The Rudolf Steiner Archive

From the reflections that were made here before my departure, and even from the, I would like to say, basic text of the public lectures, it can be seen that the science of initiation is, so to speak, “read” from the meaning of human developmental history, how one must intervene, absolutely must intervene in outer life, in all that is to be known and undertaken in outer life. If we are not able to fully absorb ourselves in this truth today, then we are asleep to the real demands of the time. This sleep with regard to the real demands of the time is indeed the case with most people of the present. We must be clear about the fact that the present poses questions to humanity that cannot be answered otherwise than from the science of initiation. It is not merely a matter of the fact that a Science of Initiation has always existed in the evolution of humanity, that at all times there have been initiates, as it were, into the events and the forces of existence. the point is that there are also such initiates today into the reasons for events and into the forces of existence; but only very few people have a proper idea of how this matter stands in more detail. And actually, people of the present would not want that at all. They actually shrink back from what can be called the necessity of the intervention of initiated science into the consciousness of the time. One can only get an idea of the seriousness of the situation by observing the differentiation of this matter throughout the civilized world. Because things are quite different in the East, they are quite different in the West. And anyone today who believes that they can get by with absolute judgments that are supposed to apply to everything is not living in reality, but is actually living in an abstract world. But it is necessary that things be looked at again and again from different points of view, so that at least some people may be impelled to realize the seriousness of the times.

If we first look at the West, preferably at the world of the English-speaking population, then today public opinion and what flows from public opinion for external events, for events within this English-speaking population is not merely dependent on what - I want to express myself quite decidedly today - the uninitiated dream and hold up as ideals in life. Particularly in the English-speaking population, there is a huge contrast between what appears in public consciousness as ideas and what those who are truly initiated into the events of world history mean behind the scenes of world history.

For if we take the general consciousness as it expresses itself in these parts of the civilized world, in the best endeavors, in the best public publications, we can say that there is a kind of ideal of a certain humanity, of humanity working towards a certain humanity, towards uniting human endeavors under the aspect of humanity, of the establishment of institutions that place themselves in the service of humanity. We want to disregard all the murky, lying waters that abound; we want to see what is best in public life that comes from the uninitiated. This is a certain striving to bring people together from the point of view of humanity. Behind this external striving stands the knowledge of the initiates, the knowledge of the leading initiates. And without the public knowing this, without the public having the opportunity to gain sufficient knowledge of the facts, the judgments and the guiding forces of certain initiated circles flow into public opinion and into the course of events that depends on it, into external action.

Here and there some society or other may arise with fine programs and beautiful ideals. People may be dripping with idealism. But they live with it without knowing it, not only in what they talk about, but there are ways and means of allowing all these things to be penetrated by what one wants to penetrate from a certain side, from the side of the initiates. And so it came about that in the last third of the 19th century, at the beginning of the 20th century – we will stop at these things for the time being and not go back further – well-meaning people who were uninitiated but dreamed of all kinds of beautiful ideals joined together to in societies, but that behind this hustle and bustle are initiates, those initiates who in the eighties - as I said, we don't want to go back further - of the 19th century spoke of the fact that a world war had to come, which above all had to give the southern and eastern European states a completely different face.

If you are able to follow what has been taught and spoken within the circles of initiates in this field, then you know that the things that have poured over the civilized world in the last five years as terrible, dreadful things have been predicted with great certainty. All these things were no secret to the initiates of the English-speaking population, and the following discrepancy runs through all the discussions: on the one hand, beautiful exoteric ideals, the ideal of humanity with the real belief in this ideal of humanity in the most diverse forms on the part of the uninitiated uninitiated; on the other hand, the doctrine, the conscious, strictly held doctrine that everything that is Romanesque, everything that is Central European culture, must disappear from modern civilization, and that what the culture of the English-speaking population is must predominate and achieve world domination.

When these things are said now, they carry much more weight than if they had been said twenty years ago, for the simple reason that twenty years ago one could say to the people who said it: Well, you hear the grass growing. Today one can point out that a large part of what has been said within the circles of the initiated has actually been realized.

I speak as cautiously as possible so as not to deviate in any way from the presentation of the purely factual. But this presentation of the purely factual is something that is extremely uncomfortable for the majority of people in the present day. They would like to cast it off, they do not want to let it approach them. In the present time, there is something so very soul-satisfying about cultivating nationalism in this or that way, about speaking of the League of Nations, about the re-establishment of ancient sacred national institutions, and so on. The fact that we are currently in the midst of a terrible human crisis is something that people today absolutely do not want to know.

Now, with a few words, we have pointed out the discrepancy between what the uninitiated in the West know and what, unbeknownst to them, is throbbing in their decisions. One can only really know how one is integrated as a human being into what is happening if one makes an effort to get to know what is there in the world, if one does not let oneself be driven and pushed, but if one tries to find ways and means that really make freedom of will possible.

And if we look towards the East: throughout the whole of the East there is also this dichotomy between the initiated and the uninitiated. What do the uninitiated say? — These uninitiated people in the East speak in a way similar to Rabindranath Tagore. Rabindranath Tagore is a wonderful idealist of the East, a person who has extraordinarily far-reaching ideals. Everything he expresses outwardly is beautiful. But everything that comes from Tagore is the speech of an uninitiated person. Those who are initiated in the Orient speak differently, or rather, according to the old custom of the Orient: they do not speak at all. They have other ways of bringing what they actually want into effect, into social effect. They want to ensure that world domination is not sought from any particular side, because they are clear about it – they believe they are clear about it – that if there is still any kind of domination on earth, it can only be that of English-American humanity. But they do not want that. Therefore, they actually want to make civilization disappear from the earth. They are, after all, very familiar with the spiritual world and are convinced that humanity will be better off if it withdraws from subsequent earthly incarnations. They therefore want to work to ensure that people avoid the following incarnations. For these initiates of the Orient, the results of Leninism will have nothing frightening about them, because these initiates of the Orient say to themselves: If these institutions of Leninism spread more and more over the earth, it is the surest way to destroy earthly civilization. But this will be to the advantage of precisely those people who, through their previous incarnation, have provided themselves with the opportunity to continue living without the earth.

When such things are spoken of to Europeans, they consider them to be paradoxical. Within the circles of Oriental initiates, these things are spoken of in the same way that a European speaks without understanding of the fact that pea soup tastes different from rice soup; for them, these are realities that need not lie outside the realm of everyday discussion. If we consider the state of the present-day civilized world and really want to understand it, we must not forget that these things, from East and West, have an effect on our present civilization. And in the present time, one can only work for human progress with a complete sense of these influences on the course of human evolution. The outer life as it presents itself, is it an imprint of what people believe exoterically, what people think, who allow themselves to be controlled only by the science of the uninitiated?

For anyone who seriously wants to study this question, I recommend simply choosing a period of eight days in May or June of the year 1914 and reading newspaper articles and books from May or June 1914, and ask himself how much spirit of reality he finds in them, that is, how much knowledge he finds that what sprouted within civilized humanity in August then broke out in this civilized humanity. The uninitiated had never dreamed of such things! Nor do the uninitiated today dream of what is actually going on. But the events of external life are not a reflection of the knowledge of the uninitiated. There is a great discrepancy between what people think and what really happens in life. This discrepancy should be brought home to oneself and the question should be answered appropriately: How much do the uninitiated really know today about life, about what dominates life?

People talk about life. They create theories and ideals and programs, but without knowing life. And when something arises that is shaped out of life, people do not recognize it, they consider it to be a theory or an absurdity or something of the sort. The influences of the West and the East have a completely different meaning for life. This different meaning plays a blatant role in our lives for those who can observe such things. If what is considered theory, program, or social belief in the West were to rule life, nothing would come of it, absolutely nothing. That there is a Western civilization, that Western life can develop institutions at all, does not stem from the fact that Western life has such ideas as Spencer or Darwin or others, more socially minded people have; because in reality nothing can be done with all these exoteric theories and views. That life goes on, that life does not stand still, is due solely to the fact that old traditional instincts live in the English-speaking population and that life is guided by these instincts, not by theories. The theories are only a decoration, through which one speaks fine words about life. What governs life are the instincts that are driven from the unconscious of the soul to the surface. This is something that must be observed and recognized in all seriousness.

And if we go to the East, let us start this East at the Rhine, because very soon life from the Rhine eastwards will become more and more similar to the East. Let us take a look at what is present in the East. First consider it historically: through Germany, through Russia, even through the Near East. If you look at it historically in Germany, you will find something extraordinarily strange. You will find that these Germans had minds like Goethe, like Fichte, like Schelling, like Hegel, like Herder, but that in reality they know nothing about it, that they have had such minds. Within Germany, civilization was the property of a small intellectual aristocracy. This civilization never took root in the broader circles. Goethe remained an unknown figure to broader German circles, even after 1862. I say 1862 because before that, it was very difficult to find Goethe's works in Germany. They were not yet free, and the Cottas made sure that they could not be easily found. Since then they have been free to print. They are read, but they have never penetrated into the real spiritual life of something like a German nation. Therefore, it already begins with the Germans having an instinctive insecurity to the highest degree. Those intensely intervening spiritual powers, which radiate from a Herder, a Goethe, a Fichte, these certain life instincts are confronted by an insecurity of instinct that can be called in the highest degree such, an insecurity of instinct for the reason that in these areas the instincts have not remained conservative. In the West they have remained more conservative. Here they have not remained conservative, but they have not been renewed either, they have not been imbued with what the spiritual substance could have given them.

This is even more noticeable in the actual European East. Just think of the role played by the so-called Orthodox religion in this European East, how it has influenced public institutions, how it has lived an external life and how it has meant nothing, absolutely nothing, to souls. The preservation of this Eastern Orthodoxy, which has long since exhausted its content, means that human souls have been pushed into the uncertainty of life. Anyone who has met Russians in Western Europe was, of course, deeply touched by the peculiar relationship that these people had, on the one hand, to the general human condition and, on the other, to this Orthodox religion. Like souls who fled from the Orthodox religion many centuries ago, who still wore the trappings and memories of this Orthodox religion and who believed that this Orthodox religion could still be something for them, so these people, who could not even imagine how much they had fled from this Orthodox religion, appear to one. This is what characterizes the Russian soul. And so the uncertainty of instinct, of not being inwardly held by instincts, has been poured out on the European East. The peculiarly soft nature that has been poured out on the Russian people is ultimately connected to this uncertainty of instinct.

The whole of Asian humanity can become prey to the European conquerors today, or in the next few decades, because those who are initiated there do not care at all that the general humanity will become prey to the conquerors. For the members of this general humanity will all the more likely acquire a taste for withdrawing from earthly life and leaving the earth for the next incarnation.

We are caught up in these forces. And today it only makes sense to talk about life if one's words are imbued with the awareness that it is precisely the case in life today that one must assume that those forces must be released from human souls that do not go in one direction or the other, but that go towards a real renewal of science and initiation. Therefore, it must be pointed out again and again how the modern human being must steer a course between extreme intellectualism on the one hand and emotionalism on the other.

Our life passes in this conflict between an ever more and more intensifying and overwhelming intellectualism and an emotionalism that seeks the impulses of existence by plunging into the wildest, most animalistic drives of human life. Intellectualism is that aspect of spiritual life that has developed out of what has grown since the 15th century. But this intellectual life is shadowy, this intellectual life is thin, this intellectual life is full of empty phrases. Because this intellectual life is thin and shadowy, the forces that work in this intellectual life are determined not by the truly spiritual, but by the instincts, the drives, the animal in humanity. Today, humanity does not have the strength to use its shadowy intellectual ideas to impel the instincts and thereby spiritualize them. And so, in every moment of his life, the modern man is fundamentally divided with regard to his soul.

Just suppose you are judgmental of your fellow human beings. In that case, you are being intellectualistic. Whenever a person today criticizes his fellow human beings in the present, he becomes intellectualistic. If he is to work together with them in a social community, he becomes emotional; then he becomes so that he lets himself be controlled by animal instincts. Everything that we seek in our life's work, we gradually immerse in the animalistic-instinctive; everything that we seek in our life's judgments, even if it extends to our fellow human beings, we immerse in the intellectualistic. People of the present are not at all aware of this dichotomy in their souls. They do not even notice how they are quite different when they judge their fellow human beings, and then when they are supposed to act together with their fellow human beings.

But the intellectual life is going overboard. The intellectual life strives beyond all realities. The intellectual life is one that, as such, does not really attach any particular importance to earthly conditions. With the intellectual life, it is the case that one works out beautiful moral principles in the midst of a social order in which people are servants, in which they are enslaved. I have mentioned this here several times in the past. Today, I would also like to remind you once again of the inquiry that was launched in England in the mid-19th century into the conditions of coal mine workers, which revealed, among many other problems, that children as young as nine, 11, and 13 were sent down the coal shafts before sunrise were sent down into the coal shafts before sunrise every week, and then were brought up after sunset, so that the poor children never saw sunlight except on Sundays, and so had to develop underground, under conditions that I will spare you the description of; because there too, strange things would be told. But with the coals that were brought to light in this way, people then entertained themselves in mirrored rooms about charity, about universal love of one's fellow man without distinction of race, nation, class, and so on.

This is the extreme of intellectual life. Nowhere do the doors to reality open. One floats with one's intellect beyond humanity. A spirit of reality is only that which, in everything one thinks, knows how what one thinks is connected with what is happening in the world outside. It is the task of spiritual science to awaken this sense of reality in humanity again. It is from such a background that what I recently said in Basel must be publicly repeated more often today: over the centuries, the religious denominations have established a monopoly on everything that can be said about soul and spirit (spirit was abolished in the year 869, after all). People who researched nature externally were not allowed to seek the spirit in nature. And it must be said that, from this point of view, the extremely clever Jesuits, for example, have created the most perfect picture of a world view; when natural scientists become naturalists, there is nothing of spirit in their natural science! If someone takes what a Jesuit writes about nature seriously, then of course he becomes a materialist under the present-day spirit of the age. Today one must distinguish between what is theoretically correct and what is really essential. Theoretically correct is that the Jesuits advocate a spiritual world view. What is really essential is that the Jesuits spread materialism! — It was theoretically correct that Newton, in addition to his mechanistic world view, always doffed his hat when he uttered the word “God”. What is really essential is that the mechanistic materialism of a later time emerged from Newton's mechanistic world view. For it is not what one means theoretically that is decisive, but what lies in the laws of reality. And the intellectualistic world view never provides laws of the world. This intellectualistic world view ultimately leads to complete Luciferianism. It actually Luciferianizes the world.

Alongside this intellectualism, we have emotionalism in the present day, life from the instincts, from the animalistic, in the way I have described it. This instinctual life, this animalistic life, actually dominates public life at the moment when man is inclined to live, when he no longer needs only to judge. One can judge that it is shameful, for example, to treat the people in the mines in such and such a way. One can judge that. But one has mining shares! By cutting the coupons, it is oneself who tortures people in this way, one just does not notice it. This is more than a symbol of life, because that is how our life goes. People think on the one hand and act on the other. But they do not realize the huge discrepancy between the one and the other.

This situation is largely due to people's complacency towards all opportunities that provide us with insights into life. Today, people want to be a “good person” in life without striving to really get to know this life. But you can't really live today without getting to know life.

This world war arose from the fact that the people who were, and in some cases still are, the so-called “rulers” were very far removed from life. Some are still in their places, namely.

But what could more clearly show the complete lack of understanding of people for life, on which so much depends, has arrived in the last decades than those of our culture, of our civilization so clearly speaking “memoirs”, which are now piling up. Every week one, initially from the defeated powers, the others will follow, publishes his memoirs. This shows quite clearly how right was the judgment of the one who said: One would not believe with how little understanding the world is ruled. But the consequences of such assumptions are not readily drawn by the people of the present. For these people of the present, for example, do not want to see that there can be no social feeling and social knowledge without a real knowledge of the world. It is still possible to establish zoology without knowledge of the world, because animals are organized by their physical organization for a specific activity, for a specific functioning. What is characteristic of man is precisely that his organization is open to what he is to take up from knowledge of the world. And so there can be no social knowledge without it being based on knowledge of the world. You can never build a real social science without knowing that everything that man has to strive for through his inner being is a result of the whole evolution, which you can find in my “Occult Science in Outline , up to the present development of the earth, and that everything that the man of the present day absorbs through the social community is a germ for that which is to happen further with the development of the earth.

One cannot understand social life without understanding the world in general. It is impossible for people today to intervene in public life with programs or ideas or ideals without laying a spiritual foundation for this intervention; for what is lacking everywhere is a soul that is moved by what really matters.

We are experiencing strange things. The outstanding German socialist theorist Karl Kautsky has now also written a book: “How the World War Came About”. He begins by discussing the question of guilt. On the first pages, Kautsky makes a remarkable confession. I would like to preface the following. I would like to say that Kautsky is one of those who, in the last few decades, have used every means at their disposal to hammer party doctrine and party discipline into the proletariat, to hammer the doctrine into people's heads that it is not individuals who are responsible for world events, but, for example, capitalism. And so you will not find the word 'capitalists' everywhere, but the word 'capitalism'. With such party doctrines one can agitate, one can found parties, one can find effective hammers for the minds of men, so that such doctrines become creeds. As soon as one is compelled to intervene, I will not say in the work at all, but only to judge reality, the whole doctrine goes out of the window! Now, when Kautsky writes about the guilty parties, what does he do? He would have to leave his whole book unwritten if he wanted to continue his old litanies of capitalism. So what does he do? On the first page, he makes a confession, a strange confession, which I will only quote to you with a few words from his book: “You cannot present capitalism as the only culprit. For capitalism is nothing but an abstraction, which is derived from the observation of numerous individual phenomena and which is an indispensable tool in the quest to explore these in their lawful contexts. But you can't fight an abstraction, except theoretically; but not practically. In practice, we can only fight individual phenomena... certain institutions and persons as the bearers of certain social functions.

Now the socialist theorist is only faced with the fact that he is not even supposed to intervene constructively in social life, but only to judge social life in one respect, and now capitalism is suddenly an abstraction. He only just comes up with it! At the moment when the same Karl Kautsky would take it as an occasion to discuss the realistic idea of threefolding, capitalism would again march up in military organization, not as an abstraction but as something highly real! One does not even notice the difference between what is derived from a real observation of life as a social concept and what is derived from general abstract thinking or even abstract feeling.

Insight is what the modern man must seek as a means of protection against the illusionism into which he must fall through the extreme intellectualism. So today I approached you from a certain side to draw your attention to important things of the present. I will continue to develop and expand these things tomorrow and the day after.

It will be well at the very beginning of today's lecture to speak of how far what we considered yesterday relation to its parts, at least in reference to some of parts, the physical world-system, the physical cosmos, is of significance to man's outlook, to his perception and knowledge. We spoke yesterday of the life of the comet, of the life of the fixed star—the solar life; of the life the moon—the lunar life; and of the planetary life. In speaking of these heavenly bodies from the standpoint of ordinary consciousness, we naturally refer to the heavenly bodies visible to our eyes. Now in the course of our lectures we have, so to say, substituted something else for this system of heavenly bodies; we have substituted the study of the corresponding spiritual beings whom we have recognized as members of the various hierarchies. Perhaps what has actually been said will be made still clearer if we state the following: We found the category of beings standing immediately above man to be the Angeloi, or Angel-beings; we have also shown how, if a man really wishes to obtain a view of the spiritual super-sensible world, he must, in a sense, organize himself up to these beings next above him; must, as it were, learn to see the world with the kind perception possessed by the Angels. Now we can raise the question: if such a being of the next higher category, in the ranks of the hierarchies acquires a consciousness of the cosmos through his perception—which we call manifestation—how does the cosmos appear to him? If this question is answered what I intended to convey will be clearer to us. Such an Angel-being would really see outside in the cosmos nothing of all we see, and which as we know is Maya, an illusion only called up by our human view. An Angel-being would see nothing of all this in the same way as we do; we must be quite clear as to this. But the Angel-being would instead see and perceive in his own way, in the manner described, the various cooperative activities between the beings of the hierarchies. Instead of saying, “Over there is Mars,” he would say: “Over there cooperate (in the way we have described) certain beings of the higher hierarchies.” This means that to those beings, to the Angels or Angeloi, the whole cosmic system directly appears as a sum of spiritual activities. How then would the planets and other bodies visible to our eyes appear to such a being? We may venture to speak of these matters, for indeed we could not speak at all of the whole super-sensible world which lies behind the planetary system, the heavens or cosmos, were we not able, through occult schooling, to translate ourselves to some extent into the consciousness of such a being. For clairvoyance simply means calling forth within us the possibility of seeing the world as such beings see it. Thus to clairvoyant consciousness those forms, those light-forms visible to ordinary sight as the heavenly bodies, actually disappear; they are no longer there. On the other hand, clairvoyant consciousness gains, and so too does the consciousness of an Angel-being, an impression of that which corresponds to the physical heavenly body. Clairvoyant consciousness cannot perceive the Moon or Mars as they appear to a dweller upon Earth, seen physically; but it is nevertheless able to know what exists there. I should now like to call up within you an idea of the kind of knowledge clairvoyant consciousness has of such a heavenly body.

You can gain an idea of this, at first theoretically—for occult training can alone provide the practical knowledge—if you call up in your mind a memory-picture, a recollection, a picture-concept of what you experienced yesterday or the day before. This picture concept which lies in your soul, differs from the picture-concept of an object which is immediately before your eyes. You only look at that with the necessary intensity. If you remember this rose tomorrow, you will have a memory picture of it. Now if you clearly realise that in your mind, in your soul, the mere memory-picture differs from that which arises as a perception-picture through a direct impression, it will then be possible for you to understand how clairvoyant consciousness perceives the heavenly bodies. Thus it transports itself clairvoyantly into the cosmos, and if, for instance, it transports itself into Mars, into the Moon, it does not know directly what would appear to sight if one were to observe the heavenly body physically, but by thus transporting itself it has something within it which cannot he described other than as a memory-picture, a thought-picture. And so it is with everything which our ordinary normal consciousness encounters as physical heavenly bodies in the cosmos. To clairvoyant consciousness everything appears in such a way that we have a direct knowledge that whatever we see there is actually something past, something which has had complete life in the past, and which, as it appears in the present, is not really in its original, living form, but is—so to speak—like a snail-shell from which the snail has gone. The whole physical system of heavenly bodies is a testimony of past times, telling of past occurrences. Whereas we, on our earth, are contemporary with the things which appear before our physical eyes, what we see in the starry heavens is actually Maya, for it does not represent an existing condition, but had its full significance in the past, and has remained behind. The physical world of heavenly bodies represents the remains of the past activities of the corresponding beings of the hierarchies, the after-effects of which still enter into the present.

Let us examine the matter still more closely by means of a concrete example. When we observe our own earth-moon by clairvoyant consciousness (which has withdrawn from everything else and, so to speak, fixed itself only upon the moon) we get the remarkable impression that the external physical moon disappears, and in its place something appears which gives the impression of being like a memory-picture. One has the impression that that which otherwise appears to the physical eye (and which, of course, is there physically, though everything physical is a Maya) gives the impression of telling of a past, just like a memory-picture. And if we allow this impression which begins to tell us past things to work upon us, it says: “If that which now actually appears to our occult vision were to be active, if its activity were not paralyzed by other things, our earth in its present form could not have endured the proximity of what we see there.” To our occult consciousness the moon tells of something which should not take place as it shows itself there, if our earth-life is to be at all possible. If that which is there represented to us were not now paralyzed, so to speak, by other things, man could not possibly live his present life, because of what the moon tells us about herself. On the other hand, the present-day animal life on the earth, nor the plant life, nor the activity in the mineral world would be specially influenced. Certain beings of the animal and plant kingdoms would certainly have to be quite different in form—that we know direct from the forces which work upon us from the moon with such vehemence—but substantially, though animal, plant, and mineral life upon the earth would be possible, human life would not. Thus the moon as we see her, tells of a condition which, if it were active, would exclude human life from the earth.

I am trying to describe these things as concretely as possible, as seen by occult vision; I do not wish to speak in abstractions, which would enable me to relate all sorts of things; I only wish to relate things as they appear to occult vision. The impression one then receives can only be compared with the following:—If—let us say—all the ideas a man of thirty had when he was fifteen years old were suddenly to arise within him, and all the concepts which he had been able to work into his soul since his fifteenth year were to cease, the inner soul-life of his fifteenth year would then be represented to his own consciousness, as it were, objectively; but he would be obliged to say: “If I now had within me only what was contained in my soul at that time, I could not think all I now think. The condition of soul in which I now am would not be possible.” Man would find himself forced back to his fifteenth year and he would see clearly that, although what he then experienced as the content of his soul could not bring about his present-day self, yet it has to do with what he has become. In this way we can in a certain sense describe the impression we receive from the moon. We can say: “Before us is something which really points to no present, but speaks of a past. Just as if I, in my thirtieth year, could only perceive the contents of my soul at my fifteenth year if I think away everything which has developed within me since, so must I now think away the possibility that there really is an earth; for the earth as it is now, comprising the requirements of human life, is not possible if that which is represented by the moon were to be realized. Now as soon as this impression appears to clairvoyant vision, it is then possible so to school this vision that we can gain an idea, a conception, of what existed before an earth could possibly exist. For what we there see was possible before the earth, and that which later led to the production of the earth only became possible after the condition thus perceived had disappeared.

You see, I have now described what the clairvoyant must do to travel back in the Akashic Chronicles to an earlier condition of our planetary system; for by fixing occult vision upon the moon, we have recalled an earlier condition of our planetary system. If we now try to describe that, we can speak of the condition of our planetary system before our present earth existed. And because we must so proceed that we can only learn about conditions before the origin of our present earth by fixing our attention on what has remained upon the moon as a sort of memory—we have also become accustomed to call the preceding condition of our earth, a moon-condition. We can, however, only gain a complete elucidation of the whole circumstances if we leave the clairvoyant state which we have developed for the purpose of obtaining a sort of memory-picture of the planetary condition, and passing from this into the ordinary condition of consciousness try to make clear to ourselves wherein the difference lies. The difference is ascertained by trying to bring the two impressions into a sort of harmony; and this bringing into harmony is only possible by first looking away from the moon; for the ordinary external vision of normal consciousness does not tell us much about the moon. You know indeed that external astronomy tries to tell us all sorts of things about the moon, but external observation in general does not tell us much. Rather for the sake of comparison we must make use of a certain clairvoyant observation of our own earth as it is at present, as a heavenly body upon which we ourselves wander. If we shut off everything physical which appears before our eyes in the various kingdoms of nature and observe our earth clairvoyantly, we see that this earth beneath our feet and around us, as a physical planet, discloses itself as a further development of what existed as the moon. When we compare the two impressions, we may ask: How has the one condition grown out of the other? And then arises before clairvoyant vision, so to speak, the work which has been accomplished in order that the old condition of our earth might pass over into our present earth condition. We then have the impression that this transition has been brought about by one or several of those spiritual beings, whom, in the ranks of the hierarchies, we have called the Spirits of Form. Thus do we gain a possibility of penetrating into the growth of the planet, into its earlier conditions. The question now is: Can we look back still further?

We must go into these considerations, for only by so doing shall we understand in the right sense the spiritual beings who participate in the work on these heavenly bodies.

As a second attempt of occult observation we must once more look away from our earth—and also from our moon, from all that is of the moon-nature in the whole planetary system; and as far as we can, transfer ourselves into the conditions of one or several of the other planets, and compare their conditions one with another. Now, I am referring to actual facts which can be apparent to our clairvoyant consciousness. Clairvoyant vision, even if perhaps not simultaneously (which the circumstances often do not permit) can be directed to other planets of our planetary system, can become aware of the impressions given by other planets of our system. If we thus observe a planet, or several together, we do not yet gain much, for we do not yet gain a clear conception of them; but we at once gain this if we proceed in a certain way with these clairvoyant impressions. I will once more give a comparison which will make clear what I actually mean. Suppose you were to remember something you experienced in your eighteenth year, and were to say to yourself. “In my eighteenth year I took up a standpoint with regard to this experience for which I was ripe at that time. I shall perhaps be clearer about the matter if I call to mind another experience. In my twenty-fifth year I experienced something else connected with the same fact—I will now compare the two impressions one with another.” Try to make clear to yourself what you can gain in life by comparing things which belong together but are apart from one another in time, and you then gain a general impression in which the one will always throw light on the other. By means of such a comparison you will actually call up and create a sort of arithmetical method, a quite new concept from the cooperation of your two memory-pictures. That is what the clairvoyant must do after succeeding in allowing his vision to be impressed—let us say—by Mars, Mercury, Venus, or Jupiter. He must now consider these separate impressions, not individually but in relation and connection with each other. He must let them work upon one another, bring them into relation with each other. If he undertakes this work he will gain the feeling that through the comparison of these impressions he again has something like a memory-concept of the planetary system. This again is not a condition possible at the present time, but one which must have been possible in the past; for it expresses itself as something which, as I described for the moon-condition, was the cause of that which now exists in the planetary system. Now the impression obtained in this way has really infinite peculiarities.

What must thus be related in what must seem to be very dry concepts, is really one of the most wonderful impressions one can possibly have, but here again, if we wish to describe the characteristics of this impression, we can only do so by means of a comparison. I must admit that I could not well endeavor to describe this impression in any other way. I do not know whether you ever had the following experience in ordinary physical life. No doubt there are times when you have been moved to weeping and sadness, in pity and sympathy for the beings around you in physical life. One may have yet another impression; certainly many among you know the impression which comes occasionally on reading an overwhelmingly arresting description in some work of art, or, for example, when you read a scene in a book of which you well know, if you would only consider a little, that there is no reality in it. Yet your tears flow abundantly; you do not stop to consider whether it is true or not, but you take that which is described into your thought and your perception, so that it works like a reality, and draws forth a flood of tears. Anyone who has had this experience has a faint conception of what is meant when it is said: “One is inspired by something spiritual, concerning which one has no opportunity of asking whether it is based on a physical reality; one is inspired to an impression about which one wants to know nothing, but which grieves one and throws one back upon oneself. It fills one inwardly, one is filled as by some normal act of perception of one's normal consciousness.” We must speak of such an impression if we are to describe the condition which overcomes us when we compare the impressions which clairvoyant consciousness receives from the individual planets. Everything we thus experience works through our inner being alone, like a soul-impression; we gain a quite definite idea of what an inspiration really is, when we know things for which the impulse of knowledge can only come from within. For instance, no one really understands the content of the Gospels unless he can compare the impressions they made on him with such an impression as has just been described. For the Gospels were written from inspiration, only one must go back to their original text. Even greater and more powerful is the impression received in the manner described through a comparison of the impressions made by the individual planets. This is the first thing I should like to say about this impression. The second thing is that we cannot gain this impression undisturbed and unchecked unless we are capable, at least for a few moments—in our present cycle of time scarcely anyone is capable of this for longer—of wholeheartedly feeling nothing but sympathy and love; of driving egotism utterly and completely out of the soul; for the smallest degree of egotism united with this impression immediately works deadeningly; and in place of what I have described, we immediately reach a kind of stupefaction, a deadening of the consciousness. Our consciousness is then immediately darkened. It is therefore one of the most blessed experiences to have such an impression.

If we are fortunate enough to have it, something very peculiar occurs. The sun, as such, no longer exists for our consciousness, no matter what we may do. Just as surely as the sun exists in our other conditions of consciousness, so it no longer exists in this. The sun ceases to be something apart from ourselves; but when we begin to find our way about, we gain the impression: “We have before us a condition in which a separate sun no longer has any meaning.” For we can only again have the whole which appears before our occult vision if we look away from our present-day planetary system, and only focus our occult gaze upon our present-day sun;—that is, when we extinguish the physical impression of the sun. We can best do this if we try to have the occult impression of the sun, not by day, but by night. Naturally the fact that at night the physical earth stands before the sun is no reason for the occult vision to have no impression of it, for though the physical earth is impenetrable by physical eyes, it is not so for occult sight. On the contrary, if we try in clear daylight to direct our occult vision to the sun, the disturbances are so great that we can scarcely succeed, without physical harm, in gaining a good occult impression of it. Hence in the ancient Mysteries it was never attempted to allow the scholars to gain an occult impression of the sun by day; they were taught that they might learn to know the sun in its peculiar nature when it is least visible to physical eyes, namely, at midnight. The pupils were taught to direct their occult vision to the sun, through the physical earth, precisely at midnight. Hence among the many descriptions of the ancient Mysteries, you find among other things, which for the most part are no longer understood today—the sentence in the Egyptian Mysteries, for instance: “The pupil must see the sun at midnight.”

What has not been brought forward by dilettantism, to explain by all sorts of nice, neat symbols, what is meant by “seeing the sun at midnight”? People as a rule have no idea that the things imparted in occult writings are most correctly understood if no endeavor is made to explain them by means of symbols, but are taken as literally as possible. The modern man, as a rule, only feels himself drawn to symbolic interpretations because the consciousness of to-day is no longer rightly organized for the understanding of these old facts. To those who reflect more closely it should be clear that in ancient writings it was the custom to speak accurately. I should like (in parenthesis as it were) to draw your attention to one thing which might have been added to the public lecture given yesterday, with reference to Kriemhilde.¹ It was stated that after Siegfried was dead, she took for herself the treasure of the Nibelung and did a great deal of good with it; but Hagen took it from her and threw it into the Rhine. When later on, in the kingdom of King Etzel she demanded it again of Hagen he did not disclose to her the place where it lay. You see, this passage is given circumstantially in the Nibelung Saga, in order to throw light on certain things. In the symbolical explanations of the Saga I have found intellectual and very brilliant interpretations supposed to elucidate what it all signifies. The treasure of the Nibelungs has a quite different meaning in them all. I admit that the intellectual labor brought to bear on such explanations is sometimes overwhelming;—the treasure of the Nibelungs is generally explained as being the symbol for something spiritual. But, in the first place, it is very difficult to heal the sick with mere symbols. In the second place one cannot conceal a symbol from any one, even from Kriemhilde, by throwing it into the Rhine; at least I cannot very well imagine a symbol of the sort many expounders allege this to be, being sunk in the Rhine. Altogether it is very difficult for me to imagine how a thing which is only to be symbolically explained, could be taken away from someone externally. Everyone who understands these things knows it was a question of something very special, something we should now call a talisman—an entirely physical talisman, which was compounded in such a way that it was entirely composed of gold. This gold was, however, only to be extracted from alluvial deposit left by the water in an estuary, and the whole power of this alluvial gold was compressed into the form—(and now comes the symbol)—into the form of this talisman, the effect of which on Kriemhilde produced in her the forces by which she could heal the sick, and so on. Hagen could actually conceal this talisman from her, and later, refuse to reveal the hiding place. Thus one has really to do with a physical thing, with a quite real thing; in which occult powers existed only through the special nature of its composition. I have given this as an example, to show you how one must often understand things in the old writings.

So we must take the expression “seeing the sun at midnight,” quite literally. Thus we can best acquire an occult impression of the sun if we are not disturbed by physical impressions; that is, if we see nothing of the sunlight at all but, observe the sun at night. We then gain an impression of the present-day sun, which to a very great extent resembles what is obtained by the impression previously described. Through all that I have described to you, there results an impression of a still earlier condition of our planetary system, to which our earth too belongs, a condition when the sun was not yet separated, but when the whole planetary system was, in a sense, Sun, and contained within it the substance of our earth. This condition, which at the same time was that of our earth, is therefore designated as the Sun-condition. So that we say. Before our earth became earth it was in a Moon-condition; before it was Moon it was in a Sun-condition.

An approximate repression of a yet earlier condition of our earth-planet can be obtained if we try to gain an occult impression of that category of heavenly bodies of which we spoke at the end of our last lecture the comets. To describe this more accurately would absorb too much of our time, but in method it is very like what has been already described. If we now compare what we gain through the occult perception of cometary life with the concept—(it is now a question of having to form a certain concept, for we cannot well compare the memory-concept thus obtained with anything at the present time) we receive an immediate impression—beyond this one cannot go—of having reached a condition lying still further back than the Sun-condition, which for certain reasons is called the Saturn condition. Thus you see that the inner experiences we may have about the planetary system, are decisive for the occultist for the concepts he forms concerning it.

We will now for a little while, leave the planetary system. Everything which I have till now brought forward, has been mentioned with the aim and object of culminating in a general description of the modes of action of the spiritual beings in the heavenly bodies. As, however, the heavenly bodies are, as it were, built up from the kingdoms of nature, we must also create, at least approximately, an idea from the standpoint of the occultist, of the immediate facts revealed to occult vision when we allow the separate kingdoms of nature to work upon us. Let us proceed to the consideration of the kingdoms of nature, beginning with man.

You know that when we observe man we find that he consists of physical body, etheric body, astral body, and what we call the “Ego-nature,” the “I” itself. Where is this four-membered human being to be found, according to anthroposophical observation? Well, this four-membered human being is in the physical world; for everything which has now been related of man takes place in the physical world. We will now pass over to the animal world. If we consider the animal, it is quite certain that we find the physical body of the animal in our ordinary sense-world, as we do that of man. Of that there can be no doubt. We must, however, also ascribe an astral and an etheric body to the animal; for we ascribe an etheric body to man in the physical world because it would not be possible for his physical body to exist alone in the physical world. This is evident directly a man passes through the gates of death. His physical body is then left alone in the physical world and falls to pieces; it is given over to its own forces. As long as man lives, there must be a combatant present to carry on a perpetual battle against the crumbling away of the physical body, and this combatant is the etheric body, which is really only visible to occult consciousness. The same circumstances also prevail in the animal, so that we must ascribe to it an etheric body in the physical world. Now because it is clear to us that facts and things not only affect man but mirror themselves in him, calling up something which we may call an inner reflection, we therefore ascribe to man an astral body; which is visible to occult vision. It is exactly the same in the case of the animal. Whereas the plant utters no cry when an external impression is made on it, the animal expresses itself in a cry, that is, an external impression produces an inner experience. Occult vision teaches us that this inner experience is only possible when an astral body is present.

Yet to speak of an “ego” in the animal, as a phenomenon of the physical world, has no meaning except to certain modern natural-philosophers, who live entirely according to analogy. If one judged merely from analogy one can maintain all sorts of things. There are even certain theosophists today who were filled with respect when a certain well-known student of nature, Raoul France, ascribed a soul to plants, and did not differentiate between what we call a soul in the animal and in the plants. For instance he considered, and this is quite correct, that there are certain plants which, when a little insect comes near them, fold their leaves together so that they draw it in and devour it. This external observer then says to himself: “Wherever facts appear in nature externally, analogous to the taking in of nourishment and consuming it, there must be something resembling the beings which, from something of an inner soul-nature, take in such things and consume them.” Now I know something which also attracts little creatures, but to this the modern natural-philosopher would certainly not ascribe a soul; I mean a mouse-trap, baited with bacon. This also attracts little creatures, and if we proceed according to the methods of these nature-philosophers, then, just as they attribute a soul to the plant called “Venus's fly-trap” so must we attribute a soul to the mouse-trap, for it attracts mice when well baited with bacon.—All these investigators, who do not merely judge by the external, ought not to lose the longing which exists in many spiritually minded people, and he content if very little is said of the spirit.

In this connection, in German literature—as many say—much of beauty has been brought to light; but, as the occultist would say; “A great deal of nonsense has been talked.” just as little as we can speak of a soul-nature resembling the animal soul dwelling in the “Venus's fly-trap” or any other plant, can one with unbiased vision say of any animal, that it has an “ego.” The animal has no ego in that which meets us on the physical plane. Occult investigation could alone lead us to the ego of the animals; for this is not to be found in the same region as the ego of the human being. The animal ego is only to be found apart from the physical body; so that we actually become acquainted with a completely different world, when with occult vision, we ascend to the animal ego. If we do not care to make all kinds of diagrammatic divisions, and to begin by saying: The world consists of physical plane, astral plant, mental plane, etc., because there is not much to be gained by such verbal designations, we must then proceed in other ways. I have found even in theosophical books, a great deal said about the expression “Logos”; but I have not found any clear concept called forth of what the “Logos” really is. As a rule I found that the writers of these books only knew that this word “Logos” consists of five letters; but as soon as one tried to arrive at real definite concepts on which one could fix one's mind, the concepts disappeared in smoke. For by relating all sorts of things, such as that the Logos “spins,” etc., a consciousness desiring to be concrete does not know what to make of it. Whatever the “Logos” may be, a spider he certainly is not; neither can his activity be described as a web.

Thus, it is, not good to begin with abstractions, to call up concepts in speaking of things extending beyond the physical sphere of man. It is somewhat different when occult vision seeks in the animal, for that which in man reveals itself in the physical world in all the actions and proceedings of man, namely, the ego. If he seeks that for the animal, he will find it, not in the world in which are the physical, etheric, and astral bodies of the animal but in a super-sensible world, which appears nearest to the sense-world as soon as one draws aside the veil of the ordinary world. So that we can say: In a world of a super-sensible nature we can find the ego of the animals. There it appears as a reality; but in the physical world this animal ego does not appear to us as an individuality; we can only understand it here if we direct our attention to a group of animals—a group of wolves or of lambs, etc. Just as a single soul belongs to our two hands, our ten fingers, and our feet—a soul which has within it its own ego; so does a group of animals of one species possess such an ego as we do not find in our physical world; it only reveals and manifests itself in the physical world. The ordinary abstract materialist of the day says: That alone is a reality in the animal which we see with physical eyes—and if we form a concept of a wolf or of a lamb, these are just ideas and nothing more. For the occultist that is not so; these are not mere ideas which live within us, they are reflected pictures of something real which is not, however, on the physical plane, but in a super-sensible world. Now, with a little reflection, it is evident that even on the physical plane, beyond what can be perceived by the senses there still exists something which cannot be perceived in the physical world but yet has a meaning for the inner relations of the forces of animals. I should like those people who, for instance, take the concept of wolf as an idea which does not correspond to any reality, to attend to the following experiment. Suppose we take a number of lambs—the wolf is known to feed upon lamb—and feed a wolf with them long enough according to what Natural Science has ascertained, for the whole physical matter to be transformed—so that the wolf, during the time in which his physical corporeality is being replaced, has been fed only upon lamb, that the wolf has nothing but lamb within it. All you then see as physical matter in the wolf proceeds from nothing but lamb; now try to find out whether the wolf has become a lamb. If it has not, you have no right to say that the concept which you have of the wolf is limited to that which can be perceived physically, for there is something super-sensible in it. This cannot be met with until we enter the super-sensible world; there it becomes evident that, just as our ten fingers belong to the one soul, so do all wolves belong to a group-ego. The world in which we find the group-egos of the animals, we designate concretely as the astral world.

Now as regards the plants, a similar observation shows that in the physical world we find nothing of the plant but its physical and etheric bodies. Just because the plants have only their physical and etheric bodies in the physical world they do not cry out when we injure them. We must therefore say; only the physical and etheric bodies of the plant exist in the physical world. If with occult vision we investigate, which we do by simply transplanting ourselves into that world in which is the group-ego of the animals, we find something very characteristic with regard to the plant-kingdom: we find that there is pain even in the plant world; this is certainly felt when we tear plants out of the ground by the roots. The collective earth-organism feels pain resembling that which we feel when a hair is pulled out of our body. Other life also, conscious life, is connected with the growth of plants. Try to imagine the sprouting forth—I have already touched upon this question during these lectures—pushing forth of the shoots of the plants from the earth in spring; this springing forth corresponds to a feeling in certain spiritual beings, beings belonging to the earth and participating in its spiritual atmosphere.

To describe this feeling we may compare it with the perception one has at the moment of passing at night from the waking-condition to that of sleep. Just as the consciousness then gradually dies down, so do certain spirits of the earth feel, when the plants spring forth in spring. Again in the gradual fading and dying of the plant-world, certain spiritual beings connected with the spiritual atmosphere of the earth have the same feeling as man has when he awakens in the morning. Thus we can say: There are certain beings connected with the organism of our earth who have the same feelings as our own astral body has in falling asleep and waking. Only one must not compare these abstractly. It would, of course, seem much more actual to compare the springing forth of nature in the spring, with the waking—and the dying down of the plant-world in autumn with falling asleep; but the reverse is correct: namely the beings we are now considering, feel a sort of awakening in autumn, but a sort of falling asleep at the springing forth of the plants in the spring. Now these beings are none other than the astral bodies of the plants; and we find them in the same region as the group-souls of the animals. The astral bodies of the plants are to be found on the so-called astral plane.

Now we must also speak of an ego of the plants, when we observe them occultly. We find this ego of the plants again in like manner as a group-ego, as something belonging to a whole group or species of plants, just like the group-egos of the animals; but in vain should we look for the group-egos of the plants in the same sphere as the astral bodies of the plants and the group-egos of the animals. We must pass into a still higher super-sensible world; we must raise ourselves from the astral plane into a world which we perceive as still higher. Only in such a world can we find the group-egos of the plants. In investigating this world we may again give it a name. To us it is first of all characterised by the fact that the group-egos of the plants are there, although there is much in it besides these. We, designate it—though names have nothing to do with the matter—as the Devachanic world.

Now it is easy to see in the physical world that we have only the physical body of the minerals. Hence the mineral appears to us as inorganic, devoid of life; on the other hand, we have its etheric body in the same world in which are the group-egos of the animals, and the astral bodies of the plants. But even here we can find nothing of the mineral nature which reveals sensation. Yet even the mineral reveals itself as living. We learn to know the long-enduring life of the mineral, its growth, and the self-development,—so to speak, of the ores and the like;—in short, on the astral plane we become acquainted with the various forms of mineral life on our planet. When we come across an individual mineral, we learn to recognize that it is not very different from our own mineral-like bones which yet are connected with our life. Thus everything mineral is also connected with a living being, but that living being is only to be found on the astral plane. The etheric body of the mineral, therefore, is to be found on the astral plane. Now if we halt occultly, as it were, in that world in which are the group-egos of the plants, we observe that the mineral kingdom is also connected with something in which feeling is possible, something astral. When stones are broken in a quarry, no perception of this is noticed on the astral plane; but on the Devachanic plane it is immediately evident that when stones are pulverized and the parts fly asunder something like a feeling of well-being, a sort of enjoyment actually appears. That is also a feeling; but it is in contradiction to the feeling which animals and men would have in such a case. Were they to be smashed to pieces, they would suffer pain; with the mineral the reverse is the case. When it is crushed it is conscious of a feeling of well-being. If we dissolve cooking salt in a glass of water, and follow with vision directed to the Devachanic world how the salt forms into crystals, we see that this causes pain: we feel that there is pain at the point of union. This is everywhere the case in mineral life when fluids, through crystallization, form into solids. This in fact is what happened to our earth, which was at one time in a softer, more liquid condition. Solid matter has gradually been formed out of the fluid, and we now walk about on solid ground and drive our ploughs into it. In so doing we do not give the earth pain; it feels it to be good. But it did not please the beings connected with the earth,—and which as astral kingdom belong to the planet, that they had to be compactly welded together in order that human life might become possible on the planet. The beings which as astral bodies stand behind the rocks had to endure pain upon pain. In the mineral kingdom the beings, the creation, suffer as the earth progresses. It gives one a very strange feeling when, after recognizing this from occult investigation, one turns again to the celebrated passage, written by an Initiate: “All creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together, waiting for the Redemption; waiting for the adoption of the state of childhood.” Such passages as this, in the writings based on occult vision, are as a rule read carelessly, but when one reads them with occult vision, then, for the first time, one knows that though they yield a great deal to even the simplest mind, they give still more to those who can perceive all, or at least a great deal, of what is contained in them. The sighing and groaning of the mineral kingdom has to be, because the process of the civilisation of our earth needs solid ground under its feet; that is what St. Paul represents when he speaks of the sighing of creation.

All this takes place in those beings which lie behind the mineral kingdom as its astral body, and which we find in the Devachanic world. The actual ego, the real group-ego of the mineral kingdom is to be sought in a higher world, which we will call the higher Devachanic world. Here only do we find the group-egos of the mineral kingdom. You must emancipate yourselves entirely from the conception of identifying what we call the astral body of a being with the astral world. With regard to the minerals, their astral body is to be sought for in Devachan; on the other hand their etheric body is in the astral world. The group-egos of the animals are on the astral plane and the astral body of the animal on the physical plane. We must say of the world, as we know it:—We must not identify what we recognize as the individual principles of beings, with the corresponding worlds, but must accustom ourselves to presuppose differentiations among the various beings. A more accurate occult discernment makes this quite clear. Thus provisionally we have to find only the group-souls of the minerals in a higher Devachanic region.

We have now spoken of the different beings of the various kingdoms of nature in their relation to the higher worlds, and this alone can give us a foundation for seeking the relations of these various kingdoms of nature to the creative beings of the hierarchies, who are active and working in the world, as we have now learnt to know them.

• 1. Public lecture given at Helsingfors, 9th April, 1912. ‘The Nature of National Epics, with special reference to the Kalevala.’

The collection of short stories by Franz Ferdinand Heitmüller, “Tampete” (Berlin S. Fischers Verlag 1899), published some time ago ¹ contains an artistic pearl. It is the novella “Tampete” that gave the volume its name. A mood poet of great narrative and characterization power has created this small work of art. “Tampete“, this Lower Saxony peasant dance, this German tarantella, lives on in this spirited style; the figures stand before us with deepened passion, like people who are not living out their own lives, but a demonic force that possesses them.”

In his recently published volume, Heitmüller has once again given us such a pearl: the novella “Als der Sommer kam”. This time, however, it is not as if a wild nature were speaking from the soul of a human being; this time it is a soul itself that is presented to us in its most intimate destiny, in lonely struggles: a soul that returns to itself from the alienation into which the world has brought it, that grows from smallness to greatness. Eugenie's child has grown up in the hands of strangers. But she herself must be seen as the virgin girl in her social environment. Only in this way can it be imagined that Arthur, her fiancé, who as a public prosecutor has “obligations to society”, will marry her. So Eugenie lives a life of pretense in the city, in the hope that one day she will be able to live a life of pretense at Arthur's side. Her child, however, whom she has hardly seen, lives far away from her, condemned to be disowned by its mother for the rest of its life. An illness of this child calls the mother to it. She hopes - a fatal illness, because with the child, what Arthur is repeatedly concerned about would be eliminated. A mother's soul, completely subjugated by the violence of social conditions, comes to her child, who is so foreign to her that she mistakes him for a stranger at first. And this mother's soul finds all the motherly love she needs at the sickbed, and with this love she finds herself, as a liberated, as an overcomer and victor. She describes this victory to the doctor of the country town, with whom she has become friends during the child's illness; she talks about how she has become free in the rural solitude, and how she now wants to carry this freedom into the city, where people can never understand such things, but where she wants to defy the lack of understanding. “The fact that I am here among people who are more or less indifferent to me and who are of no concern to me, that I am here, in a strange environment, so to speak, confessing my child, is not so bad after all. But there, in my usual sphere, which is no longer to be mine, it means something. Do you think I want to hide here and be secretive with my happiness? No, I want to proclaim it loudly, to shout it out so that everyone can hear it: look, this is me – the real me – and if they spit at me and I still remain in the calm equilibrium of proud love, then you see, only then do I have a right to myself and to the child whose mother I want to be. I want to be free of people and their rules, and that is why I have to go back to them.»

Heitmüller depicts the complete transformation of a human spirit. And he does so on fifty-two pages that are not too densely printed. But he does so with full inner truth. The poet has clearly encountered a problem that speaks to him in a rare way. He has mastered the entire psychology of this problem. And this psychology is worked out from a mood that is fully in harmony with it. Heitmüller knows how to stylishly interweave the girl's process of liberation with her life in nature. “She had rented a few rooms, far out in a somewhat dilapidated country house on the mountain. She had always seen it with its white-painted walls shining from afar. Like a hope. When she discovered a glass-covered veranda at the back of the house, which led to a spacious garden with old shady trees, she quickly came to an agreement with the owner. - And so they lived their quiet, regular lives... And very slowly, as the germs and budding buds stirred and stretched within her, dreamlike, unconscious, diverse, every day, every hour, ever stronger, swelling, a drunken confusion, until her white soul stood in a thousand glowing blossoms: - very slowly and hesitantly, the ground of the child's soul also began to green and to cover itself with the first shy colorful flowers. And on this soft ground her dreaming love wandered, pulling up the weeds everywhere or breaking a flower that had unfolded overnight, greedily inhaling its weak scent – shyly, trembling, dazed. Here and there she bent and cut back the overhanging branches, she drove away the shadow and let in the light, so that the other many buds that were peeping out everywhere from the light green lawn could also develop and unfold in full strength. And the light came from everywhere, for love has a hundred busy hands that never tire of bending aside leaf after leaf so that the sun can shine through...» This is how someone who has the finest sensitivity to the wonderful harmony that exists between the life of nature and the struggling human soul describes it. Who has a lively feeling for how deeply symbolically the human mind's desire for freedom is silently hinted at in the creations of the outside world, and how in the human heart the growth and blossoming, the germination and budding of nature is transformed into the language of the spirit.

I am less satisfied with the first novella in the book: “The Treasure in Heaven”. What Heitmüller achieved so perfectly in “When Summer Came” was to find the right style for his subject: in this novella, he has probably gone wrong. This farmer, who is so clumsily and comically deceived by Resi, the farmer's daughter, is a magnificent character, but he should be drawn with a sharp sense of humor, and we should not have the impression that the lines, which as caricatures we might well like, are being offered to us with complete seriousness. The poet does indeed make attempts at a humorous style throughout. However, it seems to me that the tone of humor does not really venture out. And so we have to accept that Resi deceives the Gaisdorffer farmer, that his deceased daughter writes him letters from heaven asking for loans, that the farmer believes this and really gives his money to help his daughter in heaven find her bridegroom. But Resi, the good girl, wants to use the money to buy herself a very earthly bridegroom, Wastl. The “pious girl” even manages to persuade the farmer that her and Wastl's little offspring is actually the Gaisdorffer farmer's grandchild. Crescence, the deceased daughter, who is still so in need of money in death, brought her the child. The farmer finally marries the “pious girl” with the child that fell from heaven. Wastl goes out into the big wide world, falls in love with someone else, and not without first spending the money that Resi has swindled from the farmer for heavenly purposes.

Heitmüller's skill at drawing simple, undifferentiated people, which we know from “Tampete”, is also evident here. None of these characters, except for the Gaisdorffer farmer himself, has suffered from the mistake of style.

I again place the last novella of the collection, “Abt David”, much higher. Here Heitmüller, the sympathetic poet of mood, lives out fully. Therefore, we are happy to overlook the fact that the idea of the story remains too pale, too abstract. David von Winkelsheim is a real abbot from the turn of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. With a priestly attitude in which Catholic principles have become completely habitual, he combines a fine sense of art. He decorates his monastery with treasures of beauty, where praying and reading the mass are only done out of old tradition, but precisely and dutifully. With delicate sensitivity, the poet depicts how a general trend of the times is reflected in a small corner of the world. His abbot reflects the attitude of many Catholic priests of the time in which the novella is set. The worldly desires and passions that must be silenced in the soul of a priest take the form of artistic longing in David. And in a meaningful contrast to the abbot stands his brother, the man of the world of that time, who brings the adventurous Johanna, the artist in men's clothing, to him so that she can decorate the monastery with works of art. The abbot sees in Johanna only the artist, but the brother loves her as a woman. And when she finds death in the floods of the Rhine, the full contrast between the natures of the two brothers is revealed. Wolf von Winkelsheim – that is David's brother's name – describes this contrast: “At the time when she lost her father so suddenly in Florence, when she had to return home alone, she may well have had the adventurous idea. Dressed as a man, she could better protect herself from the dangers of the streets and the menfolk. But I know all about that, and the morning we broke in here, it was clear to me that there was a woman in those trousers. But I went along with the pious deception – of course! To finally get rid of my promise to give him the paintings. The brother got what he wanted too, he has his pictures, and his “Herr Johannes” lives on with him and can never die. But I have lost “Frau Johanna” - I paid too much for the pictures.” The poet brings this anecdote to life in such a way that he depicts it as it comes alive in him during a stay in the old monastery, which was secularized around 1529, while he rummages through the archives. In the drawing of the monastery and the nature in which it is set, we encounter Heitmüller's beautiful atmospheric painting again. Those with a sense for genuine poetic novella will follow Heitmüller's stories with heartfelt joy.

• 1. Franz Ferdinand Heitmüller: Der Schatz im Himmel. Novelle. Berlin S. Fischers Verlag, 1900.

Open Letter to Herr Dr. Rudolf Steiner, Editor of the Magazine for Literature

Dear Herr Dr. Steiner!

More urgently than ever in the last years, the request of my friends reaches me in these days to take a position anew against the “tactics of violence,” so as not to see my name thrown together with those “anarchists” who are — no anarchists, but one and all revolutionary communists. People are pointing out to me that as a foreigner I am running a danger, in the event of the international measure of an interment of the “anarchists,” of being dismissed from Germany.

I refuse to follow the advice of my friends. No government is so blind and so foolish as to proceed against a person who participates in public life solely through his writings and does so in the sense of a reshaping of conditions without bloodshed. Besides, for years I have unfortunately lost almost all outer contact with the social movement in Europe, whose outer development, by the way, no longer claims my interest in the same degree as the spiritual progress of the idea of equal freedom in the heads of individuals, which is the only thing all hope for the future still rests upon.

In 1891, in my work The Anarchists (in both editions now published by K. Henckell & Co. in Zurich and Leipzig), in the 8th chapter, entitled “The Propaganda of Communism,” I took a position with Auban against the “propaganda of the deed,” so sharply and unambiguously that there cannot be the slightest doubt as to how I think about it. I just reread the chapter for the first time in five years and have nothing to add to it; I could not today say better and more clearly what I think of the tactics of the communists, and their dangerousness in every respect. If since then a portion of the German communists has been convinced of the harmfulness and pointlessness of every violent proceeding, then I claim an essential part in this service of enlightenment.

Also, I am not in the habit of repeating myself, and moreover, for years I have been occupied with an extensive project, in which I am trying to approach psychologically all questions pertaining to the individual and his position toward the state.

Finally, in the seven years since the appearance of my work, the situation has, after all, changed drastically, and one knows today, wherever one wants to know it, and not only in the circles of experts, that not only in respect of tactics but also in all fundamental questions of world view, there are unbridgeable contrasts between the anarchists who are anarchists and those who falsely so call themselves and are called, and that apart from the wish for an improvement and reshaping of social conditions, the two have nothing, but nothing whatsoever, in common.

Whoever still doesn’t know it can learn it from the leaflet by Benj. R. Tucker State Socialism and Anarchism, which he can get for 20 pfennig from the publisher B. Zack, Berlin SE, Oppelnerstraße 45, and in which he will also find a list of all the writings of individual anarchism an incomparable opportunity to increase his knowledge in an invaluable way for the price of a glass of beer.

To be sure, there is a dirty press (it strangely prefers to call itself the decent press), which continues to falsify ever anew even established facts that have become a matter of history. But any battle against it is not only pointless but degrading. It lies because it wants to lie.

With friendly greetings, your devoted

John Henry Mackay
for now, Saarbrucken, Rhine Province, Pesterstr. 4
15 September 1898.

Answer to John Henry Mackay

Dear Herr Mackay!

Four years ago, after the appearance of my Philosophy of Spiritual Activity, you expressed to me your agreement with my direction of ideas. I openly admit that this gave me deeply felt joy. For I have the conviction that we agree, with respect to our views, every bit as far as two natures fully independent of one another can agree. We have the same goals, even though we have worked our way through to our world of thought on quite different paths. You too feel this. A proof of this is the fact that you chose me to address the above letter to. I value being addressed by you as like-minded.

Hitherto I have always avoided using even the term “individualist anarchism” or “theoretical anarchism” for my world view. For I put very little stock in such designations. If one states one’s views clearly and positively in one’s writings: what is then the need of also designating these views with a convenient word? After all, everyone connects quite definite traditional notions with such a word, which reproduce only imprecisely what the particular personality has to say. I speak my thoughts; I characterize my goals. I myself have no need to name my way of thinking with a customary word.

If, however, I were to say, in the sense in which such things can be decided, whether the term “individualist anarchist” is applicable to me, I would have to answer with an unconditional “Yes.” And because I lay claim to this designation for myself, I too would like to say, just at this moment, with a few words, exactly what distinguishes “us,” the “individualist anarchists,” from the devotees of the so-called “propaganda of the deed.” I do know that for rational people I shall be saying nothing new. But I am not as optimistic as you, dear Herr Mackay, who simply say, “No government is so blind and foolish as to proceed against a person who participates in public life solely through his writings and does so in the sense of a reshaping of conditions without bloodshed.” You have, take no offense at me for this my only objection, not considered with how little rationality the world is governed.

Thus I would indeed like to speak once distinctly. The “individualist anarchist” wants no person to be hindered by anything in being able to bring to unfolding the abilities and forces that lie in him. Individuals should assert themselves in a fully free battle of competition. The present state has no sense for this battle of competition. It hinders the individual at every step in the unfolding of his abilities. It hates the individual. It says: I can only use a person who behaves thus and thus. Whoever is different, I shall force him to become the way I want. Now the state believes people can only get along if one tells them: you must be like this. And if you are not like that, then you’ll just have to be like that anyway. The individualist anarchist, on the other hand, holds that the best situation would result if one would give people free way. He has the trust that they would find their direction themselves. Naturally he does not believe that the day after tomorrow there would be no more pickpockets if one would abolish the state tomorrow. But he knows that one cannot by authority and force educate people to freeness. He knows this one thing: one clears the way for the most independent people by doing away with all force and authority.

But it is upon force and authority that the present states are founded. The individualist anarchist stands in enmity toward them, because they suppress liberty. He wants nothing but the free, unhindered unfolding of powers. He wants to eliminate force, which oppresses the free unfolding. He knows that at the final moment, when social democracy draws its consequences, the state will have its cannons work. The individualist anarchist knows that the representatives of authority will always reach for measures of force in the end. But he is of the conviction that everything of force suppresses liberty. That is why he battles against the state, which rests upon force and that is why he battles just as energetically against the “propaganda of the deed,” which no less rests upon measures of force. When a state has a person beheaded or locked up one can call it what one will on account of his opinion, that appears abominable to the individualist anarchist. It naturally appears no less abominable to him when a Luccheni stabs a woman to death who happens to be the Empress of Austria. It belongs to the very first principles of individualist anarchism to battle against things of that kind. If he wanted to condone the like, then he would have to admit that he does not know why he is battling against the state. He battles against force, which suppresses liberty, and he battles against it just the same when the state does violence to an idealist of the idea of freedom, as when a stupid vain youngster treacherously murders the likeable romantic on the imperial throne of Austria.

To our opponents it cannot be said distinctly enough that the “individualist anarchists” energetically battle against the so-called “propaganda of the deed.” There is, apart from the measures of force used by states, perhaps nothing as disgusting to these anarchists as these Caserios and Lucchenis. But I am not as optimistic as you, dear Herr Mackay. For I cannot usually find that speck of rationality that is, after all, required for such crude distinctions as that between “individualist anarchism” and “propaganda of the deed,” where I would like to seek it.

In friendly inclination, yours
Rudolf Steiner

Correction

One of the chiefs of the Communists, Mr. Gustav Landauer, replies in number 41 of the "Sozialisten" to John Henry Mackay's letter contained in number 39 of the "Magazin für Literatur" like someone who can do nothing but parrot his party platitudes and who regards every dissenter as a bad fellow. In Landauer's opinion, Mackay is not an opponent of violence out of principle, but because he lacks courage. Landauer betrays an intimate lack of understanding and unreserved ignorance. Thus he claims that Mackay will replace the verse "Return over the mountains, mother of freedom, revolution!" in the new edition of his "Sturm": "Stay just over the mountains, stepmother of freedom, revolution!" Now the third and fourth editions of the "Sturm" have recently been published (by K. Henckell & Co. in Zurich), enlarged but otherwise completely unchanged and unabridged. I would like to ask Mr. Landauer whether he is brazenly asserting untruths despite knowing the truth, or whether he is just blatantly disparaging people in public opinion without taking the trouble to first check whether his assertions are correct. And what the "courageous" gentleman goes on to write, with complete concealment of everything important in Mackay's letter, only shows that he also edits the "Socialist" in the way that is characterized in Mackay's letters as the most common in the press today.

Automated Translation

This lecture is number six of eighteen lectures from the lecture series entitled, Man's Responsibility for World Evolution through His Spiritual Connection with the Planet Earth and with the Stars Above. It is also known as, Spiritual Science in the Light of Today.

My dear friends,

On the basis of those things which we discussed here in the last lecture, I should now like to bring forward various details which may perhaps be of use to you as members of the Anthroposophical Movement for purposes of defence, whenever from some corner or other, attacks are made against our Anthroposophical Movement, and what must now appear in its train. In recent times, one sees these attacks appearing everywhere. To-day I will confine myself simply to attacks of a certain kind, but at the present moment attacks are being specially directed against our practical undertaking, against which has to come forth as such from the Anthroposophical Movement. Far and wide one can hear it said:—“Well, these people are now founding a ‘Kommende Tag,’ a ‘Futurum’;—what do they mean to do with these things? They only want to establish such practical things for the use of those who confess themselves as belonging to the Anthroposophical view of the world. Economic undertakings are therefore set on foot, in order that those who confess to an Anthroposophical world view may acquire a certain power, and in the first place an economic power.”

If those who make this reproach were to enter more closely into what lies at the basis of such undertakings and see how they proceed out of the whole spirit of the Anthroposophical Movement, such a reproach could not be made; but, on the other hand, one cannot deny that, even amongst those human beings who stand within our Anthroposophical movement, often things are said which contribute richly to the arising of such misunderstandings. It is quite impossible, according to the whole ways and methods by means of which what is here called Anthroposophy seeks to relate itself to the world, it is absolutely impossible that such a judgment can be in any way justified, but that will only be clear to those who can grasp the spirit of our whole Anthroposophical Movement. This Anthroposophical Movement reckons with all the forces present in the evolution of humanity. How often has it been emphasised that the development of humanity has to undergo certain points of transition, and that these turning points should be observed. I should just like to point to one such turning point, in order to show how little justified is the opinion that we may have any definite dogma or theory which we seek to bring to humanity.

It may of course, occur, as a kind of anomaly, a kind of out-growth of fanaticism amongst a few members, that they should think they have to advocate a definite dogma; and indeed, this may be considered right by many, but it does not lie in the spirit of the Anthroposophical Movement. For if, in the spirit of this Movement, we look back into human evolution, then we find that in olden times, those ancient times in which an instinctive clairvoyance was prevalent, the whole disposition of Man's soul was different; man assumed a quite different place in the world. What was striven for in those places which we often designate as the Mysteries, in those ancient epochs of human evolution? Let us for the present leave all details aside, and just try to grasp the meaning of the Mysteries.

Those who wore considered ripe and were found suitable for being received into the Mysteries during their earth-life—that means in the time between birth and death—participated in a certain instruction given them by the Guides in those Mysteries, and that instruction came from what the Leaders of the Mysteries had to impart concerning the super-sensible worlds. No Mystery-Leader made any secret of the fact that, in his opinion, the teachings in the Mysteries did not proceed only from human beings, but that, through the special rites carried on in those Mysteries, super-sensible beings, Divine Spiritual Beings were present during the celebration of the Mysteries, and with the assistance of those Gods present therein everything connected with it was given out. The essential point was this:—all the arrangements made in the Mysteries were of such a nature that they attracted, so to speak Divine Spiritual Beings, who, through the mouths of those who were the Leaders of the Mysteries, gave instruction to those who were the pupils therein.

In those olden times, everything was so organised socially, that not only were the arrangements made accepted by the Guides and Pupils of the Mysteries, but even by those who stood outside the Mysteries and who were not able to share in the life of the Mysteries. The whole arrangements made as social arrangements for humanity, were thus accepted.

One need merely think of old Egypt, and of how those who were the Leaders in the State received their directions from the Mysteries. The Mysteries were regarded as the self-understood place of direction for everything which had to occur within the social life.

To-day, my dear friends, one can also impart instruction, esoteric instruction, which can run in forms similar to those old Mystery-arrangements; but all that has quite another meaning to-day. That is because between our epoch and that ancient epoch, in reference to such things, a significant turning-point has occurred in the development of mankind. In those ancient times man was, as it were, destined to receive the instruction given through the Mysteries and through which he approached those Divine Spiritual Beings, during his life here,—between birth and death. Now things are different. We are living after that turning-point in human evolution, between birth and death. When these things altered, that which man then had to learn through the Mysteries between birth and death;—that, my dear friends, he now learns to-day, before he descends through conception or through birth into a physical body. He learns it according to his Karma, and according to the preparations he had gone through in a former life on earth. What man undergoes now in the Spiritual world, between the great Midnight Hour of existence and his next birth, is something which also includes that Spiritual instruction.

You will find what had to be said in another connection concerning these things, in a cycle which I gave in Vienna in 1914, on the life between Death and a New Birth; but that was only indicated there, was only touched upon with a few strokes. I will now try to characterise it more closely.

Man to-day experiences something akin to the old Mystery instruction, before he descends from the pre-existence condition into his physical body. That is a factor with which anyone must reckon, who through Spiritual knowledge, stands in reality to-day. We must not think of a man born to-day as he was thought of in olden times. In olden times he was so considered that one could say: “He descends on to the Earth and is destined to be initiated through the Mysteries into the knowledge of what he really is as a human being.”

The case is not like that to-day. That arrangement was made for human beings who had gone through a smaller number of earthly lives than has the man of to-day, who has, of course, taken far more into his soul in his many incarnations which made it possible for him to receive certain instruction on the part of the Divine Spiritual Beings in his pre-existent condition.

My dear friends, we have to pre-suppose something of this nature to-day, when we see a child. When we meet a child to-day, we must realise that we no longer have the task of pouring into that child that which had to be poured in, in olden times. To-day it is our task to say: “This child has been taught, he has only laid a physical body around his already-instructed-soul; that which was his pre-birthly instruction from the Gods must make its way through the veils around that soul, it must be brought out.” That is how we should think to-day in the sense of pedagogy, if we are to think in the sense of true Anthroposophical Spiritual Science. It will then be clear to us that, fundamentally, all our instruction shall tend to remove those hindrances which lie around that which the child brings with him into this world from his pre-birthly existence. It is for that reason that, in our Waldorf Teaching, such significance is laid on the fact that the teacher should really regard the child before him as something like a riddle that he has to solve,—in whom he must seek that which the child is concealing in himself; he must not lay the chief importance on anything which he has undertaken to put into the child. He must never proceed in any dogmatic way, but all the time he has to consider the child itself as his teacher, and see how the child through its special behaviour, betrays the very way in which those veils are to be broken through; so that, from out of the child itself, that Divine instruction can come forth. So the Waldorf pedagogy and didactic consist in eliminating those veils which are around the child, so that the child can come to itself, and discover within itself its own Divine instruction. Therefore, we say we have no need to inoculate into the child anything we have conceived as a theory—no matter how beautifully it may be put in our books; we leave that to those who are still rooted in the ancient traditional religious Confessions. We leave that to those who want to make children Catholics or Evangelists or to those who want to make them Jews. That is not our way,—we do not even want to inoculate Anthroposophical pedagogy into the children. We simply want to use what we have learned as Anthroposophy, to make ourselves capable of evoking into being that living spirit which lives in the child from its pre-existence. We want through Anthroposophy to acquire a dexterity in teaching, and not a number of dogmas, which we teach the children. We want to become more dexterous ourselves; we want to evolve a didactic art, so as to make of the child what it has to become. We ourselves are quite clear that all the other knowledge which is to-day brought from the most diverse sides, may indeed instruct the head, but cannot make a person an artist in pedagogy; it does not affect the whole man, but simply the head. Anthroposophy grasps the whole human being and makes him a manipulator of that artistic dexterity, (as I might call it) which should be displayed to the pupils. Therefore, we use Anthroposophy in order to become more dexterous teachers, but not to bring it to the child. We are quite clear as to this:—the spirit does not consist of a number of ideas, of concepts; it is a living thing, and it appears in each individual child in a quite special and individual way, if only we ourselves are able to bring to its consciousness what each child brings to the Earth with its birth here. My dear friends, we would impoverish this Earth, if we only sought to bring to the children things which can be comprised in a sum of dogmas; while on the contrary we make the Earth richer if we cultivate and cherish that which the Gods have given to the child and which it brings with it to the Earth. That which is the living spirit then appears in ever so many human individualities;—not that which some wish to bring as Anthroposophy to these human children in order to make them uniform, but that which brings to life that living spirit which dwells in them. That is our object, and for that reason we have absolutely no interest in bringing Anthroposophical dogma to the children. That is one of the practical outcomes of Anthroposophical Spiritual Science.

This special didactic, this special pedagogic art, is quite different from anything which human beings have thought of till now, for they have only been able to think, for instance “I believe in a certain dogma; that therefore is the best which we can give to our children.” It does not interest us at all to bring any dogmas to the children, for we know that each child brings his own message when he appears on the Earth through the Gate of Birth, and we should destroy that message if we tried to meet it with dogma of any kind. The spirit does not need to be cultivated in an abstract way; when one is able to get it free and bring it to life, the living spirit itself is then there, instead of a series of dogmas.

All our “opinions” are only there as a means of awakening the living spirit in humanity and to keep it quite in a state of continual development; that is why it is quite a wrong idea spread abroad that in the Waldorf School or in anything else which we cultivate pedagogically, we wish to carry on Anthroposophy in a dogmatic way. We do not wish to do so in the Waldorf School, nor do we want to impress Anthroposophy dogmatically on any Science. On the contrary, in every single Science we want to bring out the individual nature of that Science. We are quite convinced that it is essential to create something in the world through Anthroposophy which will extinguish all dogma and bring out the individual nature of each particular sphere. From this point of view, it was needful that those attacks springing up from all corners should be repelled, whenever they turn on our bringing Anthroposophy as Dogma into any Science, or pedagogy.

And now, in what concerns our practical undertakings we find people saying, with remarkable unanimity during the last few weeks in Germany, as also in Switzerland and many other places,—because of the recent publications of the “Kommenden Tag” and the “Futurum,”—“Well, these undertakings are all conducted by Anthroposophists combining together so that they can have their own economic undertakings, and so on. Other people perhaps nay be admitted to these undertakings and concerns, but they will certainly have no voice in the administration,” and so on and so on. Now if we wanted to do things of this kind, it would contradict the very principle on which we stand, i.e. we have to keep the development of humanity in all its details clearly before our minds, and not ask for something absolutely complete and correct, but just ask ourselves: “What ought to take place to-day?” Then we must pay attention to the second turning-point in the evolution of humanity. To-day various affairs, but especially economic affairs are developed amongst humanity from a certain principle of inertia. Formerly these arrangements were born in a tiny circle, usually in a tiny territory. To-day, because they are as a rule State economic concerns, we find, in the place of the individual undertakings of the past, that we have imperial concerns, which have consequently become gigantic, although we find them now springing up from inertia. To-day one speaks of National Economy, thereby welding two things together, the peculiar Group-Spirit which holds a race together, a Group-Spirit is externally, I might say, embodied in the blood. Now the world-relationships have for a long time been of such a nature that, with every kind of Group-Community which expresses itself in the blood, modern economics can have nothing whatever to do,—that is, if they are to be based on sound relationships. So to-day, something is strongly expressed in an economic relationship when the Rhine boundaries are discussed, because it is desired to have on one side of the Rhine a different economic arrangement to what exists on the other side, because of the different racial and national considerations. These national considerations have all arisen from different forces, and to-day have nothing whatever to do with that which constitutes world-economy (Weltwirtschaft). These things have reached a certain crisis in the course of the last third of the 19th Century. Then only did these turning-points in evolution, in the evolution of humanity, become so obvious.

As we have just tried to explain, in olden times man entered physical existence uninstructed by the Gods, and he had to be taught through the Mysteries. To-day he enters already taught, and that which is in his soul has only to be brought to his consciousness. In ancient times, as regards the social and economic life of mankind, things were so arranged that a man was born into a definite social connection, into a certain group, according to just those forces which worked in him before his birth. It was not only the principle of physical heredity which lay at the basis of the oldest forms of inequality, which we find, for instance, in the oldest caste divisions;—in the old caste division the Leaders of the social orderings operated things according to the way in which man, before his birth or conception was destined for a certain Group of his fellow-human beings. In those times when fewer earthly incarnations lay behind the earthly soul, then, because of his fewer earthly incarnations on Earth, a man was born into a quite definite Group, and in that one definite Group alone could he develop socially. A man who, for instance, belonged to a certain caste in Old India, belonged to it because of what his soul had gone through in the Spiritual world; and, because of the small number of his incarnations, if he had been transferred to another caste he would have degenerated in his soul. It was not only the blood-inheritance which lay at the basis of the Caste system, but something which I must call Spiritual pre-determination. Man has long grown out of that. Between our Age and that old epoch there is in this respect another turning-point. People to-day still bear within them marks of a Group-nature, but that if simply a phantom-image. People are born into certain nations, and also into a certain class of society, but in the great number of people growing up in a certain epoch one can already see, even in childhood, that such a predetermination from a pre-earthly existence no longer prevails to-day. To-day human beings are instructed by the Gods in their pre-natal existence, and the stamp of a definite Group is no longer impressed upon them. The last relic of this still lingers in physical heredity. In a sense, one might say that to belong with one's consciousness to a Nationality is a piece of inherited sin and is something which should no longer play a, part in the soul of man.

On the other hand, there is the fact, which does play a definite role in our modern epoch, that man, as he grows up, grows away from all the Group-forms; yet within the economic life he cannot remain without a Group-education, because, with reference to the economic life, the individual can never be dominant. That which constitutes the Spiritual life, springs from the deepest part of man's inner being, within which he can acquire, not only a certain harmony of his capacities, but should perfect and maintain them through a certain schooling. But that which constitutes a judgement in the sphere of economics can never proceed from a single human being. I have given you instances of this, and I have shown you how an economic judgment suet always fall into error when it proceeds from one single man. I will give another example, taken from the second half of the 19th Century.

I have told you that at a definite time, in the middle and second half of the 19th Century, in Parliaments and other corporate bodies the discussions everywhere centered round the Gold Standard. Those speakers who at that time spoke in favour of a Gold Standard—you could have heard them everywhere,—were really clever people. I do a not say that ironically, because the people who at that time appeared as practical and Theoretical speakers in Parliaments and other assemblies really were very clever, and what they said really belongs to the best utterances of Parliament concerning the Gold Standard in the various Countries. But almost everywhere they pointed to one thing with great sagacity,—to the fact that the Gold Standard will set Free-Trade on its feet again, and do away with all Customs Duties. If one reads to-day what was then said about the beneficial effects of the Gold standard on Free-Trade, one has real joy in seeing how clever those people were; but, my dear friends, the very opposite appeared of what all the cleverest people said. As a consequence of the Gold Standard, prohibitive tariffs appeared everywhere. You see that the cleverness in the economic life which proceeded out of single personalities, was not able to help man. That could be proved in the most diverse spheres; because the fact is, that although what a man knows about nature or about another man makes him competent to judge as a single individual, no man is competent to judge as a single individual when it comes to the sphere of economics. A man cannot have a judgment on economic things in the concrete, as a single individual. An economic judgment can only arise when human beings unite together, associate together, and support each other mutually, when there is co-operation in their associations. It is not possible for a single man to have a sound judgment which can pass into economic activity.

Just the contrary happens when a man has a scientific judgment. In a scientific judgment, if it proceeds out of the whole man, he can give a comprehensive judgment; but in concrete economics and in economic trade the point is that one man knows one part, the second knows another part, the third knows something else. The producer in one department knows something, the consumer in the same department knows something else; what they each know must flow together, and then can arise a Group-judgment in the sphere of Economics. In other words, the old Forms are done away with, and a Group-judgment, a collective judgment must arise. Human beings must form themselves into Groups of their own accord, and these must comprise associations of the economic life. From the understanding of a necessary evolving force in evolution it comes about, that this associative life of economics must be taken up by humanity, and take the place of the old group-connections which are still propagated to-day in humanity as an inherited sin. When we consider this; we must indeed say:—As regards knowledge, in ancient times humanity came untaught to Earth, but in the Mysteries, they then received their wisdom. Now human beings descend to Earth instructed, and we have so to arrange our didactics that we can draw out of them that which the Gods have taught them.

In reference to the economic arrangements, formerly human beings were pre-determined, as it were; a stamp from the Gods was imprinted on them, and so they were born into a certain Caste, or into one Group or another. That is also past. To-day human beings are born without that stamp; they are in a sense put as single isolated individuals into humanity, and now they must bring ahout their own Group- forms by means of their Spirituality. It is really not a case of bringing such human beings as profess Anthroposophy; that simply depends upon what the Gods have taught them before their birth, and whether in their former incarnations they have been found ripe for that Divine instruction so that now we can draw forth Anthroposophy from them,—Anthroposophy is in far more people to-day than one thinks, but so many are too lazy to draw forth from themselves that which is in them, or perhaps their school instruction was so organised that the veils cannot be dissolved, and so they cannot attain their consciousness.

In the practical sphere, and especially in the economic sphere, it would be absurd to bring human beings together simply because they are Anthroposophists. We study Anthroposophy in order to obtain insight into the way in which human beings are seeking, from out of their group consciousness, the group-formation which they must seek as a result of their former incarnations. They must be given the opportunity of forming Groups and of carrying out what lies in germ in the development of humanity. So you see it can never be a question of grouping together human beings because they live in a definite dogma, but those human beings who, through their previous life on earth are called upon to find themselves in groups, to those should be given the possibility of associating themselves in these groups. In these things, as soon as we pass from the abstract into the concrete, we find an extraordinary number of riddles,—I might almost say mysterious things; because, whether a man belongs to one group or another, is by no means a simple matter. The longing people now have for simplicity, shows itself in extraordinary ways. I have been informed of something concerning a lecture which the worthy Frohmeyer has just held, “Theosophy and Anthroposophy” in which he says at the end,—“his own personal relationship to Christianity reminds him of the well-known fact that it unfortunately always annoys these people that what is so great can yet he so simple.”

He means apparently that the Anthroposophists are annoyed that the great is so simple. That is, as simple as the laziness of the Rev. Frohmeyer would like to have it, for he will not endeavour to realise the greatness in all its differentiation. One always has to translate these things into their proper language. That is something which is our especial task; we must translate things into their true-speech.

Of course, there can be no question of throwing at anyone's head this doctrine of the instruction of man before his birth, of his being born into Groups in ancient times and no longer being born into Groups now-a-days; but we can permeate ourselves with these truths, and we shall then find a possibility of showing our methods as time goes on, of showing how far removed we are from introducing any dogma into our schools, or of bringing people into economic associations because they admit amongst themselves the truth of certain dogmas.

How strongly that is made a point of in our Waldorf school at Stuttgart, you can see from the simple fact that we have no interest in bringing Anthroposophy to the children. We want to have a method of instruction which can only be gained through Anthroposophy; but that is a purely objective affair. Those children, or rather their parents, who wish them to have instruction from a Catholic Priest in the Catholic religion—for them a Catholic priest can come to the Waldorf school;—and for those who want to he taught the Evangelical religious instruction, the Evangelical minister can come to the school. We place no hindrance whatever in the way of these men. But it became necessary in recent times, when so many parents, especially those from the proletariat, do not want their children instructed either in the Catholic or Evangelical views, to ask whether they perhaps would like their children to have a free religious instruction born of an Anthroposophical education. It then at once became evident that those who would otherwise have been educated without any religion whatever, and would not have entered any religious confession, were very numerous; but these came to a so-called Anthroposophical religious class which did not teach Anthroposophy, but was simply born of Anthroposophy. These children proved to be more industrious in their religious instruction than was the case with the others taught by the Catholic or Evangelistical clergy; but that we could not help, that was the business of the Catholic or Evangelical Priests. Gradually a number of children passed over from the one religious instruction to the other. I believe it was the Evangelical teacher who finally said:—“In the near future I shall have no one left in my class, they are all running away from me!” But that again was most certainly not our fault; there was never any question of teaching dogma of any kind to those children. We have no interest in doing that. We knew that if our method succeeded in removing the veils around the children, they would then have the best instruction,—that which was given to them in the Spiritual world before their descent on to the Earth. Of course, certain confessions are strongly interested in darkening this instruction, not to let it appear. Whoever e.g. can compare the extraordinary relation between what stands in the Papal Encyclical and what transpires in the Spiritual world knows that the Divine religious instruction which children enjoy before their descent is absolutely not what many religious confessions would like them to have to-day. This is especially to be noticed in the Catholic Church; because the Catholic Church, as compared with the Evangelical, has always preserved a more super-sensible influence through its ritual and Ceremonies. But super-sensible influence can appear in various ways, and one can say: it may be an error when it deviates from the truth, it may also be an error when it is the direct opposite of the truth.

Regarding now what concerns the practical undertakings,—naturally I cannot betray here what is discussed in our business meetings, which often last till 3:30. but I can give you the assurance, that in the meetings of the Futurum and Kommenden Tag, Anthroposophy is not discussed, but things of quite another nature. There are things which must be treated only in the most practical manner; how one should manage things in this or that sphere, etc. Here theoretic Anthroposophy plays no role, except that what is discussed should grasp the economic life in as clever a manner as one does when one makes ones thoughts mobile so that they can contact the reality, as happens through a living grasp of the Spirit of Anthroposophy.

One need therefore merely point out, that neither in the Statutes of the “Kommenden Tag” nor of the “Futurum,” are there any Anthroposophical dogmas,—merely economic things; the only question is how to make these undertakings better than similar undertakings to-day. That is one of the points which must be defended, because it is one of the attacks which now crop up from every corner, and will do, do so more and more, unless we put our affairs clearly and energetically before the world. What I have to say recently in Stuttgart is true; it has not yet been learnt in the Anthroposophical Movement how to be attentive to realities. Our opponents are different. They organise and will prove their organisation. We must unconditionally fail unless we are conscious of this, and can make as strong efforts for the good as are now being made for the bad.

Thus to-day I wanted to bring up one of the points in reference to which you will hear definite attacks against our practical undertakings. If you open your ears, and this is necessary (figuratively I mean), you will hear: and many things will have to be defended in this direction. I wanted to-day to say what could enthuse the soul when it becomes necessary to defend in this direction. This enthusing-of-the-soul can come, when we know what it meant in olden times that man came to Earth uninstructed by the Gods; he now comes instructed before birth and his whole life must be ordered thereto. Also what it means that man was formerly determined by the will of the Gods into Castes, Classes, Peoples, Tribes, etc. That disappeared after the turning-point which lies behind us. Man is now destined from Economic necessities to form Groups in Earth-life. That happens in Economic Associations. A right knowledge of the Earth-development of the Spiritual evolution of man and their connections, shows how what we call the “Three-fold Commonwealth” is not merely a political programme, but the result of what flows from a real knowledge of human evolution as a Necessity for the Present and the immediate Future.

Of these things, more tomorrow.

The question that was asked, gentlemen, is quite a detailed one, and we will need to discuss some of its aspects a few more times.

Today, however, I would like to say a few more specific words about the later spread of Christianity. When viewed today, Christianity takes three forms. These three forms must be considered if one is to go back from today's concepts to what actually happened as a result of the Mystery of Golgotha.

Let us first consider the matter in relation to Europe. I already told you the other day how it was: we have Asia over there, and Europe is actually a kind of peninsula of Asia. As you know, it looks like this (a map is drawn). Here would be Norway, here it goes over to Russia, here we come over to the German north coast; here we then have Denmark. From there we come over to Holland, France, and Spain would be here. From here we come to Italy, Greece; the Black Sea would be here, and from there it goes over to Asia. Africa is at the bottom.

Now, you see, in our time it is difficult to talk about the spread of Christianity, because special circumstances also prevail in relation to these things at present. But if you look at Christianity in these areas of Russia, as it was before the world war, then you come to the conclusion that Eastern Christianity still has more of the original religious character of Asia, of which I have spoken to you in its various forms among the Egyptians, the Indians, the Assyrians. Much of what was customary in terms of religious practices, for example, sacrificial rites, which were very well understood in Asia, has been incorporated into the religion that was then permeated by Christianity in these eastern regions. When you get to know the religion in these eastern regions, you immediately have the feeling that the cult is actually much more important than the teaching. The teaching wants to express in human words what belongs to the spiritual world, or at least what human feeling can grasp of the spiritual world. The teaching is also that which the human being wants to approach with his reason. The cult, on the other hand, is something that one has, that remains much more conservative. And where the cult is particularly dominant, religion also takes on a conservative character. So one has to say: Eastern religion here takes on a conservative character, places much more emphasis on the cult than on the actual inner impetus of religion, of religious life in man, than the more Western religions.

Now, the second current of Christianity started from Rome and spread to the north, and was then strongly influenced by Ireland, where the missionaries came from. This southern Central European Christianity, influenced from Rome, also retained the cult, but placed much more emphasis on the doctrine than the eastern essence. Therefore, the cult is felt much less in its importance by Roman Catholicism than the sermon, the doctrine. And there were many more disputes within the Roman Catholic Church about the actual content of the doctrine than in the eastern church.

But this Christianity has also experienced another influence. You see, Christianity originated at the beginning of our era. About six centuries after that, five or six centuries after that, Islam originated. I recently drew Arabia for you. If I draw Asia Minor again, we come down here to Arabia, would go over to India here; Africa would be there, Egypt here. Now, here in Arabia, Islam was founded by Mohammed. This Islam spread very quickly in the second half of the first Christian millennium. It spread from Asia, first towards Syria to the Black Sea, then across Africa to Italy, Spain, and up into western Europe. This Islam has a special peculiarity: it combines the fantastic element with an extremely sober, rational element in its religion. The main tenet of the Muslim religion, which spread rapidly across southern and western Europe and across Asia in the 7th, 8th, and 9th centuries, is that there is only one God, proclaimed to you through Muhammad.

We must now only properly understand what this actually means in world history, that Muhammad proclaimed the principle: There is only one God. Why then was this so strongly emphasized by Mohammed? Mohammed was already familiar with Christianity; and Christianity does not have three gods, but it does have three divine figures. You just don't feel that anymore today. You don't feel today that Christianity did not have three gods from the beginning, but it has three divine figures: Father, Son and the so-called Holy Spirit.

What does that mean? You see, in the Latin language, “person” originally meant nothing other than a figure, a mask, that which reveals itself to the outside world. And in original Christianity, people did not speak of three gods, but of three figures in which the one God reveals himself. And they also sensed how it is with these three figures.

Let us take a look at what the situation is with these three forms. Not true, today, when there is a distinct science alongside religion, one can no longer understand this at all. For science is pursued quite independently of religion today, and one does not really look to religious life when speaking of scientific life. That was not the case in ancient times, nor in the early days of Christianity; rather, religion was received along with all the science that had existed. There were no special priests or special teachers, but there were those who were both priests and teachers. This was particularly the case with what I have described to you as the last mysteries.

Now, it was first seen that man is a natural being. Man is a natural being in that he is born out of the mother's womb as a physical human being with the help of natural forces. These forces are at work in man, as was thought and felt. When I look at how man comes into being as a physical being, I see forces that I also find when I see a tree growing outside, and that are ultimately also present when water evaporates and rain falls. They are natural forces. But in ancient times, people saw spiritual forces behind these natural forces. Spiritual forces are at work everywhere in nature. When a crystal forms inside a mountain, when a stone grows, spiritual forces are at work. When a plant emerges in spring, spiritual forces are at work. When water evaporates, clouds form, and rainwater falls, spiritual forces are at work. The same spiritual forces are at work in man when he develops as a human germ in his mother's body. The same spiritual forces are at work when his blood flows through his veins and his breath comes in and out. In everything that was seen as spirit in nature, which is also seen in the physical human being, the father principle, the father, was seen, because natural science was also religion.

They said to themselves: He who has attained the highest enlightenment in the mystery is an image of this Father-Spirit, who knows everything that is everywhere in nature. That was the seventh degree, the degree that man could take in the mysteries when he had ascended to the dignity of the Father.

The next dignity - I have told you - was that of the sun spirit. What did they understand by the spirit of the sun, which was later called the son? What did they understand by it? I have already explained to you that the Christ called himself the spirit of the sun. They said to themselves: 'Of course, man is born through natural forces, through the same forces that make plants grow and so on; but when he lives on earth, he develops. Just as he is born through natural forces, so, for example, one can no more speak of good and evil in him than in a plant. It will not occur to you to call a deadly nightshade evil because it acts as a poison on humans. You will say: it cannot help it. There is no will in the deadly nightshade, as there is in man. And so one cannot say, when the child is born, that it can be good and evil through the forces of nature. It then becomes good or evil as its human will gradually develops. And in contrast to the forces that work in nature, that which works in the human will, that which can become good or evil in man, was called the son of God or the spirit of the sun. And the one who was able to ascend to the sixth level in the mystery was only his representative. All these individual representatives of the sixth level were representatives of God on earth. And then it was known that the sun is not just a gas body; the sun not only gives light and warmth, but also the forces that develop the will. Therefore, not only light and warmth come from the sun, but also the spirit of the sun. The God-son is at the same time the one who is the spirit of the sun. So that one said: The Father-Godhead is everywhere in nature; the Son-Godhead is everywhere present where human beings develop free will.

But now they felt something very peculiar. They said to themselves: Yes, but does man, by developing free will and being under the son of God, become more worthy or less worthy as a result? - This question was also asked at the time when Christianity was founded.

Gentlemen, just take a look at any natural product, even animals, if you like. Of course, when a cow has grown old, you can still say that you pay less for this cow than you paid when she was young. So she would be worth less than when she was young. Now, that is quite true; but that is not the point. Rather, it is clear that the cow has not become less valuable because of something that works as a will within her, but rather she has become less valuable because of the course of nature. But the person who acts in a bad way, who develops his will in a bad way, becomes less valuable than he actually is by nature! Therefore, man needs a third deity to guide him to make his will good again, to make it completely good, to sanctify his unhealthy will. And that was the third form of the deity: the Holy Spirit, who was depicted everywhere in the mysteries through the fifth stage of initiation, which was thus designated by the people.

And so these old people said: There are three ways in which the deity reveals itself. - You see, they could have said: There is a god of nature, a god of will, and a god of spirit, where the will is again sanctified, spiritualized. - They also said it that way, because the old words mean that perfectly. “Father” actually means something that is connected with the origin of the physical, something natural. Only in the newer languages has the meaning of these words been lost. But then these old people added something when they said: There is a God of nature, the Father; a God of will, the Son; and a God who heals everything in man that can become diseased through the will, the Holy Spirit; but - they added - these three are one. So they said that their most important sentence, their most important conviction, is: There are three forms of the Godhead, but these three are one.

And then they said something else. When you look at a human being, they said, you see a great difference in relation to nature. When you look at a stone, what is at work in it? The Father. When you look at a plant, what is at work in it? The Father God. When you look at a human being as a physical person, what is at work in him? The Father God. But if you look at a person as a spiritual being, in his will: what is at work in there? The Son of God. And if you look at the future of humanity, how it should become, if everything in the will should become healthy: there the Spirit God is at work. All three gods, it was said, work in man. There are three gods or divine figures; but they are one, and they work in man as one unit.

This was the original conviction of Christianity. And if we go back to the early days of Christianity, people still expressed a conviction. They said: Now, this healing, this health-giving Spirit must work in two ways. Firstly, because nature can become ill, it must work on the physical, on that which comes from the Father-God. And because the will must also become healthy, it must act on that which comes from the Son. So they said: This Holy Spirit must work in such a way that it emanates from the Father and the Son at the same time. That was the original conviction of Christianity.

Now, Muhammad actually did get a certain fear. He saw how the old paganism, which had many gods, would degenerate, become corrupt, and ruin humanity. Now he saw Christianity emerging and said to himself: That would also have the danger of idolatry, namely, having three gods. He did not see through that these are three divine forms. Therefore, he entered into opposition and particularly emphasized: There is only one God and Mohammed proclaims him to you. Everything else that is said about the gods is wrong.

This doctrine was then spread with tremendous fanaticism. Now, as a result, in Islam, in Mohammedanism, this thinking of the three divine figures was not there at all. They confined themselves more to speaking of the unified God, whom they then actually felt to be the Father of everything. And that is why Islam has always thought more: Now, just as the stone has no free will to grow as it is, just as the plant has no free will but gets yellow or red blossoms from nature, so everything in man also grows up from nature. - This is how this rigid idea of fate arose in Islam - fatalism is what it is called - that man must actually submit to an absolute, rigid fate: If he is happy, it is ordained by the Father God; if he is unhappy, it is ordained by the Father God. He must simply throw himself into this, as it is called, fate.

You see, gentlemen, that was the religious side of Mohammedanism. But precisely because Mohammed saw everything in man as it is in nature, he was able to absorb all ancient art and all earlier life into himself much more easily than Christianity could. Christianity, after all, mainly saw the way in which human will can be healed. Mohammedanism did not concern itself with that. Why should it? If it is determined that man will become bad, then it is determined by the Father God. In Christianity it has been said: The old pagans, they mainly looked to the Father God; so you have to put the Son of God in contrast. - Mohammed, and especially his later followers, did not say that; they said: The old pagans, even if they had many gods, also worshiped the natural world, in which, of course, the one God also works. Therefore, much of the ancient science and art has continued into Islam. And it was already the case that while, for example, in the ninth century in Europe, Charlemagne ruled in the Frankish Empire, who is known as one of the greatest rulers of the Middle Ages and is mentioned everywhere in history – he had trouble learning the letters, he could not yet write – what he achieved in art and science was a mere trifle compared to what had emerged in Asia under the ruler – his name was Harun al-Rashid – who, during the time of Charlemagne, was active in Islam, in Mohammedanism. There was a great deal of art and science that had remained from ancient paganism. And such art and science then found its way into Europe via the south to Spain.

Now, Christianity spread out from Rome. From Asia, I would like to say, Christianity was bypassed by Mohammedanism. There were also strong struggles between Christianity and Mohammedanism. Truly, Mohammedanism did something very strange there. You know that when an army is stationed somewhere, you can achieve a lot in strategy if you can go around it unnoticed and then attack it from the other side. That is actually what Mohammedanism did to Christianity; it bypassed Christianity in the south and then attacked it from the left flank.

But, gentlemen, if that had not happened, if only Christianity had spread, we would still have no science today! The religious element of Mohammedanism has been repelled, that has been fought through wars. But the intellectual element, which did not deal with religious disputes but which propagated the old science, that came to Europe with Mohammedanism. And what the Europeans learned there has flowed into today's science. Therefore, in our souls today in Europe we actually have two things: we have religion, which was inspired by Christianity, and we have science, which was inspired by Mohammedanism, albeit in a roundabout way. And Christianity was only able to develop here in such a way that Mohammedanism influenced it scientifically.

But this has led to an even greater desire to defend Christianity in this western part of Europe. Wherever cultus is dominant, religion needs less defense; cultus exerts a great influence on man. Here, starting from Rome, cultus was less dominant, although it was preserved; the doctrine became dominant. But now it had to be constantly defended against the onslaught of Mohammedanism. Actually, the whole of the Middle Ages passed under the shadow of these struggles that had been left over from Mohammedanism, struggles that were initially military struggles but later became spiritual struggles. In the second half of the Middle Ages, what is called European culture or civilization gradually developed. What happened gradually?

In the East, as far as Russia and even Greece, Christianity could not but remain true to the old traditions in its cult. But what does that mean? It means performing external acts, even if they are only symbolic. Here one must follow nature. One is much more inclined to emphasize the Father God than the Son God. And just as this principle of destiny arose intellectually in Mohammed, that one must strictly submit to what the Father-God ordains, so this Father-God also came more into his own in Eastern Christianity, in the sense that he came more into his own than the Son-God. Only a remarkable shift in thinking has taken place: these people in the East have always held fast to the Christ, but they have transferred the attributes of the Father God to the Christ. They have somewhat obscured the story here, have not spoken so much of the Son of God, but they have become Christian, recognized Christ as their God, but they saw him with the attributes of the Father God. So that actually for this eastern religion the view arose: Christ, our Father. And that actually lives in all of this eastern religion: Christ, our Father.

And when you come to Europe, a pervasive concept of the three divine persons arose precisely because people wanted to defend themselves against Mohammedanism, against the mere unity of God, which has no three forms.

Now, you see, gentlemen, you will know that you can argue for a while; people can sit down together and argue and argue and argue; one says one thing to the other, the other says another thing to the first! Well, they will argue. But what usually comes of it? They finally separate, go their separate ways! The end of the dispute is that they disagree, that they go their separate ways. Agreement is reached only in the rarest of cases, especially when the disputes are extensive. You know, at first there was a socialist party; they argued a lot. There was a left wing and a right wing. But later the wings became their own party lines. And so it was with the spread of Christianity. It spread. In Asia, that is, in the East, more was given to the Father God, but the Christ was definitely retained; in Europe, more was distinguished between the Father and the Son. There was discussion about it, arguments about it until the 9th or 10th century. Then the great church schism occurred. The eastern church, which is called the Orthodox Church today because it held on to the original, old things, and the western church, the Roman Catholic Church, separated from each other. So first this great difference arose between the eastern church, eastern Christianity, and western Christianity.

This continued for some time. In the 11th, 12th and 13th centuries, people became accustomed to this Eastern and Western division. However, an event occurred that, in a sense, confused the whole matter. And that was the Crusades.

The people among whom Muhammad originally worked and who first accepted Islam were the Arabs. These Arabs had a distinct natural religion. They were therefore actually quite suitable for understanding the “Father”, for recognizing the Father-Godhead. And that is why, in the early days of Mohammedanism, this view of the Father-God, who is active through all nature and also through human nature, developed.

But then other peoples came over from the far reaches of Asia, whose descendants are the Turks today. Mongolian, Tartar peoples came. They fought in wars against the Arab people. And the peculiar thing about this Mongolian population, whose descendants are then the Turks, is that they actually had no nature god at all. They had what man in the most ancient times had: no eye for nature, which the Greeks then had so strongly. They have kept that. The Turks brought with them from their original dwellings no sense of nature, but a tremendous sense of a spiritual god, a god that one can only grasp in thought, that one cannot look at at all. And this particular way of looking at God now passed over to Islam, to Mohammedanism. The Turks adopted the Mohammedan religion from their defeated enemies, but they changed it according to their way of thinking. And while the Muslim religion actually adopted much from the ancient world, from art and science, the Turks actually threw out everything that was art and science, and actually became hostile to art and science. And they were the terror of the western population, the terror of all those who had adopted Christianity.

You see, for Christians, the area where Christianity originated, Palestine with Jerusalem, was a particularly sacred area. Many made the pilgrimage there from all over the West, at great sacrifice. There were many people who were very poor who had to pool together what they needed to make a trip to Palestine to the so-called Holy Sepulchre. Yes, but they made that journey! And it was only when the Turks came that this journey became dangerous, because the Turks extended their rule over Palestine, and they mistreated the Christian pilgrims who came there. And the Europeans wanted Palestine to be free so that they could come there. They wanted to establish their own European rule in Palestine. That is why they undertook these great military campaigns, which have become known as the Crusades, which did not achieve their goal, but which actually express the war, the struggle between Western Christianity, and also between Eastern Christianity and Muslim Turkey. Christianity was to be saved from Muslim Turkey.

Well, there were many people who initially moved to Asia as warriors. What did they see there? The Crusades began in the 12th century and lasted for several centuries, falling right in the middle of the Middle Ages. What did those who went to Asia as crusaders or crusaders see first? First of all, they saw that the Turks were terrible enemies. In the Turks, they were facing terrible enemies. But if one or the other of the crusaders had a little time to look around in days free of fighting, they might have some strange experiences. For example, he might meet some old man who had retreated to a poor room somewhere, who didn't care about Turks, Christians or Arabs, but who had continued to develop with remarkable loyalty what had existed in ancient paganism as culture, as science, as religious science. The Turks didn't care about that. All of this had actually been eradicated by official culture; but there were such people, many such people. And so the Europeans got to know a great deal of ancient wisdom, much of which was no longer present in Christianity. They brought this with them when they returned to Europe.

Now imagine, gentlemen, what was there. Even in earlier times, the Arabs had moved across Italy and Spain, bringing with them this art and this scientific way of thinking. It spread and became our science. Now the ancient Eastern science was brought over, and it mixed with our own. And as a result, something very special came into being in Europe.

You see, the Roman Church adopted the cult, although it cultivated it less than the Eastern Church; it adopted the cult, but it also emphasized the teaching very strongly. But this teaching, this instruction, this religious instruction, was dependent on the person in the old church. Right up to the time of the Crusades, it was dependent on the person. Whatever was proclaimed from the pulpit, whatever was approved by the councils that were held, that was taught. And then there was also the so-called New Testament, the Bible. But reading the Bible was actually forbidden to people who were not priests, and this prohibition was strictly adhered to. It was actually something terrible if, in those ancient times before the Crusades, someone wanted to read the Bible, the New Testament. That was not allowed. And so you actually only had what the priesthood taught. The Bible was not in the hands of laymen, of believers.

But now something had come about – because the Arabs had brought science, because people had become acquainted with the ancient wisdom of the East – that made a great many people feel: The priests don't know that at all, the ones who teach! There is much more wisdom than they teach. – And from that came the intention: Now let's see where they get their wisdom from. And so the tendency arose to actually read the Bible and get to know the New Testament. And from that arose the third form of Christianity: Protestant Christianity, which then found a special representative in Luther, but which actually had already emerged earlier in accordance with its intention.

Take, for example, these areas of present-day Czechoslovakia, Bohemia and Bavaria, or take these areas here on the Rhine, from Holland to Germany – I could also name many other areas – where fraternities formed everywhere. Here the “Brotherhood of Common Life” formed in Holland on the Rhine. Here (pointing to the drawing) the brotherhoods formed that were called the “Moravian Brothers”. What did these brotherhoods want? These brotherhoods said: Yes, true Christianity was not actually spread from Rome, but Christianity is such that one must actually first get to know it, through the inner life. - And at first this intention to get to know Christianity originally was actually something that was striven for inwardly. Only later did they say: One must get to know the Gospel. - But both arise from the same.

You see, that is the great difference between Hus, who worked in today's Czechoslovakia, and Luther. Hus paid even less attention to the gospel than to the fact that man experiences Christianity inwardly. Later, this became more externalized into learning the gospel.

But the gospel, the New Testament, was written under completely different circumstances. It was written in a figurative language that was no longer understood later on. Let me give you an example.

At one point in the gospel, it is told how Christ healed the sick. Now, at that time, when Christ healed the sick, there were many more of those diseases in the areas where he taught that are today called nervous, nerve diseases, than those diseases that are actually located in the organs. Now, nerve diseases can often be cured from person to person through encouragement, love and so on. Most of the healings of which there is mention go back to such healing. But then it says at one point: “When the sun had set, the Christ gathered the people around him and healed them.” This passage, when you read it today in the Gospel, seems to people as if it were meaningless, as if it were only intended to give the time. But why is the time given at this point? Because they want to say: The powers that a person develops when they want to heal others are stronger when the sun is not in the sky, when it comes through the earth with its rays, than when the sun is in the sky. - This is a very meaningful passage: “When the sun had set, the Christ gathered the people around him and healed them.” It is no longer heeded. The intention was to suggest how the Christ uses the natural forces inherent in human beings for healing. And so the gospel was only translated at a time when it could no longer be understood. Basically, the gospel is very, very little really understood.

Now, actually it happened in all these areas, both in Oriental Christianity and in Western and Protestant Christianity, as it has happened in some other cases that I had to deal with, where something that was originally well understood was retained later, but no longer understood. Christianity was no longer properly understood in any of its three forms. I would like to say that each of these three forms has taken one thing mainly: Oriental Christianity took the Father God, even if He is called Christ. The Roman Catholic Western religion took the Son God, looks up to the Father only as the old man with a flowing beard, who is still painted, but little is said of the Father God. And Protestant Christianity has the Spirit God. In Protestant Christianity, the main question discussed is: How do you get rid of sin? How is man healed of sin? How is man justified before God and so on? So actually, while Christianity originally had the one Godhead in three forms, Christianity has fallen apart into three denominations. Each confession has a piece, a real piece of Christianity.

But by merely uniting the three pieces, one will not recover the original Christianity. One must rediscover it from the right human power, as I have already begun to show in the presentation I recently gave. But I also wanted to show you this so that you can see how difficult it is today to arrive at original Christianity. Because, if you ask about Eastern Christianity: What is true Christianity? Yes, they will tell you everything that refers to the Father, and then they will call the Father Christ. If you ask the Roman Catholic Church about the essence of Christianity, they will tell you everything that refers to the sinfulness of man, the wickedness of human nature, that man must be redeemed from his suffering and so on. You are told everything that relates to the Son, to the Christ. If you ask what the essence of Christianity is in terms of Protestantism, you are told: Everything depends on the principle of the recovery of the will, of healing, of the recovery of the will, of justification before God. They then speak of the Holy Spirit and call it Christ.

And that is how we came to have everything we have today; not that people thought: Now we have to unite the three different sides of Christianity, but they said: Now we understand nothing at all! And that is how the mood of the present has come about and the necessity to rediscover Christianity.

And in this way I would like to talk to you next Saturday about the mystery of Golgotha. Then I will see that I come to an end with this answering of questions.

DR STEINER:

My dear friends!

Today our agenda begins by giving us the pleasure of the lecture by Herr Werbeck.

Louis Werbeck gives his lecture on ‘The Opposition to Anthroposophy’.

DR STEINER: Dear friends, let us have a fifteen-minute break before continuing with yesterday's meeting of members.

DR STEINER: My dear friends! Let us hear again today the words which are to resound in our soul both here and later, when we depart and carry out with us what is intended here:

Soul of Man!
Thou livest in the limbs
Which bear thee through the world of space
In the spirit's ocean-being.
Practise spirit-recalling
In depths of soul,
Where in the wielding will
Of world-creating
Thine own
I Comes to being
Within God's I.
And thou wilt truly live
In the World-Being of Man.

For the Father-Spirit of the heights holds sway
In depths of worlds begetting being.
Seraphim, Cherubim, Thrones!
Let there ring out from the heights
What in the depths is echoed
Speaking:
Ex Deo nascimur.

Soul of Man!
Thou livest in the beat of heart and lung
Which leads thee through the rhythm of time
Into the realm of thine own soul's feeling.
Practise spirit-awareness
In balance of the soul,
Where the surging deeds
Of the world's becoming
Thine own I
Unite
With the World-I.
And thou wilt truly feel
In the Soul-Weaving of Man.

For the Christ-Will in the encircling round holds sway
In the rhythms of the worlds, bestowing grace on the soul.
Kyriotetes, Dynamis, Exusiai !
Let there be fired from the East
What through the West is formed
Speaking:
In Christo morimur.

Soul of Man!
Thou livest in the resting head
Which from the grounds of eternity
Opens to thee the world-thoughts.
Practise spirit-beholding
In stillness of thought,
Where the eternal aims of Gods
World-Being's Light
On thine own I
Bestow
For thy free willing.
And thou wilt truly think
In the Spirit-Foundations of Man.

For the world-thoughts of the Spirit hold sway
In the being of worlds, craving for light,
Archai, Archangeloi, Angeloi !
Let there be prayed from the depths
What in the heights will be granted
Speaking:
Per Spiritum Sanctum reviviscimus.

Let us once again take hold of these words in meaningful sections. Here we have:

[Rudolf Steiner writes on the blackboard as he speaks. See Facsimile 4, Page XV bottom.]

Practise spirit-recalling

What takes place in the soul of man is related to all being in the cosmos of spirit, soul and body. Thus this ‘Practise spirit-recalling’ especially points to what is heard in the call to the Seraphim, Cherubim and Thrones when the manner in which they work in the universe is characterized:

Seraphim, Cherubim, Thrones!
Let there ring out from the heights
What in the depths is echoed.

We have the right cosmic concept when we picture in our soul how the voices of Seraphim, Cherubim and Thrones resound in the universal word and are heard because they find an echo in the depths of the grounds of world existence, and how what is inspired from above and what resounds from below, the universal word, emanates from Seraphim, Cherubim and Thrones.

In the second verse we have:

Practise spirit-awareness

This is related to the second hierarchy: Kyriotetes, Dynamis, Exusiai. To characterize them we imagine their voices in the universal word working as expressed in the words:

Kyriotetes, Dynamis, Exusiai!
Let there be fired from, the East
What through the West is formed.

The third member of man's existence is:

Practise spirit-beholding

To this we add the indication of how the third hierarchy enters with its work into the universal word:

Archai, Archangeloi, Angeloi!
Let there be prayed from the depths
What in the heights will be granted.

[As shown on the blackboard]

Practise spirit-recalling
S. Ch. T.

Let there ring out from the heights
What in the depths is echoed.

Practise spirit-awareness

K. D. Ex.

Let there be fired from the East
What through the West is formed.

Practise spirit-beholding

A. AA. Ang.

Let there be prayed from the depths
What in the heights will be granted.

Here we have the opposite of the first hierarchy in whose case the voices resound downwards while their echo comes up from below. And we have here the voices heard coming from beings who pray for something from below and whose prayer is answered from the heights downwards into the depths. From above downwards: from the heights towards the depths; from the encircling round: East and West; from below upwards: from the depths into the heights.

My dear friends! Something left over from earlier is a letter to the Vorstand of the Anthroposophical Society in Dornach from the Polish Anthroposophical Society which has not been represented here: ‘The working groups in Poland—Cracow, Lemberg, Warsaw—have resolved to found the Polish Anthroposophical Society. The Society shall serve the ideas of Anthroposophy by revealing the treasures of its spiritual teachings to the widest circles and by working among the Polish people in a time of destiny, helping them to recognize their mission. For the celebration of the laying of the Foundation Stone, the newly-founded Anthroposophical Society in Poland sends to the leader and founder of the international Anthroposophical Movement, Dr Steiner, this expression of their highest respect. The Polish Anthroposophical Society urgently requests that he may concern himself with it and not deny it his protection and guidance. For its part, it commits itself ... (the final words were obscured by noise).

For the Warsaw circle:
For the Lemberg circle:
For the remaining circles:
Luna Drechsler as their representative.’

Furthermore from Cologne on the Rhine: ‘For the celebration of the laying of the Foundation Stone in 1923 I wish you and ... (unclear) that the significance of this laying of the Foundation Stone may be revealed to all the world. With cordial greetings, Gottfried Husemann.’

My dear friends, I now consider that for the moment the Vorstand has put before you the main concerns that had to be brought to you. In the next few days there will still be the matter of a draft of some By-Laws or rules of practice to be attached to the Statutes. But now our main concern, before any other discussions, is that our dear friends should have a chance to express what they wanted to say. Here is a list of those who wish to speak or report, and I think it would be best, in order to save time, not to proceed along given lines—for if you do this you waste time—but to bring to completion what our respected, dear friends have to say. So I would like to ask whether you agree that those friends who have already asked to speak should now have their say.

They are Herr Leinhas, Dr Kolisko, Dr Stein, Dr Palmer, Herr Werbeck, Dr Lehrs, Miss Cross, Mademoiselle Rihouët, Mr Collison, Frau Hart-Nibbrig, Herr de Haan, Herr Stibbe, Herr Zagzwijn, Frau Ljungquist.

Dr Wachsmuth points out that these requests to speak were made at the beginning and referred to general matters, not specific themes.

DR STEINER: Then let me ask for the names of those friends who now wish to say something. It is naturally necessary, for the further progress of the meeting, that those friends or delegates who are concerned about something should express this. So now in a comprehensive, general discussion let me ask all those who wish to do so to speak about what concerns them with regard to the Anthroposophical Society which has been founded here.

MR COLLISON: Later on could we please speak about education.

DR STEINER: Would anyone like to speak about something entirely general? If this is not the case, dear friends, then let us proceed to the discussion of more specific aspects. According to the programme we have a discussion on the affairs of the Society and on educational questions. Perhaps someone first has something to say with reference to Herr Werbeck's lecture and so on?

Herr Hohlenberg wishes to speak.

DR STEINER: Herr Hohlenberg will speak on the subject of the antagonism we face.

Herr Hohlenberg does this.

DR STEINER: The best thing will be if I leave what I have to say on this subject till the conclusion of the discussion. A good deal will still be brought forward over the next few days.

The next person who wishes to speak about the affairs of the Society, and also the Youth Movement, is Dr Lehrs. May I invite Dr Lehrs to speak.

Dr Lehrs speaks about the Free Anthroposophical Society.

DR STEINER: My dear friends! I do not want a misunderstanding to arise in respect of what I said here a few days ago. Dr Lehrs has understood me entirely correctly, and any other interpretation would not be correct. I did not mean that what was suggested then no longer applies today. I said that I had naturally felt it to be tragic that I had to make the suggestion of creating a division between the Anthroposophical Society in Germany and the Free Anthroposophical Society. But this suggestion was necessary; it was the consequence of the situation as it was then. And now it is equally necessary that this Free Anthroposophical Society should continue to exist and work in the manner described by our young friend from various angles. So please consider Dr Lehrs' interpretation of what I said a few days ago to be entirely correct.

I assume that Herr Hans Ludwig Pusch wishes to speak to what Dr Lehrs has said, so may I ask Herr Hans Ludwig Pusch to speak now.

Herr Hans Ludwig Pusch speaks about the aims and endeavours of German young people in Hamburg.

DR STEINER: Could I ask you to continue with your report at this point tomorrow. We have to keep to the times on the programme.

We shall continue this meeting tomorrow after Dr Schubert's lecture on ‘Anthroposophy, a Leader towards Christ’. May I now ask those friends who wish to speak, or who feel they must speak for definite reasons, to let me know this evening after the lecture so that I can gain an impression of the number of speakers and make room in the agenda. Please bear in mind that we must make the most fruitful use of the days at our disposal. Apart from what has already been announced in connection with my three last lectures, it will also be necessary to have some smaller, specialist meetings with the doctors present here. Other smaller meetings will also have to be planned.

Now let me announce the next part of the agenda: This afternoon at 4.30 the Nativity Play; in the evening at 8.30 my lecture. Tomorrow morning at 10 o'clock the lecture by Dr Schubert on ‘Anthroposophy, a Leader to Christ’. This will be followed by the continuation of today's meeting which we have had to interrupt in the middle of a speech. Unfortunately we shall probably have to do this again to enable us to carry out the proceedings in a rational manner. The meeting is now adjourned till tomorrow.

I still have a few announcements to make and would ask you to remain in your seats. First of all, please do all you can to avoid crowding at the entrance. I have been told that older people who are more frail than the young have been put in danger, so please avoid this and give consideration to others.

Secondly, Dr Im Obersteg, Centralbahn Platz 9, Basel, who has frequently arranged rail and sea travel for us, has offered to make the necessary arrangements for those who need them for their return journey. In our experience Dr Im Obersteg's service is exceptionally reliable. Chiefly it will be a matter of taking over ship and rail tickets for the western countries such as Norway, Sweden, England, Holland, France, Spain, Italy and so on. You can either go direct or arrange it through us. Will those who have wishes in this respect please approach Dr Wachsmuth.

Dear attendees!

As always before these performances, I would like to take the liberty of saying a few words today, first about our eurythmic art, for those of the honored audience who were not present at earlier performances.

Goethe said of his artistic sensibilities: When man is placed at the summit of nature, he feels himself to be a whole nature, bringing forth a higher nature from within himself by extracting order, measure, harmony and meaning from all phenomena and ultimately rising to the production of the work of art. It is out of this spirit, out of true Goetheanism, that our eurythmic art was born. I do not wish to give you a theoretical discussion in these few words, for it is self-evident that something truly artistic needs no explanation but must commend itself and be understood directly in the act of presentation. But the way in which an attempt is being made here to create an art form must be discussed in order to be understood.

They will show all kinds of movements performed by people and groups of people. You will see the way individuals within the groups relate to one another. All the movements that appear are born out of the human organism and the interaction between people. They are not contrived or arbitrary in any way, but are a real, silent language.

The development of this art is based on a deeper - to use Goethe's expression - [sensual-transcendental insight into the human being and its connection with the world. With such a sensory-supersensory insight into the human being, one can recognize which lawful movements the human larynx and its neighboring organs carry out when a person reveals the sounding, audible language or singing of himself. It is precisely those things to which we do not pay attention when we listen to spoken language, the internal movement and especially the movement patterns, that have been studied here according to Goethe's principle of metamorphosis, according to which what is formed or takes place in one organ system can be transferred to other organ systems or to the whole organism. According to this deeply significant law of Goethe's metamorphosis, what otherwise underlies movements or the potential for movement is quite naturally transferred to human speech, [via] the movements of the limbs of the human being in the world. And this is precisely how the possibility arises that the sight of such a mute language must have an artistic effect. For what is the artistic in human beings actually based on? It is based on the fact that we receive impressions of the life of nature and of human beings without the abstract imagination, or imagination at all, mixing into these impressions.

In ordinary language – even when expressed poetically – two elements of the human organism are embodied: on the one hand, the element of thought, which in more advanced, civilized language has already taken on a strongly conventional character, and on the other hand, the more subconscious will element, the emotional element, is at the root of it. If one can eliminate the thought element from speech, which crystallizes into the tone of the heard language and thus does not allow the heard language to be completely artistic, then one achieves something that can be believed to be particularly artistic. And so all the movements of speech are transferred to the human limbs; but only the will element is incorporated. The human being as a whole expresses itself, not through sharp gestures as in other dance or similar arts, but the human being as a whole expresses itself in a lawful way.

Therefore, there is nothing arbitrary, nothing merely pantomime or mimic in this eurythmy. If two people or groups of people in completely different places express one and the same piece of poetry or one and the same piece of music through this formal language of eurythmy, there is no more individuality in the two different performances than there is in the performance of one and the same Beethoven sonata by two different pianists. All arbitrariness is avoided. There are inner laws in the sequence of movements that could not be otherwise, because they are derived from the essence of nature itself. Just as the harmony and melody of music have an inner lawfulness, so here everything that is revealed in the movements has an inner, musical lawfulness. We are dealing here with a visible musical art.

Thus you will find many things presented in two ways, either at the same time through music and eurythmy or through recitation and eurythmy. In this, recitation must return to its old, good element, where it is not cultivated only for its prosaic, literal content, as it is today, but for the rhythmic, the measured quality of the sound, which is what actually constitutes the artistry of the poem. For what is felt today as poetry is not, in the first instance, the actual artistry of the poetry, but the prose content of the poem. It is the formal, the rhythmic, the metrical that underlies it, and an inner lawfulness of the essence of the world is revealed.

In the second part, we will present Christmas plays today and tomorrow, today a Paradise Play.

We resumed these plays several years ago. I can say that I myself have a very close connection with the revival of the plays in our family. It is now almost forty years since I became acquainted with these plays through one of the men who has rendered the greatest service to their collection, through my revered friend and teacher Karl Julius Schröer. Schröer was one of the first to collect these games together with Weinhold, Schröer in particular. While Weinhold collected them in Silesia, Karl Julius Schröer collected them in the Oberufer region near Pressburg [Bratislava], where Germans had advanced towards the parts of European territories where other languages were spoken as a result of emigration from more western European areas.

The Hungarian countryside is permeated by old German colonists: in Transylvania, where the Saxons settled, in the Banat, where the Swabians came from the areas around Lake Constance, in Alsace, in what is now southern Württemberg, in northern Switzerland – numerous colonists moved into the areas of northwestern Hungary. And they brought with them those Christmas plays, those Bible plays, which were performed in their original form in the German motherland until the 16th century, and later only remained in a few places, fairly unnoticed by the educated world. In the colonies, especially in the Oberufer region, near the island of Schütt, near Pressburg, the practice of playing these Christmas games in a dignified manner every year around Christmas time has become established and was preserved until the forties, fifties and even sixties of the last century. And when they began to disappear from the scene, Karl Julius Schröer collected these Christmas games in the Hungarian region of Oberufer.

It is extremely interesting to observe these Christmas plays. They provide cultural-historical evidence of the way in which Christianity was actually introduced in Europe in centuries past, and how it affected the entire spiritual life of the people. Schröer had still observed it himself, and we often talked about these things, and he told me with what dignity, with what inner participation the people celebrated these Christmas games. They were well preserved by particularly select farmers in the village concerned, by particularly respected people. They were passed down from father to son, from son to grandson, and were held sacred; they were not easily shared with outsiders. It took a great deal of effort for Karl Julius Schröer to get them out. But, as I said, it was already the dawn of this play for the German colonists in Hungary.

When October, the harvest season, approached, the person who was considered the master of the arts in these farming and working-class areas – these were mostly extremely poor communities even back then, these German communities in Hungary – he gathered the local boys he considered most worthy, and he rehearsed these Christmas plays with them. The dignity with which this was done may be gathered from the fact that, under strict disciplinary laws, those who were allowed to participate were not allowed to leave during the entire period of the play. This is expressly prescribed for those who were allowed to participate: that they are not allowed to go to the pub or indulge in any other debauchery during the entire time. During the whole time, that meant a lot: it was immediately after the grape harvest was over that one was not allowed to get drunk. Anyone who somehow violated these rules was immediately dismissed.

All the roles were played by young men. The old custom of not allowing women to participate in comedy plays, including sacred comedies, was still in place, although the educated world had long since abandoned it. However, it was still preserved and noticeable at these festival plays. And from this one can see how ancient and sacred customs have been preserved in the performance of these plays. So tomorrow, for example, we will perform a play for you, a pastoral play, in which the Rhine is mentioned, from which one can see how these plays were originally, at least as late as the sixteenth century, were performed near Lake Constance. These things take us back, I would say, to the sixth century, so that we have before us the living out of Christian life as if it were happening right in front of us.

To present something like this, I would say, as a directly revealing story to the contemporary world, that is what we would like to make our task. Now that everything that is cultural life has become so sober, so dry and so abstract, now is the time to go back to such things, which, in directly vivid imagery, by raising the old into the present, transport us back into the becoming, into the development of humanity.

Of course, since we are not dealing with trained actors, I would ask you to receive this performance, as well as the eurythmy performance itself, as one of our modest attempts. We ourselves believe that what our eurythmy art has become today is only a beginning. It is indeed a supreme artistic aspiration to apply the human being as an instrument in art, not the violin, not the piano, not the trumpet, but the human being. Especially when you consider how all the laws of nature are somehow in action in the speaking human being, then you will know how to appreciate the ideal on which eurythmy is based. But it is only just beginning. We are our own harshest critics, and so I ask you to please be very indulgent as you take it all in.

It should also be mentioned that the eurythmy performance will include not only individual pieces but also the Norwegian “Dream Song of Olaf Ästeson”. It comes from the oldest Nordic folk myth that can be expressed artistically; it was rediscovered when, alongside the Statsmäl [Riksmäl], the Landsmäl of the old Norwegian language, the popular Norwegian language, was cultivated. This dream song, this Traumlied, gave the impression of genuine Norwegian folklore, and with the help of friends in high places, I tried to express in our present language that which leads back to ancient European-Nordic times in this poem.

I would like to say that this “Dream Song” expresses a very popular worldview, a worldview that is particularly loved in those cultures that have developed on the one hand in the particularly shaped way of life in Norway and in the influence of the neighboring cultures. I would say that here, too, we can see into the depths of human feeling – especially in the way that the relationship between Nordic, clairvoyant paganism and the Christianity that was spreading there flows into one another here in the 'Dream Song'. What has emerged from the confluence of these two world currents, taken up as an elementary, original folklore and its worldviews, is actually enshrouded in mystery in this “Dream Song of Olaf Åsteson”.

It is only necessary to mention one of all the facts which speak to the same purpose, in order to see what far-reaching changes preceded the fifth century. At the end of the fourth century we find the Visigoths east of the Danube; a century later the map shows them in Spain. And just as this race travelled from one end of Europe to the other, so did many more. They penetrated into countries where they met with different civilisations, and adopted other customs. To understand the revolution which a hundred years produced in Central Europe, we must cast a glance back to the previous historical epochs. If we follow the records of the Romans, we find warlike tribes along the Rhine, whose main occupation, apart from fighting, was the chase. Farther east we find agriculture and cattle raising among the Germani; and farther still the Romans speak of the tribes in the northeast as of something nebulous and obscure.

We are told that this race, which dwelt by the sea, worshipped the Sun, believing that it saw the Sun goddess rising from the ocean. Of the Semnones, who lived in the Electorate of Bradenburg, it is told that their divine service was characterised by blood sacrifices. True, with them it was not, as a rule, human beings, but animals, that were offered up to the Gods. Nevertheless their sacrificial services bore a reputation for cruelty, which distinguished them from other tribes. And there would be much besides to relate concerning this epoch.

Then followed a comparatively quiet time.

Gradually the frontiers of the Roman Empire were crossed by various tribes. To begin with, in the third century the Burgundians advanced against the Roman Empire in the southwest, and farther north the Franks, who invaded Gaul. Farther east, too, on the Danube, other tribes moved against the Roman Empire. Thus the Romans, with their highly developed culture, had to defend themselves againse those peoples. We find here a great difference in levels of culture. Among the Germani everywhere, a system of barter still prevailed, among the Romans money transactions had been developed. Trade among the Germani was a matter of exchange; trading with money was still unknown to them. We see the clash of highly developed culture with barbaric tribes.

Then the Huns broke in. In the year 375 occurred the first clash with the Herulern and the Ostrogoths, whose dwelling place was on the Black Sea. They were forced westwards, and consequently the Visigoths were also obliged to break up their settlements. Where were they to go but into the Roman Empire, which they inundated as far as the Danube. Already the Roman Empire was split into an East and West Empire, the former with Byzantium, the latter with Rome, as its capital. The East Roman ruler assigned dwelling places to the Visigoths; but they nevertheless first had to fight for them at the battle of Adrianople. There, in that neighbourhood, Ulfils wrote his translation of the Bible. Soon, however, the Visigoths were obliged to resume their wanderings. Slavonic tribes followed in their footsteps, pressing them farther westward. Under their king Alarich, they conquered Rome, and, in the fifth century, founded the Visigothic Empire in Spain.

The Ostrogoths followed them, and likewise sought to establish a dwelling place in the domain of the Roman Empire. The Germanic tribe of Vandals conquered Spain, then sailed over to Africa, and, in the region where Carthage once stood, founded a Vandal Empire, and thence harassed Rome with incursions. Thus the whole character of these races is such, that into every part of the new configuration of Christian Rome, the Germanic races pressed. From this type of conquest new configurations of quite a special character arose.

In the domain of the former Gauls, rose a mighty empire—the empire of the Franks—which, for a whole century, imprinted its stamp on Central Europe. Within it, above all grew up what is commonly called Roman Christianity. Those other races—Goths, Vandals—who, in rapid triumphal marches, had subdued for themselves parts of the Roman Empire, soon disappeared again, completely, out of History. With the Franks we see a mighty empire extending over Europe. What is the reason for this?

To find that out, we must cast a glance at the way in which these tribes extended their empire. It was done in this way: a third, or two-thirds, of the region which they had invaded, was divided among the conquerors. Thus the leaders received great tracts of land, which they cultivated for themselves. For this work the conquered inhabitants were employed; a part of the population became slaves, or unfree. This was the policy of the Visigoths in Spain, the Ostrogoths in Italy. You may suppose that, under the existing circumstances where the population lived at a high level of culture, this mode of procedure caused great hardship and could not be permanently maintained.

It was different in Gaul.

There, there were great forests and uninhabited tracts of land. There, too, the conquered regions were divided, and large portions fell to the leaders, so that the leaders became great landowners, and rulers over the vanquished tribes. Here, however, they were not trammelled by already existing circumstances; there was room for expansion. And, although the leaders became rulers, circumstances made it possible for this to happen without great oppression. In the days before folk migrations, members of one tribe had, in essentials, resembled one another. Freedom was a common Germanic possession; in a certain sense, every man was his own master, responsible to no one, on his own land and soil. The independence and power of the leaders increased, because so many had become dependent on them.

Hence, they were in a position to protect themselves better; and small proprietors placed themselves under the protection of greater. Thus arose a protective relationship of the powerful towards the less powerful. Many small feuds were carried on by many small landowners who could not adequately protect themselves, in dependence upon more powerful protectors. Some swore fealty in case of war; others relinquished parts of their property, or paid tribute to their protectors. Such dependents were called vassals. Others held land under feudal tenure from the big proprietors, as payment for their service in case of war; this was the fief. The powerful warriors were feudal lords, the others were vassals. Thus, in the most natural way in the world, proprietary relationships grew up.

The invasions of the Goths had no lasting effect. Those peoples who had forced their way into civilised lands, came to nothing; their power was soon broken.

It was different in Gaul. Here, where extensive tracts had still to be cleared, the immigration of new tribal masses could only be welcomed, in the interest of culture. The great men in the Empire of the Franks were unimpeded in the cultivation of their racial character.

The Goths and Vandals were wiped out, they and all the Germanic tribes who came into the regions where industry was already developed. We see the Franks as independent of an industrial foundation; and the Franks gave their impress to the character of the ensuing age, especially because they provided a base upon which evolving Christianity was able to expand. Although the Visigoths were originally Aryan Christians, other ideas were engrafted into their belief; among the industrial assumptions which were foreign to their nature, that was developed which may be regarded as the stamp of materialistic conditions. It was not so among the Frankish tribes, where the Church was the great landowner. Undaunted by material considerations, these abbots, bishops, priests and theologians devoted themselves to the service of religion. Unalloyed, as it emanated from the nature of these men, the characteristic culture of this form of Christianity was developed. The spiritual strivings of the free ranks were encouraged by the influx of the Celtic element. The Celts, whose fiery blood again manifested itself, became the teachers and leaders of the spiritually less active Franks. From Scotland and Ireland came Celtic monks and priests in great numbers, to spread their faith among the Franks.

All this made it possible for Christianity to be, at that time, not a mirror of external conditions, but to develop freely, unconstrained by material considerations. The conditions of Central Europe were determined by Christianity. All the knowledge of antiquity was thus preserved by Christianity for the Germanic tribes. Aristotle gave the spiritual kernel, which Christianity sought to grasp. At that time there was no dependence on Rome. The Christian life could develop freely in the Empire of the Franks. Plato's world of ideas found entrance too into this spiritual life. This was brought about especially through the influence of Scottish monks, above all through Scotus Erigene in his work De Divisioni Naturae, a work which is well-known as indicating a high level of spiritual life. Thus we see how spiritual life was being formed, unhindered by external conditions. Spiritual currents received their characteristic independently of industrial conditions. Later when the material pressure increased they accepted, retrospectively, the character of these conditions; then, however, when they themselves joined them, they exercised influence on them in their turn.

Several small kingdoms formed what we know as the Merovingian Empire, which later came under the power of one ruler.

From the foregoing description you will see that southern Christianity was bound to be different from that with which it was later amalgamated. The Christianity of the Franks was comparatively independent, and could make use of political relationships, to its own advantage. The farther the Roman rule was pressed back, the more clerics came from among the Franks. Their education lagged far behind that of the other clergy; the learned priests and monks were all Celts.

In these centuries, therefore, the most divine tribes were gradually shaken up together; the invasion of the Huns gave rise to these changes While that which has been described was taking shape within the actual currents of civilisation, great struggles had been going on outside. But what we call the evolution of civilisation was not essentially affected by these external struggles.

The Huns had penetrated far to the west; if we are not blind to what the old legends relate, we know that they pushed as far as the south of France.

In the old heroic poem of Walther on der Vogelweide, handed down to us in a Latin translation, we are told how the princes of the Germanic tribes, the Burgundians and Franks, had to scourge the Huns, among them that Walther, son of the prince of a Germanic tribe, who ruled in Aquitania. This heroic song narrates the feats of Walther, Hagen and Gunther. In continuous succession followed incursions of the Huns, harassing the Germanic races far into the west, until eventually the Franks, the Goths and what was left of the Roman race, formed the force which opposed the Huns in battle on the Catalaunian Plain in the year 451. This is the first defeat that the Huns suffered. Their rule, however, which had weighed heavily upon the peoples, left no lasting impression.

In manners and customs the Huns were so alien to the people of Europe, that their whole type and form is described as something quite peculiar. An important point was that this race formed a compact unity; a submissiveness, amounting to idolatry, under their king, Attila, made them an irresistible terror to other races. After their defeat on the Catalaunian Plain, this army received its last decisive defeat through Leo the Great, Bishop of Rome, who withstood Attila, and induced him to retreat. Leo knew the power which Attila exercised over his people. But with all his power Attila did not know what was opposing him, namely, Christianity; therefore he bowed before it.

The rule of the Huns remained merely an episode; what came from the west made a much more lasting influence. After Attila's death in 453, his army soon collapsed. Neither was the rule of the Goths, Gepidae, or Vandals, of lasting duration; they found themselves hemmed in by conditions already settled, and were not able to maintain their own character. Things happened differently in France: the culture there proved faithful to the character of the Frankish tribe, and it may be seen how powerfully this race evolved. Later, however, we see too how this tribe forced other to accept Christianity. We see further that there existed nothing better calculated to develop material culture than Christianity; all sorts of culture forms received their stamp from external Christianity. And because they were able to maintain their free character, they provided a framework for mobile forms in which spiritual life could develop, and in this way the spiritual, industrial communities—monasteries, etc.—grew up. In process of time, however, spiritual and industrial culture were separated. Although the empire of Charlemagne considered itself a Christian empire, in spreading Christianity by force, it set itself in opposition to the spirit of Christianity. Hence Christianity was soon no longer suited to industrial life. The conditions of industrial life were felt to be oppressive—and thus the “free cities” originated.

This, in outline, is the evolution of spiritual and material evolution. You see that it was only when the spiritual currents no longer coincided with the material conditions, that this disparity found expression in a purely material culture, the city-culture. From these industrial formations grew out of material interests. The population which could not be supported on the land, pressed into the towns to find protection and security. Thus we see empires rising and falling, and new creations taking the place of old. We can, however, only understand their organisation, if we realise how the first model realm, the empire of the Franks, was formed. Not having pressed into already existing conditions, but going where space was offered for free expansion, this tribe had evolved its character and was able to develop its rule.

The tribes driven from their homes during the great folk migrations, were not only thoroughly mingled together, they were also newly constructed. Some had disappeared from History altogether, others had taken their place. This great metamorphosis was accomplished, not merely from outside, but still more in the deepest depth of their character. At the beginning of the epoch of the folk migrations, we see the various Germanic tribes asking a question of destiny. For the Goths, who had chosen for themselves a tolerant Christianity, this question signified extermination. For the Franks, confrontation with it under other freer, more favourable circumstances, it meant increase of power throughout the centuries. Whether or not for the good of all, we shall see in what follows.