, the symbolic framework must first be absorbed into the living movement of purpose , the heaviness of the church must be lightened, the stability of the dogma of separateness must be guided into the current of the universally human; just as freedom should move within the laws of justice, so religion must become an enlightened truth with the light of science, and art a cultivator of spiritual beauty in natural material!

Is it not a utopian dream and will Germany be even remotely able to fulfill such a requirement? Germany will fulfill its calling, or perish most ignominiously and with it European culture. The decision is approaching, time is pressing, the wind is blowing from the east and west, a storm can break out! The trunk of old politics stands on rotten roots, the calculations of diplomats would like to be destroyed, their art has become a distorted art that no one understands. Can you pick figs from thistles, grapes from thorns? True life of freedom sprouts only on the green branches of justice and from the warm spring of charity! Or can this unnatural state persist and the disharmony that has spread to all limbs return to the old order of withered bodies?

Evening will come, the first time has passed, but Germany's end has not yet come; so far it has had childish attempts, there will come a second time when it will discard the 'childish' and have 'manly' attempts. The time of a nation is only at an end when it no longer has questions and does not care about life's higher goods, or when it is incapable of engaging in the solution of the issues of the time! The German has lost nothing but his resilience, his mind is clear, his courage firm, and who doubts the strength of his arm? Everywhere, living spirits are at work, not as imitators, but as originals. The true hunger of the Germans is the yearning for a higher freedom of the mind; the thirst and desire for the light of truth and justice are the main driving forces to set the vigorous hands to work, all of which are still unfinished, to strive for a goal that is still far from humanity. Or should the stream flow back to the sources of its origin? Are nations to become the family fiefdoms of princes again, or is it a matter of state and national rights? There is a higher law in nature and history that no nation can escape, none can go beyond its goal, but neither can any disturb the order of the whole and fall short of it, as its abilities and the spirit of language drive it to! And will not reaction guide the wheel back onto the old track? Fools, who delight only in the dreams of their youth! You can extinguish the fire that erupts in many directions, but you cannot extinguish the inner embers once they have been ignited; reaction itself becomes the means to freedom, pressure brings accelerated movement, the hatred of the parties has a stronger effect than love on the events of the future; perhaps only some kind of spark is needed, and the suppressed intellectual power of the whole nation breaks out in bright flames of enthusiasm. “Nescit vox missa reverti,“ the spirits of life slumber under a thin cover; no free action can be taken back by the spirit; foreign spirits, moods and earthly powers act alone or together on the human will, driving it with irresistible power to acts that, according to divine order, lead to the unification of opposites, to the reconciliation of parties and to the final fulfillment of the calling!”

These are the sentences of a man who died in 1854. I also had to think when I visited dear Felix in his little house one time, that I also visited the home of the schoolmaster's widow, the widow of the schoolmaster who had died several years ago, but I visited her for reasons that the Lower Austrian schoolmaster was also a highly interesting personality. The widow still had a wealth of literature that he had collected in his library. Everything that German scholarship had collected and written down about the German language, myths and legends, in order to sink it into the forces of the German people, could be found there. The lonely schoolmaster had never had the opportunity to go public until after his death; only after his death did someone dig up some of his estate. But I still have not seen those long diaries that that lonely schoolmaster kept, in which pearls of wisdom were written. I don't know what happened to those diaries. On the one hand, this lonely schoolmaster worked among his children; but on the other hand, when he left the schoolroom, he immersed himself—like many such people from the old days of German development—in what lived on in this way as the substance of the German essence. When one then went away from them and traveled to Vienna, one could see how the ancient and the most recent times merge. We live in these most recent times, and it is up to us to understand them a little, to understand them in order to find in them the possibility, as far as it is up to us, to participate in the great tasks that this time poses for humanity.

It is truly not an external matter that all these thoughts, in connection with the experiences of which I have given you a hint, passed through my soul yesterday, just after our meeting, because yesterday, too, was basically a piece of what is falling into our time, right out of the great questions that we must have. For the man said: “The time of a people is only at an end when it no longer has any questions and is no longer concerned about the higher goods of life, or when it is incapable of engaging in the solution of the questions of the time.” Yesterday, many things passed us by that could inspire the thought: How many are there still who have real questions about the time, who still care about the higher goods of life? Did we not experience it yesterday that when our Mr. Ranzenberger appeared in a good-natured way with something that could have touched the heart, he had to disappear? As in the Symbolum, one could encounter the treatment that what is anthroposophically intended experiences in the present. He was not allowed to finish speaking. Nor was the next speaker allowed to finish, who had no questions, who really had no questions, who is living out that senile youth that has no questions and which makes one fear for the future when one knows that only that which that has the strength and substance of the spirit behind it, that can only flourish in the present time if it still has questions and is concerned about the higher goods of humanity, that does not reel off abstract phrases about content-free ideals of youth and thinks itself great with them.

These things are worthy of attention. They are just as worthy of attention as when revolutionary phrases and philistinism are combined. For revolutionary phrases and radicalism are a mask for philistinism, for pedantry, for banality, which we have also encountered enough of, especially in recent times. It is necessary in our time not to speak, not even to speak in short sentences, of those things that mean compromise, but to speak in a clearly conceivable way – for one distinction should be written in the hearts of people of the present: the distinction between content and lack of content – that that which can be developed from here is the strongest opponent of lack of content. For, through the impulse of the threefold social organism, together with friends who have devoted themselves to this idea and sensed its substantiality, we have tried to bring into the world that which is backed by spiritual insight. But on the other hand, it must also be emphasized that the spiritual reality must not be confused with the phrase of the time, no matter how beautiful that phrase may be. The same sentences can be said today: one time they are empty phrases, the other time they are spiritual content. The latter must be present as reality; it is not yet present just because the words sound the same. But everything that is mere phrase, even if it ultimately seems to succeed, has no substance of reality. And it is the task of those united in the anthroposophical movement to recognize this difference between spiritual reality and insubstantial, meaningless phrase. It is not enough that people today say that humanity must show courage again, must straighten up again, must glow with new spiritual forces, and that spiritual life must break away from economic and state life and establish an autonomy of the spirit. We must distinguish whether there is any substance behind such things or whether they are mere empty phrases, born of the spirit of empty phrases of our time. No matter how beautiful they may sound, what matters is whether there is any spiritual reality behind them or whether they are just empty phrases.

I have often said here that it is not without reason that what we call anthroposophy has emerged in our time, what we call anthroposophically oriented spiritual science. For decades we have tried to cultivate it in preparation for this serious 'time. But we must also understand it as such: as a preparation for this serious time. This time has very special characteristics. Outwardly, this time bears the mark of materialism, and the sister of materialism is empty talk. The more humanity clings to outward material things, the more that which it says about the outer world becomes empty talk. Empty talk and materialism belong together. Today we can only rise above empty talk by deepening our spiritual life. We can only rise above materialism by deepening our spiritual life. For, however strange it may sound, this age of materialism and empty phrases is the time when the spirit, with its content from the spiritual world, most strongly wants to communicate with humanity. The world lives in contradictions. Never before has man been as close to the spiritual world as he is today, although outwardly he is mired in materialism. Never before have people been so close to the spiritual world, but they do not realize it, they misunderstand it. And it is particularly strange when one is repeatedly told that one can only believe what anthroposophy brings, or that one must accept it on authority. However, there is nothing for which authority is less necessary, nothing for which it is less appropriate than for anthroposophy. For it speaks of that which today wants to enter into every human being, which wants to enter through the senses but is not allowed in by the materialistic attitude of the time. And this anthroposophy speaks of that which today wants to arise from within every human nature, but which people do not let up from the lower body through the heart to the head, and of which they naturally do not notice anything.

Not only do people today want to be approached by sensual external impressions, but these sensual external impressions want to flow in through the human senses in such a way that they become imaginations in the human being. Today, people are inwardly predisposed to develop imaginations, pictorial representations of the world. But he hates it, does not want it; he says: That is poetry, fantasy. He does not realize that science can give him many good things, but never the truth about man, and that he would experience the truth if he could come to his imaginations. And what lives in man's inner being reveals itself continually, only that man does not notice it as inspiration. Never before have people been so tormented by inspirations as they are today. For they notice that something from within them wants to rise to their hearts and minds; but they perceive it only as nervousness because they do not want to let it rise, or they anesthetize themselves with something else against these revelations of the spirit.

We have often spoken here of the fact that, in addition to his physical body, which can be seen with eyes and grasped with hands, man also has his etheric body. They also know that the etheric body can only be recognized by those who devote themselves to real imaginations. But today there is a way to truly grasp the human etheric body. This way consists in taking art in the Goethean sense seriously. Throughout his life, Goethe was convinced that truth comes to life in the artistic perception of reality, that art is a “manifestation of secret natural laws that could never be expressed without it.” But our school system is dripping a poison dew on everything that science should imbue with a productive artistic spirit. Our scientific humanity believes that it is getting closer to the truth by eradicating everything from its content that is imbued with the artistic spirit. In doing so, it is getting further and further from the real truth, not closer to it, and besides, the real truth is gradually being squeezed out of all the individual sciences that we have to hand down to young people. The only truth is what Richard Wahle says – in the sense in which I have expounded it – that in what is called science today, only ideas of a ghostly world live. Take everything that can be known through natural science: it gives man no conception of reality. Nature itself, with its true essential being, does not live in the conceptions of today's natural science, and the other sciences have formed themselves after natural science. What lives in these conceptions is not nature, it is a ghost of nature. The world spirit has taken its revenge on present-day people who no longer want to believe in a spiritual world, so that present-day humanity has fallen into the terrible superstition of taking the spectre of science as real science. Today, those who believe in ghosts are precisely those who call themselves monists, scientifically educated. And how could these ghosts of the world become reality?

This could happen if one seriously develops the artistic sense in oneself, as Goethe wanted to educate it in his nation, if one could absorb what comes to life in a productive capacity for contemplation – Goethe called it “contemplative judgment” – if one could dissolve the specter of contemplating nature into the productive, creative power of the spirit. In the middle of the last century, this creative power of the mind was treated in German intellectual life as the fantasy of the wild man who comes to this fantasy in my fairy tale in the one mystery drama. Thus we live with our ideas today as people in a ghostly world, we are superstitious without knowing it, we mock the superstition of others and are three times more entangled in this superstition than those we mock as superstitious people.

The etheric body of the human being is not built according to what we know as natural laws, but according to artistic laws. No one can grasp it, either in themselves or in others, unless they have an artistic spirit within them. And it is the lack of artistic spirit in the present that is so devastating, so destructive, so devastatingly interfering with the worldviews of the present. And in addition to his etheric body, we know that the human being also carries the astral body within him. This astral body is of particular importance in the present.

My dear friends, I know of no more poignant event for world development than the fact that the most important decisions regarding this world catastrophe were taken on a Saturday, on August 1, 1914 in Berlin, in the late afternoon, even into the night. For those who understand the basic laws of human life from the point of view of anthroposophy, many things are obvious, but for these others stand and mock at the superstition of others, but they are three times as superstitious as those they mock. For these people do not want to know anything about the deeper laws that prevail in the life of the world. They believe that gravity rules, that atomic forces rule. But they do not know that world history is ruled by deep-seated laws, of which the outer phenomena are only symptomatic expressions, that from epoch to epoch people have to enter ever different spheres and live in ever different ways. And so we have arrived in the present time because we, of all times in the development of mankind, are closest to the spiritual world, we just do not realize it yet. We have arrived at the point where we have to take into account man's relationship to the spiritual world. Oh, earlier people did not need to take this into account; their poor brains were still agile enough to receive the spiritual revelations they needed. But in the course of time these revelations have become empty shadows and phrases. And what is called Christianity today is often nothing more than a collection of empty shadows and meaningless phrases, not filled with the spirit. But mankind hates the real spirit; it repeatedly succumbs to its tendency towards complacency, in that which has been called Christianity for centuries and millennia, and which Christ repeatedly and repeatedly repels. It is always said: If you go among today's workers and talk to them about Christianity, they don't want to hear it. I can only say: I believe that. For just as you speak today, so you have spoken and thought for centuries and millennia, and now you want to heal the people to whom you have spoken in this way with the same thing that has brought about the misery of the time and of which you have proven that it has no hope.

Today, man is compelled to take his relationship with the spiritual world seriously, to feel that he really does not only live in the physical world, but also in a spiritual world. And until we take this attitude seriously, rivers of blood will still have to flow over poor Europe. For men hate the truth, and the hatred very often changes into fear; therefore, the people of the present are afraid of the truth. Today it is so that we cannot come to the truth at all when we make our decisions. I am going to tell you something extremely paradoxical, but I am only saying it because it is necessary that these things be said in our very serious times, because today man needs real self-knowledge, not empty self-knowledge. Man today is close to the spiritual world. When he is in his physical body, he is separated from the spiritual world; there he sees through his physical eyes, hears through his physical ears, and feels with his physical sense of touch. From falling asleep to waking up, however, he is in the spiritual world, where he lives the life that remains largely unconscious to him today, and that plays into his daily life with its impulses. But for the modern man it is so that he cannot come to fruitful decisions if he wants to make these decisions in the time from morning to evening, but he must have lived them prophetically the night before. It was not like that in the past, when people, through the different nature of their brains, still had spiritual revelations. Today, the human brain has dried up, even in youth it speaks in a senile way. For man must know: when he wakes in the morning, he has already prepared as an inner prophet what he must decide upon during the day. Only that is of real fruitfulness, what he has ready when he wakes in the morning. Everything else will lead more and more to need and misery for those who live in the superstition that one must come to one's decisions during the day, when one is in the physical body. Man should take this into account. For we live today in a time when he should make his relationship with the spiritual world real. That is why it is so distressing that the decisions leading up to the events that marked the beginning of the world catastrophe for Germany were not prepared by the corresponding personalities through what they could have experienced in the preceding night, but were made under the immediate impressions of Saturday, out of the mind of the day, until late into the evening.

I often said to friends when this war broke out: we will not be able to talk about this war in the same way as about the other wars that have taken place in history. We can talk about these other wars by collecting documents from the archives and then judging the facts. On the other hand, we will not be able to talk about this war and its origins in the same way. For at the time when this tempest broke out, all hell was let loose and the gates were sought by the confused human beings. And it will be possible to prove that of the forty to fifty people who were involved in the events that led to the war in July 1914, a large number did not have full use of their consciousness when they made those fateful decisions during the day. But that is the time when consciousness is silent during the day, and when people are not asleep, that is when the demons hostile to humanity intrude into human consciousness. We are therefore dealing with the playing into the world catastrophe of spiritual causes, and anyone who sees through the laws of the world can recognize how, through the fact that the most important decisions are only made on the basis of the events of the day, disaster occurs. Thus one will find less and less the possibility of getting out of the distress and misery if people do not strive to make their relationship with the spiritual world real, that is, to take their relationship with the spiritual world seriously in the facts that take place within. What use is it if you are a mystic, no matter how good, if you sit down half the day or sometimes the whole day and immerse yourself inwardly, trying all kinds of things to evoke an inner sense of comfort and pleasure What use is it if the spirit does not come to life in you, whereby you create living relationships between yourself and the real spiritual world and its laws, which are then expressed in the destinies in which we humans are involved?

All that is expressed in these words was one of the reasons why reading Ennemoser's words had inspired particular thoughts in me. For it was in the middle of German intellectual life between East and West. Ennemoser himself uses these words: “The wind blows from the east and the west.” He thus points first to a special relationship to the Orient and Occident, which I recently pointed out in a public lecture. He points this out as a man of the old Germanic times and shows that in the old days the German spirit was still connected to the world spirit, and that the German spirit was actually called upon to understand the great world connections a little. Oh yes, it goes to the heart when you read such a sentence in our time, written more than half a century ago: “Germany will fulfill its destiny or perish most ignominiously, and with it European culture.” “ One feels that others in the past have thought the same thoughts that have been expressed here and in other places to you and other people. Because basically much of it was a paraphrase of the words: Germany will either fulfill its destiny or perish, and with it European culture. — This Germany must have questions again, it must regain a connection with the higher goods of life. For this question hangs over us: can we still have questions of deeper significance? Can we still concern ourselves with life's higher goods? The question is one of being or not being. If we concern ourselves with higher goods and can still pose questions to the spiritual world, then we will find a way, starting from Central Europe, to prevent the downfall of world culture. If, on the other hand, we continue along the path of a senile youth and a philistine phrase that masquerades as revolutionary, then we will descend into barbarism. If people in Germany know how to spiritualize, then they are a blessing for the world; if they do not know how, then they are a curse for the world. Today the situation is such that the way that will lead to the salvation of mankind in the future runs between right and left like the sharp edge of a razor, and that anyone who wants to recognize things in their reality cannot love comfort and choose comfortable paths.

Remember that I have been telling our friends for a long time that he certainly counted, clearly counted, on generous historical impulses, but in a sense that was only beneficial in those places where he lived out the nationalistic impulses in such a way that their bearers saw them as universal human impulses. The Anglo-American world has its initiates, its people who appreciate intellectual power. Here you could preach and preach about intellectual power, and those three times superstitious people thought you were superstitious yourself. That is why the three times superstitious people have become the victims of the Anglo-American West, which saw through things. In the 1880s, or perhaps even earlier – I am only familiar with the period up to that time – this Anglo-American West spoke to the public about what it considered appropriate for the intellectual and spiritual state of that public. But he spoke from the lodges of his initiation in such a way that he said: The world war will come - that was a spiritual-scientific dogma among the English-speaking population - and its only goal can be that socialist experiments are being carried out in the east of Europe that we do not want and cannot want in the west. I am not telling you a fairy tale, but what was said in the 1880s by English-speaking people who were connected to those who knew about these things. But here these things were not taken for what they are, namely as explorations of a real reality. And so one was overtaken by what the others knew, who therefore could never draw the short straw, precisely for the reason that they knew. And in these mysterious lodges themselves, what kind of people were there? There were people who had their ramifications into all those areas that were important to work on. One has only to study what has been going on at various points, for example, on the Balkan peninsula, for decades, and try to see the connection. In the lectures I gave in various places during the war, I pointed out many symptoms in this regard. Everything was geared to the socialist experiments in the East coming through the world war and flooding Central Europe. In the lodges of the initiates, these people said: We in the West are preparing everything so that in the future, using all the means that can be gained from the spiritual world – but can be gained in an unlawful way – we will get such people for the exaltation of national honor, who can become their rulers, individual people on a plutocratic basis.

This was prepared by the West. The Ahrimanic spirits were involved in this, and it is in this world that those personalities are to be sought who can wait, who prepare their actions not by years but by decades, if these are the actions of great politics. In these English-speaking areas, there is not the militaristic discipline that is known in Central Europe, but rather a spiritual discipline, but to the highest degree. It is so strong that it can turn men like Asguith and Grey, who are basically innocent hares, into its puppets, into its marionettes. Grey is truly not a guilty person, but what a fellow minister said about him a long time ago is true: he is a person who always makes a concentrated impression because he has never had any thoughts of his own. But such people are chosen if you want the right puppets for the world theater. Things were well initiated and well prepared.

But today it is the case that man must not only take into account that which connects him to the spiritual world, which is so close to him, but he must also know that great cosmic laws are at work in the evolution of the world, in which humanity is enmeshed with its destiny, and that these can also be experienced through a spiritual science. One must only be able to finally break away from that stupidity which today is called history; for this history of today is stupidity. It believes that what follows is always determined by what has gone before.

But such a view is just as if you had a sea in front of you and said of it: Waves are washed up on the shore; each one is caused by the one before; the fifth comes from the fourth, the fourth from the third, the third from the second, the second from the first. But the truth is that forces are at work beneath the surface of the water, causing the individual waves to arise. In the same way that someone today looks at the sea, people today also look at history, and they are still proud to write pragmatic or causal history and to present these spectres to people, who in turn react to them superstitiously and take this stupidity of causal history as reality. But anyone who knows how things really are, how forces work from below, how every single event is driven to the surface, must say to himself: Unless this stupidity, which we call history today, is removed from people's minds and views, no salvation can come into human development and evolution. These are the serious thoughts that should fill the mind of anyone today who is really serious about what is happening today as a result of the fire signs.

Oh, it could be painfully soul-stirring when one tried to bring humanity to its senses on specific issues. In the 1880s, for example, I had to think: Oh, we have a physics that exerts its devastating effects on the whole world view with its absurd atomic theory, and that believes in the spectre of the external world of which I spoke earlier. How can one, I thought, teach this world again that it is a spectre? And I said to myself: If you make the world aware that what reaches us as color and light is not only quantity, as physics today with its atomistic stupidity believes, but also quality in the Goethean sense, then you could bring people from one corner to self-awareness in this regard. And I wanted to make people understand that Goethe's Theory of Colors is not dilettantism, but reality in the face of today's atomistic physical foolishness. But the time for that had not yet come. The German mind was still bowing to the English Newtonian theory of colors, which is just as suited to the Anglo-American mind as Goethe's theory of colors is to the German mind. If we had found the opportunity to take up what we needed, who knows what might have come of it! But we should not have tried to find it by taking the easy way out; instead, we should have taken the path of taking the spirit seriously. And then: Goethe's theory of metamorphosis was already a theory of the connection between humans and the rest of the living world. This theory of metamorphosis should have been developed further. But what happened? People did talk about it, but those who spoke had no idea of the real circumstances: what was said was mere empty phrases. People did not distinguish the phrases from what had substance, and so they adopted Anglo-American Darwinism instead of Goethe's metamorphosis theory.

These are the individual facts in a specific area, by which one can see what we have sinned against the individual facts, and what should be done, for example, with such individual facts. Today is a serious time, and it is necessary that we reflect on the great impulses of the Central European spirit, which gave the signature to the period from the turn of the eighteenth to the nineteenth century. If we can summon up the forces that were at work in that time, then there may be hope that we will again see questions arise and that we will again find goals and access to the spiritual forces of the world. For what Ennemoser wrote more than half a century ago is as true for our time as it is for his: “The decision is approaching, time is pressing, the wind is blowing from the east and the west, a storm can break out!” Today you can feel it. “The trunk of the old policy stands on rotten roots, the calculations of the diplomats would like to be destroyed, their art has become a distorted art that no one understands. Can you get figs from thistles, grapes from thorns?” And I ask: Can you make revolutions with philistines who act radically? Can the spirit be emancipated and left to its own devices with senile youth? We need true spiritual substance, not that which merely behaves in a radically phrase-filled manner. We need truly enthusiastic youth for everything that young people can be enthusiastic about, but not a youth that spouts senile phrases and has programs for everything and confuses these phrases and programs with spiritual content. One would like to see a ray of spiritual power penetrating into their hearts, so that it might prepare people to distinguish between thoughtless phrase and substantial content. But when substantial content comes to people, they say they do not understand it, it is not quite clear to them. And when the attitude lives in something: you have to form your sentences in a way that befits the truth - and it is not always convenient for it to fit into every cheap phrase - then people say: you write convoluted sentences. How often have I said: Those who take the truth seriously must write some sentences in such a way that they deal with the next sentence while formulating one, and that they place what is said in one sentence in its proper light with the next. If we take this seriously, we will develop the kind of attitude that enables us to understand anthroposophy in its deepest inner sense. Above all, we will develop the ability to distinguish, to really distinguish. Are people today really able to distinguish between things that are, for example, dawning and things that are setting? They are not. And it is here, in this power of discernment, that the big questions we have to ask ourselves must arise. We must ask ourselves what Goethe wanted for natural science. Was Goethe's theory of colours a morning light to recognize the essence of colour more deeply than physics can, or do we want to turn it into an evening glow that testifies that the sun of Goethean culture has already set? Was Goethe's theory of metamorphosis a morning light, or do we want to turn it into a Darwinian law that makes the sun of Goethean culture set? These things must be thought through and felt through today. Without this, it cannot continue.

Take the experiences of the last few weeks: you can become hopeful and hopeless at the same time. We have begun to work here in the spirit of the threefold social order. We began in such a way that we took no account of a certain stratum of humanity. We spoke to the humanity that makes up the broad masses, and we had found that no one can deny our understanding of the souls of the broad masses. During the war I once spoke a word of warning: We were condemned during the war to have healthy roots of the people, and that out of these roots of the people individualities developed, which were the German greats; but what the middle class was, that was what could fill one with doubt, that was what so easily wanted to take the easy way out in relation to truth and education. And so it came about that in our movement for threefolding, what had emerged from the roots of the people was brought into a rather alarming view: the party leaders. And the party leaders, who no longer belong to the people, are now presenting the people with a choice: either to remain reasonable and listen to what is truly based on spiritual foundations, but what can be understood in a reasonable way by human understanding, like everything that is based on spiritual foundations, can be understood by the mind, if one only wants to, or to follow the leaders and to lead Europe little by little to the fate of the ten to twelve million people who were killed during the war catastrophe, and the so-and-so many millions who were crippled, and to bring ten to twelve more millions to death or to starve them. This choice has been made today. And anyone who cannot grasp this idea cannot raise their thoughts to the level of strength necessary for the seriousness of the times.

A few weeks ago, we tackled what - it may not be aptly described as the cultural council. For three weeks we have been fiddling with the matter, and it has not been resolved. The matter had to be presented in the way it was presented, because it was also necessary to appeal to what remained of healthy instincts in the general wilderness. What was said from this point of view need not be national-chauvinistic, nor need it have the hostile point against another people. The English themselves know very well that as individual Englishmen they are something different than as a people. The man, who I have often quoted, who is one of the finest art critics, once said a beautiful word, in which he said something like the following: Oh, that's where we make history. There you examine how events actually developed and resulted and how peoples get into wars. But all that has been written is only there to praise the one that we need, according to our subjective point of view, and to condemn or defame the other. And it is true that when nations wage war, they wage war everywhere like savages and do not ask why. lerman Grimm says that the moment people wage war, they become savages. When people become a state, a nation, they do not become higher, but lower. This is the great misfortune of our time, that the state or the sense of belonging to a nation is valued higher than the individual human being. But people today are so enmeshed in the esteem of communities rather than of the individual that they feel quite comfortable being dehumanized, being a state template. It is naturally difficult to create something that can truly emancipate intellectual life. But in our time, humanity is closer to the spirit than one might think, despite its materialism. Inspiration and imagination rule in us. But because of our lack of productive imagination, we transform our imagination into all kinds of ghostly images about the world's interrelations, with which we defame the real world's interrelations. If you tell someone: Europe hangs together in such and such a way – as I did a few years before the outbreak of this war in the lecture cycle in Kristiania; if you look at the world in such a way that you judge it with inner psychology, with inner vision, then the dreamers regard it as a superstition, and if you set about putting it into practice, then these same people consider it utopian or ideological. But what matters is that we see clearly in these matters today. In their sense, the members of the Anglo-American world have seen clearly, and we have seen dimly. —- And inspirations also change, turning into wild animalistic emotions that want to live it up in blood. Look at the blood that is flowing today, look when people are lined up against the wall and shot: these are the inspirations that want to come to people with the good will of the spiritual world, which is hated by people and which therefore transforms into wild animal instincts. Because if a person does not want to allow what wants to come to him from the spiritual world as inspiration, then it transforms into wild emotions, into animalistic drives.

This should be borne in mind by those who have been involved with anthroposophically oriented spiritual science for decades. They should bear in mind that anthroposophically oriented spiritual science is not just about collecting knowledge. Whether you ultimately know something about the astral body and etheric body and I, purely conceptually, or whether you copy out a cookbook and just juxtapose what is in the cookbook in your mind, it makes no difference; one is no more valuable than the other. Anthroposophically oriented spiritual science must pass over into the human soul as knowledge, but one must not confuse this knowledge with the dull, muffled mystical feeling. Ennemoser has already said this very rightly in this essay, for he says: “Just as freedom should move within the laws of justice, so religion must become an enlightened truth with the light of science.” But people today do not want to illuminate religious feeling with anthroposophical science; they want to have an abstract divinity in the mystical feeling. And above all, they do not want art to become a cultivator of spiritual beauty in natural material.

But this is what anthroposophy must aim to achieve: it must not only impart knowledge; admittedly, knowledge, but knowledge that can become inner enlightenment, that spurs on our power of discrimination. If it can do that, then much will be served in Central Europe. For we must be able to look to the west and to the east with a gaze that sees and recognizes the world. We in the west must be able to distinguish between what rises hostile to us and what is hostile only in the declining. Here too I recall from my boyhood, when I was in the area where the Styrian mountains are, how every week, twice, I had before me in the train that Count Chambord, who lived in Frohsdorf Castle, on whose face lay the most ancient catholicity, the most ancient ultramontane Jesuit education and at the same time that which was the reflection of the French “L'Etat c'est moi”. That was still truth. Everything else is no longer truth. No matter how much France may develop her power today, she is in decline, just as the Anglo-American element is in the ascendant. But these things must be properly assessed. We must see through them so that we can fertilize ourselves with the laws of spiritual life, so that we can transform thoughts into will and find the courage to really place ourselves in the present, which demands so much seriousness and so much significance from us. We must always renew the attempts and make these attempts again and again to knock on the door of our contemporaries: Do you want a free spiritual life, do you want a soil in which a free spiritual life can develop? For these attempts must always be made. If we want to let some truth and wisdom flow into humanity, then we must put it to the test, whether people want to accept it or not; it can very well impair the matter that people do not want to accept it. Therefore, I ask you not to lie down on a lazy bed by saying to yourself, according to Ennemoser's sentence: “Germany will fulfill its destiny or perish in the most disgraceful way, and with it European culture. “ These words are not to be understood in this way; rather, you must say to yourselves that Germany will fulfill her calling if there are people who have enough strength to revive the German spirit in themselves, unchauvinistically, unnationally, as a part of the world spirit, in whose sense we have to work between East and West. And if the world rejects what can come from Central Europe, then the time should have come for us, those who for decades have committed themselves to anthroposophically oriented spiritual science, not only with our heads but also with our hearts and with all our willingness to make sacrifices, to remember and say: We are here! And that we are here to cultivate the spirit should not be a lie of the soul, but should unfold as a truth of the soul! And when others are ready to accept the call for truth, as it can come from anthroposophically oriented spiritual science, then, when this understanding occurs, what was intended as the Anthroposophical Society could become what it was intended for. Today, the call for the emancipation of spiritual life goes out to all people of good will. But those people who have laid claim to it from the standpoint of the spirit should be honest about it and say: If the others leave the path of the spirit, if they do not have the courage to do so, then we will take it upon ourselves. We have the courage to do so. We do not want the spirit to be an empty phrase for us; we want it to pulsate as reality in our blood; we want to say what has to be done for the spirit.

Dear attendees,

What arose out of anthroposophical spiritual science as the impulse for the threefold social order needs to be explained, not defended, time and again in the face of the view that the threefold social order is utopian. Anyone who really delves into my essay 'The Key Points of the Social Question' or into the wealth of literature that has since been written on it can see the fundamental difference between what is intended here, precisely on the basis of anthroposophy, and what is usually associated with utopias, utopian ideas in social, economic or other respects.

Otherwise, it is pointed out, and it is even taken for granted that it should be pointed out, how one or other institutions must be set up in order to lead to this or that satisfactory result or condition for humanity. The view of life that underlies the impulse for the threefold social order knows that, in the face of today's conditions, the assertion of any utopian ideas would be quite meaningless. Yes, I have stated in the new edition of my 'Key Points of the Social Question', which is just being published, in the rewritten preface, that I would not expect anything from any purely theoretical descriptions, however it should be in the future, even if these descriptions were to be written with the greatest of spirit. For today it is not at all a matter of expressing any ready-made, ingenious ideas about social institutions, but rather, today, in the face of humanity proud of its maturity, it is a matter of pointing out the opportunities under which, through social cooperation, people can bring about what is desirable. Thus, the impulse for the threefold social organism is not meant to characterize how the world should look, but how this social organism itself should bring people into certain mutual relationships so that people, according to their respective abilities and needs, create the conditions in which they can live in the future.

The idea is that the social organism should be structured not into three classes, but into three particular social entities, in each of which every person has a share. This structure should be into a free spiritual life, a state or political life and an independent economic life. And at the root of this lies the view that if people shape their circumstances through such a threefold social organism, then what is socially viable must come from the people themselves. So it is not a matter of presenting something utopian, but rather of characterizing opportunities under which people themselves, each individual, one might say, can gain influence over the social shaping of life that is commensurate with their abilities and needs and that must carry the necessary weight to bring about conditions that are conducive to life.

This is the fundamental difference between the impulse for the threefold social organism and, one might say, everything else that has understandably sprung up in our time out of the deep need of this time. But precisely this necessity, this basic principle, of peeling the social organism, which has become abstractly unified, into its three natural parts so that they can in turn work together all the more intimately, is still little understood in wider circles today. And that, my dear ladies and gentlemen, can on the one hand be found quite understandable, on the other hand it must be deeply regretted, because today we really do not have unlimited time to get out of the crisis and out of the decline, but because we need to get to the real spirit in spiritual, political and economic terms as soon as possible. But I said it is understandable. And one must consider the way in which it is understandable, in order to perhaps also find the way to improvement from it.

I would like to take as my starting point a judgment that has been made recently, not because it appears in a book by an economist, but because it is characteristic, despite being expressed by an individual here, of the way of thinking of the broadest circles - of the way of thinking that is precisely the sharpest obstacle to the intervention of such an impulse as that of threefolding.

It may be said that the economist and Jena professor Fritz Terhalle has written a very readable book about free and controlled price formation. The problem of price formation is, after all, the one that must be at the center of economic thinking. Terhalle sharply criticizes the price formation processes that took place during the war. It may be said that much of this writing is downright brilliantly illuminating what is actually present in current economic thinking. Terhalle asks what the benefits and effects were of the various price regulations that were issued by the state during the war. And I am allowed to share with you his four points, in which he summarizes his judgment. After he has presented in detail how the effects have shown, after again and again official bodies have issued price regulations, laws about prices – after he has examined these effects, carefully examined them, he summarizes his overall judgment in the following four points:

[First: Most of the time, the interested and relevant circles had a false conception of what should be striven for. Second: The uncertainty caused by this, as well as by the application to practice and by the practice of thoroughly opposing theoretical constructions, as well as, finally, by the most diverse jurisprudence, brought the participating circles of buyers into very undesirable confusion and agitation. Thirdly: The fight against price gouging was almost unsuccessful in some areas, particularly in primary production, and only partially successful in others, and often to an excessive extent, especially in some branches of retail trade.

And the fourth point, in which this economist sums up his judgment, is particularly characteristic. He says:

All these factors combined to damage the real business in favor of profiteering.

Now, ladies and gentlemen, this is how a man expresses himself who expressly wants to be scientific, who wants to scientifically examine the corresponding phenomena. And this is his scientific judgment of what the state did to regulate prices during the time of need.

But there is something else: the fact that this economist, from his scientific point of view, which he calls the national economic point of view – and one should believe that it is self-evident that economic demands must be judged from the national economic point of view – he states that from his scientific, national economic point of view, this way of the state influencing economic life is to be condemned. So he names these phenomena, which have come to light as a result of these state interventions, as those that he must fight from his scientific point of view. And then he says something quite extraordinarily characteristic. He says:

Yes, that is the [economic] judgment, but perhaps this [economic] judgment is one that must not be decisive, perhaps something more important, something more significant comes into question much, much more. And as such a more important, more significant factor, he cites the economic policy points of view, behind which what must be asserted from the economic point of view must recede.

So we are told that one can know that something is economically justified, but the economist must keep quiet, because anything that may come from one side or the other that is harmful from the point of view of economic policy must be put in its place.

Well, my dear attendees, one cannot resign more clearly from economic thinking than in this way. It cannot be stated more clearly that economic thinking cannot come into its own within the unified social organism of the state if those who feel professionally called to make this judgment say: This is our honest scientific conviction, but it must take a back seat to the state's economic policy measures. These are more important in the given case.

Do we not have a clear indication from the facts of life: economic life must be placed on its own ground; it is necessary that within the social organism this economic life be detached from that which it must damage when it places itself above it.

Those who today judge such things not from theoretical considerations but from full life practice, who in particular from life practice overlook the helplessness of people in these matters, can grasp with their hands how necessary it is to place economic life on its own healthy basis. And that this is only possible if, on the other hand, spiritual life is placed on its own basis, I have often stated here, and I will have to touch on it again in the further course of today's lecture. But I would still like to start from a remark that is made precisely by the side that I have characterized.

After the helplessness of economic thinking in the face of current social conditions has been admitted in this way, the emphasis is on what will actually matter in the future. And there Terhalle says:

In the future, it will be more important than ever to educate the masses about economic necessities so that they are able to think in economic terms.

It is remarkable that on the one hand the old unitary state is invoked as the higher authority, and then the demand is made not for some beautiful economic institutions – that is quite clever of Terhalle – but the demand is made that the people be taught about economic interrelations. And if you read on, this knowledge that the people should acquire about economic interrelationships extends even to the constitution of the market and market conditions. It is demanded that the people be enlightened in order to place themselves in the economic organism under the influence of this enlightenment in such a way that this economic organism can flourish. On the one hand, then, a remarkable judgment on economic policy, on the other hand, an appeal to the economic education of the people. And it is clearly recognized that it is precisely here, as a necessity, for the economic politician, the economist, that the economic actions themselves, that the whole economic behavior should change, so that people no longer how prices are determined, with a complete lack of knowledge about the structure of the market, about other economic relationships, but that each individual acts with economic enlightenment, and brings this economic enlightenment into the immediate economic activity itself. In abstracto, a very, very reasonable demand! But an important question arises from this whole context, my dear attendees, and that is this: where should this enlightenment about economic necessities come from in the future?

It is interesting that Terhalle quotes the socialist Richard Calwer with reference to a thought that the same expresses. He once said:

You need sufficient, well-founded knowledge of the goods in stock in order to be able to operate the economic supply in an appropriate manner; in other words, to arrive at appropriate economic pricing. You need knowledge of the goods in stock.

Yes, but how can this be applied? Where can it come from? And how can one educate the people with such knowledge of the supply of goods – and of course a lot of other things are necessary to educate the people about economic necessities – how can one educate the people with such knowledge?

You see, certain people, I might say, chew and chew on certain questions and get nowhere. These are the questions that the impulse for the threefold social order has envisaged in a concrete, appropriate, practical way. He started from the knowledge that a certain realization, a certain insight into economic conditions, into economic activity itself, must penetrate. But he does not declaim that such an enlightenment must be created, regardless of who is to create it. Nor does he declare that it should be created by the old unitary state. He also knows that this education must not be of a very specific kind, because an education of a certain kind, which such people probably always think of, would not be of any use at all. Because let us assume that the “clever” idea - I say “clever” in quotation marks, of course - of setting up state commissioners, state councils or whatever they are called, somehow expert councils, which, according to the known methods of today, by means of all kinds of statistics or the like, would gain knowledge of the constitution of economic conditions, and they would then, in the ways that are popular today, go among the people and create enlightenment, so that the people would then do business under the influence of this enlightenment - what would be achieved? Exactly the same would be achieved, my dear attendees, which in numerous places Terhalle criticizes with regard to the education that has always been created by the authorities during the war. There are many passages in his very interesting book in which he points out how all possible explanations, more as a sedative, were quickly thrown behind the people in rapid succession from all possible sources in the agitated times. But he states this not only for the reason, which was indeed also present, that people were so inundated with such explanations that they did not take them into account at all, but also for the other reason that such things have no effect at all when they are brought to the people in this way. Why don't they work? For the simple reason that such explanations only speak to the human mind, only speak to the human intellect, because such explanations have to be grasped with the head. And then, after what one has found reasonable, one would have to act accordingly. One would always have to say to oneself: “You must do what is reasonable!”

That is not the way to spread economic enlightenment. Oh no. This is how economic enlightenment is spread by abstract theorists who judge not by life but by their ideas about life; one could also say, by their illusions about life. Those who know what life is like have a different kind of enlightenment: an enlightenment built on the trust between the one who enlightens and the one who is to be enlightened. An enlightenment that does not speak in general terms, but in the individual, concrete terms that are currently present according to economic needs or economic circumstances, and that has an enlightening effect at the same time as action is taken. In other words, those who work together must be united in such a way that simply by meeting in economic action, one has an enlightening effect on the other. One is more familiar with the conditions of consumption in one area, the other with the conditions of production in another, depending on which branch of economic life he is more familiar with. If you know from life that he is in there, if you have other concrete connections with him in life, then you trust him and believe what he says. And in turn, he accommodates you with regard to what you yourself say, which he cannot know. And while you are communicating in this way, the economic actions are taking place. Economic enlightenment and economic activity do not fall apart, but by negotiating in a circle of trust, where producers and consumers, depending on the different circumstances, are drawn together, by negotiating in such a circle of trust, one clarifies oneself economically. One clarifies oneself within this circle. One clarifies oneself from the facts. Enlightenment is drawn into life. Enlightenment is not treated as something that is poured into the people from the outside. Because, my dear attendees, there can also be a social ethos in economic activity, because what is negotiated from person to person and is done in the negotiation is based on mutual trust, on such a trust that, in its potentization, may already be mentioned as real economic fraternity.

And this, my dear attendees, is the associative principle. The associative principle consists of nothing other than people who have some kind of economic interaction with each other joining together, associating, and the associations associating further. In this way, what is necessary for the maintenance of the economy comes about. In this way, what is effective in the economy itself comes about through direct knowledge of economic life.

Everywhere you can see that what underlies the threefold order is drawn from life itself. Only that this life is not looked at in terms of familiar illusions and illusionist theories, but in such a way that one looks at people, at people's perceptions and feelings, and above all, one asks oneself: how do people gain trust in each other? Imagine what it would mean if price regulations were to arise out of such a relationship of trust, instead of being dictated from outside. It should therefore not be said in any way that in order to arrive at a fair price, it must be done in such and such a way. Rather, it should be pointed out that if such associations exist and deal with pricing, then the corresponding prices will emerge from such a real economic life. It is not said that one should do it this way or that, but rather it is said: in this way people should join together, so that out of this union the things necessary arise, and so the other economic institutions, the other economic measures.

That is the reality of thinking about the threefold social organism. And I have often pointed this out, and I would just like to repeat it here briefly, that economic life has its own laws. The size of the associations arises automatically from the economic conditions of a territory. Associations that are too small would work too expensively, and associations that are too large would be unwieldy. I have explained this in more detail in the new preface to my “Key Points”. All the objections that are currently being raised against the associative principle disintegrate into nothing when one considers the real conditions. This associative principle alone will be able to meet the world-historical demands of social life in an appropriate way and to fulfill them. And how are these world-historical demands of social life expressed?

Now, my dear audience, the economic part of social life has actually only in the second half of the nineteenth century become what it is today. It is only from what became of the economic body of civilized humanity in the second half of the nineteenth century and has remained until our days, only from that could arise that which is nevertheless the main basis of our world war catastrophe, the economic confusion of the middle of the second decade of the twentieth century. How did it come about? We can say that if we take the immediately preceding signature of the economy of civilized humanity, then what we can call the world trade principle has gradually emerged from earlier forms of human coexistence. We can already speak of a world trade principle in the eighteenth century, and even more so in the first half of the nineteenth century. But what then emerged from the world trade principle in economic life is the world economy. And the world economy is something other than mere world trade and what it encompasses. A world economy is only present at the moment when different states exchange their production in such a way that what one obtains as raw products, the other processes in industry; that an economic production community arises between different state territories. Before that, it was essentially – always essentially, of course – the case that the states had closed national economies, that they traded their surpluses externally, and obtained from outside what they could not produce themselves. But the fact that a common working practice, as it was particularly brought about by the cotton industry – the characteristic example of what the world economy has created – spread across the whole of civilized humanity, is actually only a result of the very latest times. And one should not believe that what can be characterized as a world economy and what has established a far-reaching dependency of the individual national economies on each other, that this just hangs over humanity like a cloud.

No, dear attendees, what is happening in the world economy is affecting every single household. Every single person is finally under the influence of this world economy. But for this world economy, the earlier communities, which were aimed at something quite different, the unit states, were simply too small. They were also constituted in such a way that they were not geared to this mutual interdependence in the world economy. In short, the associations that existed in the past, which emerged from the household economy into the city economy, then into the state economy, became too small. Economic life went beyond what these associations could achieve. And finally, anyone who does not look at the surface of the phenomena, but who studies with all thoroughness the causes of the war between Central Europe and the western regions of the civilized world, knows that they arose from the breaking down of national borders by the world economy. And if you look at it that way, you have to seriously raise the question: How can we heal what the world economy, which is simply an historical necessity because of the spread of transport conditions and the possibilities it offers, has made unhealthy? The only way is to recognize that This economy and its institutions, which have arisen out of it, that one also asks about the state of mind, the whole ethos of the people who work within this world economy, how one can come out of this world economy itself to a shaping of economic life. The impulse for the threefold social order provides the answer: the kind of cooperation within the world economy that follows from it itself, not from the old institutions, is the associative principle in economic life. Now that the old associations, which came from something else and which coped with the old form of economic life, have been reduced to absurdity, the economy itself must give itself its associations. And these associations, as I have described them today more ethically, otherwise more economically, as they are also clearly characterized in my book “The Core Issues of the Social Question”, these associations, as they arise out of economic life itself, are demanded by the idea of the threefold social organism. And these associations can be created at any moment, without resorting to utopian dreams, if people in the economic sphere simply turn to themselves and thereby bring about the emancipation of economic life. When associations arise, they will initially only be able to do what the outside world allows them to do, but they will prove themselves in what they do, and then they will have to be allowed to exist, because they will prove fruitful for the economy.

But, my dear attendees, when you look at how the necessity for associations arises from the modern organization of the global economy, then on the other hand you have to ask yourself: how can that be brought about which must work in people who associate? Those people who want to work in associations that are built on trust must be able to inspire trust. This means that people must be able to place themselves in the world in such a way that this trust can work within the associations simply out of the whole human soul mood, out of the whole human soul condition. In other words, we need not only economically oriented associations; we need people in the associations who work socially, people whose social work is permeated by moral principles, by spiritual perspectives. That is why it is impossible to imagine any improvement in economic life without a simultaneous metamorphosis of intellectual life itself. For why, one might ask, do people today think, in a perfectly understandable way, that you can educate the people by simply pouring some kind of enlightenment from above down onto them? Why do people think this way? Because, under the spiritual development of the last few centuries, they have gradually become accustomed to the idea that everything that is reasonably thought must only have an effect on the intellect of the human being, must only take hold of the intellect of the human being. In order to show the right thing in this point, I have just pointed out in the lectures that preceded this one, in this week's lecture, but also in earlier lectures, what the most significant characteristic of spiritual science is.

The most significant characteristic of the anthroposophical spiritual science referred to here is that it is drawn from such deep sources of human nature and being that, in turn, as it spreads, it must have an effect on the whole person, if this whole person is educated in such a way that he or she opens up to it. Spiritual science is characterized by its effect on the whole human being and its effect from the whole human being. And this is what we need on the other side. We cannot bring economic life up if we do not have people who stand firmly with both feet on this earth and who also receive the soul nourishment from spiritual life that allows them to stand with both feet on this earth. It is a commonly held opinion today that this spiritual nourishment can be obtained simply by spreading the kind of education that is cultivated under the roofs of our schools, in adult education associations, in public libraries and adult education colleges.

But let us look at an example – we must always look at things in concrete terms – of how today's intellectual education works precisely where it is supposed to have an effect on the human mind, where it seeks to take hold of the moral and spiritual content of the human being above all. Anthroposophy is thoroughly explored by the recently mentioned theologian Kurt Leese, who is a pastor; it says so on the title page. I don't know the man, I only know the book. So he is a pastor. He is one of those personalities of whom one would have to assume, within a healthy social organism, that when he speaks, something will resonate from his words that will pour into souls in such a way that the souls will feel within themselves the moral, spiritual and soul impulses that are within them. That people who receive this spiritual life become aware of what a human being actually is to them, what a human being is within the cosmic order that they see around them in the stars, the clouds, in lightning and thunder, in the succession of earthly and world-historical events. Just think what it means for human feeling, for the human soul, when one can say to oneself, from within the spiritual life, I am not only a forsaken child in a physical body, but I am something that has been born out of the whole physical and spiritual and spiritual universe. I belong to the universe in so far as this universe is eternal. Feel what happens in the soul when a person feels at home in the cosmos. This goes as far as the forces of the blood, which gives one the strength to act in life; this permeates and spiritualizes the will when one knows what one is as a human being in the universe. But this should come to him through the cultivation of spiritual life. Anthroposophy tries to give people such a spiritual life. But what does the pastor, licentiate of theology Kurt Leese, say? He says:

What is all this talk about the service of knowledge, about the riddles of life and their solution? What is all this surge of knowledge into the depths of the primeval world and into the distance when anthroposophy

- here it says: “theosophy” -

cannot say why it is better to be an ego than a non-ego. And why, in fact, are seven world ages necessary?

And then this pastor and licentiate in theology says: the anthroposophist knows just as little about this as we do, so he also adheres to mere facticity.

Now, ladies and gentlemen, here we have the representative of the present-day spiritual life, and it is not just one person speaking, the individual can only be cited as one example, thousands and thousands are speaking, and they speak in the name of the spiritual life. They say: one cannot arrive at this, at this why it is better to be an I than a non-I, that is, to be in the eternal unconsciousness of the external natural existence.

In contrast to this, anthroposophical spiritual science emphasizes – this may emerge as a result of many lectures I have given here – anthroposophical spiritual science emphasizes what it means to become aware of how one stands in this universe. Let us just take our starting point for comparison from everyday life. We human beings in our everyday lives have gone through certain experiences since the time when we can remember back to our earliest childhood. We feel connected to these experiences. These experiences emerge in our memory as either friendly or painful. But what we bring up here is basically ourselves. We feel merged with what we have gone through in suffering and joy and what we can remember. We are aware that we are what has passed through us as pain and joy and then, through this passing, has been drawn into our soul. In our ordinary lives, we only become aware of something as a small human being by connecting with that which we have been connected with since our birth, that which has approached us and, in a sense, belongs to us. What does anthroposophy do? It expands, as it were, this sense of belonging together of the human being with the environment to the whole world, which can enter into his consciousness. As otherwise the human being only feels as one with his personal experiences, anthroposophy draws his attention to how he is connected in his being with the whole being of the world that can be perceived and experienced by him. The small consciousness of the personality expands into world consciousness. Together we grow with all the historical development of humanity, in that we recognize how we are always and again involved in it. We become one with the world. And in the same measure in which this consciousness of the world expands, this consciousness, which we otherwise have through our natural development with our experiences in suffering and joy, this consciousness, through which we also become participants in the suffering and joy of the whole world, by feeling ourselves as a human being as a member of the whole world, in the same measure in which this consciousness expands, in the same measure our consciousness of our humanity grows, and to the same extent we become stronger in this consciousness, our inner moral strength grows, because we know - although, and this is right, our sense of responsibility also grows - something grows in us through which we know that we are human within the world; through which we know what it means to be an I and not a non-I.

This awareness of what the human being is, of what he is in relation to the world and to all existence, this awareness, which, as we see and as we have tangible examples of, has been lost to the world in present-day spiritual life, this awareness is what spiritual science wants to bring back to people. And in the same measure that this consciousness, arising out of the knowledge of the spirit, which is to be imparted not as abstract knowledge but as knowledge that has been experienced, wells up out of the whole human being, in the same measure will our moral and spiritual strength grow. And what grows in us will find its way into the economic associations and assert itself as the basis for human interaction and the trust we need.

This, my dear audience, must be said if one is to describe how spiritual knowledge must take its place alongside economic demands. For the spiritual knowledge that we have today is expressed in such a way that it is indifferent whether one knows why one is an ego or a non-ego. We need a renewal in the field of spiritual knowledge. And this renewal will lead us to something quite different, which has already been hinted at in these or those lectures that I have given, which always seems bold when it is spoken out loud, but which is absolutely a result of this spiritual science, as surely as any scientific result can be.

Let us take what follows from the world view that is customary today. We look back into the distant past of our world system, when something arose out of some cosmic nebula and became what the world is in which we live. The sun and planets emerged from this nebula in a certain way, according to external natural forces. We live on this earth as lonely human beings, who feel the moral ideals sprouting up in their souls, which also signify the ultimate impulses of their social actions. They stand there with their moral ideals, which basically constitute their actual mental nervous strength as human beings; they stand there with them, and they know that without them they cannot be human in the full sense of the word.

But then again he looks up at what, according to the conventional world view, may be the end of this planetary system with our sun and our earth. What happens in our external world does not ask about our ideals, our moral and spiritual impulses. It proceeds according to external natural laws and arrives at a final state that signifies a kind of solidification, whether solidification into warmth or cold, it does not matter; it is then the charnel house at the same time, the great cemetery for all They emerged as illusions in the midst of this world-becoming, they gave man an illusory sense of his human dignity, and they will be carried to the grave with the planetary system itself.

The fact that many people do not admit to themselves that it is so does not change the fact that the present world view unconsciously flows into their feelings. And basically, it is also a saying like that one could never understand why it is better to be a self than a non-self, which arises from the desolate feeling that one must have when one sees this natural course of world events, with the spiritual and moral illusions of humanity right in the middle, giving people an illusory sense of their human dignity, but which they will one day have to carry to the grave with all of humanity.

This is countered, even if so many prejudices still speak against it today, by the view of spiritual science. I have often explained it here individually and will only describe it briefly today. Spiritual science also looks at the external world events from which the human being has emerged as a physical being. But then it recognizes that these world events, which are subject to natural laws, are in the whole, to our universe, the relative universe itself, as the plant, which sprouts in leaves, becomes a flower, develops the fruit casing to the germ inside. That which arises in the plant until the germ develops, what is the covering, passes away; the germ passes over, and the new plant life arises from it. The old covering must pass away so that the new plant life can arise from the germ.

Anthroposophy shows that everything that is physical in us, as belonging to the external physical world, belongs to such a transient part of the universe, but that a germ lives. That a germ lives in the human being, that is the spiritual, the moral of the impulses that live within. These are our moral ideals, they are a still young world. Just as the sheaths around the plant germ dry up and fall away, so will the visible stars, the visible external objects of the three natural kingdoms, fall away. They fall away. That which is the germ of the future lies in our moral soul content. The world of the future arises from this. What we do today, what we want today, becomes a real, outwardly perceptible world-forming force.

However, the sense of responsibility grows when one becomes aware that what we have in our moral intentions today will one day become as perceptible to the world as the stars are perceptible to us today. But many a word that has been said in religious documents only makes sense when one is aware of what flows from a real knowledge of the spirit. One must always remember with elevated feelings that it was once said in a particularly paradigmatic way that what lives in man as ideals and pours out into words is the creative [germ] for future worlds, to which those who are now present as external nature will not be added; they will no longer be there when new worlds have arisen from our moral ideals. “Heaven and Earth will pass away,” said the founder of Christianity, ‘but my words will not pass away.’ That means: They will be worlds when the world of heaven and earth, which one now sees with eyes, will have passed away.

This is the anticipation of a spiritual scientific truth, my dear attendees. And if we are so connected with the becoming of the world through our moral ideals, then our consciousness of our true nature as human beings also grows. In turn, we have to draw from spiritual science itself moral forces, which then become social forces.

Spiritual science does not merely theorize, spiritual science does not merely present abstract teachings, spiritual science presents something into the world that becomes strength in the human soul. And strength, ladies and gentlemen, is what we need if we want to become social human beings. For strong, morally social people must place themselves in the associations. That is what it is about.

In what I have just said, however, there is something that may appear to today's scientists to be somewhat lay and very amateurish. That is why I was also taught, when I recently expressed the same thing in Zurich, by a Zurich private lecturer, that I “reify” my ideas in this and other areas, as he said. Now, he speaks of this reification as if I were speaking of ideas as realities. Of course, he has no idea how the things are meant. He speaks of this reification very dismissively and says that I would even have claimed:

In his two lectures, Steiner literally says:

- he says explicitly, and now he wants to quote words because this seems to him to be something outrageous - I would have taken it so far in reifying that I would have said:

“Anthroposophical spiritual science recognizes the moral as being just as real as the physical. In our moral life, it recognizes indestructible seeds for emerging later worlds.”

You see, this ruler of contemporary science makes the logical mistake of reifying ideas when, from the basis of real spiritual research, he presents the truth that, not through logical error but through the great, very promising world processes for humanity, the moral ideas that we carry within us become reified, become things, become realities. Today, you are already criticized if you dare to claim - then it is put in quotation marks - that anthroposophical spiritual science recognizes the moral life as an indestructible germ for future worlds, for everything physical. You are not allowed to do that from the point of view of today's, correct university philosophies, because you are scolded as someone who understands nothing about the world.

Because the one who understands something about the world, in the opinion of these people, cannot judge otherwise than that the world has arisen out of a fog according to real laws, that it runs according to mere external physical laws and falls back into the sun as slag, while the non-reified moral impulses, which resemble mere ideas, must be buried in the same world churchyard.

But, my dear attendees, if economic life is to recover, if economic demands are to be taken seriously, then this cannot happen without

at the same time the spiritual knowledge, which places the moral and thus also the religious life alongside the economic. For the economic associations will give rise to the living insight that others also demand, but do not know where to get. And from that which is spiritual knowledge will come the social ethos, the socio-ethical power to bring these insights into reality. This is what we must bear in mind when we speak of economic demands today. We cannot seriously speak of them without at the same time pointing out what can give people the strength to fulfill these economic demands.

But, esteemed attendees, how did it come about that people in the spiritual life are already saying that one cannot know why it is better to be an I than a non-I? Even if it is unpleasant to say so, it must be said: the one who gets the drive for his spiritual work only from what the economy alone, what the state can give, which puts the individual in a certain place, the one who must succumb to this drive because it has become has become a vital necessity, he, no matter how strongly he may be an idealist as an individual, may even be a spiritualist, but he is increasingly coming to regard the spirit as no more than a mere appendage of life. Then the final consequence is this, which has become a ruling one in the broadest circles of our socialists, that the spiritual life is only an ideology, something that arises as if out of a haze and fog from the only reality, the external, material, economic reality.

That this view prevails today in broader socialist circles, that this view also dominates feelings, emotions and impulses in these circles, is only because the ruling, leading circles, through centuries, have lost direct contact with the real spiritual world; with that spiritual world in which we speak not only of the spirit as a sum of abstract concepts, but as a reality, as we speak of the physical-sensory reality. This spiritual life, which recognizes the spirit in its reality, must unfold freely and independently, emancipated from state and economic life; it must be left to its own devices. For the longer the spiritual life is dependent on any external factors, the more the consciousness of the substantial, independent spirit that weaves and pulses and works and lives through the world is lost. Spiritual knowledge can only exist within a free spiritual life. And this free spiritual life will also be the source of real spiritual knowledge. From this real spiritual knowledge, the strength will flow into the economic interrelations that we need to make progress in economic life as well.

So, my dear attendees, everything that is contained in the impulse for the threefold social order flows from a truly real contemplation of life. So everything is meant to be directly practical, but in such a way that by the practical view we do not just mean the narrow view that looks at the machines and at the length of the working day, but at the whole human being, who wants to and will give us head and heart and mind and feelings, and that will bring them to us when we approach them in such economic and spiritual contexts that trust is the element of life and brotherly love as the highest effect of this connection is the atmosphere of life in these contexts.

This must be emphasized again and again, especially in the face of the numerous misrepresentations that are made today about anthroposophical spiritual science as it is meant here. It must not be said of this spiritual science that it has no place in practical life. On the contrary, it is the science that can be said, as I said here a few days ago, to be that which does not seek to elevate the soul to a mystical, unworldly existence, to a mystical cloud-cuckoo-land. Rather, it is that which is intended to fill the soul with spirit in such a way that this spirit feels strong enough to carry spiritual substance into material life. The mystic should not become unworldly in an egoistic way, seeking refuge somewhere where the world is not to be found. He should be imbued with the spirit so that he can carry this spirit into the world around him, which is a free spiritual world, a democratically equal world, an economic world built on trust, an outwardly material world. It is precisely through spiritual science that the realization must penetrate that it is the most blatant, most sophisticated selfishness to take refuge in a world-unrelated mysticism, to cry out for asceticism, while a truly spiritual penetration should precisely give the strength for life. This strength for life, it alone can lead us out of the impending decline, out of the terrible distress and misery, towards a task.

Then in the middle is the actual state life, which will develop when, on the one hand, the free economic life and, on the other, the free spiritual life are established.

In this way, the threefold social order will be created.

Then, in the middle, there will be the actual life of the state, which will develop when, on the one hand, free economic life and, on the other, free spiritual life are separated.

In this way, the threefold social organism will be able to shape the necessary social order of the future in a way that is full of life.

Sometimes today one hears the judgment, at least ten times, and that always only reminds me of how widespread it is: What will become of the state, of legal life in the middle, if intellectual life and economic life are separated? A famous Swiss legal scholar, the most important legal teacher in Switzerland and at the present time, said this himself when he became acquainted with the threefold social order. He said that he found the threefold order appealing, but he could not understand what would then remain for the state between economic life and the life of the humanities.

Now, my dear attendees, it will be shown that a great deal will remain for a powerful and vigorous state life and that those who judge things according to today's conditions just do not see what will remain remain, because, to a certain extent, what is supposed to be there in the life of the state, built on the same democratic foundations, has been consumed on the one hand by economic life, and it wants to consume it even more where the last consequences are to be drawn from this principle. People who say that the economic-political is a higher point of view than the actual economic one do not usually see this. They do not see that the final consequence of such views is the terrible, world-murdering Bolshevism that follows from them. They will see this gradually, if they do not force themselves to form a reasonable view.

In this way, the life of the state and of the law will stand in the middle, and economic life will be built up on its own forces, while spiritual life will stand free and independent. It is as a social shaping of these forces that the impulse for threefolding wants to work. For he must say, not in some programmatic way, not out of abstract thoughts, but out of a thorough penetration of the real necessities of the present, that only on the foundations, which he can perhaps still only express in an imperfect way today - I fully admit this - but which must be further developed through the collaboration, the very necessary collaboration of a great many knowledgeable personalities. In this qualification, however, those who today feel they are the bearers of this impulse for the threefold social organism are convinced: if social life with its longings for a future design is studied and observed in this thorough way, and if these longings are met with the appropriate measures, then what makes the social organism possible must arise. For in such a social organism there will be the basis for the possibility of life; there will be a truly invigorating and fruitful spiritual life that will bring forth a healthy economic life built on brotherhood. There will be in such a social structure a truly free spirit in an economic order built on trust as the only possible social economic force.

A spiritual movement can be injured very much by one-sidedness; and when we devote ourselves to such a subject as the occult standpoints of the Stuttgart building¹ we must clearly understand that when some single truth is specially emphasised, a strong light falls upon this truth, and one may then easily fail to recognise what should also be observed — the other side of the matter. In order to arrive at an all-round view one should always bear this in mind. For example, to all that was said yesterday² something else must be added. Certainly, a still greater perfection is attained when we are able purely in thought to erect around us such a temple, when we are able to imagine ourselves surrounded in thought by such a home. To this end our thoughts must be so strong that they act like a physical home. This may be achieved by a great power of concentration when, alone by ourselves, we follow rules such as are given in my books, The Way of Initiation and Initiation and its Results.³

But now, in order that we may have the right ideas about the necessity of such a building, we must say that when we devote ourselves to our studies in our lodge work, we require not only that we as individuals shall produce the conditions for our concentration, but also that we shall be disturbed as little as possible by what is around us. As the human being consists not only of the physical organism but also of supersensible principles, and these are active and set up relations with our environment, it is necessary when we exert our physical thought, for us to support the efforts of our will for our etheric and astral bodies. This we can do by providing for our subconsciousness — that is, for our etheric and astral bodies — conditions which may best be set up when we are in occult surroundings.

For this reason such a building is a great benefit and becomes a necessity to us.

We must bear in mind that in a certain way the great truths are at the same time difficulties to a person, something which he must first learn to bear, something which at first may be shocking, which may upset him, because it agrees so little with his everyday life. Therefore, in order to come to the higher truths in as favourable a way as possible it is necessary to provide a building such as this so that the spiritual knowledge which awaits us may indeed come into us — and in our age the Masters of Wisdom and of Harmony of Feeling are able to give us a great deal.

Since the end of the 19th century many doors have opened to the spiritual world, and many streams of spiritual life may be led into us. It may be said that just in the immediate future, towards which humanity is now going, the conditions are becoming more and more favourable for the influx of important spiritual knowledge which can enable us to progress quickly in every respect; but in order to clear away the hindrances which come through people — after they have just slipped out of materialism — not yet being sufficiently mature to receive the great truths, we must develop within ourselves a frame of mind which brings less danger of disturbance. This can be accomplished by means of suitable surroundings; and everywhere where from our standpoint just at this time care should be taken to see all is in order, there everything will really be observed which the occult point of view demands. It is natural that the needs and wishes of one who comes into Anthroposophy should go very far to one side or another, and because on the other hand there cannot be the necessary insight, it is difficult to be obliged to deny things which the other considers right. Very often it is not perceived that the denial is for the other’s welfare, and it is especially the case that some can only await the answer to one question or another with very great difficulty.

Because all knowledge is exoteric, one has grown so accustomed to expect that fundamentally everything that a person may ask can always be answered; but to this belongs two things at least. One is that the person who wants the answer should be in the position to understand it, that is to say, that through his whole anthroposophical or theosophical development he had progressed far enough to understand the answer. Abstract reasons prompt him to put the question much earlier than it is possible for him to understand the answer which is given from occult worlds. The other is that the one asked knows the answer. In regard to certain spiritual knowledge we are just at the stage when a question may be very premature, not only for individuals but for our whole age, although the answer will doubtless be given to us in the right form in the course of time. For this reason I said in the course of lectures at Karlsruhe⁴ that an essential thing in occultism is: to be able to wait. Particularly one who perhaps has undergone a certain development must be able to do this, and most of all one who has reached a certain height of occult development. When a person considers it extremely important to answer a question at a certain time, the intellect, which is always ready to answer, may very easily conjure up an answer, even from the feeling of a trained occultist. This answer is not only false or insufficient, but it takes away for a long time the possibility of a coming to the right answer at all, hence it is necessary to be able to wait until one is favoured with an answer from the spiritual world.

This applies not only to the highest questions, but also to more elementary ones. Even to the trained occultist there is a great temptation to produce the answer out of himself, but then he will be liable to fall into error. These two pictures [in our building here in Stuttgart] are an example. Our friend Stockmeyer has said for a long time that he wishes to finish them. The answer concerning the idea was promised him as soon as it was possible. That went on for a long time. To the despair of the architect the pictures were only finished very late indeed. Where did the fault lie? It was because the answer which was necessary as a kind of occult sketch for these pictures could only be given very late. One had to wait until the intuition came. These ideas might very easily be thought out, but then they would be worthless. What is so necessary is that one should not only go the straight way, as it were, but one should also have the resignation not to excogitate something; only to exercise the intellect upon occult truths when they are there, but not in order to find them. For this purpose the intellect must be absolutely laid aside. When occult truths are there they must then be taken up and established by the intellect, it must give them a logical character. One must make a practice of this if one wishes to progress; just as when one uses details which may perhaps be elementary in order to fit them into a whole. Then what will happen if in Munich we wish to build a great hall and at the right time we have not the idea which is to be embodied? We are Anthroposophists and know that karma works not only in individual beings, but in all connections, and when we have this faith we know that when a thing is necessary it can let us wait, but it will come, and indeed at the right time. We cannot judge when the right time is, for this we need confidence in the future; if it does not come, then it is not the right thing for us. This is not fatalism, for such a faith does not prevent us from making every effort, but it directs these efforts into the right lines. We make no false attempts with our intellect, but prepare ourselves for the moment when we shall be favoured. Instead of worrying oneself in front of a sheet of paper it is better to sink into prayerful meditation and ask of karma that this moment of intuition may come.

With this is also connected what might be called the right view of the Rosicrucian principle. If one who is acquainted with the Rosicrucian Temple⁵ in a pedantic, external manner were to come into this building, and if he were to remember the rules taught him from old traditions, he would say: “You have done it all wrong, that is not Rosicrucian.” We should have to reply: That which you demand we do not wish, and could not wish it, for Rosicrucianism does not mean to carry on certain truths throughout the centuries, but it means to develop the sense for what each age can give to man from the spiritual world. That which in the l4th century might perhaps be wrong is right in our age, and in our age it must be done in this way, for our relation to the spiritual powers around us requires exactly this form. This building, therefore, is not constructed after an old pattern, but it is built in accordance with the requirements of our age.

For what is the demand made of us by the spiritual powers? I give hardly a single lecture without using the word ‘theosophical’, as this is linguistically possible, although it is not grammatically correct. Perhaps many would find our address, “My dear theosophical friends,” blameworthy.⁶ This word is purposely used because the heart of our mission may be characterised by this word. Theosophy, or Anthroposophy is something which has always existed in the world and has been cultivated in all ages in the way in which humanity had to cultivate it according to its requirements — at one time in wider circles and at another in smaller ones, according to the peculiarities of the several ages. It is something which — after all the preceding developments have taken place — may now be given in such a form that, within certain limits, it can enter into each human I, into every feeling and every stage of intellectual maturity.

Today there need be no one who, if he has the goodwill, may not receive Theosophy or Anthroposophy. For this reason it is on the one hand something external and on the other a special task of our age. From this standpoint we must consider ourselves as the vehicles of the world-movement which must be described as the theosophical or anthroposophical movement.

That within this movement, according to the capacities of the individuals, the most varied shades may be found, should be self-evident, and this has been the case in our movement in every age. When Theosophy becomes conviction it provides the ground upon which the most varied knowledge may blossom forth, but they have to be obtained on the paths of actual truth. Among those who understand the heart of occultism it is always the case that they cannot disturb one another; it is impossible for persons to disturb one another who are engaged in occult practice and through proceeding from different starting-points arrive at other formulations. That is a strict law. The occultist may not fight when he sees that other occultists have correct starting-points and are striving rightly, even if he finds their formulation clumsy. The fact that various occultists formulate what they have to say in different ways may depend upon the various starting-points, and according to how they consider it necessary to bring this or that from the higher worlds.

It is different when it becomes evident that other movements are not on the same level, when they simply set to work with more elementary conditions and then assert that this is the final truth. Not to recognise a higher standpoint is wrong. If someone were to say that Christ — whose nature we have tried for years in our spiritual movement to render more and more plain — can incarnate more than once upon the earth in a fleshly body — upon what would this assertion rest? From what you have heard and will still hear you will clearly understand that there is a Being Who works in such a way that He could sojourn but once in a physical body for three years, and cannot come again and again in a physical body. This is a truth which has always been emphasised by Rosicrucianism; and it was also clearly shown in the Mysteries. One who does not know this may arrive at an incorrect formulation from a knowledge which does not extend so far into these regions; incorrect because it uses the name Christ.

On the other hand it is possible to say: Why does the other speak differently? He speaks differently because he is not thinking at all of what we have here called Christ. He designates someone else as Christ, of whom perhaps might be said what he says, but it is not the one who is spoken of in this movement, because it is the unconditional necessity of our age — as the requirements of the Masters of Wisdom and Harmony of Feeling — that we should speak of this high Being whom we call Christ. And when we read the Gospels we may recognise and identify Him with the One who for 2,000 years has been thus described. This is an historical right, not an absolute one, of course! Although the knowledge of Him has been very imperfect for 2,000 years, He has been thus described, and we do the same for historical reasons. On this account this name ought not to be used for other beings. This is something which has always been emphasised and which today can really be quite easily understood by anyone.

It is, however, interesting to notice how difficult for some to understand this matter clearly, but those who from the very beginning have no particular inclination to enter into more detailed explanations will have felt it uncomfortable that we do not by any means make the matter concerning Christ so easy. This one could see again in Karlsruhe (when the preceding course of lectures on the subject of ‘Jesus to Christ’ was given). What was said there was only possible because of everything else which had preceded it. Thus at the present time it is not yet very easy to arrive at the Christ principle, but it is a necessity which is laid upon us by the leaders of the spiritual movement.

It is very remarkable that there has been a certain difficulty in introducing the special investigations of Rosicrucianism into the theosophical movement, and even the position of this movement is very misunderstood here; exactly in how far does this movement merit the name of a Rosicrucian movement? But I shall never say: “My Rosicrucian friends!” You may gather from this that it was never correct to consider what belongs to Rosicrucianism as something exclusive. If someone outside our movement were to say that we were Rosicrucians, that would not only be a misunderstanding, but it would be a somewhat defamatory designation for our movement. This always reminds me of a man in the market place who once said that so and so was a phlegmatic, and a woman said, “Oh, is that what he was? But I know he is a butcher!” It is somewhat similar when in order to distinguish us someone calls us Rosicrucians. This has no meaning. Rosicrucianism has flowed into our movement, it is assimilated and to a certain extent practised. How difficult it is to let this current flow in you may see in the remarkable fate of the personality to whom all we in this movement look up with great respect: Helena Petrovna Blavatsky. If you follow her development from Isis Unveiled to The Secret Doctrine you will see that a great amount of Rosicrucian knowledge has streamed into Isis Unveiled. For reasons which cannot now be discovered she then swerved to one side in The Secret Doctrine, which did not further develop what could have been carried further, but on the contrary took a side path. But how strongly these Rosicrucian principles acted we may see in the third volume of The Secret Doctrine. There one finds the greatest truths next to really impossible things. One who is able to discriminate may connect this with what is being revealed today.

Thus it has come about that Helena Petrovna Blavatsky has very clearly said that it must never be thought that Christ Who is to come again will reappear in a fleshly body, but that the coming Christ must only be understood as an event which a person experiences through a connection with the spiritual world. We take the same ground that she did in this respect, when in a clearer way than was possible to her, we work out what she commenced. When she turns with such severity against the idea that Christ could incarnate again in the flesh it is not easy when the reproach is made against our movement that her most important knowledge, which sometimes is not well formulated, is violated. There is continuity, and there is no need to make this breach with the original starting-point, by coming into conflict with what concerns the coming of Christ. Although we always set what is true in place of what is false, in many things we may go back to the original statements of Helena Petrovna Blavatsky. And we may know that in the form in which she now lives she wished that the continuity should be developed, which should not be an adhesion to the formulas but a working in the spirit which existed at that time. It was not a spirit of standing still, and least of all a spirit of retrogression! We work in the best way when we bring out that which was still closed to Helena Petrovna Blavatsky. The doors have opened in quite a different way, especially since 1899.

Without taking into account anything that has gone before, we try to penetrate into the meaning and importance of the Christ Principle. This leads us naturally to join on to the occult investigations which have been made with special care in Rosicrucian circles since the l3th century.

But those who have heard my various courses and lectures will know that we are not now teaching the Rosicrucianism of the 13th century. We are Rosicrucians of the 20th century! It is our task to join on to the principles which Rosicrucianism possessed, to utilise them in theosophical progress. We cannot do otherwise than recognise that what has thus been found is something higher in every way than anything else in the world with respect to the Christ Principle. We must, however, admit that on account of the energy with which this principle has been worked out the teachings regarding Karma and Reincarnation passed into the background. Therefore we are dealing not with the spirit of an historical epoch, nor with the spirit of Rosicrucianism, but with the Spirit of Truth. It is quite indifferent to us where one faith or another appears, we have to deal with the Spirit of Truth, and on this account all division into categories and forms must always give rise to misunderstandings in our movement; we desire only to serve the Truth, as was described with respect to our small festival. We wish to represent not what this or that age has said, but what comes directly from the spiritual world. That which can be recognised by the human intellect is our concern; in accordance with this we shall lead our movement further, and with respect to all other creeds we may call ourselves theosophists, according to the motto of our movement: No religion is higher than Truth. In this respect we take the most theosophic ground.

For this reason we surround ourselves not with a building modelled according to Rosicrucian pattern but with one that is planned for a particular object. For example, the size of the space is the external condition for this. Perhaps we should have been quite unable to add one thing or another if the space had been larger or smaller. No scheme is of any value, but we have to wait for what comes to us as a gift from spiritual worlds. In other words, our whole effort is to understand something that sounds so simple: To open our hearts to the spiritual world which is always around us, to understand words such as those which Christ said: “I am with you always, even to the end of the world.” If someone were to examine the work we have done in past years he will not be able to say that we present Christianity in a way it was thought in the early centuries. We desire to acquire the spirit which wishes to come close to Christ as He is today; and only when we have recognised that this Christ is a living One we shall illuminate what took place in former times.

In the same way we consider Buddha as a living One, who follows his principle that Buddha does not return any more in the flesh. If someone were to affirm this, we should have to reply that he understands nothing about Buddhism, for one who has risen from Bodhisattva to Buddha does not return. For Buddha lives, and he works in our movement and illuminates what he accomplished 2,500 years ago by what he does today.

Just as only he may speak of Buddha who knows him, so also only he who knows Christ may speak about Him. Therefore if someone says that a very important being will come in a fleshly body, that may be correct, but he has nothing to do with Christ. The fact is that if a person enters deeply into the nature of Christ he comes to understand that the other is making a mistake; it can never be the reverse. This brings difficulties, but it must be borne in mind — especially by one who has occasion to practise theosophical principles in the true sense — that one should exercise tolerance even towards error. But to exercise tolerance means, not to acknowledge error but to deal with it with love, otherwise it would be a sin against the Holy Spirit. We must exercise tolerance precisely because in regard to Christ we represent the Rosicrucian principle.

We can wait until opposition comes, exactly concerning Christ. If you understand this word, the principle of the most real search for truth and on the other hand real tolerance, you will be able to answer for yourselves the question: In what sense are we Theosophists and in what sense are we Rosicrucians?

• 1. The Branch-House in Stuttgart; the first building specially erected and designed for anthroposophical work; opened by Rudolf Steiner in October, 1911.
• 2. Special Building for Anthroposophy at Stuttgart from an Occult Point of View, Stuttgart, 15 October 1911
• 3. The Way of Initiation is an early version of the first half of the book entitled Knowledge of the Higher Worlds and Its Attainment. The book Initiation and Its Results corresponds to the second half of Knowledge of the Higher Worlds and Its Attainment.
• 4. Course of lectures From Jesus to Christ, GA 131
• 5. See description of the Temple of the Holy Grail in The Younger Titurel by Albrecht von Scharfenberg, about 1270 AD.
• 6. This lecture was given prior to the exclusion of the German Section from the Theosophical Society. Since then Dr. Steiner’s movement has continued as the Anthroposophical Society.

We have placed the Apocalypticer's concluding perspective before our souls. If we understand it correctly we see that this last perspective is described in a way which is in complete agreement with everything one can say about evolution from the viewpoint of the most exact spiritual science. We saw that the building of cultural phenomena and of the human body changed from a below upwards mode to an above downwards mode, and that this is reflected in the Apocalypse. At the end of the last lecture I pointed out that if one honestly tries to understand the Apocalypse one must become acquainted with the things which can be said about world evolution from the viewpoint of spiritual research.

However, we see that a meaning is incorporated in certain places in the Apocalypse which one will find one can only grasp if one goes into the knowledge of the human being which is found in Anthroposophy. This is definitely the case when one has to do with a revelation which is based on experiences of the spiritual world. Of course one has to be able to see that the images which are presented in the Apocalypse are revelations from the spiritual world. Here one will disregard the question as to whether the Apocalypticer would really have been able to present all of the details which we rediscover in his work in an intellectualistic way, that is, whether he understood them to that extent. For that is not important at all. The only important thing is whether he is a real seer. He looks into the things in the spiritual world, but it's not he who makes them true, they are true through their own content, and they have this content and reveal it through themselves and not through him. So that even outer, rationalistic experts could come and could prove: The one who gave us the Apocalypse had this or that amount of education, and one cannot really expect him to have had these wide perspectives of things through his own soul. I don't want to discuss whether the writer of the Apocalypse had them here; I: just want to point out that this is not important. We must place the Apocalypticer's pictures which are revelations of the spiritual world before; our soul and we must let their content work upon us.

Now we have the magnificent concluding picture of the new Jerusalem before us, which has the experiential backgrounds of which I spoke. We will do well to go backwards from this picture a little bit. Here we have the important passage where another magnificent picture appears before our soul, namely, that magnificent picture where the Apocalypticer sees what he calls heaven open, and where a power approaches him on a white horse of whom he speaks in such a way that we become aware: he doesn't just have the trichotomy or the threefoldedness of the Godhead in his intellectuality—he has it in his whole I human being. He speaks in such a way that he is really still aware with his whole soul that one has the three forms of the one God before one, and that if one places oneself outside of the physical world one can alternately speak of the one or the other of them, because they intermingle.

Of course, when they're put into the physical World one gets a picture of three persons, so that one has to distinguish between the Father God who underlies all facts of nature, including the ones which work into human nature, the Son God who has to do with everything which leads to freedom in the soul's experience and the Spirit God who lives in a spiritual, cosmic order which is far away from nature and foreign to nature. This is how sharply contoured the three persons of the Godhead appear here upon the physical plane.

Now when man crosses the threshold to the spiritual world, he gets into the condition which I described in my book How Does One Attain Knowledge of Higher Worlds? where he splits up into three beings, so that thinking, feeling and willing become somewhat independent. However, if we go to higher worlds from the physical plane we see the triune Godhead approaching us ever more as a unity. And so of course, the Apocalypse must be read in this light. One shouldn't distinguish between the Father God, the Son God and the Spirit God as directly as one would do this in the physical world.

Thus the one who approaches us on a white horse in that magnificent Imagination is none other than the unified God. And in the form in which he is' the Son of God, we have to see Him more in the free soul development of human beings on earth. But now something very strange occurs, which is what makes the picture that comes before the concluding one seem very magnificent. It is quite natural and a matter of course that John sees heaven open—I will call the one who wrote the Apocalypse John—for the new thing which is descending from the spiritual world. The whole culture must be arranged in such a way that it comes down from the spiritual world to the physical world. Now if we place this before our soul correctly, then of course the condition which must precede this is that John looks into the spiritual world. But this means: heaven is opened for him. However, he wants to indicate a future situation which will exist for human beings. He's actually saying nothing less than the following.

Before that state of affairs will arise on earth where the spiritual ingredients for the building up of the new Jerusalem will sink down from the spiritual world and will be received by men—just as men previously raised material ingredients from the earth upwards—before this state will come, before men become aware that they must build from above downwards—as I said recently, he considers this state to be a real one—before this will come, the state of affairs where man is mainly engaged with his will will be replaced by another one where he is only concerned with knowledge and where he has to look into the spiritual world: heaven is opened. The one who underlies the beings of the world in a radiating and creative and sanctifying way appears. And now the significant reason which makes the picture so magnificent: He has a name written on him which is known to no one besides himself. That is very significant. When one comes to the place in the Apocalypse where this is written, one sees another clear sign that one is dealing with one of the greatest spiritual revelations. The name which is given to the ego varies considerably in various languages, but I have pointed to the spiritually trivial fact that the name for the ego can never be spoken by someone in such a way that it can be given to someone else. I cannot say I to someone else; this distinguishes the name of the self from all other names. They are given to objects, to either inner or outer objects. But when I say “I” in any language I can only say it to myself; I can only say it to another person if I have slipped into him—which must be a real spiritual process; but there is no need to speak about that now.

Now let's imagine the things which describe the self in various languages the self was not given a name in the older languages; it was in the verb. The ego was not a direct designation. One described oneself through what one did in a kind of demonstrative way, but no name for the self-existed. This name for the self of one's human being only began to be used later; it's a significant symbolic fact that the German word for I—“ich”—contains the initials of Jesus Christ. But now let's think of an enhancement of this fact that we have a name in our languages which every one can only say in connection with himself. The enhancement consists in what is now said in the Apocalypse—that He who comes down from the supersensible world has a name written on Himself where He not only is the only one who can use it to refer to Himself, but where He is the only one who understands it; no one else understands it.

Now just think that this Revealer approaches John showing him in a prophetic picture what will later occur for humanity. There He comes down in future times the one who has the name which He alone understands. What can all of this really mean? If one honestly wants to understand it, the whole thing seems to be meaningless at first. Why does He come, the one who is to bring the salvation of the world, the justice of the world all of this is written in the Apocalypse—, “who shall make faith and knowledge true;” not what the (King James version has: “was called Faithful and True”) but “who shall make faith and knowledge true.” This is really like hide-and-seek, for if He has an inscribed name which only He understands, what is that supposed to mean? It makes us ask a question which goes deeper. What is this really all about?

Imagine it quite vividly: He has a name which only He understands. How can we relate to this name? It should really acquire a significance for us; this name should really be able to live in us. How can this occur? It can occur if the being who understands this name becomes united with us and enters our own self, then this being in us will understand the name and we will understand it also. We will have Him in us and we will continually have the awareness of Christ in us. He is the only one who understands the things, which are connected with His being; but He understands them in us, and the Christ-insight of the Christ being in us gives the light which is rayed out in us, because He becomes this light in us, in our own being. It will be an insight which dwells in men.

You see, something has occurred thereby. The first thing which has occurred is an intended, necessary consequence of the Mystery of Golgotha. This being who went through the Mystery of Golgotha, this being who must enter us, so that we comprehend the world with his understanding and not with our understanding, this being wears a garment which is sprinkled with blood, the blood of Golgotha. And we take in this picture. However, John the Apocalypticer tells us that this garment which is sprinkled with the blood of Golgotha has a name. This is not the same name he was talking about before; this is the name of the garment which is sprinkled with blood. And the name of this vesture dipped in blood is the logos of God, the Logos, God, the word of God. Thus the one who should live in us and should give the light in us through his own understanding fills us with the word of God.

The pagans read the word of God in natural phenomena. They had to receive it through outer manifestations. Christians must receive the word of God or the Creative word by taking the Christ into themselves. The time will come when all human beings who take Christianity into their souls in an honest way will know through the course of the events that the word of God is with Christ, and that this word of God has its seed in the understanding of the Mystery of Golgotha and of the garment which is sprinkled with blood. Thus we have the Christ, enclosed in the Mystery of Golgotha in the language of the Apocalypticer.

However, a third thing appears. Christ in three forms: firstly, through himself, secondly through his garment, and thirdly through the deeds which he does for men on earth. Here again a condition is described which must set in, and which will of course not begin in such a way that one can point to a particular year but Christian development must move in that direction.

The third thing that our attention is drawn to is the sword with which he works, which is the sword of his will, the sword of his deeds, the sword of what he has done among human beings upon earth by living in them. But what he's doing now, what he does in his comings and goings, as it were, bears the third name: King of all Kings, Lord of all Lords. That is the third form. What is the nature of a king or the nature of a lord? If we go into the real inner meaning of the Latin word dominus, we arrive at what linguistic usage indicates in this case, quite independently of spiritual investigation: A lord is someone who is designated to give guidance to some other being on earth or in the whole world. 3ut how long will external lords be necessary upon earth? How long will one need the commands of outer lords upon earth and even the commands of external spiritual lords above the earth? Until that point in time when Christ lives in men with the name which only he understands. Then everyone will be able to follow Christ in his own being and in his own soul. Then everyone will try to realize in himself what man's will wants to realize out of inner love. Then the Lord of lords and King of kings will live in each individual.

Seen from an inner spiritual viewpoint, this is really the time in which we're living now. The fact that we're living in it is concealed by the fact that men are continuing to live in their old ruts, and they're really denying this indwelling of the Christ as much as possible, denying it as much as possible, they're denying it as much as possible in all fields. One can certainly say that a great deal exists in a large number of people today which is preparing in the right way for the etheric appearance of the Christ, who is a being that came down from the divine world. But men must prepare themselves by finding the source of their actions and deeds in themselves.

Therewith we really touch upon a difficulty with the present-day activities of priests out of the spirit of the Apocalypse. A priest should guide and direct in a certain sense. A priest has the faithful before him, and his priestly dignity presupposes that he, the leader, is a king over the ones he is to lead' in a certain way. He is the giver of the sacraments; he is the minister. On the other hand, we live in a time where men have the potential to take in the Christ to such an extent that they can become their own leaders ever more.

You see, this is the situation which the one who wants to become a priest gets into today. And yet the ordination of priests is fully justified today, completely justified. It's fully justified because although men really do bear something in them as an essence, it must be brought out of them, it must really be brought out of them. And one really needs everything which lies behind priestly dignity in order to bring out what is in human beings today. For we live in a time which really requires something quite definite. The outer world cannot really completely confront what is required here. For the outer world must deal with men insofar as they are bearers of a physical body. But it would be a terrible prospect if men—the way they are through our civilization, which hasn't arrived at the standpoint on which man is standing—would live over into the next earth life in this form.

We know that one tries to avoid this in the Anthroposophical sphere. Human souls are offered something whereby they are supposed to live over into the next incarnation with the things men are supposed to take in today. But this must become universally human. Men must develop an ego or an individuality with which they can live over into the next incarnation. This is only possible if what is given through the grace of sacrifice, through the grace of a sacrament is added to men's experiences. This doesn't separate men from their karma but it does separate them from what is clinging to them in a very intensive way today. Human beings are walking around with masks on. They're going around masked. And it can lead to tragic conflicts if the need arises at some point to really see human beings and their individualities.

Such a tragic conflict arises with Hölderlin, who once said: when he looks around in the world he sees Germans, Frenchmen, Turks and Englishmen, but no human beings, young, mature and old people but no human beings. And he enumerates more types. Men bear an extra-human stamp, as it were.

We need a priestly activity today which speaks to human beings as human beings and which cultivates humanity. Of course none of the present-day confessions can really do this. Just consider how dependent the confessions are. The community for Christian renewal must get beyond the dependency of these confessions. It must do this through its own destiny. No one who grows out of Anthroposophy is in the same position that priests are. That is a quite special position. And it is perhaps quite right to point to what is present here out of the spirit of the Apocalypse. Just consider that in every other activity which grows out of Anthroposophy today, people become dependent upon the outer world in some way through the powers that be.

If someone becomes a teacher out of Anthroposophy, one can see the tremendous obstacles which are put in their way. People deceive themselves about this. But we won't get a second Waldorf school, because they will set up the condition everywhere that all the teachers one hires must be approved by the state in some way. The Waldorf School could only come into existence because we started at a time when no such school law existed in Württemberg yet.

Take doctors: we cannot make doctors out of people in the Anthroposophical movement from scratch without further ado. To be sure, we could make doctors. But they wouldn't be recognized, they would not be accredited. To some extent we even have this difficulty in artistic things. It won't be very long before things will tend in the direction of what is happening in Russia, and people will demand a stamp from the state. A priest who grows out of the Anthroposophical Society is the only one who can strip everything off, as it were. It's all right if he learned something, but he throws off everything in his work. He's really laying the first foundation stone of the new Jerusalem in the theology which he supports; for he represents a theology which doesn't have to be recognized by anyone besides himself. That is the important thing.

You are the only ones who are in this position. You should also feel that you are in this position, and you will feel the specific quality of your priestly dignity. If one is dealing with a country like Russia they can drive out certain kinds of priests, but people in such a country will never do anything which would make it necessary for priests to get an official stamp of approval. For one will either leave priests the way they are, or one will not want them, which has already been realized in Russia as far as the tendency goes. Thus priests are the first ones who will be able to feel the approach of the new Jerusalem, the approach of the indwelling Christ, the Christ who becomes the King of Kings, the Lord of Lords.

Hence it is very good for a priest to dwell on this passage \in the Apocalypse, to dwell on it with an ardent heart and to develop the entire enthusiasm of his priestly soul which he should develop at this place in the Apocalypse. For the Apocalypse should not be a teaching; the Apocalypse should be life which works in each of our souls. We should feel that we are united with the Apocalypse. We should be able to place what we're working and living with into the stream of prophetic things in the Apocalypse. Here we see ourselves gathered around John the Apocalypticer, who has the vision Heaven has been opened, the one who only understands his name himself comes, the one whose garment bears the name the “word of God,” the one who is King of Kings and Lord of Lords—he comes. The priesthood which gathers around the John who sees this, the priesthood that unites itself with the cultic rite which has been drawn from the spiritual world, that raises up the transubstantiation in the sense of the Holy Spirit again, that has the new act of, consecration of man, the transformed old one which has taken the valid things from the old one, but which has taken on the form which flows out of the spiritual world today—this priesthood may gather around John the Apocalypticer, who looks up into the opened heaven.

For we are permitted to look at the inauguration which took placed in the room which the fire then took hold of—, we should look at it in the light which rays out here when heaven opens—the white horse comes out with the one who sits upon it and who only knows his name himself, who must be incorporated into us if this name is to mean something to us, and who has the other characteristics which are mentioned. This is how one should understand the Apocalypse, for the Apocalypse must be understood in a living way and not just with the top of one's head.

However, I would like to say that very deep wisdom is connected with the magnificent Imagination that appears here. Just consider what appears in close proximity to this significant vision, as it were. The reader is told how active the beast that I described is—the beast which induces human beings to go down from the spiritual to the physical, which the Apocalypticer divided into three stages; the beast whose one form is a materialistic way of living and not just a materialistic view of life. However, the Apocalypticer refers to two points in time. He tells us how the beast is overcome, and on the other hand he tells us that the adversary of mankind, the stronger adversary of mankind, is bound for a thousand years and is then released again for a short time. Thus we really have to do with two adversaries of the good principle, with the beast and with what is traditionally referred to as Satan.

Now the beast is overcome with respect to the outer physical world, in the sense that a spiritual world view can always be opposed to materialism. And Satan is chained at the present time in a certain way. But he will be released again. Satan is fettered, and anyone who sees through the important things in evolution knows that he is fettered. For if Satan was not chained at the present time and if everything which could really pour out the vials of wrath would appear—if Satan was not bound,—the connection between the materialistic way of living and the materialistic view of life which is present on earth today would show up in the outer world in a ghastly way. Then the people who proclaim materialism as a truth with the deepest inner cynicism today would arouse such a desire in the unbound Satan that one would see this extraction of the materialistic view and a materialistic way of living and their acquisition by Ahrimanic powers, one would see this as the most horrible and most terrible diseases.

If Satan was not bound one would not only have to speak of materialism as a view and a way of living, one would have to speak of materialism as the worst kind of a disease. Instead of this people go through the world with the cynicism and frivolity of materialism and even with religious materialism, and nothing happens to them. But the only reason nothing happens to them is because Satan is bound and the Godhead still makes it possible for one to come to spiritual things without succumbing to Satan. If Satan was here, many a teacher who is standing in some confession and is infected by materialism would be a terrible, gruesome sight for mankind. The idea which arises when one points to the possible disease of materialism, to the leprosy of materialism which would really be there if Satan were not bound, if one points to this, it certainly gives rise to a terrible mental image.

However, anyone who is aware of his spiritual responsibility towards knowledge today will not make use of such an idea within any other context than the context of the Apocalypse. I myself would not speak of the leprosy of materialism in any other context than in the one I'm speaking of it here, where I have to connect things with the Apocalypse and where the one who becomes familiar with the ideas of the Apocalypse has these gruesome pictures before him, which however definitely correspond to the real state of the spiritual affairs.

The Apocalypse should not only permeate, our life, it should also permeate our words. If we take in the Apocalypse it is not only an enlivening element in priests' work, it is something that, permits us to point to things which we otherwise point to in exoteric life. The Apocalypse should not only live with our ego, if we want to understand it, the Apocalypse also wants to speak in our words: and if you are real priests there will be some things which you will say to each other when you are in a room with other priests so that they will live in you and remain amongst yourselves. Then you will gain the strength to say the right words when you are standing before your faithful followers.

Priests are priests today because they are the first ones who may speak about the Apocalypse freely amongst themselves. This Apocalypse is a priestly thing, that is, it is a priests' book which is appended to the Gospels. You will become priests all the more, the more you find your way into the inner spirit of the Apocalypse. We will speak about this some more tomorrow.

The reflections which we are beginning today are intended to encourage all those who have found their way to anthroposophy to think about their current position. They will present an opportunity for contemplation, for self-reflection, through a characterization of the anthroposophical movement and its relationship to the Anthroposophical Society. And in this context may I begin by speaking about the people who are central to such self-reflection: yourselves. There are those who found this path through an inner necessity of the soul, of the heart; others, perhaps, found it through the search for knowledge. There are many, however, who entered the anthroposophical movement for more or less mundane reasons; but through a deepening of the soul they have subsequently perhaps encountered more within it than they at first anticipated. But there is something which all those who end up in the anthroposophical movement have in common. And that is that they are initially driven by their inner destiny, their karma, to leave the ordinary highway of civilization on which the majority of mankind at present progresses, to search for their own path.

Let us think for a moment about the conditions in which most people now grow up. They are born to parents who are French or German, Catholic or Protestant or Jewish, or who belong to some other faith, and may hold a variety of beliefs. But among parents is the almost unquestioned assumption, which remains unspoken and sometimes unthought, that their children will, of course, grow up like themselves. These kinds of feelings naturally engender a social ambience, indeed social pressures, which more or less consciously push children into the kind of life which has been mapped out by these more or less clearly defined beliefs. The life of a child then follows its natural course of education and schooling. And during this time parents once again have all kinds of beliefs which exert a decisive influence on their children's lives. The belief, for instance, that my son will, of course, enter the secure employment of the civil service, or that he will inherit the parental business, or that my daughter will marry the man next door. It simply lies in the nature of social circumstances that they are governed by impulses which arise in this way. People have no choice in the matter because that is the effect of the beliefs which govern life. It may not always be obvious to parents, but schooling and all the other circumstances of childhood and youth imprison the human being and determine his position in life. The institutions of state and religion make the adult.

If the majority of people were asked to explain how they got where they are today, they would not be able to do so, because there would be something unbearable about having to think deeply about such matters. This unbearable element tends to be driven underground into subconscious or unconscious areas of our soul life. At best, it will be dredged up by a psychiatrist when it behaves in a particularly recalcitrant manner down there in those unknown provinces of the soul. But mostly one's own personality, the Self, is simply not strong enough to assert itself against what one has grown into in this way.

Occasionally people have the urge to rebel when their situation as a trainee, or even following qualification, unexpectedly dawns on them. You might clench your fist in your pocket, or, if you are a woman, create a scene at home because of such disappointed life expectations. These are reactions against what people are forced to become. We also frequently seek to anaesthetize ourselves by concentrating on the pleasant things in life. We go to dances and follow this with a long lie-in, don't we? Time is then filled up in one way or another. Or someone might join a thoroughly patriotic party because his professional position demands that he belong to something which will reflect his values. We have already been enveloped by the state and our religion; now that must be supplemented by surrounding what one has unconsciously grown into with a sort of aura. Well, there is no need for me to go into further detail. That is roughly the way in which the people who move in the mainstream of life have grown into their existence.

But those who find it difficult to accept this end up on many possible and impossible byways. And anthroposophy is precisely one of these paths on which human beings are seeking to realize themselves; on which they want to live with such an understanding of themselves in a more conscious manner, to experience something which is under their control to a certain extent at least. Anthroposophists are for the most part people who do not walk along the highways of life. If we investigate further why that should be, we find that this is linked with the spiritual world.

Having relived the course of their lives in the spiritual world after death human beings enter a region where they become increasingly assimilated into the spiritual world, where their lives consist of working together with the beings of the higher hierarchies, where all their acts are related to this world of substantive spirit. But a time arrives when they begin to turn their attention to earth again. For a long time in advance of their birth, human beings unite on a soul level with the generations at the end of which stand the parents who give birth to them—not only as far back as their great-great-grandparents, but much further down the line of preceding generations. The majority of souls nowadays look down, as it were, to earth from the spiritual world and display a lively interest in what is happening to their ancestors. Such souls move in the mainstream of contemporary life.

In contrast, there are a number of souls, particularly at present, whose interest is concentrated less on worldly happenings as they approach a new life on earth than on the question of how they can develop maturity in the spiritual world. Their interest lies in the spiritual world right up to the moment before they find their way to earth. As a consequence, when they incarnate they arrive with a consciousness which has its origins in spiritual impulses. With their spiritual ambitions they outgrow their environment, and are thus predestined and prepared to go their own way.

Thus the souls who descend from pre-earthly to earthly existence can be divided into two groups. One group, to which the majority of people today still belong, comprises those souls who can make themselves remarkably at home on earth; who feel thoroughly comfortable in their warm nest, which so fascinated them long before they came down to earth, even if it does occasionally appear unpleasant—but that is only appearance, maya.

Other souls, who may pass patiently through childhood—appearance is not always the decisive thing—are less able to make themselves at home, are homeless souls, and grow beyond the warmth of the nest much more than they grow into it. This latter group includes those who are subsequently attracted to the anthroposophical movement. It is therefore clearly predetermined in a certain sense whether or not one is led to anthroposophy.

The things which are being sought by these souls on the byways of life, away from the major highways, manifest themselves in many ways. If the others did not find it so agreeable to take the well-trodden paths and did not put such obstacles in the way of homeless souls, the numbers of the latter would be much more obvious to their contemporaries. But it is widely apparent today how many souls have a hint of such homelessness about them.

The tendency to such homelessness could be anticipated: the rapidly growing evidence of a longing in homeless souls for an attitude to life which was not laid out in advance; a longing for the spirit in the chaos of contemporary spiritual life. In sketching an outline of this gradual development, you can find in it, if you reflect, a little something of what I would like to describe as the anthroposophical origins of each one of you.

By way of introduction today I will do no more than pick out in outline some characteristic features. If you look back at the last decades of the nineteenth century—we could take any number of fields, but let us take a very characteristic one the cult of Richard Wagner began to take a hold. It is certainly true that much of this cult consisted of a cultural flirtation with new ideas, sensationalism and so on. But all kinds of people gathered in Bayreuth. One could see people who thought of the long journey to Bayreuth as a kind of modern pilgrimage. But even among the less fashionable there were those who were also homeless souls.

Now the essential effect of Wagnerianism on people—I speak not only about the musical element but about the movement as a cultural phenomenon—was to offer them something which went beyond all the usual offerings of a materialistic age. This gave people a feeling that here there was a gateway to a more spiritual world, a world differing from their normal environment. What went on in Bayreuth led to a great longing for more profound spiritual aspirations.

It was, of course, difficult at first to understand Richard Wagner's characters and dramatic compositions. But many people felt that they were created from a source very different from the crude materialism of the time. And the homeless souls who were driven in this particular direction were prompted into all kinds of dark, instinctive intuitions through what I might call the suggestive power of Wagnerian drama and specifically through the way of life that it introduced into our culture. Indeed, it is true to say that subsequent interpretations by theosophists of Hamlet or other works of art are very strongly reminiscent of certain essays which were written by Hans von Wolzogen, who was not a theosophist but a trained Wagnerian, in the Bayreuther Blätter.¹

Thus one can say that Wagnerianism was the reason why many people, possessed of a homeless soul, became acquainted with a way of looking at the world which led away from crude materialism towards something spiritual; and all those who became part of such a current, not because of a superficial flirtation with the idea but because of an inner compulsion of the soul, wanted to develop their experience of a spiritual world because they felt this kind of inner longing. They were no longer concerned with the certain evidence which underpinned the materialistic world view. That was true irrespective of their position in life, whether they were lawyers or artists, cabinet ministers, officials, parliamentarians or whatever—even scientists.

As I said, such homeless souls can be found everywhere. But Wagnerianism provides a particularly characteristic example of the presence of very many such souls.

I then encountered several of those people, whose first spiritual taste had been the Wagnerian experience, in Vienna² in the late 1880s, in a group which consisted entirely of such homeless souls. People no longer really appreciate the way in which that homelessness was visible for anyone to see even then, because many of the things which at that time required a great deal of inner courage have today become commonplace.

For example, I do not believe that many people today could imagine the following. I was sitting in a circle of such homeless souls and all kinds of things had already been discussed. One person started to speak about Dostoevsky's Raskolnikov,³ and spoke in such a manner that the group felt as if struck by lightning. A new world opened up: it was like suddenly finding oneself on a new planet. That is how these souls felt.

In all these observations of life which I am recounting by way of an introduction to the history of the anthroposophical movement, I never lost my connection with the spiritual world. It was always there. I mention this because it is the background against which I speak: the spiritual world accepted as self-evident, and human beings on earth perceived as images of their real existence as spiritual beings within the spiritual world. I was involved and came to know these people, not in order to observe them, but because that is how things naturally developed.

Having passed through their Wagnerian metamorphosis, they were involved in a second process of change. For example, there were among them three good acquaintances, intimate friends even, of H. P. Blavatsky,⁴ who were keen theosophists in the way that theosophists were when Blavatsky was still alive. But a peculiar quality adhered to theosophists at that time, the period following the appearance of Blavatsky's Isis Unveiled and The Secret Doctrine. They all had a desire to be extremely esoteric. They had nothing but contempt for their normal life, including, of course, their work. The exoteric life, however, was not something which could be avoided. That was accepted. But everything else was esoteric. In that setting you spoke only to fellow initiates, only within a small group. And those who were not considered worthy of talking to about such things were seen as people with whom one spoke about the ordinary things in life. It was with the former that you discussed esoteric matters. They were people who, although they might be engineers from the moment they stepped into practical life, would avidly read a book like Sinnett's Esoteric Buddhism.⁵ These people possessed a certain urge—partly still as a result of their Wagnerian past—to explain from an esoteric perspective everything which existed as legend and myth.

But as more and more of these homeless souls began to appear at the end of the nineteenth century, it was possible to see how the most interesting among them were not those who studied the writings of Sinnett and Blavatsky—with at most a nine-tenths honest mind—but those who did not wish to read for themselves because there were still great inhibitions about such things at that time, and who listened with gaping mouths when those who had been reading expounded on these things. And it was most interesting to observe how the listeners, who were sometimes more honest than the narrators, grasped these ideas with their homeless souls as essential spiritual nourishment; spiritual nourishment which they were able to transform into something more honest through the greater honesty of their souls, despite the relative dishonesty with which it was being presented to them. One could see in them the yearning to hear something completely different from what was offered in the ordinary mainstream of civilization. How they devoured what they heard! It was most interesting to observe how on the one hand the tentacles of mainstream life kept drawing people in, and how on the other they would appear at one of the meeting places—often a coffee house—and would listen with great yearning. The point is that the honest souls, the ones who had been subject to the vagaries of life, were there too.

The way in which souls unwilling to admit to their homelessness were unable to find their bearings was particularly evident towards the latter part of the nineteenth century. A person might, for instance, listen with profound interest to an explanation of the physical, etheric and astral bodies, kama manas, manas, buddhi and so on. At the same time he was obliged to write the article his newspaper expected, including all the usual goodies. It really became clear how difficult it was for some people to leave the mainstream of life. For there were several among them who behaved as if they wanted to slink away, and would prefer that no one knew where they had gone when they wished to attend what was most important and interesting to them in life. It was indeed interesting how spiritual life, spiritual activity, the yearning for a spiritual world began particularly to establish itself in European civilization.

Now you have to remember that circumstances in the late 1880s were really much more difficult than today. Even if it was less harmful, it was nevertheless more difficult then to admit to the existence of a spiritual world, because the physical world of the senses with all its magnificent laws was proven of course! There was no way of getting round that! All the proofs were there in the physics laboratories and the hospitals; all the evidence declared in favour of a world for which there was proof. But the world which could be proven was so unsatisfactory for many homeless souls, was useless to the inner soul, to such an extent that many crept away from it. And at the same time as this great contemporary culture was on offer to them by the sackful—no, by the ton, in giant quantities—they took what nips they could from what has to be seen as the flow of the spiritual world into modern civilization. It was not at all easy to speak about the spiritual world; a suitable point of entry had to be found.

If I may once again introduce a personal note. I had to find a suitable opportunity on which to build. One could not simply crash in on our civilization with the spiritual world. Especially in the late 1880s, I linked the points I had to make about the spiritual world, about its more intimate aspects, in many places with Goethe's Fairy Tale of the Green Snake and the Beautiful Lily.⁶ If one used something which had been created by no less a person than Goethe, and when it was as obvious as it is in the Fairy Tale that spiritual impulses had flowed into it, that was a suitable basis. I certainly could not use what was then being peddled as theosophy, what had been garnered from Blavatsky, from Sinnett's Esoteric Buddhism and similar books by a group of people who were undeniably hard-working. For someone who wanted to preserve his scientifically schooled thinking in the spiritual world this was simply impossible.

Neither was it easy in another respect. Why? Well, Sinnett's Esoteric Buddhism was soon recognized as the work of a spiritual dilettante, a compendium of old, badly understood esoteric bits and pieces. But it was less easy to find access to a phenomenon of the period such as Blavatsky's The Secret Doctrine. For this work did at least reveal in many places that much of its content had its origins in real, powerful impulses from the spiritual world. The book expressed a large number of ancient truths which had been gained through atavistic clairvoyance in distant ages of mankind. People thus encountered in the outside world, not from within themselves, something which could be described as an uncovering of a tremendous wealth of wisdom which mankind had once possessed as something exceptionally illuminating. This was interspersed with unbelievable passages which never ceased to amaze, because the book is a sloppy and dilettantish piece of work as regards any sort of methodology, and includes superstitious nonsense and much more. In short, Blavatsky's Secret Doctrine is a peculiar book: great truths side by side with terrible rubbish. One might almost say that it sums up very well the spiritual phenomena to which those who developed into the homeless souls of the modern age were subjected.

In the following period in Weimar⁷ I was, of course, occupied intensively with other things, although even then there were numerous opportunities to observe such searching souls. For particularly during this time all kinds of people came to the town to visit the Goethe and Schiller archive. It was possible to become acquainted with the good and bad sides of their souls in a remarkable way. I got to know some strange people, as well as those who were highly cultivated, refined and distinguished. My description of meeting Herman Grimm,⁸ for instance, appeared recently in Das Goetheanum.⁹ One had a better understanding of Weimar when Herman Grimm was there.

We need only think of his novel Unütberwindliche Mächte¹⁰ to see how Grimm also exhibited a strong drive for spiritual matters. If you read the end of his novel you can see how the spiritual world intermingles with the physical through the soul of a dying person. It is very moving, very magnificent. I have spoken about this in previous lectures.¹¹

Of course some strange people also passed through Weimar. There was a Russian state councillor, for example. No one could discover quite what he was looking for: it was something or other in the second part of Goethe's Faust. Exactly how he hoped to achieve that through the Goethe archive was impossible to elicit. It was also hard to know what to do to help him. In the end he was simply left to continue his search. Next to him was a very intelligent American, who loved to sit on the floor with his legs crossed—a very peculiar sight. It was possible to see such cameos of contemporary life in their most real form.

When subsequently I went to Berlin, destiny once again introduced me to a group of homeless souls, and I became involved to such an extent that this group asked me to hold the lectures which have now been published in my Eleven European Mystics.¹² They were people who found their way into the Theosophical Society at a somewhat later date than my Viennese acquaintances. Only a few of them studied Blavatsky's Secret Doctrine. But these people were well-versed in what Blavatsky's successor, Annie Besant,¹³ proclaimed as the theosophical ideas of the time.

So I found myself once again in a similar situation to the one in Vienna in the late 1880s, in which it was possible to observe such homeless souls. And anthroposophy at first grew up, one might say, together with—not in, but together with—homeless souls who had initially sought a new home in theosophy.

Tomorrow I will try to lead you further in this process of self-reflection which we have hardly begun today.

• 1. Bayreuther Blatter: official organ of the Wagner Association, founded in 1878.
• 2. cf. Rudolf Steiner. The Course of My Life. Translated by O. D. Wannamaker. Anthroposophic Press, New York, 1970. Also Briefe I. (Dornach, 1955).
• 3. Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky, 1821–1881, leading Russian novelist. cf. also lecture of 13 February 1915 in GA 174b. Rudolf Steiner speaks in some detail about Dostoevsky's book The Brothers Karamazov in the lecture of 13 February 1916 in GA 167; typescript (C42) in Rudolf Steiner House library, London.
• 4. Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, 1831–1891. Her main works are Isis Unveiled and The Secret Doctrine. Together with Col. H. S. Olcott, Blavatsky founded the Theosophical Society on 17 November 1875 in New York, which soon thereafter moved its headquarters to India.
• 5. Alfred Percy Sinnett, 1840–1921. Esoteric Buddhism
• 6. J. W. von Goethe. Fairy-tale of the Green Snake and the Beautiful Lily. Floris Books, Edinburgh, 1979. cf. Rudolf Steiner, Goethes Geistesart in ihrer Offenbarung durch seinen Faust und durch das Marchen von der Schlange und der Lilie (1918), GA 22. Also The Course of My Life, The Course of My Life, Chapter XXX.
• 7. From 1890 to 1896/7 Rudolf Steiner was employed at the Goethe-Schiller Archive to edit Goethe's scientific writings within the Weimar edition of Goethe's works. cf. Rudolf Steiner. The Course of My Life. Chapters XIII-XXIII. The Course of My Life, Chapter XIII–Chapter XXIII. Also Briefe I, idem.
• 8. Hermann Grimm, 1828–1901. cf. The Course of My Life, p.150ff.
• 9. The article referred to is “Eine vielleicht zeitgemsse persnliche Erinnerung” in the periodical Das Goetheanum, Vol. 2, no. 43 of 3 June 1923. Reproduced in GA 36.
• 10. Herman Grimm. Unüberruindliche Machte. Berlin 1867.
• 11. In detail on 16 January 1913 in GA 62 (not translated). Also on 6 February 1915 in GA 161; typescript (Z140) in Rudolf Steiner House library, London.
• 12. In the winter of 1900/1901, Rudolf Steiner delivered 27 evening lectures in the Theosophical Library of Count and Countess Brockdorff. They were published as a collection in 1901 (GA 7) and appeared in English as Mysticism and Modern Thought. Revised edition: Eleven European Mystics. Translated by Karl Zimmer. Rudolf Steiner Publications, New York, 1971. cf. also Chapter XXX.
• 13. Annie Besant, 1847–1933. Was elected in May 1907 to succeed H. S. Olcott as President of the Theosophical Society.