LECTURE FOUR
The more we study the Mystery of Golgotha
in the light of Spiritual Science, the more we realize that
future generations will have to penetrate ever more deeply
into this Mystery. In fact, what we have known of this
Mystery hitherto and what we know of it today is but a
preparation for a future understanding and especially for
what will be experienced by mankind through this Mystery. A
time will come when it will be possible to reveal to mankind
in a few simple words what Spiritual Science, by exploring
the widest fields of knowledge, is obliged to expound in a
somewhat involved way, a way that some would perhaps say is
“difficult to comprehend”. We can safely
anticipate that this possibility will be realized. But the
nature of spiritual development is such that the
understanding of the greatest and simplest truths must be
earned by patient effort, that the most profound truths
cannot be reduced to simplest terms in every epoch. And
therefore we must accept it as the karma of our epoch that we
have much to learn before we can grasp the full import and
the full gravity of the Mystery of Golgotha.
I should like
to open our lecture today by emphasizing that we must attach
great importance to the idea of faith, or trust, as an active
and positive force.
We have to
realize that both academic and popular thinking are at pains
to exclude morality from their view of world evolution. Today
scientists are interested only in the physical and chemical
laws which determined the emergence of the Earth out of an
original nebula and their aim is to discover how the end of
the world will be determined by these same laws. To a certain
extent we acquire our moral ideas in conjunction with these
physical conceptions and I have already pointed out that they
are not powerful enough to act as a positive force. Such is
the position today. And in the future our moral ideas will
become increasingly impotent. The idea that a deed or an
occurrence, such as the “Fall”, which stands at
the beginning of terrestrial existence, must be judged by
moral laws is regarded by the scientific mind as sheer
superstition. Our present understanding is not sufficient of
itself to conceive of a moral evolution at the end of
terrestrial existence whereby the physical and chemical
processes of the Earth would be raised by a moral impulse to
the Jupiter condition. Conceptions about what is physical and
what is moral co-exist, but cannot, so to speak,
“tolerate” each other; the two spheres are
strictly delimited. Whilst natural science excludes morality
entirely from its ideology, morality is resigned to the fact
that it is without effective life, that it has no place in
the physical world. Indeed certain religious confessions seek
to accentuate this cleavage between the physical and the
moral, which permits them to reach a kind of compromise with
natural science in that the scientist emphasizes that a clear
line of demarcation must be drawn between the sphere of
morality and what belongs to the sphere of chemistry, physics
and geology, etc.
I propose to
begin my lecture today with something that is seemingly
wholly unrelated to our subject but which leads directly into
it. First, let me say that not all who have devoted
themselves to cosmology excluded moral judgements from their
study of external nature and natural phenomena. It would
never occur to the modern botanist to apply moral ideas to
the laws of plant growth. He would consider it childish to
apply moral standards to the plant kingdom or to enquire into
plant morality. Imagine the reception that would be accorded
to anyone who took such an idea seriously. But people did not
always share this attitude. I should like to quote the
example of Goethe whom many did not regard as a Christian,
but whose “Weltanschauung” was more Christian
than that of many others. If you refer to critical studies on
Goethe, especially those by Catholic authors, you will find
that they are of the opinion that Goethe — as a man of
stature he was sometimes treated indulgently — did not
take Christianity seriously. Goethe, however, was by
temperament and disposition inherently Christian, more
profoundly Christian than those who forever have “Lord,
Lord” upon their lips. Goethe certainly did not wear
Christianity on his sleeve, but his view of the world was
profoundly Christian in character. And here I would like to
draw your attention to an aspect of Goethe's thought
which is often neglected.
In his theory
of metamorphosis Goethe attempted, as we know, to gain
insight into plant growth. I have often had occasion to refer
to a conversation between Goethe and Schiller on this subject
after they had attended a lecture by Professor Batsch in
Jena. Schiller did not approve of the way in which Batsch
classified plants. He said that the method of dividing and
classifying was unnecessary and that a totally different
approach was possible. Thereupon Goethe illustrated with a
simple sketch his idea of the metamorphosis of plants, in
order to show how the spiritual link common to the individual
plant forms could be envisaged. Schiller shook his head and
replied: “That is not an experience; that is an
idea.” Goethe did not really understand this objection
and said: “I am glad to hear that I have ideas without
knowing it and that I can even perceive them with my own
eyes.” — Goethe could not understand how that
which was derived from reality, like a tune or a colour,
could be described as an idea. He maintained that he actually
saw his ideas. Goethe, therefore, strove to discover
the spiritual behind phenomena, to find the spiritual element
underlying plant growth.
Now Goethe
realized that he could not fully communicate his ideas to his
contemporaries, for the time was not yet ripe to receive
them. Meanwhile other naturalists, amongst them the botanists
Schelver and Henschel, had been stimulated by Goethe's
theory of metamorphosis. They wrote the most remarkable
things about plant growth which met with Goethe's
approbation. But the modern botanist regards this whole
subject as dealt with by Goethe, Schelver and Henschel as
midsummer madness. In cases such as this we must adapt the
words of Paul and say: “What is foolishness to man may
be wisdom in the sight of God.” And Goethe then jotted
down his impressions of Schelver's method of
presentation.
I will now
outline briefly what Schelver wished to establish. The
existing approach to botanical studies was anathema to him.
At this time the generally accepted view was that plants are
divided into plants with female flowers and plants with male
flowers, that the ovule is fertilized by the pollen from the
stamens and so a new individual arises. Schelver firmly
rejected this view since it did not accord with the nature of
the plant kingdom. The fact is, he said, that every plant, by
virtue of its nature, can reproduce its kind. He looked upon
fertilization as a more or less secondary phenomenon, as a
mistake, an aberration of nature. If nature followed the
right course, Schelver believed, then each plant would
reproduce its kind without fertilization; there would be no
need for pollination in order to ensure the continuity of the
plant species
(note 1).
Goethe who
had made a close study of such phenomena as the metamorphosis
of the leaf into the flower, regarded it as self-evident that
the whole plant would reproduce its kind through
metamorphosis. He was attracted by Schelver's idea and
in all seriousness he recorded his reflections on the subject
in a series of aphorisms which are extremely interesting, but
which modern botanists regard as pure nonsense. In his
article on Schelver he wrote amongst other things:
“This
new theory of pollination would doubtless be most welcome
and most seemly when lecturing to young people and ladies,
for, with the existing theories the teacher finds himself
in considerable embarrassment. Moreover whenever innocent
young minds, desirous of perfecting their knowledge,
consulted botanical textbooks, they could not conceal the
fact that their moral feelings were outraged. These
perpetual “nuptials” which reduce monogamy, on
which morals, law and religion are founded, into a vague
and undefined lasciviousness are wholly intolerable to the
pure in heart.”
Thus Goethe,
surveying the plant kingdom, finds it intolerable that there
is no escape from these perpetual “nuptials”. He
finds it — as he so delicately puts it — more
seemly not to have to mention them; it is far better (in his
view) to teach the a-sexual reproduction of plants. He then
elaborated further on this and wrote:
“People have often reproached scholars — and
not without justification — for having shown undue
interest in the slightly improper and frivolous passages of
ancient authors in order to compensate to some extent for
the tedium and aridity of their own writings. In the same
way certain naturalists, seeing Mother Nature partly in the
buff, went so far as to crack ribald jokes at her expense,
as they never failed to do about old Baubo
(note 2).
We recall having seen arabesques which
depicted most realistically, in the style of antique art,
the sexual relationships within the calix.”
Goethe
therefore thought it highly desirable that the study of
sexual behaviour in the plant kingdom should be abolished.
But, of course, this was considered to be an absurd idea even
in Goethe's time. And today in the age of
psychoanalysis which seeks a sexual explanation for
everything, it would seem more foolish still to say that it
would he a good thing if we could dispense with this immoral
notion of sexuality in our study of nature. Goethe expressly
says: “Just as we find everywhere today ultras
(note 3)
— liberal as well as royalist
— so Schelver was an ultra on the question of
metamorphosis. He broke through the narrow limitations of the
earlier theory.” Goethe does not say that he found an
ultra such as Schelver in any way antipathetic; on the
contrary he warmly welcomed his appearance.
We shall the
better understand what lies behind all this if we enter more
deeply into the soul of Goethe, I mean, into his Christian
soul. Those who study nature as it is from the standpoint of
modern science can of course make nothing of such ideas, for
certain assumptions are necessary before these ideas can be
understood. It must first be assumed that the plants, as they
are at present, belie their original design. Those who make a
detailed study of the plant kingdom are compelled to
acknowledge that, when they reflect upon the original design
of plant growth, they find that fertilization by wind-blown
pollen does not accord with the original intention of nature.
Fertilization should take a different form. The only course
open to us therefore is to recognize that the whole flora
around us shows a deterioration from its original form and
that a view of nature such as that of Goethe still discovered
in the form of plants as they are today an intimation of what
they had been before the Fall. Indeed we cannot understand
Goethe's theory of metamorphosis unless we appreciate
its child-like innocence, unless we realize that Goethe
wished to indicate by this theory that the present mode of
reproduction in the plant kingdom is not what was originally
intended; it arose only after the Earth had fallen from a
higher sphere to its present level.
It follows
from this — I cannot enter into precise details at the
moment, but we shall have an opportunity to discuss these
matters later — that the same applies to the mineral
kingdom; that it too is not as originally constituted. And
those who make a careful scientific study of these problems
will also realize that what I have said is applicable to the
animal kingdom, to the so-called cold-blooded animals, but
not to the warm-blooded animals. The mineral kingdom, the
plant kingdom and the kingdom of the cold-blooded animals,
whose blood temperature is permanently below that of the
environment in which they live, these three kingdoms are not
such as they were originally intended to be. They have fallen
from a higher sphere, with the result that they are of
necessity subject to the sexual principle which governs them
today. These three kingdoms are unable to develop their
potentialities to the full; they must be given assistance in
order to fulfil their development. Originally, plants
possessed a natural capacity, peculiar to themselves, not
only to metamorphose leaf into blossom, but also to bring
forth an entirely new plant. But they now lack the vital
energies to do this; they require a new stimulus from
without, because they have forsaken the realm to which they
originally belonged. And the mineral kingdom and the kingdom
of the cold-blooded animals too were intended to be different
from what they are now; they have stopped short midway in
their evolution.
Let us now
turn to the other realms of nature: to the kingdom of the
warm-blooded animals, to the human kingdom and to the kingdom
of the ligneous plants, i.e. trees
(note 4).
The plants I have already mentioned which follow normal
metamorphosis are those which develop green leaves and stems,
the herbaceous plants. I pointed out in my previous lecture
that physical man, as at present constituted, does not answer
to his inherent potentialities; his physical body was
originally destined for immortality. This idea has further
implications. Not only has physical man who was destined for
immortality forfeited his claim to immortality, but also the
other living beings, the ligneous plants and the warm-blooded
animals bear the seeds of death in them. They are not as
originally created; not that they were created immortal, but
they have deteriorated. In consequence a new situation has
arisen for them. I stated that the kingdom of the herbaceous
plants, and the kingdom of the cold-blooded animals are
unable to fulfil their potentialities; they are in need of an
external stimulus. The warm-blooded animals, the ligneous
plants and man do not betray their origin in their present
form. Thus the first group do not develop to the full their
potentialities and need some external influence to further
their development. The second group, the ligneous plants, the
warm-blooded animals, and man as at present constituted, do
not betray their origin. The former fail to fulfil their
development; the latter do not immediately disclose their
origin in their present form.
If we accept
this point of view we can predict to a certain extent the
direction which the study of nature must take in the future.
We must make a clear distinction between what the beings were
destined to become and what they are at the present
moment.
The question
then is: how are we to account for this deterioration?
Virtually the whole of nature around us, even when
investigated scientifically, is not such as it was intended
to be. Who is responsible for this? The blame lies with man
because he succumbed to the Luciferic temptation, to what is
called in the opening chapter of Genesis, the
“Fall”, or original sin. To Spiritual Science
this is a real and genuine drama in which man was not only
involved, but which was first played out in the soul of man.
At that time man was still so powerful that he involved the
whole of nature in his fall. He involved in his fall the
plants. Consequently they were unable to complete their
development and required a stimulus from without. It was his
responsibility that, alongside the cold-blooded animals,
there are also warm-blooded animals, that is, animals capable
of suffering pain, as he does. Man therefore has dragged the
animals down with him because he succumbed to the Luciferic
temptation.
People often
imagine that man's relation to the universe has always
been the same as it is today, that he is powerless in the
face of nature, that he has no apparent influence upon the
creation of the animals and plants around him. But this has
not always been the case. Before the present order of nature
arose man was a powerful being who not only succumbed to the
Luciferic temptation, but involved the rest of creation in
his fall, with the result that the moral order was completely
divorced from the natural order.
Whoever
expresses the view I have expressed today will not meet with
the slightest understanding from those who think along the
lines of natural science. None the less it is imperative that
such views should be understood in the future. Despite all
the services it has rendered to mankind, despite its great
achievements, modern science is but an interlude. It will be
replaced by another science which will recognize once more
that there is a higher vision of the world in which the
natural law and the moral law are two aspects of a single
whole. But this higher vision will not be reached through a
vague pantheism, but from a concrete insight into reality. We
must recognize, as external nature unmistakably shows, that
it was originally designed for something other than is
disclosed in the existing order of nature today. We must have
the courage to measure external nature also by the yardstick
of morality. The materialistic monism of today which prides
itself on excluding moral principles does so from
intellectural cowardice, because it has not the courage to
probe deeply enough to a point where, as was the case with
Goethe, it becomes imperative to apply moral standards, just
as it is necessary to apply scientific standards to the study
of external nature.
Mankind would
have found it impossible to think of the world as once again
imbued with morality if the Mystery of Golgotha had not
supervened at the beginning of our present era. We have seen
that everything pertaining to the natural order has, in a
certain sense, been corrupted, has fallen from a higher
sphere and must recover once again its former high estate.
And our “Weltanschauung” likewise must rise above
its present level. Our thinking also is an integral part of
this natural order. And when Du-Bois Reymond and other
scholars maintain that our thinking cannot attain to reality,
when they assert that we can never know the ultimates
(ignorabimus) this is to some extent true. And why?
Because our thinking has forsaken the realm for which it was
originally predestined and must find its way back once again.
Thinking has declined everywhere and those who maintain that
thinking cannot attain to reality are right to some extent.
This thinking, together with the rest of creation, has been
corrupted and must lift itself to a higher level. The
necessary impulse through which this thinking can be raised
to a higher level is found in the Mystery of Golgotha, that
is, in the new stimulus which the Mystery of Golgotha brought
to mankind. Even our thinking is subject to some extent to
original sin and must be redeemed before it can again
participate in reality. And our present natural science with
its necessarily a-moral outlook is simply the outcome of this
deterioration of thought. If we have not the courage to admit
this, we have completely lost touch with reality.
The new
spiritual impulse that was brought by the Mystery of Golgotha
and whose purpose was to raise up the fallen kingdom of
nature becomes abundantly clear to us if we bear in mind
certain concrete facts, if we ask ourselves the question:
What then would have been the fate of Earth evolution after
its involvement in the Fall through the action of men —
I say this not as an expression of opinion but as the result
of spiritual investigation, just as the findings of natural
science are the result of scientific investigation —
what, I repeat, would have been the fate of Earth evolution
if the Mystery of Golgotha had not brought a new spiritual
impulse? Just as the plant cannot fulfil its development if
the ovary is removed, so the Earth could not have fulfilled
its evolution if the Mystery of Golgotha had not taken
place.
Today we have
just entered the Fifth post-Atlantean epoch. The Mystery of
Golgotha took place during the first third of the Fourth
epoch. Everywhere we find evidence of a progressive decline;
this is patent to all. Thinking that is capable of
penetrating into the essential nature of things has suffered
a catastrophic decline. The Copernican theory and allied
theories are valuable contributions to knowledge at a
superficial level, but they do not probe deeply enough. They
are the outcome of man's failure over the years to go
to the heart of things, a failure that will become
progressively more pronounced. Today, we can cite instances,
fantastic as they may seem, of the situation that must arise
if this trend of thought, which is already to some extent
endemic, were to continue unimpeded. This trend of thought
will have to be abandoned because the impulse of the Mystery
of Golgotha will gather increasing strength.
I ask you to
look with me for a moment through a window into the
possibilities of future evolution and not to discuss what I
have said in public lest you lay yourselves open to ridicule
for stating a plain truth, for today such ideas will only
meet with derision. If the present outlook of academic
science persists, if it should spread further afield and
become increasingly pervasive — we are now living at
the beginning of the Fifth postAtlantean epoch which will be
followed by a Sixth and a Seventh epoch — then, unless
the Mystery of Golgotha is understood at a deeper level, the
situation can only grow worse. Today, if one were to speak,
as I have done, of a new conception of the
“Fall”, outside an esoteric circle, a circle that
for years has been accustomed to ideas which provide evidence
that this new conception can be scientifically demonstrated,
he would of course be laughed to scorn. The materialistic,
non-Christian world would have precious little confidence in
him, if he were known to hold such views. But in the Sixth
post-Atlantean epoch things will be totally different and
there will be a different attitude amongst a certain section
of mankind. There will be a bitter struggle before the Christ
Impulse can be realized.
People
imagine that those who strive to arrive at the truth by means
of Spiritual Science can be met with the weapons of scorn and
ridicule that often pass for criticism. In the Sixth epoch
they will be treated medically! By that time medicaments will
have been discovered which will be administered compulsorily
to those who believe in a recognized canon of good and evil
independent of social sanctions. A time will come when people
will say: “What is all this talk about good and evil?
Good and evil are determined by the State. What the State
declares to be good is good; what it declares to be evil is
evil. When you speak of good and evil as moral values, you
are obviously ill.” And medicaments will be
administered to such people in order to cure them. It is no
exaggeration to say that this is the direction in which our
epoch is moving; it is a pointer to the future. For the
moment I will not disclose what will follow in the Seventh
epoch. A time will come — for human nature cannot be
changed — when people will be adjudged ill according to
the concepts of natural science and the necessary steps will
be taken to cure them. This is no flight of fancy. Even the
most sober observation of the world around confirms what I
have said. And those who have eyes to see and ears to hear
see on every side the first steps in this direction.
Now the
etheric body is not such as it was originally designed to be
and this is the determining factor in all development
subsequent to the “Fall”. It is of paramount
importance to be alive to this fact and gradually to turn it
to account in our life. Amongst the various etheric formative
forces which our etheric body originally possessed —
and originally it possessed all etheric formative forces in
their full and vigorous vitality — is the warmth ether
that is still active within it. This explains why man and the
animals which he dragged down with him in his Fall both have
warm blood. It was therefore possible for man to transform
the warmth ether in a special way. This he could not do with
the light ether. Admittedly he assimilates light ether, but
he simply radiates it again so that a lower form of
clairvoyance is enabled to perceive the etheric colours in
the human aura. They are actually present there. But in
addition, man was also designed for a particular tone; he was
endowed with his own specific tone in the whole Harmony of
the Spheres, and also with an original vitality, so that it
would always have been possible for the etheric body, if it
had retained its original vitality, to have preserved the
immortality of the physical body. And man would have been
spared the consequences. For had the etheric body preserved
its original form man would have continued to dwell in those
higher realms from which he has fallen. He would not have
succumbed to the Luciferic temptation, for in those higher
realms totally different conditions would have prevailed. And
in former times those conditions really did exist. Great
souls like Saint-Martin were to some extent still aware that
such conditions had once existed and therefore they spoke of
these conditions as a former reality.
Let us recall
for a moment one of these conditions. Man could not have
spoken at that time as he does today, for speech had not yet
been differentiated into separate languages
(note 5).
This differentiation was due to the fact
that speech became static. It was never intended originally
that language should remain static. You must have a clear
picture of what was originally intended for man. If ever a
fraction of Goethe's world-conception is realized in
the life of man — I do not mean theoretically, but in
actual practice — then people will realize what are the
implications of this statement. Suppose for a moment that man
still had the potentialities with which he was originally
endowed. He would have looked out upon a world from which he
received external impressions; he would be aware not only of
colours and tones, not only of external impressions, but also
of spirit emanating from things on every hand — from
the colour red the spirit of red, from the colour green the
spirit of green, and so on. At all times he would have been
aware of the spirit. This was anticipated by Goethe when he
said: if the Urpflanze, the archetypal plant, is
nothing more than an idea, then I can see my ideas with my
own eyes and they are realities in the external world like
colours. This is prescient of the future. I beg you to accept
as a solid, concrete fact that the spirit is an active force
that streams into us. If, however, the external impressions
were to stream into us with the same vital energy as the
spirit, we would respond to each of these impressions in our
breathing process — for our breathing always responds
to the impressions we receive through our brain and our
senses. For example, an impression of red invades us from
without; from within, our breathing responds to this
impression with tone. Tone issues from man with every
impression he receives from without. There was no such thing
as a static language; each object each impression was
immediately answered by tone from within. There was complete
correspondence between the word and the external impression.
Speech in its later development is simply the external
projection, the residuum of that original, living and
flexible language which was once common to all. And the
expression “the lost word” which is so little
understood today is a reminder of this original language. The
opening words of the
Gospel of St. John,
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God
and the Word was God” recall living “at-one-ment”
with the spirit — this primal spirit, when man not only
had eyes to see the external world, but also to perceive the
spirit, when, through the breathing process he responded to
visual impressions with a tone. It is to this communion with
the divine that the opening words of St. John's Gospel
refer.
So much for
the one aspect. On the other hand, in respiration (in so far
as it extends to the head), as we inhale or exhale there is
not only an interaction with the external world, but a
pulsation is set up within our whole organism. The
respiration that extends to the head responds to the
impressions we receive from without. But in the lower
organism our respiration responds to the metabolic process.
If man still possessed the original vitality of his etheric
body, then something totally different would be associated
with his respiration than is associated with it today. For
the metabolic process is not wholly independent of
respiration; its dependence is simply concealed, it lies
beneath the threshold of consciousness. But man would be
conscious of it if he had preserved the original vitality of
his etheric body, if in the course of his life he had not
lost this vitality to some extent, for it is this loss of
vitality, not only through the physical body, but from
within, that is the cause of death. If man had retained his
original potentialities, it would have been possible for him,
via his metabolism, not only to secrete waste products, but
to produce something of a material nature. So much for the
one possibility. On the other hand, the exhalations of man
would have contained formative forces and the formative
forces of his exhalations would have laid hold of the
material substance and thus he would have created in his
environment the animal kingdom as it was originally intended
to be. For the animal kingdom is a secretion of man and was
intended to be so, in order that man could extend his
dominion over the kingdom of nature. It is in this way that
we should think of the animal kingdom. All this is the
conclusion drawn from the investigations I have laid down
before you.
Today natural
science is inclined to think that originally the animals were
much more closely related to man. The truth is not that man
has ascended the ladder of evolution as the crude theory of
Darwin imagines but that today we can no longer grasp the
real relationship of man to the animal kingdom. The vegetable
kingdom does not fulfil its development on the terrestrial
plane, and the animal kingdom likewise does not develop its
origin on this plane. Naturalists speculate on how animals
which co-exist with man have evolved. The reason for their
co-existence must be sought in the sphere from which man has
descended. It cannot be found where Darwin and his
materialistic commentators expected to find it; it will be
found in the mighty events of prehistoric times.
And bear in
mind also what I mentioned recently: that spiritual
investigation shows that in the sixth and seventh millennium
there will be a decline in fertility. Women will become
increasingly sterile. The present method of reproduction will
no longer be possible; it must be transposed to a higher
plane. In order that the world may not fall into a state of
decadence, when opinions as to what is good and evil will be
treated medically, in order that good and evil, all personal
determination of what is good and evil, should not be
recorded merely as a matter to be decided by State regulation
or human conventions in order that this should not arise at a
time when the natural order that at present prevails in the
human species will of necessity have ceased to maintain the
race — for just as in women fertility ceases at a
certain age, so too the present method of reproduction in the
human species will cease at a certain stage of Earth
evolution — in order to forestall this, the Christ
Impulse was bestowed upon mankind.
Thus the
Christ Impulse was implanted in the whole of Earth evolution.
I doubt if there is a single person who imagines that the
Christ Impulse loses anything of its majesty or sublimity
when it is incorporated in this way in the whole world order;
when, in other words, it is restored to its cosmic rank, and
when men really acknowledge that at the beginning of Earth
evolution there existed, and at the end of Earth evolution
there will exist, an order different from the present natural
order, and a moral order that transcends the physical. The
Christ Impulse was necessary in order that the end of Earth
evolution should be worthy of the beginning. It was for this
purpose that the Christ Impulse entered our Earth evolution
and it is in this sense that we must understand it. And those
who accept the words of the Gospels, not in an external
sense, but with the true faith demanded by Christ, can find
in them the necessary attributes whereby an increasing
understanding of the Christ Impulse can gradually be
developed, an understanding that can meet the demands of
external investigation and once again relate the Christ
Impulse to the cosmic world order.
There are
certain passages in the Bible that can only be understood
with the help of Spiritual Science. It is written in the
Bible: “One jot or tittle shall in no wise pass from
the law.” Many expositors interpret these words as
implying that Christ wished to preserve the Mosaic law intact
and simply added to it His own contribution. They claimed
that this was the real meaning of the passage. Now the
passage has no such meaning. A passage should not be torn
from its context, for everything in the Gospels is closely
interrelated. When we study this interrelation — at the
moment I cannot enter into the details which would provide
convincing proof of what I am about to say — we find
the following. — On the occasion when He spoke of the
“jot or tittle”, Christ implied that, in olden
times, when the law was first framed, man still possessed his
ancient inheritance of wisdom. He had not declined to the
extent he has at the present day, when the Kingdom of Heaven
is at hand, when he must change his mental attitude. In olden
times there were still prophets, or seers who were able to
discover the law through the power of the spirit within them.
“You who are now living in the kingdom of this world
are no longer capable of adding to the law or of changing the
law. If the law is to remain just, not a jot or tittle must
be changed. The time is now past when the law can be changed
after the ancient fashion; it must remain as it is. (But at
the same time we must endeavour to rediscover its original
meaning with the new powers that the Christ Impulse has
brought.) You, the Scribes, are incapable of understanding
the Scriptures. You must recover the spirit in which they
were originally written. You are without, in the kingdom of
the world; no new laws can originate there. But to those who
are within the kingdom is granted the impulse of that living
Force” — which, as I said recently, had to be
transmitted orally, for it was not recorded in writing by
Christ. “It cannot be codified, cannot be written into
the law. It is something that is totally different from the
Mosaic law, something that must be grasped spiritually. You,
the Scribes, must approach the world in a new light, as
something more than a purely phenomenal world.”
Thus the
first powerful influence was given to mankind to see the
world as something more than a world perceptible to the
senses alone. It is only slowly and gradually that we can
accommodate ourselves to this new outlook. Occasionally one
feels impelled to speak from a Christian standpoint and then
one becomes the butt of ridicule. So too Schelling and Hegel,
although not regarded as orthodox Christians especially by
the Catholics, sometimes allowed themselves to express
genuine Christian sentiments. And they have been sharply
criticized for it. The objection levelled against them was:
“Nature is not as you describe it.” To which they
were so misguided as to reply: “So much the worse for
Nature!” This reply, it is true, is not
“scientific” as we understand the word today, but
it is Christian in spirit, the spirit in which Christ Himself
spoke when He said: However much the Scribes may speak of
laws, they do not speak of the real Law. Not only has a jot
or tittle passed from the Mosaic law, but the law itself has
changed in many respects. The Scribes speak from the kingdom
of this world and not from the Kingdom of Heaven. He who
speaks from the Kingdom of Heaven speaks of a cosmic order of
which the natural order is only a subordinate part. To this
one must reply: So much the worse for nature! To those who
objected to Goethe's claim — that plant
propagation was not determined by sexual reproduction —
on the grounds that scientific observation shows that the
ovaries are fertilized by windblown pollen — he too
would have replied, if he had given his honest opinion: So
much the worse for the plant kingdom if it is so deeply
committed to the natural order.
On the other
hand, minds such as Goethe's will always insist that
man's understanding must be enlarged, that man must
become sensitively aware so that he will be able to think,
feel and experience that up to the sixth and seventh
millennium the spoken word will once again become a reality
and will have the same creative power in the external world
as the power of fecundation in the seeds of the plant kingdom
today. The word which has become abstract today must regain
the original creative power it once possessed “in the
beginning”. Those who, in the light of Spiritual
Science are reluctant to amplify the opening words of the
Gospel of St. John,
“In the beginning was the Word, and
the Word was with God and the Word was a God”, by
adding “and the Word one day will live again”,
have not fully grasped the Christian message. For Christ
Jesus has set forth His teaching in a form that conflicts
with the external world. It is to Him that we owe the impulse
to regeneration. The world meanwhile has declined rapidly and
the Christ Impulse must be increasingly reinforced before
this decline can be arrested. To a certain extent we have
gone some way towards reversing this doctrine since the
Mystery of Golgotha, but for the most part without being
consciously aware of it. Man must learn once again to
participate consciously in cosmic events. He must begin to
realize not merely: “when I think, something takes
place in my brain”, but “when I think, something
takes place in the Cosmos”! And he must learn to think
in such a way that just as he can entrust his thinking to the
Cosmos, so too he can once again unite his being with the
Cosmos.
The necessary
changes that will have to be effected in our external life in
order that our social life may be invested with the Christ
Impulse are ignored by those who are already aware of this
need. There are reasons for their reticence. One can only
speak of them when certain prior conditions have been met;
only brief indications can be given here. You will recall
that earlier in this lecture I opened a window on to the
future when I pointed out that those who recognize other laws
than those decreed by the State will be treated medically.
Before this time arrives, however, a reaction will have set
in. One section of mankind will adopt the measures referred
to above, but another section will be the bearer of the
future Christ Impulse. A battle will ensue between the two
groups between the past and the future. And the Christ
Impulse will win the day. When the etheric Christ appears in
the present century the Impulse that streams from Him will be
able to awaken such a response in the souls of men that
governments based on ambition, vanity, prejudice or error,
will gradually become an impossibility. It will be possible
to discover principles of government free from these human
frailties but only if they are founded on a true and concrete
acceptance of the Christ Impulse. Christian impulses will not
be determined by parliamentary decrees; they will enter the
world in a different way.
This tendency
exists already. Alongside the incorporation of the Christ
Impulse into world evolution there is a longing to
incorporate the Christ Impulse into social evolution. In
order to achieve this goal a considerable reorientation of
thinking is called for. And great strength of mind will be
necessary before people can accept seriously what I have said
about the Christ. When Jesus had delivered His message to the
multitude they were filled with wrath and sought to cast Him
from the mountain top. The course of world evolution is not
so simple as one imagines. We must realize that those who
have some truth to impart may already have encountered an
attitude of mind such as Christ encountered in those who
sought to cast Him from the mountain.
In an age
whose motto is — moderation at all costs, never give
offence, avoid a reputation for iconoclasm — in such an
age the ground is being prepared for the entry of Christ into
the social evolution of mankind and perhaps with good reason
in this particular age. It is being prepared in the
subconscious; little evidence of it is to be seen on the
surface where the unchristian principle of opportunism
prevails, that unchristian principle that dare not openly
declare like Christ: “The Kingdom of Heaven is not for
you, ye Scribes and Pharisees.” — I ask you to
pause and consider what has replaced the Scribes and
Pharisees today. Gospel commentators are wont to excuse or
explain away many of Christ's statements. And recently
a priest, certainly not of the orthodox persuasion, who has
uttered many fine statements about Christ Jesus, went so far
as to say that Christ was obviously not a practical person
for He advised people to live like the fowls of the air,
“for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather
into barns”. Such advice would not take us very far
today. This preacher did not make very serious efforts to
grasp the impulse which permeates the Gospels. People find it
difficult to cope with precepts such as “whoever shall
smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also; if
any man take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also. Give
to him that asketh of thee and from him that would borrow of
thee, turn not thou away.”
(Matt. V, 39-42.)
[The book says this passage is in Matt. II, 40-42 – e.Ed.]
When we read all that has been said in extenuation of this
rather unpopular passage we have to admit that mankind today
has gone half way towards excusing Christ for the strange
sentiments He sometimes expressed. They are prepared to
excuse much if they can only retain the Gospels — after
their own fashion. But in matters such as this it is far more
important to understand what is implied. And this is
difficult because these things are closely interrelated. But
at least we can have an intimation of this interrelationship
if we read on from the passage: “and of him that taketh
away thy goods ask thou not again” (which occurs in the
Gospel of St. Luke)
to the more explicit statement in the
Gospel of St. Matthew (VII, 12):
“Whatever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even
to them.” These words, of course, refer to what has gone
before. Christ is here appealing to faith and trust.
If Christ had
shared only the current superficial ideas He could never have
said: “If any man take away thy coat, let him have thy
cloak also.” He is speaking here of laws that govern
social life and conduct — such are for the Scribes and
High Priests — He is speaking of the Kingdom of Heaven.
In this passage He wishes to emphasize that in the Kingdom of
Heaven other laws prevail than those of the external world.
And if you compare the passage in the
Gospel of St. Luke
with that of
St. Matthew
— and much depends upon the correct
translation — you will realize that He wished to say
that a faith must be awakened in man which would dispense
with the laws and statutes concerning the stealing of
another's coat and cloak. Christ wished to show that it
was pointless simply to teach, “Thou shalt not
steal”. You will recall that He said: “a jot
shall in no wise pass from the law”. But as they were
originally understood those words no longer provide any
impulse for the present epoch. We must really develop within
ourselves the power, under the present circumstances, to
offer our cloak to whomsoever has taken our coat. If we
follow the precept that “whatever ye would that men
should do to you, do ye even so to them”, and
especially if this principle can be adopted by all, it would
be impossible for anyone to steal another's cloak. No
one will steal another's cloak if the victim has the
strength of mind to say: whoever takes my coat, to him I will
give my cloak also.
In a social
order where this attitude of mind prevails there will be an
end to stealing. This was the implication of Christ's
words. The Kingdom of Heaven is contrasted with the kingdom
of the world. We must develop the power of faith. Morality
must be founded upon this inner power. Every moral act must
be a miracle, not merely a fact of nature. Man must be
capable of performing miracles. Since the original world
order has descended from its former high estate, the purely
natural order must be replaced by a supernatural moral order
which transcends the natural order. It is not sufficient
merely to keep to the old commandments which had been given
to the world under totally different conditions, nor is it
sufficient to change them; man must adapt himself to a
supernatural moral order, so that if someone steals my coat I
shall be prepared to give him my cloak also, and not proceed
against him. The
Gospel of St. Matthew
clearly states that
Christ wished to debar judicial proceedings. In that event
there would have been no point in adding to the passage about
the coat and cloak the injunction: “Whatsoever ye would
that men should do to you, do ye even so to them”
unless Christ had intended to refer to another kingdom, to a
kingdom in which miracles take place. For Christ performed
signs and wonders through His sovereign, supernal power of
faith. No one can do what Christ has done as part of the
natural order, if he cannot bring himself to see in man
something more than a nature being. Now what Christ demands
of us is that, in the moral sphere at least, our ideas should
transcend the limitations of external reality. In external
life we act on the principle: if someone takes your coat,
then get it back again! But on this basis it is impossible to
establish a social order that complies with the Christ
Impulse. In Christ's kingdom there must be something
more in our moral concepts than a mere concern with, or the
satisfaction of material interests. Otherwise the following
passages would be strange bedfellows. First, “whoever
shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other
also. If any man take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak
also. Give to every man that asketh of thee and of him that
taketh away thy goods ask not again. Whatever ye would that
men should do to you, do ye even so to them.” And then
contrast with these precepts the words: “If you smite
someone on the right cheek, then see to it that he offers the
other also, so that you can experience the satisfaction a
second time. If you steal a man's coat, do not hesitate
to take his cloak also. If you want anything from anyone, see
that he gives it you, etc.” This negates the principle:
Whatever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to
them.
From the
point of view of the practical world these injunctions of
Christ are meaningless, a mere sequence of empty phrases.
They first take on meaning if we presuppose that those who
would take an active part in the salvation of the world which
shall be initiated by the Christ Impulse through which the
world will be raised once again to higher realms, must start
from principles which do not apply to the external world
only. It will then be possible to give practical effect to
moral ideas and conceptions once again.
To understand
the Gospels in the light of the Mystery of Golgotha demands
spiritual courage, a courage which mankind sorely needs
today. And this implies that we must take seriously all that
Christ said about the opposition between the kingdom of this
world, the consequence of the progressive decline of mankind,
and the Kingdom of Heaven. Those who in times such as the
present (1917) are celebrating the Easter Festival, may
already feel a growing desire to find the courage to
understand once again the Mystery of Golgotha and to be
united with the Impulse of Golgotha. Everywhere the Gospels
speak of courage; they insistently call for courage to follow
that Impulse which Christ Jesus has implanted in the
evolution of the Earth.
In this
lecture I have endeavoured to give you a clearer insight into
the Mystery of Golgotha in order to impress upon you that
aspect which shows how this Mystery must again be
incorporated in the whole Cosmic order and can be understood
only when we recognize that the Gospels speak with the
tongues of Angels and not with the tongues of men. In the
course of its development the academic theology of the
nineteenth century has tried to reduce the Gospels to the
level of human speech. Our immediate task is to learn to read
the Gospels once more as the Word of God. In this connection
Spiritual Science will contribute to a better understanding
of the Gospels.
NOTES BY
TRANSLATOR
Note 1.
In sexual reproduction of plants fertilization takes place by
means of pollination (windblown pollen, transference of
pollen by insects, etc.). Asexual reproduction is of a
vegetative nature by means of bulbs, bulbules, tubers and
runners. The fern shows alternate sexual and asexual
reproduction. The spores fall to the ground where a new
plant is formed. The plant which develops from a spore is
attached to the ground by the prothallus (root-like hairs)
which bears a number of male and female organs.
Note 2.
Baubo tried to divert the sorrowing Demeter by cynical
jests or obscene antics. Goethe applies the name elsewhere
to an immodest merry-maker in the Roman carnival, in
Faust.
She appears in the Walpurgis Night scene.
Note 3.
Ultra — one holding extreme views of the ultra
royalist party in France, 1827. (The party of ultras split
into parties of the “right” and the
“left”.)
Note 4.
Ligneous plants are wood-forming plants, e.g. trees,
shrubs, etc. Non-ligneous plants are herbaceous plants,
e.g. annuals, herbs, etc.
Note 5.
On this subject see: Dr. Arnold Wadler,
Der Turm von Babel. Urgemeingeschaft der Sprachen.
Rudolf Geering Verlag, Stuttgart, 1935. Translated as
One Language:
American Press for Art and Science, 1948.
|