LECTURE 9
It has been
repeatedly pointed out in the course of these lectures how,
as time goes on, the relationship of mankind to the Gospels
will be fundamentally changed through the recognition of
their profoundly artistic character, and the artistry of
their composition. The occult background and the
world-historical impulses pictured in the Gospels will be
seen in the right light only when their artistic composition
is taken into account. During the entire course of the
historical evolution of mankind, the art and literature of
the Gospels are linked together in the same way, as we have
been able to point out on a few occasions in the course of
these lectures.
We have
pointed to those lonely figures in the Hellenic world who
experienced in their souls the gradual disappearance and
dying out of the old clairvoyant vision, for which they had
to exchange the consciousness of the present time, its
abstract concepts and abstract ideas, out of which the ego of
man has to work. We can also point to something else which,
precisely in Greek culture, from a certain point of view
represents a kind of concluding phase of the culture of
mankind. It is as if this culture had attained a certain
peak, and had to be enkindled again from another point of
view. I am referring to Greek art. How did it happen that
people at the time of the Renaissance in Europe sought in
their souls the land of the Greeks, that is to say the land
of Beauty, and saw an ideal of human development in the
wonderful way in which the Greeks shaped the human form? But
this did not only occur in the time of the Renaissance. In
the modern classical epoch spirits like Goethe sought in the
same way within their souls this land of the Greeks, the land
of beautiful form. The reason for this is that in actual fact
it was in Greece that beauty, which speaks out of external
form directly to human sight, came to a kind of end, an end
that indeed represented a certain high point of
achievement.
In Greek
beauty and Greek art everything confronts us enclosed in
form. The composition of Greek works of art reveals to our
sight exactly what is intended by the composition. It is
there in sense existence, fully apparent to the eye. The
greatness of Greek art consists in the fact that it has come
forth so fully into outward appearance. We may say that the
art of the Gospels also represents a new beginning, but one
that to this day has scarcely been understood at all. There
is above all in the Gospels an inner composition and an inner
interweaving of artistic threads, which are also at the same
time occult threads. As we emphasized yesterday the important
thing is everywhere to look for the real point, as it is
drawn to our attention in every description and every
story.
It is
particularly shown in the Mark Gospel, not so much in the
wording but in the general tone of the presentation, that
Christ is to be seen as a cosmic being, an earthly and
supra-earthly manifestation, while the Mystery of Golgotha is
shown as an earthly and supra-earthly fact. But something
else is also emphasized, and here we are faced with the fine
artistic element, especially toward the end of the Gospel. It
is emphasized that a cosmic element is shining into the
concerns of earth. It truly shines in; and it was the task of
earth beings, of earthly human beings to bring their
understanding to this impulse. Perhaps nowhere else is it
indicated so well as in the Mark Gospel how fundamentally the
whole of earth evolution will be necessary to enable us to
understand what shone here out of the cosmos into earth
existence, and how at the time of the Mystery of Golgotha
such understanding was altogether impossible. And even today
this understanding is still absent. The truth that at that
time there was only an initial impetus toward an
understanding that can come into being only with the further
development of mankind is shown in a quite wonderful way in
the artistic composition of the Gospel. We can discern
something of this artistic composition if we enquire into the
form of understanding that could have been possible and
brought to bear on the Mystery of Golgotha at the time it
took place.
Essentially
three kinds of understanding were possible, and they could
arise at three different levels. Firstly, understanding could
have been found in those who were nearest to Christ Jesus,
His chosen disciples. They are presented to us everywhere in
the Gospels as those whom the Lord Himself had chosen, to
whom He confided many things to help them toward a higher
understanding of existence. From them, therefore, we have a
right to expect the greatest understanding of the Mystery of
Golgotha. What kind of understanding may we expect from them?
As we approach the end of the Mark Gospel this is ever more
delicately interwoven into its composition. It is pointed out
to us very clearly that these chosen disciples could have had
a higher understanding than the leaders of the Old Testament
people. But we must everywhere look for the point to which we
are referring.
In Mark
chapter 12, verses 18 to 27 you will find a conversation
between Christ Jesus and the Sadducees, a conversation that
is primarily concerned with the immortality of the soul. If
the Gospels are read superficially it will not occur to
anybody to ask why this conversation appears precisely here,
a conversation about immortality followed by the curious
question posed by the Sadducees, who spoke as follows,
“It could happen that one of seven brothers married a
woman but he dies, and the same woman marries the second.
After the death of the second she also marries the third, and
likewise with the others. She herself dies only after the
death of the seventh brother.” The Sadducees could not
understand how, if there is indeed immortality, these seven
men should behave toward the one woman in the spiritual
world. This is a well-known Sadducean objection which, as
some of you may know, was not made only at the time of the
Mystery of Golgotha but is even to be found in some modern
books as an objection to immortality, which proves that in
the circles where such books are written there is still no
complete understanding of the matter. But why was this
conversation recorded? If we consider the matter, we shall
see that the answer given by Christ Jesus tells us clearly
that souls become heavenly after death, that there is no
marrying among beings of the supra-earthly world. In the case
cited by the Sadducees the facts are totally irrelevant,
since they are concerned with a relationship that is
essentially earthly and has no meaning beyond the earth. In
other words Christ Jesus is here speaking of circumstances
prevailing in the extraterrestrial worlds which He wishes to
bring in here solely for the contribution they can make to
the understanding of life beyond the earth.
But as you
approach the end of the Mark Gospel you will find still
another conversation when Christ Jesus is asked about
marriage
(Mark 10:1-12).
This was a conversation between Christ
Jesus and the Jewish scribes. How is it possible, He was
asked, to dismiss a wife with a letter of divorce as
permitted by the law of Moses? What was the reason for the
answer given by Christ Jesus, “Yes, Moses gave you this
law because your hearts are hard and you need an arrangement
like this?” The reason is that He is now speaking about
something entirely different. He is now speaking about how
men and women were together before human evolution had been
exposed to temptation through the Luciferic powers. That is
to say, He is talking about something cosmic, something
supra-earthly; He raised the subject to the supra-earthly
plane. The reason for His answer is that He was leading the
conversation beyond what refers simply to earthly life,
beyond experience of the senses, beyond ordinary earth
evolution. And this is already a significant example of how
by appearing on earth He brings down to it supra-earthly,
cosmic matters, and talks about such cosmic matters with the
beings of earth.
By whom might
we hope, or even go as far as to demand, that such discourses
of Christ concerning these cosmic matters will be best
understood? By those whom He had first chosen as His
disciples. So the first form of understanding could be
characterized in this way. The chosen disciples of Christ
Jesus could have understood the Mystery of Golgotha in such a
way that they could have interpreted the supra-earthly,
cosmic aspect of this world-historical fact. This might have
been expected from those disciples whom He had chosen.
A second kind
of understanding could have been expected to be found among
the leaders of the ancient Hebrew people, from the high
priests, the chief justices, from those who knew the
Scriptures and knew the historical evolution of the Old
Testament people. What could have been asked of them? The
Gospel shows clearly that they were not called upon to
understand the realities of Christ Jesus, but they were
expected to understand the fact that Christ Jesus came to the
ancient Hebrew people, that with His individuality He was
born into the blood of the people, that He was a Son of the
House of David, inwardly linked to the essence of what came
through David into the Jewish people. This is the second and
lesser kind of understanding. That Christ Jesus had a mission
that marked the high point of the mission of the whole Jewish
people is indicated in a wonderful way toward the end of the
Mark Gospel when it is shown ever more clearly — see in
what a delicately artistic way this is indicated — that
here we have to do with the Son of David. Thus, while the
disciples were called upon to have an understanding of the
mission of the cosmic hero, those who considered themselves
as belonging to the Jewish people were called upon to
understand the truth that the time had come for the
completion of the mission of David. That is the second kind
of understanding. The Jewish people should have known that
the end of their old mission had come and that there could
come a new flaming up of their own particular mission.
And the third
kind of comprehension — where should this have been
found? Again something lesser is demanded, and it is
remarkable with what delicacy the artistic composition of the
Mark Gospel indicates it. Something lesser is demanded and
this lesser element was required of the Romans. Read what
happens toward the end of this Gospel when Christ Jesus is
delivered over to the Romans by the high priests — I am
referring only to this Mark Gospel. The high priests ask
Christ Jesus if He wishes to speak of the Christ and
acknowledge Himself as the Christ, at which they would take
offense, because He would then be speaking of His cosmic
mission; or if He wishes to speak of the fact that He is a
scion of the House of David. But why does Pilate, the Roman,
take offense? Simply because Christ was supposed to have
claimed He was the “king of the Jews”
(Mark 15:1-15).
The Jews were expected to understand that He represented the
culminating point in their own development. The Romans were
expected to understand that He signified something in the
development of the Jewish people — not a climax of this
development but something that was to play a leading part in
it. If the Romans had understood this what would have been
the result? Nothing much different from what came about in
any case; only they failed to understand it. We know that
Judaism spread indirectly over the whole Western world by way
of Alexandria. The Romans could have had some understanding
for the fact that the moment in world history had arrived for
the spread of Jewish culture. Such an understanding was again
less than what the scribes ought to have understood. The
Romans were called upon to understand simply the significance
of the Jews as a part of the world. That they did not
understand this, which would have been a task of that age, is
shown through the fact that Pilate did not understand why
Christ Jesus was looked upon as the king of the Jews, and
regarded it, indeed, as a harmless matter that He should have
been presented as a king of the Jews.
Thus a
threefold understanding of the mission of Christ Jesus might
have been expected: first, that the chosen disciples could
have had an understanding of Christ as a cosmic being,
secondly, the understanding that the Jews were supposed to
have for what was burgeoning in the Jewish people itself, and
thirdly the understanding that the Romans ought to have had
of the Jewish people, how they were ceasing to expand only
over Palestine, but were beginning to spread over the greater
part of the earth.
This secret
is concealed in the artistic composition especially of the
Mark Gospel; and in it answers are given, and with great
clarity, to all three questions.
The first
question must be: Are the apostles, the chosen disciples
equal to the task of comprehension imposed on them? Did they
recognize Christ as a cosmic spirit? Did they recognize that
there in their midst was one who was not only what He
signified to them as man, but who was enveloped in an aura
through which cosmic forces and cosmic laws were transmitted
to the earth? Did they understand this?
That Christ
Jesus demanded such an understanding from them is clearly
indicated in the Gospel. For when the two disciples, the sons
of Zebedee, came to Him and asked that one of them might sit
on His right hand and the other on His left, He said to them,
“You do not know what you ask. Can you drink from the
cup that I drink, or be baptized with the baptism with which
I am baptized?”
(Mark 10:38.)
It is clearly
indicated here that Christ Jesus required this of them, and
at first they solemnly pledge themselves to it. What might
then have happened? There were two possibilities. One would
have been that the chosen disciples would really have passed
in company with Christ through all that is known as the
Mystery of Golgotha, and that the bond between Christ and the
disciples would have been preserved until the Mystery of
Golgotha. That was one of the two things that could have
happened. But it is made very clear, especially in the Mark
Gospel, that exactly the opposite occurred. When Christ Jesus
was taken prisoner, everyone fled, and Peter who had promised
solemnly that he would take offense at nothing, denied him
three times before the cock crowed twice. That is the picture
presented from the point of view of the apostles. But how is
it shown that, from the point of view of the Christ, it was
not at all like this?
Let us place
ourselves with all humility — as we must — within
the soul of Christ Jesus, who to the end tries to maintain
the woven bond linking Him with the souls of the disciples.
Let us place ourselves as far as we may within the soul of
Christ Jesus during the events that followed. This soul might
well put to itself the world-historical question, “Is
it possible for me to cause the souls of at least the most
select of the disciples to rise to the height of experiencing
with me everything that is to happen until the Mystery of
Golgotha?” The soul of Christ itself is faced with this
question at the crucial moment when Peter, James and John are
led out to the Mount of Olives, and Christ Jesus wants to
find out from within Himself whether He will be able to keep
those whom He had chosen. On the way He becomes anguished.
Yes, my friends, does anyone believe, can anyone believe that
Christ became anguished in face of death, of the Mystery of
Golgotha, and that He sweated blood because of the
approaching event of Golgotha? Anyone who could believe that
would show he had little understanding for the Mystery of
Golgotha; it may be in accord with theology, but it shows no
insight. Why does the Christ become distressed? He does not
tremble before the cross. That goes without saying. He is
distressed above all in face of this question, “Will
those whom I have with me here stand the test of this moment
when it will be decided whether they want to accompany me in
their souls, whether they want to experience everything with
me until the cross?” It had to be decided if their
consciousness could remain sufficiently awake so that they
could experience everything with Him until the cross. This
was the “cup” that was coming near to Him. So He
leaves them alone to see if they can stay
“awake,” that is in a state of consciousness in
which they can experience with Him what He is to experience.
Then He goes aside and prays, “Father, let this cup
pass from me, but let it be done according to your will, not
mine.” In other words, “Let it not be my
experience to stand quite alone as the Son of Man, but may
the others be permitted to go with me.”
He comes
back, and they are asleep; they could not maintain their
state of wakeful consciousness. Again He makes the attempt,
and again they could not maintain it. So it becomes clear to
Him that He is to stand alone, and that they will not
participate in the path to the cross. The cup had not passed
away from Him. He was destined to accomplish the deed in
loneliness, a loneliness that was also of the soul. Certainly
the world had the Mystery of Golgotha, but at the time it
happened it had as yet no understanding of this event; and
the most select and chosen disciples could not stay awake to
that point. This therefore is the first kind of
understanding; and it comes to expression with the most
consummate artistry if we can only understand how to feel the
actual occult background that lies concealed behind the words
of the Gospels.
Let us now
enquire into the second kind of understanding, and ask how
the Jewish leaders understood the one who was to come forth
from the lineage of David as the flower of the old Hebrew
development. We find in the tenth chapter of the Mark Gospel
one of the first passages in which it is pointed out to us
what understanding the ancient Hebrew people showed toward
the one who arose from the lineage of David. This is the
decisive passage when Christ Jesus is approaching Jerusalem,
and should have been recognized by the old Hebrew people as
the successor of David.
And they
came to Jericho. And as he was leaving Jericho with his
disciples and a considerable crowd, a blind man,
Bartimaeus, the son of Timaeus, was sitting by the road,
begging. And when he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth,
he began to call, “Jesus, thou Son of David, have
mercy on me.” And many scolded him, telling him to be
silent. But he called all the more loudly, “Thou Son
of David, have mercy on me.”
(Mark 10:46-48.)
It is
explicitly stated that the call of the blind man was
expressed in the words “Thou Son of David,”
showing that he could reach the understanding only of
“the Son of David.”
And Jesus
stood still and said, “Call him here.” And they
called the blind man and said to him, “Be of good
cheer, arise, he is calling you.”
So he threw
off his mantle, jumped up and came to Jesus. And Jesus said
to him, “What do you want me to do for you?”
The blind man
said to him, “Rabboni, that I may receive my
sight.”
And Jesus
said to him. “Cheer up!
[ footnote 1 ]
Your faith has rescued you.” And immediately he received his
sight and followed him on his way.
It was
therefore only faith that was required of him. Is it not
worthwhile giving consideration to why, among the other
stories, the healing of a blind man is referred to? Why does
the story stand there all by itself? We should learn
something from the way the Gospel is composed. It is not the
cure itself that is at issue, but that only one man among
them all, and he a blind man, should call with all his
strength, “Jesus, thou Son of David!” Those who
had sight did not recognize Him, but the blind man, who does
not see Him physically at all, does recognize Him. So what
has to be shown here is how blind the others are, and that
this man had to be blind in order to see Him. In this passage
what is important is the blindness, not the healing; and it
shows at the same time how little Christ was understood.
As we proceed
further we find how He speaks everywhere of how the cosmic
lives in the individual human being. Indeed, He speaks of the
cosmic when He speaks of immortality, and it is noteworthy
how He speaks of this just in connection with His appearance
as the Son of David. He proclaims that God is a God of the
living and not of the dead, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob
(Mark 12:26-27),
because Abraham, Isaac and Jacob live on
in their successors in different forms, in that God lives in
their individualities. This is pointed out still more
strongly when Christ refers to what slumbers within man and
must be awakened. Here it is said that it was not a question
of a merely physical son of David, for David himself speaks
of the “Lord” and not of a physical son
(Mark 12:35-37).
As the influence of the cosmic Christ is waning,
everywhere reference is made to the “Lord” that
lives within the individuality of man, and how this is to
spring from the lineage of David.
We wish to
draw attention to one particular passage that you will find
near the end of the Mark Gospel. It is a passage that can
easily be overlooked if it is not understood, though it is
indeed a soul-shattering passage. It occurs where it is
reported that Christ has now been delivered over to the
worldly powers, that He is to be condemned, and excuses are
sought for condeming Him. Just before this passage what He
did in the Temple was described, how He drove out the
money-changers and overturned their tables, and how He
preached most remarkable words which were heard in the souls
of those present. Yet nothing happened to Him because of
this. Christ explicitly draws attention to this when He says,
“You have heard all this. Yet now, when I am standing
before you, you are looking for false charges against me. You
have taken me prisoner by the customary method of employing a
traitor, as if you were arresting someone who has committed a
serious crime whereas you did nothing while I stood among you
in the Temple.”
This is
indeed a shattering passage, for we are given to understand
that essentially, wherever Christ is active, nothing can be
done against Him. Is it not permissible to ask why? Indeed,
He is working so actively that He points with the utmost
clarity to the fact that a turning point in cosmic evolution
has been reached, as He indicates with the words, “The
first shall be last and the last shall be first.”
(Mark 9:35.)
Such teachings that He hurls at them must have seemed
terrifying by comparison with the teachings of the Old
Testament and the way they understood them. Yet nothing
happens. Afterwards He is captured under cover of darkness
and night by the agency of a traitor; and we even have the
impression that there was something like a struggle when He
was captured. The passage is truly shattering:
But the
traitor had given them a sign and said, “The one whom
I will kiss, it is he; seize and secure him.”
And when he
came he went directly to Him and said “Rabbi,
Rabbi!” and kissed him. And they laid hands on Him
and seized Him.
But one of
those who were standing by drew his sword and struck at a
servant of the high priest and cut off his ear.
And Jesus
spoke to them, “You have come out with swords and
sticks to take me prisoner as you would a murderer. I was
daily in the Temple teaching, and you did not seize me; but
the Scriptures must be fulfilled.”
(Mark 14:44-49.)
What was it
that really happened that they did not at first capture Him,
and then sought reasons to capture Him like a murderer? It is
only possible to understand what happened if we look at it in
the light of occult truths. I have already pointed out how
the Mark Gospel clearly describes occult and spiritual facts
intermingled at random with purely physical facts. And we
shall show how Christ clearly does not limit His activity to
the deeds of the single personality, Jesus of Nazareth. He
worked upon His disciples when He came to them by the lake in
an external form but outside His physical body. So while His
physical body might be in one place or another, He could
while outside it inspire into the souls of His disciples all
that He did, and all that radiated from Him as spiritual
impulse. And we shall point out that the Mark Gospel makes it
abundantly clear how human beings hear what He preaches and
teaches while He appears to them in an external form outside
His physical body. What He says lives in their souls; though
they do not understand it, it comes to life within their
souls. In the individuality of Christ and in the crowd it is
both earthly and supra-earthly at the same time.
The Christ is
everywhere connected with a widely extended, actively working
aura. This aura was present and active because He was linked
with the souls of those whom He had chosen, and it remained
present as long as He was linked to them. The cup had not
passed away from Him; the chosen human beings had shown no
comprehension. So this aura gradually withdrew from the man
Jesus of Nazareth; Christ became ever more estranged from the
Son of Man, Jesus of Nazareth. Toward the end of His life
Jesus of Nazareth was more and more alone, and the Christ
became ever more loosely connected with Him.
Although the
cosmic element was there until the moment pictured as that of
the sweating of blood in Gethsemane, and Christ up to this
moment was fully united with Jesus of Nazareth, now through
the failure of human beings to understand this connection the
link was loosened. And whereas earlier the cosmic Christ was
active in the temple and drove out the money-changers,
expounding mighty teachings, and nothing happened to Him,
now, when Jesus of Nazareth was only loosely connected with
the Christ the posse could come near Him. However, we can
still see the cosmic element present, but less and less
connected with the Son of Man. This is what makes the whole
episode so soul-shattering! Because the threefold
understanding could not be forthcoming, what did the men
finally have in their hands? What could they seize, what
could they condemn, what could they nail to the cross? The
Son of Man! And the more they did all this, the more did the
cosmic element withdraw that had entered the life of earth as
a youthful impulse. It escaped them. For those who sentenced
Him and carried out the judgment there remained only the Son
of Man, around whom only hovered what was to come down to
earth as a youthful cosmic element.
No Gospel
other than that of St. Mark tells how only the Son of Man
remained, and that the cosmic element only hovered around
Him. Thus in no other Gospel do we perceive the cosmic fact
in relation to the Christ event expressed with such clarity,
the fact that at the very moment when men who failed to
understand laid their violent human hands upon the Son of
Man, the cosmic element escaped them. The youthful cosmic
element which from that turning point of time entered earth
evolution as an impulse, escaped. All that was left was the
Son of Man; and this is clearly emphasized in the Mark
Gospel. Let us read the passage and find out if the Mark
Gospel does indeed emphasize how, just at this moment in the
unfolding of events, the cosmic acts in relation to the
human.
And Jesus
spoke to them, “You have set out with swords and
sticks to take me prisoner, as if I were a murderer. I was
daily with you in the temple teaching, and you did not
seize me. But the Scriptures must be fulfilled.”
And they
all forsook him and fled.
(Mark 14:48-50.)
He stands
alone. But what has become of the youthful, cosmic element?
Think of the loneliness of this man, permeated as He was by
the cosmic Christ, who now confronts the posse like a
murderer. And those who should have understood Him flee!
“And they all forsook Him and fled,” it says in
the 50th verse. Then in verses 51 and 52:
And there was a youth among his followers,
[ footnote 2 ]
who wore a fine linen garment over his bare
body, and they seized him. But he let go of the linen garment
and fled naked.
Who is this
youth? Who was it who escaped here? Who is it who appears
here, next to Christ Jesus, nearly unclothed, and then slips
away unclothed? This is the youthful cosmic impulse, it is
the Christ who slips away, who now has only a loose
connection with the Son of Man. Much is contained in these
51st and 52nd verses. The new impulse retains nothing of what
former times were able to wrap around man. It is the entirely
naked, new cosmic impulse of earth evolution. It remains with
Jesus of Nazareth, and we find it again at the beginning of
the sixteenth chapter.
And when
the Sabbath was over Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of
James and Salome bought spices and went there to anoint
him. And early in the morning on the first day of the week
they came to the tomb as the sun was rising.
And they
said among themselves, “Who will roll away the stone
from the door of the tomb for us?” And when they
looked up they saw that the stone was rolled away, for it
was really very large.
And as they
entered the tomb they saw a youth sitting on the right
side, clothed in a long white robe; and they were
startled.
But he said
to them, “Do not be frightened. You seek Jesus of
Nazareth, the crucified one. He has risen!”
(Mark 16:1-6.)
This is the
same youth. In the whole artistic composition of the Gospels
nowhere else does this youth confront us, the youth who slips
away from the people at the moment when they condemn the Son
of Man, who is there again when the three days are over, and
who from now onward is active as the cosmic principle of the
earth. Nowhere else in the Gospels — you should compare
the others — except in these two passages does this
youth confront us, and in such a grandiose manner. Here we
have all we need in order to understand the profound meaning
of just this Gospel of St. Mark, which is telling us that we
have to do with a cosmic event, with a cosmic Christ. Only
now do we understand why the remainder of the Mark Gospel had
to be artistically composed as it was.
It is indeed
remarkable that, after this significant appearance of the
youth has come twice before us, the Gospel quickly comes to
an end, and all that remains are a few striking sentences.
For it is scarcely possible to imagine that anything that
came later could have still yielded any further enhancement.
Perhaps the sublime and marvelous element could have been
enhanced, but not what is soul-shattering and of significance
for earth evolution. Consider again this composition of the
Mark Gospel: the monologue of God; the cosmic conversation on
the mountain above the earth to which the three disciples
were called but did not understand; then Gethsemane, the
scene on the Mount of Olives when Christ had to acknowledge
that those who had been chosen could not attain to an
understanding of what was about to happen; how He had to
tread this path alone, how the Son of Man would suffer and be
crucified. Then the world-historical loneliness of the Son of
Man who is abandoned, abandoned by those He had chosen and
then abandoned gradually by the cosmic principle. Thus, after
we have understood the mission and significance of the youth
who slips away from the eyes and hands of men, we come to
understand in an especially profound manner the words,
“My God, my God, why hast Thou forsaken me?”
(Mark 15:34.)
Then the reappearance of the youth, whereupon it is
briefly shown how the youth is a spiritual, super-sensible
being, who becomes sense-perceptible only through special
circumstances, when He first shows himself to Mary Magdalene.
Then afterward, “He revealed Himself in another form to
two of them as they went for a walk into the
countryside.”
(Mark 16:12.)
The physical could not have
showed itself “in another form.”
Then the
Gospel quickly comes to an end, having indicated that what
could not be understood at that time had to be left to the
future. Humanity, which had then arrived at the deepest point
of its descent, could only be directed toward the future, and
it is in the way in which mankind is referred to the future
that we can best appreciate the artistic composition of the
Gospel. How may we suppose that such a reference to the
future would emanate from one who had experienced this
threefold failure to understand as He faced the fulfillment
of the Mystery of Golgotha? We can imagine that He would
point to the fact that the more we go forward into the
future, the more men will have to gain an understanding of
what happened at that time.
We shall only
achieve the right understanding if we pay attention to what
we can experience through the Mark Gospel which speaks to us
in a remarkable way. If therefore we say to ourselves that
every age has to bring more and more understanding to what
happened at that time, and to what the Mystery of Golgotha
really was — then we believe that with what we call here
our anthroposophical movement we are in fact fulfilling for
the first time something that is indicated here in this
Gospel. We are bringing a new understanding to what the
Christ wanted to come about in the world. This new
comprehension is difficult. The possibility is always present
that we may misunderstand the being of Christ; and this was
already clearly indicated by Christ Himself:
“And
then if one says to you, ‘See, here is Christ,’
or, ‘See, he is there,’ don't believe it. For
false Christs and false prophets will arise, and they will
show signs and wonders to lead astray even the chosen ones
if that should be possible.
But you see
to it! Behold, I have fortold everything to you.”
(Mark 13:21-23.)
At all times
since the event of Golgotha there has been ample opportunity
to let such words be a warning to us. Whoever has ears to
hear may also hear today how the word resounds over to us
from Golgotha, “If someone says to you ‘See, here
is Christ,’ or ‘see, he is there,’ don't
believe it. For false Christs and false prophets will arise
and show signs and wonders such as to lead astray if possible
even the chosen ones.”
How may we
face up to the Mystery of Golgotha? Among the few striking
sentences contained in the Mark Gospel after it has spoken to
us in such a soul-shattering way is to be found also the very
last sentence, in which it is related how the disciples, who
had earlier shown so little comprehension, after they had
received a new impulse through the youth, the cosmic Christ,
“went forth and preached everywhere, and the Lord
worked with them, confirming the word through the signs that
accompanied it.”
(Mark 16:20.)
The Lord
worked with them! This we recognize as in accord with the
meaning of the Mystery of Golgotha. Not that “the
Lord” could be incarnated anywhere in the physical
body, but where He is understood, if work is performed in His
name, then He works with us; and He is spiritually among
those who in truth understand His name — without
presenting Him, out of vanity, in a physical form. Rightly
understood the Gospel of St. Mark tells us about the Mystery
of Golgotha itself in such a way that, when we rightly
understand it, we may also find the possibility of fulfilling
the Mystery of Golgotha in the right manner. Precisely in
what is contained only in this Mark Gospel, in this
remarkable story of the youth who at a decisive moment broke
away, so to speak, from Christ Jesus, do we discover the
indication as to how this Gospel must be understood. Because
the chosen ones fled and they did not truly participate in
everything that happened afterward. This is also told in the
Gospel. In truly artistic fashion a passage is inserted in
the midst of the composition. A passage of the utmost clarity
is here inserted; yet none of the disciples were present, not
one of them was an eye-witness! And yet the whole story is
told! So the question is still presented to us, and we shall
try, in answering this question, to penetrate still further
into the matter, and at the same time to throw light upon the
remainder.
Where does
this remainder originate that the disciples have not seen?
Jewish traditions relate the story quite differently from the
way it appears here in the Gospels. Where does it come from?
What then is the real truth about the Mystery of Golgotha
since those who give an account of it were not themselves
present? What is the source of their knowledge of something
that none of those who have preached Christianity can have
seen?
This question
will lead us still more deeply into the matter.
Footnotes:
1.
Although this is not the meaning usually given in the
biblical translations, the Greek word used here (hypage)
ordinarily has the meaning given here and I prefer it to
the not particularly meaningful “Go” or
“Go thy way” or “go along”
customarily used. Ed.
2.
The Greek says “who was following him closely.” Ed.
|