The Rudolf Steiner Archive

The line of all development is the spiral. Its loops always follow the same laws. We can regard the spiral as the living representation of the ratio of the diameter to the circle. The first loop of each spiral arises from the fact that a line describes a circle, but not a perfect circle. Before it closes again, it turns away from the end point to describe a circle again and so on in this way. If we imagine this figure stretched out, we have a spiral.

The development of the same can be observed on a paper spiral. Each arc of a spiral is therefore created by curving a straight line, but not entirely back into itself, but by simultaneously lengthening this curved straight line. So each arc of the spiral is in the same ratio to the straight line that curves as the circle is to the diameter, as the number \(\pi\) is.

Now, every circle diameter can be placed on the circle three times with a remainder, so the diameter, by extending and curving three times, can almost close to a circle, but not quite; a gap remains, and indeed corresponding to the number \(\pi\); the gap is what follows after \(3\), namely \(1\), \(4\), \(1\), \(5\) and so on. So, to complete the circle, we need the numbers after the decimal point of the number \(\pi\), i.e. \(1415\) etc. Now, in terms of their values, these are \(1/10\), \(4/100\), \(1/1000\), \(5/1000\) of the original diameter, but since the number x is infinite, there is no number that expresses how much of the diameter can be placed on the circle. We can now imagine a process in which the diameter is bent to the circle so far until it almost closes, and where only the small gap remains open, which contains the numbers \(0,1415\) and so on. The number \(1\) denotes here \(1/10\) of the diameter.

If now the diameter, where it has reached the gap, i.e. after it has been placed on the circumference three times, continues in the same ratio, it describes a line that is in the ratio of the whole diameter to \(1/10\), \(4/100\), \(1/1000\), \(5/10000\) and so on. If at the same time it deviates from the perfect first circle at the point where this line begins, it will continuously form a spiral.

If this is the diameter of the first vibration,

then it describes the following circle; and when it turns into a spiral, the following spiral.

The spiral arises from the deviation of the diameter from the formation of a circle in the ratio of \(1/10\), \(4/100\), \(1/1000\), \(5/10000\) to a length. - If the diameter emerges from a circle, then it can only emerge from the circle in the ratio of the number \(\pi\), namely as often as it is contained in the circle. We can imagine that the circle is movable, like a circle formed by a [illegible] or a band. If you pull the band from one point with one end through the center in the direction of the diameter of the circle, it moves from the circumference in this direction.

A movable semicircle is formed, which becomes smaller and smaller. You could also continue to pull the tape in a circle, then a spiral would form.

Thus every spiral arises through the number \(\pi\), which expresses the ratio of [circumference to diameter] or the infinitely small deviation from the circular line to the straight line. A spiral is therefore the line that arises from the diameter emerging from the circle.

The number \(\pi\) expresses the ratio of the diameter to the circle. According to the numbers of this ratio, it can now also emerge from the circle, since all development arises from the fact that a force expresses itself in this ratio according to the number \(3.1415\).

If a force remained closed in itself, no revelation would be possible. To reveal oneself means to unlock oneself. Every closed force can only unlock itself through this ratio of its diameter to its perimeter. The circumference circumscribes the entire force, while the diameter divides the entire force into two halves. The force that divides the whole into two halves is not fully contained within it; it is related to it in the same way as the number \(\pi\). The effect of the dividing, revealing force thus emerges according to the numbers \(3,1415\).

Since it has retained in the first force the endeavor to close again into a whole, it will again try to describe a circle. But since it has within itself the endeavor to overcome unity, it deviates again from the circular line and thus describes a spiral.

The force of the second spiral line is twisted to the same extent as it moves away from the first force, namely in the ratio of the number \(\pi\). If the first circle is the force \(3.1415\), then the second circle of the force is contained in the first as often as the number \(\pi\), the third in the second again as often as the number \(\pi\). The second spiral line of force can emerge from the first \(3.1415\) times. The third force can emerge from the second \(3.1415\) times, from the third the fourth and so on. - In this ratio, the force on spiral lines decreases. The emergence of force occurs in the ratio of arithmetic numbers up to \(5\). If we multiply a force by the number \(3.1415\), then it becomes the next higher force; the lower force always indicates the diameter of the higher force, the higher force is \(3.1415\)-times the circumference of the lower force. The diameter of the higher force is always the circumference of the lower force. The strength of a force decreases in proportion to the squares of its distance. The reduction in strength can therefore be calculated by raising the distance from the first force to the second power.

The distance from the center of the force indicates the radius of the circle, half the diameter. This must be squared to know how strongly the force in the center acts on the circumference. If the diameter is \(4\), then the radius is \(2\), the square is \(4\) - so the force on the circumference is \(1/4\) of that in the center. If the radius is 100, then the square is 10,000, so the force on the circumference is 1/10,000 of the central force. We can express the forces as a ratio, and the force effects.

If the circumference is \(18\), then the diameter is contained in it \(3.1415\) times, so it is a little [less] than \(6\). Let us assume that it is \(6\) – then the radius would be \(3\), the square would be \(9\) – the force effect in the circumference would be \(1/9\) of the force inside, but a little less than \(1/9\).

Thus, one force after another emerges in the ratio of the number \(\pi\) – but each following force is only \(3.1415\)th the magnitude of the previous one – and each force is in the ratio of the square of the radius, which indicates the distance of the circumference from the center.

All cosmic forces are connected in this way. The descent is a continuous revelation that reveals itself as \(3.1415\) [whereby] the inner diameter of the higher force becomes the circumference of the next one, creating a spiral in which the next loop is always only the \(3.1415\)th part of the previous one. The diameter of the higher force forms the circumference of the lower force. The circumference of the smaller force is therefore the diameter of the larger force. Since the circumference of the total force is the same as the diameter of the larger force, half the circumference of the smaller force is equal to half the diameter of the larger force. Half the circumference of the smaller force therefore indicates the distance of the larger force circumference from the center - consequently, you only need to square half the circumference of a force to find the force effect of a larger force.

If the magnitude of a force is \(10\), then half the magnitude is \(5\) – in this case, the force of the higher force is \(5^2 = 25\).

Conversely, we can calculate the range of the lower force from the range of the higher force. If the range of a force is \(25\), then its radius is \(5\), its diameter is \(10\), and consequently \(10\) is the range of the lowest force that arises from it. So \(10\) is the diameter of the higher force and the circumference of the next force. From \(10\) the diameter now emerges, corresponding to the number \(\pi\), as a little less than \(1/3\) of \(10\) – to form the circumference of the following force. So the force that follows has approximately \(3\).

Thus, by means of the number \(\pi\), one can calculate all the ratios of the forces that arise from each other and their effects. Thus, the cosmic substances and forces interlock and swirl around each other in spiral lines, whereby, on the one hand, a transformation of force occurs in that the diameter emerges from the circle \(3.1415\) times – or, on the other hand, an increase in force occurs in that the circle becomes the diameter of a higher force. Furthermore, on the one hand the radii are raised to a higher power, squared to the force, and – or on the other hand, the square of the force is taken to the root of the radius of the circle that it describes. Range of force

Force effect
squaring the circle?

The diameter is related to the force effect in the same way as the semicircle \(\times 2\) is related to the semicircle squared. If the [radius] is \(x\), then the diameter is \(x \times 2\) and the force is \(x^2\). Therefore, the diameter to the force is in the ratio of \(2 \times x\) to \(x^2\) or the diameter is \(\sqrt{x^2} \times 2\).

\(x^2\) force effect
\(\sqrt{x^2} =\) radius \(= x\)
\(x \times 2 =\) diameter

Thus, \(\sqrt{x^2}\) indicates the radius and \(\sqrt{x^2} \times 2\) indicates the [diameter] of a force whose effect on the circumference is equal to the content of the force shape raised to the power of \(x^2\). The effect decreases from the center to the circumference of the circle in the ratio of \(x^2\) raised to the power of the radius squared.

Since the diameter of a force forms the circumference of the next force arising from it, \(x \times 2\) is also the circumference of the next lesser force.

If a force is equal to \(9\), then the radius is \(3\), the diameter is \(6\), and the resulting force is again equal to \(6\) in magnitude, and the radius is approximately \(1/3 = 2\). If the radius is \(1\), then the force is equal to \(1\), because \(1^2 = 1\). So if the diameter is \(2\), the force is \(1\).

The circle represents the number \(10\). The next number is \(9\), the square of \(3\). So \(3^2 =\) \(9\), almost \(10\), the closest to \(10\). The next approximation to the circle is the square drawn inside the circle. The ratio of the square to the circle is like \(9\) to \(10\) or like \(3 \times 3\) to \(3 \times 3.1415\). The circle is therefore more powerful by \(1/10\), \(4/100\), \(1/000\), \(5/10000\), etc. than the square, which has the same diameter.

(1/3) of the circumference forms the circumference of the next power that emerges from it, so approximately (1/3). The circumference must divide into three approximately to form the next power that emerges. This results in the tripartite division of power, which is indicated by the .

If we now raise the diameter of the force, which is 3 x 3.1415 in the circumference, to the square, the , but also the \(9\).

Just as the \(9\) is the precursor to perfection, so in this sense the square symbolizes \(3 \times 3\), the next step towards perfection, the transition to the \(10\), the circle, because the circle in the square is the \(10\) in the \(9\).

\(3 \times 3 = 9\)
\(3 \times 3,1415 = 10\)

Actually, \(3 x 3\) can be represented as follows:

\(||\) form only one direction – a diameter raised to the square

sun
circle in the temple
spiritual man
in the physical man

or also

The \(3 \times 3\) represents the stages of the ascent to the perfection of man - the three human powers raised to the square; to complete only [three times] the \(0.1415\) is missing. - The spiritual man is the closed circle, the physical man stepping out of the circle square - the spiritual man is the \(10\), the physical man is the \(9\). (Zodiac arranged on the sides of the square gives the \(12\).)

The circle in the square is the spiritual man emerging from the physical as the sun shining out of the temple.

Circle and square have the same diameter; we find the force effect of the circle by halving the diameter and exponentiating it.

The radius squared is the force effect, and thus also the ratio of the force reduction. The force effect is distributed in the physical square according to the square of the radius in the circle. So to find the force effect in the physical, you have to draw another circle around the square and raise the radius of this circle to the square, thus:

The physical force effect is all the less, as the square of the radius in the outer circle is greater than the square of the radius in the inner circle.

The spiral, emerging from itself, deviates from the direction of the circle at every point of its line by \(0.1415\) and so on. Through this continued deviation of a line in each point in the ratio of \(0.1415\) in relation to the circular line, the spiral arises. Or a spiral arises from a straight line when it turns in the reverse ratio of the circular line.

The spiral forms the relationship between straight line and circle; it is the union of a straight direction and a circular line. When a spiral is closed, the force rests entirely within it; when it unrolls, the force emerges. It decreases to the extent that it emerges, in proportion to the square of the distance of the end point of the spiral from the beginning.

Force \(a\) is divided by \(4/4\) up to \(10\)
Force \(b\) is divided by \(1/100\) at \(x\)
Force \(a = b\)
\(= 4 \cdot 100 \cdot 25\)
so \(b 20x\) is as great as \(a\)

A force always acts in the same direction as the hypotenuse of two forces that intersect at right angles.

If we break down a force into two forces, these forces must intersect at right angles.

The square of the force of the hypotenuse a is equal to the sum of the squares of the forces \(b\) and \(c\). The right angle is always the projection of two forces that arise from one force, of two forces that are equal to one force.

Every angle that touches the tip of the periphery, the sides of the diameter and the periphery of a circle is a right angle.

A square is created by constructing two opposite angles in a circle so that they intersect the sides of the diameter and the periphery.

The two catheti circles have the same center. The hypotenuse circle touches the small circle at the center of the large one on the periphery.

Force square – the decline of force from the Mahapara Nirvana plane to the physical plane.

Comet: the life of higher beings in particular, without regeneration.

Parable - detached from the whole and not complementing anything. The forms of new life are

All signs of the zodiac are pieces cut out of the spiral. The same applies to the numbers \(1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12\).

The Roman numerals represent only the unit and duality, the cone, the development process in the whole. \(I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, IX, X, XI, XII\).

Only \(I\) and \(X\) are independent signs. All others are composed of these. \(V\) is the \(X\) halved. The \(I\) is the beginning, the primal force. \(V\) is revelation, the deepest descent. \(X\) is completion, where the halved force \(V\) has reunited with the other half: \(X\).

The 7 planets

As long as a person lives in the physical, their consciousness is turned away from the spirit. The spiritual is a focus in an ellipse, the physical is the other.

But the spiritual encompasses the physical. The life of the etheric body with Pranayama overcomes this focus on the physical and turns it towards the spiritual, while the spiritual flows towards it.

The consciousness of the astral body, Kama, finds the connection with the spiritual, and the physical and spiritual merge.

In astral consciousness, the human being stands where these two currents intersect. It is as if he were standing in the middle between two sides of a plane of symmetry. He no longer sees the physical as we see it, but from the other side. But he also does not yet see the spiritual as the spiritual consciousness does, but – also from the other side – as it manifests itself in the soul.

When a person is spiritually conscious, he is at the center of the spirit itself, and his consciousness goes out from this center in all directions. Physical consciousness acts in one direction, soul consciousness acts in two directions. Spiritual consciousness acts in all directions as from the center. Physical consciousness is life on the outside, soul consciousness is life on the inside, and spiritual consciousness is penetration into the center.

In physical consciousness, man stands in relation to the physical world, so that he is a part of it. In the soul, he lives within himself, detached from the world; in the spiritual, he moves back into the world, but into the other side of it. Now he is not only a part of the world, but unites from the center with all parts of the spiritual world. It is as if he lived in the physical on earth, in the soul within himself, in the spiritual in the earth. Physically he perceives things, in his soul he relates to them, spiritually he lives in them. Physically he is separate from things, in his soul he lets them pass through himself \(\infty\), spiritually he moves into things.

All things around him are physically shaped spiritual archetypes that have undergone the reverse process from the spiritual to the physical, through the soul of man. The physical forms owe their diversity to the fact that they are varied in the soul of the person who received them from the spirit, allowed them to pass through him and physically separated them out. The fact that we appear in different forms in different incarnations is because our spiritual archetype passes through the soul and thereby receives the imprint that makes it appear in a different physical form in each incarnation. The archetype is always the same; it is the actual name of the person. The more the soul moves towards the spirit, the more the physical incarnation resembles the spiritual archetype.

The spiritual archetype of the person is connected to the twelve signs of the zodiac and to the sun and the forces that arise from it. The soul in man is related to the moon and the seven planets. These forces modify the spiritual ones. The physical expression of the \(12 + 1\) spiritual and the \(7 + 1\) soul forces is the physical human being, arranged in the pentagram, which thus expresses seven soul and twelve spiritual forces.

The seven soul forces and five sense forces interweave to form the twelve spiritual forces.

We have become familiar with twelve levels of consciousness, we have distinguished between emanating, perceiving and forming consciousness. We have seen that what is called substance or matter is emitted by certain mature spirits of highly developed consciousness. In the case of the radiation on Saturn, the dense physical body is emitted by a very high consciousness. From this we can conclude that the less dense substances can be emitted by less elevated spirits of a slightly lower consciousness.

If we look at the successive planetary bodies, there are seven: Saturn, Sun, Moon, Earth, Jupiter, Venus, Vulcan. They all have a dense body at certain points in time, which is emitted, just as man will one day emit his planet. Before he can radiate the dense body, he will be able to emanate his etheric body. Just as twelve planets can be radiated by twelve consciousnesses, so can etheric bodies be radiated by the corresponding lower forms.

Let us examine how consciousness comes to radiate. Let us take a look at the human backbone with the spinal cord inside it. The spinal column consists of rings of bone that fit together to form a tube; inside is the [spinal cord], which tapers downwards to a blind end and widens upwards to the brain. White nerve cords extend from all parts of the body into the spinal cord, where they connect with other nerve cords that lead to the muscles. Even lower animals have a spinal cord like this. When an animal is stimulated, the stimulus travels to the spinal cord, which transmits it to the nerve, and this triggers the muscle movement. The nerves also end in the developed human brain: those that come from the body and others that go back to the body. [There is a big difference between the frog's spinal cord and the human spinal cord. The difference is that in the frog, the movement comes from the spinal cord automatically; in humans, on the other hand, it comes from the will. [In humans, the stimulus goes all the way to the brain and does not automatically trigger the movement; the person must first want it. So his consciousness comes between the stimulus and the outgoing movement. The animal also has a consciousness, but that lies [on the astral plane], and it is from there that the muscle movement is directed. The human consciousness lies in the brain. This is because the nerve cords in the animal [in the spinal cord] are tightly knotted; in the human brain they are somewhat looser, allowing consciousness to enter, and [between the more loosely arranged nerve cords] the will can intervene.

The higher consciousness of man is characterized by the fact that the limbs of a lower consciousness are loosened. But in man, three of the basic powers of his soul are tightly connected: the powers of will, feeling and thinking. The threads are also present in the astral and etheric brain. Will, feeling and thinking correspond to three deities that we have come to know, the spirits of will, wisdom and action. The nine other forces are also present in man, only they are not equally noticeable.

What happens when man develops even higher? The higher man relates to the lower man as the ordinary man relates to the frog. Namely, the three parts - will, feeling and thinking - are loosened, first in the astral, then in the etheric and finally in the physical; and just as there comes a higher consciousness and now has to control the three parts that have diverged. With ever higher development, man loosens twelve such centers and then controls them. Before the limbs are loosened, the higher consciousness cannot intervene.

Every human power stands in relation to the primary forces of the universe, of the world. The will stands in relation to the will of the world, feeling to the wisdom [of the world], thinking to the activity of the world, forming to the forming powers of the universe. The fact that the individual limbs hold each other mutually prevents them from becoming freely outward. In the moment when, for example, the will detaches itself, it can act outwardly and perceive will-beings. It is like looking at an anthill: it has a common soul and three limbs: workers, males and females; these form a common living being.

In this way, a person can expose all twelve parts that are present in him, and in doing so, he splits his etheric body into twelve parts. Each such part has a special property – similar to a polyp, when the limbs are cut through, each part continues to live. In this way a part of the etheric body grows into a whole, so that when the highly elevated human being dies, he withdraws his consciousness and leaves twelve independent etheric bodies behind; they are there. What happens to them? They are, so to speak, the emanation of the former consciousness.

When a person dies, first his physical body returns to earth, the ether body to the general world ether, and the astral body to Kamaloka. When the person returns, an ether body must be built for him. The radiated ether bodies are used as models, which are left behind by the higher ones. In reality, everyone is already radiating etheric bodies, but they are still imperfect, hence the many imperfect bodies. Highly developed etheric bodies also remain from the highly developed. The highly developed person can radiate them when he is about to enter the gate barrier, where he will be able to radiate even denser matter.

Christ radiated new physical matter at his birth, so he was able to radiate the twelve etheric bodies beforehand, the twelve separate limbs of the previous Christ. [The twelve etheric bodies of the apostles are the twelve separate limbs of the previous Christ etheric body.] He had retained control over the twelve. [Where is the consciousness directing them? That is the Christ. Christ is the group soul of the twelve apostles.] Christ is the consciousness – his twelve apostles are his members, the twelve etheric bodies.

Jesus is the single personality; he has surrendered his body to the Christ. [Where is the body of Christ? That is the twelve apostles. Through these twelve members, Christ has truly worked.]

We want to consider as an example an organ which can show us how, towards two sides, a being can be dependent. Basically, one can also consider a human organ as independent to a certain extent - for example, the eye. It is more noble than the whole human being, it is more developed. The eye rests as a round body inside the eye socket. If we could take it out and make a cut, we would see the following: In front, the wall of the eye is transparent; light can enter the eye through the pupil. [Behind] is the lens of living material, in there the light is refracted; it passes through the fluid that fills it, and a small image is formed on the posterior wall. So far the eye is a physical apparatus; the same thing happens in any photographic apparatus.

So far the eye is physical body, Sthula Sharira. It goes to the generation of the image. But it this image would never be my image if the eye were only physical body. For that, the eye must be in some connection with the person concerned, it must be a part of his organism, it must be alive. This is brought about by the fact that the eye is continually maintained in life from the body. The blood circulation supplies the eye with blood, inside the eye is wallpapered with small blood vessels, clothed with the choroid. Through it it is a part of the body, it lives, is maintained as a member of the living body by the choroid. This is the lower self of the eye.

But of the image we would know nothing [yet], the eye is only living. It must enter into the service of something higher, which is the retina, a fine nerve membrane that is in communication with the brain. The image is transformed into consciousness and led to the brain. The eye gives itself up, to a higher self. So it grows out of a foundation, gets form and gives what it creates to a higher being. So it is with every being, also with the human being. As the eye is rooted in the human being, so the whole human being is rooted in the physical earth and draws its means of support from it. And just as the eye has a physical body, so man also has it and in turn gives himself to a higher being. In the whole world the same is to be found; one sees how everything is connected.

Now it is a question of our becoming precisely aware that a being can be a physical body in particular, without connection with another; but that it cannot be a living being without connection with others. Hence we speak of a general Brahma and not of a particular one.

So as we have considered the eye, it is with the present man. But it was not always so. In lower animals we can consider a kind of eye point, that pushes out, seeks first to come into existence; therein lies desire. Before the eye became such an unselfish organ, there was in it the desire to develop, its kamic, the desire to come to the light. If we look at this eye, we see:

First: the physical that is formed.

Second: a kind of force, that the eye is formed just at this point.

Third: the desire to come to the light.

It is just like human beings: physical body, etheric body and astral body. The desire must be present, but has already given way to selflessness at the eye, has surrendered to higher purposes. Through desire it called itself into existence, and later devotion arose instead of desire. Such is the astral body, it has the meaning to call into existence, to create, and when the human being is there, it must transform into devotion. The whole man must come as far as the eye, instead of desire there must be devotion.

[If you turn to this contemplation again, you will ask yourself: yes,] what does the eye actually perceive? In order for it to perceive, an image of the object must first be created. Between that which perceives and the object itself an image slides in, so that one must distinguish: Object, image and perception.

Let us now consider the ear. A superficial observer might think it is the same, but it is not. First of all, the ear has an external auditory canal. Attached to it is the eardrum, it closes the ear inward. After that, the actual organ of hearing begins. It has the little cartilages and the three arches; these are lined with a network that goes into [the cranial nerve]. There are a lot of little fibers in the ear, each tuned to a particular tone. When a sound comes from outside, for example, " the little fiber that is tuned to starts vibrating, the others don't. They have in their ear something like a real piano, Corti's organ.

The difference between seeing and hearing is this: in seeing, an image is made of the object; this is completely omitted in hearing, one perceives the object directly. So one enters into a much more intimate relationship with what is happening in the world. The ear is therefore more advanced than the eye, it is much more absorbed in the object, no image is pushed forward. The eye, too, will eliminate the image, at a much higher level, and then the eye will perceive not merely images, but objects directly. But then they will be higher, finer objects than those which the ear perceives{[, ethereal objects.

I have said,] man is, as it were, the transformed plant, the head is the root, firmly rooted in the earth. The ear as the most advanced organ should show how it has grown out of the objects and how it grows in again. The three arches do not stand at random, but in three different directions. If any of these channels is defective, man begins to stagger, he cannot stand vertically; so that man owes his orientation to the three arches. They are placed perpendicularly in three directions of space, and only through them man can orient himself.

What holds man to the earth? Gravity. As long as the earth itself directed man upright, he did not need special gravity organs. Since the earth has released man, he has just in the ear, the most advanced organ, the organs to straighten up in the sense of gravity. So that we have two senses in the ear: the sense of gravity or gravitation, sense of orientation, which is the lower, lower sense, and the higher, the sense of hearing.

So we can see how complicated everything is in life. In the eye, when the image will be off, we will also have two senses. This is something that lets in the development do a look in perspective.

The greatest mysteries of life, which have universal human significance, are not presented to us through special scientific research, but we encounter them at every turn in life. And the greatest questioner is surely life itself, which constantly confronts us, a questioner who not only arouses our curiosity with his questions, but who, through his questions, can mean happiness and suffering, satisfaction or even despair for our soul. Spiritual science, as presented in these lectures, is intended primarily to answer these questions posed by life itself, to the extent that human cognitive ability is allowed to look into the secrets of existence. Even if this spiritual science appears to be something new and unusual compared to today's conventional science, this is understandable for anyone who takes just a glance at those branches of conventional science that deal with questions of the soul, with questions of spiritual life. What is today called psychology or soul science can, to a large extent, be researched to the extent that it presents itself, and it will be found that precisely the great existential questions, the great riddles of life, are very much neglected in this conventional science.

One of the greatest contemporary researchers of the soul, Franz Brentano, stated the following in his “Psychology”: How questions are actually answered in current research into the soul, or at least how they are attempted, how one idea follows another, how one sensation evokes another in the soul, how perhaps those soul forces within our consciousness , which we call memory, all this – Franz Brentano also believes – could not be a substitute for what soul research once sought to fathom as a certain solution to the mystery associated with the name of the immortality of the human being. Today, questions such as that of the immortality of the soul are sought in vain in the usual humanities or spiritual science, and the same applies to other questions. They cannot even be raised from this usual spiritual science, so to speak.

One might say that the most trivial words could be used to raise the most everyday great riddles of mental life, namely with the words: How can man come to terms with himself and the world when he experiences in himself how he becomes a different person at every age, how every age presents him with new tasks even in the time between birth and death? How can man answer the great riddle of existence that confronts him every day and that, as everyone can see, is intimately connected with the whole being of man? The great mystery: how is it that everything that flows in and out of us from morning till evening when we are awake, in the form of ideas, drives, desires, passions, affects and so on, sinks into an uncertain darkness when we fall asleep and is resurrected from this uncertain darkness when we begin the new day? — Sleep and waking, which are so intimately connected with the riddle of human existence, science itself must admit and admits more and more that it hardly knows how to answer these riddle questions. And then there is the enigma of death, as already mentioned, about which a significant researcher of the recent past, as already mentioned here, knows nothing to say except what, so to speak, observation of the external physical world reveals. Huxley cites them right at the beginning of his “Outlines of Physiology” the words of the melancholy Danish prince Hamlet:

The great Caesar, dead, and turned to clay,
Might stop a hole that lets the north wind through;
Oh that the earth, to which the world did bend,
Might fling a barrier to the wind and rain!

And further, he explains what he wants to say by showing that the individual material parts that make up a person, when he passes through the gate of death, gradually dissipate, as it were, into all winds, into the other matters that surround us, and how we would have to search there for what a person was, if we were to look for the material atoms where they can be found after some time, in the vastness of the world.

That this, what has become of the atoms of the great Caesar, is not at all the question that actually concerns the human soul, this is no longer felt, so to speak, by external scientific observation. That the question is this: Where are the soul forces that worked in Caesar? What has happened to them? How do they continue to work in the world? — that this is the great question, even an external science can no longer feel that. And then there is the question that is contained in the meaningful word destiny, the fateful question that really confronts us at every turn in life, that presents us with the great riddle that shows itself to us everywhere. We see a person entering into existence, born into poverty and misery, so that we can predict at his cradle that he will have a less than favorable destiny. Or we see him entering into life with seemingly insignificant talents, so that we can again predict that he will be of little advantage to himself and to others. In another we see how he enters life, born in happiness and abundance, surrounded by caring hands from the cradle, endowed with abilities that show from the outset that he could become a useful member of the world order for himself and his fellow human beings. How much of all that we call happiness and sorrow, and what daily, hourly befalls us, is included in this fateful question! One would like to say that the great questions of existence only begin where science, so to speak, must end. And anyone who today tries to familiarize himself with such a world view, which is shaped by purely scientific principles, will say to himself: What is offered to me as a summary, however beautifully formulated, of scientific truths, shows me only the beginning of the question, the question of how I must pose the great riddles of existence; there are not yet many answers to be found.

In the face of all this, however, it must be emphasized that in the broadest sense of today's education, there is no possibility of addressing the vital questions of the human soul, for the simple reason that, as a result of phenomena and facts that have taken place over the last few centuries – and which will be discussed in the next lectures will be addressed, human thought habits, the entire faculties of human thinking, have been directed more towards external material and only feel reassured when they can apply their judgment and their research to something that is apparent or accessible to the brain-bound intellect. These habits of thinking are often deprived of the possibility of looking only at what is soul life, at those events within which what takes place is not exhausted in the physical, but is specifically soul-based.

It is clear from the lectures already given this winter that the question is not so much whether man can look into those regions where the answers to the questions raised can be found by means of the paths into the supersensible life, which were indicated in the last lecture here, but rather whether he can do so through the paths into the supersensible life, which were indicated in the last lecture here, but rather whether he can do so through the paths into the supersensible life, which were indicated in the last lecture here, but rather whether he can do so through the paths into the supersensible life, which were indicated in the last lecture here, but rather whether he can do so through the paths into the supersensible life, which were indicated in the last lecture here, but rather whether he can do so through the paths into the supersensible life, which were indicated in the last lecture here, but rather whether he can do so through the paths into the supersensible life, which were indicated in the last lecture here, but rather whether he can do so through the It has been emphasized several times that certain things must be investigated in this way, but that then the unbiased human understanding, the unbiased judgment, is quite capable of grasping what supersensible research can give. If this is the case, then it will also be understandable that the path of supersensible knowledge described in the last lecture always offers the possibility of looking at what is present in life in any case, what presents itself everywhere in life, in the right way and of getting answers to the great riddles of existence through the right view.

The spiritual in man is present everywhere, it is always there, and in order for it to proclaim its immortality, it is not so much a direct glimpse into the supersensible world that is needed as a right contemplation - which, however, can be drawn upon and refined - a right contemplation of the immediate events of our soul life itself. This should be the main focus when judging what is referred to here as spiritual science: the way in which life is observed, the way in which the phenomena of direct soul life present themselves through the unique thinking brought about by spiritual science. If we observe carefully, we find that spiritual science regards the phenomena of the immediate life of the soul in connection with the outer life of matter in such a way that the great riddle of existence, as indicated, can be answered from the direct observation of life.

It has been suggested here several times that spiritual science today is in a similar situation to that of natural science in the days of the dawn of modern education, when, for example, Francesco Redi expressed the great truth that is now generally accepted and recognized: living things can only come from living things. This meant that a powerful prejudice had been combated, a prejudice that was not limited to lay circles at the time, but dominated all of science at that time – and this time is only a few centuries ago: three centuries ago, for example, when Francesco Redi appeared, it was still believed that lower animals, such as fish, earthworms and the like, could arise from river mud through mere combination of the external material. Francesco Redi showed that this was an inaccurate observation. He showed that nothing of living existence can arise without a germ of life, originating from a similar living being, being placed in the unorganized matter, and he established the proposition: Living things can only arise from living things. Within the limits of the application of this law, it is recognized by all, from Haeckel to Du Bois-Reymond. It was not recognized at the time of Francesco Redi. He first had to show how it is based only on an inaccurate observation when one believes that inanimate matter can form itself into a living being.

In the same situation is spiritual science today in relation to the spiritual, as it was in relation to living things for Francesco Redi. Today, spiritual science shows, through the way it is able to consider the phenomena of the soul, that it is based on inaccurate observation to believe that what enters into existence with a person in terms of inner soul life could, for example, come from inheritance, from parents or grandparents, etc., or could only come from what the soul of the person absorbs through external experience, through external experience of the environment. Spiritual science has to show that the belief that it could be so is based on inaccurate observation just as much as the belief that a formed living thing could be formed from inanimate substance. Just as inorganic matter can only be gathered together by a living germ, so everything that is formed in the human soul in the way of inherited traits and qualities, everything that it absorbs from the external world through the senses and the intellect, can only be joined together to that which lives and weaves in us as a living soul being, if there is a living spirit-germ, a spirit-germ that joins together within itself both the inherited traits and everything that is taken in from the external environment.

Spiritual science focuses on this spirit or soul germ, and in doing so it certainly confronts a very, very widespread prejudice of the present day. When we speak today of the character of the human soul, when we speak of everything that a person experiences, then we will - and this has been done through the most conscientious research, which should be fully recognized in its own right - point to this or that, which is “inherited” from one's ancestors. We shall always be tempted to see what lives in the human soul and what the human being develops, so to speak, assembles through these or those causes that lie within the line of inheritance, on which we only want to influence what once storms in from outside to the human being for the overall shaping of the human soul.

A certain harmony between natural science and spiritual science will come about in this field when consideration is given to a question that must always be in the mind of the spiritual scientist when speaking of the core of the human soul and inherited tendencies: the question that is linked to the preservation of the human species as a whole. Within the life of the species, within that which is inherited in the being of generations from grandfather and father to son and so on, we do see characteristics passing from generation to generation. But one thing confronts us as a question when we consider this succession of human existence over the course of generations: that man reaches, so to speak, the age of fertility, sexual maturity, at a certain time, and at the time when he has reached this, he is in a position, so to speak, to bring a complete human being into existence again in the generative sense. In other words, having attained sexual maturity, the human being is capable of producing his own kind, and thus has the abilities that are necessary to produce his own kind.

So human development up to sexual maturity is such that the human being develops within himself all the abilities that make it possible for him to produce a being of his own kind. But the human being continues to develop after sexual maturity. New formations, new soul content also arise after sexual maturity, and it is impossible to relate what the soul undergoes in its development after sexual maturity to the whole development of the human species in the same way as what the human being undergoes to establish the human species until sexual maturity. A sharp distinction must be made in man's whole attitude to the world in relation to his development up to sexual maturity, and in relation to the time after that. This is a question that, as we shall soon see, can only be properly addressed by spiritual science.

Another significant question arises from this, but it shows how what is meant by the term “inheritance” is to be understood, in contrast to what actually takes place in the human soul and belongs to human development. We can see what occurs in man and clearly shows itself to be a product of heredity within the human species in a radical case where heredity occurs under all circumstances, simply because man is human and descends from a being of the same kind, a being of his own kind. One such thing, for example, is the change of teeth at around the age of seven. This is something that lies within the powers that man has inherited, that occur under all circumstances, even if we remove the person from the human community and place him on a lonely island, where he would grow up wild.

This is the case with all characteristics that are actually only based within the line of inheritance. But let us take something that is as intimately connected with the human soul as language, and we immediately find that the concepts of inheritance let us down. Where it is justified to speak of inheritance, the inherited characteristics will appear as with the change of teeth. But if we take a person to a lonely island and let him grow up wild, so that he hears no human sound, then language does not develop. That is, we have something that shows us that there is something in the human soul that is not bound to inheritance in the same way as the forces that we have to address in the eminent sense as inherited.

We could cite many more examples that show how little we can get by with the forces of inheritance to explain the whole being of man. But when it comes to the spiritual side, where one starts out with a prejudiced approach, one makes mistake after mistake, mistakes that simply turn out to be logical mistakes. For example, it is repeatedly believed that spiritual science wants to rebel against something that natural science has to say, while it actually holds the achievements of natural science in the highest esteem.

For example, one might think this when spiritual science asserts that what we call the human soul core does not merely come from the parents, grandparents and so on, but as a spiritual and soul core goes back to a previous, far-distant life of the person, going back so far that spiritual science has to say: The life of man on earth is not a single occurrence but a repeated one. When we enter earthly existence through birth, a soul core comes into existence that has absorbed certain peculiarities and certain forces in previous lives. Because it has absorbed these forces in previous lives, so to speak, concentrated them within itself, it enters a new body and a new physical environment in a certain sense. Just as the living germ in the physical life places itself in its inorganic surroundings and absorbs the inorganic forces and substances from there, so the human soul nucleus, coming from previous earthly lives, approaches the inherited traits, binds them, concentrates them, takes what the external world can give, and thus forms and shapes the new life that we then live through the time from birth to death. The present life is again such a contraction of partly inherited traits and partly of what the outer life offers us. And when we pass through the gate of death, then this soul core is most concentrated. Then, in the time between death and a next birth, it passes through a purely spiritual existence and, if it has continued to mature in this, enters a new earthly life through a new birth or conception.

Unfortunately, it is only a popular prejudice that anything of what today are conscientious and well-researched scientific results should be opposed or even touched by such views of spiritual science. Spiritual science is fully understood - this has already been mentioned - when the natural scientist comes and shows how, through the mixing of the paternal and maternal germ in each individual case, a special individualization of the child's germ takes place, so to speak, and how the individualities of the individual children can be different simply by this mixing of the paternal and maternal elements. Spiritual science in its depth does not engage in the trivial assertion that it is proof of a special human individuality that in one and the same family the children are different from each other, because this individualization can be understood from the different mixing of the paternal and maternal elements. If, on the other hand, the natural scientist comes and points out how what man experiences in life could point to this or that organic constitution, to this or that formation of the brain, and so on, then spiritual science is in complete agreement with this, and it remains amateurish in spiritual science if one does not want to go into it. But if what natural science has to say in this field, and quite rightly so, is to be an objection to the results of spiritual research, then a logical mistake is made that can be characterized something like this: Despite all the results of natural science research, the human soul kernel first draws on the inherited characteristics to shape a life.

Let us assume that a person sees another person breathing healthily in front of him and says: “The fact that this person is alive and standing before me as a living being is due to the air and lungs that are present.” Who would dispute that this is completely true! Just as little as this can be disputed by any spiritual science, just as little can it be disputed when the natural scientist comes and considers the material conditions from the line of inheritance in order to explain the individual form of the soul's life. It is just as true as when the natural scientist says: There stands a man before me who lives at this moment because there is air outside him and lungs inside him.

Can the natural scientist therefore consider the spiritual scientist to be refuted when spiritual science says: Despite everything that has been said, what happens to your soul is determined, spiritually and mentally determined, in a purely spiritual way by what the soul has experienced in previous lives. Despite all this, is the whole destiny of man determined by the fact that man himself has prepared this destiny in previous lives? No, the naturalist must not consider the spiritual researcher who makes such an assertion to be refuted. The naturalist who says, “The man standing before me lives at this moment because there is air outside him and lungs within him,” must not consider the spiritual researcher to be refuted, just as he who says to him: No, that is not why he lives, but he lives in this moment through something quite different; this man once wanted to hang himself, and he would most certainly have died in his then attempt at hanging if I had not intervened. But I cut it short, and that is why he is now alive.

From this we see, then, how the objective truth that the other person only lives because there is air outside him and lungs inside him does not contradict the fact that he only lives at this moment because the other person cut his rope! Just as this latter irrefutable truth does not contradict the natural scientist's realization that a person lives because air and lungs are present, so what natural science has to say does not contradict what spiritual science has to offer: that the ultimate, spiritual reasons for a person's existence lie in repeated lives on earth.

The important thing here is to direct our attention to the right thing in the right way, and here we can look at language as a good example. Every spiritual researcher who penetrates into the depths of things and understands natural science can grasp that one can easily be tempted to say: Man can speak because he has a speech center in his brain. That is certainly true. But it is equally true that this speech center of the brain has only been formed into a living speech center by the fact that a language exists in the world at all. Language has created the speech center. Likewise, everything that exists in the formations of the brain and the entire organic apparatus of the human being has been created by the spiritual and soul life. It is the soul that has impressed upon the human material the reality of spiritual life. Therefore, we must seek the true creative power in the human soul, in the spiritual-soul. We must not regard the spiritual-soul as a product of the brain, but rather the reverse: the brain, with its delicate formation, as a product of the spiritual-soul.

When we consider human life, we find that this is the case in every respect, so that a healthy consideration of life confirms what has just been said. Let us consider for a moment what we can call human development, going beyond the generic, that is, what still develops in man even when, so to speak, the forces within the inheritance are fully developed, when he has become manly, in order to carry within him the forces that can produce his own kind. The soul forces that constitute human development present themselves to us in a completely different way when we contrast them with those forces that are present throughout human life and express themselves, for example, in the preservation of the species and in reproduction. Within the sphere of the powers of reproduction we see how everything unfolds from the inside outwards, so to speak, how man brings forth beings like himself beside him through the powers that play in this sphere, that is to say, how what is within him makes its way outwards. The forces that belong to inner human development take exactly the opposite path. One must be able to see the spiritual as real in the first place. Then one will accept the consideration that is to be given now as a justified one from the outset.

How do we live our lives when we consider the inner soul? We live our lives in the opposite way to how we live life within the species: in the species, all development takes place outwards, in the individual life, all development takes place inwards. This happens in such a way that we absorb what comes to us from the outside, process it within us, and do not push it outwards as in reproduction, but rather we concentrate what we live through in ourselves more and more intensely, stripping it more and more intensely, so to speak, of its character as the outside world and making it the content of our own ego.

Anyone who looks at human life impartially will find that it would be impossible, for example, for our soul life to ever have everything that the soul has lived through, everything it can remember, really in its memory at any given moment. Let us imagine that any one of the people sitting here at this moment should have alive in his soul everything that has ever lived in the soul in terms of concepts, ideas, sensations, affects, and so on. That would be a pure impossibility. But has what we have gone through in the past, what we have inwardly taken in soulfully, been lost because we cannot remember it at this moment? It is not lost. If we compare our soul life in successive moments of time, we will find that perhaps more important than what we remember is what we seem to have forgotten, but what has worked on us and made us a different person.

In the course of our development, we are always a different person, feeling imbued with ever-changing content. If we observe ourselves as we are now and compare ourselves with what we were, say, ten years ago, we will not be able to deny that we are a different person and that what has brought this about are the processed experiences, what has flowed into us, been absorbed by us and taken the opposite path to the forces that serve reproduction. We destroy, as it were, with our looking at things, with our remembering in our imagination, that which we experience, but we take it into our I instead. Our I is continually changing. Therefore, we can say: a precise observation of life shows us how this I changes throughout life, and how it has changed through the experiences it has taken in. We feel how the I becomes inwardly fuller, permeates itself more and more, becomes richer and richer than it was when we entered life as young people. This is based on a very significant phenomenon of life, which is usually not given enough attention.

Goethe, the profound connoisseur of life, who above all saw life as it presented itself to him in his own personality, uttered the sentence: In old age we become mystics. What did he mean by that? What does it mean to become a mystic in Goethe's sense? We must remove from this sentence what is unclear and nebulous about it. What Goethe meant was that as man becomes ever more mature and mature, he has less and less of what the world offers him externally, but draws the forces of experience from the wells of his own soul, into which he has let them descend. “Man becomes a mystic” means: his soul has become fuller and fuller, has contained more and more forces within itself.

If we take a closer look at what our soul core has united within us, how it has absorbed what it has experienced and what it has made of it, then those who have become mystics independently of any age can help us to understand a little better what actually happens in the human soul. Let us ask the mystics! What do the mystics talk about most of all? About a “second self”, about a “higher human being” in man, about the fact that in this human self, which grows up with us from youth, a second self can take hold, which many mystics interpret as a “divine” one. But that is not what matters, but how they felt that as a person grows up, something matures like a second person, which he holds fast, which is concentrated within him. We see the exact opposite of what happens in reproduction: that a second person is born alongside the first, that the second is rejected. What becomes the “second self” is not something that the person rejects, but something that he concentrates more and more within himself.

Thus we can indeed say: by living his life, man shapes something in his individuality that takes the opposite direction from that of reproduction. He does not give birth to anything out of himself; he concentrates something within himself, does not let something emerge from his ego, but imbues something within himself, which the mystic quite well describes as a second human being, which develops, as it were, within the skin of the first human being and acquires more and more spiritual and soul-like determination. This is more or less evident in one person or another; but the sense of the developing human being is based on the fact that we undergo an opposite germination process, where we do not unfold, but on the contrary concentrate something within us. If we call the direction of reproduction an evolution, a development, then we can call what the I undergoes an involution, a wrapping up, an inner shaping of the experiences. And it is self-evident that the inner resilience that the I, having grown up, carries within itself as a second I, is greatest when we are at the end of our physical life, when we pass through the gate of death.

If we examine this once and take a closer look at what has developed as a second self, then we have to say: the human being is not always inclined to take a closer look. Life takes up a lot of his time and he does not pay enough attention to the second being that he is developing. But if he pays sufficient attention to it, he will find that this second being has very definite qualities, and above all bears within itself a significant urge to be independent and free in relation to what we can take up in our further life. In our further life we live in a certain linguistic context. As a result, our concepts always have a certain coloring from this linguistic context. But what we have developed within strives to free itself from what only a particular linguistic context can give, and to shape an outlook on life that is free and independent of any linguistic context. We want to grow beyond what a particular linguistic context can give, and in doing so we also grow beyond what we have grown into from our youth. From our youth on, we have to develop a certain ear, for example. We notice that what we develop within our I is something that wants to become ever freer and freer from our outer physicality. We form a new human germ that is independent of the one that has formed out of our outer physicality when we are adults.

This is what spiritual science wants to direct the soul towards: that a second self develops out of the human self in the course of life, the essence of which consists precisely in feeling more and more fully and intensely, the more independently it can feel from what has grown since youth. And if we take a closer look at this second self that has been formed in our self, we will see that it has such inherent strength that we can characterize its whole nature by saying: this self contains the strength to form a new, different human being than the one through which it itself was formed.

It is not an analogy, but only a clarification, when we say: the I that we have within us can be compared to the plant germ that has developed from the root through the stem and green leaves to the flower. Then it is most capable of life and can provide the basis for a new plant. The whole nature of the plant is concentrated in the germ, and when the germ is ripe, what has grown in the way of stem, green leaves and blossom dies off. In this way, a spiritual-soul core matures in us. Just as the germ of the plant grows more and more, even when the leaves wither and the outer physical form of the plant is approaching death, so the spiritual-soul core in man matures, while the outer layer dies more and more, as the sheaths of the organs gradually wither and approach death. Hence, when we observe our soul properly, we see the remarkable fact that the inner powers of a new ego are strongest when we pass through the gate of death. Then we carry the systems of forces, the interrelationships of forces, through the gate of death into a world that cannot have anything to do with the world in our body.

Even if we do not want to pursue further — which the following lectures will show us — how the spiritual researcher can also show us what happens to these spiritual-soul cores, formed in the I, in a purely spiritual world, which the man experiences in the time between death and the next birth, we can still say: in the same way that the natural scientist goes about understanding the plant, we can go about understanding the human being. The natural scientist turns his gaze to the germ of the plant and sees how the germ can now bring a new plant life to flourish. In this way, he seeks to understand the new plant from the germ, how the remaining germ appears again in a new plant. In the same way, the spiritual researcher can also look at the human being as he enters into life through birth or conception. There we see how the human being initially shows nothing externally other than that his organs develop in a certain way. Then the soul life appears, which we have already characterized by saying that when it appears, the moment also comes for the human being to remember back to later. For he will say to himself: I was obviously already there before this point in time, but I can only remember back to a certain point. It is the point in time when the human being is able to feel himself as an ego; but there is no doubt that he already existed as a spiritual-soul being before that. Why, spiritual science may ask, does the possibility of remembering the past only arise from a certain point in time? Were the inner powers that bring about remembering the past not there before? It would be completely illogical to think that the soul and spirit only begin at the point in time to which man later remembers. Everyday sleep can teach us how the soul and spiritual forces live in us before remembering the past awakens.

Today, people have all kinds of strange ideas about sleep. The correct idea about it has already been partially brought to light in the lectures on waking and sleeping. For example, today people have the idea that sleep is only what can be called sleep if it is brought about by fatigue. I would ask the listeners to the earlier lectures to bear in mind that spiritual science wants to speak precisely. If someone wanted to say that spiritual science itself says that sleep comes from fatigue, that is not entirely correct, because it was said: sleep is there to remove fatigue. In spiritual science, it is always important to understand things very precisely, because the aim must also be to present things accurately.

Can fatigue be the cause of sleep? Anyone who claims this is refuted by life itself. Anyone who claims that people only need to sleep because they are tired is already refuted by looking at himself or considering how the often not at all tired pensioner falls asleep in his chair in the afternoon, even though he is not at all tired. And it is especially refuted when he considers when most sleep occurs: not when one is most tired, but in childhood one sleeps most. Things must only be considered correctly.

Spiritual science now shows that during the ordinary state of sleep as well as during the dull state of consciousness of the child, those forces that are used for conscious experience are sent into the organism and work there. The forces that we use from waking to sleeping to form perceptions, sensations and so on, these same forces work on us during our sleep, but in such a way that the used up bodily forces are replaced, restored. There they regenerate us, repair what is worn and used up, that is, they form, they shape. While they deform in the waking day life, dissolve the design, and while the waking day life consists precisely in the fact that we dissolve the design, sleep is there to restore the form, that is, to work directly on the human structure. Because we often use our powers of consciousness during sleep to build up certain decayed powers, these powers elude us and we sink into unconsciousness. Because at the beginning of life, before the moment occurs that we can later remember, we use the same forces that live in us and fill our consciousness to refine and shape the brain organization and blood circulation in the first years of childhood, they therefore elude the conscious ego. The self is present during childhood, and it is a strange thing today when the way the self first appears is considered decisive for the study of the human being. Again, a grandiose logical error! |

Today you can go through entire works in which it says: We see how self-consciousness arises, how it is formed in man. You cannot imagine anything more wrong than this, and in every other field you would strictly reject such a consideration, as you would, for example, reject someone who would only gain knowledge of a clock by paying attention to how the clock is created. This is not the case in any other field. In the same way, when it comes to self-awareness, one should show, when one wants to trace how representations arise, how grandiose mistakes are made in this regard. This can only be done by someone who engages with things in a more precise way, from a spiritual-scientific perspective. Otherwise, it cannot be recognized. The way we experience our sense of self and self-awareness is such that our gradual knowledge of the self and how it develops has nothing to do with the reality of the self itself. Rather, because the self, the human being, continuously develops from the times when it is not yet conscious in the child to the times when it is then consciously experienced, we cannot say: it is not there! It is there, shaping the human being in his finer structure. Yes, much more: it shapes the human being in his connection with the whole of human life, which we only notice when we enter into human life in a more or less selfless way.

In the usual way in which people look at life, they can say about their fate: this or that happens to me. One of them I find pleasant, the other unpleasant; one of them I regard as good luck, the other as bad luck; one of them as an acceleration, the other as a deceleration of my life. But that is only a superficial consideration, because a person could convince himself that at every moment of his life he is nothing other than his concentrated destiny. What is it that makes me speak to you now? It is my concentrated destiny. It is my life experiences that speak to you, and I am nothing but my life experiences, my destiny. If I wanted to extract my destiny, I would have to cut a piece out of myself. Man is what he has made of himself, what his destiny is, what he is at a given moment. We cannot separate our self from us, from our destiny, and see the self as something different in terms of content from destiny.

Now, however, we see that we are placed in a certain context of life as a child, and that we are not only determined by our abilities, by our self, even if we are not yet aware of it, by our self working on our blood circulation, and by developing very specific talents and so on, but we also see that we are placed in a specific national context, that we are children of a specific pair of parents, grow up in a specific climate and have to live together with these or those people. This is how we see ourselves as destined for our whole life. If we examine what we can consciously pursue and address as our destiny, it is self-evident that we must address this as the destiny connected with our ego, as we are placed in a life through our circumstances, which is either laborious and laden, or surrounded by caring hands. Not only our later destinies are connected with what we have done ourselves, but also the blows of fate that come to us from the unconscious, and which we cannot follow with our consciousness.

Thus we are led to the spiritual and soul essence of man, which contains within itself all the systems of forces that developed the brain, shaped the blood system and so on, and thereby determined us. But we are also determined by fate by the same I, which places itself in a particular context of life. In the field of nature observation, everyone admits this when they say, for example, “When I look at an Alpine plant, I know that it belongs to the whole Alpine nature, and that is why the Alpine plant cannot grow in the plains.” What everyone admits in the observation of nature need only be transferred to a spiritual-soul core of being. Then one will see that the spiritual-soul core of one's being, which provides its physicality with very specific abilities, is adapted to its physicality on the one hand, seeks out this physicality, enters into it, but on the other hand also seeks out its destiny.

If this destiny is perceived as hard and then one is told: you have created this yourself, you have brought it with you through your spiritual and soul essence. If you ascribe the blame for the hard fate you feel to the person as a whole, then this feeling is based on a short-sighted observation. A deeper principle judges differently, and we can understand how it judges if we take an example from life to illustrate it. Let us imagine a young man who, because his father was wealthy, lived in such a way that he lived out of his father's pocket and did not have much to worry about. Then his father loses all his wealth through some misfortune, and the son can no longer live as he did before. He may say: What a bitter fate has befallen me! How unhappy I am! But if he learns something, if he is huffed and puffed by life and has become an able person, will he say the same when he is fifty years old? No, but now he might say: That twist of fate was quite good for my personal life, because otherwise I might have become a good-for-nothing; my father's misfortune contributed to my happiness.

What can be said from the standpoint of eighteen years of age is not particularly far-sighted; at fifty years of age we shall see further. That which is the deeper principle of life in us seeks misfortune, seeks adversity and misery, because it is only by overcoming the obstacles in adversity and misery that we have developed ourselves further towards a happiness and have become something that we would not otherwise have become. Seen from a higher vantage point, and as soon as we admit that a deeper core of being lives in a person, which passes from life to life and makes it necessary for us to look at life from a higher vantage point, much immediately presents itself to us as understandable.

If we can look at a person in such a way that, as they age, they develop a system of forces within that is directed towards a new human being who is virtually independent of what the person has developed externally from their previous life or from the circumstances of his present life, and when we see how he carries an inner tension of forces through the gate of death, then we can say: This person cannot possibly enter into existence again immediately after death. Why not? What would happen if he did enter existence again immediately? He would still find the outer environment similar to the one he has just left and from which he wanted to free himself by developing the inner core of his soul. Just as the inner soul-core has no direct relationship to itself in the sense of immediately wanting to be “itself” again, so too man cannot embody himself again immediately after death, for he would grow into himself. But this means that the inner soul-core can only re-embody itself after a certain time. During this time it lives in a purely spiritual atmosphere, not in the physical world. What has developed as a spiritual core, in the same way that a plant germ develops within the stalk, leaves and blossom, lives in a spiritual world, and will only feel drawn to to outwardly embody that which it has developed only when different conditions have arisen; that is, when the earth has changed so that the human being grows into different conditions so that he can continue to develop.

That is why so much time passes between death and the next birth, so that, for example, we are not born again into the same language area and so that the other circumstances around us have also changed. We know that conditions on the outer earth change over the centuries and millennia. But what has happened in the meantime, purely externally in culture, we learn through teaching, through education. So we step out of a certain epoch with our spiritual and soul cores, with the forces that we wanted to free, and wait until new conditions on earth are brought about. But what we have not been able to participate in during the intervening period, we have to catch up on through education and teaching. Therefore, education and teaching must be added to what we have in the way of special aptitudes and abilities, which we bring up from the fruit of earlier lives.

In the relatively short time available to me, I was unable to develop anything other than what could be called a way of looking at the human soul in such a way that this observation is, on the one hand, strictly scientific, but, on the other hand, sees something real in these spiritual and soul experiences and that it is seen how, in fact, in the person as he lives before us, what occurs in a next life is already developing as a germ, which draws on the forces of heredity as well as the forces of the environment to develop further.

A world view such as that arising out of spiritual science can have an eminently healing influence, not only on the theoretical questions of life, but also on strength and security and on the power of life. Of course, anyone who does not want to familiarize themselves with spiritual science will not understand that a healthy outer life is in many essential respects conditioned by a healthy soul life, that the healthy soul life radiates its forces into the physical body, and that when the soul is desolate and cannot draw out of its own depths that which fills its consciousness with satisfaction, then the dissatisfaction, the incoherence, the mystery of the soul life is imprinted in nervousness and so on as an unhealthy influence right into the physical body. Those who do not understand this may experience it. Life poses the greatest riddles, and in cases that are meaningful to everyone, what can be expressed by asking: Where else do certain symptoms of a life that is not satisfied with itself come from, if not from the fact that the soul life is not healthy, not complete, and therefore does not radiate health to the body? But anyone who is willing to consider the healing influence of a healthy soul life on the body will also be able to say the following: If in our time we repeatedly point out the inherited characteristics and, for example, with regard to what we feel as a predisposition to illness in us, repeatedly say to this or that person: “We have inherited this from our ancestors, we cannot change it”, then this thought means something that must weigh heavily upon our innermost soul life and must mean a depression of the soul life, which will very soon exert an unfavorable influence on the outer life of the body and must be felt by the person concerned as something depressing that cannot be changed because it lies in the purely physical line of inheritance. But anyone who, on the basis of spiritual science, can gain the conviction that what lives in him is not just a combination of inherited traits and inherited powers, but something that goes from life to life as a spiritual-soul core, can, if spiritual science is not just a theory for him but something that can constantly remind himself that, in spite of all inherited traits and powers, his spiritual and mental core lives, from which he can draw the strength to become a victor, no matter how much the line of inheritance may point to decadence.

The consciousness that can be gained from spiritual science not only answers life's riddles that are theoretical, but answers all questions that reach the whole mind as riddles that we must have answered in order to live in our soul. If we know nothing of that spiritual-soul core that hurries from life to life, then we feel oppressed and weak under the yoke of heredity. We only feel strong and vigorous and live as spiritual-soul beings when we stand upright in the constitution of our spiritual-soul core and can say: The powers of our spiritual-soul core are inexhaustible, for they alone are the sum of what is given to us in the line of inheritance, and through them we can bring what appears to be doomed to decline, from the center of our soul, to ascend again. In this way, the solutions of spiritual science are written into life itself. Only then will spiritual science bear its true fruit, when it can be integrated in this way into the whole of the soul's attitude and mood, and when we become strong, not just clever, through spiritual science. But we also become more proficient in our thinking, especially with regard to certain finer distinctions in life, and we gain in strength and judgment for a finer conception of life.

Just one example of this! When those who like to attribute everything to heredity examine any significant person in relation to his line of ancestors, they may well say: “You can see that of what this person shows in himself, in one ancestor this quality is found, in another that quality.” And then it is said: This has added up and been inherited, and then the inherited traits have merged into a soul being. — One then coins the sentence: So you can see that genius stands at the end of a line of inheritance and has been inherited from one's ancestors.

Expressed in this way, a thought is, so to speak, crossed. For who would have proved anything by this line of thought? One would only have proved something if one could show that the genius was at the beginning of a line of inheritance, but not if it showed itself at the end of it. For if it occurs at the end of a line of ancestors, this proves nothing other than, if one may say so: if a man has fallen into water and comes out of it, he is wet. It only proves that he has passed through a certain element and has absorbed something from it, just as a person is wet when he is pulled out of the water. If one wanted to prove something through the line of inheritance, one would have to show that genius is at the beginning and not at the end of a line of inheritance. But one will leave that alone, because the world speaks against it.

To put the questions correctly and answer them everywhere, that is what follows from spiritual science. Then one will realize that spiritual science does not contradict natural science, but also that a scientific answer to the great riddles of life is not enough. The greatest wisdom will probably be drawn from spiritual science when one day all human education can be placed in the light of spiritual science, when man grows up in such a way that his growth means becoming aware of the spiritual-soul core.

Then the spiritual-soul core of the being will grow with the human being between birth and death in such a way that not only does the soul enter into reality with the full content of which was spoken earlier, but that the soul also becomes aware of the second I, that germ that concentrates more and more. Then the consciousness will pass into another form of life. Then man will indeed see the time approaching when the hair turns white, the face wrinkles and the strength of the bodily organs diminishes. But he will then look up at what he has seen growing from youth, which is the remainder and inheritance of a previous life, and will feel as one feels with a plant germ when the falling leaves announce the end of the plant's form, but the germ grows stronger and stronger. Thus man will feel himself as the germ of a new life and say to himself: What falls away from you must pass through death, for you cannot remain in that; for it must be something else that can be your covering, you must build yourself another body, for you have already prepared it within you. Man will feel the life ripening within him, which he will have to live through again in distant times.

That the repetitions of life are not without beginning or end, and how the question will be answered as to what extent these incarnations of the human essence have a beginning and an end, will be answered later.

When man thus regards life as the germ of a subsequent life, he will also see how this again develops a germ. Then he does not cling to a doctrine of immortality, which he examines philosophically, as it were, but then he puts life to life, which he sees flourish and thrive, and imbues himself with the consciousness of immortality, because he knows that a new germ of life must arise from every life. In the ever-growing and hope-inspiring spiritual and soul life germ, man answers the questions about the riddle of life and death. He answers them not only theoretically, but in a living inner experience he grasps, comprehends, and experiences immortality. He does not merely say, “I have grasped immortality,” but he grasps the soul in its essential nature as a being that cannot be other than immortal, because out of every life it develops a new germ of life. Man beholds inwardly the maturing of this new germ of life. Therefore we may say: spiritual science does not only answer the question about the riddle of life and death in theory, it does not only give a theoretical certainty, but it can inwardly transform our life in such a way that we gather strength and feel what goes from life to life by grasping immortality, and thus go through all lives.

In this way, theory is transformed into life practice, the immortality puzzle into an understanding of the question of immortality itself. This is always the best fruit of spiritual science when it transforms itself from mere contemplation into something that then lives within us. And it may be said that when spiritual science is grasped by man in this sense, then it is not only something that makes him understand something, but something that sinks into his own soul like a life force and lives in him.

Therefore, we may summarize today's reflection by saying that spiritual science teaches us by also vividly verifying for the human soul what a view of the whole rest of the world teaches us, the great contemplation of the perpetual transformation of life, but at the same time also of the permanence in all change that shows itself to us over and over again; it teaches us the eternal in all that is temporal. As if written in iron tablets, the great law of life is graven on our soul: Everything that lives in the universe lives only by creating the germ of new life within itself. And the soul surrenders only to aging and death in order to mature immortalized into ever new life!

Consider what is to be the subject of today's lecture only as an insertion into the series of lectures this winter. It is perhaps justified precisely by our fateful time, in which the two Central European empires, so closely connected with each other, must approach the great demands of historical becoming in our present and for the future. I also believe I am justified in saying something about the intellectual life of Austria, since I lived in Austria until I was almost thirty years old and had not only the opportunity but also the necessity from a wide variety of perspectives to become fully immersed in Austrian intellectual life. On the other hand, it may be said that this Austrian intellectual life is particularly, I might say, difficult for the outsider to grasp in terms of ideas, concepts, and representations, and that perhaps our time will make it increasingly necessary for the peculiarities of this Austrian intellectual life to be brought before the mind's eye of a wider circle. But because of the shortness of the time at my disposal I shall be unable to give anything but, I might say, incoherent pictures, unpretentious pictures of the Austrian intellectual life of the most diverse classes; pictures which do not claim to give a complete picture, but which are intended to form one or other idea which might seek understanding for what is going on in the intellectual life beyond the Inn and the Erz Mountains.

In 1861, a philosopher who was rarely mentioned outside his homeland and who was closely connected to Austrian intellectual life, Robert Zimmermann, took up his teaching post at the University of Vienna, which he then held until the 1890s. He not only awakened many people spiritually, guiding them through philosophy on their spiritual path, but he also influenced the souls of those who taught in Austria, as he chaired the Real- und Gymnasialschul-Prüfungskommission (examination commission for secondary modern and grammar schools). And he was effective above all because he had a kind and loving heart for all that was present in emerging personalities; that he had an understanding approach for everything that asserted itself in the spiritual life at all. When Robert Zimmermann took up his post as a philosophy lecturer at the University of Vienna in 1861, he spoke words in his inaugural academic address that provide a retrospective of the development of worldviews in Austria in the nineteenth century. They show very succinctly what made it difficult for Austrians to arrive at a self-sustaining worldview during this century.

Zimmermann says: “For centuries in this country, the oppressive spell that lay on the minds was more than the lack of original disposition capable of holding back not only an independent flourishing of philosophy but also the active connection to the endeavors of other Germans. As long as the Viennese university was largely in the hands of the religious orders, medieval scholasticism prevailed in its philosophy lecture halls. When, with the dawn of an enlightened era, it passed into secular management around the middle of the last century, the top-down system of teachers, teachings and textbooks, which was ordered from above, made the independent development of a free train of thought impossible. The philosophy of Wolff – which in the rest of Germany had been overcome by Kant – in the diluted version of Feder, with a smattering of English skepticism, became the intellectual nourishment of the young Austrians thirsting for knowledge. Those who, like the highly educated monk of St. Michael's in Vienna, longed for something higher had no choice but to secretly seek the way across the border to Wieland's hospitable sanctuary after discarding the monastic robe. This Barnabite monk, whom the world knows by his secular name of Karl Leonhard Reinhold, and the Klagenfurt native Herbert, Schiller's former housemate, are the only public witnesses to the involvement of the closed spiritual world on this side of the Inn and the Erz mountains in the powerful change that took hold of the spirits of the otherworldly Germany towards the end of the past, the philosophical century."

One can understand that a man speaks in this way who had participated in the 1848 movement out of an enthusiastic sense of freedom, and who then thought in a completely independent way about fulfilling his philosophical teaching. But one can also ask oneself: Is not this picture, which the philosopher draws almost in the middle of the nineteenth century, perhaps tinged with some pessimism, some pessimism? It is easy for an Austrian to see things in black and white when judging his own country, given the tasks that have fallen to Austria due to the historical necessities – I say expressly: the historical necessities – that the empire, composed of a diverse, multilingual mixture of peoples, had to find its tasks within this multilingual mixture of peoples. And when one asks such a question, perhaps precisely out of good Austrian consciousness, all sorts of other ideas come to mind.

For example, one can think of a German Austrian poet who is truly a child of the Austrian, even the southern Austrian mountains; a child of the Carinthian region, born high up in the Carinthian mountains and who, through an inner spiritual urge, felt compelled to descend to the educational institutions. I am referring to the extraordinarily important poet Fercher von Steinwand.

Among Fercher von Steinwand's poems, there are some very remarkable presentations. I would like to present just one example to your souls as a picture of this Austrian intellectual life, as a picture that can immediately evoke something of how the Austrian, out of his innermost, most original, most elementary intellectual urge, can be connected with certain ideas of the time. Fercher von Steinwand, who knew how to write such wonderful “German Sounds from Austria” and who was able to shape everything that moves and can move human souls from such an intimate mind, also knew how to rise with his poetry to the heights where the human spirit tries to grasp what lives and works in the innermost weaving of the world. For example, in a long poem, of which I will read only the beginning, called “Chor der Urtriebe” (Choir of Primeval Instincts).

In the boundless expanse
of our ancient mother Night,
hark! there seems to be a struggle
of the most mysterious power!
Do we hear foreboding stride?
Has longing awakened?
Has a flash of inspiration ignited?
Do dreams glide through the vastness?
How the forces of the forces intoxicate each other,
blissful exchange!
Sudden hurrying,
quiet lingering,
revelatory listening
alternates with waving
Amazed fear!
The charm of attainment
Rises, to sink,
Sinks, to hate,
White with the pale
Image of the embrace
Hatred not to grasp.
Dark ramifications
Sprouting affections
Seek for tendrils.
Heavy thoughts
Dawn and falter
Over the expanses,
Seem to guess
Or to guide.
What they prepare
Are they the seeds
Of mighty deeds,
Radiant times?
Who felt the stirred up
Creatively!
Who wandered through it,
Blissfully enjoying,
Or untangled it,
Opening up great things!
Up there it moves like a ghostly embrace,
We in warmth,
We also gain,
search and ponder,
see ourselves lifted,
highest endeavor
happily interwoven.
That blows around us,
arises in us:
“It is you, ideas! -—"

The poet sees how, as he seeks to delve into the “choir of primal urges” that are world-creative, ideas come to him. He seeks to rise up to that world that lived in the minds of the philosophers I had the honor of speaking of last week: Fichte, Schelling, and Hegel. But we may ask ourselves how it was possible for that intimate bond to be woven in Fercher von Steinwand's soul, which must have connected him – and it really connected him – between the urge of his soul, which awakened in the simple peasant boy from the Carinthian mountains, and between what the greatest idealistic philosophers in the flowering of German world view development sought to strive for from their point of view. And so we ask: Where could Fercher von Steinwand find this, since, according to Robert Zimmermann's words, Schiller, Fichte, Hegel were not presented in Austria during Fercher von Steinwand's youth – he was born in 1828 – since they were forbidden fruit during his youth there? But the truth always comes out. When Fercher von Steinwand had graduated from high school and, equipped with his high school diploma, went to Graz to attend the University of Graz, he enrolled in lectures. And there was a lecture that the lecturer reading it on natural law was reading. He enrolled in natural law and could naturally hope that he would hear a lot of all kinds of concepts and ideas about the rights that man has by nature, and so on. But lo and behold! Under the unassuming title “Natural Law,” good Edlauer, the Graz university professor, the lawyer, spoke of nothing but Fichte, Schelling and Hegel for the entire semester. And so Fercher von Steinwand took his course in Fichte, Schelling and Hegel during this time, quite independently of what might have been considered forbidden, and perhaps really was forbidden, according to an external view of Austrian intellectual life. Quite independently of what was going on at the surface, a personality who was seeking a path into the spiritual worlds was therefore immersing himself in this context with the highest intellectual endeavor.

Now, when one sets out to follow such a path into the spiritual worlds through Austrian life, one must bear in mind – as I said, I do not want to justify anything, but only give pictures – that the whole nature of this Austrian spiritual life offers many, many puzzles to those – yes, I cannot say otherwise – who are looking for a solution to puzzles. But anyone who likes to observe the juxtaposition of contradictions in human souls will find much of extraordinary significance in the soul of the Austrian. It is more difficult for the Austrian German to work his way up than in other areas, for example in German, I would say, not so much in education, but in the use of education, in participating in education. It may look pedantic, but I have to say it: it is difficult for the Austrian to participate in the use of his intellectual life simply because of the language. For it is extremely difficult for the Austrian to speak in the way that, say, the Germans of the Reich speak. He will very easily be tempted to say all short vowels long and all long vowels short. He will very often find himself saying “Son” and “Sohne” instead of “Son” and “Sonne”. Where does something like that come from? It is due to the fact that Austrian intellectual life makes it necessary – it is not to be criticized, but only described – that anyone who, I might say, works their way up from the soil of the folk life into a certain sphere of education and intellect has to take a leap over an abyss – out of the language of their people and into the language of the educated world. And of course only school gives them the tools to do so. The vernacular is correct everywhere; the vernacular will say nothing other than: “Suun”, quite long, for “Sohn”, “D'Sun”, very short, for “Sonne”. But at school it becomes difficult to find one's way into the language, which, in order to handle education, must be learned. And this leap across the abyss is what gives rise to a special language of instruction. It is this school language, not some kind of dialect, that leads people everywhere to pronounce long vowels as short vowels and short vowels as long vowels. From this you can see that, if you are part of the intellectual life, you have a gulf between you and the national character everywhere. But this national character is rooted so deeply and meaningfully, not so much perhaps in the consciousness of each individual as, one might say, in each person's blood, that the power I have hinted at is experienced inwardly, and can even be experienced in a way that cuts deep into the soul. And then phenomena come to light that are particularly important for anyone who wants to consider the place of Austrian higher intellectual life in the intellectual life of Austrian nationality and the connection between the two. As the Austrian works his way up into the sphere of education, I would say that he is also lifted into a sphere, in terms of some coinage of thought, some coinage of ideas, so that there really is a gulf to the people. And then it comes about that more than is otherwise the case, something arises in the Austrian who has found his way into intellectual life, something that draws him to his nationality. It is not a home for something that one has left only a short time ago, but rather a homesickness for something from which one is separated by a gulf in certain respects, but in relation to which one cannot, for reasons of blood, create it, find one's way into it.

And now let us imagine, for example, a mind – and it can be quite typical of Austrian intellectual life – that has undergone what an Austrian scientific education could offer it. It now lives within it. In a certain way, it is separated from its own nationality by this scientific education, which it cannot achieve with ordinary homesickness, but with a much deeper sense of homesickness. Then, under certain circumstances, something like an inner experience of the soul occurs, in which this soul says to itself: I have immersed myself in something that I can look at with concepts and ideas, that from the point of view of intelligence certainly leads me here or there to understand the world and life in connection with the world; but on the other side of an abyss there is something like a folk philosophy. What is this folk philosophy like? How does it live in those who know nothing and have no desire to know anything of what I have grown accustomed to? What does it look like over there, on the other side of the abyss? — An Austrian in whom this homesickness has become so vivid, which is much deeper than it can usually occur, this homesickness for the source of nationality, from which one has grown out, such an Austrian is Joseph Misson.

Misson, who entered a religious order in his youth, absorbed the education that Robert Zimmermann pointed out, lived in this education and was also active in this education; he was a teacher at the grammar schools in Horn, Krems and Vienna. But in the midst of this application of education, the philosophy of his simple farming people of Lower Austria, from which he had grown out, arose in him, as in an inner image of the soul, through his deep love of his homeland. And this Joseph Misson in the religious habit, the grammar school teacher who had to teach Latin and Greek, immersed himself so deeply in his people, as if from memory, that this folklore revealed itself poetically in him in a living way, so that one of the most beautiful, most magnificent dialect poems in existence was created. I will just, to paint a picture for you, recite a small piece from this dialect poetry, which was only partially published in 1850 – it was then not completed – just the piece in which Joseph Misson so truly presents the philosophy of life of the Lower Austrian farmer. The poem is called: “Da Naaz,” - Ignaz - “a Lower Austrian farmer's boy, goes abroad”. So, Naaz has grown up in the Lower Austrian farmhouse, and he has now reached the point where he has to make his way into the world. He must leave his father and mother, the parental home. There he is given the teachings that now truly represent a philosophy of life. One must not take the individual principles that the father says to the boy, but one must take them in their spiritual context; how it is spoken about the way one has to behave towards luck when it comes, towards fate ; how one should behave when this or that happens to one; how one should behave when someone does one good; how one should behave towards kind people and how towards those who do one harm. And I would like to say: to someone who has undergone his philosophical studies to the extent that he has become a theologian, this peasant philosophy now makes sense. So the father says to the Naaz when the Naaz goes out:

From the first song.
Teach your children on the road.

Naaz, iazn loos, töös, wos a ta so, töös sockt ta tai Voda.
Gootsnom, wails scho soo iis! und probiast tai Glück ö da Waiden.
Muis a da sogn töös, wo a da so, töös los der aa gsackt sai.
I and my mother were dreaming and dreaming, as you know, seeing nothing else.
What we see, work and worry about,
We do it for the children, what we don't do, is not good enough! —
If we are once a little pressed for time and are short of hands, take it easy, but find us a few decent places for the children, preferably under the shade of trees, where the fish spawn. —
If your luck turns around, so live not all the days,
Stay even, in the middle of the river, don't cut the rope too short.
Luck is round and round, so roll it back again soon.
If good luck and misfortune happen, it doesn't lie in sorrows.
Don't let anything get you down, don't let it get to the clouds.
If we're down, we'll pull through, I hope so, he'll do it again!
Mocka'r and hocka'r and pfnotten and trenzen with the kimt nix außa.
Kopfhängad, grod ols won amt' Heana s Prot häden gfressa:
Töös mochts schlimmi nöd guit, gidanka'r ös Guidi no pessa!
Look at the situation we are in, think about the future!
If you give us something, don't be stingy, take this and that: it's good!
Look, my dear, we realize: a little courtesy is not too much to ask for! —
It's getting more chivalrous, foreign people, it's a saying, a word of honor.
Don't be too proud, don't be afraid of a fool.
Don't open your coat, don't let your luck run out.
There are two weeks below and one above, so give an old one. If no one chips what is also often there, give a groden. Look after your health, health is allways good for the soul. What have we, who have everything in this world, if we are not healthy? Our friends and our comrades in arms! Olli, they may know us – and fools, fools is the best!

Translation:

A lesson from my father for the journey

Ignaz, now listen, what I say to you, your father says to you.
In God's name, because it has to be so, and you should seek your fortune in the wide world,
That is why I have to tell you this, and take to heart what I say to you.
I and your mother are old and have stayed at home; you know that you can't make anything out of that.
You slave away, toil, work hard and weaken yourself with worry. You do this for the sake of your children; what wouldn't you do to keep them from going astray. If you have grown weak and sickly later in life, and hard times come, they will also jump in lovingly, but you can find this in proper, righteous children, helping to provide the things that the state and life demand so that we can have some relief.
If you should ever be lucky, don't live like a cavalier.
Stay as you were, in the golden mean of the middle road, don't stray from the right path in life.
Luck is round like a ball; it rolls away from us just as easily as it comes to us. If something doesn't work out or you experience misfortune, don't talk about it to people. Stay calm; don't let anything show on your face; don't be timid; complain about everything to God only; ask him; I tell you, he makes everything better again! Acting sad, withdrawing, making sour faces, being whiny: none of this achieves anything. |
Hanging your head as if the chickens had eaten your bread:
This does not improve anything bad, let alone make the good even better!
Keep the possessions you take with you; plan for the future a little.
If someone gives you something, accept it without being ungracious and say, “May God reward you!” —
Pay attention, Ignaz; and remember this well: no one has ever been punished for being polite! —
Don't be contrary; being away from home makes people modest; that's a saying and it's true.
Don't be tempted into gambling; don't pay too much attention to the dance floor.
Don't have your cards read; and don't seek your destiny in the dream book.
If two paths go in different directions, and one of them is new, then go the old one.
If one of them is uneven, which is often the case, then go the even one.
Guard your health; of all goods, health is the better one.
Admit it: what in the world do you really possess if you don't have your health?
-----
If you come home one day and no longer find us old people in this little room,
then we will be where your grandfather and grandmother are joyfully awaiting us,
where our benefactors will find us and our deceased relatives. Everyone will recognize us immediately – and this, Ignaz, is a very beautiful thing. Now it says:

From the second song.
How the girl leaves her father's house and gives her father's home sorrow and tears.

Vodar and Muidar said: “Good luck for all we hope for,
We wish you a long life and good health!”
“As you wish,” said Muida and wiped the tears from my eyes,
“If you want respect and honor in this world, that's how we pray."
“People set it up earlier and people later,
I and your dad, we pray, child, that no misfortune befalls you.
Go to your niece and nephew and bring them to the Moata; stop by in Piasenrait, don't stay at the Moam's, you'll find a welcome, see everything beautiful, Naaz, and say hello a lot; When you come, we will be very happy to see you, when you come home!"
The old woman cries and gives him a Guglhupf cake, a soapbox and
, in addition, a white, newly washed cloth.
Hoamlih gives him three more in a paper bag.
The Vada gives him an extra two guilders, more can't be given.
“Money, Naaz, is a piglet that won't be viable at will, Naaz."
The door opens, and Naaz looks around the room,
“Main!” says Muida, ‘that's a terrible thing to say!’
He points to the gun rack hanging just inside the door:
“Gootsnom!” Muida says, makes a cross on his forehead with a damar – and then
-----
“I'm serious, Naaz, now goodbye, take care that all is well, Naaz!
Come on, let's go to the barn, so that we know right away
Where or when or what or said that something has fallen. If you come across the Graanitz, don't take a smudge pot full of ears
Drink from a watered well, it helps for the Hungarian crown!»
Godspeed once more and once more and go out into the world with trepidation.
Hunotmal doesn't ring, they look around and beckon to their father. “Look at your sign,” cries the father of the wide world, ‘it's not valid!” “Go to the Moam,’ cries the old mother, ‘we greet you, don't forget us.’

Narration:
How Ignaz leaves his father's house and his parents see him off.

Father and mother, I bid you farewell and God bless you for all the kindness you have shown me.
I hope with all my heart that you live a long life and stay healthy.
As God wills, says the mother and wipes her eyes with the corner of her handkerchief,
If the Lord calls us from the world, we are prepared for it.
For some people it is given up earlier and for some later.
I and your father pray, Ignaz, that no misfortune befalls you.
We will walk with you for a bit and accompany you to the image of the Mother of God.
Once you are in Piasenrait, stop by at your aunt's. You will be welcomed there.
Tell her all the nice things, Ignaz, and give her our warmest regards.
If she can come, we would be very happy if she visited us.
So speaks the old mother and wraps him a crumpet, a pastry, and also a piece of white bread in a freshly washed 'cloth'. She secretly gives him three shiny new twenties, wrapped in paper. The father gives him a two-guilder piece, more he cannot give. We don't have much money, Ignaz, take what you can with good will.
Before the door opens, Ignaz looks around and takes one last look at the room.
“Oh dear,” says his mother, ‘that's a bad sign, as if you'll never see it again,’
and she dips two fingers into the holy water font hanging next to the door.
In God's name, says the mother, and makes a cross on his forehead with his thumb – and they leave. Now it's getting serious, Ignaz, now God keep you, be well, Ignaz, Let us hear from you from time to time so that we always know how you are doing or if you are sick. When you come to Graanitz, take a handful of earth beforehand,
Austrian for: border. Drink it in diluted wine, it helps against fever.
They say goodbye to you, once and again, and part sadly.
A hundred times is not enough for them to look around and wave their hands.
“Mind your ID,” the father calls from afar, ‘don't lose it.” “Go to your aunt,’ the old woman calls, ‘we send her our regards, don't forget that.’

The entire philosophy of the farming community emerges before the friar, and so vividly that one sees how intimately he has grown with it. But he is also connected to something else: to that which is so fundamentally connected to the Austrian character, to the character of the Austro-German peasantry in the Alps: to the direct, unspoilt view of nature that arises from the most direct coexistence with nature. The description of a thunderstorm is owed to what comes to life again in Joseph Misson. It vividly describes how the Naaz now travels and how he comes to a place where heath sheep graze, which a shepherd, called a Holdar there, knows how to observe closely: how they behave when a thunderstorm is coming. Now he tells himself what he sees there:

When a cloud appears in the west and it doesn't come from below, it means a thunderstorm.
“One,” he thinks, ‘is coming, the other is going, now you have to decide which way you're going.’
Get on a donkey and look – now it thunders!
Immediately again – and how it rumbles over the Beringer!
It roars and rushes powerfully into the wood, that it is completely out!
“Oh, where this breaks out, our heaven be gracious!"
Then the Holdar, takes off his hat and ‘if only,’
he looks at the Guirkan, ‘if only it doesn't scare someone!’
“Just as we are,” he says, ‘two thunderstorms are coming together.’ (This convergence of two thunderstorms is now vividly described.)
And the dog sticks its snout up in the air and sniffs the air.
He points to a swallow, which flies quietly to the barn and drinks.
Then it is quiet and sultry and the air thickens.
The birds fall asleep in the nests and the sheep bow their heads.

Reproduction:
How Ignaz gets caught in the weather and doesn't know whether to

Listen, he says to himself, sit down for a moment and think about which way you will go.
He goes to the heath and looks around – suddenly there is a clap of thunder,
followed by another, and how it rumbles over the mountains!
It creaks and hisses mightily in the wood, as if it were completely dead. Well, may the Lord have mercy on anyone this happens to, says the lad to himself, taking off his coat, saying, looking at the clouds, just hoping it doesn't start raining. It seems to me, he says, like two thunderstorms mixed together. And the dog lifts its muzzle to sniff the air, then, sensing no danger, draws its tail between its legs, goes over to the lad and lies down beside him. Now it is quiet and sultry, and the leaves tremble in the trees, the birds sleep in their nests, and the sheep put their heads together.

The good Naaz is aware of all this, and then the poet, who has meanwhile described how the Naaz entered “a Lucka” - a rock cave, a stone cave - waits there until the worst is over. Then he hangs his boots on the other shoulder and continues on his way. But the adventure with the weather is not over yet. Naaz comes to a little stream; which has of course swelled due to the weather. Naaz sees that:

"Look, the stream is so big, now I can't go around! —
Töös owa», sockt a, «wiat toh wos sain? iozt kan ik nid umi!»
He looks like a fool, the stream is too big, now he cannot cross it.
But something like that, he says, what could it be? Now I cannot cross it!

Now, in such a way, Misson, this man who really created from the depths of the folk tradition, wanted to embody the figure of Naaz. When one takes on such a figure, one sees how deeply, deeply in the subconscious soul, I could say, Austrian nationality sits with those souls who have also worked their way up into a high sphere of education. And one sees from such an example what remains of nationality for the soul in the higher sphere of education when one looks at this Austrian nationality.

One must say: mystics, in the sense that the human soul really delves into its inner life, really tries to understand what lives and moves within man, such mystics are not really found in Austria. Mystics who deal a lot with the human ego cannot flourish there. On the other hand, to feel the mysterious forces of nature in a certain way, more than just poetically, I would say, to feel the gnomes, the goblins, the spirits of nature in their liveliness, also with a certain humor, so that at the right moment you do not feel compelled to admit the full reality, but to feel in the co-experience of nature that which lives and moves in nature as a higher spiritual being – that is Austrian again. Therefore, within the Austro-German national character, it is not easy to find mystics who could be successors of Eckhart, Johannes Tauler.

On the other hand, the remarkable peasant philosopher Conrad Deubler is a truly Austrian figure. He was born in 1814 in Goisern, in the middle of the mountains, and died there in 1884 as an innkeeper. He was and remained a true farmer; but a man who so he has grasped it vividly, has penetrated it with his peasant wisdom, with a certain, I would say, curt peasant wisdom, — Conrad Deubler, such a philosopher could flourish; a philosopher who did not get involved in lengthy justifications, but liked this doctrine, and now he took from the Austrian mind everything to make this teaching appear plausible. From a primitive, elementary, rustic understanding he brought about, I might say, a Darwinian conception adapted to the Austrian peasant, by means of which he was able to carry on a copious correspondence with the great theologian and writer David Friedrich Strauss, with Feuerbach, with Ernst Haeckel, and so on. To grasp the whole expanse of nature with the intellect is more to the taste of the Austrian soul than to mystically immerse oneself in it. Therefore, one finds individual people among Austrian farmers who know every little herb in the mountains, who are also spiritually connected to the inner workings of each little herb, who, for example, engage with philosophers such as Ennemoser and Eckartshausen, who want to give a certain deeper picture of nature in its entirety, and who also want to place the human being in this picture of nature. But within this Austrian peasantry and that which arises from this peasantry, one will not easily find a pure mystic who engages in the contemplation of the human soul, averting his gaze from the external world of the senses. For it is the direct connection with that which makes an impression on the senses that characterizes the Austrian mind in the broadest sense for anyone who sees it – the seeing of more than the sensual, but the direct seeing – the seeing that does not need to reflect, that seeing that, I might say, sometimes skips the mind and goes directly to the heart.

Therefore, it can be said that in Austrian poetry, the soul and the landscape resonate with each other directly, sometimes in a way that is so moving, as in the case of Lena; but in general, this absorption of the whole soul in what can be done directly by a person, what can be accomplished by him without it being related to immediate usefulness, - that is something that belongs to the emotional qualities of the Austrian.

I would like to say, on the one hand, on this side of the Leitha, in the Austrian mountains, in the Austrian regions, there is something that can be depicted in a picture, as I attempted with Joseph Misson. On the other side of the Leitha, you are immediately in touch with the wide-open spaces of the Hungarian steppes; but you also live with what resounds in the sensual, I would say, spiritually, which the sensual tries to exhaust spiritually as much as it can be exhausted. Anyone who has ever crossed over to Hungary and listened to a Hungarian band, with all that these people put of their souls into their simple and wonderful playing, in which pain rages demonically, the lust and the exuberance of life at the same time, understands a poem like that of the Hungarian Szäz, which refers to this direct coexistence with the sensual, but which is felt spiritually, deeply spiritually and emotionally:

Listen, oh listen to the violin's song.
How it laments and how it weeps;
So much sorrow in four strings,
So much pain and grief combined!

Like the nightingales' flutes
In the silent, shadowy forest,
How the sobs of the abandoned orphan

That is lament, that is sorrow,
Which oppresses and yet uplifts,
Which weeps for the past, yet hopefully
Lives for a beautiful future.

Listen, a curse is heard – and swords
Mix clashing into the But a little fiddle bow.

Hear, oh hear the violin sounds,
How it spurs and laughs and cries,
In four strings such feeling,
So much joy and pain combined! —

You have to look very closely to understand the relevant things, you have to look very closely at the intimate interweaving of the senses with the outside world, so that the senses, in their interweaving with the outside world within the sensual, can more easily see the spiritual than when this spiritual awakens intellectually in the mind. It can be said that when it comes to making a judgment directly from the heart, to criticizing or approving the world, the Austrian will, under certain circumstances, have a little confidence in himself. He will also, especially if he has learned something, like to move in abstract terms, he will like to give something to the culture of the head, but above all want to be rooted in the culture of the heart. But the way from the head to the heart, the way from the heart to the head, is just so long, and it is so difficult to find! Often one easily stops in the middle!

It is, in a sense, quite characteristic of what, for example, a good connoisseur of Austrian culture, a contemporary, said about an Austrian personality, the former director of the Burgtheater in Vienna, Max Burckhard: that despite all his energy, the most characteristic thing about this quintessentially Austrian man, Max Burckhard, was that he never really wanted to undergo the transition from feeling to understanding or from understanding to feeling. He wanted to keep them both separate. While Max Burckhard was director of the Vienna Burgtheater, Hermann Bahr recounts, and Wilbrandt's play 'The Master of Palmyra' was to be performed at the Burgtheater, a play that is considered by many to be particularly significant and that for many is something tremendously high-minded, Burckhard did not want to stage the play. He could not understand why something so significant was seen in it; he always rejected it. So it was that well-meaning people, that is, people who meant well by Wilbrandt and the “Master of Palmyra,” managed to at least get Burckhard to attend a lecture on the “Master of Palmyra” in a really high-level society. He knew the piece, of course, but it was not to be read to him, but all the beautiful, aesthetic passages, the treatises were to have an effect on him, which the invited real professors and asthetics had to present about the mastery of this piece. Well, Burckhard was really a very clever man who, when it came down to it, was able to dialectically stand his ground and get into the spiritual ideas. He listened to the lecture. He did not just listen to the lectures of the aesthetes and professors, who said that something had been created “from the depths of human nature that points to the highest regions of spiritual life”. He also listened to how the beautiful characteristics are to be understood according to all chapters of aesthetics. He was silent. He did not allow himself to follow these trains of thought in any way. He could understand them, of course. It would have been easy for him to refute the matter from his point of view, to get involved in it. On another occasion, he might have done so, getting involved in long-winded discussions about the matter. He remained silent, he said nothing. Then ladies, especially the lady of the house, approached him: didn't he at least want to say how he related to all the witty remarks about one of the most witty plays ever written. Was it not the duty of the Burgtheater to perform the epoch-making play? But he did not engage in a discussion. He said: “I'm not putting it on!” And why? Why? They wanted to hear from him, the witty man, how he related to all the things that had been discussed wittily for hours. He just said: “Because it's a Holler!” — “A Holler” is something that means the same in Austria as “quatsch” in Berlin. But he did not engage in a discussion. That is to be taken as characteristic. He relied on his immediate judgment of the heart, on what his mind told him, and he did not find it necessary to engage in discussions of dialectics and so on; his whole criticism was that it is a “Holler”.

And so it is interesting to see, actually, how at a time when the most wonderful and glorious discussions were being held within the rest of the German-speaking world about the significance, nature and essence of drama, discussions in which Goethe and Schiller participated in such a profound way – I am referring in particular to the end of the eighteenth century and the beginning of the nineteenth century – how in this period a discussion of aesthetics, of the meaning and essence of drama, was also ignited in Austria. But how was the discussion of drama ignited there in Austria? In a very strange way, everything that was presented there for and against this way of thinking ignited in Austria; what was discussed in such a well-known profound way within the Schiller-Goethe circle and the broader circles of the whole of German intellectual life, all of this ignited in Austria in a very peculiar way, namely through dance. At the beginning of the nineteenth century, two types of dance were the subject of a very energetic and significant discussion there. At the turn of the century, Noverre was the master of dance; and his student was then Muzzarelli. Muzzarelli represented a dance, a style of dance, in which the main thing was to make beautiful movements, artificial movements, to intertwine artificial movements through their lines, where the external spatial image of presenting oneself was taken into account. Now, at the beginning of the nineteenth century, an opponent of this 'dance form' emerged in the person of Salvatore Vigano. And for this dance form of Salvatore Vigano, whose wife in particular danced the dance form he represented in a masterly fashion, whole texts were written, which did not apply to any other dance form. Whole stories, whole narratives were clothed in the dance form, so that the situations, the gestures, the form of expression, the events, the content to be told, were expressed. And now one should just delve into the far-reaching, passion-stirring discussions that have arisen about which dance is artistically the right one.

There was the Austrian playwright Ayrenhoff, who had already grown old at the time, the author of a large number of plays, who was completely on the side of the Muzzarelli dance, who spoke out most negatively against Salvatore Vigano and against the impossibility of expressing inner feelings through dance in such an unchaste way. Ayrenhoff could not understand that they even wanted to dance entire pieces, such as 'Richard the Lionheart' or 'The Daughter of the Air'. Ayrenhoff had been educated in the appreciation of beautiful form, of the sweep of lines, and his dramas were also constructed in this way. The sweep of lines in the portrayal of characters, seeing how some situation dissolves into a joke, or the transition of a situation into a joke, that was what mattered. These extraordinary forms were what mattered. He saw this in Muzzarelli's dance as well. And he was an important poet for Austria at that time. His importance can be seen from the fact that he received extraordinary recognition from Frederick the Great, who otherwise had no interest in German literature of the time. And “The Stagecoach”, a comedy by Ayrenhoff, Frederick the Great called “the best comedy that is written at all except the comedies of Moliere”. Yes, Frederick the Great went so far as to once show himself at a parade of the field marshal lieutenant - because that was Ayrenhoff and at the same time a poet - because he, Frederick the Great, was so interested in him.

On the other side, on Viganos' side, was Heinrich Joseph von Collin, who came from Belgium; but in a sense, Belgium belonged to Austria at that time. He had written the tragedy “Regulus,” but also other plays. Collin now advocated expression in dance with great enthusiasm. And he now staged his dramas in such a way that they expressed inwardness in what was being portrayed; that it was not so much about the way situations and jokes followed one another, about the external forms, but rather that the inner nature of the human being was expressed in what happened on stage. And Robert Zimmermann, who is deeply rooted in Austrian intellectual life, has spoken very beautifully of this Heinrich Collin, showing that this Heinrich Collin, who is basically also completely forgotten in Austria, but who But who can lead us deep into the course of Austrian intellectual life, who knew nothing of Fichte, and in his dramas revived the same kind of soul-feeling that lay in Fichte's philosophical representations. To make matters worse, Heinrich Collin's brother, Matthäus von Collin, has explicitly shown how Heinrich Collin knew nothing of Fichte, how he arrived at Fichteanism, but in a poetic way, in his Austrian way, entirely out of a strange parallelism of intellectual life, in the way that I have just described.

Without reflecting on the intuition, without merging into the intuition, Fichte comes back to what I described eight days ago. He says: The outer sense world, that which man lives out in the sensual, outer existence, is the sensualized material of our duty. Now that duty confronts him in such a deeply objective way and at the same time becomes related to the divine weaving and being that permeates the world, Fichte comes to say: one must not think in such a way that external sensual happiness could be bestowed on the one who faithfully fulfills his duty, but — even if this is somewhat one-sided, in the way it is presented, the energy of a certain striving of German idealism expresses itself in it; things must not be taken dogmatically – but what Fichte says is: the one who is completely absorbed in his duty must not claim that the reward for it will somehow be found in the external world of the senses. Therefore, the truly tragic – and this was Fichte's conviction – will appear when duty does not find any reward, but rather finds misfortune in the external world.

Heinrich Collin presents the same tendency in his plays. He wants to embody in a dramatic way the human soul that is built upon itself, that can live within itself without combining the happiness of the sensual world with duty. And so a deeply ethical trait emerges, but one that is intimately connected with the direct contemplation of the world as it presents itself to the senses; one that has even emerged from an aesthetics that has been formed through dance.

This close connection with observation, this life in direct perception and also the placing of what the heart experiences in direct perception, the reluctance to seek the way from the head to the heart, must be seen as one of the characteristics that are really deeply connected with this Austrian intellectual life.

And so many things in this Austrian spiritual life appear to us in such a way that contradictions are present in it, but contradictions that, if one lets them take effect in the right way, seem understandable in people who, within Europe, are placed in difficult tasks, in the mediation of the West with the East, and, I would like to say, must feel this placing in every detail of their way of life.

One can say: Wherever we touch this Austrian intellectual life, it appears to us as follows: the innermost is directly fanned in the outer world, without the mediation of a mystical dialectic. And from this underground, a phenomenon as likeable as the Austrian philosopher Bartholomäus von Carneri can be explained – as I said, I only want to present images. He was born in Trento in 1821, the son of an Austrian civil servant; deformed from birth (he was a twin), he already went through a difficult, painful youth, and then, after he had familiarized himself with the diversity of Austrian intellectual life, he became acquainted with Darwinism. For Carneri, Darwinism is not something that he simply accepts, but rather, for him, Darwinism becomes a life riddle itself. That the world, in the sense of Darwinism, can be explained by the externally observable development, is understandable to him, despite the fact that he has immersed himself deeply in German idealism. But in a certain respect, Darwinism becomes a life riddle for Carneri, the Austrian philosopher: If Darwinism is correct, what about human morality, human ethics? And so Bartholomew of Carneri becomes, one might say, the greatest ethicist, the greatest moral teacher of Darwinism. He interprets Darwinism in such a way that he seeks within the purely natural development, how the forces of nature complicate up to man, so that he still sees a spiritualization in this complication of the forces of nature, as they configure themselves. He does not want a rift between nature and spirit, but he does not want to stop at nature. He wants to chase the spirit out of itself in the configuration of the forces of nature. At the same time, he wants to find the connection between human ethics and human moral life and the explanation of nature in terms of Darwinism. Thus, for Carneri, the necessity to create an ethic arises directly from the world that appears vivid to him through Darwinism. I would like to say that what the human heart wants and needs to set before itself must be directly connected to the secrets and mysteries of nature. And it is particularly interesting to see in Bartholomäus von Carneri how he now strives for a unified world view, for a world view that fully embraces Darwinism in the spirit of the times, in the spirit of nineteenth-century materialism, but can only embrace it if if spirituality springs and can spring everywhere in nature itself, but a spirituality that is grasped directly in feeling, that is not first brought down from some transcendental spheres, as with Fichte, but that appears to him directly during the experience of sensuality. It is remarkable how the characteristic of Austrianism appears precisely in such a personality, in a personality like Carneri, who, however, also wants to place himself uniformly in the world in a different way, who everywhere sets out to show how, on the one hand, nature reaches up to the spirit, and on the other hand, the spirit works down to nature, how a unity lives in everything. Carneri also sought to depict this unity in life. He sought to bring it into life. And so one of the personalities arises, who appeared in particular in the 1860s and 1870s in Austria as fine minds, one of the personalities who were then also politically active. Carneri was on the side of the intellectual Austrian politicians of the 1870s, Plener, Beer, Herbst, Berger and so on. But wherever he spoke – and he often spoke – his words were imbued with a lofty idealism, but precisely with an idealism rooted in Darwinism, which was aware of its roots in Darwinism: I may be an idealist because my ideals come to me directly when I immerse myself in the development of nature.

It is the same spirit, in another field, that then again held sway in Robert Hamerling. In Robert Hamerling, in whom, I might say, the Austrian German found expression in the fact that Hamerling's motto was: “Germany is my fatherland, Austria is my motherland,” which combined good Austrian-ness with good German-ness. In this Hamerling everything that can be called the interpenetration of idealism with direct feeling and with intuition found direct expression. Even in Austria, where people might have been better able to understand it, Hamerling's vividly sensual images, I would say sensually imbued images, were often condemned, for example in his “Ahasver,” also in “Aspasia” and in “King of Sion.” But they did not understand that it was precisely Hamerling's idealism, which I would call Austrian idealism, that needed the sensory image to visualize itself in, so as not to suffer from the division of the world into the sensual on the other. And so for Hamerling the spiritualized sensual, the aesthetic idealism, became the goal toward which he directed his whole feeling, his whole perception and his whole thinking as a vision of the future. And in many respects it is precisely in the case of such intellectuals as Carneri and Hamerling that the difficulties of Austrian intellectual life come to light, difficulties which consist in the fact that one is placed in a multiform surging mass of humanity and has to find one's way. Hence the phenomena that so often occur within Austrian intellectual life, where a clear view of this or that remains with mere description and does not somehow find its way into action and then peter out in a certain pessimism. Hence certain phenomena are only possible in Austrian intellectual life.

Is it not really somewhat strange that there was an Austrian in the first half of the nineteenth century who was born near Znaim, who bore the typically Austrian name Karl Postl, who also became a clergyman at his mother's request, but then, like the Barnabite monk Karl Leonhard Reinhold, also cast off the robe of the order and disappeared? He has disappeared. Then a book appears: “Austria as it Is,” from America; it describes Austrian views. That was in 1828. Then, from this same Karl Postl, who called himself not Karl Postl but Charles Sealsfield, appear, for example, descriptions of the decline of the Native Americans, from which one can see how fundamentally sound this man's direct view of nature is. No one at that time had any idea that the simple Karl Postl from Austria was hidden in this Charles Sealsfield. All the stories that otherwise appear on similar subjects – just see for yourself – are written, so to speak, from the point of view of a certain education, written in a certain way, so that you notice the theory. These Postl stories are written in such a way that the eye immediately grows into what it sees; the whole soul grows together with direct perception. He then spends his lifetime from the age of thirty to the age of sixty in the canton of Solothurn in Switzerland, where he is also buried. He returns and describes the life of Germans in America in such a vivid way that it should still have a significant effect on the soul today, if only it were read.

A specifically Austrian phenomenon is also a personality, whom not only the younger, but perhaps the older members of the audience gathered here have met, those books that are written, as is modestly stated on the title page, “for maidens”; “Weihgeschenk für Jungfrauen” it says. A story, a wonderfully vivid story, steeped in a Goethean, one might almost say, Greek spirit. On the title page it says: “Weihgeschenk für Jungfrauen” by Christian Oeser, “Letters on the Main Subjects of Aesthetics.” Published in the first half of the nineteenth century in the first edition, these books experienced many editions. Those who read them today still get something from them that can expand the heart, that can warm the soul. Christian Oeser - yes, who is Christian Oeser? This Christian Oeser is the same man who, for example, had a drama published in Pressburg in 1839 that nobody knew the author of – “Life and Deeds of Emerich Tököly” “by A. Z.”, that is, from A to Z, so that all the letters between A and Z are included. Those who understood something about dramatic characterization saw in the figure of Tököly a Hungarian Götz. It is a portrayal that can be directly compared to Goethe's “Götz von Berlichingen”, which was born out of the struggles that took place in Hungary shortly before the drama was written and that moved many, many souls and the world. The drama went out into the world, and so did several others by the same author. No one knew who it was from. That remained so. In 1869, the German Schiller Foundation took a decision to pay the then support allowance to a Mrs. Therese Schröer in Vienna. The document with which the allowance was paid stated that it had been learned that the widow of one of the most worthy German writers was not living in circumstances befitting her and his merits, and that she was therefore being paid this annual allowance. It was the widow of Tobias Gottfried Schröer, the author of many plays, who had to remain unnamed, the author also of that “Weihgeschenkes für Jungfrauen”, which is imbued with the spirit of Goethe; a quiet man who was a secondary school teacher in Preßburg, but who, as such, wrestled with the highest problems of human life, who was poor and whom no one knew. Even in his own town no one could or might know that this man was the author of these dramas.

Many similar phenomena could be cited. They show that in order to get to know Austrian intellectual life, one must not consider it in terms of what, I mean, goes as a more or less Catholic, as a more or less Protestant current through the development of the times but how one must grasp this Austrian intellectual life where it works out of the root of the people and where it can appear directly in its great significance. One must not look at Austrian intellectual life through the lens of the fact that Austria is a more Catholic country. On the one hand, this Austrian intellectual life works its way to the roots of the nation, as we have seen with Misson; on the other hand, however, it works its way up to great heights in a remarkable way. Consider, for example, the following phenomena: When the Protestant pedagogue Friedrich Dittes, who was brought from Germany during the so-called Liberal Era of Austrian development and placed at the head of the K.K. When the Protestant pedagogue, who had been brought from Germany during the so-called Liberal Era of Austrian development, looked around for important pedagogues of the immediate past, he, the Protestant pedagogue who had been brought from Germany, found the Austrian Vincenz Eduard Milde to be one of the most important pedagogues of the immediate past. In 1811, Milde published an “educational theory”. In Misson, we have come to know a mind that, clothed in the robes of a religious order, worked its way up to what I would call the management of educational life, and then worked its way back down to the roots of folklore, creating his “Naaz”: peasant philosophy! In Milde we see another priest, a good Catholic; a Catholic in whom Friedrich Dittes, the Protestant pedagogue, finds one of his most important pedagogical predecessors. Spiritual life reaches out across the differences of confession in a wonderful way. Instead of a long further description, I would like to read you just one passage from Milde's theory of education, so that you can see how, in this book, published in 1811, educational work is understood in a soul-drenched way; how, in contrast to on, who worked his way down into the people, to the highest views, the most ideal views of general human activity through pedagogy, the Catholic priest Milde works his way up, how seriously, how dignified, how tremendously deep he takes the pedagogical profession. He describes how the teacher should behave in order to gain the right relationship with the pupil; first:

"1. Through diligent study of anthropology; 2. through reading well-written biographies and truthfully portrayed educational histories; 3. through thoughtful interaction with children, through unnoticed, quiet observation of them, especially of their behavior towards other children; 4. by remembering his own youth, by reflecting on the course, the reasons, the means and obstacles his own education, on the difference between his present and former way of thinking and feeling; 5. by reflecting on the success and failure of his efforts in educating the pupil; 6. by observing the methods of other educators and the success of their way of treating the children”; - finally - ‘7. by observing the course of development of nature left to itself.’

The meaning of life should be built on a healthy anthropology, that is, the study of man. Then the teacher should constantly consult with himself, as it were, meditating, in order to always find the way to the child's soul. A truly soul-filled educational vision is also poured out on this quite remarkable work, which arose, so to speak, in the quiet of Austrian intellectual life through a man who was a clergyman in the outer life, who rose to become Archbishop of Vienna and who, in his way, truly represents that Austrian intellectual life to which one attaches such great importance and to which one must attach such great importance; that Austrian intellectual life that is directed towards the general human and basically maintains the connection with the roots of the people everywhere. Yes, I say, in 1811 a leading work on education appeared in Austria that had a great impact and was also highly praised by the Protestant pedagogue Dittes in the 1860s and 1870s. It was published again very recently by the Austrian pedagogue Franz Tomberger in a short outline. One must only consider what that means. In 1811, it had only been a short time since teachers in very, very remote areas of the Austrian lands, namely the German-Austrian lands, had a very strange position, not only in the village but also in the city. Not only did the teacher not have a school building – in many areas, shortly before this “Erziehungslehre” was published, a school building was a rarity; the students gathered around the teacher, the teacher went from house to house, sometimes he was there, sometimes in the next house; wherever there was space, he taught. But that was not the only thing. For example, paying the teacher a salary, yes, that would not have been understood; that is something that must be given freely! But the teacher only needed to teach the students in winter; in summer, the children were needed outside in the fields anyway. Well, so that he doesn't starve, he is granted the right to herd cows during the summer, to be a “Holdar”. But that did not prevent all that I have just described from happening. And that did not prevent a work on the art of education from appearing after such a relatively short time in Austrian intellectual life that it was not only exemplary but also epoch-making. One has to familiarize oneself with this juxtaposition of contradictions that arise from the difficulties of Austrian life.

But this is also why the Austrian needs what appeared in the most diverse forms in Viennese life in the course of the nineteenth century. Actually, a piece of Viennese life is also what you were able to get to know here in Berlin some time ago, although it had been quite “de-Viennified” to a certain extent, as connoisseurs generally admitted – what you were able to get to know through the performance of “Alpenkönig und Menschenfeind” by Ferdinand Raimund, with the character of Rappelkopf, and, what is also well known from the same author, “Verschwender”. I do not want to speak of a well-known matter, but rather show how Austrian intellectual life can be illustrated here and there, as it were, by the splashing of a wave that makes visible in pictures what lives in Austria. Therefore, I want to speak less about Ferdinand Raimund than about the man who replaced him in the hearts of the Viennese in the 1830s and 1840s, when Raimund had become very much a part of their lives: Nestroy. And Johann Nestroy, as a folk dramatist, is, I would say, truly an Austrian product. Indeed, one has even had to hear from some clever people of the present day that Nestroy is even characterized by his fellow countrymen as not being a real Viennese, because in the early days of his career, in particular, he only told the Viennese rough truths, not only created folk plays where honest people are always right, but where he could really, forgive the harsh expression, give the people a piece of his mind. Plays like these made up the content of his first theatrical career. He actually created a great deal; in thirteen years, he wrote around seventy such farces. But they truly contain that Austrian spirit that those who know it recognize as being truly embodied in Nestroy. It is not true that the Austrians of that time wanted to hear honest portrayals of characters from the theater, of people who recognize the simplicity of life. No, that was then and Nestroy grew out of it – what was demanded was that one could say: Now he has given them what for again, that is, he has really given them a telling-off. And with such a scolding, Nestroy, himself playing at the Vienna Karl Theater, actually entertained the Viennese so much that one can say: one sees in the spirit that lives in these Nestroy folk farces, one might say folk city farces, the Austrian spirit that needs to, in the criticism of life as well as in the jokes about life, in the humor of life, to overcome many a difficulty; who needed to let his soul feel at ease after hard work in a light way, and yet in a way that was not entirely free of sympathy and antipathy. And so Nestroy is truly a typical figure of Austrian urban popular theater around the mid-nineteenth century. He had his view of life and of the events of life expressed by a character in the following manner: “I believe the worst of everyone, even of myself, and I have seldom been mistaken!” With this view of life, he, who was personally kind and loving, and who in personal dealings actually had only kind and loving words, really created character figures that easily illustrate the view of life of the Austrians in Vienna at that time , that Austrianness that wanted to be hard at work, but that wanted to build a philosophy of life from the heart, without much dialectic, that also had to have humor, that also should not exaggerate the seriousness of life too much. There was a lot in the way of facing life. So Nestroy created a character that kept reappearing under this name or under a different name; once he called him “Schnofer!” And this Schnoferl also had an attitude towards life. For example, he once talks about how he fared in life with love: “With love, things went splendidly for me, it was all right, but with dislike, things are always bad!” This same Schnoferl, who, as I said, cannot see the funny side of life, once said about what he saw in his own heart: “The pragmatic story of my heart falls into three miserable chapters: futile musings, failed attempts and worthless triumphs.” Those are the three miserable chapters. Nestroy portrayed such characters with great acuity, so much so that an important Viennese critic once said: “In Nestroy, you could see the demonic expression that could intensify to the point of being devilish when he let his eyes play from the stage into the audience.” And so Nestroy expressed well a certain Austrian view of life in need of humor in the years before 1848, or even from the beginning of the forties.

Then came a time when one could not bear this outpouring of good and evil, this Nestroyan world beyond good and evil, of good, over-good and evil people, for a while. One wanted more honest figures, one wanted to be moved more and sworn at less. One had had enough of swearing for a while, one wanted to be moved. Nestroy didn't really like that, and so he said: Yes, in the past people still knew something about what a life story is; in modern times, if you go by those who now create life stories for the stage, if there are only three jokes in it - in Nestroy's plays there was one joke after another - there are only corpses in their blood, gravediggers and blubberers. He didn't really want to go along with that. But then again, he was able to keep up with the times. And so Nestroy found a peculiar, I would even say humanly free point of view, especially during the difficult year of 1848. He was a liberal man, he was a man who was thoroughly on the side of the progressives, who did not depend on anyone in any direction, but at the same time he found the right words for many a cry for freedom, for those who only go so far. And so he managed to maintain Austrian humor even in these difficult times. Just look at this: in a play that was written during one of Austria's most difficult times, “Freedom in Krähwinkel” – he also played in this play himself – this Austrian describes how the mayor of Krähwinkel imagines freedom. He has the constable Klaus express it: “Freedom is something terrible. The Lord Mayor always says: the ruler is the father, the subject is a little child, and freedom is a sharp knife.” And one of those who, in a Nestroyesque way, understands this a little, who also understands the people of Krähwinkel in their pursuit of freedom, characterizes them in the same way: ”No, I know the people of Krähwinkel. I know the Krähwinkler, you just have to let them run riot; once the rapture is over, we'll catch them with our hand in it, and then we'll really tweak the people's nose.” In the role that Nestroy himself played, to which he gave the name ‘Ultra’, a freedom fighter now appears who is really portrayed in such a way that humor can once again take hold of him. Nestroy spoke the following through the Ultra: “Now that the fight that had broken out has ended happily, he proclaims freedom: 'I proclaim freedom of speech, of the press and other freedoms for Crowwinkel, indifference of all classes, free speech, free elections according to previous opinion, an infinitely broad basis, which will gradually extend in length, and in order to avoid all disputes in this matter, no system at all.” Then Ultra comes – one must always imagine him as presented by Nestroy himself – to an opinion about what reaction actually is. What is reaction? “Well,” says Ultra, ‘as it was on a large scale, so we have had it here on a small scale. Reaction is a spectre, but spectres only exist for the timid: so don't be afraid of it, then there will be no reaction at all.’

But in Nestroy's personality itself there is something like a thoroughly correct placing of his own personality in life. A person like Nestroy was thoroughly a personality who was accessible to the depths of the soul. But what he created, he wanted to create from direct life and for direct life. And so Nestroy is not at all inclined to reflect on the ego. Once, he came into contact with the profound, inestimably esteemed poet Friedrich Hebbel, the great poet Hebbel. But Hebbel and Nestroy were like the north and south poles. Friedrich Hebbel, outwardly impeccable in his suit, correct in every gesture, Nestroy naughty in every gesture, with a rustic suit that he wore with particular dignity! Now Nestroy became acquainted with a play like “Judith and Holofernes”, a play in which Hebbel has actually exhausted the infinite depths of the human soul and embodied them in dramatic form so that one must say: It is truly a wonderful struggle with the existential problems of life, reaching the heights of the human spirit, but not for Nestroy, one might be tempted to say, because it cannot be readily and directly taken humorously. But he took it humorously, precisely as a taunt, saying, “No, that's nothing!” He also thought, “That's a nonstarter!” I'll do a Holofernes now, Judith and Holofernes, that must be the right thing; that's not something that Hebbel did.” But now he wanted to create a character in Holofernes who was so completely turned inward, to his human ego. Nestroy was very good at creating a character who acted entirely out of the abundance of the soul's will and wanted something. But he only wanted into this ego in a genuinely Austrian way, so to speak. Yes, not through speculation, not through dialectics, not even through dramatic dialectics! So he presents himself as a figure of Holofernes, full of ego, full of the power of personality, so strong that he wants to see who is stronger, “I” – or, as he said – “I or I!” – so that he feels doubly. So he wants to wrestle with himself, so that he sees who is stronger, I or I. That becomes Nestroy's Holofernes. But he knows how to position himself in life just right. And when he hears that people say that he denies a purely artistic principle with his plays that are directly inspired by folklore, well, he says that he will not allow such an accusation, because people should consider what it actually means to write folk plays. Anyone who writes popular plays and even wants to compare himself to Goethe is just like someone who makes a Zwetschkenkrampus and wants to act as a rival to Canova. A Zwetschkenkrampus is a figure made out of dried plums on St. Nicholas' Day to look like a clown or Santa Claus.

We also need to be thoroughly familiar with this side of Austrian identity. Because it is deeply, deeply interwoven with what the Austrian soul seeks in a certain view of life, which I would characterize in the following way: Because of the difficulties of his life, the Austrian feels the need to rest in a view of life that makes one forget the seriousness of life and yet, in turn, brings strength in the subconscious soul to be prepared for life. Nestroy is certainly deeper than those who took over from him at the end of the nineteenth century. You cannot compare Nestroy's farces with those of Berg, who certainly wrote more in the same period, but had sunk to a much lower level. But this peculiar view of life, which in turn goes back to a general human one, is part of the overall shaping of this Austrian's soul. And this view of life also shows that in Austria something comes from much deeper human sources and shapes the life of the soul than all that which is usually conceived of as ideas that draw together human development. One must not think of the Austrian as being wrapped up in this or that prejudice, but to get to know him, one must consider Austrian national character. |

I have only been able to present it to your minds in a few images today; I have not really chosen them with the aim of making the Austrian lovable, but simply to describe him as he is. I did not want to summarize anything special, but only to show individual traits, of course very individual lost traits, but which can nevertheless illustrate this or that, illustrate above all how a special note, a special tone, lives in this Austrian character, over the whole of this Austrian culture, from such figures as I have described to you today, to the Magyar Emmerich Madách, the man who created the well-known “Tragedy of Man”. Out of a life of suffering, and truly out of a life of suffering, Madách rose to create a form of human philosophy that suited him. He shows the creation of man, Adam and Eve. He shows how Adam and Eve are placed in the world by the divine creator, perceiving this world as a mystery. Now Lucifer shows them what will follow. Adam is shown how he will live again, how he will return in Egyptian times, how he will live as an Egyptian, as a pharaoh; how Eve will be his slave. The Egyptian culture with all that it can trigger in the soul of the re-embodied Adam is presented by the poet. And further, we are led into the Roman period; Adam is reborn in the time of the Roman Empire. In the time of Christianity, in turn, in the time of the Franco-English culture, in the time of the German culture; at the end of the earth time, he is placed in an embodiment. The whole of human life is led past him.

As one can see, there are many paths that lead up from the depths of joy and suffering that can arise in the Austrian soul, up to the peaks of human world and life views. And it is a special note that one must say: It is precisely through the contemplation of this special note, this special 'tone in Austrian folklore that it already corresponds to an inner necessity that, for example, the German-Austrians were separated for a time from the general German intellectual life. It was precisely through this separation that they developed their innermost selves properly, that they emphasized what was truly their own in the right way. But such a separation does not destroy what connects the peoples. And what we see today, this interaction of the two Central European empires into a great overall concept of Central Europe, into an overall being of Central Europe, is firmly anchored in both the inhabitants of the one and the inhabitants of the other empire, if one looks straight into the depths of the soul. This can be seen in the depths of the national character, for example, where the will of Austria is realized, and again in the heights of Austrian achievement. When, as it seemed, a deep rift had opened up in 1866 between the hearts of the great German Empire and the hearts of the best Austrians, there was not a mood at the height of humanity after that year 1866 that cried out for revenge. There was not a mood that was later in other places, after a people had been defeated, where it was said that one must always and again and again bring the thought of revenge to life in one's soul. No, but an 'Address was delivered to the throne immediately after 1866 in Austria, which contained the words; 'It is not the secret thought of retaliation that guides our steps; a nobler satisfaction is granted to us if we succeed more and more in transforming disfavor and enmity into respect and affection through what we achieve and what we create.

These words also express the bond between the Austrian and German hearts that has been so beautifully realized today. That bond, which is expressed so beautifully in a poem by von Hamerling that truly springs from the Austrian soul: Germany is my fatherland, but in Austria I feel my motherland. I feel a sense of belonging to my mother country. This sense of belonging was so vividly experienced that it can be expressed in a few words that originated in Austria. These are strange words, perhaps not in a completely satisfactory form, but they are words that may be read aloud, especially in our time. I will say afterwards in which period these words were written. In a poem entitled “Austria and Germany” it says:

Let Russia and England prudently confer,
Perhaps not even unhappily find it,
If we here engage in a little battle,
If they try to take away our just rights!

You, German brothers, will not advise here –
The enemy's attack will only unite us
And among us every ambition will fade
Before the: One people in word and deed.

And if one among us has failed,
If discord has existed anywhere in German hearts,
There is only one thing that now inspires us:

What we have in common, our joys and our sorrows!
So let us also have in common:
A German war, if not a German peace!

They could be words written in our time. But they were written in April 1859 by the son of that Tobias Gottfried Schröer I mentioned, by Karl Julius Schröer, who worked in Vienna, having come from Zisleithania, in Austria. He worked in a way that can be said to have been suitable for, on the one hand, connecting the soul with what lives and weaves in the people and, on the other hand, carrying the souls up to the heights of spiritual life – Karl Julius Schröer, who first developed a beneficial activity as director of the Viennese Protestant schools and then as professor of German literature at the Technical University. I myself feel — please excuse this personal remark — deeply connected with this activity, because Karl Julius Schröer was once my dear teacher. This Karl Julius Schröer, on the one hand, he carried his popular research into the really deep foundations of folklore. First of all, he had Christmas plays printed that were performed among the farmers during the Christmas season but that had emerged from the people themselves. Then he was a dialect researcher, a researcher who studied the peculiarities of the Austrian dialect in the Gottschee region in Carniola, among the Germans of Spiš in Slovakia, among the so-called Heanz in western Hungary, who also researched the dialect of Lower Austria and everywhere pointed out the close connection between all Austrian intellectual life and its roots in the folk tradition; and who, on the other hand, carried the soul up to the heights of Goethe's world view through research into Faust, and in this sense again had a beneficial effect on his students. In 1859 this man expressed Austria's unity with Germany in this way. I have quoted his words to show how the Austrian national character leads to that beautiful and glorious ideal towards which we must strive today and which must develop out of the great demands and devoted deeds of our time: a Central Europe in which everything that has long been working together in our hearts will finally be united. And especially by considering the special tone that prevails in Austrian nationality and Austrian intellectual life, one can say that what should be achieved there in separation will be able to combine with the wider Germanic character in a more intimate way for the benefit and blessing of Central European development. And so we see, I would say, even if we look with an understanding of the essence of nationality at what is developing out of blood and suffering and pain in our time as a future ideal for Central Europe, we see that something is developing that must be created by the devoted and courageous deeds of arms, but which is firmly rooted, so firmly rooted that the guarantee of its durability can be seen in the hearts and souls of those who are drawing closer together and have joined forces for common action.

In conclusion, let me say: what is now coming together historically is not only coming together through external necessity, it is coming together through the inner bonds of the souls, the hearts of the peoples of Central Europe.

In the course of my lectures here I have often spoken about the great period of spiritual development that may be called the time of German idealism. And in general it is well known today, even in wider circles, what the whole intimate spiritual process of development from Kant up through Hegel means for the spiritual life of humanity in general. However, when something like this is mentioned, I do not want to fail to add that the great thinkers who come into question here are never really properly appreciated, if one is still even remotely on the ground that leads one to accept as dogma what a person expresses as a truth that he has recognized or, let us say better, meant. One can go beyond this; then one is in a position to completely abandon the formulation of any human opinion, any human construct. But to see the way in which a person has sought truth, how, as it were, the truth instinct lived in him, the how of the search for truth, that is what remains as the eternally interesting thing about the figures of, in particular, the thinkers of the past. And in particular, what remains with respect to the thinkers of German idealism, among many other things, is what one can feel, so to speak, again and again when one delves into them: that they have achieved a certain ability to orient themselves with respect to what man can call truth, truth research, world view, that they knew, as it were, how impossible it is to orient oneself in the world if one relies only on taking in the impressions of the world, letting them take effect on one, in order to be at their mercy, like a plaything, so to speak. Above all, these thinkers knew that what can decide the sense of truth, the sense of worldview, must be sought in the depths of the human soul itself, since it must be brought up.

Karl Rosenkranz was a less recognized latecomer to these great thinkers, who also became less well known. And this Karl Rosenkranz tried in the 1860s of the last century to review in his mind's eye what had developed as an understanding of the human soul and its powers since German idealism through the influences of a more scientific way of thinking. I would like to read to you the introduction to today's reflections on how Karl Rosenkranz, the well-educated, subtle Hegelian, has commented on this soul-searching of the thirty years that followed the period of German idealism. Karl Rosenkranz wrote in 1863:

It can be said of these thinkers that they had a sense of the productivity of thought; they had confidence in the power of thought, which, by intensifying itself, can find within itself that source from which that which is able to enlighten the world bubbles forth. And they knew that no matter how much external methods and instruments of natural science are perfected, that which truly quickens the spirit in man is not to be found in the realm that can be conquered by external methods and instruments. I have often said here that the spiritual science that wants to be represented in these considerations cannot, for example, be in any kind of contradiction with the scientific world view of our time. On the contrary, it is in complete harmony with every legitimate formulation of the scientific world view. This spiritual science does not want to be some kind of new religion; it wants to be a genuine, true continuation of natural science, or rather of the natural scientific way of thinking. And one can say that for anyone who observes the development of science over the time that has passed since Karl Rosenkranz wrote what you have read, it offers impulses in every field that lead directly to this spiritual science, if one is really able to engage with it. And this natural science offers such impulses precisely when one engages with it where it itself attempts to extend its observations in such a way that they lead to the realm of the spiritual.

Now there is a science that is particularly suited to making it clear where natural science is leading when it wants to approach the realm of the spiritual in a way that is right for it and its methods. This science is called, with a somewhat cumbersome word, psychophysiology, and as a rule we are dealing with people in the field of psychophysiology who thoroughly understand how to apply the scientific methods that can be acquired in the various scientific workshops. Now there are already psychological laboratories, and in these psycho-physiologists we also have people who can be trusted to be familiar with the scientific way of thinking, with the way this scientific way of thinking relates to the world and its phenomena. We can now begin to understand what has been achieved in this psycho-physiological field. If you want to educate yourself in a short time, I advise you to take Theodor Ziehen's “Physiological Psychology”, because it gives a quick overview and because it is basically, even the older editions, at the complete level of today's research in this field. But you could just as easily look for this physiological psychology in some other author. If you now engage with this physiological psychology, you get an idea of how the person who uses scientific methods in the sense of the scientific way of thinking approaches the human being in order to examine that which I would say, clinically and in the sense of a physical laboratory, or a psychological laboratory for all I care, can be investigated in a person, what can be investigated in a person by the person expressing themselves spiritually and psychologically. And it may be said that even if what is science in this field today often represents an ideal, the various directions towards this ideal can already be seen everywhere, and anyone who is not prejudiced will want to fully recognize the great merits of the individual research in this field. Naturally, in the sense of today's scientific thinking, these researchers are endeavoring to seek the physical, the bodily, in everything that takes place in the human being in a spiritual and mental way, to seek those processes in the human body that take place while something spiritual and mental is happening in us. And in this field, as I said, paths have already been opened. And there one experiences something very peculiar at first. And at this moment, when I try to describe to you what one experiences, I emphasize that I initially place myself completely on the ground of what is justified in this field of science. One experiences something remarkable; one experiences that researchers in this field can investigate what we call the life of human ideas in a truly magnificent way. In our mental life, ideas are stimulated by external impressions that we can perceive. These ideas join together and separate from one another. This is what our soul life consists of, insofar as it is a life of ideas: we form inner images of the impressions from the outside world, and these images group themselves. This is a large part of our soul life. Now the psychophysiologist can follow how the ideas socialize inwardly, how they form, and he can follow the physical processes everywhere in such a way that he always sees: On the one hand, there is the mental process in the life of ideas, and on the other hand, there is the physical process. And it will never be possible, if one is only unprejudiced, to discover a real soul life in a person to whom such a physical counterpart cannot be shown, even if, as I said, proof is still a scientific ideal today. And so it is extraordinarily appealing, extraordinarily interesting, to follow in the human thinking apparatus — now really conceived as a thinking apparatus in the proper sense, in so far as it is bodily-physically constructed — how everything happens when man inwardly experiences his imaginative life. And it is precisely in this respect that the book by Theodor Ziehen contains something extraordinarily significant, yes, I would even say scientifically extraordinarily reasonable.

But now for the other peculiarity. The moment one has to speak of feeling and especially of will in the life of the soul, this psychophysiology not only fails, I might say instinctively, but with the truly modern psychophysiologist it even fails quite consciously. And you can see in Ziehen's book how, at the moment when one is supposed to talk about feeling and will, he does not get involved in it at all, continuing the investigations up to that point. How does he speak of feelings? Well, he says it bluntly: the natural scientist does not speak of an independent emotional life in man, but rather, in that one gets impressions from the outside - these impressions are stronger or weaker, they have these or other characteristics - a certain “feeling tone” is formed afterwards. He speaks only of feeling tone, and so, to a certain extent, of a way in which the sensation sinks in first, and then the image, into the soul life. That is to say, the psychophysiologist loses his breath — forgive the trivial expression, but it has to be said — at the moment when he is to pass from the life of images and their parallelization in the psychophysiological mechanism to the life of feeling. And if he is as honest as Theodor Ziehen, he admits this by simply saying what he does: In the past, people still thought naively, speaking of three soul powers, of a thinking or imagining, of a feeling, of a willing. But for the natural scientist, there can be no question of a feeling, of a real soul-being that lives in pleasure and pain like a real one. These are all only tones in which there are shades of what the life of perception and feeling is. So the scientist consciously, not just unconsciously, loses his breath; consciously he stops breathing scientifically.

And this occurs to an even greater extent when we speak of the third soul power, the will. In psychophysiology, we find nothing about the will except what is expressed: it cannot be found, it is impossible to find it, especially with the means of a rational, scientific way of thinking. It is an interesting and extraordinarily important result that must be noted and taken seriously. The natural scientist can say: Well, I have this scientific view; with this scientific view, I find, so to speak, the thinking apparatus, the mental apparatus for the soul life, insofar as it takes place in the mental life; I do not concern myself with the other! The scientific researcher can rightly say that. The amateur world-viewer, who likes to give himself the grandiose title of monist, will not easily notice that the breath has been suppressed quite arbitrarily, but he will believe that by passing over from the life of thinking into the life of feeling and of will, he continues to breathe, and he will see in the life of feeling and of will only a kind of product of the development of the life of thinking. And so it is only natural that we arrive at the strange conclusion that people like Theodor Ziehen say: the will is not present at all, the will is a pure invention.

What do we actually have when we speak of the will in any of our activities? Well, as people think in a trivial way of looking at things, will is already present when I just move my hand. But first of all I have the impression, I feel a mental impression that causes me to move my hand. And then my mental life passes over to the observation of my moving hand, which I may also perceive with senses other than the eye. But I have only a sum of ideas. I simply go from the impressions to the ideas of movement. That is, I am actually just constantly watching myself. And if one wants to be a part of these confrontations - I now say: of the dilettantish monism, of the world view - then one should feel how one is eradicating precisely that which is the most intimate inner experience — the life of feeling and the life of will — when man is made into what he must not be made into, when natural science is not left as natural science but is turned into a Weltanschhauung in an amateurish way.

For the spiritual researcher, however, the path of the natural scientist is of extraordinary importance, because this path has already been followed to such an extent that it clearly shows how far the scientific method of research can go. A clear boundary can already be seen. Particularly when one delves into the works of those thinkers who preceded the natural science direction, the thinkers of German idealism, one finds in them a clear awareness that the higher secrets of the world must be investigated by immersing oneself in the human soul. These thinkers were even ridiculed for wanting to unravel these secrets of the world, as it were, and develop them all from the human soul. But it is also characteristic of what these thinkers actually achieved, and it is particularly characteristic for the observer to compare what the German idealists achieved and what was then achieved by the scientific way of thinking and research. What did these German idealists achieve, these much-mocked German idealists? Hegel – perhaps I may, without seeming immodest, draw attention to the accounts I have given of Hegel in 'Riddles of Philosophy', in the new edition of my 'World and Life Views in the Nineteenth Century'. — Hegel tried to grasp everything that lives and moves in the world in pure thought, so to speak, to extract the entire network of thought from the abundance of phenomena, facts and things in the world. But one must admit, despite all objections, that this network of thoughts cannot be gained through contemplation, cannot be gained through external observation. For one tries only once to let the outside world have its effect on oneself, not to produce within oneself the source of thinking, which makes the soul active – nothing will come out of thoughts! But if one does not want to apply one's thoughts to the world, if one denies that thoughts can have any meaning, because they necessarily have to arise, one might say, out of the human soul, then one would have to renounce any mental discussion of the world. And not even Haeckel would want to do that!

By handling thought in general, one lives entirely in thought, in the awareness that thought expresses something that has significance for the world itself. The Hegelians were only aware of the fact that thought is an inner experience and, despite being an inner experience, has objective significance for the existence of the world. But if we now take a closer look at what the whole idealistic way of thinking has achieved – I will now say: through thought and in thought, for whose way of observation it has had such practice – we can hardly expect anyone today, for example, to go through Hegel's writings for what I am about to mention. But if someone does so, they come to the following: Hegel is a master in the handling of thought, which is not influenced at all by any sensual impression from outside; he is a master in the development of one thought out of another, so that one has a whole living organism of thoughts in his – well, let us use the terrible word – system. But let us take a closer look at this Hegel with all his thoughts. We can, I would say, divide him into two parts. The first part is where he develops thoughts. But all these thoughts relate to that which is externally sensual in the world. They are only, I might say, internal reflections of that which is externally sensual in the world. And the second part relates to the historical development of humanity, to social and state concepts, and it culminates in what the human being can develop in terms of perceptions, thoughts and ideas, which then express themselves emotionally as religion, visually as art, and in terms of ideas as science. So that is what Hegel wants to achieve by bringing the thought to life within him; he regards this as the innermost source of world existence, and he pursues it to the flowering of development in religion, in art, in science. But religion, art and science - are they not in turn merely something that has a meaning for the outer physical world? Or could anyone imagine that the content of religious belief could somehow have a meaning for a spiritual world? Or could he even believe that art, which must speak through the sensual tool, can have any meaning - an immediate meaning, of course - within the spiritual world? Or our science? Well, we will talk about that later.

Hegel does find the thought, but it is only a thought that, though it lives and moves within, only reflects the external. This thought cannot come to life in any world that could exist except the sensual-physical world. A spiritual world does not come about through Hegelianism, but only the spiritual image of the physical world.

And science? Precisely the science that followed, which is to be taken very seriously, now examines this thought, this thought life of the human being, and finds: it comes to it, in that it finds the thinking apparatus in man, as it were, for the thought life, right up to the feeling and will life; there it has to stop. If we now really hold the two together, must we not assume that, on the one hand, Hegelianism, for example, or in general that idealistic world view of which we have spoken, really did strive into a spiritual world — but found more than merely the spiritual counter-image of what is not spiritual? On the other hand, must we not say: So could not this Hegelianism, this idealism gain access to that which it must admit to its existence because thought could have no meaning as purely spiritual in the face of reality if there were not a spiritual world? It is interesting that everything that German idealism has just produced in terms of thought flows from the spiritual world, but that there is nothing in it but what the scientific way of thinking can assume as its thinking apparatus. But in other words, if one really wants to enter the spiritual world, and if one wants to enter it in such a way that one can stand before natural science, then one must enter the realm of feeling and will, but not in the sense in which one feels and wills in ordinary life, but in the way the natural scientist enters the world of nature. Now,

Now, from other points of view, I have often indicated here the ways in which one can truly enter the spiritual world while remaining on the firm ground of natural science. Today, through this historical overview, I only wanted to show how, through the thinking that one usually knows, even when it is driven to such purity, to such cold, sober, icy purity as in German idealism, one can indeed come to the conviction that there is a spiritual world, for this thinking is not won by an outer impression, it must itself come from the spiritual world. But one cannot enter the spiritual world through this thinking.

Why can one not enter the spiritual world through this thinking? As I said, I have often treated this question here from different points of view. Today, I would like to approach it again from a different point of view. We cannot enter into the spiritual world because in recent times we have increasingly tried to expunge from our thinking everything that the natural scientist no longer finds in it. This means that we have tried to expunge feeling and will from our thinking. To see that this is so, one has only to consider the basis of the great, most important significance of the natural scientific way of thinking. It rests on the fact that, when one goes about observing nature, one must, I might say, kill and paralyze all soul-life within oneself. Whether he is observing things and their facts or experimenting, the naturalist will strictly exclude everything that comes from his feelings and everything that comes from his will. He will never allow what he feels towards things to interfere with what he wants to express about what he has observed, what he would prefer to be the truth, so to speak, rather than what the things themselves say. It may be said that the scientific development of modern times, which goes back three to four centuries, has really provided a good training in what is called scientific objectivity. Selfless, in the good sense of scientific and in many ways ennobling, would be the right description for human life, which may be called the elimination of the self in the face of the language of natural phenomena. Great progress has been made in this respect. And in psychophysiology, we have even gone so far as to think in such a way that we no longer find feeling and will in thinking. That is to say, what was a method of research has already become practical, has already come to life. We should switch off the soul when observing nature. One has learned to exclude it in such a way that one can no longer find it in the whole field of observation. What remains unconscious in our thinking, when we give ourselves completely passively to the external world, as must be the ideal of the natural scientist — when he also sets up the experiments, it must be his ideal — unconscious in thinking remains that which can be called: will. It is precisely the endeavor to eliminate the will from thinking when one conducts research in relation to nature in today's sense. It remains unconscious because one always needs a will when one adds one thought to another – they do not do it themselves, after all – or when one separates one thought from another. Nevertheless, it remains the ideal of natural science to suppress as much as possible of this will that lies in the life of thought. It is therefore quite natural that the scientific ideal, I might say, makes the inner life of the soul die away for the sake of human habit. And it is much more due to this — and I expressly say: justified — scientific ideal that the exclusion of the soul has been able to take place as it has, that one must precisely disregard everything of the soul, exclude everything of the soul, if one wants to follow nature faithfully in the sense of today's natural science.

But there is another side to this. And it is extremely important to consider this other side. What is it that man seeks when he seeks knowledge? Well, first of all, when he seeks knowledge, he seeks something that is true apart from him. For if he did not think of truth as something separate from himself, he could create it for himself in every moment. That he does not want to do that is readily admitted. So when man seeks an ideal of knowledge, he seeks to bring to life within himself something to which he contributes as little as possible. Just consider how opposed people are today to self-made concepts, especially in the scientific field! So one strives to have something in one's knowledge that, I might say, reflects external reality, but which has just as little to do with this external reality as a mirror image has with what is reflected. Just as the mirror image cannot change what is reflected, so too should what comes to life in the soul as the content of knowledge not change what takes place outside. But then one must eliminate all soul activity, for then the soul can have no significance for knowledge. And when one strives so hard to eliminate the soul, it is not surprising that in this field the soul cannot be found. Therefore spiritual research must begin precisely where the scientific way of thinking must end. That is to say, thought must be sought in what the will is in thought. And this happens in everything that the soul has to undergo in those inner experiments, as has been mentioned here often enough, everything that the soul has to undergo in inwardly strengthening and intensifying the thinking, so that the will working in the thinking no longer remains unconscious to the thinking , but becomes conscious of this will, so that man really comes to experience himself in such a way that he, as it were, lives and moves in thinking, is directly involved in the life and movement of the images themselves and now no longer looks at the images themselves, but at what he does. And in this, the human being must become more and more, I would say, a technician, acquiring more and more inner practice, living into what happens through himself as the life of the imagination unfolds. And everything that the human being discovers in himself otherwise remains between the lines of life. It always lives in the human being, but it does not rise up into consciousness, the will is suppressed in the life of the imagination. When one develops such inner vitality, such inner liveliness, that one not only has images but enters with one's experience into this surging and ebbing, into this becoming and passing away of the images, and when one can take this so far you no longer bring the content of the ideas into your attention, but only this activity, then you are on the way to experiencing the will in the world of ideas, to really experiencing something in the world of ideas that you otherwise do not experience in life. This means that, if we are to remain true to what the scientific way of thinking itself leads to, we must go completely beyond the way in which natural science conducts research. In a sense, we must not take what natural science investigates, but we must observe ourselves doing natural science. And what is practiced in this way, and what can only lead to success if it is practiced for years – after all, all scientific results are only achieved through long work – what is achieved in this way is a living into a consciousness in a completely different world. What is achieved can only be experienced; it can be described, but it cannot be shown externally, it can only be experienced. For what is achieved in practice is, I would say, what the scientific way of thinking already points to. This scientific way of thinking tells us: If I go on my way, I come to a limit. I go as far as I can still find something human. There I do not find a world in which there is will and feeling. But this world, where feeling and will are discovered just as objectively as plants and minerals are otherwise discovered here, this world can be found if one can make this inner experience of the ideas effective in the soul between the lines of the rest of the imaginative life. Only now one experiences that which one can otherwise only sense. Today, the natural scientist will already be more or less inclined to say: It is blind superstition when someone claims that what is known in the physical world as thinking, as imagining, can somehow take place without a thinking apparatus, without a brain, without a nervous system. The natural scientist asserts this on the basis of his theory. One could easily believe — and laymen in relation to this spiritual research do believe — that spiritual research must disprove the scientist's assertion. This is not the case. On the contrary, in as far as this assertion can be well derived from the facts of natural science, the spiritual researcher is standing firmly on the ground of natural research in this field. Only he actually experiences what the scientist deals with on the basis of theory. For when one experiences this weaving and living, as I have indicated, in the world of ideas, then one knows: now one has arrived at the point where the thinking apparatus can give one nothing more. All thinking one has done so far is bound to the thinking apparatus. Now one has arrived at that inner experience, that weaving, that is no longer bound to the thinking apparatus.

But at the same time, one has arrived at something that, when stated, initially seems outlandish compared to the usual ways of thinking in the present day. But everything that has ever appeared in science and had to be incorporated into the intellectual development of the world was outlandish at first and then taken for granted. At first it seems strange, but it is a truth. By awakening this inner life and activity, one leaves the world one experiences between birth or, let us say, between conception and death here on earth. One leaves it and enters a world that one cannot experience in the physical body. Rather, one is in the world to which one belonged before birth or, let us say, when the spiritual soul was just beginning to adapt to what it had been given of the physical by the hereditary current, or what it gave itself. We are dealing with forces that do not use the thinking apparatus to develop an imaginative life, but forces that first form and fully develop the thinking apparatus only in the course of life after birth. For the inner nervous life, the inner nervous web, is only chiseled out and plasticized in the course of the first years and long beyond, when we have entered our physical existence. One is in the forces that shape the human being inwardly as plastic forces, so that he can become what he is; so that he is a creature of his spiritual and soul self. But one must not believe that one should not take this existence to the full, and I now mean, in practical earnest. For you see, out of a natural weakness of human nature, the spiritual researcher will always be asked to recognize first of all that which is the immediate present, which is, I might say, more the confused spiritual of the physical-sensual world. Here in the physical-sensual world, one gets to know things with the senses. But that which has formed these senses themselves, that which underlies these senses as the architect, that one gets to know, if one knows how to transport oneself out of the physical lifetime into the time that preceded the physical life and will follow the physical life, in the way it has been described. One gets to know a world with which this world here has basically no similarity. And in what I have described as the inner experience of the thinking activity instead of the thoughts, a real spiritual world opens up, in which the world really opens up, in which the human being is with other spirit beings when he is not embodied in the physical body. This world is just as concrete and just as vividly inwardly visualized as the external, real, physical world. Only, as I have already explained here, something else must be added.

We see that in the path taken by thinking, everything comes down to strengthening, to intensifying thinking, to an inward powerful experience of thinking. So it comes down to the fact that ultimately, before this inward powerful experience, the content of thinking lies, of course, only in consciousness, and the soul can truly experience itself in the weaving of the imagination. But there must be added, as a parallel experiment, I might say, to our life a culture, a development of the will element, of the will and feeling element. Now, while everything depends on inwardly strengthening this thinking, I might say, on becoming it, in the development of thinking into the spiritual world, everything in the other development of the will depends on develop the opposite qualities: calmness of soul, composure; that one becomes capable of confronting what we call our actions, the unfoldings of our will, in the way one can learn from the study of nature. Not that one becomes a cold person, sucked dry like a lemon; one does not become that. On the contrary, everything that otherwise often remains unused by the deeper-lying 'temperament and affects comes to the soul when it is subjected to the observation that comes from composure and calmness. If one first trains oneself, then trains, as Goethe, for example, trained himself in observing the types of plants and animals, if one first trains oneself to observe the outside world in such a way that one really practices self-denial and then does not transfer this pedantically and theoretically to self-observation, but acquire the appropriate reinforcement and then turn the view that you have sharpened on nature back to yourself, then you will find the possibility to observe your own soul life, insofar as it develops from will and from feeling, from sympathies and antipathies and flows into actions as will impulses. you gain the opportunity to observe this life of the soul in such a way that you now do not stand beside yourself in the figurative sense, but really stand beside yourself and consciously look at this person, as one can look at another person, or, as I said eight days ago: as one also bears one's own life of yesterday in one's memory, because one also does not change it. One looks at this by bringing an awareness out of the ordinary awareness. You really come to the possibility of saying to yourself: you keep still within the otherwise flowing stream of soul experiences that arise from feeling and will. By keeping still yourself, by attaining complete inner peace, by really standing still, not going along with the affects, not going along with the will impulses and so on, but just standing still with the soul, you naturally duplicate yourself. For it would be a bad thing if, as I said, one became an expressionless human being, if one did not remain completely within the whole of the temperament of the person who goes further; if one could not live with all his feelings and temperaments. But the other person, whom I called the spectator in the previous lecture, remains standing: This makes him stay there, and one's own soul life really begins to move around him, as the planets move around the sun. All a spiritual process! It is difficult to learn to stand still, but one cannot observe the life of the will if one cannot stand still. If one goes with the flow of the life of the will, one is always in the middle of everything. When you stop, you can observe it because, to use a crude expression, it rubs against you as it passes by and moves away from you. But all this does not have to remain theory – remaining in theory is of no use – but it must really become an inner practice of life. Then it is not an image, but reality, that a second person emerges from the first and unites with it. Just as under certain conditions oxygen unites with hydrogen, so too, as I have just described, the second person unites with the person who has been seized, who lives and weaves with the life of ideas. And this is now really a person who lives outside of ideas. While in the past one discovered in the images a spiritual, concrete world in which there are spiritual beings, just as there are animals and minerals here on earth, when what I have just described is added, through the second person being at rest in the face of the will impulses, one discovers in fact that that which out of this spiritual world always develops into the physical world, always finds its way into the physical world; that which in the spiritual world always strives to find physical expression either through union with the physical, as is the case with human or animal life, or through direct manifestation, as is the case, for example, with crystals.

And now what is often regarded as madness by people today is beginning to be experienced inwardly; what Lessing said, what he expresses so beautifully in his “Education of the Human Race”, is now beginning to be experienced. Now the human being knows – by having achieved this inner stillness in the face of the impulses of the will – that something lives in him that once wanted to unite with this body because it developed such powers earlier, as it is now developing again, as they are now showing themselves, and as they live in this body, just as the germ lives in the plant. And just as the germ in the plant is the source of a new plant, so that which is now being grasped in man is the source of a future life, which will be grasped when the time between death and birth or a new conception is completed. The repeated lives on earth become a thought, which is a real continuation of the scientific idea of development. And only someone who cannot take his thinking far enough to see that what lives in man really lives in this man, insofar as he is a physical being, as the plant germ lives physically in the plant for a new plant, that a spiritual-soul man lives, that this spiritual-soul man, I would like to say, , has its cover in the physical body, but the germinal development is for a following earth life. Only the one who cannot think sharply enough, who cannot really think out the thoughts that are already there today and that are also used in natural science, can escape the necessity of searching for these eternal powers of the human soul from the natural scientific way of thinking. of the human soul, which are sought entirely scientifically, by first simply, I would say seriously, taking science at its word: that it must stand still in the face of emotional and will life, but then it will reach precisely into this emotional and will life, by seeking it where it would otherwise remain unconscious: in thinking. And on the other hand, thinking is sought out where it otherwise hides; for in the will, where it flows in, this thinking hides. But precisely because this natural science is taken very seriously, these eternal powers of the human soul are discovered, which cannot be reached by observing man in the abstract and saying, “There must be something eternal in this man too”; for it is not so that one can reach this eternal something by extending the lines backwards and forwards as one likes, because it is not so. These lines are not straight, continuous lines. Just as, when I have a plant in front of me, this plant forms the germ and in the germ is the disposition for the new plant, I have to go from plant to plant, adding one link to the next. In the same way, when we achieve this second thing, calmness in the life of the will, I would say that we find another memory that lights up, the memory of earlier earthly lives. And in the same way, when we achieve this second thing – peace in the life of the will – I would say that we find, as if a memory were lighting up, a review of earlier earthly lives. Admittedly, most people will give up quite early on if they are to undertake research that is not as convenient as the study of the natural world. There you have the object or the experiment in front of you, you surrender passively, you observe. No, the spiritual world cannot be observed in this way! The spiritual world can only be grasped if you really change your inner being, bring it to life for the spiritual world. For the physical world, we have hands; for the spiritual world, we must first develop the ability to grasp ideas, which, like inner hands, like inner grasping organs, can grasp the spiritual world. The researcher is always active and engaged when he is truly immersed in the spiritual world.

But now I said, one usually stops early, one will not easily lead the way, which is a laborious one, to a successful end. Indeed, the desires that can be fulfilled in this exploration of the eternal powers of the human soul, these desires are certainly shared by many people – because it is not true, “beautiful”, “infinitely beautiful” it is to look back on past lives on earth! You experience it again and again, how people find it beautiful. Those who have had a little taste of what spiritual research is, and then call themselves spiritual researchers, we experience it again and again with them, that they look back on their previous lives on earth. These earlier lives are, of course, the lives of people who were important, and who can be found in history here and there. I once participated – as I have mentioned before – in a café in an Austrian city. The following people were present: Seneca, no – Marcus Aurelius, the Duke of Reichstadt, the Marquise Pompadour, Marie Antoinette, Emperor Joseph and Frederick the Great. And all these people really believed in their flashback to past lives on Earth!

In the real flashback there is something unpleasant for ordinary desires. This flashback really satisfies nothing but knowledge. And one must have a pure striving for knowledge if one wants to achieve anything at all in this field. If one does not have this pure striving for knowledge, then one can achieve nothing. One can achieve nothing in relation to outer nature if one cannot develop that selflessness in the good and bad sense of which I have spoken. But this must be increased if one now wants to develop, for instance, the ability to look back into earlier earth lives. And when this ability to look back arises in one's own experience, it is usually disappointing in the sense that it has now been interpreted. But it can never arise — and this is an empirical law — if one could somehow use what one learns from it in this earth life. I say: arise in oneself. So every time a review of earlier earth-lives really occurs within oneself, it can only satisfy one's knowledge. It can never help one in any way to satisfy any wishes in the earth-life in which one is living. If anyone believes that he must know his past lives in order to appreciate his position in the world, he will go very far astray if he tries to learn about these past lives by his own research. And in many other respects, too, the wishes that anyone may have are very seldom satisfied in any way by real, genuine spiritual research.

With regard to these desires, the following must be noted, for example: First of all, it is the case that anyone who enters into spiritual research more as a layman or as an amateur – but of course anyone can do that, you can read about it in my book “How to Know Higher Worlds” — who enters into it as a layman, he aspires above all to see a great deal, to see a great deal in the spiritual world. That is natural and understandable. And so he might believe that the experienced spiritual researcher is advising him to occupy himself with it a great deal and to devote all the time he has to spiritual research. A spiritual researcher who is aware of his responsibility and knowledgeable will not do that at all. He will not do it himself either, but he knows that it is very bad to withdraw one's ordinary thinking, the thinking one must apply in the outer world, from the outer world after becoming a spiritual researcher; that it is bad to withdraw one's thinking, which is directed towards the outer world, and no longer want to know anything about the outer world. If you become a mental ascetic for my sake and use all your thinking only to delve into the spiritual world, you will achieve nothing in reality. You will become a dreamy brooder. You will experience something within yourself that could border on, I would say, some kind of religious madness. But if you really want to become a spiritual researcher, it is necessary to take every precaution into account – and you will find them all listed in my book 'How to Know Higher Worlds' – in order to remain a reasonable person, the same reasonable person, as I said today eight days ago, who one was before one entered into spiritual research – at least no less reasonable. And to achieve this, the spiritual researcher tries to keep his interest aroused for everything that can arouse his interest in the outside world. Indeed, when one is in the process of developing as a spiritual researcher and is doing so as a rational human being, one will feel an ever-increasing need to broaden, not narrow, one's horizons in terms of observing and living with the world, to occupy oneself with as much as possible that is connected with experiences, observations and happenings in the external physical world. Because the more you are distracted from what you are trying to achieve, the better. In this way one achieves that thinking is again and again, I would like to say, disciplined by the outer, physical world and does not go on the free flight path, on which the soul can easily go, when it now withdraws from the outer world and buries itself as much as possible only into that, in which it believes to live as in a spiritual extended one. So, interest is what belongs to spiritual research like an external practical support.

Therefore, the beginner in spiritual research in particular will have to be advised not to change his usual way of life significantly, but to enter into spiritual research without attracting attention to this external way of life, so to speak. If one changes one's external way of life too much, then the contrast between one's inner experience and one's experience with the outer world is not great enough – and it must be great. All the things that people strive for today, who seek their salvation in, well, how should I put it, withdrawing from the world, founding colonies, wearing long hair when they have worn it short before, or wearing it short when they have worn it long before, or putting on special clothes and so on, and also acquiring different habits, all this is evil. This is bad because one is demanding two things of oneself: to adapt to a new way of life and at the same time to adapt to the spiritual world. But what I said here eight days ago must be emphasized: While in any pathological state that develops in consciousness, this pathological state is there and the rational human being is gone, when developing self-awareness for spiritual research, the old human being must remain entirely as he is, and alongside that, the other consciousness must stand. The two must always be there side by side. One can say, in trivial terms: In the case of the spiritual researcher, the developed consciousness, the experience in another world, stands completely separate from what he otherwise is in the world.

Nothing has changed in what one is in the world, other than what was previously. And one looks at what one was in the world, as one looks at one's experiences of yesterday. And just as one can no longer touch these yesterday's experiences, one does not touch what one was before entering the spiritual world. If you are a crazy person or a hypnotized person or a person who can somehow be considered pathological, then that is what you are and you cannot also be a reasonable person. Because you will never discover that someone is reasonable and a fool at the same time. That is precisely what matters, that one can say: the pathological consciousness is an altered consciousness; the consciousness has undergone a metamorphosis. If one is truly at home in the spiritual world, there has been no metamorphosis at all, but the new consciousness has taken its place alongside the old one. And that is the essential thing, what matters, so that man can really fully grasp the two consciousnesses.

A further, I might say, uncomfortable aspect of attaining such spiritual goals as those indicated arises from the fact that the natural scientist naturally becomes accustomed to remaining in his field and world with what results from his field; that he therefore rejects - if he did it only for himself, it would not matter - as a world view that which lives just beyond his world view. All greatness of ordinary life, even of practical life, all greatness of natural science, too, is based on the way of thinking that has developed over the last three to four centuries. And usually, spiritual science does not regard what science achieves for life, even for external life, with less respect, but often with more; it is fully recognized by spiritual science. But precisely this spiritual science also knows that scientific thinking is easy — forgive me for using a trivial expression again — if you reject what you need as a thought. Indeed, today it is already the case that inventing an experiment involves much more than observing what comes to light through the experiment. Reading the mind of nature is easy and convenient. For this, little inner activity is needed. This activity cannot be compared at all with that which is needed if one wants to develop within oneself what has been discussed today. And so it happens that those who, in their consciousness, stand on the strict ground of science, but who, in their instincts, abandon themselves to the comfort of read thoughts, say quite naturally: Well, yes, that is something so contrived and fanciful that comes from this spiritual science. But there is something that one must perhaps admit without arrogance and pride: a more astute thinking is needed to recognize spiritual-scientific truths. But they do present themselves to astute thinking, for example, even if the person to whom they are to present themselves has not become a spiritual scientist. Today, people do not want to believe in authority; but, hand on heart - I have said this often enough: How many people believe, despite never having seen the corresponding experiment, that water can be broken down into hydrogen and oxygen, or other things! If you get to the bottom of things, there has never been a time as steeped in a belief in authority as the present day, and never a time as subject to dogmas as the present day. Only today one can say, as I stated decades ago in my introduction to Goethe's scientific writings, that people believe the dogma of experience, whereas in the past people accepted the dogma of authority. Just as one can apply in practical life, without having been in the laboratory oneself, what comes from the laboratory, so one can apply to one's world view, through corresponding really strenuous thinking, what the spiritual researcher brings to light and of which he knows that he has really discovered it in the spiritual world.

These are the inconveniences in relation to spiritual research; but many such inconveniences could be enumerated. The main thing is this, that people very easily shrink from what must arise as a kind of soul mood when the path into the spiritual world is taken. First of all – and I would like to develop what I have to say historically, so to speak – it is a matter of historical development. Most people say, for example: Oh, there have been so many philosophers and philosophies in the world, and they have all claimed different things. Oh, it is best not to deal with these philosophers and philosophies at all! But such a judgment arises only under the influence of the belief that one can grasp a philosopher only if one understands him as a dogmatist and not, I might say, as an inner artist of thoughts. You can understand him as an inner artist of thought, and then you will get a great deal out of him, especially if you study him very closely, let him have a very intimate effect on you and believe nothing of it, then go to the other and see again a serious endeavor that lives in the pursuit of truth, and you will become versatile. And precisely through this one acquires a sense for being at home in the spiritual world. Indeed, one then experiences that one becomes clear about this, especially when one genuinely follows the paths in the presence of nature research: everything one gets from observation and experiment is basically inner experience, and the outer should never be called a natural law or something like that, but — Goethe has already chosen the magnificent expression — archetypal phenomenon, archetypal appearance. And when more is experienced in the external sense world, it is experienced through the activity of the inner. Thought must reach under the phenomenon. You cannot get down under the phenomenon without thinking. This requires an inner strengthening of thought, a real inner powerful experience and continuation of the line of thought.

Under the influence of the scientific way of thinking, one does not want this. Therefore, from this point of view, the scientific way of thinking today still has something of the last remnant of ancient magic, as paradoxical as that may sound. Here it becomes clear to us that what we today call scientific experimentation and observation has developed in a straight line from ancient magic, where it was believed that through events — in the course of events through the ceremonial that was used as a basis — one could learn something that one did not experience inwardly. They shuddered at the thought of inner experience. They did not want to delve into things and wanted to be dictated to by the spirits outside, who magically live in the phenomena, that which one can only find by allowing one's inner experience to flow into the outer. But all such things are just as if someone were to say: The hands of the clock move forward because a little demon sits inside it, a little elemental spirit. Today, this is only noticed in a subtle way, but in the scientific experiment, or when the physiologists come and cut up small frog corpses to see the internal parts, you still have in mind that shudder at the secrets of nature that was present in ancient magic. This must also come out! One must not faint when one is called upon to extend one's thinking to include nature. One must have the strength to truly grasp natural phenomena. Among modern achievements — and all achievements, of course, are such — this particular weakness shows us what is commonly known as wanting to explore the spirit through external events, in that people get ready to sit around a table, for example, to seek the spirit through all kinds of mechanical, again external events, not by immersing one's own spirit in the essences of the world, but by external events. Of course, they only seek, well, let's say, in knocking tones or something else, the spirit. They don't think that they could find it much closer if they thought about the fact that when eight people are sitting around the table, there are eight embodied spirits that can be perceived differently than just the spirit that is knocking on the table through all sorts of nonsense. And so, like the other side, like a grotesque side, the counter-image of experimentation has become the order of the day, where one really wants to seek the spirit in the most crude way through things that one has to overcome.

But then there is another side to this, which today is often called a worldview in the popular sense. It is quite natural that little by little, I would say, a shyness has developed to really develop this inner soul activity, because it is considered to be something really subjective. One believes that one is merely working out a subjective thing. One only becomes aware that one can find the objective under the subjective when one really penetrates into the matter. One shies away from really developing the inner being. It would be just as if one shrank from developing arms and legs before birth, because one would believe that one would thereby bring something subjective into the world and that arms and legs could never perceive anything objective. One shrinks back, one does not want to develop the inner being. One wants to develop only that which, as we have said, is rightly linked to the mere thinking apparatus. That is to say, one only wants to let the thinking apparatus work in oneself; one really withdraws into the inactive life of imagination. And the consequence of this is that all kinds of world views develop, about which one could certainly agree with the modern psychiatrist if one only takes an entirely objective, unbiased point of view. One can certainly agree with the modern psychiatrist, for example, about what is called monism today. It is clear to both of us that those people who are monists in today's crude materialistic sense do not have the courage to develop their inner activity, that they only allow their thinking apparatus to function and that they can naturally only receive a reflection of the external physical world from their thinking apparatus. If you open a psychiatric book at random, you will find the definition of this state of mind: A set of ideas arises which the person concerned considers to be correct because he is not aware that they only come from the thinking apparatus; he considers these ideas to be correct in the absolute sense. In the psychiatric sense, this is called delusional ideas as opposed to obsessive ideas. Many delusional ideas today are worldviews! If you look at the spiritual-scientific world view, you will see that it cannot fall into either of these errors, neither into the superstition of the external view of nature, which is still based on something of magic, that is, superstition , nor can it play into the realm of delusions, because the spiritual researcher is very clear about the fact that he himself creates and brings forth what he inwardly generates for the purpose of exploring the world, and he also knows: He is allowed to create and bring forth it himself. Then it can touch the outer world. Thus he can never fall into a world view that would be nothing but a delusion.

But, as has often been suggested, the things that have been discussed again today arise when the scientific way of thinking, as it has developed over the past three to four centuries, is continued. But it must be continued in such a way that truth is not merely observed, but experienced. Therefore, a certain artistic feeling that goes into the most spiritual life is a much better preparation for spiritual-scientific experience than any other preparation. And therefore one will always find that the ascetic withdrawal from art, as it is so often noticeable in people who have aspirations of spiritual exploration of things, is of great evil, that in fact the spiritual research also broadens the horizon of the human being through the study of this artistic field. Hegel, for example, could not find a metaphysical meaning in art. For him, art was only the highest flowering of that which develops here in the physical world. But for the one who truly penetrates into the spiritual world, it is clear: that which must remain imagination here, as long as it moves on the physical plane as a human soul power, that is nevertheless born out of the spiritual, that is the physical image for the spiritual, that is the messenger that comes from the spiritual world. And if we can only grasp this supersensible mission of art, then we already have, I would say, a beginning for a truly living, atmospherically living penetration of the spiritual world. Otherwise, however, this spiritual science will continue to be treated as every spiritual impulse has been treated that has had to fit into the spiritual development of humanity. I have often pointed out here that by far the greatest number of people were hostile to the Copernican world view, understandably so, because it contradicted all habits of thought. Until then, people had thought: the earth stands still, one stands firmly on the stationary earth, the sun moves, the stars move. Now, all at once, one was supposed to rethink everything. And it cannot even be said that this Copernicanism became great precisely because, as monism demands today, it only looked at the external senses; for the external senses are precisely in line with what was thought earlier. The external sense world shows us, for this sense world itself, that the earth stands still and the sun moves. Copernicanism arrived at something new precisely by contradicting the sensory perception. And today one must arrive at something new by contradicting the usual conception of the soul as a matter of course, by contradicting precisely that which one would so easily believe is something in itself, namely what can be described as the eternal power of the human soul, namely thinking, feeling and willing, that one describes precisely that which now proves to be an inner semblance, an inner reflection of the truly eternal, and that the truly eternal, the truly eternal powers of the human soul, lie beneath this semblance. And only when one deepens one's imagination and thinking to such an extent that one goes beyond ordinary thinking to active thinking, where thinking becomes will – but will that is experienced, not merely observed as in the case of Schopenhauer – and where volition becomes thinking in that one can interpret it calmly, only then does one discover the eternal powers of the human soul, and one becomes aware that one is this physical human being, I would say, entirely according to a natural law, only conceived in a higher sense. One is this physical human being because one is transformed out of spiritual forces. In natural science, everyone knows: when you stroke the table in this way, warmth arises. There he believes in the transformation of forces. Today this is called the transformation of energies. Transformation of energies, transformation of forces, also exists in the spiritual world. What we are otherwise spiritually, transforms into the physical. This transformation of the spiritual is just as when heat is generated by friction.

All that is needed is a change in thinking habits. This is difficult for some people. Not only do they have thinking habits that they cannot let go of, but these thinking habits have even hardened into concepts. And when someone speaks today of the continuation of natural science, of the living continuation as it is meant here, then those who are so very much inside, stick-thick inside the habits of thinking, will look and say: He wants to found a new religion, that is quite clear, he wants to found a new religion! All this must be understood, must be taken for granted. And it will be understood if one allows the soul's gaze to wander a little over the course of the development of the human mind. But from a certain point of view, spiritual science does give a certain satisfaction for what the best of people have striven for. Not an easy satisfaction. Even people are afraid of this slight satisfaction, which is also something that is opposed to spiritual science. There is someone who once objected: Yes, this spiritual science wants to answer the questions, the secrets of the world. Oh, how dull life will be when all questions have been answered, because the fact that one can have questions is what life is all about. Such people, who think this way, would be surprised at what happens to them when they enter into real spiritual science! Indeed, the lazy person believes that spiritual science is something like a spiritual morphine to calm him down. That is not what it is at all. The questions do not become fewer, the riddles do not become fewer, but rather they increase. New riddles and mysteries are constantly arising. And if, as an ordinary materialist, you pick up Haeckel's “Welträtsel” (World Riddles) or his better works, then you will have answers! For the spiritual researcher, only the questions arise; only the questions leap out. And he knows that the questions that arise for him are not answered by theories, but by experience. He is looking at a development of infinite perspective. And by raising questions, he is precisely reviving the life of the soul, preparing it for the answers that are given by ever new and new events. Life becomes richer and infinitely richer as more and more questions are raised. Again, this is an inconvenience for many who seek comfort and not knowledge.

But on the whole, spiritual science is something that even the best people have sought, and what young Goethe already had in mind when he repeated to a wise man, whom he kept so hidden,:

The spiritual world is not closed;
Your mind is closed, your heart is dead!
Rise up, bathe, disciple, undaunted
The earthly breast in the dawn!

Yes, one must only find it, this dawn! He who seeks it from the bottom because he is afraid of the sun will not find this dawn in the right sense. And this is the one who, as a spiritual researcher, would be afraid of the whole, full, living human existence. He who now wants to withdraw into some aesthetic cloud-cuckoo-land in order to find the spiritual world is like a person who seeks the dawn because he is afraid of the sun, of the full shining sun. But one can also seek the dawn in another sense, in the sense that it is the afterglow of the sun, which always shines and which also shone before it rose for us for our day, for other areas. If one seeks the spiritual dawn in this way, then the opened spiritual knowledge becomes becomes a means, a tool for the realm from which one came before the transformation into the physical human existence and to which one returns after the transformation of the physical human existence, to that spiritual power with which one truly scientifically reveals to oneself the law of repeated earth lives. Spiritual science then becomes the dawn that one experiences as a reflection of the sun's activity, which one cannot have directly by observing the sun's radiance that is assigned to one in the realm in which one will one day stand here in the physical world, to that sun's radiance that spreads out in the spiritual world, into which one enters by that one has precisely the courage and strength to step out of the sensual-physical world in order to enter another, and in this other world, which one can experience, in the sense that Hegel now in turn correctly sensed when he said: Oh, how miserable is the thought that seeks immortality only beyond the grave. If you seek the immortal, if you seek the eternal powers of the human soul, you can find them. But they must be sought.

Because man is such a dual creature, he can truly find the other side of his nature. And for those who, from the standpoint of ordinary monism, disapprove of the search for the eternal powers of the human soul because it tears the soul apart into two parts, for them it must always be true that one says: Yes, one is no longer a monist when one admits that monon water breaks down and must break down into hydrogen and oxygen for knowledge, if one wants to learn to recognize it? One is truly no less a monist if one admits that true knowledge of the actual spiritual essence must be sought from that out of which the monon, the unity, the wholeness of man, becomes. But those who take such paths, as they have been tried to be characterized today, are certain that they lose nothing of what the world is to them and what they can be to themselves in the world by entering the spiritual world; that it is not a impoverishment of life that occurs, but an enrichment of life, and from this point of view, a higher satisfaction of life. Something new throbs through mind and soul, through thinking and heart, when that which can be aroused by the absence of fear of powerlessness, by the absence of shyness of courage, now permeates mind and soul, thinking and heart, in order to inwardly rise above oneself. And that is basically what the best have striven for.

But just as everything in the development of the spirit could only come into being at a certain point in time, so too could spiritual science only come into being at a certain point in time. But however it is viewed, however it is regarded, however it is ridiculed and mocked, it will live on just as truly as other things have survived that were ridiculed and mocked. When someone first said, “All life comes from life,” he was expressing something for which, in those days, he was condemned to suffer the same fate as Giordano Bruno. Today it is taken for granted. Thus in the world, truths are transformed into human conceptions, from craziness to self-evidence. For many, spiritual science is a craziness today. In the future, it will also fall prey to this fate of becoming a matter of course.

I have often characterized spiritual science, as it is meant here, in these lectures. It seeks to be a true continuation of the natural scientific world view, indeed of natural scientific research in general, in that it adds to those forces of the human soul that are used when man faces the external sensory world and uses his senses and mind to explore it, which is connected to the brain, that it adds to these forces, which are also used by all external science, those forces that lie dormant in the soul in ordinary life and in the work of ordinary science, but can be brought out of this soul, can be developed and thus enable the human being to relate in a living way to what, as spiritual laws and spiritual entities, interweaves and permeates the world, and to which man, with his innermost being, also belongs, belongs through those powers of his being that pass through birth and death, that are the eternal powers of his being. In its entire attitude, in its scientific attitude, this spiritual science wants to be a true successor of natural science. And that which distinguishes it from natural science and which has just been characterized must be present in it for the reason that, if one wants to penetrate into the spiritual world, one needs other powers for the spiritual world in the same way that natural science penetrates into the natural world. One needs the exposure of the cognitive faculty in the human soul, of cognitive powers attuned to the spiritual world.

Today, I want to show in particular that this spiritual science, as it is presented today as a starting point for the spiritual development of people in the future, is not brought out of spiritual life or placed in spiritual life by mere arbitrariness, but is firmly anchored in the most significant endeavors of German spiritual life, even if they have perhaps been forgotten due to the circumstances of modern times. And here we shall repeatedly and repeatedly encounter – and they must also be mentioned today, although I have repeatedly presented them in the lectures I have given here last winter and this winter – when we speak of the German people's greatest intellectual upsurge, of the actual summit of their intellectual life, we must repeatedly and repeatedly encounter the three figures: Fichte, Schelling and Hegel.

I took the liberty of characterizing Fichte, as he is firmly rooted in German intellectual life, in a special lecture in December. Today I would like to draw particular attention to the fact that Fichte, in his constant search for a fixed point within his own human interior, for a living center of human existence, is in a certain sense a starting point for endeavors in spiritual science. And at the same time — as was mentioned in particular in the Fichte lecture here — he is the spirit who, I might say, felt from a deep sense of what he had to say, as if through a dialogue with the German national spirit. I have pointed out how Fichte, in contrast to Western philosophy, for example, to the Western world view, is above all concerned with attaining a higher human conception of the world by revealing the human inner powers, the human soul powers. For Fichte, the human ego, the center of the human soul, is something that is constantly being created within the human being, so that it can never be lost to the human being, because the human being not only shares in the existence of this center of the human being, but also shares in the creative powers of this human being. And how does Fichte imagine that this creativity in man is anchored in the all-creative of the world? As the highest that man can attain to when he tries to immerse himself in that which weaves and lives in the world as the Divine-Spiritual. As such supreme spiritual-divine, Fichte recognizes that which is volitional, which, as world-will permeated by world-duty, pulses through and permeates everything, and with its current permeates the own human soul, but in this own human soul is now grasped not as being, but as creativity. So that when man expresses his ego, he can know himself to be one with the world-will at work in the world. The divine-spiritual, which the world, external nature, has placed before man, wants, as it were, to enter into the center of the human being. And man becomes aware of this inner volition, speaks of it as his self, as his ego.

And so Fichte felt himself to be at rest with his self, but at the same time, in this rest, extremely moved in the creative will of the world. From this he then draws the strength that he has applied throughout his life. From this he also draws the strength to regard all that is external and sensual, as he says, as a mere materialized tool for the duty of the human being that pulsates in his will. Thus, for Fichte, the truly spiritual is what flows into the human soul as volition. For him, the external world is the sensitized material of duty. And so we see him, how he wants to point out to people again and again throughout his life, to the source, to the living source of their own inner being.

In the Fichte lecture, I pointed out how Fichte stood before his audience, for example in Jena, and tried to touch each individual listener in their soul, so that they would become aware of how the All-Creative lives spiritually within. So he said to his listeners: “Imagine the wall!” Then the listeners looked at the wall and could think the wall. After they had thought the wall for a while, he said: “Now think of the one who thought the wall.” At first the listeners were somewhat perplexed. They were to grasp inwardly, spiritually, each within themselves. But at the same time, it was the way to point each individual to his own self, to point out to him that he can only grasp the world if he finds himself in his deepest inner being and there discovers how what the world wills flows into him and what rises in his own will as the source of his own being. Above all, one sees (and I do not wish to repeat myself today with regard to the lecture I gave here in December) how Fichte lives a world view of power. Therefore, those who listened to him — and many spoke in a similar way — could say: His words rushed “like a thunderstorm that discharges its fire in individual strikes”. And Fichte, by directly grasping the soul, wanted to bring the divine spiritual will that permeates the world, not just good will, to the soul; he wanted to educate great people. And so he lived in a living together of his soul with the world soul and regarded this precisely as the result of a dialogue with the German national spirit, and it was out of this consciousness that he found those powerful words with which he encouraged and strengthened his people in one of Germany's most difficult times. It was precisely out of this consciousness that he found the power to work as he was able to do in the “Speeches to the German Nation,” inspiring his people to a great extent.

Like Fichte's follower, Schelling stands there, especially in his best pages, one could say, like Fichte, more or less forgotten. If Fichte stands more as the man who wants to grasp the will, the will of the world, and let the will of the world roll forth in his own words, if this Fichte stands as the man who, so to speak, commands the concepts and ideas, then Schelling stands before us as he stood before his enthusiastic audiences – and there were many such, I myself knew people who knew the aged Schelling very well – he stands before us, not like Fichte, the commander of the world view, he stands before us as the seer, from whose eyes sparkled what he had to communicate enthusiastically in words about nature and spirit. He stood before his audience in Jena in the 1790s, at what was then the center of learning for the German people. He stood in Munich and Erlangen and Berlin in the 1840s. Everywhere he went, he radiated something of a seer, as if he were surrounded by spirituality and spoke from the realm of the spiritual.

To give you an idea of how such a figure stood in the former heyday of German intellectual life in front of people who had a sense for it, I would like to bring you some words about the lecture, which were written down by an audience member, by a loyal audience member because he met Schelling again and again: Gotthilf Heinrich Schubert. I would like to read to you the words that Schubert wrote about the way Schelling stood before his audience, “already as a young man among young men,” back in the 1790s in Jena. About this, Schubert, who was himself a deeply spiritual person, writes of a person who has wonderfully immersed himself in the secrets of nature, who tried to follow the mysterious weaving of the human soul into the dream world and into the abnormal phenomena of mental life, but who was also able to ascend to the highest heights of human intellectual life. This Schubert writes about Schelling:

Two things stand out in these words of the deep and spirited Schubert. The first is that he felt - and we know that it was the same with others who heard Schelling - that this man speaks from direct spiritual experience, he shapes his words by looking into a spiritual world and thus shapes a wisdom from direct spiritual experience that deals with this spiritual world.

That is the significance, the infinitely significant thing about this great period of German idealism, that countless people then standing on the outside of life heard personalities such as Fichte, such as Schelling and, as we shall see in a moment, Hegel, and from the words of these personalities heard the spirit speak, looked into the realm of these geniuses of the German people. Anyone who is familiar with the intellectual history of humanity knows that such a relationship between the spirit and the age existed only within the German people and could only exist within the German people because of the nature of the German people. This is a special result that is deeply rooted in the very foundations of the German character. That is one thing that can be seen from this.

The other thing is that, in this period, people were formed who, like Schubert, were able to ignite their own relationship to the spiritual world through these great, significant, impressive personalities. From such a state of soul, Schelling developed a thinking about nature and a thinking about soul and spirit that, one might say, bore the character of the most intimate life, but also bore the character of which one might say shows how man is prepared, with his soul, to descend into all being and, in all being, first of all into nature, and then into the spirit, to seek life, the direct life. Under the influence of this way of thinking, knowledge becomes something very special: knowledge becomes inner experience, becoming part of the experience of things.

I have said it again and again: It is not important to place oneself today in some dogmatic way on the ground of what these spirits have said in terms of content. One does not even have to agree with what they said in terms of content. What matters is the way of striving, the way in which they seek the paths into the spiritual world. Schelling felt so intimately connected — even if he expressed it one-sidedly — with what lives and moves in nature that he could once utter the saying, “To know nature is to create nature.” Certainly, in the face of such a saying, the shallow superficial will always be right in comparison to the genius who, like Schelling, utters such a saying from the depths of his being. Let us give the shallow superficialist the right, but let us be clear: even if nature can only be recreated in the human soul, in Schelling's saying, “To recognize nature is to create nature,” means an intimate interweaving of the whole human personality with natural existence. And for Schelling this becomes the one revelation of the divine-spiritual, and the soul of man the other revelation. They confront each other, they correspond to each other. The spirit first created itself in soulless nature, which gradually became ensouled from the plant kingdom to the animal kingdom and to man, as it were, creating the soil in which the soul can then flourish. The soul experiences the spiritual directly in itself, experiences it in direct reality.

How different it appears, when rightly understood, from the spiritual knowledge of nature which is striven for as the outcome, let us say, of Romance popularism. In the development of the German spirit there is no need to descend to the level of tone which the enemies of Germany have now reached when they wish to characterize the relation of the German spiritual life to other spiritual lives in Europe. One can remain entirely on the ground of fact. Therefore, what is to be said now is not said out of narrow national feelings, but out of fact itself. Compare such a desire to penetrate nature, as present in Schelling, where nature is to be grasped in such a way that the soul's own life is submerged in that which lives and moves outside. Compare this with what is characteristic of the Western world view, which reached its highest level with Descartes, Cartesius, at the beginning of the seventeenth century, but has been continued into our days and is just as characteristic of Western culture as Fichte's and Schelling's striving is for German culture. Like Fichte and Schelling later on, Cartesius also takes up a position in relation to the world of nature. He starts by taking the standpoint of doubt. He also seeks within himself a central point through which he can arrive at a certainty about the existence of the world and of life. His famous “Cogito, ergo sum” is well known: “I think, therefore I am.” What does he rely on? Not, like Fichte, on the living ego, from which one cannot take away its existence, because it is continually creating itself out of the world-will. He relies on thinking, which is supposed to be there already, on that which already lives in man: I think, therefore I am — which can easily be refuted with every night's sleep of man, because one can just as well say: I do not think, therefore I am not. Nothing fruitful follows from Descartes' “I think, therefore I am”. But how little this world view is suited to submerging into nature with one's own soul essence can best be seen from a single external characteristic. Descartes tried to characterize the nature surrounding the soul. And he himself sought to address the animals as moving machines, as soulless machines. Only man himself, he thought, could speak of himself as if he had a soul. The animals are moving machines, are soulless machines.

So little is the soul out of this folklore placed in the possibility of immersing itself in the inner life of the external thing that it cannot find inspiration within the animal world. No wonder that this continued until the materialism of the eighteenth century and continued - as we will mention today - until our own days, as in that materialism of the eighteenth century, in that material ism that conceived of the whole world only as a mechanism, and which finally realized, especially in de Lamettrie in his book “L'homme-machine”, even came to understand man himself only as a moving machine. All this is already present in germinal form in Cartesius.

Goethe, out of his German consciousness, became acquainted with this Western world view, and he spoke out of his German consciousness: They offer us a world of moving atoms that push and pull each other. If they then at least wanted to derive the manifold, the beautiful, the great, the sublime phenomena of the world from these atoms that push and pull each other. But after they have presented this bleak, desolate image of the world, they let it be presented and do nothing to show how the world emerges from these accumulations of atoms.

The third thinker who should be mentioned among those minds that, as it were, form the background of the world view from which everything that the German mind has achieved in that time through Goethe, Schiller, Herder, Lessing and so on has sprung, is Hegel. In him we see the third aspect of the German mind embodied at the same time. In him we see a third way of finding the point in the soul through which this human soul can feel directly one with the whole world, with that which, in a divine-spiritual way, pulses, weaves and permeates the world. If in Fichte we see the will grasping directly in the innermost part of man, and in Schelling, I might say, the mind, then in Hegel we see the human thought grasped. But in that Hegel attempts to grasp the thought not merely as human, but in its purity, detached from all sensual sensations and perceptions, directly in the soul, Hegel feels as if, in living in the living and breathing and becoming of pure thought, he also lives in the thought that not only lives in the soul, but that is only meant to appear in the soul, because it reveals itself in it, as divine-spiritual thinking permeating all of the world. Just as the divine spiritual beings scatter their thoughts throughout the world, as it were, thinking the world and continually fashioning it in thought, so it is revealed when the thinker, alone with himself, gives rise to pure thinking, thinking that is not borrowed from the external world of the senses but that the human being finds as thinking that springs up within him when he gives himself to his inner being. Basically, what Hegel wants, if one may say so, is a mystical will. But it is not an unclear, dark or nebulous mysticism. The dark, unclear or nebulous mysticism wants to unite with the world ground in the darkest feelings possible. Hegel also wants the soul to unite with the ground of the world, but he seeks this in crystal clarity, in the transparency of thinking; he seeks it in inner experience, he seeks it in the world of thoughts. In perfect clarity, he seeks for the soul that which is otherwise only believed in unclear mysticism.

All this shows how these three important minds are endeavoring from three different sides to bring the human soul to experience the totality of reality by devotion to the totality of reality, how they are convinced that something can be found in the soul that experiences the world in its depths and thus yields a satisfying world view.

Fichte speaks to his Berlin students in 1811 and 1813 about attaining such a world picture in such a way that it is clear that he is well aware that one must strive for certain powers of knowledge that lie dormant in the soul. Fichte then says to his Berlin students in the years mentioned: If one really wants to have that which must be striven for in order to truly and inwardly grasp the world spiritually, then it is necessary that the human being finds and awakens a slumbering sense, a new sense, a new sense organ, within himself. Just as the eye is formed in the physical body, so a new sense organ must be developed out of the soul in Fichte's sense, if we are to look into the spiritual world. That is why Fichte boldly says to his listeners in these years, when, as far as he could achieve it in his relatively short life, his world view has reached the highest peak: What I have to say to you is like a single seeing person entering a world of blind people. What he has to say to them about the world of light, the world of colors, initially affects them, and at first they will say it is nonsense because they cannot sense anything.

And Schelling - we can already see it in the saying that Schubert made about him - has drawn attention to intellectual intuition. What he coined in his words, for which he coined a wisdom, he sought to explore in the world by developing the organ within him into an “intellectual intuition”. From this intellectual intuition, Schelling speaks in such a way that he could have the effect that has just been characterized.

From his point of view, Hegel then opposed this intellectual view. He believed that to assert this intellectual view was to characterize individual exceptional people, people who, through a higher disposition, had become capable of looking into the spiritual world. Hegel, on the contrary, was thoroughly convinced that every human being is capable of looking into the spiritual world, and he wanted to emphasize this thoroughly.

Thus these minds were opposed to each other not only in the content of what they said, but they were also opposed to each other in such profound views. But that is not the point, but rather the fact that they all basically strive for what can truly be called spiritual science: the experience of the world through that which sits in the deepest part of man. And in this they are united with the greatest spirit who created out of German folkhood, with Goethe, as Fichte, Hegel and Schelling have often said.

Goethe speaks of this contemplative power of judgment in a beautiful little essay entitled “Contemplative Power of Judgment”. What does Goethe mean by this contemplative power of judgment? The senses initially observe the external physical world. The mind combines what this external physical world presents to it. When the senses observe the external physical world, they do not see the essence of things, says Goethe; this must be observed spiritually. In this process, the power of judgment must not merely combine; the concepts and ideas that arise must not merely arise in such a way that they seek to depict something else; something of the world spirit itself must live in the power that forms concepts and ideas. The power of judgment must not merely think; the power of judgment must look at, look spiritually, as the senses otherwise look. Goethe is completely at one with those who have, as it were, provided the background for the world view, just as they feel at one with him. Just as Fichte, for example, when he published the first edition of his seemingly so abstract Theory of Science, sent it to Goethe in sheets and wrote to him: “The pure spirituality of feeling that one sees in you must also be the touchstone for what we create.

A wonderful relationship of a spiritual kind exists between the three world-view personalities mentioned and minds such as Goethe; we could also cite Schiller, we could also cite Herder, we could cite them all, who in such great times drew directly from the depths of German national character.

It must be said that all that was created in Fichte, Schelling, Hegel, and in the others, contains something that is not fully expressed in any of them: Fichte seeks to recognize the spiritual world by experiencing the will as it flows into the soul; Schelling turns more to the mind, Hegel to the thought content of the world, others to other things. Above all of them, as it were, like the unity that expresses itself in three or so many different ways, hovers that which one can truly call the striving of the German national spirit itself, which cannot be fully expressed by any single personality, but which expresses itself as in three shades, for example, in relation to a world view in Fichte, Schelling and Hegel. Those who do not stand as dogmatic followers or opponents to these personalities – one could be beyond such childishness today, that one wants to be a follower or opponent of a spirit if one wants to understand it in its greatness – but have a heart and a mind and an open feeling for their striving, will discern everywhere, in all their expressions, something like the German national soul itself, so that what they say is always more powerful than what is directly expressed. That is the strange and mysterious thing about these minds. And that is why later, far less important personalities than these great, ingenious ones, were even able to arrive at more significant, more penetrating spiritual truths than these leading and dominant minds themselves. That is the significant thing: through these minds something is expressed that is more than these minds, that is the central German national spirit itself, which continues to work, so that lesser minds, far less talented minds, could come, and in these far less talented minds the same spirit is expressed, but even in a more spiritual scientific way than in Fichte, Schelling, Hegel themselves. They were the ones who first, I might say, set the tone and for the first time communicated something to the world, drawing it from the source of spiritual life. Even for geniuses, this is difficult. But once the great, powerful stimulus had been provided, lesser minds followed. And it must be said that these lesser minds in some cases captured the path into the spiritual worlds even more profoundly and meaningfully than those on whom they depended, who were their teachers.

Thus we see in Immanuel Hermann Fichte, the son of the great Johann Gottlieb Fichte, how he strives in his own way for a spiritual science, and in such a way that he seeks a higher human being in the sensual human being who stands before us, who is grasped by the outer senses and outer science , whom he calls an etheric human being, and in whom lie the formative forces for this physical human being, which are built up before the physical body receives its hereditary substance from the parents, and which are maintained as the sum of the formative forces when the physical body passes through the gate of death. Immanuel Hermann Fichte speaks of an ethereal human being, of an ethereal human being who is inwardly strengthened and filled with strength, who belongs to the eternal forces of the universe just as the human being here belongs to the physical forces of the hereditary current as a physical human being, probably because of his association with his father, who was a good educator for him.

And one would like to say: How carried to higher heights we find the Fichtean, the Schellingian striving in a man who has become little known, who almost belongs to the forgotten spirits of German intellectual life, but in whom is deeply rooted precisely what is the essence of the German national spirit - in Troxler. Troxler - who knows Troxler? And yet, what do we know of this Troxler? Under the influence of Schelling, in particular, he wrote his profound > Blicke in das Wesen des Menschen in 1811 and then gave his lectures on philosophy in 1834. These lectures are certainly not written in a piquant way, to use the foreign word for something foreign, but they are written in such a way that they show us: A person is speaking who does not just want to approach the world with the intellect, with which one can only grasp the finite, but one who wants to give the whole personality of the human being with all its powers to the world, so that this personality, when it immerses itself in the world's phenomena, brings with it a knowledge that is fertilized by the co-experience, by the most intimate co-experience with the being of the world. And Troxler knows something about the fact that among those powers of the soul that are initially turned towards external nature and its sensuality, higher spiritual powers live. And in a strange way, Troxler now seeks to elevate the spirit above itself. He speaks of a super-spiritual sense that can be awakened in man, of a super-spiritual sense that slumbers in man. What does Troxler mean by that? He means: The human spirit otherwise thinks only in abstract concepts and ideas that are dry and empty, mere images of the external world; but in the same force that lives in these abstract concepts and ideas, there also lives something that can be awakened by man as a spiritual being. Then he sees in supersensible images the way one can see external reality with the eyes. In ordinary cognition, the sensory image is present first, and the thought, which is not sensory-pictorial, is added in the process of cognition. In the spiritual process of cognition, the supersensible experience is present; this could not be seen as such if it did not pour itself through a power that is natural to the spirit into the image, which brings it to a spiritual-descriptive sensualization. For Troxler, such knowledge is that of the super-spiritual sense. And what this super-spiritual sense bypasses, Troxler calls the supersensible spirit, the spirit that rises above mere observation of the sensual, and which, as spirit, experiences what is out there in the world. How could I fail to mention to those esteemed listeners who heard a lecture like the one I gave on Friday two weeks ago that in this supersensible sense and supersensible spirit of Troxler, the germs — if only the germs, but nevertheless the germs — lie in what I had to characterize as the two paths into spiritual science,

But there is another way in which Troxler expresses it wonderfully. He says: When the human being is first placed in his physical body with his soul, with his eternal self, when he stands face to face with the moral, the religious, but also with the outer, immediate reality, then he develops three forces: faith, hope and love. These three forces, which he continues to develop, he develops in life within the physical-sensual body. It simply belongs to the human being, as he stands in the physical-sensual world, that he lives in faith, in love, in hope. But Troxler says: That which is proper to the soul of man here within the physical body as faith, as justified belief, is, so to speak, the outer expression of a deeper power that is within the soul, which, through this faith, shines into the physical world as a divine power. But behind this power of faith, which, in order to unfold, absolutely requires the physical body, lies supersensible hearing. This means that faith is, in a sense, what a person makes out of supersensible hearing. By making use of the sensory instrument for supersensible hearing, he believes. But if he frees himself from his sensory body and experiences himself in the soul, then the same power that becomes faith in the sensory life gives him supersensible hearing, through which he can delve into a world of spiritual sound phenomena through which spiritual entities and spiritual facts speak to him.

And the love that a person develops here in the physical body, which is the flowering of human life on earth, is the outer expression of a power that lies behind it: for spiritual feeling or touching, says Troxler. And when a person delves deeper into this same power, which lives here as the blossom of the moral earthly existence, of the religious earthly existence, when he delves deeper into this love, when he goes to the foundations of this love, then he discovers within himself that the spiritual man has organs of feeling through which he can touch spiritual beings and spiritual facts just as he can touch physical facts with his sensory organs of feeling or touching. Behind love lies spiritual feeling or touching, as behind faith lies spiritual hearing.

And behind the hope that a person has in this or that form lies spiritual vision, the insight through the spiritual sense of seeing into the spiritual world.

Thus, behind what a person experiences as the power of faith, love and hope, Troxler sees only the outer expression of higher powers: for spiritual hearing, for spiritual feeling, for spiritual beholding or seeing. And then he says: When a person can give himself to the world in such a way that he gives himself with his spiritual hearing, spiritual feeling, spiritual seeing, then not only do thoughts come to life in him that so externally and abstractly reflect the external world, but, as Tro “sensible thoughts”, thoughts that can be felt themselves, that is, that are living beings, and ‘intelligent feelings’, that is, not just dark feelings in which one feels one's own existence in the world, but something through which the feelings themselves become intelligent. We know from the lecture just mentioned that it is actually the will, not the feelings; but in Troxler there is definitely the germ of everything that can be presented in spiritual science today. When a person awakens to this seeing, to this hearing and sensing of the spiritual world, when in this feeling a life of thought awakens through which the person can connect with the living thought that weaves and lives in the spiritual world, just as thought lives in us essentially, not just abstractly. Troxler feels his striving for spiritual science so deeply. And I would like to read a passage from Troxler from which you can see just how profound this striving was for Troxler. He once said:

"In the past, philosophers distinguished a fine, noble soul body from the coarser body, or assumed that the soul was a kind of covering for the face within this body, that the soul had an image of the body, which they called a schema, and that the soul was the higher inner man... In more recent times, even Kant in Dreams of a Spirit-Seer seriously dreams, in jest, an entire inward, spiritual man who carries all the limbs of the outward on his spirit body."

Troxler then draws attention to others who have more or less sensed this other side of the nature of the world from the depths of German spiritual endeavor. Troxler continues:

"Lavater writes and thinks in the same way, and even when Jean Paul makes humorous jokes about Bonnet's undergarment and Platner's soul corset, which are said to be , we also hear him asking: What is the purpose and origin of these extraordinary talents and desires within us, which, like swallowed diamonds, slowly cut our earthly shell? Why was I stuck to this dirty lump of earth, a creature with useless wings of light, when I was supposed to rot back into the birth clod without ever wriggling free with ethereal wings?"

Troxler draws attention to such currents in German intellectual life. And then he comes up with the idea that a special science could now arise from this, a science that is a science but that has something in common with poetry, for example, in that it arises from the human soul, in that not a single power of the soul, but the whole human soul, surrenders itself in order to experience the world together with others.

If you look at people from the outside, Troxler says, you get to know anthropology. Anthropology is what arises when you examine with the senses and with the mind what the human being presents and what is revealed in the human being. But with this one does not find the full essence of the human being. What Troxler calls in the characterized sense, spiritual hearing, spiritual feeling, spiritual seeing, what he calls supersensible spirit, superspiritual sense, that is part of it, in order to see something higher in the human being. A science stands before his soul, which does not arise out of the senses, not out of mere intellect, but out of this higher faculty of knowledge in the human being. And Troxler speaks very characteristically about this science in the following way. He says - Troxler's following words were written in 1835 -:

"If it is highly gratifying that the newest philosophy, which we have long recognized as the one that founds all living religion and must reveal itself in every anthroposophy, thus in poetry as well as in history, is now making headway, it cannot be overlooked, that this idea cannot be a true fruit of speculation, and that the true personality or individuality of man must not be confused either with what it sets up as subjective spirit or finite ego, nor with what it confronts with as absolute spirit or absolute personality.

In the 1830s, Troxler became aware of the idea of anthroposophy, a science that seeks to be a spiritual science based on human power in the truest sense of the word. Spiritual science can, if it is able to correctly understand the germs that come from the continuous flow of German intellectual life, say: Among Western peoples, for example, something comparable to spiritual science, something comparable to anthroposophy, can indeed arise; but there it will always arise in such a way that it runs alongside the continuous stream of the world view, alongside what is there science, and therefore very, very easily becomes a sect or a sectarianism. , but it will always arise in such a way that it runs alongside the continuous stream of world view, alongside what is science there, and therefore very, very easily tends towards sectarianism or dilettantism. In German spiritual life — and in this respect German spiritual life stands alone — spiritual science arises as something that naturally emerges from the deepest impulses, from the deepest forces of this German spiritual life. Even when this German spiritual life becomes scientific with regard to the spiritual world and develops a striving for spiritual knowledge, the seeds of what must become spiritual science already lie in this striving. Therefore, we never see what flows through German intellectual life in this way die away.

Or is it not almost wonderful that in 1856 a little book was published by a pastor from Waldeck? He was a pastor in Sachsenberg in Waldeck. In this little book – as I said, the content is not important, but the striving – an attempt is made, in a way that is completely opposed to Hegel, to find something for the human soul, through which this human soul, by awakening the power slumbering in it, can join the whole lofty awakening spiritual world. And this is admirably shown by the simple pastor Rocholl in Sachsenberg in the Principality of Waldeck in his little book: 'Contributions to the History of German Theosophy' — a small booklet, but full of real inner spiritual life, of a spiritual life in which one can see that one who has sought it in his solitude finds everywhere the possibility of rising from the lonely inner experience of the soul to broad views of the world that are hidden behind the sensual one and yet always carry this sensual one, so that one has only one side of the world when one looks at this sensual life. One does not know what one should admire first in such a little book, which must certainly make a fantastic impression today – but that is not the point; whether one should admire more the fact that the simple country pastor found his way into the deepest depths of spiritual endeavor, or whether one should admire the foundations of the continuous flow of German intellectual life, which can produce such blossoms even in the simplest person. And if we had time, I could give you hundreds and hundreds of examples from which you would see how, admittedly not in the field of outwardly recognized, but more in the field of forgotten spiritual tones, but nevertheless vividly surviving spiritual tones, are present everywhere in such people who carry forward to our days what can be called a spiritual-scientific striving within the development of German thought.

As early as the first edition of my World and Life Views, which appeared more than a year and a half ago under the title of Riddles of Philosophy, I called attention to a little-known thinker, Karl Christian Planck. But what good did it do to call attention to such spirits, at least initially? Such spirits are more tangible as an expression, as a revelation of what is now alive, what is not expressed in the scientific activity in question, but nevertheless supports and sustains this scientific activity in many ways. Such spirits arise precisely from the deepest depths of the German character, of which Karl Christian Planck is one. Planck has written a book entitled 'Truth and shallowness of Darwinism', a very important book. He has also written a book about the knowledge of nature. I will mention only the following from this book, although basically every page is interesting:

When people talk about the earth today, they talk, I would say, in a geological sense. The earth is a mineral body to them, and man walks on it as an alien being. For Planck, the Earth, with everything that grows on it and including man, is a great spiritual-soul organism, and man belongs to it. One has simply not understood the Earth if one has not shown how, in the whole organism of the Earth, the physical human being must be present in that his soul is outwardly embodied. The earth is seen as a whole, all its forces, from the most physical to the most spiritual, are grasped as a unity. Planck wants to establish a unified world picture, which is spiritual, to use Goethe's expression. But Planck is aware – in this respect he is one of the most characteristic thinkers of the nineteenth century – of how what he is able to create really does emerge from the very depths of the German national spirit. He expresses this in the following beautiful words in his essay 'Grundlinien einer Wissenschaft der Natur' (Foundations of a Science of Nature), which appeared in 1864:

“He is fully aware of the power of deeply rooted prejudices against his writing, stemming from previous views. But just as the work itself, despite all the unfavorable circumstances that arose from the author's overall situation and professional position,” namely, he was a simple high school teacher, not a university professor — “a work of this kind was opposed, but its realization and its way into the public has fought, then he is also certain that what must now first fight for its recognition will appear as the simplest and most self-evident truth, and that in it not only his cause, but the truly German view of things, will triumph over all still unworthy external and un-German views of nature and spirit.

What our medieval poetry has already unconsciously and profoundly foreshadowed will finally be fulfilled in our nation in the maturity of the times. The impractical inwardness of the German spirit, which has been afflicted with harm and ridicule (as Wolfram von Eschenbach describes it in his “Parzival”)” - this was written in 1864, long before Wagner's ‘Parsifal’! “Finally, in the strength of its unceasing striving, it attains the highest, it gets to the bottom of the last simple laws of things and of human existence itself; and what poetry has symbolized in a fantastically medieval way in the wonders of the Grail, the mastery of which is attained by its hero, conversely receives its purely natural fulfillment and reality in the lasting knowledge of nature and of spirit itself.

Thus speaks he who then gave the summary of his world picture under the title “The Will of a German”, in which an attempt is really made, again at a higher level than was possible for Schelling, to penetrate nature and spirit. In 1912, this “The Will of a German” was published in a new edition. I do not think that many people have studied it. Those who deal with such things professionally had other things to do: the books by Bergson, by that Bergson — his name is still Bergson! who has used the present time not only to revile but also to slander in the truest sense what has emerged from German intellectual life; who has managed to describe the entire current intellectual culture of the Germans as mechanistic. I have said here before: when he wrote that the Germans have descended from the heights on which they stood under Goethe, Schiller, Herder, Schelling and Hegel, and that now they are creating a mechanical culture, he probably believed that the Germans, when they march up with cannons, would declaim Novalis or Goethe's poems to their opponents! But from the fact that he now only sees—or probably does not see—guns and rifles, he makes German culture into a completely mechanistic one.

Now, just as the other things I have been saying during this period have been said again and again in the years before the war, and also to members of other nations – so that they must not be understood as having been prompted by the situation of war – I tried to present Bergson's philosophy in the book that was completed at the beginning of the war, the second edition of my “Weltund Lebensanschauungen” (World and Life Views). And in the same book I pointed out how, I might say, one of the most brilliant ideas in Bergson's work, infinitely greater, more incisive and profound — here again we have such a forgotten 'tone of German intellectual life' — had already appeared in 1882 in the little-known Wilhelm Heinrich Preuss. At one point in his books, Bergson draws attention to the fact that when considering the world, one should not start with the mineral kingdom and then the plant and animal kingdoms, and only then include man in them, but rather start with man; how man is the is original and the other entities in the continuous flow, in which he developed while he was the first, has rejected the less perfect, so that the other natural kingdoms have developed out of the human kingdom.

In my book Rätseln der Philosophie (Mysteries of Philosophy), I pointed out how the lonely, deep thinker, but also energetic and powerful thinker, Wilhelm Heinrich Preuss, in his book Geist und Stoff (Mind and Matter), and basically in fact, even earlier than 1882, this idea in a powerful, courageous way, - the idea that one cannot get along with Darwinism understood in a purely Western sense, but that one has to imagine: if you go back in the world, you first have the human being. The human being is the original, and as the human being develops further, he expels certain entities, first the animals, then the plants, then the minerals. That is the reverse course of development.

I cannot go into this in detail today – I have even dealt with this idea several times in lectures from previous years – but I would like to mention today that this spiritual worldview is fully represented in the German spiritual movement of the 1880s in the book by Preuss, 'Geist und Stoff' (Spirit and Matter). I would like to read to you a key passage from my book “The Riddles of Philosophy” so that you can see how a powerful world view, which is part of the whole current that I have characterized for you today, flows into the spiritual life of humanity in weighty words. Preuss says:

The center of this new doctrine is man, the only species on our planet that recurs: Homo sapiens. It is strange that the older observers started with natural objects and then went so astray that they could not find the way to man, which Darwin only managed in the most miserable and thoroughly unsatisfactory way by seeking the progenitor of the Lord of Creation among the animals, while the naturalist should start with himself as a human being, and thus gradually return to humanity through the whole realm of being and thinking! It was not by chance that human nature emerged from the evolution of all earthly things, but by necessity. Man is the goal of all telluric processes, and every other form emerging alongside him has borrowed its traits from his. Man is the first-born being of the whole cosmos... When his germs had emerged, the remaining organic residue no longer had the necessary strength to produce further human germs. What emerged was animal or plant...

In 1882, what the human soul can experience spiritually, presented within German intellectual life! Then Bergson comes along and by no means presents the thought in such a powerful, penetrating way, connected with the innermost life of the soul, but, one might say, in a slightly pursed, mincing, more and more indeterminate way. And people are overwhelmed by Bergson and do not want to know about Preuss. And Bergson apparently knows nothing about Preuss. But that is about as bad for someone who writes about worldviews as it would be if he knew about it and did not say anything. But we do not want to examine whether Bergson knew and did not say, or whether he did not know, now that it has been sufficiently proven that Bergson not only borrowed ideas from Schopenhauer and expressed them in his own words, but also took ideas from the entire philosophy of German idealism, for example Schelling and Fichte, and seems to consider himself their creator. It is indeed a special method of characterizing the relationship of one people to another, as Bergson now continually does to his French counterparts, by presenting German science and German knowledge as something particularly mechanical, after he has previously endeavored - which is probably not a very mechanical activity - to describe these German world-view personalities over pages. After a while, one realizes that Bergson could have kept silent altogether if he had not built his world view on the foundations of the German world view personalities, which is basically nothing more than a Cartesian mechanism, the mechanism of the eighteenth century, warmed up by a somewhat romantically understood Schellingianism and Schopenhauerianism.

As I said, one must characterize things appropriately; for it must be clear to our minds that when we speak of the relationship of the German character in the overall development of humanity, we do not need to adopt the same method of disparaging other nationalities that is so thoroughly used by our opponents today. The German is in a position to point out the facts, and he will now also gain strength from the difficult trials of the present time to delve into the German soul, where he has not yet succeeded. The forgotten sides of the striving for spiritual science will be remembered again. I may say this again and again, after having endeavored for more than thirty years to emphasize another side of the forgotten striving of German knowledge.

From what has emerged entirely from the British essence of knowing directed only at the outside world, we have the so-called Newtonian color theory. And the power of the British essence, not only externally but also internally, spiritually, is so great that this Newtonian color theory has taken hold of all minds that think about such things. Only Goethe, out of that nature which can be won from German nationality, has rebelled against Newton's theory of colours in the physical field. Certainly, Newton's theory of colours is, I might say, in one particular chapter, what de Lamettrie's L'Homme-Machine can be for all shallow superficial people in the world. Only the case with the theory of colours is particularly tragic. For 35 years, as I said, I have been trying to show the full significance of Goethe's Theory of Colours, the whole struggle of the German world-view, as it appears in Goethe with regard to the world of colour, against the mechanistic view rooted in British folklore with Newton. The chapter 'Goethe versus Newton' will also come into its own when that which lives on in a living, active way, even if not always consciously, comes more and more to the fore and can be seen by anyone who wants to see. And it will come to the fore, precisely as a result of the trials of our time, the most intimate awareness of the German of the depth of his striving for knowledge.

It is almost taken for granted, and therefore as easy to grasp as all superficially taken for granted things, when people today say: science is of course international. The moon is also international! Nevertheless, what individuals have to say about the moon is not at all international. When Goethe traveled, he wrote back to his German friends: “After what I have seen of plants and fish near Naples and in Sicily, I would be very tempted, if I were ten years younger, to make a journey to India, not to discover anything new, but to look at what has been discovered in my way.” Of course, science is international. It is not easy to refute the corresponding statements, because they are self-evident, as everything superficial is self-evident. But as I said, it is also international like the moon. But what the individual nations have to say about what is international from the depths, from the roots of their national character, that is what is significant and also what is effective in furthering the development of humanity from the way in which the character of each individual nation relates to what can be recognized internationally. That is what matters.

To this day, however, it cannot be said that precisely that which, in the deepest sense, represents the German character has made a significant impression on the path of knowledge in the period that followed. Within the German character itself, Fichte, Schelling and Hegel initially had such a great effect that posterity was stunned and that it initially produced only one or the other, one or the other side, that even un-German materialism was able to gain a foothold within the German spiritual life. But it is particularly instructive to see how that which is primordially German works in other nationalities when it is absorbed into them. And Schelling, for example, is primordially German. Schelling has had a great effect, for example within Russian spiritual life. Within Russian spiritual life, we see how Schelling is received, how his powerful views of nature, but especially of history – the Russian has little sense of the view of nature – are received. But we also see how precisely the essentials, what matters, cannot be understood at all in the east of Europe. Yes, it is particularly interesting – and you can read more about this in my writing “Thoughts During the Time of War” – how this eastern part of Europe in the nineteenth century gradually developed a complete rejection of precisely the intellectual life not only of Central Europe, but even of Western Europe. And one gets an impression of German intellectual life when one sees how this essential, which I have tried to bring out today, this living with the soul in the development of nature and the spirit, cannot be understood in the East, where things are accepted externally. In the course of the nineteenth century, consciousness has swollen terribly in the East, especially among intellectuals – not among the peasants, of course, who know little about war even when they are waging it. The intellectual life of the East is, however, a strange matter. I have already explained it: Slavophilism appears in the first half of the nineteenth century, in the 1830s, precisely fertilized by Fichte, Schelling and Hegel; but it appears in such a way that Fichte, Schelling and Hegel are only taken superficially , quite superficially, so that one has no inkling of how Fichte, Schelling and Hegel — the tools of the will, of the soul, of thinking — actually live objectively together with what outwardly interweaves and lives through the world. And so it could come about that this Russian element, which in terms of its sense of knowledge still lived deeply in medieval feeling, took up Fichte, Schelling and Hegel in such a way that an almost megalomaniacal view of the nineteenth century, which in literary and epistemological terms is really a kind of realization of Peter the Great's Political Testament, whether falsified or not.

What did they know about the German world view over there! In one of my recent lectures, I showed how Goethe's “Faust” truly grows out of what we, once again, can allow to affect our souls as a German world view. But we have only to hear Pissarew — who as a Russian spirit is deeply influenced by Goethe — speak about Goethe's Faust, and we shall see how it is impossible not to understand what is most characteristic and most essential to the German national soul. Pissarew says, for example: “The small thoughts and the small feelings had to be made into pearls of creation” - in “Faust he means the small thoughts, the human feelings that only concern people! “Goethe accomplished this feat, and similar feats are still considered the greatest victory of art; but such hocus-pocus is done not only in the sphere of art, but also in all other spheres of human activity."

It is an interesting chapter in the history of ideas that in the case of minds such as Ivan Vasilyevich Kireevsky or Khomyakov, for example, precisely that which lives great and significant as inwardness, but as clear inwardness, dark and nebulous sentimentalism, has continued to live in such minds and we could cite a long line right up to the present day, precisely from Russian ideological minds - how in this Russian ideological mind the conviction has generally formed: that which lives to the west of us is an aged culture, a culture that has outlived itself; it is ripe for extinction. The Russian essence is there, that must replace what is in Central Europe and they also meant Western Europe in the nineteenth century, especially England - what is in England.

This is not something I have picked out at one point or another, but it is a consistent feature of Russian intellectual life, which characterizes those who matter, who set the tone. In Kireyevsky's work, this intensifies around 1829 to a saying that I will read in a moment, and one will see from such a saying that what is heard today from the East did not just arise today, but that it is deeply rooted in what has gradually accumulated in this East.

But before that, I want to cite something else. The whole thing starts with Slavophilism, with a seemingly scientific and theoretical focus on the importance of the Russian people, who must replace an old and decrepit Europe, degenerating into nothing but abstract concepts and cold utilitarian ideas. Yes, as I said, this is something that is found again and again in Russian intellectual life. But where does this Slavophilism actually come from? How did these people in the East become aware of what they later repeated in all its variations: the people in Central and Western Europe have become depraved, are decrepit; they have managed to eliminate all love, all feeling from the heart and to live only in the mind, which leads to war and hatred between the individual peoples. In the Russian Empire, love lives, peace lives, and so does a science that arises from love and peace. Where do these people get it from? From the German Weltanschauung they have it! Herder is basically the first Slavophile. Herder first expressed this, which was justified in his time, which is also justified when one looks at the depth of the national character, which truly has nothing to do with today's war and with all that has led to this war. But one can point out that which has led to the megalomania among the so-called intellectuals: We stand there in the East, everything over there is old, everything is decrepit, all of it must be exterminated, and in its place must come the world view of the East.

Let us take to heart the words of Kirejewski. He says in 1829: “The fate of every European state depends on the union of all the others; the fate of Russia depends on Russia alone. But the fate of Russia is decided in its formation: this is the condition and source of all goods. As soon as all these goods will be ours, we will share them with the rest of Europe, and we will repay all our debts to it a hundredfold.”

Here we have a leading man, a man repeatedly lionized by the very minds that have more often than not rejected the ongoing development of Russian intellectual life. Here we have it stated: Europe is ripe for destruction, and Russian culture must replace it. Russian culture contains everything that is guaranteed to last. Therefore, we are appropriating everything. And when we have everything, well then we will be benevolent, then we will share with the others in a corresponding manner. That is the literary program, already established in 1829 within Russian humanity by a spirit, in whose immaturity, in whose sentimentality even Fichte, Schelling and Hegel have worked.

There is a remarkable conception in the East in general. Let me explain this in conclusion. For example, in 1885 an extraordinary book was published by Sergius Jushakow, an extraordinary book, as I said. Jushakow finds that Russia has a great task. In 1885, he finds this task even more directed towards Asia. Over there in Asia, he believes, live the descendants of the ancient Iranians – to which he also counts the Indians, the Persians – and the ancient Turanians. They have a long cultural life behind them, have brought it to what is evident in them today. In 1885, Yushakov said that Westerners had intervened in this long cultural life, intervening with what they could become from their basic feelings and from their worldview. But Russia must intervene in the right way.

A strange Pan-Asiaticism, expressed by Yushakov in a thick book in 1885 as part of his program! He says: “These Asiatic peoples have presented their destiny in a beautiful myth—which is, however, true. There are the Iranian peoples over there who fought against Ahriman, as Jusakhov says, against the evil spirit Ahriman, who causes infertility and drought and immorality, everything that disturbs human culture. They joined forces with the good spirit Ormuzd, the god of light, the spirit that gives everything that promotes people. But after the Asians had received the blessings of Ormuzd within their spiritual life for a while, Ahriman became more powerful. But what did the European peoples of the West bring to the Asians, according to Jushakow? And that is quite interesting. Yushakov argues that the peoples of the West, with their cultural life, which in his view is degenerate and decrepit, have crossed over to Asia to the Indians and the Persians, and have taken from them everything that Ormuzd, the good Ormuzd, has fought for. That is what the peoples of the West were there for. Russia will now cross over to Asia – it is not I who say this, but the Russian Yushakov – because in Russia, rooted in a deep culture, is the alliance between the all-fertility-developing peasant and the all-chivalry-bearing — as I said, it is not I who say it, Yushakov says it — and from the alliance of the peasant and the Cossack, which will move into Asia, something else will arise than what the Western peoples have been able to bring to the Asians. The Western peoples have taken the Ormuzd culture from the Asians; but the Russians, that is, the peasants and the Cossacks, will join forces with poor Asia, which has been enslaved by the Westerners, and will fight with it against Ahriman and will unite completely with it. For what the Asians, under the leadership of Ormuzd, have acquired as a coming together with nature itself, the Russians will not take away from them, but will join with them to fight against Ahriman once more.

And in 1885, this man describes in more detail how these Western peoples actually behaved towards the Asian people plagued by Ahriman. He does not describe the Germans, for which he would have had little reason at the time, but he, Yushakov, the Russian, describes the English. And he says of the English that, after all they have been through, they believe that the Asian peoples are only there to clothe themselves in English fabrics, fight among themselves with English weapons, work with English tools, eat from English vessels and play with English baubles. And further, in 1885, Yushakov said: “England exploits millions of Hindus, but its very existence depends on the obedience of the various peoples who inhabit the rich peninsula; I do not wish anything similar for my fatherland – I can only rejoice that it is sufficiently far removed from this state of affairs, which is as glorious as it is sad.”

It is likely that these sentiments, which were not only expressed by Jushakow in 1885, but also by many others, led to Russia initially not allying itself with the Asians to help them against Ahr Ahriman, but that it first allied itself with the “so brilliant as it is sad state” of England in order to trample the “aged”, “marshy” Europe into the ground.

What world history will one day see in this ring closing around Central Europe can be expressed quite simply. One need only mention a few figures. These few figures are extremely instructive because they are reality. One day, history will raise the question, quite apart from the fact that this present struggle is the most difficult, the most significant, the greatest that has occurred in the development of human history, quite apart from the fact that it is merely a matter of the circumstances of the figures: How will it be judged in the future that 777 million people are closing in on 150 million people? 777 million people in the so-called Entente are closing in on 150 million people and are not even expecting the decision to come from military valor, but from starvation. That is probably the better part of valor according to the views of 777 million people! There is no need to be envious about the soil in which a spiritual life developed as we have described it, because the figures speak for themselves. The 777 million people live on 68 million square kilometers, compared to 6 million square kilometers on which 150 million people live. History will one day take note of the fact that 777 million people live on 68 million square kilometers, ring-shaped against 150 million people on 6 million square kilometers. The German only needs to let this fact speak in this as well as in other areas, which prevents one from falling into one-sided national shouting and ranting and hate-filled speech, into which Germany's enemies fall.

I do not want to talk now about those areas that do not belong here and that will be decided by weapons. But we see all too clearly how, today, what one wants to cherish and carry as German culture is really enclosed, lifted up above the battlefield of weapons, enclosed by hatred and slander, by real slander , not only hatred; how our sad time of trial is used to vilify and condemn precisely that which has to be placed in world history, in the overall development of mankind, in this way. For what is it, actually, that confronts us in this German intellectual life with all its conscious and forgotten tones? It is great because it is the second great flowering of insight and the second great flowering of art in the history of humanity. The first great flowering of art was Greek culture. At the turn of the eighteenth to the nineteenth century, the development of Germany produced a flowering of which even a mind like Renan said, when, after absorbing everything else, he became acquainted with the development of Germany in Goethe and Herder: “I felt as if I were entering a temple, and from that moment everything that I had previously considered worthy of the divinity seemed to me no more than withered and yellowed paper flowers.” What German intellectual life has achieved, says Renan, comparing it with the other, is like differential calculus compared to elementary mathematics. Nevertheless, on the same page on which he wrote these words to David Friedrich Strauß, Renan points to that current in France which, in the event of the loss of Alsace-Lorraine, called for a “destructive struggle against the Germanic race”. This letter was written in 1870.

This German intellectual life has been recognized time and again. But today it must be misunderstood. For how else could the words be found that are spoken in the ring that surrounds us!

If we look across, not with Yushakov's eyes, but with unbiased eyes, to Asia, we see a human culture that has grown old, that also strove for knowledge, but that strove for knowledge according to an old, pre-Christian way. There, the ego is sought to be subdued in order to merge into the universe, into Brahman or Atman, with the extinction of the ego. This is no longer possible. Now that the greatest impulse in human history, the Christ impulse, has become established in human history, the ego itself must be elevated, strengthened, not subdued as in Oriental spiritual life, but on the contrary, strengthened in order to connect as an ego with the spiritual-divine in the world, which pulsates and weaves and lives through the world. That is the significant thing, how this is again shining forth in the German spiritual striving. And this, which is unique and which must be incorporated as one of the most essential tones in the overall development of humanity, is what is coming to life in the 6 million square kilometers, compared to the 68 million square kilometers. This fact must be obscured from those who, as I said, do not fight with weapons, but who fight with words and slander this Central European spiritual life. They must cover this fact with fog. They must not see it. But we must admit it to ourselves, we must try to explain to ourselves how it is possible that these people can be so blinded as to fail to recognize the very depth of this connection of one's own soul with the spiritual life outside in the world.

Boutroux, who traveled around here in Germany for a short time before the war and even spoke at universities about the spiritual brotherhood of Germany and France, now tells his French audience how the Germans want to grasp everything inwardly. He even makes a joke: if a Frenchman wants to get to know a lion or a hyena, he goes to the menagerie. If an Englishman wants to get to know a lion or a hyena, he goes on a world tour and studies all the things related to the lion or the hyena on the spot. The German neither goes to the menagerie nor on a journey, but withdraws into his room, goes into his inner self, and from that inner self he creates the lion or the hyena. That is how he conceives of inwardness. It is a joke. One must even say that it is perhaps a good joke. The French have always made good jokes. It's just a shame that this joke is by Heinrich Heine, and Boutroux has only repeated it.

But now, when you see how these people want to cloud their minds, you come up with a few things. You wonder: How do these people, according to their nationality, seek to delude themselves about what German nature actually is? For the Russians, it must always be a new mission. I have also described this in my booklet: “Thoughts during the time of war”. They must be given the opportunity to replace Western European culture, Central European culture, because it is the destiny of the Russian people – so they say in the East, anyway – to replace the abstract, purely intellectual culture built on war with a Russian culture built on the heart, on peace, on the soul. That is the mission.

The English – one would not want to do them an injustice, truly, one would like to remain completely objective, because it really does not befit the Germans to speak in a one-sided way based solely on national feelings. That should not happen at all; but when one hears, as in the very latest times in England, declaiming that the Germans live by the word: “might is right,” then one must still remind them that there is a philosophy by Thomas Hobbes, an English philosophy, in which it is first proved in all its breadth that law has no meaning if it does not arise from power. Power is the source of law. That is the whole meaning of Hobbes's doctrine. After it has been said from an authorized position - there is also an unauthorized authorized position, but it is still an authorized position in the outside world - that the Germans live by the rule “might makes right”, that they have have come far by acting according to the principle “might is right,” I do not believe that one is being subjective when one objects that this is precisely an English principle that has become deeply ingrained in the Englishman. Yes, one can well say: they need a new lie. And that will hardly be anything other than a terminus technicus.

The French – what are they deluding themselves with? They are the ones we would least like to wrong. And so let us take the word of one of their own poets, Edmond Rostand. The cock, the crowing cock, plays a major role in Edmond Rostand's play. He crows when the sun rises in the morning. Gradually, he begins to imagine that the sun could not rise if it were not for him crowing, causing the sun to rise. One has become accustomed – and that is probably also Rostand's idea – to the fact that nothing can happen in the world without France. One has only to recall the age of Louis XIV and all that was French until Lessing, Goethe, Schiller and others emancipated themselves from it, and one can already imagine how the conceit arises: Ah, the sun cannot rise if I do not crow for it. Now, one needs a new conceit.

Italy – I heard a not insignificant Italian politician say before the war: Yes, our people have basically reached a point, so relaxed, so rotten, that we need a refresher, we need something to invigorate us. A new sensation, then! This is expressed in the fact that the Italians, in order to dull their senses, have invented something particularly new and unprecedented: a new saint, namely, Sacro Egoismo, Holy Egoism. How often has it been invoked before Italy was driven into the war, holy egoism! So, a new saint, and his hierophant: Gabriele d'Annunzio. Today, no one can yet gauge how this new saint, Sacro Egoismo and its hierophant, its high priest, Gabriele d'Annunzio, will live on in history!

On the other hand, we can remain within the German spirit and consider what is truly interwoven with this German spirit and what was unanimously felt by the Germans of Austria and Germany, on this side and on the other side of the Erz Mountains, as the German people's – not in the Russian sense of mission, but in the very ordinary sense – world-historical mission. And here I may well conclude with the words to which I have already drawn attention when, speaking of the commonality of Austrian intellectual culture with German, I also spoke of Robert Hamerling. In 1862, when he wrote his “Germanenzug”, the future of the German people lay before Robert Hamerling, the German poet of Austria, which he wanted to express by having the genius of the German people express it, when the Germanic people move over from Asia as the forerunners of the Germans. They settle on the border between Asia and Europe. Robert Hamerling describes the scene beautifully: the setting sun, the rising moon. The Teutons are encamped. Only one man is awake, the blond youth Teut. A genius appears to him. This genius speaks to Teut, in whom Robert Hamerling seeks to capture the representative of the later Germans. Beautifully he expresses:

To whom will the word break out of the depths of the soul
As your people, so rich, so delicate, so powerful?
Who breathes so solemnly into the strings
His innermost being? To whom do the senses draw so magnificently
Into the blue of heaven, granite hieroglyphics
Of the soul's upsurge and the narrowness of life?
Who finally ties the strands
of the searching thought to the stars
so boldly and strives and fights on all paths?
Whom leads so high, so deep his urge, his foreboding?
Who grasps the near and the far so faithfully?
Where does every earthly and heavenly zone
reflect itself as in your thinking, O Teuton?

And what once lived over there in Asia, what the Germans brought with them from Asia like ancestral heritage, it stands before Robert Hamerling's soul. It stands before his soul, what was there like a looking into the world in such a way that the ego is subdued, the corporeality is subdued, in order to see what the world is living through and weaving through, but what must emerge in a new form in the post-Christian era, in the form that it speaks out of the fully conscious ego, out of the fully conscious soul. This connection with the ancient times in the striving of the German people for the spirit, how beautifully Robert Hamerling expresses it:

But however proudly you aspire, high above other swarms, you will always keep the ancient, sacred fire: the dream-filled, drunken rapture of God, the blessed warmth of heart of the ancient Asian homeland. This holy ray, a temple fire of This holy ray, a temple fire
Of humanity, free of smoke, with pure flame
Glow away in your chest and soul mate
You remain and pilot your rudder!
You only strive because you love: your boldest thinking
Will be devotion that wants to sink into God.

Thus the German-Austrian poet connects the distant past with the immediate present. And indeed, it has emerged from this beautiful striving of the German soul, which we have tried to characterize today, that all knowledge, all striving wanted to be what one can call: a sacrificial service before the Divine-Spiritual. Even science, even the recognition of the spiritual, should have the effect of a sacrificial service, should work in such a way that Jakob Böhme could say: When one searches spiritually, it is so that one must bring it to go its way:

Walking in God – And striving in God –
And dying in God – And being buried in God.

Hamerling expresses this by having the German Genius say to Teut:

You strive only because you love: your most daring thought
will be devotion, sinking into God.

The affinity of the German soul with God is so beautifully expressed here. This shows us how deeply rooted true spiritual striving is in the German national character. But this also clearly gives rise to the thought in our soul, the powerful thought, that one can ally oneself with this German national spirit, for in that which it has brought forth in spiritual achievements - one current guides the other - this German national spirit is at work. It finds expression in the great, immortal deeds that are being accomplished in the present. In conclusion, let me summarize in the four lines of the German-Austrian Robert Hamerling what emerges as German faith, German love, German hope of the past, present and future, when the German unites with what is the deepest essence of his people. Let me summarize what is there as a force – as a force that has confidence that, where such seeds are, blossoms and fruits must develop powerfully in the German national character despite all enemies, in the German national character – let me summarize what is there as a force in his soul, in the words of the German-Austrian poet Robert Hamerling:

And if ever the German name
should prove a hostile day,
From ocean to ocean will run
The course of the German spirit!

Those of you who have been attending these lectures, which I have been giving in this hall for years now, know that I only very rarely mix personal remarks into these reflections. But today I would like to ask you to allow me to make a personal or at least seemingly personal comment by way of an introduction. For I would have to feel quite foolish and simple-minded if I could believe that my remarks on this topic today could be anything other than highly imperfect, perhaps even amateurish. What I want to sketchily suggest with regard to the nature and development of the German national soul could be a part, let us say a chapter, of a science that does not yet exist today, a science that one can have as a lofty ideal. But what would have to work together to really bring such a science about! First of all, it would perhaps require not one but a whole series of personalities who have the dedicated spirit of research for everything that makes up the nature, character and development of a people, such as Jakob Grimm had, who mainly directed his studies to the two expressions of the folk soul, the myth, the saga and the language. But the same spirit should spread to many other expressions of the folk soul and should be able to find laws about this folk soul that can compare with some of the wonderful laws about language that the German researcher Jakob Grimm, for example, has found.

Now, of course, I cannot boast of such a science. However, I did have the opportunity to enjoy the long-standing friendship of a good successor and student of Jakob Grimm, the Austrian dialect, legend and myth researcher, and later also Goethe researcher, Karl Julius Schröer. I have already spoken about this in these lectures, except about what he, I would like to say, tried to research so truly in the spirit of Jacob Grimm, namely about the intimate life relationships of the German folk soul to the various folk souls that prevail in Austria. For many years I was privileged to participate in his attempts to fathom the essence and significance of the German dialects prevailing in Austria – and there are many prevailing there – and I can say that I participated with heartfelt interest. I was also able to see how the soul of a people, especially the German soul, comes to life where it has to blend with Slavic and Magyar folk traditions. In those years, when I was young, one could already study the mutual relationships between the souls of nations. If one considered what happened in Austria in the 1870s and 1880s, one could apply in a vivid way what a researcher, a student of Jacob Grimm, could bring to bear from his science about the nature of the soul of a nation. And then I was able to deepen what had been offered to me in this way, again through an intimate friendship with the now long since deceased scholar of legends and myths, Ludwig Laistner, a friend of Paul Heyse. And so I was at least offered the opportunity to get to know the way in which one can immerse oneself in that external science that summarizes everything that is lawful in the nature of the folk soul and its development.

Secondly, however, anyone who wants to found such a science, as I envision it, would have to thoroughly experience the discipline of modern scientific thinking and its methods. In response to this, I can at least say that my entire youthful education is based on natural science and that I enjoyed a certain education in this method for a long time.

But all that is found externally through a people's soul study in the sense of Jakob Grimm and is steeped in the spirit of truth and knowledge that follows from scientific discipline, requires a third party. Anyone who has this ideal of science before him would have to justify it by adding, as a third element to these two, what I have tried to present in these lectures over the years as modern spiritual science. For only through the interaction of these three spiritual currents of the human soul could it really come about that a science of the folk soul can shed light on the peculiarities of the workings and effects of a folk soul. And so today, for the reasons given, I would like to speak briefly and sketchily, and of course in a rather amateurish way, about the nature and development of the German soul, the German folk soul.

You know that someone who speaks in terms of spiritual science, as it is meant here, does not speak of the national soul in the sense that one so often speaks of the national soul when one is an abstract thinker or a more or less mechanistically thinking scientist, but that such a spiritual researcher speaks of the national soul as something that really exists, just as the individual human being exists within the physical world. Naturally, in today's lecture I cannot repeat all that I have been saying on this subject for years. But one need only refer to the writings often quoted here to find so-called proofs of how justified it is, on the basis of spiritual scientific research, to speak of such higher souls that have not descended to the physical body, as is to be done here with the folk soul. But if one wants to speak about the folk soul in the spiritual-scientific sense, one must first consider certain things that relate to the individual soul of man. For, in the first place, we have before us the working of the folk soul in such a way that the working of the individual human souls, the nature of the individual human souls, so to speak, flows out, forces its way out of what is the folk soul. Now there are certain things in life, especially in the life of the soul – but this life of the soul is, of course, intimately connected with the physical life between birth and death – that come into consideration for spiritual research in a completely different sense than they do for what is often called natural science today, or at least for that within which natural science is so often limited today.

First of all, I must direct your attention to the development of the individual human being. For the spiritual researcher, there are certain stages in human life that he must pay particular attention to in order to penetrate the secrets of the development of the human being, of the whole human being. As I said, I cannot prove the details today; I can only cite the results of spiritual research. As far as the reasons are concerned, I must refer you to my earlier lectures or to my writings. One such stage occurs during the years when the human being is going through the process of changing teeth. Much of what I now have to say certainly seems fluid compared to the scientific concepts that are so firmly established and so sharply defined today. But spiritual science really must play a role in many cases, which I would like to compare with what the painter spreads over a landscape as a mood, which he otherwise, insofar as houses and trees are concerned, paints in fixed outlines. What is there of houses and trees in fixed outlines, what is, so to speak, a sharply outlined drawing, only becomes real in the right way, I just want to say now, in a painterly way, when everything that is now the mood of the picture has been poured out. And this mood content truly cannot be captured in such fixed forms as that which is drawn below in houses, trees and the like. So the seventh year approximately – of course, all these numbers are to be understood only approximately – the time of the change of teeth, is to be considered particularly. And there, to the spiritual researcher, certain processes appear in human development that are certainly more subtle, that, I might say, are poured out, as it were, only in the mood over the human soul life, but that are of great importance for the understanding of this soul life. For the spiritual researcher, this change of teeth expresses a complete shedding of what had previously worked in him as physical forces, and like the emergence to the surface of a being that has certainly wanted to come to the surface for a long time, but which, I would like to say, is like a duplication of his being. And in the eruption of the first teeth and their replacement by the second teeth, something that is going on in the whole human organism during this period is expressed strikingly and outstandingly in a particular place.

Now the spiritual researcher must bear in mind that what we encounter in human development as a whole, in the full human being, shows us that the external material, the physical, is always permeated, imbued with spiritual soul. But if one regards human development in the way that one is scientifically accustomed to today, then one grasps this development in such a way that one now actually only follows the events in the succession of time. One looks at an earlier state, a later state, again a later one and so on, and always imagines the later one emerging from the earlier one. That is how one regards development. But just as it would be wrong to look at the human organism in spatial terms, as one would a machine, in that one only considers the neighboring parts in relation to each other, so one must consider the human organism in such a way that there are, as it were, mysterious relationships between the most distant organs, which do not spatially neither do we, when we consider the whole human being in his fullness, consider what happens in the succession of time in such a way that things do not simply develop apart in the succession of time, but that what happens to the human being is intertwined in many ways. You will soon see what I mean. For the spiritual researcher, it is clear that in human development up to the change of teeth, the soul-spiritual, let us say, pushes out of its inner being – I cannot speak more specifically today due to the limited time – and, imbued, as it were, physiognomized, the material, the material. What is it exactly that pushes out as soul-spiritual during the period just mentioned?

To arrive at an answer, we must first distinguish between the development of boys and that of girls. We shall therefore speak first of the development of girls up to the change of teeth. One must consider a completely different period of human development if one wants to understand spiritually what is actually pushing its way out of the human being's inner being, not only into the face but into the whole physiognomy of the human being, what also permeates and imbues him until his teeth change, what works and lives and is active in him.

If you want to find what is inside the girl and, as it were, gives her organs plastic form, then you must first turn your gaze to certain peculiarities, but inner peculiarities, not to what the soul has learned through education, through school, but to the inner configuration, to the inner formation of the soul. First, from about the age of twenty to twenty-eight or thirty, what one must first consider comes to light emotionally and becomes visible to the outside observer. Then we must leave aside what is to be found in the period from twenty-eight to thirty-five or thirty-six, and must again consider what is in the soul in question from the age of thirty-six to forty-two, forty-three, forty-four. |

If you examine people in general, you can apply more general principles. If you want to examine an individual person, everyone can easily object, but the objection is fair, I just can't go into it now: Well, if you want to understand the person, you have to wait until they have changed their teeth, until they have become that old. Of course, you have to wait for the individual person if you want to understand them. But you know, science is not achieved through individual observations alone, but by applying what is observed in one case to the general case. And now you have to try to recognize how certain peculiarities of the soul present themselves during these years. And if one were to undertake a kind of amalgamation of the qualities in the first twenty years and the qualities in the second thirty years up to the forty-second and forty-third years and form an idea of what the soul life is in these years, then one comes to the conclusion that in the girl, until the teeth change, it presses into the physical. The way in which the physical configures itself, how it forms plastically, within which the soul lives and works, is only revealed in later years as a soul configuration in the manner indicated.

Let us now consider the boy up to about the age of seven, until the change of teeth. If we want to understand him, we must consider not two periods of time, but one period of human soul development, namely the period that lies roughly between the ages of twenty-eight and thirty-five. If we form an image in our minds of what emerges in the soul during this period and then consider what drives and propels the entire physiognomic development, lawful formation and plasticization of the boy's body, then we come to a certain understanding of the connection between the external-physical and the soul-spiritual.

Then we have to consider what lies in the second period of human development. For the spiritual researcher, this second period lasts from the change of teeth to sexual maturity, that is, up to the thirteenth, fourteenth, fifteenth, sixteenth year. During this time, we must again distinguish between the boy's and the girl's organism. What the girl's organism adds here in terms of body and soul is precisely what the boy's body incorporates in its first seven years, that is, what is experienced by the soul between the ages of twenty-eight and thirty-five. And what the boy's body then assimilates during these years is what we had to say earlier that the girl's body assimilates during the time until the change of teeth. So we see that the conditions actually overlap; that what later appears in the soul, that is, in the refined soul-spiritual state, in the internalized state, initially has a formative, invigorating effect on the person in the dull subconscious, just as he or she appears to us as a physical person.

And if we then consider the later developmental periods, we have to say that they are not as sharply defined as the first ones, but that for a more subtle observation of human life, later periods can be considered in a similar way. But what has been developed then appears in a more inward form. From puberty onwards, what used to work on the organism is withdrawn, so to speak, from imbibing, let us say, the organism, and develops internally. From this point onwards, anyone with an eye for such observations can clearly see how, from puberty to the early twenties, both in the male and female organism, the two later periods - the unified and the separate - still interact in a more individual way, but how then, to a certain extent, this distinction ceases and the soul becomes more unified, so that we can no longer say: From the early twenties onwards, we find in the soul itself something that can be related to other periods in such a way as to characterize the physical and psychological development in the first two or three stages of life. We find the soul working more out of a unified whole; we find it asserting itself as a unified whole out of a certain inner harmonious fullness. Nevertheless, with more subtle observation, we can again clearly distinguish how a mood — and an even subtler mood — is poured out over the soul life, just as this soul life itself was poured out over the physical life earlier.

We can distinguish three periods within the development of the soul. I have already hinted at them: from the beginning of the twenties to the end of the twenties; from the end of the twenties to the age of thirty-five or thirty-six; from the age of thirty-six to the age of forty-two or forty-three. The human soul does go through certain developmental phases that can be clearly distinguished, even if, as I said, what can be distinguished here only spreads like a finer mood over the soul life. There is a spiritual and soul element to the development in these years. And those who are familiar with the difference between the spiritual and the soul, which has often been mentioned here and to which I will return, will understand what I mean. In these years, up to the forty-second, forty-third, forty-fourth year, we are dealing with inner development alone, one that is colored by soul and spirit. Then a more spiritual development of the inner life begins. The inner life withdraws even more than in previous years from the saturation and permeation of the organism. It lives even more within itself. And the possibility of distinguishing periods of time for the future is hardly appropriate for the present state of development of humanity. Only when earthly development has progressed further will it be possible to distinguish between the decades of human life in the way we do for the earlier years. Thus we see how, in a quite remarkable way, the soul and spirit interact in what confronts us as human beings in the physical world.

Something must be added to these considerations about the physical, mental and spiritual development of the human being if one wants to look at the human being as he emerges, emerging from the national soul. We must add an understanding that this human soul is something composite, despite all the objections of so-called monism. I have often said that if, according to the view of certain people, one wanted to be a monist and not a dualist with regard to the soul and bodily life, then one would also have to regard water as a single entity and claim that it cannot be regarded as something composed of hydrogen and oxygen! Of course, one can be a very good monist if one regards water as composed of hydrogen and oxygen, just as one can be a very good monist if one summarizes the whole of human life as consisting of soul and spiritual elements on the one hand and bodily and physical elements on the other. In this way, the human being remains as he appears to us in the outer physical world, a monad, just as water is a monad.

Now, I cannot go back today to some of the things I have often explained here. You can read about this in my books “The Secret Science” or “How to Know Higher Worlds”. Those who do not have the time to do so can inform themselves very briefly about these things in the short essay that I have written in the magazine “Das Reich”, which is about to be published. We must face a fact that cannot be found with the ordinary powers of cognition, but with those powers of cognition that are developed in the way I have often described here. It must be recognized that the life of the soul and spirit has a certain independence, an independence that can actually be observed and experienced in inner experience and knowledge. It must be recognized that man is capable, by developing certain soul faculties, of detaching the spiritual-soul from the physical-bodily in the same way that the chemist separates hydrogen from oxygen when he breaks down water, and that one can recognize through this immersion in the spiritual-soul, that man can enter into other connections through this spiritual-soul, or let us say, in this spiritual-soul, than merely those that exist with the physical-bodily. Just as hydrogen can be separated from oxygen and then combine with other chemical elements and form other bodies, so that which is released as soul-spiritual in supersensible knowledge enters into other connections when the physical body departs at death, but only for the sake of knowledge. It surrounds man, as has often been stated here, just as the physical-sensual world surrounds him, and it can only be denied by someone who suffers from a similar state of mind as someone who has not heard anything and knows nothing about the air and denies that the air, because it cannot be seen, is not there, because there is nothing in space. With his soul and spirit, the human being belongs to a spiritual world, a real spiritual world.

A further insight of spiritual science is that we have to look at the two alternating states between waking and sleeping in such a way that the soul-spiritual really, in a certain way – but this is more figuratively speaking – leaves the bodily-physical during the state of sleep. Our language is only created for physical connections. One has, so to speak, no words to express this. One must take words that express the matter more or less figuratively, so to speak. So the spiritual-soul leaves the physical-bodily in the state of sleep. We can therefore also say figuratively that the soul and spirit are outside the physical body during sleep. And when the person wakes up again, the soul and spirit return to the physical body. For anyone who experiences the things that have often been described here, this is a real process that can be experienced. It is not something that has been made up, but a process that can be experienced. And what emerges from the physical-bodily is not only that which is encompassed by our ordinary physical consciousness, by that consciousness which, for the physical world, is bound to the body – as I just explained in lectures I gave here weeks ago – but it is still a deeper soul element, a soul element that is connected to the conscious soul, a subconscious soul element that is much more powerful than the conscious soul element, a soul element that can have a much greater effect on the physical than the conscious soul element. I may be able to say more about this the day after tomorrow.

Now we have to imagine that this spiritual-soul element, together with the subconscious spiritual-soul element, is not only active in the unconscious state from falling asleep to waking up, but that it also permeates the organism from waking up to falling asleep. But only part of it, as I have indicated, expresses itself in the conscious mental life. Another part works in a spiritual-soul way, working down through the entire evolution in the human physical-bodily organism. What we do while we sleep, we do from the moment we fall asleep until we wake up. Just as dim light is obscured by brighter light, so what takes place in our body at the subconscious level is drowned out by what we perceive as the stronger consciousness during the day.

If we wish to study such processes as I have described, the working of a later lifetime in an earlier one, let us say, the soul conditions from the twenty-eighth to the thirty-fifth year in the boy's body until the seventh year, then we must also think of this working of the later soul in the earlier bodily realm in terms of the way in which the soul-spiritual always works subconsciously in us, always works subconsciously in us throughout our entire life. Down there, spiritual-soul activity is taking place, truly spiritual-soul activity, not merely fine material activity. Down there in the human organism, in that which takes place without the consciousness, which accompanies the human organism with its knowledge, with its cognition, knowing anything about it, in these subordinate parts of the human organism, there lives a part of the soul lives in these subordinate parts of the human organism during the waking 'daytime life' with the spiritual of the environment, just as our lungs live with the air, with the spiritual of the environment, only not the spatial environment. But as I said, I cannot go into these finer concepts. A spiritual-soul life really does develop between a spiritual world and the human being as a whole, and this is just as real and real as the interaction between the air and the lungs.

And underlying what takes place throughout the whole of human life lie the influences of what we call the soul and spirit of the people, and the like. Just as during the time of individual human development up to the change of teeth in girls or boys, that which later expresses itself in the way described, works through our whole life, an existing spiritual-soul element works through our whole life, which is a higher spiritual-soul element than the human spiritual-soul element, or at least a higher one. This works in, working together with our own subconscious, which we have drawn out during sleep. And there is a continuous interaction between the soul of the people and that which is individual in us in the way indicated, like a continuous interaction between the human lungs and the air. Not in language as such, not in what is expressed first in the art, the poetry or the myths of a people – these are all effects of a supra-sensual or, one could also say, subsensible – but in a much 'deeper level, the mysterious interactions take place between man with regard to a certain inner being, which I have just characterized in its essence, and what we call the soul of a nation.

Now, as you know, it is not my way to engage in anthropomorphism in the sense of Gustav Theodor Fechner or similar people, whom I highly esteem, by the way, and to seek anthropomorphic analogies. Instead, I try to look the facts in the eye, but the facts in the physical world as well as the facts that are in the spiritual world and only show themselves in the physical world through their effects. The first step is to consider how the peculiarity, the character, the essence of a national soul can work into a person at all, what this national soul actually consists of. Those who make cheap analogies and proceed anthropomorphically take the individual human being, the boy, the development of youth and so on, and then look at a people as it also develops from certain beginnings in youth to a certain state of maturity. As I said, that is not my task.

If we now look at the way in which the soul of the nation can be recognized in the human being as a whole from the spiritual-scientific point of view, that is to say, if we approach the matter with the knowledge that I have often presented here as a spiritual-scientific method, we find that the individual national souls differ considerably in character. Now, of course, when speaking of the soul of a nation, it must be borne in mind that, when we use spiritual scientific concepts, we have something flexible and pliable, I would say in color effects, while we have firm contours in everything that is in the physical world. So, of course, it is very easy to object to what I am about to say. But if we had a few days instead of an hour or an hour and a half, we could discuss all these objections here. Of course, it is not at all a matter of criticizing any national soul, of presenting any national soul as if it had a different value from any other national soul, but of objective characteristics. What I am about to say about the individual national souls does not imply that one is of greater or less value than another, but is considered objectively.

If we study the nature of the Italian national soul from a spiritual scientific point of view, we find that such a national soul does not work as I have indicated in the life of an individual person, in that a later period of time imprints its characteristics on an earlier one; rather, such a national soul works on the human being from certain depths of the spiritual being throughout his or her life. Of course, this does not have to be the case. A person can leave one nation and be accepted into another. But the effects are the same, even if they are modified by the change. The folk soul is there, and what I have to describe is, in a sense, an encounter with the folk soul. A person who remains within his own nation throughout his life will experience this effect his whole life long. If you move from one nation to another, you will first experience the influence of one national soul and then that of the other. That is not the point now. It would be interesting to hint at the individual effects of changing the folk soul, but there is no time for that. Throughout human life, then, what comes from the folk soul can have the same effect as what comes from the stages of life in the periods of time indicated. And if we look at the Italian national soul, at its peculiarities, in the way it takes hold of people when it imprints its moods on the soul, imprints them on the whole person, we find, quite that there is a certain strong affinity between the forces of this Italian national soul and the individual forces that a person develops from the beginning of their twenties to their twenty-seventh, twenty-eighth, twenty-ninth year. So one can study the real inner essence of the Italian national soul if one can study the affinity, I would say the elective affinity, that exists between this national soul and what lives in the human soul between the twentieth, twenty-first and twenty-seventh, twenty-eighth years. One must only add – but in such a way that this second element only hints at what is lived out in the soul from the age of thirty-five to the age of forty-two, forty-three, forty-four. But the stronger element of the Italian national soul is that which is related to the early twenties. It is only shaded by that which, as I have indicated, is being lived out in the later years. The power of the Italian national soul takes hold of the individual human being who places himself in it and allows the soul to be imbued with the mood of the national soul. It takes hold of him in the way that the years between the twentieth and the twenty-seventh or twenty-eighth can be most powerfully and intensely seized by the soul and spirit.

You see, the human being is a very complicated thing, and one must see many, many things together if one really wants to study this human being. But you will recognize from what has been indicated that everything that can be regarded as Italian folk tradition is imbued with the same mood that comes from a folk soul related to the human individuality in the way indicated. Something that is intimately related to what lives in the soul from the age of twenty to twenty-eight, imprints itself in the Italian folk soul in man.

If you take the French folk soul, it imprints something in the same way in man, which is roughly related to the soul life between the ages of twenty-eight and thirty-five. If we take the British national soul, then this imprints something in the human being, that is, it pours a mood content over the entire human being from childhood on, something that then interacts with the other mood contents, which is related to the human soul in its development between the ages of thirty-five or thirty-six and forty-two, forty-three, forty-four, but shadowed by what has been in the soul since the early twenties.

Thus, the only way to study the peculiarities of the national soul is to examine its affinity to what is found to be the deeper characteristic of the individual human soul. The task is to look into this and see what forces are at work within. Of course, today the human being as a human individuality transcends nationality. But when you look at what makes an Italian Italian, you see, so to speak, not the interaction of the soul of the people with the soul of the individual, as if in an experiment, but rather an observed interaction by observing the interaction between the national soul and the individual soul during the period between the twentieth, twenty-first and twenty-seventh, twenty-eighth years.

You may think that such things as I am saying now have somehow been invented. They are no more invented than, say, the laws of sound change formulated by Jacob Grimm were invented, on a completely different level. It doesn't look as if it was thought up when you say: words that are related, that are in development, have a “t” in Greek, for example, and the same word, as it develops up to the Germanic, has a “th” or a “z” in the same place; when it has developed up to New High German, it has a “d”. These laws of sound change show how, in the succession of time, conformity to law prevails wherever the soul comes into play. If you simply develop them as Jakob Grimm presented them, they naturally appear in their abstractness; but they can be substantiated, proven in all the cases that matter, from the full breadth of experience. And so today I can only characterize these fundamental laws, as it were, which I have hinted at to you. But anyone who wants to go into what external experience offers to a spirit like the one I have described, who, like Jacob Grimm, can research the nature of the people using the methods of external science, will see the truth of it everywhere. There is not enough time today to go into this, which would be very interesting, to show how these general laws are realized in all soul phenomena, and how these soul phenomena of man and his appearance in the physical world, insofar as he belongs to any folk soul, can only be explained by coming behind the particular configuration of his appearance in this way.

Let us take a look at the Russian national soul. What we find is that the peculiarity of the national soul, the character of the national soul, turns out to be related to a kind of mixture between what happens in the individual human organism from sexual maturity to the beginning of the twenties; and that is shadowed by what happens from the age of forty-two or forty-three to the age of forty-nine or fifty. If you imagine these two soul characters in a state of confusion, that is to say, what is at work in the organism from sexual maturity into the early twenties, still permeating it, but also at work in the soul, if you imagine this overshadowed , thoroughly organized, of what works at such a late time, then you get, so to speak, an arithmetic mean, let me express the rough word for this fine thing, which shows what the peculiarities of the Russian national soul are. For the Russian national soul works with the forces that are similar to the forces just characterized in the human organism.

And other overall souls work in a very similar way. For example, we can consider an overall soul that has had a truly far-reaching effect throughout Europe from the south. Everyone can imagine for themselves how this overall soul essence has worked. I am referring to the collective soul of Christianity. Just as one can speak of the soul of a people, one can also speak of the collective soul of Christianity. What streams forth from Christianity, what it works out, permeates and shapes human beings, has done so for a long, long time and will continue to do so. But here too we are dealing with a process that must be put together in a similar way. We are dealing here with a process that draws its strength from what lives in the human being between the change of teeth and sexual maturity, mixed again with what lives there from the forty-second to the forty-ninth year. Of course, it must be much stronger forces, organizing man, than even the folk soul character, which, so to speak, shapes him religiously. Those who consider the strength with which religions have shaped people will not find what I say unreasonable.

And let us contrast all this, but really not to make value judgments, but only to emphasize peculiarities, with the basic character of the German soul, the German national soul. What I have to say about the German national soul can be wonderfully corroborated, not only from the German's own views on what lives and abides in his soul, in the soul lives and from the but also from the expressions of the other nations, especially from the impressions of unbiased observation in the other nations. The soul of the German people is truly a most peculiar thing. It is, I might say, somewhat uncomfortable to have to say this as a German, but it is truly a most peculiar thing. It should not be judged, but approached objectively. If one examines its basic character, one finds that it now permeates and interweaves the human being, giving him a certain emotional content, so that the forces in this folk soul are related to everything that is in the soul of the human being from the beginning of the twenties to the beginning of the forties, up to the forty-second, forty-third, forty-fifth year. That is the remarkable thing about the German national soul. If this should make the other nations uncomfortable, then they need only take comfort in the fact that what is poured out over three stages of life in the human being, so to speak, has a weaker effect, is diluted, as it were, while what concerns the other national organisms has a stronger effect, penetrates the human being more strongly. I would like to say how, in relation to the other thing I have said, these things can be made wonderfully clear to us in a few examples, so the facts about the German national soul that have just been hinted at can be made clear to us through certain phenomena. Those who, as I said, do not look directly at the folk soul itself in language, but at an effect of the folk soul, will not be surprised that a wonderful genius is at work in language. It is precisely the genius that is the folk soul that works. And how often is language cleverer than we are! How often do we only find out afterwards what has been ingeniously expressed in language. Of course, one can only characterize such things if one is aware that the things one says can actually only be said in one language in this way, and would have to be said differently in another language. But what I am saying now can be said in German. For example, the fact that it is expressed in two terms is wonderfully ingeniously designed: we do not say “father tongue” and “mother country” in ordinary language. We say “mother tongue” and “fatherland”. And for the humanities scholar, this expresses in the fullest possible way the whole way in which the native landscape is passed on to man through the paternal inheritance and in turn affects his unconscious; and how that which lives in language flows over to man from the maternal side through the forces of inheritance. But much, much more could be cited. Regarding what I have just said about the peculiarity of the German national soul, I was repeatedly confronted with an experience that perhaps I was able to make more easily than some others, since I spent a large part of my life, almost three decades, in Austria. In later years, in close harmony with the dialect research of my very esteemed teacher and friend Schröer, I was able to see how the German national soul develops when it moves into other national soul areas, into the Czech national soul area, into eastern and western Hungary, where, under the beautiful name of Heanzen, Germans live as far as the Wiesenburg district. Then we come to the areas below the Carpathians, where the Germans of Spiš live; then we come to Transylvania, where the Transylvanian Saxons live; then to the Banat, where the Swabians live. All these peoples will gradually – no value judgments or criticism should be made about this – be completely absorbed by the Magyar element. One can study a remarkable peculiarity here. It may well be mentioned: how easily the German in particular loses his nationality, gradually sheds it when he moves in with other nationalities. This is connected with the peculiarity of the German national soul of which I have just spoken. It takes hold of the human being, I would say, in a lighter, more delicate way with the forces that lie in the individual development of the human being between the ages of twenty and forty-five. But by characterizing him as more emotionally unstable, she makes it possible for him to strip away his emotional ties more easily, to denationalize himself and nationalize himself into other nations. He is not so strongly, so intimately imbued with this German essence that comes from the folk soul.

Another fact is added to this. I can only hint at these things. If one were to study the details of what I have just said, for example on the basis of Schröer's explanations of grammar and his dictionaries of Austro-German dialects, one would truly be able to prove the sentence just uttered as one would any scientific sentence. Another peculiarity that follows from this fact of the German soul is that the German soul needs the emotional connection to what is native and similar, the coexistence with what is native and similar, in order to feel the freshness of this native and similar again and again. The German is not able to push his way into foreign folklore with strong inner strength that leaves him unchanged, as the Englishman does, for example. If he wants to experience his own folk-spirit inwardly and vividly, he needs to be in direct contact with the whole aura, with the whole atmosphere of the folk-spirit. That is why something develops within this aura, this atmosphere of the folk-spirit, that is so difficult to understand for those around it, that is so difficult to grasp for the more rigidly configured folk-spirits, which immediately want to force everything into their categories and thereby distort it; whereas in the unstable, in the light equilibrium in which everything hovers in the German national soul, everything wants to be directly experienced and lived in the living connection with the national soul element itself. This is beautifully illustrated in certain sayings of the truly genuine German spirit Herman Grimm, who has often been mentioned here. More than many others, he has realized – not in the distinctly spiritual scientific form that I am now expounding, but in an inner feeling – how the German soul needs this constant, ever-present fertilization of the mind, and how it can only flourish there. Here he expresses very beautifully how that which the German forms, what the German forms, can actually only be fully understood by this German soul itself, which can be characterized in the way just indicated, and how that which is to be grasped from this soul is distorted, caricatured, by foreign folklore, for the very reason indicated, because the reasons I have already indicated. Herman Grimm says very beautiful and wonderful words, which perhaps many non-Germans do not appreciate, but they are wonderful. They are not only beautiful but also wonderfully true:

“A German who writes the history of France, of Italy, of Russia, of Turkey: in this, no man finds anything incongruous, anything contradictory”; — Herman Grimm thinks, because this German soul becomes pliable and flexible through this expansion, this German soul knows how to find its way into these other national souls – “but a Russian, Turk, Frenchman, Italian, who wanted to write about German history! And if the book should impress a few innocent people because it was written in a foreign language, then all that is needed is a translation. A Russian has written about Mozart and, buoyed by the success of his work, also about Beethoven. “Is this Mozart, is this Beethoven?” asks Herman Grimm. — “Music seems not to have any fatherland. These two people” – Mozart and Beethoven – ‘are two composers, one of whom wrote Mozart's works’ – according to what the Russian says – ‘and the other Beethoven's, but they themselves’ – he means the people the Russian is describing – ‘have nothing in common with the book and its judgments.’

There is an indication of this immediate coexistence, of this immediate connection. And Herman Grimm says particularly beautifully in the continuation of the passage just quoted:

"Is this the Goethe about whom Lewes has written two volumes? I would have thought we knew him differently. The Goethe of Mr. Lewes is a worthy English gentleman who happened to be born in Frankfurt in 1749 and to whom Goethe's destiny has been attributed, insofar as it has been received from first, second, third, fifth hand, and who is also supposed to have written Goethe's works. The book is a diligent piece of work, but there is little in it about the German Goethe. The English are Teutons like us, but they are not Germans, and what Goethe was to us, we alone feel."

The aforementioned characteristic of the German national soul means that what provides an understanding of the German national soul must be sought in this easy surrender, which, however, does not necessarily have to be associated with a certain weakness, as one might so easily think. And precisely this could emerge from the words of unbiased observers of the German soul. There is, for example, an unbiased observer – I almost shrink from reading these words aloud because, as I said, it is uncomfortable for a German to hear such words spoken about the Germans. One poem is called “To Germany”. It may be said that this poem is imbued at once with the diversity, the delicate balance of the German national soul and the strength that flows from this very balance. And so the poet says:

No nation is greater than you;
Once when the whole earth was a place of terror,
Among the strong nations none was more just than you.
You have Frederick Redbeard, and also Frederick Schiller.
The Kaiser, the spirit fears this summit, this lightning.
Against Caesar you have Hermann, against Peter Martin
Your breath is music – [Luther.
You have more heroes than the peaks of Athos.
Your deeds of glory are everywhere, be proud, you Germans!

Well, it may be read aloud for this reason, since the poem is by Victor Hugo and was written in 1871! It is part of a poem that he titled “Choice between Two Nations.” The first part is “To Germany,” and I have just read it. The second part is “To France,” and it reads, “Oh, my mother!” I would like to say: It is emblematic of the difficulty one has in grasping what is rooted in one's own national soul.

I have tried to give you a hint of how the facts speak volumes for what I have stated. But naturally I can only point to individual facts in a very sketchy way, which indicate the direction in which the empirical facts can be sought.

Now we have this German national soul in its development. We encounter it already so wonderfully vividly and magnificently described by Tacitus in the first century AD, which for earlier centuries points to the Germanic national soul from which the German national soul has grown. We see it then in its development through the Middle Ages up to its newer blossoms, where it was immersed in the poetry of Goethe, Schiller, Herder, and immersed in the great musical development of the newer German spiritual life. But Christianity, a different communal soul essence, intervenes and permeates this folk soul essence. If we examine the course of events in detail, we can see how these great aspects that I have mentioned are confirmed in the individual expressions of the soul of the people. For example, we can ask: If the being that unconsciously works in man until sexual maturity is truly seized by such a communal consciousness as Christianity, what wants to be incorporated? We need only take words, foreign words that the German language has adopted through Christianity. Such foreign words have entered into the German being that refer to what must be grasped in sensory perception, albeit with a supersensible character, for which one already needs a deeper soul life that can imprint itself in the way I have characterized. For example, the word 'nature' entered the Germanic character of Central Europe through Christianity. Of course, the way it was understood at that time, the word 'nature' is beyond the grasp of anyone who takes it only in the sense in which we understand it today. But in the dialects it still lives in the old meaning. And there we see how this word “nature,” which penetrated Central Europe with Christianity, developed further with folklore. From this one word “nature” and from other words in older versions that have been adopted in this way, we can see how the forces that have been hinted at, which have entered into human individuality from Christianity, are effective in such words.

Let us take a time when the influence of another national soul on the German national soul was more effective, let us say the thirteenth century. Because the soul of the German people has been poured out throughout the entire period of the development of the human soul, from the age of twenty to thirty-five or thirty-six and even later, because it is spread throughout this entire period, it can also absorb influences from outside through all the qualities I have mentioned. We shall see in a moment how particularly shaped these influences are. We have seen here how Christianity has flowed into them. We could demonstrate these peculiar words in words, in word transformations, which flowed in as foreign words at the time when the French folk soul nature had attained a particular strength, as in the thirteenth century. Then quite different words come in, words that grasp the inner soul, words that are grasped only by the subconscious and undergo their development, foreign words, yes, today one no longer knows that they are foreign words; they will therefore escape the fate of being eradicated as foreign words. Words like “price” and “clear” come in in the thirteenth century. The word “klar” (clear) does not exist before the thirteenth century; “Preis” (price), “etwas preisen” (to praise something), “einen Preis haben” (to have a price) comes in at that time. These are words that are connected with the soul being. What we have recognized in the French folk soul being has an effect on the German folk soul being.

In this way, one could follow in many individual ways how the German soul-nature is developing through the influence of foreign soul-natures. But just as we have to look for the interaction of conditions in the individual, also in the sequence of time, as I indicated in the first part of my lecture, so, if the development of the German soul is to be fully understood, the work of this German soul must be understood. And I can characterize this for you briefly in the following way. As I said, we find the German national soul already in very ancient times. You know that I do not love vague, mystical, and especially not materialistic-mystical concepts, but in this case you will forgive me: This German national soul acts like a mighty alchemist, bringing about what has been taking place among Germans in the center of Europe from ancient times, going back to pre-Christian centuries. It is already at work in such a way that the earlier activity is connected with the later one, when there could not yet be any question of the configuration of the French, Spanish, Italian, as well as the British, being present in its present form. It continued to work through the centuries and continues to work today. As we have often said in these lectures, it carries the seeds of a long-lasting effect. Precisely when one recognizes it, one can see this. And it can work through such long periods of time, in so many transformations, precisely because it contains such widespread forces as those present in the human soul from the beginning of the 1920s to the 1940s. But, as we have seen, it has been at work since ancient times. But how did it work then? Now we see how this mighty alchemist, the German national soul, comes into play, bringing about the conditions described by Tacitus, and how later there came the time when that which had been wrought out of this national soul made an onslaught against the southern, western, Roman nature.

Now we see something highly peculiar. Certain parts that were originally connected with the German folk soul move into the Balkan Peninsula, move into Spain, into present-day France, move across as Anglo-Saxons to the present-day British Isles. That which was connected with the German folk soul through blood is given off to the surrounding area, to the periphery. And the surrounding peripheral cultures arise from the fact that other folk souls in turn act like the supersensible alchemists, that, for example, the Romance element is mixed together in an alchemical way, right down to the language, with that which is the old Gallic element, but into which has flowed what was connected with the Germanic blood of the German folk soul character, which has been drawn into the Franks in the Frankish Empire. This is what is present in France of the German folk soul itself, what lives in it, what is mixed with the other element through the alchemist of the French folk soul. The same happened with the Italian element, and the same with the British element. The Anglo-Saxon element, in a state that still testifies to a relatively early development, an earlier stage of development of the German folk soul, pushed into Celtic nature. It was met by a Romanesque nature. And so the alchemist of the British national soul had to do, as it were, what I have characterized as the interrelations of these individual Western national souls with the individual human beings, who have their soul-mood character from the individual national souls. So that if we look into the surrounding area, we find that it contains truly ancient Germanic soul elements. That is there. And what has emerged in the way I have described has come about precisely because — just as substances are obtained in chemistry through the interaction of other substances — folk soul elements have been mixed together in this way. But in the center of Europe, what has undergone a continuous development is what has always remained in line and current with this broad character that I have described.

That is the difference between the people of Central Europe and the surrounding nations. That is the difference that must be borne in mind if one wants to understand how this German national soul developed further. How closely it still felt connected to what was around it! How it has in a certain way brought back what had first flowed out of Central Europe! How Italian art flows back from Italianism, and one does not need to be a racial fanatic to describe this, how the spirit of Dante flows back into what is the nature of the German folk soul! How French essence flows back, how British essence flows back! It has flowed into our days in a way that I have often hinted at here. Thus we see that this peculiarity lies in the development of the German soul. It remains in Central Europe, it creates an environment for itself and interacts with this environment. Through this, I would like to say, it fertilizes that which, because of its extended character, is only visible in individual shades.

Thus it has come about that within this German national soul those motives that lie within the national soul character of the environment could be renewed and perfected. How we hardly see the environment that emerges in the German Siegfried. And how we see how that which has been brought into Germanism from the power of the folk soul, in a certain time, seizing everything as a folk soul, has found expression in the Siegfried saga. Then this soul recovers, makes an inhalation – in contrast to the exhalation in Siegfried – in order to make a new exhalation in the twelfth or thirteenth century, a new approach, and to bring forth from itself the character opposite to Siegfried, the Parzival character. And one need only compare these two characters, who really arose from the innermost being and weaving of the German folk soul, one need only compare these two polar opposites, Siegfried and Parzival, and one will see the breadth of the German folk soul and the possibilities for development that are expressed in the path that this development has taken, from Siegfried, whose already lost song was rediscovered and written down at the time when Wolfram von Eschenbach was writing his Parzival. Yes, the German national soul goes through what it can only go through over a long period of time because of its breadth. This is the significance of its development. This is what we can still recognize today as infinitely broad possibilities in the development of the German national soul, if we look at this German national soul in the right way. But what takes hold of it, takes hold of it with a certain strength because it takes hold of it comprehensively, because it takes hold of it with the harmony of all soul forces.

It would be easy to reproach me for presenting things here that only lie on the surface of life. That is not the case, and I do not want to do it. What I have expressed as the character of the German national soul comes to one, if not in the abstract way in which I had to express it today, then, I would like to say, as a truly intuitive recognition. Wherever the German soul lives, it lives there in some form or other, and everywhere the German soul relates to other souls in the way that had to be characterized today. In this way the German soul also relates to that which flows into it as Christianity, completely embracing this Christianity with the soul and giving birth to it anew from within. One does not remain merely on the surface, on the educated surface of the German national soul, when characterizing something like this, but one expresses what is the fundamental character of the entire German soul.

I could give many examples. I will mention just one, which shows how a Catholic priest's awareness of the German national soul is lived in his feelings and perceptions, as I have indicated today in terms of knowledge. In 1850, Xavier Schmid wrote in an unassuming booklet in which he advocated a shared, in-depth understanding of Christianity as felt by the Germans: “Just as Israel was chosen to bring forth the Christ in the flesh, so the German people are chosen to give birth to him spiritually. Just as the political liberation of that remarkable people was dependent on the inner one, so the greatness of the German people will essentially depend on whether it fulfills its spiritual mission.” How is the grasp of Christianity in the mind of this simply educated priest Xavier Schmid characterized! What I have characterized is already alive in the deepest popular mind, even if, of course, one would have to coin different words than I had to coin here today to show how what has been characterized today lives in the simplest popular mind.

And how the breadth of the German national character is connected with the spiritual, one can, if one has an eye for it, also study from the external aspects that present themselves in life. Just one more example. I have in front of me two essays, one by a German and the other by someone else. Jakob Grimm, who grasped with such deep love what lived in the German national character, had an inkling of the breadth and expanse that I have characterized today. Precisely because of his love for the German people, it was clear to Jakob Grimm that there must of course also be dark sides. That is why Jakob Grimm wrote an essay about German pedantry, in which he even goes so far as to say that the Germans invented pedantry if it had not already existed in the world. But that is also indicative of the breadth of the German character. Jakob Grimm's essay on German pedantry, especially in language, is very interesting. But it also shows that the German has this peculiarity of grasping everything from the breadth of his emotional life.

We hear words about German freedom from a German, from Professor Troeltsch. Of course I do not want to take his point of view, but I am characterizing the peculiarities of the German soul. With truly German thoroughness, but also with German acumen, he sets about showing how freedom is shaded according to the Italian, the English, and the French national character. He conscientiously accounts for how the idea of freedom is conceived among these nations. And then he attempts to characterize the concept of freedom that the German people have, a concept of freedom of which Herman Grimm himself also spoke, more beautifully than Troeltsch, but in almost similar words: “It was reserved for the German people to recognize as the character of the human being in the idea that freedom which unites the full development of human individuality and personality with harmonious cooperation in the totality.” When such people characterize freedom in such a way that man works in freedom, it is always meant that what can flow from his soul as freedom is integrated into spiritual life. And especially before the middle of the last century, no German could have spoken of freedom without characterizing this freedom from the depths of spiritual life. It was only after the English influences in the second half of the nineteenth century that Germans also more or less abandoned this. But little by little they are coming back to it. And the essay continues: “If one wants to formulate a formula for German unity, one could say: organized national unity based on a dutiful and at the same time critical devotion of the individual to the whole, supplemented and corrected by the independence and individuality of free spiritual education.” — At least one idea of freedom, albeit perhaps one that could be called pedantic, but one shaped out of the abundance of spiritual understanding, an answer from the spirit to the question: What is freedom?

I will read to you an answer to the question, “What is freedom?” from the other book. For when considering the soul of a nation, it is not merely a matter of looking at the content. Someone may say, “Yes, the one from whom I am now reading sees something quite different from the other.” But that is not the point when considering the souls of nations. The souls of the people are unconsciously driven into the current in which they drift. And the fact that one person has this effect, the other that, one these ideas, the other those ideas, one these images, the other those images, even if they are both correct, is not the point when one wants to characterize the souls of the people in this unconscious work.

“What is freedom?” says the other. “The image that comes to my mind is a large, powerful machine. If I put the parts together so awkwardly and clumsily that when one part wants to move, it is hindered by the others, then the whole machine bends and comes to a standstill. The freedom of the individual parts” - note: the freedom of the parts of the machine! - ‘would consist in the best adaptation and composition of all.’ - To characterize human freedom, he says all this! ‘If the large piston of a machine is to run perfectly freely, it must be precisely adapted to the other parts of the machine. Then it is free...’ -— So, to know how man becomes free, one examines the machine! “... then it is free, not because it is isolated and left to its own devices, but because it has been carefully and skillfully integrated into the rest of the large structure. What is freedom? We say that a locomotive runs freely. What do we mean by that? We mean that the individual components are put together and fitted into each other in such a way that friction is kept to a minimum. We say of a ship that she cuts easily through the waves: how freely she sails, and mean by it that she is perfectly adapted to the strength of the wind. Set her against the wind, and she will hold and sway, all the planks and the whole hull will tremble, and immediately she is moored.” Now he shows that this applies to human nature as well as to machines, to the steamboat and so on: “It is only released when it is allowed to fall away again and the wise adaptation to the forces it must obey is restored.”

One can say that in such things one can see how the soul of a nation enters into human individuality, sometimes in the way I read it to you in the case of the German, and sometimes in the way I read it to you in the case of a very important American, Woodrow Wilson. He is most certainly a very important American. The point is to see how the human being is seized by the folk soul. One can clearly notice the difference when one goes down to the depths of the human being, where the folk soul unconsciously influences the individual human being, as I have characterized it.

I would have to say much more if I wanted to give a complete characterization of the development of the German soul in the directions indicated. But I think that at least the main points of view have been outlined, and they do testify that there is something in this German national soul nature that is predisposed by its very nature to have an effect on others. It has had an effect. We have seen how what remained in the center, what was concentrated there, was released into the periphery through blood. It continually released, I would say continually exhaled and inhaled again, what relationships are with the other national souls in the surrounding area.

In the direction I have indicated lies a science that will one day, when it exists, make understandable what exists between nations. Only then will there be a great possibility that nations will consciously understand each other fully. We see at the same time how great the distance is between what one can imagine as an ideal of understanding between nations and what one encounters in our difficult times. I did not want to weigh or evaluate. But in the end, things evaluate themselves in a certain way.

I don't know – I say this, of course, only in a very modest way – whether similar considerations are being made in Europe's periphery that strive for objectivity in the same way as we have done here today, regarding the relationship between the Italian national soul and the German national soul, the French national soul, the British national soul and the German national soul. But perhaps this is also a peculiar characteristic of the German national soul. In any case, it is already in the German national soul that, as it seems to me, the German can understand the others better than they understand him, even if they do not have to understand him as badly as they do now in our fateful times.

Does it not seem almost like a realization of what we are living in when we measure such a consideration of the national soul against all that is said today about the nature of Germanness? It is indeed our time that these things are put together. As you have seen in Victor Hugo, there were times when Germanic character could be regarded in a way that was in line with today's developments, even if not in these terms. Yes, such sentiments have been felt time and again. And there were quite a few until recently and there are certainly still some now – quite a few until recently, who also made themselves heard, pointing out how wrong it is to treat German civilization as it has been treated, for example, by the British. I can refer to words that were printed on August 2, 1914. The words were printed: “England's war against Germany in Serbia and Russia's interest is a sin against civilization.” On August 2, 1914, these words appeared in the “Times” in London, signed by C. G. Brown, Cambridge University; Burkitt, Cambridge University; Carpenter, Oxford University; Ramsay, formerly of Aberdeen University; Selbie, Oxford University; J. J. Thomson, Cambridge University. And added to these words are: We cannot know, but it may turn out – or something like that – that our country could be involved in this war through all kinds of agreements. We hope not, but if it happened, we would have to – out of a sense of patriotism, of course – well, there is something like: – keep our mouths shut. – Well, these things are not only in England, of course. But we do not want to hope – the Englishmen in question continued – that this could happen to a people that is so close to us and has so much in common with us.

There was felt what must not be expressed later. Well, of course, many things must not be expressed in our country either, that goes without saying. And from this side, the gentlemen whose names have been read out cannot be particularly reproached. But perhaps it is less important what may or may not be expressed and more important what is expressed when certain others cannot speak. And here I would like to say: I cannot believe that a weekly paper within the German national territory could be found that would write similar words about another nation in these difficult times, would have them printed, as was written on July 10, 1915 in an English weekly paper, in “John Bull,” one of the most widely read weekly papers in England, - written where others must remain silent. Don't say: John Bull is just a scurrilous paper! I say: I cannot believe that it is possible that in the most, most scurrilous paper, a similar way could be written about another nation, as it is written to characterize the German character. I will read just a few sentences: “The German is the stain of Europe, and the task of the present war is to wipe him off the face of the earth.... As he was in the beginning, so he is now and so he will remain forever – bad, brutal, bloodthirsty, cruel, mean and calculating. He is a voluptuary, is sleazy, shifty, thick-skinned. He slurs his speech in guttural sounds. He is a drunkard, miser, rapacious and fawning. That is the beast we must fight... He lives in apartments that, in terms of hygiene, are on par with a pigsty.” And now the weekly paper rises to a kind of, I would say, prayer from this mood: “Look at history wherever and however you want, you will always find the German as a beast!... God will never give you, English people, this opportunity again. Your mission is to rid Europe of this unclean animal, this beast. As long as this beast is not destroyed, the progress of humanity will be delayed. England is slowly but surely approaching the final milestone of her destiny, and when we have passed it, and the hour comes when we want to enter the gate of heaven, the Huns must not be the reason that we are sent back. But the gates of heaven would be slammed in our faces, because the heavenly realms are only for those who have destroyed the devil. The Germans are the plague-boils of human society. And these times of war are the X-rays that reveal their true character. This plague-boil must be cut out, and the British bayonet is the instrument for this operation, which must be performed on the beast when our poisonous gases have chloroformed it.

I do not know whether it would really be possible, within the bounds of what the German national soul encompasses, to find similar words in a similar direction. I think that it is precisely what can be recognized as the character of the German national soul that will prevent the Germans from doing so.

But in conclusion, I would like to say a few words: Long may the Germans preserve their spiritual character, falling into such grotesque madness. It is madness, but there is method to this madness. For it is he who develops, while the others mentioned must remain silent. These here characterize what they actually have to do against the Germans, what they are fighting for, not only in the field where the fight is with external weapons, but also in the spiritual field. We look at this. We consider it madness, albeit methodical. But the others call it: “The battle of civilization against barbarism!” - “The battle of the spirit against matter!” - I don't need to say anything more about that and I can leave it to your own thoughts as to what you want to think about it.

The day after tomorrow I will talk about the human soul and its stages of development through birth and death and its connection with the universe.

The theosophical worldview is not just intended to satisfy theoretical needs, but what is called the theosophical worldview is conceived as something comprehensive and universal. Even though the Theosophical movement has gained few followers in the last 30 years, it may be said that there is a growing understanding that it is supposed to provide something that sheds light on all branches of spiritual life.

Today, an attempt will be made to show how the personality of Richard Wagner can be understood in a special way from the point of view of the Theosophical worldview.

Today, mysticism is usually understood by people as something that cannot be connected to a clear concept. It has been completely forgotten today that there was a time - the first centuries of the Christian era - when mysticism was called mathesis, because mysticism is said to be the clearest, most vivid, brightest form of knowledge and can only be compared to the clearest, most vivid form, mathematics.

Mysticism is to the supersensible world what mathematics is to the physical world. If one speaks of the way in which one can arrive at the study of the supersensible, one calls it mysticism; if one means more the study without the methods, one calls it theosophy. Theosophy is not meant to be the study of a divine or the study of a god. For the theosophist, the Divine is the all-embracing, underlying principle of the most insignificant and the most comprehensive phenomena in the world. If a person is still at an undeveloped stage, he will recognize only a little of the world; if he is more developed, he will recognize more. However, theosophy will never presume to say that man can recognize the nature of God. We can never speak of a complete knowledge of God; we must be clear that we live, weave and are in God. Knowledge is in the divine, but the divine can never be encompassed by knowledge.

In a Berlin lecture in 1811, Johann Gottlieb Fichte characterized what underlies philosophical endeavor as an attitude, as a view. He said to his audience: “In these lectures I have something very special to tell you, nothing about what the five senses say, what the mind combines. The supersensible objects go beyond sensory perception. A new sense is necessary for this. What matters is that one has the faith that one can gain knowledge of the supersensible world. If someone does not know this spiritual world, then he is like a blind man who can see nothing of color and light. Not in the sense that theosophy and mysticism speak of the supernatural as something outside our world, but in the sense that the blind man who is operated on sees the colors and the world of light, in the sense that man awakens the powers and abilities that are in his soul and lie dormant. It is possible to awaken what are called the spiritual eyes and spiritual ears. He is not immodest who says that one can know something, but he who claims that one cannot know anything. It is for the seeing person, not the blind, to decide about colors. It is for the spiritually seeing person to decide about the supersensible world.

There have always been people who were spiritually enlightened. They are called the initiated or the initiated. They were the missionaries for the world. All religions are based on the teachings of those who have looked into the spiritual worlds. The act of looking into the spiritual worlds is called mysticism or theosophy. There are ways to work out of the spiritual worlds without looking into them with one's own insight. Those who have looked into them without being able to describe the character of the same were the great artists. The great artists, such as Dante, Goethe and Richard Wagner, drew from the spiritual world.

It is not to be said that the ideas that Richard Wagner has drawn from the spiritual worlds would have been understood by him. This is not an objection to the truth of the matter. The plant is also unaware of the ideas that the botanist draws from it or that the poet has in mind. It is unaware of the ideas of the botanist and the poet, but it grows according to what the botanist subsequently thinks about it, it realizes these laws. Just as little as the plant, the poet needs to understand what he carries within him, which then makes him understandable. Just as it would be absurd to believe that a plant knows the laws by which it grows, it would be equally absurd to believe that Richard Wagner knew anything of what can be understood from him.

Richard Wagner was not just a poet and musician; he was the bearer of a new culture. He once said: All truly symphonic instrumental music is capable of making the laws and their interrelationships appear – sometimes the mind can be caught and cornered by the secrets that art reveals to us. – The musical instruments are the organs of nature itself. The artist does not merely depict reality, but truth.

At various times in his life, Richard Wagner searched very earnestly for a solution to the world's greatest problems. He wrote on his house:

This house shall be called Wahnfried,
because here my delusion found peace.

He really was a seeker. He sought throughout his entire life. In the mid-1840s, we find in Richard Wagner a purely Christian spirit, the kind of Christian worldview that has been propagated through the centuries. Then, in the 1840s, something took hold of him – it lasted until the 1850s – like a kind of atheism or materialism. During that period, strong, bold minds had come to realize that the same laws prevail up there in the world as in inorganic nature. This was a world view that the boldest minds of the time had developed. Richard Wagner was also more or less seized by it. But for him, material reality nevertheless took on an ethical or moral character. The true materialist believed that the world of the senses was the be-all and end-all. For Wagner, this belief was associated with a deep morality, like a great vision of the meaning of life. He said: “Man can only become selfless and loving when he says to himself, ‘It will all end with this existence’ — when he is capable of merging into the universe, of comprehending everything for the world, nothing for himself.” So he also wanted to ethically and morally transfigure materialism. But he soon came to a different view through Schopenhauer. Schopenhauer gave him something that was deeply satisfying to him as an artist and as a musician.

Schopenhauer stated that all other arts face the essence of the world much more alien than music. He gives music a very special position among the arts in general. Schopenhauer has basically taken the one guiding principle of his world view:

Life is an unfortunate thing, and I try to make it bearable by thinking about it.

Underlying everything is an unconscious, blind will. It forms the stone and then from the stone the plant and so ever higher forms, because it is always unsatisfied. In human life itself there are great differences. The “savage” living in dull consciousness feels the unsatisfaction of the will much less than the higher-standing man, who can feel the pain of existence much more clearly. Then Schopenhauer says: There is a second thing that man knows besides the will, and that is the idea. It is as if the waves of the sea ripple and reflect the forms of the will, the dark urge. In man, the will rises to the illusory image of the mirage. In it, man creates an image of what is outside of him. The idea is an illusion. Man suffers not only from the unsatisfied will, but also from the fact that he knows how to awaken the idea from the will. But there is a means by which man can come to a kind of release from the blind urge of the will. One means to this end is art. Through art, man is able to transport himself beyond what would otherwise arise from the will as dissatisfaction. When man creates a work of art, he creates out of imagination. While other imaginations are mere images, he looks at art as something different. The genuine artist does not create a copy of nature. When he creates works such as, for example, a Zeus, he has combined many impressions, retained all the merits in his memory and left out all the defects. From many people, he has formed an archetype that is not realized anywhere in nature, but is nevertheless distributed among many individual personalities.

According to Schopenhauer, a kind of essence confronts us in artistic works. By going to the depths of creative nature, as it were, man creates something that is reality. While other arts have to pass through the imagination, thus giving images of the will, for Schopenhauer, sound is an expression of the will itself. He hears the will of nature and reproduces it in tones.

Goethe sees intentions everywhere in nature. This is not a cliché, but rather the fact that Goethe was aware that nature only partially achieves its purpose in every being. There is much more to every being than it expresses. What does not come to light in it is released by the artist from nature; he creates something that goes beyond nature. When man, in creating after nature, creates a higher thing, he goes beyond nature. Goethe sees man as the highest link in the chain of development of beings.

When the healthy nature of man works as a whole, when he feels himself in the world as a great, beautiful, dignified and worthy whole, when the harmonious comfort gives him a pure, free delight: then the universe, if it could feel itself, would exult as it reached its goal and admire the summit of its own being and becoming. (On Winkelmann)

That which is elevated from nature to a work of art by man is such that in the work of art the divine foundation of nature shines towards man. The artist creates and the artistic is enjoyed by those who enjoy it in the Platonic ideas. The artists seek the common archetype of things. They create something higher than imagination, but live and work in the element of imagination. For Schopenhauer, music is something that sounds out of the essence of the world. The person who is artistically active in sound is, as it were, as if he were at the heart of nature with his ear; he perceives the will of nature and reproduces it in sounds. Thus, says Schopenhauer, man has an intimate relationship with the world, for he penetrates into the innermost essence of things. He had assigned music the role of directly representing the essence of the cosmos out of a kind of instinctive insight. He had a kind of instinctive idea of the real facts.

Schopenhauer's view was heartening for Richard Wagner. From this point of view he sought to establish his place in the world as a musician and as a poet. For him, music became a direct expression of the essence of the world.

Richard Wagner looked back to ancient Greece and said: In ancient Greek culture there was also an art. This art was not only music, not only poetry. In this primal art in Greece there was an interaction of dance, poetry and music. —- The movements in dance, those gestures in ancient dance, become for Wagner the expression of what can take place in the human soul. He imagined that the most intimate relationships between lovers, the most noble relationships, were expressed in gestures and movements. For Wagner, dance was originally a sensual reflection of the deepest experiences of love in the soul. What the poet spoke was only another expression of what is going on in the soul. The word is the other means of expression that must be added to the dance. The third means of expression is music. Richard Wagner looked at an original art that was neither music nor poetry nor dance in itself. He said to himself that originally all of humanity was more selfless; it was much more imbued with a sense of being absorbed in one another. Just as a finger, if it had consciousness, would have to feel itself as a limb of an organism, so the Greek citizen was a member of the whole state. Over the centuries, only egoism has emerged, that necessary egoism that has brought about independence. Its idea was that the future would necessarily bring about a reversal from egoism to love.

All people and all human achievements have also passed through the path of egoism. The arts used to belong together and only then separated. They must first come together again to form a whole.

Wagner saw Shakespeare as a role model as a poet and Beethoven as a musician. These were artists of whom he said: If you want to achieve something as an artist, you have to learn from them a musical and poetic creation. He saw in the earlier compositions that the libretto came between the feeling and the music; he wanted to change that. It was clear to him that music is connected to the human being. As an artist, he built on Shakespeare on the one hand and Beethoven on the other.

To understand this, we need to know what the mystical element is in the human being. He is a mystic who is able to see the spiritual in all the world, in all movement. It is possible for the human being to look at the whole cosmos in the same way as one looks at a single person, for example. Everything about a person becomes an expression of the soul within. Behind the veil of the physiognomy, one can see into every person. When the mystic looks at the plant and mineral world, he recognizes in every plant and every stone the expression of the common spirit of nature, one spirit in all entities. Some plants appear to him as the laughing expression of the rejoicing spirit of the earth, others as the tears that express the sorrow of the spirit of the earth. He really does see something moral in what the earth produces, the expression of a spiritual essence. Anyone who is able to live in the right way in the whole world, who feels that what is expressed in the world stands before man as uniformly as mathematics stand before him. The earth spirit of Faust was also a reality for Goethe. When we read the words:

Eminent spirit, thou gavest me, gave me all,
What I requested. Thou didst not in vain
Turn thy face to me in the fire.
Gavest me the glorious nature for a kingdom,
Strength to feel it, to enjoy it. Not
Coldly marveling visit thou only permit,
granting me to look into her deep breast,
as into the bosom of a friend.
You lead the line of the living
past me and teach me my brothers
in the silent bush, in air and water.
And when the storm roars and creaks in the forest,
the giant spruce toppling, crushing neighboring branches
And neighboring trunks squashing down,
And the hill muffled hollow thunders,
Then you lead me to the safe cave, show
Then myself, and my own chest
Secret deep wonders open up.

When we read these words of Goethe, we see how he realizes how man recognizes the divine-spiritual in nature and feels that it rises in his own heart.

In true mysticism, one is led to a real insight. When a person practices meditation and concentration, the time comes when he gains insight into the world of light and color in the astral realm. This world appears as if the colors were floating freely in space and became the expression of spiritual beings. Everything there is permeable, but we have light and we have colors, which are the expression of spiritual beings. The third world is the actual spiritual home of man. This is a world of spiritual sound, into which one soaks in such a way that everything around us appears as a world of flowing sounds.

We can distinguish three states of mind in today's man: first, everyday consciousness, waking consciousness; secondly, unconscious life in sleep; thirdly, in between, dream consciousness.

For the mystic, the awakened one, the soul is not merely there at night, but it is also aware then. It can then perceive a world of flowing tones at night. When he has reached this stage, he must make the transition from sleep consciousness to waking consciousness in such a way that he can also perceive the spiritual world in the waking state. When the practical mystic walks through streets and alleys, he sees not only the physical but also the spiritual everywhere. It is the world of Devachan in which the human being lives and moves during the entire state of sleep. There the soul lives in its true home, in a world of sound, in the world of the harmony of the spheres, the world that resounds and sings through him. For the mystically awakened, a sound becomes audible from the soul of all beings. Theosophy does not regard what the Pythagorean view of the world calls the harmony of the spheres as a dreamt-up construct, but as reality. When we hear music in the physical world of sounds, we are only hearing a shadow image of the spiritual world. The aesthetically appreciative person feels that music is akin to the home of the soul.

Richard Wagner said: If we want to express the soul of man, we can grasp a threefold way of expressing our inner being: in movement, in word and in music. Music is connected to the innermost core of the soul. Until now, music has only expressed the inner being of man, that which is hidden within him. But it is the greatest thing that this is transformed into action.

The symphony describes what a person can experience within themselves. But where the soul's experiences lead to action, where feelings lead to action, music has not been an appropriate expression of the soul. Only once has a symphony – Beethoven's Ninth – been able to express what lives within. There the composer gives in to the power that expresses the inner life in words. There the inner life pushes to become at least words, as an expression of the bubbling up of the inner life.

Shakespeare presents what a person can do when the soul itself has already come to terms with its inner being. The spoken drama has presented the external action, but has kept silent about what lives in the soul. Music has been the portrayal of what remains of the human being within the soul. Richard Wagner said: “Music must not merely compose the poetry, but must stand directly opposite the human being itself.” What overflows into action, he writes in words; what lives in the soul as the reason for action, that is expressed by music.

The mystic knows that man does not live here on earth merely as an individual personality, that the individual human being cannot be there without the other people either. The bond that connects them is spiritual. Those who look into the spiritual worlds can see how individual peoples are members of a whole natural organism. Just as a finger that has been cut off from a hand withers, so too is the individual human being, detached from the earthly organism, something that withers like a finger when separated from the organism.

The idea that one person can redeem another makes no sense if we do not take the mystical ideal into account; for example, we recognize a knowledge of this connection in Hartmann von der Aue's “Poor Henry”. Just as we can fill up the emptiness in a glass by pouring something into it from another vessel, just as we can let warmth flow over, so there is something in humanity that can be transferred from one person to another. All ideas of redemption are based on profound mysticism. Richard Wagner felt the spiritual in man, the ascent beyond man to the superman. In the superhuman figure, he shows how there is a connection within the whole human organism. Thus he brings redemption problems, for example, in the “Flying Dutchman”, where the Dutchman is redeemed by a sacrificing female being. - Tannhäuser is redeemed by Elisabeth.

In this way he weaves the fate of one human being into the fate of another. He shows this most magnificently in the 'Nibelungenring' and in 'Parsifal'. In the Nibelungenring we see how he presents the entire working of the world, how he points to an ancient human past, a humanity that has always been there. In the distant past, there was an ancient clairvoyance at the basis of all human development. Myths and legends arose out of ancient clairvoyance. There was once a clairvoyant consciousness that humanity will regain at a higher level. From the clairvoyant somnambulistic consciousness, humanity passes to the ordinary consciousness and then again to a consciousness where the human being still has the clairvoyant consciousness in addition to the ordinary consciousness. The whole transition from an originally less self-contained personality, which was still clairvoyant, to a sensual view, that is what the conquest of gold means: the conquest of sensual perception and human power. Love turns into selfishness; later it turns back into love. Those who want to bring out the ego must renounce love, and for that they acquire the gold. In his Ring of the Nibelung, Richard Wagner describes how the self develops, the selfish self, and how it emerges from the original state of clear-sightedness to become a loveless human being. As Alberich emerges, we feel the self arise. Richard Wagner wanted to depict the loveless ego in the pedal point in E-flat major in Das Rheingold, and in the subsequent chord we hear the wonderful way it comes to life.

We see how the gods emerge from a primordial consciousness, how it arises like a warning voice. It stands before Wotan in Erda. It stands there for humanity. Wotan calls upon her; he says:

You know
What the depths conceal,
What weaves through mountain and valley,
Air and water. Where there are beings
Your breath blows:
Where minds reflect
Your mind clings:
Everything, they say,
Is known to you.

Then Erda says:

My sleep is dreaming,
my dreaming is musing,
my musing is the rule of knowledge!

Brünhilde brings redemption through sacrifice. The idea of sacrifice, the idea of redemption carried out, is the most magnificent in Parsifal. It was on Good Friday 1857 in the Villa Wesendonck on Lake Zurich that Wagner looked out at the budding, burgeoning, blossoming nature. And in that moment, the connection between the burgeoning nature and the death of Christ on the cross became clear to him. This connection is the secret of the Holy Grail. From that moment on, the thought that he had to send the secret of the Holy Grail out into the world in musical form continued to permeate Richard Wagner's soul.

To understand these thoughts of Richard Wagner, we have to go back several hundred years in the development of mankind. At that time, there were also initiation sites in Europe. Through the wisdom that was imparted to man in the mysteries, he was brought into conscious contact with the gods. Such a person is called an initiate. Only the forms of such teachings change at different times. In the medieval mysteries of Europe, the secret that Richard Wagner sensed was brought to its highest development, namely, how nature's springtime blossoming is connected to the mystery of the cross. This was taught in a special way in the initiation schools of the Middle Ages, which are called Rosicrucian. We can best present this in the form of a conversation. Let us imagine the teacher saying something like the following to the student: Look at the plant, how it is rooted in the earth and holds its leaves and flowers towards the sun. In divine innocence and chastity, it holds its fruit organs towards the sun. And now look at people. Man is the reverse of the plant. He turns his head toward the sun, which corresponds to the root of the plant, and he turns the organs that the plant holds chastely toward the sun toward the earth. Through the soul of the disciple there had to pass the feeling of divine chastity as it is expressed in the plant. He was shown a future for humanity in which man, too, will become desireless and chaste. Then a spiritual chalice will open from above and look down upon man. And as now the sunbeam descends to the plant, so will man's purified power unite with the Divine Chalice. This inverted chalice, as it was presented to the disciple as a fact in the Mysteries, is the real ideal of the Holy Grail. The sunbeam is the holy lance of love.

How a person lives, whether they are satisfied or dissatisfied, depends on the degree of understanding they have of their own nature. When looking up at the starry sky, the medieval person felt comfort and hope, full of admiration for its size and beauty, because the medieval person felt part of the universe, part of the spirit that permeates the world. He recognized his origin and his goal, which would lead him back into the bosom of the Godhead.

Compared to the mighty structure of the world, the infinity of the universe, today's man feels so small, so tiny, that he thinks he must scatter like a speck of dust. Man is certainly tiny compared to the universe, and yet one thing is greater than all creation: the soul, the spiritual part in man. The highest divine reality, to which his journey leads him back, lives within himself. This knowledge, this belief was not taken from people in the Middle Ages.

This has now changed significantly in our time. Popular writings never tire of emphasizing the smallness of man. Just as the earth appears in space only like a grain of sand, so man on earth is only a grain of sand that passes away. Thus, the present time emphasizes man's smallness, the Middle Ages his greatness. It is difficult for today's man to find his way between these considerations of the smallness and the greatness of man. Schiller, who had more of a theosophical way of thinking than most people suspect, says:

You astronomers, do not talk about nebulae and
suns, the Sublime does not dwell in space.

Theosophy brings new light into this confusion; it opens up depths for us that provide new insights into the nature of man. The theosophical world view is not reactionary; it knows and recognizes that the material world view was necessary because it led to the knowledge of the external world. But the consequence of this was that the deeper knowledge about man was neglected. The material view has conquered the globe. Now it is time to gain a deeper understanding of the soul and spirit, and the teachings of Theosophy can provide us with this.

How can the nature of man be fathomed? Today's science seeks to understand man, like everything else, through dissection. It uses the external senses to gain insight into the nature of man. The value of the science thus acquired is by no means to be belittled, but there is another way of research.

In old mystical writings (this word has an unpleasant ring for many, of course), you will find descriptions of the inner being, of the human spirit. They say that man has inner organs with which he can pursue a completely different kind of research than the one carried out with the outer senses. The result of these investigations with the inner, finer senses is now not at all fundamentally different from the materialistic investigation; it only provides further, deeper insights than the external method of investigation.

This spiritual wisdom now has different names. The name “Theosophy” is only one among many. Paul was the first to use it. This wisdom is ancient, it is nothing new; it is only being brought to people today in a way it has never been before. Higher or deeper knowledge used to be the property of secret schools. The word should not be misunderstood. The teachings are secrets only in the sense that mathematics is a secret for a simple farmer, for example. It remains a secret to him until he has learned it. Anyone who is willing to learn it can. Over the millennia, many have learned the wisdom. In the past, greater demands were placed on the student. Today, schools mainly teach intellectually and train the minds of students. In the wisdom schools, the aim is to develop the whole person with all their powers of mind and soul. And before the student was introduced to the deeper teachings of wisdom, he had to pass certain tests.

Some who read about the secret Pythagorean school may find it quite simple. Only those who put themselves in the same state of mind as the people were in at the time will recognize its true meaning. They will recognize its value.

We can understand this by considering a work of art. Two people stand before a painting by Raphael. One sees only the colors on the canvas and passes by the work of art quite untouched. The other, an art connoisseur with understanding, is opened to the wonders of the soul and spiritual worlds, which left the other quite untouched. This different perception of the work of art depends on the different development of the inner powers. In the one, only the intellect had been developed; in the other, soul and spirit had undergone a development that created the right mood to understand and enjoy the work of art.

Anyone who wants to live a life in the spirit must be clearly aware of one thing: that thoughts and feelings are real things. It is not the person who grasps the books who reads them with the intellect alone, but the person who grasps them with the spirit. Just as a brick falling from a roof kills a person just as surely as if it were a fact of nature, so does a feeling of hatred wound the soul of the one at whom it is directed. The soul is wounded by hatred just as surely as the body is wounded by the brick. The teaching of the invisible can only be grasped by the one who always realizes that the invisible is much more real than the visible.

It is also worthless to read only in books; it is life that matters, life in the spirit. The whole person must immerse themselves in the teachings, not just their minds. This must be said in advance to enable the understanding of what is to be said. It is not enough to say yes to the theosophical teachings; the person must transform themselves if they want to come to knowledge.

It is clear that man is part of the external world. Born of women, he appears on earth; the external sciences, chemistry, anatomy and so on show that the same forces, the same substances, make up the human body as they do in the rest of the world. Man is, therefore, first of all, a physical being. That much external science teaches us. Beyond that, it can investigate nothing; only that which dies can be investigated by it; theosophy gives us information about that which is immortal. That is a simple thought. Just as the human being, the external man, is grasped by looking with the external senses, so the spiritual man can be grasped by the inner senses.

What is meant by this is not difficult to understand. Look at my hands. It is conceivable that a skilled artist could create an exact replica of such a hand so that it could not be distinguished from mine; on the outside, let us assume, there would be no difference; and yet there is a word that shows the enormous difference between the artificial and the natural hand. The artificial hand remains as it is, unchanged; it can stand alone. But if you cut off the natural hand, it withers or decays. The one word is life. Science does not teach us this.

My whole body is flooded with life. Man has not only the physical body, but also, secondly, an etheric body – I ask the scholars not to take offense at this expression. Every living being has an etheric body that makes the being live. It is not perceptible to the external senses. But there is a way to see it, just as we see the physical body. There is a method that allows us to see life, not just see colors and hear sounds.

A doctor, with whom I discussed this matter, said: “It is quite natural that the hand withers when it is cut off; the blood no longer flows through it.” Quite right, but what does it need the blood for? What does it need the invisible for? To be what it is!

With death, the physical body decays and the etheric body dissipates; it returns its components to the life-giving ether that permeates the world.

We now come to the third aspect of human nature. Imagine a person standing before you; you can see and touch them. You recognize their weight and observe their life. But only the material can be felt by the hand. But there is still something else living in him: pleasure and pain, passions and desires, instincts and inclinations, which no hand can touch, no sensual eye can see. But all this is a reality for man, even if it cannot be perceived by any physical eye or other sense. The part of man that includes the instincts, desires, passions, and so on, is called the third, the astral body.

Those who have developed spiritual eyes, who have become able to see, can also perceive this body. It is also called an aura. This astral body is something that humans have in common with all animals. But beyond that, something that no animal can achieve, humans possess something that makes them human in the first place. The word “I” expresses this. In this word lies a very powerful difference from all other names. “I”, a powerful, great word. Anyone can say table, chair, dog, lion, but only you can say “I” about yourself. No other person can say “I” to you; only you can say it about yourself. I am me, everyone else is “you.” You have to delve into this thought to understand it.

All religions are based on wisdom; even Judaism; the Jews knew and recognized the God, the ego within man, the hidden God, whose name was unutterable for the people. Only the high priest was allowed to pronounce it once a year before the people: Jeoah — only a breath sounded from his mouth, and then the divine spark flashed through the hearts of the community in undulating motion. And this I is the fourth link in the human being.

Everything a person does and pursues contributes to the development of this I. In primeval times, man could not yet say “I”. He was still half animal. Instincts, desires and drives are the driving forces in the development of the animal, but through the I these instincts are ennobled; the I works into the astral body. In this way, man changes and ennobles his animal instincts. Anger and rage are transformed into calm reflection; hatred and feelings of revenge are transformed into love, as the I works into the soul. The wild is civilized, instincts become ideals, urges become duties, selfishness becomes sacrifice. This transformation of the astral body produces the growth of the “Manas”. What man has thus created for himself is permanent. This is the point where immortality begins. Every cause we build into the Manas remains, and the effects appear in the next re-embodiments.

Small children usually resemble their parents at first, and naturalists ascribe all their characteristics to their parentage. To a certain extent, they may be right. Raphael also appeared as the child of his parents, and many of his characteristics and his appearance can be explained by the nature of his ancestors. But what about when something suddenly comes to life in him, his genius, which he has inherited from neither his father nor his mother? Then one says to oneself: This must either have no cause at all or a cause other than descent. Often one also sees a great diversity among the children of a family. Where does that come from? This diversity has its basis in the fact that the individual has laid the foundation for it in previous lives. I do not owe my nature only to the similarity to my parents. Perhaps thousands of years ago I myself laid the foundation for it. The differences in human nature can thus be explained by reincarnation, by repeated lives on earth, in which each life brings to the fore what the person has laid the foundation for in previous embodiments.

What was it that made the ancient Egyptian slaves do their hard work, their forced labor, with devotion, even with joy in some cases? It was the fact that he knew that in the next incarnation the tables would turn, that the quietly obedient servant would then perhaps rule and the cruel oppressor would be enslaved; for that is how the law of retribution, karma, works. The man of the West has no idea what a feeling of bliss arises from this [law], how it produces cheerful serenity. “God is not mocked; what a man sows, that shall he also reap.” (Gal. vi. 7.) Reincarnation and Karma are the great facts which enable and impel man to work at improving his astral body.

When he has done so to a certain extent, he has undergone a catharsis. In the secret schools he is then taught how to develop not only his astral body but also his etheric body. When he has succeeded in doing this, when the etheric body is completely transformed and better, more fully formed, he no longer dissolves. He becomes immortal. This is the resurrection to life, that is, awakening Christ in us.

When a person returns, he brings with him, in addition to the astral body and the etheric body, the sixth part of the human being, the Budhi.

What lies beyond that or even deeper hidden within him is, seventhly, the Atma. It is difficult to say anything about this in a few words.

Once these higher basic parts have been developed, it is possible to become master of the whole body.

Only now, after we have become acquainted with the basic parts or bodies of the human being, can we become clear about the origin.

Natural science cannot provide any information about the origin of the human being. It is only concerned with the forms of manifestation that can be perceived by the senses. The origin of the human being can only be perceived by occult, supersensible means, through the organs of the finer bodies.

What do these reveal to us? If we look back a million years, what do we see? Something completely different from what we see now. Where Germany is now, there was a tropical climate back then; giant animals, giraffes, elephants roamed the swamps. There are hardly any traces left of this time; but theosophical wisdom can trace them back further and further through the changes brought about by the Ice Age, back to ever simpler and simpler conditions. Man, who lived thousands of centuries ago, looked quite different than he does now. There are hardly any remains from that time. The forehead was receding far, the forebrain was actually missing. He had no intelligence, no mind.

Materialistic science says that man has evolved. In his infancy, in the Stone Age, he was more similar to an animal and only gradually did he develop into today's man. There is only one difference between animals and humans that is immediately apparent. When an animal is born, it is already complete, for example a chicken; when it hatches from the egg, it can eat immediately and so on; it grows, but it does not change any further. A child undergoes major changes before reaching adulthood.

The simile of the childhood of man also applies to the theosophical science, and we are now in our youth. Natural science traces man back to his childhood, when he was similar to an animal; it cannot go beyond that. The theosophical science goes beyond that; it asks about father and mother. Why does one child of the same parents become a good-for-nothing, while the other becomes an intelligent being? Why did the animal-like being give rise, on the one hand, to animals that do not change any further, and, on the other hand, to human beings with unlimited developmental capacity? Natural science has no answer to this. Without the parents, the child would not be there; the natural scientist cannot go further, because he cannot go further than his senses reach, and there is no objection to this.

Usually, one infers from the child to the parents. In the spiritual view, research into the origin of man takes a completely different form. When asking about the parents, we must proceed very carefully. When we look at the anthropoid ape, can we see primitive man in it? Two possibilities present themselves here: Man developed from the anthropoid ape, as was concluded at the time, then science rejected this hypothesis and said to itself that, given the still too great difference between the two, it would be more likely to assume that there must have existed a being from which both the anthropoid ape and the gibbon descended, as well as the evolving man. So there we have the father of the good-for-nothing and the good, noble son. But this being could not be found anywhere, and so the naturalists placed this primeval man in the sea.

The theosophical research actually points to an area that is now covered by the sea.

How is such research conducted? How can one learn this type of research? Today, young people are taught to look into the external world. A person is considered educated if they have learned a lot and absorbed a lot.

Another teaching method was adopted in the old schools, which had the attainment of knowledge of the hidden forces as their goal. When a pupil came and desired to learn, the teacher gave him a sentence that contained power for the soul, and then he sent him away. The pupil had to repeat this sentence silently within himself for hours every day, letting it live in his soul. We find such sentences, for example, in the little book 'Light on the Path', written by Mabel Collins. The student continued this exercise for months until he had experienced the eternal content of the sentence within himself. In this way, the instruction continued until the inner sun shone in the heart, not only illuminating one's own soul but also sending rays of light to the other souls, illuminating them as well. This light, this sun, now not only illuminates the life and soul of the person living now, but the practiced disciple also learns to throw its rays back to the earliest past, like a spotlight.

You can find more details about this kind of research in my “Lucifer” No. 14-18 in the essay “Akasha Chronicle”. So there are three kinds of chronicles: the Akasha Chronicle, the written book chronicle that we have had for about 6000 years, and the chronicle of nature. Where the Atlantic Ocean now flows, the continent of Atlantis lay a long, long time ago. Our ancestors living there had not yet developed minds. They were able to use other powers that are now dulled in humans. Just as we are now able to develop a driving force from coal, or rather, how coal is converted into a driving force, so the people who lived at that time understood the seed power, that is, the power that lies in the seed, which enables it to sprout through the shell, to use it and to convert it into a forward-driving power. The powers of will were strongly developed. Where did that come from? The I, which has now taken possession of the physical brain, could not work in it at that time, because there was no brain yet. It worked much more in the etheric body, just as powerfully and mightily in the etheric body as it does now in the physical brain. The etheric body was impregnated with the divine I.

So we have the human parental pair. He comes from the spiritual father and the physical mother.

Egyptian wisdom beautifully symbolizes this eternal truth. Osiris, the spirit, the father, Isis, matter, the mother. From these two, Horus, the young human being, was born. The physical body was endowed with the I. The non-fertilized beings developed downward into the animal kingdom, while the I-fertilized primal beings developed into ever more highly educated humans.

Before the Atlantean period, the etheric body was not yet fertilized either. Only the astral body was I-fertilized.

The land inhabited by these people, who were animated only by their instincts and passions, is usually referred to as Lemuria. Science regards the Lemurian as a human being who has degenerated into an animal; the development that the spirit teaches us regards him as a being working his way out of the animal state. There was a time when there were no warm-blooded creatures on earth. Only at the moment when man descended to earth as a spiritual being, at the great moment when the astral body was endowed with the ego, did man become warm-blooded. The divine spark of the spirit, the Father-Spirit, united with Mother-Matter, and man emerged from this. Humanity consists of spirit and matter. The descent of the manas, the Manasputras, is the descent of the human ego.

The origin of man from the Father-Spirit and the Mother-Matter is the starting point for the knowledge of God and the world.

The word “I” in its entire essence of recognition is the recognition of the divine being. Self-knowledge leads to the knowledge of God because the I originates from the divine. The recognition of the divine essence of the human being is the key to the recognition of the whole, including the physical human being. The poet says:

One succeeded,
He lifted the veil from the goddess Bild at Sais.
What did he see? Wonder upon wonder – himself.

When man finds himself, he finds God: through self-knowledge to God-knowledge!

Final remark

Until recently, there were no books about these things; these divine wisdom teachings were only passed down orally from ancient times, from generation to generation. Now the time has come when people in the midst of active life should learn these things, so they are now being published in elementary form.