LECTURE 7
Working from Spiritual Reality
Dornach, 12 October 1917
To get even closer to the problems we have
opened up in these lectures, I want to make some incidental
comments today. You probably know the amusing experiment so
often done by conjurers: they show the audience some heavy
weights and the effort required to lift them. To make the
thing more credible, the pretend weights usually have figures
written on them — so and so many hundredweight, or
kilogram or whatever. Having made enormous efforts and slowly
lifted the weights, so that the audience can admire his
muscular strength, the conjurer then suddenly lifts them up
high, or may even bring on a small boy who'll trot off
swinging the weights — for the whole is made of
cardboard. It is merely that the shape and the figures have
been imitated to give the impression that those are real
weights.
This
experiment will frequently come to mind for anyone who has a
little bit of spiritual science and who learns what people,
even the more intelligent ones, are saying or writing about
historical events or historical figures. This applies even to
biographers and historians who, according to current opinion,
are doing their work extremely well. If you have training in
spiritual science, you may be entirely satisfied with the
descriptions which are given — for a time. But when you
go over it all in your mind again, it does seems as if a
child might as well come and run off swinging all this
stuff.
Perhaps there
are not very many people who feel like this, though I have
found something like it, at an instinctive level, with quite
a number of people when it comes to the historical writings
one gets today. The whole of Roman history, and particularly
also Greek history, which is written today comes under this
heading. And I am forced to say that historians dealing with
one particular field, people whom I respect highly,
nevertheless leave me with this impression. I have enormous
respect for the historian Herman Grimm,
[ Note 1 ]
as will be evident from several
of my lectures. But when I take up his books on Goethe,
Michelangelo or Raphael, these figures seem as if they had no
real weight — comparatively speaking — as if they
were but darting shadows. The whole of Grimm's Goethe, the
whole of his Michelangelo, are merely figures from a magic
lantern, for these, too, have no weight.
What is the
reason for this? It is that people who are merely equipped
with the education, the intellectual content, of our present
time do not have a real idea of the true reality, even though
they generally think they are describing such a reality.
People are infinitely far away from the true reality today
because they do not know the element which is always around
us and gives spiritual, if not exactly physical, weight to
the figures.
Luther is
being presented in hundreds, if not thousands, of ways during
these weeks.
[ Note 2 ]
All very erudite, of course, for today's writers generally are most
erudite; I am quite serious about this. But the Martin Luther
described by our contemporaries is like the image we have of
the weight made of cardboard, for the element which lends
weight to a figure is missing. You may say: If one is sitting
on a chair and watching the man lifting weights, it looks
exactly the same whether the weights are made of cardboard or
are real weights. You could even paint the scene; it would
look the same. The painting could be perfectly true, even if
the weights lifted by the model were made of cardboard. The
descriptions given of historical figures like Luther may be
eminently true, and the individuals who are so proud of their
realism may have succeeded extremely well in using numerous
details, numerous characteristic and significant things to
create a sophisticated image, but the image does not
necessarily correspond to reality, because the spiritual
weight is lacking.
If we really
want to understand Luther today we must know the inner
quality of his true nature, quite independent of our own
point of view; we must know he lived a short time after the
dawn of the fifth post-Atlantean age, but that all the
impulses of the fourth post-Atlantean age were alive in his
heart and mind. He was out of place in the fifth
post-Atlantean age, for he felt, thought and reacted like
someone from the fourth post-Atlantean age; the task facing
him belonged to the fifth postAtlantean age which then was
just beginning. And so the beginning of the fifth
post-Atlantean age, the horizon of that age, sees an
individual whose inner impulses really came from all the
qualities of the fourth post-Atlantean age. The prospect of
what was to come in the fifth post-Atlantean age lived in
Luther's soul at an unconscious, instinctive level.
That age was
to bring all the materialism which could only arise for
humanity in post-Atlantean times and would gradually
penetrate every human sphere. To put it as a paradox —
paradoxes never represent the actual facts, of course, but we
are able to deduce the facts from them — we might say:
Luther was entirely rooted in the fourth post-Atlantean age
when it came to the impulses in his heart and mind and
feelings, and this meant that he did not really understand
the innermost nature of the materialistic human beings of the
fifth post-Atlantean age. He certainly had an instinctive,
more or less unconscious, inner grasp of the conflicts which
would arise between the people of the fifth post-Atlantean
age and the outside world, of how they would act in that
world and be caught up in its works. Yet all this was really
of no concern to him, because his feelings were those of the
people who had lived in the fourth postAtlantean age. Hence
his insistence that no good would come of being connected
with the works of the world and being involved in the world.
You must distance yourselves from these works and from
everything which exists in the outside world, and find the
way to the world of the spirit solely in your heart and mind.
You must build your bridge between the spiritual and the
earthly world not on the basis of what you are able to know,
but what you are able to believe; it must grow from your
inner mind and soul. Because he was not connected with the
outside world, Luther emphasized that the relationship with
the spiritual world was a purely inward one based on
faith.
Or consider
this: In some respects the world of the spirit lay open
before Luther's inner eye. His visions of the devil do not
need to be explained in the way Ricarda Huch
[ Note 3 ]
explains them in her book, which
otherwise has considerable merit. There is no need to make
excuses for his visions of the devil by saying that he did
not believe in a devil with horns and tail walking around in
the street. Luther really had the devil appear to him; he
knew full well the nature of this ahrimanic spirit. To some
extent the spiritual world still lay open before his mind's
eye as it had done for the people of the fourth
post-Atlantean age, and it lay open specifically for the
phenomena which were, in fact, to be of the essence in the
fifth post-Atlantean age. The ahrimanic powers were
pre-eminent in the fifth post-Atlantean age, and Luther saw
them. People of the fifth post-Atlantean age are
characteristically under the influence of these powers but
not able to see them. Luther, however, was an individual of
the fourth post-Atlantean age displaced into the fifth, and
he saw those powers and therefore gave them such emphasis.
This is the concrete situation as regards the spiritual
world, and Luther cannot be understood unless this is taken
into account.
If you go back
to the fifteenth, fourteenth, thirteenth and, ultimately, the
twelfth century, you will always find that people understood
the conversion of matter. Anything written about this at a
later date was largely fraudulent, because the real secrets
were lost with the end of the fourth post-Atlantean age. But
not everything written is fraudulent, and some of the things
which were said were true, though they are difficult to find.
What has been written is not exactly outstanding, however,
especially anything printed at a later time. Yet at the time
when the secrets of alchemy were known, which was during the
fourth post-Atlantean age, church people were well able to
speak of the transubstantiation of bread and wine into the
body and the blood, for there were definite ideas connected
with these words. Luther was caught up in the thinking and
inner responses of the fourth post-Atlantean age; yet he
lived in the fifth post-Atlantean age. He had to separate
transubstantiation from the process of physical conversion of
matter. So what did the sacrament of the transubstantiation
become for him? — It became a process which occurs
entirely in the realm of the spirit. Nothing is transformed,
he said; but when the faithful receive the bread and the wine
the Body and blood of Christ enter into them. Everything
Luther said, thought and felt was said, thought and felt by
someone whose heart and mind belonged to the fourth
post-Atlantean age. He clung to the spiritual connection
between man and the gods which belonged to the fourth
post-Atlantean age, taking this with him into the godless
fifth age, an age of materialism, empty of spirit, without
faith and without understanding.
Now Luther has
weight, and we understand why he said the things he said
— we know it quite apart from the impression he makes
on us today. We see him standing in the outside world and he
is like the real weight, not the cardboard one. Hundreds or
thousands of modern theologians or historians may now come
and give their impressions — these will not give us the
man, someone with real weight; they will only give us the
kind of thing produced by someone who is not holding up a
real weight but one made of cardboard.
You see now
what really matters at the present time. We must labour to
gain awareness of the factors which give the world around us
spiritual weight, and be aware of the fact that the spirit is
alive in everything, and that this spirit can only be found
with the help of anthroposophy. You can collect all the
documents you want and scribble endless notes on Luther, you
can present an accurate picture as far as the outer aspects
are concerned — but, to stay with our analogy, you will
always have a cardboard figure, unless you are truly able to
look for the things that give the figure real weight. Now you
may well say it seems hard to say to compare the work of some
of the most erudite people to cardboard weights. And even if
this were so, their work was really beautiful and satisfying
in many ways. Is all this to be changed? Could we not go on
enjoying their work?
You see, two
questions arise for people in the present-day state of
consciousness, questions which may well touch us deeply. Why
did the spiritual world demand that these people should have
the instincts which have led to such works? Well, these
things really point to something which is very widespread
today and closely bound up with human nature. As I have
already mentioned, we are living at a time when certain
truths have to become known which are not welcome truths. Yet
anyone who can read the signs of the times knows that they
have to become known.
In the first
part of my essay on
The Chymical Wedding of Christian Rosenkreutz,
written for the next issue of the journal
Das Reich,
[ Note 4 ]
I have touched lightly on some of these truths. Just a short
while ago it was still taboo for those in the know to speak
of these things in public. Today one must speak of them, even
if this may cause problems. A short passage in my essay
relates specifically to what I am going to say now.
Is it not true
that as we move about in this world we do not have full and
real knowledge of the things which are immediately around us,
at least not to begin with? I think this is something anyone
can quite easily establish for himself. We mainly use our
sense of sight as we move through the world; but if we did
not have other kinds of experiences as well, we would never
know with complete certainty if something we see weighs a
great deal or only little. We would have to pick it up to
check the weight. Think of how many things there are where
you cannot know if they are heavy or light as air until you
pick them up. And finally, when you know that something is
not as light as air, this knowledge has not come from looking
at it but from having lifted something like it before. You do
not even think about it, but unconsciously, instinctively
come to the conclusion: If it looks the way such things
always look, it will also weigh the same. Just looking at
objects therefore provides you with nothing at all.
What does
looking at objects provide? Illusion! If you regard the world
with just one of the senses, you are deceived wherever you
go. You only escape the illusion because you are
unconsciously and instinctively drawing on experience. The
whole world is really trying to deceive us, even in the world
we perceive around us with the senses. The illusion may be
very naturalistic nowadays. Painters and sculptors, who aim
to present something to just one of the senses, fail to
realize that they are merely presenting maya, illusion; for
the more you try and present something realistically for just
one of the senses, the more you are presenting maya. This is
necessary, however, for if it were not for this illusion we
would not be able to progress in conscious awareness. We owe
our progress in consciousness to this illusion. To stay with
my original analogy: If all objects appeared in their true
weight, even when they were just perceived by the eye, if I
were to feel the burden of their weight as I looked around
me, I would quite obviously be unable to develop conscious
awareness of the outside world. We owe our consciousness to
this illusion. It lies at the root of all things which make
up our consciousness. We have to be deceived in order to
progress in consciousness, for our consciousness is the child
of illusion. To begin with, however, the illusion must not
enter into human beings or they will become unsure. The
illusion remains beyond the threshold of conscious awareness.
The Guardian makes sure that we do not realize how the world
around us is deceiving us at every step. We fight our way
upwards because the world does not reveal its weight to us
and in this way lets us rise above it and be conscious.
Consciousness also depends on many other things, but it
mainly depends on the fact that the world around us is full
of illusion.
Yet, necessary
as it may be for illusion to be there for a time so that
consciousness may arise, it is also necessary that when
consciousness has developed we rise above the illusion,
particularly in certain areas. Because it is based on maya,
on illusion, our consciousness cannot gain access to true
reality. Over and over again it would have to be subject to
the kind of confusion I have mentioned. And so there must be
alternating periods, periods when weightless situations and
people are presented, and periods when the weight, the
spiritual weight, is perceived. We are now facing the latter
kind of period with regard to major world events as well as
everyday events. We have to see through the things which
seriously come into consideration in this respect.
One thing is
particularly important: When the world looks to the East now,
to what really lives in the east of Europe today, the people
of Central Europe and America see the east of Europe exactly
like someone who is looking at weights made of cardboard.
They do not see the true spiritual weight of it. And indeed,
neither do the people who actually live in eastern Europe
have a real idea of the spirit which lives there. We can see
Luther as an individual whose inner life belonged to the
fourth post-Atlantean age, but who himself lived in the
beginning of the fifth post-Atlantean age. In the same way
the world must come to see the true nature of the spirit in
eastern Europe, for this is how we should actively consider
these things in the fifth post-Atlantean age. If you take
everything I have said about eastern Europe in lectures and
lecture cycles — how the spirit-self is actively
seeking to develop and how it must unite with the
consciousness soul
[ Note 5 ]
of the West — and if you add the fact that impulses for
the sixth post-Atlantean age are in preparation in the east of
Europe, then you have something which will lend weight to the
east of Europe. If on the other hand you take all the
statements people make today, however erudite, then you have
weights which may just as well be made of cardboard.
However, we
cannot buy or sell maya, illusion; we can only buy and sell
real objects. You would say ‘thank you very much' if
your grocer were to put cardboard weights rather than real
ones on the scales. You would certainly demand real weights,
not just some which look as if they were real. All political
principles and impulses discussed with reference to Russia
will be nothing, they will be null and void, unless they come
from the awareness gained by knowing what gives spiritual
weight. The way people talk today you would really think they
are putting cardboard weights on the scales of world history.
However, once awareness has come, it must not be used in the
old lackadaisical and slovenly way, but must address itself
to reality, not just to outer illusion. A transition will
have to be made from the familiar, comfortable way of looking
at things to one which is much more alive in its concepts
— these will, of course, be less comfortable, for they
also Shake us awake. Life will be less comfortable with the
views which have to be taken in future. Why is this so? Let
me give you an analogy which will probably also take you
aback. I am not going to flinch, however, and I will say
these things, irrespective of what individual people may feel
about them.
As I have
mentioned, in earlier ages, including the fourth
post-Atlantean age, powers were available to humans which
have been transformed into something else today. As I said,
clairvoyance has become something different today, it is
based on different things. Certain things can no longer be as
they were even as late as the fourth post-Atlantean age, and
one of these is the following.
In the fourth
post-Atlantean age — people only know tales about it
today and of course they do not believe them — there
was an ordeal by fire. To prove guilt or innocence, people
were made to walk a red hot grid. If they got burned, they
were considered to be guilty, if not, if they walked across
without being harmed, they were considered to be innocent.
People consider this to be an old superstition today, but it
is true. It is one of the abilities people had in the past
and are no longer able to have today. In those days, human
nature had this quality: Innocents who were utterly convinced
of their innocence and knew themselves to be in the
protection of the divine spirits at such a solemn moment,
people who were so firmly connected with the spiritual world
in their consciousness that the astral body would be taken
out of the physical body, could walk across the embers with
their physical bodies. It really was so in the past. This is
the truth. It is really a good thing for you to be fully and
completely clear in your minds that this old superstition is
based on truth — though of course it is not a good idea
for you to go and tell the vicar all about it.
These things
have undergone a transformation. In the past, individuals who
had to prove their innocence in a particular way, could be
made to walk the embers on occasion. You can, however, be
quite certain, that, generally speaking, people were afraid
of fire even then; they did not enjoy walking over red hot
grids. Even in those days it would generally make them
shudder — except for those who were able to prove their
innocence in this way. But some of the power which carried
people through the embers in those days has now become more
inward in the sense I spoke of in my last lecture. The
clairvoyance of the fifth post-Atlantean age, the connection
with the world of the spirit, is based on the same powers,
except that the powers which formerly enabled people to walk
through fire have been transformed and become more
inward.
If one wants to
be in touch with certain factors which belong to the world of
the spirit, one has to overcome much the same reluctance as
had to be overcome when people went through fire. That is the
reason why many people fear the spiritual world today as much
as they fear fire. We cannot really say people are just
speaking figuratively when they say they are afraid of
getting burned; they really are afraid. This is the reason
for the opposition to anthroposophy: people are afraid of
getting burned. Yet the progress of time demands that we
gradually approach the fire and do not shy away from reality.
The new inwardness of life of which I have spoken has many
factors which demand that we gently draw closer to the world
of the spirit — gently for the time being; later it
will be stronger and stronger — in all spheres, but
especially in the field of education.
In the sphere
of education people will have to realize that quite different
factors need to be considered than those which arise from the
great climax now reached in the age of materialism. The
realization must come that many of the things which from the
materialistic point of view are eminently right —
though the point of view is based on the senses and hence on
maya, illusion — must be set aside and the opposite put
in their place. Today it is considered important, especially
in the field of education, to train teachers by teaching them
as much method as possible. All the time it is said: This
must be done like this, and that must be done like that. The
aim is to develop well-regulated ideas of how one should
educate. People love the idea of the regulative ideal. They
would like to have the image of the ideal teacher and then
always have such a teacher. But they only have to think a
little bit about themselves and the issue will be clear. Ask
yourself with as much self-knowledge as you are able to
muster what has become of you — up to a certain point
we can all see what has become of us — and then ask
yourself who the teachers, the educators were who influenced
you when you were young. Or, if this is a problem, try and
think of a well-known and reasonably important person and
then consider the teachers of that individual to see if you
can somehow connect the significance of those teachers with
the achievements of the individual.
It would be
interesting if biographies told us more about the teachers;
some interesting things would then emerge. But we would not
be able to find out much about what those teachers did to
make the individuals in question what they were. In most
cases we would have the situation we have in the case of
Herder, who achieved much;
[ Note 6 ]
one of his best-known teachers was headmaster Herman Grimm.
[ Note 7 ]
He was in the habit of tanning
the boys' backsides as hard as he could. Herder's
achievements did not come from having his backside tanned; he
was a good boy and had few beatings. The teacher's general
inclinations therefore did not have any effect on him! A nice
story is told of this teacher, and it is really true. On one
occasion he gave a terrible beating to a boy in Herder's
class. Later, the boy was walking in the street when a man who
had brought calfskins and sheepskins from the country asked
him: ‘Tell me, boy, where can I find someone who'll
bark tan these skins for me?’ ‘Ah,’ said
the boy, ‘go to Mr Grimm, he is good at it.’ And
the man actually went and rang Mr Grimm's doorbell —
that taught the headmaster a lesson. But, you see, Herder did
not become a great man because his teacher had this
inclination. You will find many such things if you look into
the education of individuals who later became great
people.
Something else,
however, which relates to something much more subtle, will be
important. It will be important that the question of karma,
or destiny, is taken into account, especially with regard to
education and teaching methods. The people with whom my karma
brought me together in childhood and youth certainly are
important. And a tremendous amount depends on it that in our
teaching we are aware that we and our pupils have been
brought together. You see, much depends on a particular
quality of mind and attitude.
Take the things
we are already able to say about education today from the
point of view of anthroposophy and you will find this to be
wholly in accord with what I have said. It really has to be
emphasized today that for the first seven years, up to the
changing of the teeth, children want to imitate everything,
and during the next seven years, until they reach puberty,
they must submit to authority. We therefore have to do things
which the children can imitate in the right way. Children
will of course imitate everybody, but they do so especially
with their teachers. They also believe everybody from their
seventh to fourteenth year, but they should do so especially
when it comes to their teachers and educators. We will know
how to behave if we are constantly aware of the idea of
karma; but we must have a real inner connection with this.
Whether we are particularly good at teaching something, or
perhaps less good, is not really so important. Even
completely inept teachers may on occasion have a tremendous
influence. Now, in the age of inwardness of which I have
spoken, the question as to whether we are the right teacher
or educator depends on the way in which we were connected
with the child's soul before either of us — teacher and
child — were born. The difference is merely that we
teachers have come into the world a few years earlier than
the children. Before that we were together with them in the
world of the spirit.
Where does the
desire to imitate come from, this tendency to imitate after
we are born? We are imitators in our early years because we
bring the tendency to Imitate with us from the world of the
spirit. And whom do we like best to imitate? The individual
who gave us our qualities in the world of the spirit, from
whom we took something when we were in that world, be it in
one particular field or another. The child's soul was
connected with the soul of the teacher before birth. The
connection was a close one; later, the outer physical being
who lives in the physical world merely has to follow this
line.
If you do not
merely take what I am saying as an abstract truth but let it
enter fully into your soul, you will find it has tremendous
significance. Just think of the truly serious mood, the
profundity of feeling which would come if, in the field of
education, people lived with the idea: You are now showing
the child something which it accepted from you in the world
of the spirit before it was born. Just think, if this were to
be the real impulse! It is much more important that such a
mood, such a feeling, is brought to the task, rather than
teaching people how to do this and how to do that. This will
follow if the atmosphere is right between teacher and pupil,
and if teachers are truly conscious of the great task life
has given them. Above all there has to be this truly serious
mood. It is poison to demand that children should understand
everything, as it is often demanded today. I have frequently
pointed out that children cannot understand everything. From
their first to their seventh year they cannot understand at
all; they imitate everything. And if they do not imitate
sufficiently they will not have enough in them later which
they can use. From their seventh to the fourteenth year they
must believe, they must be under the influence of authority,
if they are to develop in a healthy way. These things have to
be made part of human life.
It is generally
considered most important today to understand everything. We
are not even supposed to teach the children their tables
without their understanding it. But they do not understand
anyway! Such an approach makes children into calculating
machines rather than sensible people. They are supposed to
accept the intellect which is in the elemental environment of
which I have spoken,
[ Note 8 ]
rather than develop their own understanding. This happens a
great deal nowadays. Instead of helping the mind of the
individual to develop, efforts are actually in progress to
make it the ideal to inculcate the elemental intellect which
is outside the human being, so that children are caught up in
the elemental world. Many instances can be seen today where
we can actually say: These people are not thinking for
themselves, they are thinking in the general thinking
atmosphere, as it were. And if something of an individual
nature should come up, its origins are not in the divine
element which can be perceived in human nature.
Human beings
must enter into truly living ways again, even in their
understanding of the world. As I have said, this is more
difficult than working with mere corpses of ideas. Humanity
must once again find a living approach, and people must
realize that dead truths cannot govern life, only living
truths can do so. The following is a dead truth.
We are supposed
to train human beings to be intelligent human beings.
Therefore — as dead truth says — we must
cultivate the intellect as early as possible, for this will
produce intelligent people. This is arrant nonsense, however.
It is as much nonsense as it would be to train a one-year-old
to be a shoemaker. People will, in fact, be intelligent only
if they are not given intellectual training too early. It is
often necessary to do the opposite of what we want to achieve
in life. We cannot eat our food raw, but have to cook it
first. And if this cooking process were to include the
processes which are involved in eating, we might perhaps save
ourselves the effort of eating! You cannot make people
intelligent by cultivating the intellect as early as
possible, but only by cultivating in them when very young the
faculties which will later have them prepared to be
intelligent. The abstract truth is: the intellect is
cultivated via the intellect. The living truth is: the
intellect is cultivated by healthy belief in rightful
authority. Both parts of the statement have quite a different
content in the living truth compared to the dead, abstract
truth. This is something humanity will have to come to
realize more and more as time goes on.
It is awkward.
Consider how comfortable it is to have a goal and to believe
this can be achieved by doing exactly what the goal says. But
in life one has to do the opposite. This is certainly
awkward. It is the challenge of our time that we must find
our way to reality and life; this is what we must eminently
make our own. There is need for this in both the great and
the small things in life. You will not understand this age,
you will be doing things as wrong as they can possibly be
done, unless you consider this. People have no idea today of
how immensely abstract they are, with everything forced
always into the same mould. But the reality is not produced
in the same mould, for it is in constant metamorphosis. The
modified vertebrae which form part of the human head look
very different from the vertebrae which make up the spine.
Let me give you an example taken from everyday life. Imagine
someone on the teaching staff of a university who teaches
something which I, or someone else, must go against. I would
of course make every effort to show that the things this
person teaches are wrong; wanting to do my duty, I would go
to any length to show that he is wrong and everything he says
— well, to put it bluntly — is balderdash. This
is one side of the matter.
Now let us
assume the individual concerned found himself in a situation
where the authorities wanted to dismiss him from his post or
discipline him in some way. Well, of course, I would stand up
for him in every possible way, against his dismissal or
disciplining; for this would not be a question of the content
of his teaching, but of ensuring academic freedom. For as
long as we are dealing with people's theories, we have to
fight; when it comes to an external institution, the fight
ends and may even be transformed into coming to the
individual's defence. It has to be realized that it is
abominable if someone lets his opposition to someone induce
him to take an active part in disciplining such a person. Let
us assume, however, the individual concerned was a lecturer
or professor of economics or politics and were appointed to
hold a government office. What would our attitude be then? It
would have to be such that one got him out of that office as
quickly as possible, for there his theories would cause real
damage.
In anything we
do, we must relate to the immediate, living reality and not
let ourselves be ruled by concepts. In the sphere of
concepts, on the other hand, it is important to take a good
hard look at the concepts we use. I have given this example
to demonstrate the difference between dealing with reality
and dealing with concepts. People who do not make this
distinction will find it quite impossible to live with the
tasks of the immediate future; they will at best be
Wilsonians. What matters is to consider carefully what lives
in reality and what one has to have by way of convictions in
the sphere of concepts.
This is
particularly important in the education of the young.
Teachers in training are weighed down today with all kinds of
principles as to how they should teach, how they should
educate. In the immediate future this will become much less
important. The important thing will be for them to get to
know human nature and the different ways in which it comes to
expression; they have to become psychologists in a most
subtle way and really know the human soul. The relationship
of the teacher to the pupil must in future be something
analogous to clairvoyance. Teachers may not be fully
conscious of this, and it may only live instinctively in
their souls, but they must instinctively, at a level close to
prophecy, have a picture of what wants to emerge from the
individual who is to be educated. Then a strange thing will
happen, peculiar as it may sound today. The teachers of the
future will dream a great deal of their pupils, for the
prophecies will be wearing the garment of dreams. The
pictures we see in our dreams arise only because we are not
used to connecting our dreams with the future; we dress them
in elements remembered from the past, as in a garment. In
reality dreams always point to the future. Yes, it is indeed
true that the inner life will have to be changed, especially
in those who educate the young. This is the most important
aspect. Of course, everybody is more or less involved in
educating the young, with just a very few exceptions, and it
must therefore also hold true in a more general sense that we
must have understanding for the karmic connections, as I have
mentioned. Tremendously much will depend on this becoming
general knowledge.
The present
generation is mainly educated to think in abstract terms, and
keeps confusing abstract and living ways of thinking. This is
why it is so rare for anyone to support someone with glowing
enthusiasm, for, having his own concepts, he dislikes those
of the other person, and it suits him rather well if others
come and put the other person out of action. These, however,
are the very things which can teach us. And there can be no
better education for people but to find ways in which they
can stand up for their opponents with ever-increasing
enthusiasm. This should not be forced, of course. People are
friends or enemies today on a purely abstract basis. There is
no point to this, however. Only the realities of life have a
point to them, and they are given by life, not by our
sympathies and antipathies. We should still have those
sympathies and antipathies, but the pendulum should not
merely swing up in one direction but also go down and in the
opposite direction. Humanity must learn to live on two levels
at once, in dualism — to enter into profound thought
and, where reality demands this, to pour ourselves out over
reality. Today, people want to take their thought-forms into
everything connected with real life; and they are only
prepared to put up with reality if it fits in with their own
thought-forms. Uniformity is what they are after. But
uniformity cannot be justified in the light of the spirit;
this is impossible. The world cannot be easy and comfortable
the way it is in reality. Not everyone will have the kind of
face we like and find sympathetic. But it is wrong to let our
actions towards others be determined by our personal
sympathies and antipathies. Other impulses must come into
play. People find it difficult to manage today because they
look at the world, and if they do not find it in accord with
their sympathies and antipathies then, in their view,
everything is crooked and awry and quite wrong, and they are
governed by just one impulse — that the world ought to
be different.
This is one
thing which has to be said. On the other hand we must not
allow this to take us to the opposite, equally lackadaisical
extreme, where we say that one should not be too fussy and
just take the world as it is. This would be equally wrong.
There are situations in life when serious objections must be
raised, and this is what should be done. It means that due
recognition must be given to reality. What really matters is
the pendulum swing between a clear-minded inner life in
well-defined concepts and loving care extended to the
phenomena of the world.
Anthroposophy
can show the way if we have the right attitude to it. But
this, too, is something which has to be learned. The truths
which are won from the world of the spirit are like
communications, even for clairvoyant individuals. If we treat
these truths in the same way we treat the facts of the
outside world which are accessible to our unrefined senses,
we are being unfair to spiritual science. The whole of
spiritual science is open to our understanding. But it is
wrong to ask the spiritual scientist ‘Yes, but
why?’ each time he says anything, for these are
communications he has received from the spiritual world. And
if I say: ‘Jack Miller has told me this or that,’
it is pointless to say: And why did he tell you this?' He
simply told me; the question as to why has little relevance.
The things which come from the spiritual world must be
considered as communications of this kind. It is important to
understand this.
We shall
continue with this tomorrow.
|